3. Damages in Case of Death

K. Damages in Case of Death

Damages that can be recovered in case of death (MEA-I 3)

• Moral damages
• Exemplary damages
• Attorney's fees and expenses for litigation
• Indemnity for death
• Indemnity for loss of earning capacity
• Interest in proper cases

Rules when crimes and quasi-delict has caused death

The amount of damages for death caused by a crime or quasi-delict shall be at least P3,000, even though there may have been mitigating circumstances. In addition:

• The defendant shall be liable for the loss of the earning capacity of the deceased, and the indemnity shall be paid to the heirs of the latter; such indemnity shall in every case be assessed and awarded by the court, unless the deceased on account of permanent physical disability not caused by the defendant, had no earning capacity at the time of his death;
• If the deceased was obliged to give support according to the provisions of Article 291, the recipient who is not an heir called to the decedent's inheritance by the law of testate or intestate succession, may demand support from the person causing the death, for a period not exceeding five years, the exact duration to be fixed by the court;
• The spouse, legitimate and illegitimate descendants and ascendants of the deceased may demand moral damages for mental anguish by reason of the death of the deceased. (NCC, Art. 2206)

NOTE:

Under Art. 2206 of the NCC, the amount of damages for death caused by a crime or quasi-delict is at least P3,000.00. The applicable amounts of civil indemnity and moral damages depend on the cause of action and, in criminal cases, the offense and penalty; P75,000 is not a universal amount for either item. Exemplary damages are not automatically awarded in every death case. (People v. Roa, G.R. No. 225599, March 22, 2017)

The plaintiff is entitled to the amount that he spent during the wake and funeral of the deceased. An expense is not excluded solely because it was paid after the burial; recovery depends on its nature, causal connection to the death, and proof that it was reasonable.

Determination of amount of damages recoverable

Much is left to the discretion of the court considering the moral and material damages involved. There can be no exact or uniform rule for measuring the value of a human life. (Villa Rey Transit, Inc., v. CA, G.R. No. L-25499, February 18, 1970)

The life expectancy of the deceased or of the beneficiary, whichever is shorter, is an important factor. Other factors that are usually considered are:

• Pecuniary loss to plaintiff or beneficiary;
• Loss of support;
• Loss of service;
• Loss of society;
• Mental suffering of beneficiaries; and
• Medical and funeral expenses.

NOTE: The formula that has gained acceptance over time has limited recovery to net earning capacity. The premise is obviously that net earning capacity is the person’s capacity to acquire money, less the necessary expense for his own living. (Philtranco Service Enterprises v. Felix Paras and Inland Trailways Inc., G.R. No. 161909, April 25, 2012)

Legend:

Net Earning Capacity = Life Expectancy x (Gross Annual Income – Living Expenses)

Life Expectancy = 2/3 x (80 – Age of the Deceased)

Living Expenses = actual necessary personal living expenses if established; otherwise, courts commonly estimate them at 50% of gross annual income

Heirs cannot claim as damages the full amount of earnings of the deceased

Said damages consist, not of the full amount of his earnings, but of the support they received or would have received from him had he not died in consequence of the negligence of the bus’s agent. Stated otherwise, the amount recoverable is not loss of the entire earning, but rather the loss of that portion of the earnings which the beneficiary would have received. In other words, only net earnings, not gross earning, are to be considered.

In fixing the amount of that support, the "necessary expenses of his own living" should be deducted from his earnings. Earning capacity, as an element of damages to one's estate for his death by wrongful act, is necessarily his net earning capacity or his capacity to acquire money, less the necessary expense for his own living. (Villa Rey Transit, Inc. v. CA, et al., G.R. No. L-25499, February 18, 1970; People of the Philippines v. Jorie Wahiman y Rayos, G.R. No. 200942, June 16, 2015)

IN CRIMES AND QUASI-DELICTS

The amount of damages for death caused by a crime or quasi-delict shall be at least ₱3,000, even though there may have been mitigating circumstances. (People v. Tabarnero, G.R. No. 168169, February 24, 2010)

