Case Digest: First Malayan Leasing and Finance Corp. vs. CA, 209 SCRA 660, GR. No. 91378

 

First Malayan Leasing and Finance Corp. vs. CA, 209 SCRA 660, GR. No. 91378, June 9, 1992

Subject: Transportation Law

FACTS

Respondent Vitug got into a three-vehicle collision with another car and an ​Isuzu cargo truck registered in the name of Petitioner FMLFC​. Bystanders were able to save Vitug; however, Vitug’s two other passengers were burned to death. Vitug also lost some personal items and had to go to US twice for medical treatment. FMLFC denied any liability, alleging that even if they were the registered owners of the Isuzu cargo truck, they had already ​sold the truck to a certain Vicente Trinidad​.

RTC ruled in favor of Vitug and ordered FMLFC to pay Vitug damages. CA affirmed but also modified RTC’s decision by ordering the estate of Vicente Trinidad to indemnify FMLFC for any amount it pays to Vitug.

ISSUE

Whether or not FMLFC is liable for damages despite it not being the actual owner of the truck.​

RULING

Yes, FMLFC is liable for damages.

Under the law, regardless of who the ​actual owner of a motor vehicle might be, the registered owner is the operator of the same with respect to the public and third persons, and as such, directly and primarily responsible for the consequences of its operation. In contemplation of law, the owner/operator ​of record is the employer of the driver, the actual operator and employer being considered merely as his agent.

In this case, FMLFC is liable. First, the trial court’s factual finding that FMLFC is the REGISTERED owner of the truck cannot be disturbed by the SC. Second, the Court ruled that it is the ​registered owner or operator of record​, despite there being a different actual owner, who is the one liable for damages caused by a vehicle regardless of any alleged sale or lease made thereon.