credit transaction case digests
Francisco v. Gregorio
GR No. L-59519 July 20, 1982
Facts: Petitioner Francisco, through her daughter, agreed to lease a piece of land where a building should be constructed by the former. The contract provided, among others: the deposit to the account of the lessor-petitioner the amount of 150k representing 30K goodwill money and 120K advanced rental and a stipulation that in case the parties will not agree as to the terms and conditions of the final contract of lease, the pre-lease contract shall be declared null and void and the petitioner shall return the deposit plus legal interest. Before final occupancy, the petitioner declared the pre-lease contract null and void, leased the premises to another lessee and offered to return the 150K deposit. Private respondents refused to accept so that petitioner was prompted to make a consignation of the money with the Court. Private respondents then filed a complaint, hence respondent judge ruled in their favor with an order to pay the amount of deposit plus compensatory interests.
Issue: Is the petitioner liable for payment of interest despite tender of payment before demand?
Held: No. The award for interests in an action for the recovery of a sum of money partakes of a nature of an award for damages. Thus, Article 2209 of the Civil Code provides: “Art. 2209. If the obligation consists in the payment of a sum of money, and the debtor incurs in delay, the indemnity for damages, there being no stipulation to the contrary, shall be the payment of the interest agreed upon, and in the absence of stipulation, the legal interest, which is six percent per annum.” Clearly, the indemnity for interest on a monetary obligation attaches only when the obligor incurs delay, that is, when he is in default, it being a fundamental principle of law that: “Those obliged to deliver or to do something incur in delay from the time the obligee judicially or extrajudicially demands from them the fulfillment of their obligation. (Art. 1169,
GR No. L-59519 July 20, 1982
Facts: Petitioner Francisco, through her daughter, agreed to lease a piece of land where a building should be constructed by the former. The contract provided, among others: the deposit to the account of the lessor-petitioner the amount of 150k representing 30K goodwill money and 120K advanced rental and a stipulation that in case the parties will not agree as to the terms and conditions of the final contract of lease, the pre-lease contract shall be declared null and void and the petitioner shall return the deposit plus legal interest. Before final occupancy, the petitioner declared the pre-lease contract null and void, leased the premises to another lessee and offered to return the 150K deposit. Private respondents refused to accept so that petitioner was prompted to make a consignation of the money with the Court. Private respondents then filed a complaint, hence respondent judge ruled in their favor with an order to pay the amount of deposit plus compensatory interests.
Issue: Is the petitioner liable for payment of interest despite tender of payment before demand?
Held: No. The award for interests in an action for the recovery of a sum of money partakes of a nature of an award for damages. Thus, Article 2209 of the Civil Code provides: “Art. 2209. If the obligation consists in the payment of a sum of money, and the debtor incurs in delay, the indemnity for damages, there being no stipulation to the contrary, shall be the payment of the interest agreed upon, and in the absence of stipulation, the legal interest, which is six percent per annum.” Clearly, the indemnity for interest on a monetary obligation attaches only when the obligor incurs delay, that is, when he is in default, it being a fundamental principle of law that: “Those obliged to deliver or to do something incur in delay from the time the obligee judicially or extrajudicially demands from them the fulfillment of their obligation. (Art. 1169,