NECESSARY DEPOSIT

 
Art. 1996. A deposit is necessary:
 
      (1)   When   it   is   made   in   compliance   with   a   legal obligation;
 
      (2) When it takes place on the occasion of any calamity, such  as  fire,  storm,  flood,  pillage,  shipwreck,  or  other similar events. (1781a)
 
Art. 1997. The deposit referred to in No. 1 of the preceding article  shall  be  governed  by  the  provisions  of  the  law establishing it, and in case of its deficiency, by the rules on voluntary deposit.
 
The deposit mentioned in No. 2 of the preceding article shall be regulated by the provisions concerning voluntary deposit and by Article 2168. (1782)
 

WHEN DEPOSIT IS NECESSARY

1.   When it is made in compliance with a legal obligation
2.   When it takes place on the occasion of any calamity, such as  fire,  storm,  flood,  pillage,  shipwreck,  or  other  similar events
3.   Travelers in hotels or inns
4.   Made by passengers with common carriers
 

NECESSARY   DEPOSIT   IN   COMPLIANCE   WITH   A   LEGAL OBLIGATION

1.   The  judicial  deposit  of  a  thing  the  possession  of  which  is being disputed in a litigation by two or more persons
2.   The  deposit  with  a  bank  or  public  institution  of  public bonds or instruments  of credit payable to order or  bearer given  in  usufruct  when  the  usufructuary  doesn’t  give proper security for their conservation
3.   The deposit of a thing pledged when the creditor uses the same  without  the  authority  of  the  owner  or  misuses  it  in any other way
4.   Those  required  in  suits  as  provided  for  in  the  Rules  of Court
5.   Those   constituted   to   guarantee   contracts   with   the government.  In this last case, the deposit arises from an obligation of a public or administrative character.   

Art.  1998.  The  deposit  of  effects  made  by  the  travelers  in hotels  or  inns  shall  also  be  regarded  as  necessary.  The keepers  of  hotels  or  inns  shall  be  responsible  for  them  as depositaries, provided that notice was given to them, or to their  employees,  of  the  effects  brought  by  the  guests  and that,  on  the  part  of  the  latter,  they  take  the  precautions which   said   hotel-keepers   or   their   substitutes   advised relative to the care and vigilance of their effects. (1783)
 
Art.  1999.  The  hotel-keeper  is  liable  for  the  vehicles, animals and articles which have been introduced or placed in the annexes of the hotel. (n) 
 

DEPOSIT BY TRAVELLERS IN HOTELS AND INNS

1.   They  have  been  previously  informed  about  the  effects brought by their guests
2.   The latter have taken the precautions prescribed regarding their safekeeping 
 

EXTENT OF LIABILITY OF KEEPERS OF HOTELS AND INNS

     The liability isn’t limited to effects lost  or damaged in the hotel  rooms  which  come  under  the  term  “baggage”  or articles such as clothing as are ordinarily used by travelers but include those lost or damaged in hotel annexes such as vehicles in the hotel’s garage
     The responsibility extends to all those who offer lodging for a compensation, whatever may be their character
 

DEFINITION OF TERMS

1.   Travelers  or  guests—it  refers  to  transients  and  not  to boarders.    Non-transients  are  governed  by  the  rules  on lease.
2.   Hotel-keeper and inn-keeper—
a.    Hotel—a  house  or  large  building  that  supplies rooms  and  food  for  pay  to  travelers  and  others;
inn.
b.   Inn—a  place  where  travelers  and  others  can  get meals and a room to sleep in. Hotels have largely
taken the place of the old inns.
c.    Motel—a  roadside  hotel  or  group  of  furnished cottages  or  cabins  providing  overnight  lodging  for
motorists; motor court.
 
Art.   2000.   The   responsibility   referred   to   in   the   two preceding articles shall include the loss of, or injury to the personal  property  of  the  guests  caused  by  the  servants  or
employees  of  the  keepers  of  hotels  or  inns  as  well  as strangers;  but  not  that  which  may  proceed  from  any  force majeure. The fact that travelers are constrained to  rely on
the  vigilance  of  the  keeper  of  the  hotels  or  inns  shall  be considered  in  determining  the  degree  of  care  required  of him. (1784a)
 
Art. 2001. The act of a thief or robber, who has entered the hotel  is  not  deemed  force  majeure,  unless  it  is  done  with the use of arms or through an irresistible force. (n)
 
Art. 2002. The hotel-keeper is not liable for compensation if the loss is due to the acts of the guest, his family, servants or  visitors,  or  if  the  loss  arises  from  the  character  of  the
things brought into the hotel. (n) 
 

WHEN HOTEL-KEEPER LIABLE

1.   The loss or injury is caused by  his servants  or employees as  well  as  by  strangers  provided  that  notice  has  been given and proper precautions taken
2.   The  loss  is  caused  by  the  act  of  the  thief  or  robber  done without  the  use  of  arms  and  irresistible  force  for  in  this case, the hotel-keeper is apparently negligent.
 

WHEN HOTEL-KEEPER IS NOT LIABLE

1.   The  loss  or  injury  is  caused  by  force  majeure,  theft  or robbery  by  a stranger  with the  use  of  arms  or irresistible force, unless he is guilty of fault or negligence in failing to provide against the loss or injury from his cause
2.   The  loss  is  due  to  the  acts  of  the  guests,  his  family, servants, or visitors 

EXEMPTION OR DIMUNITION OF LIABILITY

     The  rule  in  this  article  is  similar  to  the  rule  on  common carriers which doesn’t allow a common carrier to dispense with  or limit his responsibility by stipulation or by posting of notices
     Such  stipulations  is  deemed  contrary  to  law,  morals,  and public policy
1.   Hotel-keepers     and    inn-keepers    in    offering    their accommodations  to  the  public,  practically  volunteer  as depositaries,  and  as  such,  they  should  be  subject  to  an extraordinary  degree  of  responsibility  for  the  protection and safety of travelers who have no alternative but rely on good faith and care of those with whom they take lodging

2.   Inn-keepers   by   the   nature   of   their   business,   have supervision  and  control  of  their  inns  and  the  premises thereof.  As  a matter of fact, authorities are to the effect that  it  is  not  necessary  in  order  to  hold  an  inn-keeper liable that the effects of the guests be actually delivered to him or his employee, it is enough that they are within the inn.
 

CAN  THERE  BE  STIPULATION  EXEMPTING  LIABILITY  FOR GROSS  NEGLIGENCE?   

No  since  you  cannot  waive  liability  for gross  negligence  as  this  would  be  tantamount  to  waiving  liability for fraud.
 
Art. 2004. The hotel-keeper has a right to retain the things brought into the hotel by the guest, as a security for credits on  account  of  lodging,  and  supplies  usually  furnished  to hotel guests. (n)
 

HOTEL-KEEPER’S RIGHT TO RETAIN

     Nature of a pledge created by operation of law
     Incidentally, the act of obtaining food or accommodation in a hotel or inn without paying thereof constitutes estafa.