Case Digest (G.R. No. 186312)
Facts:
Spouses Dante Cruz and Leonora Cruz v. Sun Holidays, Inc., G.R. No. 186312, June 29, 2010, Supreme Court Third Division, Carpio Morales, J., writing for the Court.Petitioners Spouses Dante and Leonora Cruz sued Sun Holidays, Inc. in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Pasig City for damages arising from the September 11, 2000 capsizing of M/B Coco Beach III, which caused the deaths of petitioners’ son, Ruelito C. Cruz, and his wife. The deceased couple had stayed at Coco Beach Island Resort (the Resort), owned and operated by respondent, under a tour-package contract that included round-trip transportation between Puerto Galera and Batangas.
On the facts adduced at trial, survivor Miguel C. Matute testified that he and about 25 other resort guests boarded M/B Coco Beach III on September 11, 2000 after trekking to a sheltered side of the island; the vessel sailed into worsening rain and wind, began to roll, the captain left the wheel to a crew member and later allegedly told survivors to “Iligtas niyo na lang ang sarili niyo” (“Just save yourselves”); after being struck by two successive large waves the boat capsized and sank, some passengers were rescued by passing boats after roughly 45 minutes, and eight persons, including petitioners’ son and daughter‑in‑law, perished. Documentary and testimonial evidence also showed PAGASA weather advisories for tropical depressions affecting Mindoro and testimony that squalls were to be expected; there was also evidence that the vessel suffered engine trouble before sinking. Ruelito was 28 and employed abroad with a basic monthly salary of US$900.
Petitioners demanded indemnity by letter in October 2000; respondent denied liability, characterized the incident as fortuitous, denied being a common carrier (asserting its boats ferry only resort guests) and offered P10,000 upon a waiver. Petitioners filed a complaint for damages in the RTC on January 25, 2001. In its Answer respondent reiterated non-liability and alleged it exercised utmost diligence; it also filed a counterclaim for attorney’s fees.
By Decision dated February 16, 2005, Branch 267, RTC Pasig dismissed petitioners’ complaint and respondent’s counterclaim. The RTC denied petitioners’ motion for reconsideration by Order of September 2, 2005. Petitioners appealed to the Court of Appeals. By Decision dated August 19, 2008 the Court of Appeals (penned by Associate Justice Normandie B. Pizarro, concurring justices Edgardo P. Cruz and Fernanda Lampas Peralta) affirmed the RTC and denied petitioners’ appeal, holding among other things that respondent w...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Is respondent Sun Holidays, Inc. a common carrier under Article 1732 of the Civil Code and therefore bound to exercise extraordinary diligence in transporting its passengers?
- If respondent is a common carrier, did it exercise extraordinary diligence or was the capsizing a fortuitous event that absolves it of liability?
- Are petitioners entitled to damages (indemnity for death, loss of earning capacity, moral and exemplary damages, attorney’s fees a...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)