CASE DIGEST: Loadmasters v. Glodel
G.R. No.179446: January 10, 2011 | LOADMASTERS CUSTOMS SERVICES, INC.
Petitioner vs. GLODEL BROKERAGE CORPORATION and R&B INSURANCE CORPORATION
Respondents. MENDOZA, J.:
FACTS: Columbia Wire and Cable Corporation (Columbia) insured a
cargo of copper cathodes through R&B Insurance Corporation (R&B).
Columbia also engaged the services of Glodel Brokerage Corporation (Glodel) for
the transport of the cargo to Columbia facilities. Glodel then engaged the
services of Loadmasters Customs Services (Loadmasters) for the delivery of said
cargo to Columbia. Out of 12 trucks, owned by Loadmasters, used to deliver the
cargo of Columbia, only 11 made it to their respective destinations.
/span>Columbia claimed the amount of loss from R&B, which sued both
Glodel and Loadmasters. The RTC ruled in favor of R&B, but did not hold
Loadmasters liable. Both R&B and Glodelappealed the judgement. The Court of
Appeals modified the decision of the RTC and ruled that Loadmasters, being the
agent of Glodel, is liable to Glodel for all the damages it might be required to
pay.
ISSUES: Whether or not Loadmasters is an agent of Glodel, and whether or not it may be held liable under the transaction between Glodel and Columbia.
HELD: Petition is partly meritorious.
Civil Law: Glodel and Loadmasters are both common carriers, as they hold out their carriage services to the public. As such, under the Civil Code, they are mandated to show extraordinary diligence in the conduct of transport. In the case at bar, both Glodel and Loadmasters were negligent as the cargo failed to reach its destination. Loadmasters failed to ensure that its employees would not tamper with the cargo. Glodel failed to ensure that Loadmasters is sufficiently capable of completing the delivery. Glodel and Loadmasters are therefore joint tortfeasors and are solidarily liable to R&B Insurance.
Loadmasters cannot be considered an agent of Glodel. Loadmasters in no way represented itself as such, and in the transfer of cargo, did not represent itself as doing such in behalf of Glodel. In fact, Loadmasters is not privy to the agreement between Glodel and Columbia. It cannot be considered an agent of Glodel, and cannot be held liable to Glodel.
Remedial Law: Though Glodel has, admittedly, a cause of action against Loadmasters, it has effectively waived it by failing to raise the cross-claim. The rules of procedure states that compulsory counterclaims and cross-claims not pleaded are deemed waived. They cannot be raised for the first time on appeal.
FACTS: Columbia Wire and Cable Corporation (Columbia) insured a
cargo of copper cathodes through R&B Insurance Corporation (R&B).
Columbia also engaged the services of Glodel Brokerage Corporation (Glodel) for
the transport of the cargo to Columbia facilities. Glodel then engaged the
services of Loadmasters Customs Services (Loadmasters) for the delivery of said
cargo to Columbia. Out of 12 trucks, owned by Loadmasters, used to deliver the
cargo of Columbia, only 11 made it to their respective destinations.
/span>Columbia claimed the amount of loss from R&B, which sued both
Glodel and Loadmasters. The RTC ruled in favor of R&B, but did not hold
Loadmasters liable. Both R&B and Glodelappealed the judgement. The Court of
Appeals modified the decision of the RTC and ruled that Loadmasters, being the
agent of Glodel, is liable to Glodel for all the damages it might be required to
pay.ISSUES: Whether or not Loadmasters is an agent of Glodel, and whether or not it may be held liable under the transaction between Glodel and Columbia.
HELD: Petition is partly meritorious.
Civil Law: Glodel and Loadmasters are both common carriers, as they hold out their carriage services to the public. As such, under the Civil Code, they are mandated to show extraordinary diligence in the conduct of transport. In the case at bar, both Glodel and Loadmasters were negligent as the cargo failed to reach its destination. Loadmasters failed to ensure that its employees would not tamper with the cargo. Glodel failed to ensure that Loadmasters is sufficiently capable of completing the delivery. Glodel and Loadmasters are therefore joint tortfeasors and are solidarily liable to R&B Insurance.
Loadmasters cannot be considered an agent of Glodel. Loadmasters in no way represented itself as such, and in the transfer of cargo, did not represent itself as doing such in behalf of Glodel. In fact, Loadmasters is not privy to the agreement between Glodel and Columbia. It cannot be considered an agent of Glodel, and cannot be held liable to Glodel.
Remedial Law: Though Glodel has, admittedly, a cause of action against Loadmasters, it has effectively waived it by failing to raise the cross-claim. The rules of procedure states that compulsory counterclaims and cross-claims not pleaded are deemed waived. They cannot be raised for the first time on appeal.
