TRANSPORTATION LAW SYLLABUS (COURSE OUTLINE)
PUP COLLEGE OF LAW
2ND SEMESTER, AY 2021-2022
MONDAYS, 6:00-8:00 PM
PROF. ALVIN CLARIDADES
WEEK 1
INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER I
TRANSPORTATION AND COMMON CARRIERS
- TRANSPORTATION IN GENERAL
Transportation as a component of “public utilities” and “public service”
- Sec. 13(b), Commonwealth Act No. 146 or The Public Service Law (of 1936), as last amended by Republic Act No. 2677
- National Power Corp. v. CA, 345 Phil. 9 [1997]
- PUBLIC UTILITIES
Constitutional provisions on public utilities
- Sec. 11, Art. XII, 1987 Constitution
- Albano v. Reyes, G.R. No. 83551. July 11, 1989
- Sec. 17, Art. XII, 1987 Constitution
- Agan, Jr. v. Philippine International Air Terminals Co., Inc., G.R. No. 155001. May 5, 2003
What constitutes a public utility?
- Secs. 18 and 19, Art. XII, 1987 Constitution
- The Iloilo Ice and Cold Storage Company v. Public Utility Board, G.R. No. L-19857. March 2, 1923; 44 Phil. 551
Distinction between “operation” and “ownership” of a public utility
- Tatad v. Garcia, Jr., G.R. No. 114222. April 6, 1995
Power to grant licenses or franchise to operate public utilities
- Pangasinan Transportation Co., Inc. v. The Public Service Commission, G.R. No. 47065. June 26, 1940; 70 Phil 221
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity distinguished from Certificate of Public Convenience
- Philippine Airlines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board, G.R. No. 119528. March 26, 1997
- COMMON CARRIERS AND CONTRACT OF CARRIAGE
Contract of transportation or Contract of carriage defined
Contract of carriage imbued with public interest
- Art. 1755, Civil Code).
- Air France v. Carrascoso, G.R. No. No. L-21438. Sept. 28, 1966; 18 SCRA 155
- Singson v. CA, G.R. No. 119995. Nov. 18, 1997
Parties to contracts of carriage of goods and of passengers
Carrier defined
Classifications of carriers
Private or special carrier
- Spouses Pereña v. Spouses Zarate, G.R. No. 157917. Aug. 29, 2012
- National Steel Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. 112287. Dec. 12, 1997; 347 Phil. 345
Common or public carriers
- Art. 1732, Civil Code
Elements of a common carrier
Test for determining a common carrier
No legal distinction as to means of transporting; pipeline operator is a common carrier
- First Philippine Industrial Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. 125948. Dec. 29, 1998
Common carrier may have no regular schedule or clients, fixed routes, terminals or tickets
- Asia Lighterage and Shipping, Inc., v. CA, G.R. No. 147246. Aug. 19, 2003
Common carriers bound to serve all and liable for refusal to so serve without sufficient reason
No distinction made by law between common carriage as a principal or ancillary activity
- De Guzman v. CA, G.R. No. L-47822. Dec. 22, 1988
Distinctions between a common carrier and a private carrier
Laws governing domestic, inter-island and coastwise transportation
Laws applicable to international, foreign or overseas transportation
Liability of a common carrier; extraordinary diligence
- Art. 1733, Civil Code
- Arts. 1734, 1735 and 1745, numbers 5, 6 and 7, Civil Code
Observance of extraordinary diligence in the carriage of goods
- Gatchalian v. Delim, G.R. No. 56487. Oct. 21, 1991; 203 SCRA 126
When liability of common carrier starts in transport of passengers
- Aboitiz Shipping Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. 84458. Nov. 6, 1989
When liability of common carrier commences in transport of goods
Requisites of extraordinary diligence in carriages by land and by sea
- Trans‐Asia Shipping v. CA, G.R. No. 118126. March 4, 1996
- Negros Navigation v. CA, G.R. No. 110398. Nov. 7, 1997
Liabilities of a common carrier for breach of contract
Defenses in culpa contractual
- Art. 1762, Civil Code
Burden of proof in cases of contributory negligence
Damages recoverable for death of a passenger
- Briñas v. People, G.R. No. L‐30309. Nov. 25, 1983
Causes exempting the common carrier from responsibility
- Art. 1734, Civil Code
Distinctions between an action to enforce liability of the employer of the negligent driver under Article 103 of the Revised Penal Code and an action based on quasi‐delict under the Civil Code
Liability of common carrier for moral damages
- China Airlines, Ltd. v. IAC, G.R. No. 73835. Jan. 17, 1989
Common carriers generally presumed to have been at fault or to have acted negligently
- Bascos v. CA, G.R. No. 101089. April 7, 1993
Arts. 1734 and 1735, Civil Code
WEEK 2
When presumption of negligence arises; how presumption overcame; when presumption made absolute
Presumption of fault or negligence of common carrier rebuttable
- Pilapil v. CA, G.R. No. 52159. Dec. 22, 1989; 180 SCRA 546
Exceptions to the application of presumption of fault or negligence
Philippine American General Insurance Co, Inc. v. MGG Marine Services, Inc. G.R. No. 135645. March 8, 2002
Arts. 1740, 1742 and 1743, Civil Code
- Ganzon v. CA, G.R. No. L‐48757. May 30, 1988
- Southern Lines v. CA, G.R. No. L‐16629. Jan. 31, 1962, 4 SCRA 258
- Tabacalera Insurance Co. v. North Front Shipping Services, Inc., G.R. No. 119197. May 16, 1997; 272 SCRA 527
Accidents due to mechanical defects of carrier not fortuitous events
- Sweet Lines, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. L‐46340. April 29, 1983
- Juntilla v. Fontanar, G.R. No. L‐45637, May 31, 1985
- Vergara v. CA, G.R. No. 77679, Sept. 30, 1987
Fire not considered as a natural disaster or calamity
- Africa v. Caltex [Phil.], Inc., G.R. No. L-12986. March 31, 1966; 16 SCRA 448
- Art. 1734, Civil Code
- Sec. 4, COGSA
- Servando v. Philippine Steam Navigation Co., G.R. No. L‐36481‐2, Oct. 23, 1982
Typhoon or storm deemed a fortuitous event; exception
- Juan F. Nakpil & Sons v. CA, G.R. No. L-47851. Oct. 3, 1986; 144 SCRA 596
- Batangas Laguna Tayabas Bus Company v. IAC, G.R. No. 74387-90. Nov. 14, 1988; 167 SCRA 379
- Valenzuela v. CA, G.R. No. 115024. Feb. 7, 1996; 253 SCRA 303
- Arada v. CA, G.R. No. 98243. July 1, 1992
Stipulations in a contract of carriage deemed as unreasonable, unjust and contrary to public policy
- Art. 1745, Civil Code
Acts of strangers that would divest a common carrier of his/its duty of extraordinary diligence in the vigilance over the goods carried
- Art. 1745, par. (6), Civil Code
Liability of carrier for acts of robbers
Act of God must be the sole and proximate cause of the loss to exempt the carrier from liability
Common carrier not liable where the proximate cause of passenger’s injury is his own negligence
- Art. 1761, Civil Code
Liability over perishable goods
Duty of carrier to keep the vessel seaworthy
Rules regarding a carrier’s liability for delay in delivery of goods
- Saludo, Jr. v. CA, G.R. No. 95536. March 23, 1992
Liability for delay in the transportation of goods
- Arts. 1170, 1740, 1747 and 1748, Civil Code);
Certificate of Public Convenience not a requisite for incurring of liability as a common carrier
Grounds for refusal by common carrier to carry certain goods must be reasonable
