Case Digest (G.R. No. 96505)
Facts:
Legaspi Oil Co., Inc. v. The Court of Appeals and Bernard Oseraos, G.R. No. 96505, July 01, 1993, Supreme Court Third Division, Melo, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Legaspi Oil Co., Inc. (plaintiff below) purchased copra from respondent Bernard Oseraos through several authorized agents. Over 1975–1976 the parties executed a series of sale transactions: 70 tons at P95.00/100 kg (May 27, 1975), 30 tons at P102.00/100 kg (Sept. 23, 1975), a contract for 100 tons at P79.00/100 kg with delivery terms effective Dec. 15, 1975 (Nov. 6, 1975), and contract No. 3804 for 100 tons at P82.00/100 kg with delivery terms of 20 days effective March 8, 1976 (Feb. 16, 1976). Although prices were stated as “total price” in the contracts, the parties understood them to mean per 100 kilos from prior dealings.
During the March 1976 delivery period Oseraos delivered only 46,334 kilos, leaving an undelivered balance of 53,666 kilos. Repeated demands were made; on October 6, 1976 petitioner issued a final demand letter warning that failure to deliver would result in cancellation, purchase of the balance on the open market, and charging the price differential to Oseraos. When Oseraos still did not comply, petitioner bought the balance on October 22, 1976 at P168.00/100 kg—P86.00/100 kg higher than the contract price—resulting in a claimed loss of P46,152.76.
Petitioner filed a complaint for breach of contract and damages on November 3, 1976 (Civil Case No. 5529). The Court of First Instance (now Regional Trial Court) of Albay found Oseraos liable and awarded damages of P48,152.76, attorney’s fees of P2,000, and litigation costs. Oseraos appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA-G.R. CV No. 05828), which o...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Was private respondent Bernard Oseraos liable for damages for fraud or bad faith in deliberately breaching the contract of sa...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)