Republic of the Philippines written under the printed words "Non valuable apres de payment in Manila, through their

payment in Manila, through their relatives, of the Pursuant to tariff rules and regulations of the International
SUPREME COURT (meaning, "not valid after the"). readjusted rates. They finally flew back to Manila on Air Transportation Association (IATA), included in
Manila separate Air France Frights on 19 May 1971 for Jose Gana paragraphs 9, 10, and 11 of the Stipulations of Fact
and 26 May 1971 for the rest of the family. between the parties in the Trial Court, dated 31 March
The GANAS did not depart on 8 May 1970.
1973, an airplane ticket is valid for one year. "The
FIRST DIVISION
passenger must undertake the final portion of his journey
On 25 August 1971, the GANAS commenced before the
Sometime in January, 1971, Jose Gana sought the by departing from the last point at which he has made a
then Court of First Instance of Manila, Branch III, Civil
G.R. No. L-57339 December 29, 1983 assistance of Teresita Manucdoc, a Secretary of the Sta. voluntary stop before the expiry of this limit (parag.
Case No. 84111 for damages arising from breach of
Clara Lumber Company where Jose Gana was the Director 3.1.2. ) ... That is the time allowed a passenger to begin
contract of carriage.
and Treasurer, for the extension of the validity of their and to complete his trip (parags. 3.2 and 3.3.). ... A ticket
AIR FRANCE, petitioner, 
tickets, which were due to expire on 8 May 1971. Teresita can no longer be used for travel if its validity has expired
vs.
enlisted the help of Lee Ella Manager of the Philippine AIR FRANCE traversed the material allegations of the before the passenger completes his trip (parag. 3.5.1.) ...
HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, JOSE G.
Travel Bureau, who used to handle travel arrangements for Complaint and alleged that the GANAS brought upon To complete the trip, the passenger must purchase a new
GANA (Deceased), CLARA A. GANA, RAMON
the personnel of the Sta. Clara Lumber Company. Ella themselves the predicament they found themselves in and ticket for the remaining portion of the journey" (ibid.) 3
GANA, MANUEL GANA, MARIA TERESA GANA,
sent the tickets to Cesar Rillo, Office Manager of AIR assumed the consequential risks; that travel agent Ella's
ROBERTO GANA, JAIME JAVIER GANA,
FRANCE. The tickets were returned to Ella who was affixing of validating stickers on the tickets without the
CLOTILDE VDA. DE AREVALO, and EMILY SAN From the foregoing rules, it is clear that AIR FRANCE
informed that extension was not possible unless the fare knowledge and consent of AIR FRANCE, violated airline
JUAN, respondents. cannot be faulted for breach of contract when it
differentials resulting from the increase in fares triggered tariff rules and regulations and was beyond the scope of
dishonored the tickets of the GANAS after 8 May 1971
by an increase of the exchange rate of the US dollar to the his authority as a travel agent; and that AIR FRANCE was
since those tickets expired on said date; nor when it
Benjamin S. Valte for petitioner. Philippine peso and the increased travel tax were first not guilty of any fraudulent conduct or bad faith.
required the GANAS to buy new tickets or have their
paid. Ella then returned the tickets to Teresita and
tickets re-issued for the Tokyo/Manila segment of their
informed her of the impossibility of extension.
Napoleon Garcia for private respondents. On 29 May 1975, the Trial Court dismissed the Complaint trip. Neither can it be said that, when upon sale of the new
based on Partial and Additional Stipulations of Fact as tickets, it imposed additional charges representing fare
In the meantime, the GANAS had scheduled their wen as on the documentary and testimonial evidence. differentials, it was motivated by self-interest or unjust
departure on 7 May 1971 or one day before the expiry enrichment considering that an increase of fares took
date. In the morning of the very day of their scheduled effect, as authorized by the Civil Aeronautics Board
The GANAS appealed to respondent Appellate Court.
MELENCIO-HERRERA, J.: departure on the first leg of their trip, Teresita requested (CAB) in April, 1971. This procedure is well in accord
During the pendency of the appeal, Jose Gana, the
travel agent Ella to arrange the revalidation of the tickets. with the IATA tariff rules which provide:
principal plaintiff, died.