- F.C. Fisher v. Yangco Steamship Company, G.R. No. L-8095. March 31, 1915
Presumption of negligence of common carriers; how overcome
- Arts. 1735 and 1752, Civil Code
- Compania Maritima v. CA, G.R. No. L-31379, 29 Aug. 1988, 164 SCRA 685
Reasons for the requirement of extraordinary diligence
Principles on the liability of a common carrier
- Isaac v. A. L. Ammen Transportation Co., Inc., G.R. No. L-9671. Aug. 23, 1957
Periods when the liability of a common carrier begins and ceases
- Arts. 1736 and 1738, Civil Code
- Art. 619 of the Code of Commerce
- Philippines First Insurance Co., Inc. v. Wallem Phils. Shipping, Inc. G.R. No. 165647. March 26, 2009
To whom goods must be delivered
- Art. 1736, Civil Code
Parties may agree to relieve carrier from liability while goods are in custom’s custody
- Lu Do & Lu Ym Corp. v. Binamira, G.R. No. L-9840. April 22, 1957
Rule as to unloading, storage and stoppage in transitu
Implied warranty of seaworthiness of ships as common carriers
- Caltex [Philippines], Inc. v. Sulpicio Lines, Inc., G.R. No. 131166. Sept. 30, 1999; 374 Phil. 325
Passenger defined
Persons not deemed as passengers
- Lara v. Valencia, G.R. No. L-9907. June 30, 1958
Defenses of a common carrier in the carriage of goods
- Art. 1734, Civil Code
- Sabena Belgian World Airlines v. CA, G.R. No. 104685. March 14, 1996
Caso fortuito defined; characteristics; exempting circumstances
- Lasam v. Smith, 45 Phil. 661
- Republic of the Philippines v. Luzon Stevedoring Corp., G.R. No. L-21749. Sept. 29, 1967; 128 Phil. 313, citing Art. 1179, Civil Code
- Metal Forming Corp.. v. Office of the President, G.R. No. 111386. Aug. 28, 1995; 317 Phil. 853
- Art. 1740, Civil Code
- Art. 1734, Civil Code
- Sec. 4, COGSA
- Eastern Shipping Lines, Inc. v. IAC, G.R. No. L-69044 and L-71478, May 29, 1987, 150 SCRA 463
- La Mallorca and Pampanga Bus Co. v. De Jesus, G.R. No. L-21486. May 14, 1966; 123 Phil. 875
WEEK 3
Defense of negligence of the shipper or owner
- Art. 1741, Civil Code
Proximate cause defined
- Ramos v. C.O.L. Realty Corp., G.R. No. 184905. Aug. 28, 2009, 597 SCRA 526
Character of the goods or defects in the packing or in the containers
- Art. 1742, Civil Code
- Southern Lines, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. L-16629. Jan. 31, 1962; 4 SCRA 258
Order or act of competent public authority
- Art. 1743, Civil Code
- Ganzon v. CA, G.R. No. L-48757. May 30, 1988; 161 SCRA 646
Liability of a common carrier for the death of or injuries to passengers due to the acts of its employees, other passengers or strangers
- Art. 1762, Civil Code
- Art. 1764, Civil Code
Basis of carrier’s liability
- Maranan v. Perez, G.R. No. L-22272. June 26, 1967
Doctrine of respondeat superior
- Art. 1759, Civil Code
- Manila Railroad Company v. Ballesteros, G.R. No. L-19161. April 29, 1966; 16 SCRA 641
- Art. 1763, Civil Code
- Sec. 48 (b), Motor Vehicle Law or Republic Act No. 4136
Degree of diligence required of common carriers for willful acts of strangers
- Art. 1763, Civil Code
Causes of liability of common carriers
Duration of the liability of the common carrier in a contract of carriage of goods
- Arts. 1736, 1737 and 1738, Civil Code
Periods within which the common carrier in a contract of carriage of passengers may be held liable
- Light Rail Transit Authority v. Navidad, G.R. No. 145804. Feb. 6, 2003
- Del Prado v. Manila Electric Co., G.R. No. L-29462. March 7, 1929; 52 Phil. 900
Duty of common carriers to afford passengers the opportunity to board safely
- Dangwa Transportation Co., Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. 95582. Oct. 7, 1991; 202 SCRA 574
Person attempting to board a common carrier already considered a passenger
Passenger must be allowed a reasonable time to leave the carrier’s premises
- La Mallorca v. CA, G.R. No. L‐20761. July 27, 1966
Presumption of negligence
- Art. 1735, Civil Code
Rationale for the presumption
- Mirasol v. The Robert Dollar Co., G.R. No. L-29721. March 27, 1929).
- Coastwise Lighterage Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. 114167. July 12, 1995
- Art. 1755, Civil Code
Burden of proof falls on carrier to prove extraordinary diligence
Defenses to overcome presumption of fault or negligence
- Arts. 1734, 1735 and 1736, Civil Code
Valid stipulations in contracts of carriage of goods
- Art. 1744, Civil Code
- Arts. 1748, 1749 and 1750, Civil Code
- Art. 1744, Art. 1745, No. 4, Civil Code
- Art. 1758, Civil Code
Void stipulations in contracts of carriage of goods
- Art. 1745, Civil Code
- Arts. 1733, 1755 and 1757, Civil Code
Rules on checked-in baggage
- Arts. 1998, 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003, Civil Code
Rule in case of non‐paying passengers or if the fare is reduced
- Art. 758, Civil Code
Concurring causes of action
- Art. 1759, Civil Code.
- Cangco v. Manila Railroad Co., 38 Phil. 768
- Art. 2180, Civil Code
- Arts. 826-939, Code of Commerce
- Martinez v. Barredo, G.R. No. L-49308. May 13, 1948; 81 Phil. 1
- Arts. 102 and 103, Revised Penal Code
- Viluan v. CA, G.R. No. L-21477-81. April 29, 1966
- Gutierrez v. Gutierrez, G.R. No. 8896. Dec. 29, 1913; 56 Phil. 177
Stipulations limiting the liability of the carrier in a bill of lading
- H. E. Heacock Company v. Macondray & Company, Inc., G.R. No. L-16598. Oct. 3, 1921; 42 Phil. 205
- Juan Ysmael & Co., Inc. v. Gabino Barretto & Co., Ltd., G.R. No. L-28028. Nov. 25, 1927; 51 Phil. 90
When a stipulation limiting common carrier’s liability may be annulled by the shipper or owner
- Arts. 1746 and 1747, Civil Code
When the limitation of the amount of liability is valid
- Art. 1750, Civil Code
CHAPTER II
THE PUBLIC SERVICE LAW
- PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION AND ITS FUNCTIONS
- Commonwealth Act No. 146 enacted on November 7, 1936
- Secs. 1 and 2, C.A. No. 146
Jurisdiction and powers of the Public Service Commission
- Sec. 13[a], C.A. No. 146
Public service
- Sec. 13[b], C.A. No. 146
Public character and interest not number of people served determinative of public utility or service
- Luzon Stevedoring Company, Inc. v. The Public Service Commission, G.R. No. L-5458. Sept. 16, 1953
WEEK 4
Public utility defined
- JG Summit Holdings, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. 124293. Sept. 24, 2003
Statutory definition of public utility abandoned
- JG Summit Holdings, Inc. v. CA, Id.; Tinga, J., Sep. Op.
Public use
- Iloilo Ice and Cold Storage Co. v. Public Utility Board, G.R. No. L-19857. March 2, 1923; 44 Phil. 551
Exempted services
- Sec. 13, Public Service Act or C.A. No. 146, as amended
- Sec. 14, C.A. No. 146, as amended by C.A. No. 454, R.A. Nos. 2031 and 2677
Why shipyards are not deemed as public utilities; definition
- Sec. 13 (b), C.A. No. 146
- Sec. 15, C.A. No. 146
- Sec. 1(d), P.D. No. 666 reads:
- Mecano v. Commission on Audit, G.R. No. 103982. Dec. 11, 1992; 216 SCRA 500
- Sec. 20 of B.P. Blg. 391 expressly and categorically repealed the whole of Sec. 1 of P.D. No. 666.
