Author: Atty. Angeli Andan
WHAT IS A COMMON CARRIER
Under Article 1732 of the Civil Code, common carriers are persons, corporations, firms or associations engaged in the business of carrying or transporting passengers or goods or both, by land, water, or air, for compensation, offering their services to the public. This definition has been supported by the Court in the case of Sps. Jesus and Elizabeth Fernando vs. Northwest Airlines, Inc. (2017).
In Asia Lighterage and Shipping, Inc. v. C.A, the Court ruled that the test to determine a common carrier is whether the given undertaking is a part of the business engaged in by the carrier which he has held out to the general public as his occupation rather than the quantity or extent of the business transacted. As such, the peculiarity of a common carrier is not the number of the transactions they have entered into but rather whether or not they are holding themselves out to the public as one engaged in the business of transporting passengers or goods.
It is important to determine if the party is a common carrier to understand the proper law to apply in a particular case. If the party involved is a common carrier, then the law that applies is the law on common carrier under the Civil Code.
VIGILANCE OVER GOODS
The diligence required of common carriers is extraordinary diligence in the vigilance over the goods and for the safety of the passengers transported by them, according to all the circumstances of each case.
“Extraordinary diligence” refers to that extreme measure of care and caution which persons of unusual prudence and circumspection observe for securing and preserving their own property or rights. According to the case of Loadmasters Customs Services, Inc., vs. Glodel Brokerage Corp, the purpose of imposing a standard of care on common carriers is to tilt the scales in favor of the shipper who is at the mercy of the common carrier once the goods have been lodged for shipment.
As such, the burden of proof in proving such diligence is on the part of the common carrier unless they prove that they exercised extraordinary diligence in transporting the goods.
However, the law also specified the following exempting causes wherein the common carrier can raise exemption from liability:
1. Flood, storm, earthquake, lightning, or other natural disaster or calamity;
2. Act of the public enemy in war, whether international or civil;
3. Act of omission of the shipper or owner of the goods;
4. The character of the goods or defects in the packing or in the containers;
5. Order or act of competent public authority. (Art. 1734, New Civil Code)
It is important to note that if the goods are lost due to natural disaster, the natural disaster must have been the proximate and only cause of the loss in order that the common carrier may be exempted from responsibility. However, Article 1740 of the New Civil Code provides that if the common carrier negligently incurs delay in transporting the goods, a natural disaster shall not free such carrier from responsibility.
SAFETY OF PASSENGERS
In case of safety of passengers, a common carrier is bound to carry the passengers safely as far as human care and foresight can provide, using the utmost diligence of very cautious persons, with a due regard for all the circumstances.
If there is injury or death on the passengers of the common carrier, it is presumed that the common carriers are at fault or to have acted negligently, unless they prove that they observed extraordinary diligence as prescribed by law. In short, the automatic presumption applies to the possible negligence of the common carrier, and not on its liability.
In the case of Sps. Teodoro and Nanette Perena vs. Sps Nicolas and Teresita Zarate, PNR, et. al., the Court ruled that to successfully fend off liability in an action upon the death or injury to a passenger, the common carrier must prove his or its observance of that extraordinary diligence; otherwise, the legal presumption that he or it was at fault or acted negligently would stand.
LIABILITY OF COMMON CARRIERS FOR ACTS OF EMPLOYEES
The rule is that the common carrier cannot pass on their liability to their employees. Common carriers are liable for the death of or injuries to passengers through the negligence or wilful acts of the former’s employees, although such employees may have acted beyond the scope of their authority or in violation of the orders of the common carriers. Therefore, the common carrier is bound by the actions of their employees.
LIABILITY OF COMMON CARRIERS FOR ACTS OF STRANGERS
The rule is that the common carrier is liable for acts of strangers only if the common carrier’s employees through the exercise of the diligence of a good father of a family could have prevented or stopped the act or omission.
CONCLUSION
In all cases, common carriers are required to observe extraordinary diligence in the vigilance over goods and in the safety of passengers. Otherwise, common carriers are liable in the eyes of the law.
Got questions or concerns? Reach out to us via email at info@baisandanlaw.com or give us a call at (045) 281 0164 or 0915 968 2503.