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 [...]

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

Sotto v. Mijares

G.R. No. L-23563, 8 May 1969 FACTS:  Sotto filed a Motion for Deposit in the Court of First Instance of Negros Occidental dated March 20, 1963, in its Civil Case No. 6796 which requires them to deposit with the Clerk of Court the amount of P5,106.00 within ten (10) days from receipt of said order. [...]

By |2018-05-17T05:17:56+00:00May 15th, 2018|Case Digests|0 Comments

McLaughlin v. Court of Appeals

G.R. No. L-57552, 10 October 1986 FACTS: Petitioner and private respondent, Flores, entered into a contract of conditional sale of real property. When the private responded failed to pay the balance on the date stipulated, he filed a petition to rescind the contract. They entered into a Compromise Agreement. Thereafter, the petitioner made a demand. [...]

By |2018-05-17T05:19:49+00:00May 15th, 2018|Case Digests|0 Comments

TLG International Continental Enterprising, Inc. v. Flores

G.R. No. L-35381, 31 October 1972 FACTS: In a case for an action for declaratory relief involving the rights of Bearcon Trading Co, Inc. as lesseeof the premises of Juan Fabella, Judge Flores granted TLG’s Motion to Intervene.TLG intervened as sub-lessee of Bearcon over the property to protect its rights as sub-lessee and to enable it, during pendency of [...]

By |2018-07-16T05:44:44+00:00May 15th, 2018|Case Digests|0 Comments

De Guzman v. Court of Appeals

G.R. No. L-52733, 23 July 1985 FACTS: On November 29, 1977, the trial court rendered a decision approving a compromise between Pilar de Guzman, Rolando Gestuvo, and Minerva Gestuvo, as sellers, and Leonida P. Singh, the buyer. Singh agreed to pay de Guzman and the Gestuvos, now petitioners, P250,000 for two lots located at Cementina [...]

By |2018-07-16T06:44:40+00:00May 15th, 2018|Case Digests|0 Comments

Chan vs. Court of Appeals

G.R. No. 109020, 3 March 1994 FACTS:  On February 1, 1983, Petitioner Felisa Chan entered into a contract of lease with Grace Cu, private respondent, wherein the latter as the lessee and the former as the lessor. Petitioner rented two rooms for residential purposes. However, after several renewals of the contract it was agreed that [...]

By |2018-05-17T05:27:07+00:00May 15th, 2018|Case Digests|0 Comments

Meat Packing Corp vs. Sandiganbayan

G.R. No. 103068, June 22, 2001 FACTS:  Meat Packing Corporation of the Philippines (MPCP) is a corporation wholly owned by GSIS. It is the owner of 3 parcels of land in Pasig as well as the meat processing and packing plant thereon. MPCP and Philippine Integrated Meat Corporation (PIMECO) entered into an Agreement: MPCP leased [...]

By |2018-07-16T06:44:22+00:00May 15th, 2018|Case Digests|0 Comments

Pabugais v. Sahijwani

G.R. No. 156846, 23 February 2004 FACTS: Pursuant to an Agreement and Undertaking, petitioner Teddy G. Pabugais agreed to sell to respondent Dave P. Sahijwani a lot.  Respondent paid petitioner an option/reservation fee and the balance to be paid within 60 days from the execution of the contract. The parties further agreed that failure on [...]

By |2018-07-06T03:22:12+00:00May 15th, 2018|Case Digests|0 Comments

Occeña v. CA

G.R. No. L-44349, 29 October 1976 FACTS: Respondent Tropical Homes entered into a subdivision contract to develop petitioner’s land. They agreed that respondent would receive 40% from the sale of the subdivision lots. Thereafter, development costs rose to unanticipated levels which prompted respondent to file an action for the modification of the contract, particularly on [...]

By |2018-05-17T05:53:37+00:00May 15th, 2018|Case Digests|0 Comments

Naga Telephone Co. v. CA

G.R. No. 107112, 24 February 1994 FACTS: NATELCO entered into contract with CASURECO II for the use in operation of its telephone service, electric light posts of CASURECO II and in return, there will be free use of 10 telephone connections as long as NATELCO needs electric light posts. The period would last for as [...]

By |2018-05-17T05:54:01+00:00May 15th, 2018|Case Digests|0 Comments
Go to Top