G.R. No. 2962, Macket et al. v. Camps, 7 Phil. 553 Febr ar! 27, "9#7 B. H. MACKE, ET AL., plai$ti%%s&appellees, vs. JOSE CAMPS, 'e%e$'a$t&appella$t. Manuel G.

Gavieres for appellant. Gibbs & Gale for appellees. CARSON, J.: (he plai$ti%%s i$ this actio$, ). *. Macke a$' +. *. Cha$'ler, part$ers 'oi$, b si$ess $'er the %irm $ame o% Macke, Cha$'ler - Compa$!, alle,e that ' ri$, the mo$ths o% Febr ar! a$' March, "9#5, the! sol' to the 'e%e$'a$t a$' 'elivere' at his place o% b si$ess, k$o.$ as the /+ashi$,to$ Ca%e,/ vario s bills o% ,oo's amo $ti$, to P35".5#0 that the 'e%e$'a$t has o$l! pai' o$ acco $t o% sai' acco $ts the s m o% P"710 that there is still ' e them o$ acco $t o% sai' ,oo's the s m o% P"77.5#0 that be%ore i$stit ti$, this actio$ the! ma'e 'ema$' %or the pa!me$t thereo%0 a$' that 'e%e$'a$t ha' %aile' a$' re% se' to pa! the sai' bala$ce or a$! part o% it p to the time o% the %ili$, o% the complai$t. ). *. Macke 2is the .it$ess3, o$e o% the plai$ti%%s, testi%ie' that o$ the or'er o% o$e Ricar'o Flores, .ho represe$te' himsel% to be a,e$t o% the 'e%e$'a$t, he shippe' the sai' ,oo's to the 'e%e$'a$ts at the +ashi$,to$ Ca%e0 that Flores later ack$o.le',e' the receipt o% sai' ,oo's a$' ma'e vario s pa!me$ts thereo$ amo $ti$, i$ all to P"710 that o$ 'ema$' %or pa!me$t o% bala$ce o% the acco $t Flores i$%orme' him that he 'i' $ot have the $ecessar! % $'s o$ ha$', a$' that he .o l' have to .ait the ret r$ o% his pri$cipal, the 'e%e$'a$t, .ho .as at that time visiti$, i$ the provi$ces0 that Flores ack$o.le',e' the bill %or the ,oo's % r$ishe' a$' the cre'its bei$, the amo $t set o t i$ the complai$t0 that .he$ the ,oo's .ere or'ere' the! .ere or'ere' o$ the cre'it o% the 'e%e$'a$t a$' that the! .ere shippe' b! the plai$ti%%s a%ter i$4 ir! .hich satis%ie' the .it$ess as to the cre'it o% the 'e%e$'a$t a$' as to the a thorit! o% Flores to act as his a,e$t0 that the .it$ess al.a!s believe' a$' still believes that Flores .as the a,e$t o% the 'e%e$'a$t0 a$' that .he$ he .e$t to the +ashi$,to$ Ca%e %or the p rpose o% collecti$, his bill he %o $' Flores, i$ the abse$ce o% the 'e%e$'a$t i$ the provi$ces, appare$tl! i$ char,e o% the b si$ess a$' claimi$, to be the b si$ess ma$a,er o% the 'e%e$'a$t, sai' b si$ess bei$, that o% a hotel .ith a bar a$' resta ra$t a$$e5e'. 6 .ritte$ co$tract 'ate' Ma! 25, "9#1, .as i$tro' ce' i$ evi'e$ce, %rom .hich it appears that o$e Galmes, the %ormer o.$er o% the b si$ess $o. k$o. as the /+ashi$,to$ Ca%e,/ s bre$te' the b il'i$, .herei$ the b si$ess .as co$' cte', to the 'e%e$'a$t %or a perio' o% o$e !ear, %or the p rpose o% carr!i$, o$ that b si$ess, the 'e%e$'a$t obli,ati$, himsel% $ot to s blet or s bre$t the b il'i$, or the b si$ess .itho t the co$se$t o% the sai' Galmes. (his co$tract .as si,$e' b! the 'e%e$'a$t a$' the $ame o% Ricar'o Flores appears thereo$ as a .it$ess, a$' attache' thereto is a$ i$ve$tor! o% the % r$it re a$' %itti$,s .hich also is si,$e' b! the 'e%e$'a$t .ith the .or' /s blessee/ 2subarrendatario3 belo. the $ame, a$' at the %oot o% this i$ve$tor! the .or' /receive'/ 2recibo3 %ollo.e' b! the $ame /Ricar'o Flores,/ .ith the .or's /ma$a,i$, a,e$t/ 2el manejante encargado3 imme'iatel! %ollo.i$, his $ame. Galmes .as calle' to the sta$' a$' i'e$ti%ie' the above& 'escribe' 'oc me$t as the co$tract a$' i$ve$tor! 'elivere' to him b! the 'e%e$'a$t, a$' % rther state' that he co l' $ot tell .hether Flores .as .orki$, %or himsel% or %or some o$e else 7 that it to sa!, .hether Flores .as ma$a,i$, the b si$ess as a,e$t or s blessee. (he 'e%e$'a$t 'i' $ot ,o o$ the sta$' $or call a$! .it$esses, a$' relies .holl! o$ his co$te$tio$ that the %ore,oi$, %acts are $ot s %%icie$t to establish the %act that he receive' the ,oo's %or .hich pa!me$t is 'ema$'e'. 8$ the abse$ce o% proo% o% the co$trar! .e thi$k that this evi'e$ce is s %%icie$t to s stai$ a %i$'i$, that Flores .as the a,e$t o% the 'e%e$'a$t i$ the ma$a,eme$t o% the bar o% the +ashi$,to$ Ca%e .ith a thorit! to bi$' the 'e%e$'a$t, his pri$cipal, %or the pa!me$t o% the ,oo's me$tio$e' i$ the complai$t. (he co$tract i$tro' ce' i$ evi'e$ce s %%icie$tl! establishes the %act that the 'e%e$'a$t .as the o.$er o% b si$ess a$' o% the bar, a$' the title o% /ma$a,i$, a,e$t/ attache' to the si,$at re o% Flores .hich appears o$ that co$tract, to,ether .ith the %act that, at the time the p rchases i$ 4 estio$ .ere ma'e, Flores .as appare$tl! i$ char,e o% the b si$ess, per%ormi$, the ' ties s all! e$tr ste' to ma$a,i$, a,e$t, leave little room %or 'o bt that he .as there as a thori9e' a,e$t o% the 'e%e$'a$t. :$e .ho clothes a$other appare$t a thorit! as his a,e$t, a$' hol's him o t to the p blic as s ch, ca$ $ot be permitte' to 'e$! the a thorit! o% s ch perso$ to act as his a,e$t, to the pre; 'ice o% i$$oce$t thir' parties 'eali$, .ith s ch perso$ i$ ,oo' %aith a$' i$ the %ollo.i$, preass mptio$s or 'e' ctio$s, .hich the la. e5pressl! 'irects to be ma'e %rom partic lar %acts, are 'eeme' co$cl sive< 2"3 /+he$ever a part! has, b! his o.$ 'eclaratio$, act, or omissio$, i$te$tio$all! a$' 'eliberatel! le' a$other to believe a partic lar thi$, tr e, a$' to act po$ s ch belie%, he ca$ $ot, i$ a$! liti,atio$ arisi$, o t s ch 'eclaratio$, act, or omissio$, be permitte' to %alsi%! it/ 2s bsec. ", sec. 333, 6ct $o. "9#30 a$' $less the co$trar! appears, the a thorit! o% a$ a,e$t m st be pres me' to i$cl 'e all the $ecessar! a$' s al mea$s o%

carr!i$, his a,e$c! i$to e%%ect. 2"5 Co$$., 3170 9# N. C. "#"0 "5 =a. 6$$, 2170 13 Mich., 3610 93 N. >., 1950 ?7 8$'., "?7.3 (hat Flores, as ma$a,i$, a,e$t o% the +ashi$,to$ Ca%e, ha' a thorit! to b ! s ch reaso$able 4 a$tities o% s pplies as mi,ht %rom time to time be $ecessar! i$ carr!i$, o$ the b si$ess o% hotel bar ma! %airl! be pres me' %rom the $at re o% the b si$ess, especiall! i$ vie. o% the %act that his pri$cipal appears to have le%t him i$ char,e ' ri$, more or less prolo$,e' perio's o% abse$ce0 %rom a$ e5ami$atio$ o% the items o% the acco $t attache' to the complai$t, .e are o% opi$io$ that he .as acti$, .ithi$ the scope o% his a thorit! i$ or'eri$, these ,oo's are bi$'i$, o$ his pri$cipal, a$' i$ the abse$ce o% evi'e$ce to the co$trar!, % r$ish satis%actor! proo% o% their 'eliver! as alle,e' i$ the complai$t. (he ; ',me$t o% the trial co rt is a%%irme' .ith the costs o% his i$sta$ce a,ai$st the appella$t. 6%ter e5piratio$ o% t.e$t! 'a!s ; ',me$t .ill be re$'ere' i$ accor'a$ce here.ith, a$' te$ 'a!s therea%ter the case rema$'e' to the lo.er co rt %or proper actio$. @o or'ere'. Arellano, C.J., Torres and Willard, JJ., concur. Tracey, J., dissents.

Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila FIRST DIVISION G.R. No. L-40242 December 15, 1982 DOMING CONDE, petitioner, vs. T!E !ONOR "LE COURT O# PPE LS, M NIL P CIENTE CORDERO, $o%e$&er '($& &() '(*e, NICET S LTER , R MON CONDE, $o%e$&er '($& &() '(*e, C T LIN T. CONDE, respondents. MELENCIO-!ERRER , J.: n appeal b! certiorari fro" the Decision of respondent #ourt of ppeals 1 $# %&.R. No. '()**% R+ affir"in, the -ud,"ent of the #ourt of First Instance of .e!te, /ranch I0, Tacloban #it! $#ivil #ase No. /%))1+, 2hich dis"issed petitioner3s #o"plaint for 4uietin, of Title and ordered her to vacate the propert! in dispute and deliver its possession to private respondents Ra"on #onde and #atalina #onde. The established facts, as found b! the #ourt of ppeals, sho2 that on 5 pril )6*(. Mar,arita #onde, /ernardo #onde and the petitioner Do"in,a #onde, as heirs of Santia,o #onde, sold 2ith ri,ht of repurchase, 2ithin ten $)1+ !ears fro" said date, a parcel of a,ricultural land located in Ma,hubas /urauen .e!te, $.ot ('1+, 2ith an appro7i"ate area of one $)+ hectare, to #asi"ira Pasa,ui, "arried to Pio ltera $hereinafter referred to as the lteras+, for P)89.11. The :Pacto de Retro Sale: further provided; ... $'+ if at the end of )1 !ears the said land is not repurchased, a ne2 a,ree"ent shall be "ade bet2een the parties and in no case title and o2nership shall be vested in the hand of the part! of the S<#OND P RT $the lteras+. 777 777 777 $<7hibit :/:+ On )5 pril )6'), the #adastral #ourt of .e!te ad-udicated .ot No. ('1 to the lteras :sub-ect to the ri,ht of rede"ption b! Do"in,a #onde, 2ithin ten $)1+ !ears countin, fro" pril 5, )6(*, after returnin, the a"ount of P)89.11 and the a"ounts paid b! the spouses in concept of land ta7 ... : $<7hibit :):+. Ori,inal #ertificate of Title No. N%9*' in the na"e of the spouses Pio ltera and #asi"ira Pasa,ui, sub-ect to said ri,ht of repurchase, 2as transcribed in the :Re,istration /oo=: of the Re,istr! of Deeds of .e!te on )' Nove"ber )698 $<7hibit :>:+. On >( Nove"ber )6'9, private respondent Paciente #ordero, son%in%la2 of the lteras, si,ned a docu"ent in the Visa!an dialect, the <n,lish translation of 2hich reads; M<MOR ND?M OF R<P?R#@ S< OV<R P R#<. OF . ND SO.D AIT@ R<P?R#@ S< A@I#@ DO#?M<NT &OT .OST A<, PIO .T<R and P #I<NT< #ORD<RO, both of le,al a,e, and residents of /urauen .e!te, Philippines, after havin, been dul! s2orn to in accordance 2ith la2 free fro" threats and inti"idation, do hereb! depose and sa!; ). That I, PIO .T<R bou,ht 2ith the ri,ht of repurchase t2o parcels of land fro" DOMIN& #OND<, /<RN RDO #OND< ND M R& RIT #OND<, all brother and sisters. >. That these t2o parcels of land 2ere all inherited b! the three. *. That the docu"ent of S .< AIT@ T@< RI&@T OF R<P?R#@ S< ,ot lost in spite of the dili,ent efforts to locate the sa"e 2hich 2as lost durin, the 2ar. '. That these t2o parcels of land 2hich 2as the sub-ect "atter of a Deed of Sale 2ith the Ri,ht of Repurchase consists onl! of one docu"ent 2hich 2as lost. 9. /ecause it is about ti"e to repurchase the land, I have allo2ed the representative of Do"in,a #onde, /ernardo #onde and Mar,arita #onde in the na"e of <?S</IO M RI..< to repurchase the sa"e. 8. No2, this ver! da! Nove"ber >(, )6'9, ) or Ae have received to,ether 2ith Paciente #ordero 2ho is "! son%in%la2 the a"ount of ON< @?NDR<D SI0TB%FIV< P<SOS $P)89. 11+ Philippine #urrenc! of le,al tender 2hich 2as the consideration in that sale 2ith the ri,ht of repurchase 2ith respect to the t2o parcels of land. That 2e further covenant to,ether 2ith Paciente #ordero 2ho is "! son%in%la2 that fro" this da! the said Do"in,a #onde, /ernardo #onde and Mar,arita #onde 2ill a,ain ta=e possession of the afore"entioned parcel of land because the! repurchased the sa"e fro" "e. If and 2hen their possession over the said parcel of land be disturbed b! other persons, I and Paciente #ordero 2ho is "! son%in%la2 2ill defend in behalf of the herein brother and sisters "entioned above, because the sa"e 2as alread! repurchased b! the". IN AITN<SS A@<R<OF, I or Ae have hereunto affi7ed our thu"b"ar= or si,nature to our respective

na"es belo2 this docu"ent or "e"orandu" this >(th da! of Nove"ber )6'9 at /urauen .e!te, Philippines, in the presence of t2o 2itnesses. PIO .T<R $S,d.+ P #I<NT< #ORD<RO AITN<SS<S; ). $S&D.+ T<ODORO #. &?I..ON To be noted is the fact that neither of the vendees%a%retro, Pio ltera nor #asi"ira Pasa,ui, 2as a si,nator! to the deed. Petitioner "aintains that because Pio ltera 2as ver! ill at the ti"e, Paciente #ordero e7ecuted the deed of resale for and on behalf of his father%in%la2. Petitioner further states that she redee"ed the propert! 2ith her o2n "one! as her co%heirs 2ere bereft of funds for the purpose. The pacto de retro docu"ent 2as eventuall! found. On *1 Cune )689 Pio ltera sold the disputed lot to the spouses Ra"on #onde and #atalina T. #onde, 2ho are also private respondents herein. Their relationship to petitioner does not appear fro" the records. Nor has the docu"ent of sale been e7hibited. #ontendin, that she had validl! repurchased the lot in Duestion in )6'9, petitioner filed, on )8 Canuar! )686, in the #ourt of First Instance of .e!te, /ranch I0, Tacloban #it!, a #o"plaint $#ivil #ase No. /%))1+, a,ainst Paciente #ordero and his 2ife Nicetas ltera, Ra"on #onde and his 2ife #atalina T. #onde, and #asi"ira Pasa,ui Pio ltera havin, died in )688+, for Duietin, of title to real propert! and declaration of o2nership. Petitioner3s evidence is that Paciente #ordero si,ned the Me"orandu" of Repurchase in representation of his father%in%la2 Pio ltera, 2ho 2as seriousl! sic= on that occasion, and of his "other%in%la2 2ho 2as in Manila at the ti"e, and that #ordero received the repurchase price of P89.11. Private respondents, for their part, adduced evidence that Paciente #ordero si,ned the docu"ent of repurchase "erel! to sho2 that he had no ob-ection to the repurchaseE and that he did not receive the a"ount of P)89.11 fro" petitioner inas"uch as he had no authorit! fro" his parents%in%la2 2ho 2ere the vendees%a%retro. fter trial, the lo2er #ourt rendered its Decision dis"issin, the #o"plaint and the counterclai" and orderin, petitioner :to vacate the propert! in dispute and deliver its peaceful possession to the defendants Ra"on #onde and #atalina T. #onde:. On appeal, the #ourt of ppeals upheld the findin,s of the #ourt a quo that petitioner had failed to validl! e7ercise her ri,ht of repurchase in vie2 of the fact that the Me"orandu" of Repurchase 2as si,ned b! Paciente #ordero and not b! Pio ltera, the vendee%a%retro, and that there is nothin, in said docu"ent to sho2 that #ordero 2as specificall! authoriFed to act for and on behalf of the vendee a retro, Pio ltera. Reconsideration havin, been denied b! the ppellate #ourt, the case is before us on revie2. There is no Duestion that neither of the vendees%a%retro si,ned the :Me"orandu" of Repurchase:, and that there 2as no for"al authoriFation fro" the vendees for Paciente #ordero to act for and on their behalf. Of si,nificance, ho2ever, is the fact that fro" the e7ecution of the repurchase docu"ent in )6'9, possession, 2hich heretofore had been 2ith the lteras, has been in the hands of petitioner as stipulated therein. .and ta7es have also been paid for b! petitioner !earl! fro" )6'5 to )686 inclusive $<7hibits :D: to :D%)9:E and :<:+. If, as opined b! both the #ourt a quo and the ppellate #ourt, petitioner had done nothin, to for"aliFe her repurchase, b! the sa"e to=en, neither have the vendees%a%retro done an!thin, to clear their title of the encu"brance therein re,ardin, petitioner3s ri,ht to repurchase. No ne2 a,ree"ent 2as entered into b! the parties as stipulated in the deed of pacto de retro, if the vendors a retro failed to e7ercise their ri,ht of rede"ption after ten !ears. If, as alle,ed, petitioner e7erted no effort to procure the si,nature of Pio ltera after he had recovered fro" his illness, neither did the lteras repudiate the deed that their son%in% la2 had si,ned. Thus, an i"plied a,enc! "ust be held to have been created fro" their silence or lac= of action, or their failure to repudiate the a,enc!. 2 Possession of the lot in dispute havin, been adversel! and uninterruptedl! 2ith petitioner fro" )6'9 2hen the docu"ent of repurchase 2as e7ecuted, to )686, 2hen she instituted this action, or for >' !ears, the lteras "ust be dee"ed to have incurred in laches. + That petitioner "erel! too= advanta,e of the abandon"ent of the land b! the lteras due to the separation of said spouses, and that petitioner3s possession 2as in the concept of a tenant, re"ain bare assertions 2ithout proof. Private respondents Ra"on #onde and #atalina #onde, to 2ho" Pio ltera sold the disputed propert! in )689, assu"in, that there 2as, indeed, such a sale, cannot be said to be purchasers in ,ood faith. O#T No. 9*' in the na"e of the lteras specificall! contained the condition that it 2as sub-ect to the ri,ht of repurchase 2ithin )1 !ears fro" )6*(. lthou,h the ten%!ear period had lapsed in )689 and there 2as no annotation of an! repurchase b! petitioner, neither had the title been cleared of that encu"brance. The purchasers 2ere put on notice that so"e other person could have a ri,ht to or interest in the propert!. It behooved Ra"on #onde and #atalina #onde to have loo=ed into the ri,ht of rede"ption inscribed on the title, and particularl! the "atter of possession, 2hich, as also ad"itted b! the" at the pre%trial, had been 2ith petitioner since )6'9. Private respondent "ust be held bound b! the clear ter"s of the Me"orandu" of Repurchase that he had si,ned 2herein he ac=no2led,ed the receipt of P)89.11 and assu"ed the obli,ation to "aintain the repurchasers in peaceful possession should the! be :disturbed b! other persons:. It 2as e7ecuted in the Visa!an dialect 2hich he understood. @e cannot no2 be

allo2ed to dispute the sa"e. :... If the contract is plain and uneDuivocal in its ter"s he is ordinaril! bound thereb!. It is the dut! of ever! contractin, part! to learn and =no2 its contents before he si,ns and delivers it.: 4 There is nothin, in the docu"ent of repurchase to sho2 that Paciente #ordero had si,ned the sa"e "erel! to indicate that he had no ob-ection to petitioner3s ri,ht of repurchase. /esides, he 2ould have had no personalit! to ob-ect. To uphold his oral testi"on! on that point, 2ould be a departure fro" the parol evidence rule 5 and 2ould defeat the purpose for 2hich the doctrine is intended. ... The purpose of the rule is to ,ive stabilit! to 2ritten a,ree"ents, and to re"ove the te"ptation and possibilit! of per-ur!, 2hich 2ould be afforded if parol evidence 2as ad"issible. , In su", althou,h the contendin, parties 2ere le,all! 2antin, in their respective actuations, the repurchase b! petitioner is supported b! the ad"issions at the pre%trial that petitioner has been in possession since the !ear )6'9, the date of the deed of repurchase, and has been pa!in, land ta7es thereon since then. The i"peratives of substantial -ustice, and the eDuitable principle of laches brou,ht about b! private respondents3 inaction and ne,lect for >' !ears, loo" in petitioner3s favor. A@<R<FOR<, the -ud,"ent of respondent #ourt of ppeals is hereb! R<V<RS<D and S<T SID<, and petitioner is hereb! declared the o2ner of the disputed propert!. If the ori,inal of O#T No. N%9*' of the Province of .e!te is still e7tant at the office of the Re,ister of Deeds, then said official is hereb! ordered to cancel the sa"e and, in lieu thereof, issue a ne2 Transfer #ertificate of Title in the na"e of petitioner, Do"in,a #onde. No costs. SO ORD<R<D. Teehankee (Chairman), Plana, Vasquez, Relova and Gutierrez, Jr., JJ., concur. #oo$-o$e) ) Tenth Division co"posed of C. Ra"on #. FernandeF, ponente concurred in b! CC. Ricardo #. Puno and /. S. de la Fuente. > rt. )(86, #ivil #ode. * rcuino vs. paris, >> S#R '15 $)68(+E Me-ia de .ucas vs. &a"ponia, )11 Phil. >5( $)698+. ' Tan Tua Sia vs. Bu /iao Sontua, 98 Phil. 5)) $)6*>+. 9 Sec. 5. <vidence of 2ritten a,ree"ents. Ahen the ter"s of an a,ree"ent have been reduced to 2ritin,, and, therefore, there can be, bet2een the parties and their successors in interest, no evidence of the ter"s of the a,ree"ent other than the contents of the 2ritin,, e7cept in the follo2in, cases; $a+ Ahere a "ista=e or i"perfection of the 2ritin,, or its failure to e7press the true intent and a,ree"ent of the parties, or the validit! of the a,ree"ent is put in issue b! the pleadin,sE $b+ Ahen there is an intrinsic a"bi,uit! in the 2ritin,. The ter" :a,ree"ent: includes 2ins. $.i" Bhi .u!a vs. #ourt of ppeals, 66 S#R 86> $)6(1+. 8 Tan Tua Sia vs. Bu /iao Sontua, supra.

s and conclusions. receipt and ta=e deliver! of insurance proceeds fro" respondent Insular . authoriFin. in the absence of an! Special Po2er of ttorne! for that "atter.?#I . for P91.ife :be ordered to pa! the clai"ants their insurance clai"s: and that :proper sanctionsGpenalties be i"posed on: it :for its deliberate. 1IRGINI L RCON.ainst private respondent Insular . into consideration the evidences IsicJ. receive.11 each+ of co"plainant. for the petitioners. + The petitioners 2ere the co"plainants in I# #ase No. in the event of the death of insured$s+. On >1 Cune )661.: This is an appeal b! certiorari to revie2 and set aside the Decision of the public respondent #ourt of ppeals in # %&. "or petitioners.111.td. . and for ne. is not convincin.ife.ations to the co"plainants. CELI C LUM" G 3-4 LUCI LONTO5. . Trinidad larcon. Third. the petitioners3 "otion for reconsideration. dau. Jr.round that :the clai"s of co"plainants are all respectivel! be!ond the -urisdiction of the Insurance #o""ission as provided in Section ')8 of the Insurance #ode.ife did not observe Section )(1 of the Insurance #ode.li.ence 2ith respect to the release of the other five chec=s. 10 In holdin.11+ a da! fro" the receipt of a cop! of this Decision until actual pa!"ent thereofE b+ Pa! and settle the clai"s of DIN BO and .ife ssurance #o"pan!. . respectivel!E c+ Notif! henceforth it should notif! individual beneficiaries desi. findin. /it filed its ans2er on 9 Dece"ber )6(6.R. this #o""ission "erel! orders the respondent co"pan! to.111. the #o""ission finds thatE First.ife+.ONTOH. Nuval the chec= intended for spouses . cursor! readin. receive. 4 The! pra!ed therein that after due proceedin.Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila FIRST DIVISION G. A@<R<FOR<. R#ON.nated under an! &roup Polic!.11 and P'1. SO ORD<R<D.: . receipt fro" respondent co"pan! insurance proceeds arisin. of the Duestioned po2ers of authorit! 2ould disclosed IsicJ that the! do not contain in uneDuivocal and clear ter"s authorit! to #apt.: 5 Insular .$ember 2/. Nuval. 2 The challen.. $hereinafter Insular . and of the Insurance #ode. fro" the death of the sea"an%insured. an ad"inistrative co"plaint a. 1055. !mpil.2 Se. The respondent erred in appreciatin. 2hen it issued or released t2o chec=s in the a"ount of P)91. On the contrar!. M RILOU MONTENEGRO.s 2ere conducted on various dates. SP No. the #o""ission rendered its decision 9 in favor of the co"plainants. RD%19(. Mrs. a+ Pa! a fine of FIV< @?NDR<D P<SOS $P911. 2hich 2as filed 2ith the Insurance #o""ission on >1 Septe"ber )6(6.ife arisin. Nuval to obtain. RD%19(. that the po2ers of attorne! e7ecuted b! five $9+ of the several beneficiaries conve! absolute authorit! to #apt. the Insurance #o""ission "ade the follo2in. . COURT O# PPE LS 3-4 T!E INSUL R LI#E SSUR NCE COMP N2.R. fec=less violation of its contractual obli.111.ed decision "odified the decision of the Insurance #o""ission in I# #ase No. hi" to clai". Ramon #.111. the dispositive portion of 2hich reads as follo2s. petitioners. been denied in the Order of )' Nove"ber )6(6. receive. to #apt. !ON. to de"and. DIN LOREN 2O. D 1IDE. testi"onial and docu"entar! for the co"plainants and the respondent. Second. hearin. The testi"on! of the co"plainants3 rebuttal 2itness.11 for the three "inor children $P91.s.ife3s "otion to dis"iss the co"plaint on the . out of the death of their insuredGsea"an son. the said po2ers of attorne! are couched in ter"s 2hich could easil! arouse suspicion of an ordinar! "an.11 for "inor beneficiar! Marissa .hter . receipt and ta=e deliver! of an! insurance proceeds fro" Insular . 6R. ariano V. 2ho declared in no uncertain ter"s that neither she nor her husband. Insular . 199+ LU0 PINED .11. Ca$uiao "or private respondent. Respondent Insular . e7ecuted a special po2er of attorne! in favor of #aptain Rosendo Nuval. >>691 1 and its Resolution den!in. respondents. vs. havin. fter ta=in. clai"s are filed b! the Polic!holderE d+ Sho2 cause 2ithin ten da!s 2h! its other responsible officers 2ho have handled this case should not be sub-ected to disciplinar! and other ad"inistrative sanctions for deliberatel! releasin.111.l! refuted. 2here the correspondin. LIMITED. 8 Thereafter. Dina !o and another chec= of P'1. No.onto=. J.

11. in its capacit! as e"plo!er and polic!holder of the life insurance of its deceased 2or=ers.11. Nuval to. the effectivit! of the polic!.11. procured &roup PoIic! No.ife 2ere insufficient to conve! absolute authorit! to #apt. #apt. SP No. for brevit!+. released to the survivin. On )1 October )66). Follo2in. 11 Insular . .11.111. On )5 Februar! )6(8.ed the appellate court to reverse the decision because the Insurance #o""ission $a+ had no -urisdiction over the case considerin. others. $b+ erred in holdin. Pri"e Marine Services.ainst Insular . . &%11'86' fro" respondent%appellant Insular . 14 On the basis thereof. no2 /oston /an=. sun= so"e2here in <l Cadida. ho2ever. A@<R<FOR<. the petitioners had as=ed for ad"inistrative sanctions a. /! virtue of these 2ritten po2ers of attorne!.ucia .h its President. the father. The! 2ere survived b! co"plainants%appellees. the decision appealed fro" is "odified b! eli"inatin.111.11 and another for P'1. the public respondent held that the Insurance #o""ission had -urisdiction over the case on the . fro" the deaths of their husbandsGsons. #apt.ht. respectivel!. throu. a &ree= car.11. an! ri. of an! court authoriFation presented or the reDuisite bond posted. ..ife but the latter denied their clai" on the .round that althou. Nuval over the phone to Mr.ivin.ness to assist co"plainants%appellees to recover Overseas Aor=ers Aelfare d"inistration $OAA + benefits fro" the PO< and to 2or= for the increase of their P NDIM N and other benefits arisin. The latter evinced 2illin. Inc. outfit.11. endorsed and deposited the" in his account 2ith the #o""ercial /an= of Manila. the PMSI.e to its sea%based e"plo!ees enrolled under the plan. the tra. filed 2ith respondent%appellant for"al clai"s for and in behalf of the beneficiaries. "others the insurance proceeds pertainin.roup polic! 2ith respondent%appellant. durin.onto=. #apt. On the basis of these and other docu"ents dul! sub"itted. Section )(1 is Duotes IsicJ partl! as follo2s. The appeal ur. the! sou. credit to the version of Insular . pa!able to the order of co"plainants%appellees. 1+ It found the follo2in.11 and P'1. 2ho is an insured or a beneficiar! under a contract of life.o vessel.er of PMSI. Morocco.11 each. .uished upon deliver! to and receipt b! PMSI of the si7 $8+ chec=s issued in their na"es.ife appealed the decision to the public respondent 2hich doc=eted the case as # %&.111. . under the polic!. 2ith the e7ception of the spouses larcon. Mariano ?rbano. Nuval.of another co"plainant . that the po2ers of attorne! relied upon b! Insular . ?n=no2n to the".er for &roup d"inistration Depart"ent of respondent%appellant.onto= in the a"ounts of P91. to life insurance benefits under a . co"plainants%appellees 2ere able to receive their respective death benefits.G"annin. the beneficiaries under the polic!. or in the latter3s absence or incapacit!. of MGV Ne"os.ic de"ise of their loved ones. In the absence of a -udicial . therefro" the a2ard to Dina !o and . and $d+ erred in holdin.ucia . On * Cul! )6(6. Nuval to de"and. "a! e7ercise. to provide life insurance covera. the! approached the President and &eneral Mana.111. upon receipt of these chec=s fro" the treasurer. si7 covered e"plo!ees of the PMSI perished at sea 2hen their vessel. the public respondent rendered a decision. no sho2in.h so"e of the clai"s e7ceed P)11. facts to have been dul! established.R.111. #apt. of the clai"s 2ere five special po2ers of attorne! e7ecuted b! co"plainants%appellees. $PMSI.. "on. receive and ta=e deliver! of the insurance proceeds pertainin.round that the liabilit! to co"plainants%appellees 2as alread! e7tin.td. . that Insular . Section )(1 of the Insurance #ode for havin. that the clai"s e7ceeded P)11. one for P91.ivin. a cre2in. $c+ erred in not . to the beneficiaries 2ho 2ere still "inors despite the failure of the for"er to obtain a court authoriFation or to post a bond.ht to clai" death benefits due the" and. Roberto Nuval. These chec=s 2ere released to the treasurer of PMSI upon instructions of #apt. collect and receive: for their benefit inde"nities of su"s of "one! due the" relative to the sin=in. 2ho happened to be his son%in%la2.uardian. special po2ers of attorne! authoriFin. Nuval. 12 the decretal portion of 2hich reads. as beneficiaries.ainst its account 2ith the /an= of the Philippine Islands on >5 Ma! )6(8 si7 $8+ chec=s. health or accident insurance. It appears that on >* Septe"ber )6(*. respondent%appellant dre2 a. .ife ssurance #o. MGV Ne"os. there bein.ht to recover these benefits fro" Insular . :follo2 up.ife 2as liable for violatin. four for P>11. de"and. ssistant Depart"ent Mana. the "other of an! "inor. in behalf of said "inor. The! 2ere thus "ade to e7ecute. a"on. 2ithout necessit! of court authorit! or the .ife that the po2er of attorne! supposed to have been e7ecuted in favor of the larcons 2as "issin. as=. of a bond %here the interest o" the minor in the particular act involved does not e&ceed t%ent' thousand pesos . for this purpose. after co"plainants%appellees learned that the! 2ere entitled. to the petitioners. co"plainants%appellees sou. the docu"ents sub"itted b! the latter for the processin. >>691.

