8/3/2019 Lopez v Northwest Airlines
2/2
Santos vs. Northwest Orient Airlines cannot be invoked to oust
the trial court of jurisdiction over the civil case. First, it was
not shown
that the facts in Santos are the same as that with the case.
Moreover, it behooves the trial court to determine whether the
private
respondent is already barred from raising the issue of
jurisdiction because of estoppel or laches.
Finally, trial court should have taken into consideration the
earlier case ofPan American World Airways, Inc. vs. IAC, where the
Court
affirmed the CA decision awarding damages to the private
respondent for Pan Ams refusal to accommodate the latter on the
flight
despite the fact that said private respondent had a confirmed
plane ticket.
Posterior changes in the doctrine of this Court cannot
retroactively be applied to nullify a prior final ruling in the
same proceedingwhere the prior adjudication was had, whether the
case should be civil or criminal in nature.
Thus, the trial court committed grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack of jurisdiction in granting the second motion to
dismiss
solely on the basis of the Santos case, and in dismissing Civil
Case No. 88-1014 weeks after its period to decide the same had
expired.
The Presiding Judge of Branch 65 should have denied the motion
and decided the case taking into account, however, the decision
inthe Santos case and the above observations.
Dispositive:
the instant petition is hereby GRANTED. The Order of Branch 65
of he Regional Trial Court of Makati, Metro Manila of 31 August1992
in Civil Case No. 88-1014 entitled Maria L. Lopez vs. Northwest
Airlines, Inc. is hereby ANNULLED and SET ASIDE. The
respondent court is directed to render its decision in the said
case with purposeful dispatch.
Costs against the private respondent.
Votes: Bidin, Feliciano and Romero concur. Melo dissents. (4 on
1)
Dissenting opinion: (MELO,J.)
Private respondent's participation in the case by filing an
Answer, presenting evidence, and not objecting to the trial court's
order
requiring the parties to submit their evidence may not be
equated to estoppel. The private respondent had no alternative but
to go
through with the trial after the challenge it posed against the
denial of the first motion to dismiss was rebuffed by the CA and
the SC.
Furthermore, in view of the rule in Santos vs. Northwest Orient
Airlines, it is the passenger's ultimate destination that
determines thecountry where the suit against an international
carrier is to be filed.
If previous toSantosthe case below were decided on the merits
and the decision thereafter attained finality, the doctrine of the
law
of the case would apply. But since the decision is elevated with
Santosin the meantime having been pronounced, the appellate
could
should have vacated the judgment of the trial court for lack of
jurisdiction.
