5. Payment; Effect of Death (My-PC's Conflicted Copy 2016-01-16)

7/25/2019 5. Payment; Effect of Death (My-PC's Conflicted Copy 2016-01-16)

1/20

PAYMENT/ EFFECT OF DEATH

SPOUSES DEO AGNER and MARICON AGNER vs. BPI FAMILY SAVINGSBANK, INC.G.R. No. 182963 June 3, 2013

697 SCRA

Facs!

On February 15, 2001, pettoner! !pou!e! "eo A#ner an$ %ar&on A#ner

e'e&ute$ a (ro)!!ory Note *t+ C+atte %ort#a#e n -aor o- Ct)otor!, /n&.

+e &ontra&t pro$e!, a)on# ot+er!, t+at -or re&en# t+e a)ount o-

(+p83,768.00, pettoner! !+a pay (+p17,391.00 eery 15t+ $ay o- ea&+

!u&&ee$n# )ont+ unt -uy pa$ t+e oan ! !e&ure$ by a 2001 %t!ub!+

A$enture Super Sport.

On t+e !a)e $ay, Ct)otor!, /n&. a!!#ne$ a t! r#+t!, tte an$ ntere!t! n

t+e (ro)!!ory Note *t+ C+atte %ort#a#e to A4N A%RO San#! 4an, /n&.

A4N A%RO, *+&+, on %ay 31, 2002, e*!e a!!#ne$ t+e !a)e to

re!pon$ent 4(/ Fa)y San#! 4an, /n&.

For -aure to pay -our !u&&e!!e n!ta)ent!, re!pon$ent, t+rou#+ &oun!e,

!ent to pettoner! a $e)an$ etter $ate$ Au#u!t 29, 2002, $e&arn# t+e

entre ob#aton a! $ue an$ $e)an$abe an$ reurn# to pay

(+p576,66.0, or !urren$er t+e )ort#a#e$ e+&e ))e$atey upon

re&en# t+e etter. A! t+e $e)an$ *a! e-t un+ee$e$, re!pon$ent e$ on

O&tober , 2002 an a&ton -or Repen an$ "a)a#e! be-ore t+e %ana

Re#ona ra Court RC.A *rt o- repen *a! !!ue$. "e!pte t+!, t+e !ub:e&t e+&e *a! not

!e;e$. +e %ana RC rue$ -or t+e re!pon$ent. (ettoner! appeae$ t+e

$e&!on to t+e Court o- Appea! CA, but t+e CA a


2/20

Re&or$! bear t+at bot+ erba an$ *rtten $e)an$! *ere n -a&t )a$e by

re!pon$ent pror to t+e n!ttuton o- t+e &a!e a#an!t pettoner!. ?en

a!!u)n#, -or ar#u)ent=! !ae, t+at no $e)an$ etter *a! !ent by

re!pon$ent, t+ere ! reay no nee$ -or t be&au!e pettoner! e#ay *ae$

t+e ne&e!!ty o- not&e or $e)an$ n t+e (ro)!!ory Note *t+ C+atte

%ort#a#e, *+&+ t+ey ountary an$ no*n#y !#ne$ n -aor o-re!pon$ent=! pre$e&e!!or@n@ntere!t.

Furt+er, t+e Court een rue$ n Naarro . ?!&ob$o t+at pror $e)an$ ! not

a &on$ton pre&e$ent to an a&ton -or a *rt o- repen, !n&e t+ere !

not+n# n Se&ton 2, Rue 60 o- t+e Rue! o- Court t+at reure! t+e app&ant

to )ae a $e)an$ on t+e po!!e!!or o- t+e property be-ore an a&ton -or a

*rt o- repen &ou$ be e$.

A!o, t+ere ! no oaton o- Art&e 18 o- t+e C Co$e an$ t+e Court=!

$e&!on n ?!&o oo %anu-a&turn# Corporaton . Court o- Appea!.

+e re)e$e! pro$e$ -or n Art. 18 are aternate, not &u)uate. +e

e'er&!e o- one bar! t+e e'er&!e o- t+e ot+er!. +! )taton appe! to

&ontra&t! purportn# to be ea!e! o- per!ona property *t+ opton to buy by

rtue o- Art. 185.

Co)pare$ *t+ ?!&o, t+e e+&e !ub:e&t )atter o- t+! &a!e *a! neer

re&oere$ an$ $eere$ to re!pon$ent $e!pte t+e !!uan&e o- a *rt o-

repen. A! t+ere *a! no !e;ure t+at tran!pre$, t &annot be !a$ t+at

pettoner! *ere $epre$ o- t+e u!e an$ en:oy)ent o- t+e )ort#a#e$

e+&e or t+at re!pon$ent pur!ue$, &o))en&e$ or &on&u$e$ t! a&tua

-ore&o!ure. +e tra &ourt, t+ere-ore, r#+t-uy #rante$ t+e aternateprayer -or !u) o- )oney, *+&+ ! euaent to t+e re)e$y o- Be'a&tBn#

-u)ent o- t+e ob#aton. Certany, t+ere ! no $oube re&oery or un:u!t

enr&+)ent to !pea o-.

S%$n'($)d Ins"%anc# v R#*"+)&c Asa(&

Facs!Repub& A!a+ Ga!! &ontra&t! *t+ J"S -or t+e &ontru&ton o- roa$*ay! an$

$rana#e !y!te)! n RAG=! &o)poun$. J"S $oe! !o an$e! t+e reure$ &o)pan&e

bon$ *t+ Stron#+o$ /n!uran&e a&tn# a! !urety. +e &ontra&t ! 5.3% t+e bon$ !

