(12) [G.R. No. 71929 : December 4, 1990.

] After appropriate proceedings and trial, the Court of First Instance rendered judgment
192 SCRA 9 in Dr. Pablo's favor: 10

ALITALIA, Petitioner, vs. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT and FELIPA E. "(1) Ordering the defendant (ALITALIA) to pay . . . (her) the sum of TWENTY
PABLO, Respondents. THOUSAND PESOS (P20,000.00), Philippine Currency, by way of nominal damages;

(2) Ordering the defendant to pay . . . (her) the sum of FIVE THOUSAND PESOS
Dr. Felipa Pablo — an associate professor in the University of the Philippines, 1 and a (P5,000.00), Philippine Currency, as and for attorney's fees; (and)
research grantee of the Philippine Atomic Energy Agency — was invited to take part at
a meeting of the Department of Research and Isotopes of the Joint FAO-IAEA Division (3) Ordering the defendant to pay the costs of the suit."
of Atomic Energy in Food and Agriculture of the United Nations in Ispra, Italy. 2 She was
invited in view of her specialized knowledge in "foreign substances in food and the ALITALIA appealed to the Intermediate Appellate Court but failed to obtain a reversal of
agriculture environment." She accepted the invitation, and was then scheduled by the the judgment. 11 Indeed, the Appellate Court not only affirmed the Trial Court's decision
organizers, to read a paper on "The Fate of Radioactive Fusion Products Contaminating but also increased the award of nominal damages payable by ALITALIA to P40,000.00.
Vegetable Crops." 3 The program announced that she would be the second speaker on 12 That increase it justified as follows: 13
the first day of the meeting. 4 To fulfill this engagement, Dr. Pablo booked passage on
petitioner airline, ALITALIA. "Considering the circumstances, as found by the Trial Court and the negligence
committed by defendant, the amount of P20,000.00 under present inflationary
She arrived in Milan on the day before the meeting in accordance with the itinerary and conditions as awarded . . . to the plaintiff as nominal damages, is too little to make up
time table set for her by ALITALIA. She was however told by the ALITALIA personnel for the plaintiff's frustration and disappointment in not being able to appear at said
there at Milan that her luggage was "delayed inasmuch as the same . . . (was) in one of conference; and for the embarrassment and humiliation she suffered from the academic
the succeeding flights from Rome to Milan." 5 Her luggage consisted of two (2) community for failure to carry out an official mission for which she was singled out by
suitcases: one contained her clothing and other personal items; the other, her scientific the faculty to represent her institution and the country. After weighing carefully all the
papers, slides and other research material. But the other flights arriving from Rome did considerations, the amount awarded to the plaintiff for nominal damages and attorney's
not have her baggage on board. fees should be increased to the cost of her round trip air fare or at the present rate of
peso to the dollar at P40,000,00."
By then feeling desperate, she went to Rome to try to locate her bags herself. There,
she inquired about her suitcases in the domestic and international airports, and filled out ALITALIA has appealed to this Court on Certiorari. Here, it seeks to make basically the
the forms prescribed by ALITALIA for people in her predicament. However, her baggage same points it tried to make before the Trial Court and the Intermediate Appellate Court,
could not be found. Completely distraught and discouraged, she returned to Manila i.e.:
without attending the meeting in Ispra, Italy.
1) that the Warsaw Convention should have been applied to limit ALITALIA'S liability;
Once back in Manila she demanded that ALITALIA make reparation for the damages and
thus suffered by her. ALITALIA offered her "free airline tickets to compensate her for
any alleged damages. . . ." She rejected the offer, and forthwith commenced the action 2) that there is no warrant in fact or in law for the award to Dr. Pablo of nominal damages
6 which has given rise to the present appellate proceedings. and attorney's fees. 14

