85 - Robinson Fleming v. Cruz 40 Phil 42
85 - Robinson Fleming v. Cruz 40 Phil 42
85 - Robinson Fleming v. Cruz 40 Phil 42
For answer the defendant made a general and specific denial of all
of the material allegations made in the complaint. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library
After the evidence was taken upon such issues, the lower court
rendered judgment for the defendant, to which the plaintiff duly
excepted and filed a motion for a new trial, which was overruled.
virtual law library
chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles
II. The trial court erred in holding that the plaintiff was bound to
show before the court what evidence was before the arbitrators
when they made up the award; that the action of the arbitrators
Special Powers of Attorney with respect to Principal’s causes of action
85 - Robinson Fleming v. Cruz 40 Phil 42
was not binding upon the court and that the court was not bound to
assume that such action was legal and just. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library
III. The trial court erred in finding, in its final decision, that plaintiff
was a British Corporation. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library
IV. The trial court erred in finding in its final decision that it had
sustained objections to certain portions of the deposition of the
witness William Ernest Sibley, offered by plaintiff and couched in the
following words: chanrobles virtual law library
When the said 500 bales arrived in London, the plaintiffs, found that
the hemp was not in sound, dry condition in accordance with the
clause 9 of the said contract (Exhibit W. E. S. 1). The arbitration
which was duly held, resulted in an award being made by the
arbitrators appointed by the plaintiffs and defendants, respectively
in the plaintiffs' favor, whereby an allowance was made to the
plaintiffs on the price of the said 500 bales, &c.' B. E. 49. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library
V. The trial court erred in finding that there was not sufficient
evidence before the court to sustain the allegations of plaintiff. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library
IV. The trial court erred in deciding the issues in the case in favor of
the defendant and against the plaintiff.
JOHNS, J.:
Clause 11 provides:
Clause 12 provides:
It is clear that under the contract, and upon the proof in the record,
plaintiff was legally entitled to an arbitration. It is equally clear that,
if an arbitration was had and held in the manner and form provided
by the contract, and that the arbitrators made findings, and based
thereon made the award, as plaintiff alleges, plaintiff in this action
would be entitled to recover from the defendant the amount found
due and owing by the arbitrators, subject only to the legal right,
and under a proper plea, of the defendant to defend upon the
ground of fraud or mistake in the arbitration. But in an action to
recover founded upon the award of the arbitrators, the plaintiff
must both allege and prove, by competent evidence, that the
defendant had notice of the motion of the plaintiff to arbitrate; that
the arbitrators were selected in the manner and form as provided
for in the By-Laws of the Manila Hemp Association; that the
arbitrators met and performed their duties, and made and
presented their findings, based upon which, they made and signed
their award; and that the defendant was either legally a party to the
arbitration or that it ratified and approved the arbitration after it
was made. Upon all of such questions, there is a failure of proof.
There is no competent evidence that arbitrators were ever selected,
as the By-Laws provides, who they were, or that they ever met in
the discharge of their duties, or of the time and place of their
meeting, or who was present. Neither is there any competent
evidence that the arbitrators ever made or signed any findings.
Neither is there any competent evidence that the defendant was
ever notified of the proposed arbitration, or that it book part in it, or
that it ever ratified or approved the alleged findings. The proof of an
arbitration should conform to the spirit and intent of the By-Laws of
the Manila Hemp Association. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library
Under the By-Laws, for certain specified reasons, either party has a
legal right to an arbitration, and each person has a legal right to
select his own arbitrator, and it is the duty of the person desiring an
arbitration to notify the adverse party, so that he can select his own
arbitrator and be present or represented in the arbitration, if he
sees fit to do so. After the arbitrators have been selected and a
Special Powers of Attorney with respect to Principal’s causes of action
85 - Robinson Fleming v. Cruz 40 Phil 42
hearing is held and the investigation made, it is then the duty of the
arbitrators to make their findings, based upon which they make
their award, which should be in writing. The only competent
evidence of all such matters is the finding and award which is made
by the arbitrators. In other words, where a person seeks to recover
a judgment upon the findings and award of arbitrators, he must
both allege and prove that all of the conditions precedent, and that
the necessary legal steps were taken to have an arbitration, and
submit to the court either the original or an authenticated copy of
the findings and the award of the arbitrators, or in the absence of
such preliminary proof, he must both allege and prove that the
findings and award of the arbitrators have been ratified and
approved by the adverse party. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library
the merits of the controversy submitted, and it is not for the courts
to otherwise inquire whether the determination was right or wrong,
for the purpose of interfering with it. The court possesses no
general supervisory power over awards and if arbitrators keep
within their jurisdiction their award will not be set because they
have erred in judgment either upon the facts or the law. . . . It is
the general rule that a valid award operates to merge and
extinguish all claims embraced in the stipulation. Thereafter the
submission and award furnish the only basis by which the rights of
the parties can be determined, . . . .
In the interest of justice, and so that the case may be tried and
decided upon its actual merits, the judgment of the lower court is
reversed, and the case is remanded, with leave to the plaintiff to
submit competent evidence of the arbitration and the findings and
award of the arbitrators, and that the arbitration was made in a
substantial compliance with the By-Laws of the Manila Hemp
Association, and with leave to the defendant, in its discretion, to
amend its answer, and to both allege and prove that the arbitration
was fraudulent por that the arbitrators made a mistake, which is
apparent on the face of the record. Neither party to recover costs.
So ordered.