G.R. No. L-3422; June 13, 1952
HIDALGO ENTERPRISES, INC., petitioner, vs. GUILLERMO BALANDAN, ANSELMA ANILA and THE COURT OF APPEALS, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Hidalgo Enterprises, Inc. owned an ice-plant factory in San Pablo, Laguna. Within its fenced premises were two water tanks, nine feet deep, used for engine cooling. The tanks had no fences or covers, and their edges were only about a foot high from the ground. The factory’s main gate was continually open, with no guard, allowing vehicles and people to enter freely. On April 16, 1948, Mario Balandan, an 8-year-old boy, entered the premises with other children, took a bath in one of the tanks, and drowned. The boy’s parents sued for damages. The Court of First Instance and the Court of Appeals held the petitioner liable, applying the “attractive nuisance” doctrine, and ordered it to pay P2,000 in damages.

ISSUE

Whether the petitioner is liable for the death of the child under the “attractive nuisance” doctrine.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Court of Appeals and absolved the petitioner from liability. The Court held that the doctrine of attractive nuisance is generally not applicable to bodies of water, such as ponds, pools, or tanks, in the absence of some unusual condition or artificial feature beyond the mere presence of water. The Court cited the majority of American decisions which reason that natural and artificial bodies of water are common, and children are presumed to be instructed about the danger of drowning. Since the petitioner’s tanks merely duplicated a natural condition without adding any new danger, they did not constitute an attractive nuisance. Consequently, the question of whether the petitioner took reasonable precautions or whether the parents were contributorily negligent became immaterial.