Case Digest (G.R. No. L-21749)
Facts:
Republic of the Philippines v. Luzon Stevedoring Corporation, G.R. No. L-21749. September 29, 1967, the Supreme Court En Banc, Reyes, J.B.L., J., writing for the Court.In the early afternoon of August 17, 1960, Barge L-1892, owned by Luzon Stevedoring Corporation, was being towed down the Pasig River by the tugboats Bangus (lead) and Barbero (stern), also owned by the same corporation, when the barge rammed one of the wooden piles (posts) of the Nagtahan bailey bridge, smashing the posts and causing the bridge to list. The river was swollen and the current swift due to heavy rains on August 15–16, 1960.
The Republic of the Philippines sued Luzon Stevedoring Corporation for actual and consequential damages alleged at P200,000 (Civil Case No. 44562 / 44572, Court of First Instance of Manila). The defendant disclaimed liability, asserting (a) it exercised due diligence in selection and supervision of its personnel; (b) the incident was due to force majeure (caso fortuito); (c) the plaintiff lacked capacity to sue; and (d) the Nagtahan bailey bridge was an obstruction to navigation and that improper placement of dolphins contributed to the damage.
After trial, the Court of First Instance of Manila rendered judgment on June 11, 1963, holding the defendant liable and ordering payment of the actual cost of repair of the Nagtahan bailey bridge in the amount of P192,561.72, with legal interest from the filing of the complaint. The defendant appealed directly to the Supreme Court and assigned six errors, challenging negligence, force majeure, obstruction theory, dolphins placement, admission of additional evidence, and the amount of damages.
The Supreme Court noted the settled rule that a party who appeals directly to the Court and submits the case for decision is deemed to have waived the right to dispute findings of fact by the trial court; accordingly, the Court limited review to questions of law and reduced the issues to two: (1) whet...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Whether, as a procedural matter, the appellant’s direct appeal to the Supreme Court waived its right to dispute the trial court’s factual findings.
- Whether the collision of Barge L-1892 with the Nagtahan bailey bridge was caused by force majeure (caso fortuito).
- Whether the trial court abused its discretion in allowing the plaintiff to introduce additional evide...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)