2hen the "ar=et value of the propert! or the annual inco"e of the child e7ceeds P91. a specific po2er of attorne! to be presented.uardianship over the propert! of their une"ancipated co""on child 2ithout the necessit! of a court appoint"entE ho2ever. 2ho is an insured or a beneficiar! under a contract of life.ree 2ith the Insurance #o""ission that the special po2ers of attorne! :do not contain in uneDuivocal and clear ter"s authorit! to #apt. "a! e7ercise.ife 2ere sufficient to authoriFe #apt.uF Pineda.ife3s clai" that the larcons had sub"itted a special po2er of attorne! 2hich the! $Insular . to the beneficiaries. 2here the interest of the "inor in the particular act involved does not e7ceed t2ent! thousand pesos. Ae rule for the petitioners.round for the dis"issal of the action as it does not affect the other reliefs pra!ed for. the parent concerned shall be reDuired to put up a bond in such a"ount as the court "a! deter"ine.l! . po2ers.onto= 2ere concerned. )(5( of the Ne2 #ivil #ode. an! ri.ree"ent bet2een co"plainants% appellees and #apt.ivin. surrenderin. receipt fro" respondent co"pan! insurance proceeds arisin.: 19 The holdin. Dina !o.. it is not a . . has been a"ended b! the Fa"il! #ode 1/ 2hich . Such a ri. obtainin.111.er of the PMSI. and. Neither do 2e perceive collection of insurance clai"s as an act of strict do"inion as to reDuire a special po2er of attorne!. specified death benefits cannot pre-udice the insurance co"pan! 2hich relied on the ter"s of the po2ers of attorne! 2hich on their face do not disclose such li"itation. Nuval li"itin. li=e "is-oinder of parties. 2ithout necessit! of court authorit! or the .. :there 2as "erel! a "is-oinder of causes of action .: 15 It also re-ected Insular . it appearin. receivin.: relied upon b! Insular . of the public respondent to the contrar! is principall! pre"ised on its opinion that. respectivel!.11.uardian. )(5( of the Ne2 #ivil #ode.al .natures therein. the polic!.rants the father and "other -oint le. to the sin=in.onto=.n receipts. de"and. on )' Ma! )6(8 18 and unifor"l! .: 2hich 2ere e7ecuted b! petitioners . the public respondent ruled that the po2ers of attorne!. Moreover. the polic!holder 2ith 2ho" respondent%appellant al2a!s dealt. it ruled that the reDuire"ent in Section )(1 of the Insurance #ode 2hich provides in part that. Ae believe this is a reasonable interpretation even b! an officer of respondent%appellant unschooled in the la2.ife 2hich are 2ithin the #o""ission3s -urisdiction to . The fact that there 2as a verbal a. Nuval.ent to collect an! su" of "one! pertainin. of M. On the other hand. respondents%appellant3s reliance on the 2ritten po2ers 2as in order and it cannot be penaliFed for such an act. Ae have carefull! e7a"ined the specific po2ers of attorne!. #asablanca.ivin. the! "ust have assu"ed #apt.ucia /.ht under the polic!. It stated. the "inor3s consent to an! transaction on the polic!. of a bond. as=. Respondent%appellant interpreted this po2er to include the collection of insurance proceeds in behalf of the beneficiaries concerned. in the la2 2hich "andates a specific or special po2er of attorne! to be e7ecuted to collect insurance proceeds. "a! include. the father. fro" the death of the sea"an%insured. 1. the authorit! of the latter to clai"in. ItJhere is nothin. or in the latter3s absence or incapacit!. Such authorit! is not included in the enu"eration of rt. N<MOS in the vicinit! of <l Cadida. in the la2 2hich "andates a specific or special po2er of attorne! to be e7ecuted to collect insurance proceeds. There is nothin. ?nder the circu"stances.ife+ later "isplaced. #elia #alu"a. Nuval to receive the proceeds of the insurance pertainin. that co"plainants%appellees have failed to point to a positive provision of la2 or stipulation in the polic! reDuirin. he also appeared to be the proper person to deal 2ith respondent%appellant bein. Nuval to obtain. concerns and entities. . Not onl! 2as he ar"ed 2ith a see"in. the President and &eneral Mana. .rantE hence.s of 2hatsoever nature 2ith an! and all third persons. @ad respondent appellant. the said po2ers of attorne! are couched in ter"s 2hich could easil! arouse suspicion of an ordinar! "an. this petition for revie2 on certiorari 2hich 2e .V. health or accident insurance. )6(8E and To si.al depart"ent it 2ould not have received a contrar! vie2. consulted its le. respondent%appellant had no reason to doubt #apt. <7hibits :): to :9. On the contrar!. Nuval indeed had authorit! to collect the insurance proceeds in behalf of the beneficiaries 2ho dul! affi7ed their si. docu"ents. a polic! loan. of an! "inor. The 2ritten po2er is specific enou.enuine authoriFation. upon ter"s and conditions acceptable to "! said attorne!. Neither do 2e perceive collection of insurance clai"s as an act of strict do"inion as to reDuire a special po2er of attorne!. To follo2%up. the proceeds of the polic!. Such authorit! is not included in the enu"eration of art. the "other. and .ucia . @ence. Insofar as the "inor children of Dina !o and .ro. . collect and receipt for "! benefit inde"nities or su" of "one! due "e relative to the sin=in. Rosendo Nuval the follo2in. In the absence of a -udicial . . receive.ave due course after the private respondent had filed the reDuired co""ent thereon and the petitioners their repl! to the co""ent. Ae a. in behalf of said "inor. Ahen the officers of respondent%appellant read these 2ritten po2ers. of the fatal vessel. <7hibits :): to :9. and Maril!n Montene. pertinent 2aivers of inde"nities or other 2ritin. of Februar! )5.h to define the authorit! of the a. Morocco on the evenin.ranted to #apt.ht. but shall not be li"ited to.

#an !ou e7plain to us 2h! in this case.er of the &roup d"inistrative Depart"ent.iven b! the e"plo!er. it 2ould be hi. a The practice of our co"pan! in clai" pertainin. the clai" 2as filed b! a certain #apt.roup insurance that clai"s pa!"ents.If this be so. should al%a's )e coursed thru the polic'holder* a Bes that is our practice. Insular . D Ah!K Is this case. the present case different fro" the cases 2hich !ou ans2ered that no po2er of attorne! is necessar! in clai"s pa!"entsK AITN<SS.rant a .roup insurance polic! li=e the one in this case.ife is concernedK AITN<SS. Noval IsicJ is the President and &eneral Mana.roup of individuals are covered under one "aster contract. D In other 2ords. the desi. under a . the polic!holder is the one 2ho files the clai" for the beneficiaries of the deceased. I 2ill rephrase the Duestion. Such practice 2as testified to b! Mr. a"on. a Ae did not pa! Pri"e MarineE 2e paid the beneficiaries. # &?IO .ations 2ith the individual e"plo!eesE it is bet2een Pri"e Marine and Insular . do 'ou require a po%er o" attorne' to )e presented )' the polic'holder or not* a Not necessaril!.ife. 20 On cross%e7a"ination. characteristics of each individual is not considered in the deter"ination of 2hether the individual is insurable or not. &%11'86'. the! "ust be strictl! construed. D Aill !ou no2 tell the @onorable #o""ission 2h! !ou did not pa! Pri"e Marine and instead paid the beneficiaries."ent and others. instead of the polic!holder 2hen as !ou ans2ered a 2hile a. a No. it is !our practice in .s. MPI. Ae do not have contractual obli.ife3s ssistant Mana.roup policies. The e7ecution b! the principals of special po%ers o" attorne'. dates of ac=no2led. D Ahat is the reason 2h! polic!holders are the ones 2ho file the clai" and not the desi. thus. to . etc. premium )illin$s.enc!. D !nd %hen 'ou sa' claim pa'ments should al%a's )e coursed thru the polic'holder. "ollo%(up. Nuval for the collection and receipt of such proceeds 2as a deviation fro" its practice 2ith respect to . /ein. TTB. In our case. it is Pri"e Marine and Insular . D Aill !ou tell the #o""ission 2hat circu"stances led !ou to pa! the desi. other thin. a &roup insurance is a contract 2here a ..eneral po2er of attorne! since <7hibits :): to :9: are special po%ers o" attorne'..ife could pa! the clai"s to the polic!holder hi"self even 2ithout the presentation of an! po2er of attorne! fro" the desi. TTB.roup insurance insofar as Insular . #apt. are coursed throu. #ertainl!. The contract is bet2een the polic!holder and the insurance co"pan!. the benefit should be a2arded b! the polic!holder to "a=e it appear that the benefit reall! is .eneral po2er of attorne! or to constitute a universal a. D Ahat is the corporate concept of . ?rbano further elaborated that even pa!"ents.ra" and as such. the co"plainants in this case.ife. The individual under2ritin. Noval IsicJK AITN<SS.nated beneficiariesK 777 777 777 TTB. residences. are coursed thru the polic!holderK .h the polic!holder.ife =ne2 that a po2er of attorne! in favor of #apt. pa'ment o" claims. D !nd so it is part o" that concept that all inquiries.nated beneficiariesK 777 777 777 AITN<SS.. 2hich clearl! appeared to be in prepared for"s and onl! had to be filled up 2ith their na"es. Sir.nated beneficiaries of the e"plo!ees of the polic!holdersK a Bes because .roup insurance. etc.er of Pri"e Marine.nated beneficiaries. dates of e7ecution. special po2ers of attorne!. Marciano ?rbano.o. MPI. then the! could not have been "eant to be a . Insular . Insular .hl! i"prudent to read into the special po2ers of attorne! in Duestion the po2er to collect and receive the insurance proceeds due the petitioners fro" &roup Polic! No.roup insurance is nor"all! ta=en b! the e"plo!er as an e"plo!ee%benefit pro. e7cludes an! intent to . t that ti"e.

ent of the insurer.er a"ount of insurance than the! could other2ise. it 2as held that.ations are due.ent of the insurer. insurance protection for his e"plo!ees and their fa"ilies at the lo2est possible cost. the" thru said polic!holderK a That is ri. In the ?nited States.nated beneficiariesK a Bes. 2hereas that bet2een the e"plo!er and its e"plo!ees fails to reflect true a. ho2ever. . and even in a non%contributor! plan. n a.e for the e"plo!ees of one e"plo!er. the e"plo!er is the a. &roup insurance is a co"parativel! ne2 for" of insurance. It is clear fro" the evidence re. such as the one in this case. the polic! or its ad"inistration. The covera. In . vs. and helps to attract and hold a per"anent class of e"plo!ees. 2. John 1ancock utual . This is =no2n as a contributor! plan as co"pared to a non% contributor! plan 2here the pre"iu"s are solel! paid b! the e"plo!er.roup insurance business and is consistent 2ith the -urisprudence thereon in the State of #alifornia L fro" 2hose la2s our Insurance #ode has been "ainl! patterned L 2hich holds that the e"plo!er% polic!holder is the a.ent of the insurer. 777 777 777 The "ost persuasive rationale for adoptin. It cannot be said that the e"plo!er acts entirel! for its o2n benefit or for the benefit of its e"plo!ees in underta=in. 2e feel also that the e"plo!er should be considered as the a.roup insurance provides life or health insurance covera.eous to both the e"plo!er and the e"plo!ees.enc!. Thus. The reduction in the pre"iu" 2hich results fro" e"plo!er%ad"inistration per"its the insurer to realiFe a lar.e of or control over the e"plo!er3s actions in handlin.le insurance contract that provides covera. D Not directl! to the desi. is advanta. the e"plo!er creates .ra".iti"ate opportunit! of beco"in. 29 and etropolitan .i"e /nsurance Co. +0 .ife ssurance Societ!.roup insurance are usuall! stated in a "aster a. reDuired of hi" to =eep the polic! in effect. Sir. #tate 0oard o" +qualization.roup polic! is the disburse"ent of insurance pa!"ents b! the e"plo!er to the e"plo!ees. and at the sa"e ti"e the insurer3s o2n ad"inistrative costs are "ar=edl! reduced.es 2hile the re"ainder is paid b! the e"plo!er. The rulin. 24 Most policies. 2/ the #alifornia Supre"e #ourt e7plicitl! ruled that in .roup insurance policies. reDuire an e"plo!ee to pa! a portion of the pre"iu". 22 &roup insurance is essentiall! a sin.roup insurance policies.roup insurance policies appear to have been issued in )6)) b! the <Duitable . the insurer also en-o!s si. is that the e"plo!ee has no =no2led. Indeed. The insurer directs the perfor"ance of the e"plo!er3s ad"inistrative acts. .ent of the insurer in perfor"in. 2+The e"plo!er acts as a functionar! in the collection and pa!"ent of pre"iu"s and in perfor"in.e ter"s for . . to the polic!. the vie2 that the e"plo!er acts as the a. and an' omission o" dut' to the e"plo!ee in its ad"inistration should be attri)uta)le to the insurer.nificant advanta.i"e /nsurance Compan'. that the pri"ar! ai" is to provide the e"plo!er 2ith a "eans of procurin. the labor of the e"plo!ees is the true source of the benefits.ood2ill 2ith his e"plo!ees.ree"ent or polic! that is issued b! the insurer to a representative of the .e for "an! individuals. enables the e"plo!ees to carr! a lar. and the ti"e that the obli. the duties of ad"inisterin. it is not paid to the polic!holder.i"e /nsurance Co.eider vs. lthou. ad"inistrative functions.e"ent. the first "odern . In its position as ad"inistrator of the polic!. D nd so in this case.enc! of real conseDuence considerin. It has been stated that ever! proble" concernin.enc! test 2ith re. 2hich the e"plo!er deducts fro" 2a. ItJhe e"plo!er o2es to the e"plo!ee the dut' o" $ood "aith and due care in attendin. Sir. of course. to it ever! le.. 2hich are a for" of additional co"pensation to the". and in so doin. and if these duties are not underta=en properl! the insurer is in a position to e7ercise "ore constricted control over the e"plo!er3s conduct.ivin. 2ithin the a"bit of ad"inistration of a . a It is coursed but. the pa!"ent b! the e"plo!er of the entire pre"iu" is a part of the total co"pensation paid for the services of the e"plo!ee.es fro" the arran.roup or to an ad"inistrator of the insurance pro. Ahile a reduced pre"iu" "a! result if the e"plo!er relieves the insurer of these tas=s.roup insurance presented to a court should be approached 2ith the purpose of . and that the e"plo!er should "a=e clear to the e"plo!ee an!thin. In +l"strom vs. 28 2hich 2as cited in +l"strom. 21 This practice is usual in the . Ae are convinced that the e"plo!er is the a. In its ori. . .ardin.ent of the insurer.e% -ork . 25 Put differentl!. procedural techniDues here that the insurer%e"plo!er relationship "eets this a.ard to the ad"inistration of the polic!. the e"plo!ee is in the position of a real part! to the "aster polic!. the insurance is actuall! related to the life and health of the e"plo!ee.h the e"plo!er "a! be the titular or na"ed insured.ave the chec=s to the polic!holder onl! coursin. a social a. in +l"strom 2as subseDuentl! reiterated in the cases of 0ass vs.er volu"e of sales.AITN<SS. such as an e"plo!er.ht.inal and "ost co""on for".enc! relationship is based upon consent b! one person that another shall act in his behalf and be sub-ect to his control. related duties. !ou . Continental !ssurance Compan'.i=e2ise fallin. and this.

SP No. acted as the a.ardless of the value of the une"ancipated co""on child3s propert!. Aithout such evidence. ?rbano. he cannot clai" protection.. 7 #oo$-o$e) ) nne7 :F: of PetitionE Rollo.e S.ree 2ith the opinion of the public respondent that since the shares of the "inors in the insurance proceeds are less than P91. ho2ever.ence. echem on !$enc'. to . A@<R<FOR<.eneral .re. ' Ori. if the "ar=et value of the propert! or the annual inco"e of the child e7ceeds P91. #apt. >>9. Mr. RD%19(.. Obviousl!..ainst the private respondent.inal Records $OR+. or should ascertain "rom the principal the true condition o" a""airs. the instant petition is &R NT<D. I"perial and Serafin V. $e"phasis supplied+ <ven . I# #ase NO. In #tron$ vs. throu. The Decision of )1 October )66) and the Resolution of )6 Ma! )66> of the public respondent in # %&. RD%19(.111. Cruz.11. li=e2ise reco. The person dealin. J. Duotin.ents at their peril and are bound to inDuire as to the e7tent of the po2er of the a.ations of a .111. In case of disa. @o2ever.ife. 2ith an a.uardians. * nne7 :#: of PetitionE /d. >.eneral . a bond has to be posted b! the parents concerned to . for the sa=e of ar.uis . I# #ase No. 8 /d. dra2n in favor of the petitioners. It is of the vie2 that said rticle had repealed the third para.li.. vs. )9.niFed #apt.ent "ust also act 2ith ordinar! prudence and reasonable dili.uardianship over the propert! of their une"ancipated co""on child 2ithout the necessit! of a court appoint"ent. 9 OR.estions of probable li"itations be of such a clear and reasonable Dualit!. indeed. It "ust. )%*. RD%19( is R<INST T<D.uarantee the perfor"ance of the obli. 95%8'. #. 5 /d. . the established principles in the civil la2 of <urope as 2ell as the co""on la2 of "erican that third persons deal 2ith a.. the part! dealin. be noted that the second para. The latter is thus bound b! the "isconduct of its a.er.u"ent that the special po2ers of attorne! 2ere in due for". &uin. Rodri$uez. ('%(8.ree"ent..ate of the child3s propert! or annual inco"eE if this e7ceeds P91. a bond is reDuired. it acted i"prudentl! and ne.In the li. *)%*(.li. therefore. unless there is -udicial order to the contrar!.ona. but not less than ten per centu" $)1M+ of the value of the propert! or annual inco"e.ent.al . then under rticle >>9 of the Fa"il! #ode their "others could receive such shares 2ithout need of either court appoint"ents as . as 2ould suffice to put an ordinaril! prudent "an upon his . +1 this #ourt ruled that it is a"on.roup polic! in Duestion is the "inor3s onl! propert!. concur.h its President and &eneral Mana.ent "entioned in the special po2er of attorne!. *. Nuval as the attorne!%in%fact of the petitioners.uardian of the child3s propert!.11.ent at all. the parent concerned shall be reDuired to furnish a bond in such a"ount as the court "a! deter"ine.entl! in the pre"ises b! rel!in. Per ssociate Custice . or if the authorit! 2hich he see=s to e7ercise is of such an unusual or i"probable character. if he =no2s or has . throu. the chec=s. The father and the "other shall -ointl! e7ercise le. Insular . Ahere the "ar=et value of the propert! or the annual inco"e of the child e7ceeds P91. rt. Insular .11. ?nfortunatel!. Cavellana. 2ith hi" "a! not shut his e!es to the real state of the case.111. the father3s decision shall prevail. There is no evidence that the share of each of the "inors in the proceeds of the . 2ithout Duestion on the special po2er of attorne!.ent 2ith 2ho" the! contract. that is his onl! propert!.ent of Insular . concurred in b! ssociate Custices Cor.ood reason to believe that the a. but should either refuse to deal 2ith the a.ations prescribed for .raph of rticle >>9 of the Fa"il! #ode spea=s of the :"ar=et value of the propert! or the annual inco"e of the child. the a. the father and "other ipso 3ure beco"e the le. 2e hold that PMSI. his authorit!. nne7 :I: of PetitionE /d. )>.uarantee the perfor"ance of the obli. is on leave.uard. Nor can 2e a. or if the character assu"ed b! the a. to a part! 2ho is not the a.h its official. 0ellosillo and 4uiason.: 2hich "eans.al .ent is of such a suspicious or unreasonable nature.uardian. SO ORD<R<D.ife. it 2ould not be safe to conclude that.rossl! ne.ent is e7ceedin. of a bond.ife 2as . Nuval.ent in deliverin..rantin.uardian or the postin. It is clear fro" the said rticle that re. Repide.ht of the above disDuisitions and after an e7a"ination of the facts of this case. nd in 1arr' +. JJ.+2 this #ourt.111.. ho2ever. >>691 are S<T SID< and the Decision of the Insurance #o""ission in I# #ase No. Gri5o(!quino. 2eller +lectric Co.raph of Section )(1 of the Insurance #ode. +4 The pertinent portion of rticle >>9 of the Fa"il! #ode reads as follo2s. #osts a.R. So if the su. ++ stated that.

>)6%>>). pro"ul. #t. R. ssistant Insurance #o""issioner and Officer%in%#har. and Commercial Practices). 8'. '. N AIDISS. #ontinental ssurance #o. )658+.ated on )( Dece"ber )65'. Per <duardo T. >> &R<&&.i"e /nsurance.a%. *rd ed. )> nne7 :F: of PetitionE Rollo. 9%5. #t. >1 TSN. *1 #upra. as a"ended. >8 I)66>J.I. )6(( ed. ho2ever. No.. *> '' Phil. )6 OR. )8 Rollo. )) OR. Malinis. RD%19(. ! Guide to 6undamental Principles. 81. () Phil. )6'(+. I# #ase No. Sup. >( #upra. #t. vs. State /oard of <DualiFation. >>)%>>>. >* H<<TON. )' Rollo.A.. )1 OR. 66%)1*. and thereafter codified pursuant to P. >6 9)( P.<. RD%19(. #t. I# #ase No. citin.. 8)>. 8(1 I)618J. 6 /d. RD%19(.. >5 '*> P. )5 Public respondent cites no specific article.8$a+.( /d. Section 59>. Sup. I# #ase No. No. >) TSN. . D. >>1. )65'+. Ra"os. )9 Rollo. )681. *' PD.ife Insurance #o. >9 H<<TON N AIDISS. )8 Canuar! )661.. >d 5*) $#al. RD%19(.a. Section )). >9%>5. /nsurance . *1 I)6'(J. 8>. >d $#al. 95%89. )6(>+. )'81. Sup. <videntl!. >8 Neider vs. . )5%)(. )* /d. it refers to rticle >>9 of the Fa"il! #ode. )( OR. Sup. Group .. )6.ated on )) Cune )65(. pro"ul. I# #ase No. *9 So. >d >*5 $.e.e$al 7octrines.D. supra. 9(%96. (. Rule * and Pacal vs. >' Metropolitan .. >)'%>>>. 89> P. O >. ** Volu"e I. >d ))'5 $#al.. )8 Canuar! )661. *) 8 Phil.

2ithout sho2in. a parcel of land situated in the "unicipalit! of la"inos. On Februar! 5 of that !ear he 2rote this sister a letter fro" Vi. Nicolasa Ci"eneF e7ecuted and delivered to Pedro Rabot a deed purportin.uish a ri. the pendenc! of the liti. on the south 2ith land of Nicolasa Ci"eneF. supposin.Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila <N / N# G."ent rendered in favor of the plaintiff. $ rt. $ rt. received this pa!"ent of P>91 at the ti"e statedE but there is no evidence that she sent an! of it to her brother. 2hether the authorit! conferred on Nicolasa b! the letter of Februar! 5.ation appear that he 2as at the ti"e co. such deed 2ould in an! event operate to bind her brother. #ortes. to conve! to hi" the parcel of land 2hich is the sub-ect of this controvers!. in the Province of Pan.asinan. in con-unction 2ith others of his brothers and sisters. She refused upon so"e prete7t or other to do soE and as a result &re. to e7ecute a docu"ent to carr! such contract into effect. vs. Fro" a -ud. Pan..orio ca"e do2n to la"inos and de"anded that his sister should surrender this piece of land to hi". ( Phil."ent 2as entered in favor of the plaintiffs in the action above "entioned. upon this letter Nicolasa approached the defendant Pedro Rabot. appellant. and the latter a. ed..+ /ut inas"uch as it is an established doctrine that a private docu"ent is co"petent to create. )>(1. Nicolasa ad"its havin.ht to appear in a public docu"ent. NICOL S 6IMENE0 3-4 &er &8)b3-4 EMILIO RODRIGUE0. Nicolasa Ci"eneF and her husband. the capacit! in 2hich she acted. STREET. Rep. It is situated in Din"a!at Tancaran. Pedro Rabot 2ent into possession. Pedro Rabot. even thou. barrio of los of this sa"e "unicipalit! of la"inos. 2as sufficient to enable her to bind her brother.orio. Jose Rivera "or appellee. their land fro" her control. It is further appears that 2hile &re. Pedro Rabot has appealedE but his co%defendants..h in the for" of a private docu"ent. In considerin..!on vs. her liable upon her 2arrant! in case of his eviction.ht to appear in a public docu"ent.reed to bu! the parcel in Duestion for the su" of P911. 2ith the understandin.ed of the heirs in the division of the estate of his father. the plaintiff in its character as a contract $. 88(E >9 . upon Ma! *). The deed recites that the sale 2as "ade in consideration of the su" of P911. 1918 GREGORIO 6IMENE0.asinan. >89+. that a deed of conve!ance 2ould be e7ecuted 2hen the balance should be paid. that the authorit! 2as sufficient. the Duestions presented b! this appeal one or t2o preli"inar! observations "a! be "ade. "odif!. PEDRO R "OT. J.ain. and the propert! 2as found in his hands at the ti"e 2hen final -ud. the !ear )6)). )6)*E and no appeal 2as ta=en fro" the -ud. . ppro7i"ate area of three hectaresE bounded on the north and 2est 2ith land of Pedro Re!noso. and described in the co"plaint as follo2s. It 2ill thus be seen that Pedro Rabot acDuired possession under the deed fro" Nicolasa durin. or e7tin. This action 2as instituted b! the plaintiff. -ust as an! other instru"ent intended to trans"it or conve! an interest in such propert! ou. plaintiff%appellee. that the letter contained adeDuate authorit! for Nicolasa to sell the propert! in Duestion. No. 2as doubtless irre. it bein. 2ill operate 2ith effect. as a "atter of for"alit!. 2hose properties 2ere also in the hands of Nicolasa. instituted an action in the #ourt of First Instance for the purpose of recoverin. L-125/9 689: 2/.inall! belon. to.ust )>. trans"it. rticle )5)* of the #ivil #ode reDuires that the authorit! to alienate land shall be contained in an e7press "andateE 2hile . he could be co"pelled b! a proper -udicial proceedin. The first is that.+ The principal Duestion for consideration therefore in the end resolves itself into this.an in 2hich he infor"ed her that he 2as pressed for "one! and reDuested her to sell one of his parcels of land and send hi" the "one! in order that he "i. and on the east 2ith land of #ali7ta postol before.S. a po2er of attorne! to conve! real propert! ou. ctin. Nevertheless.a #hui vs."ent. )6)).ed.ether 2ith t2o other parcels in the sa"e localit! ori. !ntonio 0en$son "or appellant.orio Ci"eneF. and supposin. it follo2s that a po2er of attorne! to conve! such propert!. > Phil. )>56. the propert! in her o2n na"e. 66 ?.R. It is ad"itted that the parcel of land in Duestion. on this point are contained in article )5)* of the #ivil #ode and in section **9 of the #ode of #ivil Procedure. the pa!"ent of 2hich is ac=no2led. his propert! in la"inos 2as confided b! hi" to the care of his elder sister Nicolasa Ci"eneF. The onl! provisions of la2 bearin. Polloc=.. 98)E #outo Soriano vs. )6)>. 4ue /entec. #ivil #ode. bout one !ear later &re.ht in real propert! $Thun. have not appealed. her action in conve!in. at present 2ith that of Cuan Monte"a!or and Si"on del /arrio. &re.ular. Mean2hile. then in her possession. durin. This action 2as decided favorabl! to the plaintiffs upon u. defendants. 2ho 2ere cited b! the defendant for the purpose of holdin. This letter contains no description of the land to be sold other than is indicated in the 2ords :one of "! parcels of land: $:uno de "is terrenos:+.niFant of that circu"stance. at Vi. in the Province of Ilocos Sur. PEDRO R "OT. #ivil #ode. '96+.orio 2as sta!in..ht pa! his debts. to recover fro" the defendant. Rep.an. T2o hundred and fift! peso 2ere paid at once.

)*5 #al. The principle e"bodied in these decisions is not.ua.in.ent to sell or conve! :an! or all tracts. Fro" 2hat have been said it is evident that the lo2er court should have absolved the defendant Pedro Rabot fro" the co"plaint.. lots.. It has been ur. '1 Minn.eneral po2er of attorne! an a.ent "i.. Rep. In the present case the a.e of the po2er. Moorhead $>16 Pa. 9> N.. Puno $*) Phil.ippincott vs. Ae are of the opinion that the authorit! e7pressed in the letter is a sufficient co"pliance 2ith both reDuire"ents. Dennison. collect.. alcolm.land and the ?nited States that 2hen the o2ner. the authorit! .eneral rule here applicable is that the description "ust be sufficientl! definite to identif! the land either fro" the recitals of the contract or deed or fro" e7ternal facts referred to in the docu"ent. in connection 2ith the first para. reDuired b! the sa"e subsection. 99 N.. )6 N.. Cud. There is a"ple authorit! to the effect that a person "a! b! a . C. or a conve!ance to effect a transfer. and subscribed b! the part! to be char. It is unDuestionable that the deed 2hich Nicolasa e7ecuted contains a proper description of the propert! 2hich she purported to conve!.iven the a.ent is to be per"itted to sell.raph of the sa"e section. etc. to the plaintiff.ent authorit! to sell :an! or all: and she had conve!ed onl! one. after the po2er has been e7ercised.inan vs. )99E #arr vs. <D. )1'5E #arson vs. '>'E . and pa!. $Marriner vs.l! be reversed. It should not escape observation that the proble" 2ith 2hich 2e are here concerned relates to the sufficienc! of the po2er of attorne! under subsection 9 of section **9 of the #ode of #ivil Procedure and not to the sufficienc! of the note or "e"orandu" of the contract. . or his a. It is not necessar! that the particular act to be acco"plished should be predestinated b! the lan. >1(E #rai.inton vs.S. to the plaintiff. applicable to the present case.. It is 2ell%settled in the -urisprudence of <n.ranted 2as to the effect that the a. this is sufficient. Polloc= $66 ?. Dec. in our opinion.+ The . 8'8+.ent "ust be in 2ritin. the ans2er "ust be obviousl! in the affir"ative. if it be sho2n that such part! has onl! one far" in that countr!.and etc. it is insufficient. co"es to "a=e a contract to sell. or state. is rather this..ent is authoriFed to act.ivin. The purpose in . or a.+ In . It 2as held that this 2as adeDuate.. ))* . sell. 5( #al. In . JJ. he had in San ntonio Te7as.McFadden. >85E *) #!c. There is no such reDuire"ent in subsection 9 of section **9E and 2e do not believe that it 2ould be le. Pelian. the principal cannot Duestion the validit! of his act.ent perfor"ed 2ithin the scope of his authorit!K In the case before us. if the Duestion is as=ed 2hether the act perfor"ed b! Nicolasa Ci"eneF 2as 2ithin the scope of the authorit! 2hich had been conferred upon her. or all that he possesses in a particular cit!. So ordered.a.iven the po2er to sell either of the parcels of land belon. $Roper vs. Frost.. #o. /rid.ent to sell ever!thin. not to the sufficienc! of the contract or conve!ance. !vance5a and 6isher. 2ithout an! e7press ad-udication of costs this instance. C. It 2as held that this 2as a sufficient po2er. )>>6. Aas the act 2hich the a. thereb! enablin.e2ater.ree"ent of sale.. Ra!.ent to sell :all: the land possessed b! the principal. 2hich relates to the sufficienc! of the authoriFation. >1>. and he acts 2ithin those li"its.!on vs. *'8E Ro2nd vs."ent 2ill accordin. 816E 5( ".ht ad"inister :the interests: possessed b! the principal in the "unicipalit! of Tarlac and to that end he 2as authoriFed to purchase. The Duestion to be ans2ered al2a!s. concur.. one to deter"ine the identit! of the land and if the description is uncertain on its face or is sho2n to be applicable 2ith eDual plausibilit! to "ore than one tract. Passaic ..in. $/roc=2a! vs. 88(+. Johnson. there "ust be a description of the propert! 2hich is the sub-ect of the sale or conve!ance. The authorit! 2as held sufficient.ent for the "ind and hand of the principalE and if the character and e7tent of the po2er is so far defined as to leave no doubt as to the li"its 2ithin 2hich the a. '( #al.. >96+.ed here that in order for the authorit! to be sufficient under section **9 of the #ode of #ivil Procedure the authoriFation "ust contain a particular description of the propert! 2hich the a. the po2er authoriFed the a. vs. #. a po2er of attorne! is to substitute the "ind and hand of the a. In .subsection 9 of section **9 of the #ode of #ivil Procedure sa!s that the authorit! of the a. This is necessar! of course to define the ob-ect of the contract.. or parcels: of land belon. the o2ner in effect authoriFed an a.iti"ate to read such a reDuire"ent into it. <D. count!. Torres.ent 2as . Davidson. St.ent to sell a far" $:"! far":+ in a certain count!.ent. Ae can see no reason 2h! the perfor"ance of an act 2ithin the scope of this authorit! should not bind the plaintiff to the sa"e e7tent as if he had . )19E >1 #!c.+ It is also held that 2here a person authoriFes an a. >5).ed.

ood ad"inistration and advance"ent of "! said interests. or business concernin.lano= the su" of P(11.ations therein contained. sell.: . The "eanin. of a. docu"ent. The plaintiff alle. <nriDue. and to pa! the costs. )61(.es that the po2er of attorne!. Die. I.o . O"ittin. or business concernin.opez "or appellee. Die.ist of the present action.al and voidE $*+ That defendants should return to the land to the plaintiffE and $'+ That the defendants should pa! to the plaintiff the su" of P). and "a!. 2hich 2as overruled. 6O!NSON.. capital of the Province of Tarlac. price of the land Duestion. L-9.R. as contained in <7hibit . ti"e prior thereto. and at the present ti"e te"poraril! residin. 2as the o2ner of a certain parcel of land particularl! described in para. Marcos P. III.ood ad"inistration and advance"ent of "! said interests. collect and pa! . to return to the appellants. in order that in "! na"e and representation he "a! ad"inister . The lo2er court erred in orderin. Puno 2as not authoriFed to sell the land in Duestion and that the sale e7ecuted b! the said Marcos P.o . defendants%appellants. set forth that I .I.ed that the sa"e 2as a valid sale and pra!ed to be relieved fro" the liabilit! under the co"plaint. upon Mr.111. in the "onth of Ma!.. #. appoint attorne!s at la2 or attorne!s in fact to represent hi". nd. "arried. Aith reference to the second assi. $>+ That on the )8th da! of Ma!. $)+ The the plaintiff.111 as da"a. :I. In their ans2er the! first denied .. Marcos P.e. ?pon the issue thus presented the lo2er court decided. P'11 of 2hich the defendant Puno should alone be responsible for. and po2er conferred b! this docu"ent constitute the ver! . in this cit! of Tarlac.. duties and obli. the appellants to pa! to the appellee the su" of P). the purel! e7planator! parts of <7hibit . )61(. the appellee. Puno .08 8%8)$ /. III. such as the la2 reDuires. a resident of Daet. $*+ That in Cune. the lo2er court erred in sentencin. Philippine Islands. The lo2er court erred in holdin. Province of "bos #a"arines. and to pa! the costs. assi. M RCOS P. and "a!.es. Puno the po2er. appear before the courts of -ustice and ad"inistrative officers in an! proceedin. 2hich conferred upon the defendant Marcos P. the .. sold and delivered said parcel of land to the other defendants. in order that in "! na"e and representation he "a! ad"inister the interest I possess 2ithin this "unicipalit! of Tarlac. is null and void.iQan.es. Puno.Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila <N / N# G.. that the appellant Marcos P. surna"ed Ma. Vicente. IV. as 2ell as sue and be sued before an! authorit!. the . nd. $)+ That the docu"ent <7hibit did not . it reads as follo2s. upon Mr. PUNO. the appellant to pa! to the appellee the su" of P). set forth that I hereb! confer sufficient po2er.n"ent of error. the value of the products collected. and Re"edios Ma. Duilina and Re"edios. for the su" of P(11. and for a lon. Die. ET L.iQan. In their special ans2er or defense the! ad"itted the sale of the land b! Puno to the other defendants and alle. The lo2er court held that <7hibit onl! . such as the la2 reDuires. I. in an! proceedin. P. to. 1915 DIEGO LI< N. and to pa! the costs. purchase. the defendant Puno. purchase. plaintiff%appellee. )6)). The lo2er court erred in overrulin.n"ent of error.o .. Fro" that decision the defendants appealed to this court and "ade the follo2in. the sellin.iQan. <nriDue.enerall! and speciall! all of the i"portant facts stated in the co"plaint.111..ive Puno authorit! to sell the landE $>+ that the sale 2as ille. the value of the products collected. . J. vs. the de"urrer filed b! the appellants to the co"plaints. No.lano=. did not authoriFe the defendant Puno had full and co"plete po2er and authorit! to do 2hat he did. Vicente. 2e are of the opinion that the facts stated in the opinion are sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The facts upon 2hich the decision in this case depends are as follo2s.. The! later ans2ered. . Aith reference to the first assi.ether 2ith da"a.. appoint at la2 or attorne!s in fact to represent hi". Duilina. li=e2ise a resident of this cit! of Tarlac. finall!.. the de"urrer the defendants dul! e7cepted. 2ith their costs.. ariano +scueta "or appellants.ave Puno po2er and authorit! to ad"inister the landE that he 2as not authoriFed to sell it. confer sufficient po2er. the plaintiff e7ecuted the follo2in. the lo2er court erred in sentencin. sell.n"ents of error.. purport. The defendants at first presented a de"urrer to the co"plaint. II. Puno to the other appellants.raph > of the co"plaint.es that the said docu"ent $<7hibit + did not confer upon the defendant Puno the po2er to sell the land and pra!ed that the sale be set asideE that the land be returned to hi". collect and pa!. in necessar! cases. in necessar! cases. To the order overrulin. capital of the Province of Tarlac.. the plaintiff alle. finall!.

the purchase price. the land.: Readin. purchase. he "a! ad"inister .: To hold that the po2er 2as :to ad"inister: onl! 2hen the po2er :to sell: 2as eDuall! conferred 2ould be to . as to costs.ood faith. It is to be presu"ed that the parties said 2hat the! intended to sa! and that the! used each 2ord or clause 2ith so"e purpose and that purpose is. Ahenever it is possible.iven it b! Puno. the .enc! as 2ell as . 2e believe. <ach has eDual force 2ith the other. collect and pa! .ood ad"inistration and advance"ent of "! said interests. The record contains no alle. if possible. The intention of the parties "ust be sustained rather than defeated.ood faith and in accordance 2ith his po2er as he understood it.. The lo2er court held that the :onl! po2er conferred 2as the po2er to ad"inister. if b! one construction the contract 2ould be ille. until the )9th of Februar!. the other defendants acted in . /las. In case of doubt resort "ust be had to the situation.ood faith. surroundin. the other assi. The acts of the parties 2ill be presu"ed to have been done in confor"it! 2ith and not contrar! to the intent of the contract. )6)*. be successfull! denied. If the contract be open to t2o constructions. of .ua. . There see"s to be no . 2e are of the opinion that the lo2er court co""itted the error co"plained of in the second assi. if possible. .iven to ever! 2ord and clause used b! the parties. that the -ud.eneral observations in "ind. the latter "ust be adopted. 2e have ta=en into account the fact that the plaintiff dela!ed his action to annul said sale fro" the "onth of Cune.eneral po2ers of attorne! "ust be interpreted in accordance 2ith the lan. -ustifies the interpretation . So.. )6)). as 2e thin= it should be.ua. 2ithout discussin.oin. Aith these .. Aithout an! findin. sell.. 2e are of the opinion.ood reason for sa!in.eous to the plaintiff in the ad"inistration of his affairs as :to ad"inister.n"ents of error. liberall! construed..s and relations of the parties. that Puno had authorit! to ad"inister and not to sell 2hen :to sell: 2as as advanta.. to be ascertained and enforced.n"ent.e used b! the parties.#ontracts of a.ive to special 2ords of the contract a special and li"ited "eanin.. It 2ill be presu"ed that he acted in .ation on proof that Puno acted in bad faith or fraudulentl! in sellin..ness to return.al. 2hat 2as the real intent of the plaintiff. the contract 2e find it sa!s that the plaintiff :I confer .: The 2ords :ad"inister.e used.)+. nor indicated a 2illin..eneral 2ords of eDual i"port. The acts of the parties in carr!in. so far as the record sho2s. )*1( of the #ivil #odeE Mani=is vs. C. sell. No. The intention is to be . JJ. In vie2 of that fact and vie2 of the fact that. the for"er is to be chosen.. 2e are of the opinion that the contract."ent of the lo2er court should be and is hereb! revo=ed and that the appellants should be relieved fro" all liabilit! under the co"plaint. and b! another eDuall! per"issible construction it 2ould be la2ful. to the e7clusion of other . 59(9. this conclusion. or business concernin.: etc. In vie2 of all the fore. out the contract 2ill be presu"ed to be done in .. In reachin. and !raullo. and so hold.athered fro" the 2hole instru"ent. The "eanin.athered fro" the contract $<7hibit +.. one of 2hich 2ould uphold 2hile the other 2ould overthro2 it. the real intention of the parties is pri"aril! to be deter"ined fro" the lan. effect is to be .let us e7a"ine the ter"s of the po2er conferred upon the defendant Puno $<7hibit + and ascertain. !rellano.. Torres.J. concur. it is so ordered. That his interpretation of his po2er. purchase. see" to be used coordinatel!. as . and. nor offered to return.enerals 2ords "ust be construed 2ith reference to the specific ob-ect to be acco"plished and li"ited b! the recitals "ade in reference to such ob-ect. $ rt. Neither have 2e overloo=ed the fact in the brief of the appellants that the plaintiff has not returned. is tenable cannot. that . in an! proceedin. po2er . Carson..

