ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™  
Main Index Law Library Philippine Laws, Statutes & Codes Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Jurisprudence
Prof. Joselito Guianan Chan's The Labor Code of the Philippines, Annotated Labor Standards & Social Legislation Volume I of a 3-Volume Series 2019 Edition (3rd Revised Edition)
 

 
Chan Robles Virtual Law Library
 









 

 
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

 
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

   
August-1949 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-1261 August 2, 1949 - CATALINA OSMEÑA DE VALENCIA, ET AL. v. EMILIA RODRIGUEZ, ET AL.

    084 Phil 222

  • G.R. No. L-3059 August 2, 1949 - VICENTE G. CRUZ, ET AL. v. PLACIDO RAMOS, ET AL.

    084 Phil 226

  • G.R. No. L-1494 August 3, 1949 - ALLISON J. GIBBS v. EULOGIO RODRIGUEZ, ET AL.

    084 Phil 230

  • G.R. No. L-1514 August 5, 1949 - BONIFACIO VILLAREAL v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.

    084 Phil 264

  • G.R. No. L-1826 August 5, 1949 - JOSE L. GOMEZ, ET AL. v. MIGUELA TABIA

    084 Phil 269

  • G.R. No. L-48346 August 9, 1949 - DESTILERIA C. AYALA, INC. v. LIGA NACIONAL OBRERA DE FILIPINAS, ET AL

    084 Phil 280

  • G.R. No. L-1438 August 11, 1949 - SOCORRO C. VDA. DE ARANETA v. REHABILITATION FINANCE CORP.

    084 Phil 282

  • G.R. No. L-1935 August 11, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ELADIO BALOTOL

    084 Phil 289

  • G.R. No. L-2062 August 11, 1949 - JESUS B. LOPEZ v. RAFAEL DINGLASAN, ET AL.

    084 Phil 292

  • G.R. No. L-1367 August 16, 1949 - PIO PORTEA v. JACINTO PABELLON, ET AL.

    084 Phil 298

  • G.R. No. L-1892 August 16, 1949 - JACINTO NOTOR v. RAMON MARTINEZ, ET AL.

    084 Phil 300

  • G.R. No. L-1956 August 16, 1949 - LETICIA H. CALDERA, ET AL. v. EUSEBIO BALCUEBA, ET AL.

    084 Phil 304

  • G.R. No. L-3025 August 16, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ILDEFONSO DE CASTRO, JR.

    084 Phil 306

  • G.R. No. L-1648 August 17, 1949 - PEDRO SYQUIA, ET AL. v. NATIVIDAD ALMEDA LOPEZ

    084 Phil 312

  • G.R. No. L-1029 August 23, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. REYNALDO L. RAMOS

    084 Phil 326

  • G.R. No. L-2016 August 23, 1949 - RICHARD THOMAS FITZSIMMONS v. ATLANTIC, GULF & PACIFIC CO. OF MLA.

    084 Phil 330

  • G.R. No. L-2035 August 23, 1949 - ANGELITA V. VILLANUEVA, ET AL. v. DIRECTOR OF POSTS

    084 Phil 350

  • G.R. No. L-1761 August 24, 1949 - IN RE: JOSE LEELIN v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    084 Phil 352

  • G.R. No. L-1544 August 25, 1949 - F. V. LARRAGA, ET AL. v. EULOGIA B. BAÑEZ, ET AL.

    084 Phil 354

  • G.R. No. L-2766 August 25, 1949 - PABLO P. ROBATON v. DIRECTOR OF PRISONS

    084 Phil 357

  • G.R. No. L-2828 August 25, 1949 - JOAQUIN GOZUN, ET AL. v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL, ET AL.

    084 Phil 359

  • G.R. No. L-1760 August 26, 1949 - MARIA MOLATO, ET AL. v. CELEDONIA ARCOS, ET AL.

    084 Phil 361

  • G.R. No. L-2372 August 26, 1949 - INT’L. HARVESTER CO. OF THE PHIL. v. CRISANTO ARAGON, ET AL.

    084 Phil 363

  • G.R. No. L-2044 August 26, 1949 - J. ANTONIO ARANETA v. RAFAEL DINGLASAN, ET AL.

    084 Phil 368

  • G.R. No. L-1617 August 29, 1949 - PANFILO B. MORALES, ET AL. v. OSCAR VENTANILLA, ET AL.

    084 Phil 459

  • G.R. Nos. L-1625 & L-1626 August 30, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LORENZO PINEDA

    084 Phil 465

  • G.R. No. L-1563 August 30, 1949 - IN RE: JOSE GO v. ANTI-CHINESE LEAGUE OF THE PHIL.

    084 Phil 468

  • G.R. No. L-1542 August 30, 1949 - JOSE CRISTOBAL v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.

    084 Phil 473

  • G.R. No. L-1485 August 30, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PABLO DESLATE

    084 Phil 479

  • G.R. No. L-1442 August 30, 1949 - MIGUEL R. MATEO v. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, ET AL.

    084 Phil 482

  • G.R. No. L-2166 August 30, 1949 - ESTRELLA LEDESMA v. EDUARDO ENRIQUEZ

    084 Phil 483

  • G.R. No. L-2452 August 30, 1949 - LORENZO LLAMOSO v. VICENTE FERRER, ET AL.

    084 Phil 489

  • G.R. No. L-2894 August 30, 1949 - BUCRA CORP. v. HIGINO B. MACADAEG. ET AL.

    084 Phil 493

  • G.R. No. L-3063 August 30, 1949 - MACARIO QUINTERO, ET AL. v. FELIX MARTINEZ, ET AL.

