G.R. No. 160039 - Secosa vs. Heirs of Francisco

On June 27, 1996, at around 4:00 p.m., Erwin Suarez Francisco, an 18-year-old third-year physical therapy student of the Manila Central University, was riding his motorcycle along Radial 10 Avenue near the Veteran Shipyard Gate in Manila.
At the same time, petitioner Raymundo Odani Secosa was driving an Isuzu cargo truck with plate number PCU-253, owned by petitioner Dassad Warehousing and Port Services, Inc.
The road was being traversed by three vehicles in a southbound lane: the motorcycle driven by Francisco, a sand and gravel truck following it, and finally, the Isuzu truck driven by Secosa.

As Secosa overtook the sand and gravel truck, his Isuzu truck bumped the motorcycle ridden by Francisco, causing the latter to fall.
The rear wheels of the truck then ran over Francisco, resulting in his instantaneous death.
Fearing for his life, Secosa fled the scene, leaving his truck behind.

The parents of Erwin Francisco filed an action for damages against the petitioners – Raymundo Odani Secosa, Dassad Warehousing and Port Services, Inc., and Dassadas president, El Buenasenso Sy – under Civil Case No. 96-79554 of Branch 20 of the RTC of Manila.
On June 19, 1998, after a full trial, the RTC rendered a decision in favor of the respondents, awarding several sums for actual and compensatory damages, repair of the motorcycle, loss of earning capacity, moral damages, exemplary damages, and attorney’s fees plus costs.
The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the trial court in toto on February 27, 2003, prompting the present petition for review under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court.

Petitioner Dassad Warehousing and Port Services, Inc. argued that it had exercised the diligence of a good father of a family in the selection and supervision of its employees in line with Article 2180 of the Civil Code.
Petitioner El Buenasenso Sy was alleged to be solidarily liable with the other petitioners, a contention challenged on the basis of corporate personality and related doctrines.
The petition also questioned the appropriateness of awarding moral damages amounting to P500,000.00, deeming it manifestly absurd, mistaken, and unjust.

Whether petitioner Dassad Warehousing and Port Services, Inc. exercised the requisite diligence of a good father of a family in the selection and supervision of its employees, as required under Article 2180 of the Civil Code and supported by relevant jurisprudence.

Determination of whether oral testimonies alone, without corroborative documentary evidence, suffice to rebut the presumption of negligence.
Assessment of the evidentiary standard necessary to prove that the employer had observed due diligence.

Whether petitioner El Buenasenso Sy, though president of Dassad Warehousing and Port Services, Inc., should be held solidarily liable for the actions of the company and its employee.

Examination of the principle of separate corporate personality.
Consideration of whether there exists any justification to pierce the corporate veil in this case.

Whether the award of moral damages amounting to P500,000.00 is justified and proportionate to the suffering inflicted on the respondents as a result of the vehicular accident.