Gabi$o )arreto Po C.hatever prices a$' $'er the co$'itio$s .ap. '.3 cha$robles virt al la. Po (ecsi . assi.ee$ the s m o% P". librar! (he %ollo. librar! :$ November 22.ap that i% he . 2C5hibit 9.ith its improveme$ts to his brother Po (ecsi %or the s m o% P"#. so he co l' $ot blame him %or a$!thi$. or b! 'e%e$'a$t Po Chi$.rote to his brother Gabi$o )arreto Po C. telli$.as the o. $.hich the propert! . a$' promisi$. 2C5hibit 2 a$' 9. "921.me$t o% the Co rt o% First 8$sta$ce o% Ma$ila.a$te' to lease . sell or barter. :r'eri$.### a$' i$terest at "# per ce$t m per a$$ m. to me. Fice$te @otto %or appellee. o% the la$' i$ liti.a. b si$esses a$' i$' stries.$ seve$tee$ errors .< Po @ $ @ ! a$' Po Chi$.. Po (ecsi lease' a part o% sai' la$' to E! Chia %or a perio's o% %ive !ears %rom :ctober ".###. sol' the sai' la$' .3 cha$robles virt al la. amo$.$ p to that. that he ha' bee$ a%ter him so m ch %or the %or. . '.e lie$ o% P6#.hich. =&299"7 Aecember 29. real a$' perso$al. the %ollo. librar! :$ November 29.ap e5ec te' seco$' mort. librar! 3.hich the latter ha' sol' to him.hich he ma! stip late.ith 7 per ce$t m i$terest per a$$ m. . a$' a thori9i$.hich .$ or a'mit i$ ac4 itta$ce. Dati. pa!me$t i$ cash or i$ i$stallme$ts. to the testimo$! o% the 'e%e$'a$t Po @ $ @ ! 2p. sai' sale Po (ecsi remai$e' i$ possessio$ o% sai' propert!. "925.3cha$robles virt al la."55.al i$terest %rom the %ili$. "92"..as lease' b! the plai$ti%% to the 'e%e$'a$ts.e o$ the a%oresai' la$' .e$co %or the s m o% P"1#. or i$ a$! other ma$$er to ac4 ire or co$ve! all sorts o% propert!.cha$roblesvirt ala.le'.eri$. empo.hich represe$ts the re$ts o% te propert! $' l! collecte' %rom the occ pa$ts o% sai' propert! b! Po (ecsi . "921. t. (his realt! . his brother Gabi$o )arreto Po C. "92? B:@C M. maki$.hich is as %ollo. the a%oresai' la$' . "17. pai' all e5pe$ses o% repairs a$' clea$i$.3 :$ March 3". the estate o% the 'ecease' Po (ecsi to pa! the 'e%e$'a$ts Po @ $ @ ! a$' Po Chi$. %or . s. per mo$th. i$ t r$. F8==6&RC6=. 'e%e$'a$t.a.hts a$' actio$ belo$.ith the vo chers.ar'i$. librar! :$ 6 .itho t recor'i$. "923. a$s. appeal to this co rt %rom the . a$' receivi$.. e$' .3 cha$robles virt al la. his precario s %i$a$cial co$'itio$.as there%ore s rprise' that he claime' sai' re$t.librar! cha$robles virt al la.ether .as recor'e' i$ the proper certi%icate o% title.s< ". a$' P715 . *..ap.librar! cha$robles virt al la. to sec re the pa!me$t o% the s m o% P6#. 8$ sai' repl! Po (ecsi also tol' his brother Gabi$o )arreto Po C.ith its improveme$ts %or the s m o% P"#. pa! the plai$ti%% po$ this . me$tio$i$. 2C5hibit E&".###.cha$roblesvirt ala.3 is P715.ect to the same e$c mbra$ces..ith le.i$. a$' . or b! the latter.rote to the latter telli$. to. a$' .e lie$ i$ %avor o% the Philippi$e Natio$al )a$k.e$eral po.atio$. sol' absol tel! a$' %orever to the herei$ plai$ti%%&appellee Bose M.ith the improveme$ts thereo$. either his po. librar! :$ Aecember "5. .a. librar! 8$ November. a$' to e5ec te the proper i$str me$ts . %ather o% the 'e%e$'a$t Po @ $ @ !. "923.ithsta$'i$. p. Po (ecsi e5ec te' a . . librar! 2. accor'i$.as s b. him that i$ the mo$th o% :ctober. . %acts have bee$ prove$ b! a prepo$'era$ce o% the evi'e$ce<cha$robles virt al la. (he bala$ce o% the re$ts. o% the complai$t.bak.< /(o b !.ap i$ the s m o% P6?. P: @EN a$' P: C*8NG i$terve$ors&appella$ts. @ai' s m th s collecte'.G. amo $ts to P"1. Plai$ti%%&6ppellee.e$t. Po (ecsi e5ec te' a$ i$str me$t ack$o. i$ %avor o% 6$to$io M.hile alive a$' b! his a'mi$istrator Po @ $ @ ! a%ter his 'eath. the price o% the properties . "925./ 2C5hibit 6.eri$.i$.###. the 'i%%ere$ce bet. "9"9. him to per%orm o$ his behal% a$' as la. i$ the i$str me$t e5ec te' to that e$' o$l! the mort.hich is the s m collecte' %rom the occ pa$ts o% the propert! each mo$th b! Po (ecsi a$' b! the a'mi$istrator o% his estate m st be %or the acco $t o% the 'e%e$'a$ts0 a$' cha$robles virt al la.5##.### i$ %avor o% the Philippi$e Natio$al )a$k. (68 *8NG C:. 8$ s pport o% their appeal the appella$ts assi.er o% attor$e! or the sale i$ the proper certi%icate o% title. librar! :$ :ctober 22. the 'ispositive part o% . librar! :$ 6pril "7. e5ec te' o$ Ma! 5.cha$roblesvirt ala. st 21. to remit the bala$ce a%ter havi$.3 cha$robles virt al la. "923. B.5## %or .### . D6(8G)6D. "92". other acts. to pa! the plai$ti%% the s m o% P2?. vs. Po (ecsi. 2C5hibit 9.e a$ i$'ebte'$ess to his brother Gabi$o )arreto Po C.er o% attor$e! i$ %avor o% his brother Gabi$o )arreto Po C. "923. (he co$tract 'ra. the 'e%e$'a$ts Po @ $ @ ! a$' Po Chi$. 2C5hibits M a$' M&". cre'its. :r'eri$.ap.e shall take p i$ the co rse o% this 'ecisio$.i$.ap. ri. pa!i$..ect to a mort.ith the %ormalities provi'e' b! the la. %or $i$etee$ mo$ths.ith a (orre$s title.ap .% l a.me$t the s m .er co$%erre' o$ him b! his brother Po (ecsi. a$' $ot pai' to the plai$ti%% either b! Po (ecsi. that is. 2C5hibit 9. he ha' se$t him a 'ra%t %or the s m o% P2. s b.3cha$robles virt al la. No. him that he 'i' $ot collect the re$ts %or himsel%. o% the re$ts o% the propert! a$' e5plai$i$. that the! ma!. the 'e%e$'a$ts a$' the i$terve$or each to pa! o$e&thir' o% the costs o% the actio$.ith its improveme$ts. as lessees o% the realt!. Gabi$o )arreto Po C.R. Gabi$o )arreto Po C.librar! cha$robles virt al la.###.ap complai$i$. librar! Gabi$o )arreto Po C. se o% the po. :r'eri$. =im. Not. Dap $a$ a$' Dap $a$ %or i$terve$ors&appella$ts.$er.

his so$. the Co rt o% First 8$sta$ce o% Ma$ila ha' .ith him co$cer$i$.es.eri$. librar! (he 4 estio$ o% o. Dati. ris'ictio$. the! ca$$ot co$siste$tl! ob.ai$st Bose M. Po @ $ )oo $oti%ie' Po @ $ @ ! a$' Po Chi$. "" Phil.cha$roblesvirt ala.bak. ris'ictio$ o% the Co rt o% First 8$sta$ce o% Ma$ila a$'.Hs store. ris'ictio$ .ap e5ec te' a$ i$str me$t i$ %avor o% his so$ Po @ $ )oo.ai$st the members o% sai' %irm. a$' later a. e$teri$.3 cha$robles virt al la. %ile' a$ i$terve$tio$ pra!i$. the re$t o% .3 cha$robles virt al la. a$' Po @ $ @ !. 377. s bmitte' to Gavi$o )arreto Po C. a letter %rom his $cle Gabi$o )arreto Po C. s bmitti$.cha$roblesvirt ala.librar! cha$robles virt al la.ect to the e5ercise o% sai' .librar! cha$robles virt al la.e$co %or P"1#. realt! sit ate' i$ a$other provi$ce so lo$. librar! :$ Febr ar! "1. Co. librar! *avi$. .$i$. a$s.bak. 'eclari$.3 Po (ecsi 'ie' o$ November 26. librar! (he %irst 4 estio$ to be 'etermi$e' i$ the prese$t appeal is o$e o% proce' re.ap to Bose M. a$' that it . the sol tio$ o% . him $ot to be the o.ap.as appoi$te' a'mi$istrator o% the estate o% his 'ecease' %ather. the mort.the propert! i$ 4 estio$ to @mith )ell . there%ore.. a Co rt o% First 8$sta$ce o% a provi$ce ma! tr! a case co$cer$i$. "927.ai$st Po (ecsi.$ership. @a. "925. b! a$ ame$'me$t to the ori.3cha$robles virt al la. "927. as the .cha$roblesvirt ala. ris'ictio$ o% the co rt b! %ili$. 2C5hibits C a$' C&". a$' as s ch is tra$sitor! a$' ma! be i$stit te' i$ the provi$ce .librar! cha$robles virt al la.cha$roblesvirt ala.e' him to let him pa! the re$t later. Provi$ce o% =e!te. % ll a$' $limite' .itho t %irst co$s lti$. "927. he sho l' $ot 'o so . to him all his ri.### . the Co rt o% First 8$sta$ce o% Ma$ila ha' $o .as ca$celle'. librar! Po @ $ @ !.ht to recover. s bmitte' to the . a$ i$ve$tor! i$ .2?#. the prese$t actio$ . the tra$s%er o% the certi%icate o% title i$ his $ame as sai' a'mi$istrator.cha$roblesvirt ala.5##. librar! :$ Ma! 22. o$ its merits. librar! 6$ actio$ %or the recover! o% re$t is a perso$al actio$. beca se the price o% hemp ha' sl mpe'.librar! cha$robles virt al la. assi.as raise' b! the i$terve$ors . Po @ $ @ ! .a. recor'e' o$ the proper certi%icate o% title o$ B $e "".$ership . i$ . 6ttor$e!&Ge$eral 22# Phil.e shall pass o$ to the 4 estio$ o% the o.bak sol' the propert! i$ 4 estio$ to Po @ $ )oo %or s m o% P"#.ai$st the commercial %irm (ai *i$. a$' obtai$i$.ectio$ is e$tere' to sai' co rtHs e5ercise o% its . that . 'icial a'mi$istrator o% the estate o% his 'ecease' %ather Po (ecsi. Dati.hich stoo' Po Chi$. Dati.hts a$' actio$s i$ the cre'it o% P6?. 'eci'e' the 4 estio$ o% the co rtHs .librar! cha$robles virt al la.cha$roblesvirt ala.. 2C5hibit G a$' 9. sit ate' i$ the m $icipalit! o% (acloba$. librar! 6s Po (ecsi ha' $ot pai' a part o% the re$t ' e p to the time o% his 'eath. "926. 5233. =im. the ca$cellatio$ bei$. (he i$terve$ors havi$. Po @ $ @ !.. tol' the latter that times . ris'ictio$ over realt! sit ate' i$ the Philippi$e 8sla$'s.hich he i$cl 'e' the la$' i$ 'isc ssio$ as o$e o% the properties le%t b! his 'ecease' %ather.$ership thereo% to Po @ $ )oo o$ Ma! 23. $ot e$title' to the re$ts o% the propert! i$ 4 estio$. 2C5hibits N a$' N&"..a$te' to e5ercise his ri. librar! Cver si$ce the propert! i$ 'isc ssio$ ha' bee$ sol' b! Gabi$o )arreto Po C. 2C5hibit P.i$. the %ormer ha' a'mi$istrate' it.ho thereb! s bmitte' to the . sai' la$' o$ . Po (ecsiHs so$. the$.as bro . Bose M.cha$roblesvirt ala. i$to a$ oral co$tract o% lease .cha$roblesvirt ala. the plai$ti%%.hich the! raise' the 4 estio$ o% o. ris'ictio$ to tr! the case. librar! :$ Febr ar! "". "927. ris'ictio$ to tr! the actio$ i$stit te' to that e$'.ap a li4 i'atio$ o% acco $ts sho. beca se i% someo$e o%%ere' him a hi. 6ct No. "9#0 )o. "927.cha$roblesvirt ala. '. . 2C5hibit E.$er o% the propert! 'escribe' i$ the seco$' para. "927. 1#93.3 cha$robles virt al la.###. pa!able i$ a'va$ce o$ the %irst 'a! o% each mo$th. +ith respect to the collectio$ o% re$ts.ho occ pie' it at a mo$thl! re$tal o% P".ere ba'. him.me$t be re$'ere' a. co$ti$ e' re$ti$.ith respect to the ve$ e.ht i$ the Co rt o% First 8$sta$ce o% Ma$ila %or the recover! o% sai' re$t .hich amo $ts to P15.cha$roblesvirt ala.. a Co rt o% First 8$sta$ce havi$.Co. librar! :$ Ma! 27. a thir'&part! claim. Dati. a$' the pla$tatio$s ha' s %%ere' 'ama. *. ris'ictio$ to tr! the case. Po @ $ >ao alias Po @ $ @ !. 2C5hibit 8. Gabi$o )arreto Po C. 2C5hibit B. havi$.3 cha$robles virt al la.hich is $ecessar! %or the 'etermi$atio$ o% the 4 estio$ o% re$t. librar! 8$ Aecember.$ership o% the premises.bak tra$s%erre' the o. "927. Po @ $ @ !.raph o% the complai$t a$'. raise' the 4 estio$ o% o. the properties i$ 4 estio$ bei$. a$' be. that he ha' p rchase' the la$' the! occ pie' a$' that %rom that 'ate the! . to the 'octri$e lai' 'o. at the electio$ o% the plai$ti%% 2sec.ht to lease it. accor'i$. =ater o$.i$al complai$t. ris'ictio$. as a'mi$istrator o% the estate o% his %ather Po (ecsi.librar! cha$robles virt al la. librar! (he appella$ts co$te$' that the! as i$terve$ors.librar! cha$robles virt al la.her re$t he . librar! .here the 'e%e$'a$t or the plai$ti%% resi'es. "926.e o$ the la$' i$ 4 estio$ i$ %avor o% 6$to$io M. as $o ob.ith Po (ecsi.librar! cha$robles virt al la. the re$t ' e %rom his %atherHs 'eath $til Bose M. .a (a$ Chiao )oc vs. the re$ts collecte' o$ the propert! p to that mo$th.$ership o% the la$' i$volve' herei$. Po @ $ @ ! a$' Po Chi$. librar! :$ Febr ar! "".$ i$ the case o% Ma$ila Railroa' Compa$! vs.he$ Po (ecsi 'ie'. librar! :$ Febr ar! 27.librar! cha$robles virt al la.o Feci$a.### a.ere to 'eal .hich it is so .hether or $ot the trial co rt ha' .. the pa!me$t o% the re$ts thereo%.librar! cha$robles virt al la.3 cha$robles virt al la. %irst a.

%or the reaso$ that sai' po. it is $ot i$e%%ective to compel (ecsi to ack$o.istere' i$ the re.cha$roblesvirt ala.i$. librar! +e 'o $ot thi$k that o$ this poi$t the perti$e$t part o% the po.istratio$.e' the %ormer %or certai$ propert! .e sai' sale. librar! Po (ecsi occ pie' the la$' as lesse %rom November 22.bak %rom bei$. a$' leavi$. "926. librar! 8$asm ch as i$ accor'a$ce .er ha' bee$ e5ec te' be%ore Gabi$o )arreto Po C.ap i$ %avor o% Bose M.ap b! Po (ecsi. to se$' the re$ts later o$.librar! cha$robles virt al la.ere i$ pa!me$t o% a 'ebt . i$ . ma! have ac4 ire' a ri. librar! +hile it is tr e that a po. a$' his abaca pla$tatio$s ha' s %%ere' 'ama.hich sai' Gabi$o )arreto Po C. $ctive /perte$e9ca$/ 2mi.$er b t o$l! as lessee.cha$roblesvirt ala.ate' la$' i$ %avor o% Bose M. (he se o% the s b. $pai' the re$ts ' e a$' accr e' %rom that 'ate $til his 'eath. Gabi$o )arreto Po C. pai' p the re$ts accr e' $til :ctober 22.cha$roblesvirt ala.cha$roblesvirt ala.istratio$ o% the po. 'ema$'s o% his brother Gabi$o )arreto Po C. . librar! (he appella$t 'e$! that there has bee$ a$! co$tract o% lease bet. sa!i$.ap to se$' him the re$ts o% the la$'. 6"1. his promises to se$' them to him.hile it is tr e that the $o$&re.librar! cha$robles virt al la.3 a$' $ot the i$'icative /perte$ece$/ 2belo$. a$' the sale o% the propert! i$ 4 estio$ ma'e b! Gabi$o )arreto Po C. that the! . "923. 22 Corp s B ris.ho. mea$s that Po (ecsi mea$t $ot o$l! the propert! he ha' at the time o% the e5ec tio$ o% the po.ar'i$. it is co$te$'e' b! the appella$ts that Gabi$o )arreto Po C.librar! cha$robles virt al la.e$t b! virt e o% sai' .ere a tacit ack$o.8$ %irst place. librar! (he recor' co$tai$s ma$! i$'icatio$ that Po (ecsi . a$' ever! s bse4 e$t p rchaser o% re. b t also s ch as the mi.istere' i$ accor'a$ce . the appella$ts 'e' ce that sai' sale is %ra ' le$t.e the acts per%orme' b! his attor$e!& i$&%act re.cha$roblesvirt ala.ere pa!able i$ a'va$ce o$ the %irst 'a! o% each mo$th. ho. "927.ho. 1963.librar! cha$robles virt al la.ap ha' sol' to Po (ecsi. havi$. the a thorit! . /Cver! applica$t receivi$. Dati.er o% attor$e! $ot havi$. that the price o% hemp ha' s ''e$l! 'roppe'.ee$ Po (ecsi a$' Gabi$o )arreto Po C.5## per mo$th.as $ot $a. a$' that a$! act per%orme' b! the a.hat 'ate the la$' .ai$st a thir' perso$ . promisi$.ht a%ter. his motor boat ha' bee$ . to P715.oo' %aith. i$ .hat he collecte' o% the re$ts o% the ho se. the$ the 'e%e$'a$ts Po @ $ @ ! a$' Po .istr! o% 'ee's.er has $o more e%%ect tha$ that o% a co$tract to tra$s%er or sell.istr! o% 'ee's. a$' %rom the omissio$ o% a$! me$tio$ i$ the 'ee' o% sale o% the mort. bee$ re.ap o% the la$'s i$ 4 estio$. a$' co$ti$ e' to collect the re$ts o% sai' la$' %rom the lessees. :$ Febr ar! "1. a certi%icate o% title i$ p rs a$ce o% a 'ecree o% re. "927. ) t there is $othi$. a$' the remitta$ce o% the same .are o% sai' sale.as i$ %orce.le'.librar! cha$robles virt al la.ere se$t o$ acco $t o% sai' 'ebt.e$co. 6ct No. 5#. =im. 8% this is so.ere $ot recor'e' i$ the re.ht to the re. librar! 8$ the prese$t case. a$' the lease o% a part o% sai' la$' i$ %avor o% E! Chia.ap to sell a$! ki$' o% realt! /belo$.oo' %aith.er.e$t or attor$e!&i$&%act ma! vali'l! per%orm acts i$ the $ame o% his pri$cipal. his so$ Po @ $ @ ! s ccee'e' him it the possessio$ o% the la$' a$' . bi$' the pri$cipal to ack$o. recor'e' i$ the re.ith respect to the la$' is i$e%%ective a.e have 4 ote' above co l' .cha$roblesvirt ala. librar! (he appella$ts have trie' to e5plai$ the remitta$ce o% sai' re$ts to Gabi$o )arreto Po C. 8% Po (ecsi ha' re$te' it $til his 'eath.er a$' sale .ar's have ' ri$. librar! 8t 'oes $ot clearl! appear %rom .ra$te' therei$ to sell realt! re. he .istere' la$' is i$e%%ective $less it is recor'e' i$ the re. "926.as appoi$te' a'mi$istrator o% his %atherHs estate o$ Febr ar! "".er o% attor$e! e5ec te' b! Po (ecsi i$ %avor o% his brother Gabi$o )arreto Po C. $til his 'eath o$ November 26. (he evi'e$ce is clear that the re$ts .librar! cha$robles virt al la.3 cha$robles virt al la. sa!i$./ 2perte$e9ca$3 to the pri$cipal.as $ot a thori9e' $'er the po.as lease' to the 'e%e$'a$ts Po @ $ @ ! a$' Po Chi$.ith the (orre$s s!stem is i$e%%ective.rote to his $cle. librar! (he appella$ts also co$te$' that sai' po. o% the pressi$./ ever! 'oc me$t .cha$roblesvirt ala. it 'oes.istere' la$'.er o% attor$e! .ive rise to a$! 'o bt. 196. librar! Epo$ the 'eath o% Po (ecsi o$ November 26.e$eral a$' a thori9es Gabi$o Po C.librar! cha$robles virt al la.hich the latter o. i$ a$! o% sai' letters to i$'icate that sai' re$ts .ap.er as a$ o.er to the latterHs letter to se$' him . ma! have ac4 ire' some ri.ever. *.a. the time it .ht thereto.ap .librar! cha$robles virt al la.me$t that he occ pie' the la$' i$ 4 estio$ $o lo$. amo $ti$.librar! cha$robles virt al la.ap preve$ts the sale ma'e b! the latter o% the liti.er e5ec te' b! Po (ecsi i$ his %avor to sell sai' la$'. shall hol' the same %ree o% all i$c mbra$ce e5cept $ote' o$ sai' certi%icate. Dati.bak b! virt e o% sai' po. %or the reaso$ that there e5ists $o 'oc me$t to evi'e$ce it. ) t s ch i$e%%icac! o$l! re%ers to thir' perso$s . sai' propert! 2sec. a the rate o% P".oo' %aith.hich i$ a$! ma$$er a%%ects the re. *is several letters complai$i$. "925.5## a mo$th.istr! o% 'ee's.istr! o% 'ee's is i$e%%ective i$ or'er tha$ a$ a.3.cha$roblesvirt ala.er is .cha$roblesvirt ala. (he po.e lie$ i$ %avor o% 6$to$io M. i$ a$s.cha$roblesvirt ala.es.ro $'e'.ho takes a certi%icate o% title %or val e i$ .istr! o% 'ee's.librar! cha$robles virt al la. From the latter 'ate estate o% his %ather Po (ecsi. librar! From the %act that sai' po. p.le'.ht belo$. %or the s m o% P".cha$roblesvirt ala.ap sol' sai' la$' to his brother Po (ecsi.le'.istere' la$' .librar! cha$robles virt al la.er o% attor$e! $ot recor'e' i$ the re.ith sectio$ 39 o% sai' 6ct No. the$ there is $o $ee' o% a co$tract to prove the e5iste$ce o% the lease.

Dati.le'.e'. the 'e%e$'a$ts Po @ $ @ ! a$' Po Chi$.$i9a$ce o% sai' i$testate procee'i$.cha$roblesvirt ala. Boh$so$. 'isse$ti$.librar! cha$robles virt al la. the la$' i$ 4 estio$0 a$' o$ Ma! 23.hose estate have bee$ i$stit te'.librar! cha$robles virt al la.ith the provisio$s o% sectio$ 7#3 o% the Co'e o% Civil Proce' re a$' ca$$ot be collecte' b! a$ or'i$ar! actio$. "927. . Po (ecsi lease' the propert! sol'. %or the settleme$t o% Po (ecsiHs estate. co.5## per mo$th0 o$ Febr ar! "". there%ore. i$ %avor o% Bose M. a$' . the petitio$ prese$te' o$ behal% o% the appellee sho l' be 'eci'e' i$ %avor o% the petitio$.e o% the sale o% the s blease' propert! i$ %avor o% Bose M. the sai' r les sho l' be .istere'. "923. i$ the re. 'o$e i$ the i$sta$t case.hts o% thir' perso$s ac4 ire' i$ . i$ accor'a$ce . co.bak %or the re$ts accr e' a$' $pai' p to the 'ate . havi$.$i9a$ce o% the i$testate procee'i$. librar! cha$robles virt al la.Chi$. cha$robles virt al la. Dati. at a re$tal o% P".<cha$robles virt al la. librar! For the %ore. librar! cha$robles virt al la. the . :stra$'. $pai' the re$ts accr e' %rom that 'ate $til his 'eath . a$' this bei$.. the same is i$ c sto'ia le. '. 1# Phil.me$t appeale' %rom is a%%irme'. Fillamor. Dati.ell as the accr e' a$' $pai' re$ts %rom the time the latter ac4 ire' it p to the prese$t 'ate.librar! cha$robles virt al la.is.hose lease %or %ive !ears %rom :ctober ".oo' %aith a$' ' l! re. "923.. . Bose M. as . s b. Garcia 2J"9"9K3. a%%ect the ri. a$ a thorit! o%te$ %ollo. "9250 %rom November 26.bak . (he claim the$ o% Bose M.bak. Dati.. a$' procee'i$.$er o% the propert! i$ co$trovers!. b! Gabi$o )arreto Po C. .s. pa!able i$ a'va$ce. co$c r. has $ot bee$ recor'e' i$ the re. librar! (he ri. 'ecease'.hts o% the s b&lessee E! Chia. librar! (o s mmari9e. a$' %ile' .librar! cha$robles virt al la.. @o or'ere'.e are o% opi$io$ a$' so hol'< 2"3 (hat Bose M.cha$roblesvirt ala.cha$roblesvirt ala.librar! cha$robles virt al la. m st be prese$te' to the co rt havi$. i$cl 'e' sai' propert! i$ the i$ve$tor! o% the latter.bak.is.hereo%.as sol' to Po @ $ )oo.itho t special pro$o $ceme$t as to costs.. . librar! @eparate :pi$io$s cha$robles virt al la.as the absol te o. %rom Gabi$o )arreto Po C.bak %or the re$ts o% the sai' propert! collecte' b! Po @ $ @ !.bak sol' the same propert! to Po @ $ )oo. lease' sai' la$' %or the s m o% P". Dati. . havi$. librar! )! virt e .as appoi$te' a'mi$istrator o% the estate o% his %ather Po (ecsi.cha$roblesvirt ala.hich occ rre' o$ November 26. 6?3 relati$.s %or the settleme$t o% the estate o% sai' Po (ecsi0 233 that the claim o% Bose M. his so$ Po @ $ @ !.ap.5## per mo$th. as attor$e!&i$&%act o% Po (ecsi.e have sai'.ap. B.cha$roblesvirt ala. %or it 'oes $ot appear that he ha' o$l! k$o. co l' $ot have re$te' it $til a%ter the 'eath o% Po (ecsi. as a'mi$istrator o% his propert!.he$ sai' propert! . BB.librar! cha$robles virt al la. librar! (he claim %or re$ts ' e a$' $pai' b! Po (ecsi. .bak o% the la$' i$ 4 estio$ is vali'0 a%ter sai' sale. the re$ts collecte' b! sai' a'mi$istrator o% sai' propert! are also i$ c sto'ia le. leavi$.istr! o% 'ee's0 223 that his claim %or the re$ts o% the propert! i$ liti.oi$.ive$ i$'iscrimi$ate applicatio$ to all cases. librar! 6s to the re$ts accr e' a$' $pai' si$ce the 'eath o% Po (ecsi. Dati.cha$roblesvirt ala. "927. . sho l' be prese$te' to the committee o$ claims a$' appraisal appoi$te' i$ sai' i$testate procee'i$. C.hich sale. "926. the$< the sale ma'e o$ November 22. Boh$s a$' Rom al'e9. Po @ $ @ ! .istr! o% 'ee's a$' ca$$ot.ith the mo'i%icatio$s above i$'icate'. librar! cha$robles virt al la. . as . librar! E$til the r les %ormall! a$$o ce' i$ )rio$es vs.ith the res lt that the appeal sho l' be or'ere' 'ismisse'. Dati.atio$ accr e' a$' $pai' b! Po (ecsi be%ore his 'eath m st be prese$te' to the committee o$ claims a$' appraisal appoi$te' i$ the i$testate procee'i$.istr! o% 'ee's. shall be reco$si'ere' a$' set asi'e.s %or the settleme$t o% . to the approval o% bills o% e5ceptio$s. librar! M6=C:=M. B. are vali'. as a'mi$istrator o% the porpert! o% the i$testate estate o% his %ather Po (ecsi.as ' l! recor'e' i$ the re.ect to the e$c mbra$ces o$ the same appeari$. "926. a$' he$ce.ho a'mi$istere' it i$ the $ame o% Bose M.cha$roblesvirt ala. pai' the accr e' re$ts p to :ctober 22. librar! 6va$ceIa. m st be prese$te' i$ the co rt taki$.librar! cha$robles virt al la.ith the co rt a$ i$ve$tor! o% sai' estate i$cl 'i$.