- E.O. No. 226 (law) dated July 16, 1987
Other service not deemed as public utilities
- Automobile and aircraft manufacturers
- Oil company
- R.A. No. 387, otherwise known as the Petroleum Act of 1949
- Act No. 3108 and C.A. No. 146 included oil in the definition of public utility
- C.A. Nos. 146 and 454, R.A. Nos. 1270 and 2677 covered petroleum.
- Wharf or dock
- Albano v. Reyes, G.R. No. 83551. July 11, 1989; 175 SCRA 264
- Operator of trucks
- United States v. Tan Piaco, G.R. No. L-15122. March 10, 1920; 40 Phil. 853
- Sec. 13(b), C.A. No. 146, as amended
- Owner and lessor of equipment and facilities for a rail system
- Tatad v. Garcia, G.R. No. 114222. April 6, 1995; 243 SCRA 436
Sec. 13(b), C.A. No. 146, as amended
- Ice plant
- La Paz Ice Plant & Cold Storage Co., Inc. v. John Bordman, G.R. No. L-43668. March 31, 1938; 65 Phil. 401
- Others included in the definition of public utilities
Public utility determined not by law but by courts
- Sec. 1, R.A. No. 2677, amending Sec. 13(b), C.A. No. 146, as amended
- North Negros Sugar Co. v. Hidalgo, G.R. No. L-42334. Oct. 31, 1936; 63 Phil. 664
- FRANCHISE FOR PUBLIC SERVICES
Franchise defined
Franchise as a legislative grant
Congress has no exclusive authority to issue franchises
- Sec. 11, Art. XII, 1987 Constitution
Public Service Commission abolished and replaced
Certificate of Public Convenience (CPC) or Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN) defined
- Pangasinan Transportation Co., Inc. v. Public Service Commission, G.R. No. 47065. June 26, 1940; 70 Phil. 221
- Luque v. Villegas, G.R. No. L-22545. Nov. 28, 1969; 30 SCRA 408
- Sec. 14 of the Public Service Act (C.A. No. 146)
- Sec. 15, par. 1, C.A. No. 146
CPC included in the term “property”
- Raymundo v. Luneta Motor Co., G.R. No. L-39902, L-39903. Nov. 29, 1933; 58 Phil. 889
Conditions for the issuance of CPC or CPCN
- Par. 1, Sec. 15, C.A. No. 146, as amended
- Sec. 15, par. 2, C.A. No. 146, as amended
Requisites for the grant of CPC or CPCN
- Kilusang Mayo Uno Labor Center v. Garcia, Jr., G.R. No. 115381. Dec. 23, 1994
Other applications of the CPC or CPCN
- Sec. 15, par. 4, C.A. No. 146, as amended
Law not the title in certificate that determines the requirements for the issuance of such certificate
Unlawful acts of public service companies
- Secs. 18 and 19, C.A. No. 146, amended
Prior operator rule or Old operator rule
- Halili v. Cruz, G.R. No. L-21061. June 27, 1968; 23 SCRA 1174
Exceptions to the prior operator rule
Prior applicant rule
Third operator rule
- Yangco v. Esteban, G.R. No. 38586. Aug. 18, 1933
Protection of investment rule
- Batangas Transportation Co. v. Orlanes, G.R. No. L-28865. Dec. 19, 1928; 52 Phil., 455
- Tiongson v. Public Service Commission, G.R. No. L-24701. Dec. 16, 1970
CHAPTER III
COMMERCIAL CONTRACTS FOR TRANSPORTATION
- CODE OF COMMERCE PROVISIONS AND CONCEPTS
Relevant Code of Commerce provisions and scope of their application
- Arts. 349 to 379, Code of Commerce
WEEK 5
Contract of transportation; when deemed commercial
- Art. 349, Code of Commerce
Bill of lading defined
- Bus Company v. The Collector of Internal Revenue, G.R. No. L-14078. Feb. 24, 1961
Lading defined
Two-fold character of a bill of lading
Functions of the bill of lading
Kinds of bills of lading
- Magellan Manufacturing Marketing Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. 95529. Aug. 22, 1991
Bill of lading not indispensable to contract of carriage
- Compañia Maritima v. Insurance Company of North America, G.R. No. L-18965. Oct. 30, 1964
When liability of the carrier commences
Determination of indemnity if not stipulated
- Art. 370, Code of Commerce
Bill of lading as a contract of adhesion
- Philippine Commercial International Bank v. CA, G.R. No. 97785. March 29, 1996; 325 Phil. 588
Effect of acceptance of a bill of lading sans objection
Contract ambiguities how construed
- Art. 1377, Civil Code
- Power Commercial and Industrial Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. 119745. June 20, 1997; 274 SCRA 597
Instances when consignee is bound by the bill of lading
- Sea-Land Service, Inc. v. IAC, G.R. No. 75118. Aug. 31, 1987; 237 Phil. 531
- Art. 1311[2], Civil Code
- Mendoza v. Philippine Air Lines, Inc., G.R. No. L-3678. Feb. 29, 1952; 90 Phil 836
Duties of the carrier
Carrier’s obligation to accept the goods
- F.C. Fisher v. Yangco Steamship Company, G.R. No. L-8095. March 31, 1915
When a common carrier may lawfully decline to accept the goods
Carrier not absolutely obliged to accept a cargo
- Philippine Airlines, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. 119706. March 14, 1996
Carrier’s duty to deliver the goods
Period of delivery of goods
- Art. 358, Code of Commerce
- Art. 370, Code of Commerce
Effects of delay in the delivery of the goods
- Art.1740, Civil Code
- Art.1747, Civil Code
Instances when the consignee may refuse to receive the goods
- Arts. 363, 365 and 371, Code of Commerce
Claim for damage, when and how made
- Art. 366, Code of Commerce
- New Zealand Insurance Co., Ltd. v. Choa Joy, G.R. No. L-7311. Sept. 30, 1955
When claim for damage may no longer be admitted
- Art. 366, Code of Commerce, pars. 1 and 2
Effects of paying the transportation charges
- Art. 366, Code of Commerce
Rationale for the requisite period of giving notice of claim
- Philippine American General Insurance Co., Inc. v. Sweet Lines, Inc., G.R. No. 87434. Aug. 5, 1992; 212 SCRA 194
24-hour claim a condition precedent to an action against carrier
- Philippine Charter Insurance Corp. v. Chemoil Lighterage Corp., G.R. No. 136888. June 29, 2005
Patent damage vis-à-vis latent damage
Rules on claim do not apply to undelivered goods
- Roldan v. Lim Ponzo & Co., G.R. No. L-11325. Dec. 7, 1917
Shorter period may validly be stipulated by the parties
Application of prescriptive periods under the Civil Code
Doctrine of combined or connecting services
- Art. 373, Code of Commerce
Special right of carrier over the goods transported and prescription of action to enforce such right
- Art. 375, Code of Commerce
CHAPTER IV
LAND TRANSPORTATION
- GOVERNING LAWS
- Republic Act No. 4136 or the Land Transportation and Traffic Code – June 20, 1964
- Republic Act No. 6374;
- Presidential Decree No. 98;
- Presidential Decree No.109;
- Presidential Decree No. 843;
- Presidential Decree No. 896;
- Presidential Decree No.1057;
- Presidential Decree No.1958;
- Batas Pambansa Blg. 43;
- Batas Pambansa Blg. 74;
- Batas Pambansa Blg. 398;
- Republic Act No. 8750;
- Republic Act No. 10586 or the “Anti-Drunk and Drugged Driving Act of 2013;” and
- Other laws which expressly or impliedly modified some of its provisions.
