Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 35 views

    REVIEWED (100) ICB V IAC

    Uploaded by

    Airess Canoy Casimero
    This document discusses a legal case between International Corporate Bank (ICB) and a private respondent. ICB loaned the private respondent 50M, secured by mortgaged properties. Only 20M was approved for release, which was used to pay other debts to ICB. The private respondent claimed she received nothing from the loan. She invested in a money market placement but ICB refused to release the proceeds, claiming she failed to pay her mortgaged debt. ICB foreclosed on the properties and claims a deficiency of P6.81M remains. The private respondent sued, arguing foreclosure was illegal as the debt was not due. ICB denies the allegations and asserts a right to offset the money market claim against the deficiency

    Copyright:

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

    REVIEWED (100) ICB V IAC

    Uploaded by

    Airess Canoy Casimero
    35 views1 page
    This document discusses a legal case between International Corporate Bank (ICB) and a private respondent. ICB loaned the private respondent 50M, secured by mortgaged properties. Only 20M was approved for release, which was used to pay other debts to ICB. The private respondent claimed she received nothing from the loan. She invested in a money market placement but ICB refused to release the proceeds, claiming she failed to pay her mortgaged debt. ICB foreclosed on the properties and claims a deficiency of P6.81M remains. The private respondent sued, arguing foreclosure was illegal as the debt was not due. ICB denies the allegations and asserts a right to offset the money market claim against the deficiency

    Original Title

    REVIEWED (100) ICB v IAC

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document discusses a legal case between International Corporate Bank (ICB) and a private respondent. ICB loaned the private respondent 50M, secured by mortgaged properties. Only 20M was approved for release, which was used to pay other debts to ICB. The private respondent claimed she received nothing from the loan. She invested in a money market placement but ICB refused to release the proceeds, claiming she failed to pay her mortgaged debt. ICB foreclosed on the properties and claims a deficiency of P6.81M remains. The private respondent sued, arguing foreclosure was illegal as the debt was not due. ICB denies the allegations and asserts a right to offset the money market claim against the deficiency

    Copyright:

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

    REVIEWED (100) ICB V IAC

    Uploaded by

    Airess Canoy Casimero
    This document discusses a legal case between International Corporate Bank (ICB) and a private respondent. ICB loaned the private respondent 50M, secured by mortgaged properties. Only 20M was approved for release, which was used to pay other debts to ICB. The private respondent claimed she received nothing from the loan. She invested in a money market placement but ICB refused to release the proceeds, claiming she failed to pay her mortgaged debt. ICB foreclosed on the properties and claims a deficiency of P6.81M remains. The private respondent sued, arguing foreclosure was illegal as the debt was not due. ICB denies the allegations and asserts a right to offset the money market claim against the deficiency

    Copyright:

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

    (100) International Corporate Bank v IAC, GR 69560, June 30, 1988 [PerJ.

    Paras, Second Division]


    Facts: Private respondent secured from International Corporate Bank (ICB) a 50M loan. To
    secure this loan, she mortgaged her real properties. Of this loan, only the amount of 20M
    was approved for release. The same amount was used to pay for her other obligations to the
    same bank, Thus, she claims that she did not receive anything from the approved loan.
    Private respondent made a money market placement with ATRIUM. Meanwhile, private
    respondent allegedly failed to pay her mortgaged indebtedness to the bank so that the
    latter refused to pay the proceeds of the money market placement on maturity. With
    Atrium being the only bidder, said properties were sold in its favor for only 20M. ICB
    claims that after deducting this amount, private respondent is still indebted in the amount
    of P6.81M. Private respondent filed a complaint with the trial court against ICB for
    annulment of the sheriff's sale of the mortgaged properties, for the release to her of the
    balance of her loan from petitioner in the amount of 30M, and for recovery the proceeds
    of her money market investment and for damages. She alleges in her complaint that the
    mortgage is not yet due and demandable and accordingly the foreclosure was illegal. ICB
    denies private respondent's allegations and asserts that it has the right to apply or set off
    private respondent's money market claim and interposes counterclaims for the recovery of
    the balance of its deficiency claim after deducting the proceeds of the money market
    placement, and for damages.

    WHAT IS THE TOPIC ALL ABOUT?


     LEGAL Compensation
    Article 1278 of the Civil Code - Compensation shall take place when two persons, in their own
    right, are creditors and debtors of each other.

    Article 1279 of the Civil Code - For legal compensation to take place, the two debts be due and
    they be liquidated and demandable. Compensation is not proper where the claim of the person
    asserting the set-off against the other is not clear nor liquidated; compensation cannot extend to
    unliquidated, disputed claim arising from breach of contract.

    Article 1290 of the Civil Code - When all the requisites mentioned in Art. 1279 of the Civil Code
    are present, compensation takes effect by operation of law, even without the consent or knowledge
    of the debtors.

    WHAT DID WE LEARN FROM THE CASE?

    Whether or not legal compensation took place

    No. Legal compensation did not took place. For legal compensation to take place, both debts must
    be liquidated and demandable. ICB is indeed indebted to private respondent representing the
    proceeds of her money market investment. But whether private
    respondent is indebted to ICB representing the deficiency
    balance after the foreclosure of the mortgage executed to
    secure the loan extended to her, is vigorously disputed.

    You might also like