Sie sind auf Seite 1von 2

LOAN

BPI INVESTMENTCORP V CA
Credit transactions: Loan (Mutuum): A loan contract is not a consensual contract but a real contract. It is
perfected upon delivery of the object of the contract.
Obligations and contracts: Reciprocal Obligations: It is a basic principle in reciprocal obligations that
neither party incurs in delay, if the other does not comply or is not ready to comply in a proper manner
with what is incumbent upon him.
FACTS:
Frank Roa obtained a loan at 16 1/4% interest rate per annum from Ayala Investment and Development
Corporation. For security, Roa's house and lot were mortgaged. Later, Roa sold the house and lot to ALS
and Antonio Litonjua, who assumed Roa's debt to Ayala Investment. Ayala Investment, however, granted
a new loan to be applied to Roa's debt, secured by the same property at a different interest rate of 20%
per annum.
When ALS and Litonjua failed to pay, BPIIC, successor to Ayala Investment, filed for foreclosure of
mortgage.
ISSUE:
W/N a contract of loan is a consensual contract
HELD:
A loan contract is not a consensual contract but a real contract. It is perfected upon delivery of the object
of the contract. Although a perfected consensual contract can give rise to an action for damages, it does
not constitute a real contract which requires delivery for perfection. A perfected real contract gives rise
only to obligations on the part of the borrower.
In the present case, the loan contract was only perfected on the date of the second release of the loan.
A contract of loan involves a reciprocal obligation, wherein the obligation or promise of each party is the
consideration for that of the other. It is a basic principle in reciprocal obligations that neither party incurs in
delay, if the other does not comply or is not ready to comply in a proper manner with what is incumbent
upon him. Only when a party has performed his part of the contract can he demand that the other party
also fulfills his own obligation and if the latter fails, default sets in.
DECISION:
The payment of amortization should accrue from the time BPIIC released the loan amount to ALS and
Litonjua because it was only at that time (the delivery of the amount -- the object of the contract) that the
loan contract was perfected.

BONNEVIE v CA
Facts: Spouses Lozano mortgaged their property to secure the payment of a loan amounting to 75K with
private respondent Philippine Bank of Communication (PBCom). The deed of mortgage was executed on
12-6-66, but the loan proceeeds were received only on 12-12-66. Two days after the execution of the
deed of mortgage, the spouses sold the property to the petitioner Bonnevie for and in consideration of
100k25K of which payable to the spouses and 75K as payment to PBCom. Afterwhich, Bonnevie
defaulted payments to PBCom prompting the latter to auction the property after Bonnivie failed to settle
despite subsequent demands, in order to recover the amount loaned. The latter now assails the validity of
the mortgage between Lozano and Pbcom arguing that on the day the deed was executed there was yet
no principal obligation to secure as the loan of P75,000.00 was not received by the Lozano spouses, so
that in the absence of a principal obligation, there is want of consideration in the accessory contract,
which consequently impairs its validity and fatally affects its very existence.
Issue: Was there a perfected contract of loan?
Held: Yes. From the recitals of the mortgage deed itself, it is clearly seen that the mortgage deed was
executed for and on condition of the loan granted to the Lozano spouses. The fact that the latter did not
collect from the respondent Bank the consideration of the mortgage on the date it was executed is
immaterial. A contract of loan being a consensual contract, the herein contract of loan was perfected at
the same time the contract of mortgage was executed. The promissory note executed on December 12,
1966 is only an evidence of indebtedness and does not indicate lack of consideration of the mortgage at
the time of its execution.