Parent liability

Dear Atty. Nico,

My husband is a businessman. His work entails dealing with politicians on government projects. Due to its nature, he decided to buy a gun, a 38-caliber revolver. He keeps the same in a closet inside our bedroom. However, the said closet is not locked.

Yesterday, I learned from the school authorities that my son, a Grade 9 student, brought the gun to school and fired it at his classmate who had allegedly been bullying him since the start of the school year. Fortunately, he did not incur a fatal wound.

Due to this occurrence, his parents intend to file a civil action against us, among others.

Do they have a case against us? Praying that your response is favorable to us. Thank you.

Michelle

Dear Michelle,

According to an En Banc decision of the Supreme Court, it was held that parents should be held liable for the civil liability borne from the acts perpetrated by their minor son.

In Spouses Libi v Honorable IAC and Spouses Gotiong (G.R. No. 70890), the Court emphasized that the civil liability of parents for quasi-delicts for their minor children, as contemplated in Article 2180 of the Civil Codem is primary and not subsidiary… that the liability of the parents for felonies committed by their minor children is likewise primary, not subsidiary.

“Our concern stems from our readings that if the liability of the parents for crimes or quasi-delicts of their minor children is subsidiary, then the parents can neither invoke nor be absolved of civil liability on the defense that they acted with the diligence of a good father of a family to prevent damages. On the other hand, if such liability imputed to the parents is considered direct and primary, that diligence would constitute a valid and substantial defense.

Under the foregoing considerations, therefore, we hereby rule that parents are and should be held primarily liable for the civil liability arising from criminal offenses committed by their minor children under their legal authority or control or who live in their company, unless it is proven that the former acted with the diligence of a good father of a family to prevent such damages. That primary liability is premised on the provisions of Article 101 of the Revised Penal Code with respect to damage ex delicto caused by their children 9 years of age or under, or over 9 but under 15 years of age who acted without discernment; and with regard to their children over 9 but under 15 years of age who acted with discernment or 15 years or over but under 21 years of age, such primary liability shall be imposed pursuant to Article 2180 of the Civil Code.”

In applying the above-mentioned jurisprudence to the facts provided, it would seem that, as parents of the one who committed the alleged grievous act, you are considered answerable primarily for the consequences thereof. Furthermore, there is no showing that diligence of a good father of a family was performed as the closet where the gun was supposed to be was admittedly not locked.

Atty. Nico A. Antonio