Laws and Found

Special Form of Payment - Dacion Filinvest v. Phil. Acetylene G.R. No. L-50449 January 30, 1982 Facts: Phil. Acetylene (Defendant) purchased a vehicle through a Deed of Sale from Alexander Lim payable on installment. The balance is to be paid under a promissory note with the said vehicle as the subject of a chattel mortgage to secure the obligation. Subsequently, Lim assigned his rights to the vehicle to appellee corporation (Filinvest). Phil. Acetylene defaulted after it failed to pay nine (9) successive installments. The petitioner through a demand letter informed the defendant to make the full payment plus interests and charges or return the mortgaged property. As a result, the defendant returned the vehicle together with the document "Voluntary Surrender with Special Power of Attorney To Sell"   by appellant on March 12, 1973 and confirmed to by Filinvest’s vice-president. Filinvest then informed appellant thru a letter that it cannot sell the vehicle due...

Payment or Performance Aranas v Tutaan 127 SCRA 828 Facts: The stocks of Universal Textile Mills (UTEX) were issued to co-defendants Manuel and Castaneda. Subsequently, in 1971, the lower court declared that Luisa Aranas is the rightful owner of the 400 shares of stocks at Universal Textile Mills (UTEX. Further, it ordered that dividends in cash or stocks pertaining to the same be delivered to Aranas. UTEX then filed a motion to clarify the phrase in said decision which states “to deliver to her all dividends appertaining to the same, whether in cash or in stocks” meant dividends properly pertaining to the plaintiffs after the court’s declaration of her ownership. The said motion was granted, where the court ordered UTEX to pay the plaintiff the cash dividends which accrued to the stocks in question after the current decision was rendered but the cash dividends already paid to the co-defendants before the court decision may not be claimed by the plaintiffs. The co-defenda...

All-in-One Printers seem to be the solution for a student's or small business owners' printing woes. This is my sad experience with the worst after-sales customer service I experienced with respect to a product from  HP. I bought an HP Photosmart Ink Advantage All-in-One printer model K510 about fifteen (15) months ago for a little less than PhP8000. It all went okay during the first round of the ink I got, then problems started to crop up, the most persistent one being -- the printer would not recognize the ink cartridge. The cartridges are of course brought from the same store where I purchased the printer. I never even used a refill. I don't have any knowledge about printer fixing so I did everything to somehow manage the problem which includes cleaning, restarting, etc. I literally felt that I am in the mercy of this expensive printer each time I want to print something. It would literally ruin my day, doing all that. I got so frustrated that I stopped using the said ...

Eleizegui v. The Manila Lawn Tennis Club G.R. No. 967 May 19, 1903 Facts: A contract of lease was executed on January 25, 1980 over a piece of land owned by the plaintiffs Eleizegui (Lessor)  to the Manila Lawn Tennis Club, an English association (represented by Mr. Williamson) for a fixed consideration of P25 per month and accordingly, to last at the will of the lessee. Under the contract, the lessee can make improvements deemed desirable for the comfort and amusement of its members. It appeared that the plaintiffs terminated the lease right on the first month. The defendant is in the belief that there can be no other mode of terminating the lease than by its own will, as what they believe has been stipulated. As a result the plaintiff filed a case for unlawful detainer for the restitution of the land claiming that article 1569 of the Civil Code provided that a lessor may judicially dispossess the lessee upon the expiration of the conventional term or of ...

Telefast v. Castro G.R. No. 73867 February 29, 1988 Facts: The petitioner is a company engaged in transmitting telegrams. The plaintiffs are the children and spouse of Consolacion Castro who died in the Philippines. One of the plaintiffs, Sofia sent a telegram thru Telefast to her father and other siblings in the USA to inform about the death of their mother. Unfortunately, the deceased had already been interred but not one from the relatives abroad was able to pay their last respects. Sofia found out upon her return in the US that the telegram was never received. Hence the suit for damages on the ground of breach of contract. The defendant-petitioner argues that it should only pay the actual amount paid to it. The lower court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs and awarded compensatory, moral, exemplary, damages to each of the plaintiffs with 6% interest p.a. plus attorney’s fees.  The Court of Appeals affirm...

Palay Inc. v. Clave G.R. No. L-56076 September 21, 1983 Facts: 1.        On March 28, 1965, petitioner Palay, Inc., through its President, Albert Onstott sold a parcel of land owned by the corporation to the private respondent, Nazario Dumpit, by virtue of a Contract to Sell. The sale price was P23,300.00 with 9% interest per annum, payable with a down payment of P4,660.00 and monthly instalments of P246.42 until fully paid. Paragraph 6 of the contract provided for automatic extrajudicial rescission upon default in payment of any monthly instalment after the lapse of 90 days from the expiration of the grace period of one month, without need of notice and with forfeiture of all instalments paid. 2.     Respondent Dumpit paid the down payment and several instalments amounting to P13,722.50 with the last payment was made on December 5, 1967 for instalments up to September 1967. Almost six (6) years later, private respondent wrote petitioner...

The Bachrach Motor Co v. Espiritu G.R. No. L-28497    November 6, 1928 Facts: 1.       This is a consolidated case(Cases no. 28497 and 28948) involving two separate sale transactions. One made in Feb. 18, 1925 (case 28498), when the defendant earlier bought a truck on instalment from the petitioner and said truck was mortgaged together with the two others (no. 77197 & 92744 in the the subsequent sale transaction dated July 28, 1925. The said two of the other trucks were also purchased (but already paid previously) from the plaintiff.  The defendant failed to pay the balance. In July 1925, defendant again purchased another truck from Bachrach. The said truck, together with the 3 other vehicles were mortgaged to the plaintiff to secure the remaining balance. The defendant failed to pay the balance for the latest truck obtained. 2.     It was agreed in both sales that 12% interest will be paid on the unpaid ...