Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Credit Trans Random Digests
Credit Trans Random Digests
Eusebio
FACTS: Respondent entered into contract with SOB for construction of Therapy Bldg.
SOB demanded bonds to secure performance. Project was delayed
DOCTRINE: By guaranty a person, called the guarantor, binds himself to the creditor to
fulfill the obligation of the principal debtor in case the latter should fail to do so; if the
person binds himself solidarily with the principal debtor, the contract is called suretyship.
That the guarantee issued by the petitioner is unconditional and irrevocable does
not make the petitioner a surety. As a guaranty, it is still characterized by its subsidiary
and conditional quality because it does not take effect until the fulfillment of the
condition. Unconditional guarantee is still subject to the condition that the principal
debtor should default in his obligation first before resort to the guarantor could be had.
FACTS: Cho Siong entered into contract of agency for distribution of petroleum
products, assumed liability of former agent Tong Kuan. His agency bond was secured by
Ong Guan Can. Defaulted in the amount of P64.00
DOCTRINE: Under the terms of the bond signed by the surety, he did not answer for the
principal obligor save for the Latters acts by virtue of the contract of agency. He cannot
be held liable for the debt of a former agent, which the principal obligor assumed by
virtue of another contract, of which said surety was not even aware. A contract of
suretyship is to be strictly interpreted and is not to be extended beyond its terms.
Ong v. PCIB
FACTS: Spouses petitioners, President and Treasurer of BMC obtained a loan from
respondent, they signed as sureties. Thereafter, BMC was under receivership, MOA with
all creditors not to collect for a period of time. Petitioners contend benefits them as
sureties/guarantors. TC, CA, SC for respondent, petitioners are not guarantors but
sureties, bank may after them or BMC.
DOCTRINE: There is a sea of difference in the rights and liabilities of a guarantor and a
surety. A guarantor insures the solvency of the debtor while a surety is an insurer of the
debt itself. A contract of guaranty gives rise to a subsidiary obligation on the part of the
guarantor. It is only after the creditor has proceeded against the properties of the principal
debtor and the debt remains unsatisfied that a guarantor can be held liable to answer for
any unpaid amount.
Santiago v. Dionisio
DBP v. Licuanan
DOCTRINE: The issue of whether demand was made before the foreclosure was
affected is essential. If demand was made and duly received by the respondents and the
latter still did not pay, then they were already in default and foreclosure was proper.
However, if demand was not made, then the loans had not yet become due and
demandable. This meant that respondents had not defaulted in their payments and he
foreclosure by petitioner was premature. Foreclosure is valid only when the debtor is in
default in the payment of his obligation.
Whether or not demand was made is a question of fact. It is the refusal to pay
after demand that gives the creditor a cause of action against the debtor.
Monzon v. Relova
DOCTRINE: Any person having a lien on the property subsequent to the mortgage or
deed of trust under which the property is sold, may redeem the same at any time within
the term of one year from and after the date of sale.
Even if, for the sake of argument, Rule 68 is to be applied to extrajudicial
foreclosure of mortgages, such right can only be given to second mortgagees who are
made parties to the (judicial) foreclosure. While a second mortgagee is a proper and in a
sense even a necessary party to a proceeding to foreclose a first mortgage on real
property, he is not an indispensable party, because a valid decree may be made, as
between the mortgagor and the first mortgagee, without regard to the second mortgagee;
but the consequence of a failure to make the second mortgagee a party to the proceeding
is that the lien of the second mortgagee on the equity of redemption is not affected by the
decree of foreclosure.