G.R. No. 53401 November 6, 1989
THE ILOCOS NORTE ELECTRIC COMPANY, petitioner, vs. HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, LILIAN JUAN LUIS, JANE JUAN YABES, VIRGINIA JUAN CID, GLORIA JUAN CARAG, and PURISIMA JUAN, respondents.

FACTS

On June 29, 1967, following Typhoon “Gening,” Isabel Lao Juan waded through waist-deep floodwaters on Guerrero Street, Laoag City. She suddenly screamed, sank, and died. Witnesses saw a live, dangling electric wire moving snake-like in the water at the spot where she sank. An attempt at rescue was aborted when a rescuer felt the water was grounded. The body was later recovered near an electric post. The municipal health officer certified the cause of death as circulatory shock from electrocution, noting an electrically charged wound on her left palm. Earlier that morning, an NPC engineer had observed abnormal meter fluctuations indicating grounded lines and had seen disconnected and dangling INELCO wires, including one on Guerrero Street, but found no INELCO linemen on duty.
INELCO defended itself by asserting its electrical system in the area, including Guerrero Street, was newly installed and defect-free before and during the typhoon. Its witnesses claimed they conducted inspections and found no hazards. They argued the victim’s death could have been caused by a short circuit from a wet service drop wire connecting her residence to the main line, for which they bore no responsibility.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in reversing the trial court and finding INELCO negligent and liable for damages arising from Isabel Lao Juan’s electrocution.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals’ decision, with a modification on the damages awarded. The CA correctly reversed the trial court, as its factual findings were supported by the evidence. The legal logic centers on the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur and the specific duty of a public utility. The circumstances—a live wire dangling in floodwaters after a known typhoon, the victim’s electrocution wound, the NPC engineer’s observations of INELCO’s grounded lines, and the absence of prompt corrective action by INELCO—collectively established INELCO’s negligence. The rule of res ipsa loquitur applied because the electrocution by a dangling power line is an event that ordinarily does not occur in the absence of negligence, and the instrumentality (the power line) was under INELCO’s exclusive management and control.
INELCO, as a public utility, had a non-delegable duty to ensure the safety of its lines, especially during a typhoon for which there were prior warnings. Its failure to promptly de-energize lines or conduct effective inspections after being alerted to irregularities constituted a breach of this duty. The defense’s theory of a short circuit in the victim’s service connection was properly rejected for being speculative and unsupported by evidence. The CA’s award of damages was thus proper. The Supreme Court modified only the actual damages, increasing the indemnity for death from P12,000 to P30,000 pursuant to prevailing jurisprudence, resulting in total actual damages of P48,229.45. The awards for compensatory, exemplary damages, and attorney’s fees were affirmed.