Jobairah Gabriel Pangandaman

SECTION 4
Common Carriers (n)
SUBSECTION 1
General Provisions
ARTICLE 1732. Common carriers are persons,
corporations, firms or associations engaged in the
business of carrying or transporting passengers or
goods or both, by land, water, or air, for
compensation, offering their services to the public.
ARTICLE 1733. Common carriers, from the nature
of their business and for reasons of public policy, are
bound to observe extraordinary diligence in the
vigilance over the goods and for the safety of the
passengers transported by them, according to all the
circumstances of each case.
Such extraordinary diligence in the vigilance over the
goods is further expressed in articles 1734, 1735,
and 1745, Nos. 5, 6, and 7, while the extraordinary
diligence for the safety of the passengers is further
set forth in articles 1755 and 1756.
SUBSECTION 2
Vigilance Over Goods
ARTICLE 1734. Common carriers are responsible
for the loss, destruction, or deterioration of the
goods, unless the same is due to any of the following
causes only:
(1) Flood, storm, earthquake, lightning, or other
natural disaster or calamity;
(2) Act of the public enemy in war, whether
international or civil;
(3) Act or omission of the shipper or owner of the
goods;
(4) The character of the goods or defects in the
packing or in the containers;
(5) Order or act of competent public authority.


ARTICLE 1735. In all cases other than those
mentioned in Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 of the preceding
article, if the goods are lost, destroyed or
deteriorated, common carriers are presumed to have
been at fault or to have acted negligently, unless
they prove that they observed extraordinary
diligence as required in article 1733.
ARTICLE 1736. The extraordinary responsibility of
the common carrier lasts from the time the goods
are unconditionally placed in the possession of, and
received by the carrier for transportation until the
same are delivered, actually or constructively, by the
carrier to the consignee, or to the person who has a
right to receive them, without prejudice to the
provisions of article 1738.
ARTICLE 1737. The common carrier's duty to
observe extraordinary diligence over the goods
remains in full force and effect even when they are
temporarily unloaded or stored in transit, unless the
shipper or owner has made use of the right of
stoppage in transitu.
ARTICLE 1738. The extraordinary liability of the
common carrier continues to be operative even
during the time the goods are stored in a warehouse
of the carrier at the place of destination, until the
consignee has been advised of the arrival of the
goods and has had reasonable opportunity thereafter
to remove them or otherwise dispose of them.
ARTICLE 1739. In order that the common carrier
may be exempted from responsibility, the natural
disaster must have been the proximate and only
cause of the loss. However, the common carrier
must exercise due diligence to prevent or minimize
loss before, during and after the occurrence of flood,
storm or other natural disaster in order that the
common carrier may be exempted from liability for
the loss, destruction, or deterioration of the goods.
The same duty is incumbent upon the common
carrier in case of an act of the public enemy referred
to in article 1734, No. 2.
ARTICLE 1740. If the common carrier negligently
incurs in delay in transporting the goods, a natural
disaster shall not free such carrier from responsibility.

ARTICLE 1741. If the shipper or owner merely
contributed to the loss, destruction or deterioration
of the goods, the proximate cause thereof being the
negligence of the common carrier, the latter shall be
liable in damages, which however, shall be equitably
reduced.
ARTICLE 1742. Even if the loss, destruction, or
deterioration of the goods should be caused by the
character of the goods, or the faulty nature of the
packing or of the containers, the common carrier
must exercise due diligence to forestall or lessen the
loss.
ARTICLE 1743. If through the order of public
authority the goods are seized or destroyed, the
common carrier is not responsible, provided said
public authority had power to issue the order.
ARTICLE 1744. A stipulation between the common
carrier and the shipper or owner limiting the liability
of the former for the loss, destruction, or
deterioration of the goods to a degree less than
extraordinary diligence shall be valid, provided it be:
(1) In writing, signed by the shipper or owner;
(2) Supported by a valuable consideration other than
the service rendered by the common carrier; and
(3) Reasonable, just and not contrary to public policy.