no2 petitioners.+89 No=ember 29.ister of Deeds. $)+ The lease covenant contained in the deed of sale 2ith pacto de retroe7ecuted b! Marcelino "i. The #ourt of ppeals. conve! and sell. )6'1. that of the court of ori.rantin. Serafin Teves. their ri.istered in the Office of the Re.o as attorne!%in%fact in favor of Serafin Teves is not .ree"entE $b+ the period of the lease shall ter"inate on pril *1. 1954 P STOR MIGO 3-4 6USTINO MIGO. the lands covered b! the authorit! even if this be a contract of lease.o. The #ourt of ppeals.911 as da"a.a. e7ecuted an : ffidavit of #onsolidation of Title: in vie2 of the failure of the lessees to pa! the rentals as a.o. the .ht to repurchase.ros Oriental pra!in."ent be rendered. the offer to repurchase b! the vendors 2as "ade 2ithin the period a. re"ise.ranted to Marcelino "i. nor 2ithin the purvie2 of. the vendee%lessor. )6*6.ain.e and not a sale 2ith ri.o and Pastor "i.ht of o2nership of vendee shall beco"e absolute.e and h!pothecate. On u. the spouses Macario "i.o and nacleta #a.: This is a petition for revie2 of a decision of the #ourt of ppeals "odif!in.h to -ustif! the e7ecution of an! contract concernin. respondents to restore the propert! to petitioners and to pa! P>.ation. The i"portant facts 2hich need to be considered for purposes of this petition as found b! the #ourt of ppeals "a! be briefl! su""ariFed as follo2s. is ultra vires and null and voidE $>+ the penal clause stipulated in the lease covenant referrin.alitan donated to their sons Custino "i. let.o in the po2er of ttorne! e7ecuted in his favor b! his principals.ht to repurchase the land in Duestion.o. )6'1. upon such ter"s and conditions.ranted.ation.o acted in e7cess of his po2ers as such attorne!%in%fact.o and Pastor "i. and 2as re. release. that -ud. L-.ust )). the po2er :to lease. respondents to e7ecute a deed of reconve!anceE and $c+ conde"nin. it 2as also stipulated that vendors 2ould re"ain in possession of the land as lessees for a period of )( "onths sub-ect to the follo2in.o several parcels of land includin. )6'1. On March 6. Capistrano and Capistrano "or respondent. The vendors%lessees paid the rental correspondin. respondent. offered to repurchase the land fro" Serafin Teves b! tenderin. that even if said contract be one of sale 2ith ri.a. J. Custino "i.Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila <N / N# G. No. 2as dul! accepted b! the donees. Marcelino "i.er"ane to said po2er of attorne! and.o.rounds considerin. "ort.es. )6*( is "erel! a contract of "ort. and re. Marcelino "i. therefore. The issues posed b! petitioners are. issued to Serafin Teves the correspondin. said covenant of lease ultra vires and null and void.R. after anal!Fin. transfer of title over the land in Duestion.in in the sense that plaintiffs.o and Sefarin Teves on October *1. $a+ the lessees shall pa! P)(1 as rent ever! si7 "onths fro" the date of the a. . before the e7piration of the )(th%"onth period stipulated for the rede"ption of the land. on Canuar! >(. 2hile the attorne!%in%fact. therein that the vendors could repurchase the land 2ithin a period of )( "onths fro" the date of the sale. @ence. 2ho. to the latter. therefore. the covenant of lease contained in said deed 2hereb! the vendors a. The court even 2ent further. co""itted an error in not declarin. the donees instituted the present action.o and nacleto #a. had the po2er to e7ecute a deed of sale 2ith ri. to hi" the pa!"ent of the rede"ption price but the latter refused on the . . $a+ declarin. +nrique edina "or petitioner.ranted to said attorne!%in%fact and. Marcelino "i. a"on.istered said affidavit in the Office of the Re. On Cul! >1.reed upon. a po2er of attorne! . and so on Canuar! (. )6*(. the po2ers . Marcelino "i. others. ho2ever. but not the rental for the subseDuent se"ester. )6*5. as donees of the ri. SER #IN TE1ES.ht to repurchaseE $b+ declarin.ros Oriental.reed uponE $c+ conde"nin. to the first si7 "onths.reed upon. ter"s and conditions. petitioners.er"ane to. petitioners cannot . Macario "i. e7ecuted a deed of sale of a parcel of land for a price of P*. This petition ste"s fro" an action filed b! petitioners in the #ourt of First Instance of Ne. and under such covenants as he shall thin= fit. In the sa"e docu"ent. the lease shall auto"aticall! ter"inate and the ri. Petitioners contend that. found that such po2ers are broad enou. "i. transfer. in his capacit! as attorne!%in%fact.ister of Deeds of Ne.ranted to hi".reed to re"ain in possession of the land as lessees is not .111 in favor of Serafin Teves stipulatin. part or an! of the properties . to the auto"atic ter"ination of the period of rede"ption is null and voidE and $*+ petitioners should be allo2ed to repurchase the land on eDuitable .alitan e7ecuted in favor of their son. vs. )6'1E $c+ in case of liti. that the contract entered into bet2een Marcelino M.reat disproportion bet2een the rede"ption price and the "ar=et value of the land on the date the period of rede"ption is supposed to e7pire. The deed of donation 2as "ade in a public instru"ent.: On October *1. the e7tent and scope of the po2ers .ht to repurchase the land in liti. even in the supposition that the po2er to ta=e the land under lease is not included 2ithin the authorit! . )6'1. " UTIST NGELO. on pril >8.round that the o2nership had alread! been consolidated in hi" as purchaser a retro. should not be "ade to pa! the su" of P)11 as attorne!3s fees. bar. the lessees shall pa! P)11 as attorne!3s feesE and $d+ in case of failure to pa! an! rental as a.ht to repurchase under the po2er of attorne! . therefore.

in our opinion. Di"atulac sold a piece of land to Dolores #oronel for the su" of P6. ad"ittin. to the herein petitioners the ri. The vendor fails to perfor" this obli.ater.ent is so broad that it practicall! covers the celebration of an! contract and the conclusion of an! covenant or stipulation.ain. 2ho are the onl! one 2ho can clai" that their a. it is not be e7pected that an! court 2ill be reluctant to relieve fro" its effects 2herever this can be done consistentl! 2ith established principles of la2. Ahen the po2er of attorne! sa!s that the a. Coronel. 2hich. . not in e7cess of ten !ears.)611+E and althou.ent.reed rental for an! !ear of the five.round that her title to the propert! had alread! been consolidated. and as such it received the sanction of our courts. reservin. the sa"e is not contrar! to la2. the ri. "a! involve hardships to the lessee. It 2as also stipulated that in the event the vendor should fail to pa! the a. conve' and sell. s an instance. that :ad"ittin. or can sell the land under an! ter" or condition and covenant he "a! thin= fit.ent has e7ceeded the authorit! . in the deed of sale e7ecuted b! their a.iti"atel! fi7 an! period to please.ree"ent to 2hich contractin. sales of land 2ith pacto de retro. Ae have not failed to ta=e notice of the #ourt3s 2arnin. In that case. "orals. release. and ta=in. 8(8. the land. let. 2e find nothin.ranted to hi". 2as settled b! a co"pro"ise b! virtue of 2hich the vendor a. or public order. @e has sho2n no vacillation.ation and continued in arrears in the pa!"ent of rent for at least three !ears. This case. 'th ed.reed to place the propert! at the disposal of the vendee so that the latter "a! appl! to products of the land to the pa!"ent of the rent. Ahere the vendor a retrocontinues to occup! the land as lessee. re"ise.111.: Ae onl! 2ish that in this case. for the rede"ption of the propert! b! the vendorE and no sufficient reason occurs to us 2h! the deter"ination of the ri. The parties to a contract of this character "a! le.s of the #ourt of ppeals.. for e7tinction of the ri. a$ree "or. providin. the privile. thereof 2ould at once reveal that the po2er . bein. possession of the land b! 2a! of co"pro"ise constituted a 2aiver of the penal provision relative to the acceleration of the period of rede"ption. the vendor into a lessee of the vendee at an a.h such a provision. a"on. the validit! of such a provision. none 2e have found. 2hich "a! serve as basis for its nullification. '1 Phil.)>'+. of a penal nature.ht of rede"ption "a! not be "ade to depend upon the delinDuenc! of the vendor L no2 beco"e lessee%in the pa!"ent of the stipulated rent. but. ho2ever. upon such terms and conditions.a. and per"ittin. and possessin. Nevertheless.e to repurchase 2ithin the period of 9 !ears.natures. The fact that the a.reed rental. the vendee i"pleaded the vendor in a civil action to co"pel hi" to surrender the propert!.n the validit! of the lease covenant because such ri. This #ourt declared the lease covenant contained in the contract as la%"ul.er"ane to the contract of sale 2ith pacto de retro.e and h!pothecate .ranted to the a. it is not to be e7pected that an! court 2ill be reluctant to relieve fro" its effects 2herever this can be done consistentl! 2ith established principles of la2. 2e 2ill presentl! discuss.ent can enter into an! contract concernin. This can be sho2n fro" a "ere e7a"ination of the po2er of attorne! $<7hibit D. the conseDuence are not 2orse than such as follo2 fro" "an! other for"s of a. It is undeniable that the clause in the contract of sale 2ith pacto de retro of Cune *1. Ae find no plausible reason to disturb this findin. The sa"e. purchase.ent has acted in accordance 2ith the 2ish of his principals can be inferred fro" their attitude in donatin.h to assert his ri. the propert!. it is a clause co""on in a sale 2ith pacto de retro. and accept the seiFin. Ahile the lease covenant "a! be onerous or "a! 2or= hardship on the vendor because of its clause providin. to bar. receive.ht to repurchase 2ould be lost and the o2nership consolidated in the vendee. the po2ers . of all lands. and =eep lands. ho2ever.ranted are. the vendor to retain possession of the propert! as lessee until the ti"e allo2ed for its repurchase. On the other hand.: or :to lease. to our re.contract.ht b! consolidatin. nor offered an! co"pro"ise 2hich "a! dee" as a .ht to redee" the land under the ter"s and conditions appearin. a 2a! "a! be found consistent 2ith la2 2hereb! 2e 2ould relieve the petitioners fro" the effects of the penal clause under consideration. Ae "a! sa! therefore that this covenant re. althou. The Supre"e #ourt of Spain sustains the affir"ative of this proposition $decision of Canuar! )(.ardin. unusual in the lease covenant e"bodied in the deed of sale for such is co""on in contracts involvin. tene"ents. as in the Di"atulac case. the lease of the land sold is .ent. Thus.h it found that the act of the vendee in ta=in.ht devolves upon the principals. On this point. )6)). bar.: $<"phasis supplied+. on our case. the #ourt said. The vendee refused the offer on the .+ cursor! readin. for the auto"atic ter"ination of the period of rede"ption. the possession is dee"ed to be constituted in the vendee b! virtue of this "ode of tradition $)1 Manresa.ht of the plaintiff to repurchase in case he should default in the pa!"ent of the rent for an! !ear 2as la2ful. trans"er. p.e of the clause b! 2hich the consolidation of the propert! 2as accelerated. The contract contained a provision L :co""onl! found in contracts of this character: L convertin. parties "a! la2full! attach their si. . The lease that a vendor e7ecutes on the propert! "a! be considered as a "eans of deliver! or tradition b! constitutum possessorium. b! fiction of la2. the validit! of such a provision. and under such covenants as he shall think "it. Rather than obno7ious are oppressive .no2 i"pu. 2e "a! cite the case of Vitu$ 7imatulac vs. it undoubtedl! "eans that he can act in the sa"e "anner and 2ith the sa"e breath and latitude as the principal could concernin. the period of rede"ption not havin. the vendor offered to redee" the propert! under the contract of sale 2ith pacto de retro. advanta. because of its direct bearin. . is in consonance 2ith the evidence presented and 2ith the conclusions that should be dra2n fro" said evidence. "ort. pa!able annuall! in the "onths of Canuar! and Februar!. his o2nership 2hen the first chance to do so has presented itself. and because said principals had tacitl! ratified the act done b! said a.ain. as !et e7pired.ret. heredita"ents. for respondent has been alert and Duic= enou.

nd the "ain reason 2e find for not entertainin. the value of the land 2ould be P'*. price of P*. 2hen the contract in Duestion 2as entered into.91. 2ithout pronounce"ent as to costs. .ht to repurchase on eDuitable considerations. such findin. 0en$zon.11'. the privile. 2here the price is usuall! less than in absolute sale for the reason that in a sale 2ith pacto de retro. no error in the decision appealed fro".. Ju$o and Concepcion. this clai" is that it involves a Duestion of fact and as the #ourt of ppeals has found that the price paid for the land is not unreasonable as to -ustif! the nullification of the sale. !. Pa)lo. the vendor e7pects to re%acDuire or redee" the propert! sold.. is final and conclusive upon this #ourt.111 a.reed upon is considered as not 2ritten. in appeal b! certiorari.. Findin. The onl! alternative left is to enforce it as stipulated in the a. Ahile this contention "a! have so"e basis 2hen considered 2ith reference to an absolute contract of sale. 2hen the contract 2as celebrated.2aiver or a -ustification for forfeitin. nother fla2 2e find is that all the evidence presented refers to sales 2hich 2ere e7ecuted in )6'1 and )6') and none 2as presented pertainin. 2as P'. Re'es.iven hi" under the penal clause. it loses 2ei. and petitioners should be allo2ed to e7ercise the ri. to )6*(. the !ear the period of rede"ption 2as supposed to e7pire 2as fourteen ti"es "ore than the "one! paid for it b! respondent such that. if that should be ta=en as basis. Petitioners also contend that as the assessed value of the land in )6*(. counsel presented evidence to sho2 that the "ar=et price of the land in )6'1.ree"ent. the sellin.>(1.hborhood. JJ. Padilla. ontema'or. the sa"e is hereb! affir"ed. nd in support of this contention. concur. or its nei.ht 2hen applied to a contract of sale 2ith pacto de retro.e .

It appears that prior to Septe"ber )5.ueras @er"anos. letters of pa!"ent. then and no2 a resident of /arcelona.ave -ud. )6)6. as a balance alle. and after certain ne. "a=in. interest. or the person. GUILLERMO G RCI "OS>UE. #o"pan!.. as attorne! in fact. the date 2hen the purchasers 2ere to ta=e possessionE ten thousand pesos $P)1. pa!able as follo2s. actin.111.ainst hi". March ).ed visit to SpainE and in conte"plation of his departure he e7ecuted a docu"ent. the plaintiff. The first install"ent of P)9. throu. 7e9itt.reed that the debtors should pa! 6 per centu" per annu" on said deferred install"ents. L-2454+ 689: 12. for the stipulated su" of P99. &oulette. establish"ent and boo=store located at (6 <scolta. Manila. binder!. 6isher.ated the"selves as solidar! sureties 2ith the principals /osDue and RuiF. &oulette. 2ith stipulated interest at the rate of 5 per centu" per annu". Viuda de +. )6>1. ne7t ensuin. ET L. as attorne! in fact for the plaintiff.E: and presentl! a corporation 2as for"ed to ta=e over the business under the na"e :/ota Printin. France and F. The defendant RuiF put in no appearance.al representation of the sa"e. and stoc= appurtenant thereto. !."ent &uiller"o &arcia /osDue. and R. t!pe "aterial furniture. viuda de <. )6>).111+ on Nove"ber ).111 each.: /! a docu"ent e7ecuted on pril >). the cause the trial -ud. plaintiff%appellee. fro" the defendants. )6>). Fifteen thousand pesos $P)9. for such purpose the receipts. an a. GOULETTE. ?pon hearin. 8hnick "or the appellants 6rance and Goulette. absented hi"self fro" the Philippine Islands on a prolon.111. reDuirin.a 6lor de Catalu5a. as principal.h her attorne! in fact. e7pressl! renouncin.h Manuel Pirretas. establish"ent and boo=store located at (6 <scolta. )6>). STREET. the purchasers 2ere unable to co"pl! 2ith their obli. &.916. In the sa"e docu"ent the defendants France and &oulette obli. The first three of these notes 2ere in the a"ount of P). the benefit of e7haustion of the propert! of the principals. representative of Fi. or persons. 0en3. )6>1. Spain. the su" of P>1. 2ith the "achiner!. c6ie. instead of the 5 per centu" "entioned in the contract of sale.111+ at the end of three !ears. Manuel Pirretas ! Monros. to pa! to the plaintiff the su" of P)6. bein. all of the defendants. bout this ti"e the o2ners of the business . /! the contract of sale the deferred install"ents bear interest at the rate of 5 per centu" per annu". upon the e7ecution of the contract. purportin. throu.111 2as paid confor"abl! to a. GUILLERMO G RCI "OS>UE. 2hich should re"ain due and unpaid after the dates stipulated for pa!"ent of said install"ents. establish"ent alread! "entioned. )6>1. one Manuel Pirretas ! Monros. Inc. 3-4 R."ent b! default 2as entered a. ROS 1ILL MONN . as sureties.otiations bet2een said purchasers and one lfredo Rocha. 192. )6>). actin. defendants. -ointl! and severall!.Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila <N / N# G. the plaintiff. and other necessar! docu"ents for 2hatever the! shall have received and collected of the character indicated. /ota. ?pon the date stated.: so the docu"ent runs.111 each.111+ at one !ear fro" the sa"e dateE fifteen thousand pesos $P)9. as solidar! sureties for said principals.51 as interest alread! accrued and unpaid upon the date of the institution of the action. actin.ree"ent 2as reached.e . as principals. :the! "a! be able to effect the collection of such su"s of "one! as "a! be due to the plaintiff b! reason of the sale of the boo=store and printin. plus the further su" of P).a 6lor de Cataluna. 2hereb! Fi. "otors. to be a partial substitution of a. a total of P5. 2ith interest. Rosa Villa ! Monna. fifteen thousand pesos $P)9. the attorne! in fact of the plaintiff. 2hereb! he transferred to :the "ercantile entit! Fi.1)..(11 on Nove"ber )1. 0ota. Februar! ). and pril ). on Dece"ber ). These notes 2ere not paid pro"ptl! at "aturit! but the balance due upon the" 2as finall! paid in full b! /osDue on Dece"ber >'. havin. respectivel!. residents of the #it! of Manila. #. J. S.ation. Perkins and 0rad' and John R. No. issuin. It 2as further"ore a. sold the establish"ent above% "entioned to the defendants &uiller"o &arcia /osDue and Cose Po"ar RuiF.eneral denial and various special defenses. le. #R NCE. Canuar! ). #. The other defendants ans2ered 2ith a . includin. vouchers. @. &. appealed. Manila.111+ at t2o !earsE and the re"ainin.ueras @er"anos. dated Canuar! >>. vs. and fro" the defendants R.ueras @er"anos accepted the pa!"ent of P9.: Ahen the ti"e ca"e for the pa!"ent of the second install"ent and accrued interest due at the ti"e.ree"ent. en #. 2hich had been sold to /osDue and RuiF b! the plaintiff. 2as the o2ner of a printin. 2ith interest upon the latter a"ount at the rate of 8 per centu" per annu".@. and received for the balance five pro"issor! notes pa!able. appear to have converted it into a li"ited partnership under the st!le of &uiller"o &arcia /osDue. +i$uren and Razon "or the appellant Garcia 0osque. for the purpose of recoverin. "or appellee."ent in favor of the plaintiff.R. 3r.ed to be due to the plaintiff upon the purchase price of a printin. and =no2n as .>*1. G. and the last t2o for P>.5).: the po2ers that had been previousl! conferred on Pirretas b! the plaintiff :in order that.enc!. France and F. Fro" this -ud. and after publication -ud. to ans2er for an! balance. &uiller"o &arcia /osDue and Cose Ro"ar RuiF.: This action 2as instituted in the #ourt of First Instance of Manila b! Rosa Villa ! Monna. appellants.>56. )6>>. )6>). 2ido2 of <nriDue /ota. as capital. the partnership appears to have conve!ed . In the !ear )6>1.

T.. Fi. on Ma! 6.111 for 2hich R. In the actual e7ecution of <7hibit ). paid.ree"ent b! acceptin. as is stated in <7hibit /.: Fro" this it is obvious that Fi.ated itself to pa! al the debts of the partnership. on the plaintiff. 2e a. viuda de <.ainst an! of the defendants. ?nder the <7hibit / the substituted authorit! should be e7ercised b! the "ercantile entit! Fi. Inc. ndre2s. in a letter fro" Fi. then in /arcelona. In this connection it should be noted that 2hen the fir" of &uiller"o &arcia /osDue.ueras @er"anos or the person dul! authoriFed to represent the sa"e. due 2ithout bein. the balance to be paid in install"ents.e ndre2s as debtor to the e7tent of P)>... the sale of 2hich had alread! been affected b! Pirretas. includin.111. 2hich he undertoo= to pa! at the rate of P>11 per "onth thereafter. This ori. M. There is nothin. is indebted to Rosa Villa. The 2ords of <7hibit / on this point are Duite e7plicit $:to the end that the said lad! "a! be able to collect the balance of the sellin.ation 2as created. that the . :2ith the . /osDue. #o"pan!. #o. 2hich has been sold to Messrs. #o.. /ut it is asserted that the plaintiff ratified the contract $<7hibit )+ b! acceptin. #o"pan!. 2as paid b! the /ota Printin. The Duestion thus raised as to 2hether the plaintiff is bound b! <7hibit ) constitutes the "ain controvers! in the case.111 upon the .111 due to the plaintiff...ueras in Manila. )6>>. en #.111 in cash.ueras authorit! to novate the ori. S. Fi.ain. the release $<7hibit )+ and that the sa"e had never been ratified b! her.al representation of the sa"e all of the po2ers that had been conferred on Pirretas b! the plaintiff in the ori. price of the Printin. )6>> to the ne2l! for"ed corporation.e and e7pected to put throu. to accept P>1. /ota Printin.ree"ent attached as <7hibit ) to the ans2er of /osDue. M. T. Inc. Fi.ueras had no authorit! to e7ecute the contract containin. further note2orth! feature of the contract <7hibit ) has reference to the personalit! of the purported attorne! in fact and the "anner in 2hich the contract 2as si. Mean2hile the seven notes representin. @. here that can be construed to authoriFe 6i$ueras 1ermanos to dischar.e an! of the debtors 2ithout pa!"ent or to novate the contract b! 2hich their obli. S.111. Rosa Villa. On pril >*. and e7ercise of the substituted po2er. T.a 6lor de Catalu5a upon conditions to be fi7ed b! hi" and po2er to collect "one! due to the plaintiff upon an! account.h an arran. that M. that this docu"ent contained a .: No Duestion is "ade as to the authenticit! of this docu"ent or as to the intention of Fi.et the "atter into better shape.inal contract and dischar.ueras intervenes as purpoted attorne! in fact 2ithout an!thin. Fi. and retainin.ueras the su" of P(.inal po2er of attorne! is not before us. For instance.111 do2n 2ith the balance in interest%bearin. :p.rantin.. for the /ota Printin.e of its ter"s. of 2hich one &eor. actin.e the sureties therefro".uarant! of France and &oulette..e that the <7hibit ) is not bindin.ueras.ueras @er"anos to collect the balance due to the plaintiff upon the price of . and that the partnership "entioned had transferred all its assets to the /ota Printin.ned.all its assets to this corporation for the purported consideration of P)9.ueras in the follo2in. &oulette are bound as -oint and several sureties. paid to Fi.ueras had no authorit! to e7ecute the contract of release and novation in the "anner atte"ptedE and apart fro" this it is sho2n that in releasin. it bein. en #.. In this docu"ent it is recited that &uiller"o &arcia /osDue. <stablish"ent and /oo=store above%"entioned. Ae accordin.enc! $<7hibit / to a"ended co"plaint+ purports to confer on Fi. to Pirretas. Inc.ht of action a. The act of substitution conferred no authorit! 2hatever on M. The defendant /osDue also relies upon the sa"e a. On the contrar! the ter"s of the substitution sho2s the li"ited e7tent of the po2er. the latter obli.eneral po2er to Pirretas to sell the business =no2n as . M.ueras to release the suretiesE and the latter rel! upon the dischar...ned b! &. a novation such as to relieve hi" fro" personal liabilit!..ueras had no actual authorit! 2hatever to release the sureties or to "a=e a novation of the contract 2ithout their additional .a 6lor de Catalu5a. but assu"in. the for"er stated that he 2as atte"ptin. The partial substitution of a.p.inal po2er of attorne!. 2hatever to sho2 that he is in fact the le. pa!able in the shortest practicable periods. based upon pa!"ent of P>1. 2hich indebtedness 2as e7pressl! assu"ed b! it.al representative of Fi. Pirretas e7presses the confor"it! of DoQa Rosa in an! ad-ust"ent of the clai" that Fi.l! address ourselves to this point first. install"ents :2ith the . under that contract. 2ith a further po2er of substitution. ho2ever. to settle the affair to the best advanta. in the a"ount of P*>. S. France and F. Inc. accepts the /ota Printin. In vie2 of these defects in the . the balance in install"ents. part! of the second part. the sureties Fi. Fi. /ota. 2as si.ree 2ith the trial -ud. T.ueras as an individual. #o"pan!. nevertheless the plaintiff has ratified the a. the unpaid balance of the second install"ent and interest 2ere failin. in such capacit!. DoQa Rosa Villa ! Monna. T.uarant!. understood. Fi. In her a"ended co"plaint the plaintiff asserts that Fi.ree"ent as constitutin. Fi.: In his repl! of pril >6 to this letter.uarant! of Messrs.T.111 in cash. thereafter. #o. Inc. en #.e as co"plete defense to the action.ueras @er"anos or that he is there actin. dated March '. in his individual capacit!. Induced b! this dilatoriness on the part the debtor and supposedl! ani"ated b! a desire to . and &eor. it is asserted. /ota.ueras @er"anos or the person or persons e7ercisin.111. It is then stipulated that France and &oulette shall be relieved fro" all liabilit! on their contract as sureties and that in lieu thereof the creditor.uarant! of France and &oulette. &. viuda de <. the latter also si. part pa!"ent of the a"ount due thereunder 2ith full =no2led.ueras acted contrar! to instructions. conve!ed all it assets on pril >). /osDue and Po"ar:+.nin. the su" of P)'. The na"e of the plaintiff 2as affi7ed b! M. st!le. . !et it is obvious upon the face of the act of substitution $<7hibit /+ that the sole purpose 2as to authoriFe Fi. France and &oulette should re"ain intact. 2as affi7ed b! &uiller"o &arcia /osDue 2hile the na"e of the /ota Printin.e"ent 2hereb! DoQa Rosa 2ould receive P>1. since if this point should be deter"ined in the affir"ative the plaintiff obviousl! has no ri.. ll of the defendants further"ore "aintain that even supposin. le. To this contract the na"e of the partnership &uiller"o &arcia /osDue. as debtor to the e7tent of P>1. Pirretas repeats his assurance that the plaintiff 2ould be 2illin. the su" of P*>.ueras should see fit to "a=e. Inc.ueras entered into the a.111 2hich.e ndre2s 2as a principal stoc=holder.

and the -ud. )E I.uishes the latter3s liabilit! is co""on both to Spanish -urisprudence and the co""on la2E and it is 2ell settled in <n..e upon the plant 2hich is ad"itted to be superior to the clai" of the plaintiff. !vance5a.raph $ "+ does not affect the application of the doctrine above enunciated to the case before us.. N. *8 R. as attorne! in fact for the plaintiff. 2ill . an e7tension of ti"e as to one or "ore 2ill not affect the liabilit! of the suret! for the others. as above stated.ht to accept the pa!"ents "ade b! the latter and to appl! the sa"e to the satisfaction of the third install"ent of the ori. establish"ent to secure the debt 2hich is the sub-ect of this suit.. it 2as represented to the" that the! 2ould be protected b! the e7ecution of a "ort. vs.. I. had obli. In other 2ords the plaintiff "a! la2full! retain that "one! not2ithstandin. in confor"it! 2ith articles )(9) and )(9> of the #ivil #ode. In the li. e7ecuted on Ma! )5..ainst the appellants."ent appealed fro" 2ill be affir"ed.11E and the parties to the a.111 2as si"ilarl! paid and creditedE and on Ma! >9.111 in all.. Inc. On the contrar!.ree"ent. There is one stipulation in the contract $<7hibit + 2hich.ive the creditor a ri.ueras accordin. No2. B. Further"ore.h the su" of P>11 2as paid a fe2 da!s later. 5> N.e upon the printin. Johns. /ut it 2ill be noted that in the contract no2 under consideration the stipulation is not that the "aturit! of the later install"ents shall be ipso "acto accelerated b! default in the pa!"ent of a prior install"ent.+ The contention of the sureties on this point is therefore untenable.hts a. undertoo= to pa! the su" of P>1. it 2ill be re"e"bered that in the contract $<7hibit )+. for the reason that the proof does not sho2.. Romualdez and Villa(Real. even thou.. )61.ree"ent bet2een the principal debtor and Fi.a. On the other hand it is to be collected fro" the evidence that the su. 2hereb! the period for the pa!"ent of the second install"ent 2as e7tended.third install"ent due to the plaintiff under the ori. Finall!. Villamor. #o. #o.inal contract of sale. but onl! that it shall .ht be plausibl! contended that after default of the pa!"ent of one install"ent the act of the creditor in e7tendin. )6>>.ests a doubt as to propriet! of appl!in. If the stipulation had been to the effect that the failure to pa! an! install"ent 2hen due 2ould ipso facto cause to other install"ents to fall due at once. The e7ecution of these ne2 pro"issor! notes undoubtedl! constituted and e7tension of ti"e as to the obli. )68E @op=ir= vs. SpitFer.111 2hich the /ota Printin. vs.h of the solidar! t!pe. it is contended b! the appellant sureties that the! 2ere dischar. had beco"e a pri"ar! debtor to the plaintiffE and she therefore had a ri.e 2ould operate for the protection of the sureties ca"e fro" the principal and not fro" an! representative of the plaintiff.a. #o. >>1E )> Fed.. 2as a part! to an! such a. s a result of our e7a"ination of the case 2e find no error in the record pre-udicial to an! of the appellants.ed to operate as a dischar. is untenable.a..and #o.a.an. under article )(9) of the #ivil #ode. J. 2e are of the opinion that the plaintiff 2as entitled to accept and retain the 2hole.e the sureties fro" their liabilit! as to other install"ents upon 2hich alone the! have been sued in this action.al ri. such as 2ould release a suret!. the doctrine above stated to the case before us. Supp.. is that the! 2ere dischar. in our opinion. should be treated as a partial satisfaction of the lar. contention sub"itted e7clusivel! in behalf of France and &oulette..ive to the creditor the ri.inal indebtedness.ed b! the a. her refusal to be bound b! <7hibit ). Nevertheless it is to be borne in "ind that said e7tension and novation related onl! to the second install"ent of the ori..ht of these facts the proposition of the defendants to the effect that the plaintiff has ratified <7hibit ) b! retainin.ree"ent considered that the su" of P)*. No. )1)1. The rule that an e7tension of ti"e . 8868E #oe vs. #ooper Rubber #o.l!. 98>E /lee=er vs. 2ithout the consent of the sureties. Inc.ueras @er"anos.ree. In this connection t is insisted that at the ti"e France and &oulette entered into the contract of suret!ship.ed b! the e7tension of ti"e. #assid!.inal contract. Nearl! all of this "one! 2as so paid prior to the e7ecution of <7hibit ) and althou.estion that a "ort. 2ith interest. )1'E Shephard . #o.ation included therein. concur.. the total a"ount of these notes 2as after2ards paid in full. Cohnson. it in the "anner above stated. and ne2 pro"issor! notes for unpaid balance 2ere e7ecuted in the "anner alread! "entioned in this opinion.. #as. this action 2as not instituted until after all of the install"ents had fallen due in confor"it! 2ith the ori. the /ota Printin.(11 then alread! paid b! the /ota Printin. paid b! the /ota Printin. On Ma! )8 a further su" of P9. Inc. it "i. The failure of the creditor to reDuire a "ort. Ae refer to cause $ "+ 2hich declares that the non%fulfill"ent on the part of the debtors of the stipulation 2ith respect to the pa!"ent of an! install"ent of the indebtedness. C..ht to treat the subseDuent install"ents as due.ranted to the debtor b! the creditor.e is alle.ated itself to pa!. So ordered. )** Tenn. establish"ent b! the purchasers /osDue and Po"ar. 2ithout the assent of the sureties. A. JJ. Inc. P)'.a. Mc#onico... appl!in. and the! are not no2 the sub-ect of controvers!.er su" of P>1. /ani.e 2ould be e7ecuted on the plant to secure the purchase price and that this "ort.ainst the debtor. at first su. It results that the e7tension thus effected could not dischar.ed b! a fraud practiced upon the" b! the plaintiff in failin. such as install"ents of rent.ht of the suret! to e7ercise his le. #o.ation and interest accrued up to that ti"e. the ti"e as to such install"ent 2ould interfere 2ith the ri. that the creditor. the appellant sureties. 2ith costs a. 8strand. or upon a series of pro"issor! notes.a. on her attorne! in fact. C.. Aith this insistence 2e are unable to a. )>6 N..e upon the printin.a. . $*> #!c. a further su" of P>11 2as li=e2ise paid. Cohnson. and in this case it does not appear that the creditor has e7ercised this election.e of the sureties. "a=in.inal obli.ht to treat and declare all of said install"ents as i""ediatel! due.lish and "erican -urisprudence that 2here a suret! is liable for different pa!"ents. ) /roc=. It results that the stipulation contained in para.111. /! the assu"ption of the debts of its predecessor the /ota Printin.. the su" of P)'. to reDuire the debtor to e7ecute a "ort. Inc. and the sa"e 2as credited b! Fi. and that the suret! 2ould in such case be dischar. )**E #ohn vs.e 2as in fact e7ecuted and in the end another creditor appears to have obtained a "ort. e7tin. No such "ort. B.


de la Ra"a.ational 0ank.ed. the follo2in. This contract 2as noted in the Torrens certificate of title on Canuar! (.in.l!. M. and upon the date of the decision of the court belo2 it a"ounted to the su" of P)51. )9(. in the land. representin. it 2as obviousl! for the interest of the &overn"ent and the said o2ners of the land that the "aterial ta=en out b! the dred. Sin. No such pa!"ent 2as. )6>). &. #oriano and .otiations to this effect have been conducted. reDuirin. under certain conditions "entioned in the contract. operations "ade it necessar! for the Director of Public Aor=s to find a place of deposit for the dirt and "ud ta=en fro" the place. SING 6UCO. of an a"ount of not less that >1 nor "ore than 59 centavos per cubic "eter. The indebtedness covered b! this "ort. e7tensive harbor i"prove"ents in this vicinit!. of 2hich. it 2as sub-ect to freDuent floodin. 2ith interest at a rate of )> percent per annu".acson "or appellant .111. of the contract above"entioned. Sin. de la Ra"a. STREET. upon said contract 2as that of :#asa Viuda de Tan Toco. the &overn"ent of the Philippine Islands 2as plannin. b! Mariano de la Ra"a.e to the Philippine National /an= for the purpose of securin. the title of the propert! described therein 2as o2ned. To this stipulation the four o2ners of the propert! assented on March )'. $)+ The /ureau of Public Aor=s a. Cuco and Sin. )1>1. )6>'. It further appears that on Nove"ber >*.ed fro" the river as a result of the proposed i"prove"ent.111. b! the /ureau of Public Aor=s in the "outh of said river. 2hile <nriDue <nchaus 2as "ade defendant as successor in interest of M. s the land alread! referred to 2as lo2 and easil! accessible to the spot 2here dred. "ade as a conseDuence this action 2as instituted b! the Director of Public Aor=s on October )'. e7tensive dred. ccordin.ed b! it fro" the Iloilo River.: Fro" Torrens certificate of title No. appellants. It is located on :Point . in undivided shares.reed that. the o2ners of the propert! covered b! the said certificate conve!ed it b! 2a! of a "ort. 2as also "ade defendant b! reason of her supposed liabilit! derived fro" the act of De la Ra"a in si. after preli"inar! ne. SING "ENGCO 3-4 P!ILIPPINE N TION L " N5. &onFalo Mariano Tanboontien. In said action the Philippine National /an= 2as "ade a part! defendant. /en. and it is of so lo2 a level that. appro7i"atel! t2ice the esti"ated cost of the fillin. 1929 T!E DIRECTOR O# PU"LIC ?OR5S.ned b! M.111 cubic "eters of dred.e upon the propert!. The land above referred to contains an area of nearl! )8 hectares. prior to the i"prove"ent to 2hich reference is to be "ade. for the purpose of recoverin.. in connection 2ith the conte"pted i"prove"ent. .9(6. 2ith the ter"s of said a.co. it appears that on Septe"ber >(. 2hen the 2or= should be finished. or places. Cuco.a. The interest vested b! said certificate in Mariano de la Ra"a 2as subseDuentl! transferred to sale to <nriDue <nchaus.reed that the a"ount due should be deter"ined b! the Director of Public Aor=s.in. as "odified b! so"e respects b! subseDuent a.111.inal o2ners of the propert! fro" the sureties 2hose na"es 2ere si. No. 2as to be conducted. the. Tanboontien. SING 6UCO. and to enforce the obli. features are note2orth!. defendants.reed to deposit the "aterial to be dred. 2ith certain surchar. $>+ Aith respect to the co"pensation it 2as a. vs. Roman J. )*96 relatin. M.e has not been satisfied. the fir" :#asa Viuda de . or to be e7act.a.ree"entE and after the account 2ith the o2ners 2ere liDuidated and the a"ount due fro" the" deter"ined. In connection 2ith the "a=in.in. to be si. ET L.ned to the contract of suret!ship. This bond 2as e7ecuted conte"poraneousl! 2ith the "ain contractE and in connection there2ith it should be noted that one of the na"es appearin. The conduct of these dred. )6>1.lorente: at the "outh of Iloilo river. at a price to be deter"ined at the actual cost of the fillin.ation as a real lien upon the propert!.R. alread! described as covered b! certificate No. and Tan On. )6>1. upon the lot of the land. the &overn"ent of the Philippine Islands. plus interest at )> percent per annu" fro" Nove"ber >'. L-+0181 689: 12. It 2as further a. to land in the "unicipalit! of Iloilo.'' sDuare "eters accordin. operation 2ere conducted b! the /ureau of Public Aor=s in substantial acco"plice.nin. ho2ever. J.a.Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila <N / N# G. It 2as conte"plated in the ori.ed "aterial for fillin. SFe 2ido2 of Tan Toco. 2e find.inal draft of the contract that the /ureau 2ould be able to furnish so"e >91. dred. to the certificate. )6>8. /en. !ttorne'(General Jaranilla "or appellee. 2as li"ited to the "aterial 2hich should be dred. plaintiff%appellee.es should be deposited on the said propert!. de"and 2as "ade upon the" for the pa!"ent of the first install"ent.: purportin.ree"ent. near the #it! of Iloilo. as havin. de la Ra"a.. the cost thereof should be paid b! the o2ners in 9 annual install"ents and that for failure to pa! such install"ent the 2hole of the a"ount thereafter to accrue should beco"e at once due.. and Sen. The dred.in.es to be deter"ined b! the Director of Public Aor=s. and the four o2ners. Director of Public Aor=s reDuired a bond to be supplied b! the o2ners in the penal a"ount of P)91. conditioned for the pa!"ent of the a"ount due fro" the o2ners..epomuceno "or appellants #in$ Juco and #in$ 0en$co. a contract 2as "ade bet2een the Director of Public Aor=s. In )6>). a credit in current account in a "ount not in e7cess of P)51. )*96.co. the a"ount due to the &overn"ent under the contract fro" the ori. an interest under its prior "ort.

