Short answer. You can sue the buyer for damages for non-acceptance. The usual measure is the difference between the contract price and the market price when the goods should have been taken, plus work and materials already spent, with your lost profit taken into account.
What the law says
Where the buyer wrongfully neglects or refuses to accept and pay for the goods, the seller may maintain an action against him for damages for nonacceptance.
Civil Code, Article 1596 — Seller's Action for Damages (Non-Acceptance). Read the full provision →
What the law says
the difference between the contract price and the market or current price at the time or times when the goods ought to have been accepted, or, if no time was fixed for acceptance, then at the time of the refusal to accept
Civil Code, Article 1596 — Seller's Action for Damages (Non-Acceptance). Read the full provision →
The right the article gives you
Article 1596 is blunt about it: where the buyer wrongfully neglects or refuses to accept and pay for the goods, the seller may maintain an action against him for damages for nonacceptance. Two words in that sentence do most of the work. Wrongfully means the buyer had no legal justification — goods that arrive short, late, or not matching what was ordered give the buyer a reason to refuse, and no claim arises. And damages, not the price: this provision compensates you for the loss the refusal caused, which is a different remedy from suing for the purchase price itself. Which of the two you should pursue depends on whether ownership had already passed and on what your contract says.
How the loss is measured
The general rule is the estimated loss directly and naturally resulting in the ordinary course of events from the buyer's breach. Where the goods have an available market, the article supplies a concrete formula — the difference between the contract price and the market or current price at the time or times when the goods ought to have been accepted, or, if no time was fixed for acceptance, then at the time of the refusal to accept. So if you sold at ₱100 a unit and the market on the delivery date was ₱85, the ordinary measure is ₱15 a unit. That formula gives way where special circumstances show proximate damage of a different amount, which is where evidence of your actual position matters.
Work already done, and lost profit
Sellers who make goods to order are protected separately. Where labour or expense of material amount was needed for you to fulfil the contract, and the buyer repudiates or tells you to proceed no further, the buyer is liable for the labour performed and the expenses made before you received that notice. Costs you keep incurring after being told to stop are on you — which is why the date and manner of the countermand should be recorded the moment it arrives. The article also directs that the profit you would have made had the sale been fully performed be considered in awarding damages, so a market-price computation that leaves you worse off than performance would have is not the whole story.
What it does not cover, and what to keep
This provision does not entitle you to sit on the goods and do nothing. Where there is a market, the measure is fixed at the refusal date precisely because you are expected to deal with the goods sensibly rather than let a loss grow. It also does not fix your right to the price, to interest, or to keep a deposit — those come from your contract and other provisions of the Code. It says nothing about services, only goods. Practically, a claim like this is won on paper: the purchase order or contract, proof of what you tendered and when, the buyer's refusal or countermand in writing, quotations or invoices showing the market price on that date, and your costed records of materials and labour. Assemble those before you write a demand letter, and take them to a lawyer while the market evidence is still easy to obtain.