ARTICLE 1745. Any of the following or similar
stipulations shall be considered unreasonable, unjust
and contrary to public policy:
(1) That the goods are transported at the risk of the
owner or shipper;
(2) That the common carrier will not be liable for any
loss, destruction, or deterioration of the goods;
(3) That the common carrier need not observe any
diligence in the custody of the goods;
(4) That the common carrier shall exercise a degree
of diligence less than that of a good father of a
family, or of a man of ordinary prudence in the
vigilance over the movables transported;
Jobairah Gabriel Pangandaman
(5) That the common carrier shall not be responsible
for the acts or omission of his or its employees;
(6) That the common carrier's liability for acts
committed by thieves, or of robbers who do not act
with grave or irresistible threat, violence or force, is
dispensed with or diminished;
(7) That the common carrier is not responsible for
the loss, destruction, or deterioration of goods on
account of the defective condition of the car, vehicle,
ship, airplane or other equipment used in the
contract of carriage.
ARTICLE 1746. An agreement limiting the common
carrier's liability may be annulled by the shipper or
owner if the common carrier refused to carry the
goods unless the former agreed to such stipulation.
ARTICLE 1747. If the common carrier, without just
cause, delays the transportation of the goods or
changes the stipulated or usual route, the contract
limiting the common carrier's liability cannot be
availed of in case of the loss, destruction, or
deterioration of the goods.
ARTICLE 1748. An agreement limiting the common
carrier's liability for delay on account of strikes or
riots is valid.
ARTICLE 1749. A stipulation that the common
carrier's liability is limited to the value of the goods
appearing in the bill of lading, unless the shipper or
owner declares a greater value, is binding.
ARTICLE 1750. A contract fixing the sum that may
be recovered. by the owner or shipper for the loss,
destruction, or deterioration of the goods is valid, if
it is reasonable and just under the circumstances,
and has been fairly and freely agreed upon.
ARTICLE 1751. The fact that the common carrier
has no competitor along the line or route, or a part
thereof, to which the contract refers shall be taken
into consideration on the question of whether or not
a stipulation limiting the common carrier's liability is
reasonable, just and in consonance with public policy.
ARTICLE 1752. Even when there is an agreement
limiting the liability of the common carrier in the
vigilance over the goods, the common carrier is
disputably presumed to have been negligent in case
of their loss, destruction or deterioration.
ARTICLE 1753. The law of the country to which the
goods are to be transported shall govern the liability
of the common carrier for their loss, destruction or
deterioration.
ARTICLE 1754. The provisions of articles 1733 to
1753 shall apply to the passenger's baggage which is
not in his personal custody or in that of his employee.
As to other baggage, the rules in articles 1998 and
2000 to 2003 concerning the responsibility of hotel-
keepers shall be applicable.
SUBSECTION 3
Safety of Passengers
ARTICLE 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, with a due regard for all the
circumstances.
ARTICLE 1756. In case of death of or injuries to
passengers, common carriers are presumed to have
been at fault or to have acted negligently, unless
they prove that they observed extraordinary
diligence as prescribed in articles 1733 and 1755.
ARTICLE 1757. The responsibility of a common
carrier for the safety of passengers as required in
articles 1733 and 1755 cannot be dispensed with or
lessened by stipulation, by the posting of notices, by
statements on tickets, or otherwise.
ARTICLE 1758. When a passenger is carried
gratuitously, a stipulation limiting the common
carrier's liability for negligence is valid, but not for
wilful acts or gross negligence.
The reduction of fare does not justify any limitation
of the common carrier's liability.
ARTICLE 1759. Common carriers are liable for the
death of or injuries to passengers through the
negligence or willful acts of the former's employees,
although such employees may have acted beyond
the scope of their authority or in violation of the
orders of the common carriers.
This liability of the common carriers does not cease
upon proof that they exercised all the diligence of a
good father of a family in the selection and
supervision of their employees.
ARTICLE 1760. The common carrier's responsibility
prescribed in the preceding article cannot be
eliminated or limited by stipulation, by the posting of
notices, by statements on the tickets or otherwise.
