Quiz 7 Questions Flashcards
Discussion:
Elements of tort:
* unlawful act or omission
* damage or injury
* damage or injury in causal relation to the unlawful act or omission
* no pre-existing contractual relation between the plaintiff and defendant (but other form of obligation)
Human Relation Provision in the Civil Code of the Philippines:
Articles 21, 26, and 32.
G.R. No. 180784
1) Is COGSA applicable in this case? Why?
No. COGSA is not applicable in this case. The arrastre operator, ATI, fails to be included in the definition of a carrier of common goods.
Also, even if it were a shipowner, the operation of discharging of goods is not covered in COGSA.
G.R. No. 180784
2) Why was the shipping company not impleaded in this case?
The shipping company was not impleaded in this case due to the prescription of one year. Since the COGSA is applicable to it, the COGSA provision on prescription period applies as well.
G.R. No. 180784
3) What is the purpose why a claim under COGSA must be filed within the 15/30-day period?
The jurisprudential ruling on this is “to afford the carrier or depositary reasonable opportunity and facilities to check the validity of the claims while facts are still fresh in the minds of the persons who took part in the transaction and documents are still available.”
G.R. No. 171092
4) Is the Warsaw Convention applicable in this case? Why?
Yes. The Warsaw Convention is applicable in this case. London, the United Kingdom and Rome, Italy, where the cases should have been filed, are both signatories and “high-contracting parties” of the Warsaw Convention.
G.R. No. 171092
5) If an action is based on tort, will the Warsaw Convention apply?
Yes.
Tortious conduct is within the purview of the Warsaw Convention.
G.R. No. 171092
6) Why was the complaint dismissed?
The complaint was dismissed because the RTC (or Philippine courts in general) does not have jurisdiction to hear the case. Only courts in UK or Italy have the jurisdiction to do so.
Notes:
