Hedy Gan y Yu, Petitioner, vs. The Honorable Court of Appeals and The People of The Philippines, Respondents. GR No L-44264 September 19, 1988
Uploaded by
KWINNYHedy Gan y Yu, Petitioner, vs. The Honorable Court of Appeals and The People of The Philippines, Respondents. GR No L-44264 September 19, 1988
Uploaded by
KWINNYHEDY GAN Y YU, PETITIONER, VS.
THE HONORABLE COURT OF
APPEALS AND THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENTS.
G.R. No. L-44264 September 19, 1988
FACTS:
On the morning of July 4, 1972, Hedy Gan y Yu was driving a Toyota car
along North Bay Boulevard, Tondo, Manila. As she approached house no.
694, there were two vehicles, a truck and a jeepney parked on one side of
the road, two to three meters apart. An oncoming vehicle in the opposite
direction, followed closely by another trying to overtake, encroached on
Gan’s lane. To avoid a head-on collision, Gan swerved to the right and as a
consequence, hit an old man who was about to cross the street, pinning him
against the rear of one of the parked vehicles. The force of the impact
caused the parked vehicle to move forward hitting the other parked vehicle
in front of it. The pedestrian was injured, Gan's car and the two parked
vehicle suffered damages. The pedestrian was pronounced dead on arrival
at the hospital.
An information for Homicide thru Reckless Imprudence was filed against
Gan. She pleaded not guilty and requested a re-investigation, leading to the
City Fiscal moving for dismissal due to an affidavit of desistance from the
complainant and lack of eyewitnesses. The court denied the motion and
proceeded with the trial, ultimately convicting Gan of Homicide thru
Reckless Imprudence.
Gan appealed to the Court of Appeals, which modified her conviction to
Homicide thru Simple Imprudence and sentenced her to an indeterminate
penalty of three months and eleven days of arresto mayor and indemnity.
However, because of the unsatisfactory of Gan further appealed to the
Supreme Court for a complete acquittal.
ISSUES:
1. Whether the Court of Appeals erred in determining that Gan
should have braked immediately or lessened her speed when faced
with an oncoming vehicle.
2. Whether Gan’s conviction for Homicide thru Simple Imprudence
was proper.
3. Whether the indemnity awarded to the heirs of the deceased was
justifiable given the circumstances.
RULINGS:
1. The Supreme Court held that the appellate court’s suggestion for Gan to
brake or lessen her speed did not account for the emergency situation she
faced. The emergency rule, which asserts that one in sudden danger is not
negligent for failing to adopt the best possible course of action unless the
emergency was caused by their own negligence, applied. Gan’s reaction to
swerve right was found reasonable given the immediacy of the threat.
2. In addressing Gan’s conviction of Homicide thru Simple Imprudence, the
Court ruled that no sufficient evidence showed Gan had the time to ponder
her actions. The prosecution’s evidence confirmed Gan’s assertion that she
acted instantaneously to avoid greater danger, thus negating criminal
negligence.
3. The indemnity to the heirs was set aside because they had executed a
release of claim, effectively waiving their right to compensation.
WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered acquitting petitioner HEDY GAN
y YU of the crime of Homicide thru Simple Imprudence. She is no longer
liable for the civil indemnity awarded by the appellate court to the heirs of
the victim.
