A+ A A-

Nature Of Owner’s Liability To Suppliers

Nature Of Owner’s Liability To Suppliers

In JL Investment & Dev. Corp., v. Tendon Phils., Inc., et al., G.R. No. 148596, January 22, 2007, the SC had the occasion to rule on nature of the liability of owners to suppliers of materials. It held that:

“Those who put their labor upon or furnish materials for a price of work undertaken by the contractor have an action against the owner up to the amount owing from the latter to the contractor at the time the claim is made. However, the following shall not prejudice the laborers, employees and furnishers of materials:

1.    Payments made by the owner to the contractor before they are due;
2.    Renunciation by the contractor of any amount due from the owner.

This article is subject to the provisions of special laws. (Art. 1729, NCC).

This provision imposes a direct liability on an owner of a piece of work in favor of suppliers of materials (and laborers) hired by the contractor “up to the amount owing from the [owner] to the contractor at the time the claim is made.” (Flores v. Ruelo, No. 13905-R, September 29, 1955, 52 O.G. No. 2, 850). Thus, to this extent, the owner’s liability is solidary with the contractor, if both are sued together. By creating a constructive vinculum between suppliers of materials (and laborers), on the one hand, and the owner of a piece of work, on the other hand, as an exception to the rule on privity of contracts, Article 1729 protects suppliers of materials (and laborers) from unscrupulous contractors and possible connivance between owners and contractors. (Velasco v. CA, L-47544, January 28, 1980, 95 SCRA 616). The supplier’s cause of action under this provision, reckoned from the time of judicial or extra-judicial demand, subsists so long as any amount remains owing from the owner to the contractor. Only full payment of the agreed contract price serves as a defense against the supplier’s claim. (JL Investment & Dev. Corp. v. Tendon Phils. Inc., et al., G.R. No. 148596, January 22, 2007).


Nature Of Owner’s Liability To Suppliers

Nature Of Owner’s Liability To Suppliers

In JL Investment & Dev. Corp., v. Tendon Phils., Inc., et al., G.R. No. 148596, January 22, 2007, the SC had the occasion to rule on nature of the liability of owners to suppliers of materials. It held that:

“Those who put their labor upon or furnish materials for a price of work undertaken by the contractor have an action against the owner up to the amount owing from the latter to the contractor at the time the claim is made. However, the following shall not prejudice the laborers, employees and furnishers of materials:

1.    Payments made by the owner to the contractor before they are due;
2.    Renunciation by the contractor of any amount due from the owner.

This article is subject to the provisions of special laws. (Art. 1729, NCC).

This provision imposes a direct liability on an owner of a piece of work in favor of suppliers of materials (and laborers) hired by the contractor “up to the amount owing from the [owner] to the contractor at the time the claim is made.” (Flores v. Ruelo, No. 13905-R, September 29, 1955, 52 O.G. No. 2, 850). Thus, to this extent, the owner’s liability is solidary with the contractor, if both are sued together. By creating a constructive vinculum between suppliers of materials (and laborers), on the one hand, and the owner of a piece of work, on the other hand, as an exception to the rule on privity of contracts, Article 1729 protects suppliers of materials (and laborers) from unscrupulous contractors and possible connivance between owners and contractors. (Velasco v. CA, L-47544, January 28, 1980, 95 SCRA 616). The supplier’s cause of action under this provision, reckoned from the time of judicial or extra-judicial demand, subsists so long as any amount remains owing from the owner to the contractor. Only full payment of the agreed contract price serves as a defense against the supplier’s claim. (JL Investment & Dev. Corp. v. Tendon Phils. Inc., et al., G.R. No. 148596, January 22, 2007).


BATASnatin The Firm

Lawyers in the Philippines

Latest @ Forums

Popular

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Prev Next

SUGGESTED ANSWERS …

ANSWERS TO BAR EXAMINATION QUESTIONS IN POLITICAL LAW ARRANGED BY TOPIC (1990 – 2006) Edited and Arranged by:Silliman University College of Law Batch 2005Updated by:DondeeD’ BAR-Retake 2007 From the ANSWERS TO BAR EXAMINATION QUESTIONS by the UP LAW COMPLEX & PHILIPPINE ASSOCIATION OF LAW SCHO...

Read more

Oral Defamation l S…

Kinds and Definition of Slander or Oral Defamation   Definition: Speaking of base and defamatory words which tend to prejudice another in his reputation, office, trade, business or means of livelihood   Two kinds of oral or verbal defamation: (1) Grave Slander (2) Simple Slander   A. Factor...

Read more

Article I – THE NAT…

Article I – THE NATIONAL TERRITORYThe national territory of the Philippines comprises:1) the Philippine archipelago;2) all other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdictionPHILIPPINE ARCHIPELAGO – that body of water studded with islands which is delineated in the Treaty of...

Read more

Random

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Prev Next

Freedom of Assembly

Freedom of Assembly   The right of peaceful assembly enjoys primacy in the hierarchy of rights.   In relation to other rights, how do you classify or consider the right to peaceably assemble and petition for redress of grievances? The Supreme...

Read more

EISNER VS. MACOMBER…

Income means something derived from labor or capital. To be “derived” means something of exchangeable value separated from the capital.   FACTS: 1. Mrs. Macomber owned 2,200 share of Standard Oil Company of California stock.2. In January, 1916, th...

Read more

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW …

MANGUERA OUTLINECONSTITUTIONAL LAW I REVIEWERCOMPREHENSIVE VERSIONFRATERNAL ORDER OF UTOPIAATENEO DE MANILA UNIVERSITYSCHOOL OF LAW By:ARIS S. MANGUERADownload the full text from the attachments area below.

Read more

Featured

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Prev Next

Right to Strike

SSSEA v. CA – right to strike – At present, in the absence of any legislation in government employees the right to strike, recognizing their right to do so, or regulating the exercise of such right, they are prohibited form striking by express prohi...

Read more

People vs. Tolentin…

G.R. No. 176385, February 26, 2008 FACTS: On 13 February 1998, three separate informations of Murder and two counts of Frustrated Murder were filed before the RTC against appellants, together with accused Jimmy Trinidad and Arnel Trinidad. The murd...

Read more

Perfection Of A Con…

In Oesmer, Jr., et al. v. Paraiso Dev. Corp., G.R. No. 157493, February 5, 2007, a contract to sell was entered into by the owners of a real property. They affixed their signatures but contested its validity later contending that their co-owner had n...

Read more


BATASnatin.com- The Best Philippine Law Library

Login

Sign in with Facebook