Herrer v. Herrera
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: The plaintiff, Joaquin Ma. Herrer, sought to recover the price of two oil paintings he claimed to have executed under the order of the defendant, Arsenio Cruz Herrera, and which were allegedly accepted by the defendant. Procedural History: The case was tried before a lower court, which made express findings of fact. The defendant appealed the decision of the trial court. The Appeal: The defendant-appellant raised a point of law, contending that under Article 1544 of the Civil Code, the contract was not perfected because the price of the work was not fixed. The plaintiff-appellee argued for the perfection of the contract and the defendant's acceptance of the paintings.
Issue(s)
Whether a contract for the execution of work is perfected when the price is not fixed. Whether the appellate court can review questions of fact already determined by the trial court.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the lower court, holding that the contract was perfected and that the factual findings of the trial court were conclusive on appeal. The Court ordered that judgment be entered in accordance with the decision and the record remanded to the court below.
Ratio Decidendi
On Issue 1: The Court ruled that under Article 1544 of the Civil Code, a contract for the execution of work is perfected even if the price is not fixed. This principle was previously upheld in the case of Perez vs. Pomar. The Court cited the decision of the Supreme Court of Spain of October 18, 1899, which sustained this interpretation. Therefore, the absence of a specifically fixed price did not render the contract imperfect, as the agreement on the work itself and the possibility of determining the price by law or custom were sufficient for perfection. The Court found no ground to reverse the judgment based on this contention. On Issue 2: The Court stated that by virtue of the rule established in the De la Rama case, it was not at liberty to enter into an examination of the questions of fact upon which the trial court had made express findings. These findings are considered conclusive upon appeal. The testimony indicated a misunderstanding between the parties regarding the charter of the order, the effect of the exhibition of the paintings, and their delivery. However, since these were matters of fact determined by the trial court, the appellate court could not revisit them. The Court's role was limited to reviewing questions of law, and the defendant's argument regarding the price was treated as a legal point that had already been settled.
Main Doctrine
A contract for the execution of work is perfected even if the price is not fixed, as long as there is an agreement on the work and the price can be determined by law or custom. Furthermore, appellate courts are bound by the factual findings of the trial court, which are considered conclusive.