Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Torts - Week 7 - Persons Specifically Liable - Coggle Diagram

- - - - Proprietors of Buildings
        
        Engineer/Architect of collapsed building
        
        Head of a family for things thrown/falling
        
        Owners of enterprises/other employers
        
        Manufacturers/Producers
        
        Persons who interfere with contractual relations
        
        2 more items...
        
        Article 2187. Manufacturers and processors of foodstuffs, drinks, toilet articles and similar goods shall be liable for death or injuries caused by any noxious or harmful substances used, although no contractual relation exists between them and the consumers. (n)
        
        Liability - Requires that the death or injury be caused by the noxious or harmful substances used in the manufacture or processing of the product.
        
        3 more items...
        
        Article 1711. Owners of enterprises and other employers are obliged to pay compensation for the death of or injuries to their laborers, workmen, mechanics or other employees, even though the event may have been purely accidental or entirely due to a fortuitous cause, if the death or personal injury arose out of and in the course of the employment.
        
        The employer is also liable for compensation if the employee contracts any illness or disease caused by such employment or as the result of the nature of the employment.
        If the mishap was due to the employee's own notorious negligence, or voluntary act, or drunkenness, the employer shall not be liable for compensation. When the employee's lack of due care contributed to his death or injury, the compensation shall be equitably reduced.
        
        Article 1712. If the death or injury is due to the negligence of a fellow worker, the latter and the employer shall be solidarily liable for compensation. If a fellow worker's intentional or malicious act is the only cause of the death or injury, the employer shall not be answerable, unless it should be shown that the latter did not exercise due diligence in the selection or supervision of the plaintiff's fellow worker.
        
        Liability - owners of enterprises and other employers. For, death, injury, illness or disease suffered by their emplyoee.
        
        Other Employers - must be analogous to owners of enterprises, such as those engaging in a particular industry or trade that requires its managers to contract the services of laborers, workers or employees. Does not cover mere school teachers.(Alarcon v. Alarcon)
        
        1 more item...
        
        Death or Injury - Contemplates injury that arose out of and over the course of employment.
        
        1 more item...
        
        Illness or Disease - employer is liable if the same was caused by the employment or as a result of the nature of the employment.
        
        Article 2193. The head of a family that lives in a building or a part thereof, is responsible for damages caused by things thrown or falling from the same. (1910)
        
        Liability - Head of a family that lives in a building is liable for damage caused by things thrown or falling from the same.
        
        Strict Liability - no mention of negligence.
        
        Article 1723. The engineer or architect who drew up the plans and specifications for a building is liable for damages if within fifteen years from the completion of the structure, the same should collapse by reason of a defect in those plans and specifications, or due to the defects in the ground.
        The contractor is likewise responsible for the damages if the edifice falls, within the same period, on account of defects in the construction or the use of materials of inferior quality furnished by him, or due to any violation of the terms of the contract. If the engineer or architect supervises the construction, he shall be solidarily liable with the contractor.
        Acceptance of the building, after completion, does not imply waiver of any of the cause of action by reason of any defect mentioned in the preceding paragraph.
        The action must be brought within ten years following the collapse of the building. (n)
        
        Liability -
        
        Engineer/Architect - the person who drew up the plans and specifications for the building. Liable if: (1) there is a defect in the plans/specs OR defect in ground; (2) Building collapses.
        
        Q. Engineer and architect solidarily liable if worked together on plans?
        
        Contractor - if an edifice falls as a result of:
        
        Materials - Use of inferior quality materials furnished by the contractor
        
        Breach of Contract - Violation of the terms of the contract
        
        Defects - Defects in construction
        
        Solidary Liability - if the engineer or architect supervised the construction.
        
        Period - liability attaches if the fall/collapse occurs within (15) years from completion of the building.
        
        Presciption - action must be brought within (10) years of the collapse.
        
        Waiver - acceptance of the building after completion does not imply waiver of any of the causes of action by reason of any defect.
        
