TOCAO v. CAG.R. No. 127405; October 4, 2000FACTS: Private respondent Nenita A. Anay met petitioner William T. Belo, then the vice-president for operations of Ultra Clean Water Purier, throu!h her former employer in Ban!"o". Belo introduced Anay to petitioner #ar$orie Tocao, %ho conveyed her desire to enter into a $oint venture %ith her for the importation and local distri&ution of "itchen coo"%ares. Under the $oint venture, Belo acted as capitalist, Tocao as president and !eneral mana!er, and Anay as head of the mar"etin! department and later, vice-president for salesThe parties a!reed that Belo's name should not appear in any documents relatin! to their transactions %ith West Bend Company. Anay havin! secured the distri&utorship of coo"%are products from the West Bend Company and or!ani(ed the administrative sta) and the sales force, the coo"%are &usiness too" o) successfully. They operated under the name of *eminesse +nterprise, a sole proprietorship re!istered in #ar$orie Tocao's name. The parties a!reed further that Anay %ould &e entitled to: ,-. ten percent ,-/0. of the annual net prots of the &usiness1 ,2. overridin! commission of si3 percent ,40. of the overall %ee"ly production1 ,5. thirty percent ,5/0. of the sales she %ould ma"e1 and ,6. t%o percent ,20. for her demonstration services. The a!reement %as not reduced to %ritin! on the stren!th of Belo's assurances that he %as sincere, dependa&le and honest %hen it came to nancial commitments. 7n 7cto&er 8, -89:, Anay learned that #ar$orie Tocao had si!ned a letter addressed to the Cu&ao sales o;ce to the e)ect that she %as no lon!er thevice-president of *eminesse +nterprise.Anay attempted to contact Belo. e&ruary ?, -899and the audit of the company to determine her share in the net prots.Anay still received her ve percent ,?0. overridin! commission up to @ecem&er -89:. The follo%in! year, -899, she did not receive the same commission althou!h the company netted a !ross sales of P -5,5//,54/.//.7n April ?, -899, Nenita A. Anay led Civil Case No. 99-?/8, a complaint forsum of money %ith dama!es a!ainst #ar$orie @. Tocao and William Belo &efore the Ae!ional Trial Court of #a"ati, Branch -6/The trial court held that there %as indeed an Boral partnership a!reement &et%een the plainti) and the defendants. The Court of Appeals a;rmed thelo%er courtCs decision.ISSUE: Whether the parties formed a partnershipHEL: Des, the parties involved in this case formed a partnershipThe elicidad A&ro!ar enteredinto a loan a!reement %ith a lendin! rm called A.C. A!uila H