Short answer. Exemplary or corrective damages are amounts imposed by way of example or correction for the public good, on top of other damages a party is entitled to. They are not compensation for loss but a deterrent, awarded only in addition to moral, temperate, liquidated, or compensatory damages — never as the sole recovery in a case.
What the law says
Exemplary or corrective damages are imposed, by way of example or correction for the public good, in addition to the moral, temperate, liquidated or compensatory damages.
Civil Code, Article 2229 — Exemplary Damages Defined. Read the full provision →
What exemplary damages are for
Article 2229 defines them by their purpose: exemplary or corrective damages are imposed, by way of example or correction for the public good, in addition to the moral, temperate, liquidated or compensatory damages. They are not meant to repay a plaintiff for what he lost — other kinds of damages do that. Their function is to set an example and to correct, deterring the wrongdoer and others from repeating serious misconduct. This is why the law also calls them corrective damages: they look outward to the public interest, not just to making one injured party whole.
They ride on top of other damages
The article's phrase in addition to the other damages is a real limitation, not mere description. Exemplary damages cannot stand alone. A party must first be entitled to some other recovery — moral, temperate, liquidated, or compensatory damages — before exemplary damages can be added on top. If the claimant is not entitled to any of those, there is nothing for exemplary damages to be an addition to, and they cannot be awarded. So they are always an enhancement of an existing award, granted because the manner of the wrong warrants a further, deterrent sum.
The kind of conduct that justifies them
Exemplary damages are reserved for aggravated conduct, not ordinary breaches or simple negligence. Broadly, they may be granted where a defendant acted with a bad state of mind — for instance, in a wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive, or malevolent manner — so that an example needs to be made. The idea is that the wrongdoing was serious enough that mere compensation would not adequately answer it. Because their aim is deterrence for the public good, courts award them sparingly and only where the facts show the misconduct deserves correction beyond repairing the plaintiff's loss.
Discretion and limits
Even when the conduct qualifies, exemplary damages are never a matter of right that a claimant can simply demand. Their grant and amount rest in the court's sound discretion, guided by the gravity of the wrong and the need for deterrence. They must bear a reasonable relation to the case and cannot be used to punish arbitrarily. And because they depend on an underlying award of other damages, a claim that fails to establish any compensable injury cannot obtain exemplary damages on its own, no matter how objectionable the defendant's behavior may appear.
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.
- Remedios T. Banta vs. Equitable Bank, Inc. (now BDO Unibank, Inc.) et al, G.R. No. 223694, February 10, 2021 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- People of the Philippines vs. Conrado Laog y Ramin, G.R. No. 178321, October 5, 2011 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Heirs of Benita Yanzon Cipriano vs. National Transmission Corporation (TRANSCO), G.R. No. 255113, August 6, 2025 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Angelita A. Antonino vs. Banco De Oro Universal Bank, Inc, G.R. No. 273446, April 23, 2025 — read the decision on LawPhil →