Short answer. Yes. In cases of fraud, the law lets the injured party bring a civil action for damages that is entirely separate and distinct from the criminal action, and that civil case shall proceed independently of the criminal prosecution — you do not have to wait for the estafa case to conclude.
What the law says
In cases of defamation, fraud, and physical injuries a civil action for damages, entirely separate and distinct from the criminal action, may be brought by the injured party. Such civil action shall proceed independently of the criminal prosecution
Civil Code, Article 33 — Independent Civil Action (Defamation, Fraud, Physical Injuries). Read the full provision →
Fraud is one of the specific actions singled out
This provision names three specific situations where the injured party may bring a civil action for damages that is entirely separate and distinct from the criminal action: defamation, fraud, and physical injuries. Estafa is fraud-based, so a civil claim arising from the same underlying conduct falls within this named category rather than being folded automatically into the criminal case or made to wait behind it.
'Independently' means the two cases do not wait on each other
The rule does not merely allow a separate civil case to exist somewhere on the docket — it directs that the civil action shall proceed independently of the criminal prosecution. Your civil case for fraud can move forward on its own timeline, through its own evidence and proceedings, without being paused or suspended until the estafa prosecution reaches a verdict.
A lower standard of proof applies in the civil case
The two proceedings also differ in what has to be proven. The independent civil action shall require only a preponderance of evidence — the ordinary civil standard — rather than the proof beyond reasonable doubt a criminal conviction demands. That means the outcome of your civil case for fraud is not simply tied to whatever happens in the estafa prosecution, since a criminal acquittal does not by itself defeat a civil claim proven by that lower standard.
Why this matters while the estafa case is still pending
Because the two actions are legally separate and use different evidentiary standards, there is no requirement to wait for the criminal case's result before filing or pursuing your civil claim for damages. You are pursuing compensation for the harm the fraud caused you, which is a distinct question from whether the state can prove the criminal offense beyond reasonable doubt, and the two proceedings can run at the same time rather than one after the other.
Cases citing this provision
These Supreme Court decisions cite the provision above. We list them so you can read them yourself; the summaries of what each decided are not ours to give.
- Alastair John Kane vs. Patricia Roggenkamp, G.R. No. 214326, July 6, 2020 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Rafael Jose Consing, Jr. vs. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 161075, July 15, 2013 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Heirs of Eduardo Simon vs. Elvin Chan and the Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 157547, February 23, 2011 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Avelino Casupanan and Roberto Capitulo vs. Mario Llavore Laroya, G.R. No. 145391, August 26, 2002 — read the decision on LawPhil →