GR 61516; (March, 1989) (Digest)
G.R. No. 61516 March 21, 1989
FLORENTINA A. GUILATCO, petitioner, vs. CITY OF DAGUPAN, and the HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, respondents.
FACTS
On July 25, 1978, petitioner Florentina A. Guilatco, a court interpreter, fell into an uncovered manhole on the sidewalk of Perez Boulevard in Dagupan City, fracturing her right leg. She incurred substantial medical expenses, lost income, and suffered severe and persistent physical pain and emotional distress. The trial court found the City of Dagupan liable and awarded her actual, moral, and exemplary damages, plus attorney’s fees. The court based liability on the city’s control and supervision over the road, noting that City Engineer Alfredo G. Tangco, as ex-officio Highway Engineer, admitted supervisory responsibility for the maintenance of the drainage system and manholes along that national road.
The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s decision. It held that the petitioner failed to prove that Perez Boulevard, a national road, was under the control or supervision of the City of Dagupan. The appellate court accepted the city’s argument that control rested with the national government’s Ministry of Public Highways, notwithstanding the fact that the City Engineer concurrently served as the Highway Engineer for the area.
ISSUE
Whether the City of Dagupan is liable for damages under Article 2189 of the Civil Code for injuries caused by a defective public work, despite the road being a national road.
RULING
Yes, the City of Dagupan is liable. The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated the trial court’s decision with modifications to the damages awarded. The legal logic centers on the interpretation of Article 2189 of the Civil Code, which holds provinces, cities, and municipalities liable for damages arising from defective public works under their “control or supervision.” Ownership of the road is not the determining factor; the test is the exercise of either control or supervision.
The Court found that the City of Dagupan, through its City Engineer who was also the ex-officio Highway Engineer, exercised direct and admitted supervision over the maintenance of the manholes and drainage system on Perez Boulevard. This factual finding by the trial court, supported by the City Engineer’s own admissions, established the city’s operational control over the specific defective infrastructure that caused the injury. Therefore, the city could not evade liability by claiming the road was owned by the national government. The Court reduced the moral damages from P150,000 to P20,000 and exemplary damages from P50,000 to P10,000, finding the original awards excessive, but upheld the award for actual damages and attorney’s fees. The Supreme Court also ruled that the execution of the judgment pending appeal had been improperly granted by the trial court and was thus premature.