Practice question
A victim files a criminal complaint but makes no reservation. Years later she proposes an Article 2176 action and assumes that prescription of this independent claim was necessarily suspended throughout the prosecution. Which is sound?
- Every independent claim is automatically tolled by any criminal complaint.
- The failure to reserve permanently extinguished the quasi-delict.
- Casupanan distinguishes independent claims: criminal filing does not by itself stop their prescriptive period; timeliness must be assessed.
- Prescription never applies to negligence.
- Only the defendant can decide the deadline.
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/rc_110-127_crim.html — Rule 111 sections 1–3: ex delicto action and independent civil actions.
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1949/ra_386_1949.html — Civil Code articles 32, 33, 34, 2176 and 2177.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2002/aug2002/gr_145391_2002.html — Casupanan v. Laroya, G.R. 145391, August 26, 2002, main opinion: no reservation and independent quasi-delict.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.