Short answer. Yes. Under Article 1403, a verbal sale of goods at a price of five hundred pesos or more is normally unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds, but not where the buyer accepts and receives part of the goods or pays part of the purchase money. Your partial performance takes the sale out of the writing requirement.
What the law says
unless the buyer accept and receive part of such goods and chattels, or the evidences, or some of them, of such things in action or pay at the time some part of the purchase money
Civil Code, Article 1403 — Unenforceable Contracts and the Statute of Frauds. Read the full provision →
Why a verbal sale of goods is usually unenforceable
The Statute of Frauds in Article 1403 requires certain agreements to be in writing before a court will enforce them. Among these is An agreement for the sale of goods, chattels or things in action, at a price not less than five hundred pesos. For such a sale, the article says the agreement is unenforceable by action unless the same, or some note or memorandum, thereof, be in writing, and subscribed by the party charged, or by his agent. Without that writing, a purely verbal deal at or above that price normally cannot be sued upon. The law wants tangible proof for these larger dealings to prevent disputes built on memory alone.
Partial performance is the way out
The same article builds in an escape for deals that have already been partly carried out. The writing requirement does not apply unless the buyer accept and receive part of such goods and chattels, or the evidences, or some of them, of such things in action or pay at the time some part of the purchase money. In plain terms, if the buyer has taken some of the goods, or paid part of the price, the sale becomes enforceable even though nothing was written down. Your situation — you paid part of the price and received some of the goods — falls squarely within this. The conduct of the parties supplies the proof the writing would have.
Why performance replaces the writing
The Statute of Frauds exists to guard against false claims of a contract that never happened. Once the parties have actually begun performing — money changing hands, goods delivered and accepted — that danger largely disappears. The acts themselves confirm that a real agreement exists. That is why the law is content to let partial delivery or partial payment stand in for a signed memorandum. It is not that the writing rule was wrong; it is that its purpose has already been served by the parties' own conduct, so insisting on a document would only defeat a genuine, performed bargain.
The limits of this rule
This exception is specific to the sale of goods, chattels or things in action; other agreements listed in the Statute of Frauds — such as a sale of real property or an interest in it — are not saved merely by partial payment in the same way, and have their own requirements. The exception also proves that a contract existed and is enforceable; it does not settle the remaining terms if the parties genuinely disagree about them. And it applies to a contract that is otherwise valid — partial performance cures the lack of a writing, not some deeper defect. Within the sale of goods, though, your part performance makes the verbal agreement enforceable.