0 évaluation0% ont trouvé ce document utile (0 vote)
30 vues1 page
The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' ruling that Lim was an agent, not a buyer, of the tobacco and was therefore guilty of estafa for failing to remit the proceeds of the sale. The agreement stated that Lim would sell Ayroso's tobacco at P1.30 per kilo and remit the proceeds to Ayroso. As an agent, Lim had an obligation to return the unsold tobacco. While Lim argued she was not an agent, the Court found she admitted to receiving compensation for the sale and her actions indicated an intent to profit from the transaction, not purchase the goods. The Court therefore found the agreement constituted a contract of agency, not sale.
The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' ruling that Lim was an agent, not a buyer, of the tobacco and was therefore guilty of estafa for failing to remit the proceeds of the sale. The agreement stated that Lim would sell Ayroso's tobacco at P1.30 per kilo and remit the proceeds to Ayroso. As an agent, Lim had an obligation to return the unsold tobacco. While Lim argued she was not an agent, the Court found she admitted to receiving compensation for the sale and her actions indicated an intent to profit from the transaction, not purchase the goods. The Court therefore found the agreement constituted a contract of agency, not sale.
The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' ruling that Lim was an agent, not a buyer, of the tobacco and was therefore guilty of estafa for failing to remit the proceeds of the sale. The agreement stated that Lim would sell Ayroso's tobacco at P1.30 per kilo and remit the proceeds to Ayroso. As an agent, Lim had an obligation to return the unsold tobacco. While Lim argued she was not an agent, the Court found she admitted to receiving compensation for the sale and her actions indicated an intent to profit from the transaction, not purchase the goods. The Court therefore found the agreement constituted a contract of agency, not sale.
[DISTINCTION BETWEEN AGENCY AND SALE] CONTRACT OF AGENCY TO SELL.
It is clear in the agreement that the
00 LIM V. PEOPLE proceeds of the sale should be turned over to complainant as soon as it was November 21, 1984 | Relova, J. | sold or that the obligation was immediately demandable. Petitioner: Lourdes Valerio Lim ● The CA’s contention that Article 1197 should apply in this case is of no Respondent: People of the Philippines moment. ● Petitioner’s argument: She was not an agent since Agreement does not Doctrine: In a contract of sale, the ownership transferes from the seller to the state that she would be paid commission if goods are sold. buyer. Whereas in a contract of agency, ownership is retained by the principal and ○ SC affirms CA: Lim admitted that there was an agreement that there exists an obligation to return the thing. she would be given something upon the sale of the tobacco. As a business woman, it is unbelievable that she would go to the Facts: extent of picking up the tobacco from Ayroso’s house with a ● Lim is a businesswoman. jeep she had brought if there was no intention to make a profit ● On January 10, 1966, the appellant went to the house of Maria Ayroso from such transaction. and proposed to sell Ayroso's tobacco. Ayroso agreed to the proposition ● The fact that appellant received the tobacco to be sold at P1.30 per kilo of the appellant to sell her tobacco consisting of 615 kilos at P1.30 a kilo. and the proceeds to be given to complainant as soon as it was sold, The appellant was to receive the overprice for which she could sell the strongly negates transfer of ownership of the goods to the petitioner. tobacco. The agreement (Exhibit “A’) constituted her as an agent with the ○ Agreement states that Salvador Bantug certifies receipt of 615 obligation to return the tobacco if the same was not sold. kg of leaf tabacco from Lourdes, to be sold at P1.30 and the Dispositive proceeds of P799.50 will be given to the same Petition dismissed ● Off the total P799.50, Lim was only able to pay P240 (total of three payments by Lim). Notes ● Demands for the payment of the balance of the value of the tobacco Insert notes were made upon the appellant by Ayroso, and particularly by her sister, Salud Bantug. Salud Bantug further testified that she had gone to the house of the appellant several times, but the appellant often eluded her; and that the "camarin" the appellant was empty. ● Although the appellant denied that demands for payment were made upon her, it is a fact that on October 19, 1966, she wrote a letter to Salud Bantug stating that she is having difficulty collecting from her buyers since they change stalls very often. ● Filed complaint for estafa in the RTC due to the non-remittance of the remaining balance RTC: Guilty of estafa CA: Affirmed with modifications with regard to the penalty.
Issue: W/N the Agreement is a contract of agency to sell or a contract of sale, thereby precluding criminal liability of petitioner of the crime charged?
Dark Psychology & Manipulation: Discover How To Analyze People and Master Human Behaviour Using Emotional Influence Techniques, Body Language Secrets, Covert NLP, Speed Reading, and Hypnosis.