As it turned out, Prof. Pablo's suitcases were in fact located and forwarded to Ispra, 7 In addition, ALITALIA postulates that it was error for the Intermediate Appellate Court to
Italy, but only on the day after her scheduled appearance and participation at the U.N. have refused to pass on all the assigned errors and in not stating the facts and the law
meeting there. 8 Of course Dr. Pablo was no longer there to accept delivery; she was on which its decision is based. 15
already on her way home to Manila. And for some reason or other, the suitcases were
not actually restored to Prof. Pablo by ALITALIA until eleven (11) months later, and four Under the Warsaw Convention, 16 an air carrier is made liable for damages for:
(4) months after institution of her action. 9
1) the death, wounding or other bodily injury of a passenger if the accident causing it period of six months from the date of the occurrence causing the damage, or before the
took place on board the aircraft or in the course of its operations of embarking or commencement of the action, if that is later.
disembarking; 17
The Warsaw Convention however denies to the carrier availment "of the provisions
2) the destruction or loss of, or damage to, any registered luggage or goods, if the which exclude or limit his liability, if the damage is caused by his wilful misconduct or by
occurrence causing it took place during the carriage by air;" 18 and such default on his part as, in accordance with the law of the court seized of the case,
is considered to be equivalent to wilful misconduct," or "if the damage is (similarly)
3) delay in the transportation by air of passengers, luggage or goods. 19 caused . . by any agent of the carrier acting within the scope of his employment." 22
The Hague Protocol amended the Warsaw Convention by removing the provision that if
In these cases, it is provided in the Convention that the "action for damages, however, the airline took all necessary steps to avoid the damage, it could exculpate itself
founded, can only be brought subject to conditions and limits set out" therein. 20 completely, 23 and declaring the stated limits of liability not applicable "if it is proved
that the damage resulted from an act or omission of the carrier, its servants or agents,
The Convention also purports to limit the liability of the carriers in the following manner: done with intent to cause damage or recklessly and with knowledge that damage would
21 probably result." The same deletion was effected by the Montreal Agreement of 1966,
with the result that a passenger could recover unlimited damages upon proof of wilful
1. In the carriage of passengers the liability of the carrier for each passenger is limited misconduct. 24
to the sum of 250,000 francs . . . Nevertheless, by special contract, the carrier and the
passenger may agree to a higher limit of liability.: nad The Convention does not thus operate as an exclusive enumeration of the instances of
an airline's liability, or as an absolute limit of the extent of that liability. Such a proposition
2. a) In the carriage of registered baggage and of cargo, the liability of the carrier is is not borne out by the language of the Convention, as this Court has now, and at an
limited to a sum of 250 francs per kilogramme, unless the passenger or consignor has earlier time, pointed out. 25 Moreover, slight reflection readily leads to the conclusion
made, at the time when the package was handed over to the carrier, a special that it should be deemed a limit of liability only in those cases where the cause of the
declaration of interest in delivery at destination and has paid a supplementary sum if the death or injury to person, or destruction, loss or damage to property or delay in its
case so requires. In that case the carrier will be liable to pay a sum not exceeding the transport is not attributable to or attended by any wilful misconduct, bad faith,
declared sum, unless he proves that sum is greater than the actual value to the recklessness, or otherwise improper conduct on the part of any official or employee for
consignor at delivery. which the carrier is responsible, and there is otherwise no special or extraordinary form
of resulting injury. The Convention's provisions, in short, do not "regulate or exclude
b) In the case of loss, damage or delay of part of registered baggage or cargo, or of any liability for other breaches of contract by the carrier" 26 or misconduct of its officers and
object contained therein, the weight to be taken into consideration in determining the employees, or for some particular or exceptional type of damage. Otherwise, "an air
amount to which the carrier's liability is limited shall be only the total weight of the carrier would be exempt from any liability for damages in the event of its absolute refusal,
package or packages concerned. Nevertheless, when the loss, damage or delay of a in bad faith, to comply with a contract of carriage, which is absurd." 27 Nor may it for a
part of the registered baggage or cargo, or of an object contained therein, affects the moment be supposed that if a member of the aircraft complement should inflict some
value of other packages covered by the same baggage check or the same air way bill, physical injury on a passenger, or maliciously destroy or damage the latter's property,
the total weight of such package or packages shall also be taken into consideration in the Convention might successfully be pleaded as the sole gauge to determine the
determining the limit of liability. carrier's liability to the passenger. Neither may the Convention be invoked to justify the
disregard of some extraordinary sort of damage resulting to a passenger and preclude
3. As regards objects of which the passenger takes charge himself the liability of the recovery therefor beyond the limits set by said Convention. It is in this sense that the
