Diligence Required | General Principles of Common Carriers | TRANSPORTATION

III. TRANSPORTATION LAW – General Principles of Common Carriers: Diligence Required

In the context of Philippine transportation and mercantile law, the general principles surrounding the diligence required of common carriers are well-established in both the Civil Code and case law. This area of law imposes stringent requirements on common carriers due to their duty to ensure the safety of their passengers and goods. Here, we break down the legal principles that define the required diligence of common carriers in the Philippines, as mandated by the Civil Code, jurisprudence, and regulatory standards.


A. Definition and Scope of Common Carriers

Under Article 1732 of the Civil Code, a common carrier is defined broadly to include any person, corporation, firm, or association that transports passengers or goods for a fee, whether by land, water, or air. This definition covers not only traditional carriers such as bus companies, shipping lines, and airlines but also individuals and firms engaged in transportation for hire as a regular occupation.

B. Standard of Diligence Required

The standard of diligence expected of common carriers in the Philippines is one of extraordinary diligence. This heightened standard is specified in Article 1733 of the Civil Code, which requires that common carriers must exercise extraordinary diligence in the vigilance over the goods and the safety of passengers.

  1. Extraordinary Diligence for Passengers

    • For passenger transport, extraordinary diligence requires that carriers must take all necessary precautions to prevent injury or harm to passengers. This is a higher level of care than what is ordinarily expected in other contracts.
    • The duty to exercise extraordinary diligence applies from the moment a passenger boards the carrier until they safely disembark. It includes maintaining the vehicle in good working order, hiring competent and trained personnel, and implementing safety protocols to avoid accidents.
  2. Extraordinary Diligence for Goods

    • When transporting goods, common carriers are expected to take every reasonable measure to ensure the goods arrive in the condition in which they were received.
    • They are liable for any loss, destruction, or deterioration of the goods unless caused by fortuitous events, force majeure, or other exceptions provided by law.
  3. Duty to Exercise Extraordinary Diligence in Preventing Harm

    • This duty extends beyond mere transportation. Common carriers must act in anticipation of potential hazards, such as adverse weather conditions, technical malfunctions, or human error.
    • This diligence implies a proactive approach, where the carrier must address foreseeable risks that could compromise the safety of passengers or goods.

C. Basis for Liability: Presumption of Negligence

Under Article 1756 of the Civil Code, common carriers are presumed negligent if a passenger is injured or if there is loss, destruction, or damage to the goods they are carrying. This presumption can only be rebutted if the carrier can prove that they observed the extraordinary diligence required by law or that the damage or injury was due to any of the exceptions outlined by law.

  1. Strict Liability

    • The law generally imposes a form of strict liability on common carriers, holding them responsible even for slight negligence due to the public interest involved in transportation.
    • This presumption of liability means that in cases of damage or loss, the carrier must provide clear evidence that extraordinary diligence was exercised or that one of the legal exemptions applies.
  2. Exceptions to Liability

    • As an exception to this strict liability rule, common carriers may not be held liable if they can prove that the harm or loss resulted from:
      • Fortuitous Events or Force Majeure: Events that are unforeseen or inevitable, such as natural disasters, can exempt a carrier from liability.
      • Act of Public Enemy or War: Loss due to armed conflict may relieve the carrier from responsibility.
      • Act of Public Authority: Interference by government or legal authority that directly causes damage exempts the carrier.
      • Passenger's Own Negligence: If the injury or loss was due to the passenger’s negligence, liability may be reduced or waived.
      • Condition of Goods: Carriers are not liable if the damage is due to the inherent condition or defect of the goods transported.

D. Case Law on Extraordinary Diligence in the Philippines

Philippine jurisprudence has consistently underscored the duty of common carriers to exercise extraordinary diligence. Key cases have illustrated how courts interpret this requirement:

  1. De Guzman v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 47822)

    • In this case, the Supreme Court held that common carriers are bound to exercise extraordinary diligence and that the presumption of negligence applies when a passenger is injured. The carrier must present clear evidence to overturn this presumption.
  2. Juntilla v. Fontanar (G.R. No. 121366)

    • This case reaffirmed the strict duty of care required by common carriers. The court emphasized that even the slightest negligence could result in liability for passenger injuries.
  3. Philippine Airlines, Inc. v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 119001)

    • This case underscored that carriers are responsible for delays in the transportation of goods unless they can prove the delay was due to circumstances beyond their control and that all precautions to avoid delay were taken.
  4. Calvo v. UCPB General Insurance Co. Inc. (G.R. No. 174205)

    • In this case, the court held that if a carrier's negligence results in the loss or deterioration of goods, the carrier would be held liable, highlighting the responsibility to observe extraordinary diligence even in protecting goods from potential theft or damage.

E. Regulatory Standards and Compliance

The regulatory framework for common carriers in the Philippines is also reinforced by several agencies, including the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB), Maritime Industry Authority (MARINA), and the Civil Aviation Authority of the Philippines (CAAP), which impose strict standards to ensure safety and compliance:

  1. LTFRB Regulations for Land Transportation

    • Buses, taxis, and jeepneys are required to maintain roadworthiness and observe specified operational protocols to safeguard passenger safety.
    • Failure to comply with LTFRB regulations can result in administrative penalties and suspension or cancellation of licenses.
  2. MARINA for Water Transport

    • MARINA mandates seaworthiness for vessels and strict adherence to safety regulations to protect passengers and cargo.
    • Violations of MARINA standards can result in severe penalties, including revocation of permits and licenses.
  3. CAAP for Air Transport

    • CAAP enforces stringent airworthiness standards and flight safety protocols to ensure the safety of passengers.
    • Airlines must comply with safety requirements, and failure to do so can lead to the suspension of operations or hefty fines.

F. Implications of Failing to Exercise Extraordinary Diligence

Failure to exercise the required level of diligence can expose common carriers to significant liabilities, including:

  1. Civil Liability

    • Under the Civil Code, carriers can be held financially liable for injuries or losses resulting from their failure to meet the extraordinary diligence standard.
    • Civil damages may be claimed by passengers or cargo owners, and the carrier’s liability may extend to moral and exemplary damages in cases of gross negligence.
  2. Criminal Liability

    • In severe cases where gross negligence results in significant injury or death, criminal charges may be filed under the Revised Penal Code, subjecting responsible personnel to fines or imprisonment.
  3. Administrative Penalties

    • Regulatory bodies may impose administrative penalties for non-compliance with safety and operational standards, which may include fines, suspension of operations, and cancellation of permits.

Conclusion

The extraordinary diligence requirement for common carriers in the Philippines reflects the high value placed on public safety and the protection of passengers and goods. Philippine law imposes strict liability on common carriers, holding them accountable for any harm that arises from their operations, barring exceptions where the carrier can demonstrate that loss or injury was due to circumstances beyond their control. Compliance with both the Civil Code provisions and regulatory standards is essential for common carriers to avoid liability and continue operating within the bounds of Philippine law.