G.R. No. 181930 - Salting vs. Velez

On the evening of February 22, 1954, between 9:00 and 9:30 o’clock, a passenger bus No. 141 of the Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines, bearing Plate No. TPU-708, encountered an accident while en route to Manila.
The bus, driven by Silverio Marchan, went off course and fell into a ditch in barrio Malanday, Polo, Bulacan.
Respondents, namely Arsenio Mendoza, his wife Leonarda Ilaya, and their child Zenaida Mendoza—all waiting for a bus and having boarded as paying passengers—were inside the vehicle at the time of the accident.

As a result of the accident, all respondents sustained multiple injuries.
Plaintiff Arsenio Mendoza sustained the most severe injuries, including damage to his vertebrae resulting in paralysis of his lower extremities. His attending physician opined that he might never walk again.
The accident was attributed to the gross negligence of the bus driver, Silverio Marchan, who was later prosecuted and convicted for serious, less serious, and slight physical injuries.

Silverio Marchan was prosecuted for reckless imprudence resulting in physical injuries and was convicted on June 29, 1956. His conviction was subsequently affirmed by the Court of First Instance in Bulacan.
In the civil action, respondents sought recovery of damages against:

Defendant-appellant Silverio Marchan, as the driver responsible for the injuries, and
Defendant-appellants Bienvenido P. Buan and Natividad Paras in their capacities as administrator and administratrix, respectively, of the estate of the late Florencio P. Buan, doing business under the name of Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines.

Breach of an implied contract of carriage, and
Criminal negligence on the part of the driver which directly led to the injuries.

Silverio Marchan admitted that while driving his bus from barrio Malanday to Manila, he noticed an oncoming vehicle.
Upon encountering a six-by-six truck parked on the right lane, he declared that applying the brakes would result in a collision with the truck; hence, he increased his speed to pass it.
In his bid to resume a proper position on the right lane while avoiding an oncoming vehicle, his maneuver resulted in the rear tires skidding, ultimately causing the bus to fall into the ditch.

The evidence established that the respondents boarded the bus as passengers, having paid their corresponding fares, thereby forming an implied contract of carriage.
The Court of Appeals found that the driver’s decision to increase speed, rather than slow down when requested by a passenger, constituted gross negligence.
As a consequence of the driver’s negligence, the accident occurred, leading to the multiple injuries sustained by the respondents.
The Court of Appeals determined that the negligence of Silverio Marchan was the direct and proximate cause of the accident.

Petitioners contended that there was no implied contract of carriage between the bus firm and the respondents.
The issue centered on whether the act of boarding and paying the fare automatically presupposed a contractual relationship that imposed strict liability on the carrier for the negligence of its employee.

Petitioners disputed the award of P40,000.00 as compensatory damages, questioning the reasonableness of the amount given the circumstances of the accident and the injuries sustained.
They further challenged the imposition of P30,000.00 as exemplary damages, arguing that such punitive measures were not properly pleaded or supported by adequate evidence in the complaint.

An additional issue raised was the appropriateness and quantum of attorney’s fees amounting to P5,000.00, with petitioners asserting that this award was excessive or unfounded.

Whether Article 1759 of the Civil Code, which holds common carriers strictly liable for the negligence and wilful acts of their employees, applies to the facts of the case.
The extent to which the established precedents (e.g., Vda. de Medina v. Cresencia and others) supported the Court of Appeals’ imposition of both compensatory and exemplary damages.