Title
Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines, Inc. vs. Intermediate Appellate Court
Case
G.R. No. 66102-04
Decision Date
Aug 30, 1990
A jeepney's detached wheel caused a collision with a bus, killing three passengers. The Supreme Court ruled the jeepney driver and owners negligent, holding them liable for damages, while exonerating the bus driver due to unforeseeable circumstances.
collision case
solidarily liable
damages

Case Summary (G.R. No. 66102-04)

Factual Background

On December 24, 1966, seven passengers boarded a jeepney owned by spouses Isidro Mangune and Guillerma Carreon and driven by Tranquilino Manalo at Dau, Mabalacat, Pampanga, bound for Carmen, Rosales, Pangasinan, to spend Christmas at their homes; the agreed fare for the trip was P24.00. After a stopover at Moncada, Tarlac, the jeepney proceeded and, upon reaching barrio Sinayoan, San Manuel, Tarlac, its right rear wheel detached so that it ran unbalanced; the driver applied the brakes, and the jeepney executed an abrupt U-turn, stopped occupying a substantial portion of the western lane of the highway and faced south. Bus No. 753 of PHILIPPINE RABBIT BUS LINES, INC., driven by Tomas delos Reyes, approached from the north and, almost contemporaneously with the jeepney’s maneuver, struck the right rear portion of the jeepney; three jeepney passengers—Catalina Pascua, Erlinda Meriales, and Adelaida (Florida) Estomo—died, and the remaining passengers sustained injuries. Police sketches and photographs (Exhs. K and P in the record) showed skid marks attributed to the jeepney and a point of impact on the western lane; no skid marks attributable to the bus were found.

Procedural History

The police investigation resulted in criminal complaints for Multiple Homicide against both drivers; preliminary investigation found probable cause against Manalo and his case was elevated to the Court of First Instance, which convicted him for Multiple Homicide and Multiple Serious Physical Injuries through Reckless Imprudence; delos Reyes’s criminal case was dismissed for insufficiency of evidence. Civil suits for recovery of damages were filed before the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan in three consolidated civil cases (Civil Cases Nos. 1136, 1139 and 1140), impleading spouses Mangune and Carreon, Manalo, PHILIPPINE RABBIT BUS LINES, INC., delos Reyes, and Filriters Guaranty Assurance Corporation, Inc. as additional defendant in one case. The trial court rendered judgment on December 27, 1978, holding Manalo and the jeepney owners liable and awarding specified damages; on appeal, the Intermediate Appellate Court reversed in part, held delos Reyes and Rabbit liable, and awarded larger damages and exemplary damages; the Intermediate Appellate Court denied reconsideration, and Rabbit filed the present petition for review on certiorari.

Trial Court Findings

The Court of First Instance found that Manalo was negligent and that spouses Mangune and Carreon, as carriers, breached the contract of carriage with their passengers; the trial court relied on unrebutted testimony that the jeepney had been running fast, that passengers had warned the driver, that the right rear wheel detached and that the jeepney skidded from the eastern shoulder across the eastern lane to the point of impact on the western lane, and it relied on police sketches and the driver’s criminal conviction and application of the doctrine res ipsa loquitur. The trial court adjudged damages in specified amounts for indemnity for loss of life, loss of earnings, medical and burial expenses, and moral damages, and it held Filriters Guaranty jointly liable in the case where it was impleaded. The trial court treated the liability as contractual under the doctrine of culpa contractual and imposed carrier liability pursuant to Articles 1733, 1755 and 1756 of the New Civil Code.

Intermediate Appellate Court Ruling

The Intermediate Appellate Court reversed the trial court insofar as it had awarded Rabbit’s cross-claim recovery from the jeepney owners, and instead rendered judgment holding PHILIPPINE RABBIT BUS LINES, INC. and its driver Tomas delos Reyes jointly and severally liable to the plaintiffs for the deaths and injuries of the jeepney passengers. The appellate court premised its conclusion on the doctrines of bolded last clear chance, the presumption that a driver who bumps the rear of another vehicle is guilty unless contradicted, and the substantial factor test; it also calculated the bus’s speed from the Laoag-Tarlac route and concluded that the bus was traveling at 80–90 km/h and that delos Reyes failed to take available evasive action.

Issues Presented

The principal legal question was whether liability for the deaths and injuries of the jeepney passengers rested with the jeepney driver and owners as carriers or with the bus driver and owner, and whether the trial court’s award should be modified, including the appropriate measure for indemnity for loss of life under the New Civil Code.

Parties’ Contentions

Petitioner PHILIPPINE RABBIT BUS LINES, INC. contended that the Intermediate Appellate Court correctly attributed proximate negligence to its driver based on the rear-end collision presumption and the doctrine of last clear chance and that the bus’s speed and failure to avoid the collision made it the substantial cause of harm. Plaintiffs-appellants and respondents urged that the jeepney driver’s abrupt U-turn, the unrebutted skid marks and police sketches, and Manalo’s criminal conviction established his and the jeepney owners’ negligence; they relied on the presumption of carrier negligence in cases of passenger death or injury under Article 1756 and on precedents holding carriers strictly liable unless extraordinary diligence was shown.

Supreme Court’s Ruling

The Supreme Court granted the petition, set aside the decision and resolution of the Intermediate Appellate Court dated July 29, 1983 and November 28, 1983, reinstated the trial court’s decision of December 27, 1978 with modifications, and held that only Isidro Mangune, Guillerma Carreon, and Filriters Guaranty Assurance Corporation, Inc. were liable to the victims or their heirs; the Court increased the indemnity for loss of life to P30,000.00.

Legal Basis and Reasoning

The Court reiterated that factual findings of the Court of Appeals are final except when they conflict with the trial court’s findings, warranting reexamination. It held that the doctrine of bolded last clear chance did not apply in a passenger’s action to enforce a carrier’s contractual obligations, citing prior decision Anuran, et al. v. Buno, et al., and that it would be inequitable to absolve a negligent carrier because the other driver might share fault. The Court found that the appellate court misapplied the presumption that a driver who bumps the rear of another vehicle is guilty, because the record showed the jeepney executed an abrupt U-turn and left skid marks indicating a sudden crossing from the eastern shoulder across the eastern lane to the western lane, evidence that rebutted the presumption. The Court rejected the appellate court’s calculation of excessive speed as determinative; it held that an asserted speed of 80–90 km/h, even if correct, was within ordinary highway limits and, more importantly, that delos Reyes had only a few seconds to react given evidence of 45 meters of jeepney skid marks and the straight, unobstructed road; the driver’s testimony of approximately 50 km/h and physiological limits of reaction time meant that avoidance was impracticable. The Court further applied the doctrine of culpa contractual and Article 1756, which presumes carrier fault in cases of death or injury of passengers unless extraordinary diligence is proven, and found that the jeepney owners failed to explain the detachment of the right rear wheel or prove that the event was a caso fortuito under Article 1174. The Court held that the driver could not

...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.

About Privacy Terms