St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co. vs. Macondray & Co., Inc.doc
Content
St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co. vs. Macondray & Co., Inc G.R. No. L – 27796 March 25, 1976 Winthrop Products, Inc. of New York – Shipper SS ‘Tai Ping’ – owned and operated by Wilhelm Wilhemsen Winthrop Stearns, Inc. Manila – Consignee Barber Steamship Lines, Inc. – agent of Wilhelm Wilhelmsen St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company – Insurer Manila Port Service – arrastre contractor Macondray & Co., Inc. – carrier
•
•
FACTS: •
•
•
•
•
•
• •
•
•
•
Winthrop Products, Inc. of New York shipped aboard the SS ‘Tai Ping’, 218 cartons and drums of drugs and medicine which were consigned to Winthrop Stearns, Inc. Manila Philippines Barber Steamship Lines, Inc. issued a Bill of Lading in the name of Winthrop Products, Inc. as shipper, with arrival notice in Manila to consignee Wintrhop Stearns, Inc. Manila The shipment was insured insured by the shipper against against loos and/or damage with St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company SS Tai Ping arrived at the Port of Manila and discharged the shipment into the custody of Manila Port Service The shipment was discharged discharged complete and in good good order with the exception of 1 drum and serveral cartons which were in bad order condition The consignee filed a claim in the amount of P1,109.47 representing the C.I.F value of the damaged drum and cartons of medine with the carrier and Manila Port Service Both the carrier and Manila Port Service refused to pay such claim The consignee then then filed its claim with the insurer. On the basis of such claim, the insurance company paid to the consignee the insured value of the lost and damaged goods, including other expenses in connection therewith in the total amount of $1,134.46 As subrogee of the rights of the shipper and/or cosignee, the insurer instituted with the CFI an action against the defendants for the recovery of the amount of $1,134.46 Contention of defendant Manila Port Service: The whole cargo was delivered delivered to the consignee consignee in the o same condition in which it was received from the carrying vessel Their liability is limited to the invoice value value of the goods, o but in no case more than P500 per package pursuant to their Management Contract Contention of defendants Macondray & Co., Inc, Barber Steamship Lines, Inc. and Wilhelm Wilhelmsen: The carrier’s liability for the shipment shipment ceased upon o discharge thereof from the ship’s tackle
If any damage was sustained by the shipment while it was under the control of the vessel, such damage was caused by insufficinecy of packaging, force majeure and/or perils of the sea Lower Court Ruling: Defendants Macondray Macondray & Co, Barber Steamship Lines Inc o and Wilhel Wilhelmsen to pay plaintiff, jointly and severally P300 Defendant Manila Port Service to pay plaintiff P809.67 o (Total P1109.67) o Contention of St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co.: As subrogee of the consignee, it should be entitled to o recover from defendants the amount of $1,134.46 of $1,134.46 which it actually paid to the consignee and which represents the value of the lost and damaged shipment as well as other legitimate expenses Contention of Defendants: Their liabilty is limited to the C.I.F. value of of the goods, o pursuant to contract of sea carriage embodied in the bill of lading That the consignee’s consignee’s claim against the carrier and arrastre arrastre o operators was only for the sum of P1,109.67 o
•
ISSUES: 1.
Whether Whether or not, not, in case of loss or or damage, damage, the liabilit liability y of the carrier to the consignee is limited to the C.I.F value of the goods which were lost or damaged 2. Whether the insurer insurer who has has paid the claim claim in dollar dollars s to the consignee should be reimbursed in its peso equivalent on the date of discharge of the cargo or on the date of the decision HELD: 1. Yes •
•
•
•
The liabilities of the dendants with respect to the lost or damaged shipments are expressly limited to the C.I.F. value of the goodsas per contract of sea carriage emobodied in the bill of lading It reads: “The limitation of liability xxx shall inure not only to o the benefit of the carrier xxx but also to the benefit of any independent contractor performing services xxx” The shipper and consignee consignee are, therefore, therefore, bound by such stipulations It is for this reason that the consignee filed its claim against the defendant on the basis of the C.I.F. value of the lost or dagmaged goods in the aggregate amount of P1,109.67
2.
