Practice question
A claimant proves that a falling panel inflicted injury but offers no evidence linking the sued installer’s alleged error to the fall. Other independent explanations remain unresolved. May the court infer that this installer is the proximate cause solely from the impact?
- Yes; impact always identifies the responsible installer.
- No; the identified impact does not itself establish the missing causal link.
- Yes; every previous contractor is automatically liable.
- Yes; causation is unnecessary after injury.
- No; installers can never be liable.
Legal references
- Civil Code Articles 2176 and 2194: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1949/ra_386_1949.html
- Abrogar v. Cosmos Bottling Company, G.R. No. 164749, March 15, 2017, main decision: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/mar2017/gr_164749_2017.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.