8.phil.home assurance v. ca

8/9/2019 8.Phil.home Assurance v. CA

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/8philhome-assurance-v-ca 1/7

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. 106999. June 20, 1996]

PHILIPPINE HOME ASSURANCE CORPORATION, petitioner,vs. COURT OF APPEALS n! EASTERN SHIPPING LINES,INC., respondents.

" E C I S I O N

#APUNAN, J .$

Eastern Shipping Lines, Inc. (ESLI) loaded on board SS Eastern Eplorer in !obe,"apan, the #ollo$ing ship%ent #or carriage to &anila and 'eb, #reight prepaid and ingood order and condition, viz * (a) t$o (+) boes internal co%bstion engine parts,consigned to illia% Lines, Inc. nder -ill o# Lading No. /++012 (b) ten (3) %etric tons(11/ bags) a%%oni% chloride, consigned to Orca4s 'o%pan5 nder -ill o# Lading No.!'E3+2 (c) t$o hndred (+) bags 6le 1, consigned to 7an Oriental &atch'o%pan5 nder -ill o# Lading No. !'E02 and (d) gar%ents, consigned to Ding Vela5onder -ills o# Lading Nos. !&891 and !&89/.

hile the :essel $as o## O;ina$a, "apan, a s%all #la%e $as detected on theacet5lene c5linder located in the acco%%odation area near the engine roo% on the%ain dec; le:el. 8s the cre$ $as tr5ing to etingish the #ire, the acet5lene c5linder

sddenl5 eploded sending a #lash o# #la%e throghot the acco%%odation area, thscasing death and se:ere in<ries to the cre$ and instantl5 setting #ire to the $holesperstrctre o# the :essel. The incident #orced the %aster and the cre$ to abandonthe ship.

Therea#ter, SS Eastern Eplorer $as #ond to be a constrcti:e total loss and its:o5age $as declared abandoned.

Se:eral hors later, a tgboat nder the control o# F;da Sal:age 'o. arri:ed near the :essel and co%%enced to to$ the :essel #or the port o# Naha, "apan.

Fire #ighting operations $ere again condcted at the said port. 8#ter the #ire $as

etingished, the cargoes $hich $ere sa:ed $ere loaded to another :essel #or deli:er5to their original ports o# destination. ESLI charged port. 8#ter the #ire $as etingished,the cargoes $hich $ere sa:ed $ere loaded to another :essel #or deli:er5 to their original ports o# destination. ESLI charged the consignees se:eral a%ontscorresponding to additional #reight and sal:age charges, as #ollo$s* (a) #or the goodsco:ered b5 -ill o# Lading No. /++01, ESLI charged the consignee the s% o# 73,=+9.>?, representing sal:age charges assessed against the goods2 (b) #or the goodsco:ered b5 -ill o# Lading No. !'E3+, ESLI charged the consignee the s% o#



7+,=0.>/ #or additional #reight and 70+>.3/ #or sal:age charges against the goods2 (c)#or the goods co:ered b5 -ill o# Lading No. !'E0, ESLI charged the consignee thes% o# 71,+=+.+> #or additional #reight and 7/,31.>0 #or sal:age charges against thegoods2 and (d) #or the goods nder -ills o# Lading Nos. !&891 and !&89/, ESLIcharged the consignee the s% o# 70,119.> #or sal:age charges against the goods.

The charges $ere all paid b5 7hilippine @o%e 8ssrance 'orporation (7@8')nder protest #or and in behal# o# the consignees.

7@8', as sbrogee o# the consignees, therea#ter #iled a co%plaint be#ore theRegional Trial 'ort o# &anila, -ranch 1=, against ESLI to reco:er the s% paid nder protest on the grond that the sa%e $ere actall5 da%ages directl5 broght abot b5the #alt, negligence, illegal act andAor breach o# contract o# ESLI.

In its ans$er, ESLI contended that it eercised the diligence reBired b5 la$ in thehandling, cstod5 and carriage o# the ship%ent2 that the #ire $as cased b5 ann#oreseen e:ent2 that the additional #reight charges are de and de%andable prsantto the -ill o# Lading2 C3 and that sal:age charges are properl5 collectible nder 8ct No.

+>3>, ;no$n as the Sal:age La$.

The trial cort dis%issed 7@8'4s co%plaint and rled in #a:or o# ESLI ratiocinatingths*

The Bestion to be resol:ed is $hether or not the #ire on the :essel $hich $ascased b5 the eplosion o# an acet5lene c5linder loaded on the sa%e $as the #alt or negligence o# the de#endant.

