Batas tungkol sa “valet parking”

ni Atty. Persida Rueda-Acosta @Magtanong Kay Attorney | December 13, 2025

Dear Chief Acosta,

May batas o ba na sumasaklaw sa valet parking sa mga malls o iba pang gusali? Maraming salamat sa paglilinaw. – Sevie

---

Dear Sevie,

Para sa iyong kaalaman, nakasaad sa Artikulo 1962 ng Republic Act No. 386, o mas kilala sa tawag na New Civil Code of the Philippines, ang sumusunod:

“Article 1962. A deposit is constituted from the moment a person receives a thing belonging to another, with the obligation of safely keeping it and of returning the same. If the safekeeping of the thing delivered is not the principal purpose of the contract, there is no deposit but some other contract.” 

Hinggil sa nabanggit, ibinahagi ng Korte Suprema sa kasong Triple-V v. Filipino Merchants (G.R. No. 160544, 21 Pebrero 2005, Ikatlong Dibisyon) ang uri ng kasunduan na bumubuo sa valet parking service:

“When De Asis entrusted the car in question to petitioner’s valet attendant while eating at petitioner's Kamayan Restaurant, the former expected the car's safe return at the end of her meal. Thus, petitioner was constituted as a depositary of the same car. xxx In a contract of deposit, a person receives an object belonging to another with the obligation of safely keeping it and returning the same. A deposit may be constituted even without any consideration. It is not necessary that the depositary receives a fee before it becomes obligated to keep the item entrusted for safekeeping and to return it later to the depositor. xxx in a very real sense, a safe parking space is an added attraction to petitioner's restaurant business because customers are thereby somehow assured that their vehicle[s] are safely kept, rather than parking them elsewhere at their own risk. Having entrusted the subject car to petitioner's valet attendant, customer De Asis, like all of petitioner's customers, fully expects the security of her car while at petitioner's premises/designated parking areas and its safe return at the end of her visit at petitioner's restaurant.” 

Sa kasong Durban Apartments Corporation v. Pioneer Insurance and Surety Corporation (G.R. No. 179419, 12 Enero 2011, isinulat ni Kagalang-galang na Kasamahang Mahistrado Antonio Nachura), sinabi rin ng Korte Suprema ang sumusunod:

“Plainly, from the facts found by the lower courts, the insured See deposited his vehicle for safekeeping with petitioner, through the latter’s employee, Justimbaste. In turn, Justimbaste issued a claim stub to See. Thus, the contract of deposit was perfected from See’s delivery, when he handed over to Justimbaste the keys to his vehicle, which Justimbaste received with the obligation of safely keeping and returning it. Ultimately, petitioner is liable for the loss of See’s vehicle.” 

Samakatuwid, malinaw na kapag iniabot ng isang motorista ang susi at sasakyan sa valet parking ng isang mall o establisimyento, nagkakaroon ng contract of deposit sa ilalim ng ating New Civil Code, kung saan tungkulin ng mall o establisimyento na ingatan ang sasakyang inihabilin at ibalik ito nang ligtas sa may-ari. Pinagtibay ito ng Korte Suprema sa mga kasong nabanggit sa itaas, na kapwa nagpasya na ang establisimyento ay nagiging depositary at mananagot kung mawala o masira ang sasakyan habang nasa kanilang pangangalaga, may bayad man o wala ang nasabing valet service.

Sana ay nabigyan namin ng linaw ang iyong katanungan. Ang payong aming ibinigay ay base lamang sa mga impormasyon na iyong inilahad at maaaring magbago kung mababawasan o madaragdagan ang mga detalye ng iyong salaysay.

Maraming salamat sa iyong patuloy na pagtitiwala.