Case Digest (G.R. No. 7280)
Facts:
In Japan Airlines, petitioner, vs. Jesus Simangan, respondent, decided on April 22, 2008 under G.R. No. 170141, the Supreme Court reviewed whether an airline’s removal of a passenger from a confirmed flight constituted a breach of the contract of carriage. In 1991, Simangan volunteered to donate a kidney to his cousin in Los Angeles and secured an emergency U.S. visa. He purchased a round-trip ticket from JAL for US$1,485.00 and was duly checked in at Manila’s Ninoy Aquino International Airport on July 29, 1992. After passing immigration and security, he boarded the aircraft, but crew members suspected his parole visa was fraudulent and ordered him off the plane. He waited three hours at the airline office only to learn his documents were valid, received a partial refund, and had his U.S. visa cancelled. Simangan sued JAL in the Regional Trial Court (Valenzuela City) for P3 million moral, P1.5 million exemplary damages, and P500,000 attorney’s fees, alleging breach of contract aCase Digest (G.R. No. 7280)
Facts:
- Background and travel arrangements
- In 1991, respondent Jesus Simangan agreed to donate a kidney to his cousin in UCLA School of Medicine, Los Angeles, U.S.A., and underwent compatibility tests in Quezon City.
- Upon confirmation of compatibility, he secured an emergency U.S. visa and purchased a round-trip ticket from Japan Airlines (JAL) for the July 29, 1992 flight to Los Angeles via Narita, Japan.
- Incident and procedural history
- On July 29, 1992, after check-in and immigration/security clearance, respondent boarded the JAL aircraft. Crew suspected his visa was fraudulent, ordered him to deplane, and left him behind. He was refunded his fare minus US$500; his U.S. visa was later cancelled.
- He sued JAL in the RTC of Valenzuela City for breach of contract of carriage, claiming moral damages (₱3 M), exemplary damages (₱1.5 M), and attorneys’ fees (₱500 K).
- The RTC awarded ₱1 M moral, ₱500 K exemplary damages, and ₱250 K attorneys’ fees. On appeal, the CA affirmed with modification: ₱500 K moral, ₱250 K exemplary damages, and deleted attorneys’ fees. JAL then filed a petition for review before the Supreme Court.
Issues:
- Whether JAL committed breach of contract of carriage justifying moral damages, absent fraud or bad faith.
- Whether exemplary damages may be awarded for breach of contract of carriage when conduct was not wanton, reckless, oppressive, or malevolent.
- Whether the CA’s award of ₱750 K in moral and exemplary damages is excessive.
- Whether the CA erred in denying JAL’s counterclaim for damages arising from respondent’s suit and related publications.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)