This case finds relevance during these holidays when people travel especially through the various airlines. The issue here is about the amount of moral damages to be awarded a passenger by virtue of the negligence of the airline personnel. Under the Civil Code, moral damages include physical suffering, mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral shock, social humiliation and similar injury (Article 2217). Obviously, it is incapable of pecuniary estimation and thus subject to court determination as in this case.
This is the case of Vic who booked a flight with the local flag carrier in the business class section for Manila-Hongkong-Bangkok-Manila trip. His return flight from Bangkok to Manila on November 26, 1991 was confirmed by the airline’s booking personnel in Bangkok. But in confirming his travel accommodations, the booking personnel affixed the validation sticker on Vic’s ticket on the basis of the passenger’s name list showing that his reservation was for economy class without examining or checking his ticket during the booking validation. Then when he checked in at the airport, the airline check in clerk similarly gave Vic an economy boarding pass based on the information found in the coupon of the ticket and the passenger manifest without checking his ticket.
Thus upon checking in, a surprised Vic protested the change of his status from business to economy class passenger. The airline personnel however could offer no explanation. Although aggrieved Vic nevertheless took the flight as an economy flight passenger because he had important appointments in Manila.
Upon arrival however, he sued the airline company for moral damages of at least P100,000, exemplary damages of at least P20,000 and attorney’s fees of P30,000 plus cost of suit.
The airline denied its liability and claimed that whatever damages Vic suffered was due to his own fault when he did not protest the economy seat given to him at the time he confirmed his flight and the personnel read to him over the phone his change of accommodation. He only raised the issue when the flight was over, the airline contended.
But the trial court held the airline liable because of the inattention and lack of care of the common carrier particular the negligence of its personnel resulting in the failure of the passenger to be accommodated in the class he contracted for. So it ordered the payment of the moral and exemplary damages sought by Vic, plus attorney’s fees. This was affirmed by the Court of Appeals (CA).
The airline company however still questioned the decision of the trial court and the CA particularly the amount of moral damages of P100,000 awarded to Vic. It said the amount was excessive. Was the company correct?
No. There is no hard and fast rule in determining what would be a fair and reasonable amount of moral damages, since each case must be governed by its own peculiar facts. However it must be commensurate to the loss or injury suffered. Taking into account the attending circumstances here where it has been established that it was the negligence of the airline company which caused the downgrading of Vic’s seat and that said negligence amounted to fraud or bad faith considering the inattention and lack of care of the personnel, the amount of P100,000 awarded as moral damages is appropriate (Philippine Airlines vs. Lopez, Jr. G.R. 156654, November 20, 2008).
Note: Books containing compilation of my articles on Labor Law and Criminal Law (Vols. I and II) are now available. Call tel. 7249445.
* * *
E-mail at: jcson@pldtdsl.net