TRANSPORTATION LAW

Article 1734 – the list of causes of loss, destruction or deterioration which exempts the common carrier
for responsibility therefore is a closed list.

- Common carrier must present clear and convincing evidence that they are not negligent

Fortuitous Events – except in cases provided by law, or when it is otherwise declared by stipulation or
when the nature of the obligation requires assumption of risk, no person shall be responsible for those
events which could not be foreseen, or which though foreseen, were inevitable.

Elements of Fortuitous events:

1. The cause of the breach of the obligation must be independent of the will of the debtor
2. The event must be unforeseen or unavoidable
3. The event must be such as to render it impossible for the debtor to fulfill his obligation in a
normal manner
4. The debtor must be free from any participation in, or aggravation of the injury to the
creditor.

Tabacalera Insurance vs. North Front Shipping

- 234 sacks of corn grains

- Loaded to the ship
- Molds when it arrived in the destination
- Damaged
- Presumption of negligence
- Did not allege article 1734
- Common carrier is required to exercise extra ordinary diligence in the vigilance over the
goods it transports

Philamgen vs. Felman shipping lines

- Loading of 7,500 cases of 1 liter coca cola

- The vessel sank in the waters of Zamboanga del Norte
- Proximate cause of the sinking of the vessel – top heavy
- Filed notice of abandonment
- Ship agent could still be held liable despite notice of abandonment when the loss of injury
was due to the fault of the shipowner and the captain. The right of abandonment of the
vessel as a legal limitation of shipowner’s liability, does not apply to cases where the ibjury
or average was occasioned by the shipowner’s own fault.

Article 1735 – Presumption of negligence

- It is incumbent upon the common carrier to prove that they observed extraordinary
diligence in cases of loss, destruction, deterioration of goods in all other cases other than
those mentioned in Article 1734.

Sarkies Tours Phils. Vs. CA and Fortales

- Boarded a bus
- Did not declare the excess baggage placed on the compartment of the bus.
- Extraordinary diligence in the vigilance over the goods.
- The liability 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 person who has the right to receive them.
- Its failure to collect the freight charge is the common carrier’s own lookout.

Article 1736 – period of time within which the common carrier should observe extraordinary diligence in
transporting the goods.
Arrastre Operator and Stevedore Distinguished

Benito Macam vs. CA, China Ocean Shipping

- 3,500 boxes of watermelon

- 1,611 boxes of fresh mangoes
- Bill of lading – Pakistan Bank as consignee and Great Prospect Company of Kowloon,
Hongkong as notify party.
- The extraordinary responsibility 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 person who has the right to receive
them.

Article 1737 – right of stoppage in transit

- Responsibility of the common carrier is reduced to a mere bailee or depository – diligence of

a good father of a family in holding the goods.

Article 1738 – when the goods are placed in a warehouse

A continuation of Article 1736 on the period of time within which the common carrier should observe
extraordinary diligence in transporting the goods.

Elements

1. Notice of Arrival of the goods to the consignee, his agents or authorized representative
2. Reasonable opportunity on the part of the consignee to remove the goods or otherwise
dispose of them.

Amparo Servando vs. Phil. Steam navigation Co.

- 1,528 cavans of rice

- Delivered and discharged unto the warehouse of the Bureau of Customs
- Consignee withdrew portion of the rice
- On the same day, customs warehouse was razed by fire.

Article 1739 – proximate cause of the loss, destruction, deterioration.

Elements

1. The natural disaster must have been the proximate and only cause of the loss
2. The common carrier must have exercised due diligence to prevent or minimize loss before,
during, and after the occurrence of the natural disaster
3. The common carrier has not negligently incurred in delay in transporting the goods.

Article 1740 – Delay, exception to the exception (natural disaster)

Delay – from the time the oblige judicially or extrajudicially demands from them the fulfillment of their
obligation.

Demand by the creditor shall not be necessary when:

1. The obligation or the law expressly so declare

2. When from the nature and the circumstances of the obligation it appears that the designation of
the time when the thing is to be delivered or the services is to be rendered was a controlling
motive for the establishment of the contract
3. When the demand would be useless, as when the obligor has rendered it beyond his power to
perform.

Reciprocal obligations – neither party incurs in delay if the other does not comply or is not ready to
comply in a proper manner with what is incumbent upon him.

Maersk Line vs. CA and Castillo

- Pharmaceutical products
- Mishipped and diverted to another destination
- Negligence/delay
 - No need of demand

Article 1741 – Contributory Negligence

Negligence – the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided by those considerations
which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs, would do, or the doing of something, which a
prudent and reasonable man would not do.

Proximate Cause – is the cause which in natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any efficient
intervening cause, produces the injury, and without which the result would not have occurred.

Contributory Negligence – the act or omission amounting to want of ordinary care on the part of the
complaining party which concurring with defendant’s negligence, is proximate cause of injury.

Article 1742 – defective character of the gooods

- The common carrier must exercise due diligence to forestall or lessen the loss

Article 1743 – it is incumbent upon the common carrier to prove that the public authority had the power
to issue the order.

Mauro Guanzon vs. CA and Tumambing

- 305 tons of scrap iron from Bataan to port of Manila

- Mayor arrived during loading and demanded 5,000
- Since tumambing did not give the amount, Mayor demanded that the scrap irons be
dumped to the sea where the ship was docked.

Article 1744 – stipulation limiting liability less than extraordinary diligence

Requisites:

1. In writing signed by the shipper or owner

2. Supported by a valuable consideration other than the service rendered by the common
carrier
3. Reasonable, just and not contrary to public policy

- No less than diligence of a good father of the family.

Loadstar Shipping Co., Inc. Vs. CA and Manila Insurance

- A stipulation that the cargo was being shipped at “owner’s risk” is null and void and contrary
to public policy.

Article 1745 – stipulations that are considered unreasonable, unjust and contrary to public policy

Pedro de Guzman vs. CA and Ernest Cendana

- 750 cartons of liberty filled milk

- Truck was hijacked somewhere along the Mc Arthur Highway in Paniqui Tarlac
- Loss is due to force majeure
- Article 1734 does not include hijacking
- Specific requirements of the duty of extraordinary diligence in the vigilance over the goods
carried in the specific context of hijacking or armed robbery.
- SC: the limits of the duty of extraordinary diligence in the vigilance over the goods carried
are reached where the goods are lost as a result of a robbery which is attended by “grave or
irresistible threat, violence or force.”
- Grave and irresistible force must be proved in cases of hijacking

Article 1746

Article 1747 – stipulation, common carrier delays or changes the stipulated or usual route

Article 1748 – Article 1750

Article 1752 – Article 1754

SAFETY OF PASSENGERS

Article 1755 – Safety of Passengers – Extra-ordinary diligence

- Vested with public interest

- Once a passenger in the course of travel is injured or does not reach his destination safely,
the carrier and driver are presumed to be at fault.
- Bus – premature acceleration, once it stops is in effect making a continuous offer to bus
riders.
- As well as to those alighting therefrom
- Continues until the passenger has had a reasonable time or a reasonable opportunity to
leave the carrier’s premises.

La Mallorca vs. CA. Light Rail Transit Authority vs. Natividad – a passenger after alighting from a train
walks along the station platform is considered still a passenger.

- Brother a fellow passenger has been shot.

Aboitiz Shipping Corp. vs. CA – Passenger disembarked but did not use the gangplank.

- Stayed for one hour in the carrier’s premises

- Went back to get baggage, was hit by a crane.
- Safely alighted from the carrier’s conveyance or had a reasonable opportunity to leave the
carrier’s premises.
- Still entitled to the protection under their contract of carriage.

Bacarro, Sevilla, and Montefalcon vs. Castano and CA – truck overtook a jeepney

- Jeepney swerved to the right but did not reduce speed

- There is one way bridge ahead
- Running side by side
- Truck sideswiped the jeepney

Trans Asia Shipping lines vs. CA – The failure of the common carrier to maintain in seaworthy condition
its vessel involved in the contract of carriage is a clear breach of its duty prescribed in Article 1755 of the
Civil Code

- Repairs were ongoing but continued to travel

- Vessel was unseaworthy

Nature of the Contract of air carriage – peculiar.

Categories of International Transportation

1. That where the place of departure and the place of destination are situated within the
territories of two High Contracting Parties regardless of whether or not there be a break in the
transportation or a transshipment.

