AgencyDPFebruary32014

In the said gpa olayta can find a substitute with the

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: . When the final settlement of accounts was had, both Aragon and the plaintiff, Teofila del Rosario de Costa, confirmed it as a true statement of the account. The defendant corporation however, refused to pay over to the plaintiffs the balance of 1,795.25. Thus, plaintiffs brought this action to recover from the defendant corporation the said sum. Defendant claims that plaintiffs are just merchants who purchased the goods and were never employed as agents. Plaintiffs claim that they were the agents of the defendant; "that they received commissions on the sales made by the agency; and that they were authorized to extend a reasonable credit under the supervision of the general agent." TC: Plaintiffs are merchants. The lower court was of the opinion that the specific goods sold to the delinquent debtors, whose unpaid accounts form the basis of this litigation, had already been paid for by the plaintiffs and that this was conclusive evidence that the plaintiffs were not acting as the agents of the defendant corporation, and that in effect, the purpose of this suit was to recover back money already paid for the goods purchased and sold by the plaintiffs. Issue: Are the plaintiffs merchants or sub­agents? Held: Plaintiffs are sub­agents for the defendant corporation. Plaintiffs won. "It is not denied however, that Aragon was acting as the general agent of the defendant corporation and that as such he was invested with the authority to inaugurate and carry out a selling campaign with a view of interesting the sale of the defendant's products in the territory assigned to him. The record does not show what limitations, if any, were placed upon his powers to act for the corporation. x x x It appears further that 25 the head office in Manila was fully informed of plaintiffs' relations with the general agent in extending the sales of its products. Plaintiffs made direct remittances to the head office in Manila and these remittances were credited to the account of the agency at Legaspi, and acknowledgment w...
View Full Document

This document was uploaded on 03/11/2014.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online