TRANSPORTATION LAW; DILIGENCE REQUIRED OF COMMON CARRIERS
The diligence required of a private carrier is only ordinary, that is, the diligence of a
good father of the family. In contrast, a common carrier is a person, corporation,
firm or association engaged in the business of carrying or transporting passengers
or goods or both, by land, water, or air, for compensation, offering such services to
the public.[1] Contracts of common carriage are governed by the provisions on
common carriers of the Civil Code, the Public Service Act,[2] and other special laws
relating to transportation. A common carrier is required to observe extraordinary
diligence, and is presumed to be at fault or to have acted negligently in case of the
loss of the effects of passengers, or the death or injuries to passengers.[3] (Sps
Perea vs. Sps Zarate, G.R. No. 157917, August 29, 2012, [Bersamin, J.])
ART. 1755. A common carrier is bound to carry the passengers safely as far as
human care and foresight can provide, using the utmost diligence of very cautious
persons, with a due regard for all the circumstances.
ART. 1755. A common carrier is bound to carry the passengers safely as far as
human care and foresight can provide, using the utmost diligence of very cautious
persons, with a due regard for all the circumstances.
ART. 1756. In case of death of or injuries to passengers, common carriers are
presumed to have been at fault or to have acted negligently, unless they prove that
they observed extraordinary diligence as prescribed in articles 1733 and 1755.
The Code Commission, in justifying this extraordinary diligence required of a
common carrier, says the following:
A common carrier is bound to carry the passengers safely as far as human care and
foresight can provide, using the utmost deligence of very cautions persons, with due
regard for all circumstances. This extraordinary diligence required of common
carriers is calculated to protect the passengers from the tragic mishaps that
frequently occur in connection with rapid modern transportation. This high standard
of care is imperatively demanded by the precariousness of human life and by the
consideration that every person must in every way be safeguarded against all injury.
(Report of the Code Commission, pp. 35-36) (Padilla, Civil Code of the Philippines,
Vol. IV, 1956 ed., p. 197).
From the above legal provisions, we can make the following restatement of the
principles governing the liability of a common carrier: (1) the liability of a carrier is
contractual and arises upon breach of its obligation. There is breach if it fails to
exert extraordinary diligence according to all circumstances of each case; (2) a
carrier is obliged to carry its passenger with the utmost diligence of a very cautious
person, having due regard for all the circumstances; (3) a carrier is presumed to be
at fault or to have acted negligently in case of death of, or injury to, passengers, it
being its duty to prove that it exercised extraordinary diligence; and (4) the carrier
is not an insurer against all risks of travel. (Isaac vs. A.L. Ammen Transportation Co.,
Inc., G.R. No. L-9671, August 23, 1957, [J., Bautista-Angelo])
Common carriers are obliged to observe extraordinary diligence in the vigilance
over the goods transported by them.[4] Accordingly, they are presumed to have
been at fault or to have acted negligently if the goods are lost, destroyed or
deteriorated.[5] There are very few instances when the presumption of negligence
does not attach and these instances are enumerated in Article 1734.[6] In those
cases where the presumption is applied, the common carrier must prove that it
exercised extraordinary diligence in order to overcome the presumption. (Bascos vs.
CA, G.R. No. 101089, April 7, 1993, [Campos, Jr., J])
[1]Article 1732 of the Civil Code states:
Article 1732. Common carriers are persons, corporations, firms or associations
engaged in the business of carrying or transporting passengers or goods or both, by
land, water, or air, for compensation, offering their services to the public.
[2]Commonwealth Act No. 146, as amended, particularly by PD No. 1, Integrated
Reorganization Plan and E.O. 546.
[3]Article 1756 of the Civil Code reads:
Article 1756. In case of death of or injuries to passengers, common carriers are
presumed to have been at fault or to have acted negligently, unless they prove that
they observed extraordinary diligence as prescribed in articles 1733 and 1755.
[4]Art. 1733. Common carriers, from the nature of their business and for reasons of
public policy, are bound to observe extraordinary diligence in the vigilance over the
goods and for the safety of the passengers transported by them, according to all the
circumstances of each case.
Such extraordinary diligence in vigilance over the goods is further expressed in
articles 1734, 1735, and 1745, Nos. 5, 6, and 7, while the extraordinary diligence for
the safety of the passengers is further set forth in articles 1755 and 1756.
[5] Art. 1735. In all cases other than those mentioned in Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 of
the preceding article, if the goods are lost, destroyed or deteriorated, common
carriers are presumed to have been at fault or to have acted negligently, unless
they prove that they observed extraordinary diligence as required in article 1733.
[6]Art. 1734. Common carriers are responsible for the loss, destruction, or
deterioration of the goods, unless the same is due to any of the following causes
only:
(1) Flood, storm, earthquake, lightning, or other natural disaster or calamity;
(2) Act of the public enemy in war, whether international or civil;
(3) Act or omission of the shipper or owner of the goods;
(4) The character of the goods or defects in the packing or in the containers;
(5) Order or act of competent public authority.