        Article 2190. The proprietor of a building or structure is responsible for the damages resulting from its total or partial collapse, if it should be due to the lack of necessary repairs. (1907)
        Article 2191. Proprietors shall also be responsible for damages caused:
        (1) By the explosion of machinery which has not been taken care of with due diligence, and the inflammation of explosive substances which have not been kept in a safe and adequate place;
        (2) By excessive smoke, which may be harmful to persons or property;
        (3) By the falling of trees situated at or near highways or lanes, if not caused by force majeure;
        (4) By emanations from tubes, canals, sewers or deposits of infectious matter, constructed without precautions suitable to the place. (1908)
        Article 2192. If damage referred to in the two preceding articles should be the result of any defect in the construction mentioned in article 1723, the third person suffering damages may proceed only against the engineer or architect or contractor in accordance with said article, within the period therein fixed. (1909)
        
        Liability
        
        Collapse of Building - Here, proprietor liable for injury resulting from total or partial collapse of building if it was due to lack of necessary repairs. (2190)
        
        Elements:
        
        Total/Partial Collapse;
        
        Proprietor is defendant;
        
        Collapse due to lack of necessary repairs
        
        Strict Liability - No defense of due diligence here. Thus, strict liability tort.
        
        Other Circumstances (2191)
        
        Smoke - Excessive smoke that may be harmful to persons or property
        
        Trees - Falling of trees, situated at or near high-ways or lanes if not caused by force majeure
        
        Strict Liability tort
        
        Q. Proprietor due diligence leads to explosion, causing excessive smoke. Liable under 2191?
        
        Fire and Explosion - Explosion of machinery not taken care of with due diligence AND the inflammation of explosive substances that have not been kept in a safe and adequate place.
        
        Negligence - only exception where due diligence can be raised as a defense.
        
        Emanations - emanations from tubes, canals, sewers or deposits of infectious matter constructed without precautions suitable to the place.
        
        Proper Party - if 1723 applies, then proprietor cannot be sued.
      - Article 2189. Provinces, cities and municipalities shall be liable for damages for the death of, or injuries suffered by, any person by reason of the defective condition of roads, streets, bridges, public buildings, and other public works under their control or supervision. (n)
      - Liability - Provinces, cities and municipalities are liable for damages for the death or injuries suffered by persons due to defective public works under their control or supervision.
        
        Defense - Provision does not provide for modes of extinguishing liability. No defense of due diligence.
        
        Negligence - In Quezon City v. Dacara, SC held that 2189 is a quasi-delict.
        
        Jimenez v. City of Manila - There, city liable as tort-feasor under 2176 but also under 2189.
        
        Control or Supervision - so long as the defective public work is under the control or supervision of the LGU, liability attaches. (Guilatco v. Dagupan)
        
        Control or supervision may be expressed via city charters that allow city via its representatives to construct/manage works. No requirement that they actually own it.
    - - Driver - if proximate cause of the mishap was the driver's negligence, the owner who was present is soldiarily liable if they could have prevented the mishap by due diligence. (Caedo v. Yu Khe Thai)
      - Vicarious Liability - This is a form of vicarious liability that applies to instances where the owner is with the driver at the time of the mishap. Here, proof must be presented that they could have prevented the mishap by due diligence over driver.
        
        Reasonable Opportunity - there must be reasonable opportunity for the owner to prevent his driver from performing subject negligent acts. If the driver performs sudden negligent acts, then the owner cannot be held liable under 2184. (Chapman v. Underwood)
        
        Q. Can owner be liable under 2180 even if they're in the same car?
        
        Yu Khe Thai - there, SC said owner was not negligent in the selection of the employee. Thus, only liability could be under 2184 for supervision in the specific circumstance.
        
        Special State of Alertness - SC in this case also considered that there was no reason for the owner to be in a special state of alertness. Thus, owner must be given clear notice of danger and reasonable time to correct the same.
  - - - Where Possessor is Injured - 2183 cannot be invoked by the caretaker of the animal when they are injured against the owner. (Afialda v. Hisole)
    - - Defense of Due Diligence - Cannot be invoked to extinguish liability. Under 2183 the liability is not based on negligence.
      - Possession - What is controlling is actual possession of the animal. Regardless of ownership. (Vestil v. IAC)
- - - - Problem here is that jurisprudence usually means 2176 when they say QDs.