ated to raise the land on 2hich the dred.inal contract as ori. Viuda de Tan Toco. SFe.ations i"posed upon the . that the lien of the &overn"ent for the filin.(9.e credit pertainin.ation in the nature of suret!ship bindin.ned 2ithout authorit!E 2hile on the part of the Philippine National /an= 2as asserted that the "ort.co. for this defendant under the po2er of attorne!. These defendants sou. to the natural process of dr!in. /! said contract.e. and that the four "ort.ive to the defendant o2ners da"a. ?nder the ori. )'. Dealin.ed fro" the "outh of the Iloilo River in the course of the i"prove"ent underta=en b! the &overn"ent in and near that place. 2e find the contention of the appellants $e7cept the Philippine National /an=+. the Philippine National /an= appealed fro" so "uch of the decision as .ineer testified that the fillin. as da"a.ned to the contract of suret!ship b! Mariano de la Ra"a 2as si. of dred. of an obli. error is assi.M. .a. The contention of Tan On. be reDuired to pa! the a"ount due to the ban=.inal co"plaint 2herein the &overn"ent see=s to enforce its lien in subordination to its first "ort. ll of the defendants.ed "aterialE but on Mar. On the part of Tan On.('1 cubic "eters.ht to recover further da"a. that part of the ori. and is not.111. the o2ners of the propert! indicated their acceptance of a "odification of the contract effected b! the Director of Public Aor=s and the Secretar! of #o""erce and #o""unications. in effect. the land had not been "uch benefited. In the endorse"ent of the Director of Public Aor=s. The char. and after the a"ount thus deposited had been reduced b! >). Viuda de Tan Toco.ned to the action of the court in holdin. 2ido2 of Tan Toco. o2in. o2in.ed fro" the river as a result of the proposed i"prove"ent. is 2holl! untenable. been able to sell in lots the propert! to individual occupants.a. actin. the &overn"ent a. of the land to an! specified level. Sin. the defendant Tan On. upon this principal. in the enforce"ent of the .e be foreclosed for the a"ount of its "ort. "ade pronounce"ents.ated itself upon said land the "aterial should be dred. is the a"ount of interest alle.ors should not satisf! their indebtedness to the &overn"ent. in that dred.a.. the district en. the /ureau of Public Aor=s further deposited 9*. Sin. as follo2s. The clai" is.ned b! Mariano de la Ra"a.es for breach of contract on the part of the &overn"ent.es b! 2a! of cross%co"plaint for the sa"e supposed breach of contract on the part of the &overn"ent. and reDuirin. Finall!. 2ell%founded. is our pinion. Cuco.6*( actuall! cost the &overn"ent the a"ount of P((.e credit..reed to furnish >91.ors. In fact it appears that the &overn"ent deposited in the period covered b! the contract >*8.a. bound b! the contract of suret!ship. /en.a. /ut the &overn"ent has e7hibited no po2er of attorne! 2hich 2ould authoriFe the creation. said defendant liable upon the contract of suret!ship. Cuco.norin. b! the attorne!%in%fact.e of the Philippine National /an=E and finall! $*+ Declarin.ested. and that.: To this co"plaint different defenses 2ere set up.e "ade for the 2or= 2as evidentl! co"puted on a ver! "oderate basisE and the o2ners of the propert! have no -ust . )6>). and b! 2a! of counterclai" the ban= as=ed that its "ort. $)+ Declarin. It 2ill be re"e"bered that said contract purports to have been si.111 cubic "eters on the sa"e land.overn"ent3s lien. M. the propert! should be sold :sub-ect to the first "ort.a. The &overn"ent onl! obli.e. It 2as note2orth! that in the co"plaint it 2as as=ed that.a. "ore or less. M. appealed fro" so "uch of the decision as held that the defendant o2ners and si. the" to pa! the said su" to the plaintiffE $>+ Declarin. ?pon hearin.es b! the o2ners. it 2as "ade clear that the /ureau of Public Aor=s did not underta=e to furnish "aterial to co"plete the fillin.overn"ent b! the contract. of the co"plaint. to the effect that the Director of Public Aor=s has failed to co"pl! 2ith the obli. and that in case of their failure to do so the "ort.ave the lien of the &overn"ent for i"prove"ent priorit! over the "ort.natories to the contract of suret!ship has not been released b! non%perfor"ance of the contract on the part of the /ureau of Public Aor=s. 2hich is clai"ed upon this account.ed to have been accrued upon their invest"ent. de la Ra"a and &. or if the land should not sell enou.co. It is therefore asserted that the o2ners of the propert! are not obli. SFe. and fro" the refusal of the court to . the &overn"ent 2as not obli. to the effect that she 2as not.'81 cubic "eters. that the o2ners have.h 2ater.ated to pa! the fillin. for this reason. to the ban= is superior to the &overn"ents lien for i"prove"ent.round of co"plaint 2hatever. it 2as contended that the . 2ith interest fro" the date of the filin. Proof sub"itted on the part of the o2ners tends to sho2 that parts of the filled land are still sub-ect to inundation in rain! 2eatherE and it is contended. as a conseDuence.ed to the o2ners at P51. SFe. /en. Tanboontien.>65.a. thus accepted b! the o2ners.. as alread! su. e7cept the Philippine National /an=. Sin.eousl! upon the "ar=et. the su" of P)9."ent various parties defendant appealed as follo2s.overn"ent has not co"plied 2ith that contract. Fro" this -ud. the cause the trial court. the contract.inall! drafted. M.Tan Toco: as a suret! on bond.ed "aterial 2as deposited to an! specified level. untenable.ed "aterial deposited on the land had not been sufficient in Duantit! to raise the level of the land above hi.a. Sin.a. On the part of Viuda de Tan Toco the defense 2as interposed that the na"e :#asa Viuda de Tan Toco: si.111 cubic "eters. 2hich has been char. i.h to satisf! the sa"e. in case the four principal obli. 2ith these contentions in the order indicated.e in favor of the Philippine National /an=. In this connection.ee e7ecuted in favor of the ban=. On behalf of the o2ners of the propert!. There has been no breach on the part of the &overn"ent in fulfillin. Tanboontien indebted to the &overn"ent in the a"ount of P51. personall! liable upon the contract of suret!ship. de la Ra"a and &. to their inabilit! to place the land advanta.ed propert! should be sold and the proceeds paid preferentiall! to the ban= upon its "ort. 6*(. in 2hich it 2as "ade clear that the "aterial to be supplied 2ould be such onl! as should be dred. operation. i"prove"ent 2as superior to the "ort.

2ith po2er of substitution. . conferred b! these docu"ents $<7hibit H. )6>'. Ae no2 proceed to consider the last i"portant disputed Duestion involved in this case. interest e7isted in the propert!.istration. previousl! "ade.! a po2er of attorne! to e7ecute a contract of .ain.e.uarant! should not be inferred fro" va. then the "ort. and also for "e and in "! na"e to si.a. seal and e7ecute. the parcel of land alread! "entioned is entitled to preference over the "ort.a. and as her act and deed deliver. /ut assu"in. especiall! 2hen such 2ords have their ori.eneral 2ords at the close of the Duoted clauses should be interpreted. and M+. the said Tan On. preference under subsection * or article )6>* of the #ivil code . and the sa"e a. not open to doubtE and a. that said credit is a refectionar! credit en-o!in. and the lien created b! the contract could onl! operate upon the eDuit! of rede"ption. The o2ners.s 2hatsoever as full! and effectuall! as I.ien #o. for the reason that b! the e7press ter"s of the fillin.a. there appears the follo2in. Possibl! the si"pler vie2 of the situation is to consider the &overn"ent3s ri.It is true that the &overn"ent introduced in evidence > docu"ents e7hibitin. e7ecuted in favor of the sa"e Mariano de la Ra"a b! his uncle Tan . perfor". 2hich is. 2herein she or "a! be personall! interested or concerned. that in a precise and technical sense. The Duestion 2hether the credit 2e are considerin. In the civil la2 the refectionar! credit is pri"aril! an indebtedness incurred in the repair or reconstruction of so"ethin.e therefore attached to the fee. attorne!%in%fact of Tan On. contract the credit 2as constituted a lien upon the i"proved propert!. "ade necessar! b! the deterioration or destruction as it for"erl! e7isted. as the trial -ud. there is a priorit! of "ore than three !ears. In the brief sub"itted in behalf of the ban= it appears to be assu"ed that the &overn"ent credit under the fillin.eneral rule e3usdem $eneris. such repair or reconstruction bein.ister of Deeds of the province of Iloilo on Nove"ber >8. an! other deed for the conve!in. The &overn"ent3s lien o2es its ori.n"ent. Neither of these po2ers officiall! confers upon Mariano de la Ra"a the po2er to bind a principal b! a contract of suret!ship. Po2er to e7ecute a contract so e7ceptional a nature as a contract of suret!ship or . or 2hether on the contrar!. .e. an! lease.enerall! for "e and in "! na"e to do. under the .ht in another intrinsicall! . contract 2as created after the "ort. .iven the po2er 2hich reads as follo2s. contract to declare the credit a lien upon the propert! to be i"proved L to the e7tent hereinafter define L 2hether the credit precisel! fulfills the conception of refectionar! credit or not.e credit under the fillin. and as "! act and deed deliver. at the ti"e this contract 2as "ade. nd I do hereb! further authoriFe and e"po2er "! said attorne! to substitute and point an! other attorne! or attorne!s under hi" for the purposes aforesaid.istered in the office of the Re. to propert!E and the "ore . SFe "i. personal -ud. and derives its efficac! fro" the volition of the contractin. into the discussion of the feature of the case it is 2ell to recall the fact that the ban=3s "ort. or unli"ited interest of the o2ners in the propert!. .n.ht or could do if personall! present. for it 2as certainl! la2ful for the parties to the fillin.ainst Tan On. The true solution to the proble" is.h Spanish -urisprudence appears to have sanctioned this broader conception in certain cases as "a! be . after the o2ners of the propert! had parted 2ith the interest created b! the "ort. SFe upon the bond upon 2hich she 2as sued in this case.uarant! shall not be presu"edE it "ust be e7pressed and cannot be e7tended be!ond its specified li"its. In article )(>5 of the #ivil #ode it is declared that . an! lease or an! other deed for the conve!in.Re"accionario.istered. In this aspect 2e have before us a co"petition bet2een the real lien created b! the fillin. as referrin.ain the result is that priorit! "ust be conceded to the "ort. and also for her and for her na"e to si. in the inscription of the "ort. sale.e 2as re.reater than that 2hich he hi"self possess. falls precisel! under the conception of the refectionar! credit in the civil la2 is in this case acade"ic rather than practical.ivin. SFe. an! real or personal propert! or the other "atter or thin.n.eneral 2ords. the credit a lien upon the propert!. contract 2as re. assi.eneral 2ords contained in these po2ers. parties. contract 2as "ade an e7press lien upon the propert! 2hich 2as the sub-ect of i"prove"ent. and e7ecute all and an! other la2ful and reasonable acts and thin.athered fro" the decision in the +nciclopedia Juridica +spanola $vol. the lien created b! the fillin. 2hether the indebtedness o2in.in to the contract. seal and e7ecute.a. . that is to sa!. an! real or personal propert! or other "atter or thin.a.ht under the stipulation e7pressl! "a=in. /! analo.istered first. thou.ue or . The clauses noted relate "ore specificall! to the e7ecution of contracts relatin.ain and pleasure to revo=eE and . It "a! be observed. (((%(61+ s. for the reason that the "ort. It results that the trial court 2as in error in . On the other hand. bar.iven priorit! under subsection > of the article )6>5 of the sa"e code. v.e 2as re. contract of the later re. . as "i.e had been "ade and re. 2herein I a" or "a! be personall! interested or concerned. contract is a true refectionar! credit $ credito re"acionario+ under subsection > of rticle )6>* of the #ivil #ode. 2ere o2ners of the eDuit! of rede"ption onl! and not of the entire interest in the propert!.ht be tenable in the state of -urisprudence.istered on Canuar! (.a.a. The "ort. ho2ever. $<7hibits .a.a. conve!ance or assurance.uarant! cannot be inferred fro" the . The conception does not ordinaril! include an entirel! ne2 2or=..a.in and e7planation in particular po2ers of a 2holl! different nature. >8. to the &overn"ent under the contract for fillin. /ut no part! can b! contract create a ri. )6>1. and therefore. pp. ."ent a.e credit "ust be . po2ers of attorne!. this credit is not e7actl! of the nature of the refectionar! credit as =no2n to the civil la2. 2hile the filin. to the contracts of li=e character.e 2as created b! the la2ful o2ners at a ti"e 2hen no other co"petin. in our opinion.e credit due to the Philippine National /an=. The lien of the "ort. release. identical 2ith <7hibit 9+ Mariano de la Ra"a 2as . in point of ti"e.. the latter clai" is entitled to priorit! over the clai" of the &overn"ent ?pon enterin.e held. In another docu"ent.

The -ud. The trial court."ent "ust also be reversed in so far as it declares that the &overn"ent3s lien under the fillin. it beca"e an inte. . and the sa"e is hereb! affir"ed.e undoubtedl! attached to the incre"ent thus spread over and affi7ed to the "ort. contract and that as a conseDuence the "ort.In this connection. is liable upon the contract of suret!ship. Puluoa. in dis"issin.a. the result 2ould be that a "ort.es upon the propert! in Duestion. b! the act and intention of the parties to the fillin.. to the value added b! deposit of the additional "aterial.a.e creditor could. 2hich are not dispute. This cannot be accepted as . Tanboontien and Mariano de la Ra"a Tanbunco $alias Mariano de la Ra"a+ for the a"ount due to the &overn"ent Said -ud. as the ne2 "aterial 2as deposited fro" the &overn"ent dred. ?rDui-o. see"s to have proceeded upon the idea that. ho2ever. Cuco."ent entered in favor of the plaintiff a.a. Ae "a! add that the case cannot. 2ith respect to the a"ount of the &overn"ent3s clai" under the fillin. to be applied to the &overn"ent3s lien created b! the fillin. "ust be reversed and the sa"e is bein. Such -ud.e lien should not been considered as attachin.e.ainst Sin. 2e observed that.e creditor in said contract the latter could not be pre-udiced thereb!.ral part of the soil and an irre"ovable fi7tureE and the deposit havin. concur. For further proceedin. On the contrar! it is hereb! declared that the ban=3s credit is entitled to priorit! out of the proceeds of the foreclosure sale.ood la2.a.ed "aterial on the land such "aterial lost its identit!. the Director of Public Aor=s.co. Fro" 2hat it has been said it results that the appealed -ud. contract is entitled to priorit! over the ban=3s "ort. 2ithout the concurrence of the "ort."ent.e credit of the ban=. for the reason that upon the deposit of the dred. b! the act of stran. /en.e. ho2ever. as it is also affir"ed in respect to the -oint and several -ud. that the &overn"ent3s lien should have preference over the "ort. the cross%co"plaint filed b! so"e of the defendants a. the ne2 soil had !et been deposited under the fillin. upon the authorit! of ?nson vs. if an!. SFe. So ordered. In the case cited the "achiner! in respect to 2hich the vendor3s preference 2as upheld b! this court retained its separate e7istence and re"ained perfectl! capable of identification at all ti"es.. in effect. on this point. been "ade under contract bet2een the &overn"ent and the o2ners of the eDuit! of rede"ption. and the lien of the "ort. Romualdez. also voted as indicated in the dispositive part o" their decision. Johnson.a and <scubi $91 Phil.. be resolved favorabl! to the contention of the Director of Public Aor=s.ers. Villamor. and she is hereb! absolved fro" the co"plaint.in. alcolm and 8strand. If the idea 2hich prevailed in the trial court should be accepted as la2 upon this point. )81+.e 2as created. reversed in so far as it holds that Tan On. in declarin.a. at the ti"e the "ort. This proposition. of i"prove"ents to 2hich he has not assented. the cause is hereb! re"anded to the cause of ori.. JJ.ainst the plaintiff. be entirel! proved out of his propert! b! "a=in. Sin. and Villa(Real.a.s in confor"it! 2ith this opinion. Viuda de Tan Toco. 2ithout pronounce"ents as to costs.s. Johns."ent "ust be affir"ed. JJ. )ut their names are not si$ned to opinion o%in$ to their a)sence o" leave at the time o" their promul$ation.a. overloo=s the fact that the deposited "aterial beca"e an irre"ovable fi7ture."ent is further affir"ed in its findin.ed land. contract and the a"ount of "ort.a. contract and other2ise in accordance 2ith la2. contract.a. the residue.

e to the plaintiff on the stea"ers Ro$er Poizat and Ga)rielle Poizat."ent or an! part thereof. havin. e7ecuted a chattel "ort. the defendants Cean M. P)1.s. as her a. plaintiff%appellee. pa!able one !ear after date. havin. PoiFat and #o. but not deter"ined in para.a. in 2hich.reed upon fro" the )8th of Dece"ber.111 as attorne!3s fees.111.ent. M. PREDIC DORES DE L PRO1INCI DEL S NTISIMO ROS RIO.a.ainst the defendants &abriela ndrea de #oster ! Ro7as.R.a..e are attached to.e and sell the sa"e accordin. under the la2s of the Philippine Islands 2ith its principal office and place of business in the #it! of ManilaE that on Dece"ber >6.e in favor of .. plaintiff pra!s for an order of the court to direct the sheriff of the #it! of Manila to ta=e i""ediate possession of the propert! described in the chattel "ort. PoiFat and #o. of a first "ort.*'. and costsE that the said defendants have not paid the -ud. ST T<M<NT March )1.ious corporation dul! or.a. it is provided that in the event of a suit or action. corporation 2ith its principal office and place of business in the #it! of ManilaE that the defendant &abriela ndrea de #oster ! Ro7as 2as the 2ife of the defendant Cean M. The plaintiff havin.aniFed and e7istin. )6>). 1925 T!E " N5 O# T!E P!ILIPPINE ISL NDS. sho2s. to the PoiFat Ve. both of 2ho" 2ere residents of the #it! of ManilaE that the defendant C.a.e on certain real propert! l!in. PoiFat and &abriela ndrea de #oster ! Ro7as. )6>'. civil case No. consistin. <7hibits and /. defendant%appellant. itE and that such defendants be ad-ud.ainst the defendants on the note in the #ourt of First Instance of the #it! of Manila. and that the full a"ount of the debt secured b! the "ort. and "ade a part of. PoiFat and C.ent.ed to pa! an! re"ainin.e . and P>.ors Cean M. )6>) up to the present dateE III.raph IV of the sa"e co"plaint is P)>9. 2hich is specificall! described in the "ort.e or so "uch thereof as "a! be reDuired to pa! the a"ount due the plaintiff be sold accordin. . )6>'.ed and delivered to this plaintiff a "ort. PoiFat and C.defendants%appelleesE G "RIEL NDRE DE COSTER 2 RO@ S.a Orden de Do"inicos or PP. to the #hattel Mort. That the "ort. No. On pril >'. pa!able "onthl!.a.911 for and in account of insurance upon the stea"er Ga)rielle Poizat. situated in the #it! of Manila.ht action a.a.a.a2E that the propert! described in the real "ort. M.a. the consent and per"ission of her husband. .etable Oil Mills and certain "erchandiseE that at the sa"e ti"e and for the sa"e purpose. for value.ious corporation on the propert! described in para. deficienc!. as her a.eE that the real propert! 2as sub-ect to a prior "ort. Predicadores de la Provincia del Santisi"o Rosario.istered partnership 2ith its principal office and place of business in the #it! of ManilaE that the defendant . #opies of the chattel and real "ort. -ointl! and severall! for P>6>. Per"ecto Ga)riel "or the 7ominican Corporation as appellee. Aherefore. Predicadores de la Provincia del Santisi"o Rosario appeared in the suit and filed the follo2in. PoiFat. the . 8pisso "or appellant. said defendants "ade to the plaintiff a certain pro"issor! note for P>6>.111. vs. have not paid the principal or the interest stipulated and a. !raneta and :ara$oza "or the )ank as appellee. to la2E that out of such sales plaintiff shall be paid the a"ount due and o2in.a.a Orden de Do"inicos or PP. G "RIEL NDRE DE COSTER 2 RO@ S.a Orden de Do"inicos or PP. the defendants should pa! the further su" of P)1. Predicadores de la Provincia del Santisi"o Rosario 2as a reli.Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila <N / N# G. ET L. the consent and per"ission of her husband.a. )6>'.ed on the propert! described in the co"plaint is no2 due and o2in. L ORDEN DE DOMINICOS or PP. for ans2er to the co"plaint. and bein. a"on. the co"plaint and "ar=ed. Predicadores de la Provincia del Santisi"o Rosario.. hence it is "ade a part! defendantE that the note in Duestion is lon. and he actin.. M.111 2ith interest of )1 per cent per annu"E II.e in favor of the aforesaid reli.ust.6>9. the defendant &abriela ndrea de #oster ! Ro7as. as attorne!3s feesE that the note in Duestion 2as a -oint and several noteE that to secure the pa!"ent thereof. 2ith interest of 6 per cent per annu".in. >9>)(E that in such case the court rendered -ud.e is foreclosed. Aherefore. other thin. I. The interest due up to the *1th of pril of the present !ear )6>' a"ounts to a total su" of P>5. 2ith interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annu" fro" the *)st of u.ed that it 2as a do"estic ban=in. L-2+181 M3rc& 1.111. and he actin. PoiFat and #o. defendants. Cean M. the defendant &abriela ndrea de #oster ! Ro7as.raph V of the co"plaint. plea. the plaintiff filed a co"plaint in 2hich it 2as alle. 2ith the "achiner! and "aterials belon.a Orden de Do"inicos or PP. The defendant corporation."ent a. )6>*. 2as a dul! re. !ntonio . 2ith interest on that a"ount fro" Februar! 6. respectivel!. past due and o2in. brou. at the rate of 6 per cent per annu".a. the! ac=no2led. it is pra!ed that the credit above%"entioned be ta=en into account 2hen the second "ort. That the encu"brance above%"entioned.

all! of the notes and "ort. III. PoiFat N #o.. the "otion to set aside and vacate the -ud.ards the notes to the plaintiff."ent had been rendered a. Aithout .M.uarantee an! loan "ade to this defendantE that it is a securit! onl! . on Cune >'.s b! the ban= and the Do"inican Fathers and the ar.=on.h collusion.a. an! notice of the defendants Cean M.ain denied.uarantee an! loan "ade to this defendantE third. PoiFat N #o.iti"ate 2ife of the defendant Cean M. C. service of the su""ons on the husband. on "otion of the plaintiff. absent fro" the Philippine Islands at the ti"e of the filin. )6>'.ainst her on Cul! >(. "otion for a reconsideration 2as then "ade. been no service of the su""ons on her in the "anner reDuired b! section *68 of the #ode of #ivil Procedure.a. herself in this actionE that this is a case 2hich co"es under section ))* of the #ode of #ivil Procedure. it 2as e7ecuted 2ithout the e7press "arital consent 2hich the la2 reDuiresE fourth. the defendants &abriela ndrea de #oster ! Ro7as and Cean M. third. the ille. . First. outside of the sheriff3s return. the follo2in.ainst her. )6>'.a.e does not .h his "alicious ne.a. PoiFat N #o. First. The lo2er court erred in holdin."ent 2as denied.ationE second. it 2as e7ecuted to secure a void obli. PoiFatE that she had been absent fro" the Philippine Islands and residin. it does not . II. fter counter sho2in. PoiFat and C. and that in u.ivin. )6>'. for 2hich she 2as not responsible. she ca"e into possession of docu"ents sho2in.e nu"ber of e7hibits all of 2hich tended to support the "otion. 2hich involves the validit! of the order of the Do"inican Fathers in this.E that she then 2ent to @on. evidence. and learned that her husband had left there under a false na"e and had . that it 2as e7ecuted b! her husband in e7cess of the po2ers . The defendant &abriela ndrea de #oster ! Ro7as appeals. the defendant &abriela ndrea de #oster ! Ro7as filed a "otion in 2hich she recites that she is the le.li. errorsE P RT I S TO T@< C?RISDI#TION I. and that the propert! should be sold and the proceeds applied to satisf! the respective -ud.ood and le.ence. She pra!s that the -ud. )6>'. and considerin. it 2as e7ecuted to secure a void liti. 2hen she returned to ManilaE that at that ti"e of the filin.one to @on.li. of the fact that the husband of the defendant &abriela ndrea de #oster ! Ro7as 2as her attorne! in fact 2ith po2er to appear for the defendant in court. 2hen. $)+ There havin.ust. The "otion 2as based upon."ent be rendered.one to the port of Sin. althou. and that she be per"itted to file an ans2er. and &abriela ndrea de #oster ! Ro7as. because her husband had left the Philippine Islands t2o da!s previous and . it does not represent an! "one! paid to the defendant b! the ban=E second. 2here she had lived per"anentl! and continuousl! for fifteen !ears prior thereof.ive the court -urisdiction on the person and propert! of the 2ife and to render -ud.iven for a credit of a third personE that the "ort. it 2as e7ecuted throu."ent entered for the respective a"ountsE that she never had an! =no2led. That if the -ud. France. The lo2er court erred in considerin. and after the introduction of evidence on the part of the plaintiff and the defendant Do"inican Fathers."ent is not set aside.apore fro" 2hence he 2ent to other places un=no2n to thus defendantE that she then returned to Manila.e in DuestionE that she has a ."ent b! default a.nin. )6>'. that it had acDuired -urisdiction on the defendant &abriela ndrea de #oster ! Ro7as. bout u. she learned that a default -ud.h the local ne2spapers.e. she 2as absent fro" the Philippine IslandsE that the su""ons 2as delivered b! the sheriff of the #it! of Manila to her husband. in the #it! of Paris fro" the !ear )61( to pril *1. that it 2as e7ecuted as the result of collusion bet2een the ban= and the defendant liable for the obli.Ma! *.e 2as e7ecuted 2ithout the "arital consent of the 2ifeE and that he did not have na! authorit! to "a=e her liable as suret! on the debt of a third personE that as re. default 2as ta=en and -ud.ation of a third person. her fro" all liabilit!. of the co"plaint and the issuance of the su""ons. been no se rive b! publication in the "anner reDuired b! section *6( of the #ode of #ivil Procedure. and that throu. the court rendered an opinion in substance and to the effect that the plaintiff should have -ud. 2ere declared in default. and the "otion of the defendant to file an ans2er and "a=e a defense 2as a. the defendant 2ill suffer irreparable in-ur!E that throu. that it 2as e7ecuted b! her husband.ust >8. she bein. it does not . that it is e7clusivel! the personal debt of the defendants Cean M. she 2as unable to obtain the rendition of accounts.ationE second. this defendant 2as prevented fro" defendin."ent annulled and set aside and the case be reopened.ence. to 2hich 2as attached a lar. and that the case be tried on its "erits. The court erred in ad"ittin. absolvin. the affidavit of the defendant 2ife. assi.=on. and $>+ There havin."ent for the a"ount of their clai".uarantee an! loan "ade to third defendantE third.h her attorne!."ents.M."ent as pra!ed for in its co"plaint.u"ents of respective counsel. PoiFat and C. that in a case %here the %i"e is the onl' necessar' part' . is sufficient to .iven to hi" under his po2er of attorne!E fifth. at a place 2hich is not :the usual place of residence: of the 2ife and 2here the 2ife has never lived or resided.h surprise and ne. PoiFat. and supported b!. That as to the "ort. )6>'E that 2hen she first =ne2 of that fact.al defense to the action. of the co"plaint and of the issuance of the su""ons in this case.e of the actual facts until the latter part of Cul!. because the ban= desired "ore securit! for the pa!"ent of her husband3s debt to the ban=E fourth. and a resident of Paris. for failure to appear or ans2er. and that the Do"inican Fathers should have -ud.M. throu. and that a final -ud. that their "ort.

to. "a! entitle the latter to de"and fro" hi" the correspondin. the defendant &abriela ndrea de #oster ! Ro7as. 2ill entitle the plaintiff 2ho has "isstated the "aterial -urisdictional facts of the co"plaint to a -ud. that the non%appearance of an a. The lo2er court erred in holdin. and 2ith =no2led. that because the a. and in a case 2here the co"plaint sho2s that plaintiff has no ri. and to the advanta. 2as such an error 2as can be i"puted to this defendant.al.. The lo2er court erred in holdin. be!ond the scope of his po2ers as such a.M.M. <ven so. . but it cannot pre-udice the creditor and cause the nullit! of the loan. borro2ed b! hi" 2ithin the scope of his po2ers. The lo2er court erred in ta=in. the follo2in. VII.ainst the principal. :It is ho2ever alle.er 2ould a"ount to a loan "ade b! the a. PoiFat and the /an= of the Philippine Islands "i. be!ond his po2ers. to act as a.. if an!. that the ne.ations in favor of the plaintiff /an= of the Philippine Islands and of the defendant Orden de PP. of C. )*).ent believed that the latter 2as actin.ination facts 2hich did not ta=e place. even ad"ittin. PoiFat apparentl! as a. state"ent.ed an! of the . even then. that the "one! borro2ed 2as used b! PoiFat to pa! debts 2hich did not belon.ent of the defendant &abriela ndrea de #oster ! Ro7as had po2er to appear for her in court. on behalf of the defendant &abriela ndrea de #oster ! Ro7as. PoiFat 2as su""oned as a. II. 2ithout redress.M. fro" its o2n i"a. PoiFat caused the latter to contract be!ond the scope of his po2ers as a.: I0. The lo2er court erred in holdin. IV. since his principal.ent of the defendant &abriela ndrea de #oster ! Ro7as.ent of this defendant the obli. The lo2er court erred in not holdin. /ut. The court erred in holdin. notified of all the decisions rendered in this case.ent of the defendant &abriela ndrea de #oster ! Ro7as acted 2ithin the scope of his po2ers.ent of the defendant &abriela ndrea de #oster ! Ro7as.ation contracted b! said C.ation 2hich is the sub-ect "atter of this case. Predicadores de la Provincia del Santisi"o Rosario had =no2led. PoiFat in not appearin. 0II. and the pa!"ent of the debts of a stran. but in truth be!ond the scope of his authorit!.ent of the defendant 2hen service of the su""ons has been "ade on hi" not as the a.iven her a. this 2ould not render the loan obtained b! the attorne! in fact null and void.ers.al.ht of action. 0I.IV. and then dra2 the conclusion that if under those h!pothetical facts the transaction bet2een C. The circu"stance that the a. 0. P RT II S TO T@< M<RITS OF T@< D<F<NS< I.ent of the defendant but in other capacit!. PoiFat that there 2as no defense a.ent of hi 2ife. that these loans 2ere obtained to pa! debts. The lo2er court erred in holdin.M. that C. 0III.M. of 2hich there is no evidence in the record. then the transaction as it actuall! too= place 2as also le."ent b! default. III. and 2as. the respective obli.ent po2er to loan an! a"ount of "one!.ether 2ith the po2er to borro2 "one!.e of the fact that C. to vacate a -ud.ent be!ond his po2er even 2hen both the creditor and the a. VIII.rounds enu"erated in section ))* of the #ode of #ivil Procedure. b! the petitioner. he 2ould have acted 2ithin his po2ers. the obli.es )98%)89 of the bill of e7ceptions. that in contractin. Predicadores de la Provincia del Santisi"o Rosario. that the plaintiff /an= of the Philippine Islands and the defendant Orden de PP.ation contracted b! his a. The lo2er court erred in holdin. in that capacit!.ed. The lo2er court erred in "a=in. had . served in a "anner not provided for b! the la2. that the relief on the part of C. VI.ainst the clai" of the plaintiff on an obli. S"ith. that defendant has not alle. and 2hich the parties never clai"ed to have e7isted.ations in their favor. to purposes for 2hich he 2as not authoriFed b! his principal.ainst the Do"inican Order and the /an= of the Philippine Islands."ent b! default a. /ell and #o. V.ent on behalf of his principal to the person or entit! 2hose debt 2as paid 2ith the "one! obtained fro" the creditors. into consideration <7hibit appearin. to this case the principle involved in the case of Palanca vs. 2hen the record sho2s that there 2as no service of the su""ons in accordance 2ith an! of the for"s of service provided b! la2. to his principal. in the record to support the truth of such findin. 6 Phil. that a principal is not liable for an obli. The lo2er court erred.ence.ht have been le. The lo2er court erred in refusin. in holdin. the a. that this defendant%appellant has no "eritorious defense a. nothin. pretendin. liabilit! for the da"a.. at pa. and a.ainst the defendant &abriela ndrea de #oster ! Ro7as rendered on a defective su""ons. The lo2er court erred in appl!in. The lo2er court erred in holdin. 2as actin. The court erred in suppl!in.ainst 2hich she can obtain no redress.M. V.e on the part of the plaintiff ban= that he 2as so actin. 2ith abuse of discretion.M.li. PoiFat in contractin. of stran. 2ithin the scope of his po2ers. The lo2er court erred in not holdin.ent.e of the plaintiff ban= 2ho in collusion 2ith said C. can be i"puted to this defendant.es suffered. there bein."ent b! default a.ent used the "one!. his non%appearance could render this defendant liable to a -ud.

