Practice question
An employee is convicted of an offense committed in the discharge of duties for an employer engaged in industry. The employee's insolvency and the remaining requirements for subsidiary ex-delicto liability are established. The employer offers only diligent selection and supervision as an automatic complete defense under Article 2180. Which analysis is correct?
- The Article 2180 diligence defense automatically defeats every kind of employer liability
- The court must apply the distinct Penal Code subsidiary framework; the quasi-delict diligence defense is not interchangeable with it
- The employee's conviction automatically creates a new contract
- The employer necessarily owns the victim's claim
- The nature of the cause of action is irrelevant
Legal references
- Civil Code Articles 2177, 2180–2181 and 2194: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1949/ra_386_1949.html
- Safeguard Security Agency v. Tangco, GR 165732, December 14, 2006, main decision: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/40427
- Maitim v. Aguila, GR 218344, March 21, 2022, main decision: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2022/mar2022/gr_218344_2022.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.