28, which was designated for Business Class passengers. Dr. Vazquez presented his boarding pass to the ground stewardess, who in turn inserted it into an electronic machine reader or computer at the gate. The ground stewardess was assisted by a ground attendant by the name of Clara Lai Han Chiu. When Ms. Chiu glanced at the computer monitor, she saw a message that there was a "seat change\" from Business Class to First Class for the Vazquezes. Ms. Chiu approached Dr. Vazquez and told him that the Vazquezes accommodations were upgraded to First Class. Dr. Vazquez refused the upgrade, reasoning that it would not look nice for them as hosts to travel in First Class and their guests, in the Business Class; and moreover, they were going to discuss business matters during the flight. He also told Ms. Chiu that she could have other passengers instead transferred to the First Class Section. Taken aback by the refusal for upgrading, Ms. Chiu consulted her supervisor, who told her to handle the situation and convince the Vazquezes to accept the upgrading. Ms. Chiu informed the iatter that the Business Class was fuliy booked. and that since they were Marco Poio Club members they had the priority to be upgraded to the First Class, Dr. Vazquez continued to refuse. so Ms. Chiu told them that ifthey would not avail themselves of the privilege. they would not be allowed to take the flight. Eventually, after talking to his two friends, Dr. Vazquez gave in. He and Mrs. Vazquez then proceeded to the First Class Cabin. Upon their return to Manila, the Vazquezes, in a letter of 2 October 1995 addressed to Cathay's Country Manager, demanded that they be indemnified in the amount of leillion for the "humiliation and embarrassment" caused by its employees. They also demanded "a written apology from the management of Cathay, preferably a responsible person with a rank of no less than the Country Manager, as well as the apology from Ms. Chiu\" within fifteen days from receipt ofthe letter. In his reply of 14 October 1996. Mr. Larry Yuan, the assistant to Cathays Country Manager Argus Guy Robsonl informed the Vazquezes that Cathay would investigate the incident and get back to them within a week's time. On 8 November 1996, after Cathays failure to give them any feedback within its self-imposed deadline, the Vazquezes instituted before the Regional Trial Court of Makati City an action for damages against Cathay, praying for the payment to each of them the amounts of P2505000 as temperate damages; P500,000 as moral damages; P50415000 as exemplary or corrective damages; and P2511000 as attorneys fees. Argument ofthe Vazguezes: In their complaint, the Vazquezes alieged that when they informed Ms. Chiu that they preferred to stay in Business Class, Ms, Chiu \"ohstinately, uncompromisingiy and in a loud discourteous and harsh voice threatened" that they could not board and leave with the ight unless they go to First Class, since the Business Class was overbooked. Ms. Chiu's loud and stringent shouting annoyed, embarrassed, and humiliated them because the incident was witnessed by all the other passengers waiting for hoarding. They also claimed that they were unjustiably delayed to board the plane, and when they were finally permitted to get into the aircraft, the forward storage compartment was already full. A fiight stewardess instructed Dr. Vazquez to put his roll-on luggage in the overhead storage compartment. Because he was not assisted by any of the crew in putting up his luggage, his bliateral carpal tunnel syndrome was aggravated, causing him extreme pain on his arm and wrist. The Vazquezes also averred that they "belong to the uppermost and absolutely top elite of both Philippine Society and the Philipplne financial community. [a nd that] they were among the wealthiest persons in the Philippine[s]." Argument of Cathay Pacific In its answer, Cathay alleged that it is a practice among commercial airlines to upgrade passengers to instructed Ur. Vazquez to put his roll-on luggage in the overhead storage compartment. Because he was not assisted by any of the crew in putting op his luggage, his bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome was aggravated, causing him extreme pain on his arm and wrist. The Vazquezes also averred that they "belong to the uppermost and absolutely top elite of both Philippine Society and the Philippine financial community, [and that] they were among the wealthiest persons in the Philippine[s]." Argument of Cathay Pacific In its answer. Cathay alleged that it is a practice among commercial airlines to upgrade passengers tc the next better class of accommodation, whenever an opportunity arises, such as when a certain section is fully