Case Summary (G.R. No. 104781)
Key Dates
Accident: April 20, 1983.
Trial court judgment (Regional Trial Court, Cavite, Branch XV): rendered March 7, 1986.
Court of Appeals decision: February 15, 1989; resolution denying motion for reconsideration: August 17, 1989.
Supreme Court decision under review: (decision date in the source is February 6, 1991). Applicable constitutional framework for the Court’s decision: the 1987 Philippine Constitution.
Applicable Law and Precedents Cited
- Rule 45 jurisdictional limitation: Supreme Court reviews only questions of law from Court of Appeals decisions; appellate findings of fact are generally final if supported by substantial evidence, subject to exceptions.
- Exceptions to finality of appellate findings: where findings are conclusions without citation of evidence, are contrary to trial court findings, or are totally devoid of support in the record. (Cited: Sese v. IAC; Andres v. Manufacturers Hanover).
- Doctrine of last clear chance: described generally as liability attaching to the party who had the last clear opportunity to avoid harm despite another’s negligence; its scope and limits discussed with reference to authorities cited in the record (including Anuran v. Buno and Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines, Inc. v. IAC).
- Limitation on the doctrine’s application: it cannot be invoked among jointly negligent defendants as a means to absolve one where their negligence was concurrent; it does not generally displace solidary liability among tortfeasors in suits by injured parties or heirs against multiple defendants.
Factual Findings (as found by the trial court)
- At about 6:30 a.m., the truck and bus approached each other from opposite directions. The truck’s front left side contacted the bus’s left side, ripping off the side wall and ejecting several passengers who subsequently died.
- The truck was driven by Montesiano and owned by Del Pilar. The bus was driven by Susulin; it was registered in Novelo’s name and operated under franchise by Magtibay and Serrado.
- Before the collision, Susulin observed the truck’s front wheels “wiggling” and that the truck was veering toward his lane. Despite this, Susulin attempted to overtake a Kubota hand tractor being pushed along the shoulder by shifting to a lower gear to gain power and speed. The two vehicles then sideswiped at each other’s left sides, after which the truck skidded, struck a coconut tree, and overturned.
Trial Court’s Conclusions and Relief
- The trial court concluded that the negligent acts of both drivers (truck driver Montesiano and bus driver Susulin) combined to cause the collision and resulting deaths; because it could not be determined that only one party’s negligence was the proximate cause, the liability of the two drivers (and related owners/operators) was declared solidary.
- The RTC ordered joint and several indemnity and damages payments to the heirs of each deceased passenger. For example, for Rogelio Bustamante the RTC awarded P30,000 as indemnity for death, U.S.$127,680 as indemnity for loss of earning capacity (to be converted at prevailing rates), P10,000 moral damages, and P5,000 exemplary damages; analogous indemnities and damages were awarded to the other heirs. The court also awarded attorney’s fees and costs, and allowed a cross‑claim by Novelo against Magtibay and Serrado.
Court of Appeals Ruling
- The Court of Appeals reversed and set aside the RTC judgment insofar as defendants Federico del Pilar and Edilberto Montesiano (owner and driver of the truck) were concerned, effectively dismissing the complaint as to those two defendants. The CA held that the bus driver had the “last clear chance” to avoid the collision and that his reckless overtaking of the hand tractor was the proximate cause.
- The CA emphasized evidence that the bus driver’s competency was suspect (driver’s license confiscated days earlier, use of a ticket, lack of practical examination, and that he was not a regular driver). The CA also cited authority (People v. Vender) noting that a descending road makes a vehicle more likely to get out of control, and thus was reluctant to accept that the truck’s speed was the critical causal factor.
Issues Presented to the Supreme Court
The petition raised, inter alia: (1) whether the CA could absolve del Pilar and Montesiano despite findings that the truck was being driven fast and its front wheels were wiggling; (2) whether the CA could disregard the RTC’s factual findings, given the trial court’s advantage in observing witnesses; (3) whether the CA properly applied the doctrine of last clear chance given its own finding of negligence by the truck driver; and (4) whether the CA applied the correct law and doctrine in reversing the RTC as to the truck owner and driver.
Supreme Court’s Review of Findings of Fact and Exceptions
- The Court reiterated the general rule that findings of fact by the Court of Appeals are final when supported by substantial evidence, but recognized exceptions where appellate findings are contrary to trial court findings. Given that the CA’s findings contradicted the RTC’s determination (and given the RTC’s advantage in observing witness demeanor), the Supreme Court elected to re‑examine the factual record. The Court observed that the RTC had considered the truck’s age (a 1947 model), the wiggling front wheels, the descending road, and the presence of an oncoming bus as factors supporting a finding of negligence by the truck driver.
Supreme Court’s Analysis of the Doctrine of Last Clear Chance
- The Court explained the doctrine’s general meaning and emphasized its limited applicability. Citing prior decisions, the Court stressed that the doctrine may apply in suits between owners and drivers of colliding vehicles in certain contexts, but it cannot be extende
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 104781)
Case Citation and Procedural Posture
- Reported at 271 Phil. 633, First Division, G.R. No. 89880, decided February 6, 1991.
- This is a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Revised Rules of Court seeking reversal of the Court of Appeals decision dated February 15, 1989 (which reversed and set aside the Regional Trial Court decision insofar as defendants-appellants Federico del Pilar and Edilberto Montesiano were concerned) and the Court of Appeals resolution dated August 17, 1989 denying motion for reconsideration.
