COURSE OUTLINE IN
TRANSPORTATION LAW
2nd Semester, AY 2018-2019
A. Classroom Rules:
1. Attendance will be checked at the beginning of every meeting.
2. Recitation will be conducted every meeting. Students are expected, therefore, to come to
class prepared and to have read the materials scheduled to be covered during the meeting.
When a student is reciting, the rest of the class is expected to listen to him. Students are
encouraged to participate in the discussion by asking questions.
3. A student who is called to recite is expected to close his book during his recitation.
4. Electronic gadgets are not prohibited during class hours. A student is expected, however,
to turn off his mobile phone or to put it on silent mode as soon as he steps into the
classroom. If the student expects a call during the meeting, he can take the call by
discretely leaving the classroom. Laptops, tablets, and other similar electronic devices,
are not, likewise, prohibited but the students who are called to recite should close these
electronic devices for the duration of their recitation. The same rule applies to mobile
phones that serve as data storage.
5. Any student may discretely leave the classroom if and when absolutely necessary. When
a student is not in the classroom when called for recitation, he will be given a grade of 5.0
or its equivalent.
B. Grading System:
C.
Recitation
- 15
Quiz
- 15
Mid-Term Exam
- 30
Final Exam
- 40
Reference/s:
Essentials of Transportation and Public Utilities Law, Timoteo B. Aquino & RamonPaul L. Hernando
OUTLINE PROPER
PART I
a.
Common Carriers
1
A.
General Considerations
a. Definition
i. Contract of Transportation
b. Parties to a contract
i. Carriage of Passengers
ii. Carriage of Goods
1. Baliwag Transit v CA,
G.R. No. 80447
January 31, 1989
c. Perfection of Contract
1) Two types of contract of carriage of passengers
i) contract to carry
ii) contract of carriage or of common carrier
2) Aircraft
2. British Airways v CA
G.R. No. 92288
February 9, 1993
3. Korean Airlines v CA G.R. No. 114061
August 3, 1994
3) Buses, Jeepneys and others street cars
4) Trains
5) Carriage of Goods
d. Common Carrier (CC) – Definition
i. Test to determine whether a party is a CC
4. Sps. Fabre v CA,
G.R. No. 111127
July 26, 1996
ii. Characteristics
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
De Guzman v CA
G.R. No. L-47822
December 22, 1988
First Phil Industrial Corp. v CA
G.R. No. 125948
December 29, 1998
Asia Lighterage & Shipping v CA
G.R. No. 147246
August 19, 2003
LRT Authority v Marjorie Navidad, et.al G.R. No. 145804 February 6, 2003
Sps. Perena v. Sps. Nicolas, Gr No. 157917, August 29, 2012
Sps. Cruz v. Sun Holidays, GR No. 186312, 6/29/2010
National Steel v. CA, Gr No. Gr No. 112287, 12/71997
2
e. Charter Party
i)TWO TYPES :
1) Affreightment (time or voyage )
2) demise or bareboat charter f. Private Carrier
g. CC distinguished from Private Carrier
h. CC distinguished/Towage/Arrastre/Stevedoring/Travel Agency/Tramp
Service and Line Service
i. Governing Laws – ART 1766 CC expressly states that Civil Code is the
governing law of the CC. Suppletory are Code of Commerce and other special
laws
-
Art. 1753 – cases involving loss,
destruction or deterioration of goods- the
law of the country of destination shall
apply
-
Read page 39 of the book- the applicable
laws were summarized
j. ROR and Kabit System
i. Registration Laws (RA 4136)
ii. Registered Owner Rule
12. Filcar Transport v Espinas
G.R. No. 174156
June 20, 2012
13. Duavit v. CA, Gr No. 82318, 5/18/1989
14. PCI Leasing v UCPB
G.R. No. 162267
July 4, 2008
iii. Pari delicto rule
15. Teja Maketing v. IAC, GR No. 65510, 3/9/1987
16. Lita Enterprises v IAC
G.R. No. L-64693
April 27, 1984
iv. Kabit system
16. Abelardo Lim v CA, G.R. No. 125817
January 16, 2002
3
i) Land transportation Rule
ii) Aircraft and vessels
v. Boundary System
17. Sps. Hernandez v Sps Dolor
B.
G.R. No. 160286
July 30, 2004
OBLIGATIONS OF THE COMMON CARRIER
1) Basic Obligations of the Carrier
i.
Duty to Accept goods for transport/passegers
ii. Grounds for non-acceptance
iii. Duties for special classes of passengers
iv. Duty to make timely delivery of goods
1. Delay
2. Place of delivery
3. To whom delivered
v. Delay to transport passengers
18.
