G.R. No. L-25724 October 8, 1968
FILIPRO, INC., plaintiff-appellee, vs. MANILA PORT SERVICE and/or MANILA RAILROAD COMPANY, defendants-appellants.

FACTS

This is an action to recover the value of seven shipments of imported goods (condensed milk and infant food) discharged at the Port of Manila unto the custody of the defendants, as arrastre operators, which were not delivered or delivered in bad order to the plaintiff-consignee. The case was submitted for decision upon a stipulation of facts. The defendants’ liability is governed by paragraph 15 of the management contract, which requires: (1) filing a claim with the contractor within fifteen (15) days from the date of discharge of the last package; and (2) bringing suit in court within one (1) year from the date of discharge or from the date the claim is rejected or denied. For each of the seven shipments, the plaintiff filed a provisional claim within the 15-day period, followed later by a formal claim. The defendants argue that the provisional claims are insufficient for not stating the value of the goods and that the suit, filed on October 7, 1963, was beyond one year from the dates of discharge (from January 15 to March 13, 1962). The defendants had not expressly rejected or denied the claims.

ISSUE

1. Whether the plaintiff’s provisional claims, filed within 15 days of discharge but not stating the value of the goods, comply with the claim-filing requirement under the management contract.
2. Whether the present action was commenced within the prescriptive period, considering the defendants’ inaction on the claims.

RULING

1. Yes. The provisional claims substantially comply with the contractual requirement. Paragraph 15 does not require the claim to state the value of the goods. A provisional claim is sufficient if it describes the goods adequately to permit identification and determination of relevant facts while the transaction is still fresh. Citing Domestic Insurance Co. v. Manila Railroad Co., the Court held that the lack of a specified value does not detract from the claim’s sufficiency.
2. Yes. The action was filed on time. Under paragraph 15, suit may be brought within one year from the date of discharge OR from the date the claim is rejected or denied. The defendants cannot, by their inaction, deprive the plaintiff of the second alternative. Following established jurisprudence, in case of arrastre operator inaction, the claim is deemed rejected or denied upon the expiration of one year from the date of discharge of the last package. The prescriptive period to file suit then begins to run. Since the shipments were discharged from January 15 to March 13, 1962, the claims were deemed denied from January 15 to March 13, 1963. The complaint filed on October 7, 1963, was within one year from these deemed denial dates. The decision of the Court of First Instance of Manila was affirmed.