Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 148 views

    Digest - EDCA PUBLISHING VS SPS SANTOS

    Uploaded by

    Mitch Tinio
    EDCA Publishing sold books to Professor Jose Cruz who paid with a personal check. Cruz then sold 120 books to Leonor Santos. However, Cruz's check bounced and he was found to be using an alias. The police seized the books from Santos without a warrant. Santos sued for recovery of the books. The court found that ownership was transferred to Santos upon delivery of the books despite the bounced check between Cruz and EDCA, as Santos was unaware of the fraud. The Supreme Court upheld this decision, finding that EDCA was not unlawfully deprived of ownership.

    Copyright:

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

    Digest - EDCA PUBLISHING VS SPS SANTOS

    Uploaded by

    Mitch Tinio
    148 views1 page
    EDCA Publishing sold books to Professor Jose Cruz who paid with a personal check. Cruz then sold 120 books to Leonor Santos. However, Cruz's check bounced and he was found to be using an alias. The police seized the books from Santos without a warrant. Santos sued for recovery of the books. The court found that ownership was transferred to Santos upon delivery of the books despite the bounced check between Cruz and EDCA, as Santos was unaware of the fraud. The Supreme Court upheld this decision, finding that EDCA was not unlawfully deprived of ownership.

    Original Title

    213. Digest - EDCA PUBLISHING VS SPS SANTOS

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    EDCA Publishing sold books to Professor Jose Cruz who paid with a personal check. Cruz then sold 120 books to Leonor Santos. However, Cruz's check bounced and he was found to be using an alias. The police seized the books from Santos without a warrant. Santos sued for recovery of the books. The court found that ownership was transferred to Santos upon delivery of the books despite the bounced check between Cruz and EDCA, as Santos was unaware of the fraud. The Supreme Court upheld this decision, finding that EDCA was not unlawfully deprived of ownership.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    148 views1 page

    Digest - EDCA PUBLISHING VS SPS SANTOS

    Uploaded by

    Mitch Tinio
    EDCA Publishing sold books to Professor Jose Cruz who paid with a personal check. Cruz then sold 120 books to Leonor Santos. However, Cruz's check bounced and he was found to be using an alias. The police seized the books from Santos without a warrant. Santos sued for recovery of the books. The court found that ownership was transferred to Santos upon delivery of the books despite the bounced check between Cruz and EDCA, as Santos was unaware of the fraud. The Supreme Court upheld this decision, finding that EDCA was not unlawfully deprived of ownership.

    Copyright:

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

    213. EDCA PUBLISHING VS. SPOUSES SANTOS, G.R. No.

    80298
    Michelle Jude G. Tinio

    FACTS: In 1981, one Professor Jose Cruz (Cruz) placed an order through
    telephone with EDCA Publishing (EDCA) for 406 books, payable on its delivery. EDCA
    delivered the books and invoice to Cruz and in exchange, the latter issued a personal
    check as payment for the of P8,995.65 purchase price. Cruz then sold 120 of those to
    Leonor Santos (Santos). After verifying Cruz’s ownership from the presented EDCA
    invoice, Santos paid him P1,700.00.
    EDCA became suspicious when Cruz ordered another batch before the
    clearing of his first check. EDCA’s inquiries revealed that Cruz was not a dean in De la
    Salle College and that he had no account or deposit with Philippine Amanah Bank, the
    drawee bank for the issued check. Cruz was arrested after an entrapment operation.
    The investigation disclosed his real name as Tomas de la Peña and the sale he made
    with regard to the 120 books of EDCA. The books were seized without warrant by the
    police and was thereafter turned over to EDCA’s possession. Spouses Santos then
    sued for the recovery of the books. A writ of preliminary attachment was then issued.
    MTC recognizes ownership of the Spouses Santos over the books. RTC and CA
    sustained the decision. Thus, this petition.
    ISSUE: Whether or not EDCA has been unlawfully deprived of the books because
    the check issued by the impostor in payment therefor was dishonored?
    HELD: NO. EDCA was not unlawfully deprived of the books.
    A contract of sale is perfected upon meeting of minds of both parties and
    the ownership of a thing shall be transferred upon actual or constructive delivery, unless
    it is otherwise stipulated. Fraud and deceit render the contract voidable. The remedy
    would be annulment or ratification. However, as long as no action is taken by the party
    entitled, either that of annulment or of ratification, the contract of sale remains valid and
    binding.
    In the case at bar, actual delivery was made. Cruz acquired ownership
    over the books which he could then validly transfer to the Spouse Santos. The fact that
    he had not yet paid for them to EDCA was a matter between him and EDCA and did not
    impair the title acquired by the private respondents to the books. The title of Cruz was
    presumed under Article 559 by his mere possession of the books. Santos did not have
    to go beyond that invoice.
    Hence, the petition is denied. EDCA was not unlawfully deprived of the
    ownership of the books and Spouses Santos were held to be have the ownership over
    the books.

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy