Title
Cruz vs. Valero
Case
G.R. No. L-2826
Decision Date
Jun 11, 1951
A sugar planter sued Luzon Sugar Co. for lost sugar, molasses, and truck parts. Court ruled loss due to WWII bombing and Japanese occupation, exempting defendants under force majeure.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-10948)

Nature of the Case

This case concerns a legal action initiated by Alfredo N. Cruz to recover 634.03 piculs of domestic centrifugal sugar, 1,341 gallons of molasses, and additional amounts of sugar, as well as compensation for two tires and tubes of a truck that the Luzon Sugar Company allegedly withheld without his consent. Crucially, Cruz sought to establish that Valero had wrongfully disposed of his sugar and appropriated the proceeds.

Proceedings and Court Findings

The trial court dismissed Cruz's complaint, ruling that the loss of the sugar held in the Luzon Sugar Company's warehouse resulted from a fortuitous event, specifically an attack during World War II, and therefore could not be attributed to the defendants. The plaintiff was directed to cover the costs of the suit. The defendants' counterclaims were dismissed due to insufficient evidence of malice on Cruz’s part.

Evidence Regarding Sugar Deposits

Cruz's claim rested on the assertion that he had deposited 1,544.38 piculs of A sugar, subsequently exchanged for B sugar, which he claimed was not fully available for withdrawal by the end of December 1941. His assertion was supported by testimonies indicating discrepancies in the amounts of sugar present in the warehouse during the critical periods.

Defendants' Defense

The defendants argued that sufficient sugar was available in the warehouse until the bombing on December 28, 1941. They contended that the subsequent looting and damage caused during the war made delivery of the sugar impossible. Testimonies presented by the defendants reinforced their claims that the sugar was either destroyed or taken during the bombing and Japanese occupation.

Appellant’s Testimony and the Evidence Produced

Cruz attempted to substantiate his claims through various testimonies and letters asserting the dispossession of his sugar. However, critical evidence, including a cut letter which lacked essential information, weakened his position. The trial court ultimately found the defenses presented by the Luzon Sugar Company credible, corroborated by several witnesses, including people who testified to the events of the bombing and subsequent effects on the sugar storage.

Assessment of Evidence

The evidence presented by Cruz was found to be insufficient to overturn the co

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.