Dear PAO,
First of all, I’d like to say that I am an avid reader of your column. Last week, I drove to a nearby gas station to fill up my vehicle in anticipation of substantial fuel price hikes. There was a long line and the attendants were noticeably overwhelmed by the high volume of customers rushing to fill their tanks in advance. Nevertheless, I patiently waited for my turn. After my vehicle was refueled, I immediately drove off. However, shortly thereafter, my engine stopped working. I later found out that the gas attendant pumped gasoline in my diesel engine vehicle after I specifically asked for the latter. I understand that accidents happen but this one is going to cost me so much — from towing to repair, not to mention the inconvenience of having to commute to and from work during repair. Can I demand payment from the gas station owner for the damages which resulted from the mistake of the gas attendant?
Xie
Dear Xie,
Article 2176 of the New Civil Code of the Philippines provides that “[w]hoever by act or omission causes damage to another, there being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for the damage done. xxx.” This obligation to pay for the damage done is imposable not only upon one’s own act, but also upon the acts of those for whom one is responsible. This is referred to as vicarious liability or imputed negligence, which holds a person or entity responsible for the negligent or wrongful acts of those under one’s control or supervision.
In the context of retail and services, the concept of vicarious liability may hold an employer or business owner civilly liable for the damages suffered by the consumer due to the negligent acts of its employees. This is provided under Article 2180 of the same Code, which explicitly states:
“Article 2180. The obligation imposed by Article 2176 is demandable not only for one’s own acts or omissions, but also for those of persons for whom one is responsible. xxx
“The owners and managers of an establishment or enterprise are likewise responsible for damages caused by their employees in the service of the branches in which the latter are employed or on the occasion of their functions.
“Employers shall be liable for the damages caused by their employees and household helpers acting within the scope of their assigned tasks, even though the former are not engaged in any business or industry. xxx
“The responsibility treated of in this article shall cease when the persons herein mentioned prove that they observed all the diligence of a good father of a family to prevent damage.”
At this juncture, it bears mentioning that the employer’s or owner’s liability is based on their negligence in the selection and supervision over its employees. Thus, in order to absolve themselves from this liability, the employer or owner must prove that they observed the diligence of a good father of a family in the selection and supervision of its employees, as well as in the strict implementation of its rules, regulations, guidelines, issuances, and instructions. (Secosa, et al. vs. Francisco, GR 160039, June 29, 2004, penned by Justice Consuelo Ynares-Santiago)
In your case, you may certainly demand payment from the gas station owner for the costs associated with the repair of your vehicle, as long as you can prove that the same was incurred due to the mistake of the gas attendant. Again, under Article 2180 in relation to Article 2176 of the New Civil Code, it is the employer or owner who becomes primarily liable for the damages resulting from the negligent acts of an employee acting within the scope of his/her assigned task.
We hope that we were able to answer your queries. This advice was solely based on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. Our opinion may vary when other facts are changed or elaborated.
Thank you for your continued trust and support.
Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to dearpao@manilatimes.net
