Saludo, Inc.

vs CA

Facts:

Pomierski and Son Funeral Home of Chicago, made the necessary preparations and arrangements for the
shipment, of the remains from Chicago to the Philippines, Crispina Galdo Saludo, the plaintiffs' mother.

In the meantime, plaintiffs Maria Salvacion Saludo and Saturnino Saludo, were told by the Director of
Pomierski that the remains were booked with TWA flight to California. She and her brother had to change
reservations from UA to the TWA flight. However, upon arrival at San Francisco, when Maria went to the
TWA counter to inquire about her mother's remains, she was told they did not know anything about it.

She then called Pomierski that her mother's remains were not at the West Coast terminal, and then she
was informed that the remains were on a plane to Mexico City, as there was a switch up between two
bodies in the airport terminal. Hence, the remains arrived in the Philippines, a day after the expected date.

Issue:

Whether or not (1) the delay in the delivery of the casketed remains of petitioners' mother was due to the
fault of respondent airline companies

Ruling:

No, it is not the fault of the private respondents.

Extraordinary diligence statutorily required to be observed by the carrier instantaneously commences upon
delivery of the goods thereto, for such duty to commence there must in fact have been delivery of the cargo
subject of the contract of carriage. Only when such fact of delivery has been unequivocally established can
the liability for loss, destruction or deterioration of goods in the custody of the carrier, absent the excepting
causes under Article 1734, attach and the presumption of fault of the carrier under Article 1735 be invoked.

As already demonstrated, the facts in the case at bar belie the averment that there was delivery of the cargo
to the carrier on October 26, 1976. Rather, as earlier explained, the body intended to be shipped as agreed
upon was really placed in the possession and control of PAL on October 28, 1976 and it was from that date
that private respondents became responsible for the agreed cargo under their undertakings in PAL Airway
Bill No. 079-01180454. Consequently, for the switching of caskets prior thereto which was not caused by
them, and subsequent events caused thereby, private respondents cannot be held liable.