Case Digest: United Airlines vs. Uy, G.R. No. 127768

 

United Airlines vs. Uy, G.R. No. 127768, November 19, 1999

Subject: Transportation Law

FACTS

In October 13, 1989, Willie J. Uy, a revenue passenger on United Airlines Flight No. 819 from San Francisco to Manila, faced humiliation from United Airlines employees over an overweight luggage issue. Despite complying with repacking, issues arose when the airline refused to honor his miscellaneous charge order (MCO) for overweight charges. Upon arrival in Manila, Uy discovered one of his bags had been slashed and its contents stolen, totaling around US $5,310.00. He notified United Airlines of his losses and sought reimbursement, but the airline offered payment based on the maximum liability of US $9.70 per pound. Uy made additional demands for an out-of-court settlement, which the airline rejected.

Legal proceedings ensued as on June 9, 1992, Uy filed a complaint against United Airlines, alleging ill treatment, humiliation, and property loss. United Airlines moved to dismiss, invoking Art. 29 of the Warsaw Convention, citing a two-year limitation for filing damages from the date of arrival. Uy argued for reconciliation with local laws determining the period of limitation. The trial court granted United Airlines' motion, asserting the action must be brought within two years from arrival, excluding local interruption rules. Despite Uy's motion for reconsideration, the trial court denied it. Subsequently, Uy filed a notice of appeal two days after receiving the denial order. United Airlines moved for dismissal, asserting the notice of appeal was filed out of time.

The Court of Appeals, citing relevant jurisprudence allowing the review of orders despite procedural lapses, accepted the appeal. The Court of Appeals ruled that the Warsaw Convention did not override the Civil Code and other laws, asserting Uy's cause of action had not prescribed. Dissatisfied, United Airlines filed a petition for review on certiorari, challenging the timeliness of the notice of appeal and contesting the applicability of the Warsaw Convention.

ISSUE

1. Whether the notice of appeal was timely filed.

2. Whether Art. 29 of the Warsaw Convention should apply to the case.

RULING

1. The Court, considering the unique and peculiar facts of the case and the serious question of law it poses, inclined to give due course to the appeal despite the two-day delay in filing the notice of appeal.

2. The Court affirmed the ruling of the Court of Appeals that the Warsaw Convention did not preclude the operation of the Civil Code and other laws. While respondent's second cause of action was time-barred under the Warsaw Convention, the delaying tactics employed by United Airlines justified the filing of the action beyond the prescribed period. Therefore, respondent's second cause of action could proceed.