II. CAPTAINS AND MASTERS OF VESSELS A. CONCEPT In Yu Con v. Glicerio Ipil, et al.

, the Supreme Court Spanish commentaries on the Code of Commerce which explain that strictly speaking, the name of the captain or master is given, according to the kind of vessel, to the person in charge of it.

CAPTAIN is applied to those who govern vessels that navigate the high seas or ships of large dimensions and importance, although they be engaged in the coastwise trade. MASTERS are those who command smaller ships engaged exclusively in the coastwise trade. Nevertheless, it was also clarified that for purposes of maritime commerce, the words captain and master have the same meaning; both being the chiefs or commanders of ships. Thus, the terms captain and master are used SYNONYMOUSLY in the CODE OF COMMERCE. Similarly, pertinent regulations issued by the Maritime Industry Authority (MARINA) defines a master as the person having command of the ship. The same term is being used both for domestic trade and international trade. On the other hand, boat captain means a person authorized by the MARINA to act as officer and/or in command of a boat/ship or has the qualification/license to act as such.

B. QUALIFICATIONS ARTICLE 609 provides that (1st par) Captains, masters, patrons of vessels must be Filipinos legal capacity to contract in accordance with this code and prove the skill, capacity, and qualifications necessary to command and direct the vessel, as established by marine or navigation laws, ordinances, or regulations and must not be disqualified according to the same for the discharge of the duties of the position

(2nd par) If the owner of a vessel desires to be the captain thereof, without having the legal qualifications therefor, he shall limit himself to the financial administration of the vessel, and shall intrust the navigation to a person possessing the qualifications required by said ordinances and regulations. C. POWERS AND FUNCTIONS A master or captain, for purposes of maritime commerce, is one who has command of a vessel. A captain commonly performs three (3) distinct roles: (1) he is a general agent of the shipowner; (2) he is also commander and technical director of the vessel; and (3) he is a representative of the country under whose flag he navigates. By far, the most important is the role performed by the captain as commander of the vessel; for such role has to do with the operation and preservation of the vessel during its voyage and the protection of the passengers (if any) and crew and cargo. As a general agent of the shipowner, the captain has authority to sign bills of lading, carry goods aboard and deal with the freight earned, agree upon rates and decide whether to take cargo. The ship captain As agent of the shipowner, has legal authority to enter into contracts with respect to the vessel and the trading of the vessel, subject to applicable limitations established by statute, contract or instructions and regulations of the shipowner. To the captain is committed the governance, care and management of the vessel. Clearly, the captain is vested with both management and fiduciary functions. The Code of Commerce provides for the following powers and obligations of the captain or master as well as the procedure for the exercise thereof. o Article 610

The following powers shall be inherent in the position of captain, master or patron of a vessel: 1. To appoint or make contracts with the crew in the absence of the ship agent, and to propose said crew, should said agent be present; but the ship agent may not employ any member against the captains express refusal. 2. To command the crew and direct the vessel to the port of its destination, in accordance with the instructions he may have received from the ship agent. 3. To impose, in accordance with the contracts and with the laws and regulations of the merchant marine, and when on board the vessel, correctional punishment upon those who fail to comply with his orders or are wanting in discipline, holding a preliminary hearing on the crimes committed on board the vessel on the seas, which crimes shall be turned over to the authorities having jurisdiction over the same at the first port touched. 4. To make contracts for the charter of the vessel in the absence of the ship agent or its consignee, acting in accordance with the instructions received and protecting the interests of the owner with utmost care. 5. To adopt all proper measures to keep the vessel well supplied and equipped, purchasing all that may be necessary for the purpose, provided there is no time to request instruction from the ship agent. 6. To order, in similar urgent cases while on a voyage, the repairs on the hull and engines of the vessel and in its rigging and equipment, which are absolutely necessary to enable it to continue and finish its voyage; bur if he should arrive at a point where there is a consignee of the vessel, he shall act in concurrence with the latter. o ARTICLE 611 (Sources of funds)

