Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 91 views

    ObliCon Añover Malbarosa V CA

    Uploaded by

    Raymond Cheng
    ObliCon Añover Malbarosa v CA

    Copyright:

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

    ObliCon Añover Malbarosa V CA

    Uploaded by

    Raymond Cheng
    91 views2 pages
    ObliCon Añover Malbarosa v CA

    Original Title

    ObliCon Añover Malbarosa v 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?

    ObliCon Añover Malbarosa v CA

    Copyright:

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

    ObliCon Añover Malbarosa V CA

    Uploaded by

    Raymond Cheng
    ObliCon Añover Malbarosa v CA

    Copyright:

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

    Anover, Rafael Ignacio W.

    Malbarosa V CA

    30 April 2003
    Callejo j.
    Petition: Review on Certiorari

    Parties:
    Salvador Malbarosa - Petitioner
    SEADC and CA - respondent

    Facts:

    Salvador Malbarosa was the president and general manager of Philectic Corporation and an officer in other corporations
    belonging to S.E.A. Development corporation (SEADC) (Philectic is also owner by SEADC)

    SEADC assigned to him a 1982 mitsubishi Gallant and was also issued membership certificates in the Architectural
    Center Inc. (certificates are not his just issued to him by company)

    Jan 8 1990 Malbarosa tendered his resignation and requests incentive compensation of P395,000 for the year 1989.

    SEADC through its President Louis Da Costa acceopted and entitled him ONLY P251,057.67. And it is to be satisfied by
    tranferring the car assigned and the membership certificates that were issued to him

    SEADC gave the offer on March 14, 1990 and required that Malbarosa affix his conformity on the space provided
    therefor and the date thereof on the right bottom position of the letter

    Mar 16 1990 Malbarosa handed to Da Costa the original copy of the offer but DID NOT sign it due to him wanting to
    review the offer.

    More than 2 weeks passed without any response from Malbarosa. De Costa then withdrew his offer on April 3, 1990

    April 7, 1990 Malbarosa handed to De Costa the offer that was given to him with a signature that stated that he accepted
    the offer on March 28, 1990 and that he was just not able to communicate the acceptance. And demanded for the return
    of the vehilcle

    Petitioner refused to return the vehicle. SEADC files for the recovery of personal property with replivin with damages
    and attorneys fees.

    RTC ruled in favor of SEADC

    CA affirmed

    Issue:1. WON there was valid acceptance by Malbarosa


    2. WON there was an effective withdrawal by the respondent

    Ruling:
    1)No.
    Art 138 would require:1) consent of the contracting parties;(2) object certain which is the subject matter of the
    contract(3) cause of the obligation which is established.
    In this case, there is no contract as Malbarosa failed to meet the requirements of a valid acceptance.
    a) may be express or implied(b) must be absolute, unconditional and without variance of any sort from the offer c)
    must be made known to the offeror(d) must be made in the manner prescribed by the offeror.
    Anover, Rafael Ignacio W.

    Malbarosa communicated only after knowledge of withdrawal of offer.

    2) Yes. Authroity was impliedly given to Philtectic Corp to demand and recover the car and use proper action to recover
    said car.

    Notes: First issue alng ata kailangan haha

    You might also like