A. WHAT IS A COMMON CARRIER?

- 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 their services to the public. (Art. 1732, Civil
Code).
-

One that holds itself out as ready to engage in the transportation of

goods for hire as a public employment and not as a casual occupation.
(De Guzman vs. Court of Appeals, No. L-47822, December 22, 1988)

CARRIAGE OF GOODS

Parties
1. Common carrier
2. Shipper
3. Consignee
Cause of liability
Delay in delivery, loss, destruction,
or deterioration of the goods

CARRIAGE OF PASSENGERS

1. Common carrier
2. Passenger

Death or injury to the passengers

Duration of liability
From the time the goods are
unconditionally placed in the
possession of, and received by the
carrier for transportation until the
same are delivered actually or
constructively by the carrier to the
consignee or to the person who
has the right to receive them. (Art.
1736)
It remains in full force and effect
even when they are temporarily
unloaded or stored in transit unless
the shipper or owner has made use
of the right of stoppage in transitu.
(Art. 1737)
It continues to be operative even
during the time the goods are
stored in a warehouse of the
carrier at the place of destination
until the consignee has bee
advised of the arrival of the goods
and
has
had
reasonable
opportunity thereafter to remove
them or otherwise dispose of
them. (Art. 1738)
Delivery of goods to the custom
authorities is not delivery to the
consignee. (Lu Do v. Binamira, 101
Phil 120)

The 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 passengers are within its
premises and where they ought to
be in pursuance to the contract of
carriage. (LRTA v. Navidad, [2003])
All persons who remain on the
premises within a reasonable time
after leaving the conveyance are
to be deemed passengers, and
what is a reasonable time or a
reasonable delay within this rule is
to be determined from all the
circumstances, and includes a
reasonable time to see after his
baggage and prepare for his
departure. (La Mallorca v. CA, 17
SCRA 739 ; Abiotiz Shipping
Corporation v. CA, 179 SCRA 95)
It is the duty of common carriers
of passengers to stop their
conveyances a reasonable length
of time in order to afford
passengers an opportunity to
enter, and they are liable for
injuries suffered from the sudden
starting up or jerking of their
conveyances while doing so. The
duty
which
the
carrier
of
passengers owes to its patrons
extends to persons boarding the
cars as well as to those alighting

TRANSPORTATION LAW: Lawrence Jeffrey Delfin, Flerida Emma Manglicmot, Mark Joseph Mupas,
Melanie Pascua, Gilbert Ricaforte, Renato Segubiense Jr., Katleen Grace Serrano, Mary Jane Timbang

therefrom (Dangwa Trans Co., Inc.

vs. CA 202 SCRA 574).
Presumption of negligence
Art.1735 Civil Code
Reason: As to when and how goods
were damaged in transit is a
matter
peculiarly
within
the
knowledge of the carrier and its
employees. (Mirasol v. Dollar, 53
PHIL 124)
Mere proof of delivery of goods
to a carrier in good order and the
subsequent arrival of the same
goods at the place of destination in
bad order makes for a prima facie
case
against
the
carrier.
(Coastwise Lighterage Corp. v. CA,
245 SCRA 796)

Art.1755 Civil Code

Reason: The contract between the
passenger and the carrier imposes
on the latter the duty to transport
the passenger safely; hence the
burden of explaining should fall on
the carrier.

Defenses
1. Ordinary
circumstance:
Exercise of extraordinary
diligence (Art. 1735)
2. Special circumstances:
a. Flood,
storm,
earthquake, lighting, or
other natural disaster or
calamity
(plus
force
majeure)
b. Act
of
the
public
enemy in war, whether
international or civil
c. Act or omission of the
shipper or the owner of
goods
d. The character of the
goods or defects in the
packing
or
in
the
containers
e. Order
or
act
of
competent
public
authority (Art. 1734)

1. Exercise of extraordinary
diligence (Art. 1756)
2. Caso fortuito

TRANSPORTATION LAW: Lawrence Jeffrey Delfin, Flerida Emma Manglicmot, Mark Joseph Mupas,
Melanie Pascua, Gilbert Ricaforte, Renato Segubiense Jr., Katleen Grace Serrano, Mary Jane Timbang

