TRANSPORTATION

 LAW  DIGESTS  (2014  –  2015)                          ATTY.  NORIANNE  TAN  

 
G.R.  No.  157009             March  17,  2010   entitles  the  descendants,  ascendants,  illegitimate  children,  and  surviving  
  spouse   of   the   deceased   passenger   to   demand   moral   damages   for  
SULPICIO   LINES,   INC.   v.   DOMINGO   E.   CURSO,   LUCIA   E.   CURSO,   mental  anguish  by  reason  of  the  death  of  the  deceased.  NOTE:  There  is  
MELECIO   E.   CURSO,   SEGUNDO   E.   CURSO,   VIRGILIO   E.   CURSO,   no  mention  of  brothers  and  sisters  here!  
DIOSDADA  E.  CURSO,  and  CECILIA  E.  CURSO    
  BACKGROUND:  
PETITIONERS:  Sulpicio  Lines  (operator  of  inter-­‐island  sea  carriers)   • October   23,   1988   à   Dr.   Curso   boarded   MVDoña   Marilyn,   an  
  inter-­‐island   vessel   owned   and   operated   by   petitioner   Sulpicio  
RESPONDENTS:   (the   respondents   named   herein   are   allegedly   the   Lines,  Inc.,  bound  for  Tacloban.    
brothers   and   sisters   of   a   deceased   victim   of   the   sinking   of   a   ship   of   • October  24,  1988  (afternoon)  à  the  ship  sank  while  at  sea  and  
Sulpicio)   many   bodies   of   its   ill-­‐fated   passengers   (including   Dr.   Curso)  
  were  never  found.  
CASE:  Dr.  Curso  was  among  those  who  died  when  MVDoña  Marilyn  sank   o Dr.  Curso  was  48  years  old,  and  employed  as  a  resident  
while   traversing   the   seas   to   Tacloban.   His   brothers   and   sisters   filed   a   physician  at  the  Naval  District  Hospital  in  Naval,  Biliran.  
case  for  damages  based  on  breach  of  contract  by  carriage  of  sea  against   He  had  a  basic  monthly  salary  of  P3,940.00,  and  would  
Sulpicio   Lines   on   the   ground   that   its   negligence   was   the   cause   of   Dr.   have  retired  from  government  service  by  December  20,  
Curso’s   death.   The   respondents   here   claim   that   they   were   they   only   2004  at  the  age  of  65.  
living   heirs   of   Dr.   Curso,   and   as   such   entitled   to   recover   damages.   The   • January  21,  1993   à  Respondents  sued  the  petitioner  in  the  RTC  
Trial  Court  initially  absolved  Sulpicio  Lines,  but  this  was  reversed  by  the   in  Naval,  Biliran  to  claim  damages  based  on  breach  of  contract  
Court   of   Appeals   who   then   awarded   in   favor   of   the   respondents   the   of   carriage   by   sea,   averring   that   the   petitioner   had   acted  
following:  death  indemnity,  loss  of  earning  capacity,  moral  damages  and   negligently  in  transporting  Dr.  Curso  and  the  other  passengers.    
costs  of  suit.  Sulpicio  Lines  then  came  to  the  Supreme  Court  questioning   o They  claim  that  since  Dr.  Curso  died  single  and  with  out  
ONLY   the   capacity   of   respondents   to   receive   moral   damages   (so   the   issue,   they   were   his   surviving   heirs   and   successors   in  
other  awards  were  no  longer  questioned).   interest   who   are   entitled   to   recover   moral   and   other  
  damages   (their   claims   are:   compensatory,   exemplary,  
The   Supreme   Court   ruled   that   the   respondents,   being   only   brothers   and   expenses  of  litigation,  costs  of  suit).  
sisters,   are   not   entitled   to   receive   moral   damages   in   accordance   with   • The   petitioner   denied   liability,   insisting   that   the   sinking   of   the  
Article   2206   of   the   Civil   Code.   Also,   to   be   entitled   to   moral   damages,   vessel  was  due   to   force   majeure   (i.e.,  Typhoon  Unsang),   which  
one  must  have  a  right  founded  in  law.  In  this  case,  the  respondents  have   exempted   a   common   carrier   from   liability.   It   averred   that   the  
no  right  under  Article  2219  either.   MV   Doña   Marilyn   was   seaworthy   in   all   respects,   and   was   in   fact  
  cleared  by  the  Philippine  Coast  Guard  for  the  voyage;  and  that  
DOCTRINE:  Moral  damages  may  be  recovered  in  an  action  upon  breach   after   the   accident   it   conducted   intensive   search   and   rescue  
of   contract   of   carriage   only   when:   (a)   where   death   of   a   passenger   operations   and   extended   assistance   and   aid   to   the   victims   and  
results,   or   (b)   it   is   proved   that   the   carrier   was   guilty   of   fraud   and   bad   their  families.  
faith,   even   if   death   does   not   result.   Article   2206   of   the   Civil   Code  

