THIRD DIVISION
G.R. No. 212008, November 16, 2016
WILLIAM ENRIQUEZ AND NELIA-VELA ENRIQUEZ, Petitioners, v. ISAROG LINE TRANSPORT, INC. AND VICTOR SEDENIO, Respondent.
D E C I S I O N
PERALTA,**J.:
This is a Petition for Review which petitioners William Enriquez and Nelia Vela-Enriquez filed assailing the Court of Appeals (CA) Decision1 dated June 13, 2013 and Resolution2 dated March 4, 2014 in CA-G.R. CV No. 97376.
The pertinent antecedents of the case as disclosed by the records are as follows:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrarySonny Enriquez was a passenger of a bus owned and operated by respondent Isarog Line Express Transport, Inc. (Isarog Line) driven by Victor Sedenio on July 7, 1998. While traversing the diversion road at Silangang Malicboy, Pagbilao, Quezon, said bus collided with another bus owned by Philtranco Service Enterprises, Inc. (Philtranco) which was being driven by Primitivo Aya-ay. As a result of the impact between the two (2) buses, several passengers died, including Sonny, who was twenty-six (26) years old at that time.
On September 7, 1999, Sonny's parents, petitioners William Enriquez and Nelia Vela-Enriquez (the Spouses Enriquez), filed a complaint for damages against Isarog Line and Philtranco as well as their drivers before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Libmanan, Camarines Sur.
On February 24, 2011, the RTC rendered a Decision finding Isarog Line, Sedenio, Philtranco, and Aya-ay solidarity liable for Sonny's death, thus:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
WHEREFORE, premises considered, decision is hereby rendered in favor of the plaintiffs, William Enriquez and Nelia Vela-Enriquez, and against defendants Isarog Line Express Transport, Inc., Victor Sedenio, Philtranco Service Enterprises, Inc., and Primitivo Aya-ay. Said defendants are hereby declared SOLIDARILY liable to the plaintiffs in the following amounts:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibraryIsarog Line then appealed before the CA. On June 13, 2013, the appellate court affirmed the RTC Decision, with modification, thus:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrarya) PHP 50,000.00 - as civil indemnity for the death of Sonny Enriquez;The total amount adjudged shall earn interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of this judgment until finality; thereafter, 12% per annum until the judgment is satisfied.
b) PHP 1,038,960.00 - for unrealized income;
c) PHP 100,000.00 - for moral damages;
d) PHP 25,000.00 - for exemplary damages;
e) PHP 25,000.00 - for attorney's fees.
Costs against the defendants.
SO ORDERED.3chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant appeal is hereby DISMISSED for lack of merit. ACCORDINGLY, the challenged Decision dated 24 February 2011 and Resolution dated 02 June 2011 of the RTC, Branch 29, Libmanan, Camarines Sur are AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION in that the monetary award in the amount of P1,038,960.00 by way of unrealized income is DELETED; and that Appellant is ordered to pay Appellees the amount of P25,000.00 as temperate damages.The Spouses Enriquez then filed a Motion for Partial Reconsideration, which the CA denied.5chanrobleslaw
SO ORDERED.4chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Article 2206. 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 addition:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibraryCompensation of this nature is awarded not for loss of earnings, but for loss of capacity to earn. The indemnification for loss of earning capacity partakes of the nature of actual damages which must be duly proven by competent proof and the best obtainable evidence thereof. Thus, as a rule, documentary evidence should be presented to substantiate the claim for damages for loss of earning capacity. By way of exception, damages for loss of earning capacity may be awarded despite the absence of documentary evidence when (1) the deceased was self-employed and earning less than the minimum wage under current labor laws, in which case, judicial notice may be taken of the fact that in the deceased's line of work no documentary evidence is available; or (2) the deceased was employed as a daily wage worker earning less than the 'minimum wage under current labor laws.6chanrobleslaw(1) 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;
x x x
Endnotes:
** Acting Chairperson per Special Order No. 2395 dated October 19, 2016.
1 Penned by Associate Justice Jane Aurora C. Lantion, with Associate Justices Vicente S.E. Veloso, and Eduardo B. Peralta, Jr.; concurring; rollo, pp. 24-37.
2Id. at 47-48.
3Rollo, pp. 68-69.
4Id. at 36. (Emphasis in the original)
5Id. at 47-48.
6People v. Villar, G.R. No. 202708, April 13, 2015, 755 SCRA 346, 356.
7 658 Phil. 647 (2011).
8Id. at 651.
9People v. Bautista, 665 Phil. 815, 827 (2011).
10 684 Phil. 363 (2012).
11Supra note 6.
12Supra note 7.
13 GAI = Daily wage x Number of working days in a week x Number of weeks in a year
= P185.00 x 6 x 52
= P57,720.00
14 Pursuant to the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas Circular No. 799, Series of 2013; Nacar v. Gallery Frames, 716 Phil. 267 (2013).