In addition to the amount to be awarded, Art. 2206 of the NCC provides that the defendant shall also be liable for the following:

• Loss of the earning capacity of the deceased, and the indemnity shall be paid to the heirs of the latter; such indemnity shall in every case be assessed and awarded by the court, unless the deceased on account of permanent physical disability not caused by the defendant, had no earning capacity at the time of his death;
• If the deceased was obliged to give support according to the provisions of Article 291, the recipient who is not an heir called to the decedent's inheritance by the law of testate or intestate succession, may demand support from the person causing the death, for a period not exceeding five years, the exact duration to be fixed by the court;

A support recipient may claim under Article 2206(2) if the deceased was obliged to support the recipient and the recipient is not an heir called to the deceased’s inheritance by testate or intestate succession. Being a devisee or legatee does not, by itself, resolve that question.

• The spouse, legitimate and illegitimate descendants and ascendants of the deceased may demand moral damages for mental anguish by reason of the death of the deceased. (BAR AREA)

NOTE: In case of death caused by quasi-delict, the brother of the deceased is not entitled to the award of moral damages based on Article 2206 of the New Civil Code. (Sulpicio Lines Inc. v. Curso, G.R. No. 157009, March 17, 2010)

Q: Rodolfo, Monalisa, Johanna and Abellana arrived at the municipal wharf of Jetafe, Bohol. They boarded a cargo truck which would transfer them from the wharf to Poblacion, Jetafe. While passengers were getting on the truck, Simolde called Caballes, the official truck driver. Caballes approached Simolde but left the engine running. While Simolde and Caballes were talking, Aparra, chief diesel mechanic, started driving the truck. Upon seeing the truck move, Caballes rushed to the truck and sat beside Aparra. However, instead of taking control of the vehicle, Caballes allowed Aparra to drive. Shortly thereafter, Aparra lost control of the truck and they fell off the wharf. Consequently, Rodolfo and Monalisa died while Johanna and Abellana were injured. Vivian, the widow of Rodolfo and the mother of Johanna, filed a complaint.

A) Whether or not quasi-delict was committed?

B) Whether or not loss of earning capacity should be awarded to Vivian, wife of Rodolfo?

A:

A) YES. The requisites for quasi-delict are: (1) damages to the plaintiff; (2) negligence, by act or omission, of which defendant, or some person for whose-acts he must respond, was guilty; and (3) the connection of cause and effect between such negligence and the damages. Caballes was grossly negligent in allowing Aparra to drive the truck despite being an inexperienced driver. Aparra's inexperience caused the accident that led to the deaths of Rodolfo and Monalisa. It is undisputed that the deaths of Vivian's husband and daughter caused damage to her. Clearly, the requisites for a quasi-delict are present in this case.

B) YES. Article 2206 provides that the amount of damages for death caused by a crime or quasi-delict shall be at least Three thousand pesos, even though there may have been mitigating circumstances. In the cited Torreon case, the Court awarded ₱50,000 as civil indemnity for each death. In addition, the defendant shall be liable, among others, for the loss of the earning capacity of the deceased, and the indemnity shall be paid to the heirs of the latter; such indemnity shall in every case be assessed and awarded by the court, unless the deceased on account of permanent physical disability not caused by the defendant, had no earning capacity at the time of his death. The indemnity for the deceased's lost earning capacity is meant to compensate the heirs for the income they would have received had the deceased continued to live. (Vivian B. Torreon and Felomina F. Abellana v. Generoso Aparra, Jr., Felix Caballes, and Carmelo Simolde, G.R. No. 188493, December 13, 2017)

Updated: Civil indemnity for death caused by a crime is awarded in the amount applicable to the particular offense and circumstances under controlling jurisprudence (Soriano v. Intestate Estate of Bryan G. Diano, G.R. No. 277496, 20 January 2026).