Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Philamgen vs. MCG Marine Services, G.R. No. 135645, 8 March 2002

    Uploaded by

    Maria Lopez
    92 views2 pages
    This case involves a cargo of beer bottles that was insured and loaded onto a vessel named M/V Peatheray Patrick-G to be transported from Mandaue City to Bislig, Surigao del Sur. However, the following day the vessel listed and sank off Cawit Point, Cortes, Surigao del Sur due to strong winds and enormous waves. The insurer paid the owner of the cargo and then filed a case against the vessel owners to recover the amount. The Board of Marine Inquiry investigation found that the sinking was caused by the fortuitous natural event of strong winds and waves that could not have been foreseen. The Court of Appeals and Supreme Court ruled that the vessel owners were

    Original Description:

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This case involves a cargo of beer bottles that was insured and loaded onto a vessel named M/V Peatheray Patrick-G to be transported from Mandaue City to Bislig, Surigao del Sur. However, the following day the vessel listed and sank off Cawit Point, Cortes, Surigao del Sur due to strong winds and enormous waves. The insurer paid the owner of the cargo and then filed a case against the vessel owners to recover the amount. The Board of Marine Inquiry investigation found that the sinking was caused by the fortuitous natural event of strong winds and waves that could not have been foreseen. The Court of Appeals and Supreme Court ruled that the vessel owners were

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    92 views2 pages

    Philamgen vs. MCG Marine Services, G.R. No. 135645, 8 March 2002

    Uploaded by

    Maria Lopez
    This case involves a cargo of beer bottles that was insured and loaded onto a vessel named M/V Peatheray Patrick-G to be transported from Mandaue City to Bislig, Surigao del Sur. However, the following day the vessel listed and sank off Cawit Point, Cortes, Surigao del Sur due to strong winds and enormous waves. The insurer paid the owner of the cargo and then filed a case against the vessel owners to recover the amount. The Board of Marine Inquiry investigation found that the sinking was caused by the fortuitous natural event of strong winds and waves that could not have been foreseen. The Court of Appeals and Supreme Court ruled that the vessel owners were

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    29. Philamgen vs. MCG Marine Services, G.R. No.

    135645, 8 March 2002

    FACTS: On March 1, 1987, San Miguel Corporation insured several beer bottle cases
    with petitioner Philippine American General Insurance Company. The cargo were lo
    aded on board the M/V Peatheray Patrick-G to be transported from Mandaue City to
    Bislig, Surigao del Sur.

    After having been cleared by the Coast Guard Station in Cebu the previous day, the
    vessel left the port of Mandaue City for Bislig, Surigao del Sur on March 2, 1987. The
    weather was calm when the vessel started its voyage.

    The following day, M/V Peatheray Patrick-G listed and subsequently sunk off Cawit
    Point, Cortes, Surigao del Sur. As a consequence thereof, the cargo belonging to San
    Miguel Corporation was lost.

    Petitioner paid San Miguel Corporation the full amount of the cargo pursuant to the t
    erms of their insurance contract, and as subrogee filed with the Regional Trial Court
    (RTC) of Makati City a case for collection against private respondents to recover the a
    mount it paid.

    Meanwhile, the Board of Marine Inquiry conducted its own investigation and found
    that the cause of the sinking of the vessel was the existence of strong winds and enor
    mous waves in Surigao del Sur, a fortuitous event that could not have been for seen a
    t the time the M/V Peatheray Patrick-G left the port of Mandaue City. It was further
    held by the Board that said fortuitous event was the proximate and only cause of the
    vessel's sinking.

    ISSUE: Whether or not respondent MGG should be held liable.- No.

    RULING: No. Common carriers, from the nature of their business and for reasons of
    public policy, are mandated to observe extraordinary diligence in the vigilance over t
    he goods and for the safety of the passengers transported by them. Owing to this hig
    h degree of diligence required of them, common carriers, as a general rule, are presu
    med to have been at fault or negligent if the goods transported by them are lost, destr
    oyed or if the same deteriorated.

    However, this presumption of fault or negligence does not arise in the cases enumera
    ted under Article 1734 of the Civil Code:

    Common carriers are responsible for the loss, destruction, or deterioration of the goo
    ds, unless the same is due to any of the following causes only:(1) Flood, storm, earthq
    uake, lightning or other natural disaster or calamity;(2) Act of the public enemy in w
    ar, whether international or civil;(3) Act or omission of the shipper or owner of the g
    oods;(4) The character of the goods or defects in the packing or in the containers;(5)
    Order or act of competent public authority.

    In order that a common carrier may be absolved from liability where the loss, destruc
    tion or deterioration of the goods is due to a natural disaster or calamity, it must furt
    her be shown that the such natural disaster or calamity was the proximate and only c
    ause of the loss; there must be "an entire exclusion of human agency from the cause o
    f the injury of the loss."Moreover, even in cases where a natural disaster is the proxi
    mate and only cause of the loss, a common carrier is still required to exercise due dili
    gence to prevent or minimize loss before, during and after the occurrence of the natu
    ral disaster, for it to be exempt from liability under the law for the loss of the goods. I
    f a common carrier fails to exercise due diligence--or that ordinary care which the cir
    cumstances of the particular case demand -- to preserve and protect the goods carrie
    d by it on the occasion of a natural disaster, it will be deemed to have been negligent,
    and the loss will not be considered as having been due to a natural disaster under Ar
    ticle 1734 (1).

    In the case at bar, the issues may be narrowed down to whether the loss of the cargo
    was due to the occurrence of a natural disaster, and if so, whether such natural disast
    er was the sole and proximate cause of the loss or whether private respondents were
    partly to blame for failing to exercise due diligence to prevent the loss of the cargo.

    The parties do not dispute that on the day the M/V Peatheray Patrick-G sunk, said v
    essel encountered strong winds and huge waves ranging from six to ten feet in heigh
    t. The vessel listed at the port side and eventually sunk at Cawit Point, Cortes, Suriga
    o del Sur.

    The Court of Appeals, citing the decision of the Board of Marine Inquiry in the admi
    nistrative case against the vessel's crew (BMI--646-87), found that the loss of the carg
    o was due solely to the existence of a fortuitous event, particularly the presence of str
    ong winds and huge waves at Cortes, Surigao del Sur on March 3, 1987.

    You might also like