Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
GLENN CAPANAS
Carriers need not be engaged in the business of public reference to any circumstances of danger (vessels with no
transportation for the provisions of the NCC on Common injury or damage).
Carriers to apply.
The party in a contract of towage is required to observe the
Article 1734 establishes the general rule that common carriers due diligence of a good father of the family. Any negligence
are responsible for the loss, destruction or deterioration of the from the obligor renders him liable for damages.
goods which they carry, "unless the same is due to any of the
following causes only: Arrastre – Refers to hauling of cargo, comprehends the
a. Flood, storm, earthquake, lightning, or other natural handling of cargo on the wharf or between the establishment
disaster or calamity; of the consignee or shipper and the ship’s tackle. The
b. Act of the public enemy in war, whether international or civil; responsibility of the arrastre operator lasts until the delivery of
c. Act or omission of the shipper or owner of the goods; the cargo to the consignee.
d. The character of the goods or defects in the packing or in
the containers; Stevedoring – Not a common carrier for it does not transport
e. Order or act of competent public authority. goods or passengers. Mainly provides labor. Involves the
loading and unloading of coastwise vessels calling at the port.
Continuing Offer - Originated from the word “stipare”, meaning “to stuff”. The
responsibility of the stevedore ends upon the loading and
Contract of Carriage – One whereby a certain person or stowing of the cargo in the vessel. The diligence required is
association of persons obligate themselves to transport the diligence of a good father of a family.
person, things, or news from one place to another for a fixed
price. Travel Agency – Not a common carrier. The contract
between the travel agency is a contract of service. Requires
Under the NCC Art. 1723, persons, corporations, firms, or only diligence of a good father of a family. Services include
associations engaged in the business of carrying or the arranging, facilitating the booking, ticketing, and
transporting passengers or goods or both, by land, water, or accommodation in a package tour.
air, for compensation, offering their services to the public.
Tramp Service (TS) – Referred to as “Contract Carrier” in RA
Airline – Contract of Air Carriage 9515 but can be a common carrier depending on the
A contract of carriage arises when an airline issues a ticket to circumstances.
a passenger confirmed on a particular flight, on a certain date
and the passenger has every right to expect that he would fly No regular and fixed routes and schedules but accepts cargo
on that flight and on that date, otherwise, the carrier opens wherever and whenever the shipper desires, is hired on a
itself to a suit for breach of contract of carriage (Ramos v. contractual basis, or chartered by any one or more shippers
China Airlines). under mutually agreed terms and usually carries bulk or break
bulk cargoes (“pakyaw”)
Generates a relation attended with public duty. It is different
in kind and degree from any other contractual relation. JGC: I submit that TS is a common carrier because if you
check Gothong, it carries break-bulk cargoes and it advertises
If a Passenger is Waitlisted – The status of a waitlisted itself to the public. Regulation by the government is also an
passenger is changed to that of a confirmed passenger when indicator that it is a common carrier.
the name is entered into the passenger manifest.
Line Service – Common carrier. Fixed schedules. Ex: 2Go
Vessel from Cebu to Manila.
Private Carrier Customs Broker
The distinction lies in the character of the business, such that Ferry Services
if the undertaking is a single transaction, not a part of a Freight/Cargo Forwarder – Common Carrier
general business or occupation, although involving the
carriage of goods for a fee, the person or corporation offering
such service is a private carrier.
CHAPTER 2
Servando vs. Phil Steam
Basic Obligations of the Carrier Clara Uy Bico and Amparo Servando loaded on board a vessel of
1. To accept passengers and goods without Philippine Steam Navigation Co. for carriage from Manila to Negros
discrimination Occidental 1,528 cavans of rice and 44 cartons of colored paper, toys
2. To seasonably deliver the goods or bring the and general merchandise.
passenger to the destination
3. To deliver the goods or bring the passenger to the The contract of carriage of cargo was evidenced by a Bill of Lading
(B/L). There was a stipulation limiting the responsibility of the carrier
proper place or destination
for loss or damage that may be caused to the shipment. Upon arrival
4. To deliver the goods to the proper person of the vessel at its destination, the cargoes were discharged in good
5. To exercise extraordinary diligence in the condition and placed inside the warehouse of the Bureau of Customs.
performance of its duties Unfortunately, the warehouse was razed by fire of unknown origin later
that same day destroying the remaining cargoes. Uy Bico and
Servando filed a claim for the value of the goods against the carrier.
