Actual or compensatory damages must be proved

SPOUSES NORA SAGUID and ROLANDO P. SAGUID vs. SECURITY FINANCE, INC., G.R. No. 159467, December 9, 2005

“x x x.

It is well-settled that actual or compensatory damages must be proved and proved with reasonable degree of certainty. A party is entitled only up to such compensation for the pecuniary loss that he has duly proven.^[47] It cannot be presumed.^[48] Absent proof of the amount of actual damages sustained, the Court cannot rely on speculations, conjectures, or guesswork as to the fact and amount of damages, but must depend upon competent proof that they have been suffered by the injured party and on the best obtainable evidence of the actual amount thereof.^[49]

In the instant case, the trial court awarded as actual damages the amount of P750.00 per day as daily earnings of the seized vehicle from 28 October 1998 until its return. Same should be deleted for lack of competent proof. The bare assertion of petitioner Rolando Saguid that the subject vehicle was earning P750.00 a day before it was seized is inadequate, if not speculative, and should not be accepted because it is not supported by independent evidence. Petitioners should have at least presented a record or journal that would clearly show how much the vehicle earned in a specific period. This, petitioners failed to do. Instead, they relied on mere allegations that do not prove anything.

X x x.”