LRTA v Natividad| GR 145804| February 6, 2003|Vitug, J. b. For Prudent: Nothing to link the agency with Nicanor’s death.

No proof
that Escartin hit Nicanor. Merely established the fact of death by getting
Summary: Natividad and Escartin, a security guard on duty, had an altercation. hit by a train.
Natividad fell on the LRT tracks just as a train was coming in. He died. No proof was
adduced as to who started the fight, who hit first, or how Natividad fell. TC held Prudent ISSUE with HOLDING
(employer) and Escartin liable. CA exonerated the two and held Roman and LRTA 1. Is LRTA and Roman liable? (Yes for LRTA; NO for Roman)
liable. SC agreed that no link was established between the death and Prudent bc no
negligence on part of the employee (Escartin) was ever established. LRTA is liable LRTA: the CA ignored the evidence and the factual findings of the trial court by
based on the contract of carriage. holding them liable on the basis of a sweeping conclusion that the presumption of
negligence on the part of a common carrier was not overcome.
DOCTRINE
The law renders a common carrier liable for death of or injury to passengers Escartin’s assault of Nicanor, which caused the latter to fall on the tracks was an act
(a) through the negligence or willful acts of its employees or of a stranger and cannot be foreseen or prevented. force majeure. Also, no EER
(b) on account of willful acts or negligence of other passengers or of strangers if the between Escartin and Roman as the latter admitted that he was the employee of Metro
common carriers employees through the exercise of due diligence could have Transit.
prevented or stopped
the act or omission. Natividads: Contract of carriage was deemed created from the moment Nicanor paid
for the fare and entered the premises, thus he as entitled to all the rights and protection
In case of such death or injury, a carrier is presumed to have been at fault or been under a contractual relation. Ca correct is holding pet liable for failing to exercise
negligent, and by simple proof of injury, the passenger is relieved of the duty to still extraordinary diligence of a common carrier
establish the fault or negligence of the carrier or of its employees and the burden shifts
upon the carrier to prove that the injury is due to an unforeseen event or to force Under Art 1755, 1756, 1759, 1763 of NCC, the law requires common carriers to carry
majeure. passengers safely using the utmost diligence of very cautious persons with due regard
for all circumstances. Such duty of a common carrier to provide safety to its passengers
so obligates it not only during the course of the trip but for so long as the
FACTS
passengers are within its premises and where they ought to be in pursuance to the
1. Oct 14, 1993: At about 7:30 PM, Nicanor Natividad, then drunk, entered the EDSA
contract of carriage.
LRT station after buying a token. While standing on the platform, Junelito Escartin,
the security guard assigned to the area approached Nicanor.
The law renders a common carrier liable for death of or injury to passengers
2. An altercation/misunderstanding between the 2 ensued and led into a fist fight. No
(a) through the negligence or willful acts of its employees or
evidence was adduced as to who started the fight, who between the 2 gave the
(b) on account of willful acts or negligence of other passengers or of strangers
first blow or how Nicanor fell on the tracks.
if the common carriers employees through the exercise of due diligence could
3. At the exact moment that Nicanor fell, an LRT train, operated by Rodolfo Roman,
have prevented or stopped the act or omission.
was coming in. The train hit Nicanor and killed him.
4. The heirs of Nicanor (wife+children) filed a complaint for damages against
(impt) In case of such death or injury, a carrier is presumed to have been at fault
Escartin, Roman, LRTA, Metro Transit, and Prudent (Security Agency of Escartin),
or been negligent, and by simple proof of injury, the passenger is relieved of the
for the death of Nicanor.
duty to still establish the fault or negligence of the carrier or of its employees
a. LRTA and Roman filed a counterclaim against Navidad and a cross-claim
and the burden shifts upon the carrier to prove that the injury is due to an
against Escartin and Prudent. Prudent, in its answer, denied liability and
unforeseen event or to force majeure.
averred that it had exercised due diligence in the selection and
supervision of its security guards.
Liability of:
b. The LRTA and Roman presented their evidence while Prudent and
Escartin, instead of presenting evidence, filed a demurrer contending that
A. LRTA: Based on the contract of carriage and its obligation to indemnify is by reason
Navidad had failed to prove that Escartin was negligent in his assigned
of its failure to exercise high diligence required of a common carrier, which resulted in
task.
a breach of contract. It may choose to hire its own employees or avail of services of an
outside firm but as a common carrier it is not relieved of its responsibilities under the
5. TC held Prudent and Escartin liable. CA modified by exonerating Prudent and
contracat of carriage
Escartin and holding LRTA and Roman liable.
a. For LRTA: There was already a contract of carriage when Nicanor
entered the place where the passengers were supposed to be after
paying the fare and getting the token.
1
B. Prudent: NO, it is not. If at all liable, it would be under Art 2176 and 2180. But the
liability would be on the basis of its negligence in the supervision and selection of its
employees.

A liability for tort may arise even under a contract, where tort is that which breaches the
contract. In short, when an act which constitutes a breach of contract would have itself
constituted the source of a quasi-delict liability had no contract existed between the
parties, the contract can be said to have been breached by tort, thereby allowing the
rules on tort to apply.

And as stated by CA, the death has no link with Prudent bc negligence of Escartin the
employee had not been duly proven.

C. Rodolfo Roman: No liability. No showing that he was guilty of any culpable act or
omission.

DISPOSITIVE PORTION
LRTA liable