795. J"S -a! *oe-uybe+n$ !&+e$ue, pro)ptn# RAG to re!&n$ t+e &ontra&t an$

$e)an$ t+e &o)pan&e bon$. +e o*ner o- J"S $e! an$ J"S $!appear!. SD/re-u!e!

to pay t+e bon$ &a)n# t+at t+e $eat+ o- J"S o*ner e'tn#u!+e! t+e ob#aton. /!

SD/ r#+tE

H#)d!A! a #enera rue, t+e $eat+ o- et+er t+e &re$tor or t+e $ebtor $oe! not

e'tn#u!+ t+e ob#aton.B8Ob#aton! are tran!)!!be to t+e+er!, e'&ept *+en

2


3/20

t+e tran!)!!on ! preente$ by t+e a*, t+e !tpuaton! o- t+e parte!, or t+e

nature o- t+e ob#aton.B9Ony ob#aton!t+at are per!onaB10 or are $ente$

*t+ t+e per!on! t+e)!ee! are e'tn#u!+e$ by $eat+.B11

Furt+er)ore, +e abty o- pettoner ! &ontra&tua n nature, be&au!e t e'e&ute$

a per-or)an&e bon$, A! a !urety, pettoner ! !o$aryabe *t+ Santo! n

a&&or$an&e *t+ t+e C Co$e

-! TO 0HOM PAYMENT SHOULD BE MADE

PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK VS. COURT OF APPEALS AND LORETO TAN

-12 SCRA A*%&) -, 332

Facs oreto an ! t+e o*ner o- a par&e o- an$ n 4a&oo$ Cty. ?'propraton

pro&ee$n#! *ere n!ttute$ by t+e #oern)ent a#an!t prate re!pon$ent an an$

ot+er property o*ner! be-ore a tra &ourt n Ne#ro! O&&$enta. an e$ a )otonreue!tn# !!uan&e o- an or$er -or t+e reea!e to +) o- t+e e'propraton pr&e o-

(32, 80.00.

+e tra &ourt reure$ pettoner (N4@4a&oo$ 4ran&+ to reea!e to an t+e a)ount

o- (32,80.00 $epo!te$ *t+ t by t+e #oern)ent. +rou#+ t! A!!!tant 4ran&+

%ana#er Juan a#a)oa, (N4 !!ue$ a )ana#er! &+e& -or (32,80.00 an$

$eere$ t+e !a)e to one Sona Gon;a#a *t+out an! no*e$#e, &on!ent or

aut+orty. Sona Gon;a#a $epo!te$ t n +er a&&ount *t+ Far ?a!t 4an an$ ru!t

Co. F?4C an$ ater on *t+$re* t+e !a$ a)ount.

(rate re!pon$ent an !ub!euenty $e)an$e$ pay)ent n t+e a)ount o-

(32,80.00 -ro) pettoner, but t+e !a)e *a! re-u!e$ on t+e #roun$ t+at pettoner

+a$ area$y pa$ an$ $eere$ t+e a)ount to Sona Gon;a#a on t+e !tren#t+ o- aSpe&a (o*er o- Attorney S(A ae#e$y e'e&ute$ n +er -aor by an.

>+en +e -ae$ to re&oer t+e a)ount -ro) (N4, prate re!pon$ent e$ a )oton

*t+ t+e &ourt to reure (N4 to pay t+e !a)e to +). (ettoner e$ an oppo!ton

&onten$n# t+at Sona Gon;a#a pre!ente$ to t a &opy o- t+e %ay 22, 1978 or$er

an$ a !pe&a po*er o- attorney by rtue o- *+&+ pettoner $eere$ t+e &+e& to

+er. +e pettoner *a! $re&te$ by t+e &ourt to pro$u&e t+e !a$ !pe&a po*er o-

attorney t+ereat. Do*eer, pettoner -ae$ to $o !o.

+e &ourt $e&$e$ t+at t+ere *a! nee$ -or t+e )atter to be entate$ n a !eparate

& a&ton an$ t+u! prate re!pon$ent e$ a &o)pant *t+ t+e Re#ona ra

Court n 4a&oo$ Cty a#an!t pettoner an$ Juan a#a)oa, (N4! A!!!tant 4ran&+

%ana#er, to re&oer t+e !a$ a)ount. /n t! $e-en!e, pettoner &onten$e$ t+atprate re!pon$ent +a$ $uy aut+or;e$ Sona Gon;a#a to a&t a! +! a#ent.

a#a)oa, n +! an!*er, !tate$ t+at Sona Gon;a#a pre!ente$ a Spe&a (o*er o-

Attorney to +) but borro*e$ t ater *t+ t+e pro)!e to return t, &a)n# t+at !+e

nee$e$ t to en&a!+ t+e &+e&.

+e pettoner e*!e e$ a t+r$@party &o)pant a#an!t t+e !pou!e! No an$

Sona Gon;a#a prayn# t+at t+ey be or$ere$ to pay prate re!pon$ent t+e a)ount

o- (32, 80.00. Do*eer, -or -aure o- pettoner to +ae t+e !u))on! !ere$ on

3


4/20

t+e Gon;a#a! $e!pte opportunte! #en to t, t+e t+r$@party &o)pant *a!

$!)!!e$.

