View full case

FAR EASTERN SHIPPING COMPANY v. COURT OF APPELAS

FACTS:

On June 20, 1980, the M/V PAVLODAR, a vessel flying the flagship of the USSR and owned by Far Eastern Shipping Company (FESC), arrived at the Port of Manila from Vancouver, British Columbia at approximately 7:00 in the morning. The vessel was assigned Berth 4 at the Manila International Port for berthing. Captain Roberto Abellana of the Philippine Ports Authority was designated to supervise the berthing, and Captain Senen Gavino, from the Manila Pilot's Association (MPA), was tasked with conducting the docking maneuvers. Gavino boarded the vessel at the quarantine anchorage and positioned himself on the bridge, alongside the vessel's master, Victor Kavankov. After an initial briefing, the vessel lifted anchor and proceeded to its assigned berth. Conditions at sea and wind were favorable for docking. As the vessel approached the port, approximately 2,000 feet from the pier, Gavino ordered the anchor to be dropped, but it failed to take hold, resulting in the vessel not slowing down and eventually ramming the apron of the pier, causing significant damage to both the pier and the vessel.

Subsequently, Gavino and Kavankov filed their respective reports on the incident. The Philippine Ports Authority (PPA) incurred costs amounting to P1,126,132.25 for the rehabilitation of the damaged pier. On January 10, 1983, PPA, through the Solicitor General, filed a complaint for a sum of money against FESC, Capt. Gavino, and MPA in the Regional Trial Court of Manila, seeking joint and several liability for actual and exemplary damages. The trial court held the defendants jointly and severally liable for P1,053,300.00 in actual damages. The defendants appealed the decision to the Court of Appeals, questioning whether the pilot’s sole liability under compulsory pilotage absolved the vessel's owner if the master was concurrently negligent. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's finding but ruled that MPA's liability was not based on an employer-employee relationship but on provisions under Customs Administrative Order No. 15-65, thus modifying the decision to hold MPA solidarily liable but entitled to reimbursement from Capt. Gavino beyond 75% of its reserve fund. Both FESC and MPA subsequently sought review of this decision.

ISSUES:

  1. Is the pilot of a commercial vessel, under compulsory pilotage, solely liable for the damage caused by the vessel to the pier for his negligence?

  2. Would the owner of the vessel be liable if the damage is caused by the concurrent negligence of the master of vessel and the pilot under compulsory pilotage?

RULING:

  1. No, the pilot is not solely liable. The Supreme Court held that while the pilot, Capt. Gavino, was negligent, the master of the vessel, Capt. Viktor Kabankov, was also negligent because he did not take action to prevent the damage despite having the authority and ability to countermand the pilot’s orders in an emergency situation.

  2. Yes, the owner of the vessel would be liable. The Court found that the concurrent negligence of both Capt. Gavino and Capt. Kabankov (the master of the vessel), made them joint tortfeasors. Consequently, the negligence of the master imposed liability on the owner of the vessel, Far Eastern Shipping Co., for the damages inflicted upon the pier.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Res ipsa loquitur The doctrine applies where the nature of the accident is such that it would not ordinarily occur without negligence.

  • Concurrent Negligence When the concurrent negligence of two or more parties (such as a pilot and a shipmaster) causes damage, they are joint tortfeasors and are solidarily liable.

  • Duties and Responsibilities of a Pilot and Shipmaster A pilot must exercise ordinary skill and care, and possess the requisite special knowledge for navigation. The shipmaster retains command and must act in face of imminent danger.

  • Vicarious Liability Not applicable in absence of employer-employee relationship. However, Customs Administrative Orders can impose liability for statutory breaches.

  • Customs Administrative Order No. 15-65 This regulation imposes liability upon pilots' associations for damages caused by their members while performing pilotage services, up to a reserve fund limit.

  • Civil Code, Article 2194 Imposes solidary liability on joint tortfeasors whose concurrent negligence results in damage.