Several passengers including gatchalian were injured

This preview shows page 1 - 3 out of 11 pages.

road, went off the road, turned turtle and fell into a ditch. Several passengers, including Gatchalian, were injured. They were promptly taken to the hospital for medical treatment. Gatchalian sustained physical injuries on the leg, arm and forehead. Petitioner Gathalian filed with the CFI an action extra contractu to recover compensatory and moral damages. She alleged that her injuries had left her with a conspicuous white scar measuring 1 by 1/2 inches on the forehead, generating mental suffering and an inferiority complex on her part; and that as a result, she had to retire in seclusion and stay away from her friends. She also alleged that the scar diminished her facial beauty and deprived her of opportunities for employment. Issue: W/ N Respondent should be held liable? YES Ruling: . To exempt a common carrier from liability for death or physical injuries to passengers upon the ground of force majeure, the carrier must clearly show not only that the efficient cause of the casualty was entirely independent of the human will, but also that it
Image of page 1
was impossible to avoid. Any participation by the common carrier in the occurrence of the injury will defeat the defense of force majeure. We have already noted that a duty to exercise extraordinary diligence in protecting the safety of its passengers is imposed upon a common carrier. In case of death or injuries to passengers, a statutory presumption arises that the common carrier was at fault or had acted negligently "unless it proves that it [had] observed extraordinary diligence as prescribed in Articles 1733 and 1755". In fact, because of this statutory presumption, it has been held that a court need not even make an express finding of fault or negligence on the part of the common carrier in order to hold it liable. To overcome this presumption, the common carrier must show to the court that it had exercised extraordinary diligence to prevent the injuries. The standard of extraordinary diligence imposed upon common carriers is considerably more demanding than the standard of ordinary diligence, i.e., the diligence of a good paterfamilias established in respect of the ordinary relations between members of society. A common carrier is bound to carry its passengers safely "as far as human care and foresight can provide, using the utmost diligence of a very cautious person, with due regard to all the circumstances" In the case at bar, the records before the Court are bereft of any evidence showing that respondent had exercised the extraordinary diligence required by law. Breach of Contract of Carriage Singapore Airlines v Andion Facts : Andion Fernandez is an acclaimed soprano here in the Philippines and abroad. At the time of the incident, she was availing an educational grant from the Federal Republic of Germany. She was invited to sing before the King and Queen of Malaysia on February 3 and 4, 1991. For this singing engagement, an airline passage ticket was purchased from petitioner Singapore Airlines which would transport her to Manila from Frankfurt, Germany on January 28, 1991. From Manila, she would proceed to Malaysia on the next day.
Image of page 2
Image of page 3

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 11 pages?

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

Stuck? We have tutors online 24/7 who can help you get unstuck.
A+ icon
Ask Expert Tutors You can ask You can ask You can ask (will expire )
Answers in as fast as 15 minutes