Deposit.docx

Lopez, Raffy D. 2-A Credit Transaction

TRIPLE-V FOOD SERVICES INC. VS. FILIPINO COMPANY, GR NO. 160554, FEBRUARY 21, 2005

MECHANTS

INSURANCE

Facts: Mary Jo-Anne De Asis dined at petitioner’s Kamayan Restaurant. De Asis was using a Mitsubishi Galant Super Saloon Model 1995 issued by her employer Crispa Textile Inc., On said date, De Asis availed of the valet parking service of petitioner and entrusted her car key to petitioner’s valet counter. Afterwards, a certain Madridano, valet attendant, noticed that the car was not in the parking slot and its key is no longer in the box where valet attendants usually keep the keys of cars entrusted to them. The car was never recovered. Thereafter, Crispa filed a claim against its insurer, herein respondent Filipino Merchants Insurance Company Inc. Having indemnified Crispa for the loss of the subject vehicle, FMICI, as subrogee to Crispa’s rights, filed with the RTC at Makati City an action for damages against petitioner Triple –V Food Services Inc., Petitioner claimed that the complaint failed to adduce facts to support the allegations of recklessness and negligence committed in the safekeeping and custody of the subject vehicle. Besides, when De Asis availed the free parking stab which contained a waiver of the petitioner’s liability in case of loss, she hereby waived her rights.

Issue: Whether petitioner Triple V Food Services Inc. is liable for the loss for the vehicle as a depositary subject. Held: The SC ruled in the affirmative. In a contract of deposit, a person receives an object belonging to another with the obligation of safely keeping it and returning the same. A deposit may be constituted even without any consideration.Petitioner cannot evade liability by arguing that neither a contract of deposit nor that of insurance, guaranty or surety for the loss of the car was constituted when De Asis availed of its free valet parking service Hence, and as aptly pointed out by the Court of Appeals, petitioner must not be allowed to use its parking claim stub's exclusionary stipulation as a shield from any responsibility for any loss or damage to vehicles or to the valuables contained therein. Here, it is evident that De Asis deposited the car in question with the petitioner as part of the business enticement for customers by providing them a safe parking space within the vicinity of its restaurant. In a very real sense, a safe parking space is an added attraction to petitioner's restaurant business because customers are thereby somehow assured that their vehicle are safely kept, rather than parking them elsewhere at their own risk.