Quick answer

Malicious prosecution is a civil action for damages brought by a person against another who wrongfully and in bad faith initiated a criminal (or civil) proceeding against them that ended in the plaintiff's favor. It is meant to redress the injury to a person's reputation, feelings, and property caused by a baseless case filed to vex or harass them, while at the same time not discouraging the legitimate reporting of crimes. Because the law does not want to deter people from bringing genuine complaints, the requisites for a successful malicious prosecution suit are strict, and all must concur: first, the defendant was himself the prosecutor or instigated the prosecution, or the fact of prosecution and that the defendant was the prosecutor; second, the criminal (or civil) action finally ended with an acquittal or dismissal in favor of the plaintiff (the person now suing); third, in bringing the action, the prosecutor acted without probable cause, meaning there was no reasonable ground to believe the plaintiff was guilty; and fourth, the prosecution was impelled by legal malice, that is, it was prompted by a sinister or improper motive such as ill will, vengeance, or the deliberate intent to injure, rather than a genuine desire to bring an offender to justice. The mere fact that a criminal case was dismissed or the accused acquitted does not, by itself, prove malicious prosecution; the plaintiff must affirmatively prove the absence of probable cause and the presence of malice. If proven, the offended party may recover actual, moral, and exemplary damages and attorney's fees. So malicious prosecution allows a person harassed by a baseless case filed in bad faith to recover damages, but only upon strict proof of a favorable termination, want of probable cause, and malice.

What It Redresses

Malicious prosecution is a civil action for damages against one who wrongfully and in bad faith filed a baseless case that ended in the plaintiff's favor — balanced against not discouraging genuine complaints.

The Strict Requisites

Acquittal Alone Is Not Enough

The mere dismissal or acquittal does not prove malicious prosecution. The plaintiff must affirmatively prove the absence of probable cause and the presence of malice. If proven, they recover actual, moral, exemplary damages and attorney's fees.

Practical Takeaways

Frequently Asked Questions

What is malicious prosecution? A civil action for damages against a person who wrongfully and in bad faith initiated a baseless criminal or civil proceeding that ended in the plaintiff's favor, redressing the injury to reputation and feelings.

What must be proven for malicious prosecution? That the defendant was the prosecutor or instigated the case, that the action ended in the plaintiff's favor, that it was brought without probable cause, and that it was impelled by legal malice.

Is an acquittal enough to sue for malicious prosecution? No. The mere fact that a criminal case was dismissed or the accused acquitted does not by itself prove malicious prosecution. The plaintiff must affirmatively prove the absence of probable cause and the presence of malice.

What damages can be recovered? If malicious prosecution is proven, the offended party may recover actual, moral, and exemplary damages and attorney's fees for the injury caused by the baseless case.

This commentary is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For guidance specific to your situation, please consult a licensed attorney.

If you have questions about your rights or options under Philippine law, our firm is available to assist. You may reach us via Viber or WhatsApp, call us at 0995 433 5550, or send an email to vivasnobles@gmail.com. We look forward to hearing from you.