In order to comply with the obligations mentioned in the preceding article, the captain, when he has no funds and does not expect to receive any from the ship agent, shall obtain the same in the successive order stated below; 1. By requesting said funds from the consignee of the vessel or correspondents of the ship agent. 2. By applying to the consignees of the cargo or to those interested therein. 3. By drawing on the ship agent. 4. By borrowing the amount required by means of a loan on bottomry. 5. By selling a sufficient amount of the cargo to cover the sum absolutely indispensable for the repair of the vessel and to enable it to continue its voyage. In these two last cases he must apply to the judicial authority of the port, if in the Philippines, and to the consul of the Republic of the Philippines if in a foreign country, and where there is none, to the local authority, proceeding in accordance with the provisions of Article 538, and with the provisions of the law of civil procedure. o ARTICLE 612 The following obligations shall be inherent in the office of captain: 1. To bring on board the proper certificate and documents

2. To have a copy of the Code of Commerce To keep a Log Book, Accounting Book and Freight Book 3. To have three folioed and stamped books, placing at the beginning of each one a memorandum of the number of folios it contains, signed by the

maritime authority, and in his absence by the competent authority. To keep a Log Book, Accounting Book and Freight Book 4. Before receiving cargo, to make with the officers of the crew and two experts, if required by the shippers and passengers, an examination of the vessel, in order to ascertain whether it is watertight, with the rigging and engines in good condition, and with the equipment required for good navigation, preserving under his responsibility a certificate of the memorandum of his inspection, signed by all those who may have taken part therein. The experts shall be appointed, one by the captain of the vessel and another by those who request its examination, and in case of disagreement a third shall be appointed by the marine authority of the port or by the authority, exercising his functions. 5. To remain constantly on board the vessel with the crew while the cargo is being taken on board and to carefully watch the stowage thereof; Not to consent to the loading of any merchandise or matter of a dangerous character, without the precautions which are recommended for their packing, handling and isolation; Not to permit the carriage on deck of any cargo which by reason of its arrangement etc. which might endanger the safety of the vessel; And if, on account of the nature of the merchandise, the special character of the shipment, and principally the favorable season in which it is undertaken, merchandise may be carried on deck, he must hear the opinion of the officers of the vessel and have the consent of the shippers and of the ship agent.

6. To demand a pilot at the expense of the vessel whenever required by the navigation, and principally when he has to enter a port, canal, or river, or has to take a roadstead or anchoring place with which neither he nor the officers and crew are acquainted. 7. To be on deck on reaching land and to take command on entering and leaving ports, canals, roadsteads, and rivers, unless there is a pilot on board discharging his duties. He shall not spend the night away from the vessel except for serious causes or by reason of official business. 8. To present himself, when making a port in distress o to the maritime authority if in the Philippines o to the consul of the Republic of the Philippines if in a foreign country, before 24 hours have elapsed, and to make a statement of the name registry, and port of departure of the vessel, of its cargo, and the cause of arrival which declaration shall be visaed by the authority or consul, if after examining the same it is found to be acceptable, giving the captain the proper certificate proving his arrival in distress and the reasons therefore. In the absence of the maritime authority or of the consul, the declaration must be made before the local authority. 9. To take the necessary steps before the competent authority in order to record in the certificate of the vessel in the registry of vessels the obligations which he may contract in accordance with Article 583 10. To place under good care and custody all the papers and belongings of any members of the crew who might die on the vessel, drawing up a detailed inventory, in the presence of passengers, or, in their absence, of members of the crew as witnesses.

11. To conduct himself according to the rules and precepts contained in the instructions of the ship agent, being liable for all that which he may do in violation thereof. 12. To inform the ship agent from the port at which the vessel arrives, of the reason of his arrival etc.; to notify him of the cargo he may have received, stating the names and domiciles of the shippers, freightage earned, and amounts borrowed on bottomry loan; to advise him of his departure, and of any operation and date which may be of interest to him. 13. To observe the rules with respect to situation, lights and maneuvers in order to avoid collisions. 14. To remain on board, in case the vessel is in danger, until all hope to save it is lost, and before abandoning it, to hear the officers of the crew, abiding by the decision of the majority; and if the boats are to be taken to, he shall take with him, before anything else, the books and papers, and then the articles of most value, being obliged to prove, in case of the loss of the books and papers, that he did all he could to save them. 15. In case of wreck, to make the proper protest in due form at the first port of arrival, before the competent authority or the Philippine consul, within 24 hours, specifying therein all the incidents of the wreck, in accordance with subdivision 8 of this article. 16. To comply with the obligations imposed by the laws and regulations on navigation, customs, health, and others. D. DISCRETION OF CAPTAIN OR MASTER A ships captain must be accorded a reasonable measure of discretionary authority to decide what the safety of the ship and of its crew and cargo specifically requires on a stipulated ocean voyage. The captain is held responsible, and properly so, for such safety.