Valid stipulations
1. Reduction of degree of diligence
to ordinary diligence, provided it
be:
a) In writing, signed by the
shipper or owner;
b) Supported by a valuable
consideration other than the
service rendered by the
carriers; and
c) Reasonable, just and not
contrary to public policy.
(Art. 1744)
2. Fixed amount of liability: A
contract fixing the sum to be
recovered by the owner or shipper
for the loss, destruction or
deterioration of the goods, if it is
reasonable and just under the
circumstances and has been fairly
and freely agreed upon. (Art. 1750)
3. Limited liability for delay: An
agreement limiting the common
carriers liability for delay on
account of strikes or riots (Art.
1748)
4. Stipulation limiting liability to
the value of the goods appearing
in the bill of lading, unless the
shipper or owner declares a
greater value. (Art. 1749)

Stipulation limiting liability when a

passenger is carried gratuitously,
but not for willful acts or gross
negligence. (Art. 1758)

The diligence required in the

carriage of the goods may be
reduced by only one degree, from
extraordinary to ordinary diligence
or diligence of a good father of a
family. (Art. 1744, Art. 1745, no. 4)
Void stipulations
1. That the goods are transported
at the risk of the owner or
shipper;
2. That carrier will not be liable
for any loss, destruction or
deterioration of the goods;
3. That the carrier need not
observe any diligence in the
custody of the goods;
4. That the carrier shall exercise
a degree of diligence less than
that of a good father of a family
over the movable transported;
5. That the carrier shall not be
responsible for the acts or
omissions of his or its employees;
6. That the carriers liability for
acts committed by thieves or
robbers who do not act with grave
or irresistible threat, violence or
force is dispensed with or

Dispensing with or lessening the

extraordinary responsibility of a
common carrier for the safety of
passengers imposed by law by
stipulation, by posting of notices,
by statements on tickets or
otherwise. (Art. 1757)

TRANSPORTATION LAW: Lawrence Jeffrey Delfin, Flerida Emma Manglicmot, Mark Joseph Mupas,
Melanie Pascua, Gilbert Ricaforte, Renato Segubiense Jr., Katleen Grace Serrano, Mary Jane Timbang

diminished;
7. That
the
carrier
is
not
responsible
for
the
loss,
destruction or deterioration of the
goods on account of the defective
condition of the car, vehicle, ship
or other equipment used in the
contract of carriage. (Art. 1745)

CAUSE OF ACTION/BREACH OF CONTRACT

1. Culpa contractual (breach of contract)
Only the carrier is primarily liable and not the driver, because there is no
privity between the driver and the passenger.
Basis: Art.1759, NCC.
No defense of due diligence in the selection and supervision of
employees.
2. Culpa aquiliana (quasi-delict)
The carrier and driver are solidarily liable as joint tortfeasors.
Basis: Art. 2180, NCC.
Defense of due diligence in the selection and supervision of employees is
available. Exception: maritime tort resulting in collision. (See notes on
Collision)
3. Culpa criminal (criminal negligence)
The driver is primarily liable. The carrier is subsidiarily liable only if the
driver is convicted and declared insolvent.
Basis: Art. 100, RPC.
In case of injury to a passenger due to the negligence of the driver of
the bus on which he is riding and of the driver of another vehicle, the
drivers as well as the owners of the two vehicles are jointly and severally
liable for damages. It makes no difference that the liability of the bus
driver and owner springs from contract while that of the owner and driver
of the other vehicle arises from quasi-delict. (Fabre vs. CA)

B. CHARACTERISTICS OF A COMMON CARRIER

Art. 1732 of the Civil Code avoids any distinction between one whose
principal business is the carrying of persons or goods or both, and one
who does such carrying only as an ancillary activity (sideline).

It also avoids a distinction between a person or enterprise offering

transportation service on a regular or scheduled basis and one offering
such service on an occasional, episodic or unscheduled basis.

Article 1732 does not distinguish between a carrier offering its services
to the general public, that is the general community or population, and
one who offers services or solicits business only from a narrow
segment of the general population.

A person or entity is a common carrier even if he did not secure a

Certificate of Public Convenience

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.