ARTICLE 1761. The passenger must observe the
diligence of a good father of a family to avoid injury
to himself.
ARTICLE 1762. The contributory negligence of the
passenger does not bar recovery of damages for his
death or injuries, if the proximate cause thereof is
the negligence of the common carrier, but the
amount of damages shall be equitably reduced.
ARTICLE 1763. A common carrier is responsible for
injuries suffered by a passenger on account of the
wilful acts or negligence of other passengers or of
strangers, if the common carrier's employees
through the exercise of the diligence of a good father
of a family could have prevented or stopped the act
or omission.
SUBSECTION 4
Common Provisions
ARTICLE 1764. Damages in cases comprised in this
Section shall be awarded in accordance with Title
XVIII of this Book, concerning Damages. Article 2206
shall also apply to the death of a passenger caused
by the breach of contract by a common carrier.
ARTICLE 1765. The Public Service Commission may,
on its own motion or on petition of any interested
party, after due hearing, cancel the certificate of
public convenience granted to any common carrier
that repeatedly fails to comply with his or its duty to
observe extraordinary diligence as prescribed in this
Section.
ARTICLE 1766. In all matters not regulated by this
Code, the rights and obligations of common carriers
Jobairah Gabriel Pangandaman
shall be governed by the Code of Commerce and by
special laws.
Common Carriers
What are common carriers?
1. Must be a Person, corporation, firm or association
2. Must be engaged in the Business of carrying or transporting
passengers or goods or both
3. The carriage or transport must either be by Land, water or air
4. The service is for Compensation
5. The service is offered to the Public.
Common Carriers
Common Carriers are persons, corporations, firms or associations
engaged in the business of carrying or transporting passengers or
goods or both, by land water air, for compensation, offering their
service to the public.
Elements of a common carrier:
a. persons' corporations, firms or associations
b. engaged in the businessof carrying or transportingpassengers,
goods or both
c. means of carriage is by land, water or air
d. the carrying of passengers , goods or both is for compensation
e. the service is offered to the public without distinction.
-Engaged in the business is deemed to cover operations whether
regular or scheduled, occasional, episodic or unscheduled.
- One is a common carrier even if he has no fixed and publicly
known route, maintains no terminals and issues no ticket.
- The true test of whether the character of the use is whether the
public may enjoy it by right or by permission. Note that the
contract of transportation is a consensual contract. Hence, a
common carrier engages in a continuous offer. If you flag a
common carrier down, the contract becomes perfected and is
consistent with the idea that entering with a contract with the
common carrier is a matter of right and not permission. You would
know when the carrier you are going to flag down is a common
carrier because it should hold itself out principally as such.
- Recovery from a contract of private carriage, requires a contract,
that there was negligence, and that the goods are lost. On the other
hand, recovery from a contract with a common carrier, only
requires the contract and that the goods were lost. This is so
because of the presumption of negligence.
- Regardless of whether the object are goods or passengers,a
common carrier mus observe extra-ordinary diligence.
- If loss, destruction or deterioration of the goods occurs or death
or physical injuries is suffered by a passenger, there is a
presumption of negligence that arises. The presumption may only
be overcome by a showing that the required degree of diligence
has been observed or that Article 1735 applies in the case of goods.
In case of passengers, only the former.
- The following or similar stipulations shall be considered
unreasonable, unjust and contrary to public policy:
a. that the common carrier shall not be responsible for the acts or
omissions of its or his employees
b. that the common carrier's liability for acts committed by thieves,
or of robbers who do not act with grave or irresistible threat,
violence or force, is dispensed with or diminished.
c. that the common carrier is not responsible for the loss,
destruction, or deterioration of goods on account of the defective
condition of the car, vehicle, ship, airplane or other equipment
used in the contract of carriage.
Transportation Defined
Generally Speaking, it has been referred to as the movement of
goods or persons from one place to another, by carrier. As a
contract, it is one whereby a person, natural or juridical, obligates
himself to transport persons, goods or both, from one place to
another, by land, water or air, for a price or compensation.
