Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 1

Epitacio San Pablo v. Pantranco South Express G.R. No.

L-61461 August 21 1987

Patranco South Express is a domestic corporation engaged in land transportation through PUBs for passengers and freight. It was issued a CPC to operate from Manila to Bicol and East Samar. Patranco filed an application before MARINA asking for the authority to purchase a vessel M/V Black Double to operate a ferryboat service from Sorsogon to Samar which will service company buses and freight trucks. Marina denied the application because the route was already taken by Cardinal Shipping and Epitacio San Pablo and market conditions cannot support additional tonnage on the route. Despite the adverse ruling, Patranco still bought the M/V Black Double.Patranco wrote to the BOT proposing that it operate a ferryboat service claiming that the ferryboat service is merely incidental to the original service covered by the CPC. The BOT asked the Minister of Justice to render a legal opinion on the issue. The Minister held that there is no need to secure a separate CPC to operate the ferry between two terminals of a small body of water. Accordingly, the BOT decided in favor of patranco. The prior operators filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court seeking the revocation of the BOT's decision Whether or not the ferry service is an extension of the highway and part of the previous CPC No, the Supreme Court held that in this case the ferry boat service is not an extension of the highway. Accordingly, it cannot be considered as a part of the highway. In the case of Javellana v. Public Service Commission, we defined a ferry as implied the continuation by means of boats, barges, or rafts, of a highway or the connection of highways located on the opposite banks of a stream or other body of water. The term necessarily implies transportation for a short distance, almost invariably between two points, which is unrelated to other transportation. Where the service crosses the open sea, it cannot be considered as ferry service. The law treats it as coastwise or interislang service. The area between Sorsogon and Samar is about 23 kilometers and it cannot be safely traversed by smaller ships. This means that the service is considered coastwise service, not ferry boat. The sea is not a continuation of the highway and a separate CPC is necessary to operate it. Patranco's contention that it operates a private carrier is specious in light of the fact that it charges a separate fee for the use of the ferryboat. Furthermore, evidence has been submitted showing that patranco allows walk-in passengers to board the M/V Black Double Accordingly, the Court holds that the assailed decision is reversed. Patranco is enjoined from operating the ferryboat until it complies with the requirements provided by law.

Вам также может понравиться