Practice question
A negligent bus employee injures both a passenger and a pedestrian. The passenger relies on the carriage undertaking; the pedestrian establishes the relevant Article2180 tort elements. The company invokes a single selection-supervision defense as if both sources had identical rules. Which analysis is correct?
- The different sources and applicable defenses must be assessed separately, including Article1759 for the passenger
- Every victim necessarily has the same contract with the company
- The pedestrian becomes a passenger by being injured
- Selection diligence necessarily defeats the passenger claim under Article1759
- The passenger must abandon every contractual right
Legal references
- Civil Code RA386: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1949/ra_386_1949.html Articles1759,2176–2180.
- Revised Penal Code Act3815: https://lawphil.net/statutes/acts/act_3815_1930.html Article103.
- Barredo v Garcia GR48006 July8,1942 MAIN: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1942/jul1942/gr_48006_1942.html Primary employer tort liability distinguished from subsidiary penal liability.
- Cangco v Manila Railroad GRL12191 October14,1918 MAIN: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1918/oct1918/gr_l-12191_1918.html Contract liability distinguished from selection-supervision defense.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.