Monday, February 5, 2024

Case Digest: Sweet Lines vs. Court of Appeals, 121 SCRA 769, G.R. No. L-46340

 

Sweet Lines vs. Court of Appeals, 121 SCRA 769, G.R. No. L-46340, April 28, 1983

Subject: Transportation Law


FACTS

Private respondents purchased first- class tickets from petitioner at the latter's office in Cebu City. They were to board petitioner's vessel, M/V Sweet Grace, bound for Catbalogan, Western Samar. Instead of departing at the scheduled hour of about midnight on July 8, 1972, the vessel set sail at 3:00 A.M. of July 9, 1972 only to be towed back to Cebu due to engine trouble, arriving there at about 4:00 P.M. on the same day. Repairs having been accomplished, the vessel lifted anchor again on July 10, 1972 at around 8:00 A.M.

Instead of docking at Catbalogan, which was the first port of call, the vessel proceeded direct to Tacloban at around 9:00 P.M. of July 10, 1972. Private respondents had no recourse but to disembark and board a ferryboat to Catbalogan.

Hence, this suit for damages for breach of contract of carriage which the Trial Court, affirmed by respondent Appellate Court. Hence this petition.

ISSUE

Whether or not the owner of the vessel and the ship agent is liable for the acts of the captain for damages for by-passing a court of call without previous notice.

RULING

Yes, the owner of the vessel and the ship agent is liable for the acts of the captain for damages for by-passing a court of call without previous notice.

Article 614 of the Code of Commerce states that a captain who, having agreed to make a voyage, fails to fulfill his undertaking, without being prevented by fortuitous event or force majeure, shall indemnify all the losses which his failure may cause, without prejudice to criminal penalties which may be proper.

In this case, there was no fortuitous event or force majeure which prevented the vessel from fulfilling its undertaking of taking private respondents to Catbalogan. The voyage to Catbalogan was "interrupted" by the captain upon instruction of management. The "interruption" was not due to fortuitous event or for majeure nor to disability of the vessel. Having been caused by the captain upon instruction of management, the passengers' right to indemnity is evident. The owner of a vessel and the ship agent shall be civilly liable for the acts of the captain.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Case Digest: General Santos Coca-Cola Plant Free Workers Union – TUPAS vs Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines., Inc., CA and NLRC, G.R. No. 178647

  General Santos Coca-Cola Plant Free Workers Union – TUPAS vs Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines., Inc., CA and NLRC,  G.R. No. 178647,  Februa...