1.A junk dealer who has engaged in the buying and selling of used-up bottles and scrapped materials in Pangasinan uses two trucks to bring the scrapped metals to Manila for resale and back haul various cargoes from different merchants from the same place. In November 1970, he contracted with AB to have 750 cartons of milk delivered from Manila to Urdaneta. However, only 150 boxes were delivered since only one of the trucks was hijacked during its trip by armed men. AB demanded to the junk dealer to pay for the lost merchandise and cargo. Is the junk dealer a common carrier so as to be bound to exercise extraordinary diligence in the vigilance over the goods? Can he not use the fortuitous event as defense in order to be absolved from liability?

1. Antonio was drunk when he entered the LRT Station after purchasing a token representing payment of fare. He had a misunderstanding and altercation with the security guard assigned in the area that led to a fist fight. Due to the fight, Antonio fell in the LRT tracks. At the exact moment that he fell, an LRT train was coming in. He was stricken by the moving train and was killed instantly. Will the LRTA be held liable as a common carrier even though the deceased is yet to board the train?