Title
N.T. Hashim and Co. vs. Rocha and Co.
Case
G.R. No. L-6195
Decision Date
Jan 17, 1911
Defendant's gross negligence caused potato spoilage; plaintiff awarded damages after proving improper storage and handling led to loss.

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-6195)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Parties Involved
    • Plaintiff and Appellant: N. T. HASHIM & CO.
    • Defendant and Appellee: ROCHA & CO.
  • The Cargo and Its Handling
    • The dispute arose over a shipment of potatoes.
    • The cargo was discharged from a vessel into a lorcha (a small boat) and into several cascos (larger vessels).
    • All potatoes discharged into the cascos were reported to be in good condition at the time of discharge, establishing a baseline for the cargo's quality.
  • Conditions of the Lorcha
    • The potatoes loaded into the lorcha were kept tightly closed and without ventilation.
    • The lorcha was left in the hot sun for two days.
    • As a result of these conditions, the potatoes within the lorcha suffered significant deterioration—they became rotted and were rendered worthless.
  • Evidence and Witness Testimonies
    • Multiple witnesses, including:
      • The captain of the ship,
      • The first officer, and
      • The customs inspector present during the discharge,
unanimously testified that the potatoes were in good condition when first discharged from the vessel.
  • Additional evidence was provided by:
    • Circumstantial details regarding the usual condition of potatoes when discharged into the cascos.
  • Conflicting Testimony:
    • The sole dissenting testimony came from Villanueva, an employee of the plaintiff who later testified that the potatoes were already badly rotted at the time of discharge.
    • However, Villanueva’s earlier written report to his employer indicated that only 54 out of 1,085 crates were in bad condition—a loss percentage (about 5%) typical for that time of year in potato transportation.
  • The Negligence and Its Impact
    • The evidence established that the negligence was not in the condition of the potatoes when discharged from the ship but in the subsequent handling:
      • The wrongful acts and gross carelessness of the defendant’s employees in leaving the lorcha tightly closed and unventilated in the heat caused the loss.
    • The deterioration in the quality of the potatoes was not a result of inherent defects in the shipment but was due entirely to poor post-discharge handling practices.
    • The typical loss during transportation (5%) was considered, and the loss attributed to negligence was calculated after deducting this general loss.
  • Valuation of the Damaged Cargo
    • The value of the potatoes, as proven at trial, was P3.75 per crate.
    • The total assessed damage amounted to P4,068.75.
    • After deducting the standard 5% loss applicable to the whole cargo, the balance determined was P3,865.31 in damages.

Issues:

  • Issue of Causation
    • Whether the potatoes discharged into the lorcha were in good condition at the time of discharge.
    • Whether the subsequent deterioration was a result of the negligent handling by the defendant’s employees.
  • Issue of Evidence
    • Whether the preponderance of evidence supported the claim of gross carelessness in the handling of the potatoes.
    • Evaluation of conflicting accounts, particularly the discrepancy between Villanueva’s oral testimony and his written report.
  • Issue of Liability and Damages
    • Whether the defendant should be held liable for the monetary loss incurred due to the rotted potatoes.
    • Whether the deduction of the normal 5% loss from the total damage was appropriate under the circumstances.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)
Unlock Full Case Digest

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.

About Privacy Terms