Compañia General de Tabacos v · G.R. 2091

Petitioner: Compañia General de Tabacos
Respondent: Sebastian Victor Molina
Citation: G.R. No. 2091
Court: Supreme Court En Banc
Division: En Banc
Ponente: Willard, J.
Decided: October 18, 1905

Summary

Commercial law case involving validity and enforceability of promissory note. Compañia General de Tabacos sold cigars and cigarettes to tobacco store owner Sebastian Molina in 1895. Molina executed promissory note for 3,319.74 pesos in 1896 with Juan Molina as surety. When plaintiff sued in 1903, lower court dismissed based on three-year commercial statute of limitations. Supreme Court affirmed dismissal against surety but reversed against principal debtor. Court held that while promissory note was time-barred commercial instrument, original contract of sale remained enforceable under Civil Code Article 1170, which provides that delivery of promissory note suspends but does not extinguish original obligation. No novation occurred. Case demonstrates interaction between commercial and civil law regarding commercial instruments and underlying obligations.

Statutes applied

Related cases

Other Philippine cases on the same provisions and issues.

Trans-Asia Shipping Lines v. Court of Appeals G.R. No. 118126
Radio Communications of the Philippines v. Alfonso Verchez G.R. No. 164349
Margarita Suria v. Hon. Intermediate Appellate Court G.R. No. 73893
Diamond Laboratories v. Topy Industries G.R. No. 198913
Optimum Motor Center Corporation v. Annie Tan G.R. No. 170202
Mr. & Mrs. George R. Tan v. G.V.T. Engineering Services G.R. No. 153057
Yht Realty Corporation v. The Court of Appeals G.R. No. 126780
Santos Ventura Hocorma Foundation v. Ernesto V. Santos G.R. No. 153004

By Intellegal Editorial Board · October 18, 1905

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.