Case Digest (G.R. No. 129644) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In China Banking Corporation v. Court of Appeals et al. (G.R. No. 129644, March 7, 2000), Alfonso Roxas Chua and his wife, Kiang Ming Chu Chua, owned a residential lot in San Juan, Metro Manila, covered by TCT No. 410603. In 1984, Metrobank levied on the property in Civil Case No. 82-14134, prompting Kiang to file a suit contesting enforcement against their conjugal property. The spouses entered a compromise limiting enforcement to Alfonso’s one-half undivided share. Meanwhile, in 1985 China Banking Corporation obtained a judgment against Pacific Multi Commercial Corporation and Alfonso for ₱2.5 million on promissory notes and caused a levy and sale on Alfonso’s one-half share in 1991 and 1992, respectively. In November 1988, prior to China Bank’s levy, Alfonso assigned his right of redemption over that share to his son, Paulino Roxas Chua, who redeemed it immediately and had the redemption annotated on TCT No. 410603 in March 1989. In May 1993 Paulino and Kiang filed Civil Case Case Digest (G.R. No. 129644) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Ownership and Initial Levy
- Alfonso Roxas Chua and his wife, Kiang Ming Chu Chua, owned residential land in San Juan, Metro Manila, covered by TCT No. 410603.
- On February 2, 1984, the Manila RTC issued a notice of levy in Civil Case No. 82-14134 (Metrobank vs. Pacific Multi Commercial Corp. and Alfonso R. Chua), annotated on TCT No. 410603.
- Contest and Compromise Agreement
- Kiang Ming Chu Chua filed a complaint questioning the levy, claiming the property was conjugal and beyond enforcement.
- Parties compromised that the levy was valid only against Alfonso’s ½ undivided conjugal share.
- China Bank’s Collection Suit and Levy
- On June 19, 1985, China Banking Corporation sued Pacific Multi Agro-Industrial Corp. and Alfonso R. Chua in Civil Case No. 85-31257 on three promissory notes totaling ₱2.5 million.
- On November 7, 1985, the court rendered judgment in favor of China Bank for ₱1.8 million plus 21% per annum interest; ₱350,000 plus 12% interest; another ₱350,000 plus 12% interest; 10% attorney’s fees; and costs.
- On February 4, 1991, a sheriff’s levy was made on Alfonso’s interest in TCT 410603; a certificate of sale in favor of China Bank issued April 13, 1992 (inscribed May 4, 1992).
- Assignment and Redemption by Paulino Roxas Chua
- Pacific Multi-Agro and Alfonso’s appeal was dismissed September 29, 1988.
- On November 21, 1988, Alfonso assigned his right to redeem the ½ undivided share to his son, Paulino R. Chua.
- Paulino redeemed that share the same day, with annotation entries Nos. 7629 and 7630 dated March 14, 1989.
- Civil Case No. 63199 Before RTC-Pasig
- On May 20, 1993, Paulino and Kiang instituted suit against China Bank, claiming a prior better right: the assignment and redemption in 1988-1989 preceded China Bank’s 1991 annotation.
- On July 15, 1994, RTC-Pasig granted judgment in favor of Paulino and Kiang: awarded moral and exemplary damages, attorney’s fees, costs; made injunction permanent; and ordered cancellation of China Bank’s annotations.
- The Court of Appeals, on June 26, 1997, affirmed, holding China Bank remiss for not redeeming under Rules of Court.
Issues:
- Whether the 1988 assignment of the right to redeem by Alfonso to Paulino was made in fraud of China Bank’s rights and thus rescissible under Civil Code Article 1387.
- Whether China Bank’s failure to redeem under Rule 39 precluded enforcement of its judgment or levy.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)