Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 2K views

    Daywalt vs. Corporacion de PP. Agustinos Recoletos - Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Abigail Tolabing
    The document summarizes a court case regarding a breach of contract for the sale of land. Teoderica Endencia had obligated to convey land to Geo W. Daywalt but became reluctant after her land title was secured. Members of the Corporacion de PP. Agustinos Recoletos advised Teoderica not to comply with the contract. The Supreme Court found the members acted with improper motives. However, it also found that the corporation's liability could not exceed Teoderica's, as the directly bound party. The court considered the extent of Teoderica's liability for failing to transfer the land title and possession.

    Copyright:

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

    Daywalt vs. Corporacion de PP. Agustinos Recoletos - Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Abigail Tolabing
    2K views2 pages
    The document summarizes a court case regarding a breach of contract for the sale of land. Teoderica Endencia had obligated to convey land to Geo W. Daywalt but became reluctant after her land title was secured. Members of the Corporacion de PP. Agustinos Recoletos advised Teoderica not to comply with the contract. The Supreme Court found the members acted with improper motives. However, it also found that the corporation's liability could not exceed Teoderica's, as the directly bound party. The court considered the extent of Teoderica's liability for failing to transfer the land title and possession.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document summarizes a court case regarding a breach of contract for the sale of land. Teoderica Endencia had obligated to convey land to Geo W. Daywalt but became reluctant after her land title was secured. Members of the Corporacion de PP. Agustinos Recoletos advised Teoderica not to comply with the contract. The Supreme Court found the members acted with improper motives. However, it also found that the corporation's liability could not exceed Teoderica's, as the directly bound party. The court considered the extent of Teoderica's liability for failing to transfer the land title and possession.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    2K views2 pages

    Daywalt vs. Corporacion de PP. Agustinos Recoletos - Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Abigail Tolabing
    The document summarizes a court case regarding a breach of contract for the sale of land. Teoderica Endencia had obligated to convey land to Geo W. Daywalt but became reluctant after her land title was secured. Members of the Corporacion de PP. Agustinos Recoletos advised Teoderica not to comply with the contract. The Supreme Court found the members acted with improper motives. However, it also found that the corporation's liability could not exceed Teoderica's, as the directly bound party. The court considered the extent of Teoderica's liability for failing to transfer the land title and possession.

    Copyright:

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

    LCP

    SUBJECT: Obligations and Contracts


    TOPIC: Article 1314: Liability of third person responsible for breach of contract

    Daywalt vs. Corporacion de PP. Agustinos Recoletos


    No. 13505 | February 4, 1919 | Street, J.

    GENERAL RULE OF LAW/DOCTRINE


    CONTRACTS; DAMAGES FOR BREACH; LIABILITY OFTHIRD PARTY.—Whatever may be the
    character of the liability, if any, which a stranger to a contract may incur by advising or assisting one of the
    parties to evade performance, he cannot become more extensively liable in damages for the
    nonperformance of the contract than the party in whose behalf he intermeddles.

    FACTS:
    Teoderica Endencia obligated herself to convey to Geo W. Daywalt a tract of land. The deed should be
    executed as soon as the tittle of the land is perfected. There was a decree recognizing Teoderica as the
    owner of land but the Torrens certificate was not issued until later. The parties met immediately upon the
    entering of the decree and made a new contract.

    There was a development of Teoderica’s land as the Torrens title was issued and in view of this
    development she became reluctant to transfer the whole tract of land asserting that she never intended to
    sell the large amount of land and that she was misinformed by the area of the land.

    After the Torrens title was issued to Teoderica she gave it to the defendant company for safekeeping in
    which the defendant did so. As Teodorica still retained possession of said property Father Sanz entered
    into an arrangement with her whereby large numbers of cattle belonging to the defendant corporation
    were pastured upon said land.

    ISSUE:
    Whether a person who is not a party to a contract for the sale of land makes himself liable for damages to
    the vendee, beyond the value of the use and occupation, by colluding with the vendor and maintaining
    him in the effort to resist an action for specific performance.

    RULING:
    The Supreme Court held that the members of the defendant’s corporation, in advising and prompting
    Teodorica Endencia not to comply with the contract of sale, were actuated by improper and malicious
    motives.

    In a fair conclusion on this feature of the case is that father Juan Labarga and his associates believed in
    good faith that the contract could not be enforced and that Teodorica would be wronged if it should be
    carried into effect. Any advice or assistance which they may have given was, therefore, prompted by no
    mean or improper motive.

    In the case at bar, as Teodorica Endencia was the party directly bound by the contract, it is obvious that
    the liability of the defendant corporation, even admitting that it has made itself coparticipant in the breach
    of the contract, can in no even exceed hers.

    This leads us to consider at this point the extent of the liability of Teodorica Endencia to the plaintiff by
    reason of her failure to surrender the certificate of title and to place the plaintiff in possession.

    RELEVANT LAWS APPLICABLE


    ARTICLE 1314. Any third person who induces another to violate his contract shall be liable for damages
    to the other contracting party. (n)

    1
    by Divina
    LCP

    2
    by Divina

    You might also like