A.

RELEVANT JURISPRUDENCE ON MUTTUM

a. Goyanko v. United Coconut Planters Bank (690 SCRA 79)DUMAGCAO
b. Hur Tin Yang v. PP (703 SCRA 606)DUMAGCAO

1. Interest Rates
i. Forbearance of money, goods and credit; DEFINITION
1. Estores v. Supangan (GR No. 175139 April 18,
2012)JUANITEZ
2. Land Bank v. On ate (713 SCRA 678)DOMINGO
ii. Philippine Rabbit v. Cruz (143 SCRA 158) ORYAN
iii. Tio Khe Chio v. CA (202 SCRA 119) MELODIA LIN
iv. Eastern Shipping Lines Inc. v. CA (234 SCRA 78)GUIMBUNGAN
v. Vicente v. Planters (396 v. 282)BUENO

a. CB Circular No. 799. Landmark case of Eastern Shipping v. CA no

longer controlling.
vi. Nacar v. Gallery Frames (GR No. 189871 Aug. 13, 2013)-
FORTUNATO
vii. Rivera v. Souses Chua (GR No. 184458, Jan. 14, 2015)-
MALIAMAN
viii. Raymundo v. Galen Realty (707 SCRA 515)-PAR-OGAN

b. The trial courts discretion to award legal interest even if not prayed for
ix. Materrco, Inc. v First Landlink Asia (539 SCRA 226) MILO

c. Payment of interest does not convert the commodatum to mutuum unless

such was the intention
x. Producers Bank of the Philippines v. CA (GR No. 115324 Feb. 19,
2003) TIU

d. Compounding Interest must be in writing.

xi. Sps. Tagumpay v. Sps. Embisan (GR No. 210831 Nov. 26,
2014)AGITO
xii. Ting Ting Pua vs. Sps. Benito (GR No. 198660 Oct. 23,
2013)FINISHED CASE*
xiii. Land Bank v. On ate (713 SCRA 678)CANTUBA

e. SUMMATION cases when SC ruled that the following interest rates are
excessive, unconscionable, and inordinate (how many percent?):
xiv. Bulos v. Yasuma (527 SCRA 727[2008])ORYAN
xv. Macalalag v. People (511 SCRA 400) LAGAO
 xvi. Svendsen v. People (546 SCRA 659) PENA
xvii. Poltan v. BPI Family (517 SCRA 430) CHONGAEL
xviii. Trade and Investment v. Roblett (490 SCRA 1) MANG-USAN
xix. Din o v. Jardines (481 SCRA 226) FINISHED CASE*
xx. Dio v. Japor ( 463 SCRA 170) MACUTAY*
xxi. Cuaton v. Salud (421 SCRA 278) FLORES
xxii. Ruiz v. Ca (401 SCRA 410)SOKOKEN
xxiii. Toring v. Ganzon-Olan (568 SCRA 376)FINISHED CASE*
xxiv. Marilag v. Martinez (GR No. 201892 July 22, 2015)
xxv. Does this stop the debtor from payment of interest?
1. Andal v. PNB (711 SCRA 15) EMING
xxvi. Benavidez v. Salvador (712 SCRA 239) NICOLAS

2. USURY LAW
a. Define
b. Relevant Jurisprudence
i. Interest ceilings are now removed by CB Circ. 905 but does not grant
lenders absolute authority to increase interest rates
1. Dio v. Japer (GR No. 154129 July 8, 2005) MACUTAY*
2. Chua v. Timan (GR No. 170452 Aug. 13, 2008) GUIMBUNGAN
i. PNB v. Ensina (544 SCRA 608) PAR-OGAN
ii. Toring v. Ganzon-Olan (568 SCRA 376)FINISHED CASE*
iii. DBP v. Perez (442 SCRA 238) FORTUNATO
iv. Carpo v. Chua (471 SCRA 471) BUENO
v. PNB v. CA (238 SCRA 20) MALIAMAN

3. ESCALATION CLAUSE
a. Define
b. Conditions
i. Insular Bankd of Asia v. Spouses Salazar (159 SCRA 133)MILO
ii. Banco Filipino v. Navarro (152 SCRA 346)TIU
iii. PNB v. IAC (183 SCRA 133)AGITO
iv. Llorin v. CA (218 SCRA 436)CANTUBA
v. PNB v. CA (196 SCRA 536)DOMINGO
vi. Almeda v. CA (256 SCRA 292)DUMAGCAO
vii. Florendo v. Metropolitan Bank (532 SCRA 43)JUANITEZ

c. No unilateral right to change interest rate agreed upon. Why?

i. Sps Sitos v. PNB (GR No. 181405 July 2, 2014) MELODIA LIN
ii. Sps. Agner v. BPI Family (GR No. 182963 June 3, 2013)MACLI-
ING
 iii. Juico v. China Bank (695 SCRA 520)PERALTA

4. PENALTY CHARGES
a. Ligutan v. CA (376 SCRA 560)ORYAN
b. Tan v. CA (367 SCRA 571) LAGAO
c. State Investment v. CA (361 SCRA 201) CHONGAEL
d. Lim v. DBP (700 SCRA 210) NAY-UD

5. NATURE OF AN ACTION TO ANNUL A CONTRACT OF LOAN

a. Chua v. Total Office Products (471 SCRA 500) MADANOM

6. ASSIGNMENT OF CREDIT
a. Aquintey v. Tibong (511 SCRA 414) SOKOKEN
b. Ledinio v. Capitol Development Corporation (526 SCRA 379) FLORES
c. Rosario v. PCI Leasing and Finance (474 SCRA 500) MANG-USAN

7. PAYMENT BY THIRD PERSONS

a. Carandang v. Heirs of Quirino de Guzma (508 SCRA 469)EMING

8. CREDIT CARDS
a. Aznar v. Citibank (519 SCRA 287) NICOLAS

9. DOCTRINE OF PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL

a. Mendoza v. CA (359 SCRA 438)FORTUNATO

10. GROSS INTERMEDIATION SPREAD

a. New Sampaguita Builders v. PNB (435 SCRA 565)BANDONILL*

B. TRUTH IN LENDING ACT (RA 3765)

a. Obligation of Creditor under the Truth in Lending Act
i. United Coconut Planters Bank v. Beluso (530 SCRA 567) PENA
b. Consequence of Non-Compliance with the Truth in Lending Act
i. New Sampaguita Builders v. PNB (435 SCRA 565) BANDONILL*