Shell Company of Philippines v. Firemen’s Insurance Company of Newark b.

b. Moreover, the company undertook to "answer and see to it that the

How is agency distinguished from other contracts/relationships?|Jan 29 1957|Padilla, J. equipment are in good running order and usable condition;"
c. CA found that the Company's mechanic failed to make a thorough check
Nature of Case: Certiorari (Rule 46) up of the hydraulic lifter – checkup made by mechanic was done by raising
Digest maker: Villafuerte the lifter once or twice
SUMMARY: Perlito Sison brought a Plymouth car owned by his father Salvador Sison to a
Shell station operated by Porfirio de la Fuente for washing, greasing, and spraying. To be RULING: The judgment under review is affirmed, with costs against the petitioner.
able to grease a certain part of the car, the grease-men loosened the lifter and pressed the
valve, which caused the car to swing, fall, and suffer damage. After having paid Sison, the
insurers and the owner of the car brought an action against Shell and de la Fuente. The SC
held that de la Fuente was a mere agent of Shell and not an independent contractor.
DOCTRINE: As the act of the agent or his employees acting within the scope of his
authority is the act of the principal, the breach of the undertaking by the agent is one for
which the principal is answerable.

FACTS:
 Perlito Sison brought a Plymouth car owned by his father Salvador Sison to a Shell
station operated by Porfirio de la Fuente (located at the corner of Marques de
Comillas and Isaac Peral Streets, Manila) for washing, greasing, and spraying. (It cost
P8!)
o The car was then placed on the hydraulic lifter under the direction of the
personnel of the station
 To be able to grease a certain part of the car, the grease-men loosened the lifter and
pressed the valve, which caused the car to swing, fall, and suffer damage.
 The case was immediately reported to the Manila Adjustor Company, the adjustor
for the Firemen's Insurance Company and the Commercial Casualty Insurance
Company
o The damaged car was restored to running condition after repairs
amounting to P1,651.38. Salvador Sison assigned his rights in favor of the
insurers.
 After having paid Sison, the insurers and the owner of the car brought an action
against Shell and de la Fuente. CFI dismissed.
 CA reversed judgment and sentenced the defendant to pay the amount, legal
interests, and costs.

ISSUE/S & RATIO:

1. WON de la Fuente is an independent contractor – NO – he is a mere agent of Shell.
a. The operator owed his position to the company and the latter could
remove him or terminate his services at will;
b. The service station belonged to the company and bore its tradename and
the operator sold only the products of the company;
c. Equipment used by the operator belonged to the company and were just
loaned to the operator and the company took charge of their repair and
maintenance;
d. An employee of the Company supervised the operator and conducted
periodic inspection of the company's gasoline and service station;
e. The price of the products sold by the operator was fixed by the company
and not by the operator;
f. Receipts signed by the operator indicated that he was a mere agent.
2. WON Shell is liable – YES
a. As the act of the agent or his employees acting within the scope of his
authority is the act of the principal, the breach of the undertaking by the
agent is one for which the principal is answerable.