1980 Bar Exams

1. Question:
Tirso Molina charters a vessel owned and operated by Star Shipping Co., a common carrier,
for the purpose of transporting two tractors to his logging concession. The crane operator of the
shipping company somehow negligently puts the tractors in a place where they would tilt each
other. During the trip, a strong wing hits the vessel, causing severe damage to the tractors.
Tirso Molina sues the shipping company for damages. The latter cites a stipulation in the
charter agreement exempting the company from liabiloity for loss or damage arising from the
negligence of its agents. Tirso Molina countered by stating that the aforementioned stipulation is
against public policy and, therefore null and void.
Is the stipulation valid? Would you hold the shipping company liable?
Answer:
Yes, the stipulation in the chrater is valid, and the Star Shipping Co. is not liable. The Civil Code
provisions on common carriers should not apply where the common carrier is not acting as
such but as a private carrier, as in the case in the above problem. A common carrier
undertatking to carry a special cargo or chartered to a special person only, becomes a
private carrier. As a private carrier, a stipulation exempting the owner (Star Shipping Co.)
from liability for the negligence of its agent is valid, being not against public policy. (Home
Insurance Co. v. American Steamship Agencies, April 4, 1968; 23 SCRA 24)

2. Question:
Vessels U and V collided with each other causing damage to both vessels. Vessel U
had the last clear chance to avoid the collision but failed to do so.
1. Is the doctrine of last clear chance in tort applicable to collisions of veseels at sea under
the Code of Commerce? Which vessel should shoulder liability for the damage suffered
by bith vessels and by the cargo?
2. Assume tat the negligence of the captain of vessel U was the proximate cause of the
collision, while the negligence of the captain of the vessel V was merely contributory.
To which vessel should the collision be deemed imputable?
Answer:
1. The doctrine of last clear chance in tort is not applicable to collisions of vessels at sea
under the Code of Commerce, and the case is deemed as if the collision is imputable to
bothe vessels; thus, each one of the vessels shall suffer her own damage, and bothe
shall be solidarily liable for the damages occasioned to their cargoes. (See Arts. 827 &
828, Code of Commerce; C.B. Williams v. Yangco, 27 Phil. 68; Sarasola v. Sontua, 47
Phil. 365)
2. The collision shall be deemed imputable also to bothe vessels, as in the preceding
answer to No. 1 question. Since the doctrine of contributory negligence in tort is not
also applicable to collisions of vessels at sea under the Code of Commerce, the case is
deemed as if the collision if imputable to both vessels. (Arts. 827 &828, Code of
Commerce; Govt of P.I. v. Phil. Steamship Co. Inc., 44 Phil. 359.)