He is right there on the vessel, in command of it and (it must be presumed) knowledgeable as to the specific requirements of seaworthiness and particular risks and perils of the voyage he is to embark upon. The applicable principle is that the captain has control of all departments of service in the vessel, and reasonable discretion as to its navigation. It is the right and duty of the captain, in the exercise of sound discretion and in good faith, to do all things with respect to the vessel and its equipment and conduct of the voyage which are reasonably necessary for the protection and preservation of the interests under his charge, whether those be of the shipowners, charterers, cargo owners or underwriters.

It is a basic principle that in navigating the vessel, the master must be left free to exercise his own best judgment. Under the requirements of safe navigation, the judgment and discretion of the captain of a vessel may be confined within a straitjacket, even in this age of electronic communications. E. PILOTAGE A pilot, in maritime law, is a person duly qualified, and licensed, to conduct a vessel into or out of ports, or in certain waters. In a broad sense, the term pilot includes both: (1) those whose duty it is to guide vessels into or out of ports, or in particular waters, and (2) those entrusted with the navigation of vessels on the high seas. However, the term pilot is more generally understood as a person taken on board at a particular place for the purpose of conducting a ship through a river, road or channel, or from a port. States possessing harbors have enacted laws or promulgated rules requiring vessels approaching their ports to take on board pilots licensed under the local law. This is known as COMPULSORY PILOTAGE. In this jurisdiction, compulsory pilotage is being implemented in the Port of Manila. The Port of Manila is within the Manila Pilotage District which is under compulsory pilotage pursuant to Section

8, Article III of Philippine Ports Authority Administrative Order No. 03-85, which provides that: Sec. 8. Compulsor Pilotage Service. For entering a harbor and anchoring thereat, or passing through rivers or straits within a pilotage district, as well as docking and undocking at any pier/wharf, or shifting from one berth or another, every vessel engaged in coastwise and foreign trade shall be under compulsory pilotage. . . .
-

In case of compulsory pilotage, the respective duties and responsibilities of the compulsory pilot and the master have been specified by the same regulation in this wise: Sec. 11. Control of vessels and liability for damage. On compulsory pilotage grounds, the Harbor Pilot providing the service to a vessel shall be responsible for the damage caused to a vessel or to life and property at ports due to his negligence or fault. He can only be absolved from liability if the accident is caused by force majeure or natural calamities provided he has exercised prudence and extra diligence to prevent or minimize damage. The Master shall retain overall command of the vessel even on pilotage grounds whereby he can countermand or overrule the order or command of the Harbor Pilot on beard. In such event, any damage caused to a vessel or to life and property at ports by reason of the fault or negligence of the Master shall be the responsibility and liability of the registered owner of the vessel concerned without prejudice to recourse against said Master. Such liability of the owner or Master of the vessel or its pilots shall be determined by competent authority in appropriate proceedings in the light of the facts and circumstances of each particular case. Sec. 32. Duties and responsibilities of the Pilot or Pilots' Association. The duties and responsibilities of the Harbor Pilot shall be as follows: f) a pilot shall be held responsible for the direction of a vessel from the time he assumes his work as a pilot thereof until he leaves it anchored or berthed safely; Provided, however, that his responsibility shall cease at the moment the Master neglects or refuses to carry out hisorder.

