doctrine
GR: When the terms
of an agreement have been reduced into writing, it is considered as containing
all the terms agreed upon and there can be, between the parties and their
successors in interest, no evidence of
such terms other than the contents of the written agreement.
E: A party to a
written agreement may present evidence to modify, explain or add to the terms
of the agreement if he puts in issue in his pleading the ff:
1.
An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in the written
agreement;
2.
The failure of the written agreement to express the true intent and
agreement of the parties thereto;
3.
The validity of the written agreement; or
4.
The existence of other terms agreed to by the parties or their
successors in interest after the execution of the written agreement.
facts
·
Teresita Lazaro, a rice trader gave petitioner P132K to buy
palay. The petitioner, who was alleged to be an agent in the buy-and-sell of
palay, agreed to deliver the palay on or before Nov 28, 1998.
·
According to the "Kasunduan" the parties shall earn a
commission of P0.20. But if no palay is purchased on Nov 28, the petitioner
must return the P132K to
Teresita within 1 week after Nov 28.
·
Teresita made oral and written demands for the return of the P132K.
·
Petitioner alleged that she owed Teresita a balance of P13,704.32 for the fertilizers
and rice, and that she was made
to sign a blank "Kasunduan" that reflected no written date and
amount. She
denied personally receiving any written demand letter from Teresita. She also
denied receiving the P132K.
·
RTC convicted the petitioner. CA affirmed.
issue
Whether
prosecution proved her guilt of the crime of estafa beyond reasonable doubt.
RULING
·
The "Kasunduan" clearly stated that the petitioner received in
trust the amount of P132K
from Teresita with the obligations to deliver the palay or to return the P132K.
Parol
Evidence
·
GR: When the terms of an agreement have been reduced into writing, it is
considered as containing all the terms agreed upon and there can be, between
the parties and their successors in interest, no evidence of such terms other than the contents of the written
agreement.
·
E: A party to a written agreement may present evidence to modify,
explain or add to the terms of the agreement if he puts in issue in his
pleading the ff:
1.
An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in the written
agreement;
2.
The failure of the written agreement to express the true intent and
agreement of the parties thereto;
3.
The validity of the written agreement; or
4.
The existence of other terms agreed to by the parties or their
successors in interest after the execution of the written agreement.
·
The petitioner alleges that the "Kasunduan" failed to express
the real agreement between her and Teresita; that theirs was a plain and simple
loan agreement and not that of a principal-agent relationship in the
buy-and-sell of palay.
·
The receipts presented by the petitioner to prove her loan obligation
with Teresita were vague, undated and unsigned. The witnesses who
testified that they saw the petitioner sign the "Kasunduan" were not
even certain of the real transaction between the petitioner and Teresita.
re allegation
that she signed a blank document
·
Petitioner: after she signed the "Kasunduan," Teresita
subsequently made her execute a deed of sale over her property, which deed she
refused to sign. This
statement negates the petitioner’s self-serving allegation that she was tricked
by Teresita into signing a blank "Kasunduan," as she was fully aware
of the possible implications of the act of signing a doc.
·
For fraud to vitiate consent, the deception employed must be the causal
(dolo causante) inducement to the making of the contract, and must be
serious in character. It
must be sufficient to impress or lead an ordinarily prudent person into error,
taking into account the circumstances of each case.
elements
of Estafa committed with abuse of confidence:
1.
that money, goods or other personal property is received by the offender
in trust or on commission, or for administration, or under any other obligation
involving the duty to make delivery of or to return the same[;]
2.
that there be misappropriation or conversion of such money or property
by the offender, or denial on his part of such receipt[;]
3.
that such misappropriation or conversion or denial is to the prejudice
of another; and
0 comments:
Post a Comment