Ramos Vs China Southern Airlines

TOPIC: Damages
Alfredo S. Ramos, Conchita S. Ramos, Benjamin B. Ramos, Nelson T. Ramos

and Robinson T. Ramos vs China Southern Airlines Co. Ltd.
G.R. No. 213418 September 21, 2016
FACTS: On 7 August 2003, petitioners purchased five China Southern Airlines from
Active Travel Agency for a roundtrip plane tickets from Manila to Xiamen, China. On
their way back to the Manila, however, petitioners were prevented from taking their
designated flight despite the fact that earlier that day an agent from Active Tours
informed them that their bookings for China Southern Airlines flight are confirmed.
The refusal came after petitioners already checked in all their baggages and were
given the corresponding claim stubs and after they had paid the terminal fees.
According to the airlines' agent with whom they spoke at the airport, petitioners
were merely chance passengers but they may be allowed to join the flight if they
are willing to pay an additional 500 Renminbi (RMB) per person. When petitioners
refused to defray the additional cost, their baggages were offloaded from the plane
and China Southern Airlines flight then left Xiamen International Airport without
them.
Petitioners were able to fly back to Manila and upon arrival, they went to China
Southern Airlines to demand for the reimbursement of their airfare and travel
expenses in the amount of P87,375.00. When the airline refused to accede to their
demand, petitioners initiated an action for damages before the RTC of Manila and
sought for the payment of actual, moral and exemplary damages.
In their Answer, China Southern Airlines denied liability by alleging that petitioners
were not confirmed passengers of the airlines but were merely chance passengers.
RTC ruled in favor of the petitioners and granted the award of actual, moral and
exemplary damages.
CA modified the decision. Deleting the award of moral and exemplary damages.
ISSUE: Whether or not the award of moral and exemplary damages should be
granted.
RULING: Yes. A contract of carriage, in this case, air transport, is intended to serve
the traveling public and thus, imbued with public interest. The law governing
common carriers consequently imposes an exacting standard of conduct as
provided in Article 1755 of the Civil Code.
With respect to moral damages, the following provision of the New Civil Code is
instructive: Article 2220. Willful injury to property may be a legal ground for
awarding moral damages if the court should find that, under the circumstances,
such damag.es are justly due. The same rule applies to breaches of contract where
the defendant acted fraudulently or in bad faith.
Bad faith does not simply connote bad judgment or negligence. It imports dishonest
purpose or some moral obliquity and conscious doing of a wrong. It means breach of
a known duty through some motive, interest or ill will that partakes the nature of
fraud. Bad faith is in essence a question of intention.
We find that the airline company acted in bad faith in insolently bumping petitioners
off the flight after they have completed all the pre-departure routine. Bad faith is
evident when the ground personnel of the airline company unjustly and
unreasonably refused to board petitioners to the plane which compelled them to
rent a car and take the train to the nearest airport where they bought new sets of
plane tickets from another airline that could fly them home. Petitioners have every
reason to expect that they would be transported to their intended destination after
they had checked in their luggage and had gone through all the security checks.
Instead, China Southern Airlines offered to allow them to join the flight if they are
willing to pay additional cost; this amount is on top of the purchase price of the
plane tickets. The requirement to pay an additional fare was insult upon injury. It is
an aggravation of the breach of contract. Undoubtedly, petitioners are entitled to
the award of moral damages.
China Southern Airlines is also liable for exemplary damages as it acted in a
wantonly oppressive manner as succinctly discussed above against the petitioners.
Exemplary damages which are awarded by way of example or correction for the
public good, may be recovered in contractual obligations, as in this case, if
defendant acted in wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive or malevolent manner.

Ramos Vs China Southern Airlines

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ramos Vs China Southern Airlines

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

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

Ramos Vs China Southern Airlines

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TOPIC: Damages

Alfredo S. Ramos, Conchita S. Ramos, Benjamin B. Ramos, Nelson T. Ramos

You might also like