TRANSPORTATION LAW: Lawrence Jeffrey Delfin, Flerida Emma Manglicmot, Mark Joseph Mupas,
Melanie Pascua, Gilbert Ricaforte, Renato Segubiense Jr., Katleen Grace Serrano, Mary Jane Timbang

A person or entity may be a common carrier even if he has no fixed

publicly known route, maintains no terminals, and issues no tickets.

Undertakes to carry for all people indifferently and thus is liable for
refusal without sufficient reason (Lastimoso vs. Doliente, 3 SCRA ,
[1961]);

Cannot lawfully decline to accept a particular class of goods for

carriage to the prejudice of the traffic in these goods;

No monopoly is favored (Batangas Trans. vs. Orlanes, 52 Phil. 455);

Provides public convenience.

C. TESTS WHETHER A PARTY IS A COMMON CARRIER OF GOODS:

1. He must be engaged in the carrying of goods for others as a public
employment, and must hold himself out as ready to engage in the
transportation of goods or persons generally as a business and not as a
casual occupation.
2. He must undertake to carry goods of the kind to which his business is
confined;
3. He must undertake to carry by the method by which his business is
conducted and over his established roads; and
4. The transportation must be for hire.
E. DISTINCTIONS
CARRIER

BETWEEN

Common Carrier
As to passengers
Holds himself out for all
indiscriminately.

COMMON CARRIER AND

PRIVATE

Private Carrier
people Contracts with particular individuals
or groups only.

As to required diligence
Requires extraordinary diligence.

Requires only ordinary diligence.

As to state regulation
Subject to regulation.

Not subject to regulation.

As to stipulation on limiting liability

Parties may not agree on limiting the Parties may agree on limiting the
carriers liability except when provided carriers liability, provided not
by law.
contrary to law, morals or good
customs.
Presumption as to fault and negligence
Presumption of fault or negligence No fault or negligence is presumed.
applies.
As to laws applicable on damages
Law on common carriers.
Law on obligations and contracts.

B. EXTRAORDINARY DILIGENCE
REQUIREMENT OF EXTRAORDINARY DILIGENCE
Common Carriers, from the nature of their business and for reasons of

TRANSPORTATION LAW: Lawrence Jeffrey Delfin, Flerida Emma Manglicmot, Mark Joseph Mupas,
Melanie Pascua, Gilbert Ricaforte, Renato Segubiense Jr., Katleen Grace Serrano, Mary Jane Timbang

public policy, are bound to observe extraordinary diligence on the vigilance

over goods and for the safety of the passengers transported by them
according to all the circumstances of each case. (Art. 1733, Civil Code)
Coverage
1.
2.

Vigilance over goods (Arts. 1734-1754)

Safety of passengers (Arts. 1755-1763)

Passenger - A person who has entered into a contract of carriage, express or

implied, with the carrier. They are entitled to extraordinary diligence from the
common carrier.
Persons Not Considered As Passengers
1.
One who has not yet boarded any part of a vehicle regardless of
whether or not he has purchased a ticket;
2.
One who remains on a carrier for an unreasonable length of
time after he has been afforded every safe opportunity to alight;
3.
One who has boarded by fraud, stealth, or deceit;
4.
One who attempts to board a moving vehicle, although he has a
ticket, unless the attempt be with the knowledge and consent of the
carrier;
5.
One who boarded a wrong vehicle, has been properly informed
of such fact, and on alighting, is injured by the carrier; or
6.
One who rides any part of the vehicle which is unsuitable or
dangerous or which he knows is not designed or intended for
passengers.
RULES ON PRESUMPTION OF NEGLIGENCE:
A. In the Carriage of Goods:
In case of loss, destruction and deterioration of goods, common carriers
are presumed to be at fault or have acted negligently, unless they
prove that they exercise extraordinary diligence.
In the transport of goods, mere proof of delivery of goods in good order
to a carrier and the subsequent arrival of the same goods at the place
of destination in bad order makes for a prima facie case against the
carrier.
B. In the Carriage of Passengers:
In case of death or injury to passengers, common carriers are presumed
to be at fault or have acted negligently, unless they prove that they
exercise extraordinary diligence. .(Art. 1755,NCC)
The court need not make an express finding of fault or negligence of
common carriers. The law imposes upon common carriers strict
liability, as long as it is shown that there exists a relationship between
the passenger and the common carrier and that injury or death took
place during the existence of the contract.
The common carrier is not an absolute insurer against all possible risks
of transportation or travel. (Pilapil vs. CA et al, 180 SCRA 546)
Doctrine of Proximate Cause is NOT applicable to contract of carriage
The injured passenger or owner of goods need not prove causation to
establish his case. The presumption arises upon the happening of the
accident. (Calalas v. CA, 383 SCRA, [2002])
DEFENSES OF COMMON CARRIERS
General Rule: Common carriers are responsible for the loss, destruction or
deterioration of the goods.
Exceptions: The same is due to any of the following causes only:
TRANSPORTATION LAW: Lawrence Jeffrey Delfin, Flerida Emma Manglicmot, Mark Joseph Mupas,
Melanie Pascua, Gilbert Ricaforte, Renato Segubiense Jr., Katleen Grace Serrano, Mary Jane Timbang

