- Statute
- Civil Code
- Article
- Art. 29
- Topic
- Civil action after acquittal on reasonable doubt
- Status
- In force
- Book
- Preliminary Title
- Chapter
- CHAPTER 2 Human Relations (n)
- Year
- 1949
- Cited by
- Multiple Supreme Court decisions
The provision
ARTICLE 29. When the accused in a criminal prosecution is acquitted on the ground that his guilt has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt, a civil action for damages for the same act or omission may be instituted. Such action requires only a preponderance of evidence. Upon motion of the defendant, the court may require the plaintiff to file a bond to answer for damages in case the complaint should be found to be malicious. If in a criminal case the judgment of acquittal is based upon reasonable doubt, the court shall so declare. In the absence of any declaration to that effect, it may be inferred from the text of the decision whether or not the acquittal is due to that ground.
Intellegal Wiki · In plain terms
An acquittal in a criminal case for failure to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt does not bar a separate civil action for damages over the same act, and that civil case needs only preponderance of evidence, a lower standard. The court should state when an acquittal rests on reasonable doubt, and the defendant may ask that the plaintiff post a bond in case the claim proves malicious.
An editorially maintained plain-language explanation of this provision — not legal advice.
Key points
Article 29 preserves a civil remedy after a criminal acquittal based on reasonable doubt. When an accused is acquitted because guilt was not proved beyond reasonable doubt, a civil action for damages for the same act or omission may still be filed, and it need only be proved by a preponderance of evidence.
On the defendant's motion, the court may require the plaintiff to post a bond against a malicious complaint. The article reflects that the civil and criminal standards of proof differ, and is read with Articles 30 and 35 and with the Rules of Court on the civil aspect of criminal cases.
Cases applying this article
- People v. Rogelio Ligon y Trias G.R. No. 74041
- Linda Mohamed Barrueco v. The Consul General of Spain In the Philippines G.R. No. 48796
- AAA261422 v. XXX261422 G.R. No. 261422