    084 Phil 496

  • G.R. No. L-3226 August 30, 1949 - DOMINADOR S. PONGOS v. HIDALGO ENTERPRISES, INC., ET AL.

    084 Phil 499

  • G.R. No. L-1358 August 31, 1949 - MARIETA J. ROTEA, ET AL. v. LEVY HERMANOS, INC., ET AL.

    084 Phil 502

  • G.R. No. L-1827 August 31, 1949 - ALFREDO CATOLICO v. IRINEO RANJO, ET AL.

    084 Phil 505

  • G.R. No. L-2262 August 31, 1949 - FLORENTINA ZAFRA VDA. DE VALENZUELA v. BERNABE DE AQUINO, ET AL.

    084 Phil 507

  • G.R. No. L-2345 August 31, 1949 - SEGUNDO AGUSTIN, ET AL. v. MANUEL DE LA FUENTE

    084 Phil 515

  • G.R. No. L-2480 August 31, 1949 - FLORENTINA ZAFRA VDA. DE VALENZUELA v. IRENE ZAFRA DE AGUILAR

    084 Phil 518

  • G.R. No. L-2754 August 31, 1949 - FIDEL ABRIOL v. VICENTE HOMERES

    084 Phil 525

  •  





     
     

    G.R. No. L-2828   August 25, 1949 - JOAQUIN GOZUN, ET AL. v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL, ET AL. <br /><br />084 Phil 359

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    EN BANC

    [G.R. No. L-2828. August 25, 1949.]

    JOAQUIN GOZUN and CARMEN VICENCIO, Petitioners, v. THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES and THE AUDITOR GENERAL, Respondents.

    Artemio C. Macalino and Pedro S. David, for Petitioners.

    Assistant Solicitor General Francisco Carreon and Solicitor Antonio A. Torres for Respondents.

    SYLLABUS


    1. CONTRACTS; AGREEMENT AS TO AMOUNT OF LIQUIDATED DAMAGES; ESTOPPEL TO CLAIM INTEREST. — A party to a contract who unqualifiedly and unconditionally accepts the settlement of his claim for damages without reservation as to interest or any other further claim from the other party, is estopped from claiming interest thereafter.


    D E C I S I O N


    OZAETA, J.:


    By way of petition for review, the petitioners appeal from a decision of the Auditor General denying their claim against the Government for the sum of P21,924, arising from the following facts:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    In December, 1940, negotiations were begun between the Government and the petitioners for the use and occupancy by the former of a strip of land belonging to the latter, containing an area of 60.90 hectares, which the Government needed to construct and maintain a public dyke from the Pampanga River, municipality of Arayat, to the Candaba Swamp, Municipality of Candaba, Province of Pampanga. For such use and occupancy of the land the Government offered to pay the petitioners the assessed value, or P500 per hectare, while the petitioners asked for P1,000 per hectare. The war subsequently broke out without the parties’ having reached a final agreement. In the meantime the Government went ahead with its project and took possession of the land. After the liberation the negotiations to fix the price were resumed, and the parties finally reached an agreement which was embodied in a public document entitled "Channel and Dyke Right-of-Way Agreement," dated December 31, 1946, whereby the Government paid to the petitioners, and the latter accepted, P60,900 "as damages for the use and occupancy" of the land hereinabove mentioned. In other words, the Government finally agreed to pay the price of P1,000 per hectare originally asked by the petitioners, and the latter accepted it although they had sought to raise the price to P1,500 per hectare on the ground that the land had increased in value since 1940.

    After receiving payment of the said sum of P60,900 from the Government, the petitioners filed the present claim for P21,924 as interest on the said sum of P60,900 for six years at the legal rate of 6% per annum. The Auditor General denied said claim on two grounds: first, that the sum of P60,900 was, according to the agreement above mentioned, in payment of the full compensation for the use and occupancy of the land, including whatever damages might have been sustained by the petitioners incident to such use and occupancy; and, second, that under the law the Government is not liable to pay interest unless it expressly engages to do so.

    The petitioners’ appeal is grounded on the argument that to all intents and purposes the Government expropriated and took possession of the land in December, 1940, and that since it did not pay the price until January, 1947, it should pay interest on that price during the intervening period of six years. That, we think, is not a valid argument.

    In the first place, the premise is wrong. There was no expropriation or condemnation proceeding. What there was, was a voluntary agreement between the parties whereby the claim of the petitioners for damages arising from the perpetual use and occupancy of their land by the Government was fully liquidated as of December 31, 1946, without any reservation as to interest or any other further claim by the petitioners against the Government.

    In the second place, even if the premise were correct, the conclusion sought to be drawn would not necessarily be so. Even if we should by analogy consider the Government’s taking possession of the land in 1940 as equivalent to taking possession of it through a condemnation proceeding, and the agreement between the parties for the payment of P60,900 as equivalent to a judgment in an expropriation proceeding, it would not follow that the Government is liable to pay interest on said sum. It would be liable to pay interest only if the judgment expressly so provided. No such provision was made in the agreement.

    We hold that the petitioners are estopped from claiming interest by their unqualified and unconditional acceptance of the settlement of their claim as embodied in the Right-of-Way Agreement of December 31, 1946.

    The decision of the Auditor General is affirmed, with costs.

    Moran, C.J., Paras, Feria, Bengzon, Padilla, Tuason, Montemayor and Reyes, JJ., concur.

    G.R. No. L-2828   August 25, 1949 - JOAQUIN GOZUN, ET AL. v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL, ET AL. <br /><br />084 Phil 359


    Back to Home | Back to Main

     

    QUICK SEARCH

    cralaw

       

    cralaw



     
      Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
    ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
     
    RED