r

f n(

\H .

n1 11 1'

1:)

J
J)htintifl'. aud
L. d f ndant.

u n

f l1

urt f Fir t Instance

ht b the heirs of Encarnaiia,. again t Quit rio Dabato~,

nt t r boat TEDDY, Antonio

V L. ~. DECE.M.BE~
I\. J7 1
, 965
'
Canulf, et at. 1Js. Dub t
~-

u. 0 8, et al.

919

butos, son of Quiterio, patron f

---of the boat , arising
to the boat and th
. 'h1 l
Jfll'n
ou of a
'
e crew
1
" trll' ,,o . " e , Joat
which occurred sea mishap d unng
.
t,,e
.
"crcut s~,ncllrnacron Caiias and n on April 22 19
"'''
h
. h d
lOSdad C
, 60
and f!OTl, .ave pe:l~ e .
o aiias, mother
After tnal, decH:4JOn w as rende d
re the disPos1bve
. . portion
of wn1.ch rca' d s as f ollows :
J)ll tiJCfli

"Pilt;r.us~:H c.:oNSJUJt~<.:v, the Cou t

. D b t
r th
renders judginent sentencing
defl'ndall ~ Q u I't cno
a a os, owner of
tUfll the !IUtn of P5,000.00 as damage e mol~r banca, to pay plain.
C s r esu tmg fr
b
EncarnaCIOn anas.
om t e death 00
jiDefendant Quiterio Dabatos is Iikew'
th
lSe sentenced to
.
Emilio Canas, . e sum of f'3,000.00, as dama e8 .
pay plamtiff
tbe death of D1osdado Canas. The Co rt h g m consequence of
favor of plaintiff Emilio Canas exclusi~ely ~s ~~de the award in
of his deceased son Diosdado Canas.
' e emg the lone heir
4
' Defendant

. .
.
hQuiterio Dabatos is finally senteneed to mdemnify
ptamtdfs m th e hamount of P3,000.00 as moral damages, f or the
mental angu1s t ey had suffered due to the loss of tw0 embe
of their family. He shall also pay the costs.
m
rs
"Defendant Antonio Dabatos, patron of the motor boat TEDDY
iJ hereby sentenced to reimburse his co-defendant Quiterio Dabatos
whatever damages are paid by the latter to the plaintiff by way
ot damages.
"Inasmuch as the other defendants Rufino Sampayan, Armando
Cutamora, Roberto Octura, Rizal Racaza, Teofilo Abapo, Cirilo Maearaya, Arturo Dabatos and Felix Cabafiero were but emp'loyees
under the control of the patron, Antonio Dabatos, the Court hereby
relieves them from whatever responsibility and, as a corollary, they
are absolved from the complaint, without special pronouncement as
j

to C!Oitl.,

The plaintiffs and the defendants Quiterio and Antonio

ornamed Dabatos appealed from the decision. The. ap-

P8al of the plaintiffs, however , was dismi~sed for fail~re

to pay the appeal docket fee. And they did not file brief
as appellees. The appeal of the defendants Dabatos was

liven du~ course.

be testimony of Anto~ faets of the case culled from t
b t TEDDY was
nio .h M.. ... J._
.
The
motor
oa
.,.,.ws are as fo11ows . . D b tos It has been

O'lnl84

&nd operated by Quiterw

a a

920

OURT OF ;\ P PEA JJS HJ~I,O ft'J'H

C

-----=-fi
Ca all,

cl" al. 'IJH. DaualiOH, ct. nl.

to 19fir:
.
ation pr1or
,v. J11 th at YN~ r I ut,r,, 1t WUH tp
m. oper or the fir t time. On N ovom b r I O, Ivr,g 011 ~J dl
paucdbi t .. lied "Purim" wus topa irod, how vt , cc mt rnty
of the on c.l
, .
Q 'l . J

