Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 440 views

    Estacion Vs Bernardo 483 SCRA 222

    Uploaded by

    G-one Paisones
    The document summarizes a Supreme Court case from 2006 regarding a traffic accident. It finds that the driver of the cargo truck, Gerosano, was negligent for driving too fast with faulty brakes, causing him to rear-end a jeepney and injure passenger Noe Bernardo. As the employer of the driver, petitioner Larry Estacion is also liable. However, the court also finds Bernardo guilty of contributory negligence for standing in the rear of the moving jeepney, putting himself in danger. The jeepney driver and owner are also found negligent.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Estacion Vs Bernardo 483 SCRA 222

    Uploaded by

    G-one Paisones
    440 views2 pages
    The document summarizes a Supreme Court case from 2006 regarding a traffic accident. It finds that the driver of the cargo truck, Gerosano, was negligent for driving too fast with faulty brakes, causing him to rear-end a jeepney and injure passenger Noe Bernardo. As the employer of the driver, petitioner Larry Estacion is also liable. However, the court also finds Bernardo guilty of contributory negligence for standing in the rear of the moving jeepney, putting himself in danger. The jeepney driver and owner are also found negligent.

    Original Description:

    Case

    Original Title

    Estacion vs Bernardo 483 SCRA 222

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document summarizes a Supreme Court case from 2006 regarding a traffic accident. It finds that the driver of the cargo truck, Gerosano, was negligent for driving too fast with faulty brakes, causing him to rear-end a jeepney and injure passenger Noe Bernardo. As the employer of the driver, petitioner Larry Estacion is also liable. However, the court also finds Bernardo guilty of contributory negligence for standing in the rear of the moving jeepney, putting himself in danger. The jeepney driver and owner are also found negligent.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    440 views2 pages

    Estacion Vs Bernardo 483 SCRA 222

    Uploaded by

    G-one Paisones
    The document summarizes a Supreme Court case from 2006 regarding a traffic accident. It finds that the driver of the cargo truck, Gerosano, was negligent for driving too fast with faulty brakes, causing him to rear-end a jeepney and injure passenger Noe Bernardo. As the employer of the driver, petitioner Larry Estacion is also liable. However, the court also finds Bernardo guilty of contributory negligence for standing in the rear of the moving jeepney, putting himself in danger. The jeepney driver and owner are also found negligent.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    3

    LARRY ESTACION vs NOE BERNARDO


    483 SCRA 222 (February 27, 2006)

    FACTS:
    On October 16, 1982 in the afternoon, respondent Noe Bernardo was going home to
    Dumaguete from Cebu. He boarded a Ford Fiera jeepney driven by Quinquillera and owned
    by Bandoquillo. He was seated on the extension seat at the center of the Fiera. From San
    Jose, an old woman wanted to ride so Noe offered his seat and hung/stood on the left rear
    carrier of the vehicle. The Fiera slowed down and stopped to pick up more passengers.

    Suddenly, an Isuzu cargo truck owned by the petitioner Larry Estacion and driven by
    Gerosano, which was travelling in the same direction, hit the rear portion of the jeepney.
    The Fiera crushed Bernardos legs and feet, and he was brought to Silliman University
    Medical Center where his lower left leg was amputated. Police report showed that there
    were 10 more who were injured by the accident.

    On February 18, 1993, Bernardo, and his guardian ad litem Arlie Bernardo, filed with
    the Regional Trial Court of Dumaguete a complaint for damages arising from quasi-delict
    against petitioner as owner of the truck and his driver. RTC ruled that Gerosano was
    negligent and it was the direct and proximate cause of the incident. It also held petitioner
    liable as employer. CA affirmed in toto the RTC.

    ISSUE:
    Whether or not petitioner is liable and whether or not Bernardo was guilty of
    contributory negligence

    HELD:
    YES.

    RATIO:
    From the way the truck reacted to the application of the brakes, it can be shown that
    Gerosano was driving at a fast speed because the brakes skidded a lengthy 48 ft. as shown
    in the sketch of the police. There was also only one tire mark which meant that the brakes
    of the truck were not aligned properly, otherwise, there would have been 2 tire marks. It is
    the negligent act of the petitioners driver of driving the cargo truck at a fast speed coupled
    with faulty brakes which was the proximate cause of the respondent Bernardos injury. As
    employer of Gerosano, petitioner is primarily and solitarily liable for the quasi-delict
    committed by the former. He is presumed to be negligent in the selection of his employee
    which petitioner failed to overcome. He failed to show that he examined driver Gerosano as
    to his qualifications, experience and records.

    Bernardo is guilty of contributory negligence by standing at the rear portion of the


    jeep. Contributory Negligence is conduct on the part of the injured party, contributing as a
    legal cause to the harm he has suffered, which falls below the standard to which he is
    required to conform for his own protection. Bernardos act of standing on the left rear
    portion showed his lack of ordinary care and foresight that such act could cause him harm
    or put his life in danger. To hold a person as having contributed to his injuries, it must be
    shown that he performed an act that brought about his injuries in disregard of warning or
    signs of an impending danger to health and body. Quinquillera (jeepney driver) was also
    negligent because there was overloading which is in violation of traffic rules and regulations.
    He also allowed Bernardo to stand on the left rear of his jeep. There is also a presumption of
    negligence on the part of the owner of the jeep, Bandoquillo, to which she did not rebut.

    You might also like