Scribd Logo
Hochladen

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 537 views

    PH Credit Corporation Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Brian Jonathan Paraan
    1) PH Credit Corporation filed a collection suit against Pacific Lloyd Corp., Carlos Farrales, Thomas Van Sebille, and Federico Lim and was awarded a judgment by the trial court. 2) The judgment did not specify in the conclusion whether the debtors' liability was joint or solidary. 3) The Court of Appeals held that in the absence of a clear statement in the conclusion, and according to the Civil Code, the parties were jointly liable, not solidarily. 4) The sale of Carlos Farrales' property was void since it was used to satisfy the whole debt when the parties were only jointly liable.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    PH Credit Corporation Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Brian Jonathan Paraan
    537 views1 page
    1) PH Credit Corporation filed a collection suit against Pacific Lloyd Corp., Carlos Farrales, Thomas Van Sebille, and Federico Lim and was awarded a judgment by the trial court. 2) The judgment did not specify in the conclusion whether the debtors' liability was joint or solidary. 3) The Court of Appeals held that in the absence of a clear statement in the conclusion, and according to the Civil Code, the parties were jointly liable, not solidarily. 4) The sale of Carlos Farrales' property was void since it was used to satisfy the whole debt when the parties were only jointly liable.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    PH Credit Corporation vs CA

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    1) PH Credit Corporation filed a collection suit against Pacific Lloyd Corp., Carlos Farrales, Thomas Van Sebille, and Federico Lim and was awarded a judgment by the trial court. 2) The judgment did not specify in the conclusion whether the debtors' liability was joint or solidary. 3) The Court of Appeals held that in the absence of a clear statement in the conclusion, and according to the Civil Code, the parties were jointly liable, not solidarily. 4) The sale of Carlos Farrales' property was void since it was used to satisfy the whole debt when the parties were only jointly liable.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    537 views1 page

    PH Credit Corporation Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Brian Jonathan Paraan
    1) PH Credit Corporation filed a collection suit against Pacific Lloyd Corp., Carlos Farrales, Thomas Van Sebille, and Federico Lim and was awarded a judgment by the trial court. 2) The judgment did not specify in the conclusion whether the debtors' liability was joint or solidary. 3) The Court of Appeals held that in the absence of a clear statement in the conclusion, and according to the Civil Code, the parties were jointly liable, not solidarily. 4) The sale of Carlos Farrales' property was void since it was used to satisfy the whole debt when the parties were only jointly liable.

    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 1

    PH Credit Corporation vs. Court of Appeals and Carlos M.

    Ferrales
    G.R. No. 109648 November 22, 2001

    Facts:

     PH Credit Corporation filed a suit for collection of sum of money against Pacific Lloyd
    Corp., Carlos Farrales, Thomas H. Van Sebille and Federico C. Lim.
     A judgment was rendered by the trial court holding all aforementioned liable to pay PH
    Credit Corporation the amount of Php 118,814.49 at 18% interest per annumstarting
    December 20, 1982 until fully paid; Surcharge of 16% per annum from December 20,
    1982; Penalty Charge of 2% per month from December 20, 1982, computed on interest
    and principal compounded; Attorney’s fees in an amount equivalent to 25% of the total
    sum due; and Costs of suit.
     A writ of execution was issued and the personal properties of Carlos M. Farrales were
    levied and sold at public auction where PH Credit Corp. was the highest bidder.
     The judgment failed to specify in the fallo part whether the liability of the
    aforementioned debtors were joint or solidary.
     PH Credit Corp. contends that the body of the decision holds that the debtors are jointly
    and severally liable which should render them solidarily liable.

    Issue:
    Whether or not the aforementioned parties are solidarily liable.

    Held:
    Article 1207 and 1208 of the Civil Code provides that in the absence of clear stipulation or of
    the law or the nature of the obligation does not require solidary liability then the parties are
    presumed to be jointly liable. The statement holding the aforementioned parties as
    solidarily liable were only part od the statement of facts of the judgment rendered by the
    judge, thus in the absence of any express statement in the fallo portion of the judgment
    holding the parties solidarily liable, they are jointly liable. Furthermore, the sale of Carlos M.
    Farrales’ property is deemed void for it was made to answer for the whole obligation
    against PH Credit Corp., when parties are jointly liable an execution sale of their property
    should only be up to the extent of their liability.

    You might also like