Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 164 views

    3 Marquez v. Valera

    Uploaded by

    tomoyo tv
    This case discusses the joinder of a real estate broker, L.G. Marquez, as a plaintiff in a lawsuit against defendants over unpaid commissions. The defendants argued that Marquez could not join the suit as he had no privity of contract with them. However, the court ruled that under the code system of pleading used in this jurisdiction, all persons with a material interest in the subject of the action can be joined as plaintiffs. Marquez was found to have an interest as he was entitled to a share of the commission from the agency contract between the other broker and the defendants, and worked jointly with that broker on the property sale. Therefore, Marquez had a valid cause of action and could properly be joined in

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    3 Marquez v. Valera

    Uploaded by

    tomoyo tv
    164 views2 pages
    This case discusses the joinder of a real estate broker, L.G. Marquez, as a plaintiff in a lawsuit against defendants over unpaid commissions. The defendants argued that Marquez could not join the suit as he had no privity of contract with them. However, the court ruled that under the code system of pleading used in this jurisdiction, all persons with a material interest in the subject of the action can be joined as plaintiffs. Marquez was found to have an interest as he was entitled to a share of the commission from the agency contract between the other broker and the defendants, and worked jointly with that broker on the property sale. Therefore, Marquez had a valid cause of action and could properly be joined in

    Original Title

    3-Marquez-v.-Valera.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case discusses the joinder of a real estate broker, L.G. Marquez, as a plaintiff in a lawsuit against defendants over unpaid commissions. The defendants argued that Marquez could not join the suit as he had no privity of contract with them. However, the court ruled that under the code system of pleading used in this jurisdiction, all persons with a material interest in the subject of the action can be joined as plaintiffs. Marquez was found to have an interest as he was entitled to a share of the commission from the agency contract between the other broker and the defendants, and worked jointly with that broker on the property sale. Therefore, Marquez had a valid cause of action and could properly be joined in

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    164 views2 pages

    3 Marquez v. Valera

    Uploaded by

    tomoyo tv
    This case discusses the joinder of a real estate broker, L.G. Marquez, as a plaintiff in a lawsuit against defendants over unpaid commissions. The defendants argued that Marquez could not join the suit as he had no privity of contract with them. However, the court ruled that under the code system of pleading used in this jurisdiction, all persons with a material interest in the subject of the action can be joined as plaintiffs. Marquez was found to have an interest as he was entitled to a share of the commission from the agency contract between the other broker and the defendants, and worked jointly with that broker on the property sale. Therefore, Marquez had a valid cause of action and could properly be joined in

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    L. G. MARQUEZ et al, v FRANCISCO VARELA et al.

    G.R. No. L-4845, December 24, 1952, EN BANC

    DOCTRINE:

    The principle underlying the code system of pleading is that all persons having a
    material interest under the substantive law should be made parties, as distinguished
    from that of the common law which allowed only a two-sided controversy, each party to
    be opposed to the other.

    FACTS:

    Gutierrez Lora was authorized by defendants to negotiate the sale of their share
    or interest in a parcel of land in Manila, and having meet his co-plaintiff L. G. Marquez,
    a real estate broker, both of them agreed to work together for the sale of defendant's
    property; that they found a ready, willing, and able buyer, which accepted defendants'
    price and terms, but that thereafter defendants, without any justifiable reason, refused
    to carry out the sale and execute the necessary deed therefor; and that as a consequence
    plaintiffs failed to receive the commission which they were entitled to receive.

    The defendants presented a motion to dismiss the complaint as to L. G. Marquez


    on the ground that he has no cause of action against defendants given that Marquez
    cannot join in the action and enforce therein his rights directly against the defendants,
    evidently because defendants never dealt with Marquez, directly or indirectly. The
    motion having been granted; plaintiff L. G. Marquez has prosecuted an appeal.

    ISSUE:

    Was there a cause of action in favor of Marquez against the defendants?

    RULING:

    Yes, Marquez has a cause of action against the defendants.

    The principle underlying defendants' objection is one of substantive law,


    recognized under common law, where no one could sue for a breach of a contract who
    was not a party thereto, and the action allowed to be brought only in the name of the
    one holding the legal title. The requirement was based upon the doctrine of privity of
    contract. At common law, in order that two or more persons may join in an action upon
    a contract, there must be community of interest between them; that is, they must be
    parties to the contract and jointly interested in therein.

    However, this jurisdiction does not make use of the common law procedure,
    rather it is a system of code pleading. The code system of pleading adopted in substance
    the rules of equity practice as to parties, under which "all persons having an interest in
    the subject of the action, and in obtaining the relief demanded, may be joined as
    plaintiffs". The principle underlying the rule is that all persons having a material interest
    under the substantive law should be made parties, as distinguished from that of the
    common law which allowed only a two-sided controversy, each party to be opposed to
    the other.
    Marquez clearly falls under the above rule. He is entitled to be paid his
    commission out of the very contract of agency between Lora and the defendants; Lora
    and he acted jointly in rendering services to defendants under Lora's contract, and the
    same questions of law and fact govern their claims. The rules do not require the
    existence of privity of contract between Marquez and the defendants as required under
    the common law; all that they demand is that Marquez has a material interest in the
    subject of the action, the right to share in the broker's commission to be paid Lora under
    the latter's contract, which right Lora does not deny. This is sufficient to justify the
    joinder of Marquez as a party plaintiff, even in the absence of privity of contract between
    him and the defendants.

    You might also like