Nobio Sardane -vs- Court of Appeals

GR No. L-47045 – 22 November 1988

Facts:
Nobio Sardane has been engaged in business of the Sardane Trucking Service, entering into
contracts with the government for the construction of wharfs and seawall. He executed several
promissory notes in favour of private respondent. After several demands, Sardane continuously
failed to make payments which prompted private respondent to take legal action. The trial court
however, based on the testimony of Sardane, held that the promissory notes executed by
Sardane were merely receipts for the contributions to said partnership and, therefore, upheld
the claim that there was ambiguity in the promissory notes, hence parol evidence was allowable
to vary or contradict the terms of the represented loan contract.
Issue:
Whether or not a partnership existed between private respondent and herein petitioner.
Held:
Even if evidence aliunde other than the promissory notes may be admitted to alter the meaning
conveyed thereby, still the evidence is insufficient to prove that a partnership existed between
the private parties hereto. The fact that he had received 50% of the net profits does not
conclusively establish that he was a partner of the private respondent herein. Article 1769(4) of
the Civil Code is explicit that while the receipt by a person of a share of the profits of a business
is prima facie evidence that he is a partner in the business, no such inference shall be drawn if
such profits were received in payment as wages of an employee.