The actor failed to exercise the required diligence.
: Concepts and legal provisions are explained first, followed by illustrative examples and selected Supreme Court decisions. Comprehensive Coverage
This article is for informational and educational purposes regarding the academic text "Torts and Damages" by Hector S. De Leon. It does not constitute legal advice. For specific legal issues, consult a licensed Philippine attorney. torts and damages de leon
Excluding damages for breach of contract or obligation, these represent the actual loss suffered ( damnum emergens ) and the profits failed to be realized ( lucrum cessans ). To be recovered, they must be pleaded and proven with a reasonable degree of certainty. L - Liquidated Damages (Article 2226)
In Philippine law (Civil Code, Art. 2176), a quasi-delict is defined as an act or omission that causes damage to another, there being fault or negligence, with no pre-existing contractual relation between the parties. The actor failed to exercise the required diligence
The plaintiff knew of the danger and voluntarily exposed themselves to it.
An action for quasi-delict must be filed within four (4) years from the time the injury occurred. Conclusion De Leon
: The act or omission must be the proximate cause of the injury.
In the realm of law, torts and damages are two interconnected concepts that play a crucial role in seeking compensation for harm or injury caused to individuals or their property. The book "Torts and Damages" by De Leon provides an in-depth analysis of these concepts, and in this blog post, we will explore the key aspects of torts and damages.
In Philippine law, the concept of "tort" is largely synonymous with "quasi-delict," though the former is broader and encompasses intentional wrongs derived from common law. De Leon emphasizes that the primary governing law is the Civil Code of the Philippines. Statutory Definition Article 2176 of the Civil Code defines a quasi-delict: