Scribd
Upload
41 views1 page

Mauro Ganzon vs. Court of Appeals G.R. No. L-48757 May 30, 1988 Sarmiento, J. Facts

Uploaded by

Nichole Patricia Pedriña

Gelacio Tumambing hired Mauro Ganzon to transport 305 tons of scrap iron by boat from Mariveles, Bataan to Manila. However, upon arrival in Manila, police ordered the boat captain to dump the scrap iron into the sea. The Court of Appeals found Mauro Ganzon liable for breach of contract and ordered him to pay damages to Gelacio Tumambing. Mauro Ganzon appealed, arguing he was not liable as the scrap iron was out of his control. The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' decision, finding that Ganzon became responsible once the goods were received for transport and that the dumping was not a fortuitous event beyond his control

Copyright:

© All Rights Reserved
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt

Mauro Ganzon vs. Court of Appeals G.R. No. L-48757 May 30, 1988 Sarmiento, J. Facts

Uploaded by

Nichole Patricia Pedriña
41 views1 page
Gelacio Tumambing hired Mauro Ganzon to transport 305 tons of scrap iron by boat from Mariveles, Bataan to Manila. However, upon arrival in Manila, police ordered the boat captain to dump the scrap iron into the sea. The Court of Appeals found Mauro Ganzon liable for breach of contract and ordered him to pay damages to Gelacio Tumambing. Mauro Ganzon appealed, arguing he was not liable as the scrap iron was out of his control. The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' decision, finding that Ganzon became responsible once the goods were received for transport and that the dumping was not a fortuitous event beyond his control

Original Description:

gevfbags

Original Title

R

Copyright

© © All Rights Reserved

Available Formats

DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Gelacio Tumambing hired Mauro Ganzon to transport 305 tons of scrap iron by boat from Mariveles, Bataan to Manila. However, upon arrival in Manila, police ordered the boat captain to dump the scrap iron into the sea. The Court of Appeals found Mauro Ganzon liable for breach of contract and ordered him to pay damages to Gelacio Tumambing. Mauro Ganzon appealed, arguing he was not liable as the scrap iron was out of his control. The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' decision, finding that Ganzon became responsible once the goods were received for transport and that the dumping was not a fortuitous event beyond his control

Copyright:

© All Rights Reserved
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
41 views1 page

Mauro Ganzon vs. Court of Appeals G.R. No. L-48757 May 30, 1988 Sarmiento, J. Facts

Uploaded by

Nichole Patricia Pedriña
Gelacio Tumambing hired Mauro Ganzon to transport 305 tons of scrap iron by boat from Mariveles, Bataan to Manila. However, upon arrival in Manila, police ordered the boat captain to dump the scrap iron into the sea. The Court of Appeals found Mauro Ganzon liable for breach of contract and ordered him to pay damages to Gelacio Tumambing. Mauro Ganzon appealed, arguing he was not liable as the scrap iron was out of his control. The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' decision, finding that Ganzon became responsible once the goods were received for transport and that the dumping was not a fortuitous event beyond his control

Copyright:

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

Mauro Ganzon vs.

Court of Appeals
G.R. No. L-48757 May 30, 1988
Sarmiento, J.
Facts:

On November 28, 1956, Gelacio Tumambing contracted the services of the petitioner Mauro B.
Ganzon to haul 305 tons of scrap iron from Mariveles, Bataan, to the port of Manila on board the
Lighter “Batman”.
On December 1, 1956, Gelacio Tumambing delivered the scrap iron to the Captain of the Lighter.
On December 4, 1956, Acting Mayor Basilio Rub, accompanied by three policemen, ordered the
captain of the Lighter to dump the scrap iron where the lighter was docked.

Statement of the Case:

The Court of Appeals rendered a decision ordering Mauro Ganzon to pay Gelacio Tumambing the
sum of P5,895.00 as actual damages, the sum of P5,000.00 as exemplary damages, and the
amount of P2,000.00 as attorney’s fees, thus the reason for this certiorari alleging the errors in the
decision of the Court of Appeals.

Issues:

Whether or not the Court of Appeals erred in imposing a liability against him since the scraps were
not under his custody and control.

Whether or not the Court of Appeals erred in finding the petitioner Guilty of breach of contract of
carriage.

Whether or not the Court of Appeals erred for failure to consider that the loss of the scrap was due
to a fortuitous event.

Ruling:

No, the Court of Appeals did not err in imposing such liability because the moment the goods were
delivered to the Captain of the Lighter and the subsequent receipt by the carrier for the
transportation has deemed the contract of carriage as perfected.

No, the Court of Appeals did not err in finding the petitioner Guilty of breach of contract of carriage
since the petitioner has neither presented that the loss of the scraps was due to any of the following
causes enumerated in Article 1734 of the Civil Code, nor proven that he has exercised
extraordinary diligence, proving the petitioner negligent in the exercise of his obligation.

No, the Court of Appeals did not err in finding such event as fortuitous as the petitioner was not
duty bound to obey the illegal order to dump the scrap iron into the sea. Moreover, there is absence
of sufficient proof that the issuance of the same order was attended with such force or intimidation
as to completely overpower the will of the petitioner’s employees.

Dispositive Portion:

WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED; the assailed decision of the Court of Appeals is hereby
AFFIRMED. Costs against the petitioner,

This decision is IMMEDIATELY EXECUTORY.

You might also like