Republic of the Philippines REGIONAL TRIAL COURT 11th Judicial Region Branch 11 Davao City
DAVAO RABBIT BUS LINE INC., Represented by JUAN G. DELA CRUZ (President),
Plaintiff
CIVIL CASE NO: 004-08
,
- Versus -
FOR: DAMAGES and ATTORNEYS FEES
AMADOR BULAN, ROLANDO SUIZO,
Defendants
.
x--------------------------------------------------x PRE-TRIAL BRIEF OF THE PLAINTIFF
COMES NOW, the PLAINTIFF, through the undersigned Counsel, and to the Honorable Court most respectfully states that:
1. Earnest efforts by the the Plaintiff have been exerted to to reach a compromise with the Defendants but the same have failed. However, Plaintiff is still willing to compromise this case provided the terms t erms are just and fair; I. STATEMENT OF THE FACTS, CLAIMS AND DEFENSE I. SUMMARY OF ADMITTED FACTS
1. Plaintiff, DAVAO RABBIT BUS LINE INC., is a domestic corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the Republic of the Philippines, engaged in the business of public land transportation, with its office address at Km. 11, Sasa, Davao City, Philippines where it may be served with summons, court orders and other processes;
2. Plaintiff herein is represented by its President, JUAN G. DELA CRUZ as authorized by virtue of Davao Rabbit’s Board Resolution No. 2, Series of 2013; 3. Defendant Rolando Suizo, is of legal age and a resident of 273 Palosapis St. Nova Tierra Village Lanang, Davao City; th
4. Defendant Amador Bulan, is of legal age and a resident of 12 Avenue Fortune Homes Lanang, Davao City, is the registered owner of the KB Hino Truck driven by Rolando Suizo, his employee. 5. Defendant Amador Bulan is impleaded as a defendant being the employer of Rolando Suizo, the driver. 6. The passenger bus that BENJAMIN BIGAT was driving was registered under the name of plaintiff, Davao Rabbit Bus Line, Inc., with principal office at Km. 11, Sasa Davao City, with the following specifications: i. ii. iii. iv.
Make Plate No. Chassis No. Engine No.
: : : :
KB Hino Truck 246 MMBJNKA40AD091108 4D56UCBR7019
II. PROPOSED STIPULATION OF FACTS
7. On October 26, 2013, at around 6:40 in the morning, Benjamin Bigat, a driver who plaintiff employs, was driving a passenger bus along MacArthur Highway, Davao City. He was driving within the inner lane of the road, wearing his seatbelt, and observing the 30kph speed limit imposed within the City’s jurisdiction; 8. As the passenger bus that BENJAMIN BIGAT was driving neared the intersection between McArthuy Highway and Sandawa Road, a cargo truck (KB HINO TRUCK, with plate number LWR-349 and Engine Number B3821577, registered under the name of Defendant Amador Bulan), suddenly swerved and encroached the lane of Bigat, coming from the opposite direction. 9. The cargo truck’s maneuver described in the immediately preceding paragraph was made without any appropriate warning, in gross violation of the City’s Traffic Code and well a s other pertinent laws in place at that time; 10. Because of the lack of warning mentioned above, Plaintiff’s driver BENJAMIN BIGAT was not able to anticipate that defendant Rolando
Suizo had the intention to traverse the former’s lane since the traffic ligh t for left turn going to Maa signified a Stop Sign; 11. To avert the harm that was looming at that time, Plaintiff’s driver BENJAMIN BIGAT tried to respond and hit his brakes in order to avoid the impact however, such was futile since defendant Rolando Suizo, traversed the former’s lane at a very high speed and at a very short distance from the former’s driven vehicle at about two (2) meters; 12. Due to the swift speed of the vehicle driven by defendant Rolando Suizo, upon impact, his vehicle did not stop but continued to run through; 13. Due to the swift speed of the vehicle driven by defendant Rolando Suizo, the passenger bus that Plaintiff’s driver BENJAMIN BIGAT was driving turned 180 degrees facing back towards Matina;
14. Due to the said recklessness, negligence and imprudence of Rolando Suizo, the driver of the cargo truck previously described, plaintiff’s motor vehicle which Benjamin Bigat, was driving, incurred damages which had a repair cost amounting to Php200,000.00; 15. Due to the negligence of Rolando Suizo, Benjamin Bigat suffered Physical Injuries, specifically lacerated wounds in his midfrontal area, which had a healing period of seven days; 16. Due to the negligence of defendant Rolando Suizo, plaintiff spent the amount of Php 5,000.00, for the medical expenses of its driver Benjamin Bigat and Antonia Macasaet, a bus passenger; 17. By reason of having been deprived the use of the Davao Rabbit Bus Line Bus no. 1357 with plate number 246, plaintiff had suffered loss of earnings amounting to P100,000.00; 18. Several demands were made for defendants to pay their obligation but they stubbornly failed and willfully refused to pay despite receipt of said demands; 19. Defendant’s obstinate yet groundless refusal to pay plaintiff’s just and valid claims caused the latter to unduly suffer and so that others would be deterred from following defendant’s example and for the good of the public, it must be adjudged liable to pay exemplary damages in the amount of not less than P50,000.00;
20. That in being compelled to litigate, plaintiff was obliged to engage the services of a lawyer who is entitled to attorney’s fees in an amount of P40,000.00.
