G.R. No. 169467; February 25, 2010
ALFREDO P. PACIS and CLEOPATRA D. PACIS, Petitioners, vs. JEROME JOVANNE MORALES, Respondent.

FACTS

Petitioners Alfredo P. Pacis and Cleopatra D. Pacis, parents of the deceased 17-year-old Alfred Dennis Pacis, Jr., filed a civil case for damages against respondent Jerome Jovanne Morales, owner of the Top Gun Firearms and Ammunitions Store in Baguio City. On January 19, 1991, Alfred died from a gunshot wound to the head sustained inside the gun store. The fatal gun, an AMT Automag II Cal. 22 Rimfire Magnum brought in by a customer for repair, was left by respondent in a drawer inside the store. Respondent was in Manila at the time, and his regular caretaker was also absent, having left the store keys with sales agents Aristedes Matibag and Jason Herbolario. Matibag and Herbolario took the gun from the drawer and placed it on a table. Alfred took hold of the gun, and when he handed it back to Matibag as requested, the gun accidentally discharged, killing Alfred. A criminal case for homicide against Matibag resulted in acquittal due to the exempting circumstance of “accident.” The trial court ruled in favor of petitioners, awarding damages. The Court of Appeals reversed, absolving respondent from civil liability under Article 2180 of the Civil Code, finding no employer-employee relationship and no negligence attributable to respondent.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Jerome Jovanne Morales is civilly liable for damages arising from the death of Alfred Dennis Pacis, Jr., due to negligence under Articles 2176 and 2180 of the Civil Code.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court granted the petition, finding respondent directly and primarily liable for his own negligence under Article 2176 of the Civil Code. As a gun store owner, respondent was required to observe a higher degree of care in handling dangerous instrumentalities. He was negligent in accepting a defective gun for repair without ensuring it was unloaded and in storing it insecurely in a drawer instead of a vault. This failure to take exceptional precautions to prevent harm constituted a breach of his duty, making him liable for the resulting damages. The Court emphasized that his liability is primary and direct, based on his personal negligence, not merely vicarious under Article 2180. The awards for damages were reinstated, with modifications: indemnity for death increased to ₱50,000.00, moral damages increased to ₱75,000.00, and temperate damages of ₱25,000.00 awarded in lieu of actual damages, with attorney’s fees and costs.