Title
Goquiolay vs. Sycip
Case
G.R. No. L-11840
Decision Date
Jul 26, 1960
Partnership dispute over property sale by widow as administratrix; court upheld sale, citing good faith, necessity, and apparent authority.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-11840)

Grant of Power of Attorney

On May 31, 1940, Goquiolay executed a general power of attorney in favor of Tan Sin An. The instrument authorized him to manage partnership affairs, execute contracts, mortgage or sell real estate, borrow funds, and perform all acts “necessary to the proper conduction of the businesses.”

Acquisition and Mortgage of Properties

On formation date the partnership purchased three Davao lots subject to a ₱25,000 mortgage to La Urbana Sociedad, later consolidated with Tan Sin An’s ₱35,000 individual mortgage. The combined ₱52,282.80 obligation, with 8% interest, was secured by 49 parcels mortgaged to Banco Hipotecario, payable in 96 monthly installments.

Death of Partner and Probate Proceedings

Tan Sin An died June 26, 1942. His widow, Kong Chai Pin, and four minor children inherited. In March 1944 she was appointed administratrix of his estate. Creditors Yutivo Sons Hardware and Sing Yee & Cuan Co. paid the mortgage and later filed claims (approved February 1947) for reimbursement of advances, interest, and taxes as joint obligations of the partnership and the deceased.

Petition for Sale of Partnership Properties

March 29, 1949: Widow filed in probate court to sell all 49 parcels—partnership and conjugal—for settlement of the approved claims. The court authorized sale April 2, 1949, and she executed a deed of sale April 4, 1949, to Sycip and Lee for ₱37,000 cash plus assumption of the Yutivo and Sing Yee & Cuan claims.

Deeds of Sale and Transfers

In July 1949, Sycip and Lee conveyed the same 49 parcels to Insular Development Co., Inc. Goquiolay, upon learning of the deed, petitioned probate court July 25, 1949, to annul the sale as to his partnership share. Probate court annulled December 29, 1949; on appeal the Supreme Court remanded for new trial (June 30, 1953) for non-inclusion of indispensable parties.

Initiation of Litigation by Goquiolay

January 15, 1953: Goquiolay and the partnership filed a new suit in the Court of First Instance of Davao seeking annulment of the sale of the three partnership lots. He alleged that widow had no authority as managing partner, that co-partner consent was required, and that the transaction was fraudulent and undervalued.

Trial Court’s Decision

October 30, 1956: The trial court dismissed the complaint, finding that Kong Chai Pin succeeded as managing partner by virtue of the partnership articles and general power of attorney; that she had authority to sell to satisfy obligations; that Sycip and Lee acted in good faith; and that Goquiolay’s failure to oppose estopped him from attack.

Supreme Court’s Analysis on Management Rights

The Court held that the power of attorney and articles granted Tan Sin An a personal right of management that expired at his death. The clause continuing heirs in the firm related only to proprietary interests. Under Code of Commerce Article 222 heirs became partners unless they refused. Although heirs ordinarily become limited partners (Article 148), Kong Chai Pin chose to act as general partner by managing properties and executing the deed, thus waiving her limited status and assuming full liability.

Application of Estoppel and Third-Party Reliance

Strangers are entitled to assume that a managing partner has authority to bind the firm absent restrictive provisions. Under Articles 129 and 180 of the Code of Commerce, third parties need not inquire into internal agreements. Goquiolay’s seven-year acquiescence in the widow’s control estopped him from conten

...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.