Professional Documents
Culture Documents
_______________
* SECOND DIVISION.
556
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001712b086d9f2de98733003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 1/16
3/24/2020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 468
557
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001712b086d9f2de98733003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 2/16
3/24/2020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 468
558
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001712b086d9f2de98733003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 3/16
3/24/2020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 468
559
TINGA, J.:
Before us
1
are consolidated petitions questioning the
Decision of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CV No.
61318, entitled Philippine Export and Foreign Loan
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001712b086d9f2de98733003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 4/16
3/24/2020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 468
_______________
560
_______________
561
_______________
16 Id., at p. 415.
17 Ibid.
18 CA Rollo, p. 211.
19 Id., at p. 205.
20 Ibid.
21 Id., at p. 206.
22 Id., at p. 207.
562
23 24
JN. Interpreting Art. 2058 of the Civil Code, the
appellate court explained that while the provision states
that the guarantor cannot be compelled to pay unless the
properties of the debtor are exhausted, the guarantor is not
precluded from waiving the 25
benefit of excussion and paying
the obligation altogether.
Finally, the CA found that Narciso Cruz was unable to
prove the alleged forgery of his signature in the
Undertaking, the evidence presented not being sufficient to
overcome the presumption of regularity
26
of the Undertaking
which is a notarized document.
Petitioners sought reconsideration of the Decision and
prayed for the admission of documents evidencing the
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001712b086d9f2de98733003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 7/16
3/24/2020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 468
_______________
23 Ibid.
24 Art. 2058. The guarantor cannot be compelled to pay the creditor
unless the latter has exhausted all the property of the debtor, and has
resorted to all the legal remedies against the debtor.
25 CA Rollo, pp. 209-210.
26 Id., at p. 209.
27 Resolution dated 12 December 2001, CA Rollo, pp. 305-306.
28 G.R. No. 151060, Rollo, p. 8.
563
_______________
The guarantor who pays for a debtor must be indemnified by the latter.
The indemnity comprises:
564
_______________
565
_______________
566
_______________
41 People’s Bank and Trust Co. v. Santana, 149 Phil. 169, 174; 42 SCRA
119, 122 (1971).
42 Supra note 40.
43 Art. 2069. If the debt was for a period and the guarantor paid it
before it became due, he cannot demand reimbursement of the debtor
until the expiration of the period unless the payment has been ratified by
the debtor.
Art. 2070. If the guarantor has paid without notifying the debtor, and
the latter not being aware of the payment, repeats the payment, the
former has no remedy whatever against the debtor, but only against the
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001712b086d9f2de98733003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 11/16
3/24/2020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 468
567
_______________
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001712b086d9f2de98733003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 12/16
3/24/2020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 468
46 Exhibits, p. 7.
568
_______________
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001712b086d9f2de98733003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 13/16
3/24/2020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 468
49 CA Rollo, p. 21.
50 Id., at pp. 305-306.
569
_______________
51 Exhibits, p. 71.
570
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001712b086d9f2de98733003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 14/16
3/24/2020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 468
52
alleging forgery. Mere denial will not suffice to overcome
the positive value of the Undertaking, which is a notarized
document, has in its favor the presumption of regularity,
and carries the evidentiary weight
53
conferred upon it with
respect to its due execution. Even in cases where the
alleged forged signature was compared to samples of
genuine signatures to show its variance 54therefrom, this
Court still found such evidence insufficient. Mere variance
of the signatures cannot be55
considered as conclusive proof
that the same were forged.
WHEREFORE, the consolidated petitions are DENIED.
The Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No.
61318 is AFFIRMED.
No pronouncement as to costs.
SO ORDERED.
——o0o——
_______________
52 Ladignon v. Court of Appeals, 390 Phil. 1161, 1170; 336 SCRA 42, 48
(2000).
53 Aznar Brothers Realty Company v. Court of Appeals, et al., 384 Phil.
95, 112; 327 SCRA 359, 374 (2000).
54 Ladignon v. Court of Appeals, supra note 52.
55 Veloso v. Court of Appeals, 329 Phil. 398; 260 SCRA 593 (1996).
571
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001712b086d9f2de98733003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 15/16
3/24/2020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 468
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001712b086d9f2de98733003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 16/16