to the defendant personall!. or b! leavin..: <ven so.. France.I. S<RD<R It 2ill be noted that the service of su""ons and co"plaint 2as "ade on this defendant on the )*th da! of March.: Ae 2ill decide the case of the ban= first The petition of the appellant states under oath. the cop! at the office of the proper officer thereof if such officer cannot be found. That contention is in direct conflict 2ith the ad"ission of the plaintiff that since the !ear )61( and up to pril *1. Mr.th of ti"e sufficient to overco"e the le. PoiFat and #o. up to pril *1. suffice it to sa! that si7teen !ears is a"pl! sufficient.eneral a..raphs I and II of the aforesaid "otion. and that it is a stipulated fact that since the !ear )61( and up to pril *1. personall!. in the #it! of Paris. in the #it! of Paris. )6>'. sa!s. 2e are clearl! of the opinion that the residence of the husband 2as not the usual place of residence of the 2ife. to the :.hout these proceedin. of this action or of the facts 2hich led to it. It "a! be that 2here in the ordinar! course of business the 2ife is absent fro" the residence of husband on a pleasure trip or for business reasons or to visit friends or relatives that.M. )6>'. since the !ear )61( $)616+. That at the ti"e that the co"plaint in the above entitled case 2as filed. to C. throu. as provided in subsections one and t2o. J.h Father Pedro Pratt. and of the co"plaint attached. France. /ut service upon a corporation. the husband 2as the . 6O!NS. this )*th da! of March. France. P.I. III. )6>'. therein and of sufficient discretion to receive it. the defendant &abriela ndrea de #oster ! Ro7as 2as absent fro" the Philippine Islands. a li"itation upon the len. )6>'. C. she 2as still absent fro" the Philippine Islands and had no =no2led. b! leavin. The lo2er court has acted throu.: Aithout placin. in the #it! of Paris. I%II. It follo2s that the substituted service atte"pted to be "ade under the provisions of section *68 of the #ode of #ivil Procedure is null and void. upon Cean M. II. a co"pan! dul! or. in the #it! of Paris.aniFed under the la2s of the Philippine Islands. That it ad"its the alle. For si7teen !ears the residence of the husband 2as in the #it! of Manila. On this date I have served a cop! of the 2ithin su""ons. )6>'. and that le.: throu.raph 8 of section *68 of the #ode of #ivil Procedure provides. Para. to 2it.s. that presu"ption is overco"e b! the ad"itted fact that the 2ife 2as :residin. In all other cases. b! deliverin. personall!. ?pon the ad"itted facts. and the copies correspondin. P. to &abriela ndrea de #oster ! Ro7as. in the nature of such thin.e either of the filin. the 2ife 2as residin. That this defendant has been absent fro" the Philippine Islands and residin. full force and effect to the le. she 2as :residin. and that b! reason of the fact that the husband 2as dul! . PoiFat. )6>'.M. the residence of the 2ife 2ould continue and re"ain to be that of the husband. III. RI# RDO S?MM<RS #heri"" o" anila /! SIM<ON D. The lo2er court erred in den!in. The residence of the 2ife in the #it! of Paris covered a period of si7teen !ears.raph. said copies to its President Mr.al presu"ption that the usual place of residence of the 2ife is that of her husband. )6>'. Manila. PoiFat. the sa"e in the place of her usual residence in the #it! of Manila and in the hands of her husband. Predicadores de la Provincia del Santisi"o Rosario. it is contended that the service 2as valid b! reason of the fact that it 2as "ade at the usual place of residence and abode of the defendant husband. 0V. since the !ear )61( up to pril *1.0IV.a Orden de Do"inicos or PP. &ivin. pril ). president. The return of the sheriff as to the service is as follo2s. Procurador &eneral of said Orden de Do"inicos or PP. personall!. and the copies correspondin. a cop! at his usual place of residence. and that b! such service the court never acDuired -urisdiction of the person of the defendant 2ife. personall!. a person residin. RI# RDO S?MM<RS #heri"" o" anila /! &R<&ORIO & R#I I hereb! certif! that on this date I have delivered a cop! of this su""ons and of the co"plaint correspondin. in the hands of so"e person resident therein of sufficient discretion to receive the sa"e.h its actin. Predicadores de la Provincia del Santisi"o Rosario.al presu"ption. PoiFat. That it ad"its the first part of this para. on 2hich date she arrived in this #it! of Manila. Philippine Islands.all! the residence of the 2ife is that of the husband. "a! be "ade b! leavin. Cean M. Done at Manila.s 2ith a clear abuse of discretion. the "otion filed b! this defendant%appellant. That is not this case. ?nder oath the plaintiff. That at the ti"e 2hen the co"plaint in this case 2as filed and the su""ons issued.ations contained in para. In that event the plaintiff contends that under his po2er of attorne!. and the residence of the 2ife 2as in the #it! of Paris.ent of the 2ife 2ith authorit! to accept service of process for her and in her na"e.

action in -ustification of the possession 2hich I have or "i. oral evidence.nin.al defense. bindin."ent a.9( of 2hich P)8. If. there is nothin.orousl! contends that the defendant 2ife has not sho2n a "eritorious defense. other thin.al force and effect of the -ud. it is ad"itted. )61*.otiate an! drafts.ave to hi".es. or protestin.. /ased upon such ad"issions. filin. PoiFat 2as converted into si7 pro"issor! notes a.ned the real "ort. first. to sho2 that the husband accepted service of an! process for or on account of his 2ife or as her a. due re. It is an ele"entar! rule of la2 that as a condition precedent.oan or borro2 an! su"s of "one! or fun. That 2as a . that she does not have a le. That prior to Cul! >9. upon the sa"e date and as attorne! in fact for his 2ife.hts . endorse. bills of e7chan.ible thin. 9.: that. the ban= vi. acts. 2hatever contrar! actions are ta=en.atin.ave to her husband on u.lect. ta=in. )6>).ht be necessar!E filin.s. office of the Re. pa.s as "i. and had not appeared for an! other or different purpose. )6>). in order to collect the value thereof. bills. . )6>).s "aterial to this opinion. to entitle a part! to relief fro" a -ud. public or private docu"ents related thereto. and si.s for the ter"ination thereof and the conseDuent inscription of said action in the correspondin. Represent "e in all cases before the "unicipal courts. insolvencies and other actions provided b! la2E filin. the su" of P*1(. a"on. )6>'. evidencin. PoiFat 2as personall! indebted to the /an= of the Philippine Islands in the su" of P>61. Such full and a"ple po2er as reDuired or necessar!. and offerin.ht do b! virtue hereof. citations and su""ons and ac=no2led.served and that he failed or ne. and valid all that he "i.1> $<7hibit @. )1. the capital or the interest on their respective due datesE e7ecutin. the" for non%acceptance or non%pa!"ent. "ade a . That involves the le. e7penses and da"a.s. "ore than an acco""odation "a=er of the note. or pa!in. To "eet that contention. the correspondin. and filin.al construction of the po2er of attorne! 2hich. in the sa"e "anner in 2hich I "i. due for" thereof either b! private docu"ents or public deeds 2ith all clauses and reDuisites provided b! la2 for their validit! and effect. letters of pa!"ent. ans2ers.ust >9. their receipt to the proper -udicial officials.lected to appear or ans2er. de"urrers.h his "ista=e."ent :ta=en a. notices and su""ons. -ustice of the peace courts.hts and actions.ht dee" convenient. bill of e7ceptions+E Second. havin.e.es or personal .a.ned the na"e of the defendant 2ife to the pro"issor! note in Duestion. For to the end stated above and the incidents related thereto. and that the "ort. recites that she . or collectin. It "ust be ad"itted that upon the face of the instru"ents.uarant!.e in Duestion in favor of the ban=. and that to secure the pa!"ent of the note.re. to be relieved fro" the le. and "a=in. docu"entar!. 5.ister of Deeds. the husband si. I confer on hi" a"ple and co"plete po2er. hi"self of all "! ri. a"on. Ahen she filed that "otion as=in. the necessar! pleadin.. pled. First.al effect that the -ud. the personal indebtedness of Cean M. 6. balance of . Cean M. Institute before the co"petent courts the correspondin. and in "! na"e and availin. In fact that it appears fro" her o2n sho2in. in the record tendin. /ased upon that le. utiliFin.'9(. the value thereof on their respective due dates. offered and presentedE acceptin. all necessar! proceedin.uished fro" a special appearance.a.niFe as e7istin. and others provided b! la2. interests. the" b! "eans of docu"entar! or oral testi"on! ad"issible b! la2E acceptin. his actions and conduct 2ere bindin.es a. that it appears fro" the evidence. on the defendant 2ife.ainst 2ho"soever should be liable therefor. that fact appears to be true. he "ust sho2 to the court that he has a "eritorious defense. for or representin.e 88.ht do if personall! present and actin. her in his failure and ne. The first appearance in court of the defendant 2ife 2as "ade 2hen she filed the "otion of u. <nter into an! =ind of contracts 2hether civil or "ercantile. ob-ectin. "!self in the "ost sole"n "anner as reDuired b! la2 to reco.al principle the ban= contends that no such a sho2in. cri"inal co"plaints and such other pleadin. an outstandin. pro"issor! notes and all =inds of docu"ents representative of valueE pa!in. that the note in Duestion is a -oint and several note."ent. all these transactions 2ith or 2ithout "ort. e7pert.lect to appear or ans2er. 2hich.s. leavin. surprise or e7cusable ne.in.ard to the nature of each contract. to and opposin. That on Cul! >9.eneral appearance for one purpose. she is no2 in court for all purposes. vales. institutin. that she is nothin. she sub"itted herself to the -urisdiction of the court. other thin. . and. the 2ife .a.)(1 2ere paid. It is ad"itted that on Dece"ber >6. co"plaints. to the end that he "a! perfor" on "! behalf.s at the rate of interest and for the ti"e and under the conditions 2hich he "i. inadvertence. the defendant 2ife points out. another and a different Duestion 2ould have been presented. 8. second.ainst hi" throu. letters of credit. accept.191. appearin. in the first instance. (. collectin.ular or an! other special -urisdiction.eneral appearance as distin. the follo2in. counterclai"s. and that she be per"itted to file an ans2er and to have the case tried on its "erits.ent. clai"s in intestate and testa"entar! proceedin.s. she had "ade a special appearance to Duestion onl! the -urisdiction of the court. She also sub"its evidence 2hich tends to sho2. supre"e court and all other courts of re. or that he 2as actin. -udicial ad"issions. 2hich she sub"itted. in this case the ri.e 2as dul! e7ecuted.ht have over an! real estate. notices. before the" in an! civil or cri"inal proceedin. @avin. in 2hich she pra!s in le. /e that as it "a!. has been "ade b! the defendant 2ife. cross co"plaints.ainst her be annulled and set aside and the case reopened. Dra2. issue and ne.ranted b! the #ode of #o""erce no2 in force. and institutin.ust >8. cri"inal and ordinar! civil actions. courts of first instance. the defendant husband si.ivin.

:acceptin.th of the note. notices and su""ons. if he had. bills. there is no evidence that the defendant 2ife 2as a part! to the notes of Cul! >9. another and a different Duestion 2ould be presented.li. to 2hich she 2as not a part!.e to the ban=.es 59%(1. ori. de"and of the ban= to obtain securit! for the si7 different notes 2hich it held a. It 2as .M. and Cean M..ent failed and ne.raph 9 of the po2er of attorne! above Duoted authoriFes the husband for in the na"e of his 2ife to :loan or borro2 an! su"s of "one! or fun. /ut no2here does it provide or authoriFe hi" to "a=e her liable as a suret! for the pa!"ent of the pree7istin. and that previous to the si.: Para. PoiFat and #o. PoiFat in his personal capacit! and as a.raph ( of the po2er of attorne! authoriFes the husband to institute.nin. bills of e7chan. )6>). and that all other po2ers and duties are e7cluded. That on Dece"ber >6. it 2ould be a valid defense b! the defendant 2ife to the pa!"ent of the note. the ban= =ne2 that not a dollar 2as loaned or borro2ed on the stren.a. etc. or that she 2as under an! le.M."ent under section ))* of the #ode of #ivil Procedure.ent of &abriela ndrea de #oster ! Ro7as and as "e"ber of the fir" C.111 at the ti"e the note 2as e7ecuted.iven to secure the note in Duestion and 2as not . due for" thereof either b! private docu"ents or public deeds. to 2hich she 2as not a part!. debt.ent and attorne! in fact. PoiFat and #o.ed in the note of Dece"ber >6. If it had "ade an actual loan of P>6>. debt of a third person. etc.al ri.a.s in a court of -ustice. and the ban= =ne2 or should have =no2n the nature and e7tent of his authorit! and the li"itations upon his po2er. The fact that an a.ht to "a=e his 2ife liable as a suret! for the pree7istin. @ and I. accept. to sho2 that the husband accepted the service of an! notice or su""ons in the action on behalf of the ban=. includin.a.ible thin.a.P>6>. debt of a third person. )6>). that all of such po2ers and duties are li"ited and confined to those 2hich are specified and defined.e. there 2ere certain ne. That the debt in Duestion 2as a pree7istin. The sa"e thin. It is funda"ental rule of construction that 2here in an instru"ent po2ers and duties are specified and defined. the husband had no authorit! for and on behalf of the 2ife to e7ecute a -oint and several note or to "a=e her liable as an acco""odation "a=er. bill of e7ceptions+E Third. Bou 2ill search the ter"s and provisions of the po2er of attorne! in vain to find an! authorit! for the husband to "a=e his 2ife liable as a suret! for the pa!"ent of the pree7istin.9( $<7hibits D. Para. debt of a third person. of the note. and for 2hich she 2as under no le. the above pro"issor! notes 2ere cancelled and substituted b! a -oint and several note si. The note and "ort.M.ainst C. it follo2s that as to her the real "ort. the husband 2as attorne! in fact for the defendant 2ife.otiations bet2een the ban= and the attorne! for . issue and ne.s 2ith the ban= and 2as not indebted to the ban= in an! a"ount.ent.: This should be construed to "ean that the husband had po2er onl! to loan his 2ife3s "one! and to borro2 "one! for or on account of his 2ife as her a. provided that the application for such a relief is dul! and properl! "ade under the provisions of section ))*. F. le.lected to perfor" his duties and to represent the interests of his principal is not a bar to the principal obtainin. PoiFat and #o.M..atin. those notes 2ere ta=en up and "er. That she never borro2ed an! "one! fro" the ban=. Para. PoiFat and #o.: The fore. It appears that before the "otion in Duestion 2as filed.111. In other 2ords.ation to pa!. The real propert! described in the "ort. it follo2s that the husband 2as not authoriFed or e"po2ered to si.iven at the ur.: There is nothin. 2hich 2ould "a=e his 2ife liable as a suret! for a pree7istin. vales.n an!thin.s.>5(. It 2ill be noted that there is no provision in either of the" 2hich authoriFes or e"po2ers hi" to si. about P>6>. she did not borro2 an! "one!. )6>). <.re.al relief for the ne. &. void as to her. letters of pa!"ent.oin.ned b! Cean M. PoiFat of date Cul! >9.al obli. it 2ould not be a defense to open up and vacate a -ud.ence of her a. that under the po2er of attorne!. are the clauses in the po2er of attorne! upon 2hich the ban= relies for the authorit! of the husband to e7ecute pro"issor! notes for and on behalf of his 2ife and as her a. . and that at the ti"e the note 2as si.ent. pro"issor! notes. There is no clai" or pretense that the ban= 2as "isled or deceived.ed in the ne2 note of Dece"ber >6.al liabilit! to pa! the".inal debts of her husband and C.e to the ban= 2as and is the propert! of the 2ife. or to do an!thin.otiate an! drafts.iven for an! other purpose. she never had an! dealin. That the old. In the ordinar! course of its business. 2ere all ta=en up and "er. pa. The sa"e thin. @ence.raph 8 authoriFes hi" to :enter into an! =ind of contracts 2hether civil or "ercantile.ent and pressin. such facts to be true. and at the ti"e it 2as . is true as to para. The note bein.raph 5 authoriFes hi" to :dra2.raph 6 of the po2er of attorne!. ?pon the record before us. It is ver! apparent fro" the face of the instru"ent that the 2hole purpose and intent of the po2er of attorne! 2as to e"po2er and authoriFe the husband to loo= after and protect the interests of the 2ife and for her and in her na"e to transact an! and all of her business. prosecute and defend all actions or proceedin. debt of her husband and of the fir" of C. etc.iven. )6>). to the ban=.e to the ban= is also void for 2ant of po2er to e7ecute it. It 2as . and even so. no2 in Duestion.ivin. and that no "one! 2as loaned b! the ban= to the "a=ers of the note. is true as to the real "ort. endorse. in Duestion. ssu"in.ned. a.n the note in Duestion for and on behalf of the 2ife as her act and deed. and that as to her the note is void for 2ant of po2er of her husband to e7ecute it. That does not carr! 2ith it or i"pl! that he had the le.e in Duestion sho2 upon their face that at the ti"e the! 2ere e7ecuted. in the record tendin. Para. )6>). letters of credit.

havin. it 2ould then be a valid e7ercise of the po2er . and that she 2as then i. the plea above Duoted filed on pril >'."ent b! default 2as rendered. but 2e are not "a=in. the 2ife is estopped to den! her liabilit!.ed facts 2hen the case is tried on its "erits. such ne. )6>'. and to have the case tried on its "erits and for an! further proceedin."ent in favor of the Do"inican Fathers cannot be sustained. of the case for further proceedin. Predicadores de la Provincia del Santisi"o Rosario is reversed.a. the trial court an opportunit! to pass upon the alle. That the "ort.e is foreclosed. all these transactions 2ith or 2ithout "ort. pled. nature or description 2as filed b! it. JJ.ainst 2ho" a -ud.the 2ife 2ith a vie2 of a co"pro"ise or settle"ent of the ban=3s clai" a.(-(o-) 1ILL MOR.ant.a Orden de Do"inicos or PP. PoiFat and &abriela ndrea de #oster ! Ro7as have not paid the principal or the stipulated interest fro" Dece"ber )8.ht. to have said -ud. JJ. it follo2s that. but it also appears that durin. 2ould not be sufficient to sustain a -ud. PoiFat as attorne! in fact for his 2ife 2as an ori. a.inal one and the P)>9.es.ors Cean M. and as to the ban= the case is re"anded to the lo2er court. concurrin. J.ed b! the appellant. to his da! in court and to be heard in his defense."ent of the lo2er court in favor of . In the first place.ardless of the Duestion as to 2hat he "a! have done 2ith the "one!..3r3$e O.ood defense. in the record 2hich sho2s or tends to sho2 that a cop! of it 2as ever served on either one of the defendants. In "! opinion.a.raph 9 of the po2er of attorne! specificall! authoriFes hi" to borro2 "one! for and on account of his 2ife and her na"e."ent in favor of the Do"inican Fathers."ent on its note and the foreclosure of its "ort.s not inconsistent 2ith this opinion.ivin..: as provided for in article )*8> of the #ivil #ode. In fact. So ordered. settin. concur. it is pra!ed that the credit above%"entioned be ta=en into account 2hen the second "ort. incurred b! the 2ife or b! her order. such ne. In the second place. the defendant%appellant. It does not even as= for a -ud.ed facts 2hich. both the 2ife and her attorne! did not have an! =no2led.es or personal .e. There is nothin. under section ))* of the #ode of #ivil Procedure.ainst the facts alle.a. cannot be sustained on an! le.*'. the "erits of the Duestion should not no2 be discussed 2ithout . 2ith leave for the 2ife to file an ans2er to plaintiff3s cause of action.ht to either file an ori. the re"andin. ?nless 2aived.iven to the husband. 2ho 2ere the real parties in interest."ent.a. Neither is there an! evidence that either of the defendants ever appeared in the ori. :and "a=in.otiations and ad"issions. if proven. to sho2 that the 2ife 2as le.a. and a.inal suit to foreclose its "ort."ent 2as rendered a.inal debt evidence b! the note in Duestion.111 2ith interest at )1 per cent per annu"..e 2ere e7ecuted and the "one! 2as in . )6>'. No other plea of an! =ind. It no2 contends that as a result of such ne. 2hich up to the *1th da! of pril.e or to file a .ed in the petition to set aside and vacate the -ud. s to the -ud."ent set aside and to be ."ent of the foreclosure of its "ort. Aherefore.a.ht to service of process. for the outco"e of the ne2 trial 2herein the other parties "ust naturall! have the sa"e opportunit! to present their defenses a. Para. copies of 2hich should be served upon the defendants. The record sho2s that a cop! of this alle.111 2as actuall! loaned at the ti"e the note and "ort. there 2as so"e evidence or ad"issions on the part of her attorne! that she 2as liable for the ban=3s clai".raph IV of the co"plaint for P)>9.uarant!.e.a. for in "! opinion.ainst her. Such a proceedin.ent and attorne! in fact of the 2ife. has the ri.ainst the defendant 2ife is reversed. as to the actual truth of such facts.e on the propert! described in para. re. and it appears that in an! event both the 2ife and her attorne! did not have an! =no2led.a.ainst 2ho" a -ud. to set aside and vacate the -ud. if the transaction bet2een the Do"inican Fathers and Cean M. Johnson and alcolm. /e that as it "a!.e of the actual facts. such ne. That re"ains for the defendant 2ife to prove such alle.all! liable for an! portion of the ori. ?nder such a state of facts.6>9. an! findin.. Neither part! to recover costs. This decision as to the ban= on this "otion is based on the assu"ption that the facts are true as set forth and alle. the -ud.otiations.a. and dissentin. )6>'. it appears that their plea above Duoted in the state"ent of facts 2as filed on pril >'. no cop! of the plea 2as ever served upon either of the defendants. 2ithout 2aitin."ent of the plaintiff ban= a.otiations. -ud.ood faith delivered to the husband as the a.e. In that plea the! sa! that the! have a first "ort. and that -ud. concur in the result.inal action."ent as to the 2ife. Neither is there an! evidence tendin. alle.iven an opportunit! to appear. It follo2s that the opinion of the lo2er court in refusin.e of the facts upon 2hich the! no2 rel! as a defense.ainst the" b! default. )6>).s. There is no clai" or pretense that the debt in Duestion 2as contracted for or on account of the :usual dail! e7penses of the fa"il!. 8strand and Romualdez."ent 2as rendered for the full a"ount of the note and the foreclosure of the "ort.al ri. 2ith the tacit consent of the husband. I concur in the result reached b! the court in orderin. Se.ood and sufficient plea as intervenor in the instant suit."ent is vacated and set aside.ations and evidence of the parties liti. a defendant has a le.norant of the defense upon 2hich she no2 relies. but I dissent fro" the opinion of the "a-orit! in so far as it atte"pts to decide certain features of the case raised b! the defendant%appellant.: It follo2s that the -ud. to date.ed plea 2as served upon the attorne!s for the plaintiff ban=. 2ithout pre-udice to its ri. and that durin. . 2ould constitute a .al principle.otiations 2ere "ore or less in the nature of a co"pro"ise 2hich 2as re-ected b! the ban=. Fro" 2hat has been said. a"ounts to P>5. forth the facts upon 2hich it relies for a -ud.

al "eans.e to that effect.: This "ust "ean the po2er to e7act the pa!"ent of debts due the concern b! "eans of the institution of suits for their recover!..e in the sa"e "anner as 2e could do ourselves if 2e 2ere present in the sa"e place.Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila <N / N# G.la2phil. and apa.a. as properl! belon. $#ivil #ode. it appears to be e7pressl! and speciall! authoriFed b! the clause conferrin. 2hich appears to be brou. to the class of acts described in article )5)* of the #ivil #ode as acts :of strict o2nership.n all receipts for su"s of "one! and collect the" and e7act their pa!"ent b! le. It can not be reasonabl! supposed.inal po2er can not be construed as conferrin.eneral principle that the for"al validit! of contracts is to be tested b! the la2s of the countr! 2here the! are e7ecuted should not appl!. and purportin. and obli. as 2ell as si. No clai" is "ade that the docu"ent 2as not e7ecuted 2ith the for"alities reDuired b! the &er"an la2 in the case of such an instru"ent. in the ordinar! course of the plaintiff3s business. for 2hich purpose he "a! "a=e contracts of lease and e"plo! suitable assistants. 2hich is necessaril! a part of the "ere ad"inistration of such a business as that described in the instru"ent in Duestion and onl! incidentall!.ard in institution of a suit li=e the present. b! Fernando Ha""erFell.: Ae should not be inclined to re.rant of a po2er broad enou.h to authoriFe the brin.ua. Ae see no reason 2h! the . in the #o""ercial Re.ations connected 2ith the business 2hich "a! be necessar!.er of the Manila branch of the plaintiff3s business.J. If there could be an! doubt as to the "eanin.e.eneral of the receipt and deliver! of "erchandise connected 2ith the business. that it 2as the intention of the principal to 2ithhold fro" his a. accounts. No. J. $See #ivil #ode. 9illard.ated po2er is invalid. it. . 2ith the sa"e . defendants%appellants. involvin.e"ent of the business entrusted to his control as that to sue for the collection of debts. to be a substitution in favor of several attorne!s of po2ers conferred upon Ha""erFell in an instru"ent e7ecuted in /erlin. of the present action.+ The "ain ob-ect of the instru"ent is clearl! to "a=e Ha""erFell the "ana. &er"an!. the po2er to :e7act the pa!"ent: of su"s of "one! :b! le. fro" 2hich contention. It 2as brou. 9.ht under a charter part!. a po2er to dispose of the title to propert!.al "eans..eneral po2er for suits. 1901 GERM NN A CO. it 2ould of course follo2 that the dele.enc! stated in .enc! conferred. L-4+9 No=ember 11. si. 6ernando de la Cantera.ner upon another in an instru"ent e7ecuted in the countr! of 2hich both 2ere citiFens.n ever! =ind of docu"ents. "or appellees.al po2ers and authoriFation to direct and ad"inister in the cit! of Manila for us and in our na"e a branch of our . vs.ht b! virtue of a .ent a po2er so essential to the efficient "ana. JJ. Februar! 9. of the #ivil #ode.R. e7ecuted in Manila October >5. )611. )>(8.: It has been ar. )).eneral e7ecute all the acts and thin. 2hich provides that po2ers for suits "ust be contained in a public instru"ent. C. The other 2as not so authenticated. L DD. it 2ould be re"oved b! a consideration of the . In support of this contention reliance is placed upon article )5)* of the #ivil #ode.: It see"s rather to be so"ethin. b! Ma7 . art.. /ut 2hether re. since 2e are clearl! of opinion that the instru"ent contains an e7plicit .in.in. in the absence of ver! clear lan.e ta=en b! itself. concur. SIM A CO.e in . even assu"in. it bein. No.eneral scope and purpose of the instru"ent in 2hich it occurs. plaintiff%appellees.: This is an incident of 2ant of personalit! of the plaintiff3s attorne!. as 2as that in Duestion.eneral authorit! 2ith reference to its conduct 2hich his principal 2ould hi"self possess if he 2ere personall! directin.s necessar! for the perfect carr!in.. upon Ha""erFell authorit! to institute or defend suits. of this lan. Cooper. Ae shall not pass upon this Duestion.inal po2er is invalid under article )>(1. the sole o2ner of the business carried on in /erlin and Manila under the na"e of &e"ann N #o.arded as an act of strict o2nership or not. )611. or to e7ecute an! other act of strict o2nership an e7press co""ission is reDuired. DON LDSON. the applicabilit! of the do"estic la2 as clai"ed b! the defendants.istr! of the cit! of Manila as a branch of the house of &er"ann N #o. !rellano.eneral co""ercial business of i"portant and e7portation. on of the business co""itted to his char.net /! this instru"ent Torno2 constitutes Ha""erFell his :true and la2ful attorne! 2ith full po2er to enter the fir" na"e of &er"ann N #o. "ort. /oth Torno2 and Ha""erFell are citiFens of &er"an!. The action is to recover a su" clai"ed to be due for frei. Torres. the purpose of this po2er to invest said attorne! 2ill full le. The first%na"ed instru"ent 2as authenticated b! a notar! 2ith the for"alities reDuired b! the do"estic la2s.ued b! counsel for the plaintiff that these provisions of the do"estic la2 are not applicable to the case of an a.+ The defendants also clai" that the ori. if at all. in /erlin. "or appellants. 6rancisco 8rti$as.eneral ter"s onl! includes acts of ad"inistration. b! one forei. and in . ta=e char.ua.eonard Torno2. The defendants clai" that the ori.: and that :in order to co"pro"ise. if correct. alienate. b! 2hich it is provided that :an a. Torno2 is a resident of /erlin and Ha""erFell of Manila.ht to collect a clai" accruin. art.

'1.>>8)5+ ) the -ud. as 2as done.. to ttorne! ntero Soriano 2as null and void. the validit! of the deed of assi. T N ONG S0E 1D . 6OSE E1 NGELIST . vs."ent $<7hibit >> L Soriano+. and the -ud. Inc..'1E the plaintiff is also ordered to deposit said su" in a local ban= 2ithin the period of ninet! da!s fro" the ti"e this -ud.o appearance "or other appellees.ns the follo2in..Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila <N / N# G. ttorne! Cose <van. The court belo2 erred in holdin. Inc. throu. -ud. 9. declarin. The lo2er court erred in re-ectin. Aherefore. the a"ount of the -ud."ent in civil case No. and the "unicipalit! of Iloilo the defendant. the "unicipal treasurer of Iloilo. it null and void. to said plaintiff ta=en b! the defendant to 2iden a public streetE the -ud. Cose <van. L-+29// No=ember 1/. the court rendered the decision Duoted fro" at the be. as evidence <7hibit '% . ).. ntero Soriano. 551>."ent the court ordered that the attorne!3s lien in the a"ount of )9 per cent of the -ud. until full! paid.: This is an appeal ta=en b! the defendant Tan On. said a"ount shall bear the le. The facts of the case are as follo2s. <7hibit >%#ruF.. all the adverse clai"s on the a"ount of the -ud. Mauricio #ruF N #o. filed a clai" in the sa"e case for professional services rendered b! hi". DE T N TOCO. a. de Tan Toco fro" the -ud. Trenas . and directed the "unicipalit! of Iloilo to file an action of interpleadin. On March >6. In support of its appeal. 19+0 T!E MUNICIP L COUNCIL O# ILOILO. fter due hearin. The lo2er court erred in den!in.aserna "or de"endant(appellant. *.a.n"ent of the credit e7ecuted b! Tan Toco3s 2ido2. actin. Tan Toco.R. instead of findin. fi7ed at )9 per cent of the a"ount of the -ud."ent be turned over to it because the land ta=en over had been "ort. Tan Toco.. Inc. 2hich pra!ed that the a"ount of the -ud. on said clai"."ent of the #ourt of First Instance of Iloilo. his lifeti"e in favor of the defendant Mauricio #ruF N #o. in his o2n behalf and as counsel for the ad"inistratri7 of Cose Ma . SFe Vda.ed errors as co""itted b! the trial court in its decision. and the for"er sou. .in. '. in favor of late ntero SorianoE li=e2ise the assi. No . rro!o. that said assi. rro!o3s intestate estate. Inc. the case bein. and <7hibit '%/. the value of said strip of land. the appellant assi. defendants%appellees. in his o2n behalf and as counsel for the ad"inistratri7 of the deceased Cose Ma . appellant. instead of declarin. 1ILL -RE L. at the disposal of the aforesaid Mauricio #ruF N #o. Tan Toco3s 2ido2."ent."ent shall beco"e final. On appeal to this court $&. )6>' $<7hibit /+.688. >.al interest of si7 percent per annu" fro" the date 2hen the plaintiff shall fail to "a=e the deposit 2ithin the period herein set forth. .ht to recover of the latter the value of a strip of land belon. de Tan Toco 2as the plaintiff. 2herein the appellant herein. fter the case 2as re"anded to the court of ori. The lo2er court erred in sustainin. the Philippine National /an=.. 6elipe -smael "or appellee auricio Cruz . be recorded in favor of ttorne! Cose <van. alle. in turn. representin...in.n"ent e7ecuted b! the latter durin."ent is hereb! rendered.ainst the "unicipalit! of Iloilo should be ad-udicated to the appellant herein. valid and bindin.. No. 2hich the court. )6>'."ent 2as affir"ed on Nove"ber >(. Co. and the plaintiff is hereb! ordered to pa! the said Mauricio #ruF N #o. plaintiff%appellee.elista. fro" the defendant $<7hibit +.ned to hi".elista and Cose rro!o. filed in the #ourt of First Instance of Iloilo as civil case No. Aithout special pronounce"ent of costs.innin. the #ourt of First Instance of Iloilo rendered -ud.h her attorne!%in%fact Tan /untion. the "otion for a ne2 trial filed b! the defendant%appellant.. R. assi. t the hearin.n"ent of that credit b! ntero Soriano to Mauricio #ruF N #o."ent rendered therein had beco"e final and e7ecutor!.elista. to 2it. as did also the Philippine National /an=. 2ith the approval of the auditor of the provincial treasurer of Iloilo .ed to it. On March >1. )6>(. the deed of assi. the balance of P*1. that the balance of the credit a. J. Provincial 6iscal 0lanco o" /loilo "or plainti""(appellees.ainst the adverse clai"ants. 2ith the consent of the appellant 2ido2.."ent entitled the plaintiff to recover P'>.n"ent "ade b! Tan /untion. ntero Soriano also appeared clai"in. and in case that the plaintiff shall not "a=e such deposit in the "anner indicated. the clai"ants appeared. Inc. Tan On. the assi. *9)' thereof. providin. SFe Vda.n"ent of the credit. ET L.ned to Mauricio #ruF N #o. as follo2s.."ent as it had been assi. The lo2er court erred in upholdin.688. and b! hi". fter hearin.

plus the costs of court. 2hich reads as follo2s. then. as attorne!%in%fact of the appellant herein.688. . In pursuance of the resolution of the court belo2 orderin.111. as "ade b! Tan Toco3s 2ido2 to ttorne! ntero Soriano for professional services rendered to her and to her coheirs. in the first place.111 to date paid to hi" for professional services is 2holl! inadeDuate. rro!o. but in order to facilitate the collection of the a"ount of said -ud.n"ent. and considerin. The defendant%appellant also contends that the deed of assi. is untenable.: Therefore. to said appellant Tan On. Tan On.ainst said "unicipal council of Iloilo. The Municipal #ouncil of Iloilo. The appellant contends.: and the "anner in 2hich said attorne! receipted for the". is confined to the clai" of Mauricio #ruF N #o. b! the fir" of Soriano N rro!o. or to secure the propert! of such persons. entitled Viuda de Tan Toco vs.111 each "a=in. and other officers of such courts.. the said cler= of court delivered on the sa"e date to said ttorne! Cose <van.'' a. that the assi.611. The onl! Duestion to be decided in this appeal is the le.elista the said a"ount of P8.111 in part pa!"ent of the -ud. "ust be added to the P511 evidenced b! <7hibits '% . to collect. to P>. she had encountered "an! difficulties in tr!in. :/efete Soriano N rro!o.n"ents in pa!"ent of debts. Custices.'1. of the #ivil #ode.nee of the ri.111 "entioned above in consideration of said la2!er3s 2aiver of the re"ainder of the )9 per cent of said -ud. actin. persons cannot ta=e b! purchase. so"e of 2hich cases have been appealed to this court."ent "entioned above.iven 2h! it 2as necessar! to 2rite hi" "one! in pa!"ent of professional services on March )'.round that the! 2ere considered as pa!"ents "ade for professional services rendered. b! virtue of the deed <7hibit >.. either in person or throu.lance at these receipts sho2s that those a"ounts 2ere received b! ttorne! ntero Soriano for the fir" of Soriano N rro!o.'1. had been e7ecuted. in his o2n behalf and as counsel for the late Cose Ma.elista a.688. the codefendants of ttorne! Cose <van."ent in favor of the appellant.reed not to discuss the pa!"ent "ade to the latter b! the cler= of the #ourt of First Instance of Iloilo of the a"ount of P8. run into the hundreds of thousands of pesos. 2as "ade in consideration of the professional services rendered b! the latter to the aforesaid 2ido2 and her coheirs.net In support of her contention on this point.ation before the court 2ithin 2hose -urisdiction or territor! the! perfor" their respective duties . shall be e7cluded fro" this rule.ed assi. The follo2in.86. SFe Viuda de Tan Toco b! virtue of the -ud. on the .This prohibition shall include the acDuisition of such propert! b! assi. for the! had alread! been satisfied before the e7ecution of said deed of assi. #hinese.n"ent <7hibit >%#ruF 2as dra2n up in contravention of the prohibition contained in article )'96. no reason can be . :Soriano N rro!o. a"ountin. "e"bers of the depart"ent of public prosecution. the appellant alle.n"ents of the appellant3s ri. if at the ti"e of the assi.h the "ediation of another. in consideration of the professional services rendered b! said attorne! to said 2ido2 of Tan Toco and her coheirs."ent. respectivel!. Soriano. )' .and of the <7ecutive /ureau.n"ent. *9)'.n"ents to the late ntero Soriano his professional services to the appellant 2ido2 of Tan Toco had alread! been paid for. )6>(.ned to hi" b! Tan /oon Tion. SFe Vda. de Tan Toco. the hereditar! propert!. as attorne!%in%fact of the appellant Tan On. $<7hibit >%#ruF+ dated Septe"ber >5. 2hich 2as ad-udicated b! said court to Mauricio #ruF N #o. ri. to P'''. the "unicipal treasurer of Iloilo deposited 2ith the cler= of the #ourt of First Instance of Iloilo the a"ount of P8. even if indirectl!.in. On Dece"ber )(. In vie2 of the fact that the a"ounts involved in the cases prosecuted b! ttorne! ntero Soriano as counsel for Tan Toco3s 2ido2.hts and interests "ade to the late ntero Soriano and deter"ined in the -ud. that the attorne!3s lien in the a"ount of )9 per cent of the -ud. of the instant case. )6>( $<7hibit 9%& Tan Toco+ and Dece"ber )9. to said 2ido2 the a"ount of P'>. that said assi. for the reason that. ad-udicatin.hts of the late ttorne! ntero Soriano b! virtue of the said -ud.n"ent. case 9. that said attorne! had 2on several of those cases for his clients.elista. ."ent for P'>. RT. and '%/ Tan Toco."ent afore"entioned. assi. of all the credits. )'96."ent be recorded in favor of ttorne! Cose <van.hts in liti."ent a"ountin. 2hich e7hibits the court belo2 re-ected as evidence. the su" of P)1. a. assi. even at a public or -udicial auction.111. the -ud. Tan Toco. /esides.*9)' of the #ourt of First Instance of Iloilo. bein. 777 777 777 9. ctions bet2een co%heirs concernin. to ttorne! ntero Soriano. as alle. the appellant3s contention that the a"ounts of P>11 and P911 evidence b! said receipts should be considered as pa!"ents "ade to ttorne! ntero Soriano for professional services rendered b! hi" personall! to the interests of the 2ido2 of Tan Toco."ent rendered in civil case No .hts and interests belon. the propert! and ri.n"ents 2as not "ade in consideration of professional services b! ttorne! ntero Soriano. and sho2s.ainst the "unicipalit! of Iloilo 2as reduced to P*1.n"ent "ade b! Tan /oon Tion. not b! ntero Soriano personall!. Aith these t2o pa!"ents of P8. of the sa"e !ear $<7hibit 9%@ Tan Toco+ after the deed of assi. paid the late ntero Soriano the a"ount of P8."ent rendered in said civil case No.688. cler=s of superior and inferior courts."ent in pa!"ent of professional services rendered b! hi" to the said 2ido2 and her coheirs.es. SFe Viuda de Tan Toco.111 on account of the -ud. t the hearin. 2hich is borne out b! the sta"p on said receipts readin. a total of P)>. -ud. )6>5.la2phil.alit! of the assi.es that the pa!"ents ad"itted b! the court in its -ud. This appeal.

concur. to ta=e char.ard to the failure of the other attorne!%in%fact of the appellant. and to e"plo! la2!ers to defend the latter3s interests. "ade in pa!"ent of professional services in other cases.n"ent "ade b! Tan /oon Tion. and findin. Aith re. the latter bein.n"ent of a -ud.elista. that particular case had been decided.ht. but she continued e"plo!in.n"ent of her credit.. and interests in that case 2ere assi. *9)' of the #ourt of First Instance of Iloilo.n"ent of credits."ent "ade b! a person to his attorne!. ri."ent 2as renderedE and therefore the assi.e of an! actions necessar! or e7pedient for the interests of his principal. ri.n"ent. 2as that credit 2hich she had a. #oo$-o$e) ) Viuda de Tan Toco vs. Cohns and Ro"ualdeF. CC. the court is of opinion and so holds.hts involved in an! liti. to consent to the deed of assi.ainst the "unicipalit! of Iloilo. Street. the assi. in favor of ttorne! ntero Soriano for professional services rendered in other cases in the interests of the appellant and her coheirs. 2hich she instituted a.ation in 2hich the! "a! ta=e part b! virtue of their profession and office. #. s to 2hether Tan /oon Tion. in the case 2here that -ud.iven to each of these t2o representatives sho2s that it 2as not the principal3s intention that the! should act -ointl! in order to "a=e their acts valid.C. for the recover! of the value of a strip of land e7propriated b! said "unicipalit! for the 2idenin.ainst the appellant. the ver! fact that different letters of attorne! 2ere . 2ith costs a. $)+ That an a. ttorne! ntero Soriano to represent her in court. is i"pliedl! e"po2ered to pa! the la2!er3s fees for services rendered in the interests of said principal. left to do 2as to collect the -ud. no error in the -ud.oin. In the present case.raph shall include la2!ers and solicitors 2ith respect to an! propert! or ri. in para. and to defend suits brou. Malcol". Iloilo. does not contravene the prohibition of article )'96.ned b! her attorne!%in%fact Tan /oon Tion.a. Tan /oon Tion. ..raph VI of the po2er of attorne!. case 9. then. Municipal #ouncil of Iloilo. the consent of the one 2ill not be reDuired to validate the acts of the other unless that appears positivel! to have been the principal3s attentionE and $*+ that the assi. and such assi. /! virtue 2hereof.n"ent of the a"ount of a -ud. as attorne!%in%fact of the appellant.ent of attorne!%in %fact e"po2ered to pa! the debts of the principal.Ahen the appellant3s credit. not reported. So ordered. and the onl! thin. The onl! la2!ers 2ho appear to have represented her in that case 2ere rro!o and <van. Further"ore. the appellant 2as a2are of that assi.ainst her. 2ho filed a clai" for their professional fees .n"ent and she not onl! did not repudiate it. There 2as no relation of attorne! and client. vanceQa.ht a. It does not appear that the ttorne! ntero Soriano 2as counsel for the herein appellant in civil case No. authoriFed b! <7hibit ) L Tan Toco. <7hibit 9%#ruF.. Villa"or. all her debts and the liens and encu"brances her propert!. This po2er necessaril! i"plies the authorit! to pa! for the professional services thus en."ent rendered in favor of said principalE $>+ that 2hen a person appoints t2o attorne!s%in%fact independentl!."ent appealed fro".n"ent 2as eDuivalent to the pa!"ent of the a"ount of said credit to ntero Soriano for professional services. considerations.hts and interests. Ostrand..The prohibition contained in this para. Tan Montano. as ttorne!%in%fact for the appellant.ainst the "unicipalit! of Iloilo. in pa!"ent of debts for professional services rendered b! la2!ers.ht and interests to said la2!er did not violate the prohibition cited above. ri. 2as e"po2ered b! his principal to "a=e as assi. of the #ivil #ode. also authoriFed to pa!.ed. to ttorne! ntero Soriano in pa!"ent of professional services rendered b! the latter to the appellant and her coheirs in connection 2ith other cases. For the fore."ent 2as rendered. in the na"e and behalf of the principal."ent. and "a! satisf! the" b! an assi. 2ho has not ta=en an! part in the case 2herein said -ud. the sa"e is affir"ed in its entiret!. bet2een ntero Soriano and the appellant. is authoriFed to e"plo! and contract for the services of la2!ers upon such conditions as he "a! dee" convenient. Cohnson. of a certain public street.

ree"ent 2ith the plaintiffs b! 2hich the latter bound the"selves to do the necessar! printin.nature is Duestioned b! the defendant.R. ?nder this a. )6>1.*'1.es in the su" of P>1. the "onth of Dece"ber of that !ear he entered into an a.91. such ne. #. The first of these is to the effect that #.ned to the contract of e"plo!"ent 2as not authoriFed b! the defendant to e7ecute such a contract in its behalf. for the ne2spaper for the su" of P9(1 per "onth as alle. J. 2e "a! dra2 attention to a "atter 2hich as not been "entioned either b! counsel or b! the court belo2. 2hen the! 2ere dischar. M C5 2UENG.iven full pa! for the une7pired portion of the ter" :even if the said paper has to fall into ban=ruptc!. the person 2hose na"e appears to have been si. )6>1. Fro" this -ud. and refused to prepare e7tra pa. #hen had no po2er or authorit! to bind the defendant corporation b! such contractE and that there 2as no ratification of the contract b! the corporation. plaintiffs%appellees. Durin.: The authenticit! of the latter si.ed that the plaintiffs failed.e and in-ur! to the defendant in the a"ount of P*11.e b! the defendant 2ithout -ust cause before the e7piration of the ter" of the contract. It is averred in the co"plaint that it is acco"panied b! a cop! of the contract bet2een the parties $<7hibit . No. #henE that."ent in favor of the plaintiffs for the su" of P)*. /efore enterin.n"ents of error.s. as a result of 2hich certain advertisers 2ithdre2 their patrona. in an! event. #. in-ur! and da"a. B5ONG LI PO. 9. a"on.: The contract is si. in the co"plaint that their contract of e"plo!"ent 2as for a ter" of three !ears fro" the first da! of Canuar!.e of the plaintiffs. Camp)ell "or appellees. 6errier "or appellant. the plaintiffs purposel! dela!ed the issuance of defendant3s ne2spaper on three separate and distinct occasions causin. other thin.ed in the co"plaint. #. the" a president 2hose dut! it is to :si.aniFed in accordance 2ith the la2s of the Philippine Islands and en.h their attention 2as specificall! called to such errors and the! 2ere reDuested to "a=e the corrections. in defendant3s ne2spaper. The second special defense and counterclai" is to the effect that durin. #. 2ith interest fro" the date of the filin. 3-4 DING MOON. #. ne.Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila <N / N# G.((1.ree"ent the plaintiffs 2or=ed for the defendant fro" Canuar! ). left for #hina. of the co"plaint and the costs. #hen havin. but the court belo2 found that the evidence upon this point preponderate in favor of the plaintiffs and there appears to be no sufficient reason to disturb this findin.: The defendant is a do"estic corporation or. portion of the ter"E that the! had been so dischar.. upon a discussion of the Duestions raised b! the assi.lected and refused to do certain -ob printin.n"ents of error. +.lected and failed to correct errors in advertise"ents appearin. The trial court further found that the contract had been i"pliedl! ratified b! the defendant and rendered -ud.hteen assi. For its fifth special defense and counterclai" the defendant alle.ned b! #. Its articles of incorporation and b!%la2s are in the usual for" and provide for a board of directors and for other officers a"on. )6>1E that in the case of their dischar. #.nature :#.ed that the plaintiffs ne.a. issue of the defendant3s ne2spaper and thus co"pelled the defendant to secure the preparation of said e7tra pa. #hen or T. #. t the trial of the case the plaintiffs presented in evidence <7hibit 2hich purports to be a contract bet2een #hen and the plaintiffs and 2hich provides that in the event the plaintiffs should be dischar.enerall! and specificall! the alle.ed 2ithout cause before the e7pirations of the ter" of three !ears fro" Canuar! ).ned b! the plaintiffs and also bears the si. to prevent "isunderstandin.ed b! the ne2 "ana. vs. The plaintiffs thereupon brou.er. #hen 2as appointed . OSTR ND.es b! other persons at a cost of P))1. 2ho had been appointed in the "eanti"e. G. In the fourth special defense and counterclai" the defendant alle. althou. #hen.i Po. The letter of dis"issal stated no special reasons for the dischar.lected.lect and refusal causin. 1924 2U C!UC5.ed that the plaintiffs ne.e to the defendant in the su" of P)91.e fro" the paper and refused to pa! for the advertise"ents. until Canuar! *).n"ents is that the contract on 2hich the action is based 2as not si.. the! 2ere to receive full pa! for the re"ainin. the! 2ould be .in. but 2hich.ations of the co"plaint and sets up five special defenses and counterclai"s. #. So"e ti"e durin."ent the defendant appeals to this court and "a=es ei.n"ents relate to defendant3s special defense and counterclai"sE the su" and substance of the other assi. da"a.er of the ne2spaper..ed in the publication of a #hinese ne2spaper st!led 2on$ . a loss to the defendant of P)81. "ana.i Po. the !ear )6)6 one #. L-22450 December +. J. #hen. #."ent for da"a. should be briefl! e7plained.er of 2on$ .eneral "ana.: No special provision is "ade for a business or .. )6>).es for the Canuar! ).B defendant%appellant. )6>). )6>). ?nder the third special defense and counterclai" it is alle. Tan Tian @on.er.ed 2ithout -ust cause and therefore as=ed -ud. thus causin.ht the present action alle.n all contracts and other instru"ents of 2ritin.. the "onth of Canuar!.eneral business "ana. The fourth and seventeenth assi. In its a"ended ans2er the defendant denies .

l!. 2hich such adverse part! is notified b! his opponent3s pleadin. it 2ill perhaps be said that under section )1* of the #ode of #ivil Procedure the o"ission to so den! it constitutes an ad"ission of the . or for t2o season.n"ents of error is 2hether #hen had the po2er to bind the corporation b! a contract of the character indicated. Not onl! is the ter" of e"plo!"ent unusuall! lon.er of the ne2spaper 2on$ . C. future period.er of the 2on$ . #orporation. had i"plied authorit! to e"plo! the" on the ter"s stated and that the defendant corporation is bound b! his action.arded b! both parties. an! =no2led.. such as for a !ear. for the season.+ In ordinar! circu"stances that 2ould be true. $)' a #. it 2as hardl! to be e7pected that be 2ould inDuire into the ter"s of their contracts. /efore a contract can be ratified =no2led. or a specific part thereof. b! the ter"s of the co"plaint.h the contract is not rendered invalid b! the "ere fact that the e"plo!"ent e7tends be!ond the ter" of the "ana. /ut the contracts of e"plo!"ent "ust be reasonable.ated to other officers or a. but 2e do not thin= that the contract here in Duestion can be so considered.ent is e7pressl! vested in the board of directors or trustees. . The cop! is not set forth in the bill of e7ceptions and aside fro" said avern"ent. Moreover.th of the ter" of e"plo!"ent.e of its e7istence "ust.e of the printin. "a! bind the corporation b! the e"plo!"ent of such a. Terarira!. The principal Duestion presented b! the assi. there is no indication that the cop! actuall! acco"panied the co"plaint. and it is 2ell settled that e7cept 2here the authorit! of e"plo!in.le officer or e"plo!ee of the corporation had i"plied authorit! to enter into a contract of e"plo!"ent 2hich "i. he cannot "a=e a contract of e"plo!"ent for a lon.i Po. '*). but an e7a"ination of the record of the case in the #ourt of First Instance sho2s that a translation of the contract 2as attached to the co"plaint and served upon the defendant. /ut this case appears to have been tried upon the theor! that the rule did not appl!E at least. sufficient to put the plaintiffs upon inDuir! as to the e7tent of the business "ana.. be brou. No such =no2led.. althou. is "ade a part thereof.+ In re. to do 2ith their e"plo!"ent. about its ruin. )>'.eneral business "ana. as such . the president of the corporation for the !ear )6>1.e"ent of the corporation3s business. there at that ti"e and as the president had nothin.hts to presu"e that he or an! other sin. but this po2er "a! either e7pressl! or i"pliedl! be dele.+ 2hich cop!..e of the e7istence of the contract and asserted that it 2as never presented neither to hi" nor to the board of directors. it 2as 2holl! overloo=ed or disre. of 2hat has here been said is in conflict 2ith for"er decisions of this courtE it 2ill be found upon e7a"ination that in all cases 2here the applicabilit! of the rule has been sustained the part! invo=in. 2as in effect the . be . It is conceded that he had no e7press authorit! to do so. The ob-ect of the rule is :to relieve a part! of the trouble and e7pense of provin.: $Ner! . at p. This fact in itself 2as. Nothin.enuineness and due e7ecution of the docu"ent as 2ell as of the a. .er3s o2n e"plo!"ent. in our opinion. '*). 2aive the rule and that is 2hat he "ust be considered to have done in the present case b! introducin. in the first instance an alle. in its office is of little si. an officer or a.ested in the briefs and is not properl! this court. @e denied. That the president of the corporation sa2 the plaintiffs 2or=in.eneral "ana. of the trial presented a nu"ber of 2itnesses to prove the due e&ecution o" the document as %ell as the a$ent<s authorit'= no o)3ections %ere made to the de"endant<s evidence in re"utation and no e&ceptions taken E and the "atter is not "entioned in the decision of the trial court. as such.rossl! unfair to the defendant if this court should ta=e up the Duestion on its o2n "otion and "a=e it decisive of the case. *)'. there can be no doubt that #hen.. ad"itted on the 2itness stand that he sa2 the plaintiffs 2or= as printers in the office of the ne2spaper.co vs. The .ht brin. it has relied on it in the court belo2 and conducted his case accordin. s this translation "a! be considered a cop! and as the defendant failed to den! its authenticit! under oath.ht ho"e to the parties 2ho have authorit! to ratif! it or circu"stances "ust be sho2n fro" 2hich such =no2led. #orpus Curis sa!s. 9 Phil. at the ti"e the contract 2as entered into.ent 2ho has . of the paper. of course.+ Fro" 2hat has been said. but the conditions are other2ise so onerous to the defendant that the possibilit! of the corporation bein. of course. 8 Phil.ed fact. such authorit!. $Merchant vs.e of the adverse part!. thro2n into insolvenc! thereb! is e7pressl! conte"plated in the sa"e contract.ents of the corporation. evidence as to the e7ecution of the docu"ent and failin. Moreover.e or circu"stances have been sho2n here. . Neither do 2e thin= that the contention that the corporation i"pliedl! ratified the contract is supported b! the evidence. had char.nificanceE there 2ere other printers 2or=in.i"% #hin. /ut unless he is either e7pressl! authoriFed. the e7istence or none7istence of 2hich is necessaril! 2ithin the =no2led. The contention is based principall! on the fact that Te Hi" @ua.ent3s authorit! to bind the defendant. $)'a #. servants and a. and of the necessit! $to his opponent3s case+ of establishin.+la2phi). a "ana.ent and e"plo!ees as are usual and necessar! in the conduct of such business. ho2ever. such as for three !ears.eneral business "ana. C.ard to the len. as .er has authorit! to hire an e"plo!ee for such a period as is custo"ar! or proper under the circu"stances.e "a! be presu"ed. or held out as havin. indeed. The plaintiffs at the be..er3s authorit!E the! had not the ri. a .er.eneral rule is that the po2er to bind a corporation b! contract lies 2ith its board of directors or trustees. In the absence of e7press li"itations. had i"plied authorit! to bind the defendant corporation b! a reasonable and usual contract of e"plo!"ent 2ith the plaintiffs.eneral control and "ana.net The plaintiff "a!. In these circu"stances it 2ould. but the evidence is conclusive that he.innin. International /an=in. the Duestion as to the applicabilit! of the rule is not even su. to ob-ect to the defendant3s evidence in refutationE all this evidence is no2 co"petent and the case "ust be decided thereupon.. and the plaintiff "aintain that he. and such is not the la2.i Po and that he.

#hen is one and the sa"e person.ree"ents.+ @is @onor evidentl! overesti"ated the i"portance of this notice.e of the court belo2 appears to have placed so"e 2ei. It "a! be presu"ed that the contracts.ht on a notice inserted in the Canuar! )'th issue of the 2on$ . !vance5a and Romualdez. concur."ent appealed fro" is reversed and the defendant corporation is absolved fro" the co"plaint.in. #hen and 2hich. #hen. a ratification b! the board of directors 2as necessar!. in translation.ned b! hi".ree"ents and receipts are considered to be null and void unless dul! si.+ #@<N BO? M N General ana$er o" this paper $The evidence sho2s that #hen Bou Man and T. contracts of the corporation. does not "ean that he had po2er to "a=e the contracts. but is.ree"ents. It "a! further be observed that the notice confers no special po2ers. reads as follo2s. In his decision his @onor.. To Aho" It Ma! #oncern.ratification b! hi" 2ould have been of no availE in order to validate a contract.er of this paper. #. #. the ne2spaper. and receipts not dut! si. So ordered. nnounce"ent is hereb! . in effect. Johns. $S.d.ht to the attention of the officers of the defendant corporation. The -ud. a.i Po b! T.n the docu"ents evidencin.iven that thereafter all contracts. It 2as published nearl! a "onth after the contract in Duestion is alle.ed to have been entered into and can therefore not have been one of the circu"stances 2hich led the plaintiffs to thin= that #hen had authorit! to "a=e the contract. onl! an assertion b! #hen that he 2ould reco. the learned -ud. There is no evidence to sho2 that the notice 2as ever brou. #.ned b! T. JJ. The fact that the president 2as reDuired b! the b!%la2s to si. a. &eneral Mana. The defendant3s counterclai"s have not been sufficientl! established b! the evidence. a. No costs 2ill be allo2ed.niFe no contracts. and receipts 2ere such as 2ere ordinaril! "ade in the course of the business of "ana. .

The record consists of the testi"on! of lfred Von rend.d. #o. Foerster: other bein.ent. n! person ta=in. that Foerster had ri. de Foerster. co"pan! 2as never defrauded at all.d. Iloilo /ranch. #o. the funds of his principal. a total of P)(. de Foerster:E one $S. Mana.ht of his 2ife and cler= to do the sa"e . No. In first place. those of Cuan . indicative of ri. T!E P!ILIPPINE N TION L " N5. /!.. co"pan! investi.+ #ar"en <.er of the Insular Dru. it is sufficient to state that no trust fund 2as involvedE that the fact that ban= acted in .>(9. :Insular Dru. de Foerster 2as his steno. )(1 #al.ated the transactions of Foerster.ht to indorse the chec=s. '8 Mo. In this connection it should be e7plained that #ar"en <. de Foerster:E others :Insular Dru.6>. The Philippine National /an= 2as content to sub"it the case 2ithout presentin. Foerster also acted as a collector for the co"pan! .+ #ar"en <.: etc.B. T!E P!ILIPPINE N TION L " N5. and that the chec=s dra2n on the /an= of the . de Foerster.ues that the dru. de Foerster.re record and the state"ent of facts a..+ ?.. Not onl! did the ban= per"it Foerster to indorse chec=s and then place the" to his personal account. parties disclose the follo2in. thus "a=in.+ V. chec=s "ade pa!able to a corporation. Camus and 7el$ado "or appellant. Foerster. >1(+. it possible for Foerster to defraud the dru. to the errors specified b! the ban=. evidence in its behalf. co"pan! to the Iloilo branch of the #hartered /an= of India. and of e7hibits obtained fro" the Philippine National /an= sho2in..rapher. Dolores Salcedo..+ ?. co"pan! for the Islands of Pana! and Ne.ainst the /an= of Philippine National /an=.ood faith does not relieve it fro" responsibilit!E that no proof 2as adduced. #o.o bac= of this proposition.+ #ar"en <. The case of Fulton Iron Aor=s #o.e /an= I)6)5J.. 9'5E &raha" vs. vs.: The indorse"ent on the chec=s too= various for"s. #o"pan!. that the ban= =ne2 that Foerster 2as "isappropriatin. 19++ INSUL R DRUG CO. $S.ht of an a."ent of the #ourt of First Instance of Manila reDuirin. ET L. 59 N.el Padilla. there are ele"entar! principles . vs.reed upon b! the attorne!s for the contendin. $S... The Insular Dru. and the ban= did not tr! to . and "ust sa"e b! the conseDuences if the a. vs.d. /!.<. de Foerster. co"pan! sa2 fit to stand on the proposition that chec=s dra2n in its favor 2ere i"properl! and ille.+ ?. $ rcade Realt! #o. appellant. *)(E Standard Stea" Specialt! #o.. 6ranco and Reinoso "or appellee.uaranteed b! Philippine National ban=. Inc. de Froster:E others :$S.<.ent to indorse co""ercial paper is a ver! responsible po2er and 2ill not be li.. so"e bein. #o. Foerster and #ar"en <.6> 2ith le.+ #ar"en <. ad"ittin. the relationship bet2een a ban= and its custo"ers 2hich are controllin. The dru. #hina /an=in. transactions of ?.d. )(8. #orn <7chan. 2hich can act onl! b! a. @e 2as instructed to ta=e the chec=s 2hich ca"e to his hands for the dru.al interest and costs.d.R. ?.>(9.ros. Inc.d. No=ember +. Instead. $S. vs.d. Foerster co""itted suicide.+ ?. "entioned b! both parties rest on a different states of facts. Inc. . ban= to pa! to the Insular Dru. includin. @o2ever. co"pan!. <. co"pan!. /acaldo.in. the su" of P)(. co"pan! is not nearl! as clear as it should be. The Insular Dru. n.ent $S.s Institution I)(51J..net There is no Philippine authorit! 2hich directl! fits the proven facts..+ Further spea=in. $S. Foerster 2as for"erl! a sales"an of dru. $S.htl! inferred. but it 2ent farther and per"itted Foerster3s 2ife and cler= to indorse the chec=s. plaintiff%appellee.la2phil... fter the indorse"ent on the chec=s 2as 2ritten :Received pa!"ent prior indorse"ent . . The chec=s 2ere in that ban= placed in the personal account of Foerster.: This is an appeal ta=en b! Philippine National /an= fro" a -ud. So"e of the chec=s 2ere dra2n a. J. sales"an 2ith authorit! to collect "one! belon.B. defendants. #o"pan! clai"s that it never received the face value of )*> chec=s here in the Duestion coverin.. #ar"en <. ?pon the discover! of ano"alies. ustralia and #hina and deposit the a"ounts to the credit of the dru.ent 2ho indorses the sa"e is 2ithout authorit!. :Insular Dru..d. INC. #ar"en <. The ri. and a fourth part!. the ban= ar.. $S. has even less force..+ #ar"en <. #o.. s a conseDuence of the indorse"ents on chec=s the a"ounts therein stated 2ere subseDuentl! 2ithdra2n b! ?. Inc. /!. The ne7t point relied upon b! the ban=.d. ?nited States Savin. Foerster. #orporation $I)6*1J.. /an= of #o""erce I)6)6J. de Foerster. /an= of North "erica I)(56J. is a Philippine corporation 2ith offices in the #it! of Manila. M LCOLM. it is a sufficient ans2er to state that no such special defense 2as relied upon b! the ban= in the trial court. <ventuall! the Manila office of the dru... <stanislao Salcedo. #o. facts.. Inc. to the effect that Foerster had i"plied authorit! to indorse all chec=s "ade out in the na"e of the Insular Dru.. Ahile the evidence on the e7tent of the loss suffered b! the dru.d. Inc. $S. /ut there is no evidence sho2in. The "ea.ent does so at his peril.. L-+881. 99 Phil.. Foerster deposited chec=s. to his principal does not have the i"plied authorit! to indorse chec=s received in pa!"ent. Inc.er. Inc.all! cashed b! the ban= for Foerster and placed in his personal account. Foerster 2ith the ban=.Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila <N / N# G. President and Mana. /!. 2ith the Iloilo branch of the Philippine National /an=.overnin.. >>1 N.lorente. #o. >5(E People vs. Foerster:E othersE :Insular Dru.

the errors assi. a sales"an of the dru.Philippine Islands can not be differentiated fro" those dra2n on the Philippine National /an= because of the indorse"ent b! the latter.ned.ence of its a.. 1ull. "ade authorit! fro" the dru. 2ere brou. but the ban= has not done so.ht to the branch office of the Philippine National /an= in Iloilo b! Foerster. Overrulin. The ban= could relieve itself fro" responsibilit! b! pleadin. /mperial. and not to Foerster or his 2ife or his cler=. Much "ore could be said about this case. co"pan! 2hich thus suffered no loss. Villa(Real. #o. #o. co"pan! for the a"ounts represented b! the chec=s. and 0utte."ent of the trial court 2ill be affir"ed. JJ.ents. The ban= could tell b! the chec=s the"selves that the "one! belon.. Inc. and Foerster3s cler=. but it suffices to state in conclusion that ban= 2ill have to stand the loss occasioned b! the ne. the ban= "ade itself responsible to the dru. the costs of this instance to be paid b! appellant.. that after the "one! 2as 2ithdra2n fro" the ban= it passed to the dru. co"pan! to do so.ed to the Insular Dru. Ahen the ban= credited those chec=s to the personal account of Foerster and per"itted Foerster and his 2ife to "a=e 2ithdra2als 2ithout there bein.li. this is a case 2here )*> chec=s "ade out in the na"e of the Insular Dru. . co"pan!. -ud. Inc. concur... Foerster3s 2ife. and provin. In brief.

(erms a$' co$'itio$s .to$ Ca%N0 that Flores 2a.e$t o% >a$. se$'i$. a'vertise' the %act that Colla$tes .*.as $o lo$.as the ' t! o% >a$. a$' selli$. (his s m .oo's a$' ma'e vario s pa!me$ts thereo$ amo $ti$.itho t $e.$ as the <+ashi$.as his a.le'. alle. 2"? b $'les o% tobacco i$ the lea% to be sol' o$ commissio$.as $ot k$o. Faili$.ith >a$. he is respo$sible to them %or .e$t3 later ack$o.oo' 'eal o% pro' ce to be sol' o$ commissio$. the latter to be the co$si. 8% so.co.O vario s bills o% . i$ the abse$ce o% Camps.e$t %or >a$. o$e o% the plai$ti%%s.co a . that prior to the se$'i$.co a$' his a. perso$all! a$' $ot as a. o% sai' tobacco >a$. as a. as pri$cipal is liable. himsel% $ot to s blet or s bre$t the b il'i$.6GCNC> A8GC@(@ ".oo's the s m o% P"77.ho represe$te' himsel% to be the a.ht b! the sale o% the pro' ce RE=8NG< >es >a$.he$ he .ive ' e a$' timel! $otice thereo% to Rallos. *.as receive' a$' sol' b! Colla$tes. that o% a hotel .$e' b! Camps a$' the $ame o% Ricar'o Flores as a .ive$ b! >a$.as .es %or s ch sale . L(his co$tract .ati$. >a$. his bill he %o $' Flores.$or i$ b !i$. *avi$. b si$ess $'er thee %irm $ame o% Macke.herei$ the b si$ess .ritte$ co$tract . (he char.itho t the co$se$t o% the sai' Galmes. i$ all to P"710 that believes that Flores is still the a.ith Colla$tes a$' that the latter . o% the termi$atio$ o% s ch relatio$ship 2.e.e$t . the %ormer o% P+ashi$. the mo$ths o% Febr ar! a$' March "9#5.ee$ >a$. act al or co$str ctive. i$ the ha$'s o% sai' Colla$tes the s m o% ".h the sai' Colla$tes. k$o. Rallos procee'e' to 'o a co$si'erable b si$ess .li.e$t to the +ashi$.ere also co$tai$e' i$ the letter.co.as i$tro' ce' as evi'e$ce.co as pri$cipal m st re% $' to Rallos the sai' s m bro . o$ that b si$ess. Camps obli. .itho t k$o.537. to him as a.s . (his %act . the! sol' to Bose Camps a$' 'elivere' at his place o% b si$ess. Cha$'ler 6$' Compa$!. to Rallos. to Camps %or " !ear %or the p rpose o% carr!i$.5# L Plai$ti%%s ma'e 'ema$' %or the pa!me$t %rom 'e%e$'a$t a$' that the latter %aile' a$' re% se' to pa! the sai' bala$ce or a$! part o% it L Macke. a$' havi$.or' Preceive'O . .ive$ special $otice to Rallos o% that %act.it$ess a$' attache' thereo$ is a$ i$ve$tor! o% the % r$it re a$' %itti$.oo's to the 'e%e$'a$t at the +ashi$.as co$' cte'.co ha' severe' his relatio$s .oo's ma! bee$ i$ . a$' at the %oot o% this i$ve$tor! the . L 6ccepti$.co. the $ame. ). .5#0 that Camps has o$l! pai' o$ acco $t o% sai' .#? belo$. as his %actor.$ se b! sai' a.i$.to$ Ca%N %or the p rpose o% collecti$.$e' b! Camps .co o$ the termi$atio$ o% the relatio$ship o% the pri$cipal a$' a. L 8t appears.co th s re% se' to pa! the sai' s m po$ 'ema$' o% Rallos.to$ Ca%NO s bre$te' the b il'i$.e$t.to$ Ca%N. L >a$. %rom . sai' b si$ess bei$.as si.e$t o% Camps0 a$' that . as his %actor.ere P2#6. it .96.e that ' ri$.co o% the termi$atio$ o% the relatio$s bet.e$t o% >a$. as ha' bee$ other pro' ce previo sl!.er acti$.oo' %aith a$' . L 6 .e$t to . the i$vitatio$.as.hich also is si. he shippe' the sai' .$ to Rallos0 a$' it is co$ce'e' i$ the case that $o $otice o% a$! ki$' .ro $' that at the time the sai' tobacco . appare$tl! i$ char. part$ers 'oi$. testi%ie' that o$ the or'er o% o$e Ricar'o Flores.ith s ch a. *.e$t o% Bose Camps.ith the .or' Ps blesseeO belo. L Rallos se$t to the sai' Colla$tes. or the b si$ess . lea% tobacco a$' other $ative pro' cts. he .e o% the b si$ess a$' claimi$.oo's the s m o% P"710 that there is still ' e them o$ acco $t o% sai' .co.711. .e$t a$' havi$. Macke a$' +. co$verte' to his o.er o% Camps. to P35". placi$.ive$ them a special i$vitatio$ to 'eal . s ch re% sal po$ the .ith a bar a$' resta ra$t a$$e5e'.e$t %or >a$.e$t. leavi$.co se$t Rallos a letter i$viti$. Cha$'ler.as acti$. ho.co trho .le'. to 'o so.e' the receipt o% the sai' . to be the b si$ess ma$a.e$ce se$t to the a. L (he sai' Colla$tes receive' sai' tobacco a$' sol' it %or the s m o% P". appare$tl!. Colla$tes.hich it appears that o$e Galmes.e$t. M6CDC C( 6= F B:@C C6MP@ F6C(@< L ).hatever .ever. R6==:@ F >6NGC: F6C(@< L >a$.oo's amo $ti$. 8@@EC< +MN Colla$tes is a$ a.

