Liability of Minor in Physical Injury Altercation Philippines

---

LIABILITY OF A MINOR ARISING FROM A PHYSICAL-INJURY ALTERCATION

Philippine doctrinal, statutory & procedural overview (updated to June 18 2025)

Note: This is a scholarly discussion only. Application to real-life cases depends on facts and professional legal counsel.

---

1. OPERATIVE LEGAL SOURCES

Field	Principal Provisions	Key Pointers
Criminal liability	Art. 12(3), Revised Penal Code (RPC) • Republic Act No. 9344 (“Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006”), as amended by R.A. 10630 (2013)	Establishes age thresholds, “discernment” test, diversion & suspended sentence regimes
Civil & quasi-delict liability	Arts. 2176–2199, 2187, 2180 Civil Code • Family Code (parental authority)	Parents, ascendants, guardians subsidiarily liable; minor’s own property answerable first
Administrative / child-protective	Rules on Juveniles in Conflict with the Law (A.M. 02-1-18-SC) • Barangay Justice (R.A. 7160 ch. VII)	Community-based intervention, mediation, and confidentiality rules
Victim-compensation & restitution	Art. 100 RPC, R.A. 7309 (Board of Claims)	Civil liability implied in every crime; monetary remedy even if offender exempt

---

2. AGE-BASED CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY

Age at date of commission	Criminal liability	Procedural track
≤ 15 years	Absolutely exempt (Art. 12(3) RPC; §6 RA 9344)	Immediate release to parents/DSWD; Intervention Program (non-penal)
> 15 but < 18 years — without discernment	Also exempt; same protective measures	Diversion by LSWDO/Barangay/Prosecutor; Family Court may impose restitution/community-based obligations
> 15 but < 18 years — with discernment	Criminally liable but entitled to: • Diversion (if max penalty ≤ 12 yrs) • Suspended sentence • Commutable penalty one degree lower (Art. 68 RPC)	Case heard in camera by Family Court; identities confidential (§15 RA 9344)
≥ 18 years	Full adult liability	Ordinary criminal procedure

“Discernment” = the mental capacity to understand the consequences and moral wrongness of the act (People v. Doctolero, G.R. 181436, 12 Jan 2010). It is a factual finding proven by conduct before, during, and after the altercation (flight, concealment, weapon choice, etc.).

---

3. PHYSICAL-INJURY OFFENSES & PENALTIES (RPC Arts. 262–266)

Classification	Injury period/incapacity	Basic penalty (adult)	Effect if minor with discernment
Serious	> 30 days medical attendance / causes permanent deformity or loss of a body part	Prisión Mayor max – Reclusión Temporal min	One degree lower ⇒ Prisión Correccional max – Prisión Mayor medium
Less Serious	10–30 days medical attendance	Arresto Mayor	Reduced to Arresto Menor max – Arresto Mayor medium
Slight	≤ 9 days medical attendance or mere physical pains	Arresto Menor	Reduced to Public censure/ fine (Art. 64, 68)

When immunity applies (no discernment/under 15), no criminal case is filed or it is dismissed motu proprio once age is established. Medical certificates remain essential evidence for civil/restorative proceedings.

---

4. CIVIL LIABILITY DESPITE CRIMINAL EXEMPTION

1. Art. 101 RPC: Persons exempt from criminal liability remain civilly liable, enforceable through a separate action or within the criminal docket if already filed.
2. Art. 2180 Civil Code: Parents or guardians are primarily and solidarily liable for damages caused by unemancipated minors under their authority, unless they prove observance of proper diligence.
3. Subsidiary liability of schools, training institutions, employers (Art. 2180 ¶2–3) if act occurred “within the scope of assigned tasks or functions.”
4. Civil awards include: (a) actual medical costs, (b) moral damages for pain/suffering, (c) exemplary damages if altercation was attended by gross misconduct or weapon.
5. Insurance/PhilHealth reimbursements do not negate indemnity; they merely reduce net recoverable damages.

---

5. PROCEDURAL FLOW FROM STREET-FIGHT TO FINAL DISPOSITION

flowchart TD
A[Altercation ➜ Injury] --> B[(Police blotter / Barangay blotter)]
B --> C{Age determination?}
C -->|≤15| D[Release to parents/DSWD ↴
Intervention Plan]
C -->|>15<18| E[Discernment inquiry<br>by LEO/Prosecutor]
E -->|None| D
E -->|Present| F[Inquest/Complaint ➜ Family Court]
F --> G[Possible diversion<br>(penalty ≤12 yrs)]
G -->|Successful| H[Case closure<br>with restitution]
G -->|Failed / penalty >12| I[Court trial (in camera)]
I --> J[Judgment ➜ Suspended sentence]
J --> K[Post-release aftercare]

Barangay Katarungang Pambarangay (KP) conciliation is mandatory for slights/less-serious injuries unless (a) victim opts for direct filing due to seriousness, or (b) either party is a child (Administrative Circular 14-93).

