8 People v Oandasan Jr.

presented a time record sheet and an employment

G.R. No. 194605 | June. 14, 2016 | J. Bersamin certificate.
2. Oandasan said that he and Cutaran had a misunderstanding
Topic: Concept of Actual or Compensatory Damages when he worked in Navarro Construction, the same
company that the Cutaran worked in.
Summary: The defendant murdered 3 people. He presented an 3. Oandasan said that he caught Cutaran stealing sacks of
alibi that was overturned by positive identification of a witness. The cement and prevented them from doing so. Then, Cutaran
Court also appreciated the aggravating circumstance of treachery plotted to kill him.
which the lower court did not do. In deciding on the damages to be 4. Another alleged witness, Escobar, stated that the man who
imposed to the defendant, the Court outlined the jurisprudential shot the victims was shorter in stature than defendant
history of the value of death indemnity. The Court also outlines Oandasan.
pertinent provisions in determining the value of death indemnity.
Issues:
Doctrine: The Court can change the value of death indemnity 1. Whether or not the alibi of Oandasan overcomes the
according to the value of the currency at the time the judgement is witness’ positive identification of him?
rendered. 2. Whether or not treachery was an attendant circumstance in
each murder?
Facts: 3. What is the amount of damages that is proper for the
As gathered by the Court of Appeals indemnification of the victims and their heirs?
1. Edgardo Tamanu, Danilo Montegrico, and Mario Paleg were
shot by Oandasan while they were having a drinking spree Ratio:
with witness Ferdinand Cutaran. 1. No.
2. Danilo Montegrico and Edgardo Tamanu (murder) died a. As stated by the Court of Appeals: In the case at bar,
while Mario Paleg survived (frustrated murder due to timely appellant failed to prove the element of physical
medical intervention). impossibility for him to be at the scene of the crime
3. Two other witnesses were present during the commission of at the time it took place. His alibi that he was in
the crime. Cavite and the employment certificate and time
record sheet which he presented cannot prevail over
As alibi presented by defendant Oandasan the positive and categorical testimonies of the
1. During the day of the murder, Oandasan was in Cavite and prosecution witnesses.
reported to work from 7AM to 5PM. To bolster this, he
 b. Alibi is the weakest defense not only because it is damages of P75,000.00; and temperate damages of
inherently weak and unreliable, but also because it P50,000.00;
is easy to fabricate. It is generally rejected when 2) To the heirs of Edgardo Tamanu, civil indemnity of
the accused is positively identified by a witness. P75,000.00; moral damages of P75,000.00; exemplary
damages of P75,000.00; and temperate damages of
2. Yes. P50,000.00; and
a. The following requisites for the appreciation of the 3) To Mario Paleg, civil indemnity of P50,000.00; moral
aggravating circumstance treachery is present in the damages of P50,000.00; exemplary damages of
case. These requisites are a) that the means of P50,000.00; and temperate damages of P25,000.00.
execution employed gave the person attacked no
opportunity to defend themselves, and b) that such This is justified by the following arguments.
means of execution were deliberately adopted by 1) Historically, the threshold of death indemnity was set at
the accused without danger to his person. P3,000 as the least amount and P75,000 pesos as the most
b. Even though it is contested that the witnesses did amount. In recent times, the Court had set death indemnity
not directly see the shooting of the two other victims, at P50,000 and P75,000 in different instances.
it is sufficiently established by circumstantial (reproduced below)
evidence. The court decides on the sufficientness of a) This is due to the consideration of the difference of
the quantity of circumstances for every case. the value of currency between the time of
promulgation of the Civil Code and the modern times
3. In determining the value of damages with regard to as stated in People v Pantoja.
crimes of murder, the following provisions is 2) Temperate damages should be awarded to the heirs of the
considered by the Court. murdered for the interment of the deceased, and to the
1) Art. 2206 of the Civil Code injured for hospitalization fees.
2) Art. 2202 of the Civil Code preceded by Section 1 of 3) Moral damages are awarded even without proof or
Commonwealth Act 284 allegation if the victim dies as a result of the crime (basis
(reproduced below) missing, the case says it is a “matter of law”)
4) Art 2230 authorizes the award of exemplary damages if an
The following amounts were determined by the court. aggravating circumstance is present.
1) To the heirs of Danilo Montegrico, civil indemnity of
P75,000.00; moral damages of P75,000.00; exemplary Addendum
Article 2206. The amount of damages for death caused by a crime especially loss of life, to be compensated in the form of damages.
or quasi-delict shall be at least three thousand pesos, even though For this purpose, damages may be defined as the pecuniary
there may have been mitigating circumstances. In addition: compensation, recompense, or satisfaction for an injury
(1) The defendant shall be liable for the loss of the earning sustained, or, as otherwise expressed, the pecuniary
capacity of the deceased, and the indemnity shall be paid to the consequences that the law imposes for the breach of some
heirs of the latter; such indemnity shall in every case be assessed duty or the violation of some right. As such,damages refer to
and awarded by the court, unless the deceased on account of the amount in money awarded by the court as a remedy for
permanent physical disability not caused by the defendant, had the injured. 61 Although money has been accepted as the most
no earning capacity at the time of his death; frequently used means of punishing, deterring, compensating and
(2) If the deceased was obliged to give support regulating injury throughout the legal system, it has been
according to the provisions of article 291, the recipient who is not explained that money in the context of damages is not
an heir called to the decedent's inheritance by the law of testate or awarded as are placement for other money, but as substitute
intestate succession, may demand support from the person causing for that which is generally more important than money; it is the
the death, for a period not exceeding 6ve years, the exact duration best thing that a court can do. Regardless, the civil indemnity for
to be fixed by the court; death, being compensatory in nature, must attune to
(3) The spouse, legitimate and illegitimate descendants contemporaneous economic realities; otherwise, the desire to
and ascendants of the deceased may demand moral damages for justly indemnify would be thwarted or rendered meaningless.
mental anguish by reason of the death of the deceased. This has been the legislative justification for pegging the
minimum, but not the maximum, of the indemnity.
Article 2202. In crimes and quasi-delicts, the defendant shall be
liable for all damages which are the natural and probable
consequences of the act or omission complained of. It is not
necessary that such damages have been foreseen or could have
reasonably been foreseen by the defendant.

Court’s spiel about death indemnity

It is again timely to raise the civil indemnity for death arising
from crime or quasi-delict. We start by reminding that human life,
which is not a commodity, is priceless.The value of human life is
incalculable, for no loss of life from crime or quasi-delict canever be
justly measured. Yet, the law absolutely requires every injury,