17 Trans-asia Shipping Lines V. Ca.docx

Trans-Asia Shipping Lines v. CA GR No. 118126 March 4, 1996 Facts: Plaintiff Atty. Arroyo was on board M/V Asia Thailand, a vessel owned by the defendant Trans-Asia Shipping Lines, bound for Cagayan de Oro City from Cebu City. During the trip, the vessel stopped near Kawit Island and after an hour of stillness, some passengers demanded that they be allowed to return to Cebu City because they no longer wanted to continue their voyage to Cagayan de Oro City. The Captain aceeded to the request and the vessel headed back to Cebu City. Upon arrival in Cebu, several passengers including Arroyo boarded another Trans-Asia vessel bound for Cagayan de Oro City. For the defendant’s failure to transport Arroyo and several other passengers to their destination as contracted, Arroyo sued Trans-Asia for damages. Issue: Whether or not Trans-Asia Shipping Lines was bound to observe extraordinary diligence in ensuring the safety of Arroyo. Ruling: YES. The Court held that there was a contract of common carriage between Trans-Asia and Arroyo, therefore Trans-Asia was bound to observe extraordinary diligence in ensuring the safety of Arroyo. Thus, pursuant to Art. 1755 of the Civil Code, Trans-Asia was bound to carry Arroyo safely as far as human care and foresight could provide, using the utmost diligence of very cautious persons, with due regard for all the circumstances. In the case, the Court found that there was a failure on part of Trans-Asia as a common carrier to maintain the vessel in seaworthy condition hence there is a breach in contract of carriage and the duty imposed upon it by virtue of Art. 1755. A vessel to be seaworthy must be adequately equipped for the voyage and manned with a sufficient number of competent officers and crew. However in the case, the vessel was unseaworthy even before the voyage because before the repairs on the vessel were completed, Trans-Asia allowed it to leave the port causing it to stop and remain adrift at sea.