Ella gave the same negative answer and warned her that
In this petition for review on certiorari, petitioner AIR although the tickets could be used by the GANAS if they
FRANCE assails the Decision of then respondent Court of 6. TARIFF RULES
left on 7 May 1971, the tickets would no longer be valid On 15 December 1980, respondent Appellate Court set
Appeals 1 promulgated on 15 December 1980 in CA-G.R. for the rest of their trip because the tickets would then aside and reversed the Trial Court's judgment in a
No. 58164-R, entitled "Jose G. Gana, et al. vs. Sociedad have expired on 8 May 1971. Teresita replied that it will 7. APPLICABLE FARE ON THE
Decision, which decreed:
Nacionale Air France", which reversed the Trial Court's be up to the GANAS to make the arrangements. With that DATE OF DEPARTURE
judgment dismissing the Complaint of private respondents assurance, Ella on his own, attached to the tickets
for damages arising from breach of contract of carriage, WHEREFORE, the decision
validating stickers for the Osaka/Tokyo flight, one a JAL.
and awarding instead P90,000.00 as moral damages. appealed from is set aside. Air 3.1 General Rule.
sticker and the other an SAS (Scandinavian Airways
France is hereby ordered to pay
System) sticker. The SAS sticker indicates thereon that it
appellants moral damages in the
Sometime in February, 1970, the late Jose G. Gana and his was "Reevaluated by: the Philippine Travel Bureau, All journeys must be charged for at
total sum of NINETY THOUSAND
family, numbering nine (the GANAS), purchased from Branch No. 2" (as shown by a circular rubber stamp) and the fare (or charge) in effect on the
PESOS (P90,000.00) plus costs.
AIR FRANCE through Imperial Travels, Incorporated, a signed "Ador", and the date is handwritten in the center of date on which transportation
duly authorized travel agent, nine (9) "open-dated" air the circle. Then appear under printed headings the commences from the point of
passage tickets for the Manila/Osaka/Tokyo/Manila route. notations: JL. 108 (Flight), 16 May (Date), 1040 (Time), SO ORDERED. 2 origin. Any ticket sold prior to a
The GANAS paid a total of US$2,528.85 for their OK (status). Apparently, Ella made no more attempt to change of fare or charge (increase
economy and first class fares. Said tickets were bought at contact AIR FRANCE as there was no more time. or decrease) occurring between the
Reconsideration sought by AIR FRANCE was denied,
the then prevailing exchange rate of P3.90 per US$1.00. date of commencement of the
hence, petitioner's recourse before this instance, to which
The GANAS also paid travel taxes of P100.00 for each journey, is subject to the above
Notwithstanding the warnings, the GANAS departed from we gave due course.
passenger. general rule and must be adjusted
Manila in the afternoon of 7 May 1971 on board AIR
accordingly. A new ticket must be
FRANCE Flight 184 for Osaka, Japan. There is no
The crucial issue is whether or not, under the issued and the difference is to be
On 24 April 1970, AIR FRANCE exchanged or question with respect to this leg of the trip.
environmental milieu the GANAS have made out a case collected or refunded as the case
substituted the aforementioned tickets with other tickets may be. No adjustment is necessary
for breach of contract of carriage entitling them to an
for the same route. At this time, the GANAS were booked However, for the Osaka/Tokyo flight on 17 May 1971, if the increase or decrease in fare
award of damages.
for the Manila/Osaka segment on AIR FRANCE Flight Japan Airlines refused to honor the tickets because of their (or charge) occurs when the journey
184 for 8 May 1970, and for the Tokyo/Manila return trip expiration, and the GANAS had to purchase new tickets. is already commenced. 4
on AIR FRANCE Flight 187 on 22 May 1970. The They encountered the same difficulty with respect to their We are constrained to reverse respondent Appellate
aforesaid tickets were valid until 8 May 1971, the date return trip to Manila as AIR FRANCE also refused to Court's affirmative ruling thereon.
honor their tickets. They were able to return only after pre-
The GANAS cannot defend by contending lack of know from you what did you mean by this testimony of effort, perhaps, to beat the deadline and in the thought that
knowledge of those rules since the evidence bears out that yours? by commencing the trip the day before the expiry date,
Teresita, who handled travel arrangements for the they could complete the trip even thereafter. It should be
GANAS, was duly informed by travel agent Ella of the recalled that AIR FRANCE was even unaware of the
A That was on the day when they were asking me on May
advice of Reno, the Office Manager of Air France, that the validating SAS and JAL. stickers that Ella had affixed
7, 1971 when they were checking the tickets. I told Mrs.
tickets in question could not be extended beyond the spuriously. Consequently, Japan Air Lines and AIR
Manucdoc that I was going to get the tickets. I asked her
period of their validity without paying the fare FRANCE merely acted within their contractual rights
what about the tickets onward from the return from Tokyo,
differentials and additional travel taxes brought about by when they dishonored the tickets on the remaining
and her answer was it is up for the Ganas to make the
the increased fare rate and travel taxes. segments of the trip and when AIR FRANCE demanded
arrangement, because I told her that they could leave on
payment of the adjusted fare rates and travel taxes for the
the seventh, but they could take care of that when they
Tokyo/Manila flight.
ATTY. VALTE arrived in Osaka.

WHEREFORE, the judgment under review is hereby

Q What did you tell Mrs. Manucdoc, in turn after being Q What do you mean?
reversed and set aside, and the Amended Complaint filed
told this by Mr. Rillo?
by private respondents hereby dismissed.
A The Ganas will make the arrangement from Osaka,
A I told her, because that is the reason why they accepted Tokyo and Manila.
No costs.
again the tickets when we returned the tickets spin, that
they could not be extended. They could be extended by
Q What arrangement?
paying the additional fare, additional tax and additional SO ORDERED.
exchange during that time.
A The arrangement for the airline because the tickets
Teehankee (Chairman), Plana, Relova and Gutierrez, Jr.,
would expire on May 7, and they insisted on leaving. I
Q You said so to Mrs. Manucdoc? JJ., concur.
asked Mrs. Manucdoc what about the return onward
portion because they would be travelling to Osaka, and her
A Yes, sir." ... 5 answer was, it is up to for the Ganas to make the
arrangement.
The ruling relied on by respondent Appellate Court,
therefore, in KLM. vs. Court of Appeals, 65 SCRA 237 Q Exactly what were the words of Mrs. Manucdoc when
(1975), holding that it would be unfair to charge you told her that? If you can remember, what were her
respondents therein with automatic knowledge or notice of exact words?
conditions in contracts of adhesion, is inapplicable. To all
legal intents and purposes, Teresita was the agent of the
A Her words only, it is up for the Ganas to make the
GANAS and notice to her of the rejection of the request
arrangement.
for extension of the validity of the tickets was notice to the
GANAS, her principals.
Q This was in Tagalog or in English?
The SAS validating sticker for the Osaka/Tokyo flight
affixed by Era showing reservations for JAL. Flight 108 A I think it was in English. ... 7
for 16 May 1971, without clearing the same with AIR
FRANCE allegedly because of the imminent departure of
The circumstances that AIR FRANCE personnel at the
the GANAS on the same day so that he could not get in
ticket counter in the airport allowed the GANAS to leave
touch with Air France 6 was certainly in contravention of
is not tantamount to an implied ratification of travel agent
IATA rules although as he had explained, he did so upon
Ella's irregular actuations. It should be recalled that the
Teresita's assurance that for the onward flight from Osaka
GANAS left in Manila the day before the expiry date of
and return, the GANAS would make other arrangements.
their tickets and that "other arrangements" were to be
made with respect to the remaining segments. Besides, the
Q Referring you to page 33 of the transcript of the last validating stickers that Ella affixed on his own merely
session, I had this question which reads as follows: 'But reflect the status of reservations on the specified flight and
did she say anything to you when you said that the tickets could not legally serve to extend the validity of a ticket or
were about to expire?' Your answer was: 'I am the one revive an expired one.
who asked her. At that time I told her if the tickets being
used ... I was telling her what about their bookings on the
The conclusion is inevitable that the GANAS brought
return. What about their travel on the return? She told me
upon themselves the predicament they were in for having
it is up for the Ganas to make the arrangement.' May I
insisted on using tickets that were due to expire in an