Scribd Logo
Hochladen

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Banco Español

    Uploaded by

    Yeshua Tura
    26 views2 pages
    The bank foreclosed on property used as collateral for a debt after the mortgagor died. The administrator of the estate appealed, arguing the court never acquired jurisdiction over the defendant because the clerk failed to mail notice of the foreclosure proceeding as required. The Supreme Court held that for a valid judgment, the court must have jurisdiction over the defendant and the subject property, the defendant must have an opportunity to be heard, and judgment must be rendered after a lawful hearing. As these elements of procedural due process were not satisfied, the foreclosure judgment was void for lack of jurisdiction and was overturned.

    Original Description:

    Banco Español Case Digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The bank foreclosed on property used as collateral for a debt after the mortgagor died. The administrator of the estate appealed, arguing the court never acquired jurisdiction over the defendant because the clerk failed to mail notice of the foreclosure proceeding as required. The Supreme Court held that for a valid judgment, the court must have jurisdiction over the defendant and the subject property, the defendant must have an opportunity to be heard, and judgment must be rendered after a lawful hearing. As these elements of procedural due process were not satisfied, the foreclosure judgment was void for lack of jurisdiction and was overturned.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    26 views2 pages

    Banco Español

    Uploaded by

    Yeshua Tura
    The bank foreclosed on property used as collateral for a debt after the mortgagor died. The administrator of the estate appealed, arguing the court never acquired jurisdiction over the defendant because the clerk failed to mail notice of the foreclosure proceeding as required. The Supreme Court held that for a valid judgment, the court must have jurisdiction over the defendant and the subject property, the defendant must have an opportunity to be heard, and judgment must be rendered after a lawful hearing. As these elements of procedural due process were not satisfied, the foreclosure judgment was void for lack of jurisdiction and was overturned.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Constitutional Law: Banco Español vs.

    Palanca, 37 Phil
    921
    Banco Español vs. Palanca, 37 Phil 921

    Facts:
    Engracio Palanca Tanquinyeng secured a debt with various parcels of real property in Manila. The
    debt amounted to P218,294.10 at 8% per annum, payable quarterly. Property's estimated value
    was about P292,558. After the instrument's execution, mortgagor returned to Amoy, China and
    died on January 29, 1810. The foreclosure proceeding needed publication pursuant to section
    399 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Publication was made in a newspaper of Manila and an order
    of the court deposited in the post office in a stamped envelope of the summons and complaint
    directed to defendant. The clerk, however, failed to comply with the mail publication
    requirement.
    The bank was able to foreclose the property without the defendant.
    After seven years, the administrator of the estate, Vicente Palanca, appeared and requested the
    court to set aside the order of default of July 2, 1908, and the judgment rendered upon July 3,
    1908, and to vacate all the proceedings subsequent thereto. The basis of this application, as set
    forth in the motion itself, was that the order of default and the judgment rendered thereon were
    void because the court had never acquired jurisdiction over the defendant or over the subject of
    the action. His appeal was denied by the lower court, hence the appeal.
    His appeal was denied by the lower court, hence the appeal.

    Issue: Whether or not the procedural aspect of the right to due process has been prejudiced.

    Held:
    1. There must be a COURT or TRIBUNAL clothed with judicial power to hear and determine the
    matter before it;
    2. JURISDICTION must be lawfully acquired over the person of the defendant or over the property
    which is the subject of the proceeding;
    3. The defendant must be given the OPPORTUNITY to be heard; and
    4. Judgment must be rendered upon lawful HEARING.
    The essentials of procedural fairness inn judicial proceedings are:

    Conclusions stated by the court indicated that the judgment appealed from is without error, and the
    same is accordingly affirmed.

    You might also like