Title
Dilson Enterprises, Inc. vs. Intermediate Appellate Court
Case
G.R. No. 74964
Decision Date
Feb 27, 1989
A car owner sued a hotel after his vehicle, parked by his son, was stolen from the hotel's lot. Courts ruled in favor of the owner, affirming his right to sue and awarding attorney’s fees.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 74964)

Facts:

Dilson Enterprises, Inc. v. Intermediate Appellate Court and Ramon Dy Prieto, G.R. No. 74964, February 27, 1989, Supreme Court Second Division, Paras, J., writing for the Court. Petitioner Dilson Enterprises, Inc. operated the Manila Monte Hotel. On December 18, 1976, Antonio Dy Prieto, a son of respondent Ramon Dy Prieto, while a guest at the hotel, parked a Colt Gallant owned by his father in the hotel parking area. Antonio gave the car key to Reynante Oliveros, a security guard employed by Central Protective Agency, which Dilson had engaged to secure the parking basement and hotel premises. The key was later taken from Oliveros by an unknown person claiming to be Antonio’s brother.

Sometime on or about April 20, 1977, the vehicle was recovered by the Anti‑Carnapping Unit of the Metropolitan Police Force at an auto repair shop and returned to Antonio in a severely damaged condition. Ramon Dy Prieto then filed suit in the Court of First Instance of Manila (later the Regional Trial Court) against Dilson Enterprises, Inc. and Reynante Oliveros/Central Protective Agency for the value of the car accessories, repair costs, attorney’s fees, and costs.

After trial, on September 26, 1983 the Regional Trial Court rendered judgment in favor of Ramon Dy Prieto, ordering Dilson and Central Protective Agency jointly and severally to pay specified sums (P14,785.00 for missing accessories, P8,000.00 for repainting/repairs, P5,000.00 attorney’s fees, and costs). On motion for reconsideration the lower court also awarded interest. Petitioner Dilson appealed to the Intermediate Appellate Court.

In a decision promulgated February 26, 1986 (received by petitioner’s counsel April 4, 1986), the Intermediate Appellate Court modified the RTC award by reducing the cost of repair and repainting to P2,500.00 but otherwise affirmed the judgment; petitioner’s motion for reconsideration in the Intermediate Appellate Court was denied. Petitioner then brought the p...(Subscriber-Only)

Issues:

  • Did Ramon Dy Prieto, as owner of the motor vehicle, have a cause of action and standing to sue even though his son was the hotel guest who parked the car?
  • Was the award of attorney’s fees to Ramon Dy Prieto l...(Subscriber-Only)

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.