LPG plant owner, employee ordered to pay burn victim
By Leila Salaverria
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 17:31:00 05/15/2008
MANILA, Philippines -- The Court of Appeals has ruled that the owner and employee of a liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) refilling plant should pay nearly P300,000 in damages to a customer who was badly burned when fire engulfed the facility.
The appellate court upheld the decision of the Quezon City Regional Trial Court finding the Capitol Allied Trading and Transport (Catgas) liable for negligence after one of its employees changed a light bulb while the plant was saturated with flammable vapor, causing a spark and starting the blaze.
The gas escaped into the air because of the irregular transfer of LPG to an empty cylinder since the plant's gas pump was broken.
According to the appellate court, Catgas owner Daniel Gutierrez and employee Eddie Fernandez are liable to LPG retailer Ronnie Sevillana for the second-degree burns he suffered all over his body and his nearly monthlong stay in hospital following the 1997 fire.
It affirmed the award to Sevillana of more than P232,000 in actual damages and P50,000 in moral damages to be paid by Gutierrez and Fernandez.
In an April 30 decision, the appellate court said it was Fernandez' fault that the fire started because he changed the light bulb without turning off the light switch. This caused a spark that ignited the LPG vapors in the air in the enclosed portion of the Catgas office.
Sevillana was at Catgas because he was having empty LPG cylinders filled.
He also said he remained at the Catgas refilling area, even though he was not supposed to be there, because the plant had no weighing scale to determine that the correct volume of gas being transferred to the empty cylinders.
The appellate court said Fernandez should have been, careful given his environment, and warned that people should be cautious when doing electrical repairs in gas-filled areas.
"Appellant Fernandez should have foreseen or taken steps before making any repairs to insure that no fire would occur considering the hazardous nature of the industry where he is employed ... It must be noted that when repairs will be made when an electric line is involved, its main switch should be turned off, otherwise, sparks will easily ignite the gas...released during the refilling operation," the appellate court said in a decision penned by Justice Ramon Garcia.
It also said that since Gutierrez is Fernandez' employer, the former is responsible for his worker's negligence. It was also up to Gutierrez to prove that he had been diligent in hiring and supervising his employees' activities.
The Catgas owner claimed that he studied Fernandez' credentials and trained all his refillers for one month on safety procedures, but the appellate court said there was no evidence shown to support this contention.
Gutierrez and Fernandez did not present proof to show that safety procedures were observed in Catgas, it added.
"The evidence at hand shows that Catgas employees were pulling the refilling pin while the gas was still being transferred from the LPG storage tank to the empty cylinders. This was unusual since the standard procedure was to pull the refilling pin only when the LPG tanks were already full," it noted.
It also pointed out that the gas pump used for refilling the LPG tanks was not functioning, while the refilling area was enclosed and the sides of the roof lacked proper ventilation.
The sprinkler system was also not working and there were no signboards in the plant reminding the customers of safety measures.
|
