Planters Products, Inc. v.

CA, Soriamont Steamship Agencies and Kyosei KisenKabushiki

Kaisha
G.R. No. 101503 September 15, 1993
FACTS:
Planters Products purchased from Mitsubishi Interl Corp. 9.3K metr
i c t o n s o f U r e a (fertilizer), 46% of which the latter shipped in bulk aboard the cargo vessel
M/V Sun Plum owned by Kyosei Kisen Kabushiki Kaisha (KKKK). A T i m e C h a r t e r Party on the vessel M/V Sun Plum pursuant to the Uniform General
Charter was entered into between Mitsubishi as shipper/charter and KKKK
a s s h i p o w n e r.
Before loading the
fertilizer aboard the
vessel
they were
inspected by the charterers representative and found fit for loading. After the Urea fertilizer
was loaded in bulk by stevedores (somebody whose job is to load and unload ships) hired by
and under the supervision of the shipper, the steel hatches were closed with heavy
iron lids, covered with 3 layers of tarpaulin, then tied with steel bonds. The hatches
remained closed and tightly sealed throughout the entire voyage.
Port area was windy, certain portions of the route to the warehouse
were sandy and the weather was variable, raining occasionally while the discharge was in progress.
Survey report revealed a shortage in the cargo of 106.726 M/T and that a portion of
the Urea fertilizer approximating 18 M/T was contaminated with sand, rust and dirt. Planters
Products sent a claim letter to Soriamont Steamship Agencies, the resident agent of the carrier,
for damages.
ISSUE: WON a common carrier becomes a private carrier by reason of a charter-party;
HELD:
Yes. The Supreme Court defined Charter- party as a contract by which an entire ship, or
some principal part thereof, is let by the owner to another person for a specified time
or use; a contract of affreightment by which the owner of a ship or other vessel lets the
whole or a part of her to a merchant or other person for the conveyance of goods, on a particular
voyage, in consideration of the payment of freight It went further on discussing the two types
of charter-party:
a. contract of affreightment involves the use of shipping space on vessels leased by the owner
in part or as a whole, to carry goods for others; may either be:
i)time charter -vessel is leased to the charterer for a fixed period of time; or

ii)voyage charter - ship is leased for a single voyage

b.charter by demise or bareboat charter whole vessel is let to the charterer with a transfer to
him of its entire command and possession and consequent control over its navigation,
including the master and the crew, who are his servants
In both types, the charter
party provides for the hire of vessel only, either for a
determinate period of time or for a single or consecutive voyage, the ship owner to supply the
ships stores, pay for the wages of the master and the crew, and defray the expenses for the
maintenance of the ship.
Distinction between a common or public carrier and a private or special carrier lies in
the character of the business, such that if the undertaking is a single transaction,
not a part of the general business or occupation, although involving the carriage of goods for a
fee, the person or corporation offering such service is a private carrier.
Common carrier should observe extraordinary diligence in the vigilance over the goods
they carry; in case of loss, destruction or deterioration of the goods, it is presumed to be at fault
or to have acted negligently, and the burden of proving otherwise rests on it. Private carrier
-exercise of ordinary diligence in the carriage of goods will suffice; no such presumption applies
to private carriers only when the charter includes both the vessel and its crew, as in a bareboat
or demise that a common carrier becomes private, at least insofar as the particular voyage
covering the charter-party is concerned when Planters Products chartered the vessel M/V Sun
Plum, the ship captain, its officers and compliment were under the employ of the ship owner
and therefore continued to be under its direct supervision and control. As stranger to the crew
and to the ship, Planters Products did not have the duty of caring for its cargo as it did
not have control of the means in doing so.