When the accused dies

Joe Pallugna

THERE were several queries from common-folks about what happens to the monetary claims of the victims of crime when the accused dies during the pendency of the case. Can the family of the victims still claim damages after the accused dies during trial?

In one case, a man named Gerry was accused of murder in the RTC of Quezon City. During the trial of his case and before final judgment, he died. There arose the question of whether or not his estate can still be liable for civil damages to the family of the victim?

This question was answered with clarity by the Supreme Court in the recently-decided case of People of the Phils. versus Gerry Lipata (G.R. No. 200302, April 20, 2016), wherein the High Tribunal ruled that:

“At the outset, we declare that because of appellant’s death prior to promulgation of the CA’s decision, there is no further need to determine the appellant’s (accused) criminal liability. Appellant’s death has the effect of extinguishing his criminal liability. Article 89(1) of the Revised Penal Code provides: ‘Art. 89–Criminal liability is totally extinguished: 1. By the death of the convict, as to personal penalties; and as to pecuniary penalties, liability therefor is extinguished only when the death of the offender occurs before final judgment.’

“What this Court will discuss is the effect of appellant’s death with regard to his civil liability. In 1994, the Court, in People v. Bayotas (G.R. No. 102007, 02 Sept. 1994, 236 SCRA 239), reconciled the differing doctrines on the issue of whether the death of the accused pending appeal of his conviction extinguishes his civil liability. We concluded that ‘upon death of the accused pending appeal of his conviction, the criminal action is extinguished inasmuch as there is no longer A defendant to stand as the accused; the civil action instituted therein for recovery of civil liability ex delicto is ipso facto extinguished, grounded as it is on the criminal.’

“We also ruled that ‘if the private offended party, upon extinction of the civil liability ex delicto desires to recover damages from the same act or omission complained of, he must subject to Section 1, Rule 111 (of the then applicable 1985 Rules on Civil Procedure as amended) file a separate civil action, this time predicated not on the felony previously charged but on otehr sources of obligation. The source of obligation upon which the separate civil action is premised determines against whom the same shall be enforced.’

“We proceeded to distinguish the defendants among the different causes of action. If the act or omission complained of arises from quasi-delict or, by provision of law, results in an injury to person or to real or personal property, the separate civil action must be filed against the executor or administrator of the estate pursuant to Section 1, Rule 87 of the Rules of Court. On the other hand, if the act or omission complained of arises from contract, the separate civil action must be filed against the estate pursuant to Section 5, Rule 86 of the Rules of Court.”

So, my friends, it is now clear. If the accused commits a crime penalized by the Penal Code or some special laws, the civil liability is erased if the accused is still not convicted by final judgment. However, if the offense arises out of a car accident, or if it came from the issuance of checks or breach of contract arising out of fraud or direct damage to property like malicious mischief, the victim may still file a separate civil action against the estate of the accused after his death while the case was still pending trial or appeal.

Yes, there may be some exceptions to all these rules, and the exceptions may cause more confusion to the ordinary folks. But, the basics can easily be understood.

And if you still get a little bit confused, better hire a lawyer rather than trying to decipher this legal issue yourself. That’s the beauty of the law–it is confusing so lawyers will still have a profession.

(Joe Pallugna is a lawyer based in Cagayan de Oro. E-mail: ajpallugna@gmail.com)