Transportation Laws Upload1

San Beda College of Law
54
MEMORY AID IN COMMERCIAL LAW
TRANSPORTATION LAWS
COMMERCIAL LAW COMMITTEE

 CHAIRPERSON: Garny Luisa Alegre  ASST. CHAIRPERSON:Jayson O’S Ramos  EDP: Beatrix I. Ramos  SUBJECT
HEADS:
Marichelle De Vera (Negotiable Instruments Law); Jose Fernando Llave (Insurance); Aldrich Del Rosario
(Transportation Laws);
Shirley Mae Tabangcura, Bon Vincent Agustin (Corporation Law); Karl Steven Co (Special Laws); John Lemuel
Gatdula (Banking Laws); Robespierre CU (Law on Intellectual Property)
San Beda College of Law
55
MEMORY AID IN COMMERCIAL LAW
CONTRACT OF TRANSPORTATION/ CARRIAGE
 A contract whereby a person, natural or juridical, obligates to transport persons, goods, or both, from one place to another, by
land, air or water, for a price or compensation.
 Classifications:
1. Common or Private
2. Goods or Passengers
3. For a fee (for hire) or Gratuitous
4. Land, Water/maritime, or Air
5. Domestic/inter-island/coastwise or International/foreign
 It is a relationship which is imbued with the public interest.
COMMON CARRIER
 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 (Art. 1732, Civil Code).
 Art. 1732 of the New Civil Code avoids any distinction between one whose principal business activity is the carrying of persons or
goods or both and one who does such carrying only as an ancillary activity (sideline). It also avoids a distinction between a person
or enterprise offering transportation service on a regular or scheduled basis and one offering such service on an occasional, episodic
or unscheduled basis.
Neither does the law distinguish between a carrier offering its services to the general public that is the general community or
population and one who offers services or solicits business only from a narrow segment of the general population.
A person or entity is a common carrier even if he did not secure a Certificate of Public Convenience (De Guzman vs. CA, 168
SCRA 612).
 It makes no distinction as to the means of transporting, as long as it is by land, water or air. It does not provide that the
transportation should be by motor vehicle. (First Philippine Industrial Corporation vs. CA)
 One is a common carrier even if he has no fixed and publicly known route, maintains no terminals, and issues no tickets (Asia
Lighterage Shipping, Inc. vs. CA).
 Characteristics:
1. Undertakes to carry for all people indifferently and thus is liable for refusal without sufficient reason (Lastimoso vs. Doliente,
October 20, 1961);
2. Cannot lawfully decline to accept a particular class of goods for carriage to the prejudice of the traffic in these goods;
3. No monopoly is favored (Batangas Trans. vs. Orlanes, 52 PHIL 455);
4. Provides public convenience.
PRIVATE CARRIER
 One which, without being engaged in the business of carrying as a public employment, undertakes to deliver goods or
passengers for compensation. (Home Insurance Co. vs. American Steamship Agency, 23 SCRA 24)
 TESTS WHETHER CARRIER IS COMMON OR PRIVATE:

 The SC in First Philippine Industrial Corporation vs. CA (1995) reiterated the following tests:
1. It must be engaged in the business of carrying goods for others as a public employment and must hold itself out as ready
to engage in the transportation of goods generally as a business and not as a casual occupation;
2. It must undertake to carry goods of the kind to which its business in confined;
3. It must undertake to carry by the method by which his business is conducted and over its established roads; and
4. The transportation must be for hire.
 In National Steel Corp. vs. CA (1997) the SC held that the true test of a common carrier is the carriage of goods or passengers
provided it has space for all who opt to avail themselves of its transportation for a fee.
COMMERCIAL LAW COMMITTEE

 CHAIRPERSON: Garny Luisa Alegre  ASST. CHAIRPERSON:Jayson O’S Ramos  EDP: Beatrix I. Ramos  SUBJECT HEADS:
Marichelle De Vera (Negotiable Instruments Law); Jose Fernando Llave (Insurance); Aldrich Del Rosario (Transportation Laws);
Shirley Mae Tabangcura, Bon Vincent Agustin (Corporation Law); Karl Steven Co (Special Laws); John Lemuel Gatdula (Banking
Laws); Robespierre CU (Law on Intellectual Property)

Transportation Laws Upload1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Transportation Laws Upload1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Transportation Laws Upload1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

San Beda College of Law

COMMERCIAL LAW COMMITTEE

 TESTS WHETHER CARRIER IS COMMON OR PRIVATE:

COMMERCIAL LAW COMMITTEE

You might also like