- IMPLEMENTING AGENCIES AND BODIES
- The Land Transportation Office (LTO)
WEEK 6
- Book IV, Title XV, Chapter 1, Sec. 2, Administrative Code of 1987).
- Sec. 4 (d) [1], Art. III, R.A. No. 4136, as amended
- Sec. 27, Land Transportation and Traffic Code or R.A. No. 4136, as amended
Driver’s license issued by the LTO
Specific powers and functions of the LTO
- Sec. 4 (d) [1], Art. III, R.A. No. 4136, as amended,
- The Land Transportation, Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB)
- E.O. No. 202, dated 19 June 1987
- Land Transportation Office v. Butuan, G.R. No. 131512. Jan. 20, 2000
“To regulate” and “to register” construed
Key powers and functions of the LTFRB
- E.O. No. 202, s. 1987
- The Local Government Units (LGUs)
Power to regulate the operation and grant franchises to tricycles devolved to LGUs
- Sec. 458. R.A. No. 7160
Rationale for the devolution
LTO powers on vehicle registration and drivers’ licensing not devolved to LGUs
- The Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA)
MMDA’s power to enforce traffic laws in Metro Manila
- Sec. 5(f), Republic Act No. 7924
- RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF ROAD USERS
- Caminos, Jr. v. People, G.R. No. 147437. May 8, 2009
Duty of drivers to have license
- Sec. 19, R.A. No. 4136, as amended by B.P. Blg. 398
Right of way construed
Right of way rule in intersections
- Sec. 42, R.A. No. 4136
Duty to yield
Rule determined by imminence of collision
Crossing a thru-stop street
- Adzuara v. CA, G.R. No. 125134. Jan. 22, 1999; 301 SCRA 657
Driving on right side of highway
- Sec. 37, R.A. No. 4136, as amended
Overtaking a vehicle
- Sec. 39, R.A. No. 4136, as amended
Driver to give way to overtaking vehicle
- Sec. 40, R.A. No. 4136, as amended
Turning right or left at intersections
- Sec. 45[a] and [b], R.A. No. 4136, as amended
Parking prohibited in specified places
- Sec. 46, R.A. No. 4136, as amended
Hitching to a vehicle prohibited
- Sec. 51, R.A. No. 4136, as amended
Obstruction of traffic
- Sec. 54, R.A. No. 4136, as amended
Prohibited acts specifically penalized under R.A. No. 4136
Retroactive effect of penal laws
- Sec. 19 of R.A. No. 10586 expressly modified Sec. 56(f) of R.A. No. 4136
- Art. 22, RPC, in relation to Sec. 3(e), RA 10586
- RECKLESS DRIVING AND ROAD ACCIDENTS
Reckless driving and reckless imprudence
- Sec. 48, R.A. No. 4136, as amended
Imprudence defined
Reckless imprudence resulting in damage to property; elements
Presumption of imprudent driving; burden of proof on the accused
When motor vehicle operator at fault may be held criminally liable
- Sec. 56[n], R.A. No. 4136, as amended
Negligence of other party not a defense in reckless driving case
Instance when presumption of driver’s negligence arises
- Art. 2185, Civil Code
Rate of speed a basic factor in determining reckless driving
Restriction as to speed
- Sec. 35[a], R.A. No. 4136, as amended
Reasonable rate of speed
- Gabriel v. CA, G.R. No. 128474. Oct. 6, 2004; 440 SCRA 136
- Sec. 35, R.A. No. 4136
Swerving per se not violative of traffic law
- Sec. 48, R.A. No. 4136
- Sydeco v. People, G.R. No. 202692. Nov. 12, 2014
Driving under the influence of alcohol
- Sec. 5, R.A. No. 10586
- Sec. 3(g), IRR of R.A. No. 10586
Driving under the influence of dangerous drugs and other similar substance
- Sec. 3[f], R.A. No. 10586
WEEK 7
Conduct of field sobriety tests
- Sec. 6, R.A. No. 10586
- Sec. 3[g], R.A. No. 10586
Use of breath analyzer
- Sec. 3[b], R.A. No. 10586
Chemical and confirmatory tests
- Sec. 3[c], R.A. No. 10586
Mandatory alcohol and chemical testing of drivers involved in motor vehicular accidents
- Sec. 7, R.A. No. 10586
Refusal to submit to mandatory tests
- Secs. 6, 7, 8 and 15, R.A. No. 10586
Children prohibited from sitting in front seat
- Sec. 5, R.A. No. 8750
Duty of driver in case of accident
- Sec. 55, R.A. No. 4136, as amended
- ARRESTS AND SEARCHES
When refusal to get off of the vehicle for a body and vehicle search not deemed as serious disobedience to a lawful order
- Abenes v. CA, G.R. No. 156320. Feb. 14, 2007; 515 SCRA 690
- Art. 151, Revised Penal Code
Reasonable suspicion of a crime that would justify stop-and-frisk action
- People v. Sy Chua, G.R. No. 136066-67. Feb. 4, 2003; 444 Phil. 757
General rule is confiscation of driver’s license not arrest
- Sec. 29. R.A. 4136
No warrant of arrest to be issued for offense penalized only by fine; effect of issuance of traffic citation ticket
- Luz v. People, G.R. No. 197788. Feb. 29, 2012
Requirements for a valid arrest
- Morales, Jr. v. Enrile, G.R. No. L-61016. April 26, 1983; 206 Phil. 466
Invalid arrest does not authorize warrantless search
- People v. Bolasa, G.R. No. 125754. Dec. 22, 1999; 378 Phil. 1073
Evidence seized not in plain view
- People v. Macalaba, G.R. No. 146284-86. Jan. 20, 2003; 443 Phil. 565
Consented warrantless search
- Caballes v. CA, G.R. No. 136292. Jan. 15, 2002; 424 Phil. 263
Inadmissibility of articles seized during illegal arrest
- People v. Martinez, G.R. No. 191366. Dec. 13, 2010
- MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION AND FRANCHISING
Motor vehicle defined
Compulsory registration of motor vehicles
- Sec. 5(a) and (e), R.A. No. 4136, as amended
Unregistered sale or lease of motor vehicle not binding on third persons injured in vehicular accidents
- First Malayan Leasing and Finance Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. 91378. June 9, 1992; 209 SCRA 660
- Roxas v. CA, G.R. No. 92245. June 26, 1991; 198 SCRA 541
- PCI Leasing and Finance, Inc. v. UCPB General Insurance Co., Inc., G.R. No. 162267. July 4, 2008
Nature of motor vehicle registration fees: taxes or regulatory fees
- Philippine Airlines, Inc. v. Edu, G.R. No. L- 41383. Aug. 15, 1988
Mandatory emission standards for motor vehicles
- Sec. 46, R.A. No. 8749 or the Clean Air Act of 1999
Seat belt device defined
- Sec. 3, R.A. No. 8750
Mandatory use and provision of seat belts in certain motor vehicles
- Sec. 4, R.A. No. 8750
Penalties and fines for violation of the Seat Belts Use Act
- Sec. 12, R.A. No. 8750
Permanent number plates
- Sec. 17, R.A. No. 4136, as amended by B.P. Blg. 43
Certificate of Public Convenience issued by LTFRB
Franchise defined
Public convenience or necessity construed
Public hearing an indispensable requirement in issuance of CPC
- Batangas Transportation Co. v. Orlanes, G.R. No. L-28865. Dec. 19, 1928; 52 Phil., 455
- Manila Electric Company v. Pasay Transportation Co., Inc., G.R. No. L-37655. Feb. 9, 1933; 57 Phil. 825
Requisites for the grant of CPC
- Sec. 16(a), C.A. No. 146, as amended
LTFRB cannot redelegate its delegated power to a common carrier
- United States v. Barrias, G.R. No. 4349. Sept. 24, 1908; 11 Phil. 327
Kabit system
