Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to www.scribd.com

Scribd
Upload
278 views3 pages

Nikko Hotel Manila Garden and Ruby Lim vs. Roberto Reyes G. R. No. 154259 February 28, 2005 Chico - Nazario, J.

Roberto Reyes attended a birthday party at the Nikko Hotel penthouse despite not being invited by the celebrant. He was asked to leave by Ruby Lim, the Executive Secretary, which embarrassed Reyes. Reyes sued Lim and the hotel for damages. The court found Reyes' version of events was unsupported and that Lim did not abuse her rights in asking an uninvited guest to leave. As Lim was not liable, neither was the hotel. The court ruled in favor of Lim and the hotel.

Uploaded by

Ezekiel Fernandez
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
278 views3 pages

Nikko Hotel Manila Garden and Ruby Lim vs. Roberto Reyes G. R. No. 154259 February 28, 2005 Chico - Nazario, J.

Roberto Reyes attended a birthday party at the Nikko Hotel penthouse despite not being invited by the celebrant. He was asked to leave by Ruby Lim, the Executive Secretary, which embarrassed Reyes. Reyes sued Lim and the hotel for damages. The court found Reyes' version of events was unsupported and that Lim did not abuse her rights in asking an uninvited guest to leave. As Lim was not liable, neither was the hotel. The court ruled in favor of Lim and the hotel.

Uploaded by

Ezekiel Fernandez
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Nikko Hotel Manila Garden and Ruby Lim Vs.

Roberto Reyes

G. R. No. 154259 February 28, 2005

Chico – Nazario, J.:

FACTS:

On October 13, 1994, while Roberto Reyes was having coffee at the lobby of Hotel

Nikko, he was invited by his friend of several years, Mrs. Filart to join her in a party at the

hotel’s penthouse for the manager’s birthday celebration. Lining up at the buffet table, Roberto

Reyes was stopped by Ruby Lim, Executive Secretary, claiming he was not invited in a

manner that was embarrassing Roberto Reyes. Mrs. Filart completely ignored the cries for

help of Roberto Reyes who was being escorted out of the party by a policeman. Roberto

Reyes claimed one million pesos moral and exemplary damages and two hundred thousand

pesos for attorney’s fees.

Ruby Lim admitted that she asked Roberto Reyes to leave the party but not in the

manner that Roberto Reyes painted in his testimonies. One of her functions included

organizing the birthday party of the hotel's former General Manager, Mr. Tsuruoka. The year

1994 was no different. For Mr. Tsuruoka's party, Ms. Lim generated an exclusive guest list and

extended invitations accordingly. The guest list was limited to approximately sixty of Mr.

Tsuruoka's closest friends and some hotel employees and that Mr. Reyes was not one of those

invited.
Mrs. Filart also testified that she did not invite Roberto Reyes to the party. Roberto

Reyes volunteered to carry the basket of fruits intended for the birthday celebrant as he was

likewise also about to use the elevator to go to Altitude 49.

ISSUES:

Whether or not Ruby Lim acted abusively in asking Roberto Reyes, a.k.a. "Amay

Bisaya," to leave the party where he was not invited by the celebrant thereof thereby becoming

liable under Articles 19 and 21 of the Civil Code.

RULING:

The Court found more credible the lower court’s findings of facts. There was no proof of

motive on the part of Ms. Lim to humiliate Mr. Reyes and to expose him to ridicule and shame.

Mr. Reyes’ version of the story was unsupported, failing to present any witness to back his

story. Ms. Lim, not having abused her right to ask Mr. Reyes to leave the party to which he was

not invited, cannot be made liable for damages under Articles 19 and 21 of the Civil Code.

Necessarily, neither can her employer, Hotel Nikko, be held liable as its liability springs from

that of its employees.

When a right is exercised in a manner which does not conform with the norms enshrined in

Article 19 and results in damage to another, a legal wrong is thereby committed for which the

wrongdoer must be responsible. Article 21 states that any person who willfully causes loss or

injury to another in a manner that is contrary to morals, good customs or public policy shall

compensate the latter for the damage.


Without proof of any ill-motive on her part, Ms. Lim’s act cannot amount to abusive conduct.

The maxim “Volenti Non Fit Injuria” (self-inflicted injury) was upheld by the Court, that is, to

which a person assents is not esteemed in law as injury, that consent to injury precludes the

recovery of damages by one who has knowingly and voluntarily exposed himself to danger.

You might also like