carrier is limited to 5000 francs per passenger. Convention has been applied, or ignored, depending on the peculiar facts presented by
each case.
4. The limits prescribed . . shall not prevent the court from awarding, in accordance with
its own law, in addition, the whole or part of the court costs and of the other expenses In Pan American World Airways, Inc. v. I.A.C., 28 for example, the Warsaw Convention
of litigation incurred by the plaintiff. The foregoing provision shall not apply if the amount was applied as regards the limitation on the carrier's liability, there being a simple loss
of the damages awarded, excluding court costs and other expenses of the litigation, of baggage without any otherwise improper conduct on the part of the officials or
does not exceed the sum which the carrier has offered in writing to the plaintiff within a employees of the airline or other special injury sustained by the passenger.
 indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss suffered — and this Court agrees that the
On the other hand, the Warsaw Convention has invariably been held inapplicable, or as respondent Court of Appeals correctly set the amount thereof at P40,000.00. As to the
not restrictive of the carrier's liability, where there was satisfactory evidence of malice or purely technical argument that the award to her of such nominal damages is precluded
bad faith attributable to its officers and employees. 29 Thus, an air carrier was by her omission to include a specific claim therefor in her complaint, it suffices to draw
sentenced to pay not only compensatory but also moral and exemplary damages, and attention to her general prayer, following her plea for moral and exemplary damages
attorney's fees, for instance, where its employees rudely put a passenger holding a first- and attorney's fees, "for such other and further just and equitable relief in the premises,"
class ticket in the tourist or economy section, 30 or ousted a brown Asiatic from the which certainly is broad enough to comprehend an application as well for nominal
plane to give his seat to a white man, 31 or gave the seat of a passenger with a damages. Besides, petitioner should have realized that the explicit assertion, and proof,
confirmed reservation to another, 32 or subjected a passenger to extremely rude, even that Dr. Pablo's right had been violated or invaded by it — absent any claim for actual
barbaric treatment, as by calling him a "monkey." 33 or compensatory damages, the prayer thereof having been voluntarily deleted by Dr.
Pablo upon the return to her of her baggage — necessarily raised the issue of nominal
In the case at bar, no bad faith or otherwise improper conduct may be ascribed to the damages.: rd
employees of petitioner airline; and Dr. Pablo's luggage was eventually returned to her,
belatedly, it is true, but without appreciable damage. The fact is, nevertheless, that some This Court also agrees that respondent Court of Appeals correctly awarded attorney's
special species of injury was caused to Dr. Pablo because petitioner ALITALIA fees to Dr. Pablo, and the amount of P5,000.00 set by it is reasonable in the premises.
misplaced her baggage and failed to deliver it to her at the time appointed — a breach The law authorizes recovery of attorney's fees inter alia where, as here, "the defendant's
of its contract of carriage, to be sure — with the result that she was unable to read the act or omission has compelled the plaintiff to litigate with third persons or to incur
paper and make the scientific presentation (consisting of slides, autoradiograms or films, expenses to protect his interest," 34 or "where the court deems it just and equitable."
tables and tabulations) that she had painstakingly labored over, at the prestigious 35
international conference, to attend which she had traveled hundreds of miles, to her
chagrin and embarrassment and the disappointment and annoyance of the organizers. WHEREFORE, no error being perceived in the challenged decision of the Court of
She felt, not unreasonably, that the invitation for her to participate at the conference, Appeals, it appearing on the contrary to be entirely in accord with the facts and the law,
extended by the Joint FAO/IAEA Division of Atomic Energy in Food and Agriculture of said decision is hereby AFFIRMED, with costs against the petitioner.
the United Nations, was a singular honor not only to herself, but to the University of the
Philippines and the country as well, an opportunity to make some sort of impression SO ORDERED.
among her colleagues in that field of scientific activity. The opportunity to claim this
honor or distinction was irretrievably lost to her because of Alitalia's breach of its
contract.

Apart from this, there can be no doubt that Dr. Pablo underwent profound distress and
anxiety, which gradually turned to panic and finally despair, from the time she learned
that her suitcases were missing up to the time when, having gone to Rome, she finally
realized that she would no longer be able to take part in the conference. As she herself
put it, she "was really shocked and distraught and confused."

Certainly, the compensation for the injury suffered by Dr. Pablo cannot under the
circumstances be restricted to that prescribed by the Warsaw Convention for delay in
the transport of baggage.

She is not, of course, entitled to be compensated for loss or damage to her luggage. As
already mentioned, her baggage was ultimately delivered to her in Manila, tardily but
safely. She is however entitled to nominal damages — which, as the law says, is
adjudicated in order that a right of the plaintiff, which has been violated or invaded by
the defendant, may be vindicated and recognized, and not for the purpose of