Title
Land Bank of the Philippines vs. David
Case
G.R. No. 176344
Decision Date
Aug 22, 2008
A borrower challenges the foreclosure proceedings and interest rates imposed by a bank, leading the Supreme Court to declare the foreclosure sale null and void and reduce the interest rate and penalty charges.
Font Size

Case Digest (G.R. No. 176344)

Facts:

  • Yolanda G. David operated a poultry business named David Poultry Farm in Arayat, Pampanga.
  • On April 21, 1993, she secured a loan of P1,100,000 from the Land Bank of the Philippines, with interest rates aligned to prevailing lender's rates and a 12% per annum penalty for defaults.
  • David mortgaged a parcel of land (Transfer Certificate of Title No. 334702-R) to secure the loan.
  • Due to business setbacks, a Restructuring Agreement was made on April 18, 1996, establishing a new principal balance of P1,171,467.18 and an interest rate of 17% per annum.
  • After failing to make two consecutive quarterly payments, Land Bank initiated foreclosure proceedings.
  • On July 28, 1997, David filed a complaint in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) to stop the foreclosure, claiming the interest rates were usurious.
  • The RTC granted a Temporary Restraining Order but later denied her request for a preliminary injunction.
  • The mortgaged property was sold at public auction for P1,298,460.88.
  • David filed a supplemental complaint to annul the sale, arguing the amount was due to usurious interest.
  • The RTC dismissed her complaint, but the Court of Appeals found the interest and penalty charges excessive, reducing them and nullifying the foreclosure sale.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Yolanda G. David, affirming the Court of Appeals' decision.
  • The Court found both the interest rate and penalty charges to be excessive, reducing them to 12% per annum and 5% per annum...(Unlock)

Ratio:

  • The ruling was based on the principle that courts can equitably reduce interest rates and penalty charges deemed iniquitous or unconscionable, as per Article 1229 of the Civil Code.
  • The Court emphasized that determining what constitutes an iniquitous or unconscionable rate is at the discretion of the courts, considering the specific circumstances of each case.
  • The loan was part of a social assistance program aimed at improving ...continue reading

Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.

© 2024 Jur.ph. All rights reserved.