E:idence has been presented that the SS Eastern Eplorer $as a sea$orth5:essel (Deposition o# "%pei &aeda, October +1, 3=0, p. 1) and be#ore the shiploaded the 8cet5lene '5linder No. N' 09?, the sa%e has been tested, chec;ed and

ea%ined and $as certi#ied to ha:e co%plied $ith the reBired sa#et5 %easres andstandards (Deposition o# Sen<ei @a5ashi, October +1, 3=0, pp. +1). hen the #ire $asdetected b5 the cre$, #ire #ighting operations $as i%%ediatel5 condcted bt de to theeplosion o# the acet5lene c5linder, the cre$ $ere nable to contain the #ire and had toabandon the ship to sa:e their li:es and $ere sa:ed #ro% dro$ning b5 passing :esselsin the :icinit5. The brning o# the :essel rendering it a constrcti:e total loss andincapable o# prsing its :o5age to the 7hilippines $as, there#ore, not the #alt or negligence o# de#endant bt a natral disaster or cala%it5 $hich nobod5 $old li;e tohappen. The sal:age operations condcted b5 F;da Sal:age 'o%pan5 (Ehibits /

8 and >8) $as per#ectl5 a legal operation and charges %ade on the goods reco:ered$ere legiti%ate charges.

Act No. 2616, otherwise known as the Salvage Law, is thus applicable to the case at

bar. Section 1 of Act No. 2616 states:

"Section 1. hen in case of shipwreck, the vessel or its cargo shall be be!on the

control of the crew, or shall have been abanone b! the#, an picke up an

conve!e to a safe place b! other persons, the latter shall be entitle to a rewar for

the salvage.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1996/jun1996/106999.htm#_edn1




$hose who, not being inclue in the above paragraph, assist in saving a vessel or its

cargo fro# shipwreck, shall be entitle to like rewar."

%n relation to the above provision, the Supre#e &ourt has rule in 'rlanger (

)alinger v. Sweish 'ast Asiatic &o., Lt., *+ hil. 1-, that three ele#ents are

necessar! to a vali salvage clai#, na#el! /a0 a #arine peril /b0 service voluntaril!renere when not reuire as an eisting ut! or fro# a special contract an /c0

success in whole or in part, or that the service renere contribute to such success.

$he above ele#ents are all present in the instant case. Salvage charges #a! thus be

assesse on the cargoes save fro# the vessel. As provie for in Section 1* of the

Salvage Law, "$he epenses of salvage, as well as the rewar for salvage or

assistance, shall be a charge on the things salvage or their value." %n 3anila 4ailroa

&o. v. 3aconra! &o., *- hil. 5*, it was also hel that "when a ship an its cargo

are save together, the salvage allowance shoul be charge against the ship an cargo

in the proportion of their respective values, the sa#e as in a case of general average . .." $hus, the "co#pensation to be pai b! the owner of the cargo is in proportion to the

value of the vessel an the value of the cargo save." /Atlantic )ulf an acific &o. v.

chia 7isen 7aisha, +2 hil. *210. /3e#oranu# for 8efenant, 4ecors, pp. 2129

21*0.

ith respect to the additional #reight charged b5 de#endant #ro% the consignees o# the goods, the sa%e are also :alidl5 de%andable.

8s pro:ided b5 the 'i:il 'ode*

"Article 11-+. 'cept in cases epressl! specifie b! law, or when it is otherwise

eclare b! stipulation, or when the nature of the obligation reuire the assu#ption or

risk, no person shall be responsible for those events which coul not be foreseen, or

which though foreseen, were inevitable."

"Article 1266. $he ebtor in obligations to o shall also be release when the

prestation beco#es legall! or ph!sicall! i#possible without the fault of the obligor."

The brning o# E8STERN E7LORER $hile o## O;ina$a rendered it ph5sicall5i%possible #or de#endant to co%pl5 $ith its obligation o# deli:ering the goods to their

port o# destination prsant to the contract o# carriage. Gnder 8rticle 3+>> o# the 'i:il'ode, the ph5sical i%possibilit5 o# the prestation etingished de#endant4s obligation.

It is bt legal and eBitable #or the de#endant there#ore, to de%and additional #reight#ro% the consignees #or #or$arding the goods #ro% Naha, "apan to &anila and 'eb'it5 on board another :essel, the E8STERN &8RS. This #inds spport nder 8rticle0// o# the 'ode o# 'o%%erce $hich pro:ides as #ollo$s*



"Article ++. A captain who #a! have taken on boar the goos save fro# the

wreck shall continue his course to the port of estination an on arrival shoul

eposit the sa#e, with ;uicial intervention at the isposal of their legiti#ate owners.

