ChanRobles Virtual law Library
[G.R. No. 163720.� July 13, 2005]
LIM vs. SABAN
SECOND DIVISION
Sirs/Mesdames:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated JUL 13 2005.
G.R. No. 163720 (Genevieve Lim vs. Florencio Saban.)
This treats of the Motion for Reconsideration (For Modification and Clarification of Decision) dated February 11, 2005 filed by petitioner requesting clarification of the Decision dated December 16, 2004, specifically as regards the total amount payable as agent's commission and praying that she be held liable only for the proportionate part of the obligation.
As required in the Resolution dated April 27, 2005, private respondent filed a Comment/Opposition dated May 28, 2005.
In its Decision, the Court upheld the right of private respondent to his commission from the sale of a 1,000-square meter property owned by the late Eduardo Yba�ez after finding sufficient basis to affirm the appellate court's conclusion that petitioner and Yba�ez connived to deprive private respondent of his commission by dealing directly with each other and reducing the purchase price of the lot, leaving nothing to compensate private respondent for his efforts.
The Court ascertained that Yba�ez agreed to sell the property for
P200,000.00 and authorized private respondent to mark up the selling
price to include the amounts needed for the payment of taxes, transfer of title
and other expenses incident to the sale, as well as private respondent's
commission. It was also established that private respondent was able to
negotiate the sale of the property to petitioner for P600,000.00. Hence,
of the overprice of P400,000.00, private respondent was entitled to
receive as commission the amount of P236,743.00, which represented the
net amount after deducting P113,257.00 for taxes and P50,000.00
for petitioner's broker.
With these premises, the Court concurred with the result reached by the Court of Appeals, but disagreed as regards said court's finding that petitioner had acted as an accommodation party.
We note that petitioner's confusion arose from a paragraph in the
Decision in which the Court pronounced that she should pay private
respondent the balance of P200,000.00. For the clarification of the
parties, the Decision affirmed the Court of Appeals' decision holding
petitioner liable to pay private respondent the amount of P236,743.00,
plus legal interest. This is in accordance with the tenor of the Decision
and the specific findings of the appellate court, affirmed by this Court, as
regards the application of P400,000.00 overprice.
The applicable legal interest in this case is Six Percent (6%) per annum in accordance with Art. 2209 of the Civil Code since the obligation does not constitute a loan or forbearance of credit. However, as declared in the case of Eastern Shipping Lines, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, [1] cralaw the interim period from the finality of the judgment awarding a monetary claim and until payment thereof is deemed to be equivalent to a forbearance of credit. Thus, from the time the judgment becomes final until its full satisfaction, the applicable rate of legal interest shall be Twelve Percent (12%).
Concerning petitioner's claim that the obligation be divided among herself and her co-vendees, the Spouses Benjamin and Lourdes Lim, there is no basis to rule on the matter since it was raised for the first time only in the petition for review before this Court. It is axiomatic that an issue which was neither alleged in the pleadings nor raised during the proceedings below cannot be ventilated for the first time before this Court as such would be offensive to the basic rule of fair play, justice and due process. [2] cralaw
WHEREFORE, the Motion for Reconsideration dated
February 11, 2005 is hereby DENIED with FINALITY. Petitioner is hereby ORDERED
to pay respondent Florencio Saban the amount of P236,743.00, plus
interest thereon at the rate of Six Percent (6%) per annum from the time the
complaint was filed until fully paid. A Twelve Percent (12%) interest, in lieu
of Six Percent (6%), shall be imposed on such amount upon finality of this
decision until the payment thereof.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) LUDICHI YASAY-NUNAG
Clerk of Court
Endnotes:
[1] cralaw G.R. No. 97412, July 12, 1994, 234 SCRA 78.
[2] cralaw Blas v. Angeles-Hutalla, G.R. No. 155594, September 27, 2004, 439 SCRA 273.
HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
QUICK SEARCH
