Case Digest (G.R. No. 185964)
Facts:
The case involves Asian Terminals, Inc. (ATI) as the petitioner and First Lepanto-Taisho Insurance Corporation (FIRST LEPANTO) as the respondent. The events leading to the case began on July 6, 1996, when 3,000 bags of sodium tripolyphosphate were loaded onto the M/V aDa Fenga, owned by China Ocean Shipping Co. (COSCO), for delivery to Grand Asian Sales, Inc. (GASI). The shipment was insured against all risks for P7,959,550.50 under Marine Open Policy No. 0123 with FIRST LEPANTO. Upon arrival in Manila on July 18, 1996, the shipment was discharged into the custody of ATI, which is engaged in the arrastre business.
The shipment remained in ATI's storage until it was withdrawn by Proven Customs Brokerage Corporation (PROVEN) on August 8 and 9, 1996. Upon inspection, GASI discovered shortages totaling 11,915 kg, valued at P166,772.41. GASI sought recompense from COSCO, ATI, and PROVEN but was denied. Consequently, GASI filed a claim with FIRST LEPANTO, which paid GASI the...
Case Digest (G.R. No. 185964)
Facts:
1. Shipment Details and Insurance:
- On July 6, 1996, 3,000 bags of sodium tripolyphosphate in 100 jumbo bags were loaded onto M/V Da Feng, owned by China Ocean Shipping Co. (COSCO), for consignee Grand Asian Sales, Inc. (GASI).
- The shipment was insured by GASI with First Lepanto-Taisho Insurance Corporation (FIRST LEPANTO) under Marine Open Policy No. 0123 for P7,959,550.50.
2. Arrival and Damage:
- The shipment arrived in Manila on July 18, 1996, and was discharged into the custody of Asian Terminals, Inc. (ATI), an arrastre operator.
- The shipment remained in ATI’s custody until it was withdrawn by Proven Customs Brokerage Corporation (PROVEN) on August 8 and 9, 1996.
- Upon inspection, GASI found shortages of 8,600 kg and spillage of 3,315 kg, totaling 11,915 kg of loss/damage valued at P166,772.41.
3. Claims and Subrogation:
- GASI sought reimbursement from COSCO, ATI, and PROVEN but was denied. FIRST LEPANTO paid GASI P165,772.40 as insurance indemnity.
- GASI executed a Release of Claim, subrogating FIRST LEPANTO to its rights against the liable parties.
- FIRST LEPANTO demanded reimbursement from COSCO, ATI, and PROVEN but was unsuccessful, leading to the filing of a complaint for sum of money.
4. Defenses:
- ATI denied liability, claiming it exercised due diligence and that the damage occurred while the shipment was in COSCO’s custody.
- ATI also argued that its liability was limited to P5,000 per package under its contract with the Philippine Ports Authority (PPA).
- PROVEN denied liability, stating the damage occurred while the shipment was in ATI’s custody.
Issue:
- (Unlock)
Ruling:
- (Unlock)
Ratio:
Arrastre Operator’s Duty of Care:
- An arrastre operator, like ATI, is required to exercise the same degree of diligence as a common carrier or warehouseman. It must prove it exercised due care in handling the shipment to avoid liability for loss/damage.
Subrogation:
- Subrogation is a legal principle where an insurer steps into the shoes of the insured after paying a claim. The right of subrogation arises under Article 2207 of the Civil Code and does not require the presentation of the insurance contract when the loss is clearly established.
Prescription:
- The 15-day notice requirement for filing claims is satisfied by substantial compliance, such as filing a provisional claim through a Request for Bad Order Survey. Strict compliance is not required if the arrastre operator is aware of the loss/damage.
Attorney’s Fees and Interest:
- Attorney’s fees may be awarded when a party is compelled to litigate due to the other party’s unjustified refusal to pay a valid claim. Legal interest is imposed to compensate for the delay in payment.