The defendants admit some facts from the plaintiff's complaint but dispute that a contract for the sale of two fishing vessels was perfected. They claim the document instead embodied an agreement for loans to the plaintiffs to manage the vessels, with an understanding the defendants could buy the vessels for PHP 900,000 if the business proved profitable. However, no terms of payment were agreed on and the vessels were damaged when delivered. While open to settlement, the key issue is whether a contract of sale was actually formed. The defendants will present a promissory note for PHP 900,000 and two witnesses in their defense.
The defendants admit some facts from the plaintiff's complaint but dispute that a contract for the sale of two fishing vessels was perfected. They claim the document instead embodied an agreement for loans to the plaintiffs to manage the vessels, with an understanding the defendants could buy the vessels for PHP 900,000 if the business proved profitable. However, no terms of payment were agreed on and the vessels were damaged when delivered. While open to settlement, the key issue is whether a contract of sale was actually formed. The defendants will present a promissory note for PHP 900,000 and two witnesses in their defense.
The defendants admit some facts from the plaintiff's complaint but dispute that a contract for the sale of two fishing vessels was perfected. They claim the document instead embodied an agreement for loans to the plaintiffs to manage the vessels, with an understanding the defendants could buy the vessels for PHP 900,000 if the business proved profitable. However, no terms of payment were agreed on and the vessels were damaged when delivered. While open to settlement, the key issue is whether a contract of sale was actually formed. The defendants will present a promissory note for PHP 900,000 and two witnesses in their defense.
The defendants admit some facts from the plaintiff's complaint but dispute that a contract for the sale of two fishing vessels was perfected. They claim the document instead embodied an agreement for loans to the plaintiffs to manage the vessels, with an understanding the defendants could buy the vessels for PHP 900,000 if the business proved profitable. However, no terms of payment were agreed on and the vessels were damaged when delivered. While open to settlement, the key issue is whether a contract of sale was actually formed. The defendants will present a promissory note for PHP 900,000 and two witnesses in their defense.
The case stems from the allegation of the plaintiff, Sps Eduardo Ramos and Carmencita Ramos that a Contract of Sale of two (2) fishing vessels, the Lady Lalaine and the Lady Theresa, for the price of Php 900,000.00 was perfected with the respondents. The reason for this is the document presented by plaintiff allegedly purporting such sale. II. ADMISSIONS 1. Respondent admit the averments in paragraph 1 and 2 of the complaint.
III. PROPOSED ADMISSIONS
1. The document being sued upon merely embodies an agreement brought about by the loans that defendants extended to plaintiffs. 2. The plaintiffs allowed the defendants to manage or administer the fishing vessels as business 3. The plaintiffs had an understanding with the defendants that: should the latter find the business profitable; the vessels would be sold to the latter for Nine Hundred Thousand Pesos (P900, 000.00). 4. Both parties have no agreement on any the terms of payment. 5. Both fishing vessels were damaged when they were delivered to respondents.
IV. WILLINGNESS TO SETTLE
It is admitted by the respondent that a settlement at this stage may be welcome.
V. Issue 1. Whether or not there was a contract of sale perfected.
VI. EVIDENCE TO BE PRESENTED
1. A promissory note executed by Plaintiff for the sum of Php 900,000.00.
VII. APPLICABLE LAW/JURISPRUDENCE
1. Article 1458 of the New Civil Code 2. Article 1197 of the New Civil Code 3. SWEDISH MATCH AB v. COURT OF APPEALS, G.R. 128120, October 20, 2004