Case Digest: Worcester vs Ocampo, et. al. 22 Phil 42, G.R. No. L-5932

Worcester vs Ocampo, et. al. 22 Phil 42, GR No. L-5932, February 27, 1912

Subject: Obligations and Contracts

FACTS

The plaintilff, Honorable Dean Worcester, a member of the Civil Commission of the Philippines and Secretary of the Interior, filed a civil complaint against Martin Ocampo and eight others as editors, writers and administrators of newspapers “El Renacimiento” and “Muling Pagsilang.”

The papers published an editorial about a bird of prey, an eagle, committing all sorts of abuse. Worcester claimed that the editorial alluded to him as understood by the public and had made it difficult to do his job. Said editorial also made him so unpopular as to destroy public confidence in his position.

The editors and writers of the two newspapers argued Worcester's complaint was vague and unintelligible, and that the bird did not refer to a determinate person.

The CFI of Manila ruled that even though Worcester was not referred to by name, an action for libel may still be maintained for the publication of the article. The CFI also awarded damages amounting to P100,000. Hence, the instant petition.

ISSUE

Whether or not the joint tortfeasors are solidarily liable.

RULING

Yes, the joint tortfeasors are solidarily liable.

Under the law (Art 1207), the concurrence of two or more creditors or of two or more debtors in one and the same obligation does not imply that each one of the former has a right to demand, or that each one of the latter is bound to render, entire compliance with the prestation. There is a solidary liability only when the obligation expressly so states, or when the law or nature of the obligation requires the solidarity.

In this case, the difficulty in the contention of the appellants is that they fail to recognize that the basis of the present action is a tort. They fail to recognize the universal doctrine that each joint tortfeasor is not only individually liable for the tort in which he participates but is also jointly liable with his tortfeasors. If several persons jointly commit a tort, the plaintiff or person injured, has his election to sue all or some of the parties jointly, or one of them separately, because the tort is in its nature a separate act of each individual. It may be stated as a general rule, that the joint tortfeasors are all the persons who command, instigate, promote, encourage, advise, countenance, cooperate in, aid or abet the commission of a tort, or who approve of it after it is done, if done for their benefit. They are each liable as principals, to the same extent and in the same manner as if they had performed the wrongful act themselves.

Joint tortfeasors are jointly and severally liable for the tort which they commit. Each is liable for the whole damage caused by all, and all together are jointly liable for the whole damage. Joint tortfeasors are not liable pro rata. The damages cannot be apportioned among them, except among themselves. They can no insist upon an apportionment, for the purpose of each paying an aliquot part. They are jointly and severally liable for the full amount. A payment in full of the damage done, by one of the joint tortfeasors, of course satisfies any claim which might exist against the others. There can be but one satisfaction. The release of one of the joint tortfeasors by agreement, generally operates to discharge.