- Baliwag Transit Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. 57493. Jan. 7, 1987; 147 SCRA 82
- Art. 1409, Civil Code
- Lim v. CA, G.R. No. 125817. Jan. 16, 2002
WEEK 8
Purpose behind the proscription against the kabit system
Kabit system not a criminal offense but void under civil law
- Art. 1412, Civil Code
- Lita Enterprises, Inc. v. IAC, G.R. No. 64693. April 27, 1984
Boundary system
- Paguio Transport Corp. v. National Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No. 119500. Aug. 28, 1998
Relationship between the owner of the vehicle and the driver under a “boundary system”
- Jardin v. National Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No. 119268. Feb. 23, 2000
- National Labor Union v. Dinglasan, G.R. No. L-14183. Nov. 4, 1993
Effect of transfer or lease of franchise
- Montoya v. Ignacio, G.R. No. L-5868. Dec. 29, 1953; 94 Phil. 182
Registered owner liable despite transfer of ownership of vehicle
- Perez v. Gutierrez, G.R. No. L-30115. Sept. 28, 1973; 53 SCRA 149
- Benedicto v. IAC, G.R. No. 70876. July 19, 1990
Approval of sale, encumbrance or lease of property
- DOTC Order No. 2010‐34
Sale or lease of franchise requires prior approval by LTFRB
Prior approval of the sale, lease or encumbrance of property not a condition precedent to validity of contract
- Fores v. Miranda, G.R. No. L-12163. March 4, 1959
Solidary liability of a registered owner/operator of a public service vehicle
- Gelisan v. Alday, G.R. No. L-30212. Sept. 30, 1987
CHAPTER V
MARINE TRANSPORTATION
- MARINE TRANSPORTATION AND MARITIME LAWS
Marine transportation defined
Governing law
Admiralty or maritime law
Admiralty law differentiated from the Law of the Sea
- THE KEY ACTORS IN MARITIME COMMERCE
- The shipowner and ship agent
- Art. 586, Code of Commerce and Sec. 1, R.A. No. 9515
Powers and functions of a ship agent
Civil liabilities of the shipowner and ship agent
- Art. 587, Code of Commerce
Authority of the ship agent to discharge the captain and members of the crew
- Art. 603 and 605, Code of Commerce
- The ship captain and master of the vessel
- Yu Con v. Ipil, G.R. No. L-10195. Dec. 29, 1916
Nature of the position of captain and master
Qualifications of a captain or master
- Art. 609, Code of Commerce
Inherent powers of a captain or master
- Art. 610, Code of Commerce
Hull
Rigging
Fund sources
- Art. 611, Code of Commerce
Duties of a captain or master
- Art. 612, Code of Commerce
“Log book” and its contents
“Accounting book” and its contents
“Freight book” and its contents
Solidary liability of the captain and ship agent
- Art. 618, Code of Commerce
Instances when the captain incurs no liability
- Art. 620, Code of Commerce
Ship’s captain discretionary authority
- Inter-Orient Maritime Enterprises Inc. v. National Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No. 115286. Aug. 11, 1994
Captain cannot be substituted without ship agent’s consent
- Art. 615, Code of Commerce
Cases when the captain and crew members may rescind their contracts of employment
- Art. 647, Code of Commerce
(1) The officers and crew of the vessel
Cases when the officers and crew are exempted from all obligations
- Art. 647, Code of Commerce
Sailing mate or First mate
- Art. 627, Code of Commerce
Duties of a Sailing mate or First mate
- Arts. 628 to 631, Code of Commerce
“Binnacle book” and its contents
- Arts. 629 to 631, Code of Commerce
WEEK 9 –MIDTERM EXAM
WEEK 10
Second mate
Duties of a Second mate
- Art. 632, Code of Commerce
Marine engineers
Duties of the Chief engineer
“Engine book” and its contents
The crew and its composition
- Art. 634, Code of Commerce
Just causes for the discharge of a seaman
- Art. 637, Code of Commerce
Rules if a seaman should die or be captured during the voyage
- Art. 645, Code of Commerce
Complement of a vessel
- Art. 648, Code of Commerce
- Supercargoes
- Art. 649, Code of Commerce
- The pilot
- Far Eastern Shipping Company v. CA, G.R. No. 130068. Oct. 1, 1998
Harbor pilot
Pilotage defined
Compulsory pilotage
Liability of a pilot
- Sec.11, Art. III, PPA Admin Order 03-85
- IMPORTANT CONCEPTS IN MARITIME COMMERCE
Essential terms used in maritime commerce
- Merchant vessel defined
- P.D. No. 1521
- Maritime lien
- Philippine National Bank v. CA, G.R. No. 128661. Aug. 8, 2000; 337 SCRA 381
- Secs. 17 and 21 of P.D. No. 1521 or “The Ship Mortgage Decree of 1978”
- Preferred maritime lien
- Sects. 17 and 21 of P.D. No. 1521
- Doctrine of limited liability or the Limited liability rule
- Art. 587, Code of Commerce
- Yangco v. Laserna, G.R. No. L-47447-47449. Oct. 29, 1941; 73 Phil. 330
Rationale for the doctrine
Doctrine of limited liability; specific applications
- Arts. 587, 590, 643 and 837, Code of Commerce
Limited liability rule under the provisions of the Code of Commerce
- Arts. 587, 590 and 837, Book III, Code of Commerce
Exceptions to the limited liability rule
- Chua Yek Hong v. IAC, G.R. No. 74811. Sept. 30, 1988
- Art. 827, Code of Commerce
Abandonment defined
- Sec. 140, Insurance Code, as amended
General limitation on abandonment
- Sec. 142, Insurance Code, as amended
Abandonment of the vessel; when needed
- Art. 837, Code of Commerce
- Luzon Stevedoring Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. L-58897. Dec. 3, 1987; 156 SCRA 169
Abandonment; how done
- Secs. 145 and 146, Insurance Code, as amended
Acceptance of abandonment
- Secs. 152 to 155, Insurance Code, as amended
Effect of refusal to accept a valid abandonment
- Sec. 156, Insurance Code, as amended
Abandonment no longer required when vessel is totally lost
- Arts. 587, 590 and 837, Code of Commerce
- Vasquez v. CA, G.R. No. L-42926. Sept. 13, 1985; 138 SCRA 553
When abandonment becomes ineffectual
- Sec. 144, Insurance Code, as amended
Causes justifying resort to abandonment
- Sec. 141, Insurance Code, as amended
Subsidiary liability of the shipowner and agent
- The Philippine Shipping Company v. Vergara, G.R. No. L-1600. June 1, 1906; Phil. 281
- Art. 837, Code of Commerce
- Manila Steamship Co., Inc. v. Abdulhaman, G.R. No. L-9534. Sept. 29, 1956; 100 Phil. 32
Limitations on the right of abandonment
- Philippine American General Insurance Company, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. 116940. June 11, 1997; 339 Phil. 455
- Negros Navigation Co., Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. 110398. Nov. 7, 1997; 346 Phil. 551
WEEK 11
Effect of abandonment of vessel and earned freight
- Art. 587, Code of Commerce
- Switzerland General Insurance Co., Ltd. v. Ramirez, G.R. No. L-48264. Feb. 21, 1980; 96 SCRA 297
Right of abandonment
Extent of liability of the shipowner and ship agent
- Aboitiz Shipping Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. 121833, 130752, 137801. Oct. 17, 2008; 569 SCRA 294).
