8/12/2019 Pestano v Sumayang Digest

1/1

Pestano v Sumayang

GR No. 139875

December 4, 2000

Facts: Sumayang, accompanied by another person, was riding a motor vehicle on a

highway in Cebu. While turning left at a junction, Sumayang was violently hit by a

speeding bus driven by Pestano. Sumayang and his companion died due to the

accident. The heirs of Sumayang filed a civil action against Pestano and Metro Cebu

Bus Company, the owner of the Bus driven by Pestano. A witness named Neis

accounts that before Sumayang turned left, the former had raised his left arm as a

signal but was run over by the bus and was thrown 14 meters away. Pestano alleges

the victims were negligent because 15-20 meters away, he had already blown the bus

horn and even blew it a second time when he got near but could only step on the brake

after the bus had hid the motor vehicle. RTC and CA held Pestano liable and also heldMetro Cebu Bus liable for negligence.

Issue: W/N Metro Cebu Bus may be held liable for the acts of Pestano

Held: There were factual findings that the bus had a defective speedometer and the

Company was held to have shown laxity in the conduct of its operations and supervision

of employees. Under Articles 2180 and 2176 of the Civil Code, owners and managers

are responsible for damages caused by their employees. When an injury is caused bythe negligence of a servant or an employee, the master or employer is presumed to be

negligent either in the selection or in the supervision of that employee. This

presumption may be overcome only by satisfactorily showing that the employer

exercised the care and the diligence of a good father of a family in the selection and the

supervision of its employee. The CA said that allowing Pestao to ply his route with a

defective speedometer showed laxity on the part of Metro Cebu in the operation of its

business and in the supervision of its employees. The negligence alluded to here is in

its supervision over its driver, not in that which directly caused the accident. The fact

that Pestao was able to use a bus with a faulty speedometer shows that Metro Cebu

was remiss in the supervision of its employees and in the proper care of its vehicles. Ithad thus failed to conduct its business with the diligence required by law.