Trans Asia v CA
G.R. No. 118126
March 4, 1996
vi. Air Transportation (chapter 8 of the Book)
vii. Duty to exercise extraordinary diligence
19.
20.
Delsan Transport v American Home
La Mallorca v CA
, G.R. No. L-20761
G.R. No. 149019
July 27, 1966
August 15, 2006
viii. Duty to third person
4
21.
Kapalaran v Coronado
GR No. 85331
Aug 25, 1989
ix. Effect of stipulation on EOD
1. Goods
2. Passengers
3. Gratuitous Passenger
22.
Lara v Valencia
G.R. No. L-9907
June 30, 1958
x. EOD in Carriage by Sea
i. Seaworthiness
ii. Cargoworthiness
iii. Proper Manning
iv. Adequate Equipment
v. No overloading
vi. Proper storage
vii. Negligence of captain and crew
xi. Duty to take Proper Route
xii. Duty to inspect in carriage by sea
xiii. EOD in Carriage by land
xiv. Duty to inspect
xv. EOD in Carriage by Train
23.
Brinas v People
G.R. No. L-30309
November 25, 1983
- Only due diligence in traversing crossing
-Ensure the safety of other by placing safety devices and signs
24.
Phil National Railways v Vizcara
G.R. No. 190022
February 15, 2012
5
NOTE:
1)Not obliged to stop train every time he sees a person on or near the tracks;
2) Damages to properties and persons near railroad tracks (negligence caused
the destruction of neighboring properties through fire)
3) Speeding can be a proof of negligence
xvi. Passenger’s Baggage
NOTE: read LTFRB rules with respect free carriage of baggage for passengers
xvii. Hand Carried Luggage
C.
OBLIGATIONS OF THE PASSENGER AND SHIPPER
a.) Duties and Obligations
25. PAL v. CA, GR no. 188961, Oct. 13, 2009
26. Philam vs. Heung-a Shipping, GR No. 187701 and 187812, July 23, 2014
D.
DEFENSES OF THE COMMON CARRIER
a) Carriage of Goods (defenses)
i. Requisites of Fortuituos Events
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
Edgar Cokaliong v. UCPB, GR No 146018, June 25, 2003
Bascos v. CA, GR No. 101089, April 7, 1993
Son v. Cebu Autobus Company, 94 Phil 892
Juntilla v. Fontanar, GR No. L-45637, May 13, 1985
Fortune Express v. CA, GR No. 119756, 3/18/1999
Gacal v. PAL, GR No. 55300, 3/15/1990
Asian Terminals v. Simon, Gr No. 177116, 2/27/2013
Southern Lines v. CA, 45 SCRA 259
Ganzon v. CA, GR No. L-48757, 5/30/1988
b) Carriage of Passengers (defenses)
36.
Bacarro v. Castano, GR No. 34597, November 5, 1982
6
37.
38.
39.
Bachelor Express v. CA, GR No. 85691, 7/31/1990
Silverio v. Mendoza, GR No. 24471, 8/ 30/1968
Marana v. Perez, Gr No. L-22272, 6/26/1967
c) DOCTRINES (defenses)
-
acts of the shipper/passenger
contributory negligence of the shipper
proximate cause/causation
avoidable consequences
assumption of risk
last clear chance
40.
Japan Airlines v. CA, Gr No. 118664, 8/7/1998
41.
42.
43.
Calalas vs. Ca, GR No. 122039, 5/31/2000
Rabbit vs. IAC, GR No. 66102-04, 8/30/1990
Tiu v. RRIESGADO, 437 SCRA 426
d) CLAIMS
i. For overland transportation and coastwise shipping
44.
45.
UCPB v. Aboitiz, GR No. 168433, 2/10/2009
Lorenzo v. Chubb and Sons, GR. No. 147724, 6/8/2004
ii. For international carriage of goods
46.
47.
48.
Philam vs. Heung-a Shipping, GR No. 187701 and 187812, July 23, 2014
Belgian Oversease v. Philippine First, Gr No. 143133, 6/5/2002
Vector v. American, GR No. 159213, 7/3/2013
iii. For Air transportation (warsaw Convention)
49.
50.
Federal Express v. American Home, GR No. 150094, 8/18/2004
PAL v. Judge Savillo, Gr No. 149547, July 4, 2008
iv. LIMITING STIPULATIONS (defense)
E.
BILL OF LADING AND OTHER FORMALITIES
I.
CONCEPTS
i)
ii)
What is a bill of lading?