 
RACHELLE  ANNE  D.  GUTIERREZ  
TRANSPORTATION  LAW  DIGESTS  (2014  –  2015)                          ATTY.  NORIANNE  TAN  
 
• July   28,   1995   à   the   Regional   Trial   Court   dismissed   the   legislative   intent   to   exclude   them   from   the   recovery   of   moral  
complaint  finding  that  the  vessel  sank  due  to  force  majeure,  and   damages   for   mental   anguish   by   reason   of   the   death   of   the  
that  the  ship  was  seaworthy.   deceased.  
• September   16,   2002   à   The   Court   of   Appeals   reversed   the   • Receiver   for   North   Negros   Sugar   Company,   Inc.   v.   Ybañez   à   in  
decision   stating   that   there   was   inadequate   proof   to   show   that   case   of   death   caused   by   quasi-­‐delict,   the   brother   of   the  
Sulpicio   Lines,   Inc.,   or   its   officers   and   crew,   had   exercised   the   deceased   was   not   entitled   to   the   award   of   moral   damages  
required   degree   of   diligence   to   acquit   the   appellee   of   liability.   It   based  on  Article  2206  of  the  Civil  Code.  
claims  that  the  mishap  would  not  have  occurred  if  the  crew  had    
been   monitoring   the   weather   reports.   As   such,   Sulpicio   Lines   MAJOR   POINT   2:   To   be   entitled   to   moral   damages,   the   respondents  
Inc.   was   ordered   to   pay   death   indemnity,   loss   of   earning   must  have  a  right  based  upon  law.    
capacity,  moral  damages  and  costs  of  suit.   • It   is   true   that   under   Article   1003   of   the   Civil   Code   they  
  succeeded   to   the   entire   estate   of   the   late   Dr.   Curso   in   the  
ISSUES  TO  BE  RESOLVED:   absence   of   the   latter’s   descendants,   ascendants,   illegitimate  
1. Whether  or  not  the  surviving  brothers  and  sisters  of  a  passenger   children,   and   surviving   spouse.   However,   they   were   not  
of   a   vessel   that   sinks   during   a   voyage   is   entitled   to   recover   included  among  the  persons  entitled  to  recover  moral  damages,  
moral  damages  from  the  vessel  owner  as  common  carrier.   as  enumerated  in  Article  2219  of  the  Civil  Code.  
  • Article   2219   circumscribes   the   instances   in   which   moral  
RESOLUTIONS  AND  ARGUMENTS:   damages   may   be   awarded.   The   provision   does   not   include  
ISSUE   1   à   Whether   or   not   the   surviving   brothers   and   sisters   of   a   succession   in   the   collateral   line   as   a   source   of   the   right   to  
passenger  of  a  vessel  that  sinks  during  a  voyage  is  entitled  to  recover   recover  moral  damages.  
moral   damages   from   the   vessel   owner   as   common   carrier.   à   NO.    
They  are  not  included  in  the  law.   OTHER  DOCTRINES:  
  Conditions  for  awarding  moral  damages  are:    
MAJOR  POINT  1:  As  a  general  rule,  moral  damages  are  not  recoverable   (a) There   must   be   an   injury,   whether   physical,   mental,   or  
in   actions   for   damages   predicated   on   a   breach   of   contract,   unless   psychological,  clearly  substantiated  by  the  claimant;    
there   is   fraud   or   bad   faith.   As   an   exception,   moral   damages   may   be   (b) There  must  be  a  culpable  act  or  omission  factually  established;    
awarded   in   case   of   breach   of   contract   of   carriage   that   results   in   the   (c) The   wrongful   act   or   omission   of   the   defendant   must   be   the  
death   of   a   passenger,   in   accordance   with   Article   1764,   in   relation   to   proximate  cause  of  the  injury  sustained  by  the  claimant;  and    
Article   2206   (3),   of   the   Civil   Code,   which   states:   “The   spouse,   (d) The   award   of   damages   is   predicated   on   any   of   the   cases   stated  
legitimate   and   illegitimate   descendants   and   ascendants   of   the   in  Article  2219  of  the  Civil  Code.  
deceased   may   demand   moral   damages   for   mental   anguish   by   reason    
of  the  death  of  the  deceased.”   FINAL  VERDICT:  The  award  of  moral  damages  is  deleted  and  set  aside.  
• The  foregoing  legal  provisions  set  forth  the  persons  entitled  to    
moral   damages.   The   omission   from   Article   2206   (3)   of   the   NO  SEPARATE  OPINIONS  
brothers   and   sisters   of   the   deceased   passenger   reveals   the    
 
RACHELLE  ANNE  D.  GUTIERREZ