Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Artex Development
SECOND DIVISION
SYNOPSIS
SYLLABUS
https://0-cdasiaonline-com.lib1000.dlsu.edu.ph/jurisprudences/28262/print 1/5
11/4/2019 G.R. No. L-25748 | Consolidated Terminals, Inc. v. Artex Development
case at bar are the depositor, consignee and shipper, the warehouseman
has no cause of action in seeking recovery of damages for the non-
delivery of said bales.
3. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; EXCEPTION. — It would be different if the
depositor, consignee and shipper had required the warehouseman to pay
damages, or that the Commissioners of Customs and Internal Revenue
had held it liable for the duties and taxes. In such a case, the
warehouseman might logically and sensibly go after the party wrongfully
obtaining custody of the merchandiser.
4. ID.; ID.; DELICT OR WRONG REQUIRED FOR VALID
JUDGMENT TO BE RENDERED. — Where a complaint does not
unequivocally allege what right was violated, or what delict or wrong was
committed, no valid judgment can be rendered thereon (See Ma-ao Sugar
Central Co., Inc. vs. Barrios, 79 Phil. 666; 1 Moran's Comments on the
Rules of Court, 1970 Ed., pp. 259, 495).
DECISION
AQUINO, J : p
https://0-cdasiaonline-com.lib1000.dlsu.edu.ph/jurisprudences/28262/print 2/5
11/4/2019 G.R. No. L-25748 | Consolidated Terminals, Inc. v. Artex Development
https://0-cdasiaonline-com.lib1000.dlsu.edu.ph/jurisprudences/28262/print 4/5
11/4/2019 G.R. No. L-25748 | Consolidated Terminals, Inc. v. Artex Development
https://0-cdasiaonline-com.lib1000.dlsu.edu.ph/jurisprudences/28262/print 5/5