"x x x.
Because the circumstances of the present case evince a contractual relation between the PSBA and Carlitos Bautista, the rules on quasi-delict do not really govern. 8 A perusal of Article 2176 shows that obligations arising from quasi-delicts or tort, also known as extra-contractual obligations, arise only between parties not otherwise bound by contract, whether express or implied. However, this impression has not prevented this Court from determining the existence of a tort even when there obtains a contract. In Air France vs. Carrascoso (124 Phil. 722), the private respondent was awarded damages for his unwarranted expulsion from a first-class seat aboard the petitioner airline. It is noted, however, that the Court referred to the petitioner-airline’s liability as one arising from tort, not one arising from a contract of carriage. In effect, Air France is authority for the view that liability from tort may exist even if there is a contract, for the act that breaks the contract may be also a tort. (Austro-America S.S. Co. vs. Thomas, 248 Fed. 231).”
However, because the circumstances of the case have not yet shown that a breach of the contract was violated, in view of the fact that trial on the merits have not yet commenced, the Supreme Court remanded the case to the trial court for trial on the merits, and denied the petition of the school to have the case dismissed."
See -
G.R. No. 84698 February 4, 1992. PHILIPPINE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, JUAN D. LIM, BENJAMIN P. PAULINO, ANTONIO M. MAGTALAS, COL. PEDRO SACRO and LT. M. SORIANO, petitioners, vs.COURT OF APPEALS, HON. REGINA ORDOÑEZ-BENITEZ, in her capacity as Presiding Judge of Branch 47, Regional Trial Court, Manila, SEGUNDA R. BAUTISTA and ARSENIA D. BAUTISTA, respondents.
See -
http://thelawyerspost.net/stabbing-incident-inside-the-school-is-the-school-liable/?utm_source=New+Subscribers&utm_campaign=e1811ad019-Welcome_Emails2_8_2015&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_2bd6daca43-e1811ad019-279668609#.VVmDjbmqqkp