Customs Administrative Order No. 15-65 issued twenty years earlier likewise provided in Chapter I thereof for the responsibilities of pilots: Par. XXXIX. A Pilot shall be held responsible for the direction of a vessel from the time he assumes control thereof until he leaves it anchored free from shoal: Provided, That his responsibility shall cease at the moment the master neglects or refuses to carry out his instructions. Par. XLIV. Pilots shall properly and safely secure or anchor vessels under their control when requested to do so by the master of such vessels. a. Master and Pilot CASE: FAR EASTERN SHIPPING COMPANY vs. COURT OF APPEALS When a licensed pilot is employed in a place where pilotage is compulsory, it is his duty to insist on having effective control of the vessel, or to decline to act as pilot. Under certain systems of foreign law, the pilot does not take entire charge of the vessel, but is deemed merely the adviser of the master, who retains command and control of the navigation even in localities where pilotage is compulsory. It is quite common for states and localities to provide for compulsory pilotage, and safety laws have been enacted requiring vessels approaching their ports, with certain exceptions, to take on board pilots duly licensed under local law. The purpose of these laws is to create a body of seamen thoroughly acquainted with the harbor, to pilot vessels seeking to enter or depart, and thus protect life and property from the dangers of navigation. b. Shipowner and Pilot In general, a pilot is personally liable for damages caused by his own negligence or default to the owners of the vessel, and to third parties for damages sustained in a collision. Such negligence of the pilot in the performance of duty constitutes a maritime tort. At common law, a shipowner is not liable for injuries inflicted exclusively by the negligence of a pilot accepted by a vessel compulsorily. The exemption from liability for such negligence shall apply if the pilot is actually in charge and solely

in fault. Since, a pilot is responsible only for his own personal negligence, he cannot be held accountable for damages proximately caused by the default of others, or, if there be anything which concurred with the fault of the pilot in producing the accident, the vessel master and owners are liable. In case of collision, the colliding vessel is prima facie responsible, the burden of proof is upon the party claiming benefit of the exemption from liability. It must be shown affirmatively that the pilot was at fault, and that there was no fault on the part of the officers or crew, which might have been conducive to the damage. The fact that the law compelled the master to take the pilot does not exonerate the vessel from liability. The parties who suffer are entitled to have their remedy against the vessel that occasioned the damage, and are not under necessity to look to the pilot from whom redress is not always had for compensation. The owners of the vessel are responsible to the injured party for the acts of the pilot, and they must be left to recover the amount as well as they can against him. It cannot be maintained that the circumstance of having a pilot on board, and acting in conformity to his directions operate as a discharge of responsibility of the owners. Except insofar as their liability is limited or exempted by statute, the vessel or her owner are liable for all damages caused by the negligence or other wrongs of the owners or those in charge of the vessel. Where the pilot of a vessel is not a compulsory one in the sense that the owner or master of the vessel are bound to accept him, but is employed voluntarily, the owners of the vessel are, all the more, liable for his negligent act. c. Pilot and his Association The fact that the pilot is a member of an association does not make the association jointly and severally liable. Article 2180 of the Civil Code does not apply because there is no employer-employee relationship. The Supreme Court explained: The Court of Appeals, while affirming the trial court's finding of solidary liability on the part of FESC, MPA and Capt. Gavino, correctly based MPA' s liability not on the concept of employer-employee relationship between Capt. Gavino and itself, but on the provisions of Customs Administrative Order No. 15-65: The Appellant MPA avers that, contrary to the findings and disquisitions of the Court a quo, the Appellant Gavino was

not and has never been an employee of the MPA but was only a member thereof. The Court a quo, it is noteworthy, did not state the factual basis on which it anchored its finding that Gavino was the employee of MPA. We are in accord with MPA's pose. Case law teaches Us that, for an employer-employee relationship to exist, the confluence of the following elements must be established: (1) selection and engagement of employees; (2) the payment of wages; (3) the power of dismissal; (4) the employer's power to control the employees with respect to the means and method by which the work is to be performed (Ruga versus NLRC, 181 SCRA 266). The liability of MPA for damages is not anchored on Article 2180 of the New Civil Code as erroneously found and declared by the Court a quo but under the provisions of Customs Administrative Order No. 15-65, supra, in tandem with the by-laws of the MPA.

