Title
Gaw vs. Intermediate Appellate Court
Case
G.R. No. 70451
Decision Date
Mar 24, 1993
Businessman Gaw breached a marketing agreement with Tan by refusing a deposit, leading to legal disputes. Courts ruled Gaw acted in bad faith, denied his damages claim, and rejected Tan’s unrealized profits due to insufficient evidence.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. 100985)

Facts:

Henry H. Gaw, a dealer of Prime White Cement Corporation (PWCC), sued Uy Diet Tan in Civil Case No. Q-28799 for damages allegedly caused by a restraining order issued in Civil Case No. Q-27097, which arose from a marketing agreement between Gaw and Tan and which temporarily enjoined Gaw from delivering cement; the Court of First Instance rendered judgment for Gaw awarding P20,000 actual damages and P10,000 attorney’s fees. The then Intermediate Appellate Court reversed, dismissed Gaw’s complaint, and awarded Tan P100,000 actual damages and P20,000 attorney’s fees; Gaw petitioned for review on certiorari.

Issues:

  • Did the Intermediate Appellate Court err in reversing the trial court’s judgment in favor of Henry H. Gaw?
  • May Gaw recover damages for the effects of the restraining order without proof that Tan maliciously prosecuted the prior action and that it was without probable cause?
  • Did Tan prove his claim for actual damages in the form of unrealized profits with sufficient certainty?

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.