Back

PEZA vs. Pilhino Sales

PHILIPPINE ECONOMIC ZONE AUTHORITY, PETITIONER, VS. PILHINO SALES CORPORATION, RESPONDENT.

G.R. No. 185765 | 2016-09-28

Republic of the Philippines
Supreme Court
Manila
 
SECOND DIVISION
 
DECISION
 
LEONEN, J.:
 
Although the provisions of a contract are legally null and void, the stipulated method of computing liquidated damages may be accepted as evidence of the intent of the parties. The provisions, therefore, can be basis for finding a factual anchor for liquidated damages. The liable party may nevertheless present better evidence to establish a more accurate basis for awarding damages. In this case, the respondent failed to do so.

This resolves a Petition for Review on Certiorari[1] praying that the assailed May 2, 2008 Decision[2]...