When does liability of the common carrier commence in
connection to the transfer of goods?
It begins with the actual delivery of the goods for transportation,
and not merely with the formal execution of a receipt or bill of
lading; the issuance of a bill of lading is not necessary to complete
delivery and acceptance.
Aboitiz Shipping Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. 84458, Nov. 6, 1989
When does the duty to exercise extraordinary diligence
commence and cease with respect to transport of passengers?
The duty of the common carrier commence from the moment the
person who purchases the ticket from the carrier presents himself
at the proper place and in a proper manner to be transported. The
relation of carrier and passenger continues until the passenger has
been landed at the port of destination and has left the vessel
owner's dock or premises. Once created, the relationship will not
ordinarily terminate until the passenger has, after reaching his
destination, safely alighted from the carrier's conveyance or had a
reasonable opportunity to leave the carrier's premises. (Aboitiz
Shipping Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. 84458, Nov. 6, 1989)
Fire as Natural Disaster
Is fire considered a natural disaster?
No. This must be so as it arises almost invariably from some act of
man or by human means. It does not fall within the category of an
act of God unless caused by lightning or by other natural disaster
or calamity. It may even be caused by the actual fault or privity of
the carrier (Eastern Shipping Lines v. IAC, G.R. No. L-69044, May
29, 1987).
Note: In case that the goods have been already deposited in the
warehouse of Bureau of Customs then the goods was destroyed by
fire, the carrier is not anymore liable (Sevando vs. Philippine
Steam Navigation, G.R. No. L-36481-2, October 23, 1982).
Liabilty of a Common Carrier for Acts of Criminals
Is a common carrier liable for the acts of strangers or
criminals?
Yes. A common carrier is liable even for acts of strangers like
thieves or robbers.
Exception: where such thieves or robbers acted "with grave or
irresistible threat, violence or force." The common carrier is not
liable for the value of the undelivered merchandise which was lost
because of an event that is beyond his control. (De Guzman v. CA,
G.R. No. L-47822, Dec. 22, 1988)
Rules Regarding the Time of Delivery of Goods and Delay
Jobairah Gabriel Pangandaman
What are the rules regarding the time of delivery of goods and
delay?
1. If there is an agreement as to time of delivery delivery must be
within the time stipulated in the contract or bill of lading
2. If there is no agreement delivery must be within a reasonable
time. (Saludo, Jr. v. CA, G.R. No. 95536, Mar. 23, 1992)
Liability of the Carrier if There is Delay
If there is delay in the delivery of goods, what is the liability of
the carrier?
The carrier shall be liable for damages immediately and
proximately resulting from such neglect of duty. (Saludo, Jr. v. CA,
GR No. 95536, Mar. 23, 1992)
Contributory Negligence on the Part of the Shipper
What is the rule if there is contributory negligence on the part
of the shipper?
General Rule: If the shipper or owner merely contributed to the
loss, destruction or deterioration of the goods, the proximate cause
thereof being the negligence of the common carrier, the latter shall
be liable for damages, which however, shall be equitably reduced.
(Art. 1741)
Exception: In a collision case and allision cases, the parties are
liable for their own damages.
Lu Do & Lu Ym Corp. v. Binamira, G.R. No. L-9840, Apr. 22,
1957
To whom should delivery be made?
It must be delivered, actually or constructively, to the consignee or
to the person who has a right to receive them. Note: Delivery of the
cargo to the customs authorities is not delivery to the consignee, or
to the person who has a right to receive them. (Lu Do & Lu Ym
Corp. v. Binamira, G.R. No. L-9840, Apr. 22, 1957)
Loss of a Valuable Item Stolen by Other Passengers
Could a common carrier be held liable for the loss of a
valuable item stolen by other passenger when the victim told
the driver that he has valuable item?
