Micole Kate C.

Quijano LEGAWRI – K31

Case Digest: RCPI vs. Court of Appeals & Minerva & Flores Timan
G.R. No. 79578 March 13, 1991

Facts:
On January 24, 1983, respondent-spouses, Minerva and Flores Timan sent a telegram
of condolence to their cousins, Mr. and Mrs. Hilario Midoranda, at Trinidad, Calbayog City,
through petitioner, Radio Communications of the Philippines (RCPI) at Cubao, Quezon City,
in order to give their deepest sympathy for the death of the mother in law of Hilario
Midoranda. The content of the telegram was: “Mr. and Mrs. Hilario Midoranda. May God
give you courage and strength to bear your loss. Our deepest sympathy to you and members
of the family. – Miner and Flory”. The telegram was correctly transmitted the same way the
written text was. However, the condolence message communicated and delivered to the
addressees was typewritten on a Happy Birthday card and placed inside a Christmasgram
envelope. This caused Timan to demand an explanation, as he believed that it was done
intentionally and with gross breach of contract, which ridiculed and humiliated the Timan
couple and the addressees. RCPI explained via letters, dated March 9 and April 20, 1983, and
the Timans were unconvinced and filed a complaint for damages.

Issue:
Whether or not RCPI is liable of damages for gross breach of contract for sending
Timan’s condolence telegram in a Happy Birthday card and a Christmasgram envelope.

Ruling:
The court ruled that RCPI is liable of damages to the amount of Php 30,848.05 as
actual damages and compensatory damages, Php 10,000 as moral damages, Php 5,000 as
exemplary damages and Php 5,000 as attorney’s fees.
RCPI, being in a service and telecommunications business that affects public interest,
is bound to exercise with due diligence the performance of their obligations. Although the
message was transmitted correctly, the telegram was meant to be for condolence and
sympathy. It is absurd that a message of condolence would be placed in a birthday card and
delivered in a Christmas envelope as this ridicules the deceased’s relatives and ruins the
atmosphere of grief and sympathy for the deceased. This error is equivalent to committing
fraud, malice or bad faith as anyone who avails of RCPI’s facilities have a choice to send
their message in ordinary form, which is on plain newsprint paper or in a social form, which
is with its proper decorations and embellishments. It is evident that when RCPI typed the
message in a birthday card and sealed in a Christmas envelope, it is committing breach of
contract, gross negligence and misconduct, therefore, will make them liable for damages. The
excuse saying that they ran out of social condolence cards and envelopes is unacceptable as
there could have been the option of sending it ordinarily instead and reimbursed the Timan’s
afterwards. The telegram that was sent became a joke and a mockery among the deceased
family’s friends, relatives and associates, which caused much embarrassment and distress to
Minerva Timan, who then suffered nervousness and hypertension and was confined for three
days beginning April 4, 1983, at Capitol Medical Center. There was gross negligence on the
part of RCPI personnel in transmitting the wrong telegram, of which RCPI must be held
liable for wanton misconduct.

Controlling Issue:
Whether or not RCPI is liable of damages for gross breach of contract for sending
Timan’s condolence telegram in a Happy Birthday card and a Christmasgram envelope.

Legal Dispute:
Timan’s claim against RCPI as they acted with gross negligence, misconduct, reckless
manner and breach of contract.
RCPI’s claim that they correctly transmitted the text of the telegram with error on the
social form and envelope, therefore, is not liable for negligence.