Title
Asian Terminals, Inc. vs. Daehan Fire and Marine Insurance Co., Ltd.
Case
G.R. No. 171194
Decision Date
Feb 4, 2010
ATI and customs broker held liable for loss of 14 boxes of printed aluminum sheets during custody; liability not limited to P5,000 per package.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 171194)

Facts:

Shipment and Insurance

  • On July 8, 2000, Doosan Corporation shipped 26 boxes of printed aluminum sheets on board the vessel Heung-A Dragon, owned by Dongnama Shipping Co., Ltd. The shipment was consigned to Access International in Manila and insured by respondent Daehan Fire and Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. under an "all-risk" marine cargo insurance policy.

Arrival and Storage

  • The vessel arrived in Manila on July 12, 2000. The container van was discharged and unloaded in apparent good condition, with no exceptions noted in the Equipment Interchange Receipt (EIR) issued by petitioner Asian Terminals, Inc. (ATI). The container van was stored in ATI's Container Yard.

Request for Joint Survey

  • On July 18, 2000, Access International requested a joint survey of the shipment while it was still in ATI's custody. However, no inspection was conducted.

Delivery and Discovery of Loss

  • On July 19, 2000, the shipment was withdrawn by customs broker Victoria Reyes Lazo and delivered to Access International's warehouse. Upon inspection, it was discovered that 14 out of 26 boxes were missing.

Claims and Subrogation

  • Access International filed a claim against ATI and V. Reyes Lazo for the missing shipment. After failing to collect, Access International sought indemnification from Daehan, which paid the claim and was subrogated to Access International's rights.

Legal Proceedings

  • Daehan, through its settling agent Smith Bell, filed a complaint against Dongnama, Uni-ship, ATI, and V. Reyes Lazo. Dongnama and Uni-ship were later dismissed from the case. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) dismissed the complaint against ATI and V. Reyes Lazo, but the Court of Appeals (CA) reversed the decision, holding both liable for the loss.

Issue:

  1. Whether ATI is liable for the loss of the shipment despite the consignee's broker acknowledging receipt of the goods in good order.
  2. The extent of ATI's liability, if any.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Conclusion:

The Supreme Court affirmed the CA's decision, holding ATI and V. Reyes Lazo jointly and severally liable for the loss of 14 boxes of printed aluminum sheets. ATI's liability was not limited to P5,000.00 per package, as the value of the shipment was properly communicated.


Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.