GR 129792; (December, 1999) (Digest)
G.R. No. 129792 December 21, 1999
JARCO MARKETING CORPORATION, LEONARDO KONG, JOSE TIOPE and ELISA PANELO, petitioners, vs. HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, CONRADO C. AGUILAR and CRISELDA R. AGUILAR, respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Jarco Marketing Corporation owned Syvel’s Department Store, with petitioners Kong, Tiope, and Panelo as its managers. Respondents are the parents of six-year-old Zhieneth Aguilar. On May 9, 1983, while Criselda Aguilar was signing a credit slip at the store’s second-floor counter, a gift-wrapping counter/structure suddenly fell, pinning Zhieneth underneath. She sustained severe internal injuries and died fourteen days later. The parents demanded reimbursement for expenses, which petitioners refused, leading to a damages suit.
The Regional Trial Court dismissed the complaint, finding the proximate cause was Zhieneth’s act of climbing and clinging to the counter, coupled with her mother’s contributory negligence. It absolved petitioners, noting the counter was sturdy, had stood for fifteen years, and was not an attractive nuisance. The Court of Appeals reversed this decision, holding petitioners negligent. Petitioners sought review by the Supreme Court.
ISSUE
Whether petitioners are liable for damages arising from quasi-delict for the death of Zhieneth Aguilar.
RULING
Yes, petitioners are liable. The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals, applying the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. The falling of a heavy, stationary counter in a commercial establishment does not ordinarily occur in the absence of negligence. Petitioners failed to rebut the presumption of negligence. The Court rejected the defense that Zhieneth climbed the counter, finding the child’s spontaneous statement to a doctor—that she did nothing and the counter just fell—part of the res gestae and credible. A child of six is presumed incapable of contributory negligence. The store owners and operators have a duty to ensure the safety of their premises for invitees. Their failure to properly secure the counter, despite its long existence, constituted a lack of due care. The proximate cause of the accident was this negligence, not the child’s behavior. Petitioners were thus solidarily liable for actual, moral, and exemplary damages, plus attorney’s fees.