2 iniego vs purganan.pdf - SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED...

This preview shows page 1 - 3 out of 9 pages.

3/12/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 485 1/9 G.R. No. 166876. March 24, 2006. * ARTEMIO INIEGO, 1 petitioner, vs. The HONORABLE JUDGE GUILLERMO G. PURGANAN, in his official capacity as Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 42, City of Manila, and FOKKER C. SANTOS, respondents. Civil Procedure; Courts; Jurisdictions; What must be determined to be capable or incapable of pecuniary estimation is not the cause of action, but the subject matter of the action. Respondent Judge’s observation is erroneous. It is crystal clear from B.P. Blg. 129, as amended by Republic Act No. 7691, that what must be determined to be capable or incapable of pecuniary estimation is not the cause of action, but the subject matter of the action. A cause of action is “the delict or wrongful act or omission committed by the defendant in violation of the primary rights of the plaintiff.” On the other hand, the “subject matter of the action” is “the physical facts, the thing real or personal, the money, lands, chattels, and the like, in relation to which the suit is prosecuted, and not the delict or wrong committed by the defendant.” Same; Same; Same; Damages; Actions for damages based on quasi-delicts are primarily and effectively actions for the recovery of a sum of money for the damages suffered because of the defendant’s alleged tortious acts. —Actions for damages based on quasi-delicts are primarily and effectively actions for the recovery of a sum of money for the damages suffered because of the defendant’s alleged tortious acts. The damages claimed in such actions represent the monetary equivalent of the injury caused to the plaintiff by the defendant, which are thus sought to be recovered by the plaintiff. This money claim is the principal relief sought, and is not merely incidental thereto or a consequence thereof. It bears to point out that the complaint filed by private respondent before the RTC actually bears the caption “for DAMAGES.” Same; Same; Same; Same; Subsection (d) of Section 5, Rule 2 of the Rules of Court provides that where the claims in all such joined causes of action are principally for recovery of money, the aggregate _______________ * FIRST DIVISION. 1 Also spelled as Iñego in some parts of the Rollo and Records. 395 VOL. 485, MARCH 24, 2006 395 Iniego vs. Purganan
3/12/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 485 2/9 amount claimed shall be the test of jurisdiction. —Even assuming, for the sake of argument, that the claims for moral and exemplary damages arose from a cause of action other than the quasi-delict, their inclusion in the computation of damages for jurisdictional purposes is still proper. All claims for damages should be considered in determining the jurisdiction of the court regardless of whether they arose from a single cause of action or several causes of action. Rule 2, Section 5, of the Rules of Court allows a party to assert as many causes of action as he may have against the opposing party. Subsection (d) of said section provides that

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture