G.R. No.

L-57339 December 29, 1983

AIR FRANCE vs. HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, JOSE G. GANA, et. al
FACTS: in February, 1970, the late Jose G. Gana and his family, numbering nine (the GANAS),
purchased from AIR FRANCE through Imperial Travels 9 nine (9) "open-dated" air passage
tickets for the Manila/Osaka/Tokyo/Manila route. AIR FRANCE exchanged or substituted the
aforementioned tickets with other ticket sfor the same route. The aforesaid tickets were valid
until 8 May 1971, the date written under the printed words "Non valable apres de" (meaning,
"not valid after the"). The GANAS did not depart on 8 May 1970.
On January 1971, Jose Gana sought the assistance for the extension of the validity of their
tickets, which were due to expire on 8 May 1971. However, the tickets were returned and their
agent was informed that the extension was not possible unless the fare differentials resulting
from the increase in fares triggered by an increase of the exchange rate of the US dollar to the
Philippine peso and the increased travel tax were first paid.
In the meantime, the GANAS had scheduled theird eparture on 7 May 1971 or one day before
the expiry date. They were warned that although the tickets could be used by the GANAS if they
left on 7 May1971, the tickets would no longer be valid for the rest of their trip because the
tickets would then have expired on 8May 1971. Notwithstanding the warnings, the GANAS
departed from Manila in the afternoon of 7 May 1971 on board AIRFRANCE Flight 184 for
Osaka, Japan.
However, for the Osaka/Tokyo flight on 17 May 1971, Japan Airlines refused to honor the
tickets because of their expiration, and the G ANAS had to purchase new tickets. They
encountered the same difficulty with respect to their return trip to Manila as AIR FRANCE also
refused to honor their tickets.
On 25 August 1971, the GANAS commenced before the then Court of First Instance of Manila a
case for damages arising from breach of contract of carriage.
AIR FRANCE traversed the material allegations of the Complaint and alleged that the GANAS
brought upon themselves the predicament they found themselves in and assumed the
consequential risks; AIR FRANCE was not guilty of any fraudulent conduct or bad faith.
Trial Court dismissed the Complaint and upon appeal, the CA reversed and set aside the ruling of
the lower court.
ISSUE: Whether or not GANAS have made out a case for breach of contract of carriage entitling
them to an award of damages
HELD: No, Pursuant to tariff rules and regulations of the International Air Transportation
Association (IATA),
the passenger must undertake the final portion of his journey by departing from the last point at
which he has made a voluntary stop before the expiry of this limit x x x That is the time allowed
a passenger to begin and to complete his trip x x x A ticket can no longer be used for travel if its
validity has expired before the passenger completes his trip x x x To complete the trip, the
passenger must purchase a new ticket for the remaining portion of the journey".
It is clear that AIRFRANCE cannot be faulted for breach of contract when it dishonored the
tickets of the GANAS after 8 May 1971 since those tickets expired on said date. Moreover, the
GANAS cannot defend by contendin
g lack of knowledge of those rules since the evidence bears out that Teresita, who handled travel
arrangements for the GANAS, was duly informed by travel agent Ella of the advice of Rillo, the
Office Manager of Air France, that the tickets in question could not be extended beyond the
period of their validity without paying the fare differentials and additional travel taxes brought
about by the increased fare rate and travel taxes.
The circumstance that AIR FRANCE personnel at the ticket counter in the airport allowed the
GANAS to leave is not tantamount to an implied ratification of travel agent Ella's irregular
actuations. It should be recalled that the GANAS left Manila the day before the expiry date of
their tickets and that "other arrangements" were to be made with respect to the remaining
segments. Besides, the validating stickers that Ella affixed on his own merely reflect the status of
reservations on the specified flight and could not legally serve to extend the validity of a ticket or
revive an expired one.