Republic of the Philippines

First Judicial Region

Regional Trial Court
Branch 17, Batac
Y,
Plaintiff,
-versus-

CIVIL CASE NO: 12-34567

For: Collection of sum of money

X,
Defendant.
x-------------------------------------------------------------------------x
MEMORANDUM
COME NOW PLAINTIFF, through the undersigned counsel, unto this court most
respectfully submit and present this Memorandum in the above-titled case and avers
that:
THE PARTIES
1. Plaintiff Y is of legal age, single, and residing on #102 Brgy. Nalupta Batac City,
Ilocos Norte, where he may be served with legal processes and notices issued
by this Honorable Court;
2. Defendant X is of legal age and residing on #106 Brgy. Aglipay Batac City, Ilocos
Norte, and may be served with legal processes and other judicial notices thereto.
I.
1.

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On September 18, 2013, herein Plaintiff filed a Complaint for Collection of sum
of money dated September 15, 2013 against Defendant;

2. On September 20, 2013, an Answer dated September 25, 2013 was filed by the
Defendant;
3. On October 11, 2013, a Rejoinder-Affidavit dated October 9, 2013 was filed by
the Plaintiff;
Hence, the filing of the instant Memorandum.

II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

4. Plaintiff seeks the recovery of P 2,000,000.00 evidenced by a promissory note

payable on August 2, 2013;

5. Defendant, on the other hand, refused to pay his indebtedness, despite the

repeated verbal and written demands of Plaintiff;

6. Plaintiff sent a Final Demand Letter to Defendant to pay his indebtedness until

September 15, 2013;

7. Due to the foregoing failure to collect the sum of money attributed to the

obstinate refusal of the Defendant, Plaintiff was compelled to hire the services of
a legal counsel to commence the collection of sum money under the wings of the
courts of law.

II.

ISSUES OF THE CASE

A. WHETHER OR NOT PLAINTIFF CAN CLAIM WHAT IS DUE TO HIM?

IV. DISCUSSION
A.

It is clear that the plaintiff issued a promissory note to the defendant. The
presentation of a valid promissory note is a conclusive evidence of indebtedness
of the person whose signature is affixed on the face of the note. A Promissory
Note need not to be notarized to be binding.
Payment is one of the ways to extinguish a debt. According to Article 1233
of the Civil Code of the Philippines, A debt shall not be understood to have been
paid unless the thing or service in which the obligation consists has been
completely delivered or rendered, as the case may be. In the present case,
defendant failed and/or refused to pay or extinguish his indebtedness to the
plaintiff.
Once a loan or debt becomes due and demandable, as when the agreed
time for payment has arrived, the creditor may already proceed to the borrower
and ask for payment. The lender may choose to collect extrajudicially that is to
collect payment from the borrower without aid from any court of justice; or, if the
borrower adamantly refuses to pay the lender, the latter may go to court and
collect money judicially. In this case, plaintiff sought to collect what is due to him
from defendant through final demand letter.
If the borrower continues to refuse to pay, the lender may then proceed to
send his final demand letter a letter containing a statement to the effect that
should the borrower still refuse to pay, the lender may proceed to file legal
actions against the borrower. If the borrower takes the final demand letter for
granted, the lender may now seek assistance from courts in collecting money
owed him he may now file a civil case for collection of sum of money.
Under Article 19 of the New Civil Code, provides that Every person must,
in the exercise of his right and in the performance of his duties, act with justice,
give everyone his due and observe honesty and good faith. When a right is
exercised in a manner which does not conform with the norms enshrined in
Article 19 and results in damage to another, a legal wrong is thereby committed
for which the wrongdoer must be held responsible.
The ruling of Flores vs. Spouses Lindo. The principle is applicable
considering that X owes Y with a large sum of money which was already due as
evidenced by the promissory note, and after efforts were made and such
extension was given by Y to X, the debt has not been fully paid without just
cause. Nemo cum alterius detriment protest.
It is so clear that the failure or refusal of the Defendant to pay the debt,
entitles Petitioner a right to exercise a right for recovery, specifically, in this
instant case, the right of action against a person unjustly enriched in order to
recover the indebtedness.

PRAYER
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that judgment be rendered in favor of the
plaintiff and against the defendant to pay the plaintiff the sum of P2,000,000.00 plus
interest of 6% from the date of the instrument until full amount is paid and attorneys
fees in the amount of P50 000 and the cost of the suit.
Other just and equitable relief are likewise being prayed for.
Respectfully submitted.
October 16, 2013, Batac City.

Ira Perceval G. Canonizado

Counsel for Plaintiff
San Nicolas, Ilocos Norte