Civil Liability Arising from Felony
42. Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines, Inc. (PRBL) vs. People, 427
SCRA 526 (2004)
Facts:
In
May 16, 1995, PRBL Bus, driven by petitioner Pleyto, was traveling along
MacArthur Highway in Gerona, Tarlac bound for Vigan, Ilocos Sur. It was
drizzling that morning and the macadam road was wet. Right in front of the bus,
headed north, was the tricycle owned and driven by one Rodolfo Esguerra.
According to RollyOrpilla, a witness and one of the bus passengers, Pleyto tried to overtake Esguerra’s tricycle but hit it instead. Pleyto then swerved into the left opposite lane. Coming down the lane, some fifty meters away, was a southbound Mitsubishi Lancer car, driven by Arnulfo Asuncion. In the car seated beside Arnulfo was his brother-in-law, Ricardo Lomboy, while in the back seat were Ricardo’s 18-year old daughter Carmela and her friend, one Rhino Daba. PRBL Bus smashed head-on the car, killing Arnulfo and Ricardo instantly. Carmela and Rhino suffered injuries, but only Carmela required hospitalization.
According to RollyOrpilla, a witness and one of the bus passengers, Pleyto tried to overtake Esguerra’s tricycle but hit it instead. Pleyto then swerved into the left opposite lane. Coming down the lane, some fifty meters away, was a southbound Mitsubishi Lancer car, driven by Arnulfo Asuncion. In the car seated beside Arnulfo was his brother-in-law, Ricardo Lomboy, while in the back seat were Ricardo’s 18-year old daughter Carmela and her friend, one Rhino Daba. PRBL Bus smashed head-on the car, killing Arnulfo and Ricardo instantly. Carmela and Rhino suffered injuries, but only Carmela required hospitalization.
Issue:
THE COURT
OF APPEALS DISREGARDED THE DOCTRINE LAID DOWN IN VILLA REY TRANSIT, INC. v.
COURT OF APPEALS, WHEN IT ARBITRARILY PEGGED THE MONTHLY LIVING EXPENSES AT 50%
OF GROSS EARNINGS.
Held:
No.
Ratio:
Petitioners,
in the Supreme Court view, misread the Villa Rey Transit case. In considering the earning capacity of the victim as an element
of damages, the net earnings, which is computed by deducting
necessary expenses from the gross earnings, and not the gross earnings, is to
be utilized in the computation. Note that in the present case, both the Court
of Appeals and the trial court used net earnings, not gross earnings in
computing loss of earning capacity. The amount of net earnings was arrived at
after deducting the necessary expenses (pegged at 50% of gross income) from the
gross annual income. This computation is in accord with settled jurisprudence,
including the Villa Rey case.
Walang komento:
Mag-post ng isang Komento