Sunday, November 30, 2008

Ong vs. Metropolitan Water District

MR. & MRS. ONG vs. METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT (gov’t-owned corp.)
No. L-7664. 29 August 1958.
Appeal from a judgment of the CFI, Rizal QC
BAUTISTA ANGELO, J.:

Facts: Plaintiff spouses seek to recover from defendant, damages, funeral expenses and attorney’s fees for the death of their son, Dominador Ong, in one of the swimming pools of the latter. After trial, the CFI dismissed the complaint for it found the action of the plaintiffs-appellants untenable.

Issues: (1) WON plaintiffs have clearly established the fault/negligence of the defendants so as to make it liable for the damages sought; (2) WON the Doctrine of Last Clear Chance applies in the case at bench.

Ruling: Judgment affirmed.

(1) The person/s claiming damages has/have the burden of proving that the damages is caused by the fault/negligence of the person from whom the damages is claimed. Plaintiffs failed to overcome the burden. Defendant employed 6 well-trained lifeguards, male nurse, sanitary inspector and security guards to avoid danger to the lives of their patrons. The swimming pools are provided with ring buoy, tag roof and towing line. Also, conspicuously displayed in the pool area the rules and regulations for pool use. In that, it appears that defendant has taken all the necessary precautions to avoid/prevent danger/accidents which may cause injury to or even death of its patrons.
(2) The Doctrine of last Clear Chance means that, “a person who has the last clear chance to avoid the accident, notwithstanding the negligent acts of his opponent, is considered in law solely responsible for the consequences of the accident.” Since minor Ong has went to the big swimming pool w/o any companion in violation of the rules and regulations of the defendant as regards the use of pools, and it appearing that the lifeguard responded to the call for help as soon as his attention was called to it, applying all efforts into play in order to bring minor Ong back to life, it is clear that there is no room for the application of the Doctrine to impute liability to appellee. Minor Ong’s fault/negligence is the proximate and only cause of his death.

*Dani'q

No comments: