Case Summary (G.R. No. L-6409)
Facts of the Case
Anacleto Viana, a 40-year-old passenger and farmer, boarded the M/V Antonia at San José, Occidental Mindoro, on May 11, 1975. He disembarked at Pier 4, North Harbor, Manila, but re-boarded the vessel to claim cargo. About one hour after passenger disembarkation, Pioneer Stevedoring’s crane began unloading. While pointing to his cargo, Viana was struck by the crane and trapped between it and the vessel. He died three days later of injuries sustained. His widow incurred ₱9,800 in hospital and burial expenses; his average annual income and family support figures were established in evidence.
Procedural History
- Plaintiffs filed suit against Aboitiz for breach of contract of carriage.
- Aboitiz denied liability and filed a third-party complaint against Pioneer, attributing negligence to its crane operator.
- Trial court (April 17, 1980) held Aboitiz liable, ordered it to pay various damages, and directed Pioneer to reimburse Aboitiz.
- On reconsideration (October 27, 1982), the trial court absolved Pioneer for lack of proof of its operator’s negligence but left Aboitiz’s liability intact.
- The Court of Appeals (July 29, 1988) affirmed the modified trial court judgment, adjusting the amounts due plaintiffs but rejecting Aboitiz’s claim for indemnity from Pioneer.
- Aboitiz appealed by certiorari to the Supreme Court.
Issues Presented
- Whether the carrier-passenger relationship had terminated before the accident, rendering the La Mallorca doctrine inapplicable.
- Whether contributory negligence on Viana’s part barred recovery under Art. 1762 of the Civil Code.
- Whether Pioneer should have been compelled to indemnify Aboitiz for amounts paid to the Vianas.
Court’s Analysis
Carrier-Passenger Relationship
- A passenger remains under the carrier’s duty of extraordinary diligence until granted a reasonable opportunity to leave the vessel and claim baggage.
- One hour to disembark and retrieve cargo on a ship is reasonable given the nature and volume of vessel traffic.
- Viana was still a passenger when the accident happened; La Mallorca applies.
Presumption of Carrier Negligence and Standard of Diligence
- Common carriers owe “utmost diligence of very cautious persons” to ensure passenger safety (Arts. 1755–1756, Civil Code).
- In case of injury or death, carrier negligence is presumed; the carrier must rebut it.
- Aboitiz failed to prove effective precautions at the unloading site (no reliable cordon or enforced warning).
Contributory Negligence
- Although Viana was contributorily negligent, his fault was not the proximate cause because proper safeguards by Aboitiz would have prevented the accident.
- Art. 1762 (reduction of damages) was inapplicable: contributory negligence did not bar recovery where carrier negli
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. L-6409)
Facts of the Case
- On May 11, 1975, Anacleto Viana purchased ticket No. 117392 for P23.10 and boarded M/V Antonia at San Jose, Occidental Mindoro, bound for Manila.
- Vessel arrived May 12, 1975, at Pier 4, North Harbor; a gangplank was provided but Viana disembarked via the vessel’s third deck leveled with the pier.
- Under a Memorandum of Agreement (Exh. 2, July 26, 1975), Pioneer Stevedoring Corporation assumed exclusive control of the vessel’s cargo one hour after passengers disembarked.
- While Viana was pointing out his remaining cargo to the crew, Pioneer’s crane (operated by Alejo Figueroa) struck and pinned him against the vessel; he died three days later of hypostatic pneumonia secondary to traumatic fracture of the pubic bone and a lacerated bladder (Exh. C).
- Funeral and medical expenses totaled P9,800. Viana, 40 years old and in good health, earned roughly 400 cavans of palay annually; his parents received 20 cavans (P120) monthly before his death.
- Plaintiffs claimed actual damages, unearned income, support for parents, moral damages, and attorney’s fees for the breach of contract of carriage.
Procedural History
- Private respondents filed suit against Aboitiz Shipping Corporation for breach of contract of carriage.
- Aboitiz denied liability, invoking the fellow-servant rule and alleging that Pioneer, not it, controlled the cargo-unloading operation.
- Aboitiz filed a third-party complaint against Pioneer for indemnity on the theory of Pioneer’s crane-operator negligence.
- Pioneer defended on grounds of due diligence, plaintiff’s gross negligence, lack of privity, and the pendency of a criminal case against its crane operator.
- Trial court (Apr. 17, 1980) held Aboitiz liable and ordered Pioneer to reimburse any sums paid to the Vianas; awarded death benefit, actual damages, value of palay, support, moral damages, attorney’s fees, and