Peralta v Madrigal

FACTS:
Pacifico Acacio entered into a contract of carriage
with Madrigal Shipping,whereby for certain
consideration the latter undertook to carry the
former on its vessel "M.S.Regulus" from
Zamboanga to Manila.
The vessel capsized during the voyage,
which resulted to the death of Pacifico. His wife
and daughter filed a complaint for damages
against Madrigal Shipping, but was dismissed by
the lower court due to prescription for being filed
(on April 30,1957) beyond the 6-year period of
prescription for oral contracts.
ISSUE: WON the dismissal of the complaint is
proper
HELD:
No. The Court considered that the complaint
implied that there was a written contract by
virtue of a passenger ticket usually issued in
contracts of carriage, therefore the prescription
period is 10years and not 6 years.

The case was remanded to the lower court for

hearing on the merits, including the presence of
the written contract. Where the complaint shows
that appellants' cause of action is predicated on
the failure of appellee to comply with its contract
of carrying safely the deceased from one place to
another, in that the vessel on which he was riding
belonging to appellee capsized because of the
reckless and imprudent manner it was managed
and steered by its crew, it can be implied that
the transportation was undertaken by virtue
of a written contract of carriage.
DOCTRINE:
It is a matter of common knowledge that
whenever a passenger boards a ship for
transportation from one place to another he is
issued a ticket by the shipper which has all the
elements of a written contract, namely: (1) the
consent of the contracting parties manifested by
the fact that the passenger boards the ship and
the shipper consents or accepts him in the ship for
transportation; (2) cause or consideration which is
the fare paid by the passenger as stated in the
ticket; and (3) object, which is the transportation
of the passenger from the place of departure to
the place of destination which are stated in the
ticket