THIRD DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated JAN 26 2005.

G.R. No. 165728 (Marcbilt Construction, Inc. vs. Lim Yee Lin.)

Petitioner assails the August 9, 2004 decision ^[1] cralaw of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 77751, affirming an earlier decision ^[2] cralaw of the Regional Trial Court at Para�aque City, Branch 257 in Civil Case No. 97-04-13, adjudging petitioner liable for damages, as follows:

"WHEREFORE, defendants Carlito Q. Manalo and Marcbilt Construction, Inc. are found solidarity liable and ordered to pay plaintiff the amounts of P349,500.00 representing the cost of replacing the cab of the tractor truck, P30,000.00 for attorney's fees, and the costs of suit. The claim for interest is denied for lack of basis.

SO ORDERED".

Respondent Lim Yee is the owner of a truck tractor (UEW-902) with Hi-Bed trailer bearing Plate No. PUB-416. ^[3] cralaw On the other hand, petitioner Marcbilt Construction, Inc. (Marcbilt), engaged in the trucking business, is the owner of an Isuzu Dump Truck with Plate No. UFK-268, ^[4] cralaw driven by its driver Carlito Q. Manalo

On February 5, 1997 at about 5:00 o'clock in the afternoon, Manalo parked the Isuzu dump truck beside Marcbilt's office at Anabu 1^st along General E. Aguinaldo Highway, Imus, Cavite. At the time, the dump truck was loaded with gravel and sand. Manalo alighted from the truck to get delivery receipts from their office, leaving the engine of the dump truck running. He also did not pull its handbrake which was functioning. The dump truck rolled backwards and went directly down the road; moved across the highway from Marcbilt's parking area; hit two (2) vehicles, a Mitsubishi Lancer and respondent's trailer truck which was cruising at moderate speed and loaded at the time with 1,000 bags of Island Cement. The dump truck first sideswiped the Mitsubishi Lancer's left portion and then its rear portion hit the left side of the respondent's trailer truck's cab and also part of the trailer's "barangadilla", with the cement bags carried by it thrown into the pavement.

The impact seriously damaged the cab of respondent's trailer truck which was rendered useless. The vehicle was brought to Pyramid International Trucks Center which estimated the cost of replacement and repair at P349,500.

As Marcbilt refused to pay despite repeated demands by respondent, the latter filed with the RTC, Para�aque City a civil suit for damages (Civil Case No. 97-0413) on September 2, 1997, seeking to hold Marcbilt liable for the payment of the sums of (a) P349,500 representing the expenses for the repair of respondent's damaged truck tractor; (b) P305,000.00 for expenses in the rental of a trucking firm in order not to paralyze respondents business operations; and (c) P20,000.00 as acceptance fee of counsel, plus 25% of the total amount due and costs.

In its Answer, Marcbilt denied liability for the damages, asserting that its driver Manalo is an experienced, diligent and cautious driver and that the cause of the accident was the unfortunate event of the dump truck's handbrake giving way and the negligence of respondent's driver in not taking the necessary precautions to avoid damage to its truck when he had a lot of time and opportunity to do so. Marcbilt contended that the damage to respondent's trailer truck was very minimal, only a dent at the left side portion which would amount to, at most, P15,000.00, and that it had communicated its offer to repair the trailer truck but respondent turned down its offer, adding that respondent's claim for damages is very much bloated and designed merely to harass petitioner to cough up a large amount of money to profit from this unfortunate incident. Marcbilt also invoked the doctrine of "last clear chance", saying that there was sufficient time for respondent's driver to avoid the accident but did not.

On January 30, 2004, the trial court rendered a decision in favor of respondent. The decision contained the following findings and conclusions:

"The vehicular mishap occurred because the dump truck owned by defendant Marcbilt moved backward and rolled towards the Aguinaldo Highway where it hit plaintiff's truck tractor. The dump truck rolled towards Aguinaldo Highway because it was parked on a slightly higher ground, the lower level being the Aguinaldo Highway.

Immediately before the accident, defendant Carlito Q. Manalo parked the dump truck at the side of defendant Marcbilt's office. Before leaving the dump truck to get the receipt of the cargo, he did not turn-off the engine as he was in a hurry to leave because it was almost truck ban time.

It was the aforesaid omission of defendant driver that made possible the occurrence of the vehicular mishap. He is negligent since he failed to exercise the proper care and caution which a prudent person would ordinarily do in the same situation. (Mandarin Villa vs. Court of Appeals, 257 SCRA 538).

xxx��� xxx������ xxx

The evidence presented by defendant Marcbilt has so far shown only that it had exercised care in the selection of its driver, defendant Manalo, but it had failed to exercise care in the supervision over him after such selection was made. xxx. The interview record (Exhibit 4), the Driving and Road Test Results (Exhibit 5) and the Maintenance and Service Schedule (Exhibit 6) do not show that defendant Manalo was supervised or warned not to leave the heavy dump truck without pulling its handbrake or placing a stopper or stone against its tire to prevent it from rolling. The existence of hiring procedures and even supervising policies is insufficient and cannot be casually invoked to overturn the presumption of negligence on the part of the employer (Fabre, Jr. vs. Court of Appeals 259 SCRA 426" (Emphasis supplied).

Petitioner moved for a reconsideration but its motion was denied by the trial court on April 1, 2002.

Petitioner then appealed to the Court of Appeals, contending that there was no sufficient evidence presented to support the award of attorney's fees and the cost of replacing the cab of the respondent's truck trailer, nor to hold petitioner solidarily liable with its driver.

In the herein assailed decision dated August 9, 2004, ^[5] cralaw the Court of Appeals affirmed that of the RTC and accordingly dismissed petitioner's appeal, thus:

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the present appeal is hereby DISMESSED for lack of merit and the appealed decision of the court a quo in Civil Case No. 97-0413 is hereby AFFIRMED.

No pronouncement as to costs.

SO ORDERED.

Undaunted, petitioner comes to this Court via the instant petition for review on certiorari, insisting that the Court of Appeals committed reversible error in affirming the finding of the RTC that petitioner is solidarity liable with its driver in the amount P349,500 for the replacement of respondent's cab.

We deny the petition, premised as it is on the alleged insufficiency of evidence presented against it and the misappreciation thereof by the two (2) courts below.

To begin with, this Court is not a trier of facts. It is not its function to examine and determine the weight of the evidence supporting the assailed decision. In Philippine Airlines, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals ^[6] cralaw , we have held that factual findings of the Court of Appeals which are supported by substantial evidence are binding, final and conclusive upon this Court. So also, well-established is the rule that "factual findings of the Court of Appeals are conclusive on the parties and carry even more weight when the said court affirms the factual findings of the trial court." ^[7] cralaw Moreover, well-entrenched is the prevailing jurisprudence that only errors of law and not of facts are reviewable by this Court in a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45, which jurisprudence applies with greater force to the petition under consideration because the factual findings by the Court of Appeals are in full agreement with what the trial court found.

WHEREFORE, the petition is hereby DENIED.

SO ORDERED.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) LUCITA ABJELINA-SORIANO

Assistant Division Clerk of Court