$he owners of the cargo shall efra! all the epenses of this arrival as well as the pa!#ent of the freight which, after taking into consieration the circu#stances of the

case, #a! be fie b! agree#ent or b! a ;uicial ecision."

Frther%ore, the ter%s and conditions o# the -ill o# Lading athoriHe the i%positiono# additional #reight charges in case o# #orced interrption or abandon%ent o# the:o5age. 8t the dorsal portion o# the -ills o# Lading issed to the consignees is thisstiplation*

"12. All storage, transship#ent, forwaring or other isposition of cargo at or fro# a

port of istress or other place where there has been a force interruption orabanon#ent of the vo!age shall be at the epense of the owner, shipper, consignee of

the goos or the holer of this bill of laing who shall be ;ointl! an severall! liable

for all freight charges an epenses of ever! kin whatsoever, whether pa!able in

avance or not that #a! be incurre b! the cargo in aition to the orinar! freight,

whether the service be perfor#e b! the na#e carr!ing vessel or b! carrier<s other

vessels or b! strangers. All such epenses an charges shall be ue an pa!able a!

b! a! i##eiatel! when the! are incurre."

The bill o# lading is a contract and the parties are bond b5 its ter%s (6o:t. o# the

7hilippine Islands vs. nchasti and 'o., / 7hil. +3=). The pro:ision Boted is bindingpon the consignee.

De#endant there#ore, can :alidl5 reBire pa5%ent o# additional #reight #ro% theconsignee. 7lainti## can not ths reco:er the additional #reight paid b5 the consignee tode#endant. (&e%orand% #or De#endant, Record, pp. +3?+3>). C+

On appeal to the 'ort o# 8ppeals, respondent cort a##ir%ed the trial cort4s#indings and conclsions,C1 hence, the present petition #or re:ie$ be#ore this 'ort onthe #ollo$ing errors*

%. $=' 4'S>N8'N$ &>4$ '44>N'>SL? A8>$'8 %$= A4>@AL

$=' $4%AL &>4$<S %N8%N)S $=A$ $=' B4N%N) > $=' SS "'AS$'4N'CL>4'4," 4'N8'4%N) %$ A &>NS$4&$%@' $>$AL L>SS, %S A

NA$4AL 8%SAS$'4 >4 &ALA3%$? =%&= N>B>8? >L8 L%7' $>

=A'N, 8'S%$' 'C%S$%N) D4%S48'N&' $> $=' &>N$4A4?.







%%. $=' 4'S>N8'N$ &>4$ A4B%$4A4%L? 4L'8 $=A$ $=' B4N%N)

> $=' SS "'AS$'4N 'CL>4'4" AS N>$ $=' AL$ AN8

N')L%)'N&' > 4'S>N8'N$ 'AS$'4N S=%%N) L%N'S.

%%%. $=' 4'S>N8'N$ &>4$ &>33%$$'8 )4A@' ABS' >

8%S&4'$%>N %N 4L%N) $=A$ 8''N8AN$ =A8 'C'4&%S'8 $=''C$4A>48%NA4? 8%L%)'N&' %N $=' @%)%LAN&' >@'4 $=' )>>8S AS

4'E%4'8 B? LA.

%@. $=' 4'S>N8'N$ &>4$ A4B%$4A4%L? 4L'8 $=A$ $=' 3A4%N'

N>$' > 4>$'S$ AN8 S$A$'3'N$ > A&$S %SS'8 B? $=' @'SS'L<S

3AS$'4 A4' N>$ ='A4SA? 8'S%$' $=' A&$ $=A$ $=' @'SS'L<S

3AS$'4, &A$. L%&A?L%&A? AS N>$ 4'S'N$'8 %N &>4$, %$=>$

'CLANA$%>N =A$S>'@'4 >4 =%S N>N94'S'N$A$%>N, $=S,

'$%$%>N'4 AS 8'4%@'8 > %$S 4%)=$ $> &4>SS9'CA3%N' $='

A$=>4 $='4'>.

@. $=' 4'S>N8'N$ &>4$ '44>N'>SL? A8>$'8 %$= A4>@AL

$=' $4%AL &>4$<S &>N&LS%>N $=A$ $=' 'C'NS'S >4 A@'4A)'S

%N&44'8 %N SA@%N) $=' &A4)> &>NS$%$$' )'N'4AL A@'4A)'.