to the testimony of Antort io, IHH f t;thor ut t,n t . lttt ,II

th t thnt repair was mude on Mn1ch JO, 101?U. (p. 17J,
t.s~n.) The special permit ii:!I:!UOd by th I 1ul,lH Uttrl
Boilers Jnspection Divi~:~ion of tho u u.ouu or ~J IIHltmtM
for t he operation of the boat had expnerl on ~ btuur,y
5, 1960, without having been J'enewod, I!)xhibllH H and
B- 1, (p. 113, t .s.n.) such that when thq ~on tnlHhap oc..
curred during the trip of the bout or1 Ar>rll 22, 1960 th
boat had trfo'l:luch special permit. On thiH :f'ntul occun 11
Encarnachm' Canas and Diosdatlo 'niiaH poriHhcd ut H n
when the boat capsized. Under its 029Jir~nn!.J.. th \
boat was authorized as common currier ~r cnJ'S.W 08 onl y, .
It had no permission to carry passertgm'e; othor--t'tlltn H1:1
seven (7) crew members. Antonio Dnhntos WnH i.ho pntron and skipper of the boat on April 22, 1!160. 1' hl
Bureau of Customs had not issued ' to him nny s pocinl
permit for unlicensed Officers, Exhibit C- 1. 'rho bortt'H
usual route is from Hingotanan, Boh'ol to Ccbu, nnd vic
versa, and for its one way trip at least flve htHU'I'\ wor
needed. The customary time of departure of' th ' bont
from Hingotanan to Cebu was in the morning , bocltmi
the permit states that it cnn navfgnte on dnytim on!~.
Durin~ the nine months before April 22, 1960 thnt Antonio
had skippered the boat he never left Jlingotnnnn
Ct'hu
in ~he afternoon, (p. 110, t.s.n.) 'rhe place CalwltlHtr11,
an Island, where the boat capsized was not the uKnnl rnntt
of the boat. "Q. How about that route you tonk fi'Oill Il l
ngotanan to Calunasan, Jetafe, Bohol waM th uHunl nnttt1
or not the usual
t ., A
'
.
.
rou e
. That WaR no~ tlu wwnl ro1d1~
tn uomg to Cebu be
'f
.
cause 1 we start enrly fu tho null'll hlf.'
we pass m the plac
II d B
that t'tme 'We startede ca
e anakon nnci Snndnrnn l~tt l crf
lat 6

tafe Bohol t
t
eo we passed by Cnlnnm~nn, '''
(pp: 91_92 to pas)s he night because ther wntt n hm trliu.''

ro

, .s.n.

VOL. 8, DECEMBER
-

--

Caiias, et al. vs.

- -

17, 1965

Db - -

921
a atos, et al. - -

:\t about 3 :00 o'clock in the afterno

.
'tle tho boat was moored at H' on of Apr11 21 19GO
b
"~:~eing
d th e b oat under themgotanan
Joadc m
su er .. cargoes' were
n. portion of the cargoes belong dp t VlSlon of the pat~as the deceased, some to Antonio' e 0 Encarnacion ca.
nd' the rest to "those persons" whos uncle. Alfredo Abapo,
1
"' t
11<>,
.s.n.) , t o b e taken to Cebu were
W'thm the boat (pp.

ca;nacion Cai1as she was in the bo~t n0lt reispect t~ Enb t h h d

on Y as shipper
of cargoes, u s e a the express consent of th

-Q. In other words, Encarnacion Canas h d e patron.

. . t b .ard
b
a your per-

mlSSJOn o o
your anca TEDDY beca
h
? A y
(
use s e was a
shipper es. p. 117 t.s.n.) After the cargoes had
been loaded the ~oat started the trip at about 3 :30 o'clock
of that day. Aside from the members of the crew there
were also thirte.en pas~engers on board the boat, among~
them, EncarnaciOn Canas and her son, Diosdado Canas.~
Denying that the thirteen persons in the boat were paying
passengers, Antonio declared at first that said persons
"requested me that they would go to Cebu", but "I refused
IDd turned down their request because that banca was not
a passenger banca.", and "Although they listened they did
not go away." On this point, regarding the presence of
those persons in the boat, Teofi.1o Abapo in charge of the
administration of the boat or in charge of the trip, a witness
for the defendants, gave a version insinuating that the
thirteen persons had surreptitiously boarded the boat. To
fJUOte from Abapo's testimony-"Q. Why were they able
to board your boat to ride your boat, if you were not
aM,
? A
We did not allow them
IICIUWed to carry passengers .

. .
to board the banca and they did not even secure per~Iss~~n
h
b t hen we were there m e
otn Antonio Dabatos, u w, * * A. I did not know
banca they were already there. b they were already
1Vhy because when we reached the . ~nc~abatos on further
1
there:" (pp. 144-145, t.s.n.) An:~; ~hat the thirteen per"-tlons to him declare~, ho.we no~Iedge and consent, beSOns Were in the boat with his k
h'
of some of the
cause Encarnacion Canas was the s Ipper

--------

< a1 a , t al. v . IJaoaros, er; at.

nd the other "would serve as cargadore8 of th

_. . ................:: of my bnncn." To quote from Antonio's testt
A
1 1 -" Q . Wh,.
were t hev
. on board your banca?. .t'\
:u they " r t he owners of the cargoes loaded in ou~
Q. \\"ill you plense name the other persons, if any
,, ith you in that banca?
A. Gonzalo Padmo'
1
1 1 ngn rflt, Balbina Dncolpo, Petrona Dabatos, On~
, d 1 , th spou8e~ Mr. nnd Mrs. 'Badajos, Alfre~o Saba.
1 n 11, ont< mor .'' (p. 85, t.s.n.) " Q. In what category
di th y t k thnt banca of yours? A. They would serve
~ co 1pacl{)res of the cargoes of my ban ca." (p. 87, t.s.n.),
nd
use "they helped us load the cargoes so that they
\l ill be allowed to ride, and beca use there was no other
tran portation so they were able to r ide with us." (p.
11 , t.s.n.)
to the rondition of the weather when the trip was
made, denying t he testimony of Emilio Caiias, a witness
f or the plaintitl's, t hat the weather on that day (April 21)
windy, cloudy and raining, Antonio said that "the
ther was fine". ( p. 88, t.s.n.)
lrineo Cabreros, an employee of the Weather Bureau at
bu, in charge of Port Meteorological Liaison Officer dedared as f ollows: "Q. From this weather observation, aceord!Da to this Exhibit 2, what was the weather condition
oa pril 20, 1960? A. The weather condition seems to ap,.r llOI'ID&l except the slight change of the pressure of the
atlaolphere and the wind was coming from the Northeast
tiMm East. COURT: Q. According to E xhibit 3 which is
Me NHrH ride of Exhibit 4, what was the condition of
lh tHGtMr ott A pril 21, 1960? A. Now, on this date the
,.uure beg4n to fall or dr op which was caused by the

&tvrbance in the p'resence of typhoon Karen.

ftl'. BACALTOI (counsel for defendants) CONTINUES : Q.

~ to B#Aibit 8, you said that ther e was a change of

Me flhlospAeric Pf'8BBUre, can you inforrn what time there

WI a

cltott.ge of atmospheric pressure? A. W,eU, it stafftecl

, _ aoon "' to tke morning of the rne.xt day. couRT:

VOL. 8, DECEl !BER

--

Canat~, et al. vs.

" 17, 1965

Jib
a atoll, et al.

923

,Hhat
was .the pressure at 7 .. 00 0 ,clock .
n
_.. t004.4 millibars. Q. And Whe m the morning?
~t-. that means that there is depr .n the fig.ll'e is u e
tJllS
B
ess10n? A y
y
J{onor, ATTY. ~CALTOS CONTINUES: Q .. . . e ' our
ce with Exh1b1t 3, can you enlighten
ow, m ac:e.ordJilf Cebu was affected with this atmos h e .Court -''hat p~
o
h.
. d th
P enc pres.sur'".,
puring t IS periO
e typhoon, or, we call tba . - . . ....._
fla1'P.Jl struck the southern part of Ceb
tt deprer:...sl.(ln,
~- h

u a about 800
'cloCk m t e next
mormng and ' accor,1;to the pressure

uut.g
reading ?e~e, 1t wa~ ver; clo~ to the province of ~bu
1JeC8USe 1t IS yet 7.00 o clock m the morning and Geb
was bit at abou.t 8:00 o'clock in the morning. * * Conrr~
Q. How about In J etafe, Bohol what is the effec.-t of tMt
dePression? A. The weather condition there must be -ra-y
bad already because it had an earlier period affected than
In Cebu because it is located in t he East side of our localit-; Q. Do you have any observation of the end oft~~
~tart ? A. This observatio-n started at 8:00 c/ cwek in the
1110f"ning of Apri~ 21 , 1960 and ended 7:00 r/ cwek in the
fiU11'fling the following day, fo r thie record sheet of April
11." (pp. 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32, t .s.n., June 5, 1962.) " Q.
What was the pressure in your observation? A. StiU th.e
'""ure is dropping. Q. Where is this shown in Exhibit
"A. This is at 12:30 noon, local time, of Apn121. Here
II ODiy inches. Q. Now, bow long such depression
lilted? A. The whole day ; the effects of t~ lasted the
,.,-.u day until signs of depression begin to lmpro:;) ~e
day." (pp. 35, 36, 37 and 38, t.s.nB., ~ 1 ..
ba
.d
as to what tow'lls of o o mJOD
ve any I. ea .
\\.eather Bureau is con81 your experience m t~~tted lines? A. Well, I am
are affected
tbes? he towns but in the genermuch acquainted wJth td a little north of TagbiIIIJ)ect the distur bance ~asse its course. Q. Can yon
and South of Cebu Clty on area from Tagbilaran
us as to the coverage or ? A In this scale
hoon Karen

.
1
affected bY typ
.
the statute ID.lles. -.tan be determined by usmg
1\

th . .

?Y

24

COL-RT OF APPEALS REPORTS

Coii.a-: ct al. vs. Dabatos, et al.

i:-- : 1... t within the proximity of . T~gbilar~n-~uai a little
rth l f Tagbilaran; because th1~ 1s mov~ng m a North~
~t ~ ur~e it moYe toward~ a httle up m .the directi(m
... ( rth b~ wet. Q... 'ow, m accor dance w1th that scale
~
an not. fully identify the po~tion or area. affected by
t\ phoon K<lren insofar as Bohol 1s concerned! A. Well
1r 1 am :.~llowed to see a bigger map (Witness now looking
t hig m< p) it passed al most at Calape, Bohol but a
little ~outh of Calape. Q. \Viii you please restate, I did
not geot ~-ou yery well when you told this Honorable Court
a5 to the direction of the wind that hit Cebu, will you

pleaseo restate that wind direction which hit Cebu? A.

7'1tc "tJmlgest m ma:rhnwn w ind speed in Cebu during
typhoon Kare1r was coming from the East-NoTtheast at the
~,-d of 30 miles pe1 hour. Q. Could we fai'r l?J say when you
1 E ast-Xortheast that that wind passed by Bohol and hi~
C~buf A. O.f Course, this character of wind should
crJso po& BoJwl. Q. Of the two p'rovinces Bohol and Cebu,
wiicl of these two provinces was earlier hit by typhoon
Cftfl1 - A. It should be Bohol first, being located in the
~ of Cebu."
(pp. 61, 62, 63, and 64, t.s.n. id.)
So that according to your experience would you conit still advisable for an 'arais' (patron) of a motor
- - to navigate, say, from Bohol to Cebu with that
.tiller mndition as already described? A. Well, if you are
. . my opinion about it, if I am a skipper, which I am
I would rather get more cautious movement on
a sailor if such condition occurs, but I am not a
llilor ao I would rather give this opinion to the sailor
Nee-If. Q. Ia otker words, if you were asked to give
_,. . , . _ to the sailor you will advise him not to pro~
.,.. .,.tM~e? A. I should." (pp. 67-68, t.s.n. id.)
O.Unnmg his testimony, Antonio Dabatos said that at
li:IO o'doek in the afternoon of April 21, the b~at
. . . .!Ill amclior at the island of Calunasan, Bohol which
1Mlt " - 1I8Ual route in going to Cebu from Hingotanan,
cQer to take P'-...
n1g
ht " ' and ''1
~~ut1on f or the commg

'ac

my

VOL. 8, DECEl\1:BE

~---

,...,-

Canas, et al -;;8

Rl719 65

D ab t

'

92S

----------a os, et al.

told JJlY crew r_n:mbers as wen as
_
ca to be vigilant in the n . the other per
: : I told t~em not to sleep ~:~t, because ther:o~: in t~e
in the mormng of April 22 "W . At about 2 oo s. ~am
.-~nd which caused our bane e twere hit by a v~ry ~tc ock
w
"A Th
a o cap . ,
rong
t.&Jl)

e waves were b'

~Ize. (pp. 94 95

h
d
'
Ig,
the
Wind
'
the ram was ar . ' (p. 97 t
)
was strong and'
capsized all the persons. wer~ t~~wn 'Y'hen the boat had
six (6) of the passengers have P . h mto the water, and
carnaeion Canas and Diosdado C e~Is ed, among them Enl . .
anas.
In c atmmg exculpation for the d th
,.,as
and Diosdado Canas a d . ea . . of Encarnacion
\J4IU
,
n m assru
h d .
tile appellants have assigned two erro c t ed' ecision,
the court erred
in holding that the thirte' on n m~ that
d
ersons m the
boat, exc1u mg the crew members, were carried as passengers, and that the appellants were guilty of gross negligence.
~there is no debate as to the fact that not one of the
itirieen passengers have paid an amount of money as fare
:fGr their conveyance from Hingotanan to Cebu. The undisputed fact, however, is that all of them were in the
boat with the knowledge and consent of the patron. The
eleven passengers, other than Encarnacion and Diosdado,
were in the boat 'because they have helped in loading the
cartoes in the boat, and "to serve as cargadores of the
CVgoes", presumably, in unloading them at the ~lace of
Mblation. For those services they we~e ~ern~Itted to
be the boat and to proceed to their destmatl.on m .ceb~.
'111.:..

d ere the valuable considerat10n m

~-. Sei'Vlces rendere w
.
re "In onerous conEilcbange for the transportat wt ~a for each contracting
the cause is und~rstood. 0 ta thing or service PY
Patty, the prestation or ..,promise o the servi'ce or benefit
the ttber. in remuneratorY . ones, t ts -of pure benefi~
Wllf6 ~& ~emunerated ;. and in co~ braeefactor." (Article
of the en
es~ the mere hbera 1 Y . lar reference to the pr_
la.&o, Civil Code.) , Wit~ pa:t~~u hel' son, Diosdado. Canas
4ladt of Encarnacion Canas

tracts

.\

rt

C:OUUT OF Al'l't ;J\t4:-;l

4

('(tftntr, t!f rrf.

l !H.

l'J ,:I'OI~' I'H

n crhrtlrm,

I rrl .

PI ley to obligate themMelv s In at'l'lll' durtt' wilh lhl~ ('od ,

and mu1t prove that they hu v 14kill, <"ntmcit,v, und tHtHii
Ut'U11 r qulred to commaud und dit'tct tho VCRHll, IS
ablteb d by marine or navlgution lnwa, OJ'dbuu1c R, ot
laUon, and muet not be dlsqunlifhd uccording to tho
Hml tor th discharge or the dutiua of that po~ilion."
tlcl 811 of the same Code impo~o~cH on lhl ca ptain or
matawr ot th ve&nl the tluty "'l'o comply with tho oblign.
ttl tmp01 d by the laws and regulations of nuvjgation,
ut*oma, h alth, and otherM", nnd for tho patron'M IIOtlpllan~ With this duty, the OWiler Of the bont iR lia})Je.

11

"-

Ill. The C!aptaln shall be dvilly llahlo to the 11hip ttiCNtl,

to tht third per10n1 who may hnvo mndt ('(IJlttnclH wilh

tM

~~ I

.... FOl' thOle arlslnar b:r rtcuon of u mleuso oC vowcl'K nnd non~j ol dutltl oorr.apondlnr to him ln nc<'ordtut<o with Articl(!l

llt,., (See

al1o Sontua & Co. ,.,., 0 8()f'io, 4!l Ph il.

f~ the fact

nlJ.)

lhat under its expired Hpeciul permit

btat ,.TEl>D " could navigate for freight only,

and

thtreot aR;wed certain pasMengerR to bonrd

d to be tran ported from port to port. Under
a frefrhter can ferry passengerR if it haH n spe~

do ao.

t of th d~ts, however, did(ri~ have Ruch

.IJiellaJ Plftn!t. F
h, under the exp1te'u permit of
~-rtlldattt the boat was good for "<la~n aviJta
lblt. but the patron undertook to navigate at ni~ht.
of departure of the boat wa~ in the
IMIIdwm order that It could negotiate the f>-hour triP
Ull
but on the fatal day of the occul'rence
..,....,.~; Wahap tbe boat departed at 3:30 o'clock in t~1 e
111!11110118 and tbua embarked on a nighttime navigatwn m

lab..,

VOL. 8, DECEMBER
- - - --- - -

Canas, et al

17, 1965

- - -- - - - - vs. Dabatos, et al.

929

---

'flolftion of the permit Pre .

..:a.A boat deviated from its u VIously granted to 't -h~
111
bl' h d t
.sual cour f
1 l'"lfth
1118 esta IS e he island of C l
se, or as the e .d '
flclnity whereof the boat cap .a udnasan, in the i~~:ntce
f th
Slze is not 'thi
Ia e
e~urse o
e voyage from Cebu to B
WI .n the !lsual
t,o veer towards Calunasan in .
oh?l. The boat had
tot& For this violation the Vl~w. of Its belated deparJiable to the ship agent or 0~ap am or master is civilly
.Ja liable to third persons.
ner and the latter in turn

.
'
.s an act of God
proxiJnate cause of t?e ~::e~essarilY exposed
is liable if the captain