[go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd
Upload
176 views1 page

Sarmiento vs. Sps. Cabrido

Tomasa Sarmiento filed a complaint against Luis and Rose Sun-Cabrido and their jewelry shop for damages when a diamond earring was broken during an attempt to remove it and remake it into rings. The municipal trial court found the respondents liable and ordered them to pay damages. However, the regional trial court and court of appeals absolved the respondents of liability. The Supreme Court reversed and found the respondents jointly and severally liable for P30,000 in actual damages and P10,000 in moral damages due to the gross negligence of their employee, the goldsmith, in using pliers instead of a safer tool to remove the diamond.

Uploaded by

Abak Nay Grave
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
176 views1 page

Sarmiento vs. Sps. Cabrido

Tomasa Sarmiento filed a complaint against Luis and Rose Sun-Cabrido and their jewelry shop for damages when a diamond earring was broken during an attempt to remove it and remake it into rings. The municipal trial court found the respondents liable and ordered them to pay damages. However, the regional trial court and court of appeals absolved the respondents of liability. The Supreme Court reversed and found the respondents jointly and severally liable for P30,000 in actual damages and P10,000 in moral damages due to the gross negligence of their employee, the goldsmith, in using pliers instead of a safer tool to remove the diamond.

Uploaded by

Abak Nay Grave
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

TOMASA SARMIENTO, Petitioner, v. SPS.

LUIS & ROSE SUN-CABRIDO and MARIA LOURDES


SUN, Respondents.
G.R. No. 141258. April 9, 2003.
Facts: Tomasa Sarmiento, petitioner, stated that sometime in April 1994, her friend Dra Virginia Lao
requested her to find somebody to reset a pair of diamond earrings into two gold rings. Tomasa then
sent a certain Tita Payag with the pair of earrings to Dingding’s Jewelry Shop, owned and managed
by respondent spouses Luis and Rose Cabrido, which accepted the job order for P400.
Petitioner provided 12 grams of gold to be used in crafting the pair of ring settings. After 3 days, Tita
Payag delivered to the jewelry shop one of Dra. Lao’s diamond earrings which was earlier appraised
as worth .33 carat and almost perfect in cut and clarity. Respondent Ma. Lourdes (Marilou) Sun went
on to dismount the diamond from its original setting. Unsuccessful, she asked their goldsmith, Zenon
Santos, to do it. Santos removed the diamond by twisting the setting with a pair of pliers, breaking the
gem in the process.
On June 28, 1994, petitioner filed a complaint for damages with the Municipal Trial Court in Cities
(MTCC) of Tagbilaran City.
MTCC of Tagbilaran City ruling: Decision is hereby rendered in favor of plaintiff Tomasa Sarmiento
and against defendants Spouses Luis and Rose Sun-Cabrido, ordering defendants to pay jointly and
severally the amount of Thirty Thousand Pesos (P30,000.00) as actual or compensatory damages;
Three Thousand Pesos (P3,000.00) as moral damages; Five Thousand Pesos (P5,000.00) as
attorney’s fees; Two Thousand Pesos (P2,000.00) as litigation expenses, with legal interest of 6% per
annum from the date of this decision and 12% per annum from the date when this decision becomes
final until the amounts shall have been fully paid and to pay the costs.
Respondents appealed with RTC, RTC reversed the decision of MTCC absolving the respondents of
any responsibility arising from breach of contract.
CA affirmed the judgement of the RTC.
Issue: Whether or not respondents are liable for failing to perform its obligation with the ordinary
diligence required by the circumstances.
Ruling: Yes.
As a general rule, moral damages are not recoverable in actions for damages predicated on a breach
of contract for it is not one of the items enumerated under Article 2219 of the Civil Code. Moral
damages may be awarded in a breach of contract only when there is proof that defendant acted in
bad faith, or was guilty of gross negligence amounting to bad faith, or in wanton disregard of his
contractual obligation. Santos was a goldsmith for more than 40 years. Given his long experience in
the trade, he should have known that using a pair of pliers instead of a miniature wire saw in
dismounting a precious stone like a diamond would have entailed an unnecessary risk of breakage.
He went on with it anyway. Hence, respondent spouses are liable for P10,000 as moral damages due
to the gross negligence of their employee.
WHEREFORE, the instant petition is GRANTED and the assailed decision of the Court of Appeals
dated November 26, 1999 is hereby reversed and set aside. Private respondents Luis Cabrido and
Rose Sun-Cabrido are hereby ordered to pay, jointly and severally, the amount of P30,000 as actual
damages and P10,000 as moral damages in favor of the petitioner.

You might also like