8/13/2019 2008 Transpo Bar Questions and Suggested Answers

1/3

2008

VIII

City Railways, Inc. (CRI) provides train services, for a fee, to commuters from Manila to Calamba, Laguna.

Commuters are required to purchase tickets and then proceed to designated loading ang unloadingfacilities to board the train. Ricardo Santos purchased a ticket for Calamba and entered the station.

While waiting, he had an altercation with the security guard of CRI leading to a fistfight. Ricardo Santos

fell on the railway just as a train was entering the station. Ricardo Santos was run over by the train. He

died. In the action for damages filed by the heirs of Ricardo Santos, CRI interposed lack of cause of

action, contending that the mishap occurred before Ricardo Santos boarded the train and that it was not

guilty of negligence. Decide.(5%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

The contention of CRI is not tenable.

Under the law, the degree of care required of a common carrier is extraordinary diligence or the

obligation to carry the passenger safely as far as human care and foresight can provide, using the utmost

diligence of very cautious persons with due regard to all the consequences. Thus, in case of death or

injury to passengers, the common carrier is presumed negligent and upon him rests the burden of proof

of exercise of extraordinary diligence. The duty to exercise extraordinary diligence attaches from the

moment the person who purchases the ticket from the carrier presents himself at the proper place and

in a proper manner to be transported.

In the given case, there is no doubt that CRI is a common carrier for the reason that it is engaged in the

business of transporting passengers by land, for compensation, offering its services to the public. As

such, it is required to exercise extraordinary diligence and this responsibility attached from the moment

Ricardo Santos purchased the ticket and entered the station. When Ricardo died while he was within the

premises of CRI, the latter is presumed to be at fault. This is true even if Ricardo has not yet boarded the

train, so long as he has presented himself to the carrier at the proper place and in a proper manner.

Hence, CRI, as a common carrier, is liable to the heirs of Ricardo Santos.

IX

On October 30, 2007, M/V Pacific, a Philippine registered vessel owned by Cebu Shipping Company

(CSC), sank on her voyage from Hong Kong to Manila. Empire Assurance Company (Empire) is the insurer

of the lost cargoes loaded on board the vessel which were consigned to Debenhams Company. After it

8/13/2019 2008 Transpo Bar Questions and Suggested Answers

2/3

8/13/2019 2008 Transpo Bar Questions and Suggested Answers

3/3

Hence, the Doctrine of Limited Liability is inapplicable and CSC is liable for the loss.

3. Yes, the heirs of the three (3) crewmembers who perished can recover from CSC. This is because

another exception to the applicability of the Limited Liability Rule is Workmen's Compensation Claims.

However, in this case, the heirs cannot go after CSC directly since their claim based on workmen's

compensation would have be to be filed with the Social Security System (SSS). After paying said claims,

the SSS is subrogated to their rights and is thus entitled to go after CSC. In either case, CSC cannot raise

the defense that its liability is limited to the value of his vessel.