F. CODE OF COMMERCE PROVISIONS ON CAPTAINS o ARTICLE 613 A captain who navigates for freight in common or on shares may not make any separate transaction for his own account; and should he do so, the profit which may accrue shall belong to the other persons interested, and the losses shall be borne by him exclusively. o ARTICLE 614 A captain who, having made an agreement to make a voyage, fails to perform his undertaking, without being prevented by fortuitous accident or force majeure, shall indemnify for all the losses which he may cause without prejudice to the criminal penalties which may be proper. o ARTICLE 615 Without the consent of the agent, the captain cannot have himself substituted by another person; and should he do so, besides being liable for all the acts of the substitute and bound to the indemnities mentioned in the foregoing

articles, the captain as well as the substitute may be discharged by the ship agent. o ARTICLE 616 If the provisions and fuel of the vessel should be consumed before arriving at the port of destination, the captain shall order, with the consent of the officers of the same, the arrival at the nearest port to get a supply of either; but if there are persons on board who have provisions of their own, he may force them to deliver said provision for the common consumption of all those who may be on board, paying the price thereof at the same time, or at the latest, at the first port reached. o ARTICLE 617 The captain may not contract loans on respondentia secured by the cargo; and should he do so, the contracts shall be void. Neither may he borrow money on bottomry for his own transactions, except on the portion of the vessel he owns, provided no money has been previously borrowed on the whole vessel, and there does not exist any other kind of lien or obligation chargeable against the vessel. If he may do so, he must state what interest he has in the vessel. In case of violation of this article, the principal, interest, and cost shall be for the personal account of the captain, and the ship agent may furthermore discharge him. o ARTICLE 618 The captain shall be civilly liable to the ship agent, and the latter to the third persons who may have made contracts with the former; 1. For all damages suffered by the vessel and its cargo by reason of want of skill or negligence on his part. If a misdemeanor or crime has been committed, he shall be liable in accordance with the Penal Code. 2. For all the thefts committed by the crew, reserving his right of action against the guilty parties.

3. For the losses, fines, and confiscation imposed an account of violation of customs, police, health, and navigation laws and regulations. 4. For the losses and damages caused by mutinies on board the vessel or by reason of faults committed by the crew in the service and defense of the same, if he does not prove that he made timely use of all his authority to prevent or avoid them. 5. For those caused by the misuse of the powers and the non-fulfillment of the obligation pertaining to him in accordance with Articles 610 and 612. 6. For those arising by reason of his going out of his course or taking a course which he should not have taken without sufficient cause, in the opinion of the officers of the vessel, at a meeting with the shippers or supercargoes who may be on board. o ARTICLE 619 The captain shall be liable for the cargo from the time it is delivered to him at the dock or afloat alongside the vessel at the port of loading, until he delivers it on the shore or on the discharging wharf at the port of unloading, unless the contrary has been expressly agreed upon. No liability for the following: o ARTICLE 620 (1) The captain shall not be liable for the damages caused to the vessel or to the cargo by force majeure; but he shall always be so for those arising through his own fault, no agreement to the contrary being valid. (2) Neither shall he be personally liable for the obligations he may have contracted for the repair, equipment, and provisioning of the vessel, which shall devolve upon the ship agent, unless the former has expressly bound himself personally or has signed a bill of exchange or promissory note in his name. o ARTICLE 621

A captain who borrows money on the hull, engine, rigging or tackle of the vessel, or pledges or sells merchandise or provisions outside of the cases and without the formalities prescribed in this Code, shall be liable for the principal, interests, and costs, and shall indemnify for the damages he may cause. He who commits fraud in his accounts shall pay the amount defrauded and shall be subject to the provisions of the Penal Code. o ARTICLE 622 If while on a voyage the captain should learn of the appearance of privateers or men of war against his flag, he shall be obliged to make the nearest neutral port, inform his agent or shippers, and await an occasion to sail under convoy, or until the danger is over or he has received express orders from the ship agent or the shippers. o ARTICLE 623 If he should be attacked by a privateer, and, after having tried to avoid the encounter and having resisted the delivery of the effects of the vessel or its cargo, they should be forcibly taken away from him, or he should be obliged to deliver them, he shall make an entry thereof in his freight book and shall prove the fact before the competent authority at the first port he touches. After the force majeure has been proved, he shall be exempted from liability. o ARTICLE 624 A captain whose vessel has gone through ahurricane or who believes that the cargo hassuffered damages or averages, shall make aprotest thereon before the competent authority atthe first port he touches, within 24 hours followinghis arrival and shall ratify it within the same periodwhen he arrives at his destination, immediately proceeding with the proof of the facts, and he may not open the hatches until after this has been done.

