Sevilla vs CA

- Respondents Sgundina Noguera and Eliseo Canilao, representing TWS (tourist world
service) Enetered into a contract whereby TWS leased the property of Noguera as a branch
office.
- In said contract, petitioner held herself solidarily liable with TWS for monthly rent.
When the branch was opened, it was run by petitioner and earned commissions for her efforts.
- TWS was informed that Sevilla was a part of a rival firm (Philippine travel bureau).
- Since the branch office was anyhow losing, TWS decided to close the branch office,
having its corporate secretary padlock the office to protect the interests of TWS, and thus
prompting Sevilla to file a complaint against TWS.
- The trial court dismissed the case for lack of merit.
- In Sevilla’s appeal to the CA, she claimed that she was not an employee, but that they
entered into a joint business venture between her and TWS. CA ruled in favor of Respondents.
Issue: WON Sevilla was in a partnership with TWS
Ratio: The ties contemplated are that of a principal agent relationship rather than a joint
management.
- Records show that sevilla was not subject to control by TWS. She had also bound
herself in solidum for the rental payments, and neither was she under the payroll of TWS. That
does not make her an employee.
- A joint venture, including partnership, each party exercises equal rights in the conduct
of business. Petitioner expressly conceded TWS’s right to stop the operation of business.
- Sevilla agreed to run the office pursuant to a contract of agency – where she solicited
airline fares on behalf of TWS.