Rights of the Shipper or Passenger
Held: The court a quo held that the delivery of the shipment in question
1. Right against discrimination
to the warehouse of the Bureau of Customs is not the delivery
2. Right to have his goods or be transported without contemplated by Article 1736; and since the burning of the warehouse
delay occurred before actual or constructive delivery of the goods to the
3. Personal right to enforce all the obligations of the appellees, the loss is chargeable against the appellant (the steamship).
carrier
It should be pointed out, however, that in the bills of lading issued for
8/30/19 Questions the cargoes in question, the parties agreed to limit the responsibility of
1. Can the crew validly refuse a passenger to board the the carrier. The stipulation is valid not being contrary to law, morals or
vessel? public policy.
2. Is there discrimination when a Grab driver rejects your
booking for Lapu-lapu? Also, where fortuitous event is the immediate and proximate cause of
3. If the driver rejects you because he is headed to Talisay the loss, the obligor is exempt from liability for non-performance. In the
and not to your destination which is Lapu-lapu, is there case at bar, the burning of the customs warehouse was an
discrimination? extraordinary event which happened independently of the will of the
4. What is the meaning of extraordinary diligence? appellant. The latter could not have foreseen the event.
5. If the carrier was not able to fulfill the time of delivery and
the goods were covered by a bill of lading. There is a Aquino, concurring: From the time the goods in question were
stipulation that the liability is only equal to the amount deposited in the Bureau of Customs' warehouse in the morning of their
indicated therein unless the value of the goods are higher arrival up to two o' clock in the afternoon of the same day, when the
than declared. warehouse was burned, Amparo C. Servando and Clara Uy Bico, the
6. What if the cause of the loss is a typhoon? The carrier says consignees, had reasonable opportunity to remove the goods. Clara
he is not liable. Rule on it. had removed more than one-half of the rice consigned to her.
- The carrier is liable for the damages caused by the To exempt a common carrier from liability for death or physical
delay injuries to passengers upon the ground of force majeure, the
- The consignee may exercise his right to abandon carrier must clearly show not only that the efficient cause of
under Art. 371 of the CoC. the casualty was entirely independent of the human will, but
- Under NCC Art 1740 and 1747 also that it was impossible to avoid. Any participation by the
common carrier in the occurrence of the injury will defeat the
EXTRAORDINARY DILIGENCE defense of force majeure.
ART. 1755 – A Common carrier is bound to carry the
passengers safely as far as human care and foresight can
provide, using the utmost diligence of very cautious persons, THERE IS NO PRESUMPTION OF BAD FAITH
with a due regard for all circumstances. Bad faith should be established by clear and convincing
evidence. Good faith is presumed. However, a finding of bad
With respect to carriage of goods, ED is the extreme measure faith is necessary for the court to award moral and exemplary
of care and caution which persons of unusual prudence and damages in breach of contract of carriage cases.
circumspection use for securing and preserving their own
property rights. To grant favor to the shipper who is at the EFFECT OF ACQUITTAL
mercy of the common carrier. A ruling on the culpability of the offender will have no bearing
on said independent civil action based on an entirely different
This high standard of care is imperatively demanded by the cause of action (i.e. culpa contractual). An acquittal will have
preciousness of human life and by the consideration that no effect on the presumption of negligence in the breach of
every person must in every way be safeguarded against all contract cases.
injury.
Cargoworthiness – Even if the vessel was properly Loss or injury is an act of an employee
maintained and is free from defect, the carrier must not accept Article 1759 expressly makes the common carrier liable for
goods that cannot be properly transported in the ship. The intentional assaults committed by its employees upon its
ship must be fit to carry the contemplated cargo as a carrying passengers.
receptacle.
In a book example (p. 224), the railroad company was not held
liable when the guard shot a passenger because of a personal
PASSENGER’S BAGGAGES grudge nurtured against the latter since it was entirely
Baggage – whatever articles a passenger usually takes with unforeseeable and the company had no means to ascertain
him for his own personal use, comfort, and convenience or anticipate that the two would not meet. The shooting was a
according to the habits or wants of the particular class to fortuitous event. Also, the killing was not done in line of duty
which he belongs, wither with reference to his immediate since the killing happened two hours before his shift started.
necessities or the ultimate purpose of his journey. The position of the guard was that of another passenger.
