Wednesday, January 18, 2017

WARRANTIES in Sales Contracts

ETRIII Civil Law Review Lecture Series


OUTLINE/ LECTURE ON 
WARRANTIES AND REMEDIES
IN CASE OF BREACH
IN SALES CONTRACTS

By: Atty. Eduardo T. Reyes, III

(Prepared for Law 4-C,
Univ. of San Agustin Law School,
Civil Law Review II, SY 2016-2017)


I. WARRANTIES. Warranties may be express or implied. Implied warranties are natural elements of a contract of sale.

1.1. General Rule: Express Warranties of seller. An express warranty is any affirmation of fact or any promise by the seller relating to the thing if the natural tendency of such affirmation or promise is to INDUCE the buyer to purchase the same, and if the buyer purchase the thing relying thereon.[1]

Exception: No affirmation of the value of the thing, nor any statement purporting to be a statement of the seller’s OPINION only shall be construed as a warranty.

Exception to exception: When the seller made such affirmation or statement as an expert and it was relied upon by the buyer.

1.2. Implied Warranties of Seller. Unless a contrary intention appears, the following are deemed included in a contract of sale even without an express stipulation:

a)    Warranty against eviction. That the seller has the right to sell the thing at the time when the ownership is to pass and the buyer shall from that time have and enjoy the legal and peaceful possession of the thing.[2]
b)   Warranty against Hidden Defects. An implied warranty that the thing shall be free from any hidden faults or defects, or any charge or encumbrance not declared or known to the buyer[3].
c)    In sale of Goods, Warranty of Quality or Fitness.

c.1. Where the buyer, expressly or by implication, makes known to the seller the particular purpose for which the goods are acquired, and it appears that the buyer relies on the seller’s skill or judgment (whether he be the grower or manufacturer or not), there is an implied warranty that the goods shall be reasonably fit for such purpose[4].

c.2. Where the goods are brought by description from a seller who deals in goods of that description (whether he be the grower or manufacturer or not), there is an implied warranty that the goods shall be of merchantable quality[5].

1.3. Warranty in Case of Eviction. This warranty is a natural element of a contract of sale. The warranty may be eliminated by stipulation so long as the stipulation was agreed upon in good faith. Any stipulation exempting the vendor from the obligation to answer for eviction shall be void, if he acted in bad faith[6].

            1.3.1. Requisites for enforcement of warranty in case of eviction.[7]

                        See Arts. 1548 & 1558.
            a. Vendee is deprived of the whole or of part of the thing purchased;
            b. Eviction was by virtue of final judgment
            c. Based on ground on a right prior to the sale or an act imputable to the vendor
            d. The vendor must be summoned in the suit for eviction at the instance of the vendee.
1.3.2. Waiver of warranty in case of eviction. May be Conciente or Intentionada.

-        Conciente- when the vendee made the waiver WITHOUT knowledge of the risks of eviction – the vendor shall only PAY THE VALUE which the thing sold had AT THE TIME OF EVICTION
-        Intentionada- when the vendee made the waiver WITH KNOWLEDGE of the risks of eviction and assumed its consequences – Vendor is NOT LIABLE.


1.3.3. Liabilities of Vendor in case of Breach.

a)    RETURN the value which the thing sold had at the time of the eviction, be it greater or less than the price of the sale.
b)   The income or fruits, if he has been ordered to deliver them to the party who won the suit against him.
c)    The costs of the suit which caused the eviction, and, in a proper case, those of the suit brought against the vendor for the warranty.
d)   The expenses of the contract, if the vendee has paid them.
e)    The damages and interests, and ornamental expenses, if the sale was made in bad faith.

Alternative Remedy. Should the vendee lose, by reason of the eviction, a part of the thing sold of such importance, in relation to the whole, that HE WOULD NOT HAVE BOUGHT IT WITHOUT SAID PART, he may:

(1) Within 1 year, to be computed from the execution of the deed, (i) bring an action for rescission, or, (ii) sue for damages. In case of rescission, there is an obligation to return the thing without other encumbrances than those which it had when he acquired it.[8]

(2) After 1 year, - The vendee may only bring an action for damages within an equal period, to be counted from the date on which he discovered the burden or servitude.


            1.3.4. Warranty against HIDDEN DEFECTS of or Encumbrance Upon the Things Sold. (Article 1561, New Civil Code). The vendor shall be responsible for warranty against hidden defects which the thing sold may have, should they render it unfit for the use for which it is intended, or should they diminish its fitness for such use to such an extent that, had the vendee been aware thereof, he would not have acquired it or would have given a lower price for it.

ü The vendor shall not be answerable for PATENT DEFECTS or those which may be VISIBLE, or those which are not visible if the vendee is an expert who, by reason of his trade or profession, should have known them.
ü There is no warranty as to the thing’s FITNESS for any PARTICULAR PURPOSE, unless there is a stipulation to the contrary.
ü Merchantability- In the case of a contract of sale by SAMPLE, if the seller is a dealer in goods of that kind, there is an implied warranty that the goods shall be free from any defect rendering them unmerchantable which would not be apparent on reasonable examination of the sample[9].
ü Unless the contrary is stipulated, knowledge of the vendor is not essential for the enforcement of this warranty[10].

