Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 97 views

    Villaroel v. Estrada

    Uploaded by

    AudreySyUyan
    Juan's mother obtained a loan from Bernardino's parents in 1912. After both sets of parents passed away, Juan signed a document in 1930 assuming the debt. Although the original debt had prescribed, the new document signed by Juan constituted a novation that made the debt enforceable again. The court ruled that Bernardino could recover payment from Juan based on the new obligation created by the 1930 document.

    Copyright:

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

    Villaroel v. Estrada

    Uploaded by

    AudreySyUyan
    97 views1 page
    Juan's mother obtained a loan from Bernardino's parents in 1912. After both sets of parents passed away, Juan signed a document in 1930 assuming the debt. Although the original debt had prescribed, the new document signed by Juan constituted a novation that made the debt enforceable again. The court ruled that Bernardino could recover payment from Juan based on the new obligation created by the 1930 document.

    Original Title

    1. Villaroel v. Estrada

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Juan's mother obtained a loan from Bernardino's parents in 1912. After both sets of parents passed away, Juan signed a document in 1930 assuming the debt. Although the original debt had prescribed, the new document signed by Juan constituted a novation that made the debt enforceable again. The court ruled that Bernardino could recover payment from Juan based on the new obligation created by the 1930 document.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    97 views1 page

    Villaroel v. Estrada

    Uploaded by

    AudreySyUyan
    Juan's mother obtained a loan from Bernardino's parents in 1912. After both sets of parents passed away, Juan signed a document in 1930 assuming the debt. Although the original debt had prescribed, the new document signed by Juan constituted a novation that made the debt enforceable again. The court ruled that Bernardino could recover payment from Juan based on the new obligation created by the 1930 document.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    JUAN VILLARROEL V.

    BERNARDINO ESTRADA
    19 December 1940 | Avanceñ a, J. |
    Natural Obligations: As Distinguished from Moral Obligations

    DOCTRINE: As a general rule, a prescribed debt can no longer be recovered. However, through novation, a prescribed debt
    may turn into a moral or natural obligation, which will make such an obligation enforceable and legally demandable.

    SUMMARY: Juan’s mother, Alejandra, obtained a loan of P1k from Bernardino’s parents. When their parents died, they
    became the current debtor and creditor. Juan signed a document that would allow him to assume his mother’s loan.
    Although the original debt has prescribed, through novation via the document Juan signed, Bernardino may enforce and
    legally demand the payment of the debt from him.

    FACTS:
     9 May 1912, Alejandra Callao, Juan’s mother, obtained a loan of P1k from sps. Mariano and Severina Estrada, w/c was
    payable in 7 yrs
     Alejandra died and left Juan as the sole heir; Sps. Estrada also died and left Bernardino as the sole heir
    o This led to them becoming the current debtor and creditor respectively
     9 Aug. 1930, Juan signed a doc, assuming the obligation of P1k w/ an interest of 12% per year
     CFI Laguna ordered Juan to pay Bernardino the amount w/ its legal interest from 9 Aug. 1930 until its full payment

    ISSUE: W/N Bernardino may recover the loan even if the its period has prescribed - YES

    RULING:
     Parties are the sole heirs to their parents’ contract
    o Juan, as Alejandra’s only son, contracted the obligation in favor of Bernardino, sps. Estrada’s sole heir
     The P1k in the obligation bet. Juan & Bernardino is the same P1k in the obligation bet. their parents
     Action in present case is not based on their parents’ obligation but on the Aug. 1930 doc that Juan signed
     Juan, as Alejandra’s child, has the right to succeed her inheritance. Along with this inheritance is also the obligations
    and debts she had
    o The debt she contracted, although it has prescribed already, has turned into a moral obligation for Juan
     As a general rule, prescribed debts can no longer be recovered. But a new promise to pay (novation) such debt may be
    made by the same obligated person or by another who is legally authorized to do so
     However, in the present case, Juan voluntarily assumed the obligation and thus, he can’t use the prescription as a
    defense against fulfilling the obligation

    DISPOSITION: CFI Laguna’s judgment AFFIRMED.

    NOTES: (to make things clearer; got them from online digests)
     As a general rule, if the debt has already prescribed, it can no longer be recovered. However, in the case at bar, there
    was a novation by the parties, where Juan agreed to assume the fulfillment of the obligation. As a prescribed debt
    constitutes a moral or natural obligation as such, it can be the cause or consideration for a new obligation in novation.
    Prescription must be set up as a defense by the debtor in the complaint against him if he does not want to be bound
    anymore under the obligation. Otherwise, the obligation shall continue to subsist. The failure to put up prescription as
    a defense is equivalent to waiver. In the case at bar, there was already a novation when Juan agreed to resume the
    obligation of his mother in law. Hence, he can no longer put up prescription as a defense.
     As a general rule, when a debt has already prescribed, it cannot be imposed by the creditor. However, a new contract
    w/c recognizes and assumes the prescribed debt is an exception, for it would be valid and enforceable. Hence, a
    person who acknowledges the correctness of the debt and promises to pay it despite knowing that the debt has
    already prescribed, such as the case at bar, waived the benefit of the prescription.

    You might also like