Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 205 views

    TECSON

    Uploaded by

    tosh matsuyama
    Delfino Tecson filed a complaint against Pilipino Telephone Corporation (PilTel) in the Regional Trial Court of Iligan City regarding six cellular phone subscriptions. PilTel argued the case should be heard in Makati City per the terms of the service agreements. The court ruled the contract was one of adhesion but such contracts are valid and binding if terms are clear. While protecting weaker parties, adhesion contracts are generally enforceable if the other party had opportunity to read the terms. The court found Tecson secured six subscriptions over various dates, giving him sufficient opportunity to review the terms, including the venue stipulation.

    Copyright:

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

    TECSON

    Uploaded by

    tosh matsuyama
    205 views1 page
    Delfino Tecson filed a complaint against Pilipino Telephone Corporation (PilTel) in the Regional Trial Court of Iligan City regarding six cellular phone subscriptions. PilTel argued the case should be heard in Makati City per the terms of the service agreements. The court ruled the contract was one of adhesion but such contracts are valid and binding if terms are clear. While protecting weaker parties, adhesion contracts are generally enforceable if the other party had opportunity to read the terms. The court found Tecson secured six subscriptions over various dates, giving him sufficient opportunity to review the terms, including the venue stipulation.

    Original Description:

    TECSON

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Delfino Tecson filed a complaint against Pilipino Telephone Corporation (PilTel) in the Regional Trial Court of Iligan City regarding six cellular phone subscriptions. PilTel argued the case should be heard in Makati City per the terms of the service agreements. The court ruled the contract was one of adhesion but such contracts are valid and binding if terms are clear. While protecting weaker parties, adhesion contracts are generally enforceable if the other party had opportunity to read the terms. The court found Tecson secured six subscriptions over various dates, giving him sufficient opportunity to review the terms, including the venue stipulation.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    205 views1 page

    TECSON

    Uploaded by

    tosh matsuyama
    Delfino Tecson filed a complaint against Pilipino Telephone Corporation (PilTel) in the Regional Trial Court of Iligan City regarding six cellular phone subscriptions. PilTel argued the case should be heard in Makati City per the terms of the service agreements. The court ruled the contract was one of adhesion but such contracts are valid and binding if terms are clear. While protecting weaker parties, adhesion contracts are generally enforceable if the other party had opportunity to read the terms. The court found Tecson secured six subscriptions over various dates, giving him sufficient opportunity to review the terms, including the venue stipulation.

    Copyright:

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

    TOPIC: Contract of adhesion

    PILIPINO TELEPHONE CORPORATION, petitioner, vs. DELFINO TECSON, respondent.


    G. R. No. 156966, THIRD DIVISION, May 7, 2004, Vitug, J.
    FACTS:
    Delfino C. Tecson applied for six (6) cellular phone subscriptions with petitioner Pilipino
    Telephone Corporation (PILTEL), a company engaged in the telecommunications business.
    Respondent filed with the Regional Trial Court of Iligan City, Lanao Del Norte, a complaint
    against petitioner for a "Sum of Money and Damages." Petitioner moved for the dismissal of the
    complaint on the ground of improper venue, citing a common provision in the mobiline service
    agreements to the effect that –
    "Venue of all suits arising from this Agreement or any other suit directly or indirectly arising from
    the relationship between PILTEL and subscriber shall be in the proper courts of Makati, Metro
    Manila. Subscriber hereby expressly waives any other venues."
    Both the RTC and CA denied the MTD.
    ISSUE:
    Whether or not the stipulation in venue in the mobiline service agreement is null and void on the
    ground that it is a mere contract of adhesion. (NO)
    RULING:
    The contract herein involved is a contract of adhesion. But such an agreement is not per se
    inefficacious. The rule instead is that, should there be ambiguities in a contract of adhesion, such
    ambiguities are to be construed against the party that prepared it. If, however, the stipulations are
    not obscure, but are clear and leave no doubt on the intention of the parties, the literal meaning
    of its stipulations must be held controlling.
    A contract of adhesion is just as binding as ordinary contracts. It is true that this Court has,
    on occasion, struck down such contracts as being assailable when the weaker party is left with
    no choice by the dominant bargaining party and is thus completely deprived of an opportunity to
    bargain effectively. Nevertheless, contracts of adhesion are not prohibited even as the courts
    remain careful in scrutinizing the factual circumstances underlying each case to determine the
    respective claims of contending parties on their efficacy.
    In the case at bar, respondent secured six (6) subscription contracts for cellular phones
    on various dates. It would be difficult to assume that, during each of those times,
    respondent had no sufficient opportunity to read and go over the terms and conditions
    embodied in the agreements.
    A contract duly executed is the law between the parties, and they are obliged to comply
    fully and not selectively with its terms. A contract of adhesion is no exception.

    You might also like