Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Tibong
case Background
-Spouses Felicidad and Rico Tibong (Respondents) secured several loans from
Agrifina Aquintey (Petitioner) at monthly interest rates of 6% to 7%.
-Despite demands, the respondents failed to pay their outstanding loan,
amounting to 773,000php
-Respondent issued a check to the petitioner for an amount of 50,000php that
was dishonoured. Respondent was ordered by the court to pay the amount and
did so.
-Petitioner presented copies of the promissory notes and acknowledgement
receipts executed by respondents covering the loaned amounts.
-Petitioner stated that she had lost the receipts signed by respondent for the
following amounts: 100,000php, 34,000php, and 2,000.
-Respondents admitted that they had secured loans from petitioner and the
proceeds of the loan were then re-lent to other borrowers at higher interest
rates.
-Respondents specifically denied the material averments in paragraph 2 and 2.1
of the complaint. However, they did not state the total amount of their loans
and declared that they did not receive anything from petitioner without any
receipt.
-Petitioner sought the assistance of Atty. A-ayo who advised her to require
respondent to execute deeds of assignment over respondents debtors.
-Atty. A-ayo also suggested that respondents debtors execute promissory notes
in petitioners favour, to turn over their loans from respondent.
-Petitioner agreed to the proposal and petitioner, respondent, and the
respondents debtors had a conference where Atty. A-ayo explained that
petitioner could apply her collections as payments of the respondents account.
-Respondent executed deeds of assignment of credits notarized by Atty. A-ayo,
in which respondent transferred and assigned to petitioner.
-Petitioner tried to collect the balance on respondents account but respondent
told her to wait until her debtors had money.
-When respondent reneged on her promise, petitioner filed a complaint for the
collection of 773,000php.
-The Court of Appeals found that 585,659php was covered by the deeds of
assignment and promissory notes.
-Respondents other debtors were able to pay 103,500php to the petitioner.
Statement of the Problem
Whether the obligation of the respondents to pay the balance of their loans, including
interest, was partially extinguished of the deeds of assignment in favour of petitioner.
Objectives
Determine the total amount of the loan.
Determine if the respondents obligation is extinguished by novation or dation in
payment (dacion en pago)
(aliud pro alio); and (3) there must be an agreement between the creditor and debtor
that the obligation is immediately extinguished by reason of the performance of a
prestation different from that due. (Lo v. KJS Eco-Formwork System Phil., Inc., 459
Phil. 532, 539)
In an assignment of credit, the consent of the debtor is not essential for its perfection;
the knowledge thereof or lack of it affecting only the efficaciousness or
inefficaciousness of any payment that might have been made. The assignment binds
the debtor upon acquiring knowledge of the assignment but he is entitled, even then,
to raise against the assignee the same defenses he could set up against the assignor.
[National Investment and Development Co. v. De Los Angeles, No. L-30150, August
31, 1971, 40 SCRA 487, 496 (1971)]
Even if the debtor had not been notified, but came to know of the assignment by
whatever means, the debtor is bound by it. If the document of assignment is public, it
is evidence even against a third person of the facts which gave rise to its execution
and of the date of the latter. (Tolentino, Civil Code of the Philippines, Vol. V, 1959
ed., pp. 168-1969)
Case law is that, an assignment will, ordinarily, be interpreted or construed in
accordance with the rules of construction governing contracts generally, the primary
object being always to ascertain and carry out the intention of the parties. This
intention is to be derived from a consideration of the whole instrument, all parts of
which should be given effect, and is to be sought in the words and language
employed. (GA C.J.S. Assignments, p. 709)
Art. 1291 Obligations may be modified by:
(1) Changing their object or principal conditions;
(2)Substituting the person of the debtor;
(3)Subrogating a third person in the rights of the creditor. (Civil Code of the
Philippines)
Unlike other modes of extinction of obligations, novation is a juridical act of dual
function in that at the time it extinguishes an obligation it creates a new one in lieu of
the old. (Government vs. Bautista, (C.A.) 37 Off. Gaz., 1880; Pascual vs. Lacsamana
(S.C.) 53 Off. Gaz. 2467, April, 1957; 2 Castan 566)
monetary liability for P6,000 of the said respondent under the appellate court's
judgment. Additionally, to sustain novation necessitates that the same be so declared in
unequivocal terms clearly and unmistakably shown by the express agreement of the
parties or by acts of equivalent import or that there is complete and substantial
incompatibility between the two obligations. 5
Facts: The appellate court's judgment obliges the respondent to do two things: (1) to
recognize the easement, and (2) to pay the petitioners the sums of P5,000 actual and
P500 exemplary damages and P500 attorney's fees, or a total of P6,000. The full
satisfaction of the said judgment requires specific performance and payment of a sum of
money by the respondent. The parties entered into an agreement reducing the payment
to P4000, and was subsequently paid by respondent. Was there a novation?
In the case at bar there is nothing in the May 14, 1982, agreement which supports the
petitioner's contention. There is neither explicit novation nor incompatibility on every
point between the "old" and the "new" agreements.
Facts: Daniel Roxas sued NPC to compel the NPC to restore the contract of Roxas for
security services which the former had terminated. However, they reached a
compromise agreement, and the court approved it. One of the stipulations of the
agreement was that the parties shall continue with the contract of security services
under the same terms and conditions as the previous contract effective upon the signing
thereof. Parties entered into another contract for security services but NPC refused to
implement the new contract for which Daniel filed a Motion for Execution. The NPC
assails the Order on the ground that it directs execution of a contract which had been
novated by that of the new contracts. Upon the other hand, Roxas claims that said
contract was executed precisely to implement the compromise agreement for which
reason there was no novation.
Facts: Josefa Pacheco binds herself to acknowledge in favor of the Kabankalan Sugar
Co., Inc., all the easements which the Kabankalan may consider convenient and
necessary for its railroad on the Hilabagan estate belonging to the Pacheco; the only
differences being that the term of the contract of November 1, 1920, is twenty years,
while that of the contract entered into on September 29, 1922, is seven crops (one of the
stipulations of the contract).
obligation, and the third person or new debtor must assume the formers place in
the relation. Well
-settled is the rule that novation is never presumed. Consequently, that which
arises from a purportedchange in the person of the debtor must be clear and express. It
is thus incumbent on petitioner to show clearly and unequivocally that novation has
indeed taken place. Note also that for novation to be valid andlegal, the law requires that
the creditor expressly consent to the substitution of a new debtor.In a solidary
obligation, the creditor is entitled to demand the satisfaction of the whole obligation
fromany or all of the debtors. It is up to the former to determine against whom to
enforce collection. Havingmade himself jointly and severally liable with de Jesus,
petitioner is therefore liable for the entireobligation.(2) By its terms, the note was made
payable to a specific person rather than bearer to or order
a requisite