II. MATTERS OR ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED I WHETHER OR NOT THE BENJAMIN BIGAT, EMPLOYEE OF PLAINTIFF, WAS EXERCISING EXTRAORDINARY DILIGENCE WHEN HE WAS DRIVING THE PASSENGER BUS II WHETHER OR NOT DEFENDANT ROLANDO SUIZO WAS RECKLESSLY, HEEDLESSLY AND NEGLIGENTLY DRIVING THE KB HINO CARGO TRUCK AT A VERY FAST SPEED AND IN TOTAL DISREGARD OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN THAT INSTANCE THAT HE CAUSED IT TO HIT THE PASSENGER BUS THAT BENJAMIN BIGAT WAS DRIVING CAUSING THE SAID BUS TO FACE 180 DEGREES TOWARDS THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION OF ITS SUPPOSED COURSE III WHETHER OR NOT THE PROXIMATE CAUSE OF THE ACCIDENT WAS THE RECKLESS, HEEDLESS AND NEGLIGENT DRIVING OF ROLANDO SUIZO IV WHETHER OR NOT BENJAMIN BIGAT PROXIMATE CAUSE OF THE ACCIDENT
WAS
THE
V. WHETHER OR NOT PLAINTIFF HAD EMPLOYED THE NECESSARY DUE CARE IN THE SELECTION AND SUPERVISION OF THEIR EMPLOYEES PARTICULARLY THAT OF BENJAMIN BIGAT VI WHETHER OR NOT PLAINTIFF IS ENTITLED TO AWARD OF ACTUAL AND EXEMPLARY DAMAGES PRAYED FOR IN THE COMPLAINT, AS WELL AS TO AWARD FOR LOSS OF INCOME AND ATTORNEY’S FEES
VII WHETHER OR NOT THE AWARD OF DAMAGES PRAYED FOR AS COUNTERCLAIMS BY THE DEFENDANTS IS JUSTIFIABLE
III. DOCUMENTARY EXHIBITS TO BE MARKED EXHIBIT
“A”
PARTICULAR
Davao Rabbit’s Board Resolution No. 2, Series of 2013 authorizing Mr. Juan Dela Cruz as the representative of the plaintiff
PURPOSE
a) To prove that the Board of Directors of Davao Rabbit Bus line, Inc. had duly appointed Juan Dela Cruz to institute the case against the Defendants; b) To prove that the Board Resolution was accordingly made pursuant to the provisions of the Corporation Code of the Philippines
“B”
Official Receipt for LTO Registration over the passenger bus owned by Davao Rabbit Bus Line Inc.
a) To prove that the registration of the Davao Rabbit Bus Line Inc. had been renewed and necessary fees entailed therein had been paid;
“C”
Certificate of Registration of the passenger bus owned by Davao Rabbit Bus Line Inc. issued by the LTO
a) To provide proper identification of the passenger bus owned by the Davao Rabbit Bus Line Inc. involved in the accident subject of this case,and; b) To prove that the necessary requirements for registration of the said passenger bus before the LTO had been complied with and as a consequence, the use of the said bus for operation is so lawfully authorized;
“D”
Traffic Report of the accident
a) To prove authorities
that had
the appropriate conducted the
necessary investigation pertaining to the vehicular mishap; b) To prove who were the persons involved in the accident, and; c) To prove who or what was the proximate cause of the accident; “E”
Receipt for the Cost of Repair of the Passenger Bus
a) To provide the exact amount by which Davao Rabbit Bus Line Inc. had incurred to repair the passenger bus that got involved in the vehicular mishap subject of this case;
“F”
Photograph of the Passenger Bus at the time it was delivered to the Repair Shop
a) To provide a visual and accurate representation of the extent and actual physical damage sustained by the passenger bus by virtue of the vehicular mishap involved in this case;
“G”
Medical Certificate of Benjamin Bigat
a) To prove the extent of the injuries sustained by Benjamin Bigat, and; b) To prove the cause of the physical injuries suffered by Benjamin Bigat;
“H”
Hospital Bill paid for the Treatment of Injuries sustained by Benjamin Bigat
a) To prove the actual expenses paid for the treatment of Benjamin Bigat’s wounds and other injuries sustained by virtue of the vehicular mishap;
“H-1”
Hospital Bill paid for the Treatment of Injuries sustained by Antonia Macasaet, a passenger of the bus subject of this case
a) To prove the actual expenses paid for the treatment of Antonia Macasaet’s wounds and other injuries sustained by virtue of the vehicular mishap;
“I”
Corporate Affidavit
a) To prove that Plaintiff was deprived the use of the Davao Rabbit Bus
Treasurer’s
