May 26, 1977
FACTS:
Reginald Hill was accused of killing Agapito Elcano. Hill was subsequently acquitted on the ground that his act was not considered criminal because of “lack of intent to kill, coupled with mistake.”
Pedro Elcano, father of the victim Agapito, filed a case for recovery of damages instead against Reginald and his father, Marvin Hill, before the Court of First Instance of Quezon City.
The Hills filed a Motion to Dismiss, alleging, among others, that the action is barred by a prior judgment which is now final and or in res-adjudicata. The CFI granted said motion. Hence, the instant petition.
ISSUE:
Whether the action for recovery of damages by the Elcanos is barred by the acquittal of Reginald Hill in the criminal case filed against him. -- NO.
HELD:
Under Art 2177, acquittal from an accusation of criminal negligence, shall not be a bar to a subsequent civil action, nor for civil liability arising from criminal negligence, but for damages due to a quasi-delict or culpa aquiliana.
Art 2177 means that a separate civil action lies against the offender in a criminal act, whether or not he is criminally prosecuted and found guilty or acquitted, provided that the offended party is not allowed, if he is actually charged also criminally, to recover damages on both scores, and would be entitled in such eventuality only to the bigger award of the two, assuming the awards made in the two cases vary.
Culpa acquiliana includes voluntary and negligent acts which may or may not be punished by law.
In the case of Barredo vs. Garcia, the Supreme Court held that negligent act can result in civil liability under the Penal Code and the Civil Code. In that case the Court said that an act of negligence may be a proper subject matter either of a criminal action with its consequent civil liability arising from a crime or of an entirely separate and independent civil action for fault or negligence under the Civil Code (1902).