What Is Negligence?

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 1

NEGLIGENCE

By: Atty. Karissa Faye Tolentino-Maxino

What is negligence?
Negligence is the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided upon those
considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct to human affairs, would do, or doing
something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do.
The Supreme Court added that the whole theory of negligence presuppose some uniform
standard of behavior which must be an external and objective one, rather than the individual
judgment good or bad, of the particular actor; it must be, as far as possible, the same for all
persons; and at the same time make proper allowance for the risk apparent to the actor for his
capacity to meet it, and for the circumstances under which he must act.
Moreover, the question as to what would constitute the conduct of a prudent man in a
given situation must, of course, be always determined in the light of human experience and of the
acts involved in the particular case.

Are bad faith and negligence the same?


No. In the case of Montinolla v Philippine Airlines (G.R. No. 198656, September 8,
2014) the Supreme Court pronounced that Bad faith does not simply mean negligence or bad
judgment. It involves a state of mind dominated by ill will or motive. It implies a conscious and
intentional design to do a wrongful act for a dishonest purpose or some moral obliquity. While
negligence is the failure to observe for the protection of the interests of another person that
degree of care, precaution, and vigilance which the circumstances justly demand, by reason of
which such other person suffers injury.

Is negligence punishable under the Philippine laws?


Yes. Article 2176 of the New Civil Code provides that whoever by act or omission causes
damage to another, there being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for the damage done. Such
fault or negligence, if there is no pre-existing contractual relation between the parties, is called
quasi-delict and is governed by the provision of this chapter.

What is the test to determine if the negligence is the proximate cause of the harm incurred?
One of the commonly used tests for determining the existence of proximate cause is the
foreseeability test. This test provides that where the particular harm was reasonably foreseeable
at the time of the defendant’s misconduct, his act or omission is the legal cause thereof. To be
negligent, the defendant must have acted or failed to act in such a way that an ordinary
reasonable man would have realized that certain interests of certain persons were unreasonably
subjected to a general but definite class of risk which made the actor’s conduct negligent, it is
obviously the consequence for the actor must be held legally responsible.

You might also like