This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2015-07-22 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| Specifically, contracts of sale are perfected by mutual consent, when the seller obligates himself, for a price certain, to deliver and transfer ownership of a specified thing or right to the buyer over which the latter agrees.[70] | |||||
|
2013-01-23 |
VILLARAMA, JR., J. |
||||
| The acceptance must be identical in all respects with that of the offer so as to produce consent or meeting of the minds.[23] Where a party sets a different purchase price than the amount of the offer, such acceptance was qualified which can be at most considered as a counter-offer; a perfected contract would have arisen only if the other party had accepted this counter-offer.[24] In Villanueva v. Philippine National Bank[25] this Court further elucidated on the meaning of unqualified acceptance, as follows: …While it is impossible to expect the acceptance to echo every nuance of the offer, it is imperative that it assents to those points in the offer which, under the operative facts of each contract, are not only material but motivating as well. Anything short of that level of mutuality produces not a contract but a mere counter-offer awaiting acceptance. More particularly on the matter of the consideration of the contract, the offer and its acceptance must be unanimous both on the rate of the payment and on its term. An acceptance of an offer which agrees to the rate but varies the term is ineffective.[26] (Emphasis supplied) | |||||