11

SARKIES TOURS PHILIPPINES, INC., v. CA, DR. ELINO G. FORTADES, MARISOL

A. FORTADES and FATIMA MINERVA A. FORTADES
G.R. No. 108897 October 2, 1997

FACTS:
Fatima boarded petitioner's bus bringing 3 pieces of luggage with her. Her brother
helped her load them on the bus compartment. During a stopover at Daet, it was
discovered that only one bag remained in the open compartment. Private respondents
asked assistance from the radio stations and from Philtranco bus drivers who plied the
same route. They were able to recover one of Fatima's bags. After a few weeks, private
respondents formally demanded from petitioner. In its letter, petitioner tacitly admitted
its liability by apologizing and assuring respondents that efforts were being made to
recover the lost items. Months later, respondents filed a case to recover the value of the
remaining lost items claiming that the loss was due to petitioner's failure to observe
extraordinary diligence in the care of Fatima's luggage and that petitioner dealt with
them in bad faith from the start. Petitioner denied liability on the ground that Fatima
allegedly did not declare any excess baggage upon boarding its bus.

ISSUE:
WON petitioner, as a common carrier, is responsible for the loss.

RULING:
YES. Under the Civil Code, "(c)ommon carriers, from the nature of their business and
for reasons of public policy, are bound to observe extraordinary diligence in the
vigilance over the goods… transported by them," and this 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 a right to receive them," unless the loss is due to any of the
excepted causes under Article 1734 thereof. The cause of the loss in the case at bar
was petitioner's negligence in not ensuring that the doors of the baggage compartment
of its bus were securely fastened. Further, where the common carrier accepted its
passenger's baggage for transportation and even had it placed in the vehicle by its own
employee, its failure to collect the freight charge is the common carrier's own lookout; it
is responsible for the consequent loss of the baggage. In this case, petitioner’s
employee even helped Fatima and her brother load the luggages in the bus' baggage
compartment, without asking that they be weighed, declared, receipted or paid for.
 12
SEVERO DEL CASTILLO vs. LORENZO JAYMALIN MANUEL SABIT and BITRANCO
and A. L. AMMEN TRANS. CO., INC.
G.R. No. L-28256 March 17, 1982

Facts:
Mario del Castillo, a deaf-mute, son of Severo del Castillo, and a paying passenger of
Bicol Transportation Company (Bitranco), operated by A.L. Ammen Transportation Co.,
Inc. (ALATCO), fell upon alighting from Bus No. 624 of said companies and died as a
result. An action for the recovery of damages for Mario's death was filed by Severo,
against the driver and conductor of the bus, and the transportation companies. The
transportation companies traversed the complaint by stating that the passenger bus
involved was owned by Bicol Transportation Co. alone; that the two companies had
always exercised due diligence in the selection and supervision of their employees; and
that the proximate cause of Mario's death was his recklessness and gross negligence in
jumping out of the bus while in motion.

Issue:
WON Bitranco and ALATCO are liable for damages for the death of Mario.

Ruling:
Yes. They are jointly and severally liable for damages. Common carriers are
responsible for the death of their passengers (Articles 1764 and 2206 of the Civil Code).
This liability includes the loss of the earning capacity of the deceased. It appears proven
that the defendant corporations failed to exercise the diligence that was their duty to
observe according to Articles 1733 and 1755. The conductor was apprised of the fact
that Mario del Castillo was deaf and dumb. With this knowledge the conductor should
have taken extra-ordinary care for the safety of the said passenger. In this he failed.