Castelo vs Court of Appeals (244 SCRA 180)

FACTS

On 15 October 1982, petitioners Antonio Castelo, Bernabe Banson, Lourdes Banson and Pompeyo Depante entered into a contract denominated as a "Deed of Conditional Sale" with private respondent Milagros Dela Rosa involving a parcel of land. The agreed price of the land was P269,408.00. Upon signing the contract, private respondent paid petitioners P106,000.00 leaving a balance of P163,408.00. The Deed of Conditional Sale also stipulated that:

"xxx xxx xxx

b.)The balance of P163,408.00 to be paid on or before December 31, 1982 without interest and penalty charges;

c.)Should the said balance [remain unpaid] by the VENDEE, the VENDORS hereby agree to give the VENDEE a grace period of SIX (6) months or up to June 30, 1983 to pay said balance provided that interest at the rate of 12% per annum shall be charged and 1% penalty charge a month shall be imposed on the remaining diminishing balance. 

Private respondent Dela Rosa was unable to pay the remaining balance. Petitioners filed an action for specific performance with damages. RTC rendered the decision ordering the rescission of the Deed of Conditional Sale. Petitioners went on Certiorari to CA. They claimed that rescission of the contract was only an alternative relief available under the Civil Code, while they in their complaint before the RTC, had asked for specific performance with damages.CA reversed the RTC decision. Writ of execution was issued. Private respondent Dela Rosa was required to  pay petitioners a total of P197,723.68. Petitioners filed a motion for reconsideration and a separate motion for alias writ of execution contending that the sum of P197,723.68 was erroneous. They argued that the obligation of private respondent was to pay (a) interest at the rate of twelve percent (12%) per annum plus (b) one percent (1%) penalty charge per month, from default, i.e, from 1 January 1983; that the amount to be paid by the Defendant should be P398,814.88 instead and not P197,723.68 or a difference of P201,091.20.

RTC denied the motion. Further contends that the phrase "to pay interest" found in the dispositive portion of the CA’s November 21, 1986 decision did not refer to the stipulation in the "Deed of Conditional Sale" but rather to the legal rate of interest imposed by the CA which started to run from 12 February 1987, the date of entry of judgment.

Petitioner filed on certiorari to CA. CA dismissed it. But stated that the part of the dispositive portion, ordering the "defendant . . . to pay the balance of the conditional sale in the amount of P163,408.00, to pay interest . . . ." Being a "new" judgment or decision, the computation of the "interest" on the balance of the conditional sale should commence from the date of its ENTRY on February 12, 1987, when the decision became FINAL and EXECUTORY. 

ISSUE

What is the correct interpretation of the phrase "to pay interest" set out in the dispositive portion of the CA decision?

HELD

The established doctrine is that when the dispositive portion of a judgment, which has become final and executory, contains a clerical error or an ambiguity arising from an inadvertent omission, such error or ambiguity may be clarified by reference to the body of the decision itself.

SC believe and so hold that the phrase “to pay interest,” found in the dispositive portion of the CA decision must, under applicable law, refer to the interest stipulated by the parties in the Deed of Conditional Sale which they had entered into on 15 October 1982. SC note, in the first place, that the phrase “to pay interest” comes close upon the heels of the preceding phrase "to comply with her obligation under the conditional sale to pay the balance — of P163,408.00." A strong inference thus arises that the "interest" required to be paid is the interest stipulated as part of the “obligation [of private respondent dela Rosa] under the conditional sale [agreement] to pay the balance of [the purchase price of the land.

In the computation for the amount to be paid, The question is whether, during the period of 1 January 1983 up to 30 June 1983, 12% interest per annum plus 1% penalty charge a month was payable "on the remaining diminishing balance;" or whether during the period from 1 January 1983 to 30 June 1983, only 12% per annum interest was payable while the 1% per month penalty charge would in addition begin to accrue on any balance remaining unpaid as of 1 July 1983.

