Title
Spouses Ching vs. Family Savings Bank
Case
G.R. No. 167835
Decision Date
Nov 15, 2010
The Supreme Court denies the appeal of the Spouses Ching, affirming the lower courts' decisions and ruling that their failure to comply with procedural requirements and the enforcement of the summary judgment render their arguments invalid.
Font Size

Case Digest (G.R. No. 167835)

Facts:

  • Two consolidated petitions for review on certiorari were filed by Spouses Alfredo and Encarnacion Ching against Family Savings Bank (now BPI Family Bank) and the Sheriff of Manila.
  • The first petition (G.R. No. 167835) sought to annul and set aside the Resolutions of the Court of Appeals (CA) dated November 17, 2004, and April 7, 2005, in CA-G.R. SP No. 87217.
  • The second petition (G.R. No. 188480) challenged the CA Decision dated July 31, 2008, in CA-G.R. SP No. 96675, which dismissed the petition and denied the motion for reconsideration on June 19, 2009.
  • The dispute began when Cheng Ban Yek and Co., Inc. secured a loan from Family Savings Bank with Alfredo Ching acting as surety.
  • The Bank filed a complaint for collection of a sum of money against Cheng Ban Yek and Alfredo Ching, leading to a summary judgment in favor of the Bank by the Court of First Instance (CFI) of Manila on August 12, 1982.
  • The judgment was affirmed by the CA, and a subsequent petition to the Supreme Court was dismissed for being filed out of time.
  • The Bank moved for execution pending appeal, resulting in the attachment, levy, and public auction of the Spouses Ching's conjugal property on October 10, 1983, where the Bank emerged as the highest bidder.
  • The Spouses Ching failed to redeem the property within the one-year redemption period, leading to further legal proceedings to transfer the title and secure possession of the property.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • Both petitions were denied.
  • The Supreme Court affirmed the Resolutions of the Court of Appeals dated November 17, 2004, and April 7, 2005, in CA-G.R. SP No. 87217.
  • The Supreme Court also affirmed the Decision an...(Unlock)

Ratio:

  • The Supreme Court ruled that the CA's dismissal of the petition for failure to attach relevant documents was justified, but the subsequent submission of the ...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.