October 2009 - Philippine Supreme Court Decisions/Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence
G.R. No. 188961 - Air France Philippines/KLM Air France v. John Anthony De Camilis
FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. NO. 188961 : October 13, 2009]
AIR FRANCE PHILIPPINES/KLM AIR FRANCE, Petitioner, v. JOHN ANTHONY DE CAMILIS, Respondent.
R E S O L U T I O N
CORONA, J.:
Respondent John Anthony de Camilis filed a case for breach of contract of carriage, damages and attorney's fees against petitioner Air France Philippines/KLM Air France (AF) in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Makati City, Branch 59.
Respondent alleged that he went on a pilgrimage with a group of Filipinos to selected countries in Europe. According to respondent: (1) AF's agent in Paris failed to inform him of the need to secure a transit visa for Moscow, as a result of which he was denied entry to Moscow and was subjected to humiliating interrogation by the police; (2) another AF agent (a certain Ms. Soeyesol) rudely denied his request to contact his travel companions to inform them that he was being sent back to Paris from Moscow with a police escort; Ms. Soeyesol even reported him as a security threat which resulted in his being subjected to further interrogation by the police in Paris and Rome, and worse, also lifted his flight coupons for the rest of his trip; (3) AF agents in Rome refused to honor his confirmed flight to Paris; (4) upon reaching Paris for his connecting flight to Manila, he found out that the AF agents did not check in his baggage and since he had to retrieve his bags at the baggage area, he missed his connecting flight; (5) he had to shoulder his extended stay in Paris for AF's failure to make good its representation that he would be given a complimentary motel pass and (6) he was given a computer print-out of his flight reservation for Manila but when he went to the airport, he was told that the flight was overbooked. It was only when he made a scene that the AF agent boarded him on an AF flight to Hongkong and placed him on a connecting Philippine Airlines flight to Manila.
The RTC found that AF breached its contract of carriage and that it was liable to pay P200,000 actual damages, P1 million moral damages, P1 million exemplary damages and P300,000 attorney's fees to respondent.
On appeal, the Court of Appeals (CA)affirmed the RTC decision with modifications.1
The CA ruled that it was respondent (as passenger), and not AF, who was responsible for having the correct travel documents. However, the appellate court stated that this fact did not absolve AF from liability for damages.
The CA agreed with the findings of fact of the RTC that AF's agents and representatives repeatedly subjected respondent to very poor service, verbal abuse and abject lack of respect and consideration. As such, AF was guilty of bad faith for which respondent ought to be compensated.
The appellate court affirmed the award of P1 million moral damages and P300,000 attorney's fees. However, it reduced the actual damages to US$906 (or its peso equivalent). According to the CA, this amount represented the expenses respondent incurred from the time he was unable to join his group in Rome (due to the unfounded "communiqu
