Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 40 views

    PNB Vs SAYO

    Uploaded by

    Vincent Rey Bernardo
    PNB endorsed warehouse receipts for sugar stocks held by Noah's Ark Sugar Refinery as security for loans to Luis and Cresencia. When Luis and Cresencia defaulted on the loans, PNB demanded delivery of the sugar stocks. Noah's Ark refused, claiming ownership and a warehouseman's lien for storage fees. The Supreme Court ruled that while PNB was entitled to the sugar stocks as endorsee, delivery was conditional on paying the lien. However, Noah's Ark lost the lien by refusing delivery for an invalid reason of adverse ownership instead of unpaid fees. PNB was still liable for storage fees and charges up until the date of refusal.

    Copyright:

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

    PNB Vs SAYO

    Uploaded by

    Vincent Rey Bernardo
    40 views1 page
    PNB endorsed warehouse receipts for sugar stocks held by Noah's Ark Sugar Refinery as security for loans to Luis and Cresencia. When Luis and Cresencia defaulted on the loans, PNB demanded delivery of the sugar stocks. Noah's Ark refused, claiming ownership and a warehouseman's lien for storage fees. The Supreme Court ruled that while PNB was entitled to the sugar stocks as endorsee, delivery was conditional on paying the lien. However, Noah's Ark lost the lien by refusing delivery for an invalid reason of adverse ownership instead of unpaid fees. PNB was still liable for storage fees and charges up until the date of refusal.

    Original Title

    361688672-PNB-vs-SAYO.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    PNB endorsed warehouse receipts for sugar stocks held by Noah's Ark Sugar Refinery as security for loans to Luis and Cresencia. When Luis and Cresencia defaulted on the loans, PNB demanded delivery of the sugar stocks. Noah's Ark refused, claiming ownership and a warehouseman's lien for storage fees. The Supreme Court ruled that while PNB was entitled to the sugar stocks as endorsee, delivery was conditional on paying the lien. However, Noah's Ark lost the lien by refusing delivery for an invalid reason of adverse ownership instead of unpaid fees. PNB was still liable for storage fees and charges up until the date of refusal.

    Copyright:

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

    PNB Vs SAYO

    Uploaded by

    Vincent Rey Bernardo
    PNB endorsed warehouse receipts for sugar stocks held by Noah's Ark Sugar Refinery as security for loans to Luis and Cresencia. When Luis and Cresencia defaulted on the loans, PNB demanded delivery of the sugar stocks. Noah's Ark refused, claiming ownership and a warehouseman's lien for storage fees. The Supreme Court ruled that while PNB was entitled to the sugar stocks as endorsee, delivery was conditional on paying the lien. However, Noah's Ark lost the lien by refusing delivery for an invalid reason of adverse ownership instead of unpaid fees. PNB was still liable for storage fees and charges up until the date of refusal.

    Copyright:

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

    PNB v SAYO, JR.

    ISSUE: WoN PNB is entitled to the stocks of sugar as the endorsee


    of the quedans, without paying the lien
    FACTS

    - Noah’s Ark Sugar Refinery (Noah’s) issued several


    warehouse receipts (quedans), which were negotiated to SC: YES
    Rosa, RNS and St. Therese (vendees), which were again
    negotiated to Luis and Cresencia, which they (Luis and - While PNB is entitled to the stocks of sugar as the endorsee
    Cresencia) endorsed to PNB as security for 2 loan of the quedans, delivery to it shall be effected only upon
    agreements. payment of the storage fees.

    o Transfer of quedans – Noah’s  Rosa, RNS and St. - The warehouseman is entitled to the warehouseman’s lien
    Therese  Luis and Cresencia  PNB that attaches to the goods invokable against anyone who
    claims a right of possession thereon.
    - Luis and Cresencia failed to pay their loans hence PNB
    demanded delivery of sugar stocks, however, Noah’s Ark - However, in this case, the lien was lost when R refused to
    refused, alleging ownership thereof. deliver the goods, which were not anchored to a valid
    excuse (i.e. non satisfaction of W/Hman Lien) but on an
    - Noah’s Ark contended that the agreement made by them adverse claim of ownership.
    with the vendees was stopped since the bank dishonored
    the payments made by the vendees to Noah’s Ark. As such, - The loss of W/H Man’s lien does not necessarily mean the
    the vendees and the endorsers of the quedans never extinguishment of the obligation to pay the W/H fees and
    acquired ownership thereof. charges which continues to be a personal liability of the
    owners, PNB in this case. However, such fees and charges
    - Noah’s Ark claimed for warehouseman’s lien for the storage have ceased to accrue from the date of the rejection by
    of the goods. Noah’s Ark to heed the lawful demand for the release of the
    goods.
    - LC granted lien

    - PNB appealed

    You might also like