Yes. Ordinarily, the common carrier is not liable for acts of other
passengers. But the common carrier cannot relieve itself from
liability if the common carriers employees could have prevented
the act or omission by exercising due diligence. In this case, the
passenger asked the driver to keep an eye on the bag which was
placed beside the drivers seat. If the driver exercised due diligence,
he could have prevented the loss of the bag. (1997 Bar Question)
Intention to Board
When a Public Utility Vehicle is not in motion, is there a
necessity for a person who wants to ride the same to signal his
intention to board?
No. When the bus is not in motion there is no necessity for a
person who wants to ride the same to signal his intention to board.
A public utility bus, once it stops, is in effect making a continuous
offer to bus riders. Hence, it becomes the duty of the driver and the
conductor, every time the bus stops, to do no act that would have
the effect of increasing the peril to a passenger while he was
attempting to board the same. The premature acceleration of the
bus in this case was a breach of such duty. (Dangwa vs. CA, G.R.
No. 95582, October 7, 1991)
Dangwa vs. CA, G.R. No. 95582, October 7, 1991
If the bus started moving slowly when the passenger is
boarding the same, is the passenger negligent?
No. Further, even assuming that the bus was moving, the act of the
victim in boarding the same cannot be considered negligent under
the circumstances. As clearly explained in the testimony of the
aforestated witness for petitioners, Virginia Abalos, the bus had
"just started" and "was still in slow motion" at the point where the
victim had boarded and was on its platform. (Dangwa vs. CA, G.R.
No. 95582, October 7, 1991)
Is a person mere stepping on the platform of a bus already
considered a passenger?
Yes. The person, by stepping and standing on the platform of the
bus, is already considered a passenger and is entitled all the rights
and protection pertaining to such a contractual relation. Hence, it
has been held that the duty which the carrier owes to its patrons
extends to persons boarding cars as well as to those alighting
therefrom (Dangwa vs. CA, G.R. No. 95582, October 7, 1991).
La Mallorca vs. CA, GR L-20761, 27 July 1966
Robert De Alban and his family rode a bus owned by
Joeben Bus Company. Upon reaching their desired
destination, they alighted from the bus but Robert
returned to get their baggage. However, his youngest
daughter followed him without his knowledge. When he
stepped into the bus again, the bus accelerated that
resulting to Roberts daughter death. The bus ran over her.
Is the bus company liable?
Yes. The relation of carrier and passenger does not cease at the
moment the passenger alights from the carriers vehicle at a place
selected by the carrier at the point of destination, but continues
until the passenger has had a reasonable time or reasonable
opportunity to leave the current premises (La Mallorca vs. CA, GR
L-20761, 27 July 1966).
Are common carriers liable for acts of its employees?
Common carriers are liable for the death of or injuries to
passengers through the negligence or willful acts of the formers
employees, although such employees may have acted beyond the
scope of their authority or in violation of the orders of the common
carriers. The liability of the common carriers does not cease upon
proof that they exercised all the diligence of a good father of a
family in the selection and supervision of their employees. (Art.
1759)
What is the rationale behind this principle?
The basis of the carrier's liability for assaults on passengers
committed by its drivers rests on the principle that it is the carrier's
implied duty to transport the passenger safely. As between the
carrier and the passenger, the former must bear the risk of
wrongful acts or negligence of the carrier's employees against
passengers, since it, and not the passengers, has power to select
and remove them. (Maranan v. Perez, G.R. No. L- 22272, June 26,
1967)
Nocum v. Laguna Tayabas Bus Company, G.R. No. L-23733,
Oct. 31, 1969
In a jeepney, Angela, a passenger, was injured because of
the flammable material brought by Antonette, another
passenger. Antonette denied her baggage to be inspected
invoking her right to privacy. Should the jeepney operator
be held liable for damages?
No. The operator is not liable for damages. In overland
transportation, the common carrier is not bound nor empowered to
make an examination on the contents of packages or bags,
Jobairah Gabriel Pangandaman
particularly those handcarried by passengers. (Nocum v. Laguna
Tayabas Bus Company, G.R. No. L-23733, Oct. 31, 1969)
Pilapil v. CA, G.R. No. 52159, Dec. 22, 1989
A passenger was injured because a bystander outside the bus
hurled a stone. Is the bus company liable?
