Explanation of Article 518
The article clarifies the ruling on hotel deposits or their equivalents, such as hospitals, sanatoriums, cafes, restaurants, commercial stores, sports clubs, and the like. It stipulates that the owners of these places are considered responsible for any deficiency that occurs to the guests' belongings, whether this deficiency is due to theft or loss.
The owners of these places are held responsible for the deficiency whenever three conditions are met:
First Condition: The belongings must be inside the hotel or its affiliated places, such as guest rooms, restaurants, parking lots, and other areas associated with the hotel. If the belongings are outside the hotel, the owners of these places are not responsible for them.
Second Condition: The deficiency that occurred to the guest's belongings must be due to an error or negligence by the hotel owners or one of their employees. If the deficiency is due to theft from outside or loss not caused by an error from the hotel owners, the owners of these places are not responsible.
Third Condition: The guest must have informed the hotel owners of the presence of the belongings at the time of arrival or when they became aware of it. If the guest did not inform the hotel owners of the presence of the belongings, the owners of these places are not responsible for them, as the lack of notification is an indication of the guest's lack of intention to place them under the hotel's protection, and because the hotel may not be able to exercise the required care in safeguarding without knowing of the deposit's presence.
The article exempts two cases from this ruling where hotel owners are not responsible for the deficiency that occurs to the guests' belongings:
First Case: If the deficiency that occurred to the guest's belongings is due to the guest's own error or that of someone accompanying them or visiting them, such as the guest forgetting to lock their room or leaving their belongings outside the room, exposing them to loss or theft, the hotel owners are not responsible.
Second Case: If the deficiency that occurred to the guest's belongings is due to a force majeure, such as earthquakes, volcanoes, and the like, the hotel owners are not responsible.
What is stated in this article is considered public policy; therefore, hotel owners are not allowed to stipulate the negation of their responsibility for the deficiency that occurs to the guests' belongings. This ruling also applies to hospitals, cafes, restaurants, and commercial stores. If the items placed by customers in the custody of these places are subjected to deficiency due to an error by the employees, the owners of these places are responsible for them, and in this case, the cost is borne by the homeowners.
Related To
Article 518
A receiver shall be appointed by agreement of the concerned parties. If no agreement is reached, the court may appoint a receiver if it believes that leaving the property in the possession of its holder poses imminent risk.