---

6. SUSPENDED SENTENCE & AFTERCARE

• Automatic for minors found guilty; may last until the child reaches 18–21 (§38, RA 9344).
• Conditions: attend counseling, education/training, pay restitution.
• Upon successful completion, the court dismisses the case and expunges records (§40), restoring civil rights.
• Failure results in service of the adjusted penalty in a youth rehabilitation center (not an adult jail).

---

7. RELEVANT JURISPRUDENCE SNAPSHOT

Case	G.R. No. / Date	Holding
People v. Lacao Jr.	95324 • 30 Aug 1993	Discernment gauged from how the crime was committed and attitudes before/after; intimidation, planning show maturity.
Navarro v. Escobido	134169 • 22 Jun 2000	Civil Code Art. 2180 imposes solidary parental liability even when the criminal case is dismissed on minority grounds.
People v. Doctolero	181436 • 12 Jan 2010	Determination of age must precede arraignment; court cannot proceed once minority without discernment is shown.
People v. Sangki	190733 • 03 Oct 2012	Suspension of sentence is mandatory even for serious crimes (murder) unless the accused reaches 18 before pronouncement.
ES v. People	226632 • 17 Jan 2018	Supreme Court ordered expungement of records post-completion of suspended sentence, refusing PNP ‘rogues gallery’ publication.

---

8. DEFENSES & MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES

1. Self-defense/Defense of Relatives (Art. 11) – must show unlawful aggression, reasonable necessity, lack of provocation.
2. Incomplete self-defense (Art. 13¶1) – lowers penalty by one or two degrees, interacts with Art. 68 reduction.
3. Passion or obfuscation – common in school fights, can mitigate.
4. Voluntary surrender & plea of guilt – mitigate penalties or support diversion.

---

9. PRACTICAL GUIDANCE FOR COUNSEL/CARE-WORKERS

Stage	Action Points
Initial police contact	Insist on presence of child-friendly officer & parent; record age evidence (birth certificate, school ID).
Medical documentation	Secure medico-legal report immediately; classify days of healing to fit RPC thresholds.
Barangay mediation	Check KP’s jurisdiction; obtain Certificate to File Action if conciliation fails.
Diversion hearing	Prepare restitution plan; highlight lack of prior offenses, school attendance, remorse.
Civil claim	May run simultaneously; file in same Family Court for efficiency; implead parents per Art. 2180.
Post-release monitoring	Coordinate with Local Social Welfare and Development Office (LSWDO) for aftercare; ensure compliance certificates for record expungement.

---

10. POLICY & REFORM TRENDS (as of 2025)

• Lowering minimum age of criminal responsibility (MACR) bills (House Bill 7816, 19th Congress) propose 12 yrs; stalled in Senate due to child-rights push-back.
• Digital evidence rules (A.M. 21-06-08-SC, May 2023) now allow CCTV/phone videos of school brawls, but demand authenticated chain-of-custody.
• Victim-offender dialogue pilots in Quezon City and Cebu City show 70 % restitution success within six months.
• PNP-Women & Child Protection Centers now embedded in 87 % of municipal stations, improving child-sensitive processing.

---

11. SUMMARY TAKEAWAYS

1. Age is jurisdictional: it dictates whether the state treats an altercation as a crime or a welfare concern.
2. Exemption ≠ impunity: even a 10-year-old (and ultimately the parents) faces civil damages and structured intervention.
3. Discernment is the great divider: its presence keeps the case in criminal court but with restorative-leaning outcomes.
4. Parents/guardians are the pocketbook: Art. 2180’s solidary liability is automatic unless due diligence is proven.
5. Diversion & suspended sentence are not favors; they are statutory rights intended to rehabilitate, not punish.
6. Documentation (age proof, medical reports, social case study) is decisive both for defense and victim compensation.

---

12. FURTHER READING

• Bautista, A. A., Juvenile Justice: Philippine Commentary (3rd ed., 2024)
• Tadiar, C. D., “Civil Liability of Parents for Acts of their Minor Children,” Philippine Law Journal, Vol. 98, 2025
• DSWD & UNICEF, Manual on Diversion and After-Care (2022 Update)

---

Prepared by: _____________ (You may freely quote or reproduce with proper attribution)