Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Seven Brothers Shipping Corporation vs. Court of Appeals Facts
Seven Brothers Shipping Corporation vs. Court of Appeals Facts
COURT OF APPEALS
FACTS:
Petitioner Seven Brothers Shipping Corporation is the owner of the cargo ship
M/V "Diamond Rabbit," (vessel), while respondent DMC-Construction Resource, Inc. is
the owner of coal-conveyor facility, which was destroyed when the vessel became
uncontrollable and unmanueverable during a storm.
The CA affirmed the RTC's Decision with respect to the finding of negligence on
the part of the vessel's captain. However, the appellate court modified the nature of
damages awarded (from actual to nominal), on the premise that actual damages had
not been proved. Petitioner filed a Motion for Partial Reconsideration. Respondent filed
a Comment on the Motion on 22 June 2010, and the former, a Reply on 29 June 2010.
In a Resolution promulgated on 24 September 2010, the CA denied petitioner's Motion.
Hence, the instant Petition.
ISSUE
Whether or not the CA erred in awarding nominal damages to respondent after
having ruled that the actual damages awarded by the RTC was unfounded.
RULLING:
We rule that temperate, and not nominal, damages should be awarded to
respondent in the amount of P3,523,175.92. Factual findings of appellate and trial
courts are entitled to great weight and respect on appeal, especially when established
by unrebutted testimonial and documentary evidence.
Court has repeatedly held that petitions for review under Rule 45 of the Rules of
Court may be brought only on questions of law, not on questions of fact. Moreover, the
factual findings of trial courts are entitled to great weight and respect on appeal,
especially when established by unrebutted testimonial and documentary evidence. And
the findings of facts of the Court of Appeals are conclusive and binding on the Supreme
Court except when they conflict with the findings of the trial court.
In this case, two facts have been established by the appellate and trial courts:
that respondent suffered a loss caused by petitioner; and that respondent failed to
sufficiently establish the amount due to him, as no actual receipt was presented.
Temperate or moderate damages may be recovered when the court finds that some
pecuniary loss has been suffered but its amount cannot, from the nature of the case, be
provided with certainty.
We are convinced that respondent sustained damages to its conveyor facility due
to petitioner's negligence. Nonetheless, for failure of respondent to establish by
competent evidence the exact amount of damages it suffered, we are constrained to
award temperate damages. Considering that the lower courts have factually established
that the conveyor facility had a remaining life of only five of its estimated total life often
years during the time of the collision, then the replacement cost of P7,046,351.84
should rightly be reduced to 50% or P3,523,175.92. This is a fair and reasonable
valuation, having taking into account the remaining useful life of the facility. Wherefore,
the petition for review on certiorari is hereby dismissed.