2. Lopez vs. Duruelo [No.
29166, October 22, 1928] Vessels which are licensed to engage in maritime commerce/commerce by
1. Agusto Lopez wants to embark upon the inter island steamer San Jacinto
to go to Iloilo. The boat was in the anchoring ground of the port of Silay,
which was half a mile distant from the port.
2. Lopez embarked at the landing in the motor boat Jison, which was
engaged in conveying passengers & luggage back and forth from the
landing to boats at anchor. The motor boat is owned by defendant Jison
and Duruelo was the patron.
3. The motorboat Jison was overloaded since it had 14 passengers on board
when it only had a capacity of 8/9 pax.
4. When the motorboat approached the steamer San Jacinto, it came too
near the stern of the ship & as the propeller of the ship has not yet
ceased to turn, the blades of the propeller stuck the motor boat & sank.
The dangerous proximity w/ the propeller of the steamship was due to the
negligence of defendant Duruelo as patron of Jison.
5. As the motorboat sank, Lopez was thrown into the water against the
propeller, and the revolving blades inflicted various injuries upon him. He
was in the hospital for 8 months.
6. Hence, this petition by Lopez to claim damages for the injuries he suffered.
7. Defendant filed a demurrer on the ground that the complaint states no
cause of action since the complaint didnt allege that a protest was made
by Lopez 24 hours after the incident to the competent authority at the
port where the accident occurred. It insisted that under 835 of the Code
of Commerce such is required. The demurrer was granted. Hence this
appeal.
ISSUE: Does the motor boat come within the definition under the 835 of the Code
of Commerce to which protest is necessary before there could be a cause of action?
NO.
HELD:
Protest is not necessary in this case. The above-mentioned article found in Book 3
under the Code of Commerce deals with collisions of sea-going vessels and not
applied to small boats engaged in river & bay traffic.
The word "vessel" (Spanish, "buque," "nave"), used in the section referred
to was not intended to include all ships, craft or floating structures of
every kind without limitation, and the provisions of that section should not
be held to include minor craft engaged only in river and bay traffic.
The word nave in Spanish is used interchangeably with "buque" in the
Code of Commerce w/c means "Ship, a vessel with decks and sails." The
use of the word decks is significant since a deck is not a feature of the
smallest types of watercraft.
sea, whether in foreign /coastwise trade are regulated by Book 3 of the
Code of Commerce.
Other vessels minor in nature and not engaged in maritime commerce
such as river boats and those carrying passengers from ship to shore must
be governed by Civil Code or other special provisions of law.
In the case of Yu Con v Ipil, SC held that small vessel used for transportation of
merchandise by sea & making voyage from 1 port to another and equipped for such
purpose by the owner is a vessel within the purview of the Code of Commerce to
determine the character & effect of the relations created b/w the cargo owners and
shipowner.
However, in this case, the motor boat Jison was propelled by a 2nd hand
motor, originally used for a tractor plow & had 8 person capacity.
The use for Jison was to carry passengers & luggages b/w the landing at
Silay & ships in the harbour.
The motor boat such as Jison is not the one contemplated in Art. 835 of
the Cpde of Commerce w/c requires a protest in case of collision.
Assuming the protest is required and even if Art 835 would be applied:
SC held that there should be fair interpreation of the allegations of the
complaint since the injuries suffered by Lopez was in a nature as to excuse
protest.
Since also under the same article, it states that lack of protest cant
prejudice a person not in a condition to make known his wishes.
Hence, Lopez who suffered a compound fracture of the femur & received
other physical injuries, which caused him to stay at the hospital for 8
months, is not a condition to make protest within 24hrs after such
incident.
The demurrer was not well taken & must be overruled.