4. Damnum Absque Injuria

G. Damnum Absque Injuria

There can be damage without injury in those instances in which the loss or harm was not the result of a violation of a legal duty. In such cases, the consequences must be borne by the injured person alone, the law affords no remedy for damages resulting from an act which does not amount to a legal injury or wrong. These situations are often called damnum absque injuria.

In other words, in order that a plaintiff may maintain an action for the injuries of which he complains, he must establish that such injuries resulted from a breach of duty which the defendant owed to the plaintiff- a concurrence of injury to the plaintiff and legal responsibility by the person causing it.

The underlying basis for the award of tort damages is the premise that an individual was injured in contemplation of law. Thus, there must first be a breach of some duty and the imposition of liability for that breach before damages may be awarded; and the breach of such duty should be the proximate cause of the injury. (Equitable Banking Corp. v. Calderon, G.R. No. 156168, December 14, 2004, 487 PHIL 499- 511)

Principle of Damnum Absque Injuria

It means damage without injury. One who merely exercises one’s rights does no actionable injury and cannot be held liable for damages. (Amonoy v. Spouses Fornilda, G.R. No. 140420, February 15, 2001)

Injury is the illegal invasion of a legal right; damage is the loss, hurt, or harm which results from the injury; and damages are the recompense or compensation awarded for the damage suffered. (Pantaleon v. American Express International, Inc., G.R. No. 174269, August 25, 2010)

There can be damage without injury in instances which the loss or harm was not the result of a violation of a legal duty. In such cases, the consequences must be borne by the injured person alone (Ibid.)

Damages v. Injury

Injury is the illegal invasion of a legal right; damage is the loss, hurt, or harm which results from the injury; damages are the compensation awarded for the damage suffered. There can be damage without injury in those instances in which the loss or harm was not the result of a violation of a legal duty.

Example: damnum absque injuria. (Sps. Custodio v. CA, G.R. No. 116100, February 9, 1996; Carbonell v. Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company, G.R. No. 178467, April 26, 2017)

Damage Without Injury

There can be damage without injury in those instances in which the loss or harm was not the result of a violation of a legal duty. In such cases, the consequences must be borne by the injured person alone, the law affords no remedy for damages resulting from an act which does not amount to a legal injury or wrong. These situations are often called damnum absque injuria.

In other words, in order that a plaintiff may maintain an action for the injuries of which he complains, he must establish that such injuries resulted from a breach of duty which the defendant owed to the plaintiff- a concurrence of injury to the plaintiff and legal responsibility by the person causing it.

The underlying basis for the award of tort damages is the premise that an individual was injured in contemplation of law. Thus, there must first be a breach of some duty and the imposition of liability for that breach before damages may be awarded; and the breach of such duty should be the proximate cause of the injury. (Equitable Banking Corp. v. Calderon, G.R. No. 156168, 14 Dec. 2004)

The proper exercise of a lawful right cannot constitute a legal wrong for which an action will lie, although the act may result in damage to another, for no legal right has been invaded. One may use any lawful means to accomplish a lawful purpose and though the means adopted may cause damage to another, no cause of action arises in the latter’s favor. Any injury or damage occasioned thereby is damnum absque injuria. The courts can give no redress for hardship to an individual resulting from action reasonably calculated to achieve a lawful end by lawful means. (The Orchard Golf & Country Club, Inc., v. Yu, G.R. No. 191033, 11 Jan. 2016)

NOTE: When damage occurs without a corresponding legal wrong, there is damnum absque injuria. (Jose v. Lagon, G.R. No. 119107, March 18, 2005)

The principle does not apply when the exercise of this right is suspended or extinguished pursuant to a court order. (Amonoy v. Spouses Fornilda, G.R. No. 140420, February 15, 2001)

Q: Yu Han Yat is the registered owner of a property in Quezon City. Later, he subdivided the property into 60 lots duly approved by the Bureau of Lands. TCT Nos. 47294 and 47353 were then issued in his name. To finance his plan of developing the subject property, Yu Han Yat applied for loans using some of his TCTs as security. When the mortgage instruments were presented for registration, the Registry of Deeds of Quezon City refused to record the same on the ground that the Yu Han Yat’s TCTs overlapped with the boundaries covered by another title, TCT No. 336663, registered in the name of Esperanza Nava (Nava). Eventually, the Land Registration Authority ordered the registration of the mortgage instruments.

In 1992, Yu Han Yat filed a Petition for Quieting of Title against the Estate of Nava, Mejia, Bernas and the Register of Deeds of Quezon City. The Estate of Nava applied for an injunction to restrain Yu Han Yat from undertaking development works on the property which the RTC granted. On appeal, the CA ruled in favor of Yu Han Yat and awarded him damages and attorney’s fees to compensate him for the duly substantiated losses he suffered to protect his interest over the property. Is the CA correct?

A: NO. There is no basis in awarding damages in favor of Yu Han Yat. In the absence of malice or bad faith in the prosecution of the case, the award of damages is unavailing. Settled is the rule that the adverse result of an action does not per se make the action wrongful and subject the actor to damages, for the law could not have meant to impose a penalty on the right to litigate. If damages result from a person's exercise of a right, it is damnum absque injuria (Bernas v. Estate of Felipe Yu Han Yat, G.R. Nos. 195908 & 195910, 15 Aug. 2018)