Title
Supreme Court
Sanico vs. Colipano
Case
G.R. No. 209969
Decision Date
Sep 27, 2017
Passenger injured in jeepney accident due to owner’s negligence; breach of contract of carriage upheld, voided waiver, adjusted damages.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 7380)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Background and parties
    • On January 7, 1997, Werherlina P. Colipano (“Colipano”) filed a complaint for breach of contract of carriage and damages against Jose Sanico (“Sanico”), owner/operator of a jeepney, and Vicente Castro (“Castro”), its driver.
    • The incident allegedly occurred on December 25, 1993 at around 4:00 P.M. in Carmen, Cebu, when Colipano and her young daughter were paying passengers in Sanico’s jeepney, driven by Castro.
  • Circumstances of the accident
    • Due to overcrowding, Colipano was made to sit on an empty beer case at the rear exit of the jeepney, with her sleeping child on her lap.
    • The jeepney lost engine power on an uphill stretch to Natimao-an and slid backwards into a coconut tree. In trying to brace herself, Colipano’s left foot slipped on the wet step board and was crushed between the board and the tree, resulting in a severe leg injury and eventual amputation.
  • Lower court proceedings
    • The Regional Trial Court (Branch 25, Danao City) on October 27, 2006 found both Sanico and Castro liable for breach of contract of carriage; it awarded actual damages of ₱2,098.80 and compensatory damages for loss of income of ₱360,000.00.
    • On September 30, 2013, the Court of Appeals affirmed with modification, reducing compensatory damages to ₱200,000.00 and maintaining joint and several liability of both respondents. No motion for reconsideration was filed.
  • Supreme Court petition
    • Sanico and Castro filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45, challenging (a) the finding of breach by both respondents; (b) the binding effect of an Affidavit of Desistance and Release of Claim executed by Colipano; and (c) the computation and amount of compensatory damages.
    • Colipano opposed, asserting that only Sanico was party to the carriage contract, that the affidavit was void, and that her damages were correctly proven and computed.

Issues:

  • Breach of contract of carriage
    • Whether the Court of Appeals erred in holding both Sanico and Castro liable for breach of the contract of carriage.
    • Whether Castro, as driver and employee, is a proper party to the carriage contract.
  • Validity of the Affidavit of Desistance and Release of Claim
    • Whether Colipano’s post-accident affidavit releasing her claim is binding.
    • Whether the requisites for a valid waiver under the Civil Code were satisfied.
  • Quantum of damages
    • Whether the compensatory damages for loss of earning capacity were correctly computed and awarded.
    • What the proper amount of compensatory damages should be, considering the applicable formula and evidence.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.