PLDT VS CA PLDT vs. CA Facts: On July, 30, 1968, respondent spouses Esteban had their jeep ran over a sand of earth and fell into an open trench, an excavation allegedly undertaken by PLDT for the installation of its underground conduit system. Respondent Antonio Esteban failed to notice the open trench which was left uncovered because of the creeping darkness and the lack of warning light or signs. Respondent spouses suffered physical injuries and their jeeps windshield was shattered. PLDT alleged that the respondents were negligent and that it should be the independent contractor L.R. Barte and Company which undertook said conduit system to be the one liable.The latter claimed to have complied with its contract and had installed necessary barricades. Issue: WON PLDT and L.R. Barte and Co. are liable. Ruling: Private Respondent´s negligence was not merely contributory but goes to the very cause of the accident, hence he has no right to recover damages for the injuries which he and his wife suffered. Private respondent cannot recover notwithstanding the negligence he imputes on PLDT considering that he had ¨the last clear chance¨, to avoid the injury. One who claims damages for the negligence of another has the burden of proof to show existence of such fault or negligence causative thereof.
