Home›Bar Review›2010›Remedial Law›Question II
Question II
On August 13, 2008, A, as shipper and consignee, loaded on the M/V Atlantis in Legaspi City 100,000 pieces of century eggs. The shipment arrived in Manila totally damaged on August 14, 2008. A filed before the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) of Manila a complaint against B Super Lines, Inc. (B Lines), owner of the M/V Atlantis , for recovery of damages amounting to ₱167,899. He attached to the complaint the Bill of Lading.
a. B Lines filed a Motion to Dismiss upon the ground that the Regional Trial Court has exclusive original jurisdiction over "all actions in admiralty and maritime" claims. In his Reply, A contended that while the action is indeed "admiralty and maritime" in nature, it is the amount of the claim, not the nature of the action, that governs jurisdiction. Pass on the Motion to Dismiss. (3%)
b. The MeTC denied the Motion in question A. B Lines thus filed an Answer raising the defense that under the Bill of Lading it issued to A, its liability was limited to ₱10,000. At the pre-trial conference, B Lines defined as one of the issues whether the stipulation limiting its liability to ₱10,000 binds A. A countered that this was no longer in issue as B Lines had failed to deny under oath the Bill of Lading. Which of the parties is correct? Explain. (3%)
c. On July 21, 2009, B Lines served on A a "Notice to Take Deposition," setting the deposition on July 29, 2009 at 8:30 a.m. at the office of its counsel in Makati. A failed to appear at the deposition-taking, despite notice. As counsel for B Lines, how would you proceed? (3%)
Model answer · ALAC
Answer — Legal basis — Application — Conclusion.
AI-drafted in ALAC form and AI-verified against landmark authorities — refined with every round of verification.