G.R. No. 150255. April 22, 2005
SCHMITZ TRANSPORT & BROKERAGE CORPORATION, Petitioner, vs. TRANSPORT VENTURE, INC., INDUSTRIAL INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD., and BLACK SEA SHIPPING AND DODWELL now INCHCAPE SHIPPING SERVICES, Respondents.

FACTS

Industrial Insurance Company, Ltd., as subrogee of consignee Little Giant Steel Pipe Corporation, filed a complaint for damages against Schmitz Transport & Brokerage Corporation, Transport Venture, Inc. (TVI), and Black Sea Shipping. The claim arose from the loss of 37 steel coils washed overboard from TVI’s barge “Erika V” at the Manila South Harbor. The coils were part of a shipment carried by Black Sea’s vessel, M/V “Alexander Saveliev.” Schmitz Transport, engaged by the consignee to receive and deliver the cargo, contracted TVI to provide a barge and tugboat for lighterage from the shipside. Unloading onto the barge commenced and finished on October 26-27, 1991, during inclement weather with a storm signal raised. The barge, left unattended at shipside without a tugboat, capsized due to strong waves, resulting in the total loss of the cargo.
The Regional Trial Court held all defendants solidarily liable, finding them negligent for proceeding with the unloading operation despite the storm warning. The Court of Appeals affirmed, ruling that Schmitz Transport, TVI, and Black Sea were all common carriers whose concurrent negligence led to the loss. Schmitz Transport filed the present petition, arguing it was merely an agent of the consignee and not a common carrier, and that the loss was due to a fortuitous event.

ISSUE

Whether petitioner Schmitz Transport & Brokerage Corporation is solidarily liable with the other respondents for the loss of the cargo.

RULING

Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed the solidary liability of Schmitz Transport. The Court rejected the petitioner’s claim that it acted only as an agent. By contracting to secure cargo clearances, receive the goods from shipside, and deliver them to the consignee’s warehouse for a fee, Schmitz Transport undertook a contract of carriage, making it a common carrier under the law. As a common carrier, it is bound to observe extraordinary diligence in the vigilance over the goods. Its failure to ensure the barge was timely towed to a safe pier after unloading, despite knowledge of the worsening weather, constituted a breach of this duty.
The defense of fortuitous event was unavailing. A storm may be a fortuitous event, but the negligence of the carriers intervened. The loss was not solely due to the storm but to the concurrent failures: Black Sea for unloading outside the breakwater in unsafe conditions, TVI for leaving its barge unattended, and Schmitz Transport for failing to supervise the safe completion of the transfer operation. Their collective negligence was the proximate cause of the loss. Under Article 2194 of the Civil Code, two or more persons liable for a quasi-delict are solidarily liable. Thus, the finding of solidary liability among all respondents, as common carriers who failed to exercise the required diligence, was proper.