Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 209 views

    01 Republic Vs Grijaldo

    Uploaded by

    Jonathan Malimban Mendoza
    This case involved loans that Grijaldo obtained from the Bank of Taiwan totaling P1,281.97 that were secured by a chattel mortgage on crops. When the crops were destroyed during WWII, Grijaldo claimed his obligation to repay was extinguished. The Supreme Court held that Grijaldo's obligation was a generic obligation to pay money, not deliver a specific thing, so the loss of the crops did not extinguish the debt. The Court also noted that prescription did not run against the state, which had taken over the Bank of Taiwan's assets, and that wartime moratorium laws had interrupted the prescription period.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    01 Republic Vs Grijaldo

    Uploaded by

    Jonathan Malimban Mendoza
    209 views1 page
    This case involved loans that Grijaldo obtained from the Bank of Taiwan totaling P1,281.97 that were secured by a chattel mortgage on crops. When the crops were destroyed during WWII, Grijaldo claimed his obligation to repay was extinguished. The Supreme Court held that Grijaldo's obligation was a generic obligation to pay money, not deliver a specific thing, so the loss of the crops did not extinguish the debt. The Court also noted that prescription did not run against the state, which had taken over the Bank of Taiwan's assets, and that wartime moratorium laws had interrupted the prescription period.

    Original Title

    01 Republic vs Grijaldo.doc

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involved loans that Grijaldo obtained from the Bank of Taiwan totaling P1,281.97 that were secured by a chattel mortgage on crops. When the crops were destroyed during WWII, Grijaldo claimed his obligation to repay was extinguished. The Supreme Court held that Grijaldo's obligation was a generic obligation to pay money, not deliver a specific thing, so the loss of the crops did not extinguish the debt. The Court also noted that prescription did not run against the state, which had taken over the Bank of Taiwan's assets, and that wartime moratorium laws had interrupted the prescription period.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    209 views1 page

    01 Republic Vs Grijaldo

    Uploaded by

    Jonathan Malimban Mendoza
    This case involved loans that Grijaldo obtained from the Bank of Taiwan totaling P1,281.97 that were secured by a chattel mortgage on crops. When the crops were destroyed during WWII, Grijaldo claimed his obligation to repay was extinguished. The Supreme Court held that Grijaldo's obligation was a generic obligation to pay money, not deliver a specific thing, so the loss of the crops did not extinguish the debt. The Court also noted that prescription did not run against the state, which had taken over the Bank of Taiwan's assets, and that wartime moratorium laws had interrupted the prescription period.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Chunky Monkeys CM Digest

    Case Name: Republic vs Grijaldo


    Docket: G.R. No. L-20240
    Date: December 31, 1965
    Ponente: Zaldivar, J.

    FACTS
     Appellant Grijaldo obtained five loands from Bank of Taiwan, with total sum of
    P1,281.97 with interest. (Bank of Taiwan is Japanese owned)
     Since the loans were crop loans it was considered that the loans were due one year
    after they were incurred.
     Loan was secured by a chattel mortgage on the standing crops of Grijaldo’s land,
    Hacienda Campugas.
     The assets of Bank of Taiwan, Ltd. were vested in the Government of the United States,
    and subsequently to the Republic of the Philippines (RP). (After Japan lost to US)
     RP then made a written extrajudicial demand upon the appellant for the payment of the
    account in question, but appellant failed to pay.
     Grijaldo died and now represented by his legal heirs.
     Appellant contends that because the loans were secured by a chattel mortgage on the
    standing crops on his land and these crops were lost or destroyed through enemy
    actions(Japanese) his obligations to pay the loans were thereby extinguished.

    ISSUE and HELD


    1. W/N the destruction of the crops extinguished appellant Grijaldo’s obligation. NO
     The obligation of the appellant was not to deliver a determinate thing namely, the crops
    to be harvested from his land, or the value of the crops that would be harvested from
    his land. Rather, his obligation was to pay a generic thing - the amount of money
    representing the total sum of the five loans, with interest.
     The transaction between the appellant and the Bank of Taiwan, Ltd. was a series of five
    contracts of simple loan of sums of money.
     Art. 1933:
    o By a contract of (simple) loan, one of the parties delivers to another x x x
    money or other consumable thing upon the condition that the same amount of
    the same kind and quality shall be paid.
     The obligation of the appellant under the five promissory notes evidencing the loans in
    question is to pay the value thereof; that is, to deliver a sum of money - a clear case of
    an obligation to deliver a generic thing.
     Art. 1263:
    o In an obligation to deliver a generic thing, the loss or destruction of anything of
    the same kind does not extinguish the obligation.
     The chattel mortgage on the crops growing on appellant’s land simply stood as a
    security for the fulfillment of appellant’s obligation covered by the promissory notes,
    and the loss of the crops did not extinguish his obligation to pay, because the account
    could still be paid from other sources aside from the mortgaged cropss.

    *Something about prescription: Doesn’t run against the state. Also, Moratorium Laws which
    interrupted the running of the prescription period during WWII.

    Balbanero, Bruzon, Go, Olazo, Ong, Santos, Sarmiento, Umandap, Yrreverre

    You might also like