G.R. No. L-14414. April 27, 1960.
SEVERINO SALEN and ELENA SALBANERA, plaintiffs-appellants, vs. JOSE BALCE, defendant-appellee.

FACTS

Plaintiffs-appellants Severino Salen and Elena Salbanera are the legitimate parents of Carlos Salen, who died from wounds inflicted by Gumersindo Balce, the legitimate son of defendant-appellee Jose Balce. At the time of the incident, Gumersindo Balce was single, a minor below 18 years of age, and living with his father, the defendant. Gumersindo Balce was prosecuted, convicted of homicide, and sentenced to imprisonment and to pay an indemnity of P2,000.00 to the heirs of the deceased. Plaintiffs, as the only heirs, obtained a writ of execution for the indemnity, but it was returned unsatisfied because Gumersindo Balce was insolvent and had no property in his name. Plaintiffs then demanded payment from defendant Jose Balce as the father, but he refused. Plaintiffs subsequently filed a civil action against defendant to recover the P2,000.00 indemnity. The trial court dismissed the complaint, sustaining defendant’s defense that the Revised Penal Code, not the Civil Code provision on quasi-delicts, governs civil liability arising from criminal acts, and that the Penal Code does not impose subsidiary liability on a father for the civil liability of a minor son over 15 who acted with discernment.

ISSUE

Whether defendant-appellee Jose Balce can be held subsidiarily liable for the payment of the P2,000.00 indemnity imposed on his son, Gumersindo Balce, arising from the latter’s criminal conviction for homicide.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court reversed the trial court’s decision. While the civil liability arising from a crime is generally governed by the Revised Penal Code, the subsidiary liability of parents for acts of minors under their custody is governed by Article 2180 of the Civil Code when the Penal Code is silent. The Revised Penal Code (Article 101) only imposes civil liability on a father for acts of a son who is an imbecile, insane, under 9, or over 9 but under 15 and acted without discernment—conditions where the minor is exempt from criminal liability. For a minor over 15 who acts with discernment and is criminally liable, as in this case, the Penal Code does not provide for parental subsidiary liability. This gap is filled by Article 2180 of the Civil Code, which holds parents responsible for damages caused by minor children living in their company. The Court rejected the argument that Article 2180 applies only to quasi-delicts, noting it would be absurd to hold parents liable for negligent acts but not for intentional criminal acts of their children. The Court cited precedents (Exconde vs. Capuno and Araneta vs. Arreglado) where parents were held subsidiarily liable for damages from criminal acts of their minor children under Article 2180. Accordingly, defendant Jose Balce is ordered to pay plaintiffs the sum of P2,000.00, with legal interest from the filing of the complaint, and the costs.