Case Digest (G.R. No. 9973)
Facts:
W. E. Hicks v. Manila Hotel Company, G.R. No. 9973, November 06, 1914, the Supreme Court, Moreland, J., writing for the Court. Plaintiff-appellant W. E. Hicks and defendant-appellee Manila Hotel Company executed a written contract dated November 9, 1912, by which Hicks was granted the exclusive right to serve the hotel's patrons with five-passenger automobiles for one year, together with "preference over others of renewing for a further period of one year." Hicks performed the contract during the first year and kept an office at the hotel in accordance with the agreement.About June 1913, while the first contractual year was still running, the Hotel advertised for proposals for its automobile privileges for the ensuing year and, after negotiations, contracted with George E. Brown for the same privileges for the period beginning November 9, 1913; that contract was executed before the first year of Hicks's contract expired. When the first year ended, the Hotel refused Hicks the renewal, evicted him from his hotel office, and denied him the privilege for the second year.
Hicks sued in the Court of First Instance of the City of Manila to recover damages for breach of the renewal stipulation. The trial court dismisse...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the clause "with preference over others of renewing for a further period of one year" create an enforceable right in favor of the plaintiff to renew the original contract for a second year?
- If Hicks had an enforceable right to renew, did his negotiations with the hotel and with Brown constitute a waiver or abandonment of that right?
- What is the proper measure of damages for the Hotel's breach and wha...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)