Kinds of Bill of Lading
7
iii)
iv)
v)
Parties
Prohibited Stipulations in the BL
Functions of BL
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
MOF Company v. Shin Yang, GR No. 172822, 12/18/2009
Ace Navigation v. FGU Insurance, GR No. 171591, June 25, 2012
Provident v. CA, GR No. 118030, 1/15/2004
Sweet Lines v. Judge Teves, GR No. L-37750, 5/19/1978
Edgar Cokaliong v. UCPB, GR No. 146018, 6/25/2003
Shewaram v. PAL, GR No. L-20099, 7/7/1966
Belgian Overseas v. Phil First Insurance, GR No. 143133, 6/5/2002
Philam vs. Heung-a Shipping, GR No. 187701 and 187812, July 23, 2014
Saludo v. CA, GR No. 95536, 3/23/1992
National Development v. CA, GR No. L-49407 and L- 49469, 8/19/1988
F.
ACTIONS AND DAMAGES IN CASE OF BREACH
i) Distinctions between Culpa contractual and Culpa aquiliana
ii) Damages
a) Definition
b) Elements
iii) Kinds of Damages (Definition and elements)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
Actual or compensatory
Moral
Nominal
Temperate or moderate
And exemplary or corrective
Attorney’s fees
Interest rate
61.
Fabre v. CA, GR No. 111127, 7/26/1996
62.
Gregorio v. Sps. Paz, Gr No. 139875, 12/4/2000
63.
Victory Liner v. Heirs of Andres, GR No. 154278, 12/27/2002
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
Spouses Ong v. CA, GR No. 117103, January 21, 1999
Pp v. Mataro, et. al, GR No. 130378, March 8, 2001
Serra v. Mumar, Gr No. 193861, March 14, 2012
Spouses Perena v. Spouses Nicolas, GR No. 157917, August 29, 2012
PAL vs. CA, GR No. 123238, 9/22/2008
Cathay v. Reyes, GR No. 185891, June 26, 2013
Expert Travel v. CA, GR No. 130030, 6/25/1999
Air France v. Gillego, GR. No. 165266, December 15, 2010
Kuwait Airways Corporation vs. PAL, GR No. 156087, May 8, 2009
British Airways v. CA, GR NO. 121824, January 29,1998
China Airlines v. Chiok, GR no. 152122, July 30, 2003
75.
UNITED AIRLINES, INC v. CA, GR no. 124110, April 20, 2001
Northwest Airlines v. Laya, GR No. 146020, May 29, 2002
Cathay Pacific v. Spouses Vasquez, GR no. 150843, 3/4/2003
Singapore v. Fernandez, GR No. 142305, 12/10/2003
Northwest Airlines v. Catapang, GR No. 174374, July 30, 2009
74.
75.
76.
77.
8
78.
American Airlines vs. CA, GR No. 116044-45, 3/9/2000
G.
AIRCRAFT AND CIVIL AVIATION
i) Applicable Laws
ii) Aircraft- Definition
iii) Parties
iv) Classification of aircraft charters
v) Cabotage
80.
Kuwait Airways Corporation vs. PAL, GR No. 156087, May 8, 2009
H.
OBLIGATIONS OF CARRIER IN AIR TRANSPORTATION
i)
Extraordinary of air transportation
ii)
Instances that air carrier be made liable with respect to care of baggages
iii)
Instances where the Air carrier may deny passenger from boarding
81.
UNITED AIRLINES, INC v. CA, GR no. 124110, April 20, 2001
82.
Northwest Airlines v. Laya, GR No. 146020, May 29, 2002
83.
Air France v. Gillego, GR. No. 165266, December 15, 2010
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.
90.
91.
92.
93.
94.
95.
Sabena v. CA, GR No. 104685, 3/14/1996
Saludo v. CA, GR No. 95536, 3/23/1992
Trans World Airlines v. CA, GR No. 78656, 8/30/1988
PAL v. CA, GR No. 119641, 3/14/1996
Air France v. Carrascoso, Gr No. L-21438, 9/28/1966
China v. Chiok, GR no. 152122, 7/30/2003
PAL v. Lopez, GR No. 156654, 11/20/2008
Japan Airlines v. CA, GR No. 118664, 8/7/1998
Northwest v. Catapang, GR No. 174364, 7/30/2009
Northwest v. Spouses Heshan, GR No. 179117, 2/3/2010
PAL v CA, GR No. 123238, 12/10/2003
Northwest Airlines v. Laya
I.
THE WARSAW CONVENTION
i) Warsaw Convention
ii) Liabilites under Warsaw Convention
iii) Venue
iv) Rules on Notice of claim
96.
Lhuillier v. British Airways, GR No. 171092, 3/15/2010
97.
Federal Express v. American Home, GR No. 150094, 8/18/2004
9
98.
PAL v. CA and Mejia, GR NO. 119706, 3/14/1996
99.
United Airlines v. Uy, Gr No. 127768, 11/19/1999
100.
American Airlins v. CA, GR No. 116044-45, 3/9/2000
101.
Lufthansa German v. CA, GR No. 83612, 11/24/1994
PART III
J.
MARITIME LAW
GENERAL CONCEPTS
a) Maritime Law (definition)
b) Limited Liability Rule
i) To 3rd person
ii) Ship co-owned
iii) Exceptions
102.
LOADSTAR SHIPPING V. CA, GR No. 131621, September 28, 1999
NOTE: Abandonment of the vessel is the number 1 requirement to avail of the right of LLR, but if
the vessel was entirely lost then this requirement can be dispensed with.
NOTE:
For enforcement of all claims against the shipowner, no preference is given either
you filed your cases ahead of the other, if your case is completed, it shall remain pending until all
other cases against the shipowner is done before execution can be done.
103.
Aboitiz Shipping v. CA, GR No. GR No. 121833, 10/17/2008
104.
Aboitiz v. General Accident, GR No. 100446, 1/21/1993
105.
De la Torre v. CA, GR no. 160088 and GR No. 160565, 7/13/2011
106.
Abueg v. San Diego, L-773, 12/17/1946
107.
Ohta Development v. Steamship Pompey, GR No. 100446, January 21, 1993
c) Protest
i)
ii)
Definition
When required
d) Jurisdiction
108.
Crescent Petroleum v. M/V Lok Maheshwari, GR No. 155014, 11/11/2005
e) MARINE POLLUTION DECREE
i) Prohibited Acts
ii) Exceptions
iii) Pollution insurance
f) MARINA Insurance (amount of coverage)
10
K.
VESSELS
a) Vessel
i) Definiion
ii ) Importance
109.
LOPEZ V. DURUELO, GR NO. 29166, October 22, 1928
iii) Kinds
iv) Acquisition and Registration
L.
SHIP MORTGAGE AND MARITIME LIENS
NOTE: Mortgage and encumbrances over vessels are governed by the provisions of PD 1521,
otherwise known as the Ship Mortgage Decree of 1978. The provision of PD 1521 with respect to
mortgage prevail over the Code of Commerce and Civil Code provisions.
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
What is Preferred Mortgage?
Requirements for ship mortgage to be considered preferred mortgage
Preferred claims provided in Section 17 of the Ship Mortgage Decree
Prescription
Who may constitute
i)
110.
M.
Requirements
POLIAND Industrial v. NDC, 467 SCRA 500, August 22, 2005
PERSONS WHO TAKE PART IN MARITIME COMMERCE
NOTE:
The shipowner is the person who is primarily liable for damages sustained in the
operation of vessel.
1) PARTIES
a. Ship Agent
i)
Extent of Liability
ii)
Powers and Functions
b. Part Owners
c. Captain and Masters of Vessel
i)
Qualifications
ii)
Powers and Functions
iii)
Liability
d. Pilotage
NOTE: powers inherent in the position of captain and liability of captains and ship agents to third
persons with respect to contracts
e. Pilotage
NOTE: He is, generally, personally liable for damage caused by his own negligence or default to the
owners of the vessel and third persons in a collision. But in one case, the court held that the owner
11
should be responsible to the injured acts and it is the owner who should run after the pilot. All the
more if the pilot is employed by the shipowner.
111.
N.
Inter- Orient Maritime v. NLRC, GR NO. 115286, August 11, 1994
CHARTER PARTIES
a) Charter Party
i) Definition
ii) Kinds
112.
PLANTER PRODUCTS V. CA, GR NO. 101503, September 15, 1993
113.
LITONJUA SHIPPING V. NATIONAL SEMAN, GR No. 51910, August 10, 1989
114.
CALTEX v. SULPICIO LINES, GR No. 131166, September 30, 1999
115.
REPUBLIC v. FORBES, GR No. 152313, October 19, 2011
iii) Parties
iv) Requisites
116.
O.
De La torre vs. CA, GR NO. 160088 160565, July 31, 2011
LOANS ON BOTTOMRY AND RESPONDENTIA
a) Bottomry
b) Respondentia
c) Distinctions of bottomry/respondentia from simple loan
d) Authorized to constitute loans on bottomry/respondentia
e) Forms
f) Effects
P.
