Dear Atty. Nico,

I used to have a household helper. Apparently, she took with her several pieces of my jewelry which had an aggregate amount of P5,000,000.

According to my daughter, she saw her talking to someone on the landline. After which, the said helper informed her that I allegedly made instructions to bring some personal items and meet me in Quezon City.

Upon arriving at the guard house, the security guard on duty tried to ask for the helper’s gate pass. Although she never secured one, it had become a custom for my daughter to allow her egress without the necessity of such pass. Hence, she was allowed by the guard, but the latter logged her exit in the logbook afterwards.

Can I hold the security agency accountable for the loss of my valuables due to the failure of the security guard on duty to accost my household helper?

Ruby

□□□□□

Dear Ruby,

In the case of Oreta-Ferrer v Right Eight Security Agency, the Court stated that there can be no recovery of damages unless there has been damnum et injuria that act must be not only hurtful, but wrongful.

Injury is the illegal invasion of a legal right; damage is the loss, hurt, or harm which results from the injury; and damages are the recompense or compensation awarded for the damage suffered. Thus, there can be damage without injury in those instances in which the loss or harm was not the result of a violation of a legal duty. These situations are often called damnum absque injuria.

In order that a plaintiff may maintain an action for the injuries of which (he/she) complains, he must establish that such injuries resulted from a breach of duty which the defendant owed to the plaintiff — a concurrence of injury to the plaintiff, and legal responsibility by the person causing it. There must first be the breach of some duty and the imposition of liability for that breach before damages may be awarded; it is not sufficient to state that there should be tort liability merely because the plaintiff suffered some pain and suffering.

In situations of damnum absque injuria, or damage without injury wherein the loss or harm was not the result of a violation of legal duty, there is no basis for an award of damages. There must first be a breach of duty and imposition of liability before damages may be awarded. Therefore, the injured person alone bears the consequences because the law affords no remedy for damages resulting from an act that does not amount to a legal injury or wrong.

In view of the jurisprudence stated above, it is but unfortunate that you cannot have any remedy under the law. The loss you suffer was a consequence of your own negligence for putting too much trust on your household helper as well as your failure to strictly comply with the requirements of securing a gate pass.

Atty. Nico A. Antonio