Title
Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd. vs. Spouses Vazquez
Case
G.R. No. 150843
Decision Date
Mar 14, 2003
Cathay Pacific breached its contract by upgrading passengers to First Class without consent, but no fraud or bad faith was found; nominal damages awarded.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 150843)

Factual Background

The Vazquezes checked in for Flight CX-905 on September 28, 1996, with confirmed Business Class seats. At boarding, Ms. Chiu informed them that, due to Business Class overbooking, their seats had been involuntarily upgraded to First Class based on their Marco Polo Club status. The Vazquezes initially refused, insisting on remaining with their guests in Business Class, but were ultimately told they could not board otherwise. They acceded under protest.

Procedural History

On October 2, 1996, the Vazquezes demanded P 1 million in indemnity and apologies for humiliation. After no substantive response, they filed suit on November 8, 1996, seeking temperate, moral, exemplary damages, and attorney’s fees. The Makati RTC (October 19, 1998) awarded each spouse P 100,000 nominal, P 2 million moral, P 5 million exemplary, and P 1 million attorney’s fees. The Court of Appeals (July 24, 2001) reduced moral to P 250,000 each, nominal to P 50,000 each, attorney’s fees to P 50,000 total, and deleted exemplary damages. Cathay petitioned for further relief.

Issues Presented

  1. Whether involuntary upgrading from Business to First Class without consent constitutes breach of the contract of carriage.
  2. Whether the upgrade was tainted by bad faith or fraud.
  3. Whether respondents are entitled to moral, exemplary damages, attorney’s fees, and other relief.

Breach of Contract of Carriage

A valid contract existed when respondents paid for Business Class seats and received corresponding boarding passes. The involuntary upgrade altered the agreed object of the contract without prior consent, constituting a breach. The respondents had the right to decline the upgrade and remain in Business Class; imposition of a different accommodation breached the carrier’s obligation.

Good Faith and Fraud

Fraud and bad faith require clear and convincing evidence of deceit or dishonest purpose. Cathay’s practice of upgrading loyal customers when sections are full is industry‐wide, objectively benevolent, and disclosed. No proof of insidious machination, concealment, or malicious intent by Cathay personnel was established. Overbooking within ten percent is permissible under CAB Regulation No. 7 and does not imply bad faith.

Damages Analysis

Under Articles 2219–2221 of the Civil Code, m

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.