Title
Singson vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 119995
Decision Date
Nov 18, 1997
Passenger's return flight delayed due to missing ticket coupon; Cathay Pacific found liable for breach of contract, gross negligence, and ordered to pay damages.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 119995)

Contract of Air Carriage

Contracts for air carriage are subject to a heightened standard of care due to their public nature, necessitating airlines to exercise extraordinary diligence to ensure passenger safety. Any failure to meet this standard may result in liability for damages incurred by the passenger.

Factual Background

Carlos Singson and his cousin, Crescentino Tiongson, purchased round-trip tickets from Cathay Pacific Airways for travel from Manila to the United States, consisting of various flight segments. Upon attempting to confirm their return flights, it was discovered that Singson’s ticket booklet was missing a critical flight coupon necessary for his return from San Francisco to Hong Kong, leading to issues with his booking.

Legal Proceedings Initiated

Singson initiated a legal action against Cathay Pacific for damages, claiming the airline's negligence caused him significant distress, particularly concerning his urgent business engagements in the Philippines. Cathay, however, argued that the absence of a ticket coupon meant no binding contract existed at the time of his request for a flight confirmation.

Trial Court's Decision

The trial court found in favor of Singson, determining that Cathay exhibited gross negligence and awarded actual, moral, and exemplary damages, as well as attorney's fees. The court underscored the inadequacies in Cathay's handling of Singson’s ticket issue and the airline's lack of urgent response.

Appeal and Court of Appeals' Ruling

Upon appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's decision, asserting that there was no breach of contract due to the nature of Singson’s open-dated ticket. It deleted the awards for moral and exemplary damages, arguing that a breach had not occurred since Singson was not confirmed on a specific flight date and that negligence on the part of Cathay did not meet the threshold for moral damages.

Review by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court found merit in Singson’s petition, ruling that a breach of contract occurred due to Cathay’s failure to confirm his flight, despite the open-dated nature of his ticket, which served as a complete contract. The Court noted that the ticket included all necessary elements of a contract and that the airline's agents' negligence directly caused the issues with Singson's booking.

Findings on Negligence and Bad Faith

The Court determined that the actions of Cathay’s agents constituted gross negligence, akin to bad faith. The circumstances surrounding the missing flight coupon derived from either a removal glitch by an airline agent or a failure to issue the coupon when the ticket was sold. This negligence justifiably supported Singson’s claims for not only actual damages but also moral and exemplary damages, given that the distress caused went beyond mere inconvenience.

Adjustments to Damages Awarded

While the Supreme Court uph

...continue reading

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