[go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd
Upload
888 views2 pages

Equitable Pci Bank v. NG Sheung Ngor (2007)

This case involved a dispute between Equitable PCI Bank and respondents Ng Sheung Ngor, Ken Appliance Division, Inc and Benjamin E. Go over promissory notes signed by the respondents to avail of credit facilities from the bank. [1] The respondents claimed they were unaware the documents contained clauses allowing the bank to increase interest rates without their consent. [2] The trial court upheld the validity of the notes but invalidated the escalation clauses. It also used the 2000 dollar exchange rate to compute respondent's dollar loans. [3] Equitable appealed but properties were levied and auctioned to satisfy the judgment. The Court of Appeals dismissed Equitable's petition for certiorari.

Uploaded by

Charmaine Mejia
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
888 views2 pages

Equitable Pci Bank v. NG Sheung Ngor (2007)

This case involved a dispute between Equitable PCI Bank and respondents Ng Sheung Ngor, Ken Appliance Division, Inc and Benjamin E. Go over promissory notes signed by the respondents to avail of credit facilities from the bank. [1] The respondents claimed they were unaware the documents contained clauses allowing the bank to increase interest rates without their consent. [2] The trial court upheld the validity of the notes but invalidated the escalation clauses. It also used the 2000 dollar exchange rate to compute respondent's dollar loans. [3] Equitable appealed but properties were levied and auctioned to satisfy the judgment. The Court of Appeals dismissed Equitable's petition for certiorari.

Uploaded by

Charmaine Mejia
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

EQUITABLE PCI BANK V.

NG SHEUNG NGOR (2007)


FACTS: Respondent Ng Sheung Ngor, Ken Appliance Division, Inc and Benjamin E.
Go iled an action or annulment and!or reormation o documents and contracts against
petitioner E"uita#le $%I Ban& 'E"uita#le( and its emplo)ees, Aimee *u and Bejan
+ionel Apas.
,. Respondents claimed that E"uita#le induced them to avail o its peso and dollar
credit acilities #) oering lo- interest rates so the) accepted the propodal and
signed the #an&.s printed promissor) notes on various dates #eginning ,//0. But
the) -ere una-are that the documents contain identical escalation clause granting
E"uita#le authorit) to increase interest rates -ithout their consent
1. E"uita#le asserted that respondents &no-ingl) accepted all the terms and
conditions contained in the promissor) notes, also the) continuousl) availed o
and #eneited rom E"uita#le.s credit acilities or ive )ears.
2. 3he trial court upheld the validit) o the promissor) notes ho-ever it invalidated
the escalation clause or it violated the principle o mutualit) o contracts. It also
too& judicial notice o the steep depreciation o the peso during the intervening
period and declared the e4istence o e4traordinar) delation
5. R3% ordered the use o the ,//0 dollar e4change rate in computing respondent.s
dollar denominated loans and a-arded moral and e4emplar) damages.
6. E"uita#le iled an 7R, -hile respondents pra)ed or the issuance o a -rit o
e4ecution.
0. R3% issued an omni#us order den)ing 7R and ordered the issuance o the motion
o a -rit o e4ecution in avor o respondents.
8. 3hree real properties o E"uita#le -ere levied upon and -ere sold in a pu#lic
auction. Respondents -ere the highest #idder and certiicates o sale -ere issued.
9. E"uita#le iled a petition or certiorari -ith an application or an injunction in the
%A to enjoin the implementation and e4ecution o the omni#us order. %A granted
E"uita#le.s application or injunction -as granted.
/. Despite the injunction, E"uita#le.s properties previousl) levied -ere sold in a
pu#lic auction to respondent. E"uita#le moved to annul the auction sale. %A
dismissed the petition or certiorari, hence this petition.
ISSUE: :hat is the relationship #et-een the #an& and its depositor;
HELD: 3he relationship #et-een the #an& and its depositor is that o creditor and
de#tor. <or this reason, a #an& has the right to set o the deposit in its hands or the
pa)ment o a depositor.s inde#tedness. Respondent indeed deaulted on their o#ligation.
<or this reason, E"uita#le had the option to e4ercise its legal right to set=o or
compensation. >o-ever, the R3% mista&enl) 'or, as it no- appears, deli#eratel)(
concluded that E"uita#le acted ?raudulentl) or in #ad aith or in -anton disregard@ o
its contractual o#ligations despite the a#sence o proo. 3he undenia#le act -as that,
-hatever damage respondents sustained -as purel) the conse"uence o their ailure to
pa) their loans. 3here -as thereore a#solutel) no #asis or the a-ard o moral damages
to them.

You might also like