Title
King Mau Wu vs. Sycip
Case
G.R. No. L-5897
Decision Date
Apr 23, 1954
Plaintiff King Mau Wu sued defendant Francisco Sycip for unpaid commissions under an agency agreement for the sale of coconut oil. Court ruled in favor of plaintiff, awarding commissions, overprice share, and interest.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-5897)

Claim Overview

The plaintiff seeks to recover the amount of P59,082.92, along with lawful interest from October 14, 1947—the date of a written demand for payment—and associated costs. The claim stems from a contract of agency established on November 7, 1946, wherein the plaintiff was to receive a commission of 2.5% on sales made through his efforts, along with an additional 50% of the difference between the authorized and actual sale prices.

Court Proceedings and Judgment

Following a trial where testimonies from the plaintiff, Fassett, and the defendant were presented, the court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, granting the claims as outlined in the complaint. The defendant’s motions for reconsideration and a new trial—based on purported newly discovered evidence—were denied.

Defendant's Contentions

The defendant argues that the sale of the coconut oil emulsion was an independent transaction occurring on October 16, 1946, and not covered under the agency agreement dated November 7, 1946. The defendant asserts that he had sufficiently compensated the plaintiff for this sale. However, the court found the defendant's claims to be unsupported by the evidence presented.

Evidence and Commission Entitlement

The evidence demonstrates that the sale in question was indeed linked to the agency agreement, as numerous documents leading to the agreement suggest that the transaction was part of the plaintiff's agency role. The court found that the plaintiff was entitled to the commission, including an argument that if the defendant had paid the plaintiff commissions on previous shipments, he should also pay the same on the most recent shipment.

Jurisdictional Issues

The defendant contended that the Court of First Instance of Manila lacked jurisdiction over the matter due to the contract being executed in New York; however, the court affirmed its jur

...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.