PSBA Vs CA

 

G.R. No. 84698 February 4, 1992 PHILIPPINE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS A!INIS"RA"ION, #UAN . LI!, BEN#A!IN P. PAULINO, AN"ONIO !. !AG"ALAS, COL. PERO SACRO a$% L". !. SORIANO, petitioners, vs.

COUR" OF APPEALS, HON. REGINA ORO&E'(BENI"E', ORO&E'(BENI"E', )$ *er +aa+)-y a Pre)%)$/ #u%/e o0 Bra$+* 4, Re/)o$a "r)a Cour-, !a$)a, SEGUNA R. BAU"IS"A a$% ARSENIA . BAU"IS"A, respondents. FAC"S3 Carlitos Bautista was a third year student at the Philippine School of Business Administration.  Assailants, who were not members of the schools academic community, while in the premises of PSBA, stabbed Bautista to death. This incident prompted his parents to file a suit against PSBA and its corpor cor porate ate offic officers ers for dam damage ages s due to their their all allege eged d neglige negligence nce,, reckle recklessn ssness ess and lac lack k of securi security ty precautions, means and methods before, during and after the attack on the victim. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss, claiming that the compliant states no cause of action against them based on uasi!delicts, as the said rule does not cover academic institutions. The trial court denied the motion to dismiss. Their motion for reconsideration was likewise dismissed, and was affirmed by the appellate court. "ence, the case was forwarded to the Supreme Court.

ISSUE3 #hether or not PSBA is liable for the death of the student.  

RULING3 Because the circumstances of the present case evince a contractual relation between the PSBA and Carlitos Bautista, -*e rue o$ ua)(%e)+- %o $o- reay /o5er$ . A perusal of Article $%&' shows that obligations arising from uasi!delicts or tort, also known as e(tra!contractual obligations, arise only between parties not otherwise bound by contract, whether e(press or implied. "owever, this impression has not prevented this Court from determining the e(istence of a tort even when there obtains a contract.  Article $%)*, in con+unction with Article $%&' of the Civil Code, establishes the rule in in o+o are$-).  Article $%)* provides that the damage should have been caused or inflicted by pupils or students of the educational institution sought to be held liable for the acts of its pupils or students while in its custody. "owever, this material situation does not e(ist in the present case for, as earlier indicated, the assailants of Carlitos were not students of the PSBA, for whose acts the school could be made liable. But it does not necessarily follow that PSBA is absolved form liability.

*e$ a$ a+a%e7)+ )$-)-u-)o$ a++e- -u%e$- 0or e$ro7e$-, -*ere ) e-ab)*e% a +o$-ra+be-ee$ -*e7, reu-)$/ )$ b)a-era ob)/a-)o$ *)+* bo-* ar-)e ) bou$% -o +o7y )-* . or  its part, the school undertakes to provide the student with an education that would presumably suffice to euip him with the necessary tools and skills to pursue higher education or a profession. This includes ensuring the safety of the students while in the school premises. -n the other hand, the student covenants to abide by the schools academic reuirements and observe its rules and regulations.

/n the circumstances obtaining in the case at bar, however, there is, as yet, no finding that the contract between the school and Bautista had been breached thru the formers negligence in providing proper  security measures. This would be for the trial court to determine. And, even if there be a finding of  negligence, the same could give rise generally to a breach of contractual obligation only. 0sing the test of Cangco Cangco,, supra supra,, the negligence of the school would not be relevant absent a contract. /n fact, that negligence becomes material only because of the contractual relation between PSBA and Bautista. /n other words, a contractual relation is a condition sine qua nonto nonto the schools liability. The negligence of 

 

the school school can cannot not e(ist e(ist ind indepe epende ndentl ntly y of the contra contract, ct, unless unless the neg neglig ligenc ence e occurs occurs under under the circumstances set out in Article $% of the Civil Code.