Title
Dela Llana vs. Biong
Case
G.R. No. 182356
Decision Date
Dec 4, 2013
A car rear-ended by a dump truck caused minor injuries initially, but plaintiff later claimed whiplash. Court ruled insufficient evidence linked injury to accident, denying damages.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 182356)

Key Dates

  • March 30, 2000: Vehicular collision at North Avenue, Quezon City.
  • June–October 2000: Onset of whiplash symptoms; three months of physical therapy; cervical spine surgery on October 19, 2000.
  • May 8, 2001: Complaint for damages filed in RTC, Quezon City.
  • April 19, 2007: RTC decision in favor of petitioner.
  • February 11, 2008: Court of Appeals decision reversing RTC.
  • March 31, 2008: CA resolution denying motion for reconsideration.
  • December 4, 2013: Supreme Court decision under review.

Applicable Law

  • 1987 Philippine Constitution (jurisdictional basis, due process).
  • Civil Code of the Philippines:
    • Article 2176 (quasi-delict; liability for negligence).
    • Article 2180(5) (employer’s vicarious liability for employees acting within scope of assigned tasks).
  • Rules of Court:
    • Rule 45 (certiorari; review of CA decisions with conflicting RTC findings).
    • Rule 129, Section 2 (judicial notice).
    • Rule 130 (rules on evidence and expert testimony).
  • Relevant Jurisprudence: Nutrimix Feeds Corp. v. CA; GSIS v. Ibarra; Carvajal v. Luzon Development Bank.

Factual Background

  • The petitioner’s brother, Juan dela Llana, stopped at a red light on North Avenue when Joel’s gravel-laden dump truck suddenly rammed the rear of their car.
  • Dra. dela Llana suffered glass splinter wounds and later experienced escalating pain in her left neck and shoulder.
  • After unsuccessful physical therapy under Dr. Rosalinda Milla, she underwent cervical spine surgery by Dr. Eric Flores to relieve nerve compression between C5 and C6.

Trial Court Findings (RTC)

  • Determined that Joel’s reckless driving proximately caused petitioner’s whiplash injury.
  • Held respondent vicariously liable for failing to exercise the diligence of a good father of a family in hiring and supervising Joel.
  • Awarded P570,000.00 actual damages, P250,000.00 moral damages, and costs.

Court of Appeals Ruling

  • Reversed the RTC for lack of proof linking collision to whiplash injury by preponderance of evidence.
  • Noted the lengthy interval between accident and symptom onset raised reasonable doubt.
  • Emphasized absence of immediate medical examination and the petitioner’s failure to present expert witnesses or establish causation in her medical certificate.

Issue before the Supreme Court

Whether Joel Primero’s negligent driving was the proximate cause of Dra. dela Llana’s whiplash injury and, consequently, whether respondent is vicariously liable.

Supreme Court Analysis

  1. Quasi-delict Elements (Art. 2176):
    – Existence of damages.
    – Fault or negligence.
    – Direct causal connection between negligence and damages.
  2. Burden of Proof:
    – Lies with petitioner to establish causation by preponderance of evidence.
  3. Scope of Review:
    – CA findings of fact are generally conclusive under Rule 45 unless conflicting with RTC.
    – Here, a conflict permitted examination of evidence.
  4. Evaluation of Evidence:
    a. Photographs of the damaged car only prove impact, not medical causation.
    b. Medical certificate inadmissible (not f

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.