The Fourth Chamber of the Chamber of Appeals in Civil and Commercial Matters partially granted an appeal and partially revoked a judgment of first instance against the concessionaire Fadua.
The dealership and an automotive company were jointly and severally sentenced to deliver a new car to a man or the one that replaces it in the market with the same or better characteristics, and the complainant must pay the agreed price and expenses. But in addition, both the automaker and the dealership must pay the man twenty thousand pesos for non-pecuniary damage. plus interest and fifty thousand pesos for punitive damage.
The man had been awarded the vehicle by lotterybut such action was subsequently annulled despite the fact that deposited the agreed amount but in the account of the dealership and not of the automaker.
Judges Guadalupe Valdés Ortiz and María Isabel Romero Lorenzo pointed out that in the case there is no contract that proves that the prohibition of making the deposit in one account and not in another has been established. “It is clear then that this deposit had that purpose because there is no proven reason why the plaintiff would deposit that same amount in the account of the person who sold it and attended to matters related to its plan”, even more so when it was the same dealership that informed him of the number corresponding to his bank account.
The concessionaire accepted the deposit without hesitation and this has legal relevance, the judges pointed out.
Due to the activity carried out by the dealership and the automotive company, “an evident appearance has been generated of being both defendants responsible for the delivery of the thing and everything related to the savings contract. This situation places the defendants in joint and several liability”, they pointed out.