The captain shall proceed in the same manner, if, the vessel having been wrecked; he is saved alone or with part of his crew, in which case he shall appear before the nearest authority, and make a sworn statement of facts. The authority or the consul shall verify the said facts receiving sworn statements of the members of the crew and passengers who may have been saved; and taking such other steps as may assist in arriving at the facts he shall make a statement of the result of the proceedings in the log book and in that of the sailing mate, and shall deliver to the captain the original records of the proceedings, stamped and folioed, with a memorandum of the folios, which he must rubricate, in order that it maybe presented to the judge or court of the port of destination. The statement of the captain shall be accepted if it is in accordance with those of the crew and passengers; if they disagree, the latter shall be accepted, always saving proof to the contrary. o ARTICLE 625 The captain, under his personal responsibility as soon as he arrives at the port of destination, should get the necessary permission from the health and customs officers, and perform the other formalities required by the regulations of the administration, delivering the cargo without any defalcation, to the consignee, and in a proper case, the vessel, rigging, and freightage to the ship agent. CASE: SWEET LINES, INC. vs. THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, MICAELA B. QUINTOS, FR. JOSE BACATAN, S.J., MARCIANO CABRAS and ANDREA VELOSO, G.R. No. L-46340. April 28, 1983. MELENCIO-HERRERA, J.: FACTS: For having by-passed a port of call without previous notice, petitioner shipping company and the ship captain were sued for damages by four of its passengers, private respondents herein, before the then CFI of Cebu, Branch VIII.

Private respondents purchased first- class tickets from petitioner at the latter's office in Cebu City. They were to board petitioner's vessel, M/V Sweet Grace, bound for Catbalogan, Western Samar. Instead of departing at the scheduled hour of about midnight on July 8, 1972, the vessel set sail at 3:00 A.M. of July 9, 1972 only to be towed back to Cebu due to engine trouble, arriving there at about 4:00 P.M. on the same day. Repairs having been accomplished, the vessel lifted anchor again on July 10, 1972 at around 8:00 A.M. Instead of docking at Catbalogan, which was the first port of call, the vessel proceeded direct to Tacloban at around 9:00 P.M. of July 10, 1972. Private respondents had no recourse but to disembark and board a ferryboat to Catbalogan.

ISSUE: Whether or not petitioner shipping company is liable. RULING: As found by both Courts below, there was no fortuitous event or force majeure which prevented the vessel from fulfilling its undertaking of taking private respondents to Catbalogan. In the first place, mechanical defects in the carrier are not considered a caso fortuito that exempts the carrier from responsibility. In the second place, even granting arguendo that the engine failure was a fortuitous event, it accounted only for the delay in departure. When the vessel finally left the port of Cebu on July 10, 1972, there was no longer any force majeure that justified by-passing a port of call. The vessel was completely repaired the following day after it was towed back to Cebu. In fact, after docking at Tacloban City, it left the next day for Manila to complete its voyage. The reason for by-passing the port of Catbalogan, as admitted by petitioner's General Manager, was to enable the vessel to catch up with its schedule for the next week. The record also discloses that there were 50 passengers for Tacloban compared to 20 passengers for Catbalogan, so that the Catbalogan phase could be scrapped without too much loss for the company. The voyage to Catbalogan was "interrupted" by the captain upon instruction of management. The "interruption" was not due to fortuitous event or for majeure nor to disability of the vessel. Having been caused by the captain upon instruction of management, the passengers' right to indemnity is evident. The owner of a vessel and the ship agent shall be civilly liable for the acts of the captain.

