Chavez, Krizzel Ann P.

BSTM 4A

LEGAL ASPECTS

Our tourist economy is not just big business; it also contributes to the overall national economic

growth revenue. It has piqued the public's interest enough to warrant cabinet-level promotion and

regulation. We have special laws and policies in place to protect visiting tourists, but this protection has

not been extended to Filipino tourists traveling abroad. This is a case against a Filipino travel agency that

have breached the contract with their client. This case was called “LYDIA L. GERALDEZ, Petitioner, v. HON.

COURT OF APPEALS and KENSTAR TRAVEL CORPORATION, Respondents.:” To summarize the case, Lydia

Geraldez, the petitioner filed a contractual breach against to the Filipino travel agency, Kenstar Travel

Corporation. After the petitioner saw an advertisement through newspaper about the private respondent

regarding about the tour in Europe, she then contacted the private respondent through phone. After that,

the private respondent gives their representative, Alberto Vito Cruz. He’s the one who introduced the

brochure to the petitioner and explained the highlights of the package. However, after they settled all the

documents that needed in for the tour, the private respondent failed to meet the expectation or the said

contract. In the brochure or the contract said and included the European tour manager, the hotel is first

class, and their local or Filipino tourist guide is well educated and knowledgeable in about the important

sites in Europe. The petitioner also said that they were uncomfortable during the whole trip. The

petitioner was charged with the amount $2,990.00 or P190,000.00 for a 22-day tour in Europe,

unfortunately they didn’t enjoy it nor feel safe the whole trip.

The petitioner filed breach of contract and fraudulent against the private respondent in

contracting obligation. Hence, the instant petition from which, after sifting through the blades of
contentions alternately thrust and parried in the exchanges of the parties, the pivotal issue that emerges

is whether or not private respondent acted in bad faith or with gross negligence in discharging its

obligations under the contract. After thorough and painstaking scrutiny of the case records of both the

trial and appellate courts, we are satisfactorily convinced, and so hold, that private respondent did commit

fraudulent misrepresentations amounting to bad faith, to the prejudice of petitioner and the members of

the tour group. Therefore, the ruling of the respondent Court of Appeals is hereby attempt to distance,

and a new one is rendered, ordering private respondent Kenstar Travel Corporation to pay petitioner Lydia

L. Geraldez P100,000.00 in moral damages, P50,000.00 in exemplary damages, and P20,000.00 in

attorney's fees, with costs against private Respondent. The award of nominal damages is thus revoked.

As a tourism student that is soon to be working in this field, we should be aware about the

packages that we offer. We must always have integrity since that is the foundation in our work in order

to make the clients, guests and tourists trust us. It’s also a good thing that the petitioner filed a complaint

toward to the actions of the said company, its their right to do that since they paid for it, and if they feel

wronged, it is the right thing to make an action and get what they deserve.