Case Digest (G.R. No. 70547)
Facts:
Philippine National Railways and Honorio Cabardo v. Intermediate Appellate Court and Baliwag Transit, Inc., G.R. No. 70547, January 22, 1993, Supreme Court Third Division, Melo, J., writing for the Court.The case arose from a collision on August 10, 1974, between PNR Train No. 73 (engineered by Honorio Cabardo, aka Honorio Cirbado) and a Baliwag Transit, Inc. passenger bus at the railroad crossing at Barrio Balungao, Calumpit (road to Hagonoy), Bulacan. The bus stalled on the crossing; upon impact the rear portion of the bus was struck, eighteen passengers died and more than fifty-three were injured. Baliwag Transit (plaintiff in the trial court; respondent here) sued PNR and Cabardo for damages.
The trial was preceded by a pre-trial stipulation (June 23 and continued July 12, 1976) that set forth agreed facts: the identities of the vehicles and operators, the approximate time (about 1:20–1:30 P.M.), that there was intermittent rain, the absence at the crossing of bars, semaphores or signal lights (only an “Stop, Look and Listen” sign remained), that the train stopped about 50 meters beyond the crossing after the collision, and that a criminal complaint for reckless imprudence was filed against the bus driver, Romeo Hughes, but not against the train engineer.
At trial the plaintiff maintained PNR’s negligence in operating an express train through a busy intersection without warning devices; defendants contended the bus driver was negligent for failing to stop, look and listen and thus caused the collision. The trial court found for plaintiff, holding the train engineer and PNR negligent and ordering defendants, jointly and severally, to pay specified actual damages, reimbursement for payments made to claimants, exemplary damages, attorney’s fees, interest and costs, and dismissing defendants’ counterclaim. The decretal portion awarded (inter alia) P179,511.52 (actual damages), P436,642.03 (reimbursement), P50,000 (exemplary), P5,000 (attorney’s fees), legal interest from August 10, 1974, and costs.
The Intermediate Appellate Court (Fourth Civil Cases Division) affirmed the trial court’s judgment, agreeing that (1) the bus was hit at its rear after having crossed the tracks and being stalled because of obstructions ahead; (2) the train was running fast and the engineer had the last clear chance to prevent the collision but failed to slacken speed or apply brakes; (3) the absence (or abandonment) of crossing bars, semaphores or flagmen where conditions made them reasonably necessary constituted negligence (citing Lilius v. Manila Railroad Company); and (4) PNR could not plead immunity from suit, it had capacity to sue and be sued, and, having engaged in transport business, acted in a proprietary capacity.
PNR moved for reconsideration in the Intermediate Appellate Court, which denied it. The petitioners then brought...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Is PNR immune from suit for damages arising from the collision?
- Were the train engineer Honorio Cabardo and PNR negligent and therefore civilly liable for the collision?
- Was the bus driver (or Baliwag Transit) contributorily negligent or otherwise responsible so as to excu...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)