Ship agent defined
- Art. 587, Code of Commerce
“No vessel, no liability” rule
- The Government of the Philippine Islands v. The Insular Maritime Co., G.R. No. L-21495. March 18, 1924; 45 Phil. 805).
Origin of the rule and the rationale for its adoption in maritime law
- Abueg v. San Diego, G.R. No. L-773. Dec. 17, 1946; 77 Phil. 730
Real and hypothecary nature of maritime law
- Aboitiz Shipping Corp. v. General Accident Fire and Life Assurance Corp., Ltd., G.R. No. 100446. Jan. 21, 1993; 217 SCRA 359
“Real” and “hypothecary” construed
- Rubiso v. Rivera, G.R. No. L-11407. Oct. 30, 1917; 37 Phil. 72
Primary governing law on liability of ship owners or agents for total loss or destruction of the vessel
- Arts. 1732-1766, Civil Code
- Art. 587, Code of Commerce
- Package liability limitation
- Causes of revocation of voyage
- Art. 640, Code of Commerce
Interdiction of commerce
Blockade
Embargo
Order of preference in case of sale of vessel
Effect of sale of vessel
- Sec. 17, P.D. No. 1521
- Art. 587, Code of Commerce
- Art. 687, Id.
- Sec. 138, Insurance Code
- Participants in maritime commerce
- Charter party
- Tabacalera Insurance Co. v. North Front Shipping Services, Inc., G.R. No. 119197. May 16, 1997; 272 SCRA 527
Charter party as a special contract in maritime commerce
Parties to a charter party
Kinds of charter party
- Puromines, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. 91228. March 22, 1993
Charter of demise or bareboat
Owner pro hac vice
Contract of affreightment
Kinds of contract of affreightment
Time charter
- Litonjua Shipping Company Inc. v. National Seamen Board, G.R. No. L-51910. Aug. 10, 1989
Voyage charter
Distinctions between a civil law lease and a charter party
Distinctions between a charter party and a bill of lading
Distinctions between a demise or bareboat charter party and a contract of affreightment
Persons who can make a charter
- Art. 598, Code of Commerce
- Art. 609, Id.
- Art. 679, Id.
Requirements of a valid charter party
Instances when a charter party may be rescinded
Freight defined
Freightage
- Sec. 104, P.D. No. 612 or the Insurance Code, as amended by R.A. No. 10607
Requisites and contents of charter party
- Art. 652, Code of Commerce
Charter party clauses
Jason clause
Paramount clause
- Carriage of Goods by Sea Act (46 U.S.C.A. § 1300)
Rights and obligations of the shipowner or ship agent
- Arts. 669-678, Code of Commerce
Lay days defined
Extra lay days
WEEK 12
Demurrage
Obligations of charterers
- Arts. 679-687, Code of Commerce
Primage
Rescission of a charter party at the charterer’s request
- Art. 688, Code of Commerce
Rescission of a charter party at the shipowner’s request
- Art. 689, Code of Commerce
Rescission of a charter party due to fortuitous causes
- Art. 690, Code of Commerce
Transshipment defined
- Sec 2[m], R.A. No. 10668
- Magellan Manufacturing Marketing Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. 95529. Aug. 22, 1991
- Loans on bottomry and respondentia
- Art. 719, Code of Commerce
Aleatory contract
Distinctions between a loan on bottomry and a loan on respondentia
Requisites of loan on bottomry or respondentia
When loan on bottomry or respondentia treated as a simple loan
- Arts. 726 and 727, Code of Commerce
Interest rate on the loan; Usury law and CB Circular 905-92
- Central Bank Circular No. 905-82
- Dio v. Japor, G.R. No. 154129. July 8, 2005; 463 SCRA 170
- Almeda v. CA, G.R. No. 113412. April 17, 1996; 256 SCRA 292
Distinctions between a loan on bottomry or respondentia and marine insurance
Hypothecary nature of bottomry and respondentia
- Art. 731, Code of Commerce
Hypothecary
Barratry defined
Barratry clause
- Roque v. IAC, G.R. No. L-66935. Nov. 11, 1985
Marine insurance and loan on bottomry and respondentia
- Sec. 101, Insurance Code
- Art. 735, Code of Commerce
- Accidents in maritime commerce
(1) Averages
- Art. 806, Code of Commerce
Ordinary expenses
- Art. 807, Code of Commerce
Kinds of averages
- Art. 808, Code of Commerce
Simple or particular averages
- Arta. 809 and 810, Code of Commerce
General or gross averages
- Art. 811, Code of Commerce
Requisites for general average
- Arts. 816-818, Code of Commerce
Procedure for recovery expenses for gross average
- Arts. 813 and 814, Code of Commerce
Contribution to the general average
- Art. 812, Code of Commerce
- Art. 859, Id.
- Art. 732, Id.
- A. Magsaysay, Inc. v. Agan, G.R. No. L-6393. Jan. 31, 1955
- Art. 812, Code of Commerce
Jettison defined
Order of goods or cargo to be jettisoned or cast overboard
- Art. 815, Code of Commerce
Cargo not covered by general average
- Art. 855, Code of Commerce
- Rule IX, York-Antwerp Rule
Rationale for the rule on deck cargo
- Subsec. 1, Art. 815, Code of Commerce,
- Standard Oil Company of New York v. Castelo, G.R. No. L-13695. Oct. 18, 1921).
Rule different in coastwise and inland waters navigation
Requisites for inclusion of jettisoned goods in the general average
- Art. 816, Code of Commerce
(2) Arrival under stress
- Art. 819, Code of Commerce
Steps to be followed in arrival under stress
- Art. 819, Code of Commerce
Protest in arrival under stress only a disclaimer on owner’s liability
When arrival deemed unlawful
- Art. 820, Code of Commerce
Who bears the expenses of arrival
- Art. 821, Code of Commerce
WEEK 13
Duty of the captain to continue the voyage
- Art. 825, Code of Commerce
(3) Collision and allision
Vessel at fault liable for indemnity
- Art. 826, Code of Commerce
Liability if both vessels at fault or if it cannot be determined which vessel caused the collision
- Arts. 827 and 828, Code of Commerce
Doctrine of last clear chance and Rule on contributory negligence
- Art. 827, Code of Commerce
Doctrine of inscrutable fault
Divisions of time or zones in collisions of vessels
- G. Urrutia & Co. v. Baco River Plantation Co., G.R. No. L-7675. March 25, 1913).
Error in extremis defined
Liability in collision through fortuitous event or force majeure
- Art. 830, Code of Commerce
Presumption of fault against a moving vessel striking a stationary object; doctrine of res ipsa loquitur
- Far Eastern Shipping Company v. CA, G.R. No. 130068. Oct. 1, 1998
- Republic v. Luzon Stevedoring Corp., G.R. No. L-21749. Sept. 29, 1967; 21 SCRA 279
Civil tort vis-à-vis maritime tort
Liability of third vessel causing the collision
- Art. 831, Code of Commerce
Liability of properly anchored and moored vessel colliding with nearby vessels due to storm or force majeure
- Art. 832, Code of Commerce
When vessel presumed as lost by reason of collision
- Art. 833, Code of Commerce
Role of protest for the recovery of losses and damages due to collision; when and how made
- Art. 835, Code of Commerce
Who can file maritime protest in case of collision
- Arts. 835-836, Code of Commerce
- Verzosa v. Lim, G.R. No. 20145. Nov. 15, 1923
Effect of absence of protest on persons not on board
- Art. 836, Code of Commerce
Limitation on the shipowners’ civil liability
- Art. 837, Code of Commerce
Indemnity for death or injury of persons
- Art. 838, Code of Commerce
Summary investigation of the accident
- Art. 839, Code of Commerce
Presumptions to determine negligence
Rules to prevent collision
Port and starboard
Windward and leeward
Rules governing sailing vessels and steamships
Maritime protest defined; by whom and when made; to whom filed
- Art. 835, Code of Commerce
Persons not required to file protest
- Art. 836, Code of Commerce
Cases where protest requirement applies
- Art. 835, Code of Commerce
- Art. 612[8], Id.
