Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

COASTAL PACIFIC TRADING v. SOUTHERN ROLLING MILLS

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 177086 2012-12-05	ALBERT M. CHING v. FELIX M. BANTOLO DEL CASTILLO, J.
"It is essential that for damages to be awarded, a claimant must satisfactorily prove during the trial that they have a factual basis, and that the defendant's acts have a causal connection to them."[1]
	GR No. 171101 2011-07-05	HACIENDA LUISITA v. PRESIDENTIAL AGRARIAN REFORM COUNCIL VELASCO JR., J.
An innocent purchaser for value and in good faith is one who "buys the property of another without notice that some other person has a right to or interest in the property and who pays the full and fair price for it at the time of the purchase, or before they get notice of some other persons' claim of interest in the property." [296] A person dealing with registered land has a right to rely on the Torrens certificate of title and to dispense with the need for inquiring further, except when the party has actual knowledge of the facts and circumstances that would impel a reasonably cautious man to make such inquiry or when the purchaser has knowledge of a defect or the lack of title of the vender or of sufficient facts to induce a reasonably prudent man to inquire into the status of the title of the property in litigation. [297]
	GR NO. 131723 2007-12-13	MANILA ELECTRIC COMPANY v. T.E.A.M. ELECTRONICS CORPORATION NACHURA, J.
We, however, deem it proper to delete the award of moral damages. TEC's claim was premised allegedly on the damage to its goodwill and reputation.[50] As a rule, a corporation is not entitled to moral damages because, not being a natural person, it cannot experience physical suffering or sentiments like wounded feelings, serious anxiety, mental anguish and moral shock. The only exception to this rule is when the corporation has a reputation that is debased, resulting in its humiliation in the business realm.[51] But in such a case, it is imperative for the claimant to present proof to justify the award. It is essential to prove the existence of the factual basis of the damage and its causal relation to petitioner's acts.[52] In the present case, the records are bereft of any evidence that the name or reputation of TEC/TPC has been debased as a result of petitioner's acts. Besides, the trial court simply awarded moral damages in the dispositive portion of its decision without stating the basis thereof.