2. Negligent

Negligent Torts

Concept

A negligent tort involves harm caused by a failure to take precautions that a prudent person in the actor’s position would have taken. The test is whether that person could reasonably foresee the harm and therefore had reason to refrain from the conduct or take precautions against it. (Sanggacala v. National Power Corporation, G.R. No. 209538, 7 July 2021)¹

Governing provisions

Article 20 requires a person to indemnify another for damage caused, contrary to law, willfully or negligently. Article 19 requires justice, honesty, and good faith in the exercise of rights and performance of duties. Article 1172 makes responsibility for negligence in performing an obligation demandable, subject to regulation by the courts according to the circumstances. (Art. 20, Civil Code)² (Art. 19, Civil Code)³ (Art. 1172, Civil Code)⁴

Article 2176 addresses injury from an act or omission where intent is irrelevant and liability depends on fault or negligence measured against the diligence required by the circumstances. Good faith does not necessarily rule out negligence that gives rise to damages under Article 2176. (St. Martin Polyclinic, Inc. v. LWV Construction Corporation, G.R. No. 217426, 4 December 2017)⁵ (Art. 456, Civil Code)⁶

Requisites / Rules

• Identify the conduct and the foreseeable harm. Ask whether a prudent person in the actor’s position would have refrained or taken precautions; failure to do so constitutes negligence. (Sanggacala v. National Power Corporation)¹
• Establish a legal wrong and resulting damage. An accident or injury alone, without a legal wrong by the defendant, creates no cause of action for damages. (Spouses Latonio v. Mcgeorge Food Industries Inc., G.R. No. 206184, 6 December 2017)⁷
• Prove negligence through credible and admissible evidence. Without such proof, liability under Article 2176 does not follow. (St. Martin Polyclinic, Inc. v. LWV Construction Corporation)⁵
• Connect the negligence to the injury through proximate cause: a cause that produces the injury in a natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by an efficient intervening cause, and without which the result would not have occurred. (Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital v. Spouses Capanzana, G.R. No. 189218, 22 March 2017)⁸

Distinctions

Negligence-based liability differs from Article 21 liability, which requires a willful act, including intent to do the act and a desire to achieve its outcome. Article 2176 does not make intent the controlling inquiry. Article 1172, in turn, expressly addresses negligence in the performance of an obligation. (St. Martin Polyclinic, Inc. v. LWV Construction Corporation)⁵ (Art. 1172, Civil Code)⁴

Article 2176 generally governs parties not bound by contract. When a contractual relationship exists, quasi-delict rules do not ordinarily govern that relationship, although tort liability may still be considered if the act or omission is independently actionable. (Orient Freight International, Inc. v. Keihin-Everett Forwarding Company, Inc., G.R. No. 191937, 9 August 2017)⁹

Key doctrines

Res ipsa loquitur permits an inference of negligence from the occurrence of an accident when the chief evidence is practically accessible to the defendant but inaccessible to the injured party. It eases proof of specific negligence; it is neither a substantive rule nor a separate ground of liability. (Aleta v. Sofitel Philippine Plaza Manila, G.R. No. 228150, 11 January 2023)¹⁰

Negligence can arise in particular relationships. An agent answers for negligence, with the rigor of judicial assessment depending on whether the agency was compensated. Upon partition, a co-owner must pay for damage caused by the co-owner’s negligence or fraud. (Art. 1909, Civil Code)¹¹ (Art. 500, Civil Code)¹²

Exceptions

If the victim’s own negligence is the proximate cause, a third party is not liable absent independent negligence on that party’s part. Assumption of risk covers known, particular risks inherent in an activity, but does not excuse injury caused by risks outside those inherent dangers. (Spouses Latonio v. Mcgeorge Food Industries Inc.)⁷ (Abrogar v. Cosmos Bottling Company and Intergames, Inc., G.R. No. 164749, 15 March 2017)¹³

Bar tip

Start with foreseeable harm and the precaution a prudent person would take. Then prove the defendant’s negligence, resulting damage, and proximate cause; do not treat injury alone as proof of liability. (Sanggacala v. National Power Corporation)¹ (St. Martin Polyclinic, Inc. v. LWV Construction Corporation)⁵ (Spouses Latonio v. Mcgeorge Food Industries Inc.)⁷