- Arts. 612[15] and 843, Id.
- Art. 624, Id.
(4) Shipwreck defined
Owners bear the losses due to shipwreck
- Art. 840, Code of Commerce
Indemnity from the captain due to his fault
- Art. 841, Code of Commerce
When the captain may be held liable for shipwreck
- Art. 841, Code of Commerce
- SPECIAL CONCEPTS IN MARITIME COMMERCE
(a) Arrastre defined
Arrastre services
- Sec. 1213, R.A. No. 1937
Nature of arrastre function; BOC’s immunity from suit
- Mobil Philippines Exploration, Inc. v. Customs Arrastre Service, G.R. No. L-23139. Dec. 17, 1966
Arrastre operators
Functions of an arrastre operator
- Hijos de F. Escao, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No. 59229. Aug. 22, 1991; 261 SCRA 63
- Summa Insurance Corp., v. CA, G.R. No. 84680. Feb. 5, 1996; 323 Phil. 214
- Fireman’s Fund Insurance Co., v. Metro Port Service, Inc., G.R. No. 83613. Feb. 21, 1990; 182 SCRA 455
WEEK 14
Arrastre operator and carrier solidarily liable
- Lua Kian v. Manila Railroad Company, G.R. No. L-23033. Jan. 5, 1967; 19 SCRA 5
- Northern Motors, Inc. v. Prince Line, G.R. No. L-13884. Feb. 29, 1960; 107 Phil. 253).
What arrastre operator must prove to avoid liability
- Asian Terminals, Inc. v. Daehan Fire and Marine Insurance Co., Ltd., G.R. No. 171194. Feb. 4, 2010; 611 SCRA 555
Arrastre operator deemed a public utility
- New Zealand Insurance Company, Ltd. v. Navarro, G.R. No. L-48686. Oct. 4, 1989
(b) Stevedoring service defined
- Cebu Arrastre Service v. Collector of Internal Revenue, G.R. No. L-7444. May 30, 1966
- The Chief of Staff, Armed Forces of the Philippines v. Collector of Internal Revenue, G.R. No. L-21835. Aug. 19, 1967
- Anglo-Fil Trading Corp. v. Lazaro, G.R. No. L-54958. Sept. 2, 1983
(c) Containerization
- United States Lines, Inc. v. Commissioner of Customs, G.R. No. L-73490. June 18, 1987
When carrier of the containerized cargo may be held liable
- Reyma Brokerage, Inc. v. Philippine Home Assurance Corp., G.R. No. 93464. Oct. 7, 1991
- Bankers & Manufacturers Assurance Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. 80256. Oct. 2, 1992
- SALVAGE LAW OR ACT NO. 2616
Salvage defined
- Erlanger & Galinger v. The Swedish East Asiatic Co., [Ltd.], G.R. No. L-10051. March 9, 1916
Elements needed to a valid salvage claim
Rules for determining the reward for salvage
- Sec. 9, Act No. 2616
Proper subjects of salvage
- Salvage Law (Act No. 2616)
Flotsam, jetsam, lagan defined
Towage defined
Salvage distinguished from towage
- Art. 2142, Civil Code
- Barrios v. Carlos A. Go thong & Company, G.R. No. L-17192. March 30, 1963
Persons having no right to reward for salvage
- Sec. 3, Act No. 2616
Derelict defined
Basic rules on salvage reward
- Secs. 9, 11, 12 and 13, Act No. 2616
- The Atlantic, Gulf & Pacific Company of Manila v. Uchida Kisen Kaisha, G.R. No. L-15871. Nov. 7, 1921
- CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA ACT (COGSA) OR COMMONWEALTH ACT NO. 65
U.S. COGSA adopted by the Philippine Congress via C.A. No. 65
- Public Act No. 521 of the 74th US Congress
- Sec. 1, C.A. No. 65
Application of COGSA in relation to provisions of other laws
- Art. 1753, Civil Code
- Art. 1766, Civil Code
- COGSA
Significant provisions of COGSA
Rationale for limiting common carrier’s liability
- Edgar Cokaliong Shipping Lines, Inc. v. UCPB General Insurance Co., G.R. No. 146018. June 25, 2003
Carriage of goods; period covered
- Sec. 1(e), Title I of C.A. No. 65 (COGSA)
- Insurance Company of North America v. Asian Terminals, Inc., G.R. No. 180784. Feb. 15, 2012
Notice of loss or damage
- Sec. 3[6], COGSA
Action to recover not barred by lack of notice
- E. E. Elser, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. L‐6517. Nov. 29, 1954)
Prescriptive period for filing an action under COGSA
- Par. (6), Sec. 3, COGSA
- Belgian Overseas Chartering and Shipping, N.V. v. Philippine First Insurance Co., Inc., G.R. No. 143133. June 5, 2002; 383 SCRA 23)
Other persons covered by the one-year prescriptive period
- Kuy v. Everrett Steamship Corp., G.R. No. L‐5554. May 27, 1953
Insurer covered by the one-year prescriptive period
- Filipino Merchants Insurance Company, Inc. v. Alejandro, G.R. No. L‐54140. Oct. 14, 1986
- Sec. 3(6), COGSA
- Mayer Steel Pipe Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. 124050. June 19, 1997
Arrastre operator not covered by prescriptive period
Rationale for the prescriptive period under COGSA
- Ang v. American Steamship Agencies, Inc., G.R. No. L-22491. Jan. 27, 1967; 19 SCRA 129
WEEK 15
Not loss or damage but misdelivery
- Sec. 3(6), COGSA
Applicable rule on prescription in case of misdelivery of goods
- Arts. 1144(1) and 1146, Civil Code
- Tan Liao v. American President Lines, Ltd., G.R. No. L-7280. Jan. 20, 1956; 98 Phil. 203
Instances when prescription is suspended
- Universal Shipping Lines, Inc. v. IAC, G.R. No. 74125. July 31, 1990; 188 SCRA 170
- F. H. Stevens & Co. Inc. v. Norddeuscher Lloyd, G.R. No. L-17730. Sept. 29, 1962; 6 SCRA 180
Provisions of Civil Code on prescription not applicable to COGSA
- Art. 1155, Civil Code
- Sect. 3, par. 6, COGSA
- Chua Kuy v. Everett Steamship Corp., G.R. No. L-5554. May 27, 1953
- Art. 1155, Civil Code
- The Yek Tong Lin Fire & Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. v. American President Lines, Inc., G.R. No. No. L-11081. April 30, 1958; 103 Phil. 1125
- Dole Philippines, Inc. v. Maritime Company of the Philippines, G.R. No. L‐61352. Feb. 27, 1987
When prescription begins to run
- Continental Insurance Company v. Manila Port Service, G.R. No. L-22208. March 30, 1966, 16 SCRA 425
- Union Carbide Philippines, Inc. v. Manila Railroad Co., G.R. No. L-27798. June 15, 1977
Prescriptive period applies to insurer of goods
When cases for loss or damage of goods must be filed
Manner of determining the amount of liability of common carrier for loss or damage to the goods transported
- Art. 372, Code of Commerce
When shipper fails to declare value of goods
- Sec. 4, par. 5, COGSA
- Philam Insurance Company, Inc. v. Heung-A Shipping Corp., G.R. No. 187701. July 23, 2014
Amount of carrier’s liability
- Sec. 4(5), COGSA
- Eastern Shipping v. IAC, G.R. No. L-69044. May 29, 1987; 150 SCRA 463).
