Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1K views

    Universal Foods Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Marie Cecile
    Magdalo V. Francisco, Sr. discovered a formula for MAFRAN sauce and registered the trademark in 1942. Due to lack of capital, he partnered with Universal Food Corporation (UFC), signing a contract making him the permanent Chief Chemist. However, UFC later stopped paying his salary and dismissed him in 1960. Francisco sued for rescission of contract and damages. The court ruled in his favor, finding that UFC substantially breached the contract by dismissing him without cause, defeating the purpose of the agreement. Rescission was allowed as Francisco had no other means of obtaining reparation.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Universal Foods Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Marie Cecile
    1K views2 pages
    Magdalo V. Francisco, Sr. discovered a formula for MAFRAN sauce and registered the trademark in 1942. Due to lack of capital, he partnered with Universal Food Corporation (UFC), signing a contract making him the permanent Chief Chemist. However, UFC later stopped paying his salary and dismissed him in 1960. Francisco sued for rescission of contract and damages. The court ruled in his favor, finding that UFC substantially breached the contract by dismissing him without cause, defeating the purpose of the agreement. Rescission was allowed as Francisco had no other means of obtaining reparation.

    Original Description:

    law

    Original Title

    Universal Foods vs CA

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Magdalo V. Francisco, Sr. discovered a formula for MAFRAN sauce and registered the trademark in 1942. Due to lack of capital, he partnered with Universal Food Corporation (UFC), signing a contract making him the permanent Chief Chemist. However, UFC later stopped paying his salary and dismissed him in 1960. Francisco sued for rescission of contract and damages. The court ruled in his favor, finding that UFC substantially breached the contract by dismissing him without cause, defeating the purpose of the agreement. Rescission was allowed as Francisco had no other means of obtaining reparation.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    1K views2 pages

    Universal Foods Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Marie Cecile
    Magdalo V. Francisco, Sr. discovered a formula for MAFRAN sauce and registered the trademark in 1942. Due to lack of capital, he partnered with Universal Food Corporation (UFC), signing a contract making him the permanent Chief Chemist. However, UFC later stopped paying his salary and dismissed him in 1960. Francisco sued for rescission of contract and damages. The court ruled in his favor, finding that UFC substantially breached the contract by dismissing him without cause, defeating the purpose of the agreement. Rescission was allowed as Francisco had no other means of obtaining reparation.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    No. L-29155.

    May 13, 1970


    UNIVERSAL FOOD CORPORATION vs. THE COURT OF APPEALS,
    MAGDALO V. FRANCISCO, SR. and VICTORIANO V. FRANCISCO
    Petition for certiorari to review a decision of the Court of Appeals
    FACTS:
    Magdalo V. Francisco, Sr. discovered a formula for the manufacture of a food
    seasoning (sauce) derived from banana fruits popularly known as MAFRAN
    sauce. It was used commercially since 1942, and in the same year Francisco,
    Sr. registered his trademark in his name as owner and inventor with the
    Bureau of Patents. However, due to lack of sufficient capital to finance the
    expansion of the business, Francisco, Sr. secured the financial assistance of
    Tirso T. Reyes who, after a series of negotiations, formed Universal Food
    Corporation (UFC) eventually leading to the execution of a "Bill of
    Assignment". Francisco, Sr. entered into contract with UFC stipulating among
    other things that he be the Chief Chemist and Second Vice-President of UFC
    and shall have absolute control and supervision over the laboratory
    assistants and personnel and in the purchase and safekeeping of the
    chemicals used in the preparation of said Mafran sauce and that said
    positions are permanent in nature. In line with the terms and conditions of
    the Bill of
    Assignment, Magdalo Francisco was appointed Chief Chemist with a salary of
    P300.00 a month. Magdalo Francisco kept the formula of the Mafran sauce
    secret to himself. Thereafter, however, due to the alleged scarcity and high
    prices of raw materials, UFC issued a Memorandum Supervisor Ricardo
    Francisco should be retained in the factory and that the salary of Francisco,
    Sr., should be stopped for the time being until the corporation should resume
    its operation. Subsequently, UFC issued several Memorandums ordering
    Francisco, Sr to produce orders to cope with the orders of the corporations
    various distributors and with instructions to take only the necessary daily
    employees without employing permanent employees. Francisco, Sr. received
    his salary as Chief Chemist in the amount of P300.00 a month only until his
    services were terminated on November 30, 1960. Thereafter, UFC looked for
    a buyer of the corporation including its trademarks, formula and assets at a
    price of not less than P300,000.00. Francisco, Sr. filed an action for rescission
    of contract and damages due to his dismissal as Chief Chemist
    ISSUE:
    Whether or not Francisco, Sr. is entitled to rescission due to his dismissal
    from UFC
    RULING:
    YES. Under Art 1191, the power to rescind obligations is implied in reciprocal
    ones, in case one of the obligors should not comply with what is incumbent

    upon him, the injured party may choose between fulfillment and rescission of
    the obligation, with payment of damages in either case. The general rule is
    that rescission of a contract will not be permitted for a slight or casual
    breach, but only for such substantial and fundamental breach as would
    defeat the very object of the parties in making the agreement. Rescission is
    a subsidiary remedy which cannot be instituted except when the party
    suffering damage has no other legal means to obtain reparation for the
    same. In this case the dismissal of the respondent patentee Francisco, Sr. as
    the permanent chief chemist of the corporation is a fundamental and
    substantial breach of the Bill of Assignment. He was dismissed without any
    fault or negligence on his part. Thus, apart from the legal principle that the
    optionto demand performance or ask for rescission of a contract belongs to
    the injured party, the fact remains that the Francisco had no alternative but
    to file the present action for rescission and damages.

    You might also like