Temere Animus

G.R. No. 107968| October 30, 1996 ELIAS S. CIPRIANO and/or E.S. CIPRIANO ENTERPRISES , petitioner, vs. THE COURT OF APPEALS and MACLIN ELECTRONICS, INC .,  respondents. Rationale: A VIOLATION OF A STATUTORY DUTY IS NEGLIGENCE PER SE. - We have already held that violation of a statutory duty is negligence per se. In F.F. Cruz and Co., Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, we held the owner of a furniture shop liable for the destruction of the plaintiff's house in a fire which started in his establishment in view of his failure to comply with an ordinance which required the construction of a firewall. In Teaque vs. Fernandez, we stated that where the very injury which was intended to be prevented by the ordinance has happened, none compliance with the ordinance was not only an act of negligence, but also the proximate cause of the death. Indeed, the existence of a contract between petitioner and private respondent does not bar a finding of negligence under the principles of quasi-delict,...

G.R. No. 147324| May 25, 2004 PHILIPPINE COMMUNICATIONS SATELLITE CORPORATION, (Philcomsat)   petitioner, vs  GLOBE TELECOM, INC. (formerly and Globe Mckay Cable and Radio Corporation), respondents. Case summary: Facts: 1.         On 07 May 1991, Philcomsat and Globe entered into an Agreement whereby Philcomsat obligated itself to establish, operate and provide an IBS Standard B earth station (earth station) within Cubi Point for the exclusive use of the USDCA. 2.         The term of the contract was for 60 months, or five (5) years. 3.       In turn, Globe promised to pay Philcomsat monthly rentals for each leased circuit involved. 4.      At the time of the execution of the Agreement, both parties knew that the Military Bases Agreement between the Republic of the Philippines and the US (RP-US Military Bases Agreement), which was the ba...

G.R. No. L-29640 June 10, 1971 GUILLERMO AUSTRIA,  petitioner, THE COURT OF APPEALS (Second Division), PACIFICO ABAD and MARIA G. ABAD,  respondents. Rationale: Quantum of proof is required to establish that a fortuitous event did take place. To require in the present action for recovery the prior conviction of the culprits in the criminal case, in order to establish robbery as a fact, would be to demand proof beyond reasonable doubt to prove a fact in a civil case. Case Summary: Facts: 1.      In a receipt dated 30 January 1961, Maria G. Abad acknowledged having received from Guillermo Austria one (1) pendant with diamonds valued at P4,500.00, to be sold on commission basis or to be returned on demand. 2.        On 1 February 1961, however, while walking home to her residence in Mandaluyong, Rizal, Abad was said to have been accosted by two men, one of whom hit her on the face, while the other snat...