Title
Nikko Hotel Manila Garden vs. Reyes
Case
G.R. No. 154259
Decision Date
Feb 28, 2005
Hotel Nikko and Ruby Lim absolved of liability after Roberto Reyes was asked to leave an uninvited party; no abuse of rights proven.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 203754)

Regional Trial Court Ruling

The RTC credited Lim’s testimony that she politely and discreetly asked Reyes to leave. It found that Reyes, as an uninvited guest, assumed the risk of being asked to leave (volenti non fit injuria) and thus dismissed the complaint against Lim and the hotel.

Court of Appeals Ruling

The CA reversed, holding that Lim’s alleged public and loud command to Reyes was contrary to morals and good customs (Art. 21), causing humiliation. It imposed solidary liability on Hotel Nikko, Lim, and Dr. Filart for moral (₱200,000), exemplary (₱200,000) damages, and attorney’s fees (₱10,000). The CA also criticized Lim for not first privately verifying at Filart’s side and invoked social equality to justify exemplary damages.

Issues for Supreme Court Review

I. Applicability of volenti non fit injuria given assumed risk.
II. Joint and several liability of Lim and hotel with Dr. Filart.
III. Departure from RTC’s factual findings on Lim’s conduct.
IV. Introduction of poverty/discrimination argument without evidence.
V. Failure to address alleged defects in petitioner’s appellate brief.

Standard of Review on Conflicting Findings

Where RTC and CA findings irreconcilably conflict, the Supreme Court may review credibility and weigh evidence to resolve which version is more credible.

Credibility and Abuse of Rights Analysis

  • Lim’s long hotel career required discretion; she had motive to remove an uninvited person quietly to avoid displeasing the celebrant.
  • Reyes’s own testimony admitted Lim was “very close”—“nearly kissing distance”—when she spoke, undermining claim of loud public shouting.
  • No evidence of ill motive or malice; no witness corroborated public humiliation.
  • RTC finding that any commotion resulted from Reyes’s own reaction was accepted as more credible.

Doctrine of Volenti Non Fit Injuria and Civil Code Duties

  • Even assuming Reyes risked ejection, Articles 19 and 21 impose a duty to act in good faith, fairness, and avoid damage to another.
  • Lim’s removal request was a legal exercise of her duty and right, without bad faith or intent to injure.

Employer Liability

  • Under Art. 2180, hotel’s liability depends on employee’s wrongful act. Absent abuse of rights by Lim, Hotel Nikko is not liable.

Exemplary Damages and Discrimination Finding

  • Exemplary damages require proof of intent to injure or malice; none was shown.
  • CA’s view that Lim acted out of contempt for the poor lacks factual basis: Reyes’s status as an actor and media personality belies poverty

    ...continue reading

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