CASE: INTER-ORIENT MARITIME ENTERPRISES, INC., SEA HORSE SHIP, INC. and TRENDA WORLD SHIPPING (MANILA), INC. vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION and RIZALINO D. TAYONG G.R. No. 115286. August 11, 1994. FELICIANO, J.: FACTS: Private respondent Captain Rizalino Tayong, a licensed Master Mariner with experience in commanding ocean-going vessels, was employed by petitioners Trenda World Shipping (Manila), Inc. and Sea Horse Ship Management, Inc. through petitioner Inter-Orient Maritime Enterprises, Inc. as Master of the vessel M/V Oceanic Mindoro, for a period of one (1) year. On 15 July 1989, Captain Tayong assumed command of petitioners' vessel at the port of Hongkong. His instructions were to replenish bunker and diesel fuel, to sail forthwith to Richard Bay, South Africa, and there to load 120,000 metric tons of coal. While at the Port of Hongkong and in the process of unloading cargo, Captain Tayong received a weather report that a storm would shortly hit Hongkong. Precautionary measures were taken to secure the safety of the vessel, as well as its crew, considering that the vessel's turbo-charger was leaking and the vessel was fourteen (14) years old. On 21 July 1989, Captain Tayong followed-up the requisition by the former captain of the Oceanic Mindoro for supplies of oxygen and acetylene, necessary for the welding-repair of the turbo-charger and the economizer. This requisition had been made upon request of the Chief Engineer of the vessel and had been approved by the shipowner. On 25 July 1989, the vessel sailed from Hong Kong for Singapore. Then Captain Tayong reported a water leak from M.E. Turbo Charger No. 2 Exhaust gas casing. On 29 July 1989, while the vessel was en route to Singapore, Captain Tayong reported that the vessel had stopped in midocean for six (6) hours and forty-five (45) minutes due to a leaking economizer. On 31 July 1989, the vessel arrived at the port of Singapore. The Chief Engineer reminded Captain Tayong that the oxygen and acetylene supplies had not been delivered. Captain Tayong inquired from the ship's agent in Singapore about the supplies but the latter stated that these could only be delivered on August 1, 1989 as the stores had closed. Captain Tayong called the shipowner, Sea Horse Ship Management, Ltd., in London and informed them that the departure of the vessel for South Africa may be affected because of the delay in the delivery of the supplies. He was advised by Sea Horse to wait for the supplies. Then the requisitioned supplies were delivered and Captain Tayong immediately sailed for Richard Bay.

When the vessel arrived at the port of Richard Bay, South Africa on 16 August 1989, Captain Tayong was instructed to turn-over his post to the new captain. He was thereafter repatriated to the Philippines, after serving petitioners for a little more than two weeks. He was not informed of the charges against him. Captain Tayong instituted a complaint for illegal dismissal before the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration ("POEA"), claiming his unpaid salary for the unexpired portion of the written employment contract, plus attorney's fees. The POEA dismissed Captain Tayong's complaint and held that there was valid cause for his untimely repatriation. On appeal, NLRC reversed and set aside the decision of the POEA. The NLRC found that Captain Tayong had not been afforded an opportunity to be heard and that no substantial evidence was adduced to establish the basis for petitioners' loss of trust or confidence in the Captain. ISSUE: Whether NLRC had acted with grave abuse of discretion. RULING: It is well settled in this jurisdiction that confidential and managerial employees cannot be arbitrarily dismissed at any time, and without cause as reasonably established in an appropriate investigation. Such employees, too, are entitled to security of tenure, fair standards of employment and the protection of labor laws. The captain of a vessel is a confidential and managerial employee within the meaning of the above doctrine. A master or captain, for purposes of maritime commerce, is one who has command of a vessel. Clearly, the captain is vested with both management and fiduciary functions. More importantly, a ship's captain must be accorded a reasonable measure of discretionary authority to decide what the safety of the ship and of its crew and cargo specifically requires on a stipulated ocean voyage. The captain is held responsible, and properly so, for such safety. It is the right and duty of the captain, in the exercise of sound discretion and in good faith, to do all things with respect to the vessel and its equipment and conduct of the voyage which are reasonably necessary for the protection and preservation of the interests under his charge, whether those be of the shipowners, charterers, cargo owners or of underwriters. It is a basic principle of admiralty law that in navigating a merchantman, the master must be left free to exercise his own best judgment.

Therefore, Captain Tayong had reasonable grounds to believe that the safety of the vessel and the crew under his command or the possibility of substantial delay at sea required him to wait for the delivery of the supplies needed for the repair of the turbo-charger and the economizer before embarking on the long voyage from Singapore to South Africa.