Fe Perez Vs Josefina Gutierrez (Digest)

 

FE PEREZ vs.JO vs. JOSE SEFI FINA NA and PANFILO ALAJAR

GUT UTIE IERR RREZ EZ

FACTS:

 Appellant Fe Perez, together with 9 co-teachers, was a passenger of an AC jeepney registered under the name of Appellee osefina which met an accident due to the rec!less negligence of its driver "eopoldo Cordero resulting in injuries to herself which re#uired her hospitalization.

Perez filed a case against $utierrez for damages in the Court of First %nstance of &avao. 'he complaint was later amended for (reach of contract of carriage

who, in fac who, fact, t, eve even n ass assume umed d res respon ponsi(i si(ility lity for the hospitalization of Perez. 'he court held Alajar lia(le to pay Pe Pere rez z ho hosp spit ital al e+ e+pe pens nses es,, ac actu tual al an and d mo mora rall damages, incidental e+penses and attorney0s fees as well as payment to $utierrez of moral damages and attorney0s fees, with cost of suit in (oth cases.

'he present appeal #uestions the correctness of the disp di spos osit itiv ive e port portio ion n of the the deci decisi sion on a #uo #uo wh whic ich h adjudg adj udged ed Alaja Alajar, r, ins instea tead d of $uti $utierr errez, ez, as the par party ty lia( lia(le le to her her for for the the pay payme ment nt of the the dama damage ges s ad adju judi dica cate ted d in he herr favo favor. r. Pere Perez z argu argues es that that the the registered owner of a motor vehicle should (e the one he held ld lia(l lia(le e for for da dama mage ges s resu result lting ing from from (rea (reach ch of  contract of carriage (y a common carrier.

ISSUE: 1hether or not the trial court erred in holding  Alajar lia(le to answer for damages resulting from

against $utierrez.

(reach of contract of carriage

$utierrez averred that actual owner of the jeepney, Panfil Pan filo o Al Alaja ajar, r, should should (e held held res respon ponsi(l si(le e for the acci ac cide dent nt ag agai ains nstt whom whom sh she e file filed d a thir thirdd-pa part rty y complaint. )er assertion was pursuant to the &eed of  *ale *a le e+ e+ec ecut uted ed (e (ett $uti $utier erre rez z and and Ala laja jarr wh whic ich h provided that the latter (inds himself and assumes respon res ponsi( si(ili ility ty for all act actions ions,, claims claims,, demand demands, s, and rights of action, and whatever !ind and nature, that may hereafter develop as a conse#uence of or in the course of operation of the vehicle.

RULING: Yes Gu!ie""e# is !$e one lia%le !o Pe"e# &o" da'ages no! Ala(a") Ala(a")

 Alajar disclaimed responsi(ility alleging that the deed of sale was null and void for it has not (een registered wi with th th the e Pu(l Pu(lic ic *erv *ervic ice e Comm Commis issi sion on de desp spit ite e hi his s demands on vendee $utierrez the $utierrez collects rentals from him for the use of said vehicle and that title to said vehicle remained with $utierrez pending approval of the sale (y the Pu(lic *ervice Commission.

RATIO:

%n Peralta vs. Mangusang:

%f the proper property ty cov covere ered d (y the franc franchis hise e is tra trans nsfer ferred red or  leased to another without o(taining the re#uisite approval, the transfer is not (inding on the Pu(lic *ervice Commission and, in co cont ntem empl plat atio ion n of la law w, th the e gr gran ante tee e co cont ntin inue ues s to (e responsi(le under the franchise in relation to the Commission and and to th the e pu(l pu(lic ic fo forr th the e co cons nse# e#ue uenc nces es in inci cide dent nt to th the e operation of the vehicle.

%n Erezo vs. Jepte:  CFI Davao Davao Ruling Ruling the trial court court fou found nd "eop "eopold oldo o Cordero Corde ro driver/ driver/ guilty of rec!less rec!less imprudence and found fou nd that that Al Alaja ajarr owned owned and ope operat rated ed the veh vehicle icle

 

... that in deali dealing ng with vehic vehicles les register registered ed under the Pu(lic *ervice "aw, the pu(lic has the right to assume or presume that the registered owner is the actual owner thereof , for it would (e difficult for the pu(lic to enforce the actions that they may have for injuries caused to them (y the vehicles (eing negligently operated if the pu(lic should (e re#uired to prove who the actual owner is.

%n Tamayo vs. Aquino:

'he trial court erred in holding Panfilo Alajar, rather  than osefina $utierrez, as the one directly lia(le to Fe Perez for the latter3s injuries and the corresponding damages incurred. Further, the lower  court ine+plica(ly failed to hold the driver "eopoldo Corde derro/, whom it found gu guiilty of rec!less imprudence, jointly and solidarily lia(le with osefina $uti $u tier erre rez z to Fe Pe Pere rez z in acco accord rdan ance ce wi with th the the provisions of article 4567 in relation to article 4568 of  the new Civil Code. 

2ut as the tra trans nsfer feree, ee, who ope operat rated ed the vehic vehicle le whe when n the passenger died, is the one directly responsi(le for the accident and death, death, he sho should uld in tur turn n (e mad made e res respon ponsi( si(le le to the registered owner for what the latter may have (een adjudged to pay. %n operating the truc! without transfer thereof having (een (een appr approv oved ed (y the the Pu Pu(l (lic ic *erv *ervic ice e Co Comm mmis issi sion on,, th the e transferee acted merely as agent of the registered owner and should (e responsi(le to him the registered owner/, for any damages that he may cause the latter (y his negligence.

'he judgment is modified in the sense that osefina $utierrez and "eopoldo Cordero are here(y adjudged directly and jointly and solidarily lia(le to Fe Perez for  the sums adjudicated in the judgment (elow in her  Fe Per Perez3 ez3// favor favor,, whi while le Pan Panfil filo o Alaja Alajarr is, in turn, turn, here(y held answera(le to osefina $utierrez for such amou am oun nt as the the lat latter ter ma may y pay pay to Fe Pere erez in satisfaction of the judgment appealed from.