G.R. No.

110295 October 18, 1993 Ruling:

Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc. vs. Petiton denied.
The Honorable Court of Appeals and Ms. Lydia Geronimo Defects of or encumbrances upon the thing sold are not limited to those
prescribed in Article 1567 of the Civil Code which provides:
Facts:
Art. 1567. In the case of Articles 1561, 1562, 1564, 1565 and 1566, the
Lydia L. Geronimo was the proprietress of Kindergarten Wonderland
vendee may elect between withdrawing from the contract and
Canteen in Dagupan City, an enterprise engaged in the sale of soft
demanding a proportionate reduction of the price, with damages either
drinks (including Coke and Sprite) and other goods to the students of
case.
Kindergarten Wonderland and to the public. On or about August 12
1989, some parents of the students complained to her that the Coke The vendee may also ask for the annulment of the contract upon proof
and Sprite soft drinks sold by her contained fiber-like matter and other of error or fraud, in which case the ordinary rule on obligations shall be
foreign substances or particles. She then went over her stock of soft applicable. Under the law on obligations, responsibility arising from
drinks and discovered the presence of some fiber-like substances in fraud is demandable in all obligations and any waiver of an action for
the contents of some unopened Coke bottles and a plastic matter in the future fraud is void. Responsibility arising from negligence is also
contents of an unopened Sprite bottle. She brought the said bottles to demandable in any obligation, but such liability may be regulated by the
the Regional Health Office of the Department of Health at San courts, according to the circumstances. Those guilty of fraud,
Fernando, La Union, for examination. She received a letter from the negligence, or delay in the performance of their obligations and those
Department of Health informing her that the samples she submitted who in any manner contravene the tenor thereof are liable for damages.
"are adulterated;" as a consequence of the discovery of the foreign
The vendor could likewise be liable for quasidelict under Article 2176 of
substances in the beverages, her sales of soft drinks severely
the Civil Code, and an action based thereon may be brought by the
plummeted from the usual 10 cases per day to as low as 2 to 3 cases
vendee. While it may be true that the pre-existing contract between the
per day resulting in losses of from P200.00 to P300.00 per day, and not
parties may, as a general rule, bar the applicability of the law on quasi-
long after that she had to lose shop on December 12 1989, she became
delict, the liability may itself be deemed to arise from quasi-delict, i.e.,
jobless and destitute. She demanded from the petitioner the payment
the acts which breaks the contract may also be a quasi-delict.
of damages but was rebuffed by it.
Issue:
WON the subsequent action for damages by the proprietress against
the soft drinks manufacturer should be treated as one for breach of
implied warranty against hidden defects or merchantability.
 E.C. Mccullough vs. R. Aenlle & Co.
G.R. No. 1300 February 3, 1904

Facts:

R. Aenlle & Co. sold to E. C. Mccullough the tabbacco cigarette

factory known as "La Maria Cristina," together with all that
belongs to it with the execution of three contracts. Sometime after
plaintiff sold all the tobacco bought by him from the defendant.
The buyer, rejected the two lands of tobacco claiming that
tobacco in such land is worthless. Plaintiff filed for the recovery of
his payment.

Issue:

Whether or not the plaintiff can recover.

Held:

No. Where the agreement between the parties is that the buyer
is to take all the tobacco in a certain building and to pay therefor
the price named, the obligation resulting is absolute, and in 110
wise depends upon the quality of the tobacco or its value and
statements in an inventory subsequently drawn as to the quality
of the tobacco do not affect the rights and obligations of the
parties. The warranty against hidden defect cannot apply in the
case because the consideration on the party of the plaintiff is to
buy the building and the only way to do so is to buy the whole
tobacco company.