Case Digest (G.R. No. 199886)
Case Digest (G.R. No. 199886)
Facts:
Cagayan II Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. Allan Rapanan and Mary Gine Tangonan, G.R. No. 199886, December 03, 2014, Supreme Court Third Division, Villarama, Jr., J., writing for the Court. Petitioner is Cagayan II Electric Cooperative, Inc. (Cagelco II), represented in the petition by its manager and chief executive officer, Gabriel A. Tordesillas; respondents are Allan Rapanan and Mary Gine Tangonan (the latter alleging to be the common-law wife of the deceased Camilo Tangonan).On October 31, 1998, at about 9:00 p.m., a motorcycle carrying three persons—driver Camilo Tangonan (who died), respondent Allan Rapanan (injured), and Erwin Coloma (injured)—was involved in an accident along the National Highway of Maddalero, Buguey, Cagayan. On March 29, 2000, Rapanan and Mary Gine filed a complaint for damages before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Aparri, Cagayan, Civil Case No. 10-305, alleging that a live tension wire from one of petitioner’s electric posts dangled across the road and electrocuted/strangled the victims; they claimed petitioner knew of the danger and failed to repair the wire. They prayed for various amounts for death indemnity, loss of earning capacity, funeral expenses, medical expenses, moral and exemplary damages, and attorneys’ fees.
Cagelco II answered, attributing snapped wires and fallen poles to typhoons (fortuitous events), asserting its crews removed/rolled dangling wires and placed them at the foot of poles behind the road as a temporary safety measure, and pleading contributory/negligent conduct by the victims (overspeeding, overloading the motorcycle). At trial respondents testified and presented Dr. Triffany C. Hasim, who found abrasions and opined that Camilo’s cause of death was cardiorespiratory arrest secondary to strangulation possibly from an electric wire; Dr. Hasim did not find electrical burns on Rapanan. Petitioner produced SPO2 Pedro Tactac (investigator) who noted a 30-meter skid mark suggesting overspeeding, and employees Tranquilino Rasos and Rodolfo Adviento who testified that, after typhoons, crews rolled fallen wires and placed them at the foot of poles about four to five meters from the road.
On December 9, 2002 the RTC dismissed the complaint, finding the proximate cause to be Camilo’s negligence and holding Mary Gine had no legal personality to sue as she was a common-law wife, not a legal heir. The Court of Appeals (C.A. G.R. CV No. 77659) reversed and, in a decision dated (as quoted below) April 8, 2011 (authored by Justice Amelita G. Tolentino), held Cagelco II liable for quasi-delict, awarded damages to Rapanan and to the legal heirs of the deceased, and ordered attorneys’ fees. Petitioner sought relief by a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45, assailing the CA’s finding of proximate negligence by petitioner and the award of damages to heirs not impleaded. The Supreme Court Third Division resolved the case by decision penned by Justice Villarama, Jr.
Issues:
- Was petitioner’s negligence in the maintenance of its power lines the proximate cause of Camilo Tangonan’s death and of Allan Rapanan’s injuries?
- If petitioner is found negligent, may damages properly be awarded to Camilo Tangonan’s legal heirs even though they were not impleaded and the complainant was his common-law wife?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)