+e tra &ourt ren$ere$ :u$#)ent or$ern# pettoner an$ a#a)oa to pay prate

re!pon$ent :onty an$ !eeray t+e a)ount o- (32, 80.00 *t+ e#a ntere!t,

$a)a#e! an$ attorney! -ee!. 4ot+ pettoner an$ a#a)oa appeae$ t+e &a!e to

t+e Court o- Appea!. Do*eer, t+e appeate &ourt $!)!!e$ a#a)oa! appea

-or -aure to pay t+e $o&et -ee *t+n t+e re#e)entary pero$. +e appeate &ourt

!ub!euenty aa! Cuaba e'&u!e$ by +!)!taen pay)entE

H#)d!Cuaba -ae$ to ob!ere t+e $ue $#en&e reure$ n partn# *t+ !u&+ a

auabe &on!$eraton. De !+ou$ +ae ere$ t+e $enttyo- t+e a#ent an$ +!

aut+orty to re&ee. De $$ not, t+u! +e *a! #uty o- ne##en&e, t+e eLe&t! o-


5/20

*+&+ not een +! &a)! o- #oo$ -at+&an !+e$ +) -ro). Cuaba ! abe to pay

S%4.

A/?" 4ANM/NG COR(ORA/ON S /% S/O >AN,

Facs! On Noe)ber 1, 1983, re!pon$ent ) So >an $epo!te$ *t+ pettoner

Ae$ 4ann# Corporaton Ae$ a )oney )aret pa&e)ent o- 1,152,597.35 -or a ter) o-

31 $ay! to )ature on "e&e)ber 15, 1983, a! e$en&e$ by (ro!ona Re&ept No. 1356

$ate$ Noe)ber 1, 1983. On "e&e)ber 5, 1983, a per!on &a)n# to be ) So >an

&ae$ up

Cr!tna So, an oan=!

)oney )aret pa&e)ent, to !!ue a )ana#er=! &+e& repre!entn# t+e pro&ee$! o- t+e

pa&e)ent, an$ to #e t+e &+e& to one "ebora+ "ee Santo! *+o *ou$ p& up t+e &+e&.

) So >an $e!&rbe$ t+e appearan&e o- Santo! !o t+at So &ou$ ea!y $ent-y +er. ater,

Santo! arre$ at t+e ban an$ !#ne$ t+e app&aton -or) -or a )ana#er=! &+e& to be

!!ue$. +e ban !!ue$ %ana#er=! C+e& No. 035669 -or (+( 1,158,68.9, repre!entn# t+e

pro&ee$! o- ) So >an=! )oney )aret pa&e)ent n t+e na)e o- ) So >an, a! payee.+e &+e& *a! &ro!!@&+e&e$

For (ayee=! A&&ount Ony an$ #en to Santo!. +erea-ter, t+e )ana#er=! &+e& *a!

$epo!te$ n t+e a&&ount o- Fpna! Ce)ent Corporaton FCC at re!pon$ent %etropotan

4an an$ ru!t Co. %etro ban, *t+ t+e -or#e$ !#nature o- ) So >an a! en$or!er.

?arer, on Septe)ber 21, 1983, FCC +a$ $epo!te$ a )oney )aret pa&e)ent -or (+( 2

)on *t+ re!pon$ent (ro$u&er! 4an. Santo! *a! t+e )oney )aret tra$er a!!#ne$ to

+an$e FCC=! a&&ount. Su&+ $epo!t ! e$en&e$ by Oan=! pa&e)ent, t+e )ana#er=! &+e& n

t+e na)e o- ) So >an *a! $epo!te$ n t+e a&&ount o- FCC, purporte$y repre!entn# t+e

pro&ee$! o- FCC=! )oney )aret pa&e)ent *t+ (ro$u&er! 4an. /n ot+er *or$!, t+e Ae$

&+e& *a! $epo!te$ *t+ %etro ban n t+e a&&ount o- FCC a! (ro$u&er! 4an=! pay)ent o-

t! ob#aton. +e &+e& *a! !ent to Ae$ t+rou#+ t+e (CDC. Hpon t+e pre!ent)ent o- t+e

&+e&, Ae$ -un$e$ t+e &+e& een *t+out &+e&n# t+e aut+ent&ty o- ) So >an=!

purporte$ en$or!e)ent. +u!, t+e a)ount on t+e -a&e o- t+e &+e& *a! &re$te$ to t+e

a&&ount o- FCC.

On "e&e)ber 1, 1983, upon t+e )aturty $ate o- t+e r!t )oney )aret pa&e)ent, )

So >an *ent to Ae$ to *t+$ra* t. S+e *a! t+en n-or)e$ t+at t+e pa&e)ent +a$ been

pre@ter)nate$ upon +er n!tru&ton!. S+e $ene$ #n# any n!tru&ton! an$ re&en# t+e

pro&ee$! t+ereo-. Con!euenty, ) So >an e$ *t+ t+e RC a Co)pant a#an!t Ae$ to

re&oer t+e pro&ee$! o- +er r!t )oney )aret pa&e)ent. On %ay 15, 198, or )ore t+an

!' 6 )ont+! a-ter -un$n# t+e &+e&, Ae$ n-or)e$ %etro ban t+at t+e !#nature on t+e

&+e& *a! -or#e$. +u!, %etro ban *t++e$ t+e a)ount repre!ente$ by t+e &+e& -ro)

FCC. ater on, %etro ban a#ree$ to reea!e t+e a)ount to FCC a-ter t+e atter e'e&ute$ an

Hn$ertan#, pro)!n# to n$e)n-y %etro ban n &a!e t *a! )a$e to re)bur!e t+e

a)ount. A-ter tra, t+e RC !!ue$ t! "e&!on +o$n# Ae$ !oey abe to ) 1So >an

1 oue ?!&aera

5


6/20

Ae$ appeae$ to t+e CA *+&+ rue$ t+at Ae$ !+a be abe -or t+e 60 o- t+e a)ount o-

t+e )oney an$ 0 !+a be borne by %etro ban Den&e, Ae$ e$ t+e n!tant petton.

