SAN FERNANDO REGALA TRADING, INC. vs. CARGILL PHILIPPINES, INC., G.R. No. 178008, October 9, 2013; and CARGILL PHILIPPINES, INC. vs. SAN FERNANDO REGALA TRADING, INC., G.R. No. 178042, October 9, 2013.
“Cargill, of course, claimed that it had sufficient inventories of molasses to complete its deliveries, implying that had San Fernando accepted its initial delivery of 1,174 mt it would have continued delivering the rest. But it is not enough for a seller to show that he is capable of delivering the goods on the date he agreed to make the delivery. He has to bring his goods and deliver them at the place their agreement called for, i.e., at the Ajinomoto Pasig River wharf.
A stipulation designating the place and manner of delivery is controlling on the contracting parties.9 The thing sold can only be understood as delivered to the buyer when it is placed in the buyer’s control and possession at the agreed place of delivery.10 Cargill presented no evidence that it attempted to make other deliveries to complete the balance of Contract 5026.”