@%. $=' 4'S>N8'N$ &>4$ '44>N'>SL? A8>$'8 $=' $4%AL

&>4$<S 4L%N) $=A$ '$%$%>N'4 AS L%ABL' $> 4'S>N8'N$

&A44%'4 >4 A88%$%>NAL 4'%)=$ AN8 SAL@A)' &=A4)'S. F+G

It is Bite e:ident that the #oregoing assign%ent o# errors challenges the #indings o# #act and the appreciation o# e:idence %ade b5 the trial cort and later a##ir%ed b5respondent cort. hile it is a $ellsettled rle that onl5 Bestions o# la$ %a5 be raisedin a petition #or re:ie$ nder Rle /? o# the Rles o# 'ort, it is eBall5 $ellsettled thatthe sa%e ad%its o# the #ollo$ing eceptions, na%el5* (a) $hen the conclsion is a#inding gronded entirel5 on speclation, sr%ises or con<ectres2 (b) $hen thein#erence %ade is %ani#estl5 %ista;en, absrd or i%possible2 (c) $here there is a gra:eabse o# discretion2 (d) $hen the <dg%ent is based on a %isapprehension o# #acts2 (e)$hen the #indings o# #act are con#licting2 (#) $hen the 'ort o# 8ppeals, in %a;ing its#indings, $ent be5ond the isses o# the case and the sa%e is contrar5 to the ad%issionso# both appellant and appellee2 (g) $hen the #indings o# the 'ort o# 8ppeals are

contrar5 to those o# the trial cort2 (h) $hen the #indings o# #act are conclsions $ithotcitation o# speci#ic e:idence on $hich the5 are based2 (i) $hen the #acts set #orth in thepetition as $ell as in the petitioners4 %ain and repl5 brie#s are nor dispted b5 therespondents2 and (<) $hen the #inding o# #act o# the 'ort o# 8ppeals is pre%ised on thespposed absence o# e:idence and is contradicted b5 the e:idence on record. C? Ths, i# there is a sho$ing, as in the instant case, that the #indings co%plained o# are totall5de:oid o# spport in the records, or that the5 are so glaringl5 erroneos as to constitte







gra:e abse o# discretion, the sa%e %a5 be properl5 re:ie$ed and e:alated b5 this'ort.

It is $orth5 to note at the otset that the goods sb<ect o# the present contro:ers5$ere neither lost nor da%aged in transit b5 the #ire that raHed the carrier. In #act, thesaid goods $ere all deli:ered to the consignees, e:en i# the transship%ent too; longer

than necessar5. hat is at isse there#ore is not $hether or not the carrier is liable #or the loss, da%age, or deterioration o# the goods transported b5 the% bt $ho, a%ong thecarrier, consignee or insrer o# the goods, is liable #or the additional charges or epenses incrred b5 the o$ner o# the ship in the sal:age operations and in thetransship%ent o# the goods via a di##erent carrier.

In absol:ing respondent carrier o# an5 liabilit5, respondent 'ort o# 8ppealssstained the trial cort4s #inding that the #ire that gtted the ship $as a natral disaster or cala%it5. 7etitioner ta;es eception to this conclsion and $e agree.

In or <risprdence, #ire %a5 not be considered a natral disaster or cala%it5 sinceit al%ost al$a5s arises #ro% so%e act o# %an or b5 h%an %eans. It cannot be an act

o# 6od nless cased b5 lightning or a natral disaster or casalt5 not attribtable toh%an agenc5.C>

In the case at bar, it is not dispted that a s%all #la%e $as detected on theacet5lene c5linder and that b5 reason thereo#, the sa%e eploded despite e##orts toetingish the #ire. Neither is there an5 dobt that the acet5lene c5linder, ob:iosl5 #ll5loaded, $as stored in the acco%%odation area near the engine roo% and not in astorage area considerabl5 #ar, and in a sa#e distance, #ro% the engine roo%. &oreo:er,there $as no sho$ing, and none $as alleged b5 the parties, that the #ire $as cased b5a natral disaster or cala%it5 not attribtable to h%an agenc5. On the contrar5, thereis strong e:idence indicating that the acet5lene c5linder caght #ire becase o# the #alt

and negligence o# respondent ESLI, its captain and its cre$.First, the acet5lene c5linder $hich $as #ll5 loaded shold not ha:e been stored in

the acco%%odation area near the engine roo% $here the heat generated there#ro%cold case the acet5lene c5linder to eplode b5 reason o# spontaneosco%bstion. Respondent ESLI shold ha:e easil5 #oreseen that the acet5lene c5linder,containing highl5 in#la%%able %aterial, $as in a real danger o# eploding becase it$as stored in close proi%it5 to the engine roo%.