a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

Flood, storm, earthquake, lightning or other natural disaster or calamity;

Act of public enemy in war, whether international or civil;
Act or omission of the shipper or the owner of the goods;
The character of the goods or defects in the packing or in the containers;
Order or act of competent authority. (Art.1734, Civil Code)

The above enumeration is exclusive. If not one of those enumerated

is present, the carrier is liable. (Belgian Chartering and Shipping, N.V.
v. Phil. First Insurance Co.,Inc., 383 SCRA, 2002)
The exceptions in Art 1734 must be proven whether the presumption of
negligence applies. Common carriers are bound to observe
extraordinary diligence in the vigilance over the goods transported by
them. They are presumed to have been at fault or to have acted
negligently if the goods are lost, destroyed or deteriorated. To
overcome the presumption of negligence in case of loss, destruction or
deterioration of the goods, the common carrier must prove that it
exercised extraordinary diligence. There are, however, exceptions to
this rule. Article 1734 of the Civil Code enumerates the instance when
the presumption of negligence does not attach. (Delsan v. Trans.
American Home Insurance, August 15, 2006)

A. Caso Fortuito / Force Majeure

Requisites:
a. Must be the proximate and only cause of the loss;
b. Event independent of human will;
c. Occurrence makes it impossible for debtor to fulfill the obligation in a
normal manner;
d. Obligor must be free of participation in, or aggravation of, the injury to
the debtor; and
e. Impossible to foresee or impossible to avoid.
o Fire is not considered a natural disaster or calamity as it arises
almost invariably from some act of man or by human means unless
caused by lightning or by natural disaster or calamity. It may even
be caused by the actual fault or privity of the common carrier.
(Eastern Shipping Lines Inc. vs. IAC, 150 SCRA 469, [1987])
o Mechanical defects are not force majeure if the same was
discoverable by regular and adequate inspections. (Aquino T. &
Hernando, Notes and Cases on the Law on Transportation and
Public Utilities, , R.P. 2004 ed. p.120-122)
B. Act of God
Requisites:
1. The common carrier must have exercised extraordinary diligence
before, during and after the time of the accident;
2. The event must be unforeseen or even if it can be foreseen, it cannot
be avoided;
3. There must have been no undue delay on the part of the common
carrier;
4. The proximate cause must not be committed by the common carrier.

Fortuitous event must be established to be the proximate cause

of the loss. (Asia Lighterage and Shipping, Inc. v. CA, et al., 409
SCRA, [2003])

Exemption to Liability From Natural Disasters or Calamities:

1. The natural disaster must have been the proximate cause of the loss.
2. It must have been the cause of the loss.
TRANSPORTATION LAW: Lawrence Jeffrey Delfin, Flerida Emma Manglicmot, Mark Joseph Mupas,
Melanie Pascua, Gilbert Ricaforte, Renato Segubiense Jr., Katleen Grace Serrano, Mary Jane Timbang

The common carrier must have exercised due diligence to prevent or

minimize the damage or loss before, during and after the natural
disaster.
4. The common carrier has not negligently incurred delay in transporting
the goods.
3.

