ChanRobles Virtual law Library
[G.R. No. 155945.
PHIL. PROVINCE OF GOOD SHEPHERD vs. GOTHONG LINES
SECOND DIVISION
Gentlemen:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this
Court dated
G.R. No. 155945(The Philippine Province of Good Shepherd, et al. vs. Carlos A. Gothong Lines, Inc. and Victor Bayotas.)
On
The nuns' next of kin and Good Shepherd, herein petitioners, filed a complaint for breach of contract of carriage with damages against, among others, respondents Carlos A. Gothong Lines, Inc. and the M/V Casandra's captain, Victor Bayotas. The complaint was docketed as Civil Case No. 2546 in the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch III, Batangas City.
After trial, the RTC rendered judgment on April 3, 1990 ordering respondents jointly and severally to pay petitioner Jovencio C. Conti P30,000.00 as actual and compensatory damages and P50,000.00 as moral damages; to pay petitioners Lucia Olavides Loreto and Mari Rose C. Jurado each the amount of P30,000.00 as actual and compensatory damages; and to pay all three petitioners P200,000.00 as exemplary damages, P50,000.00 as attorney's fees, and the costs of litigation. The trial court found that the proximate cause of the M/V Casandra's sinking was the gross negligence of respondents in proceeding with the voyage despite damage to the vessel.
On appeal by both parties, the Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC's decision with the modification that the indemnity for the death of the three nuns be increased to P50,000.00 per person.
Hence this petition. Petitioners contend that the Court of Appeals erred in (1) holding that petitioner Good Shepherd is not a real party-in-interest entitled to damages for the deaths of its member nuns and (2) refusing to increase the amount of exemplary damages awarded by the trial court as the same "belittles the philosophy behind the grant of exemplary damages."
Considering the foregoing arguments, the Court finds the petition to be without merit.
First. Petitioner Good Shepherd contends that it is a real party-in-interest as the three nuns, being under the vow of poverty, purchased the tickets using the congregation's money. Thus, petitioner Good Shepherd posits, the nuns were acting as its agents, and it is Good Shepherd which is the real party to the contract with the common carrier.
The contention has no merit. First of all, as pointed out by the Court of Appeals, the issue of agency was never raised before the trial court so Good Shepherd is precluded from raising it for the first time on appeal. Moreover, that the three nuns used the funds of Good Shepherd in the purchase of their tickets does not necessarily make Good Shepherd party to the contract of carriage. It is obvious the nuns purchased the tickets for themselves since they were the ones who in fact undertook the journey that tragically ended in their deaths.
Second. Anent the award of exemplary damages, the same is subject to the sound discretion of the trial court which, if properly exercised, will not be disturbed on appeal (See Philippine Airlines, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 188 SCRA 461 (1990)). Contrary to petitioners' claim, the award of P200,000.00 as exemplary damages is not insufficient or inadequate. In Sulpicio Lines, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 316 Phil. 455 (1995), which involved a sea mishap that likewise caused the death of a passenger, the Court affirmed an award of P50,000.00 as exemplary damages to the parents of the said passenger.
Third. The petition should likewise be denied since not all of the petitioners executed the required verification and certification of non�-forum shopping (Loquias v. Office of the Ombudsman, 338 SCRA 63 (2000)).
WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED.
Very truly yours,
TOMASITA M. DRIS
Clerk of Court
By:
(Sgd.)LUDICHI YASAY-NUNAG
Asst. Div. Clerk of Court
HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
QUICK SEARCH
