2
Reparations Commission v. Universal Deep Sea Fishing Corporation A.M. No. 21901-96 June 27, 1978 J. Concepcion Jr. Prepared by: Ayson, Paul Facts: The Reparations Commission awarded six (6) trawl boats to the Universal Deep-Sea Fishing Corporation which were delivered two at a time, each delivery being covered by a Contract of Conditional Purchase and Sale providing for identical schedules of payments the first installment representing 10% of the total cost was to be paid 24 months after delivery and the balance of the total cost to be paid in ten (10) equal installments, which, in the schedule were numbered as "1", "2", "3", etc., the first of which was due one year after the first installment. When the Reparations Commission sued Universal and its surety to recover various amounts of money due under the contracts, they claimed that the amounts were not yet due and demandable. Universal alleged that there was an obscurity in the terms of the contracts in question which was caused by the plaintiff as to the amounts and due dates of the first installments which should have been first fixed before the creditor could demand its payment from the debtor, specifically referring to the schedule of payments which allegedly indicated two (2) due dates for the payment of the first installment. Issue: Whether or not judgment, first installments under judgment, three (3) contracts of conditional purchase and sale of reparations goods were already due and demandable when judgment, complaint was filed. Held: Yes Ratio:

Reparations Commission v. Universal Deep Sea

  • Upload
    pja

  • View
    257

  • Download
    10

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Reparations Commission v. Universal Deep Sea

Citation preview

Page 1: Reparations Commission v. Universal Deep Sea

Reparations Commission v. Universal Deep Sea Fishing CorporationA.M. No. 21901-96 June 27, 1978J. Concepcion Jr.Prepared by: Ayson, Paul

Facts:

The Reparations Commission awarded six (6) trawl boats to the Universal Deep-Sea Fishing Corporation which were delivered two at a time, each delivery being covered by a Contract of Conditional Purchase and Sale providing for identical schedules of payments the first installment representing 10% of the total cost was to be paid 24 months after delivery and the balance of the total cost to be paid in ten (10) equal installments, which, in the schedule were numbered as "1", "2", "3", etc., the first of which was due one year after the first installment.

When the Reparations Commission sued Universal and its surety to recover various amounts of money due under the contracts, they claimed that the amounts were not yet due and demandable. Universal alleged that there was an obscurity in the terms of the contracts in question which was caused by the plaintiff as to the amounts and due dates of the first installments which should have been first fixed before the creditor could demand its payment from the debtor, specifically referring to the schedule of payments which allegedly indicated two (2) due dates for the payment of the first installment.

Issue: Whether or not judgment, first installments under judgment, three (3) contracts of conditional purchase and sale of reparations goods were already due and demandable when judgment, complaint was filed.

Held: YesRatio:

The Supreme Court found the terms of the contracts clear and left no doubt as to the intent of the contracting parties that the first installment due 24 months after delivery was different from the first ten (10) equal yearly installment of the balance of the purchase price (which are not designated as "first", "second", "third", etc., installments).