Title
National Power Corp. vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 96410
Decision Date
Jul 3, 1992
Typhoon "Kading" caused a flood near Angat Dam; NPC's negligence in water release and ineffective warnings led to damages, making them liable despite force majeure.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 105227)

Background and Incident

On October 27, 1978, intense rainfall associated with Typhoon "Kading" led to severe flooding in areas near Angat Dam. The private respondents claimed they were awakened by rapidly rising water levels that submerged their homes and properties. They attributed this disaster to the unannounced simultaneous opening of all three floodgates at the dam, which they alleged was done recklessly without adequate warning to the residents.

Petitioners' Defense

The petitioners denied the claims of negligence and argued that they had maintained the water level at the dam safely and opened the floodgates gradually, taking necessary precautions. They contended that written warnings were disseminated to nearby towns, and thus, they should not be held liable for the damages caused, asserting that the flooding resulted from a fortuitous event and not due to their negligence.

Appellate Court Decision

The Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court's decision, which had ruled in favor of the respondents, resulting in the petitioners being ordered to pay substantial damages, including interest, attorney's fees, and litigation costs. The appellate court held that the petitioners were liable despite their claims of force majeure, applying the principles established in the case of Juan F. Nakpil & Sons vs. Court of Appeals, which indicated that negligence can establish liability even in the presence of an act of God.

Liability Under Civil Code

The court's analysis centered on Article 2176 of the Civil Code, which states that anyone who causes damage through fault or negligence is liable to pay for such damages. The court noted that the negligence of the petitioners in managing the dam, particularly in the timely opening of the floodgates, contributed significantly to the flooding.

Findings on Negligence

The appellate court highlighted the failure of the petitioners to implement necessary safeguards prior to and during the storm. Testimonies from meteorological officials indicated that the rainfall was moderate and not unusual enough to cause such severe flooding. Furthermore, evidence showed that while there were forecasts about Typhoon "Kading," water levels were maintained at maximum instead of being adequately managed to prevent overflow.

Warning Notifications

The petitioners argued that they had provided warning notifications to local officials regarding the potential need to release water from the dam. However, the court found the delivery of

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.