Case Digest - Torts and Damages

SARKIES TOURS vs. COURT OF APPEALS / FORTADES
G.R. No. 108897 October 2, 1997
ROMERO, J.:

FACTS:
Private respondent Fortades boarded a Sarkies bus with 3 luggage containing important documents and personal things. All were kept in the baggage compartment of the bus but dring the stop over, passenger noticed her lost luggage. Passengers suggested to the driver to trace the route of the bust but were ignored. After nine months of trying to recover the luggage, Fortades filed a case to recover the value of her lost things including moral and exemplary damages against petitioner. Lower court decided favorably while CA concurred but deleted the award for moral and exemplary damages

ISSUE:
Whether or not private respondent was entitled to moral and exemplary damages.

RULING:

The Court agrees with the Court of Appeals in awarding P30,000.00 for the lost items and P30,000.00 for the transportation expenses, but disagrees with the deletion of the award of moral and exemplary damages which, in view of the foregoing proven facts, with negligence and bad faith on the fault of petitioner having been duly established, should be granted to respondents in the amount of P20,000.00 and P5,000.00, respectively.

================

SARKIES TOURS PHILIPPINES vs IAC / DIzon
MELENCIO-HERRERA, J :

FACTS:
Petitioner Sarkies advertised for a Corregidor tour for Independence Day 1971. Dizon family availed of the promo and were brought to Corregidor, together with other excursionists, through a motorized boat owned by Mendoza. A daughter of the Dizons died when the boat accidentally capsized on its way back to Manila. A case was filed against Sarkies and Dizon, and the CA found them both liable for the reason that the relationship between Sarkies and the excursionists was a “single operation which in effect guaranteed them safe passage all through out.” Exemplary damages in the amount of 50,000 was likewise awarded.

ISSUE:
Whether or not the award for exemplary damages was with legal basis.

RULING:
The award of exemplary damages should be eliminated. In Munsayac vs. De Lara, 23 SCRA 1086, 1089 (1968), it was said:

"It is not enough to say that an example should be made, or corrective measures be employed, for the public good especially in accident cases where public carriers are involved. The causative negligence in such cases is personal to the employees actually in charge of the vehicles, and it is they who should be made to pay this kind of damages by way of example or correction, unless by the demonstrative tolerance or approval of the owners they themselves can be held at fault and their fault is of the character described in article 2232 of the Civil Code."

In the case at bar, there is no showing that SARKIES acted "in a wanton . . . or malevolent manner" (Art. 2232, Civil Code).