This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2011-08-24 |
BERSAMIN, J. |
||||
| not only in the fallo but also in the text of the decision, or else, the award should be thrown out for being speculative and conjectural.[53] | |||||
|
2010-03-17 |
BERSAMIN, J. |
||||
| Essentially, the purpose of moral damages is indemnity or reparation, that is, to enable the injured party to obtain the means, diversions, or amusements that will serve to alleviate the moral suffering he has undergone by reason of the tragic event. According to Villanueva v. Salvador,[13] the conditions for awarding moral damages are: (a) there must be an injury, whether physical, mental, or psychological, clearly substantiated by the claimant; (b) there must be a culpable act or omission factually established; (c) the wrongful act or omission of the defendant must be the proximate cause of the injury sustained by the claimant; and (d) the award of damages is predicated on any of the cases stated in Article 2219 of the Civil Code. | |||||
|
2008-02-14 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| On a final note, petitioners' liability for moral damages and attorney's fees cannot now be questioned for failure of petitioners to raise it before the Court of Appeals. It is a well-entrenched rule that issues not raised below cannot be raised for the first time on appeal as to do so would be offensive to the basic rules of fair play and justice.[20] Moreover, the award of moral damages in this case is justifiable under Article 2219 (2)[21] of the Civil Code, which provides for said damages in cases of quasi-delicts causing physical injuries.[22] The award for attorney's fees is also proper under Article 2208 (2)[23] of the Civil Code, considering that De Vera, Jr. was compelled to litigate when petitioners ignored his demand for an amicable settlement of his claim.[24] | |||||