Case Summary (G.R. No. 220149)
Factual Background
Augusto Mercado, son of petitioner Ciriaco L. Mercado, and Manuel Quisumbing, Jr., both pupils of Lourdes Catholic School, quarreled over a “pitogo” — a nutshell piggy bank used by children. During the altercation on February 22, 1966, Augusto Mercado wounded Manuel Quisumbing, Jr. on the right cheek with a piece of razor. The Court of Appeals found that Augusto Mercado initiated the aggression after Manuel Quisumbing, Jr. intervened in Mercado’s attempt to retrieve the pitogo from another student. The injury did not require hospitalization.
Issue of Liability and Responsibility
Petitioner argued that since the incident occurred within a Catholic school during recess, liability should rest on the school administration or the teacher, not the father under Article 2180 of the Civil Code. The court examined the provision concerning the liability of teachers and heads of “establishments of arts and trades” for damages caused by their pupils under their custody. The Court clarified that this provision does not apply to ordinary academic educational institutions, such as the Lourdes Catholic School, where pupils return to their parents after school hours. Thus, parental liability remains intact. The petitioner’s contention that the school should be held liable was rejected on this basis.
Moral Damages Awarded and Analysis
The Court of Appeals awarded Manuel Quisumbing, Jr. moral damages of ₱2,000 and medical expenses of ₱50. The medical expense amount was based on an approximation, as the attending doctor did not specify actual fees. Petitioner claimed that the moral damages sum was excessive, given the wound was sustained in a common school fight and did not cause any permanent disfigurement or hospitalization.
The Court reviewed the statutory provisions on moral damages under the Civil Code. Moral damages may be awarded when a criminal offense or quasi-delict causes injury or suffering, as clarified under Articles 2217 and 2219. The Court noted that no criminal case was filed against the child aggressor and that Augusto Mercado was only nine years old and likely lacked discernment to be held liable criminally. Therefore, any quasi-delict liability would hinge on negligence or fault.
Contributory Fault and Absence of Grounds for Moral Damages
The Court found that Manuel Quisumbing, Jr.’s own intervention in Augusto Mercado’s attempt to retrieve his property (the pitogo) was the proximate cause of the fight and injury. Under Article 2179 of the Civil Code, contributory negligence or fault bars or reduces recovery. Consequently, the injured boy’s own fault negated the justification for awarding moral damages.
Additionally, the Court found that none of the specific circumstances enumerated in Article 2219—such as defamation, physical injuries caused by criminal acts, or other exceptional conditions—were demonstrated. Hence, the basis for moral damages was absent.
Attorney’s Fees and Damages for Parents
The Court also dismissed claims for moral damages by Manuel Quisumbing, Sr., and Ana Pineda for their own mental anguish, citing jurisprudence that excludes recovery for sympathy or anxiety caused by injury to another person, even a child. Claims for attorney’s fees were denied because there was no showing of wanton disregard by the petitioner.
Final Ruling
The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals’ award of moral damages, declaring petitioner Ciriaco Mercado exempt from paying such dama
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 220149)
Nature and Background of the Case
- This case is a petition for review from a decision of the Court of Appeals.
- The Court of Appeals condemned petitioner Ciriaco L. Mercado to pay moral damages amounting to P2,000 and medical expenses of P50.
- The damages arose from a physical injury inflicted by petitioner’s son, Augusto Mercado, on Manuel Quisumbing, Jr., his classmate at Lourdes Catholic School, Kanlaon, Quezon City.
- The original complaint was dismissed by the Court of First Instance of Manila, presided over by Hon. Bienvenido A. Tan.
- The respondents, Manuel Quisumbing, Jr. and his father, accused the petitioner of responsibility for the injury caused by Augusto Mercado.
Facts Found by the Court of Appeals
- Manuel Quisumbing, Jr. and Augusto Mercado were classmates.
- The conflict arose from a quarrel over a "pitogo," an empty nutshell used by children as a piggy bank.
- Augusto Mercado inflicted a wound on Manuel’s right cheek with a piece of razor during the fight on February 22, 1966.
- Augusto Mercado initiated the aggression, allegedly aggravated by Manuel Quisumbing’s intervention during Augusto’s attempted retrieval of his pitogo from another boy, Renato Legaspi.
- Both Manuel and Renato were unaware that the pitogo rightfully belonged to Augusto, believing it belonged to Benedicto P. Lim who lent it to Renato.
- The fight escalated physically, with Augusto pushing and hitting Manuel before cutting him.
Medical and Moral Damages Assessed
- Dr. Antonio B. Past treated Manuel but did not specify fees charged; Manuel was not hospitalized.
- The Court of Appeals accepted P50 as a fair estimate of medical expenses.
- Moral damages of P2,000 were awarded on the basis of the moral suffering of the child due to the wound.
- The respondents also claimed moral damages for themselves (parents) and attorney’s fees, but the Court of Appeals denied these claims.
- The court held that mental anguish or moral damages for parents due to sympathy for their child’s suffering are generally not recoverable under law.
Petitioner’s Arguments on Liability
- Petitioner argued that since the injury occurred on school premises during recess, the school authorities or teacher should be held responsible, not the father.
- Reliance was made on the last paragraph of Article 2180 of the Civil Code whic