G.R. No. 102206 - National Power Corp. vs. Court of Appeals

Case Summary (G.R. No. 102206)

Factual Background

The private respondents were owners of several parcels of land in Angat and Norzagaray, Bulacan, which they alleged suffered extensive damage and loss during an inundation at the height of typhoon “Kading” on the evening of 26 October 1978 into the early morning of 27 October 1978. The complained damages were pleaded in specific amounts: Jose Palad P59,900.00; Lauro Palad P42,500.00; Domingo Cruz P25,000.00; Matias Castillo P5,000.00; Emilia Mariano P9,500.00; Raymundo Palad P19,000.00; and Francisca Torres P18,000.00. The private respondents attributed their losses to abrupt opening of the spillway gates of the Angat Dam, which they alleged caused an unusually rapid rise of waters that inundated the towns.

Trial Court Proceedings

The private respondents filed Civil Case No. SM-1338 with the RTC of Malolos on 25 October 1982. The petitioners answered and pleaded that they took necessary precautions, exercised due care in maintenance and operation of the Angat hydro-electric plant, issued written warnings on 24 October 1978 to affected towns, and invoked force majeure, absence of causal relation, damnum absque injuria, last clear chance on the part of the plaintiffs, and laches. After trial the RTC rendered judgment on 18 June 1990 ordering payment of actual damages to the named plaintiffs in the amounts claimed, awarding moral damages of P30,000.00 to each plaintiff with legal interest from promulgation, and attorney’s fees amounting to twenty-five percent of whatever was collected from the defendants.

Appellate Court Decision

The petitioners appealed to the Court of Appeals, which in CA-G.R. CV No. 27985 promulgated its decision on 16 August 1991. The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC’s finding of negligence on the part of petitioners, applied the doctrine that negligence concurrent with an act of God does not absolve liability, and sustained the award of actual damages. The appellate court deleted the award of moral damages for lack of malice or bad faith and reduced attorney’s fees to a fixed sum of P5,000.00. The court found negligence in the petitioners’ delay in spilling water and in their decision to open spillway gates only late on the evening of 26 October 1978 instead of gradually during the morning of 26 October 1978 when meteorological forecasts indicated the typhoon was heading toward Central Luzon.

Issues on Review

The petition raised four assignments of error: first, that the Court of Appeals erred in applying the Court’s prior ruling in National Power Corporation vs. Court of Appeals, 161 SCRA 334 so as to render petitioners liable despite the typhoon being force majeure; second, that written warnings given by petitioners absolved them from liability; third, that any damage suffered was damnum absque injuria; and fourth, that the appellate court erred in not awarding petitioners’ counterclaim for attorney’s fees and litigation expenses.

Petitioners’ Contentions

Petitioners maintained that they acted with due care in anticipation of the typhoon, pointed to written warnings issued on 24 October 1978, and argued that the deluge was the immediate and exclusive consequence of an act of God for which they were not liable. They relied on the absence of causal relation between any act or omission of theirs and the plaintiffs’ losses, and asserted defenses of force majeure, damnum absque injuria, laches, and the last clear chance doctrine. Petitioners also invoked an internal investigative report of the National Bureau of Investigation allegedly exculpating petitioner Chavez.

Supreme Court’s Analysis and Legal Reasoning

The Court reviewed its prior holdings in related cases, notably National Power Corporation vs. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 96410) and National Power Corporation vs. Court of Appeals (G.R. Nos. 103442-45), and reaffirmed that where a human factor of negligence concurred with an act of God the defendant could not invoke force majeure to escape liability. The Court observed that petitioners raised the same defenses previously rejected in the cited authorities and that the evidence showed petitioners delayed authorized spilling and did not exercise the requisite discretion to avert the flood. The Court recited the Court of Appeals’ factual findings that forecasts as early as the morning of 25 October 1978 indicated the typhoon’s direction toward Metro Manila and Central Luzon, that petitioner Chavez sought permission to open flood gates by midmorning of 26 October 1978 but received approval only at 5:40 p.m., and that gates were not opened until 9:00 p.m. and were then increased abruptly to full opening by midnight. The Court accepted the trial court’s credibility assessments and factual determinations that the catastrophic rise in water between 1:00 and 2:00 a.m. immediately following the gate operations proved that the flood was not exclusively the product of rain from typhoon “Kading” but was materially caused by petitioners’ delayed and abrupt operation of the spillway.

Evid

Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 102206)

Parties and Procedural Posture

National Power Corporation and Benjamin Chavez were the petitioners before the Supreme Court and the defendants below.
The Court of Appeals acted as the public respondent on appeal from the Regional Trial Court.
The private respondents were the landowners Lauro Palad, Jose Palad, Domingo Cruz, Matias Castillo, Emilia Mariano, Raymundo Palad, and Francisca C. Torres who sued for damages.
The private respondents filed Civil Case No. SM-1338 on 25 October 1982 before the Regional Trial Court of Malolos, Bulacan, and the case was raffled to Branch 22.
The petitioners appealed the RTC decision to the Court of Appeals as CA-G.R. CV No. 27985, and thereafter filed a petition for review with the Supreme Court.

Key Factual Allegations

A typhoon called "Kading" caused heavy rains and preceded an unusual inundation of towns neighboring the Angat Dam on the evening of 26 October 1978 into the early morning of 27 October 1978.
The private respondents alleged that the inundation resulted in extensive damage to their properties and claimed the following losses in pesos as documented in the record.
The claimed losses included P42,500.00 for Lauro Palad, P59,900.00 for Jose Palad, P25,000.00 for Domingo Cruz, P5,000.00 for Matias Castillo, P9,500.00 for Emilia Mariano, P19,000.00 for Raymundo Palad, and P18,000.00 for Francisca C. Torres.
The petitioners delayed spilling water from the Angat reservoir despite forecasts indicating the typhoon’s change of course toward Central Luzon on 25 October 1978.
Petitioner Benjamin Chavez sought permission to open spillway gates about 10:45 a.m. on 26 October 1978 but requested approval from two division managers and received confirmation only at 5:40 p.m. on the same day.
The spillway gates were opened between 9:00 p.m. and 12:00 midnight on 26 October 1978, with openings gradually increased to a maximum of 14 meters by midnight.
Witnesses for the plaintiffs testified that the flood occurred between 1:00 and 2:00 a.m. and that water levels rose from knee to neck level within about ten minutes.

Issues Presented

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in applying the doctrine of National Power Corporation v. Court of Appeals and holding petitioners liable despite the coming of the typhoon being force majeure.
Whether the giving of written warnings by the petitioners absolved them from liability.
Whether any damage suffered by the respondents amounted to damnum absque injuria.
Whether the petitioners were entitled