Practice question
A contractor negligently cuts a sprinkler line; an ordinary foreseeable fire then spreads because the system cannot function. The contractor calls the fire an intervening event. Failure of the disabled system and causal damage are proved. Which is sound?
- An event within the very protective risk does not automatically supersede the disabling negligence.
- Every fire is necessarily an efficient intervening cause.
- A protective-system failure can never cause damage.
- The contractor is liable only if it also lit the fire.
- Sprinklers create absolute liability for every loss.
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.