Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 599 views

    Hedy Gan VS Ca

    Uploaded by

    Paulo Villarin
    Hedy Gan was driving her car when another vehicle tried to overtake two parked cars, encroaching on Gan's lane. To avoid a head-on collision, Gan swerved right and hit a pedestrian, pinning him against a parked car and causing a chain reaction of collisions. The pedestrian died. Gan was found not guilty because she was faced with an emergency situation and had to act instantly to avoid danger, without time to consider alternative actions. The court found Gan took reasonable action to protect herself and others from the imminent threat caused by the other driver's actions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Hedy Gan VS Ca

    Uploaded by

    Paulo Villarin
    599 views1 page
    Hedy Gan was driving her car when another vehicle tried to overtake two parked cars, encroaching on Gan's lane. To avoid a head-on collision, Gan swerved right and hit a pedestrian, pinning him against a parked car and causing a chain reaction of collisions. The pedestrian died. Gan was found not guilty because she was faced with an emergency situation and had to act instantly to avoid danger, without time to consider alternative actions. The court found Gan took reasonable action to protect herself and others from the imminent threat caused by the other driver's actions.

    Original Title

    HEDY GAN VS CA

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Hedy Gan was driving her car when another vehicle tried to overtake two parked cars, encroaching on Gan's lane. To avoid a head-on collision, Gan swerved right and hit a pedestrian, pinning him against a parked car and causing a chain reaction of collisions. The pedestrian died. Gan was found not guilty because she was faced with an emergency situation and had to act instantly to avoid danger, without time to consider alternative actions. The court found Gan took reasonable action to protect herself and others from the imminent threat caused by the other driver's actions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    599 views1 page

    Hedy Gan VS Ca

    Uploaded by

    Paulo Villarin
    Hedy Gan was driving her car when another vehicle tried to overtake two parked cars, encroaching on Gan's lane. To avoid a head-on collision, Gan swerved right and hit a pedestrian, pinning him against a parked car and causing a chain reaction of collisions. The pedestrian died. Gan was found not guilty because she was faced with an emergency situation and had to act instantly to avoid danger, without time to consider alternative actions. The court found Gan took reasonable action to protect herself and others from the imminent threat caused by the other driver's actions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    HEDY GAN vs CA the least possible harm to herself and to others.

    The
    G.R. No. L-44264 September 19, 1988 appellate court is asking too much from a mere mortal
    like the petitioner who in the blink of an eye had to
    exercise her best judgment to extricate herself from a
    FACTS: difficult and dangerous situation caused by the driver of
    the overtaking vehicle. Petitioner certainly could not be
    In the morning of 4 July 1972, the accused Hedy Gan expected to act with all the coolness of a person under
    was driving along North Bay Boulevard, Tondo, Manila. normal conditions. The danger confronting petitioner
    There were two vehicles parked on one side of the road, was real and imminent, threatening her very existence.
    one following the other. As the car driven by Gan She had no opportunity for rational thinking but only
    approached the place where the two vehicles were enough time to heed the very powerfull instinct of self-
    parked, there was a vehicle coming from the opposite preservation.
    direction, followed by another which tried to overtake
    the one in front of it thereby encroaching the lane of
    the car driven by Gan. 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.

    Gan was convicted of Homicide thru reckless


    imprudence. On appeal, CA modified the trial court's
    decision convicting Gan of Homicide thru simple
    imprudence.

    ISSUE:

    Is Hedy Gan guilty for the death of the pedestrian?

    HELD:

    NO.

    A corollary rule is what is known in the law as the


    emergency rule. "Under that rule, one who suddenly
    finds himself in a place of danger, and is required to act
    without time to consider the best means that may be
    adopted to avoid the impending danger, is not guilty of
    negligence, if he fails to adopt what subsequently and
    upon reflection may appear to have been a better
    method, unless the emergency in which he finds himself
    is brought about by his own negligence." Applying the
    above test to the case at bar, we find the petitioner not
    guilty of the crime of Simple Imprudence resulting in
    Homicide

    The course of action suggested by the appellate court


    would seem reasonable were it not for the fact that
    such suggestion did not take into account the amount
    of time afforded petitioner to react to the situation she
    was in. For it is undeniable that the suggested course of
    action presupposes sufficient time for appellant to
    analyze the situation confronting her and to ponder on
    which of the different courses of action would result in

    You might also like