Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 172 views

    N-10-01 Jimenez v. Bucoy

    Uploaded by

    刘王钟
    The administrator argued that the promissory notes were invalid because they did not contain an express promise to pay a specified amount. However, the Supreme Court ruled that (1) an acknowledgement of debt can become a promise to pay if it contains implied terms of payment, such as being "payable" on a certain date. (2) Here, the notes stated the total amount and said it was "payable 6 months after the war," which implied a promise to pay. Therefore, the petitioner was entitled to the full amount of the promissory notes.

    Copyright:

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

    N-10-01 Jimenez v. Bucoy

    Uploaded by

    刘王钟
    172 views1 page
    The administrator argued that the promissory notes were invalid because they did not contain an express promise to pay a specified amount. However, the Supreme Court ruled that (1) an acknowledgement of debt can become a promise to pay if it contains implied terms of payment, such as being "payable" on a certain date. (2) Here, the notes stated the total amount and said it was "payable 6 months after the war," which implied a promise to pay. Therefore, the petitioner was entitled to the full amount of the promissory notes.

    Original Description:

    Digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The administrator argued that the promissory notes were invalid because they did not contain an express promise to pay a specified amount. However, the Supreme Court ruled that (1) an acknowledgement of debt can become a promise to pay if it contains implied terms of payment, such as being "payable" on a certain date. (2) Here, the notes stated the total amount and said it was "payable 6 months after the war," which implied a promise to pay. Therefore, the petitioner was entitled to the full amount of the promissory notes.

    Copyright:

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

    N-10-01 Jimenez v. Bucoy

    Uploaded by

    刘王钟
    The administrator argued that the promissory notes were invalid because they did not contain an express promise to pay a specified amount. However, the Supreme Court ruled that (1) an acknowledgement of debt can become a promise to pay if it contains implied terms of payment, such as being "payable" on a certain date. (2) Here, the notes stated the total amount and said it was "payable 6 months after the war," which implied a promise to pay. Therefore, the petitioner was entitled to the full amount of the promissory notes.

    Copyright:

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

    Jimenez v. Bucoy 1.

    Whether or not Pacifica may collect from the promissory notes


    103 SCRA 41| Feb. 28, 1958 | Bengzon, J. even though there is not express promise to pay a specified
    Petition: for certiorari amount – YES.
    Petitioners: Intestate of Luther Young and Pacita Young, spouses.
    Pacifica Jimenez, petitioner and appellee RULING & RATIO
    Respondents: Dr. Jose Bucoy, administrator and appellant 1. An acknowledgement may become a promise by the
    Nego. Section 10. addition of words by which a promise of payment is naturally
    implied, such as “payable,” “payable on a given day,”
    DOCTRINE “payable on demand,” or “paid when called for.”
    An acknowledgement of a debt becomes a promise to pay by the a. To constitute a good promissory note, no precise
    addition of words implying a promise of payment, such as “payable, words of contract are necessary, provided they
    “payable on a given day,” “payable on demand.” amount, in legal effect, to a promise to pay. If over
    and aboe the mere acknowledgement of the debt
    FACTS there may be collected from the words used a
    promise to pay it, the instrument may be regarded
    as a promissory note.
    • In this intestate of Luther Young and Pacita Young, who died in b. In the instant case, the note stated “received from
    1954 and 1952, respectively, Pacifica Jimenez present for Miss Pacifica Jimenez the total amount of P21k,
    payment 4 promissory notes signed by Pacita for different payable 6 months after the war, without interest.”
    amounts totaling P21k. This amounted to a promise to pay, hence a valid
    • The administrator was willing to pay provided adjustment of the promissory note.
    sums be may in line with the Ballantyne schedule. DISPOSITION
    o The Balantyme Conversion Table does not apply where • Petition denied.
    the monetary obligation was not payable during the
    Japanese occupation. Here, since the promissory notes
    expressly stated the the debt would be due 6 months
    after the war, the Conversion Table should not apply to
    the promissory notes, hence Pacifica is entitled to the full
    P21k.
    • Pacifica objected to this and insisted on full payment.
    • The lower court ruled that Pacifica should be awarded the full
    amount, hence this petition by the administrator.
    • The Supreme Ruled that indeed Pacifica was entitled to the full
    P21k, pursuant to the promissory notes, so the administrator put
    up the defense that the promissory notes contained no express
    promise to pay a specified amount (This is the main argument in
    this case).

    ISSUES

    Kool Kids 2016 | ALS 2D N-10-01 Jimenez v. Bucoy.pdf


    AURELIO | BALLESTEROS | BATUNGBACAL | BILIRAN | CADIENTE | DONES | GALLARDO | GESTA | GUBATAN | PINTOR | SY | TOLEDO Page 1 of 1

    You might also like