PART II OUTLINE:

CONCURRING SOURCES OF OBLIGATIONS (CONTINUATION)

A. Exercise of diligence; "Negligence"; "Presumption of negligence"

Duty to observe required ("due") diligence

Negligence; test (Picart vs. Smith)

"Presumption of negligence"

Rebutting the presumption; available defenses

Breach of contract of carriage, law on common carriers, Civil Code

Breach of contract (doctrine in FGU Insurance vs. GP Sarmiento Trucking)

Law on quasi-delicts, Civil Code (relate to Article 2180; vicarious liability of employers)

Doctrine of Res ipsa loquitur

B. Exempting circumstances; fortuitous event

Article 1174, Civil Code

Article 1734, Civil Code

7) De Guzman vs. CA

26) GV Florida Transport vs. Heirs of Romeo Battung, Jr., GR 208802, 14 October 2015

27) Sulpicio Lines vs. Napoleon Sesante, et al., GR 172682, 27 July 2016

28) Transimex vs. Mafre Asian Insurance, GR 190271, 14 September 2016

29) Lea Mer Industries vs. Malayan Insurance, GR 161745, 30 September 2005

15) Spouses Cruz vs. Sun Holidays, GR 186312, 29 June 2010

30) Philippine American General Insurance vs. PKS Shipping, GR 149038, 9 April 2003

C. Doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur

10) Heirs of Del Carmen vs. Bacoy

31) Vicenta Josefa vs. Meralco, GR 182705, 18 July 2014

32) Luz Palanca Tan vs. JAM Transit, GR 183198, 25 November 2009
III. Common Carrier vs. Private Carrier

Law on Common Carriers, Civil Code

Contract, Article 1306, Civil Code

6) FGU Insurance vs. GP Sarmiento Trucking

33) Federal Phoenix Assurance vs. Fortune Sea Carrier, GR 188118, 23 November 2015

29) Lea Mer Industries vs. Malayan Insurance

30) Philippine American General Insurance vs. PKS Shipping

34) Valenzuela Hardwood and Industrial Supply vs. CA, GR 102316, 30 June 1997

35) Planters Products vs. CA, GR 101503, 15 September 1993

36) National Steel Corporation vs. CA, GR 112287, 12 December 1997

* carefully study and analyze the ways and methods by which distinction is made between the 2 types of
carriers