Checked-in Baggage – Governed by rules regarding Note: For it to be considered fortuitous, the carrier must
carriage of goods. Articles 1733, 1734, and 1736 applies to overcome the presumption of fault and negligence.
hold the carrier liable in case of loss or damage.
HIJACKING
CHAPTER 3
AFFIDAVIT OF DESISTANCE
PRESCRIPTIVE PERODS
followed. When the law requires a notice of claim, the same Torres-Madrid Case – Argued that they were not
must be complied with and any action that may be filed a common carrier but they failed to allege
thereafter must be filed within the prescriptive period extraordinary diligence.
provided by law.
Purpose of Notice of Claim
Exam Tips:
Substantial Compliance Allowed
“Assuming for the sake of argument that the
SHORE PASS REQUIREMENT cause is not a storm, then the carrier is still liable
A shore pass is required of a foreigner aboard a vessel or because of ___________.”
aircraft who desires to stay in the neighborhood of the port TN: Do not merge all in one paragraph. Discuss
of call for not more than 72 hours. separately.
Japan Airlines (JAL) vs Asuncion:
Concept: Sovereign act c. Requisites of 1734 – Proximate Cause
JAL did not breach its contract of carriage with respondents. It may
be true that JAL has the duty to inspect whether its passengers have
the necessary travel documents, however, such duty does not
extend to checking the veracity of every entry in these documents. d. Fortuitous (1174)
JAL could not vouch for the authenticity of a passport and the The requisites are more strict. Connect to
correctness of the entries therein. The power to admit or not an alien Hijacking and to the case of De Guzman vs. CA.
into the country is a sovereign act which cannot be interfered with
even by JAL. The most that could be expected of JAL is to endorse
Hijacking can be a defense under 1735.
respondents’ applications, which Mrs. Higuchi did immediately upon
their arrival in Narita. This is not within the ambit of the contract of e. 1759
carriage entered into by JAL and herein respondents. As such, JAL Absolute Responsibility
should not be faulted for the denial of respondents’ shore pass
applications. Cannot raised ED as defense if there is
admission of employment.
Boundary Basis/ Contract of Lease – No EE
relationship.
LECTURE – 9/6/2019 Notice that “Management is not responsible for
I. Obligations of Shipper/Passenger loss of valuable” will not prosper.
a. Manay Jr – About an air carriage where a ticket
was obtained from a branch. What are the f. 1763
obligations of a passenger who purchased an Pilapil and Battung Cases – the absence of
airline ticket? defects on method/means/negligence/acts of
b. Heung-a – Container holds; the shipper’s load employees. The injury of the passenger has
and count basis is one of the limitations or one nothing to do with the abovementioned.
of the defenses of the common carrier. The
Shipper’s Load and Count must specify the Know the distinction between Battung and
Quantity, Description, and Condition. If there is Fortune Express on the matter of precaution
a discrepancy, the carrier is not responsible. where no measures were adopted despite prior
notice.
What if the shipper intentionally placed
damaged goods? Can the consignee file a g. Negligence/Contributory Negligence
complaint? NO, because of the Shipper’s Load If it is the shipper/passenger’s sole negligence,
and Count. then the carrier is absolved. If there is
contributory negligence, then the carrier’s
liability is absolved.
II. Defenses of CC
a. 1734 Contributory Negligence cannot be invoked by
De Guzman vs. CA – The defenses are in a the “victim”, there is no cause of action.
closed list.
h. Notice of Claim
Hijacking – Not included in the exclusive list. To Phil. Charter Insurance – The court did not
be safe, go back to the OMR where you include believe the telephone call made by the
all your relevant defenses. employee. It is a matter of proof.
j. Limitation of Liability
1749 – Stipulation is valid unless the Shipper
declares a higher value. Talks about a fixed
amount.
1750 – Requisites of the Stipulation in 1749.
k. Desistance
There was no pronouncement in Sanico that all
affidavits of desistance are invalid. It depends
on the circumstances.
l. Violation
Federal Express Case.