Case Digest (G.R. No. L-24069)
Facts:
La Fuerza, Inc. v. The Hon. Court of Appeals and Associated Engineering Co., G.R. No. L-24069, June 28, 1968, Supreme Court En Banc, Concepcion, C.J., writing for the Court.The plaintiff, Associated Engineering Co., Inc., manufactured and installed flat belt conveyors; the defendant, La Fuerza, Inc., manufactured wines. In January–February 1960 plaintiff’s manager Antonio Co proposed and, by a letter dated February 4, 1960 (Exhibit A), offered to supply and install a conveyor system for La Fuerza’s plant. On February 11 the defendant’s president signed the offer with an added proviso that “all specifications shall be in strict accordance with the approved plan made part of this agreement.” La Fuerza paid a P5,000 down payment by check.
Plaintiff began work in March 1960, delivered two conveyor units in April (total valuation P13,250), and continued installation and trial runs through May–July 1960. Multiple trial runs were conducted in the presence of the parties’ representatives; La Fuerza’s manager reported collisions, bottles jumping off the belt, breakage and sluggish flow, and repeatedly requested adjustments. La Fuerza ultimately refused to pay the P8,250 balance when billed, claiming the conveyors failed to serve the intended purpose; the conveyors remained installed in the plant.
Plaintiff filed suit on March 22, 1961 to recover the P8,250 balance and attorney’s fees. La Fuerza answered, asserted that the conveyors did not meet warranted conditions, counterclaimed for rescission and demanded refund of the P5,000 down payment. The Court of First Instance of Manila rendered judgment rescinding the contract, ordering plaintiff to refund P5,000 and permitting plaintiff to remove the conveyors. The Court of Appeals initially affirmed that judgment but, on plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration, set aside its original decis...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did delivery of the conveyors occur for purposes of prescription under the Civil Code, thereby starting the running of the six-month period of Article 1571?
- Does Article 1571 of the Civil Code—prescribing that actions arising from the preceding ten articles are barred after six months from delivery—apply to an action to rescind a contract based on hidden defects, or does the four-ye...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)