G.R. No. 205090 - Greenstar Express, Inc. vs. Universal Robina Corp.

Petitioners: Greenstar Express, Inc. (a public transportation company) and its bus driver Fruto L. Sayson, Jr.
Respondents: Universal Robina Corporation (URC) and Nissin Universal Robina Corporation (NURC), both food business corporations; NURC is a subsidiary of URC.
Vehicle: Mitsubishi L-300 van (URC van) registered under URC’s name; driven by Renante Bicomong, NURC’s Operations Manager.

Date and Time: February 25, 2003, around 6:50 a.m., declared a special national holiday by Proclamation No. 331.
Location: Km. 76, Maharlika Highway, Barangay San Agustin, Alaminos, Laguna.
Incident: Greenstar bus, driven by Sayson, Manila-bound collided head-on with URC van driven by Bicomong, who was Quezon province-bound.
Result: Bicomong died on the spot; both vehicles sustained considerable damage.

Petitioners filed a complaint for damages against NURC on September 23, 2003, later amending to include URC as an additional defendant.
Respondents filed answers claiming no negligence on their part or Bicomong’s.
Trial proceeded with petitioners presenting witness Sayson and others; respondents presented testimonies including Bicomong’s widow and company officials.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) of San Pedro, Laguna, Branch 31, issued decision on April 4, 2011, dismissing the complaint and counterclaim.
Petitioners appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA), which affirmed RTC’s decision on September 26, 2012, and denied the motion for reconsideration on December 28, 2012.
A petition for review on certiorari was filed before the Supreme Court.

Sayson’s Testimony: Driving at approx. 60 km/h; saw URC van on opposite shoulder 250 meters away; noted van was moving fast, producing dust clouds; van re-entered proper lane near bus; collision occurred on bus’s lane; he tried to swerve but was unable to avoid collision; he fled scene due to fear of reprisals and later reported accident.
Police Investigator SPO3 Marfori: Arrived after accident; found Bicomong dead; sketched accident scene; determined cause likely van swerved left, encroaching bus lane.
Respondents’ Witnesses:

Alexander Caoleng (HR Manager) testified Bicomong’s official vehicle was a Toyota Corolla, not the involved van; that Bicomong’s official work area was Cavite; the accident occurred on a holiday; the van was assigned to another employee;
John Legaspi (Project Manager) testified Bicomong was going home for a personal matter on accident day; NURC has no facilities in Quezon or Laguna provinces;
Gloria Bicomong (widow) confirmed Bicomong was going home to Quezon, was not performing work duties.

Damage Patterns: Bus sustained damage on left side; van front totally wrecked; point of impact suggests possible swerve but details were inconclusive.

Bicomong was not acting within scope of employment at time of accident.
Van was not assigned to Bicomong; he used it for personal trip on a holiday.
Employer not liable under Article 2180 since employee not performing duties.
No conclusive evidence on which party’s negligence caused accident; each must bear own losses.

Whether respondents (URC and NURC) are liable for damages to petitioners caused by the negligence of Bicomong.
Whether respondents waived the defense that Bicomong was not acting within the scope of his employment at the time of accident, due to failure to plead it properly.
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in finding respondents not liable despite evidence of negligence and violation of traffic rules by Bicomong.
Whether URC is liable as registered owner of the vehicle regardless of employment scope rules.
Whether petitioner bus driver’s conduct contributed to the collision and whether the doctrine of last clear chance applies.