Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 27 views

    Transpo (Week 1)

    Uploaded by

    Mary ruth David
    This document outlines the course for Transportation Law. It covers preliminary considerations like governing laws and regulatory agencies. It then discusses general concepts in transportation such as the definition of a common carrier and parties to carriage. Finally, it examines the contract of carriage of goods, including the carrier's obligations to accept, deliver and exercise diligence over goods as well as defenses and liability limitations. The course will analyze these topics through discussion of relevant cases.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Transpo (Week 1)

    Uploaded by

    Mary ruth David
    27 views3 pages
    This document outlines the course for Transportation Law. It covers preliminary considerations like governing laws and regulatory agencies. It then discusses general concepts in transportation such as the definition of a common carrier and parties to carriage. Finally, it examines the contract of carriage of goods, including the carrier's obligations to accept, deliver and exercise diligence over goods as well as defenses and liability limitations. The course will analyze these topics through discussion of relevant cases.

    Original Description:

    trans_week 1

    Original Title

    Transpo (week 1)

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document outlines the course for Transportation Law. It covers preliminary considerations like governing laws and regulatory agencies. It then discusses general concepts in transportation such as the definition of a common carrier and parties to carriage. Finally, it examines the contract of carriage of goods, including the carrier's obligations to accept, deliver and exercise diligence over goods as well as defenses and liability limitations. The course will analyze these topics through discussion of relevant cases.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    27 views3 pages

    Transpo (Week 1)

    Uploaded by

    Mary ruth David
    This document outlines the course for Transportation Law. It covers preliminary considerations like governing laws and regulatory agencies. It then discusses general concepts in transportation such as the definition of a common carrier and parties to carriage. Finally, it examines the contract of carriage of goods, including the carrier's obligations to accept, deliver and exercise diligence over goods as well as defenses and liability limitations. The course will analyze these topics through discussion of relevant cases.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 3

    TRANSPORTATION LAW

    COURSE OUTLINE
    Atty. Amapola M. Bulusan

    I. PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS

    A. Governing Laws
    1. New Civil Code
    2. Warsaw Convention
    3. Code of Commerce
    4. Carriage of Goods by Sea Act
    5. Salvage Law
    6. Public Service Act
    7. Article XII, Sec. 11 on operation of public utility
    B. Concept of public Utility & public service (Sec. 13, Public Service
    Act)
    C. Constitutional limitations on operation of public utilities (Art. XII,
    1987 Constitution)
    D. Regulatory Agencies
    E. Concept of franchise and certificate of public convenience

    CASES:

    Tatad v. Garcia, Jr., G.R. No. 114222, 06 April 1995


    Samar Mining Co., Inc. v. Nordeutscher Lloyd, G.R. No. L-28673, 23 October 1984
    Eastern Shipping Lines v. IAC, G.R. No. L-69044, 29 May 1987
    National Development Co. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-49407, 19 August 1988

    II. GENERAL CONCEPTS

    A. Contract of Transportation in general


    B. Perfection
    C. Common Carrier
    1. statutory definition (Art. 1732, NCC)
    2. distinguished from private carrier
    3. distinguished from towage, arrastre and stevedoring
    4. tests to determine common carrier
    5. Parties to the contract of carriage
    D. Registered owner rule and Kabit System

    CASES:

    British Airways v. Court of Appeals, GR 121824, 29 January 1988


    Fisher v. Yangco Steamship Co., G.R. No. L-8095, 31 March 1915
    Loadstar Shipping Co., Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. 131621, 28 September 1999
    First Phil. Industrial v. CA, G.R. No. 125948, 29 December 1998
    Virgines Calvo v. UCPB General Insurance Co., G.R. No. 148496, 19 March 2002
    Philippine American General Insurance Co. v. PKS Shipping Co., G.R. No. 149038, 09
    April 2003
    Asia Lighterage and Shipping, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, et al., G.R. No. 147246, 19
    August 2003
    Spouses Cruz v. Sun Holidays, Inc., G.R. No. 186312, 29 June 2010
    Home Insurance Co. v. American Steamship, G.R. No. L-25599, 04 April 1968
    San Pablo v. Pantranco , G.R. No. L-61461, 21 August 1987
    National Steel Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. 112287, 12 December 1997
    Planters Products Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. 101503, 15 September 1993
    Equitable Leasing Corporation v. Lucita Suyon, et al., G.R. No. 143360, 05 September
    2002
    Lita Enterprises, Inc. vs. CA G.R. No. 64693. April 27, 1984
    Nostradamus Villanueva vs. Domingo, GR 144274, September 20, 2004
    Spouses Hernandez et al vs. Spouses Dolor et al, GR No. 160286, July 30, 2004

    III. CONTRACT OF CARRIAGE OF GOODS

    A. Vigilance over the goods

    1. Duty to exercise extraordinary diligence (Art. 1733, NCC, Article


    363, 364 & 365, CC)
    2. Presumption of negligence (Art. 1735, NCC)
    3. Duration of liability (Art. 1736, 1737 & 1738, NCC)
    4. Defenses of common carriers (Art. 1734, 1739, 1740, 1742, & 1743)
    a. fortuitous event (Art. 1739, NCC)
    b. public enemy (Art. 1739, NCC)
    c. improper packing (Art. 1742, NCC)
    d. order of public authority (Art. 1743, NCC)
    5. Contributory negligence of the shipper (Art. 1741, NCC)
    6. Stipulation limiting liability of carrier (Art. 1744, 1748, 1749 &
    1750 NCC)
    a. Requisites (Art. 1744, 1751, NCC)
    b. invalid stipulations (Art. 1745, NCC)
    c. effect of delay (Art. 1747, NCC)
    d. rule on presumption of negligence despite stipulation (Art.
    1752, NCC)

    B. Other obligations

    1. Duty to accept goods


    a. Grounds for valid refusal to accept goods
    2. Duty to deliver goods
    a. Time of delivery (Art. 358, CC)
    b. Consequences of delay (Art. 1740 & 1747, NCC; Art. 370- 374,
    CC)
    c. Place of delivery (Art. 360, CC)
    d. To whom delivery shall be made (Art. 368 & 369, CC)

    CASES:

    Delsan Transport Lines v. American Home Insurance, GR 149019, 15 August 2006


    Eastern Shipping v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 94151, 30 April 1991
    Delsan Transport v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 127897, 15 November 2001
    Philippine Charter Insurance Corp. v. Unknown Owner of Vessel M/V “National
    Honor”, National Shipping Corp. and International Container Services, Inc., G.R. No.
    161833, July 08, 2005 Saludo v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 95536, 23 March 1992.
    Lorenzo Shipping v. BJ Marthel, G.R. No. 145483, 19 November 2004
    Sealoader Shipping v. Grand Cement Manufacturing, G.R. Nos. 167363 & 177466, 15
    December 2010
    Central Shipping v. Insurance Company, 438 SCRA 511, G.R. No. 150751, 20 September
    2004.
    Everett Steamship v. Court of Appeals, 297 SCRA 496, G.R. No. 122494, 8 October 1998.
    Cruz v. Sun Holidays, 622 SCRA 389, G.R. No. 186312, 29 June 2010.
    Mitusi Lines v. Court of Appeals, 287 SCRA 366, G.R. No. 119571, 11 March 1998.
    Sulpicio v. First Lepanto, 462 SCRA 125, G.R. No. 140349, 29 June 2005.
    Coastwise Lighterage v. Court of Appeals, 245 SCRA 796, G.R. No. 114167, 12 July 1995
    Philippine First Insurance v. Wallem First Shipping, 582 SCRA 457, G.R. No. 165647, 26
    March 2009.
    Samar Mining v. Nordeutscher Lloyd (supra), G.R. No. L-28673, 23 October 1984
    Ganzon v. CA, G.R. No. L-48757, 30 May 1988.
    Macam v. CA, G.R. 125524, 25 August 1999
    Magellan Marketing v. Court of Appeals, GR 95529, 22 August 1991

    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