1.3.5. Remedies in case of Breach of Warranty against HIDDEN DEFECTS, within the PRESCRIPTIVE PERIOD of SIX (6) MONTHS from delivery of the thing, the vendee :

ü ACCION REDHIBITORIA- withdrawing from the contract with damages
ü RECOUPMENT- Demanding PROPORTIONATE REDUCTION with damages.
ü Article 1599, NCC. “Where there is a breach of warranty by the seller, the buyer may, at his election:

1)     Accept or keep the goods and set up against the seller, the breach of warranty by way of recoupment in diminution or extinction of the price;
2)    Accept or keep the goods and maintain an action against the seller for damages for the breach of warranty;
3)    Refuse to accept the goods, and maintain an action against the seller for damages for the breach fo warranty;
4)   Rescind the contract of sale and refuse to receive the goods or if the goods have already been received, return them or offer to return them to the seller and recover the price or any apart thereof which has been paid.

X x x”

            1.3.6. REDHIBITORY DEFECT OF ANIMALS- If the hidden defect of animals, even in case a professional inspection has been made, should be of such a nature that expert knowledge IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO DISCOVER IT[11].

ü Sale of animals suffering from contagious disease shall be void.
ü Also void if the use or service for which they are acquired has been stated in the contract and they are found UNFIT therefor.
ü If a VETERINARIAN, through ignorance or bad faith should fail to discover or disclose it, the veterinarian shall be liable for damages.

-Prescriptive period- 40 days from date of delivery to vendee.

II. REMEDIES IN CASE OF BREACH OF OBLIGATIONS.

a. Specific Performance; b. Rescission; c. Damages.


A. Specific Performance. Action to recover the price by the seller of goods is available to the seller. This action is available to the seller under three different scenarios, viz:

            A.1. The ownership of the goods has passed to the buyer and he wrongfully neglects or refuses to pay for the goods according to the terms of the contract of sale; or

            A.2. The price is payable on a certain day, irrespective of delivery or transfer of title and the buyer wrongfully neglects or refuses to pay such price

            A.3. When the buyer refused to receive the goods upon the seller’s offer to deliver (where the goods cannot readily be resold for a reasonable price); the seller may notify the buyer that the goods thereafter held by the seller as bailee for the buyer and thereafter treat the goods as the buyer’s and may maintain an action for the price.

B. DAMAGES. Apart from the 3 scenarios above mentioned, the remedy is an action for damages where the buyer wrongfully neglects or refuses to accept and pay for the goods. The measure of damages is the estimated loss directly and naturally resulting in the ordinary course of events from the buyer’s breach of contract.[12]

C. RESCISSION BY SELLER. (Article 1597, NCC). The seller can give notice of rescission where the goods have not been delivered to the buyer, and the buyer has:
1)     Repudiated the contract of sale;
2)    Manifested his inability to perform his obligations
3)    Has committed a breach thereof, the seller may totally rescind the contract of sale


C.1. RECTO LAW. (Article 1484, NCC). In a contract of sale of personal property on installment basis, the vendor may exercise any of the following ALTERNATIVE REMEDIES:

a)    Exact fulfillment of the obligation, should the vendee fail to pay
b)   Cancel the sale, should the vendee’s failure to pay cover two or more installments; or,
c)    Foreclose the mortgage.

c.1.1. Applicable only to sale of personal property on installment. Not to a straight sale (one-time payment) or a sale that is partly cash and partly term meaning there will be an initial payment  with the balance all payable once in the future.[13]

c.1.2. Alternative Remedies v. Alternative Obligations. In Borbon II v. Servicewide Specialists, Inc.[14], it was ruled that:

            “The remedies under Article 1484 of the Civil Code are not cumulative but alternative and exclusive. In an ordinary alternative obligation, a mere choice categorically and unequivocally made and then communicated by the person entitled to exercise the option concludes the parties. The creditor may not thereafter exercise any other option, unless the chosen alternative proves to be ineffectual or unavailing due to no fault on his part. This rule, in essence, is the difference between alternative obligations, on the one hand, and alternative remedies, upon the other hand, where in the latter case, the choice generally becomes conclusive upon the exercise of the remedy. For instance, in one of the remedies expressed in Article 1484 of the Civil Code, it is only when there has been a  foreclosure of the chattel mortgage that the vendee-mortgagor would be permitted to escape from a deficiency liability. Thus, if the case is one for specific performance, even when this action selected after the vendee has refused to surrender the mortgaged property to permit an extrajudicial foreclosure sale, the property may still be levied on execution and an alias writ may be issued if the proceeds thereof are insufficient to satisfy the judgment credit. So, also, a mere demand to surrender the object which is not heeded by the mortgagor will not amount to a foreclosure, but the repossession thereof by the vendor-mortgagee would have the effect of foreclsore”.