SC believed the parties intended the latter view. The interpretation SC adopted is also supported by the principle that in case of ambiguity in contract language, that interpretation which establishes a less onerous transmission of rights or imposition of lesser burdens which permits greater reciprocity between the parties, is to be adopted (Art. 1378).

WHEREFORE, the writ of certiorari is hereby GRANTED.

“xxx xx xx

(2)ordering the defendant to comply with her obligation under the conditional sale to pay the balance of the conditional sale in the amount of P163,408.00, to pay interest on the amount of the balance remaining unpaid during the period from 1 January 1983 to 30 June 1983 at the rate of 12% per annum; and, from 1 July 1983 until full payment of the amount due, to pay interest at the rate of 12% per annum plus another 12% per annum (i.e., 1% penalty charge per month), or a total of 24% per annum, on the balance remaining unpaid; and

(3)in default thereof, the rescission of the "Deed of Conditional Sale" is the alternative."

Borromeo vs Court of Appeals (47 SCRA 65)

NATURE

PETITION for review by certiorari of a decision of the Court of Appeals

FACTS

Before 1933, defendant [Jose A. Villamor] was a distributor of lumber belonging to Mr. Miller who was the agent of the Insular Lumber Company in Cebu City. Defendant being a friend and former classmate of plaintiff [Canuto O. Borromeo] used to borrow from the latter certain amounts from time to time. On one occasion, defendant borrowed from plaintiff a large sum of money for which he mortgaged his land and house in Cebu City to pay some pressing obligation with Mr. Miller. Mr. Miller filed a civil action against the defendant and attached his properties including those mortgaged to plaintiff, inasmuch as the deed of mortgage in favor of plaintiff could not be registered because not properly drawn up. Plaintiff then pressed the defendant for settlement of his obligation, but defendant instead offered to execute a document promising to pay his indebtedness even after the lapse of ten years. Liquidation was made and defendant was found to be indebted to plaintiff in the sum of P7,220.00, for which defendant signed a promissory note therefor on November 29, 1933 with interest at the rate of 12% per annum, agreeing to pay as soon as I have money'. The note further stipulate that defendant 'hereby relinquish, renounce, or otherwise waive my rights to the prescriptions established by our Code of Civil Procedure for the collection or recovery of the above sum of P7,220.00. * * * at any time even after the lapse of ten years from the date of this instrument'.

After the execution of the document, plaintiff limited himself to verbally requesting defendant to settle his indebtedness from time to time. Plaintiff did not file any complaint against the defendant within ten years from the execution of the document as there was no property registered in defendant's name, who furthermore assured him that he could collect even after the lapse of ten years. After the last war, plaintiff made various oral demands, but defendants failed to settle his account. CFI: Villamor ordered to pay Borromeo (represented by his heirs) the sum of P7,220.00 within ninety days from the date of the receipt of such decision with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the xpiration of such ninety-day period. CA: reversed CFI ruling

ISSUE

Whether or not the CA erred in reversing the ruling of the CFI in finding the lack of validity of the stipulation amounting to a waiver in line with the principle "that a person cannot renounce future prescription"

HELD

YES! Between two possible interpretations, that which saves rather than destroys is to be preferred.

It is a fundamental principle in the interpretation of contracts that while ordinarily the literal sense of the words employed is to be followed, such is not the case where they "appear to be contrary to the evident intention of the contracting parties," which “intention shall prevail” (Art. 1370). The terms, clauses and conditions contrary to law, morals and public order (in this case the contested stipulation) should be separated from the valid and legal contract when such separation can be made because they are independent of the valid contract which expresses the will of the contracting parties.