booked. Priority in upgrading is given to its frequent flyers, who are considered favored passengers like the Vazquezes. Thus, when the Business Class Section of Flight CXeQDS was fully booked, Cathay's computer sorted out the names of favored passengers for involuntary upgrading to First Class. When Ms. Chiu informed the Vazquezes that they were upgraded to First Class, Dr. Vazquez refused. He then stood at the entrance of the boarding apron, blocking the queue of passengers from boarding the plane, which inconvenienced other passengers. He shouted that it was impossible for him and his wife to be upgraded without his two friends who were traveling with them, Because of Dr. Vazquezs outburst, Ms. Chiu thought of upgrading the traveling companions of the Vazquezes. But when she checked the computer, she learned that the Vazquezes companions did not have priority for upgrading. She then tried to book the Vazquezes again to their original seats. However, since the Business Class Section was already fully booked, she politely informed Dr. Vazquez of such fact and explained that the upgrading was in recognition of their status as Cathays valued passengers, Finally, after talking to their guests, the Vazquezes eventually decided to take the First Class accommodation. Cathay also asserted that its employees at the Hong Kong airport acted in good faith in dealing with the Vazquezes; none of them shouted, humiliated, embarrassed, or committed any act of disrespect against them [the Vazquezesl. Assuming that there was indeed a breach of contractual obligation, Cathay acted in good faith, which negates any basis for their claim for temperate. moral, and exemplary damages and attorney's fees. Hence, it prayed for the dismissal of the complaint and for payment of P100,000 for exemplary damages and P300300 as attorney's fees and litigation expenses. The Trial During the trial, Dr. Vazquez testied to support the allegations in the complaint. His testimony was Corroborated by his two friends who ware with him at the time of the incident, namely, Pacita G. Cruz and Josena Vergel de Dios. For its part, Cathay presented documentary evidence and the testimonies of Mr. Vuen; Ms. Chiu; Norma Barrientos, Comptroller of its retained counsel; and Mr. Robson. Yuan and Robson testied on Cathay: policy of upgrading the seat accommodation of its Marco Polo Club members when an opportunity arises. The upgrading of the Vazquezes to First Class was done in good faith; in fact, the First Class Section is definitely much better than the Business Class in terms of comfort, quality of food, and service from the cabin crew. They also testied that overbooking is a widely accepted practice in the airline industry and is in accordance with the International Air Transport Association [iATA] regulations. Airlines overbook because a lot of passengers do not show up for their flight. With respect to Flight CX-BDS, there was no overall overbooking to a degree that a passenger was bumped off or downgraded. Yuen and Robson also stated that the demand letter of the Vazquezes was immediately acted upon. Reports were gathered from their ofce in Hong Kong and immediately fowvarded to their counsel Atty. Remollo for legal advice. However, Atty. Remollo begged off because his services were likewise retained by the Vazquezes; nonetheless, he undertook to solve the problem in behalf of Cathay, But nothing happened until Cathay received a copy of the complaint in this case. For her part, Ms. Chiu denied that she shouted or used foul or impolite language against the Vazquezes. Ms. Barrientos testified on the amount of industry and is in accordance with the International Air Transport Association (IATA) regulations. Airlines overbook because a lot of passengers do not show up for their flight. With respect to Flight CX-905, there was no overall overbooking to a degree that a passenger was bumped off or downgraded. Yuen and Robson also stated that the demand letter of the Vazquezes was immediately acted upon. Reports were gathered from their office in Hong Kong and immediately forwarded to their counsel Atty. Remollo for legal advice. However, Atty. Remollo begged off because his services were likewise retained by the Vazquezes; nonetheless, he undertook to solve the problem in behalf of Cathay. But nothing happened until Cathay received a copy of the complaint in this case. For her part, Ms. Chiu denied that she shouted or used foul or impolite language against the Vazquezes. Ms. Barrientos testified on the am attorneys fees and other litigation expenses, such as those for the taking of the depositions of Y Chiu. In its decision1 of 19 October 1998, the trial court found for the Vazquezes and decreed as follows: WHEREFORE, finding preponderante of evidence to sustain the instant complaint, judgment is hereby rendered in favor of plaintiffs Vazquez spouses and against defendant Cathay Pacific Airways, Ltd., ordering the latter to pay each plaintiff the following: a) Nominal damages in the amount of P100,000.00 for each plaintiff; b) Moral damages in the amount of P2,000,000.00 for each plaintiff; c) Exemplary damages in the amount of P5,000,000.00 for each plaintiff; d) Attorney's fees and expenses of litigation in the amount of P1,000,000.00 for each plaintiff; and e) Costs of suit. SO ORDERED. According to the trial court, Cathay offers various classes of seats from which passengers are allowed to choose regardless of their reasons or motives, whether it be due to budgetary constraints or whim. The choice imposes a clear obligation on Cathay to transport the passengers in the class chosen by them. The carrier cannot, without exposing itself to liability, force a passenger to involuntarily change his choice. The upgrading of the Vazquezes accommodation over and above their vehement objections was due to the overbooking of the Business Class. It was a pretext to pack as many passengers as possible into the plane to maximize Cathays revenues. Cathays actuations in this case displayed deceit, gross negligence, and bad faith, which entitled the Vazquezes to awards for damages. Appeal and Final Ruling On appeal by the petitioners, the Court of Appeals, in its decision of 24 July 2001, 2 deleted the award for exemplary damages; and it reduced the awards for moral and nominal damages for each of the Vazquezes to P250,000 and P50,000, respectively, and the attorney's fees and litigation expenses to P50,000 for both of them. The Court of Appeals ratiocinated that by upgrading the Vazquezes to First Class, Cathay novated the contract of carriage without the formers consent. There was a breach of contract not because Cathay overbooked the Business Class Section of Flight CX-905 but because the latter pushed through with the upgrading despite the objections of the Vazquezes. However, the Court of Appeals was not convinced that Ms. Chiu shouted at, or meant to be discourteous to, Dr. Vazquez, although it might seemed that way to the latter, who was a member of the elite in Philippine society and was not therefore used to being harangued by anybody. Ms. Chiu was a4:14 5 8 10 Edit 16 X CASE STUDY ON BREACH OF CONTRACT AND AWARDING OF DAMAGES Read and analyze the case below. FIRST DIVISION G. R. No. 150843 - March 14, 2003 CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS, LTD., Petitioner, vs. SPOUSES DANIEL VAZQUEZ and MARIA LUISA MADRIGAL VAZQUEZ, Respondents. DAVIDE, JR., C.J.: The facts in this case, as found by the Court of Appeals and adopted by petitioner Cathay Pacific Airways, Ltd., (hereinafter Cathay) are as follows: Cathay is a common carrier engaged in the business of transporting passengers and goods by air. Among the many routes it services is the Manila-Hongkong-Manila course. As part of its marketing strategy, Cathay accords its frequent flyers membership in its Marco Polo Club. The members enjoy several privileges, such as priority for upgrading of booking without any extra charge whenever an opportunity arises. Thus, a frequent flyer booked in the Business Class has priority for upgrading to First Class if the Business Class Section is fully booked. Respondents-spouses Dr. Daniel Earnshaw Vazquez and Maria Luisa Madrigal Vazquez are frequent flyers of Cathay and are Gold Card members of its Marco Polo Club. On 24 September 1996, the Vazquezes, together with their maid and two friends Pacita Cruz and Josefina Vergel de Dios, went to Hongkong for pleasure and business. For their return flight to Manila on 28 September 1996, they were booked on Cathays Flight CX-905, with departure time at 9:20 p.m. Two hours before their time of departure, the Vazquezes and their companions checked in their luggage at Cathays check-in counter at Kai Tak Airport and were given their respective boarding passes, to wit, Business Class boarding passes for the Vazquezes and their two friends, and Economy Class for their maid. They then proceeded to the Business Class passenger lounge. When boarding time was announced, the Vazquezes and their two friends went to Departure Gate No. 28, which was designated for Business Class passengers. Dr. Vazquez presented his boarding pass to the ground stewardess, who in turn inserted it into an electronic machine reader or computer at the gate. The ground stewardess was assisted by a ground attendant by the name of Clara Lai Han Chiu. When Ms. Chiu glanced at the computer monitor, she saw a message that there was a "seat change" from Business