JOSE P. MECENAS, ROMEO P. MECENAS, LILIA P. MECENAS, ORLANDO P. MECENAS, VIOLETA M.

ACERVO,
LUZVIMINDA P. MECENAS; and OFELIA M. JAVIER, petitioners,
vs.
HON. COURT OF APPEALS, CAPT. ROGER SANTISTEBAN and NEGROS NAVIGATION CO., INC.,respondents.
FELICIANO, J.
December 14, 1989
G.R. No. 88052
Doctrine
In requiring compliance with the standard which is in fact that of the highest possible degree of diligence, from
common carriers and in creating a presumption of negligence against them, the law seeks to compel them to
control their employees, to tame their reckless instincts and to force them to take adequate care of human
beings and their property
Facts

Issues/Ratio

Leaving of the two vessels: On April 22, 1980, M/V Tacloban City (TC) left Amlan, Negros Oriental
bound for Manila. M/V Don Juan (DJ) left Manila bound for Bacolod.
The unfateful swerve: TC had visual contact of DJ when they were about 5 miles apart and as a
precaution, it was steered to its left. DJ had radar contact of TC when they were four miles apart and
following R18 of the International Rules of the Road when a collision is possible, it was steered to its
right.
Collision: At 10:30 PM, both collided as a result of which DJ sank 15 minutes later and hundreds of its
passengers perished.
Filed a case: Petitioners, children of the victims, filed a case against Negros Navigation, owner of DJ,
based on quasi-delict.
The RTC: awarded damages of P 400,000 for the death of plaintiffs' parents and P 15,000 for
attorney's fees.
The CA: modified the award to P 100,000 as actual and compensatory damages.

Who was negligent? M/V Tacloban was primarily and solely at fault. M/V Don Juan was also at
fault.
As found by the CFI, DJ steered to the right while TC continued its course to the left. There
can be no excuse for them not to realize that with such maneuvers, they will collide. They
executed maneuvers inadequately and too late, to avoid collision. The question is WON the
defendants were recklessly or grossly negligent. The SC ruled in the affirmative.
As for the captain, he was playing mahjong before and up to the time of the collision. WON
he was then off-duty is immaterial; there is, both realistically speaking and in contemplation of
law, no such thing as off-duty hours for the master of a vessel at sea that is a CC upon whom
the law imposes the duty of extraordinary diligence. When the collision occurred, the captain
failed to supervise his crew in the process of abandoning the ship and he failed to avail of
measures to prevent the too rapid sinking of his vessel, thus aggravating the casualties.
As for Negros Aviation, in permitting, or in failing to discover and correct the regularity of the
captain's mahjong sessions while DJ was at sea, it must be deemed grossly negligent. It also
sailed with an overload (1,004 passengers and crewmembers).
As for the failure of TC to follow R18 by turning right instead of left, the SC ruled that it is not
applicable and will not relieve DJ from responsibility if the collision could have been avoided by
proper care and skill on her part or even by a departure from the rules. DJ is still at fault when,
upon seeing TC turn to its left, it still turned to its right resulting in the collision.

W/N liable for EXEMPLARY DAMAGES YES

In an action based upon a breach of the contract of carriage, the carrier under our civil law is
liable for the death of passengers arising from the negligence or wilful act of the carrier's
employees although such employees may have acted beyond the scope of their authority or
even in violation of the instructions of the carrier, which liability may include liability for moral
damages.
Whether petitioners are entitled to exemplary damages as claimed must depend upon whether
or not private respondents acted recklessly, that is, with gross negligence. We believe that the
behaviour of the captain of the "Don Juan" in this instance playing mahjong "before and up to
the time of collision" constitutes behaviour that is simply unacceptable on the part of the
master of a vessel to whose hands the lives and welfare of at least seven hundred fifty (750)
passengers had been entrusted. There is also evidence that the "Don Juan" was carrying more
passengers than she had been certified as allowed to carry. We conclude that Capt. Santisteban
and Negros Navigation are properly held liable for gross negligence. We find no necessity for
passing upon the degree of negligence or culpability properly attributable to PNOC and PNOC
Shipping or the master of the "Tacloban City," since they were never impleaded here.

Exemplary damages are designed by our civil law to permit the courts to reshape
behaviour that is socially deleterious in its consequence by creating negative incentives
or deterrents against such behaviour.

 In requiring compliance with the standard of extraordinary diligence, a standard which is in fact
that of the highest possible degree of diligence, from common carriers and in creating a
presumption of negligence against them, the law seeks to compel them to control their
employees, to tame their reckless instincts and to force them to take adequate care of human
beings and their property. Both the demands of substantial justice and the imperious
requirements of public policy compel us to the conclusion that the trial court's implicit award of
moral and exemplary damages was erroneously deleted and must be restored and augmented
and brought more nearly to the level required by public policy and substantial justice.

Petition for Review on certiorari is hereby GRANTED

[Transpo | Prof. Angeles]