No. There is no showing that any such incident previously
happened so as to impose an obligation on the part of the personnel
of the bus company to warn the passengers and to take the
necessary precaution. Such hurling of a stone constitutes fortuitous
event in this case. The bus company is not an insurer of the
absolute safety of its passengers. (Pilapil v. CA, G.R. No. 52159,
Dec. 22, 1989) (1994 Bar Question)
Injury While Trying to Board the Vehicle
May a common carrier be held liable to a passenger who was
injured and eventually died while trying to board the vehicle?
Yes. It is the duty of common carriers of passengers to afford
passengers an opportunity to board and enter, and they are liable
for injuries suffered by boarding passengers resulting from the
sudden starting up or jerking of their conveyances while they are
doing so. The victim, by stepping and standing on the platform of
the bus, is already considered a passenger and is entitled all the
rights and protection pertaining to such a contractual relation.
(Dangwa Transportation Co., Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. 95582, Oct. 7,
1991)
Aboitiz Shipping Corporation vs. CA, GR No. 84458,
November 6, 1989
Is the victims presence in a vessel after 1 hour from his
disembarkation was no longer reasonable and he consequently
ceased to be a passenger?
No. Carrier-passenger relationship continues until the passenger
has been landed at the port of destination and has left the vessel--
owners premises (Aboitiz Shipping Corporation vs. CA, GR No.
84458, November 6, 1989)
What is assumption of risk on the part of passengers?
Passengers must take such risks incident to the mode of travel.
Note: Carriers are not insurers of any and all risks to passengers
and goods. It merely undertakes to perform certain duties to the
public as the law imposes, and holds itself liable for any breach
thereof. (Pilapil v. CA, G.R. No. 52159, Dec. 22, 1989)
Liability for Damages Caused by Mechanical Defects of
Equipments
Is a carrier liable to its passengers for damages caused by
mechanical defects of equipments or appliances installed in the
carrier?
Yes, whenever it appears that the defect would have been
discovered by the carrier if it had exercised the degree of care
which under the circumstances was incumbent upon it, with regard
to inspection and application of the necessary tests. The
manufacturer is considered as being in law the agent or servant of
the carrier, as far as regards the work of constructing the appliance.
The good repute of the manufacturer will not relieve the carrier
from liability. The rationale of the carrier's liability is the fact that
the passenger has neither choice nor control over the carrier in the
selection and use of the equipment and appliances in use by the
carrier. Having no privity whatever with the manufacturer or
vendor of the defective equipment, the passenger has no remedy
against him, while the carrier usually has. It is but logical,
therefore, that the carrier, while not in insurer of the safety of his
passengers, should nevertheless be held to answer for the flaws of
his equipment if such flaws were at all discoverable. (Necesito v.
Paras, G.R. No. L-10605, June 30, 1958)
Liability of the Registered Owner of the Vehicle
May the registered owner of the vehicle be held liable for
damages suffered by a third person in the course of the
operation of the vehicle?
Yes. The registered owner of a public service vehicle is
responsible for damages that may arise from consequences incident
to its operation or that may be caused to any of the passengers
therein (Gelisan v. Alday, G.R. No. L-30212, Sept 30, 1987). Also,
the liability of the registered owner of a public service vehicle for
damages arising from the tortious acts of the driver is primary,
direct, and joint and several or solidary with the driver. (Philtranco
Service Enterprises, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. 120553)
What is a bill of lading?
It is a written acknowledgement of receipt of goods and agreement
to transport them to a specific place and to a named person or to
his order.
Choa Joy, G.R. No. L- 7311, Sept. 30, 1955
What are the requisites before claim for damages under Art.
366 may be demanded?
1. Consignment of goods through a common carrier, by a
consignor in one place to a consignee in another place; and
2. The delivery of the merchandise by the carrier to the consignee
at the place of destination (New Zealand Ins. Co., Ltd. v. Choa Joy,
G.R. No. L- 7311, Sept. 30, 1955).