Parties may stipulate higher amount up to actual damage sustained
Stipulation limiting carrier’s liability for loss of goods permitted
- Arts. 1749 and 1750, Civil Code
- Sec. 4, par. (5), COGSA
Stipulation limiting the carrier’s liability; when valid
- Art. 1744, Civil Code
Rule on packages shipped in a container
“Container” construed
- Aboitiz Shipping Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. 89757. Aug. 6, 1990
Deterioration of goods due to delay in transit constitutes loss or damage
- Sec. 3(6), COGSA
Instances when carrier or ship not liable
CHAPTER VI
AIR TRANSPORTATION
- AIR TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY BODIES
- Republic Act No. 776, as amended by Presidential Decree 1462
- Republic Act No. 9497
- The Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB)
CAB’s authority to issue certain documents, permits
Specific powers and duties of the CAB
- Sec. 10[C], R.A. No. 776, as amended
Considerations in CAB’s rate-fixing
- Sec. 10[C][2], R.A. No. 776, as amended
- The Civil Aviation Authority of the Philippines (CAAP)
Powers of the CAAP
- TRANSPORTATION STATUTES AND GLOBAL ACCORDS
- Civil Aeronautics Act of the Philippines or Republic Act No. 776, as amended (1952);
- Civil Aviation Authority Act of 2008 or Republic Act No. 9497; and
- Warsaw Convention of 1929 or the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules Relating to International Carriage by Air, as amended by subsequent international agreements.
- The Civil Aeronautics Act of the Philippines or Republic Act No. 776, as amended (1952);
- Republic Act No. 776, otherwise known as the Civil Aeronautics Act of the Philippines, as amended by Presidential Decree No. 1462 and Executive Order No. 217
CAB empowered to issue CPCNs and permits to air carriers
CAB requirements to be satisfied by a foreign air carrier intending to operate in the country
Regulation of airfares
- Sec. 5.01, IRR of E.O. No. 219, s. 1995 and E.O. No. 32, s. 2001
Aviation-specific passenger protection rules and regulations
- CAB’s Economic Regulation No. 9, December 18, 2012
Serious aviation crimes under the Anti-hijacking Law of 1971
- Sec. 1, R.A. No. 6235
Shipping, loading or carrying of any substance regulated by CAB
- Secs. 2 and 3, R.A. No. 6235
Air Passenger Bill of Rights
- DOTC-DTI Joint Administrative Order No. 1 (2012)
WEEK 16
The Civil Aviation Authority Act of 2008 or Republic Act No. 9497
- Republic Act No. 9497, otherwise known as the Civil Aviation Authority Act of 2008
CAAP’s authority to prevent flight
- Sec. 39, R.A. No. 9497
System and procedures for investigation of air accidents
Aircraft accident investigation and Inquiry board
- Sec. 42, R.A. No. 9497
Establishment of registry of aircrafts
- Sec. 43, R.A. No. 9497
Eligibility for registration of aircraft
- Sec. 43, R.A. No. 9497, citing R.A. No. 776, P.D. No. 1278, E.O. No. 546, and B.P. Blg. 504
Nationality of aircraft
- Sec. 47, R.A. No. 9497
Conveyance of aircraft required to be recorded in CAAP to be valid against third parties
- Sec. 49, R.A. No. 9497
Form of conveyance
- Sec. 50, R.A. No. 9497
CAAP’s aviation safety powers and functions
- Sec. 55, R.A. No. 9497
The Chicago Convention
- The Warsaw Convention of 1929
- Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules Relating to International Carriage by Air, commonly known as the Warsaw Convention (WC)
- Santos III v. Northwest Orient Airlines, G.R. No. 101538. June 23, 1992
Warsaw Convention; its application vis-à-vis Philippine laws
- Mapa v. CA, G.R. No. 122308. July 8, 1997; 341 Phil. 281
- Cathay Pacific Airways, Ltd., v. CA, G.R. No. 60501. March 5, 1993; 219 SCRA 520
Principal goal of the treaty
Twin purposes of the treaty
Scope of application of the treaty
International transportation
- Art. 1[2], Warsaw Convention
High contracting party
Transportation by several successive air carriers deemed as one undivided transportation
- Art. 1[3], Warsaw Convention
Carrier’s liability for damage in case of passenger’s death or injury
- Art. 17, Warsaw Convention
Liability for damage for destroyed, lost or damaged articles
- Art. 18, Warsaw Convention
Period of transportation by air
Liability of carrier for delay
- Art. 19, Warsaw Convention
Provision limiting carrier’s liability for damage caused by its willful misconduct removed by Hague Protocol
- Alitalia v. IAC, G.R. No. 71929. Dec. 4, 1990
Limit of carrier’s liability
- Art. 22, Warsaw Convention
Exceptions to the limitations
Willful misconduct
- Luna v. CA, G.R. No. 100374-75. Nov. 27, 1992
- Northwest Airlines v. CA, G.R. No. 120334. Jan. 20, 1998
- Lhuiller v. British Airways, G.R. No. 171092. March 15, 2010
Airway bill defined
Warsaw Convention does not preclude the operation of the Civil Code and other laws
Stipulation relieving the carrier from or limiting its liability
- Art. 23, Warsaw Convention
- Pan American World Airways, Inc. v. IAC, G.R. No. 70462, 164 SCRA 268
- Northwest Airlines, Inc. v. Cuenca, G.R. No. L-22425. Aug. 31, 1965; 14 SCRA 1063); or
- Ortigas, Jr. v. Lufthansa German Airlines, G.R. No. L-28773. June 30, 1975; 64 SCRA 610
- Korean Airlines Co., Ltd. v. CA, G.R. No. 114061. Aug. 3, 1994; 154 SCRA 211
- Zulueta v. Pan American World Airways, Inc., G.R. No. L-28589. Jan. 8, 1973; 43 SCRA 397
Validity of stipulation relieving the carrier from or limiting its liability
- Art. 23[1], Warsaw Convention
Notices of claim in case of damage or delay
- Art. 26, Warsaw Convention
When right to damages is extinguished by prescription
- Art. 29, Warsaw Convention
- United Airlines v. Uy, G.R. No. 127768. Nov. 19, 1999
Recovery of claim covered by the Convention after 2 years
- Art. 19, Warsaw Convention
- Art. 24, Id.
- Philippine Airlines, Inc. v. Savillo, G.R. No. 149547. July 4, 2008; 557 SCRA 66
Jurisdiction
“Destination” and “agreed stopping place”
Article 28(1) refers to jurisdiction not venue
- Art. 28(1), Warsaw Convention
- Art. 32, Id.
Special rules on the liabilities of airline carriers
- Philippine Airlines, Inc., v. CA, G.R. No. L-82619. Sept. 15, 1993);
- Zalamea v. CA, G.R. No. 104235. Nov. 18, 1993
- Lufthansa German Airlines v. CA, G.R. No. 83612. Nov. 24, 1994
- KLM Dutch Airlines v. CA, G.R. No. No. L-31150. July 22, 1975; 65 SCRA 237
Rule in case of various successive carriers
Remedies of parties in carriage of passengers and goods
- Art. 30, Warsaw Convention
Contract of carriage performed by different carriers
- Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. British Overseas Airways Corp., G.R. No. L-65773-74. April 30, 1987,
- Art. VI, Res. 850 of the IATA
- American Airlines v. CA, G.R. No. 116044-45. March 9, 2000; 384 Phil. 227
Distinction between damage to baggage and injury to passenger due to the misconduct of airline employees
Limitations to the liability of air carriers under the Convention
- Art. 22, Warsaw Convention
- Art. 25, Id.
WEEK 17 – FINAL EXAM