Short answer. Generally yes, and to a high degree. Under Article 1754 of the Civil Code, checked baggage no longer in your custody is governed by the strict common-carrier rules, so the carrier must observe extraordinary diligence over it. Only hand-carried items you keep with you fall under the lighter hotel-keeper rules instead.

What the law says

The provisions of articles 1733 to 1753 shall apply to the passenger's baggage which is not in his personal custody or in that of his employee.

Civil Code, Article 1754 — Passenger's Baggage. Read the full provision →

Two kinds of baggage, two sets of rules

Article 1754 splits your luggage into two categories. Baggage that is not in your personal custody — the suitcase you check in and hand over to the carrier — is treated like cargo: the goods-transport rules in articles 1733 to 1753 apply. Baggage that stays with you, such as the bag you keep at your feet or in the overhead rack, is other baggage, and the rules on hotel-keepers' responsibility govern it instead. The dividing line is custody. Once you surrender control of a bag to the carrier, the law holds the carrier to its strictest standard; while a bag remains in your own hands, a different and lighter regime applies.

Checked baggage: the carrier owes extraordinary diligence

Because checked baggage is governed by the common-carrier provisions, Article 1733 controls. It says common carriers are bound to observe extraordinary diligence in the vigilance over the goods transported by them, for reasons of public policy. That is a demanding standard — well above ordinary care. As with lost cargo, the carrier is generally presumed responsible when checked baggage is lost or damaged, and it must prove it exercised that extraordinary diligence or that the loss fell within a recognised exempting cause. So if the bag you checked in disappears, the law starts by placing responsibility on the carrier, not on you to prove exactly how it was lost.

Hand-carried items: the hotel-keeper analogy

For baggage you keep with you, Article 1754 borrows the hotel-keeper rules. Under Article 1998, a keeper is responsible for a guest's effects as a depositary, provided notice of the effects was given and the guest took the precautions advised for their care. Article 2000 extends that responsibility to loss or injury caused by the keeper's employees as well as strangers; but not that which may proceed from any force majeure. Applied to travel, this means the carrier's responsibility for items in your own custody is real but more limited and conditioned on your own care, since you, not the carrier, are watching over them.

What this does not decide

Article 1754 fixes which liability regime applies; it does not by itself set how much you can recover. The amount can be affected by valuation limits, declared-value rules, or ticket and tariff conditions, and for international flights special treaty rules on baggage may also come into play alongside the Civil Code. The article also does not excuse you from proving the loss and its value, so keeping your baggage claim tags, receipts and a record of the contents matters. If a carrier denies or undervalues a claim for lost checked baggage, it is worth having the ticket terms and applicable limits reviewed with counsel.

Cases citing this provision

These Supreme Court decisions cite the provision above. We list them so you can read them yourself; the summaries of what each decided are not ours to give.

Related provisions

Note. Statute text quoted on this page is reproduced from the official enactment and is linked to the full provision. The explanation around it is general legal information from Vivas & Nobles Law Office, not legal advice. Whether it applies to your situation depends on facts only a lawyer reviewing them can assess.