Scribd
Upload
594 views1 page

New Manila Lumber v. Republic of The Philippines

The contractor (principal) executed powers of attorney authorizing the plaintiff lumber company to collect any amounts owed to the contractor by the defendant Republic of the Philippines for school construction projects. However, the contractor later directly demanded and collected the money from the defendant, revoking the plaintiff's agency under Articles 1920 and 1924 of the Civil Code. Even if the powers of attorney were irrevocable, this would not affect the defendant who was not a party to that agreement. The plaintiff's claim for payment should have been lodged with the Auditor General, as the state cannot be sued without its consent.

Uploaded by

Abegail Galedo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
594 views1 page

New Manila Lumber v. Republic of The Philippines

The contractor (principal) executed powers of attorney authorizing the plaintiff lumber company to collect any amounts owed to the contractor by the defendant Republic of the Philippines for school construction projects. However, the contractor later directly demanded and collected the money from the defendant, revoking the plaintiff's agency under Articles 1920 and 1924 of the Civil Code. Even if the powers of attorney were irrevocable, this would not affect the defendant who was not a party to that agreement. The plaintiff's claim for payment should have been lodged with the Auditor General, as the state cannot be sued without its consent.

Uploaded by

Abegail Galedo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

G.R. No.

L-14248             April 28, 1960 WON the contractor (principal) validly


revoke the authority of plaintiff to collect
NEW MANILA LUMBER COMPANY, from defendant
INC., plaintiff-appellant,
vs. HELD:
REPUBLIC OF THE
PHILIPPINES, defendant-appellee. The powers of attorney made plaintiff the
contractor's agent in the collection of
DOCTRINE:
whatever amounts may be due the
Article 1920. The principal may revoke the contractor from the defendant. And since it
agency at will, and compel the agent to is also alleged that, after the execution of
return the document evidencing the agency. the powers of attorney, the contractor
Such revocation may be express or implied. (principal) demanded and collected from
defendant the money the collection of
Article 1924. The agency is revoked if the which he entrusted to plaintiff, the
principal directly manages the business agency apparently has already been
entrusted to the agent, dealing directly with revoked. (Articles 1920 and 1924, new
third persons. (n) Civil Code.)

FACTS: The point is made by plaintiff that the


powers of attorney executed by the
 Plaintiff lumber company filed a contractor in its favor are irrevocable
complaint against the defendant and are coupled with interest. But even
Republic of the Philippines for the supposing that they are, still their
recovery of a sum of money alleged irrevocability cannot affect
 Plaintiff's complaint seeks to enforce defendant who is not a party thereto.
against the Republic of the They are obligatory only on the principal
Philippines a money claim for the who executed the agency.
payment of materials it furnished for
the construction of two public school Plaintiff’s claim is one for sum of money and
buildings undertaken by contractor should have been lodged with the Auditor
Alfonso Mendoza, on the basis of General since the state cannot be sued
powers of attorney executed by the without its consent.
latter authorizing said plaintiff to
collect and receive from defendant
Republic any amount due or may be
due to said contractor as contract
price for the payment of the
materials so supplied.
 The trial court held that there was no
juridical tie between plaintiff and
defendant.

PLAINTIFF’S CONTENTION:

There is an implied contract between it and


the defendant Republic arose, when the
latter, thru the Director of Public Schools, on
being furnished copies of the powers of
attorney executed by the contractor,
promised to make payment to plaintiff for
the materials supplied for the construction of
the school buildings.

ISSUES:

You might also like