Scribd
Upload
48 views2 pages

G.R. NO. 225199 - July 09, 2018 - Peralta, J

This document contains summaries of three Philippine Supreme Court cases related to surety agreements, commodatum contracts, and interest on loans. The first case found that a surety is no longer obliged to ensure payment if the surety agreement is revoked or the surety is no longer a stockholder in the principal corporation. The second case discussed the obligations in a commodatum contract where property is loaned for temporary use and must be returned. The third case addressed that interest is only due if stipulated in writing, and outstanding interest earns legal interest from the time of judicial demand if the obligation is silent on interest.

Uploaded by

Aurora Catindig
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
48 views2 pages

G.R. NO. 225199 - July 09, 2018 - Peralta, J

This document contains summaries of three Philippine Supreme Court cases related to surety agreements, commodatum contracts, and interest on loans. The first case found that a surety is no longer obliged to ensure payment if the surety agreement is revoked or the surety is no longer a stockholder in the principal corporation. The second case discussed the obligations in a commodatum contract where property is loaned for temporary use and must be returned. The third case addressed that interest is only due if stipulated in writing, and outstanding interest earns legal interest from the time of judicial demand if the obligation is silent on interest.

Uploaded by

Aurora Catindig
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

ALLIED BANKING CORPORATION (NOW PHILIPPINE NATIONAL

BANK) v. EDUARDO DE GUZMAN, SR., IN HIS CAPACITY AS SURETY


TO THE VARIOUS CREDIT ACCOMMODATIONS GRANTED TO
YESON INTERNATIONAL PHILIPPINES, INC.,
G.R. NO. 225199 | July 09, 2018 | Peralta, J.
TOPIC- Extinguishment – Art. 2076
DOCTRINE: Once a surety agreement had been revoked, the surety is no longer
obliged to ensure payment of the obligation. More so, if the surety was a
stockholder of the principal/corporation, there was no reason nor logic for the
said stockholder to remain as surety for the corporation when he was no longer a
stockholder of the same, and thus, is no longer in a position to ensure payment of
the obligation.

COLITO T. PAJUYO v. COURT OF APPEALS and EDDIE GUEVARRA


G.R. NO. 146364 | June 3, 2004 | Carpio, J.
TOPIC- Commodatum; Obligations of the Bailee; Obligations of the Bailor
DOCTRINE: In a contract of commodatum, one of the parties delivers to another
something not consumable so that the latter may use the same for a certain time
and return it. An essential feature of commodatum is that it is gratuitous. Another
feature of commodatum is that the use of the thing belonging to another is for a
certain period. Thus, the bailor cannot demand the return of the thing loaned until
after expiration of the period stipulated, or after accomplishment of the use for
which the commodatum is constituted.
If the bailor should have urgent need of the thing, he may demand its return
for temporary use. If the use of the thing is merely tolerated by the bailor, he can
demand the return of the thing at will, in which case the contractual relation is
called a precarium. Under the Civil Code, precarium is a kind of commodatum.

1
SPOUSES SALVADOR ABELLA AND ALMA ABELLA v. SPOUSES
ROMEO ABELLA AND ANNIE ABELLA
G.R. NO. 195166 | July 08, 2015| Leonen, J.
TOPIC- Interest; BSP Circular No. 799, Series of 2013
DOCTRINE: Article 1956 of the Civil Code spells out the basic rule that no
interest shall be due unless it has been expressly stipulated in writing.
When the obligation is breached, and it consists in the payment of a sum of
money, i.e., a loan or forbearance of money, the interest due should be that which
may have been stipulated in writing. Apart from the liability for conventional
interest, the outstanding conventional interest—if any is due from respondents—
shall itself earn legal interest from the time judicial demand was made by
petitioners. This is consistent with Article 2212 of the Civil Code, which provides
that interest due shall earn legal interest from the time it is judicially demanded,
although the obligation may be silent upon this point.
In the absence of stipulation, the rate of interest shall be 6% per annum to
be computed from default, i.e., from judicial or extrajudicial demand and subject
to the provisions of Article 1169 of the Civil Code.

You might also like