C.

Acts of Public Enemy In War

Requisites:
1. The act of the public enemy must have been the proximate and only
cause of the loss; and
2. The common carrier must have exercised due diligence to prevent or
minimize the loss before, during or after the act causing the loss,
deterioration or destruction of the goods (Art. 1739, Civil Code)

D. Act or Omission of the Shipper or Owner of Goods

1. The act or omission of the shipper/owner must have been the sole and
proximate cause of the loss. This is an absolute defense.
2. Contributory Negligence: partial defense. (Art. 1741, Civil Code )
Doctrine of Contributory Negligence

Failure of a person who has been exposed to injury by the fault or

negligence of another, to use such degree of care for his safety and
protection as ordinarily prudent men would use under the
circumstances. (Rakes v. Atlantic, Gulf and Pacific Co., 7 Phil. 359
[1907])

The common carrier shall be liable even if the shipper or owner merely
contributed to the loss, destruction or deterioration of the goods, the
proximate cause thereof being the negligence of the common carrier,
the latter shall be liable in damages, which, however, shall be equitably
reduced. (Art. 1741, Civil Code)

E. Character of the Goods or Defects in the Packing or in the Container

That the loss, destruction or deterioration was caused by the character
of the goods or the faulty packing or containers.
Even if the damage should be caused by the inherent defect/character
of the goods, the common carrier must exercise due diligence to
forestall or lessen the loss. (Art. 1742, Civil Code)
o

The rule is that if the improper packing is known to the carrier or his
employee or is apparent upon ordinary observation, but he
nevertheless accepts the same without protest or exception
notwithstanding such condition, he is not relieved of liability for the
resulting damage. (A.F. Sanchez Brokerage Inc. vs. C.A., 447
SCRA 427, [2004])

E. Order or Act of Public Authority

The common carrier is not ipso facto relieved from

liability due to the loss, destruction or deterioration of goods caused by
public authority.
Requisites:
The common carrier must prove that the public authority has the power
to issue the order for the seizure or destruction of the goods.
The common carrier must exercise extraordinary diligence to prevent or
minimize the loss, destruction or deterioration of he goods at the time
of the accident.
o

Said public authority must have the power to issue the order (Article

TRANSPORTATION LAW: Lawrence Jeffrey Delfin, Flerida Emma Manglicmot, Mark Joseph Mupas,
Melanie Pascua, Gilbert Ricaforte, Renato Segubiense Jr., Katleen Grace Serrano, Mary Jane Timbang

1743, Civil Code). Consequently, where the officer acts without legal
process, the common carrier will be held liable. (Ganzon v. CA 161,
SCRA 646 [1988])

D. DURATION OF RESPONSIBILITY OR LIABILITY OF COMMON

CARRIERS
A. IN CASE OF GOODS
START: From the time that the goods are delivered to the common carrier.
(Article 1736, Civil Code. Cia Maritima vs. Insurance Co. of America)
TERMINATION: When the goods are delivered, actively or constructively, by
the carrier to the consignee/person who has the right to receive them, or the
consignee/person who has the right to receive them has been informed of the
arrival of the goods and the consignee had reasonable time to remove such.
(Article 1736 and 1738, Civil Code)
The liability remains in full force and effect even when they are
temporarily unloaded or stored in transit unless the shipper or owner made
use of the right of stoppage in transitu. (Article 1737, Civil Code)
WHEN RIGHT OF STOPPAGE IN TRANSITU IS EXERCISED:
It is the right of the unpaid seller who has parted with his goods to stop
its delivery while in transit when the buyer of the goods is or turns insolvent.
(Article 1530, Civil Code)
The common carrier who holds the goods becomes the warehouseman
or ordinary bailee and the contract is terminated when such right is exercised.
Requisites:
1. Unpaid seller (Article 1525, Civil Code);
2. Goods must be in transit (Article 1531, Civil Code);
3. The seller must either actually take possession of the goods sold or
give notice of his claim to the carrier or other person in possession
(Article 1532 [1], Civil Code);
4. The seller must surrender the negotiable document of title, if any,
issued by the carrier or bailee (Article 1532[2], Civil Code);
5. The seller must bear the expenses of delivery of the goods after the
exercise of the right (Article 1532[2], Civil Code); and
6. The buyer is in a state of insolvency or becomes insolvent.
B. IN CASE OF PASSENGERS
START: The carrier is bound to exercise utmost diligence with respect to
passengers the moment the person who purchases the ticket (or a token)
from the carrier presents himself at the proper place and in a proper manner
to be transported. Such person must have bona fide intention to use the
facilities of the carrier, possess sufficient fare with which to pay for his
passage, and present himself to the carrier for the transportation in the
manner provided. (Vda. De Nueca v. Manila Railroad Company, CA, G.R. No.
31731, January 30, 1968)
It is the duty of carriers of passengers to stop their conveyances for a
reasonable length of time in order to afford passengers an opportunity to
board and enter, and they are liable for injuries suffered by boarding
passengers resulting from the sudden starting up or jerking of their
conveyances (Dangwa Transportation Co., Inc. vs. CA, 202 SCRA [1991])
TERMINATION: Until the passenger has, after reaching his destination,
TRANSPORTATION LAW: Lawrence Jeffrey Delfin, Flerida Emma Manglicmot, Mark Joseph Mupas,
Melanie Pascua, Gilbert Ricaforte, Renato Segubiense Jr., Katleen Grace Serrano, Mary Jane Timbang

