Scribd
Upload
381 views1 page

Nhassie John G. Gonzaga Conflict of Laws Case Digest Chapter 1 & 2

Uploaded by

J

This document summarizes a case regarding a sinking ship where 10 crew members drowned. The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint filed by the surviving heirs of the deceased crew members against the ship's charterer and owner, both non-resident corporations not doing business in the Philippines. The Labor Arbiter ruled it lacked jurisdiction as the summonses could not be validly served on the foreign respondents. However, the court held that the Labor Arbiter does not have jurisdiction over tort cases. While the deceased had an employer-employee relationship with the respondents, the act that caused their death was a quasi-delict, not a breach of contract. As such, the case requires expertise in general civil law, not labor law

Copyright:

© All Rights Reserved
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt

Nhassie John G. Gonzaga Conflict of Laws Case Digest Chapter 1 & 2

Uploaded by

J
381 views1 page
This document summarizes a case regarding a sinking ship where 10 crew members drowned. The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint filed by the surviving heirs of the deceased crew members against the ship's charterer and owner, both non-resident corporations not doing business in the Philippines. The Labor Arbiter ruled it lacked jurisdiction as the summonses could not be validly served on the foreign respondents. However, the court held that the Labor Arbiter does not have jurisdiction over tort cases. While the deceased had an employer-employee relationship with the respondents, the act that caused their death was a quasi-delict, not a breach of contract. As such, the case requires expertise in general civil law, not labor law

Original Title

Spouses dalen vs. Mitsui

Copyright

© © All Rights Reserved

Available Formats

DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

This document summarizes a case regarding a sinking ship where 10 crew members drowned. The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint filed by the surviving heirs of the deceased crew members against the ship's charterer and owner, both non-resident corporations not doing business in the Philippines. The Labor Arbiter ruled it lacked jurisdiction as the summonses could not be validly served on the foreign respondents. However, the court held that the Labor Arbiter does not have jurisdiction over tort cases. While the deceased had an employer-employee relationship with the respondents, the act that caused their death was a quasi-delict, not a breach of contract. As such, the case requires expertise in general civil law, not labor law

Copyright:

© All Rights Reserved
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
381 views1 page

Nhassie John G. Gonzaga Conflict of Laws Case Digest Chapter 1 & 2

Uploaded by

J
This document summarizes a case regarding a sinking ship where 10 crew members drowned. The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint filed by the surviving heirs of the deceased crew members against the ship's charterer and owner, both non-resident corporations not doing business in the Philippines. The Labor Arbiter ruled it lacked jurisdiction as the summonses could not be validly served on the foreign respondents. However, the court held that the Labor Arbiter does not have jurisdiction over tort cases. While the deceased had an employer-employee relationship with the respondents, the act that caused their death was a quasi-delict, not a breach of contract. As such, the case requires expertise in general civil law, not labor law

Copyright:

© All Rights Reserved
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 1

Nhassie John G.

Gonzaga Conflict of Laws


Case Digest Chapter 1 & 2
__________________________________________________________________
Spouses Dalen v. Mitsui O.S.K. Lines
G.R. No. 194403, [July 24, 2019]

Facts: Based on the records of the case, it was found that Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, a non-resident
corporation, not doing business in the Philippines, was the charterer of MV Sea Prospect while
Diamond Camellia, S.A., another non-resident corporation, not doing business in the Philippines,
and of Panamian registry is the registered owner of the said vessel. On or about August 22, 1998, MV
Sea Prospect headed to Japan. While there, or on August 26, 1998, weather was inclement and the
vessel developed a list between 10 and 15 degrees to starboard. Upon inspection, it was found that
the cargo was very wet so the Captain ordered to fill the ballast tanks, thus achieving the vessel's
stability. He then ordered a change in the course of the vessel to the Island of Okinawa to seek
refuge. While nearing the Island of Okinawa, the vessel listed again 3 to 5 degrees then to 90 degrees,
taking water in the bridge, the engine stopping and the electric power being cut. After 30 minutes,
MV Sea Prospect sunk, drowning 10 crew members.

On July 18, 2002, the Labor Arbiter (LA) dismissed the complaint on the grounds of lack of
jurisdiction over the persons of the respondents and prescription of action. According to the LA,
summonses cannot be validly served upon the respondents being foreign corporations and not
having transacted business in the Philippines. 13 In this case, the action for damages is an action in
personam, wherein jurisdiction over their person is necessary for the LA to validly try and decide
their case. However, since they are non-residents, personal service of summonses within the
Philippines is essential for the acquisition of jurisdiction over their persons.

Issue: Whether or not the Labor Arbiter has jurisdiction over the case.

Held: NO. The Labor Arbiter has no jurisdiction over tort cases. The Labor Code provides that:

Art. 224. [217] Jurisdiction of Labor Arbiters and the Commission. – x x x


xxxx
4. Claims for actual, moral, exemplary and other forms of damages arising
from the employer-employee relations;

Here, petitioners argue that respondents are duty bound to exercise due diligence required by law in
order to ensure the safety of the crew and all the passengers therein. It was further averred that the
negligence on the part of the respondents is quite apparent when they allowed the vessel to load and
transport wet cargo. For failure therefore to exercise extraordinary diligence required of them, the
respondents must be held liable for damages to the surviving heirs of the deceased crew members. 29
Notwithstanding the contractual relation between the parties, the act of respondents is a quasi-delict
and not a mere breach of contract. Where the resolution of the dispute requires expertise, not in
labor management relations nor in wage structures and other terms and conditions of employment,
but rather in the application of the general civil law, such claim falls outside the area of competence
or expertise ordinarily ascribed to the LA and the NLRC.30

Therefore, the LA has no jurisdiction over the case in the first place; it should have been filed to the
proper trial court.

You might also like