Petitioner
Professional Academic Plans
Respondent
Dinnah L. Crisostomo
Citation
G.R. No. 148599
Court
Supreme Court
Division
Second Division
Decided
March 14, 2005

Summary

This case involves a contractual dispute over franchise commission between PAPI company officers and district manager Dinnah Crisostomo. Crisostomo successfully negotiated an AFPSLAI account and was granted franchise commission through company resolution, later reduced to 2% via written memorandum. When PAPI executed a new MOA with AFPSLAI, they stopped paying her commission and terminated her employment. The Supreme Court affirmed her entitlement to the commission based on estoppel principles, ruling that the original MOA was modified rather than cancelled, and that her written commission agreement remained valid. However, the Court deleted damage awards for lack of specific findings of bad faith, emphasizing that companies cannot unilaterally abandon contractual obligations without mutual consent under Article 1308 of the Civil Code.

Statutes applied

Related cases

Other Philippine cases on the same provisions and issues.

Other Philippine cases also address these provisions and issues.

Search Philippine case law on Intellegal →

By the Intellegal Editorial Board · March 14, 2005

Search Philippine case law on Intellegal →
AI-assisted case analysis — for research only. Verify against the official decision. A research aid, not legal advice; using this page creates no attorney-client relationship. For legal advice, consult a Philippine lawyer. Verify every holding and citation against the official decision (Supreme Court E-Library / Official Gazette) before relying on it.