R8: > :=6)6RR8C(6 6NA M:=8N6 F >E (CC .e$c! i$to e%%ect.le'.ee$ Rio a$' > (ec %or the sale a$' p rchase o% the real propert! C5hibit ) 2letter .e o% the %acts a$' .C:.ith the .ht to be char.o !ears. 6.atio$ arisi$.reeme$t L (hat 'e%e$'a$t. a$' or'eri$.ive$ shall be ca$celle'3 is $othi$.e$t.ith a thorit! to bi$' Camps.ritte$ co$tract bet. Calvi$ is o% a.riti$. to the pre.ere ma'e.ith % ll k$o.ether . %or the pa!me$t o% the . .e$t.F.e$t leave little room %or 'o bt that he .e$t o% Camps. a. co l' $ot e$%orce the speci%ic per%orma$ce o% C5hibit ).### a$' pra!s that the sale to Calvi$ be 'eclare' $ ll a$' voi'.### at the e$' o% the seco$' !ear.oo's (he co$tract s %%icie$tl! establishes the %act that Camps . > (ec a$' Co is a 'omestic corporatio$ a$' the 'e%e$'a$t.as the o. his pri$cipal. the price o% the sale o% the parcel o% la$'. Moli$a ha' $o a thorit! to sell the propert! po$ a$! terms a$' co$'itio$s a%ter the stip late' perio'.ith the %act that at the time the p rchases . Rio s %%ere' 'ama.eme$t o% the bar o% the +ashi$.< >es Cvi'e$ce is s %%icie$t to s stai$ a %i$'i$.ith appare$t a thorit! as his a.e$t o% Camps i$ the ma$a. o t o% s ch 'eclaratio$.i$. Ma$ila. .Co. act or omissio$. .oo' %aith a$' i$ the ho$est belie% that he is .ith i$terest o% ?Q a$' the remai$i$. B. b! his o.i$. (he 'e%e$'a$t. a$' the bala$ce Ri. it 'oes $ot speci%! the terms a$' co$'itio$s po$ . a$' hol's him o t to the p blic as s ch.i$.hich . act.a$i9e' a$' e5isti$. .ivi$.ive$ the a.ht be co$str e' as %i5i$. all to be sec re' b! a %irst mort. a$' to act po$ s ch belie%.### a$' that Molli$a.as the$ a limite' part$ership. its a. ca$ $ot be permitte' to 'e$! the a thorit! o% s ch perso$ to act as his a. Calvi$.hich o%%ere' to p rchase the la$' %or the s m o% P 1#.e$c! b! Cstoppel &&& :$e .e L Rio accepte' the o%%er b t > (ec compa$! ma'e several e5c ses a$' re% se' to carr! o t the a. F6C(@< LPlai$ti%%.as the a. a thorit! to B.to$ Ca%N .ithi$ the speci%ie' perio'.e' b! the $ame PRicar'o FloresO . more tha$ a$ a thorit! to sell +hile C5hibit ) mi. P25.e'O RE=8NG< >es Moli$a. . the a thorit! . his a.e$tO imme'iatel! %ollo.i$. o% the co$tract. the a thorit! o% the a.e' or its a. a thori9e' its a.$e' b! the part! to be char. Rio is a copart$er$ership or. 'ice o% i$$oce$t thir' perso$s 'eali$. it .$ 'eclaratio$. Moli$a as a.hich the sale . $'er the la.e a$' a resi'e$t o% Ma$ila L Rio alle. tr e.ith > (ec.or's Pma$a.### 8@@EC< +MN the co$tract o% p rchase a$' sale o% real propert! is voi' P $less the a thorit! o% the a. L +ithi$ the time .a. . o% .e o% selli$. i$te$tio$all! a$' 'eliberatel! le' a$other to believe a partic lar thi$.e$t %o $' a p rchaser i$ the $ame o% plai$ti%% 2Rio3 .e$t.hich he p rchase' the propert! %rom the compa$!. (here is $o evi'e$ce i$ the recor' o% a$! .ive$. ma'e k$o.as there as the a thori9e' a. that %act . si.$i$.e$t.### i$stea'.es that > (ec .al %orce a$' e%%ect o% C5hibit C 2speci%ie' a$' 'e%i$e' the terms a$' co$'itio$s o% a$! sale ma'e b! Moli$a 8$ the abse$ce o% a re$e.e$t m st be pres me' to i$cl 'e all the $ecessar! a$' s al mea$s o% carr!i$. Cstopple&&&& P+he$ever a part! has. e$tere' i$to a co$tract b! .e$t.ith the co$tract a$' to e5ec te a 'ee' to Rio a$' to pa! 'ama. i$ a$! liti.ith s ch perso$ i$ . to it locate' o$ Calle Felas4 e9. a$' s bscribe' b! the part! so . (o$'o. he ca$ $ot. 8@@EC< +MN Ricar'ol Flores .ho clothes a$other . to. a. %ra ' le$tl! co$spiri$.e$t o% Camps R li$. the ' ties s all! i$tr ste' to a ma$a. the a. that Flores is the a.hich re% se' to accept it L > (ec o%%ere' to sell the la$' %or P12.hich P7.e$t be i$ .i$.$er o% the b si$ess a$' o% the bar.hat he appears to be. Moli$a to %i$' a p rchaser or a lessee o% a tract o% la$' belo$.e$tO attache' to the si. or omissio$ be permitte' to %alsi%!0 a$' $less the co$trar! appears.as appare$tl! i$ char.ithi$ t. a. compa$! to compl! .$at re o% Flores .%ollo.al or e5te$sio$ i$ .e$t.e$t o% > (ec a$' i% the latter shall $ot take a'va$ta.e o% the b si$ess per%ormi$.$ its o%%er to the respo$'e$t compa$! .### .o l' 'estro! the le. Flores .riti$. his $ame. 3. a$' the title o% Pma$a.as to be pai' o$ the si.es i$ the s m o% P"2. L )! reaso$ thereo%.es o% P"2.ithi$ the time .hich appears o$ that co$tract.s o% the Phil 8sla$'s.as to be ma'e @i$ce C5hibit ) alrea'! e5pire'.

orio Bime$e9 . or at least implie'. A ra$ mi. po.e$t.al %orm a 'ee' o% co$ve!a$ce o% the parcel o% la$' b t the latter re% se' to 'o so. A ra$. i$ %avor o% that :re$se p blicl! rati%ie' a$' co$%irme' the sai' sale 2. . Nicolasa approache' Rabot a$' the latter a.ith the b il'i$.e$c!.as e5ec te' b! his $ephe.ith the latterSs k$o.ht o% rep rchase a$' :re$se also re% se' to 'eliver the propert! a$' to pa! re$tal thereo% 8@@EC< ".rote his sister a letter %rom Fi. P25# .o other parcels i$ the same localit! ori. . .ho acte' . L 6cti$.ithi$ the scope o% his a thorit! Cve$ i% sai' co$se$t .ive his co$se$t i$ or'er that his $ephe.er o% a.ether . '. havi$. Pa$. .asi$a$ L (he propert! i$ 4 estio$.hich he i$%orme' her that he .ithi$ 1 !ears L Plai$ti%% ha' $ot e$tere' i$to possessio$ o% the la$' si$ce it is bei$.le'. a $ephe. .e$c! po$ his $ephe. e5ec te' be%ore a $otar! a p blic i$str me$t .hose $ame it .s that :re$se 'i' ..ho has $either his a thori9atio$ $or le.ith A ra$ havi$.Ss maki$.itho t a$! .$er po$ his stati$. the o. .as presse' %or mo$e! a$' re4 este' her to sell o$e o% his parcels o% la$' a$' se$' him the mo$e! i$ or'er that he mi. bee$ assi.ht to rep rchase %or the same price .5## the a%oreme$tio$e' propert! .$er o% a parcel o% la$'.i$all! belo$.ra$te' s bse4 e$tl! to the sale.hich he receive' L A ra$ %aile' to e5ercise his ri.hile Gre.a$ i$ .as prese$t i$ this case RE=8NG< >C@ (: ):(* Cvi'e$ce sho. po$ this letter.e that he himsel% co$se$te' to his $ephe. o% :re$se. e5ec te' b! A ra$ . his propert! i$ 6lami$os .as p blicl! a$' %reel! co$%irme' a$' rati%ie' b! :re$se i$ a verbal 'eclaratio$ ma'e b! him to the e%%ect that the i$str me$t . the ri. b t a%ter.ar's became per%ectl! vali' a$' c re' o% the 'e%ect o% $ llit! it bore at its e5ec tio$ b! the co$%irmatio$ solem$l! ma'e b! the sai' o. to. plai$ti%% ha' to 'ema$' :re$se that he e5ec te i$ le. the sai' propert! (he pri$cipal m st % l%ill all the obli. a parcel o% la$' sit ate' i$ 6lami$os.e' to Bime$e9. it is 4 estio$able that :re$se.al represe$tatio$ shall be voi'.$e' to him as o$e o% the heirs i$ the 'ivisio$ o% the estate o% his %ather L 8t % rther appears that . %or P ". the sai' sale 5. approve' the actio$ o% his $ephe.hereb! he sol' a$' co$ve!e' to G tierre9 *erma$os. a$' improveme$ts thereo$ sit ate' i$ the p eblo o% 6lba!.a$.as .i$$i$.ho accepte' it i$ the same . 8locos @ r. b! virt e o% a co$tract o% lease e5ec te' b! plai$ti%% to A ra$ L @ai' i$str me$t o% sale o% propert!. o% :re$se.ho i$ this case acte' as the ma$a.e a$' co$se$t L 8$ or'er to per%ect the title to sai' propert!. L *e . that a 'ee' o% co$ve!a$ce . $'er oath to the .. revoke' b! the other co$tracti$.as sta!i$.ith his k$o.$er o% the propert!.ree' to b ! the propert! %or the s m o% P5##. a$' he sho l' be compelle' to e5ec te sai' 'ee' beca se his $ephe.as pai' at o$ce. e5press or implie' .ht pa! his 'ebts. $less it sho l' be rati%ie' b! the perso$ i$ . at Fi..s that :re$se co$%erre' verbal.le'.ht sell the propert! to plai$ti%% compa$! a$' that he 'i' co$%irm a$' rati%! the sale b! mea$s o% p blic i$str me$t e5ec te' be%ore a $otar! 8t %ollo.ith the $'ersta$'i$.or's Po$e o% m! parcels o% la$'O. +MN a co$tract o% a.1.orio Bime$e9 %ile' this actio$ to recover %rom Rabot.ith t.istere' $'er his $ame L Bose A ra$. $ephe. GE(8CRRCR *CRM6N:@ F :RCN@C F6C(@< L :re$se ha' bee$ the o.atio$s co$tracte' b! the a.o l' be e5ec te' . (he letter co$tai$s $o 'escriptio$ o% the la$' to be sol' other tha$ is i$'icate' i$ the . .a! b! selli$. a$' ha' bee$ re.er o% his $cleSs b si$ess a$' :re$seSs rati%icatio$ pro' ce' the e%%ects o% a$ e5press a thori9atio$ to make the sai' sale P6 co$tract e5ec te' i$ the $ame o% a$other b! o$e .e a$' co$se$t.as co$%i'e' b! him to the care o% his el'er sister Nicolasa Bime$e9.as e5ec te' be%ore bei$. . part!O (he sale o% the sai' propert! ma'e b! A ra$ to G tierre9 *erma$os . +MN the sale e5ec te' b! A ra$.as i$'ee' $ ll a$' voi' %rom the be. B8MCNCR F R6):( F6C(@< L Gre. sti%iable ca se or reaso$. is $otorio sl! i$solve$t a$' ca$$ot reimb rse plai$ti%% compa$! %or the price o% sale . occ pie' b! :re$se a$' A ra$.

ht to appear i$ a p blic 'oc me$t 6rt.er o% attor$e! .ithi$ the 5 !ear perio' %rom 'ate o% its %i$alit! alle.orio Bime$e9 .ee$ Cosmic = mber.e$t m st be i$ .ra$te' Fillamil&Cstra'a $'er the special po.ithi$ .reeme$t ma'e b! the a.h its Ge$eral Ma$a.e$c! bet.re.61# comp te' at P?#Ms4 are meter a$' that Cosmic = mber reco. thro .er o% attor$e! is to s bstit te the mi$' a$' ha$' o% the a. Fillamil Cstra'a.hatever e5pe$ses o% s b'ivisio$.hich the a.e$t to a thir' perso$. a. L Nicolasa a'mits havi$. pri$cipal a$' Pa9 Cstra'a.$ership a$' possessio$ o% Pere9 b! virt e o% this compromise a.ivi$.ith Pere9. Nicolasa e5ec te' a$' 'elivere' to Rabot a 'ee' p rporti$. to appear at the pre&trial a$' e$ter i$to a$! .er is so 'e%i$e' as to leave $o 'o bt as to the limits . it bei$.e$t th s bi$'i$.hile.er o% attor$e!. the pri$cipal ca$$ot 4 estio$ the vali'it! o% his act (he . "7"3 o% the Civil Co'e re4 ires that the a thorit! to alie$ate la$' shall be co$tai$e' i$ a$ e5press ma$'ate @ bsectio$ 5 o% sectio$ 335 o% Co'e o% Civil Proce' re sa! that the a thorit! o% the a.ht to appear i$ a p blic 'oc me$t.ithi$ those limits. b! virt e o% her po. Pa9 G.er o% 6ttor$e! appoi$ti$.e$eral r le here applicable is that the 'escriptio$ m st be s %%icie$tl! 'e%i$ite to i'e$ti%! the la$' either %rom the recitals o% the co$tract or 'ee' or %rom e5ter$al %acts re%erre' to i$ the 'oc me$t. Gre. 6. C:@M8C =EM)CR C:RP:R6(8:N F C6 F6C(@ L Cosmic Corporatio$.ectme$t o% thir' perso$s a$'Mor s4 atters o% the e$tire lot 9"27 a$' 113 %or the sai' s4 atters to remove their ho ses a$' vacate the premises i$ or'er that the corporatio$ ma! take material possessio$ o% the e$tire lot L Pa9 G.as e5plicit a$' e5cl sio$ar!< %or her to i$stit te a$! actio$ i$ co rt to e. i$stit te a$' %ile a$! co rt actio$ %or the e. a$' he acts . the terms a$' co$'itio$s s ch as< P 8$ or'er %or Pere9 to b ! the sai' lot he is prese$tl! occ p!i$.$erSs ' plicate cop! o% title $ee'e' to se. it is i$s %%icie$t.e' @C< the a thorit! e5presse' i$ the letter is a s %%icie$t complia$c. plai$ti%% i$stit te' a$ actio$ to recover the la$' %rom her co$trol L Mea$. .e$t is a thori9e' to act.istratio$ a$' other i$ci'e$tal e5pe$ses shall be sho l'ere' b! Pere9 L altho .e$t back to 6lami$os a$' 'ema$'e' that his sister s rre$'er the piece o% la$' to him.reeme$t .$i9es o.e$t %or the mi$' a$' ha$' o% the pri$cipal0 a$' i% the character a$' e5te$t o% the po. Pa9 Cstra'a to Pere9 $'er the compromise a.he$ the bala$ce sho l' be pai'.e'l! ' e to the %ail re o% Cosmic = mber to pro' ce the o. Fillamil&Cstra'a as attor$e!&i$&%act to i$itiate.ate %rom lot 113 the portio$ sol' b! the attor$e!&i$& %act.reeme$t over sai' portio$ o% 333 s4m o% lot 113 a$' ..h Csta'a the s m o% P26.$ to be applicable .ect all perso$s %o $' o$ lots $ mber 9"27 a$' 113 so that Cosmic = mber co l' take material possessio$ thereo% a$' %or this p rpose. o$e to 'etermi$e the i'e$tit! o% the la$' a$' i% the 'escriptio$ is $certai$ o$ its %ace or is sho.as $ot e5ec te' . st as a$! other i$str me$t i$te$'e' to tra$smit or co$ve! a$ i$terest i$ s ch propert! o .er e5ec te' a @pecial Po.riti$.er o% attor$e! to co$ve! real propert! o . to co$ve! to him the parcel o% la$' 8@@EC< +MN the a thorit! co$%erre' o$ Nicolasa b! the letter .ectme$t o% private respo$'e$t 8si'ro Pere9 a$' recover the possessio$ o% a portio$ o% lot 113 be%ore the R(C L Cstra'a e$tere' i$to a Compromise 6.h the a.ith e4 al pla sibilit! to more tha$ o$e tract. Pere9 i$ selli$. a po. re.. thereb! e$abli$. L @he re% se' po$ some prete5t or other to 'o so a$' as a res lt. tih both re4 ireme$ts (he p rpose i$ . he has to pa! to plai$ti%% thro . i$stit te' a$ actio$ %or the e.as approve' b! the trial co rt a$' the 'ecisio$ became %i$al a$' e5ec tor! it .reeme$t 8@@EC< +MN there is a co$tract o% a. a po. receive' this pa!me$t b t there is $o evi'e$ce that she se$t it to her brother L 6%ter o$e !ear. a$' s bscribe' b! the part! to be char. the portio$ o% the sai' propert! RE=8NG< No (he a thorit! . the$ i$ her possessio$.reeme$t .as s %%icie$t to e$able her to bi$' her brother o% the sale ma'e i$ %avor o% Rabot RE=8NG< >es 6s a matter o% %ormalit!. the pri$cipal over the compromise a.

hich the! . Corporatio$ 2PFA*C3 primaril! %or parties 4 ali%ie' to obtai$ loa$s %rom the Gover$me$t @ervice 8$s ra$ce @!stem 2G@8@3. lacke' the re4 isites resse$tial %or the per%ectio$ o% co$tracts )oth spo ses 'ealt .ith PFA*C %or the p rchase o% $its i$ the sai' s b'ivisio$.### to PFA*C o$ the $'ersta$'i$.ith the G@8@. PFA*C . .reeme$t . '. sol' %or a price o% P?#Ms4m .e$t o% PFA*C.e$t i$ clear a$' $mistakable la$.as bei$.ere allo. )lock 67. % rther that plai$ti%% $ever receive' the procee's o% the sale +he$ the sale o% a piece o% la$' or a$! i$terest thereo$ is thro .ar' to the sale o% the $its i$ 4 estio$ Recor's 'o $ot sho.er to sell be vali'l! i$%erre' %rom the speci%ic a thorit! Pto e$ter i$to a compromise a. (he crimi$al case %or esta%a a.ive$ the $it o$ =ot 7. a$' e.riti$.ere $ot G@8@ members. ho. the . (he sale ipso .ho co l' act as accommo'atio$ parties b! allo. he is $ot reall! acti$. e$tirel! o tsi'e the scope o% his a. 'isapprove' the loa$ applicatio$s o% both spo ses. 6s the! .hile the spo ses Mitra that o% Ae$a =im.hich . (h s. Fillamil&Cstra'a acte' .h a$ a.ht o% Cosmic = mber to ph!sicall! possess the same. to Pere9 a portio$ o% Cosmic = mberSs la$' thro .0 other.ere per%ecte' co$tracts o% sale bet.er to sell the s b.ill be 'etermi$e' a%ter the approval o% their loa$ applicatio$s . PFA*C 'ema$'e' them to vacate the $its the! .er o% attor$e! m st so e5press the po.ith re.as protective o% the ri.$ $ame L )oth spo ses applie' 'irectl! . alie$atio$ b! sale o% a$ immovable certai$l! ca$$ot be 'eeme' protective o% the ri.### respectivel! %or . them to se their policies.ise. a po.ith Gat s . the case.e 8t is there%ore clear that b! selli$.653 . the! looke' %or members . the $its i$ 4 estio$ RE=8NG< No @C< Parties i$ this case ha' $ot reache' a$! a.i$.otiate' .ho .ere still allo.ever. that these acco $ts .reeme$t. the sale sho l' be voi'. the possibilit! o% b L!i$.ere a'vise' b! PFA*C to seek other so rces o% %i$a$ci$. %or the pri$cipal b t is reall! acti$. a$' m st . (his bei$.ive him speci%ic a thorit!. 8$ the co$te5t o% special i$vestit re o% po.e' to remai$ i$ the sai' premises L Fail re o% both spo ses to raise mo$e!.as Fillamil&Cstra'a .hts a$' i$terests o% Cosmic = mber i$ the propert! No. b t . R6C( F C6 F6C(@< L Petitio$ers Cesar a$' Clviira Raet 2the spo ses Raet3 a$' petitio$ers Re5 a$' C'$a Mitra 2@po ses Mitra3 $e. re is co$se4 e$tl! voi' a$' so is the compromise a.hts o% the latter to certai$ $its at the =as Fillas 'e @to.ive$ to them b! Gat s.e$t to sell real estate.ere occ p!i$.hile @po ses Mitra .e$t to e5ec te a co$tract %or the sale o% real estate m st be co$%erre' i$ .ere .h a compromise a.e$c! 7.e$t.ers o% the a. (he %ormer pai' P32. Phase 16 o% the s b'ivisio$ .reeme$tO beca se o% the e5plicit limitatio$ %i5e' b! the . Ni$o @ b'ivisio$ i$ Me!ca !a$.ai$st them 8@@EC< +MN there .as $ot the a. the total costs o% the $its i$ 4 estio$ a$' the pa!me$t schemes there%ore. co$tract co$tai$i$. ) laca$.me$t base' thereo$ is $ecessaril! voi' +he$ a$ a.ere iss e' receipts b! Gat s i$ her o. the a thorit! o% a$ a.a. (he partiesS tra$sactio$s th s.e' i$ the perpetratio$ o% a %ra ' po$ his pri$cipal %or his o.e$eral b si$ess o% the pri$cipal or to e5ec te a bi$'i$.hts a$' i$terest o% the corporatio$ i$ the a%oreme$tio$e' lotsO.hich are i$ the co$tract he 'i' e5ec te For the pri$cipal to co$%er the ri.reeme$t.ere %ile' a.ht po$ a$ a.ith 6mparo Gat s co$cer$i$.itho t or i$ obvio s a thorit!.s 'evelope' b! private respo$'e$t Phil Fille Aevelopme$t a$' *o si$.here i$ this a thori9atio$ . terms a$' co$'itio$s .ect propert! $or a portio$ thereo% Neither ca$ a co$%erme$t o% the po.e' to occ p! the $it b ilt o$ =ot 1. res re%erre' to b! both spo ses . L @po ses Raet a$' @po ses Mira pai' Gat s the total amo $ts o% P1#. more so .ee$ petitio$ers a$' private respo$'e$t PFA*C i$volvi$.ra$tor that the compromise e$tere' i$to shall o$l! be Pso %ar as it shall protect the ri.riti$.reeme$t b t o$l! i$so%ar as this .### a$' P35.stip latio$ o% %acts a$'Mor compromise a.$ e5cl sive be$e%it. (he %i.ai$st .hile the latter pai' P27.ers to Fillamil&Cstra'a. )lock 6". Phase 16 thereo% L G@8@. the ri. a.o l' be cre'ite' to the p rchase prices o% the $its . either to co$' ct the .ectme$t cases . the a thorit! o% the latter shall be i$ . ver! m ch less tha$ its assesse' val e o% P25#Ms4m a$' co$si'eri$. (he! .ere mere estimates . L@po ses Raet .e$t is e$.ra$te' e5pressl! or implie'l! a$! po.o l' process the applicatio$s %or the p rchase o% the $its po$ the approval b! the G@8@ o% petitio$ersS loa$ applicatio$ L @po ses Raet prese$te' G@8@ polic! o% Cr$esto Casi'si'.he$ the la$' . L (his s b'ivisio$ . %or himsel%.

25# pa!able as %ollo.e$eral p blic thro . Ro! s bse4 e$tl! i$%orme' Cit!&=iteSs represe$tative that it .or's.ith a$ area o% 7".P.ith G@8@ . o% 9.istere' o. price o% P6. Ro! a$'Mor Metro Ar .ith the locatio$ pla$ a$' cop! o% the (C( to 6tt!. F.as to e$ter i$to a.ree' to sell the propert! to Cit!&=ite provi'e' o$l! the latter s bmit its accepta$ce i$ . res Gat s .#56.e' sales.$ behal% a$' $ot as a$ a.as 2Q o% selli$.le'.s. appraisal a$' accepta$ce o% the tra$sactio$ co l' be ma'e o$l! b! F.reeme$ts co$cer$i$. *ol'i$.atio$ L 6l G.ithi$ 6 mo$ths %rom 'o. %rom the be.ect $its . *ol'i$.otiati$. it is rather stra$.P.e that co$tracts o% s ch importa$ce have $ot bee$ re' ce' i$ . Metro Ar . 8$c. e9 6ve$ e.riti$.ritte$ memora$' m iss e' b! respo$'e$t F.as %o $' o t that she $ever represe$ete' hersel% to be a$ a.as re' ce' a$' that pa!me$t be i$ i$stallme$t %or a certai$ perio' L (he parties reache' a$ a. C5ec tive Fice Presi'e$t."92 s4m is the s b.as the a.s< P"5 M as 'o.her . 8$ a''itio$. price.s a$' Realt! Corporatio$ 2F. s b.. .i$$i$. other.ith both spo ses o$l! po$ approval o% their loa$ applicatio$s .e$t o% PFA*C . brokerSs commissio$ .hich %aile' to materiali9e (here are $o . to.as a per%ecte' co$tract o% sale bet.$pa!me$t to be pa!able imme'iatel! po$ e5ec tio$ o% the 'ee' o% sale a$' the bala$ce .rote Metro Ar .e o% the %i.as o%%ere' %or sale to the . la.!er a$' a lice$se' real estate broker.ritte$ co$tracts to evi'e$ce the alle. *:=A8NG@ beca se o% a lack o% 'e%i$ite a. L (he %ro$t portio$ co$sisti$. *:=A8NG@ re% se' to e5ec te the correspo$'i$. Ro! mere co$tact perso$ 6rt. ta5es a$' other char.25#Ms4m .h a$ a.P. Ro'ri. PFA*C .ith them i$ her o. 8% both spo ses a$' PFA*C ha' i$'ee' e$tere' i$to co$tracts i$volvi$.O .reeme$t o$ the ma$$er o% pa!i$.itho t i$terest L C6 reverse' (CSs 'ecisio$ 8@@EC< +MN there . Ro!3 e5pressi$.as $e..es.e$t o% PFA*C )oth spo ses k$e.P.hom the! . Ro! se$t a sales broch re.ith terms o% pa!me$t $e.reeme$t a$' Ro! a. .ere s ppose' to e$'orse to F.as Mel'i$ 6l G.s 8$c. Ro! a$'Mor Metro Ar .P. $et o% .ether .P.as o$l! to assist F.ect propert! i$stea' o% o$l! hal% thereo% provi'e' the aski$. =e. 8$ other . Metro Ar . it co l' $ot have rati%ie' the same at the time the latter applie' %or the p rchase o% the $its. o% *=ER) 6rbiter that Gat s .as $ot receptive to the p rchase o% o$l! hal% o% the %ro$t lot L 6tt!. a$' Mel'i$ 6l G. . *ol'i$. *ol'i$. price o% P6. Ro!. Gelacio Mamaril.751 s4m L (he propert! .e$t. F.s3.ithhol'i$.as 'ismisse' beca se it .P. *ol'i$.$ as the PFiola. Mamaril .P. Co$tact perso$ .ee$ Cit!&=ite a$' respo$'e$t F. T e9o$ Cit! also k$o. to them possible prospects . *:=A8NG@ Presi'e$t re4 esti$. the a thorit! o% the latter shall be i$ . %ormerl! the @parta *ol'i$. the sale shal be voi'.s.ave to both spo ses as estimates o% the costs o% the $its. the p rchase price a$' that Metro Ar .P. that Gat s .25#Ms4m . sai' $its. Mamaril passe' i$ t r$ passe' o$ these 'oc me$ts to 6$to$io (e$.s i$ looki$.Ss assista$ce i$ %i$'i$.$pa!me$t . a$' 6tt! Fictor Filla$ eva.ith respect to the tra$sactio$s i$ 4 estio$ @i$ce PFA*C ha' $o k$o.$er o% a parcel o% la$' sit ate' alo$.as o$l! limite' to that o% mere liaiso$ or co$tact perso$ RE=8NG< No. b !ers %or the propert! Memora$' m i$'icates that Mel'i$ G. C8(>&=8(C RC6=(> C:RP:R6(8:N F C6 F6C(@ L Private Respo$'e$t F.e$t o% PFA*C (here is th s $o basis %or the %i$'i$. ?. ) t the %i$al eval atio$.P. Ro! .al Co $sel o% Cit!&=ite L Cit!&=ite co$ve!e' its i$terest to p rchase a portio$ or o$e&hal% 2"M23 o% the %ro$t lot o% the PFiola. .h the circ latio$ o% a sales broch re co$tai$i$.o l' take time to s b'ivi'e the lot a$' F. the 'escriptio$ o% the propert! a$' the aski$. 26l G. *:=A8NG@ to e5ec te a 'ee' o% sale o% the propert! i$ %avor o% the %ormer %or the total co$si'eratio$ o% P55.O (he abse$ce o% a thorit! to sell ca$ be 'etermi$e' %rom the .as the re.as o$l! a co$tact perso$ . %or b !ers a$' re%erri$. C.o Propert!O or the P@a$ =ore$9o R i9 Commercial Ce$ter.o Propert!O 6ppare$tl!. "?71 o% NCC< P+he$ the sale o% a piece o% la$' or a$! i$terest therei$ is thro . 'ee' o% sale i$ %avor o% Cit!&=ite o% the %ro$t lot o% the propert! L (rial co rt r le' i$ %avor o% Cit!&=ite or'eri$. a practici$.riti$. *:=A8NG@ . to the terms a$' co$'itio$s o% the sale L For some reaso$ or a$other a$' 'espite 'ema$'.ise.ect o% this liti.otiable. a$' that the a thorit! o% Ro! .ith $o a thorit! to co$cl 'e a sale .riti$.ere $ot a thori9e' to sell the propert! to Cit!&=ite. Cit!&=iteSs 'esire to b ! the e$tire %ro$t lot o% the s b.

itho t the i$terve$tio$ o% @immie.reei$.ether %or a possible tra$sactio$ @C< %or lack o% a . 6GEN6 F.i$.s belo$.i$. *e also took s ch steps as . =6RCN6 F6C(@< L (his actio$ is bro .$e' b! sai' +ashb r$ %or a s m $ot to e5cee' 3.e' co$tract a$' that o$e 6. a$' the$ )ro'ek closes sai' co$tract . i$ the collectio$ o% the re$ts ' e %rom the te$a$ts occ p!i$. the alle.ever it is a %act that ' ri$.i$. le%t to be 'o$e e5cept the pa!me$t o% the sai' propert!. +ashb r$ .B. co$sisti$."5# pesos a$' that there .6##.hich he co l' p rchase the sai' la $ch L*e % rther claims that b! virt e o% this a. the latter to p rchase the sai' la $ch %or the pri$cipal. plai$ti%% alle. to the 'ecease' a$' 'escribe' i$ his complai$t .as the o.e o% the 'ecease'Ss ho ses sit ate' i$ Ma$ila L E$'er the seco$' ca se o% actio$. he 'i' $ot receive a$! compe$satio$. a s m e4 al to the 'i%%ere$ce bet. the 'ecease'Ss ho ses i$ Ma$ila a$' atte$'i$.5## pesos.as to receive %or s ch services a s m e4 al to the 'i%%ere$ce bet.6## o$ t.as b ilt b! him .ee$ this %i5e' price a$' .as to bri$.ee$ 3. to pa! a %i5e' price %or s ch propert!. plai$ti%% claims the s m o% P9.as a mere broker a$' Ro!Ms o$l! .ob .as the o. the trial co rt hel' that the compe$satio$ %or services o% plai$ti%% . the co rt hel' that the plai$ti%% 'i' $ot have a$! so rce o% i$come that co l' pro' ce him s ch a lar.as re4 ire' to protect the i$terests o% the 'ecease' i$ co$$ectio$ . to the repair o% sai' ho ses . a$' @immie has complete' the co$tract o% sale a$' there is $othi$. sai' perio'.ritte$ a thorit! to sell the PFiola. L @immie claims that he e$tere' i$to a co$tract .o ca ses a. @immie 8@@EC< +MN there .as a co$tract o% a.h his a thori9e' a. ho.o Propert!O o$ the part o% Ro! a$'Mor Metro Ar .### L Cvi'e$ce sho.ee$ the act al p rchase price o% sai' propert! a$' the .he$ $ecessar!.ree' to pa! %or the same "#.s that )ro'ek . )ro'ek RE=8NG< >C@ +here )ro'ek e$ters i$to a co$tract thro .e$t Aorr. the sale sho l' be as it is 'eclare' $ ll a$' voi' 9.s that at the time he re$'ere' his services. L Cvi'e$ce sho.as to p rchase the hal% i$terest o. a$' %or that reaso$ he is e$title' to recover the s m 'isb rse' b! him i$ its co$str ctio$.rat ito s se a$' occ patio$ o% some o% the ho ses o% the 'ecease' b! the plai$ti%% a$' his %amil! L 6s to the seco$' ca se.hich )ro'ek a."5# pesos.s that plai$ti%% re$'ere' services to the 'ecease'. a. .ee$ )ro'ek a$' @immie.ee$ 3. L*e % rther claims that he .ere $ecessar! to e$%orce the pa!me$t o% re$ts a$' all that .hich @immie is able to p rchase the propert!.ith the sai' +ashb r$ to pa! to the latter the s m o% 2.ith sai' ho ses L Cvi'e$ce also sho.ai$st the a'mi$istrator o% the estate o% the 'ecease' Maria$o =are$a L Epo$ his %irst ca se o% actio$.35# pesos L8$%erior co rt r le' i$ %avor the plai$ti%%.$er o% the other hal%.as the .hich he . to P2#.itho t pa!i$. parties the parties to. @8MM8C F *. )R:ACD F6C(@< L @immie %ile' a$ actio$ a.e' val e o% services re$'ere' b! him to sai' 'ecease' as his a.reeme$t he e$tere' i$to a co$tract .hatever s m less tha$ that amo $t %or . Aorr.e$t i$ char. .e s m o% mo$e! as that i$veste' i$ the co$str ctio$ o% the ho se0 a$' the %act that the 'ecease' ha' more tha$ the $ecessar! amo $t to b il' the ho se . amo $ti$. a$! re$t at all L Epo$ the %irst ca se o% actio$. to the 'ecease' .5## pesos a$' . @immie. plai$ti%% occ pie' a ho se belo$.ith the co$se$t o% the 'ecease'.e$c! bet.5## pesos a$' 2.35# pesos %or services per%orme' b! the %ormer %or )ro'ek i$ the p rchase o% a U i$terest i$ the la $ch calle' Fre' =.ith @immie to p rchase propert!. the %ormer is liable to the latter %or a$ amo $t e4 al to the 'i%%ere$ce bet.ith )ro'ek b! the terms o% ..as ' e %rom )ro'ek to him the 'i%%ere$ce bet.o% the propert! Ro! a$'Mor Metro Ar .ht to recover the s m o% P29.es that o$e o% the b il'i$.$er o% U i$terest i$ the sai' la $ch prior to the time o% the alle. allo. or the s m o% ".ai$st )ro'ek to recover the s m o% ".hatever s m less tha$ that %or .

a$! compe$satio$ %rom the 'ecease'. . the plai$ti%% co l' have re$'ere' services as he 'i' %or ? !ears . bee$ re$'ere'.ato$ to compe$sate them m st $ecessaril! arise.8@@EC< +MN there . the %ormer compe$satio$ %or services re$'ere' i$ %avor o% the latter RE=8NG< N: Plai$ti%% i$sists that.as a co$tract o% a.as the .ee$ plai$ti%% a$' respo$'e$t e$titli$.e$c! bet.rat ito s se a$' occ patio$ o% some o% the ho ses o% sai' 'ecease' b! plai$ti%% a$' his %amil! 8% it . a$ obli. to the e%%ect that plai$ti%% . a$' claimi$. as his services as a.e$t o% the 'ecease' M =are$a havi$. (he trial co rt hel' that the compe$satio$ %or the services o% the plai$ti%% .itho t receivi$.ere tr e that the plai$ti%% a$' the 'ecease' ha' a$ $'ersta$'i$. it ca$$ot be e5plai$e' ho.as to receive compe$satio$ asi'e %rom the se a$' occ patio$ o% the ho ses o% the 'ecease'.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful