Today is Su

Republic of the Philipp

S
Manila
SECOND DIVISION

G.R. No. 110398 Nov

NEGROS NAVIGATIO
vs.
THE COURT OF APP
RICARDO and VIRGI

MENDOZA, J.:
This is a petition for re
Court of Appeals affirm
Court's award of dama
of relatives as a result
In April of 1980, privat
purchased from the Ne
cabin tickets (#74411,
daughter, son and niec
attend a family reunion
of the M/V Don Juan,
1980.
The ship sailed from th
At about 10:30 in the e
collided off the Tablas
City, an oil tanker own
Company (PNOC) and
Corporation (PNOC/S
Several of her passen
bodies of some of the

shore, but the four me

were never found.
Private respondents fi
Regional Trial Court o
Navigation, the Philipp
the PNOC Shipping an
seeking damages for t
Miranda, 48, Rosario V
16, and Elfreda de la V
In its answer, petitione
purchased ticket numb
that the ticket numbers
and that the Don Juan
22, 1980 and sank tha
tanker M/T Tacloban C
some of the passenge
however, denied that t
actually boarded the v
bodies were never rec
the Don Juan was sea
competent crew, and t
fault of the crew of the
On January 20, 1986,
Navigation Co., Inc. en
whereby petitioner ass
and satisfaction of all c
with the collision and r
from any liability to it. T
by the trial court to be
PNOC/STC. Private re
After trial, the court ren
the dispositive portion
WHEREFORE, in view
rendered in favor of th
pay jointly and severa
To Ramon Miranda:
P42,025.00 for actual
P152,654.55 as comp
earning capacity of his
P90,000.00 as compe

death of three (3) victi

P300,000.00 as moral
P50,000.00 as exemp
amount of P634,679.5
P40,000.00 as attorne
To Spouses Ricardo a
P12,000.00 for actual
P158,899.00 as comp
earning capacity;
P30,000.00 as compe
death;
P100,000.00 as moral
P20,000.00 as exemp
amount of P320,899.0
P15,000.00 as attorne
On appeal, the Court o

Regional Trial Court with

1. Ordering and sente

severally, to pay plaint
of P23,075.00 as actu
2. Ordering and sente
severally, to pay plaint
of P150,000.00, instea
damages for the death
3. Ordering and sente
severally, to pay plaint
amount of P50,000.00
compensatory damage
Dela Victoria;
Hence this petition, ra
(1) whether the memb
actually passengers o
(2) whether the ruling

the crew members of pe

performance of their dut

(3) whether the total lo

petitioner's liability; an
(4) whether the damag
excessive, unreasona
First. The trial court

passengers of the M/
private respondent R
purchased tickets num
at P131.30 each from
No. 47-A of the M/V D
April 22, 1980. This
manifest (Exh. E) on w
names of Ardita Mira
Victoria appear.
Petitioner contends th
necessarily mean that
Petitioner asserts t
passengers purchase
use them. Hence, pri
presence of the vict
affirmed that the victi
unreliable.
This contention is wi
Miranda testified that
niece to the vessel on
them on the ship unti
reason he should c
perished in the accide
not normally lie abou
ones. It would be mor
the existence of their r
for petitioner to show
that the bodies of the
recovered from the sit
of the other passeng
this Court noted in the
Private respondent M
Edgardo Ramirez. Ra
survivors of the collisio
and Elfreda de la Vict
them. He knew Mrs. M
school. He also knew
and townmate. Ramir
her children and niec
the collision happene

them. Ramirez said h

dinner and it was ther
of the two vessels. Re
Ramirez testified that
escorted her to the ro
when the lights went
was not able to do so
stampede of passenge
Petitioner casts doub
Ramirez could not hav
hours and not run out
"storehouse" of sto
acquaintances thrown
together for hours on
while the hours away?
Petitioner also points
before he finally conta
to tell him about the fa
that it took Ramirez
respondent Miranda t
Miranda and her child
the days following the
searched for survivors
Indeed, given the fact
to even suggest that
board the ill-fated ve
because their bodies w
Second. In finding pet
to exercise the extra
carriage of passenger
court relied on the
Intermediate Appellate

death of other passeng

the proximate cause of
of the M/T Tacloban C
negligent as it found
Santisteban, was playin
officer on watch, Senior
he failed to call the atte
facing them. This Court

of the M/V Don Juan fa

at least delay the sinkin
of the ship.

Petitioner Negros Na
tolerating the playing o
crew members while o
M/V Don Juan seawor
10 to 15 minutes of its
In addition, the Court f
The Certificate of Insp
the Philippine Coast
that the total number
of whom 810 are pass
board the vessel whe
maximum number tha
Taking these circumst
Don Juan, as the fa
have avoided a collisio
that even if the Taclo
observe an internatio
Don Juan was guilt
Justice Feliciano, this
The grossness of t
underscored when on
in the context of the fo
more than twice as
Juan's" top speed wa
City" was 6.3. knots. S
complement of office
passenger vessel of
equipped with radar w
the "Don Juan's offic
City" on his radar sc
nautical miles away. V
established by the "D
still 2.7 miles away.
existed in the instan
seriously its duty of e
avoided the collision w
Juan" might well hav

exercised ordinary dili

It is true that the "Tacl
International Rules of
driven vessels meetin
her course to starboa
on the port side (left)
the two (2) vessels we
turned (for the secon
Juan" veered hard to
of the International Ru
from responsibility if t
proper care and skill
the rules.
In the petition at ba
"Tacloban City" when
in failing to take early
(2) vessels to come t
collision inevitable wh
near to the "Tacloba
inevitability, for the "D
It is noteworthy that t
port shortly before
intention to do so by
The "Don Juan" gave
intention and proceede
We conclude that Ca
are properly held liable
the collision of the "D
sinking of the "Don Ju
passengers. . . . 5
Petitioner criticizes th
case, arguing that, al
incident as that involv
and trial was conduc
the decision in this ca
and defenses pleaded
on the record of this ca
The contention is with
be true with respect
against petitioner but

ship on April 22, 198

which there can only
subscribing to the sop
falsehood on the other
Adherence to the Me
policy of maintaining
with the legal maxim
(Follow past precede
settled.) Where, as in
the same event have
situated as in a pre
competent court, the
attempt to relitigate th

Realties Corporation, 7 t
where substantially si
presented and applicab
court was bound by the
ex rel. Tollinger v. Gill, 8
decisis a ruling is final
original proceeding and
judicata doctrine. The
wise: "Stare decisis sim
conclusion reached in o
follow, if the facts are
parties may be different
this Court relied on its
parties in sustaining th
"stare decisis et non qu

Indeed, the evidence

those presented in the
Document Mecenas c
Decision of Command

Guardin BMI Case No.4

Decision of the Minist

dated 3/12/82

Resolution on the Exh

(private of the decisio

defense dated 7/27/84

Certificate of Exh. 1-A

Certificate of Stability
Nor is it true that the

the Mecenas case. T

findings on the basis
Senior Third Mate R
substantially the same
the Board of Marine
conclusions of the th
both vessels to be neg
Third. The next issue
damages notwithstand
not one of first impres
jurisprudence that a s
to passengers notw
hypothecary nature of
the shipowner. 15
In Mecenas, this Cou
(1) allowing or toleratin
playing mahjong durin
the vessel seaworthy
passengers than it
therefore, clearly liable
Fourth. Petitioner con
case applies, private
only P43,857.14 eac
Mecenas case, the a
the seven children of
formula, Ramon Miran
De la Victoria spouses
Here is where the pri
view of differences
victims. For that matte
if private respondents
the Mecenas case. T
bar only against issue
issue involved was no
not passed upon by
decision in the prev
question presently pr

case relates to damag

claimants in that case.

In the case at bar,

damages is reasonab
Miranda suffered as a
a matter of fact, three
a heart condition undo
of his family. The P1
Victoria is likewise rea
As for the amount
respondents, the app
victim should be su
formerly set in De Li

Amparo delos Santos v

Bus Lines, Inc. v. Inte
was subsequently incre
Lines, Inc. v. Court of
another interisland ship

We now turn to the d

the victims. With res
awarded damages com

In the case of victim Ard

accident was 48 years
21.33 years, and there
years old. Her gross ea
per annum, would be P
her living expenses, he
which plaintiff Ramon
damages for the loss of
30% as the living expen
account the fact that p
daughter and son who
and Law respectively.

