Common Carrier Flashcards
What is a common carrier? (Art. 1732)
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 theirs services to the public.
Spouses Dante Dela Cruz v. Sun Holidays, Inc.
The law makes no distinction:
(a) between one whose principal business activity is the carrying of persons or goods or both, and one who does such carrying only as an ancillary activity;
(b) between a person or enterprise offering transportation on a regular or scheduled basis AND one offering such service on an occasional, episodic or unscheduled bases;
(c) between a carrier offering its services to the general public AND one who offers services or solicits business only from a narrow segment of the general population.
Crisostomo v. CA
A travel agency is not an entity engaged in the business of transporting either passengers or goods and is therefore, neither a private nor a common carrier.
De Guzman v. CA
The concept of “common carrier” under Art. 1732 may be seen to coincide neatly with the notion of “public service” under the Public Service Act which states in section 13, par b, public service includes: xxx every person that now or hereafter may own, operate, manage, or control in the Philippines, for hire or compensation, with general or limited clientele, whether permanent, occasional or accidental, and
done for general business purposes, any common carrier, railroad, street railway, traction railway, subway motor vehicle, either for freight or passenger, or both, with or without fixed route and whatever may be its classification, freight or carrier service of any class, express service, steamboat, or steamship line, pontines, ferries and water craft, engaged in the transportation of passengers or freight or both, shipyard, marine repair shop, wharf or dock, ice plant, ice-refrigeration plant, canal, irrigation system, gas, electric light, heat and power, water supply and power petroleum, sewerage system, wire or wireless communications systems, wire or wireless broadcasting stations and other similar public services. Xxx
Further, a certificate of public convenience is not a requisite for the incurring of liability under the
Civil Code provisions governing common carriers. That liability arises the moment a person or firm acts as a common carrier
Erezo v. Jepte; Should the registered owner be liable even though he no longer operate the vehicle?
The Revised Motor Vehicle Law (Act No. 3992, as amended) provides that no vehicle may
be used or operated upon any public highway unless the same is properly registered. The main aim of motor vehicle registration is to identify the owner so that if any accident happens, or that any damage or injury is caused by the vehicles on the public highways, responsibility therefore can be fixed on a determinate individual, the registered owner… were a registered owner allowed to evade responsibility by proving who the supposed transferee
or owner is, it would be easy for him, by collusion with others or otherwise, to escape said responsibility and transfer the same to an indefinite person, or to one who possesses no property with which to respond financially for the damage or injury done. The protection that the law aims to extend to him would become illusory were the registered owner given the opportunity to escape liability by disproving his ownership.
Lim v. CA; What is Kabit System?
It is an arrangement whereby a person who has been granted a certificate of public convenience allow other persons who own motor vehicles to operate them under his license, sometimes for a fee or percentage of the earnings. Although the parties to such an agreement are not outrightly penalized by law, the kabit system is invariably recognized as being contrary to public policy and therefore void and inexistent under Art. 1409 of the civil code.
Lim v. CA; Exceptions to Kabit System
(a) Neither of the parties to the kabit system is being held for damages;
(b) The case arose from the negligence of another vehicle in using the public road to whom no representation, or such representation, or misrepresentation, was necessary;
(c) The riding public was not bothered nor inconvenience at the very least by the illegal arrangement.
Lita Enterprises v. IAC
By virtue of the fact that the KABIT SYSTEM is a void contract, being contrary to public policy, and that both parties were in fault. They shall be deemed to be in pari delicto and hence, no relief should be accorded to them by the courts.
Exceptions to the revised motor vechicle law:
(a) Without the knowledge of the owner;
(b) Lease is annotated/ registered to avoid liability.
Who should file for breach of contract fo carriage of Passengers? (Baliwag Transit Corp. v. CA)
Every action based on contract (even a contract of carriage) must be brought by the person whose contractual right has been invaded.
Distinguish CONTRACT TO CARRY v. CONTRACT OF CARRIAGE/ COMMON CARRIAGE. (British Airways v. CA)
The former is an agreement to carry the passenger at some future date which is consensual. While the latter is a real contract for not until the facilities of the carrier are actually used can the carrier be said to have already assumed the obligation of the carrier.
Actions for damages in a CONTRACT TO CARRY; British Airways v. CA
An action for damages may be sustained for breach of contract to carry. Even if no tickets were issued, a verbal contract to carry is already binding.
“Public” Ferry Service; Spouses Cruz v. Sun Holidays
When the ferry service is so intertwined with the main business as to be properly considered ANCILLARY thereto.
Constancy and tour packages which include such service can be availed of by anyone who can afford to pay the same. This service is thus available to the public.
FPIC v. CA
The Civil Code makes no distinction as to the means of transporting, as long as it is by land, water or air;
The Civil Code does not provide that the transportation should be by motor vehicle.
Asia Lighterage and Shipping, Inc. v. CA
A person or entity may be a common carrier even if has no fixed and publicly known route, maintains no, and issues no tickets.
