SANICO VS. COLIPANO GR NO. 209969 (2017)

FACTS: 

Colipano filed a complaint for breach of contract of carriage and damages against Sanico and Castro. In her complaint, Colipano claimed that she and her daughter were paying passengers in the jeepney operated by Sanico, which was driven by Castro when the accident happened. Colipano's leg was badly injured and was eventually amputated. Sanico claimed that he paid for all the hospital and medical expenses of Colipano, and that Colipano eventually freely and voluntarily executed an Affidavit of Desistance and Release of Claim. However, Colipano testified that she did not understand the document she signed. She also did not understand the nature and extent of her waiver as the content of the document was not explained to her.

 

ISSUE: Whether the Affidavit of Desistance and Release of Claim is void.

 

RULING:

Yes. It is clear from the plaintiffs’ circumstances that she is not able to understand English, more so stipulations stated in the said Affidavit and Release. It is understandable that in her pressing need, the plaintiff may have been easily convinced to sign the document with the promise that she will be compensated for her injuries. For there to be a valid waiver, the following requisites are essential: (1) that the person making the waiver possesses the right, (2) that he has the capacity and power to dispose of the right, (3) that the waiver must be clear and unequivocal although it may be made expressly or impliedly, and (4) that the waiver is not contrary to law, public policy, public order, morals, good customs or prejudicial to a third person with a right recognized by law. The third and fourth requirements are, however, lacking.