Case Summary (G.R. No. 149878)
Key Dates
- November 2, 1956: Death of Consolacion Bravo‐Castro and attempted telegram.
- February 11, 1986: Decision of the Intermediate Appellate Court (IAC).
- February 29, 1988: Decision of the Supreme Court.
Applicable Law
- Civil Code of the Philippines (1950), Articles 1170 (liability for breach), 2176 (quasi‐delict), and 2217 (moral damages).
- 1987 Philippine Constitution (in force at Supreme Court decision).
Facts of the Case
- On November 2, 1956, Consolacion Bravo‐Castro died in Lingayen, Pangasinan.
- Her daughter, Sofia C. Crouch—then vacationing in the Philippines—paid Telefast to send a telegram to her husband, Ignacio Castro Sr., at his Indiana address notifying him of Consolacion’s death.
- Telefast accepted payment, but the telegram never reached any addressee; no explanation or apology was furnished to Sofia.
- Only Sofia attended the interment; the other heirs, all residing in the U.S., were never informed in time.
- Upon return to the U.S., Sofia and the other heirs sued Telefast in the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan for breach of contract and negligence.
Procedural History
• Trial Court (C. F. I. of Pangasinan, Civ. Case No. 15356):
– Found Telefast liable for breach of contract and negligence.
– Awarded Sofia P31.92 (telegram fee), P16,000 compensatory damages (travel expenses), P20,000 moral damages; awarded other heirs varying amounts of moral damages; P1,000 exemplary damages each; P5,000 attorney’s fees; costs.
• Intermediate Appellate Court (AC‐G.R. No. CV‐70245):
– Affirmed liability but deleted compensatory P16,000 for Sofia; struck out exemplary damages; reduced certain moral damages from P20,000 to P10,000.
• Supreme Court Review (G.R. No. 73867):
– Petition by Telefast for certiorari.
Issue
Whether Telefast, guilty of negligent non‐transmission of the telegram but not proven fraudulent or malicious, can be held liable for moral and exemplary damages beyond mere reimbursement of the telegram fee.
Legal Analysis
• Breach of Contract and Quasi‐Delict
– Article 1170: Liability arises from fraud, negligence, or delay in performance of obligations.
– Article 2176: Liability arises from fault or negligence causing damage.
– Telefast undertook, for a fee, to transmit the message; its failure to do so despite payment constituted contract breach and negligent omission.
• Moral Damages
– Article 2217: Moral damages include mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety, and similar injury if proximately caused by wrongful act or omission, even if incapable of exact pecuniary computation.
– The delayed knowledge of their mother’s death and inability to attend her burial caused the heirs great mental anguish and sorrow—compensable as moral damages.
• Exemplary Damages
– Justified as a deterrent to ensure telegram companies exercise
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 149878)
Procedural History
- Petition for review on certiorari filed by Telefast Communications/Philippine Wireless, Inc. from the Intermediate Appellate Court decision dated February 11, 1986 in AC-G.R. No. CV-70245
- Original complaint filed as Civil Case No. 15356 before the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan by Sofia C. Crouch and other members of the Castro family
- Trial court rendered judgment awarding compensatory, moral, exemplary damages, attorney’s fees, and costs
- Intermediate Appellate Court affirmed in part and modified certain damage awards
- Supreme Court docketed as G.R. No. 73867, decision promulgated February 29, 1988
Factual Background
- On November 2, 1956, Consolacion Bravo-Castro died in Lingayen, Pangasinan
- Sofia C. Crouch, Consolacion’s daughter vacationing in the Philippines, sent a paid telegram from Telefast’s Dagupan office addressed to her father, Ignacio Castro Sr., in Indiana, USA
- The telegram was accepted and charged but never delivered to the addressee
- Consolacion was buried with only Sofia in attendance; the overseas family learned of the death only after interment
- Upon return to the United States, Sofia discovered the telegram had not been received and, with her siblings, sued Telefast for breach of contract and damages
Legal Issues
- Whether petitioner’s failure to transmit the telegram constituted a breach of contractual obligation under Articles 1170 and 2176 of the Civil Code
- Whether plaintiffs are entitled to moral and exemplary damages despite absence of fraud, malice, or reckless intent
- Whether compensatory damages for Sofia C. Crouch’s travel expenses are recoverable
- Proper quantum of damages to be awarded