AGENCY TRUST AND PARTNERSHIP | BEARNEZA VS. DEQUILLA, 43 PHIL. 237, MARCH 24, 1992
BEARNEZA VS. DEQUILLA,
43 PHIL. 237, MARCH 24, 1992
TOPIC/DOCTRINE
After the dissolution of a partnership by the death of one of its
members, its legal status is that of a partnership in liquidation, and the only
rights and interests transmitted to the legal successor or successors of the
said deceased are those resulting in his favor from such liquidation.
FACTS
In the year 1903, Balbino Dequilla, the herein defendant, and
Perpetua Bearneza formed a partnership for the purpose of exploiting a fish
pond situated in the barrio of Talisay, municipality of Barotac Nuevo, Province
of Iloilo, Perpetua obligating herself to contribute to the payment of the
expenses of the business, which obligation she made good, and both agreeing to
divide the profits between themselves, which they had been doing until the
death of the said Perpetua in the year 1912.
The deceased left a will in one of the clauses of which she appointed
Domingo Bearneza, the herein plaintiff, as her heir to succeed to all her
rights and interests in the fish pond in question.
Demand having been made upon Balbino Dequilla by Domingo Bearneza for
the delivery of the part of the fish pond belonging to his decedent, Perpetua,
and delivery having been refused, Domingo Bearneza brought this action to
recover said part of the fish pond and one-half of the profits received by the
defendant from the fish pond from the year 1913 to 1919, as damages (the
amended complaint was filed on April 12, 1920), amounting, according to
plaintiff, to the sum of thirteen thousand one hundred pesos (P13,100).
ISSUE
Whether or not the plaintiff has any right to maintain an action
for the recovery of one-half of the said fish pond.
RULING
No.
The court ruled that in the organization of a partnership, none of
the mercantile forms has been adopted and, therefore, the provisions of the
Code of Commerce are not applicable to it, said partnership is dissolved by the
death of any of the members, as provided in subsection 3 of article 1700 of the
Civil Code, unless there is a stipulation to the contrary, pursuant to the
provisions of article 1704 of the same Code. After the dissolution of a
partnership by the death of one of its members, its legal status is that of a
partnership in liquidation, and the only rights and interests transmitted to
the legal successor or successors of the said deceased are those resulting in
his favor from such liquidation.
Here,
the court ruled that the partnership formed by Perpetua Bearneza and Balbino
Dequilla, as to the existence of which the proof contained in the record is
conclusive and there is no dispute, was of a civil nature. It was a particular
partnership, as defined in article 1678 of the CiviJ Code, it having had for its subject-matter a
specified thing, to wit, the exploitation of the aforementioned fish pond.
Although, as the trial court says in its decision, the defendant, in his
letters to Perpetua or her husband, makes reference to the fish pond, calling
it "our," or "your fish pond," this reference cannot be
held to include the land on which the said fish pond was built. It has not been
proven that Perpetua Bearneza participated in the ownership of said land, and
Exhibits 2 and 3 of the defendant show that he has been paying, as exclusive
owner of the fish pond, the land tax thereon, although in Exhibit X he says
that the said land belongs to the State. The conclusion, therefore, from the
evidence is that the land on which the fish pond was constructed did not constitute
a part of the subject-matter of the aforesaid partnership.
