Case Digest (G.R. No. 145044)
Facts:
Philippine Charter Insurance Corporation v. Neptune Orient Lines/Overseas Agency Services, Inc., G.R. No. 145044, June 12, 2008, First Division, Azcuna, J., writing for the Court. The petition is a Rule 45 petition for review on certiorari of the Court of Appeals’ Resolution in CA-G.R. CV No. 52855 dated April 13, 2000.Petitioner Philippine Charter Insurance Corporation (PCIC) insured a shipment of three sets of warp yarn shipped by L.T. Garments Manufacturing Corp. Ltd. from Hong Kong to Fukuyama Manufacturing Corporation destined for Metro Manila under Bill of Lading No. HKG-0396180. The shipment was containerized in Container No. IEAU-4592750 and insured for P228,085 under Marine Cargo Policy No. RN55581. During the voyage aboard respondent carrier Neptune Orient Lines’ vessel M/V Baltimar Orion, the container fell overboard and was lost. Fukuyama made a claim against the local agent, Overseas Agency Services, Inc. (Overseas Agency), but when the claim was not satisfied PCIC, as insurer, paid Fukuyama and received a Subrogation Receipt dated February 17, 1994.
PCIC sued respondents in the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 35, Manila, on March 21, 1994 to recover the insured sum. Respondents denied liability, asserted that the loss resulted from heavy weather (a fortuitous event), and alternatively invoked the limited-liability clause in the bill of lading and the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act (COGSA), claiming liability not to exceed US$500 per package.
The RTC, in a Decision dated January 12, 1996, found respondents failed to prove they exercised extraordinary diligence and ordered them jointly and severally to pay PCIC the peso equivalent of HK$55,000. Respondents’ motion for reconsideration was denied by the RTC (Order dated February 19, 1996). They appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA).
The CA, in a Decision promulgated February 15, 2000, affirmed the RTC with modification and ordered respondents to pay PCIC P228,085. Respondents moved for reconsideration, arguing that their liability was limited to US$500 per package under COGSA. In a Resolution dated April 13, 2000 the CA granted reconsideration in part and reduced respondents’ liability to ...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals err in awarding damages subject to the US$500 per package limitation under the bill of lading and COG...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)