Cms Logging v. The Court… · G.R. 41420

Petitioner: Cms Logging
Respondent: The Court of Appeals
Citation: G.R. No. 41420
Court: Supreme Court
Division: Second Division
Ponente: Nocon, J.
Decided: July 10, 1992

Summary

CMS Logging and DRACOR entered a 5-year exclusive agency agreement in 1957 for log exports to Japan. CMS discovered DRACOR used sub-agent Shinko Trading who allegedly received US $77,264.67 in separate commissions. CMS sued to recover this amount, claiming double compensation violation. DRACOR counterclaimed for commissions on CMS's subsequent direct sales to Japanese buyers. The Supreme Court found insufficient evidence that Shinko received the questioned commissions from buyers rather than from DRACOR's own commission. However, the Court ruled that CMS's direct sales constituted implied revocation of the agency under Civil Code Article 1924, making DRACOR ineligible for commissions on those transactions. The decision established that principals may revoke agency agreements through conduct, and agents cannot claim commissions after such implied revocation.

Statutes applied

Civil Code, Art. 1924

Related cases

Other Philippine cases on the same provisions and issues.

Aquilino Calvo v. Co Cang & Co. G.R. No. 11754
Carmen Olivares y Tello v. Hoskyn & Co. G.R. No. 1178
Carlos Sanchez v. Medicard Philippines G.R. No. 141525
Farida Yap Bitte v. Spouses Fred G.R. No. 212256
Inventory Insolvency of U. de Poli. Felisa Roman v. J.R. Herridge G.R. No. 22511
Nicanor Jacinto v. Conrado de Leon G.R. No. 26635
J. J. Peterson v. Charles P. Newberry G.R. No. 2698
Mariano S. Yatco v. The Intestate Estate of Pablo Manguerra G.R. No. 30818

Other Philippine cases also address these provisions and issues.

Search Philippine case law on Intellegal →

By the Intellegal Editorial Board · July 10, 1992

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.