Iss"#! >+et+er or not Ae$ ! !oey abe to ) So >an

H#)d!A! to t+e abty o- t+e parte!, *e n$ t+at Ae$ ! abe to ) So >an.

Fun$a)enta an$ -a)ar ! t+e $o&trne t+at t+e reaton!+p bet*een a ban an$ a &ent !

one o- $ebtor@&re$tor. Art&e! 1953 an$ 1980 o- t+e C Co$e pro$e

Art. 1953. A per!on *+o re&ee! a oan o- )oney or any ot+er -un#be t+n# a&ure! t+e

o*ner!+p t+ereo-, an$ ! boun$ to pay to t+e &re$tor an eua a)ount o- t+e !a)e n$

an$ uaty.

Art. 1980. F'e$, !an#!, an$ &urrent $epo!t! o- )oney n ban! an$ !)ar n!ttuton!

!+a be #oerne$ by t+e pro!on! &on&ernn# !)pe oan.

+u!, *e +ae rue$ n a ne o- &a!e! t+at a ban $epo!t ! n t+e nature o- a !)pe oan or

)utuu). %ore !u&&n&ty, n Ctban, N.A. For)ery Fr!t Natona Cty 4an . Sabenano,t+! Court rue$ t+at a )oney )aret pa&e)ent ! a !)pe oan or )utuu). Furt+er, *e

$ene$ a )oney )aret n Cebu /nternatona Fnan&e Corporaton . Court o- Appea!, a!

-oo*!

BA )oney )aret ! a )aret $ean# n !tan$ar$;e$ !+ort@ter) &re$t n!tru)ent!

non# ar#e a)ount! *+ere en$er! an$ borro*er! $o not $ea $re&ty *t+ ea&+ ot+er

but t+rou#+ a )$$e )an or $eaer n open )aret. /n a )oney )aret tran!a&ton, t+e

ne!tor ! a en$er *+o oan! +! )oney to a borro*er t+rou#+ a )$$e)an or $eaer.

/n t+e &a!e at bar, t+e )oney )aret tran!a&ton bet*een t+e pettoner an$ t+e prate

re!pon$ent ! n t+e nature o- a oan.

) So >an, a! &re$tor o- t+e ban -or +er )oney )aret pa&e)ent, ! entte$

to pay)ent upon +er reue!t, or upon )aturty o- t+e pa&e)ent, or unt t+e

ban ! reea!e$ -ro) t! ob#aton a! $ebtor. Hnt any !u&+ eent, t+e

ob#aton o- Ae$ to ) So >an re)an! une'tn#u!+e$.

Sn&e t+ere *a! no eLe&te pay)ent o- ) So >an=! )oney )aret pa&e)ent,

t+e ban !t +a! an ob#aton to pay +er at !' per&ent 6 ntere!t -ro)

%ar&+ 16, 198 unt t+e pay)ent t+ereo-. o reterate, +a$ Ae$ e'er&!e$ t+e

$#en&e $ue -ro) a nan&a n!ttuton, t+e &+e& *ou$ not +ae been !!ue$

an$ no o!! o- -un$! *ou$ +ae re!ute$. /n -a&t, t+ere *ou$ +ae been no

!!uan&e o- en$or!e)ent +a$ t+ere been no &+e& n t+e r!t pa&e.

Gen t+e reate part&paton o- Ae$ an$ %etro ban to t+e n!tant &a!e,bot+ ban! &annot be a$:u$#e$ a! euay abe. Den&e, t+e 600 rato o- t+e

abte! o- Ae$ an$ %etro ban, a! rue$ by t+e CA, )u!t be up+e$.

>D?R?FOR?, t+e petton ! (ARP GRAN?"

SPOUSES MINIANO B. DELA CRUZ and LETA L. DELA CRUZ, Petitioners, v. ANAMARIE CONCEPCION, Respondent.

6


7/20

PERALTA, J.

FACTS:

Petitioners Miniano and Leta Dela Cruz (spouses Dela Cruz) entered into a contract to sellwith respondent Ana Marie Concepcion (Concepcion) involving a house and lot or a

consideration o PhP !"###"###$## pa%a&le in install'ents$ As instructed &% spousesDela

Cruz" Concepcion paid her last install'ent to a certain Adoracion or Dori Losloso$ Thus"

Concepcion was a&le to pa% the total purchase price and the title to the propert% was

transerred in her avor$

otwithstanding Concepcions ull pa%'ent" the spouses Dela Cruz de'anded the a'ount

o P!#*"###$## purportedl% as re'aining &alance o the purchase price$ Concepcion

reused to pa% the said a'ount$ The spouses averred that Concepcions pa%'ent to Dori

was not valid$ +ence" spouses Dela Cruz iled a Co'plaint or Su' o Mone% with

Da'ages &eore the ,TC$

-n her answer" Concepcion ailed to allege the deense o pa%'ent o the a'ount clai'ed

&% the spouses$ +owever" during the presentation o her evidence" she su&'itted a receipt

to prove that she had alread% paid the re'aining &alance$

The ,TC dis'issed the spouses co'plaint$ .n appeal" the CA air'ed the ,TCs decision

with 'odiication$ +ence" this instant petition$

-SS/0S:

-$ 1hether or not the ,TC erred in dis'issing the spouses co'plaint notwithstanding thatConcepcion ailed to allege in her answer the deense o pa%'ent2

