Case Digest: Erlanger vs. Swedish East, 34 SCRA 178, G.R. No. 10051

 

Erlanger vs. Swedish East, 34 SCRA 178, G.R. No. 10051, March 09, 1916

Subject: Transportation Law

FACTS

S.S. Nippon was bound for Manila to Singapore, loaded mainly with copra and with some other general merchandise. The ship struck the Scarborough Reef, and it was filled with water. Immediately the chief officer wired the Director of Navigation at Manila for assistance for rescue. Shortly thereafter, the captain and crew left the Nippon and went on board of SS. Marchuria and headed for Hong Kong.

Plaintiff Erlanger and Galinger applied to the Director of Navigation for a charter of a coast guard cutter. Through the said cutter, the Nippon was floated and towed to Olangapo, where temporary repairs were made, and then brought to Manila.

The trial court found that the plaintiffs were “entitled to recover one-half of the net proceeds from the property salved and sold, and one-half the value of the property delivered to the claimants.

ISSUES

1)      Whether or not the ship abandoned

2)      Whether or not the salvage conducted with skill, diligence, and efficiency

3)      Whether or not the award is justified

RULING

The relief of property from an impending peril of the sea, by the voluntary exertions of those who are under no legal obligation to render assistance, and the consequent ultimate safety of the property, constitute a case of salvage.

Three elements necessary for a valid salvage claim: (1) A marine peril. (2) Service voluntarily rendered when not required as an existing duty or from a special contract. (3) Success, in whole or in part, or that the service rendered contributed to such success.

(1) The evidence proves that the Nippon was in peril; that the captain left in order to protect his life and the lives of the crew; that the animo revertendi was slight.

When a man finds property thus temporarily left to the mercy of the elements, whether from necessity or any other cause, though not finally abandoned and legally derelict, and he takes possession of it with the bona fide intention of saving it for the owner, he will not be treated as a trespasser. On the contrary, if by his exertions he contributed materially to the preservation of the property, he will entitle himself to a remuneration according to the merits of his service as a salvor.

(2) The plaintiffs were diligent in commencing the work and were careful and efficient in its pursuit and conclusion. While the plaintiff entered upon the salvage proceedings without proper means and not being adapted by their business to conduct their work, and while it may appear that possibly the salvage might have been conducted in a better manner and have accomplished somewhat better results in the saving of the copra cargo, yet it appears that they quickly remedied their lack of means and corrected the conduct of the work so that it accomplished fairly good results.

(3) The award granted to the plaintiff must be reduced. Compensation as salvage is a reward given for perilous services, voluntarily rendered, and as an inducement to mariners to embark in such dangerous enterprises to save life and property. One of the grounds for liberality in salvage awards is the risk assumed by the salvor, that he can have no recompense for service or expense unless he is successful in the rescue of property, and that his reward must be withing the measure of his success. In other words, he can only have a portion, in any event; and the fact that his exertions were meritorious and that their actual value, or the expense actually incurred, exceeded the amount produced by the service, cannot operate to absorb the entire proceeds against the established rules of salvage.