GR L 66102 04; (August, 1990) (Digest)
G.R. Nos. L-66102-04. August 30, 1990.
PHILIPPINE RABBIT BUS LINES, INC., petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT AND CASIANO PASCUA, ET AL., respondents.
FACTS
On December 24, 1966, a group of passengers boarded a chartered jeepney bound for Pangasinan. Upon reaching San Manuel, Tarlac, the jeepney’s right rear wheel detached, causing it to swerve. The driver applied the brakes, resulting in the jeepney making a sudden U-turn and coming to a stop, blocking the western lane of the highway. Almost simultaneously, a Philippine Rabbit bus, driven by Tomas delos Reyes, collided with the rear of the stationary jeepney. The collision resulted in the deaths of three jeepney passengers and physical injuries to others. The heirs of the deceased and the injured passengers filed separate actions for damages against the jeepney owner, driver, insurer, and the bus company.
The trial court absolved all defendants, finding the accident was due to a fortuitous event—the sudden detachment of the jeepney’s wheel. The Intermediate Appellate Court reversed this decision, holding both the jeepney owner/driver and the bus company jointly and severally liable. The appellate court found the jeepney driver negligent for operating a defective vehicle and the bus driver negligent for failing to avoid the collision, given the road’s straight and unobstructed condition.
ISSUE
Whether the bus company, as a common carrier, is liable for the damages arising from the collision.
RULING
Yes, the bus company is solidarily liable. The Supreme Court affirmed the appellate court’s finding of negligence on the part of the bus driver. As a common carrier, the bus company is bound to observe extraordinary diligence for passenger safety under Articles 1733, 1755, and 1756 of the Civil Code. In case of an accident, the law presumes the carrier was at fault or negligent. This presumption was not overcome.
The Court held that the detachment of the jeepney’s wheel was not a fortuitous event that would exculpate the bus driver. The road was straight and visibility was clear for 200 meters. The evidence, including the point of impact on the bus’s lane, showed the jeepney had been stationary for a couple of minutes before the collision. A reasonably prudent driver exercising extraordinary diligence could have and should have observed the obstruction in time to avoid it. The bus driver’s failure to do so constituted negligence. Consequently, pursuant to Article 1759, the bus company is solidarily liable with the jeepney owner and driver for the resulting damages. The decision of the Intermediate Appellate Court was affirmed.