2. That where the place of departure and the place of destination are within the territory of a
single High Contracting Party if there is an agreed stopping place within a territory subject to the
sovereignty, mandate, or authority of another power, even though the power is not a party to
the convention.

Carlo Singson vs. CA and Cathay Pacific

- Round Trip Ticket, 5 stubs, Manila – Hongkong – San Francisco – Los Angeles – San Francisco
– Hongkong – Manila
- Its contention that there was no contract of carriage that was breached because the ticket
was open dated is untenable. The round trip ticket issued by the carrier to the passenger
was in itself a complete written contract by and between the carrier and the passenger.
- The loss of the coupon was due to the negligence of Cathay’s agents and was the proximate
cause of the non-confirmation of petitioner’s return flight.

Japan Airlines vs. CA and Agana

- California bound for manila

 - Stop over at Narita Japan
- Mt. Pinatubo Eruption – unrelenting ash fall blanketed Ninoy Aquino International Airport
rendering it inaccessible to airline traffic
- Hotel and accommodation expenses during their stay in Narita
- Force Majeure – their predicament was not due to the fault or negligence of JAL
- Common carriers are not the insurer of all risks.

Article 1756 – Presumed to be at fault or to have acted negligently in case of death or of injuries to
passengers.

- Extraordinary diligence, presumption of negligence

- It is incumbent upon the common carrier to rebut the presumption

Circumstance indicative of negligence

- Faulty or defective motor vehicle

- Article 2185 – it is presumed that a person driving a motor vehicle has been negligent if at
the time of the mishap he was violating a traffic regulation.
- Drivers of vehicles who bump the rear of another vehicle are presumed to be the cause of
the accident unless contradicted by other evidence.

Rule on overtaking

Section 41 of R.A. No. 4136

Article 1757 – Article 1763 – Read

Article 1764 – Damages for breach of Contract of Common Carriers

Under the New Civil Code, Obligations arise from:

1. Law
2. Contracts
3. Quasi Contracts
4. Delicts - Acts or Omissions punished by Law
5. Quasi – Delicts

From these sources of obligations, 3 kinds of culpa or fault or negligence are derived

1. Culpa – Contractual or contractual negligence due to breach of contract of carriage

2. Culpa Aquiliana – Tort or Quasi Delict
3. Culpa Criminal – Criminal negligence which results in criminal liability

If a passenger of a public utility bus gets njured due to the driver’s recklessness:

1. Civil Case for Breach of Contract of Carriage against the common carrier – the liability of the
Common Carrier is direct and primary – Preponderance of Evidence – defense of due
diligence in the selection and supervision of employee, though may mitigate liability is not a
complete defense in culpa contractual or breach of contract of carriage.

2. Criminal Case against the driver for reckless imprudence resulting in physical injuries – Proof
Beyond reasonable doubt – liability of the driver/employee is direct and primary while the
liability of the common carrier is subsidiary – driver employee is insolvent

3. Culpa Aquiliana or quasi delict against the common carrier – the injured passenger has the
burden of proving the negligence of the common carrier and his driver, and the defense of
due diligence in the selection and supervision of employee is a complete defense of the
common carrier as employer to avoid civil liability.

In quasi delict, the negligence or fault should be clearly established because it is the basis of the action,
whereas in breach of contract, the action can be prosecuted merely by proving the existence of the
contract and the fact that the obligor, in this case the common carrier failed to transport his passenger
safely to his destination.

Villa Rey Transit vs. CA - Damages – Computation of indemnity, life expectancy of victim as basis in fixing
amount recoverable, and earning capacity.

Dangwa Transportation Co. Inc. vs. CA – The amount recoverable by the heirs of a victim of a tort is not
the loss of the entire earnings, but the loss of that portion of the earnings which the beneficiary would
have received.

To prove actual damages, the best evidence available to the injured party must be presented.

Moral and exemplary damages is not due in a case where a passenger is guilty of contractual negligence.

Gregoria Vda. De Paman et al vs. Seneris – Subsidiary liability of an employer under article 103 of the
revised penal code is enforceable in the same criminal case where award was made.

Baliwag Transit vs. CA – Release of claims executed by the injured party discharging the insurance and
transportation companies from any and all liability is valid.

