1. MAERSK LINE VS COURT of APPEALS FACTS: Maersk Line Is
1. MAERSK LINE VS COURT OF APPEALS FACTS: Maersk Line is engaged in the transportation of goods by sea, doing business in the Philippines through its general agent Compania General de Tabacos de Filipinas. Private respondent Efren Castillo is the proprietor of Ethegal Laboratories, a firm engaged in the manufacture of pharmaceutical products. On November 12, 1976, private respondent ordered from Eli Lilly. Inc. of Puerto Rico through its agent in the Philippines, Elanco Products, 600,000 empty gelatin capsules for the manufacture of his pharmaceutical products. The capsules were placed in six (6) drums of 100,000 capsules each valued at US $1,668.71. The 600,000 empty gelatin capsules in six drums were already shipped on board MV "Anders Maerskline" for shipment to the Philippines via Oakland, California. Shipper Eli Lilly, Inc. specified the date of arrival to be April 3, 1977. Said cargo of capsules were mishipped and diverted to Richmond, Virginia, USA and then transported back Oakland, Califorilia. The goods finally arrived in the Philippines on June 10, 1977 or after two (2) months from the date specified in the memorandum. As a consequence, private respondent as consignee refused to take delivery of the goods on account of its failure to arrive on time. Private respondent alleging gross negligence and undue delay in the delivery of the goods, filed an action before the trial for rescission of contract with damages against petitioner and Eli Lilly, Inc. as defendants. Denying that it committed breach of contract, petitioner alleged in its that answer that the subject shipment was transported in accordance with the provisions of the covering bill of lading and that its liability under the law on transportation of good attaches only in case of loss, destruction or deterioration of the goods as provided for in Article 1734 of Civil Code.
[Show full text]