Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 767 views

    Bicol Savings and Loan Association Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Toni Rose Abrera
    Juan de Jesus owned land and gave his son Jose special power of attorney to mortgage the land to obtain a loan from Bicol Savings. Jose mortgaged the land and obtained a P20,000 loan but failed to pay it back. Bicol Savings then extrajudicially foreclosed on the land. Jose contested the foreclosure sale, but the lower court dismissed the case. The appellate court reversed this decision. The Supreme Court ruled the foreclosure sale was valid, as the power to foreclose is intended to protect the mortgagee in the event of default, and is recognized by the Rules of Court independently of the mortgage contract.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Bicol Savings and Loan Association Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Toni Rose Abrera
    767 views1 page
    Juan de Jesus owned land and gave his son Jose special power of attorney to mortgage the land to obtain a loan from Bicol Savings. Jose mortgaged the land and obtained a P20,000 loan but failed to pay it back. Bicol Savings then extrajudicially foreclosed on the land. Jose contested the foreclosure sale, but the lower court dismissed the case. The appellate court reversed this decision. The Supreme Court ruled the foreclosure sale was valid, as the power to foreclose is intended to protect the mortgagee in the event of default, and is recognized by the Rules of Court independently of the mortgage contract.

    Original Description:

    Case on Agency

    Original Title

    Bicol Savings and Loan Association vs CA

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Juan de Jesus owned land and gave his son Jose special power of attorney to mortgage the land to obtain a loan from Bicol Savings. Jose mortgaged the land and obtained a P20,000 loan but failed to pay it back. Bicol Savings then extrajudicially foreclosed on the land. Jose contested the foreclosure sale, but the lower court dismissed the case. The appellate court reversed this decision. The Supreme Court ruled the foreclosure sale was valid, as the power to foreclose is intended to protect the mortgagee in the event of default, and is recognized by the Rules of Court independently of the mortgage contract.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    767 views1 page

    Bicol Savings and Loan Association Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Toni Rose Abrera
    Juan de Jesus owned land and gave his son Jose special power of attorney to mortgage the land to obtain a loan from Bicol Savings. Jose mortgaged the land and obtained a P20,000 loan but failed to pay it back. Bicol Savings then extrajudicially foreclosed on the land. Jose contested the foreclosure sale, but the lower court dismissed the case. The appellate court reversed this decision. The Supreme Court ruled the foreclosure sale was valid, as the power to foreclose is intended to protect the mortgagee in the event of default, and is recognized by the Rules of Court independently of the mortgage contract.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Bicol Savings and Loan Association vs.

    CA Facts: Juan de Jesus was the owner of a parcel of land in Naga City. He executed a Special Power of Attorney in favor of Jose de Jesus, his son, wherein the latter could negotiate and mortgage the formers property in any bank preferably in the Bicol Savings and Loan Association. By virtue of such document, Jose was able to obtain P20,000 from Bicol Savings. To secure payment, he executed a deed of mortgage wherein it was stipulated that upon the mortgagors failure or refusal to pay the obligation, the mortgagee may immediately foreclose the property. Juan de Jesus died and the loan obligation was not paid. As a result, Bicol Savings extrajudicially foreclosed the mortgaged property. The bank won as the highest bidder during the auction sale. Jose and the other heirs failed to redeem the property. Thereafter, they tried to negotiate with Bicol Savings but the parties did not come up to an agreement. Bicol Savings sold the property to another person. Hence, Jose filed for annulment of the foreclosure sale. The lower court dismissed the case. On appeal, the CA reversed RTCs decision. Hence, this appeal. Issue: Whether or not the extrajudicial foreclosure sale of the property was valid. Ruling. Yes. Art 1879 of the CC which states that special power to sell excludes the power to mortgage and vice versa is inapplicable in the case. What it proscribes is a voluntary and independent contract of sale and not an auction sale resulting from extrajudicial foreclosure caused by the default of the mortgagor. The power to foreclose is not an ordinary agency but is primarily conferred upon the mortgagee for its protection. The right of the bank to foreclose is independent of the mortgage contract as it is recognized by the Rules of Court.

    You might also like