Line Bus no. 1357 with plate number 246 because of the vehicular mishap, and; b) To prove that Plaintiff had suffered loss of earnings amounting to P100,000.00 because of the vehicular mishap “J”
Demand Letters
a) To prove that several demands had been sent to the Defendants for the payment of the damages sustained by the Plaintiff as evidenced by the receipts attached therein;
IV. NUMBER OF WITNESSES NAME OF WITNESSES
1. Juan Dela Cruz
SUMMARY OF THE TESTIMONY OF WITNESS
a. To prove that the management of Davao Rabbit Bus Line, Inc. had decided to institute the instant case; b. To prove that he is the duly authorized representative to file the instant suit; c. To prove that Davao Rabbit Bus Line, Inc. had an employer-employee contract relation with Benjamin Bigat; d. To prove that the management of Davao Rabbit Bus Line, Inc. had undertaken the necessary steps to ensure the fitness of Benjamin Bigat to be one of its bus drivers; e. To prove that the management was not remiss in the selection and supervision of Benjamin Bigat; Attached herewith is a copy of the PLAINTIFF’S judicial affidavit in compliance with A.M. No. 128-8-SC or the Judicial Affidavit Rule.
2. Benjamin Bigat
a. To prove that he has an employer-employee relationship with that of Davao Rabbit Bus Line, Inc.; b. b. To prove that he is employed as one of the bus drivers of Davao Rabbit Bus Line, Inc.; c. To prove that he had carefully driven the bus
when he negotiated it while traversing the intersection of Sandawa Road and Macarthur Highway, Matina d. To prove that it was the reckless driving of Rolando Suizo that caused the accident; e. To prove that he and his passengers sustained physical injuries as a result of the accident; f. To prove that Rolando Suizo was the proximate cause of the accident; Attached herewith is a copy of the Benjamin Bigat’s judicial affidavit in compliance with A.M. No. 12-8-8-SC or the Judicial Affidavit Rule. 3. Boyet de Leon
a. To prove that he is the manager of Motor City’s Repair Shop; b. To prove that the Plaintiffs engaged the services of Motor City’s Repair Shop to fix the damages sustained by passenger bus no. 1357; c. To prove that the repairs made on passenger bus no. 1357 amounted to P 79, 000.00; d. To prove that the Plaintiffs paid P 79, 000.00 for the repairs made on the bus. Attached herewith is a copy of the plaintiffs ’s judicial affidavit in compliance with A.M. No. 12-8-8-SC or the Judicial Affidavit Rule.
V. APPLICABLE LAW AND JURISPRUDENCE
1. 1. Section 1 (b) , Rule 16 of the Rules of Court and other applicable provisions of the Rules of Court; 2. Articles 2176, 2179, 2180, 2194, 2202, 2205, 2206, 2208, 2214, 2217, 2219 and other applicable provisions of the New Civil Code; 3. Applicable jurisprudence enunciated by the Supreme Court of the Philippines.
VI. POSSIBILITY OF AMICABLE SETTLEMENT
Earnest efforts by the Plaintiff have been exerted to reach a compromise with the Defendant but the same have failed. However, Defendant is still willing to compromise this case provided the terms are just and fair. VII. AVAILABLE TRIAL DATES
Plaintiff together with the undersigned Counsel hereby manifest that they are available for the following trial dates: 1. 2. 3. 4.
April 10, 2014; April 23, 2014; April 30, 2014, and; May 07,2014 th
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, this 25 day of March 2014, Davao City, Philippines. Cirunay, Domingo, Quibod, Santos Law Offices th Door 1, 4 Floor, Abreeza Corporate Center, Bajada, Davao City (082) 224-9889
[email protected]
by:
Atty. Sonny Paul R. Cirunay PTR No. 31888568 IBP No. 935086 Roll No. 72872 MCLE Compliance Cert No. II -1085688 Mobile: (63)922-292-5924
Atty. Kristine Mae Quibod PTR No. 77481; 1/4/13; Davao City IBP No. 83205; 1/4/13; Davao City Roll No. 55522 MCLE Compliance No. II-12/15/2013 Mobile: (63) 917.3909.732 Copy furnished: Atty. Jessielle Ann C. Fabian ANTEPUESTO, DACUMOS, FABIAN, MACABABBAD LAW OFFICES th Dr. 7, 7 Floor, SM Lanang Premier Lanang, Davao City Received by:___________ Received on:___________
