Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 282 views

    Bachrach V Talisay Silay

    Uploaded by

    Tenet Manzano
    The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's judgment that Bachrach Motor Co has preferential right over Talisay-Silay Milling Co. (TSMC) to the bonus owed to Mariano Lacson Ledesma. Specifically: 1) TSMC induced farmers including Ledesma to mortgage their lands to a bank to secure TSMC's debt, promising a 2% annual bonus on the debt amount. 2) Bachrach sued TSMC for over P13k in bonuses owed to Ledesma. The bank claimed preferential right as the bonuses constituted civil fruits of the mortgaged land. 3) The Supreme Court held the bonuses were not civil fruits or income from the land, but rather

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Bachrach V Talisay Silay

    Uploaded by

    Tenet Manzano
    282 views1 page
    The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's judgment that Bachrach Motor Co has preferential right over Talisay-Silay Milling Co. (TSMC) to the bonus owed to Mariano Lacson Ledesma. Specifically: 1) TSMC induced farmers including Ledesma to mortgage their lands to a bank to secure TSMC's debt, promising a 2% annual bonus on the debt amount. 2) Bachrach sued TSMC for over P13k in bonuses owed to Ledesma. The bank claimed preferential right as the bonuses constituted civil fruits of the mortgaged land. 3) The Supreme Court held the bonuses were not civil fruits or income from the land, but rather

    Original Title

    Bachrach v Talisay Silay

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's judgment that Bachrach Motor Co has preferential right over Talisay-Silay Milling Co. (TSMC) to the bonus owed to Mariano Lacson Ledesma. Specifically: 1) TSMC induced farmers including Ledesma to mortgage their lands to a bank to secure TSMC's debt, promising a 2% annual bonus on the debt amount. 2) Bachrach sued TSMC for over P13k in bonuses owed to Ledesma. The bank claimed preferential right as the bonuses constituted civil fruits of the mortgaged land. 3) The Supreme Court held the bonuses were not civil fruits or income from the land, but rather

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    282 views1 page

    Bachrach V Talisay Silay

    Uploaded by

    Tenet Manzano
    The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's judgment that Bachrach Motor Co has preferential right over Talisay-Silay Milling Co. (TSMC) to the bonus owed to Mariano Lacson Ledesma. Specifically: 1) TSMC induced farmers including Ledesma to mortgage their lands to a bank to secure TSMC's debt, promising a 2% annual bonus on the debt amount. 2) Bachrach sued TSMC for over P13k in bonuses owed to Ledesma. The bank claimed preferential right as the bonuses constituted civil fruits of the mortgaged land. 3) The Supreme Court held the bonuses were not civil fruits or income from the land, but rather

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Barach Motor Co. vs. Talisay-Silay Milling Co.

    No. 35223
    Romualdez, J.

    Sept. 17, 1931

    Facts:
    -

    December 22, 1923: Talisay-Silay Miling Co. Inc., (TSMC) was indebted to PNB. To secure the
    payment for its debt, TSMC was able to induce its planters, including a certain Mariano Lacson
    Ledesma, to mortgage their land to the creditor bank.
    o To compensate the farmers for the risk they took, TSMC passed a resolution on the same
    date (later amended March 23, 1928) that undertook to credit the owners of mortgaged
    lands every year with a sum equal to two percentum of the debt secured according to the
    yearly balance, the payment of the bonus being made at once, or in part from time to
    time, as soon as the central became free from its obligation to PNB and had funds thereof.
    Bachrach Motor Co., Inc. later on filed a complaint against TSMC for the delivery of P13,850 (or
    promissory notes or other instruments of credit for that sum) on June 30, 1930 representing the
    bonus of Mariano Lacson Ledesma given by TSMC, and to render accounting on the amount that
    the sugar central owed Ledesma and that the sale made by Ledesma be declared null and void
    (Not specified what sale this isa conjecture would be that MLL sold his land to Cesar
    Ledesma).
    o PNB: filed a third party claim alleging a preferential right to whatever amount MLL
    would be entitled. PNB claimed that such bonuses constitute civil fruits of the land
    mortgaged to said bank.
    o Cesar Ledesma: said he was buyer in good faith .
    o Bachrach: as a response to the bank, said that its credit against MLL was prior and
    preferential to the bank.
    CFI Iloilo: held that Bachrach has the preferred right over MLLs bonus.
    Hence, this petition.

    Issues/Held:
    -

    Art. 355 of the (old) CC considers three things as civil fruits: 1. Rents of buildings; 2. The
    proceeds from leases of lands; 3. Income from perpetual or life annuities, or other similar sources
    of revenue (shortened by the court as 3. certain kinds of income). As the bonus in the case is
    not of rent nor proceeds from lease, can it be a form of income?
    o SC: No. Said bonus bears no immediate, but only a remote and accidental relation to the
    land mentioned, having been granted as compensation for the risk of having subjected
    ones land to a lien in favor of the bank for the benefit of the entity granting said bonus.
    o In short, this is not civil fruits or income from mortgaged property, which, as far as
    concerned, has nothing to do with it. This stems from MLLs generosity in facing the
    danger (of mortgaging ones land) for the protection of the central.
    o Hence the amount of the bonus is not based upon the value, importance or any other
    circumstance of the mortgaged land, but upon the total value of the debt thereby secured.

    Judgment Affirmed.

    You might also like