Campagnie vs.
Hamburg-Amerika, 36 Phil. 590, G.R. No. L-10986, March 31, 1917
Subject: Transportation Law
FACTS
This is an action
by the Compagnie de Commerce et de Navigation D'Extreme Orient, a corporation
duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the Republic of
France, with its principal office in the city of Paris, France, and a branch office
in the city of Saigon, against the Hamburg Amerika Packetfacht Actien
Gesellschaft, a corporation duly organized under and by virtue of the laws of
the Empire of Germany, with its principal office in the city of Humburg,
Germany, and represented in the city of Manila by Behn, Meyer & Company
(Limited), a corporation. The plaintiff seeks to recover the full value if
Saigon of a certain cargo of the steamship Sambia, alleged to amounts to the
sum of P266,930, Philippine currency, and prays that certain proceeds of the
sale of said cargo, amounting to P135,766.01, now on deposit in this court, be
applied on said judgment, and that judgment be rendered in favor of the
plaintiff and against the defendant for such sum as may represent the
difference between the said amount and the value of the payment and delivery
unto plaintiff from said deposit, with legal interest and costs of suit.
RTC decided in
favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant and further, that the
plaintiff to recover from the defendant the sum of P60,841.32 for the actual
damages suffered by the plaintiff by the defendant's breach of the charter
party in evidence, with legal interest thereon from the date of the filing of
the complaint in this case until paid. The defendant's cross-complaint is
hereby dismissed with the costs of this case against the defendant. Both
plaintiff and defendant appealed to the Supreme Court as to the damages
imposed.
ISSUE
Whether or not the
master of the Sambia, when he fled from the port of Saigon and took refuge in
the port of Manila, had reasonable grounds to apprehend that his vessel was in
danger of seizure or capture by the public enemies of the flag under which he
sailed.
RULING
Yes, the master of
the Sambia had reasonable grounds to apprehend that his vessel was in danger of
seizure or capture by the public enemies of the flag under which he sailed.
Under the general
provisions of maritime law and the
express provisions of article 7 of the charter party, the act of God, the
king's enemies, arrests and restraints of princes, rulers and people, perils of
the seas, barratry of the master and crew, pirates, collisions, strandings,
loss or damage from fire on board, in hulk or craft, or on shore; and act,
neglect, default or error in judgment whatsoever of pilots, master, crew or
other servant of the shipowners in the navigation of the steamer; and all and
every the dangers and accidents of the seas, canals and rivers, and of
navigation of whatever nature or kind always mutually excepted.
In this case, there
is no question as to the necessity, arising out of the presence of enemy
cruisers on the high seas which compelled the Sambia, once she had left the
port of Saigon, to take refuge in the port of Manila and to stay there
indefinitely pending the outcome of the war. The deviation of the Sambia from the
route prescribed in her charter party, and the subsequent abandonment by the
master of the voyage contemplated in the contract of affreightment, must be
held to have been justified by the necessity under which he was placed to elect
that course which would remove and preserve the vessel from danger of seizure
by the public enemies of the flag under which she sailed; and that neither the
vessel nor her owners are liable for the resultant damages suffered by the
owner of the cargo.
No comments:
Post a Comment