Title
Lawyers Cooperative Publishing Co. vs. Tabora
Case
G.R. No. L-21263
Decision Date
Apr 30, 1965
Buyer liable for unpaid balance after fire destroyed delivered books; contract allocated risk of loss to buyer post-delivery, negating force majeure defense.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-21263)

Facts

On May 3, 1955, Tabora purchased from the petitioner a complete 48-volume set of American Jurisprudence with 1951 pocket parts, plus a four-volume General Index, for P1,675.50, plus freight of P6.90, totaling P1,682.40. He paid P300.00 down and agreed to pay the balance in monthly installments. The books were delivered and receipted on May 15, 1955, at Tabora’s law office in Naga City. That same midnight, a conflagration destroyed the entire block, including Tabora’s office and the books. Tabora notified the petitioner by letter on May 20, 1955. The petitioner replied on May 23, offering four complementary volumes as goodwill. Tabora thereafter failed to pay further installments.

Contract Terms and Applicable Law

The parties’ contract provided that (a) title and ownership remain with the seller until full payment and (b) “loss or damage to the books after delivery to the buyer shall be borne by the buyer.” Article 1504, Civil Code, confirms that where the seller retains ownership to secure payment, goods delivered are at the buyer’s risk. Article 1262 provides that an obligor is generally exempt when performance becomes impossible through no fault of either party, but exceptions exist when parties stipulate otherwise.

Issue

Whether Tabora is liable to pay the unpaid balance of P1,382.40 and 25% as liquidated damages despite the books having been destroyed by fire through no fault of his own.

Ruling

The trial court rendered judgment in favor of the petitioner ordering Tabora to pay P1,382.40 with legal interest from the complaint’s filing date and 25% of the total as liquidated damages. The Supreme Court, upon certification of only law questions, affirmed liability for the unpaid balance but modified the judgment by eliminating the 25% liquidated damages.

Legal Rationale

  1. Risk Allocation under Article 1504: Although ownership remained with the seller until full payment, the contract clearly placed the risk of loss on the buyer from delivery. The retention of title was a security device and did not shift the burden of fortuitous loss back to the seller.
  2. Exception to Fortuitous-Event Exemption (Article 1262): The general rule that an obligor is exempt from liability when performance is prevented by a fortuitous event does not apply when the obligation is pecuniary

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.