Charter Party Contract
What is a charter party contract?
A contract whereby the whole or part of the ship is let by the
owner to a merchant or other person for a specified time or use for
the conveyance of goods, in consideration of the payment of
freight. (Caltex v. Sulpicio Lines, G.R. No. 131166, Sept. 30, 1999)
Voyage Charter
What is a voyage charter?
A voyage charter is a contract wherein the ship was leased for a
single voyage for the conveyance of goods, in consideration of the
payment of freight. The shipowner retains the possession,
command and navigation of the ship, the charterer merely having
use of the space in the vessel in return for his payment of freight.
An owner who retains possession of the ship remains liable as
carrier and must answer for loss or non-delivery of the goods
received for transportation. (Cebu Salvage Corp. vs. Philippine
Home Assurance Corp., G.R. No. 150403, Jan. 25, 2007)
Captain of the Ship
What is the three-fold character of the captain?

1. General agent of the ship owner

2. Vessels technical director

3. Government representative of the flag he navigates under
Inherent Powers of the Ship Captain
What are the inherent powers of the ship captain?
1. To appoint or make contracts with the crew in the ship agents
absence, and to propose said crew, should said agent be present;
but the ship agent may not employ any member against the
captain's express refusal
Jobairah Gabriel Pangandaman
2. To command the crew and direct the vessel to the port of its
destination, in accordance with the instructions he may have
received from the ship agent
3. To impose correctional punishment: a. Upon those who fail to
comply with orders; or b. Those wanting in discipline
4. To make contracts for the charter of the vessel in the absence of
the ship agent or of its consignee
5. To adopt all proper measures to keep the vessel well supplied
and equipped, purchasing all that may be necessary for the purpose,
provided there is no time to request instruction from the ship agent
6. To order, in similar urgent cases while on a voyage, the repairs
on the hull and engines of the vessel and in its rigging and
equipment, which are absolutely necessary to enable it to continue
and finish its voyage. (Art. 610)
Obligations of the Captain
What are the obligations of the captain?
1. Inventory of equipment
2. Keep a copy of Code of Commerce on board
3. Have a log book, freight book, accounting book 4. Conduct a
marine survey of vessel before loading
5. Remain on board while loading
6. Demand pilot on departure and on arrival at each port
7. Be on deck when sighting land
8. Arrivals under stress: to file marine protest in 24 hours
9. Record bottomry loan with Bureau of Customs
10. Keep papers and properties of crew members who might die
11. Conduct himself according to the instuctions of the ship agent
12. Report to ship agent on arrival
13. Observe rules on the situation of lights and maneuvers to
prevent collisions
14. Remain on board until the last hope to save the vessel is lost
and to abide by the decision of the majority whether to abandon or
not
15. In case of shipwreck: file marine protest, within 24 hours
16. Comply with rules and regulation on navigation. (Art. 612)
In what cases shall the ship owner/agent be liable to the
damages caused by the captain?
1. Damages suffered by the vessel and its cargo by reason of want
of skill or negligence on his part
2. Thefts committed by the crew, reserving his right of action
against the guilty parties;
3. Losses, fines, and confiscations imposed an account of violation
of customs, police, health, and navigation laws and regulations;
4. Losses and damages caused by mutinies on board the vessel or
by reason of faults committed by the crew in the service and
defense of the same, if he does not prove that he made timely use
of all his authority to prevent or avoid them;
5. Those caused by the misuse of the powers;
6. For those arising by reason of his going out of his course or
taking a course which he should not have taken without sufficient
cause, in the opinion of the officers of the vessel, at a meeting with
the shippers or supercargoes who may be on board. No exceptions
whatsoever shall exempt him from this obligation;
7. For those arising by reason of his voluntarily entering a port
other than that of his destination, outside of the cases or without
the formalities referred to in Article 612; and
8. For those arising by reason of non-observance of the provisions
contained in the regulations on situation of lights and maneuvers
for the purpose of preventing collisions (Art. 618).
