FACTS:
It was established
that Lim Tong Lim requested Peter Yao to engage in commercial fishing with
him and one Antonio Chua. The three agreed to purchase two fishing
boats, fishing nets and other fishing equipment, but since they do not
have the money they borrowed from one Jesus Lim (brother of Lim Tong Lim). Now,
Yao and Chua represented themselves as acting in behalf of “Ocean Quest Fishing
Corporation” (OQFC) they contracted with Philippine Fishing Gear Industries
(PFGI) for the purchase of fishing nets amounting to more than P500k.
They were however unable to pay PFGI and so they
were sued in their own names because apparently OQFC is a non-existent
corporation. Chua admitted liability and asked for some time to pay. Yao waived
his rights. Lim Tong Lim however argued that he’s not liable because he was not
aware that Chua and Yao represented themselves as a corporation; that the two
acted without his knowledge and consent.
ISSUE:
Whether or not Lim Tong Lim is liable.
HELD:
Yes. From the factual findings of both lower
courts, it is clear that Chua, Yao and Lim had decided to engage in a
fishing business, which they started by buying boats worth P3.35 million,
financed by a loan secured from Jesus Lim. In their Compromise Agreement, they
subsequently revealed their intention to pay the loan with the proceeds of the
sale of the boats, and to divide equally among them the excess or loss. These
boats, the purchase and the repair of which were financed with borrowed money,
fell under the term “common fund” under Article 1767. The contribution to such
fund need not be cash or fixed assets; it could be an intangible like credit or
industry. That the parties agreed that any loss or profit from the sale and
operation of the boats would be divided equally among them also shows that they
had indeed formed a partnership.
Lim Tong Lim cannot argue that the principle of
corporation by estoppels can only be imputed to Yao and Chua. Unquestionably,
Lim Tong Lim benefited from the use of the nets found in his boats, the
boat which has earlier been proven to be an asset of the partnership. Lim, Chua
and Yao decided to form a corporation. Although it was never legally
formed for unknown reasons, this fact alone does not preclude the liabilities
of the three as contracting parties in representation of it. Clearly, under the
law on estoppel, those acting on behalf of a corporation and those benefited by
it, knowing it to be without valid existence, are held liable as general partners.
No comments:
Post a Comment