--$ 1hether or not pa%'ent to Losloso a'ounts to a valid tender o pa%'ent2

+0LD: The petition is without 'erit$

F-,ST -SS/0: The ,TC cannot &e aulted or ad'itting respondents testi'onial and

docu'entar% evidence to prove pa%'ent$

,0M0D-AL LA1: a'end'ent to conor' to or authorize presentation o evidence

Section 3" ,ule * o the ,ules o Court states that deenses and o&4ections not pleaded

either in a 'otion to dis'iss or in the answer are dee'ed waived$ +ence" respondent

should have &een &arred ro' raising the deense o pa%'ent o the unpaid P!##"###$##$

+owever" Section 5" ,ule 3# o the ,ules o Court allows the a'end'ent to conor' to or

authorize presentation o evidence$

The oregoing provision envisions two scenarios" na'el%" when evidence is introduced in an

7


8/20

issue not alleged in the pleadings and no o&4ection was inter4ected6 and when evidence is

oered on an issue not alleged in the pleadings &ut this ti'e an o&4ection was raised$ 1hen

the issue is tried without the o&4ection o the parties" it should &e treated in all respects as i

it had &een raised in the pleadings$ .n the other hand" when there is an o&4ection" the

evidence 'a% &e ad'itted where its ad'ission will not pre4udice hi'$

1hen the receipt was or'all% oered as evidence" petitioners did not 'aniest their

o&4ection to the ad'issi&ilit% o said docu'ent on the ground that pa%'ent was not an

issue$ Since there was an i'plied consent on the part o petitioners to tr% the issue o

pa%'ent" even i no 'otion was iled and no a'end'ent o the pleading has &een ordered"

the ,TC cannot &e aulted or ad'itting respondents testi'onial and docu'entar% evidence

to prove pa%'ent$

S0C.D -SS/0: Pa%'ent 'ade to Losloso is dee'ed pa%'ent to the spouses Dela Cruz$

C-7-L LA1: pa%'ent

-n order to e8tinguish said o&ligation" pa%'ent should &e 'ade to the proper person as set

orth in Article 3!9# o the Civil Code$ The Court e8plained in Ca'&roon v$ Cit% o utuan"

cited in ,epu&lic v$ De ;uz'an" to who' pa%'ent should &e 'ade in order to e8tinguish

an o&ligation: -n general" a pa%'ent in order to &e eective to discharge an o&ligation"

'ust &e 'ade to the proper person$ Thus" pa%'ent 'ust &e 'ade to the o&ligee hi'sel or

to an agent having authorit%" e8press or i'plied" to receive the particular pa%'ent$ Pa%'ent

'ade to one having apparent authorit% to receive the 'one% will" as a rule" &e treated as

though actual authorit% had &een given or its receipt$ Li


9/20

o assign'ent was drated &% the respondent on .cto&er @" !### and March " !##3 respectivel%$

Petitioners co'pleted the deliver% o heav% eBuip'ent 'entioned in the deed o assign'ent to

respondent which accepted the sa'e without protest or o&4ection$ ,espondent 'aniested to ad'it

an a'ended co'plaint or the seizure and deliver% o two 'ore heav% eBuip'ent which are covered

under the second deed o the chattel 'ortgage$ ,TC ruled that the deed o assign'ent and the

petitioners deliver% o the heav% eBuip'ent eectivel% e8tinguished the petitioners o&ligation andrespondent as stopped$ CA reversed the decision ordering the petitioner the outstanding de&t o

P9"!>5"*3*$@* plus interests$

ISSUE Did the Deed o Assign'ent operate to e8tinguish petitioners de&t to the respondent suchthat the replevin suit could no longer prosper2

RULIN$ The deed o assign'ent was a perected agree'ent which e8tinguished petitioners total

outstanding o&ligation to the respondent$ The nature o the assign'ent was a dacion en pago

where&% propert% is alienated to the creditor in the satisaction o a de&t in 'one%$ Since the

agree'ent was consu''ated &% the deliver% o the last unit o heav% eBuip'ent under the deed"

petitioners are dee'ed to have &een released ro' all their o&ligations ro' the respondents$

SPOUSES WILFREDO N. ONG AND EDNA SHEILA PAGUIO-ONG v. ROBAN

LENDING CORPORATION

557 SCRA 516 (2008)

In a true dacion en pago, the assignment of the property extinguishes the monetarydebt.

On various dates, petitioner Spouses Wilfredo N. Ong and Edna Sheila PaguioOng

obtained several loans from respondent !oban "ending #orporation in the total amount

of P$, %%%,%%%. &hese loans 'ere secured by real estate mortgage on Spouses Ong(s

parcel of lands.

"ater Spouses Ong and !oban executed several agreements ) an amendment to the

amended !eal Estate *ortgage 'hich consolidated their loans amounting to P+,-,--/.+%0 dacion in payment 'herein spouses Ong assigned their mortgaged

properties to !oban to settle their total obligation and *emorandum of 1greement

2*O13 in 'hich the dacion in payment agreement 'ill be automatically enforced in case

spouses Ong fail to pay 'ithin one year from the execution of the agreement.

9


10/20

Spouses Ong filed a complaint before !egional &rial #ourt of &arlac #ity to declare the

mortgage contract, dacion in payment agreement, and *O1 void. Spouses Ong allege

that the dacion in payment agreement is pactum commissorium, and therefore void. In

its 1ns'er 'ith counterclaim, !oban alleged that the dacion in payment agreement is

valid because it is a special form of payment recogni4ed under 1rticle -5$+ of the #ivil

#ode. ! ruled in favor of !oban, finding that there 'as no pactum commissorium.

&he #ourt of 1ppeals upheld the ! decision.

ISSUE

Whether or not the dacion in payment agreement entered into by Spouses Ong and

!oban constitutes pactum commissorium

HELD

&he #ourt finds that the *emorandum of 1greement and 6acion in Payment constitute

pactum commissorium, 'hich is prohibited under 1rticle 5%77 of the #ivil #ode 'hich

provides that the creditor cannot appropriate the things given by 'ay of pledge or

mortgage, or dispose of them. 1ny stipulation to the contrary is null and void

&he elements of pactum commissorium, 'hich enables the mortgagee to ac8uire

o'nership of the mortgaged property 'ithout the need of any foreclosure proceedings,

are9 2-3 there should be a property mortgaged by 'ay of security for the payment of theprincipal obligation, and 253 there should be a stipulation for automatic appropriation

by the creditor of the thing mortgaged in case of nonpayment of the principal obligation

'ithin the stipulated period.

:ere, *emorandum of 1greement and the 6acion in Payment contain no provisions for

foreclosure proceedings nor redemption. ;nder the *emorandum of 1greement, the

failure by the

petitioners to pay their debt 'ithin the oneyear period gives respondent the right to

enforce the 6acion in Payment transferring to it o'nership of the properties covered by

& No. 5/7$%. !espondent, in effect, automatically ac8uires o'nership of the

properties upon Spouses Ong


11/20

:ere, the alienation of the properties 'as by 'ay of security, and not by 'ay of

satisfying the debt. &he 6acion in Payment did not extinguish Spouses Ong


12/20

R")&n'!

Sy&+n#+o! +a$ t+e r#+t to &oney tte.

A! t+ere *a! no preou! -ore&o!ure o- t+e )ort#a#e on t+e !ub:e&t property,

Sy&+n#+o! o*ner!+p t+ereo- re)ane$ nta&t. /n$ee$, a )ort#a#e $oe! not aLe&t

t+e o*ner!+p o- t+e property a! t ! not+n# )ore t+an a en t+ereon !ern# a!

!e&urty -or a $ebt. +e )ort#a#ee $oe! not a&ure tte t+ereto.

>+ateer ob#aton t+e Sy&+n#+o! )ay !t o*e 4(/ t+en F?4C, t+! ! not a

&on&ern o- pettoner a! +e ! not a party to t+e oan $o&u)ent! &oern# t. Sn&epettoner a#ree$ to t+e -u e'tn#u!+)ent o- re!pon$ent@!pou!e! t+en

out!tan$n# ob#aton n e* o- t+e un&on$tona &oneyan&e to +) o- t+e !ub:e&t

property, t+ere ! a per-e&te$ an$ en-or&eabe dacion en pago. De !+ou$ t+u!

en:oy -u entte)ent to t+e !ub:e&t property.

Do*eer, !urren$er o- t+e &ert&ate o- tte * not )par any e'!tn# )ort#a#e

on t+e !ub:e&t property. /t ! an ee)entary prn&pe n & a* t+at a rea e!tate

)ort#a#e !ub!!t! not*t+!tan$n# &+an#e! n o*ner!+p, an$ a !ub!euent

pur&+a!er! o- t+e property )u!t re!pe&t t+e )ort#a#e.

Fa))$!

0HEREFORE, t+e &+aen#e$ "e&!on o- t+e Court o- Appea! !

REVERSEDan$ SET ASIDE. 4an o- t+e (+ppne /!an$!, to *+&+ Far ?a!t 4an

an$ ru!t Co)pany *a! )er#e$, ! or$ere$ to !urren$er t+e o*ner! $up&ate &opy

o- C No. 6259@R to t+e Re#!ter o- "ee$! o- San Juan, %etro %ana n or$er to

pro&e!! t+e !!uan&e o- a ne* tte oer t+e !ub:e&t property n t+e na)e o-

pettoner, Jo!ep+ ypn#&o.

$.R. No. %/)&( !e*r+ar ', -%-

TAN S0U1,Petitioner"vs$Spo+ses $UILLERMO MAULA"IN and PARIN$ CARI2O3MAULA"IN,,espondents$

12


13/20

D 0 C - S - .

SERENO, J.:

eore the Court is a Petition or ,eview on Certiorari iled under ,ule 95 o the ,ules o Court"assailing the ?3 =ul% !##* Decision and 3? ove'&er !##* ,esolution o the Court o Appeals

(CA)$3

Facts

Petitioner Tan Shu% is engaged in the &usiness o &u%ing copra and corn in the Fourth District ouezon Province$ According to 7icente Tan (7icente)" son o petitioner" whenever the% would &u%copra or corn ro' crop sellers" the% would prepare and issue a pesada in their avor$ A pesada is adocu'ent containing details o the transaction" including the date o sale" the weight o the cropdelivered" the truc


14/20

,espondent ;uiller'o countered that he had alread% paid the su&4ect loan in ull$ According to hi'"he continuousl% delivered and sold copra to petitioner ro' April 3** to April 3***$ ,espondent saidthe% had an oral arrange'ent that the net proceeds thereo shall &e applied as install'ent pa%'entsor the loan$ +e alleged that his deliveries a'ounted to P 9!#"5?>$@ worth o copra$ To &olster hisclai'" he presented copies o pesadas issued &% 0lena and 7icente$ +e pointed out that thepesadas did not contain the notation pd" which 'eant that actual pa%'ent o the net proceeds ro'

copra deliveries was not given to hi'" &ut was instead applied as loan pa%'ent$ +e averred that TanShu% iled a case against hi'" &ecause petitioner got 'ad at hi' or selling copra to other copra&u%ers$

