5 Questions per Day

1. Passengers of JAL headed for the Philippines were stranded in Tokyo due to the Mt. Pinatubo
eruption. Passengers sought recovery from JAL for the hotel and meal expenses incurred by
them for being “stranded up to the time they actually reached their final destination, even when
delay was caused by force majeure, since airlines have the obligation to ensure the comfort and
convenience of its passengers.

Held: No. There is no dispute that the Mt. Pinatubo eruption was force majeure not imputable
to JAL and prevented it from proceeding to Manila on schedule; and whatever losses or
damages in the form “of hotel and meal expenses the stranded passengers incurred, cannot be
charged to JAL. Airline passengers must take such risks incident to the mode of travel-adverse
weather conditions or extreme climatic ‘changes are some of the perils involved in air travel, the
consequences of which the passenger must assure or expect. After all, common carriers are not
the insurer of all risks.

2. G posits that the damage in the cargos was due to the bad weather, hence, he is exempted from
liabilities. Owners of the said cargos assert that there is negligence on the part of the carrier
since it still carry-on the voyage even if it knows that the weather is bad. Furthermore, owners
aver that G did not show any care to their belongings when the typhoon happened. Can the
owners of the cargos get compensation from the damage to their property due to bad weather?
Can G escape liability due to fortuitous event?

Owners of the cargos can get compensation from G to their damage cargos. It is a standard
procedure in all voyage to tune-in to weather forecast before proceeding with the travel. This is
to make sure of the safety of both the passengers and cargos. It is true that the law includes bad
weather as natural disaster and may exempt common carrier from liability, but this is only true if
the bad weather is the sole proximate cause of the damages. In this case, there is negligence on
the part of the shipowner (G) when it did not pay heed to the weather forecast and continue the
voyage without any knowledge of the bad weather. Hence, G cannot be exempted from liability
by asserting bad weather in his defense.

If the bad weather happened in an instant and cannot be foreseen even if the shipowner tune-in
on the weather forecast, the shipowner can be exempted from liability only if it is shown that he
exercises due diligence in the protection of the cargoes before, during, and after the occurrence
of the natural disaster. In the given case, G shows lack of care to the cargos when the typhoon
happened. Therefore, G is still liable to the damages to the cargos even if the typhoon is
contemplated as a natural disaster under the law.

3. Can fire be used as a fortuitous event or natural disaster to be exempted from liability?

No, the law does not include fire among the natural disasters that exempt a carrier from liability.
It is assumed that fire is always cause by human intervention. Hence, the carrier will always be
presumed negligent if the cause of the damage is fire.
4. What is kabit system? What is the rationale behind its prohibition?

Kabit System is an arrangement where the person who obtained a certification of public
convenience (CPC) let another person who owns a public transportation use it for a fee or
percentage of the income under his license.

The law prohibits said scheme because it undermines the purpose of issuing a CPC; that is to
make sure that owners of the vehicle are financially capable to compensate for the damage or
injury that it might cause to the passengers or their cargos.

It is illegal because it will jeopardize the riding public and their cargos to carriers who might not
be able to compensate them in case of mishap.

5. Give the difference between Interisland Trade and Overseas Trade in terms of filing a notice of
claim and filing a suit in court. Give the rationale of the prescription period of filing a notice of
loss or damage to the goods.

In Interisland Trade, filing a notice of claim is a condition precedent before the aggrieved party
can file a case in court because it is the basis of cause of action. Overseas Trade, on the other
hand does not need a notice of claim, before the aggrieved party can file his claim to the court
as long as said claim for loss or damage is filed within the prescription period. That is one year.

The rationale for filing a notice of claim for loss or damage is to immediately inform the carrier
that there is a party seeking for compensation for loss or damages of the cargos that the carrier
transported. The prescription period rationale is to make sure that things are fresh for the
examination of the carrier so as to avoid bogus or fraudulent claims.

6. Global Transport Services, Inc. (GTSI) operates a fleet of cargo vessels plying interisland routes.
One of its vessels, My Dona Juana, left the port of Manila for Cebu laden with, among other
goods, 10,000 television sets consigned to Romualdo, a TV retailer in Cebu.
When the vessel was about ten nautical miles away from Manila, the ship captain heard on the
radio that a typhoon which, as announced by PAG-ASA, was on its way out of the country: had
suddenly veered back into Philippine territory. The captain realized that My Dona Juana would
traverse the storm’s path, but decided to proceed with the voyage. True enough, the vessel
sailed into the storm. The captain ordered the jettison of the 10,000 television sets, along with
some other cargo, in order to lighten the vessel and make it easier to steer the vessel out of the
path of the typhoon. Eventually the vessel, with its crew intact, arrived safely in Cebu.
Will you characterize the jettison of Romualdo’s TV sets as an average? If so, what kind of an
average, and why? Against whom does Romualdo have a cause of action for indemnity of his
lost TV sets? Explain.

Answer: