CASE DIGEST
Cacdac v. Mercado
G.R. No. 242731, [June 14, 2021]
SECOND, LOPEZ, M.V
Civil Liability despite Acquittal; Demurrer to Evidence without Leave of Court; Estafa
When a demurrer to evidence is filed without leave of court and is granted, the accused is deemed to have waived the right to present evidence on both the criminal and civil aspects. In such cases, the trial court is called upon to decide the entire case based on the evidence presented by the prosecution. The required quantum of proof, preponderance of evidence, to establish civil liability, even when the criminal action is dismissed.
On December 8, 2004, Roberto Mercado, a
gasoline station owner, delivered 10,000 liters of diesel fuel worth
P235,000.00 to Byron Express Bus Company through its clerk, Jaivi Mar Juson.
Juson executed a trust receipt, committing to remit the proceeds on December
15, 2004. However, Juson failed to fulfill this obligation, prompting Mercado
to file an estafa complaint against Juson and Byron Cacdac, the alleged owner
of Byron Express. Mercado claimed that Cacdac ordered the fuel, while Juson
received the delivery. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) instituted criminal
charges against Cacdac and Juson under Article 315 paragraph 1(b) of the
Revised Penal Code. At the trial, Mercado testified that Cacdac owned Byron
Express but did not present supporting evidence. Cacdac, through a demurrer to
evidence, argued that he was not criminally and civilly liable. The RTC
dismissed the criminal case against Cacdac but held him civilly liable for
P235,000.00. Dissatisfied, Cacdac moved for reconsideration, and the RTC clarified
that his civil liability was only civil in nature. The Court of Appeals (CA)
affirmed the RTC's findings with a modification in the interest computation.
Whether or not Byron Cacdac's civil liability was validly adjudged despite his demurrer to evidence and acquittal in the criminal aspect.
NO.
The Supreme Court granted the petition, reversing the CA's decision. It ruled
that Cacdac's civil liability was not validly adjudged. The Court held that the
trial court properly decided the civil aspect of the case as Cacdac filed a
demurrer without leave of court. However, the evidence did not preponderantly
establish Cacdac's civil liability. There was no conclusive proof that Cacdac
ordered the diesel fuel or that Juson acted as his agent. The trust receipt
agreement and demand letter implicated only Juson and Byron Express. The burden
of proof rested on Mercado, and without adequate evidence, Cacdac could not be
held liable for corporate obligations. The Court emphasized the need for
preponderant evidence to establish civil liability, and since it was lacking,
Cacdac's civil liability was deleted.
No comments:
Post a Comment