Second, respondent ESLI shold ha:e ;no$n that b5 storing the acet5lene c5linder in the acco%%odation area spposed to be reser:ed #or passengers, it nnecessaril5eposed its passengers to gra:e danger and in<r5. 'rios passengers, ignorant o#

the danger the tan; %ight ha:e on h%ans and propert5, cold ha:e handled the sa%eor cold ha:e lighted and s%o;e cigarettes $hile repairing in the acco%%odation area.

Third, the #act that the acet5lene c5linder $as chec;ed, tested and ea%ined andsbseBentl5 certi#ied as ha:ing co%plied $ith the sa#et5 %easres and standards b5Bali#ied epertsC9be#ore it $as loaded in the :essel onl5 sho$s to a great etent thatnegligence $as present in the handling o# the acet5lene c5linder a#ter it $as loaded and$hile it $as on board the ship. Indeed, had the respondent and its agents not been







negligent in storing the acet5lene c5linder near the engine roo%, then that sa%e $oldnot ha:e lea;ed and eploded dring the :o5age.

Veril5, there is no %erit in the #inding o# the trial cort to $hich respondent corterroneosl5 agreed that the #ire $as not #alt or negligence o# respondent bt a natraldisaster or cala%it5. The records are si%pl5 $anting in this regard.

8nent petitioner4s ob<ection to the ad%issibilit5 o# Ehibits / and ?, the State%ento# Facts and the &arine Note o# 7rotest issed b5 'aptain Tibrcio 8. Lica5lica5, $e #indthe sa%e i%pressed $ith %erit becase said doc%ents are hearsa5 e:idence. 'apt.Lica5lica5, &aster o# S.S. Eastern Eplorer $ho issed the said doc%ents, $as notpresented in cort to testi#5 to the trth o# the #acts he stated therein2 instead,respondent ESLI presented "npei &aeda, its -ranch &anager in To;5o ando;oha%a, "apan, $ho e:identl5 had no personal ;no$ledge o# the #acts stated in thedoc%ents at isse. It is clear #ro% Section 1>, Rle 31 o# the Rles o# 'ort that an5e:idence, $hether oral or doc%entar5, is hearsa5 i# its probati:e :ale is not based onthe personal ;no$ledge o# the $itness bt on the ;no$ledge o# so%e other person not

on the $itness stand. 'onseBentl5, hearsa5 e:idence, $hether ob<ected to or not, hasno probati:e :ale nless the proponent can sho$ that the e:idence #alls $ithin theeceptions to the hearsa5 e:idence rle. C0 It is eclded becase the part5 against$ho% it is presented is depri:ed o# his right and opportnit5 to crossea%ine thepersons to $ho% the state%ents or $ritings are attribted.

On the isse o# $hether or not respondent cort co%%itted an error in concldingthat the epenses incrred in sa:ing the cargo are considered general a:erage, $e rlein the a##ir%ati:e. 8s a rle, general or gross a:erages inclde all da%ages andepenses $hich are deliberatel5 cased in order to sa:e the :essel, its cargo, or both atthe sa%e ti%e, #ro% a real and ;no$n ris;. C=hile the instant case %a5 technicall5 #all$ithin the pr:ie$ o# the said pro:ision, the #or%alities prescribed nder 8rticle

031C3 and 03/C33 o# the 'ode o# 'o%%erce in order to incr the epenses and case theda%age corresponding to gross a:erage $ere not co%plied $ith. 'onseBentl5,respondent ESLI4s clai% #or contribtion #ro% the consignees o# the cargo at the ti%e o# the occrrence o# the a:erage trns to naght.

7rescinding #ro% the #oregoing pre%ises, it indbitabl5 #ollo$s that the cargoconsignees cannot be %ade liable to respondent carrier #or additional #reight andsal:age charges. 'onseBentl5, respondent carrier %st re#nd to herein petitioner thea%ont it paid nder protest #or additional #reight and sal:age charges in behal# o# theconsignee.

%HEREFORE, the <dg%ent appealed #ro% is hereb5 REVERSED and SET

8SIDE. Respondent Eastern Shipping Lines, Inc. is ORDERED to retrn to petitioner 7hilippine @o%e 8ssrance 'orporation the a%ont it paid nder protest in behal# o# theconsignees herein.

SO OR"ERE".

(no Available Digest)









8.phil.home assurance v. ca

Documents