safely alighted from the carriers conveyance or had a reasonable opportunity

to leave the carriers premises. (La Mallorca v. CA, 17 SCRA 739 [1966])
A person by stepping and standing on the platform of a bus, is already
considered a passenger and is entitled to all rights and protection pertaining
to such conventional relation (I.d.).
E. RULES ON PASSENGERS BAGGAGE
1. Baggage in the custody of the passengers or their employee:
That baggage, while in transit will be considered as necessary deposits. The
common carrier shall be responsible for the baggage as depositaries,
provided that notice was given to them or its employees and the passengers
took the necessary precautions which the carrier has advised them relative
to the care and vigilance of their baggage.
2. Baggage not in personal custody, but in that of a Carrier
Carrier who has in its custody the baggage of a passenger to be
carried like any other goods is required to observe extraordinary
diligence. In case of loss or damage, the carrier is presumed
negligent. As to the other baggage, the rules in Article 1998 and
2000 to 2003 of the Civil Code concerning the responsibility of
hotel-keepers shall be applicable. (Art.1733-1735, Civil Code)
BILL OF LADING
The written acknowledgment of the receipt of goods, and the
agreement to transport them to a specific place to a person named or to his
order. It is not indispensable for the creation of a contract of carriage.
(Compania Maritima v. Insurance Co. of North America 12 SCRA 213 [1964])
Two-fold Character of a Bill of Lading:
1.
It is receipt of the goods to be transported; and
2.
It constitutes a contract of carriage of the goods.
Functions:
1.
Best evidence of the existence of the contract of
carriage of cargo (Art. 353 Code of Commerce);
2.
Commercial document whereby, if negotiable,
ownership may be transferred by negotiation; and
3.
Receipt of cargo.
Limitations as to the Carriers Liability:
A stipulation in the Bill of Lading limiting the liability of the carrier to an
agreed valuation unless the shipper declares a higher value and pays a
higher rate of freight is valid.

However, the carrier cannot limit its liability for injury to, or loss of,
goods shipped where such injury or loss was caused by its own
negligence.
o

The surrender of the original bill of lading is not a condition precedent

for a common carrier to be discharged of its contractual obligation. If
surrender of the original bill of lading is not possible, acknowledgment
of the delivery by signing the delivery receipt suffices. (RP v. Lorenzo
Shipping, February 7, 2005)

Kinds of Bill of Lading:

1. On Board - issued when the goods have been actually placed aboard the
ship with very reasonable expectation that the shipment is as good as on
TRANSPORTATION LAW: Lawrence Jeffrey Delfin, Flerida Emma Manglicmot, Mark Joseph Mupas,
Melanie Pascua, Gilbert Ricaforte, Renato Segubiense Jr., Katleen Grace Serrano, Mary Jane Timbang