On the date of the discharge of the cargo The plaintiff, as insurer, after paying the claim of the insured for damages under the insurance, is subrogated merely to the rights of the assured As subrogee, it can recover only the amount that is recoverable by the latter Since the right of the assured is limited or restricted by the provisions in the bill of lading, as suit by the insurer as subrogee necessarily is subject to like limitations and restrictions •
•
•
•
•
FACTS: •
•
•
•
•
•
• •
•
•
•
Winthrop Products, Inc. of New York shipped aboard the SS ‘Tai Ping’, 218 cartons and drums of drugs and medicine which were consigned to Winthrop Stearns, Inc. Manila Philippines Barber Steamship Lines, Inc. issued a Bill of Lading in the name of Winthrop Products, Inc. as shipper, with arrival notice in Manila to consignee Wintrhop Stearns, Inc. Manila The shipment was insured insured by the shipper against against loos and/or damage with St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company SS Tai Ping arrived at the Port of Manila and discharged the shipment into the custody of Manila Port Service The shipment was discharged discharged complete and in good good order with the exception of 1 drum and serveral cartons which were in bad order condition The consignee filed a claim in the amount of P1,109.47 representing the C.I.F value of the damaged drum and cartons of medine with the carrier and Manila Port Service Both the carrier and Manila Port Service refused to pay such claim The consignee then then filed its claim with the insurer. On the basis of such claim, the insurance company paid to the consignee the insured value of the lost and damaged goods, including other expenses in connection therewith in the total amount of $1,134.46 As subrogee of the rights of the shipper and/or cosignee, the insurer instituted with the CFI an action against the defendants for the recovery of the amount of $1,134.46 Contention of defendant Manila Port Service: The whole cargo was delivered delivered to the consignee consignee in the o same condition in which it was received from the carrying vessel Their liability is limited to the invoice value value of the goods, o but in no case more than P500 per package pursuant to their Management Contract Contention of defendants Macondray & Co., Inc, Barber Steamship Lines, Inc. and Wilhelm Wilhelmsen: The carrier’s liability for the shipment shipment ceased upon o discharge thereof from the ship’s tackle
If any damage was sustained by the shipment while it was under the control of the vessel, such damage was caused by insufficinecy of packaging, force majeure and/or perils of the sea Lower Court Ruling: Defendants Macondray Macondray & Co, Barber Steamship Lines Inc o and Wilhel Wilhelmsen to pay plaintiff, jointly and severally P300 Defendant Manila Port Service to pay plaintiff P809.67 o (Total P1109.67) o Contention of St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co.: As subrogee of the consignee, it should be entitled to o recover from defendants the amount of $1,134.46 of $1,134.46 which it actually paid to the consignee and which represents the value of the lost and damaged shipment as well as other legitimate expenses Contention of Defendants: Their liabilty is limited to the C.I.F. value of of the goods, o pursuant to contract of sea carriage embodied in the bill of lading That the consignee’s consignee’s claim against the carrier and arrastre arrastre o operators was only for the sum of P1,109.67 o
•
ISSUES: 1.
Whether Whether or not, not, in case of loss or or damage, damage, the liabilit liability y of the carrier to the consignee is limited to the C.I.F value of the goods which were lost or damaged 2. Whether the insurer insurer who has has paid the claim claim in dollar dollars s to the consignee should be reimbursed in its peso equivalent on the date of discharge of the cargo or on the date of the decision HELD: 1. Yes •
•
•
•
The liabilities of the dendants with respect to the lost or damaged shipments are expressly limited to the C.I.F. value of the goodsas per contract of sea carriage emobodied in the bill of lading It reads: “The limitation of liability xxx shall inure not only to o the benefit of the carrier xxx but also to the benefit of any independent contractor performing services xxx” The shipper and consignee consignee are, therefore, therefore, bound by such stipulations It is for this reason that the consignee filed its claim against the defendant on the basis of the C.I.F. value of the lost or dagmaged goods in the aggregate amount of P1,109.67
2.
On the date of the discharge of the cargo The plaintiff, as insurer, after paying the claim of the insured for damages under the insurance, is subrogated merely to the rights of the assured As subrogee, it can recover only the amount that is recoverable by the latter Since the right of the assured is limited or restricted by the provisions in the bill of lading, as suit by the insurer as subrogee necessarily is subject to like limitations and restrictions •
•
•
