Professional Documents
Culture Documents
DATION IN PAYMENT
Elements of Pactum Commissorum which
enables the mortgagee to acquire ownership
of the mortgaged property without the need
of any foreclosure proceedings are:
1. There should be a property mortgaged by
way of security for the payment of the
principal obligation.
2. There should be a stipulation for
automatic appropriation by the creditor of
the thing mortgaged in case of non-payment
of the principal obligation within
the stipulated period.
For dacion en pago to exist, the following
elements must concur:
(a) existence of a money obligation;
(b) the alienation to the creditor of a
property by the
debtor with the consent
of the former; and
(c) satisfaction of the money obligation of
the debtor.
Estanislao vs East West Banking
Facts: On July 24, 1997, petitioner obtained a
loan from the respondent in the amount of
P3,925,000 evidenced by a promissory note
and secured by two deeds of chattel
mortgage covering two dump trucks and a
bull dozer . Petitioner defaulted entire
obligation became due and demandable. A
deed of assignment was drafted by the
respondent on October 6, 2000 and March 8,
2001 respectively. Petitioners completed the
delivery of heavy equipment mentioned in
the deed of assignment to respondent which
accepted the same without protest or
objection. Respondent manifested to admit
an amended complaint for the seizure and
delivery of two more heavy equipment which
are covered under the second deed of the
chattel mortgage. RTC ruled that the deed of
assignment and the petitioners delivery of
the
heavy
equipment
effectively
extinguished the petitioners obligation and
respondent as stopped. CA reversed the
decision
ordering
the
petitioner
the
outstanding debt of P4,275,919.69 plus
interests.
computed for
reasonable
consideration
principal loan
issued
(Public
the
loan
was
already
Sychinghos
ownership
thereof remained
intact. Indeed, a mortgage does not affect
the ownership of the property as it is nothing
more than a lien thereon serving as security
for a debt. The mortgagee does not acquire
title thereto. Whatever obligation the
Sychinghos may still owe BPI (then FEBTC),
this is not a concern of petitioner as he is not
a party to the loan documents covering
it. Since petitioner agreed to the full
extinguishment of respondent-spouses then
outstanding obligation in view of the unconditional
conveyance to him of the subject property, there
is a perfected and enforceable dacion en
pago .
. He should thus enjoy full entitlement to the
subject property. However, surrender of the
certificate of title will not impair any existing
mortgage on the subject property. It is an
elementary principle in civil law that a real
estate mortgage subsists notwithstanding
changes in ownership, and all subsequent
purchasers of the property must respect the
mortgage.
Tan Shuy vs Maulawin
There is dation in payment when property is
alienated to the creditor in satisfaction of a
debt in money. Here, the debtor delivers and
transmits to the creditor the formers
ownership over a thing as an accepted
equivalent of the payment or performance of
an outstanding debt. In such cases, Article
1245 provides that the law on sales shall
apply, since the undertaking really partakes
in one senseof the nature of sale; that is,
the creditor is really buying the thing or
property of the debtor, the payment for
which is to be charged against the debtors
obligation. Dation in payment extinguishes
the obligation to the extent of the value of
the thing delivered, either as agreed upon by
the parties or as may be proved, unless the
parties by agreementexpress or implied, or
by their silenceconsider the thing as
equivalent to the obligation, in which case
the obligation is totally extinguished.
Dation in payment exists when there was
partial payment every time Guillermo
delivered copra to petitioner, chose not to
collect the net proceeds of his copra
deliveries, and instead applied the collectible
as installment payments for his loan from
Tan Shuy.The subsequent arrangement
there
was
an
Pabugais vs Sahijwani
Facts: Pursuant to an "Agreement And
Undertaking", petitioner Teddy G. Pabugais,
in consideration of the amount of Fifteen
Million Four Hundred Eighty Seven Thousand
Five
Hundred
Pesos
(P15,487,500.00),
agreed to sell to respondent Dave
P.Sahijwani a lot containing 1,239 square
meters located at Jacaranda Street, North
Forbes
Park,
Makati,
Metro
Manila.
Respondent paid petitioner the amount of
P600,000.00 as option/reservation fee and
the balance of P14,887,500.00 to be paid
within 60 days from the execution of the
contract, simultaneous with delivery of the
owner's duplicate Transfer Certificate of Title
in respondent's name the Deed of Absolute
annum
on
the
P600,000.00
option/reservation fee stated in the default
clause of the "Agreement And Undertaking"
was agreed upon by the parties.
b. petitioner's tender of payment in the form
of manager's check is valid even though it is
not a legal tender since he did not object to
the form.
2. NO- Withdrawal of the money consigned
would
enrich
petitioner
and
unjustly
prejudice respondent.
a. Article 1260 is not applicable here. It
provides that Once the consignation has
been duly made, the debtor may ask the
judge to order the cancellation of the
obligation
b. Respondent's prayer in his answer that the
amount consigned be awarded to him is
equivalent to an acceptance of the
consignation, which has the effect of
extinguishing petitioner's obligation.
c. Petitioner failed to manifest his intention
to comply with the "Agreement And
Undertaking" by delivering the necessary
documents and the lot subject of the sale to
respondent in exchange for the amount
deposited.
Disposition
The instant petition for review is DENIED and
the petitioner's obligation to respondent
under paragraph 5 of the "Agreement And
Undertaking" as having been extinguished, is
AFFIRMED
Llobrera vs Fernandez
Consignation based on Article 1256 of the
Civil Code indispensably requires a creditordebtor relationship between the parties, in
the absence of which, the legal effects
thereof cannot be availed of.The judgment
favoring the ejectment of petitioners being
consistent with law and jurisprudence can
only be affirmed. The alleged consignation of
the P20.00 monthly rental to a bank account
in respondents name cannot save the day
for the petitioners simply because of the
absence of any contractual basis for their
claim to rightful possession of the subject
property. Consignation based on Article 1256
of the Civil Code indispensably requires a
creditor-debtor relationship between the
parties, in the absence of which, the legal
effects thereof cannot be availed of.
COMPENSATION
BPI vs CA
Art. 1278. Compensation shall take place
when two persons, in their own right, are
creditors and debtors of each other.
Art. 1279. In order that compensation may
be proper, it is necessary:
(1) That each one of the obligors be bound
principally, and that he be at the same time
a principal creditor of the other;
(2) That both debts consist in a sum of
money, or if the things due are consumable,
they be of the same kind, and also of the
same quality if the latter has been stated;
(3) That the two debts be due;
(4) That they be liquidated and demandable;
(5) That over neither of them there be any
retention or controversy, commenced by
third persons and communicated in due time
to the debtor.
BPI vs CA
PNB vs CA
In view of the foregoing, the Court is of the
opinion that the parties are not both
principally bound with respect to the
$2,627.11 from Jeddah; neither are they at
the same time principal creditor of the other.
Therefore, as matters stand, the parties
obligations are not subject to compensation
or set off under Art. 1279 of the Civil Code,
for the reason that the defendant is not a
principal debtor nor is the plaintiff a principal
creditor insofar as the amount of $2,627.11
is concerned. They are debtor and creditor
only with respect to the double payments;
but are trustee-beneficiary as to the fund
transfer of $2,627.11.
Only the plaintiff is principally bound as a
debtor of the defendant to the extent of the
double credits. On the other hand, the
defendant was an implied trustee, who was
obliged to deliver to the Citibank for the
benefit of the plaintiff the sum of $2,627.11.
Bank
Intl
Bank vs