Back

MoF Company, Inc. Vs. Shin Brokerage Corporation

MOF COMPANY, INC., Petitioner, versus SHIN YANG BROKERAGE CORPORATION, Respondent

G.R. No. 172822 | 2009-12-18

D E C I S I O N


DEL CASTILLO, J.:

The necessity of proving lies with the person who sues.

The refusal of the consignee named in the bill of lading to pay the freightage on the claim that it is not privy to the contract of affreightment propelled the shipper to sue for collection of money, stressing that its sole evidence, the bill of lading, suffices to prove that the consignee is bound to pay. Petitioner now comes to us by way of Petition for Review on Certiorari[1] under Rule 45 praying for the reversal of the Court of Appeals' (CA) judgment that dismissed its action for sum of money for insufficiency of evidence.

Factual...