Note: Ship owner/agent is not liable for the obligations contracted
by the captain if the latter exceeds his powers and privileges
inherent in his position of those which may have been conferred
upon him by the former. However, if the amount claimed were used
for the benefit of the vessel, the ship owner or ship agent is liable.

In what causes shall the captain be not liable for loss or injury
to persons or cargo?
1. Force majeure
2. Obligations contracted for the vessels benefit, except when the
captain expressly agrees to be liable.
Ship Agent
Who is a ship agent?
The person entrusted with provisioning or representing the vessel
in the port in which it may be found. Hence, whether acting as
agent of the owner of the vessel or as agent of the charterer, he will
be considered as the ship agent and may be held liable as such, as
long as he is the one that provisions or represents the vessel.
(Macondray & Co., Inc. v. Provident Insurance Corp, G.R. No.
154305, Dec. 9, 2004)
What are the powers, functions, and liabilities of ship agents?
1. Indemnity for expenses incurred for ships benefit.

2. Discharge of captain and/or crew members. The following are
the rules observed by the ship agent:
a. Captain and/or crew members contract not for a definite
period or voyage:
i. Before vessel sets out to sea: Ship agent at his discretion
may discharge the captain and members of the crew. Ship agent
must pay captain and/or crew members salaries earned according
to their contracts, and without any indemnity whatsoever, unless
there is an expressed agreement;
ii. During voyage: Captain and/or crew member shall
receive salary until return to the port where contract was made.
Article 637 of the Code of Commerce enumerates the just causes
for discharge.
b. Where captain and members of the crews contracts with ship
agent be for a definite period or voyage:
i. Captain and/or crew members may not be discharged until
after the fulfillment of their contracts, except by reason of
insubordination in serious matters, robbery, theft, habitual
drunkenness, or damage caused to the vessel or to its cargo through
malice or manifest or proven negligence. (Art. 605, Code of
Commerce)
Jobairah Gabriel Pangandaman
ii. If the captain should be the vessels co-owner, he may
not be discharged unless ship agent returns his amount of interest
therein. In the absence of agreement between the parties, interest
shall be appraised by experts appointed in the manner established
by civil procedure.
What are the civil liabilities of ship owners and agents?
1. Damages suffered by a 3rd person for tort committed by the
captain;
2. Contracts entered for provisioning and repair of vessel;
3. Indemnities in favor of 3rd persons arising from the conduct of
the captain from the care of goods; and
4. Damages in case of collision due to fault or negligence or want
of skill of the captain.
Doctrine of Limited Liability
What is the Doctrine of Limited Liability?
Also called the no vessel, no liability doctrine, it provides that
liability of ship owner is limited to ship owners interest over the
vessel. Consequently, in case of loss, the ship owners liability is
also extinguished. Limited liability likewise extends to ships
appurtenances, equipment, freightage, and insurance proceeds. The
ship owners or agents liability is merely co-extensive with his
interest in the vessel, such that a total loss of the vessel results in
the liabilitys extinction. The vessels total destruction extinguishes
maritime liens because there is no longer any res to which they can
attach. (Monarch Insurance v. CA, G.R. No. 92735, June 8, 2000)
What are the exceptions to the doctrine of limited liability?
1. Repairs and provisioning of the vessel before the loss of the
vessel; (Art. 586)
2. Insurance proceeds. If the vessel is insured, the proceeds will go
to the persons entitled to claim from the shipowner; (Vasquez v.
CA, G.R. No. L-42926, Sept. 13, 1985)
3. Workmens Compensation cases (now Employees
Compensation under the Labor Code); (Oching v. San Diego, G.R.
No. 775, Dec. 17, 1946)
4. When the shipowner is guilty of fault or negligence; Note: But if
the captain is the one who is guilty, doctrine may still be invoked,
hence, abandonment is still an option.
5. Private carrier; or
6. Voyage is not maritime in character.
http://www.batasnatin.com/law-library/mercantile-
law/transportation-laws/2200-doctrine-of-limited-liability.html