Victims of MV Princess of the Stars tragedy to get P242M

Atty. Persida Acosta (center) together with PAO legal eagle's team, defending Victims and relatives of MV Princess of the Stars in CEBU RTC BR.16:  Attys. Rev Dacpano, Howard Areza, Arman Cavalida, and G-ree Calinawan, Gariando.

“Hindi natutulog ang Diyos,” ito ang madalas sambitin ng masipag at butihing abogado ng Public Attorneys Office (PAO) na si Atty. Persida Acosta. Sa dami kasi ng indigent at high-profile cases na hinahawakan ng ahensya, palaging naitatanong sa kanya kung paano nya mina-manage ang lahat.

Nitong October 14 ay dumating ang magandang balita para sa mga biktima ng MV Princess of the Stars. Isa itong kaso laban sa Sulpicio Lines na pitong taon na hinahawakan ng PAO office. For more details, please see related post: http://mlrgarcia.blogspot.com/2014/09/special-report-paigtingin-ang.html

Narito ang summary of decision na ipinadala sa amin ni PAO Chief Acosta:

              In a decision dated 18 September 2015, the Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 49, ruled in favour of Celerna Calayag, et al., victims and heirs of the victims of the tragedy that is the sinking of Sulpicio Lines, Inc.’s (now Philippine Span Asia Carrier Corporation) M/V Princess of the Stars at the height of Typhoon Frank on 21 June 2008.

The court ruled that Calayag, et al. proved by preponderance of evidence the negligence of Sulpicio Lines/PSACC. 

They were able to establish that there was a contract of carriage between the passengers and the said shipping line, as proven by the Passenger’s Manifest and by the Releases and Quitclaims which serve as express admission on the part of Sulpicio/PSACC that the recipients of the amounts covered therein are victims and survivors of the said tragedy.

They were also able to establish that Sulpicio/PSACC failed to observe extraordinary diligence required of common carriers as prescribed in Articles 1733 and 1755 of the Civil Code.  The fact that M/V Princess of the Stars never reached its destination as it capsized along the waters of Sibuyan, San Fernando, Romblon created the presumption that Sulpicio/PSACC and its owners were negligent.  No evidence was presented to rebut this presumption. 

PO2 Felix Rizaldy Sardan, the PCG Clearing Officer/Boarding Officer, Capt. Amado Romillo, an expert in maritime industry, and Real Admiral Luis M. Tuason of PAGASA also testified and opined that the disaster was brought about by the gross negligence of the shipowner and ship management.  Capt. Marimon was not unaware of the typhoon signals declared in the regular route of M/V Princess of the Stars (where it capsized) and even in its alternate route.  There was already a forecast from PAGASA that Storm Signal Nos. 2 and 3 were raised in the areas where M/V Princess of the Stars will be cruising, but no specific instruction was given for the M/V Princess of the Stars to take shelter. There also appears deception as two cargo manifests exist – one with no declaration of the toxic substance “endosulfan”, and another declaring the same.  This is coupled with the Master’s Oath which states “NIL” in the portion pertaining to the carriage of dangerous cargo.

Sulpicio/PSACC’s failure to observe extraordinary diligence was likewise announced by MARINA in its Decision dated January 23, 2015.

The negligence was also bolstered by the fact that there was no emergency crisis management employed before, during and after the capsizing, as testified to by survivors Francisco Batula, Gerardo Pelimer, Sosan Lisbo and Rodel Laborte.  During the tragedy, nobody from the crew assisted them.

As to the ship’s seaworthiness, Cap. Romillo and Engr. Ramirez testified otherwise.  Ballast Tank Nos. 1, 2 and 4 of M/V Princess of the Stars are empty, hence, compromising the stability of the vessel.  In an inspection of M/V Princess of the Earth, it was discovered that there were insufficient lashing gears, few conical locks, no pad eyes and no ropes.

As to the waivers and quitclaims signed by the survivors and surviving heirs, the same are contrary to law, public order, public policy, morals or/and good customs.  Those documents were obviously prepared by Sulpicio/PSACC in order to deter any litigation.  The provision that Sulpicio/PSACC and its owners will not be liable even if they are found negligent, is a violation of the law for Articles 1733 and 1755 of the Civil Code (on extraordinary diligence) cannot be dispensed with or lessened by stipulation, or otherwise (Article 1757, Civil Code).  Also, at the time of the signing of said documents, the recipients of the amounts covered were at an economic disadvantage and all of them are still grieving.  Also, from the evidence, it appears that the P200,000.00 monetary offer and burial assistance of P20,000.00 in the various Release and Quitclaim is an equivalent amount to the aggregate limit of liability for accidental death and burial expenses as contained in the Group Personal Accident Insurance Cover issued to Sulpicio Lines, Inc. by Oriental Assurance Corporation.

Also noteworthy is the Court of Appeals Decision in CA G.R. CV No. 04148 entitled ELINA EDISAN versus SULPICIO LINES, INC., Captain FLORENCIO MARIMON, ENRIQUE S. GO, EUSEBIO S, GO, CARLOS S. GO, VICTORIANO S. GO, DOMINADOR S, GO, RICARDO S. GO, EDWARD S, GO, and EDGAR S. GO where it was ruled that the releases and quitclaims are contrary to public policy.

As to the award of damages, the Court awards the damages as prayed in the complaints and of the actual (compensatory) damages proved during the trial.  In addition, in view of the loss of earning capacity of the victims of the M/V Princess of the Stars, their life expectancy based on the American Expectancy Table of Mortality formula: 2/3 x (80-Age) x annual income, must be considered.

Sulpicio/PSACC, Enrique S. Go, Eusebio S. Go, Carlos S. Go, Victoriano S. Go, Dominador S. Go, Ricardo S. Go, Edward S. Go, and Edgar S. Go, as common carrier and shipowners, are jointly and solidarily liable.  The individual liability of the Gos stems from how poorly Sulpicio/PSACC is being managed, as reinforced by several sea mishaps it suffered. 

They are likewise liable for moral and exemplary damages.  In breach of contract of carriage, moral damages may be recovered when it results in the death of a passenger (Article 2206 in relation to Article 1764 of the Civil Code); while Article 2232 of the Civil Code gives the Court the discretion to grant exemplary damages in breach of contract when the defendant acted in a wanton, fraudulent and reckless manner. There being an award for exemplary damages, an award of attorney's fees is likewise proper pursuant to Article 2208 of the Civil Code.