Article 1765 – Article 1766 – Read

DOCTRINE OF LAST CLEAR CHANCE – calls for application in suits between owners of 2 colliding vehicles.

VALIDITY OF STIPULATIONS

- As to the diligence required

 - As to amount of liability

Liability of Common Carriers for acts of employees – Article 1759

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE – Passengers must observe the diligence of a good father of a family to
avoid injury to himself.

Article 1763 – Common Carrier’s responsibility for acts of strangers.

Distinctions between common carrier of goods and common carrier of passengers – Common carrier of
goods = five instances where presumption of negligence does not apply.

MARITIME COMMERCE

Applicable Laws – Code of Commerce, COGSA, Salvage Law

MARINA

Article 573 – How Ownership of a vessel may be acquired

Vessel – movable property

Article 586 – obligations of ship owner and ship agent.

CAPTAIN – one who governs vessels and navigates the high seas or of large dimension and importance.

Article 610 -General Functions of a captain – Inter Orient Maritime vs. NLRC

Captain vs. Pilot of a vessel – a person duly qualified and licensed to conduct a vessel into or out of ports
or in certain waters

Article 619 - Duration of liability of captain vs. carrier

The captain shall be liable for the cargo from the time it is turned over to him at the dock, or
afloat alongside the ship, at the port of loading until he delivers it on the shore or on the discharging
wharf, of the port of unloading unless the contrary has been expressly agreed upon.

Maritime Protest – a written statement under oath, made by the captain or master of the vessel after
the occurrence of an accident or disaster in which the vessel or cargo is lost or injured with respect to
circumstances attending such occurrence.

Officers and Crew of the Vessel

ABANDONMENT/DOCTRINE OF LIMITED LIABILITY IN MARINE TRANSPORTATION

Abandonment – is equivalent to an offer of the value of the vessel, her equipment and freight earned in
return for an exemption from liability

Real and Hypothecary Nature of Maritime Commerce

When abandonment CANNOT BE MADE

1. When the voyage is not maritime, but only in a river, bay, or gulf
2. When the vessel is not acting as a common carrier but a private carrier
3. When the shipowner/ship agent is at fault, i.e. when there is lack of proper equipment, lack of
technical training of the crew, unlicensed crew members, captain. So any kind of negligence no
matter how minute will remove the right of abandonment.

SPECIAL CONTRACTS IN MARITIME COMMERCE

1. Charter Party – a contract wherein the entire ship or some principal part thereof is let by the
owner to another person for a specified time or use, in consideration of the payment or a fee.
a. Contract of affreightment – owner retains control of the vessel, he provides the crew,
what is being leased is only the space of the vessel, it can be a time charter or a voyage
charter.
b. Bareboat/Demise Charter-owner of the vessel gives up the control and full possession of
the vessel to the charterer who becomes the owner pro hac vice.
BILL OF LADING – an instrument in writing signed by the carrier or his agent, describing the freight so as
to identify it, stating the name of the consignor, the terms of the contract of carriage and agreeing or
directing that the fright be delivered to the order or assigns of a specified person at a specified place.

Two fold nature: Serves as a receipt as well as evidence of a contract.

Article 719 – Loan on Bottomry and/or respondentia – It is a loan, the security of which is the vessel
itself and conditioned on the safe arrival at the port of destination. The vessel must be exposed to a
maritime peril.

If the collateral is the vessel – Bottomry

If the collateral is goods – Respondentia

RISKS, DAMAGES, AND ACCIDENTS OF MARITIME COMMERCE

2 TYPES OF AVERAGES

1. Simple or Particular Average – all the expenses and damages caused to the vessel or to her
cargo, which have not redounded to the benefit and common profit of all the persons interested
in the vessel and her cargo.

2. General or Gross Average – all the damages and expenses which are deliberately caused in order
to save the vessel, her cargo, or both at the same time from a real and known risk

REQUISITES FOR GENERAL AVERAGE

1. There must be a common danger, a danger in which the ship, cargo and crew all participate.
2. For the common safety or for the purposes of avoiding imminent peril, part of the cargo or
vessel on board is sacrificed deliberately
3. There must be attempt to avoid the imminent peril must be successful in a sense that the vessel
and some of the cargo are saved
4. Damages or expenses were incurred after taking the proper legal steps.