.n !> =ul% !##>" the trial court issued a Decision" ruling that the net proceeds ro' ;uiller'oscopra deliveries K represented in the pesadas" which did not &ear the notation pd K should &eapplied as install'ent pa%'ents or the loan$ -t gave weight and credence to the pesadas" as theirdue e8ecution and authenticit% was esta&lished &% 0lena and 7icente" children opetitioner$5+owever" the court did not credit the net proceeds ro' 3! pesadas" as the% weredeliveries or corn and not copra$ According to the ,TC" ;uiller'o hi'sel testiied that it was the netproceeds ro' the copra deliveries that were to &e applied as install'ent pa%'ents or the loan$Thus" it ruled that the total a'ount o P 93"55$!5" which corresponded to the net proceeds ro'corn deliveries" should &e deducted ro' the a'ount o P 9!#"5?>$@ clai'ed &% ;uiller'o to &e thetotal value o his copra deliveries$ Accordingl%" the trial court ound that respondent had not 'ade aull pa%'ent or the loan" as the total credita&le copra deliveries 'erel% a'ounted to P ?>"*5!$9?"leaving a &alance o P 93"#9>$5> in his loan$@

.n ?3 =ul% !##*" the CA issued its assailed Decision" which air'ed the inding o the trial court$According to the appellate court" petitioner could have easil% &elied the e8istence o the pesadasand the purpose or which the% were oered in evidence &% presenting his daughter 0lena aswitness6 however" he ailed to do so$ Thus" it gave credence to the testi'on% o respondent;uiller'o in that the net proceeds ro' the copra deliveries were applied as install'ent pa%'entsor the loan$>.n 3? ove'&er !##*" the CA issued its assailed ,esolution" which denied the Motionor ,econsideration o petitioner$

Petitioner now assails &eore this Court the aore'entioned Decision and ,esolution o the CA andpresents the ollowing issues:

-ssues

3$ 1hether the pesadas reBuire authentication &eore the% can &e ad'itted in evidence" and

!$ 1hether the deliver% o copra a'ounted to install'ent pa%'ents or the loan o&tained &%respondents ro' petitioner$

Discussion

As regards the irst issue" petitioner asserts that the pesadas should not have &een ad'itted inevidence" since the% were private docu'ents that were not dul% authenticated$+e urther contendsthat the pesadas were a&ricated in order to show that the goods delivered were copra and not corn$Finall%" he argues that ive o the pesadas 'entioned in the For'al .er o 0vidence o respondentwere not actuall% oered$*

1ith regard to the second issue" petitioner argues that respondent undertoo< two separateo&ligations K (3) to pa% or the loan in cash and (!) to sell the latters lucad or copra$ Since theirwritten agree'ent did not speciicall% provide or the application o the net proceeds ro' the

1
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt5http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt5http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt6http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt8http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt8http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt9http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt5http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt6http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt8http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt9


15/20

deliveries o copra or the loan" petitioner contends that he cannot &e co'pelled to accept copra aspa%'ent or the loan$ +e e'phasizes that the pesadas did not speciicall% indicate that the netproceeds ro' the copra deliveries were to &e used as install'ent pa%'ents or the loan$ +e alsoclai's that respondents copra deliveries were dul% paid or in cash" and that the pesadas were inact docu'entar% receipts or those pa%'ents$

1e reiterate our ruling in a line o cases that the 4urisdiction o this Court" in cases &rought &eore itro' the CA" is li'ited to reviewing or revising errors o law$3#Factual indings o courts" whenadopted and conir'ed &% the CA" are inal and conclusive on this Court e8cept i unsupported &%the evidence on record$33There is a Buestion o act when dou&t arises as to the truth or alsehood oacts6 or when there is a need to cali&rate the whole evidence" considering 'ainl% the credi&ilit% othe witnesses and the pro&ative weight thereo" the e8istence and relevanc% o speciic surroundingcircu'stances" as well as their relation to one another and to the whole" and the pro&a&ilit% o thesituation$3!

+ere" a inding o act is reBuired in the ascertain'ent o the due e8ecution and authenticit% o thepesadas" as well as the deter'ination o the true intention &ehind the parties oral agree'ent on theapplication o the net proceeds ro' the copra deliveries as install'ent pa%'ents or the loan$ 3?This

unction was alread% e8ercised &% the trial court and air'ed &% the CA$ elow is a reproduction othe relevant portion o the trial courts Decision:

8 8 8 The deendant urther averred that i in the receipts or pesadas issued &% the plainti to thosewho delivered copras to the' there is a notation pd on the total a'ount o purchase price o thecopras" it 'eans that said a'ount was actuall% paid or given &% the plainti or his daughter 0lenaTan Shu% to the seller o the copras$ To prove his aver'ents the deendant presented as evidencetwo (!) receipts or pesadas issued &% the plainti to a certain Cario (08hi&its 3 and ! Kdeendant) showing the notation pd on the total a'ount o the purchase price or the copras$ Suchclai' o the deendant was urther &olstered &% the testi'on% o Apolinario Cario which air'edthat he also sell copras to the plainti Tan Shu%$ +e also added that he incurred inde&tedness to theplainti and whenever he delivered copras the a'ount o the copras sold were applied as pa%'entsto his loan$ The witness also pointed out that the plainti did not give an% oicial receipts to those

who transact &usiness with hi' (plainti)$ This Court gave weight and credence to the docu'entsreceipts (pesadas) (08hi&its ? to @9) oered as evidence &% the deendant which does not &earthe notation pd or paid on the total a'ount o the purchase price o copras appearing therein$

Although said pesadas were private instru'ent their e8ecution and authenticit% were esta&lished&% the plaintis daughter 0lena Tan and so'eti'es &% plaintis son 7icente Tan$ 8 8 8$39(0'phasissupplied)

-n air'ing the inding o the ,TC" the CA reasoned thus:

