Yu Con vs. Ipil, 41 Phil 770,
G.R. No. 10195, December 29, 1916
Subject: Transportation Law
FACTS
Yu Con, a merchant from San Nicolas, Cebu, had
chartered a banca named Maria from Narciso Lauron for the transportation of
merchandise and money. On 17 October 1911, Yu Con delivered P450 to Ipil and
Solamo, master and supercargo of the banca, for delivery to Ipil and Solamo's
shop in Catmon. However, the money disappeared on 18 October, and no
investigation was conducted.
Yu Con sued to recover the lost sum, claiming it was
due to the defendants' negligence or abandonment of their duty. The court
concluded that Lauron was responsible for the negligence, and Yu Con was
entitled to recover the lost amount. Judgment was rendered on 20 April 1914,
favoring Yu Con and Ipil, et. al., for P450, with interest at 6% per annum from
the complaint's filing.
ISSUE
Whether or not the banca may be considered as a vessel and whether or not Glicerio Ipil, as a master, may be considered as the captain in the determination of liability.
RULING
YES. The text discusses the legal relationship between
Yu Con and defendant Narciso Lauron, who owned a banca called Maria. The term
"vessel" refers to any kind of craft, regardless of its technical
name or future nautical advancements. In maritime commerce, "captain"
and "master" have the same meaning, both being chiefs or commanders
of ships. In the Philippines, the Code of Commerce compares masters with
captains, with masters governing vessels that navigate high seas or ships of
large dimensions and importance, and masters commanding smaller ships engaged
exclusively in coastwise trade. The agent is civilly liable for indemnities in
favor of third persons arising from the conduct of the captain in the care of
the goods the vessel carried. In this case, defendant Narciso Lauron should be
held civilly liable to the plaintiff for the loss, theft, or robbery of the
P450 belonging to the plaintiff and delivered to the master and supercargo.
No comments:
Post a Comment