10

its way.
2. Received - one in which it is stated that the goods have been received for
shipment with or without specifying the vessel by which the goods are to
be shipped.
3. Negotiable - one in which it is stated that the goods referred to therein will
be delivered to the bearer or to the order of any person named therein.
4. Non-Negotiable - One in which it is stated that the goods referred to
therein will be delivered to a specified person.
5. Clean One which does not indicate any defect in the goods.
6. Foul One which contains a notation thereon indicating that the goods
covered by it are in bad condition.
7. Spent One which covers goods that already have been delivered by the
carrier without a surrender of a signed copy of the bill.
8. Through One issued by the carrier who is obliged to use the facilities of
other carriers as well as his own facilities for the purpose of transporting
the goods from the city of the seller to the city of the buyer, which bill of
lading is honored by the second and other interested carriers who do not
issue their own bills.
9. Custody One wherein the goods are already received by the carrier but
the vessel indicated therein has not yet arrived in the port.
10. Port One which is issued by the carrier to whom the goods have been
delivered, and the vessel indicated in the bill of lading by which the goods
are to be shipped is already in the port where the goods are held for
shipment.
On-Board Bill of Lading v. Received for Shipment Bill of Lading:
An On Board Bill of Lading is one in which it is stated that the goods
have been received on board the vessel which is to carry the goods. An on
board bill of lading is issued when the goods have been actually placed
aboard the ship with every reasonable expectation that the shipment is as
good as on its way. It is, therefore, understandable that a party to a maritime
contract would require an on board bill of lading because of its apparent
certainty of shipping as well as the seaworthiness of the vessel which is to
carry the goods. (Magellan Mfg.,etc. v. Court of Appeals, 201 SCRA 116117[1991])
A Received for Shipment Bill of Lading is one which it is stated that
the goods have been received for shipment without specifying the vessel by
which the goods are to be shipped. Received for shipment bills of lading are
issued wherever conditions are not normal and there is insufficiency of
shipping space. (Magellan Mfg., etc. v. Court of Appeals,201 SCRA 116)
OBLIGATIONS OF THE CARRIER
A. Duty to Accept the Goods
General Rule: A common carrier cannot ordinarily refuse to carry a
particular class of goods.
Exception: For some sufficient reason the discrimination against the
traffic in such goods is reasonable and necessary. (Fisher vs. Yangco
Steamship Co. 31 Phil 1 [1915]).
Instances when the carrier may validly refuse to accept the goods:
1. Goods sought to be transported are dangerous objects, or substances
including dynamite and other explosives;
2. Goods are unfit for transportation;
3. Acceptance would result in overloading;
4. Contrabands or illegal goods;
5. Goods are injurious to health;
6. Goods will be exposed to untoward danger like flood, capture by
enemies and the like;
7. Goods like livestock will be exposed to disease;
TRANSPORTATION LAW: Lawrence Jeffrey Delfin, Flerida Emma Manglicmot, Mark Joseph Mupas,
Melanie Pascua, Gilbert Ricaforte, Renato Segubiense Jr., Katleen Grace Serrano, Mary Jane Timbang

11

8. Strike;
9. Failure to tender goods on time.
In case of carriage by railway, the carrier is exempted from liability if
carriage is insisted upon by the shipper, provided its objections are
stated in the bill of lading.
o However, when a common carrier accepts cargo for shipment for
valuable consideration, it takes the risk of delivering it in good condition
as when it was loaded. (PAL vs. CA, 226 SCRA 423 )
B. Duty to deliver the goods
Not only to transport the goods safely but to deliver the same to the
person indicated in the bill of lading. The goods should be delivered to the
consignee or any other person to whom the bill of lading was validly
transferred or negotiated.
o

TIME OF DELIVERY
Stipulated in Contract/Bill
of Lading
Carrier is bound to fulfill the
contract and is liable for any
delay; no matter from what
cause it may have arisen.

No stipulation
1.
2.

Within a reasonable time.

