The diligence required of a private carrier is only ordinary, that is, the diligence of a good

father of the family. In contrast, a common carrier is a person, corporation, firm or

association engaged in the business of carrying or transporting passengers or goods or both,
by land, water, or air, for compensation, offering such services to the public.[1] Contracts of
common carriage are governed by the provisions on common carriers of the Civil Code, the
Public Service Act,[2] and other special laws relating to transportation. A common carrier is
required to observe extraordinary diligence, and is presumed to be at fault or to have acted
negligently in case of the loss of the effects of passengers, or the death or injuries to
passengers.[3] (Sps Perea vs. Sps Zarate, G.R. No. 157917, August 29, 2012, [Bersamin,
J.])
ART. 1755. A common carrier is bound to carry the passengers safely as far as human care
and foresight can provide, using the utmost diligence of very cautious persons, with a due
regard for all the circumstances.
ART. 1755. A common carrier is bound to carry the passengers safely as far as human care
and foresight can provide, using the utmost diligence of very cautious persons, with a due
regard for all the circumstances.
ART. 1756. In case of death of or injuries to passengers, common carriers are presumed to
have been at fault or to have acted negligently, unless they prove that they observed
extraordinary diligence as prescribed in articles 1733 and 1755.
The Code Commission, in justifying this extraordinary diligence required of a common
carrier, says the following:
A common carrier is bound to carry the passengers safely as far as human care and
foresight can provide, using the utmost deligence of very cautions persons, with due regard
for all circumstances. This extraordinary diligence required of common carriers is calculated
to protect the passengers from the tragic mishaps that frequently occur in connection with
rapid modern transportation. This high standard of care is imperatively demanded by the
precariousness of human life and by the consideration that every person must in every way
be safeguarded against all injury. (Report of the Code Commission, pp. 35-36) (Padilla, Civil
Code of the Philippines, Vol. IV, 1956 ed., p. 197).
From the above legal provisions, we can make the following restatement of the principles
governing the liability of a common carrier: (1) the liability of a carrier is contractual and
arises upon breach of its obligation. There is breach if it fails to exert extraordinary diligence
according to all circumstances of each case; (2) a carrier is obliged to carry its passenger
with the utmost diligence of a very cautious person, having due regard for all the
circumstances; (3) a carrier is presumed to be at fault or to have acted negligently in case of
death of, or injury to, passengers, it being its duty to prove that it exercised extraordinary
diligence; and (4) the carrier is not an insurer against all risks of travel. (Isaac vs. A.L.
Ammen Transportation Co., Inc., G.R. No. L-9671, August 23, 1957, [J., Bautista-Angelo])
Common carriers are obliged to observe extraordinary diligence in the vigilance over the
goods transported by them.[4] Accordingly, they are presumed to have been at fault or to
have acted negligently if the goods are lost, destroyed or deteriorated.[5] There are very few
instances when the presumption of negligence does not attach and these instances are
enumerated in Article 1734.[6] In those cases where the presumption is applied, the
common carrier must prove that it exercised extraordinary diligence in order to overcome
the presumption. (Bascos vs. CA, G.R. No. 101089, April 7, 1993, [Campos, Jr., J])
[1]Article 1732 of the Civil Code states:

Article 1732. Common carriers are persons, corporations, firms or associations engaged in
the business of carrying or transporting passengers or goods or both, by land, water, or air,
for compensation, offering their services to the public.
[2]Commonwealth Act No. 146, as amended, particularly by PD No. 1, Integrated
Reorganization Plan and E.O. 546.
[3]Article 1756 of the Civil Code reads:
Article 1756. In case of death of or injuries to passengers, common carriers are presumed to
have been at fault or to have acted negligently, unless they prove that they observed
extraordinary diligence as prescribed in articles 1733 and 1755.
[4]Art. 1733. Common carriers, from the nature of their business and for reasons of public
policy, are bound to observe extraordinary diligence in the vigilance over the goods and for
the safety of the passengers transported by them, according to all the circumstances of
each case.
Such extraordinary diligence in vigilance over the goods is further expressed in articles
1734, 1735, and 1745, Nos. 5, 6, and 7, while the extraordinary diligence for the safety of
the passengers is further set forth in articles 1755 and 1756.
[5] Art. 1735. In all cases other than those mentioned in Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 of the
preceding article, if the goods are lost, destroyed or deteriorated, common carriers are
presumed to have been at fault or to have acted negligently, unless they prove that they
observed extraordinary diligence as required in article 1733.
[6]Art. 1734. Common carriers are responsible for the loss, destruction, or deterioration of
the goods, unless the same is due to any of the following causes only:
(1) Flood, storm, earthquake, lightning, or other natural disaster or calamity;
(2) Act of the public enemy in war, whether international or civil;
(3) Act or omission of the shipper or owner of the goods;
(4) The character of the goods or defects in the packing or in the containers;
(5) Order or act of competent public authority.