7/25/2019 Torts Fortuitous AssumptionOFrisk

1/2

C. Fortuitous Event1. National Power Corporation v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 103442-4. !a" 21, 1##3

Facts:

Plaintifs led a complaint against respondent or the lost o lives and destruction o propertiesdue to the negligence o the latter in releasing water rom Angat dam during the typhoon Kading

Benamin !have"# $eing the supervisor at that time o a multi%purpose hydroelectric plant in the Angat&iver at 'illtop# (or"agaray# Bulacan# ailed to e)ercise due diligence in monitoring the water level atthe dam*(P!# in its deense# alleged among others that the damages incurred $y the privaterespondents were caused $y a ortuitous event or orce maeure and are in the nature and character odamnum a$s+ue inuria*

,n appeal# the !A ruled that (P! is negligent $ased on the indings that stored water wassuddenly and simultaneously released rom Angat -am*

.ssue:

/,( the 0ash 0ood was a ortuitous event which e)onerates (P! rom lia$ility*

&uling:

(o* Accordingly# petitioners cannot $e heard to invo1e the act o 2od or orce maeure to

escape lia$ility or the loss or damage sustained $y private respondents since they# the petitioners#were guilty o negligence* 3he event then was not occasioned e)clusively $y an act o 2od or orcemaeure4 a human actor 5 negligence or imprudence 5 had intervened* 3he efect then o the orcemaeure in +uestion may $e deemed to have# even i only partly# resulted rom the participation oman* 3hus# the whole occurrence was there$y humani"ed# as it were# and removed rom the lawsapplica$le to acts o 2od*

2. $out%eastern Colle&e, 'n(. v. CA, G.R. No. 12)3*#. +ul" 10, 1##*

Facts:

Private respondents are owners o a house at 678 !ollege &oad# Pasay !ity# while petitionerowns a our%storey school $uilding along the same !ollege &oad* 3yphoon 9alinghit etroanila* Bufeted $y very strong winds# the roo o petitioners $uilding was partly ripped of and $lownaway# landing on and destroying portions o the roong o private respondent;s house* Privaterespondents led a complaint against petitioner or damages $ased on culpa a+uiliana* .n its answer#petitioner averred among others that it has not $een remiss in its responsi$ility to see to it that saidschool $uilding# is in tip%top condition4 and urthermore# typhoon 9alingwas an act o 2od andthereore $eyond human control*

.ssue:

/,( petitioner can invo1e act o god to e)cuse it rom lia$ility*

&uling:

(o* .n order that a ortuitous event may e)empt a person rom lia$ility# it is necessary that he$e ree rom any previous negligence or misconduct $y reason o which the loss may have $eenoccasioned* An act o 2od cannot $e invo1ed or the protection o a person who has $een guilty o

gross negligence in not trying to orestall its possi$le adverse conse+uences* /hen a person;snegligence concurs with an act o 2od in producing damage or inury to another# such person is note)empt rom lia$ility $y showing that the immediate or pro)imate cause o the damage or inury was aortuitous event* /hen the efect is ound to $e partly the result o the participation o man whether it$e rom active intervention# or neglect# or ailure to act the whole occurrence is here$y humani"ed#and removed rom the rules applica$le to acts o 2od*

7/25/2019 Torts Fortuitous AssumptionOFrisk

2/2

. Assuption of Ris / iolente Non Fit 'nuria1. Aala v. isole, G.R. No. 5-206. Nove7er 2#, 1#4#

Facts: