Title
Barrios vs. Go Thong and Co.
Case
G.R. No. L-17192
Decision Date
Mar 30, 1963
MV Henry I captain Barrios towed MV Don Alfredo after engine failure; court ruled service as towage, not salvage, denying Barrios compensation as owner waived claim.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-14336)

Facts of the Case

On the evening of May 1, 1958, while navigating from Dumaguete City, Barrios received a distress signal from the MV Don Alfredo, which was experiencing engine failure and drifting in open water. Following the distress call, he altered the course of the MV Henry I to assist and eventually towed the MV Don Alfredo towards Dumaguete City over several hours. After encountering another vessel, the MV Lux, Barrios released the tow lines at the request of the captain of the MV Don Alfredo.

Trial Court Proceedings

Barrios filed a case against Go Thong & Company, claiming compensation based on the provisions of the Salvage Law (Act No. 2616) and Article 2142 of the New Civil Code regarding quasi-contracts. The trial court dismissed his case, stating that no imminent maritime peril existed for the MV Don Alfredo, and thus the situation did not qualify for salvage rights.

Legal Standard for Salvage

The Salvage Law considers a vessel a proper subject for salvage if it is derelict or quasi-derelict and in a state of perils, necessitating external assistance. The court examined whether the MV Don Alfredo was genuinely in such a peril. It concluded that, despite the ship experiencing mechanical failure, conditions were not severe enough to constitute a legitimate peril—evidence presented showed fair weather and a lack of danger, negating the salvage classification.

Argument on Towage vs. Salvage

The core issue was distinguishing whether Barrios's actions constituted “salvage” or mere “towage.” The court clarified that if the service did not meet the criteria for salvage, the relationship established was one of towage, under which remuneration would typically revert to the vessel's owner—the William Lines, Inc.—and not Barrios personally. Consequently, Barrios did not possess a direct entitlement to compensation since his employer had waived any claim for remuneration.

Equity Considerations

Barrios attempted to invoke equity principles to recover compensation. However, the court mainta

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.