Reasoning                                  

 There is nothing implausible in the view that such language renouncing the debtor's right to the prescription established by the Code of Civil Procedure should be given the meaning, as noted in the preceding sentence of the decision of respondent Court, that the debtor could be trusted to pay even after the termination of the ten-year prescriptive period. (so CA should have interpreted the stipulation based on the context of the friendship between the two parties)-'Where an agreement founded on a legal consideration contains several promises, or a promise to do several things, and a part only of the things to be done are illegal, the promises which, can be separated, or the promise, so far as it can be separated, from the illegality, may be valid. The rule is that a lawful promise made for a lawful consideration is not invalid merely because an unlawful promise was made at the same time and for the same consideration, and this rule applies, although the invalidity is due to violation of a statutory provision, unless the statute expressly or by necessary implication declares the entire contract void. The first ten years after November 29, 1933 should not be counted in determining when the action of creditor, now represented by petitioners, could be filed. From the joint record on appeal, it is undoubted that the complaint was filed on January 7, 1953. If the first ten-year period was to be excluded, the creditor had until November 29, 1953 to start judicial proceedings. After deducting the first ten year period which expired on November 29, 1943, there was the additional period of still another ten years.29 Nor could there be any legal objection to the complaint by the creditor Borromeo of January 7, 1953 embodying not merely the fixing of the period within which the debtor Villamor was to pay but likewise the collection of the amount that until then was not paid.

Disposition

Wherefore, the decision of respondent Court of Appeals of March 7, 1964 is reversed, thus giving full force and effect to the decision of the lower court of November 15, 1956. With costs against private respondents.

A new life blossomed

It was about 6 in the evening of February 4, 2012 when I got a call from my classmate Jess. After I greeted her with a hello she hurriedly blurted out "Shie nanganak na daw si Momi Jen"! Upon hearing the news, the feelings of warmth and excitement hurdled in my system and both enclosed my entire being. It was the day that Sikma has long been waiting for -the day that a
new life blossomed. With so much enthusiasm, we immediately scheduled our visit to the cutie-little girl. However, it was only today that I was able to finally took glimpse of our first ever Sikma angel. But seeing her was not an easy undertaking. We've been into some trouble getting inside Vicente Sotto hospital since we were not aware of the hospital policies regarding visiting arrangements. Nevertheless, with some might and fight -not caring if we would look like thieves as we take into the proper timing ensuring that Manong Guard wasn't looking in our direction, we we're able to finally meet her.

I can say that Sikma was on Jenny's (Mae's mom) side all throughout her journey of carrying a new life in her womb. We are all too excited, with questions in mind like -Is it a Boy or a Girl, How does he/she looks like? Will he/she get more features from her mom or from her dad? How is he/she going to call us, will it be tito and tita, auntie and uncle, ate and kuya, sikmayow and sikmahey? Well, the first was already answered. The baby is a SHE and that's unquestionable. However, the second question is still debatable since we still ague among ourselves as to whom the baby resembles more. And as for the third query, well, we still have to settle that issue!

Nonetheless, Sikma is so happy with the new bundle of joy! Rainejane Mae

--xoxo tita/auntie/ate shie :))

Transcending (anthro blog)

Gays, bisexual and transgender people - I would usually consider them as the faces of entertainment industry; seeing them up the stage with all those colorful costumes, with all those make-up, with all those humors and happy dispositions. They would do almost everything to entertain and make us laugh our hearts out. I see them as people who always take things in life lightly. But, after hearing the stories and statements of Rica, Britney, Bemz, Humphrey, Sass, Jonas and those three other individuals, realization slapped me. Life was in fact never light and easy for people like them. When the masks are down, what I saw are people who are discriminated, abused and tormented.

They are in a battle, a bloody struggle for defending and uplifting their rights. I salute these people who stood up before the world and with dignity proclaimed what their human soul dictated them to be. Going against the societal norm and religious dictum is never simple. Nonetheless, their desire for harmonious existence served as the driving force to continue fighting.

In China, they are called Py Bianxingzhe. In Thailand, they are termed as Kateoy. In Indonesia, they are the Waria. In America, they are referred to as Transgendered. In the Philippines, their kind are often called Bakla or Trans Pinay. In a world where we categorize every individual as man and woman, where should these people lie? Do their being less of a man and more of a woman make them less human? To this question my answer is no. I believe that they too, just like any other man or woman, only want a life to live, with freedom, liberty and pursuit of happiness. These things are not ours (man and woman) to take from them (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender). There’s no exclusivity of prescription for these. They too are humans, only that they are unique on their own special ways. Their being unique does not give us the right to treat them with indifference and persecute them. Instead, why don’t we give them one important thing that they really want and need?-- Acceptance!

