BANGASAN, Roxanne Angela Claire L.

CASE PROBLEM:
ST. PAUL FIRE & MARINE INSURANCE CO., vs. MACONDRAY et. al
G.R. No. L-27796 (March 25, 1976)

Winthrop Productions, Inc of New York, USA shipped a 218 cartons and drums of drugs and
medicine which were consigned to Winthrop Stearns, Inc. of Manila, Philippines.
After it arrived at the Port of Manila, it was found that the drum and several cartons were at bad
order due to the failure of the consignee to receive the whole shipment.
Due to the bad condition of the said items, the consignee filed a corresponding claim for the
recovery of money against the defendant but they refused to pay because they contend that the
whole cargo was delivered to the consignee in the same condition as when they shipped it.

BAR QUESTIONS:
1. Granting that the defendant will pay the corresponding claim, is the payment valid? Why or
why not? (4 pts).
2. Do you think the payment is supposed to be paid in dollar or in peso? Why or why not? (3 pts)
3. If you were the judge, how would you rule the case? Are the defendants liable to pay or not?
(2 pts)
4. Define payment. (1 pt)

ANSWERS:
1. YES because the defendants are the ones who are at fault. Since the item came from USA,
they supposed to check it twice or thrice and made sure that it was well-packed so it will be in a
good condition. In this case, the defendants failed to double pack it and did not checked it well
and that is the reason why the item is not in good condition when it was received by the plaintiff-
consignee.
2. The payment is supposed to be in Philippine peso because the one who bought the items is
from the Philippines and it is the liability of the seller to return the money in their currency for
the convenience of their customer.
3. If I am the judge, I will order the defendants to pay the consignee since it is their fault because
as a seller, it is their duty to check the item twice or thrice before shipping it to make sure that
the item is in good condition when the buyer received it.
4. Under the law, PAYMENT may consist of not only in the delivery of money but also the
giving of a thing (other than money), the doing of an act, or not doing an act.