Sei sulla pagina 1di 1

24) PEDRO MARTINEZ vs.

ONG PONG CO and ONG LAY (January 10, 1910


ARELLANO, C.J.)
The failure to fulfill an obligation on the part of a partner who acted as agent in receiving money
for a given purpose, for which he has rendered no accounting, such agent is responsible only for
the losses.
FACTS:
Plaintiff delivered P1,500 to the defendants who, in a private document, acknowledged that
they had received the same with the agreement "that we are to invest the amount in a store, the
profits or losses of which we are to divide with the former, in equal shares."
Plaintiff filed a complaint to compel the defendants to render him an accounting of the
partnership as agreed to, or else to refund him the P1,500. Ong Pong Co admitted the fact of the
agreement and the delivery of the P1,500, but he alleged that Ong Lay (deceased) was the one who
had managed the business, and that nothing had resulted therefrom save the loss of the capital of
P1,500, to which loss the plaintiff agreed.
CFI of Manila ordered Ong Pong Co to return to the plaintiff one-half of the capital of
P1,500 (P750) he had received from the plaintiff, plus P90 as one-half of the profits, calculated at
the rate of 12%/annum for the six months that the store was supposed to have been open, making
a total of P840, with legal interest rate of 6%/annum, from the 12 June 1901, when the business
terminated, until the full payment thereof. Ong Pong Co appealed due to the fact that there were
losses/the closing of the store due to ejectment from the premises occupied by it.

ISSUE:
Whether or not respondents are liable as agents of the company and are obliged to refund
the money that they received. (YES)

RULING:
The defendants received a certain capital from the plaintiff for organizing a company and
were to handle the said money and invest it in a store (object). They failed to fulfill the obligation
of a partner who acted as an agent (agent because there was no special agreement vesting in one
sole person the management of the business) in receiving money for a given purpose, for which he
has rendered no accounting, such agent is responsible for the losses which he incurred.
Art. 1688 is applicable (no other money than that contributed as is involved). Article 1138
of the Civil Code has been invoked (debts of a partnership where the obligation is not a joint one),
as is likewise provided by article 1723 (liability of two or more agents with respect to the return
of the money that they received from their principal).
Judgment appealed from is affirmed, provided that the defendant Ong Pong Co shall only
pay the plaintiff the sum of P750 with the legal interest rate of 6%/per annum from the time of the
filing of the complaint (April 25, 1907) and the costs.

Note: The court finds no evidence that the entire capital or any part was lost. With regard
to the possible profits, the court does not find that the amount thereof has been proven, nor deem
it possible to estimate them to be a certain sum; hence, it can not admit the 12%/annum for the
period of six months.

Potrebbero piacerti anche