Carrier is bound to forward them in
the 1st shipment of the same or similar
goods which he may make to the point of
delivery. (Art. 358 Code of Commerce)

Effects of delay:
1. Merely suspends and generally does not terminate the contract of
carriage.
2. Carrier remains duty bound to exercise extraordinary diligence.
3. Natural disaster shall not free the carrier from responsibility (Art.1740,
Civil Code)
4. If delay is without just cause, the contract limiting the common carriers
liability cannot be availed of in case of loss or deterioration of the goods
(Art.1747, Civil Code)
C. Duty to exercise extraordinary diligence
o Inquiry may be made as to the nature of passengers baggage, but
beyond this constitutional boundaries are already in danger of being
transgressed. (Nocum vs. Laguna Tayabas Bus Co., 30 SCRA 68)[this
doctrine is not applicable to aircrafts because of Section 8 of AntiHijacking Law (RA 6235)]

TRANSPORTATION LAW: Lawrence Jeffrey Delfin, Flerida Emma Manglicmot, Mark Joseph Mupas,
Melanie Pascua, Gilbert Ricaforte, Renato Segubiense Jr., Katleen Grace Serrano, Mary Jane Timbang

12

RIGHT OF CONSIGNEE TO ABANDON GOODS

Instances:
1. Partial non-delivery, where the goods are useless without the others (Art.
363, Code of Commerce);
2. Goods are rendered useless for sale or consumption for the purposes for
which they are properly destined (Art. 365, Code of Commerce); and
3. In case of delay through the fault of the carrier (Art. 371, Code of
Commerce).
NOTICE OF DAMAGE
Requisites for Applicability:
1. Domestic/inter-island/coastwise transportation
2. Land/water/air transportation
3. Carriage of goods
4. Goods shipped are damaged (Art. 366, Code of Commerce)
Rules:
a. Patent damage: shipper must file a claim against the carrier immediately
upon delivery (it may be oral or written)
b. Latent damage: shipper should file a claim against the carrier within 24
hours from delivery.
o These rules do not apply to misdelivery of goods. (Roldan vs. Lim
Ponzo)
o The filing of notice of claim is a condition precedent for recovery.
Purpose of Notice: To inform the carrier that the shipment has been
damaged, and it is charged with liability therefore, and to give it an
opportunity to make an investigation and fix responsibility while the matter is
fresh.
Prescriptive Period
Not provided by Article 366. Thus, in such absence, Civil Code rules on
prescription apply.
If despite the notice of claim, the carrier refuses to pay, action must be
filed in court.
1. If no bill of lading was issued: within 6 years
2. If bill of lading was issued: within 10 years.
COMBINED CARRIER AGREEMENT
General Rule: In case of a contract of transportation of several legs, each
carrier is responsible for its particular leg in the contract. (Art. 373, Code of
Commerce)
Exception: A combined carrier agreement where a carrier makes itself liable
assuming the obligations and acquiring as well the rights and causes of action
of those which preceded it.
TRANSPORTATION LAW: Lawrence Jeffrey Delfin, Flerida Emma Manglicmot, Mark Joseph Mupas,
Melanie Pascua, Gilbert Ricaforte, Renato Segubiense Jr., Katleen Grace Serrano, Mary Jane Timbang

13

ARTICLE 366 (COC)

SECTION 3(6) (COGSA)

Applicability
1. Domestic/inter1.
International/overseas/f
island/coastwise
oreign (from foreign country to
transportation.
Philippines).
2. Land, water, air transportation.
subject to the rule on
3. Carriage of goods.
Paramount Clause
4. Maritime transportation.
2. Water/maritime
transportation
3. Carriage of goods
Notice of damage
1. Filing of notice of claim for the
1. Filing of a notice of claim for the
damages is a condition
damages is not a condition
precedent
precedent
2. 24-hour period for claiming
2. 3-day period for claiming latent
latent damage.
damage.
Prescriptive period
None provided; Civil Code
One year from the date of delivery
applies.
(delivered but damaged goods), or
date when the vessel left port or from
the date of delivery to the arrastre
(non-delivery or loss).

TRANSPORTATION LAW: Lawrence Jeffrey Delfin, Flerida Emma Manglicmot, Mark Joseph Mupas,
Melanie Pascua, Gilbert Ricaforte, Renato Segubiense Jr., Katleen Grace Serrano, Mary Jane Timbang

14