MAPA V. CA, G.R. No.

122308, July 8, 1997

Facts:
Petitioner filed a complaint for damages against Trans-World Airlines
Inc. The RTC as well as the CA, on appeal, dismissed the case for lack of
jurisdiction because, none of the circumstances provided under Article 28 (1)
of the Warsaw Convention occurred in order to conclude that the courts of
the Philippines could take cognizance of the case. Aggrieved, the petitioner
filed this instant petition essentially contending that the case was not covered
by the Warsaw Convention as it is not an international transportation. The
transportations was solely done in the territory of the United States.
Issue: WON it is an international transportation, hence, covered by the
Warsaw Convention.
Held:
No.
There are [then] two categories of international transportation, viz., (1)
that where the place of departure and the place of destination are situated
within the territories of two High Contracting Parties regardless of whether or
not there be a break in the transportation or a transshipment ; and (2) that
where the place of destination are within the territory of single High
Contracting Party if there is an agreed stopping place within a territory
subject to the sovereignty, mandate, or authority of another power, even
though the power is not a party to the Convention.
It is obvious that the place of departure and the place of destination
are all in the territory of the United States, or of a single High Contracting
Party. The contracts, therefore, cannot come within the purview of the first
category of international transportation. Neither can it be under the second
category since there was NO agreed stopping place within a territory subject
to the sovereignty, mandate, or authority of another power.