-n his last assigned error" plaintiEappellant herein i'pugns the conclusion arrived at &% the trialcourt" particularl% with respect to the giving o evidentiar% value to 08hs$ ? to @9 &% the latter inorder to prove the clai' o deendantEappellee ;uiller'o that he had ull% paid the su&4ect loan

alread%$

The oregoing deserves scant consideration$

+ere" plaintiEappellant could have easil% &elied the e8istence o 08hs$ ? to @9" the pesadas orreceipts" and the purposes or which the% were oered in evidence &% si'pl% presenting hisdaughter" 0lena Tan Shu%" &ut no eort to do so was actuall% done &% the or'er given thatscenario$35(0'phasis supplied)

15
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt10http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt11http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt11http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt12http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt13http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt14http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt15http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt15http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt15http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt10http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt11http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt12http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt13http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt14http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt15


16/20

1e ound no clear showing that the trial court and the CA co''itted reversi&le errors o law in givingcredence and according weight to the pesadas presented &% respondents$ According to ,ule 3?!"Section !# o the ,ules o Court" there are two wa%s o proving the due e8ecution and authenticit% oa private docu'ent" to wit:

S0C$ !#$ Proo o private docu'ent$ K eore an% private docu'ent oered as authentic is received

in evidence" its due e8ecution and authenticit% 'ust &e proved either:

(a) % an%one who saw the docu'ent e8ecuted or written6 or

(&) % evidence o the genuineness o the signature or handwriting o the 'a


17/20

de&t$!!-n such cases" Article 3!95 provides that the law on sales shall appl%" since the underta$@ which according to

the deendant &ased on the pesadas (08hi&its ? to @9) that he presented as evidence" is the totala'ount o the pa%'ent that he 'ade or his loan to the plainti$ 8 8 8

8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8

Clearl% ro' the oregoing" since the total a'ount o deendants loan to the plainti is P9!#"###$##and the evidence on record shows that the actual a'ount o pa%'ent 'ade &% the deendant ro'the proceeds o the copras he delivered to the plainti is P?>"*5!$9?" the deendant is still inde&tedto the plainti in the a'ount o P93"#9>$5? (sic) (P9!#"###$##EP?>"*5!$9?)$!5(0'phasis supplied)

17
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt22http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt22http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt23http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt24http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt25http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt25http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt22http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt23http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt24http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/feb2012/gr_190375_2012.html#fnt25


18/20

-n air'ing this inding o act &% the trial court" the CA cited the a&oveEBuoted portion o the ,TCsDecision and stated the ollowing:

-n act" as &orne &% the records on hand" herein deendantEappellee ;uiller'o was a&le to descri&eand spell out the contents o 08hs$ ? to @9 which were then prepared &% 0lena Tan Shu% orso'eti'es &% witness 7icente Tan$ +erein deendantEappellee ;uiller'o proessed that since the

release o the su&4ect loan was su&4ect to the condition that he shall sell his copras to the plaintiEappellant" the or'er did not alread% receive an% 'one% or the copras he delivered to the latterstarting April 3** to April 3***$ +ence" this Court can onl% e8press its approval to the apto&servation o the trial court on this 'atterI$J

8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8

otwithstanding the a&ove" however" this Court ull% agrees with the pronounce'ent o the trial courtthat not all a'ounts indicated in 08hs$ ? to @9 should &e applied as pa%'ents to the su&4ect loansince several o which clearl% indicated 'ais deliveries on the part o deendantEappellee ;uiller'oinstead o coprasI$J!@(0'phasis supplied)

The su&seBuent arrange'ent &etween Tan Shu% and ;uiller'o can thus &e considered as one inthe nature o dation in pa%'ent$ There was partial pa%'ent ever% ti'e ;uiller'o delivered copra topetitioner" chose not to collect the net proceeds o his copra deliveries" and instead applied thecollecti&le as install'ent pa%'ents or his loan ro' Tan Shu%$ 1e thereore uphold the indings othe trial court" as air'ed &% the CA" that the net proceeds ro' ;uiller'os copra deliveriesa'ounted to P ?>"*5!$9?$ 1ith this partial pa%'ent" respondent re'ains lia&le or the &alancetotaling P 93"#9>$5>$!>

1+0,0F.,0 the Petition is D0-0D$ The ?3 =ul% !##* Decision and 3? ove'&er !##*,esolution o the Court o Appeals in CAE;$,$ C7 o$ *##># are here&% AFF-,M0D$

S. .,D0,0D$

-15! E7TRAORDINARY INFLATION/DEFLATION

E!UITABLE PCI BAN" #S. NG SHEUNG NGOR

+$- S#!1 55= 6ecember -, 5%%/

F$%&'9 On October /, 5%%-, respondents Ngor and >o filed an action for amendment

and?or reformation of documents and contracts against E8uitable and its employees.

&hey claimed that they 'ere induced by the ban@ to avail of its peso and dollar credit

facilities by offering lo' interests so they accepted and signed E8uitable


19/20

computing respondent


20/20

R*+,9 Petitioners are stopped from shifting to respondent the burden of paying the

1&. th #ondition states that respondent can only be held liable for ne' taxes imposed

after the affectivity of the contract of lease, after -//, 1& cannot be considered a Fne'

taxG. Neither can petitioners legitimately demand rental adBustment because of

extraordinary inflation or devaluation. 1bsent an official pronouncement or declaration

by competent authorities of its existence, its effects are not to be applied. :ence,

petition is denied. #1 decision is affirmed.

20

5. Payment; Effect of Death (My-PC's Conflicted Copy 2016-01-16)

Documents

Transcript of 5. Payment; Effect of Death (My-PC's Conflicted Copy 2016-01-16)