Del Prado v MRR

DOCTRINE: Though there is no obligation on the part of street railway company to stop its cars to take on
intending passengers at other points than those appointed for stoppage. Nevertheless, when the motorman
sees a person attempting to board the car while in motion and at a place not for stopping. He should not do
any act to increase the peril of such person and if in violation of this duty the motorman in charge of the car
prematurely accelerates speed while the intending passenger is in the act of boarding the car with the result
that he slips and gets his foot crushed under the wheel of the moving car, the company is civilly liable in
damages.

CC: Manila Electric Company

Passenger: Ignacio Del Prado

Who Won: Ignacio Del Prado

FACTS:

Manila Electric operates street cars (ung mga mukhang tren sa lansangan, meron nito sa Pinas noong early
1900s. See footnote1). The subject car traverses Hidalgo St. Manila.

There are designated loading and unloading stops. However, Ignacio made "para" the car. The street car
appeared to have slowed down and so Ignacio attempted to board as the train was moving: he held the
rails with one hand and placed his one foot on the platform. But before he even secured his position, the
operator jerked the street car forward causing igancio to fall, his foot crushed under the car. He# as
amputated.

ISSUE: Who is at fault? The Manila Electric Company because of culpa contractual

HELD:

Although Ignacio attempted to board the car at an undesignated loading station, the operated is still
required to observe diligence. He cannot just jerk the car forward. The defense of diligence is not tenable
because that only obtains culpa aquiliana. This is culpa contractual, and since there is a breach of duty,
Manila Electric is liable. While Ignacio may not be completely without fault, his fault is not the proximate
cause of injury, but his actions warrant a reduction of damages.

Dissent: the motor man did not see Ignacio boarding and he was careful, his alleged herking of the streetcar
is not true