Class to First Class for the Vazquezes. Do W Tools Mobile View Share PDF to DOC Edit on PCAnswer the following questions. Type your answer and send it via email or attached in Canvas as file submission. Question 1: Make a one-page summary on the case making point on the obligation of Cathay Pacic to its passengers, the case of the Vazquez family and in your own point of view, whether or not they have the right tole a case or not for the seat upgrading that they got from Cathay Pacific. Question 2: By upgrading the seat accommodation of the Vazquezes from Business Class to First Class did Cathay breach its contract of carriage with the Vazquezes. why? Question 3: Was the upgrading of seat by Cathay Pacific tainted with fraud or bad faith? Explain your answer! Question 4: Are the Vazquezes entitled for damages? Why? : Question 5: Did Cathay Pacific acted on bad faith when they overbooked the business class section of the flight? ls overbooklng legal or not? Question 5: Before Cathay Pacic filed for an appeal in the Court of Appeals, the lower court ordered Cathay Pacific to pay the Vazquezes of P2 million pesos and P5 million pesos each for the moral and exemplary damages. Do you think that the lower court isjust in ordering a huge amount of damages in favor of the plaintiff? Question 7: If you were the supervisor of Cathay Pacic, will you insist on asking the passengers to take the upgrade seats even though they don't want to take it? Question 8: Based on the facts presented, do you believe that Ms. Chiu acted in bad faith, shouted and humiliated the Vazquezes during the boarding time? Answers to the case will be discussed in the next session. Submit the file during the given timeframe only. 4:14 (EEG-8|: - upgrading despite the objections ofthe Vazquezes. However, the Court of Appeals was not convinced that Ms. Chiu shouted at, or meant to be discourteous to, Dr. Vazquez, although it might seemed that way to the latter, who was a member of the elite in Philippine society and was not therefore used to being harangued by anybody. Ms, Chiu was a Hong Kong Chinese whose fractured Chinese was difficult to Understand and whose manner of speaking might sound harsh or shrill to Filipinos because of cultural differences. But the Court of Appeals did not nd her to have acted with deliberate malice, deceit, gross negligence, or bad faith. If at all, she was negligent in not offering the First Class accommodations to other passengers. Neither can the flight stewardess in the First Class Cabin be said to have been in bad faith when she failed to assist Dr. Vazquez in lifting his baggage Into the overhead storage bin. There is no proof that he asked for help and was refused even after saying that he was suffering from "bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome." Anent the delay of Yuen in responding to the demand letter of the Vazquezes, the Court of Appeals found it to have been sufciently explained. The Vazquezes and Cathay separately tiled motions for a reconsideration of the decision, both of which were denied by the Court oprpeals. Cathay seasonably led with us this petition in this case. Cathay maintains that the award for moral damages has no basis, since the Court of Appeals found that there was no "wanton, fraudulent, reckless and oppressive" display of manners on the part of its personnel; and that the breach of contract was not attended by fraud, malice, or bad faith. If any damage had been suffered by the Vazquezes, it was damnum absoue injuria, which is damage without injury, damage or injury inflicted without injustice, loss or damage without violation of a legal right, or a wrong done to a man for which the law provides no remedy. Cathay also invokes our decision in United Airlines, Inc. v. Court of Appea|s3 where we recognized that, in accordance with the Civil Aeronautics Boards Economic Regulation No. 7, as amended, an oyerbooking that does not exceed ten percent cannot be considered deliberate and done in bad faith. We thus deleted in that case the awards for moral and exemplary damages, as well as attorneys fees, for lack of proof of oyerbooking exceeding ten percent or of bad faith on the pa rt of the airline carrier. On the other hand, the Vazquezes assert that the Court of Appeals was correct in granting awards for moral and nominal damages and attorney's fees in View of the breach of contract committed by Cathay for transferring them from the Business Class to First Class Section without prior notice orconsent and over their vigorous objection. They likewise argue that the issuance of passenger tickets more than the seating capacity of each section of the plane is in itself fraudulent, malicious and tainted with bad faith