Title
Supreme Court
Medrano vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 150678
Decision Date
Feb 18, 2005
A dispute over a 5% broker’s commission for the sale of a foreclosed mango plantation, where the Supreme Court upheld the validity of a Letter of Authority and ruled respondents as the procuring cause of the sale.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 150678)

Factual Background

In 1986, Medrano tasked Flor with finding a buyer for the bank's foreclosed property, a mango plantation valued at P2,200,000.00. Borbon, responding to prior client Dominador Lee's preference for mango trees, became involved after being informed by Flor about the available property. Subsequently, Medrano issued a letter authorizing Borbon and Antonio to negotiate the sale, committing to pay them a 5% commission from the total sale price.

Ocular Inspection and Buyer Interaction

Initial attempts for Lee to inspect the property were hindered by logistics. Ultimately, Lee conducted an independent visit, arranged to talk to Medrano's daughter for more details. Following the visit, Lee indicated he intended to purchase the property, leading to a deed of sale executed between Lee and the bank for P1,200,000.00. Respondents sought their commission post-sale, which the petitioners contested.

Dispute Over Commission and Authority

Petitioners argued that Medrano's authority was improperly granted since he was not the registered owner of the property. They also claimed the respondents failed to fulfill their obligations under the letter of authority. As a result, the petitioners only offered a nominal fee instead of the full commission.

Trial Court Decision

The Regional Trial Court upheld the validity of the letter of authority, concluding that it effectively bound both Medrano and the bank. The court ruled that respondents had played a critical role in facilitating the sale and, thus, were entitled to the promised commission. They were awarded P60,000.00 representing their commission, alongside additional costs for attorney fees and litigation expenses.

Appeal and Court of Appeals Decision

Dissatisfied with the ruling, the petitioners appealed, reiterating arguments regarding the authority's non-binding nature and disputing the respondents' role in the transaction. The Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court's findings, emphasizing that Medrano's authority was valid and the respondents were instrumental in the sale’s consummation. The appellate court held that the action for commission persisted despite Medrano's death, and that obligations arising from the sale were valid claims against his estate.

Legal Principles - Broker's Role and Commission

The core legal principle involved is the definition and rights of a broker as an agent in real estate transactions. A broker earns a commission for bringing a buyer ready, willi

...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.