AVERAGES
a) Averages
i) Definition
ii) Classification
1)simple(definition)
2) general average
i) Definition
ii) Requisites
iii) Legal Steps
12
iv) Jettison
NOTE: if there is a loan but the goods are lost, then it’s the lender who shall bear the loss. Example
of simple averages are found in art. 809 of COC
117.
National Development v. CA, GR No. L-49407, August 19, 1988
NOTE:
examples of General average read Art. 811 of the COC
v) Goods not entitled to claim general average
118.
American Home Assurance v. CA, GR No. 94149, May 5, 1992
119.
Standard Oil v. Castelo, GR no. 13695, October 18, 1921
NOTE: YORK-ANTWERP RULES- parties may by stipulation in the charter party agree that this
rule shall be applied
Q.
COLLISIONS
A)
Collision/Allision
a) Definition
b) Zones in collision
120.
Urrutia & Co. v. Baco River, GR NO. 7675, March 25, 1913
c) Governing law
NOTE: SPECIFIC RULES UNDER THE Code Of Commerce IN CASE OF COLLISION
ARTICLES--- 826, 827, 828, 832, 831
121.
SMITH BELL v. CA, GR No. 56294, May 20, 1991
B) Protest
122.
US v. Smith Bell, Gr no. 1875, September 30, 1905
123.
Luzon Stevedoring v. CA, GR No. L-58897, December 3, 1987
124.
Litonjua Shipping v. National Seamen, GR NO. 51910, August 10, 1989
R.
ARRIVAL UNDER STRESS AND SHIPWRECKS
A)
Arrival under Stress
a) Definition
b) Steps under taken for a valid arrival under stress
c) when not lawful
b)
Shipwreck
13
NOTE: read the provisions with respect to shipwrecks
S.
SALVAGE – governing law is Act No. 2616
A) Salvage
a) Definition
b) Kinds
c) Elements of a valid Salvage
d) Persons not entitled to salvage
e) Derelict
125.
BARRIOS v. Go Thong, GR No. L-17192, March 30, 1963
f) Jetsam/Flotsam/Ligan
g) Salvage Fee
i)Limit
ii)Circumstances to consider
f) Rights and Obligations of Salvors and Owners
g) Maritime Lien
126.
G. Urrutia v. Pasig Steamer, GR No. 7294, March 22, 1912
127.
Wallace v. Pujalter & Co., GR No. L-10019, March 29, 1916
128.
Fernandez v. Thompson, GR No. 12475, March 21, 1918
T.
COGSA (Carriage of Goods by Sea Act)
A) Applicability
B) Parties
c) CLAIMS (Cogsa Act)
PART IV
U.
PUBLIC UTILITIES
PUBLIC SERVICE REGULATION
a) Public Utility/Public Service
i)
ii)
iii)
iv)
v)
vi)
vii)
viii)
Elements
Purpose
Constitutional Provisions/Limitations
Ownership
Term/Exclusivity
Amendment
Monopolies and Unfair Competition
Regulation of rates
14
129.
Metropolitan Ceby v. Adala, GR No. 168194, 7/4/2007
130.
People v. Quasha, GR No. L-6055, 6/12/1953
131.
Gamboa v. Tevez, Gr no. 176579, 10/9/2012
132.
Tatad v. Garcia, 243 SCRA 436 (1995)
133.
Kilosbayan v. Guingona, 232 SCRA 110 (1994)
134.
ABS-CBN v. Philippine Multi-Media, GrNo. 175769-70, 1/19/2009
135.
Panay Autobus v. Philippine railway, GR No. L-37869, 1/17/1933
136.
Kilusang Mayo v. Garcia, Gr no. 115381, 12/23/1994
b) Franchise and Certificate of Public Convenience (CPC)
137.
Radio Communication v. NTC, 150 SCRA 450 (1987)
138.
Francisco v. Toll Regulatory Board, Gr No. 166910, 10/19/2010
139.
Associated Communications v. NTC, GR No. 144104, 2/17/2003
c) Certificate of Public Convenience ad Necessity (CPCN)
i) baisc requirements
ii) rules and policies
iii) Free competition
iv) Instances when CPC is not required
v) transfer of certificate/other transactions
vi) revocatoin of CPC
vii) When NTC has no power to cancel legislative franchise
140.
San Pablo v. Pantranco, Gr No. L-61461, 8/21/1987
141.
Lagman v. City of Manila, GrNo. L-23305, 6/30/1966
142.
Halili v. Herras, 10 SCRA 769 (1993)
143.
Manzanal v. Ausejo, GR No. 31056, 8/4/1988
------------------------------- NOTHING FOLLOWS! --------------------------------------------------
15
16