CASEDIGEST(TransportationLaw):LoadstarShippingvs.

CA
LoadstarShippingvs.CourtofAppeals
(GR131621,28September1999)
FACTS:
LoadstarShippingCo.Inc.receivedonboarditsM/VCherokeegoods,amountingtoP6,067,178,which
wereinsuredforthesameamountwiththerespondentManilaInsuranceCo.(MIC)againstvariousrisks
includingtotallossbytotallossofthevessel.Thevessel,inturn,wasinsuredbyPrudentialGuarantee&
Assurance,Inc.(PGAI)forP4million.OnitswaytoManilafromtheportofNasipit,AgusandelNorte,
thevessel,alongwithitscargo,sankoffLimasawaIsland.Asaresultofthetotallossofitsshipment,the
consigneemadeaclaimwithLoadstarwhich,however,ignoredthesame.Astheinsurer,MICpaid
P6,075,000totheinsuredinfullsettlementofitsclaim,andthelatterexecutedasubrogationreceipt
therefor.
MICfiledacomplaintagainstLoadstarandPGAI,allegingthatthesinkingofthevesselwasduetothe
faultandnegligenceofLoadstaranditsemployees.PGAIwaslaterdroppedasapartydefendantafterit
paidtheinsuranceproceedstoLoadstar.Loadstarsubmitsthatthevesselwasaprivatecarrierbecauseit
wasnotissuedacertificateofpublicconvenience,itdidnothavearegulartriporschedulenorafixed
route,andtherewasonly"oneshipper,oneconsigneeforaspecialcargo.Thetrialcourtrenderedjudgment
infavorofMIC.LoadstarelevatedthemattertotheCourtofAppeals,whichaffirmedtheRTCsdecision
intoto.
ISSUE:
WhetherornotLoadstarisacommoncarrier.
HELD:
Yes.
xxx[W]eholdthatLOADSTARisacommoncarrier.Itisnotnecessarythatthecarrierbeissueda
certificateofpublicconvenience,andthispubliccharacterisnotalteredbythefactthatthecarriageofthe
goodsinquestionwasperiodic,occasional,episodicorunscheduled.
Insupportofitsposition,LOADSTARreliedonthe1968caseofHomeInsuranceCo.v.American
SteamshipAgencies,Inc.,wherethisCourtheldthatacommoncarriertransportingspecialcargoor
charteringthevesseltoaspecialpersonbecomesaprivatecarrierthatisnotsubjecttotheprovisionsofthe
CivilCode.Anystipulationinthecharterpartyabsolvingtheownerfromliabilityforlossduetothe
negligenceofitsagentisvoidonlyifthestrictpolicygoverningcommoncarriersisupheld.Suchpolicy
hasnoforcewherethepublicatlargeisnotinvolved,asinthecaseofashiptotallycharteredfortheuseof
asingleparty.LOADSTARalsocitedValenzuelaHardwoodandIndustrialSupply,Inc.v.Courtof
AppealsandNationalSteelCorp.v.CourtofAppeals,bothofwhichupheldtheHomeInsurancedoctrine.
ThesecasesinvokedbyLOADSTARarenotapplicableinthecaseatbarforsimplereasonthatthefactual
settingsaredifferent.TherecordsdonotdisclosethattheM/V"Cherokee,"onthedateinquestion,
undertooktocarryaspecialcargoorwascharteredtoaspecialpersononly.Therewasnocharterparty.
Thebillsofladingfailedtoshowanyspecialarrangement,butonlyageneralprovisiontotheeffectthat
theM/V"Cherokee"wasa"generalcargocarrier."14["Ageneralshipcarryinggoodsforhire,whether
employedininternal,incoasting,orinforeigncommerceisacommoncarrier."(Baer,Senior&Co.s

Successorsv.LaCompaniaMaritima,6Phil.215,217218,quotingLiverpoolSteamshipCo.v.Phoenix
Ins.Co.,129U.S.397,437),citedin3TEODORICOC.MARTIN,PHILIPPINECOMMERCIALLAWS
118(Rev.Ed.1989).]Further,thebarefactthatthevesselwascarryingaparticulartypeofcargoforone
shipper,whichappearstobepurelycoincidental,isnotreasonenoughtoconvertthevesselfromacommon
toaprivatecarrier,especiallywhere,asinthiscase,itwasshownthatthevesselwasalsocarrying
passengers.

Commoncarrier;liability.Commoncarriersareboundtoobserveextraordinarydiligenceoverthegoods
theytransport,accordingtoallthecircumstancesofeachcase.
Intheeventofloss,destruction,ordeteriorationoftheinsuredgoods,commoncarriersareresponsible,
unlesstheycanprovethatsuchloss,destruction,ordeteriorationwasbroughtaboutby,amongothers,
flood,storm,earthquake,lightning,orothernaturaldisasterorcalamity.
InallothercasesnotspecifiedunderArticle1734oftheCivilCode,commoncarriersarepresumedtohave
beenatfaultortohaveactednegligently,unlesstheyobservedextraordinarydiligence.Regional
ContainerLines(RCL)ofSingaporeandShippingAgencyvs.TheNetherlandsInsuranceCo.(Philippines)
Inc.,G.R.No.168151,September4,2009

FEB LEASING V SPS. BAYLON

FACTS:AnIsuzuoiltanker,registeredinthenameofpetitionerFEBLeasingandFinanceCorporation
andleasedtoBGHauler,Inc.,wasrunningalongDelMonteAvenueinQuezonCity.Whileexecutinga
leftturnuponreachinganintersection,theoiltankerhitLorettaBaylon,daughterofrespondentspouses
SergioandMaritessBaylon,whowasthencrossingtheDelMonteAvenue.Duetothestrongimpact,
Lorettawasviolentlythrownawayresultingtoherdeath.
ISSUE:WhetherornotFEBLeasingandFinanceCorp.(nowBPILeasingCorp.)shouldbeheldliable
RULING:Yes.Inaccordancewiththelawoncompulsorymotorvehicleregistration,withrespecttothe
publicandthirdpersons,theregisteredownerofamotorvehicleisdirectlyandprimarilyresponsiblefor
theconsequenceofitsoperationregardlessofwhotheactualvehicleownermightbe.Wellsettledisthe
rulethattheregisteredownerofthevehicleisliableforquasidelictsresultingfromitsuse.Thus,evenif
thevehiclehasalreadybeensold,leasedortransferredtoanotherpersonatthetimethevehiclefiguredin
anaccident,theregisteredvehicleownerwouldstillbeliablefordamagescausedbytheaccident.Thesale,
transferorleaseofthevehicle,whichisnotregisteredwiththeLandTransportationOffice,willnotbind
thirdpersonsaggrievedinanaccidentinvolvingthevehicle.