- The trial court rendered judgment on March 7, 1986 awarding indemnities and damages against multiple defendants jointly and severally; only defendants Federico del Pilar (owner) and Edilberto Montesiano (driver) of the sand and gravel truck appealed to the Court of Appeals.
- The petitioners (heirs and certain plaintiffs) filed a petition to the Supreme Court after denial of their motion for reconsideration by the Court of Appeals.
Parties
- Petitioners: Emma Adriano Bustamante, in her own behalf as guardian-ad-litem of minors Rossel, Gloria, Yolanda, Ericson and Ederic Bustamante; spouses Salvador Jocson and Patria Bone-Jocson; spouses Jose Ramos and Enriqueta Cebu-Ramos; spouses Narciso Himaya and Adoracion Marquez-Himaya; spouses Jose Bersamina and Ma. Commemoracion Perea-Bustamante (heirs of deceased passengers).
- Private respondents/appellants in Court of Appeals: Federico del Pilar (owner of the sand and gravel truck) and Edilberto Montesiano (driver of the sand and gravel truck).
- Other defendants named at trial: Valeriano Magtibay and Simplicio Serrado (actual owners and/or operators of the passenger bus), Ricardo Susulin (driver of the bus), Efren Novelo (registered owner of the bus), and others as reflected in the trial court judgment.
Facts — Time, Place, and Collision Circumstances
- Date and time: About 6:30 a.m., April 20, 1983.
- Location: National road at Calibuyo, Tanza, Cavite.
- Vehicles involved:
- Gravel and sand truck, Plate No. DAP 717, driven by defendant Montesiano, owned by defendant Del Pilar; admitted to be a 1947 model.
- Mazda passenger bus, Motor No. Y2231, Plate No. DVT 259, driven by defendant Susulin, registered in name of Novelo but owned/operated by Magtibay and Serrado under a franchise (line Naic, Cavite to Baclaran, Parañaque), with ownership/franchise transfers noted (Novelo to Magtibay on November 8, 1981; Magtibay to Serrado on January 18, 1983).
- Sequence immediately before collision:
- Truck and bus were approaching from opposite directions.
- When the truck was about 30 meters away, bus driver Susulin observed the truck’s front wheels wiggling and that the truck was heading toward his lane.
- Susulin did not immediately take evasive action because he believed the truck driver was “merely joking.”
- Bus driver shifted from fourth to third gear to gain power and speed in order to overtake or pass a Kubota hand tractor being pushed along the shoulder while ascending an inclined part of the road.
- While the bus was overtaking the hand tractor, the truck and bus sideswiped each other on their left sides; the truck then skidded across to the other side of the road and landed in a nearby residential lot, hitting and felling a coconut tree.
Victims and Resulting Deaths
- Several bus passengers were thrown out and died from injuries sustained in the impact.
- Specifically named deceased and their relationships to plaintiffs:
- Rogelio Bustamante, 40 — husband of petitioner Emma Adriano Bustamante and father of minors Rossel, Gloria, Yolanda, Ericson, and Ederic Bustamante.
- Maria Corazon Jocson, 16 — daughter of plaintiffs spouses Salvador and Patria Jocson.
- Jolet Ramos, 16 — daughter of plaintiffs spouses Jose and Enriqueta Ramos.
- Enrico Himaya, 18 — son of plaintiffs spouses Narciso and Adoracion Himaya.
- Noel Bersamina, 17 — son of plaintiffs spouses Jose and Ma. Commemoracion Bersamina.
Trial Court Findings of Fact (Regional Trial Court, Cavite, Branch XV)
- The trial court found that negligent acts of both drivers (truck driver Montesiano and bus driver Susulin) contributed to and combined in directly causing the accident and resultant deaths.
- Factors leading to the trial court’s finding of the truck driver’s negligence:
- Truck was old (1947 model) as admitted by owner Del Pilar.
- Front wheels of truck were wiggling.
- Truck was driven fast and on a descending/descending portion of the road.
- There was a passenger bus approaching from the opposite direction.
- Factors leading to the trial court’s finding of bus driver Susulin’s negligence:
- Susulin saw the truck’s front wheels wiggling and the truck usurping his lane at a distance of about 30 meters.
- Susulin, despite these observations, chose to shift to third gear to overtake a hand tractor rather than stop or swerve to avoid collision.
- Had Susulin exercised ordinary prudence, he could have stopped the bus or swerved to the side/shoulder to avoid the collision.
Trial Court Disposition (March 7, 1986)
- The trial court ordered defendants Valeriano Magtibay, Simplicio Serrado, Ricardo Susulin, Efren Novelo, Federico del Pilar, and Edilberto Montesiano to pay jointly and severally to plaintiffs:
- To Emma Adriano Bustamante and her minor children:
- P30,000.00 as indemnity for death of Rogelio Bustamante;
- U.S. $127,680.00 as indemnity for loss of earning capacity of the deceased, at prevailing rate in pesos at time decision becomes final and executory;
- P10,000.00 as moral damages;
- P5,000.00 as exemplary damages.
- To Salvador and Patria Jocson:
- P30,000.00 indemnity for death of Maria Corazon Jocson;
- P10,000.00 moral damages;
- P5,000.00 exemplary damages.
- To Jose and Enriqueta Ramos:
- P30,000.00 indemnity for death of Jolet
- To Emma Adriano Bustamante and her minor children: