Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 5

TRANSPORTATION LAW COURSE OUTLINE

TARLAC STATE UNIVERSITY


College of Law
1st Term, AY 2018-2019

Course: Transportation Law (LAW 312)


Year/Sections: 3rd year

Professor: Atty. Joseph T. Tagudin, Jr.


Mobile: 09223590959
Email: thugzter_82@yahoo.com

I. PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
A. Governing Laws
1. New Civil Code
2. Warsaw Convention
3. Code of Commerce
4. Carriage of Goods by Sea Act
5. Salvage Law
6. Public Service Act
7. Article XII, Sec. 11 on operation of public utility

B. Concept of public Utility & public service (Sec. 13, Public Service Act)
C. Constitutional limitations on operation of public utilities (Art. XII, 1987 Constitution)
D. Regulatory Agencies
E. Concept of franchise and certificate of public convenience
CASES: National Development Company vs. CA, August 19, 1998; Tatad vs. Sec. Garcia, April 16,
1995; Radio Communication of the Phils, Inc. NTC, 150 SCRA 450

II. GENERAL CONCEPTS


A. Contract of Transportation in general
B. Perfection
C. Common Carrier
1. statutory definition (Art. 1732, NCC)
2. distinguished from private carrier
3. distinguished from towage, arrastre and stevedoring
4. tests to determine common carrier
5. Parties to the contract of carriage

D. Registered owner rule and Kabit System


CASES: Spouses Dante Cruz and Leonora Cruz vs. Sun Holidays, Inc., G.R. No. 186312, June 29,
2010; A.F Sanchez Brokerage, Inc. vs. CA G.R. No. 147079, December 21, 2004; Crisostomo vs. CA,
August 25, 2003, GR No. 138334; De Guzman vs. CA, Dec. 12, 1988; First Phil. Industrial Corp. vs.
CA, Dec. 29, 1998; Erezo vs. Jepte, Sept. 30, 1957; Lim vs. CA, Jan. 16, 2002; Lita Enterprises vs. IAC,
April 27, 1984; Teja Marketing vs. IAC, 148 SCRA 347; Nostradamus Villanueva vs. Domingo, G.R.
No. 144274, September 20, 2004; Spouses Hernandez et al vs. Spouses Dolor et al, GR No. 160286,
July 30, 2004; FEB Leasing and Finance Corporation (now BPI Leasing Corp.) vs. Sps. Sergio P.
Baylon and Maritess Villena Baylon, et al., G.R. No. 181398, June 29, 2011); Spouses Teodoro and
Nanette Perena v. Spouses Nicolas and Teresita L. Zarate, G.R. No. 157917, August 29, 2012

III. OBLIGATIONS OF THE COMMON CARRIER IN A CONTRACT OF CARRIAGE OF GOODS


A. Vigilance over the goods
1. Duty to exercise extraordinary diligence (Art. 1733, NCC, Article 363, 364 & 365, CC)
2. Presumption of negligence (Art. 1735, NCC)
3. Duration of liability (Art. 1736, 1737 & 1738, NCC)
4. Defenses of common carriers (Art. 1734, 1739, 1740, 1742, & 1743)
a. fortuitous event (Art. 1739, NCC)
b. public enemy (Art. 1739, NCC)
c. improper packing (Art. 1742, NCC)
d. order of public authority (Art. 1743, NCC)
5. Contributory negligence of the shipper (Art. 1741, NCC)
6. Stipulation limiting liability of carrier (Art. 1744, 1748, 1749 & 1750 NCC)
a. Requisites (Art. 1744, 1751, NCC)
b. invalid stipulations (Art. 1745, NCC)
c. effect of delay (Art. 1747, NCC)
d. rule on presumption of negligence despite stipulation (Art. 1752, NCC)

B. Other obligations
1. Duty to accept goods
a. Grounds for valid refusal to accept goods
2. Duty to deliver goods
a. Time of delivery (Art. 358, CC)
b. Consequences of delay (Art. 1740 & 1747, NCC; Art. 370-374, CC)
c. Place of delivery (Art. 360, CC)
d. To whom delivery shall be made (Art. 368 & 369, CC)

CASES: Delsan Transport Lines, Inc. vs. American Home Insurance, G.R. No. 149019, 15 August
2006; Sarkies Tours Phils vs. CA, Oct. 2, 1997; Tabacalera Insurance vs. North Front Shipping, May
16, 1997; Macam vs. CA, Aug. 25, 1999; Samar Mining Company vs Nordeutscher Lloyd, et al., Oct.
23, 1984; Servando vs. Phil. Steam Navigation, Oct. 23, 1982; Edgar Cokaliong Shipping Lines vs.
UCPB General Insurance Company, June 25, 2003; Eastern Shipping Lines vs. IAC, 150 SCRA 469;
Bascos vs. CA, Apr. 7, 1993; Ganzon vs. CA, May 30, 1988; Philamgen vs. MCG Marine Services,
March 8, 2002; Calvo vs. UCPB General Insurance 379 SCRA 510; Belgian Overseas Chartering vs.
Phil. First Insurance Co., 383 SCRA 23

IV. OBLIGATIONS OF THE COMMON CARRIER IN A CONTRACT OF CARRIAGE OF


PASSENGERS

A. Safety of Passengers
1. Duty to observe utmost diligence (Art. 1755, NCC)
2. Duration of liability
3. Presumption of negligence (Art. 1756, NCC)
4. Liability for acts of employees (Art. 1759, NCC)
5. Liability for acts of strangers (Art. 1763, NCC)
6. Effect of stipulation on liability (Art. 1757, 1758,1760, NCC)
B. Passenger's Baggages (Art. 1754, 1998, 2000 to 2003, NCC)
C. Relevant provisions of the Warsaw Convention
1. Binding Effect of the Warsaw Convention
2. Categories of International Air Transportation
3. Liability under the Convention

CASES: Aboitiz Shipping Corporation vs. CA, 179 SCRA 95; Dangwa Transportation vs. CA, 202
SCRA 574; LRT vs. Navidad, Feb. 6, 2003; La Mallorca vs. CA, July 27, 17 SCRA 739; Japan Airlines
vs. CA, Aug. 7, 1998; Phil. Airlines vs. CA, 226 SCRA 423; Gacal vs. PAL, 183 SCRA 189; Fortune
Express, Inc. vs. CA, March 18, 1999; Pilapil vs. CA, Dec, 22, 1989; Maranan vs. Perez, 20 SCRA 412;
Singapore Airlines vs. Andion Fernandez, 10 December 2003; Fortune Express vs. CA, March 18,
1999; Bachelor Express vs. CA, July 31, 1990; De Gillaco vs. Manila Railroad Company, G.R. No. L-
8034, Nov. 18, 1955; Cathay Pacific Airways vs. CA, March 5, 1993; Mapa vs. CA, July 8, 1998

V. OBLIGATIONS OF THE SHIPPER, CONSIGNEE AND PASSENGER


A. Effect of negligence of shipper or passenger (Art. 1741, 1761, 1762, NCC)
B. Payment of freight (Art. 374 & 375, CC)
C. Liability for demurrage
CASES: Isaac vs. A.L. Ammen Transportation, 101 Phil 1046; Compania Maritima vs. CA, Aug. 29,
1988; PNR vs. CA, Oct. 4, 1985

VI. EXTRAORDINARY DILIGENCE


A. Underlying Reason
B. Effect of Stipulation (Art. 1744, 1757, 1758, & 1760, NCC)
C. Extraordinary diligence in carriage by sea
1. Seaworthiness of the vessel (Sec. 3 [1] & [2] COGSA; Sec. 116 & 119, IC; Art. 609, CC)
2. Overloading
3. Proper Storage
4. Obligation of captain and crew
5. Rule on deviation and transshipment (Art. 359, CC)
D. Extraordinary diligence in carriage by land
1. Vehicle's condition
2. Traffic Rules (See relevant provisions of RA 4136)
3. Obligation to Inspect
E. Extraordinary diligence in carriage by air
CASES: Standard Vacuum Oil vs. Luzon Stevedoring, April 18, 1956; Planters Products, Inc. vs. CA,
Sept. 15, 1993; Mecenas, et al. vs. CA, 180 SCRA 83; Brinas vs. People of the Phils., Nov. 25, 1983;
BLTB vs. IAC, Nov. 14, 1988; Batangas Transportation Company vs. Caguimbal, et al, Jan. 24, 1968;
Mallari vs. CA, Jan. 31, 2000; Nocum vs. Laguna Tayabas Bus Company, Oct. 31, 1969; PAL vs. CA,
Sept. 15, 1993; Vda. De Abeto vs. PAL, July 30, 1982; Japan Airlines vs. Michael Asuncion et al, G.R.
No. 161730, January 28, 2005

VII. BILL OF LADING AND OTHER FORMALITIES


A. Definition of bill of lading
B. Classes of bill of lading
C. Nature of bill of lading (Art. 353, 709 CC; Sec. 3[4] and [5], COGSA)
1. as a contract
a. Basic stipulations in a bill of lading (Art. 350, 707-718, CC; Sec. 4[5] COGSA)
b. Prohibited stipulations (Art. 1745, NCC)
2. as a document of title (Art. 1508, 1509, 1510, 1513, 1515 NCC)
3. as a receipt
D. Relevant provisions of the Warsaw Convention (Art. 17-19, 22, WC)
CASES: HE Heacock Company vs. Macondray, Oct. 3, 1921; Ong Yiu vs. CA, June 29, 1979; Sea-Land
Service vs. IAC, Aug. 31, 1987; Citadel Lines vs. CA, Apr. 25, 1990; Everett Steamship Corporation
vs. CA, Oct. 8, 1998; Saludo, Jr. vs. CA, 207 SCRA 498; Northwest Airlines vs. Cuenca, Aug. 31, 1965;
Alitalia vs. IAC, Dec. 4, 1990; Pan American World Airways vs. IAC, Aug. 11, 1988; China Airlines
vs. Daniel Chiok, July 30, 2003; Santos III vs. Northwest Airlines, June 23, 1992; United Airlines vs.
Willie Uy, Nov. 19, 1999

VIII. ACTIONS IN CASE OF BREACH OF CONTRACT OF CARRIAGE


A. Causes of action and nature/extent of liability (culpa contractual, culpa aquiliana and culpa
delictual)
B. Prescriptive period and conditions precedent
1. Overland transportation of goods and coastwise shipping (Art. 366, CC)
2. International carriage of goods by sea (Sec. 3[6]
C. Recoverable Damages
CASES: Fabre vs. CA, July 26, 1996; PhilAmGen Insurance vs. Sweetlines 212 SCRA 194; Ang vs.
American Steamship Agencies, 125 SCRA 543; Mitsui vs. CA, 287 SCRA 366; Fil Merchants vs.
Alejandro, 145 SCRA 42; Mayer Steel Pipe Corp. vs. CA, 274 SCRA 432; Dole Phils. vs. Maritime
Company of the Phils. Feb. 27, 1987; Insurance Company of North America v. Asian Terminals, Inc.,
G.R. No. 180784, February 15, 2012; Benjamin Cua v. Wallen Philippines Shipping, Inc., G.R. No.
171337, July 11, 2012

IX. MARITIME LAW


A. Concept of Maritime Law
B. Limited liability rule (Art. 587, 590, 643, 837, CC)
1. concept
2. exceptions to the rule
3. abandonment
C. Vessels
1. Acquisition
a. by prescription (Art. 573 & 575, CC)
b. by sale (Art. 576-578, CC)
c. registration (Sec. 810, Tariff and Customs Code)
d. ship’s manifest (Sec. 906, TCC)
2. Mortage of vessels (See relevant provisions of the Ship Mortgage Decree or PD 1521)
D. Persons who take part in Maritime Commerce
1. Shipowners and shipagents (Art. 586-588, CC)
a. Rules in case of part-owners (Art. 589-594, CC)
b. Rules in case of shipagents (Art. 595-602, CC)
2. Captains and masters of vessels
a. Qualifications (Art. 609, CC)
b. Powers and functions (Art. 610-612, CC)
c. Discretion powers
3. Pilot
a. Concept
b. Relationship to master and shipowner
4. Officers and crew of the vessel
E. Charter Parties
1. Concept
2. Kinds: bareboat and contract of affreightment
3. Persons qualified to make charter
4. Requisites of a valid charter (Art. 652, CC)
5. Concept of and liability for demurrage
6. Rights and obligations of charter parties
F. Loans on Bottomry and Respondentia
1. Definition (Art. 719, CC)
2. Distinguished from ordinary loan
3. Parties to the loan
4. Formalities needed (Art. 720, CC)
5. Effect of loss of on loan (Art. 731, CC)
6. Cases where loan is regarded as simple loan (Art. 726-729, CC)
G. Averages
1. Concept (Art. 806, CC)
2. Classes of average and the persons liable
a. Simple average (Art. 809-810, CC)
b. General average (Art. 811, 812-813, 816-818, 732, 859-861, CC)
H. Collisions
1. Definition
2. Zones in collision (see: doctrine of error in extremis)
3. Rules on liability (Art. 826-832 CC; see: doctrine of inscrutable fault)
4. Limited liability rule (Art. 837, CC)
I. Arrival under stress
1. Concept (Art. 819, CC)
2. When improper (Art. 820, CC)
3. Expenses (Art. 821-822, CC)
4. Custody of cargo (Art. 823-824, CC)
5. Captain’s liability (Art. 825, CC)
6. Rules in case of shipwreck (Art. 840-845, CC)
J. Salvage
1. Definition
2. Rights and obligations of salvors and owners (See relevant provisions of the Salvage Law)
CASES: Aboitiz Shipping Corporation vs. General Accident Fire and Life Assurance Corporation,
217 SCRA 359; Chua Yek Hong vs. IAC, Dec. 14, 1988; Monarch Insurance vs. CA, 281 SCRA 534;
PhilAmGen vs. CA, 273 SCRA 262; Vasquez vs. CA, 138 SCRA 553; Abueg vs. San Diego, 77 Phil
730; Luzon Stevedoring vs. CA, Dec. 3, 1987; Yangco vs. Laserna, Oct. 29, 1941; Yu Con vs. Ipil, G.R.
No. L-10195, Dec. 29, 1916; Inter-Orient Maritime Enterprises vs. CA, 235 SCRA 267; Far Eastern
Shipping vs. CA, Oct. 1, 1998; Caltex Phils. vs. Sulpicio Lines, Inc., 315 SCRA 709; Planters Products
vs. CA, 226 SCRA 478; A. Magsaysay, Inc. vs. Agan, Jan. 31, 1955; Macondray vs. Provident
Insurance Corporation, GR No. 154305, December 9, 2004