C.1.3. Foreclosure of mortgage. Unpaid Balance. “In this cae, he shall have no further action against the purchase to recover any unpaid balance of the price. Any agreement to the contrary shall be void”.

Hypotheticals:

a. In a sale of personal property on installments, a promissory note was executed and secured by a chattel mortgage. When the note matured but remained unpaid, the creditor chose to collect on the note and prayed for a preliminary attachment. When judgment was rendered, the same became final and executory and levy on execution was made on the very property previously attached via preliminary attachment. It is also the very same property subject of chattel mortgage. If it turns out that the value of the property is insufficient to cover the entire “unpaid balance”, can the creditor recover the difference through a  “deficiency judgment”?

a.1. If allowed, would this not allow indirectly the evil sought to be prevented by the Recto Law?

-Read Tajanlangit v. Southern Motors, Inc.[15]      and Southern Motors, Inc. v. Moscoso[16]

b. If seller avails of rescission, generally, “unpaid balance” is recoverable. Is there an exception? – Read Delta Motor Sales Corp., v. Niu Kim Duan[17] on effect of recovery of chattel as a result of mutual rescission.

-“Rescission” is deemed availed of when: possession of chattel is retaken, filing of judicial rescission, and mere sending of notice of rescission.

c. Scope of “Unpaid Balance” which cannot be recovered. – Macondray & Co., Inc. v. Eustaquio[18]- “deficiency judgment to which the mortgagee may be entitled where, after the mortgaged chattel is sold at public auction, the proceeds obtained therefrom are insufficient to cover the full amount of the secured obligation which in the case at bar as shown by the note and by the mortgaged deed, include interest on the principal, attorney’s fees, expenses of collection, and the costs”.

-Exception. Read- Filipinas Investment & Finance Corp. v. Ridad[19], “Where the mortgagor plainly refuses to deliver the chattel subject of the mortgage upon his failure to pay two or more installments, or if he conceals the chattel to place it beyond the reach of the mortgagee, what then is the mortgagee expected to do? It is past of conventional wisdom and the rule of law that no man can take the law into his own hands; so it is not supposed that the Legislature intended that the mortgagee should wrest or seize the chattel forcibly from the control and possession of the mortgagor, even to the extent of using violence which is unwarranted in law. Since the mortgagee would enforce his rights through the means and within the limits delineated by law, the next step in such situations being the filing of an action for replevin to the end that he may recover immediate possession of the chattel and thereafter, enforce his rights in accordance with the contractual relationship between him and the mortgagor as embodied in their agreement, then it logically follows as a matter of common sense, that the necessary expenses incurred in the prosecution by the mortgagee of the action for replevin so that he can regain possession of the chattel, should be borne by the mortgagor. Recoverable expenses would, in our view, include expenses properly incurred in effecting seizure of the chattel and reasonable attorney’s fees in prosecuting the action for replevin x x x”.

d. Other Securities apart from Chattel Mortgage

-        Chattel mortgage must be on the very thing subject of the sale on installments in order for Recto Law to apply
-        In Cruz v. Filipinas Investment & Finance Corp.[20]    , it was held that allowing the foreclosure on the real estate mortgage, after the chattel mortgage was foreclosed, in order to recover deficiency, is to “overlook the fact that if the guarantor should be compelled to pay the balance of the purchase price, the guarantor will in turn be entitled to recover what she has paid from the debtor vendee (Article 2066, Civil Code); so that ultimately, it will be the buyer who will be made to bear the payment of the balance of the price, despite the earlier foreclosure of the chattel mortgage given to him. Thus, the protection given by Art. 1484 would be indirectly subverted, and public policy overturned”.
-        What if, the seller (creditor/ mortgagee) instead of running after the chattel mortgage, decides to foreclose on the real estate mortgage first and then when there is a deficiency, it is only then that he decides to foreclose the chattel mortgage?

Read Borbon II v. Servicewide Specialists, Inc.[21]- “in the event the seller-mortgagee first seeks the enforcement of the additional mortgages, guarantees or other security arrangement, he must then be held to have lost by waiver or non-choice his lien on the chattel mortgage of the personal property sold byt and mortgaged back to him, although, similar to an action for specific performance, he may still levy on it”.


[1] Article 1546, New Civil Code
[2] Article 1547, Ibid.
[3] Article 1547, Ibid.
[4] Article 1562, ibid
[5] Id.
[6] Article 1553, New Civil Code
[7] Article 1548, Ibid.
[8] Article 1555, New Civil Code
[9] Article 1565, NCC
[10] Article 1566, Ibid.
[11] Article 1576
[12] Article 1596, NCC
[13] Levy Hermanos, Inc. v. Gervacio, 69 Phil. 52 (1939)
[14] 258 SCRA 634, 72 SCAD 111
[15] 101 Phil. 606
[16] 2 SCRA 168
[17] 213 SCRA 259
[18] 64 Phil. 446
[19] 30 SCRA 564
[20] 23 SCRA 791
[21] 258 SCRA 634

No comments:

Post a Comment