Scribd
Upload
78 views2 pages

Philippine Airlines, Inc., Petitioner, Vs - Court of Appeals and Pedro Zapatos

1) Pedro Zapatos filed a complaint against Philippine Airlines for damages due to a breach of contract of carriage after his flight from Cebu to Ozamiz City was diverted to Cotabato City due to inclement weather. 2) At Cotabato City, passengers were given options to return to Cebu that day and then travel to Ozamiz City the next day, or stay overnight and take the next available flight to Ozamiz City. Only 6 seats were available on the return flight to Cebu. 3) Zapatos was not given priority on the return flight despite insisting, as he was passenger number 9 on the original flight. He had to wait two additional days to travel to

Uploaded by

Japsalm Lyann Astudillo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
78 views2 pages

Philippine Airlines, Inc., Petitioner, Vs - Court of Appeals and Pedro Zapatos

1) Pedro Zapatos filed a complaint against Philippine Airlines for damages due to a breach of contract of carriage after his flight from Cebu to Ozamiz City was diverted to Cotabato City due to inclement weather. 2) At Cotabato City, passengers were given options to return to Cebu that day and then travel to Ozamiz City the next day, or stay overnight and take the next available flight to Ozamiz City. Only 6 seats were available on the return flight to Cebu. 3) Zapatos was not given priority on the return flight despite insisting, as he was passenger number 9 on the original flight. He had to wait two additional days to travel to

Uploaded by

Japsalm Lyann Astudillo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

PHILIPPINE AIRLINES, INC., petitioner, vs.

COURT OF APPEALS and PEDRO ZAPATOS

On 25 November 1976, private respondent filed a complaint for damages for breach of contract
of carriage2 against Philippine Airlines, Inc. (PAL), before the then Court of First Instance, now
Regional Trial Court, of Misamis Occidental, at Ozamiz City. According to him, on 2 August
1976, he was among the twenty-one (21) passengers of PAL Flight 477 that took off from Cebu
bound for Ozamiz City. The routing of this flight was Cebu-Ozamiz-Cotabato. While on flight and
just about fifteen (15) minutes before landing at Ozamiz City, the pilot received a radio message
that the airport was closed due to heavy rains and inclement weather and that he should
proceed to Cotabato City instead.

Upon arrival at Cotabato City, the PAL Station Agent informed the passengers of their options to
return to Cebu on flight 560 of the same day and thence to Ozamiz City on 4 August 1975, or
take the next flight to Cebu the following day, or remain at Cotabato and take the next available
flight to Ozamiz City on 5 August 1975.3 The Station Agent likewise informed them that Flight
560 bound for Manila would make a stop-over at Cebu to bring some of the diverted
passengers; that there were only six (6) seats available as there were already confirmed
passengers for Manila; and, that the basis for priority would be the check-in sequence at Cebu.

Private respondent chose to return to Cebu but was not accommodated because he checked-in
as passenger No. 9 on Flight 477. He insisted on being given priority over the confirmed
passengers in the accommodation, but the Station Agent refused private respondent's demand
explaining that the latter's predicament was not due to PAL's own doing but to be a force
majeure.4

While the failure of plaintiff in the first instance to reach his destination at Ozamis City in
accordance with the contract of carriage was due to the closure of the airport on account of rain
and inclement weather which was radioed to defendant 15 minutes before landing, it has not
been disputed by defendant airline that Ozamis City has no all-weather airport and has to
cancel its flight to Ozamis City or by-pass it in the event of inclement weather. Knowing this fact,
it becomes the duty of defendant to provide all means of comfort and convenience to its
passengers when they would have to be left in a strange place in case of such by-passing. The
steps taken by defendant airline company towards this end has not been put in evidence,
especially for those 7 others who were not accommodated in the return trip to Cebu, only 6 of
the 21 having been so accommodated. It appears that plaintiff had to leave on the next flight 2
days later. If the cause of non-fulfillment of the contract is due to a fortuitous event, it has to be
the sole and only cause (Art. 1755 CC., Art. 1733 C.C.) Since part of the failure to comply with
the obligation of common carrier to deliver its passengers safely to their destination lay
in the defendant's failure to provide comfort and convenience to its stranded passengers using
extra-ordinary diligence, the cause of non-fulfillment is not solely and exclusively due to
fortuitous event, but due to something which defendant airline could have prevented, defendant
becomes liable to plaintiff
AIR FRANCE, petitioner, vs. RAFAEL CARRASCOSO

On March 28, 1958, the defendant, Air France, through its authorized agent, Philippine Air Lines,
Inc., issued to plaintiff a "first class" round trip airplane ticket from Manila to Rome. From Manila to
Bangkok, plaintiff travelled in "first class", but at Bangkok, the Manager of the defendant airline
forced plaintiff to vacate the "first class" seat that he was occupying because, in the words of the
witness Ernesto G. Cuento, there was a "white man", who, the Manager alleged, had a "better right"
to the seat. When asked to vacate his "first class" seat, the plaintiff, as was to be expected, refused,
and told defendant's Manager that his seat would be taken over his dead body; a commotion
ensued, and, according to said Ernesto G. Cuento, "many of the Filipino passengers got nervous in
the tourist class; when they found out that Mr. Carrascoso was having a hot discussion with the
white man [manager], they came all across to Mr. Carrascoso and pacified Mr. Carrascoso to give
his seat to the white man" (Transcript, p. 12, Hearing of May 26, 1959); and plaintiff reluctantly gave
his "first class" seat in the plane

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy