This is case digest for today:
Infante vs. Cunanan
G.R L- 5180 August 31, 1953
Bautista Angelo, J:
Infante was the owner of the land with a house built on it. Cunanan and Mijares were contracted to sell the property from which they would receive commission. Noche agreed to purchase the lot but Infante informed C & M about her change of mind to sell the lot and had them sign a document stating that their authority to sell was already cancelled. Subsequently, Infante sold the lot & house to Noche. Defendants herein demanded for their commission. RTC ordered Infante to pay commission. CA affirmed.
Whether or not petitioner was duty bound to pay commission notwithstanding that authority to sell has been cancelled.
A principal may withdraw the authority given to an agent at will. But respondents agreed to cancel the authority given to them upon assurance by petitioner that should property be sold to Noche, they would be given commission.
That petitioner had changed her mind even if respondents had found a buyer who was willing to close the deal, is a matter that would give rise to a legal consequence if respondents agree to call off to transaction in deference to the request of the petitioner. Petitioner took advantage of the services of respondents, but believing that she could evade payment of their commission, she made use of a ruse by inducing them to sign the deed of cancellation. This act of subversion cannot be sanctioned and cannot serve as basis for petitioner to escape payment of the commissions agreed upon.