YAM v. CA

G.R. No. 104726, 11 February 1999

FACTS:

The parties herein entered into a Loan Agreement with Assumption of Solidary Liability. Petitioner subsequently obtained a second Industrial Guarantee and Loan Fund. The petitioner had paid the first debt, it so happened that the private respondent was placed under receivership. The petitioner made a partial payment to the second loan and the private respondent sent an answer letter to the petitioner that their penalty charges will decreased provided that they can pay on or before July 30, 1986. Because of the failure of the petitioner to pay the specific amount totaled private respondent filed a complaint against the petitioner. The petitioner now contending that they had fully paid their obligation where before July 2, 1986, Yam and his wife the president of the respondent’s corporation agreed to waive the penalties and services charge provided petitioners paid the principal and interest.

ISSUE:

Whether petitioners are liable for the payment of the penalties and service charges on their loan which, as of July 31, 1986

RULING:

In the case at bar, it is undisputed that the alleged agreement to condone P266,146.88 of the second IGLF loan was not reduced in writing.

Art. 1270, par. 2 of the Civil Code provides that express condonation must comply with the forms of donation. Art. 748, par. 3 provides that the donation and acceptance of a movable, the value of which exceeds P5,000.00, must be made in writing, otherwise the same shall be void.

Moreover, it is to be noted that the alleged agreement to condone the amount in question was supposedly entered into by the parties sometime in July 1986, that is, after respondent corporation had been placed under receivership on November 4, 1985. As held in. Thus, Sobrepeas had no authority to condone the debt.

 * Case digest by Aileen B. Buenafe, LLB-1, Andres Bonifacio Law School, SY 2017-2018

By |2018-07-16T06:46:47+00:00May 15th, 2018|Case Digests|0 Comments

Leave A Comment