In accordance with the

of Appeals, 22 we think

correctly determined to
contends, however, tha
job as a public school
capacity should be reck

The accepted formula

multiplied by (80 minu
that in the Philippines
in calculating the life e
of determining loss o

the Civil Code, it is a

earned income even
this case, the trial co
Miranda had a mas
becoming principal of
There was reason to
increased through the
her retirement, e.g., b
died. The gross earnin
be expected to earn
therefore, correctly
P218,077.92 (given a
life expectancy of 21.3
Petitioner contends th
60% should be dedu
merely 30% as the tria
30% is unrealistic, co
would have been sub
and inflation.
We agree with this
Court of Appeals, 23 th

for living expenses from

which is roughly 54.2%
and a training assistan
People v. Quilation, 24
earning a daily wag
P120,000.00 which wa
P234,000.00. In Peop
deduction of P19,800
deceased's annual sala
Hultman, was 17 years
as a secretary. In the ca
from Mrs. Miranda's
reasonable, so that
P109,038.96. There is
expenses constituted a
than the living expense
would have used only
larger part going to the
and unreasonable.

As for Elfreda de la V

time of her death, she

school in Malolos, B
Although a probation
working in the school
and she had a gener
be presumed that, if
have become a regu
capacity is P111,456.0
net earning = life x gro
capacity (x) expectanc
income living expense
(50%)
x = [2(80-26)] x [P6,19

3
= 36 x 3,096.00
= P111,456.00
On the other hand, the
of P23,075.00 was de
basis receipts submitt
is reasonable conside
respondent Miranda in
for his family, spendin
such as Batangas C
bodies of other victims
erecting a monument
obituaries in the Bul
novenas.
Petitioner's contention
monument and other
victims should be co
death awarded to
Indemnity for death is
rights of the deceas
integrity. 26 On the othe

of such death are for p

deceased.

As for the award of at

Appeals that the amou
Ramon Miranda and P

is justified. The appella

The Mecenas case ca
the award for attorney
or differ in each case.
Ramon Miranda who
plaintiffs-appellees D
separate testimonial
appellee Ramon Mira
plaintiffs-appellees sp
1981, p. 43). Conside
into the case as indi
stenographic notes, w
P40,000.00 for pla
P15,000.00 for plaintif
The award of exemp
P300,000.00 for Ram
la Victoria spouses
Mecenas case:
Exemplary damages a
courts to reshape beh
consequence by crea
against such behavi
standard of extraordin
that of the highest pos
carriers and in creatin
them, the law seek
employees, to tame th
to take adequate care
Court will take judicia
which grievous mariti
massive loss of life. T
afford domestic air tra
the frequent sinking
crowds of people co
prepared to use the
securing the ends o
instruments is the ins
those ends, of specia
the Philippines, is the
goods by sea. 28

WHEREFORE, the
AFFIRMED with mod
pay private responden
To private respondent
P23,075.00 for actual
P109,038.96 as comp
earning capacity of his
P150,000.00 as comp
death of three (3) victi
P300,000.00 as moral
P300,000.00 as exem
P882,113.96; and
P40,000.00 as attorne
To private responden
Victoria:
P12,000.00 for actual
P111,456.00 as compe
earning capacity;
P50,000.00 as compe
death;
P100,000.00 as moral
P100,000.00 as exem
P373,456.00; and
P15,000.00 as attorne
Petitioners are further
In the event the Phili
PNOC Shipping and T
to pay all or a portio
Negros Navigation C
such amount or amou
event of failure of Ne
necessary reimbursem
entitled to a writ of e
action.
SO ORDERED.
Regalado and Puno, J
Footnotes
1 Per Justice Eduardo
Justices Arturo B. Bue
2 180 SCRA 83 (1989

3 180 SCRA at 87.

4 Ibid.
5 Id. at 95-98.
6 J. M. Tuason & Corp
7 130 N.J. Eq. 519, 23
8 75 Ohio App. __, 62
9 Heisler v. Thomas C
394, 395 (1922). Acco
Philadelphia Co., 350
Burtt's Estate, 353 Pa
10 p. 90 at note 7.
11 Id., at note 8.
12 Id., at note 9.
13 p. 94 at note 16.
14 Id., at note 18.
15 Manila Steamship C
(1956); Chua Yek Hen
SCRA 183 (1988); He
Appeals, 186 SCRA 6
16 Eubanks v. State, T
(1947).
17 160 SCRA 70 (198
18 Supra, note 15.
19 189 SCRA 158 (19
20 246 SCRA 376 (19
21 Records, p. 721.
22 31 SCRA 511 (197
249 SCRA 54 (1995);
Appeals, 185 SCRA 1
Appellate Court, 169 S
Airlines, 49 SCRA 497
23 Supra, note 22.
24 265 SCRA 279 (19
25 Supra, note 22.
26 Geluz v. Court of A
27 Rollo, p. 62.
28 180 SCRA at 100.
The Lawphil Project - Arellano