RCBC v Arro

• Residoro Chua and Enrique Go, Sr. executed a comprehensive surety agreements to guaranty
among others, any existing indebtedness
indebtedness o !avao Agricu"tura"
Agricu"tura" #ndustries Corporation $the "atter
is reerred to as !aicor%.
•  A promissory
promissory note in the &'((,((( )as issued in avor o petitioner RCBC payab"e on
the amount o &'((,(((
*une '+, '--.
• he note note )as signed by Enrique Go, Sr. in his persona" capacity and in beha" o !aicor.
• he promissory note )as not u""y paid despite repeated demands/ hence,  petitioner i"ed a
comp"aint or a sum o money against !aicor, Enrique Go, Sr. and Residoro Chua.
• Respondent Residoro
Residoro Chua on the
t he ground that the comp"aint states no cause o action as
against him.
• 0e a""eged that can not be he"d "iab"e under the promissory note because it )as on"y Enrique Go,
Sr. )ho signed the same in beha" o !aicor and in his o)n persona" capacity.
• &etitioner a""eged that by virtue o the execution o the comprehensive surety agreement,
respondent is "iab"e because said agreement is continuing/ and it encompasses every other
indebtedness the !aicor may, rom time to time incur )ith petitioner ban1.

234 Respondent Chua is "iab"e.

• 5ES.
• he comprehensive surety agreement )as 6oint"y executed by respondent Residoro Chua and
Enrique Go, Sr., &resident and Genera" 7anager respective"y, o !aicor, to cover existing as )e""
as uture ob"igations )hich !aicor may incur )ith t he petitioner ban1, sub6ect on"y to the proviso
that their "iabi"ity sha"" not exceed &'((,(((.((.
&'((,(((.((.
• he guaranty is a continuing one )hich sha"" remain in u"" orce and eect unti" the ban1 is
notiied o its termination.
•  At the time the "oan o o &'((,(((.(( )as
)as obtained rom petitioner
petitioner by !aicor,
!aicor, or the purpose o
having an additiona" capita" or buying and se""ing coco8she"" charcoa" and importation o
activated carbon, the comprehensive surety agreement )as admitted"y in u"" orce and eect.
• he "oan )as, thereore, covered by the said agreement, and private respondent, even i he did
not sign the promis sory note, is "iab"e by virtue o the surety agreement.
• he on"y condition that )ou"d ma1e him "iab"e thereunder
thereunder is that the !aicor 9is or may become
"iab"e as ma1er, endorser, acceptor or other)ise9. here is no doubt that !aicor is "iab"e on the
promissory note evidencing the indebtedness.
• he surety agreement )hich )as ear"ier signed by Enrique Go, Sr. and private respondent,
respondent, is an
accessory ob"igation,
ob"igation, it being dependent
dependent upon a principa" one )hich, in this case is the "oan
obtained by !aicor as evidenced by a promissory note.
• 2hat obvious"y induced petitioner ban1 to grant the "oan )as the surety agreement )hereby Go
and Chua bound themse"ves so"idari"y to guaranty the punctua" payment o the "oan at maturity.
• #t can be c"ear"y seen that the surety agreement )as executed to guarantee uture debts )hich
!aicor may incur )ith petitioner, as is "ega""y a""o)ab"e under the Civi" Code.
• hus — Artic"e :(;+. — A guaranty
guaranty may a"so
a"so be given as security
security or uture debts,
debts, the amount o
)hich is not yet 1no)n/ there can be no c"aim against the guarantor unti" the debt is "iquidated. A
conditiona" ob"igation may a"so be secured.