I remembered watching a documentary show about Trans Pinay (i-Witness). And as an end note, I would like to share the words of Kristine Madrigal, a Trans Pinay. We may ponder them and reach into the very essence of what she said:

"Sa panahon ngayon, hindi na ito question ng kung sino ang makasalanan, kung sino ang banal;

kung sino na lang ang marunong gumawa ng mabuti at marunong makipagkapwa-tao;

sabi nga nila mahirap magpakababae kung hindi ka tunay na babae;

mahirap ding magpakalalake kung hindi ka tunay na lalake;

pero mahirap magpakatao kung hindi nila kami ituturing bilang isang tao."

On track again

I suddenly missed writing here ;) those times when I have to meet all the set deadlines for the class blogs, whether I like it or not, i have to write something on this page. haha. jeezz! i survived, still surviving!

Well, I did not really miss this a hundred percent, only about 20. hehe...yeah because i'm currently having my class blog for my Anthro class. :)

Well, i will try to post new blog from time to time or maybe post here some of my blogs for Anthro. :):):)

Song of Becoming...

Upon reading the poem Song of Becoming, the first image that flashed in my head is that one scene in the movie Kite Runner wherein childhood friends, Amir and Hassan are flying kites. The two characters spent most of their early childhood days playing, roaming the peaceful city streets and being just boys but then those days came to an end when war broke out. They were just like the boys in the poem "who used to frolic and play, launching rainbowed kites on the western wind".

Fadwa Tuqan is known for her representation of the resistance to the Israeli occupation. Though she is a Palestinian, she did not merely represented the Palestinian side in her poem. Because of the presence of the lines: "carried the love's messages like the Bible or the Quran" and "to become the worshipped and the worshipper", it is evident that she is aching and mourning in behalf of both Arab and Jewish boys. She is searching for good fate instead of graves and "sullen tanks" for the innocent ones. She fears for what the future may hold for these boys. She doesn't want the idea that they continue to live amidst the war and engage in war themselves, by the time they grow up; that consequences were shown in her poem to serve as a wake-up call.

A waring state is never a healthy environment for anybody. The word "war" is seemed synonymous with violence and destruction. It doesn't solely destroy ones' physical environment but the lives of the individuals as well. Nobody could be considered a real winner when it comes to wars.

Guests...

I, for one, know no sweeter sight for a man's eyes than his own country, that's what a homeland is for Homer; so does for Mahmoud Darwish. The concept of "watan" or homeland is the central theme of Darwish's poetry. All throughout his life he is in quest for a land which he can call his; for the his fellow Palestinian to be called theirs. Through poetry he made known what is life without a homeland. As what Naomi Shihab Nye put it:

Mahmoud Darwish is the Essential Breath of the Palestinian people, the eloquent witness of exile and belonging, exquisitely tuned singer of images that invoke, link, and shine a brilliant light into the world's whole heart. What he speaks has been embraced by readers around the world-his in an utterly necessary voice, unforgettable once discovered.

Every line of his poem Guests on the Sea revealed his personal experience as an exile; being one of the guests on the sea. He himself had savored the experience of being homeless, of being a nomad, just like any other Palestinians. Their venture of having a place for their own has grown long, so long that "the plants of the distance have grown tall" already. Why is it that the realization of that simple longing is so difficult? They are pleading to the sea, to those who are in power, not to give them the "song they do not deserve" which is the exodus from their homeland. Perhaps that's why that line is given stress and repeated.

Mahmoud Darwish gave us a clear view of what is in the heart of every homeless individauls, their wants and their needs. Though, he is a poet of resistance he believed that even there's struggle, there's also the ray of hope and that peace is attainable.