JULIAN SINGSON and RAMONA DEL CASTILLO vs. BANK OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS and SANTIAGO FREIXAS (Pres. Of BPI)G.R. No. L-24837. 29 June 1968.
CONCEPCION, C.J.:
Facts: Appeal by plaintiffs from a decision of the CFI Mla dismissing their complaint against defendants.
On May 8, 1963, the Singsong commenced the present action against the Bank and its president, Freixas, for damages in consequence of said illegal freezing of plaintiffs' account.
After appropriate proceedings, the CFI Mla rendered judgment dismissing the complaint upon the ground that plaintiffs cannot recover from the defendants upon the basis of a quasi-delict, because the relation between the parties is contractual in nature.
Issue: WON the existence of a contractual relation between the parties bar recovery of damages.
Ruling: The judgment appealed from is reversed holding defendant BPI to pay to the plaintiffs nominal damages, and attorney's fees, apart from the costs.
The SC have repeatedly held that the existence of a contract between the parties does not bar the commission of a tort by the one against the order and the consequent recovery of damages therefore.
In view, of the facts obtaining in the case at bar, and considering, particularly, the circumstance, that the wrong done to the plaintiff was remedied as soon as the President of the bank realized the mistake they had committed, the Court finds that an award of nominal damages the amount of which need not be proven in the sum of P1,000, in addition to attorney's fees in the sum of P500, would suffice to vindicate plaintiff's rights.
CONCEPCION, C.J.:
Facts: Appeal by plaintiffs from a decision of the CFI Mla dismissing their complaint against defendants.
On May 8, 1963, the Singsong commenced the present action against the Bank and its president, Freixas, for damages in consequence of said illegal freezing of plaintiffs' account.
After appropriate proceedings, the CFI Mla rendered judgment dismissing the complaint upon the ground that plaintiffs cannot recover from the defendants upon the basis of a quasi-delict, because the relation between the parties is contractual in nature.
Issue: WON the existence of a contractual relation between the parties bar recovery of damages.
Ruling: The judgment appealed from is reversed holding defendant BPI to pay to the plaintiffs nominal damages, and attorney's fees, apart from the costs.
The SC have repeatedly held that the existence of a contract between the parties does not bar the commission of a tort by the one against the order and the consequent recovery of damages therefore.
In view, of the facts obtaining in the case at bar, and considering, particularly, the circumstance, that the wrong done to the plaintiff was remedied as soon as the President of the bank realized the mistake they had committed, the Court finds that an award of nominal damages the amount of which need not be proven in the sum of P1,000, in addition to attorney's fees in the sum of P500, would suffice to vindicate plaintiff's rights.
