Title
Shell Company of the Philippines, Ltd. vs. Firemen's Insurance Company of Newark
Case
G.R. No. L-8169
Decision Date
Jan 29, 1957
A car fell from a hydraulic lifter at a Shell-operated station, causing damage. Shell was held liable for negligence due to defective equipment and its agent's actions.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 160453)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Background of the Incident
    • On September 3, 1947, an automobile owned by Salvador R. Sison was brought to the Shell Gasoline and Service Station at the corner of Marques de Comillas and Isaac Peral Streets, Manila.
    • The car was delivered for washing, greasing, and spraying in exchange for a service fee of P8.00.
  • Details of the Service Operation
    • The car was placed on the hydraulic lifter under the direction of the station’s personnel.
    • Testimonies from witnesses provided differing accounts:
      • Perlito Sison recounted that the car was raised up to six feet, and during the lowering process to reach an ungreased portion, the car swayed and fell after the valve was released.
      • Alfonso M. Adriano, one of the greasemans, explained that the car was lifted about five feet, and while lowering the lifter slightly to reach the unreachable portion, he pressed the valve, which inadvertently caused the car to swing and fall.
  • Insurance and Repair Proceedings
    • The incident was immediately reported to the Manila Adjustors Company, the representative for the Firemen’s Insurance Company and the Commercial Casualty Insurance Company.
    • A representative inspected the car, and upon approval, it was taken to Philippine Motors, Incorporated for repairs.
    • Repairs were completed at a cost of P1,651.38, after which the car was restored to running condition.
    • Salvador Sison, the owner, assigned his right to recover the said repair amount to the insurance companies.
  • Defendant’s (Porfirio de la Fuente) Statement and Position
    • In his counter-statement, De la Fuente confirmed that the car was brought to the station owned by the Shell Company of the Philippine Islands, Ltd., which he operated.
    • He detailed that the servicing was performed by him and his two employees: Alfonso M. Adriano (greaseman) and another helper/washer.
    • He described the procedure of correctly positioning the car on the hydraulic lifter, raising it approximately five feet, and then attempting to lower it slightly to complete the greasing of an inaccessible portion.
    • De la Fuente denied any negligence, attributing the fall to an unforeseen accident during the lowering mechanism's operation.
  • Agency and Operational Control
    • The service station was operated by De la Fuente as an agent of the Shell Company of the Philippine Islands, Ltd.
    • Evidence showed that De la Fuente’s appointment depended on his relationship with the Shell Company—he was subject to removal at any time and was required to sell exclusively the company’s products.
    • The equipment used, including the hydraulic lifter, was owned and maintained by the Shell Company and delivered to De la Fuente on a loan basis.
    • Supervision over the service station and its equipment was exercised by Shell Company representatives, including a sales superintendent and a foreman.
  • Findings on Equipment Maintenance and Negligence
    • Witnesses testified that the equipment (hydraulic lifter) was maintained by the Shell Company, which was responsible for ensuring its proper functioning.
    • The company’s mechanic’s routine check was found insufficient—in effect, it was merely a preliminary observation rather than a thorough inspection.
    • This defective maintenance contributed to the hydraulic lifter’s jerking and swaying when the valve was released, leading to the accident.

Issues:

  • Whether the fall of Salvador Sison’s automobile from the hydraulic lifter was due to the negligence in the performance of the servicing operations.
  • Whether the Shell Company is vicariously liable for the acts of negligence committed by its agent, Porfirio de la Fuente and his employees.
  • Whether De la Fuente was acting as an independent contractor or as an agent of the Shell Company during the incident.
  • Whether the defective condition and insufficient maintenance of the hydraulic lifter constituted an unforeseen accident or a preventable negligent act.
  • Whether the recovery of the repair amount along with legal interest and costs against the defendants was justified.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.