Case Digest (G.R. No. 128106-07) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In Soledad Soco, Petitioner, vs. Hon. Francis Militante, Incumbent Presiding Judge of the Court of First Instance of Cebu, Branch XII, Cebu City and Regino Francisco, Jr., Respondents (G.R. No. L-58961, June 28, 1983), the petitioner, Soledad Soco, lessor of a commercial building on Manalili Street, Cebu City, executed a ten-year lease renewable for another ten years with Regino Francisco, Jr., lessee, on January 17, 1973, for a monthly rental of ₱800.00. Francisco sub-leased part of the premises at a higher rate, prompting Soco to seek annulment and reformation of the lease (Civil Case No. R-16261, CFI Cebu). Meanwhile, Francisco paid rent by personal delivery and, starting 1975, by checks drawn from his account with the Commercial Bank and Trust Company (Comtrust). In May 1977 Soco allegedly refused to accept further checks. Francisco’s counsel then informed her by letters dated June 9 and July 6, 1977, of his intention to deposit unpaid rentals with the Clerk of Court in cons Case Digest (G.R. No. 128106-07) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Contract of Lease
- On January 17, 1973, Soledad Soco (lessor) leased her commercial building at Manalili Street, Cebu City, to Regino Francisco Jr. (lessee) for ₱800.00/month for 10 years, renewable for another 10 years. Paragraphs 10 and 11 of the contract were canceled in differing exhibits.
- Lessee sub-leased a portion of the building to NACIDA at a higher rent, prompting lessor to file Civil Case No. R-16261 for annulment and/or reformation of the lease.
- Payment by Check and Refusal
- Beginning February 1975, Francisco issued post-dated checks via Commercial Bank & Trust Company (Comtrust) for rental payments; Soco accepted them until April 1977 but thereafter issued no receipts and allegedly refused further payment.
- Francisco, through counsel, tendered payments and warned of consignation (Exh. 10, June 9, 1977) and later informed Soco of deposits with the City Court Clerk (Exh. 12, July 6, 1977; Exh. 1, Nov. 28, 1978).
- Proceedings Below
- City Court of Cebu (Branch II) held that Francisco failed to validly tender or consign rent from May 1977 onward and ordered his eviction, payment of arrears (May 1977–Aug. 1980), damages, attorney’s fees, and costs.
- Court of First Instance, Branch XII (Cebu City) reversed, finding substantial compliance with consignation requirements, dismissed the illegal detainer complaint, and awarded Francisco moral and exemplary damages (₱10,000) plus attorney’s fees (₱3,000).
Issues:
- Validity of Consignation
- Did the lessee validly discharge his rental obligation by consignation under Articles 1256–1261 of the New Civil Code?
- Were the requisite acts—tender, deposit, and notices—properly performed?
- Standard of Compliance
- Is substantial compliance with consignation requisites sufficient, or is strict adherence mandatory?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)