Case Digest (G.R. No. L-20753)
Facts:
Basic Books (Phil.), Inc. v. Emilio Lopez, et al., G.R. No. L-20753, February 28, 1966, Supreme Court En Banc, Regala, J., writing for the Court.The plaintiff-appellee Basic Books (Phil.), Inc. sued Emilio Lopez and Isidro C. Kintanar in the Municipal Court of Manila to recover P1,548.70 plus attorney’s fees, alleging that Lopez, as its agent, received books on consignment in 1957 which he failed to account for and that, on December 10, 1959, Lopez and Kintanar executed a written agreement binding themselves jointly and severally to pay the stated sum in installments with 6% interest and an accelerating clause upon default. Lopez confessed judgment; Kintanar denied liability, asserting the agreement was void because it was executed to stifle prosecution for estafa then pending against Lopez.
The Municipal Court found Lopez liable but absolved Kintanar, holding the agreement to be based on illegal consideration. Basic Books appealed to the Court of First Instance (CFI), which examined the contract and a December 8, 1959 letter from Kintanar proposing installment payments for Lopez’s indebtedness, and concluded that Kintanar knew of Lopez’s obligation and had bound himself to secure its payment; the CFI therefore held Kintanar jointly and severally liable, awarding principal, interest at 6% per annum, P200 attorney’s fees and costs.
Kintanar appealed to the Court of Appeals, which certified the case to the Supreme Court on the ground that the issues presented were questions of law; the Sup...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Is the agreement executed by Emilio Lopez and Isidro C. Kintanar void for being founded on an illegal consideration — namely, a promise to secure dismissal of the estafa prosecution against Lopez (i.e., contrary to public policy)?
- If not void, is Isidro C. Kintanar jointly and severally liable under the agreement to pay the P1,548.70 claimed by ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)