Case Digest (G.R. No. 209906)
Facts:
Coca-Cola Bottlers Phils., Inc. v. Ernani Guingona Menez, G.R. No. 209906, November 22, 2017, Supreme Court Second Division, Caguioa, J., writing for the Court.Ernani Guingona Menez (respondent) was a customer at Rosante Bar and Restaurant in Dumaguete City on March 28, 1995. He ordered bottled drinks including a bottle labeled “Sprite” served with a straw. Upon drinking, he perceived a repulsive taste and a kerosene smell, experienced throat and stomach burning, and vomited; he was taken to Silliman University Medical Center (SUMC) and confined for three days. He retained the bottle, which was later examined by a Silliman University chemist and reported to contain pure kerosene.
Menez sued Coca‑Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc. (CCBPI) and Rosante for damages (actual, moral, exemplary, attorney’s fees and costs), alleging liability under Article 2187 of the Civil Code (manufacturer liability). CCBPI filed a motion to dismiss arguing (1) plaintiff failed to plead requisites of Article 2187 and tort law and (2) Menez failed to exhaust administrative remedies available under R.A. No. 3720 (Bureau/Board of Food and Drug Inspection). At trial Menez offered medical records, bills (including U.S. medical examinations), and the laboratory result on the bottle; the defense contested chain of custody and other facts.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 39, Dumaguete City, dismissed the complaint on October 29, 2007 for insufficiency of evidence, citing gaps in the chain of custody of the bottle, the thirty‑six hour lapse before laboratory testing, and the absence of vital witnesses; the RTC also noted that R.A. 3720 procedures should have been invoked. Menez appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA).
In a Decision dated April 22, 2013 (Eighteenth Division), the Court of Appeals reversed the RTC: it held prior resort to the Bureau of Food and Drugs was not necessary for a damages action under Article 2187 and, on the merits, awarded moral damages (P200,000), exemplary damages (P200,000), attorney’s fees (P50,000)...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Is prior resort to the Bureau of Food and Drugs (exhaustion of administrative remedies under R.A. No. 3720) a condition precedent to a civil action for damages under Article 2187 of the Civil Code?
- Did the Court of Appeals err in awarding moral damages to Menez?
- Did the Court of Appeals err in awarding exemplary damages to Menez?
- Did the Court of Appeals err in a...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)