G.R. Nos. 79050-51 November 14, 1989
PANTRANCO NORTH EXPRESS, INC., petitioner, vs. MARICAR BASCOS BAESA, THRU HER PERSONAL GUARDIAN FRANCISCA O. BASCOS, FE O. ICO, IN HER BEHALF AND IN BEHALF OF HER MINOR CHILDREN, NAMELY ERWIN, OLIVE, EDMUNDO AND SHARON ICO, respondent.

FACTS

On June 12, 1981, a group of fifteen persons, including the Baesa and Ico families, were traveling in a passenger jeepney driven by David Ico to a picnic. While proceeding along the highway towards Malalam River at a speed of 20 kph, a speeding PANTRANCO bus, traveling from Aparri to Manila, encroached on the jeepney’s lane while negotiating a curve and collided with it. The accident resulted in the deaths of David Ico, spouses Ceasar and Marilyn Baesa, and their children Harold Jim and Marcelino Baesa. Other passengers suffered injuries, and the jeepney was extensively damaged. The PANTRANCO bus driver, Ambrosio Ramirez, fled the scene and remained at large. All other victims settled under PANTRANCO’s “No Fault” insurance, but Maricar Baesa (a minor survivor) and Fe Ico (for herself and her minor children) filed separate actions for damages based on quasi-delict.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the Court of Appeals erred in holding PANTRANCO liable for damages and in rejecting its defenses, including the application of the “last clear chance” doctrine and its claim of having exercised due diligence in the selection and supervision of its driver.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the Court of Appeals’ decision with modification. On the defense of due diligence, the Court ruled that PANTRANCO failed to prove it exercised the diligence of a good father of a family in the selection and supervision of its driver, Ambrosio Ramirez. Mere presentation of employment documents and a driver’s license is insufficient; the employer must demonstrate the adoption of stringent standards and actual monitoring of the driver’s performance, which PANTRANCO did not establish. Regarding the “last clear chance” doctrine, the Court found it inapplicable. The doctrine requires that the defendant had the last fair opportunity to avoid the harm after the plaintiff’s negligence. The evidence showed the PANTRANCO bus was speeding and encroached on the wrong lane, which was the proximate cause of the collision. The jeepney driver, traveling at a moderate speed on his correct lane, had no sufficient opportunity to avoid the suddenly encroaching bus. Thus, PANTRANCO’s negligence was established. The Court also modified the award, increasing the death indemnity for Harold Jim and Marcelino Baesa to P30,000.00 each, consistent with prevailing jurisprudence, while affirming the other damages as properly computed based on the victims’ earning capacities and circumstances.