Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 58 views

    Homeowners V Dailo

    Uploaded by

    Allen Windel Bernabe
    The petitioner bank sued the widow Miguela C. Dailo to recover property used as collateral for a loan obtained by her late husband Marcelino Dailo, Jr. without her consent. The court ruled in favor of Miguela, finding that the property was part of the conjugal partnership between Miguela and Marcelino and that the bank failed to prove the loan benefited the family as required. Therefore, the property could not be held liable for the loan.

    Copyright:

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

    Homeowners V Dailo

    Uploaded by

    Allen Windel Bernabe
    58 views1 page
    The petitioner bank sued the widow Miguela C. Dailo to recover property used as collateral for a loan obtained by her late husband Marcelino Dailo, Jr. without her consent. The court ruled in favor of Miguela, finding that the property was part of the conjugal partnership between Miguela and Marcelino and that the bank failed to prove the loan benefited the family as required. Therefore, the property could not be held liable for the loan.

    Original Title

    Homeowners v Dailo

    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 petitioner bank sued the widow Miguela C. Dailo to recover property used as collateral for a loan obtained by her late husband Marcelino Dailo, Jr. without her consent. The court ruled in favor of Miguela, finding that the property was part of the conjugal partnership between Miguela and Marcelino and that the bank failed to prove the loan benefited the family as required. Therefore, the property could not be held liable for the loan.

    Copyright:

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

    Homeowners V Dailo

    Uploaded by

    Allen Windel Bernabe
    The petitioner bank sued the widow Miguela C. Dailo to recover property used as collateral for a loan obtained by her late husband Marcelino Dailo, Jr. without her consent. The court ruled in favor of Miguela, finding that the property was part of the conjugal partnership between Miguela and Marcelino and that the bank failed to prove the loan benefited the family as required. Therefore, the property could not be held liable for the loan.

    Copyright:

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

    HOMEOWNERS SAVINGS & LOAN BANK, - The CA favored Miguela.

    petitioner - Hence this petition.


    v
    MIGUELA C. DAILO, respondent ISSUES:
    - W/N the conjugal partnership is
    liable for the payment of loan
    FACTS: obtained by the late Marcelino Dailo,
    - Respondent Miguela C. Dailo and Jr. the same having redounded to
    Marcelino Dailo, Jr. were married on the benefit of the family.
    August 8, 1967. During their
    marriage, the spouses purchased a RULING:
    house and lot. - The petition lacks merit.
    - The Deed of Absolute Sale, however,
    was executed only in favor of the late - The Court held that the property
    Marcelino Dailo, Jr. as vendee relation in this case shall be
    thereof to the exclusion of his wife. governed by Family Code, and
    suppletorily by Civil Code.
    - In 1993, through a grant of Special - The spouses were married in 1967,
    Power of Attorney to Lilibeth having no marriage settlement.
    Gesmundo, Marcelino obtained a Thus, their properties were governed
    loan from petitioner Homeowners by the system of Conjugal Property
    Savings and Loan Bank, secured by of Gains.
    the property in San Pablo.
    - Gesmundo also executed a Real - For the property to be held liable,
    Estate Mortgage on the subject the obligation contracted by the late
    property in favor of petitioner spouse must have redounded to the
    without the knowledge and consent benefit of the conjugal partnership.
    of respondent. - The burden of proof that the debt
    - The loan matured and remained was contracted for the benefit of the
    outstanding which led to the conjugal partnership of gains lies
    foreclosure of the mortgage. with the creditor-party litigant.
    - The court held that for failure to
    - In 1995, Marcelino died. present clear proof that the said
    obligation redounded to the benefit
    - Respondent claimed that she had no of the family which under Article 121
    knowledge of the mortgage and the of the Family Code, the subject
    property was conjugal in nature, property could not be held liable.
    thus she instituted Nullity of Real
    Estate Mortgage and Certificate of
    Sale, etc. against petitioner. - WHEREFORE, the petition is
    - Petitioner prayed for the dismissal of DENIED.
    the complaint on the ground that the
    property in question was the
    exclusive property of the late
    Marcelino Dailo, Jr.

    You might also like