PARTNERSHIP: Fortis vs Hermanos Facts: Plaintiff Fortis is an employee of defendant Gutierrez Hermanos.

The former brought an action to recover a balance due him as salary for the year 1902. He also alleged that he was entitled, as salary, to 5 per cent of the net profits of the business of the defendants for said year. The complaint also contained a cause of action for the sum of 600 pesos, money expended by plaintiff for the defendants during the year 1903. The lower court ruled in favor of the plaintiff. The total judgment rendered amounted to P13, 025.40, which was reduced to Philippine currency. The defendants moved for new trial but were denied. They brought the case in the SC thru bill of exceptions; the appellants (defendants) alleged that that the contract made the plaintiff a copartner of the defendants in the business, which they were carrying on. Issue: WON the plaintiff is a co-partner of the defendants in the business. Held: NO. It was a mere contract of employment. The plaintiff had neither voice nor vote in the management of the affairs of the company. The fact that the compensation received by him was to be determined with reference to the profits made by the defendants in their business did not in any sense make by a partner therein. The articles of partnership between the defendants provided that the profits should be divided among the partners named in a certain proportion. The contract made between the plaintiff and the then manager of the defendant partnership did not in any way vary or modify this provision of the articles of partnership. Note: The rule is that, receipt of a person in a share of profits of business is a prima facie evidence that he is a partner. Exception is if the profit is for the payment of wages of an employee. Bill of exceptions- A written statement from a trial judge to an appellate court listing a party’s objections or exceptions made during the trial and the grounds on which they were based.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful