7/24/2019 Fireman's v Metro Digest
1/2
II. DEGREE OF DILIGENCE REQUIRED
FIREMANS FUND INSURANCE CO vs METRO PORT SERVICES
FACTS:
Vulcan Industrial and Mining Corporation imported from the
United States several
machineries and equipment which were loaded on board the SIS
Albert Maersk at the port ofPhiladelphia U!S!A! and transhipped for
Manila through the vessel S"S Maersk #empo!
#he shipment arrived at the port of Manila on $une % &'('
and was turned over completeand in good order condition to the
arrastre operator )! *a+on Inc! ,now Metro Port ServiceInc! and
referred to as the A**AS#*)-!
A tractor operator named .anilo /ibrando and emplo0ed b0 the
A**AS#*) was ordered totransfer the shipment to the )quipment 1ard
at Pier %! 2hile /ibrando was maneuvering thetractor ,owned and
provided b0 Maersk /ine- to the left the cargo fell from the
chassis andhit one of the container vans of American President
/ines! It was discovered that there wereno twist lock at the rear
end of the chassis where the cargo was loaded!
An Insurance was claimed b0 Vulcan Industrial in turn the
petitioner insurance compan0
demanded recover0 from Maerks /ine! #he trial court ruled that
Maerks and Metro Port beheld solidaril0 liable! 3n appeal b0 Metro
Port the Court of Appeals reversed ruling that it isonl0 Maerks
that is liable!
ISSUE:
234 Maerks and Metro Port e5ercised the proper degree of
diligence!234 Maerks and Metro Port be held liable solidarit0!
RULING:
Maerks and Metro port did not exercise the proper diligence.
In general the nature of the work of an arrastre operator covers
the handling of cargoes atpiers and wharves! #he A**AS#*) is
required to provide cargo handling equipment which
includes among others trailers chassis for containers! In some
cases however the shippingline has its own cargo handling
equipment!
In this case Maerks provide for the chassis and tractors and
merel0 requested the arrastre,Metro- to dispatch a tractor
operator! A**AS#*) which had the sole discretion andprerogative to
hire and assign /ibrando to operate the tractor! It was also the
A**AS#*)6ssole decision to detail and deplo0 /ibrando for the
particular task from among its pool oftractor operators or drivers!
Since the A**AS#*) o7ered its drivers for the operation oftractors
in the handling of cargo and equipment then the A**AS#*) should see
to it thatthe drivers under its emplo0 must e5ercise due diligence
in the performance of their work!
#he testimonies are appreciated and the court held that Maerks
is at fault in not providingtwist locks on the chassis and Metro is
also at fault for /ibrando8s negligence in not checkingthat the
cargo is securel0 loaded on the chassis!
Both the arrastre and the carrier are charged with and obligated
to deliver thegoods in good condition to the consignee.
#he legal relationship between the consignee and the arrastre
operator is akin to that of adepositor and warehouseman ,/ua 9ian
v! Manila *ailroad Co! &' SC*A : ;&'( Phil! ?:%;&'=-!
Since it is the dut0 of the A**AS#*) to take good care of the goods
that are in itscustod0 and to deliver them in good condition to the
consignee such responsibilit0 also
