Fisher v. Robb

CASE DIGEST
Fisher v. Robb
Obligations and Contracts
Court Supreme Court

Date November 2, 1939
Plaintiff-Appellee A.O. Fisher
Defendant-Appellant John C. Robb
Ponente Villa-Real, J.
Relevant topic Natural Obligations
FACTS:
 In Sept. 1935, the BOD of Philippine Greyhound Club, Inc. (PGCI) tasked Robb to make a business trip to
Shanghai to study the operation of a dog racing course. In Shanghai, Robb became acquainted with Fisher
through mutual friends.
 Robb came to know that Fisher was the manager of a dog racing course in Shanghai. Fisher came to know
the purpose of Robb’s trip to Shanghai and expressed to Robb his interest in becoming a stockholder for
PGCI. Robb answered in the affirmative. Fisher filled a subscription blank and, through his bank in Shanghai,
sent to PGCI in Manila a telegraphic transfer of P3, 000 as payment for the first instalment of his subscription.
Robb later returned to Manila
 Some months thereafter, upon a call by the BOD of PGCI for the payment of the 2nd instalment of
subscriptions, Rob sent a radiogram to Fisher requesting said payment. Fisher sent P2, 000 directly to PGCI
 Due to manipulations of those who controlled PGCI while Robb was in Shanghai, the company failed. Robb
undertook the organization of a new company called The Philippine Racing Club (PRC). To save the
investment of those who subscribed to the PGCI, Robb had the PRC acquire the remaining assets of PGCI.
 Robb wrote to Fisher explaining the critical condition of PGCI and outlining the his plan to save the properties
and assets of Fisher, saying he felt morally responsible to the stockholders who paid their 2 nd instalment
 In reply, Fisher wrote to Robb requiring him to return the entire amount he paid to PGCI
 Robb answered back, saying it was not his duty under the law to reimburse Fisher for any loss he might have
suffered in connection to PGCI, in the same way that Robb could not expect anyone to reimburse him for his
own losses which were much more than those of Fisher’s
 The CFI of Manila ordered Robb to pay Fisher P2, 000 with legal rate of interest. Robb appealed
ISSUE – HELD – RATIO:
ISSUES HELD
WON there was sufficient consideration to justify the promise made by Robb in NO
his letters to Fisher
RATIO:
 Excerpts from the correspondence between the parties
- Robb to Fisher: “I feel a moral responsibility for these 2 nd payments…and Mr Hilscher and I will see to it
that stockholders who made 2nd payments receive these amounts back as soon as possible, out of our
own personal funds…The only salvage will be the 2 nd payment that you made, and that will come from
Hilscher and me personally, as I say, not because of any obligation, but simply because we have taken it
on ourselves to do that…”
 Art. 1254 of the CC states:
“A contract exists from the moment one or more persons consent to be bound with respect to another or
others to deliver something or to render some services.
 Art. 1261 of the CC states:
“There is no contract unless the following requisites exist:

1. The consent of the contracting parties;
2. A definite object which is the subject-matter of the contract;
3. A consideration for the obligation established.
 It does not appear that Fisher consented to the reimbursement suggested by Robb. Hence, the 1st requisite
for the existence of a contract is lacking.
 As to consideration for the obligation established, Articles 1274 and 1275 provide:
Page 1 of 2
CASE DIGEST
Fisher v. Robb
Obligations and Contracts
“Art. 1274. In onerous contracts, the consideration as to each of the parties is the delivery or performance or
the promise of delivery or performance of a thing or service by the other party; in remuneratory contracts, the
consideration is the service or benefit for which the remuneration is given, and in contracts of pure
beneficence, the consideration is the liberality of the benefactors.”
“Art. 1275. Contracts without consideration or with an illicit consideration produce no effect whatsoever. A
consideration is illicit when it is contrary to law or morality.”
 Consideration is different from motive. The former is the essential reason for the contract while the latter is a
particular reason of a contracting party which do not affect the other party and which do not preclude the
existence of a different consideration.
 The contract sought to be enforced by Fisher is onerous in character, since it involves a deprivation of Robb
of an amount of money which impairs his property, which is a burden, and for it to be legally valid, it is
necessary that it should have a consideration consisting in the lending or promise of a thing or service by such
party.
- Robb is required to give a thing, namely, the amount of P2, 000, but Fisher has not given or promised a
thing or service to Robb which may compel him to make such payment. The promise made by Robb in his
letter was prompted by a feeling of pity. Said obligation is therefore, purely moral and, as such, is not
demandable in law but only in conscience, over which human judges have no jurisdiction
 As to whether a moral obligation is a sufficient consideration, the Court cited vol. 12 of American
Jurisprudence which provides that:
“Section 96. Moral obligation – Although there is authority in support of the board proposition that a moral
obligation is sufficient consideration, such proposition is usually denied.”
It provided 5 classes of moral obligations:

1) Cases in which the moral obligation arose wholly from ethical considerations, unconnected with any
legal obligations, perfect or imperfect, and without the receipt of actual pecuniary or material benefit
by the promisor prior to the subsequent promise;
2) Cases in which the moral obligation arose from a legal liability already performed or still enforceable;
3) Cases in which the moral obligation arose out of, or was connected with, a previous request or
promise creating originally an enforceable legal liability, which, however, at the time of the subsequent
express promise had become discharged or barred by operation of a positive rule of law, so that at
that time there was no enforceable legal liability;
4) Cases in which the moral obligation arose from, or was connected with, a previous request or promise
which, however, never created any enforceable legal liability, because of a rule of law which rendered
the original agreement void, or at least, unenforceable; and
5) Cases in which the moral obligation arose out of, or was connected with, the receipt of actual material
or pecuniary benefit by the promisor, without, however, any previous request or promise on his part,
express or implied, and therefore, of course, without any original legal liability, perfect or imperfect.
“Section 97. Moral obligation unconnected with legal liability or legal benefit - …it is now well-established that
a mere moral obligation or conscience duty arising wholly from ethical motives or a mere conscientious duty
unconnected with any legal obligation, perfect or imperfect, or with the receipt of benefit by the promisor of a
material or pecuniary nature will not furnish a consideration for an executory promise…”
 The Court held that the promise made by Robb to Fisher to return to him certain amounts paid by the latter
for his subscription upon the belief by the former that he was morally responsible because of the failure of the
company, is not the consideration required by Art. 1261 of the CC as an essential element for the legal
existence of an onerous contract which would bind the promisor to comply with his promise.
RULING:
WHEREFORE, the appealed judgment is reversed and the costs to the plaintiff.
Page 2 of 2

Fisher v. Robb

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fisher v. Robb

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fisher v. Robb

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CASE DIGEST

Court Supreme Court

ISSUE – HELD – RATIO:

 Art. 1261 of the CC states:

“There is no contract unless the following requisites exist:

It provided 5 classes of moral obligations:

You might also like