[go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd
Upload
352 views1 page

Clara Tambunting de Legarda Vs Victoria Desbarats Miailhe

This case involves a dispute over payment of a mortgage. The plaintiff deposited payment in Japanese military notes, which the defendant claimed violated their agreement to pay in Philippine or English currency. However, the court ruled that at the time of maturity, only Japanese notes or Philippine currency were available as legal tender due to Japanese occupation. As such, the plaintiff's tender of payment in Japanese notes was valid and in accordance with their agreement, since it was the only permissible currency at the time. The defendant did not have the right to demand payment in an impossible or illegal currency.

Uploaded by

Jed Sulit
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
352 views1 page

Clara Tambunting de Legarda Vs Victoria Desbarats Miailhe

This case involves a dispute over payment of a mortgage. The plaintiff deposited payment in Japanese military notes, which the defendant claimed violated their agreement to pay in Philippine or English currency. However, the court ruled that at the time of maturity, only Japanese notes or Philippine currency were available as legal tender due to Japanese occupation. As such, the plaintiff's tender of payment in Japanese notes was valid and in accordance with their agreement, since it was the only permissible currency at the time. The defendant did not have the right to demand payment in an impossible or illegal currency.

Uploaded by

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

Clara Tambunting De Legarda vs Victoria Desbarats

Miailhe, G.R. No. L-3435 (Alternative and Facultative


Obligations)
Facts: On June 3, 1944, plaintiffs filed a complaint against original defendant
William. Burke, alleging defendant's unjustified refusal to accept payment in
discharge of a mortgage indebtedness in his favor and praying that the latter
be ordered to receive the sum of P75,920.83 deposited by plaintiff Clara
Tambunting de Legarda, the mortgagor, on the same date with the clerk of
this court in payment of the mortgage indebtedness of said plaintiff to
defendant herein, to execute the corresponding deed of release of
mortgage, and to pay damages in the sum of P1,000. After the hearing, the
petition was granted in favor of the plaintiff. After the Japanese occupation,
the respondent filed a case claiming that petitioner de Legarda violated her
agreement with defendant, by forcing to deposit Japanese military notes
when they originally agreed that the interest was to be condoned until after
the occupation and that payment was rendered either in Philippine or English
currency. Defendant was later substituted upon death by his heir Miailhe and
the Courts judged in defendants favor. Petitioner now assails the said
decision.
Issue: Whether or not the defendant could insist on the payment of English
currency.
Ruling: No, the Court ruled that the option to demand payment of the
indebtedness has to be exercised upon maturity of the obligation, which is
February 17, 1943. On the said date, the only currency available is the
Philippine currency, or the Japanese Military notes, because all other
currencies, including the English, were outlawed by a proclamation issued by
the Japanese Imperial Commander on January 3, 1942, making the right of
election to ceaseto exist on that date because it had become legally
impossible. And this is so because in alternative obligations there is no right
to choose undertakings that are impossible or illegal under the Article 1132,
par. 2 of the Civil Code. In other words, the obligation on the part of the
debtor to pay the mortgage indebtedness has since then ceased to be
alternative under Articles 1134 & 1136, par. 1 of the Civil Code. Thus, the
tender of payment made by the plaintiff in Japanese Military notes was a
valid tender because it was the only currency permissible at the time, and
the same was made in accordance with the agreement because payment in
Japanese Military notes during the occupation is tantamount to payment in
Philippine currency.

You might also like