Case Digest (G.R. No. 161151)
Facts:
In BJDC Construction, represented by its Manager/Proprietor Janet S. Dela Cruz, vs. Nena E. Lanuzo, et al. (G.R. No. 161151, March 24, 2014), the surviving spouse and children of the late Balbino Los Baños Lanuzo (“Lanuzo heirs”) sued BJDC Construction (“the company”) for damages after Balbino died on October 30, 1997 at about 6:30 p.m. while riding his Honda motorcycle along a national highway undergoing a re-blocking project in San Agustin, Pili, Camarines Sur. The heirs alleged that the company failed to provide adequate lighting and warning signs at the site—run by the company from September to November 1997—causing Balbino to sideswipe a barricade, crash on the freshly cemented lane, and suffer fatal injuries. They claimed actual damage to the motorcycle, funeral and burial expenses, unearned income, moral damages, attorney’s fees, and litigation costs. The company denied negligence, maintained that warning devices and electric lights were installed and operational under DPCase Digest (G.R. No. 161151)
Facts:
- Parties and Project
- BJDC Construction, a single proprietorship managed by Janet S. de la Cruz, was the contractor for a re-blocking project on one lane of the national highway at San Agustin, Pili, Camarines Sur from September to November 1997.
- Nena E. Lanuzo filed a complaint on January 5, 1998 as surviving spouse of the late Balbino L. B. Lanuzo; four minor children (Janet, Claudette, Joan Bernabe, Ryan Jose) were later joined as co-plaintiffs.
- Circumstances of the Accident
- On the evening of October 30, 1997 at about 6:30 p.m., Balbino was riding his Honda motorcycle along the newly cemented lane closed for re-blocking.
- He allegedly sideswiped a road barricade placed by the company, lost control, crashed on the fresh pavement, and died instantly from a depressed skull fracture.
- Plaintiffs’ Allegations and Prayer
- Plaintiffs contended that the company failed to provide adequate lighting and illuminated warning signs at the project site at night, making the barricade invisible and causing the fatal accident.
- They claimed damages for:
- P5,000 actual damage to motorcycle;
- P100,000 funeral expenses;
- P559,786 lost income expectancy;
- P100,000 moral damages;
- P75,000 attorney’s fees plus P1,500 per appearance;
- P20,000 litigation costs.
- Company’s Defense and Counterclaim
- The company denied negligence, asserting it installed:
- Overhead streamers and road signs warning “Slow Down, Road Under Repair”;
- Barricades with 50-watt electric bulbs switched on nightly;
- Illuminated warning signs at both ends of the work area;
- Temporary widening of the adjacent shoulder for two-way traffic.
- It contended Balbino’s own negligence—speeding, overtaking another motorcycle, no helmet—caused the accident, as confirmed by the police report.
- By counterclaim, it sought P100,000 attorney’s fees and moral damages.
- Trial Court and CA Decisions
- Regional Trial Court (Branch 32, Pili) on October 8, 2001 found Balbino’s negligence proximate cause, credited the company’s warning devices and police investigator’s report, and dismissed the complaint.
- On appeal, the Court of Appeals (August 11, 2003) applied res ipsa loquitur, discredited company witnesses as self-serving, found lighting inadequate, reversed the RTC, and awarded plaintiffs P50,000 death indemnity, P20,000 temperate damages, and P939,736.50 loss of earning capacity.
Issues:
- Whether the CA erred in applying res ipsa loquitur despite the RTC’s finding that the victim’s own negligence was the proximate cause.
- Whether the CA improperly substituted its findings of fact for those of the trial court without cogent reasons, warranting supervisory correction by the Supreme Court.
- Whether the CA’s conclusions manifest grave abuse of discretion in the appreciation of facts and misinterpretation of evidence.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)