Title
United Planters Sugar Milling Company, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 126890
Decision Date
Nov 28, 2006
UPSUMCO successfully sues PNB and APT for illegal fund appropriation, resulting in a Supreme Court ruling that affirms their deficiency obligation and mandates payment with adjusted attorney's fees and interest.
Font Size

Case Digest (G.R. No. 126890)

Facts:

  • The case involves United Planters Sugar Milling Company, Inc. (UPSUMCO) as the petitioner and Philippine National Bank (PNB) and Asset Privatization Trust (APT) as respondents.
  • UPSUMCO, a sugar miller in Negros Oriental, secured loans from PNB for constructing its milling plant, backed by real estate and chattel mortgages.
  • Loan agreements mandated UPSUMCO to maintain accounts with PNB for settling obligations.
  • In the early 1980s, UPSUMCO defaulted on loans due to a decline in the sugar market, leading to the creation of the Philippine Sugar Corporation (PHILSUCOR) to assist distressed millers.
  • PNB sold P3 billion in sugar bonds to PHILSUCOR and assigned 30% of its credit with UPSUMCO to PHILSUCOR.
  • Proclamation No. 50 established APT on December 8, 1986, to manage non-performing assets of government corporations, including PNB.
  • PNB assigned its rights over UPSUMCO to the government, which were then transferred to APT.
  • APT conducted a "friendly" foreclosure of UPSUMCO's assets on August 27, 1987, purchasing them for P450 million.
  • On September 3, 1987, UPSUMCO executed a Deed of Assignment, transferring its right to redeem the foreclosed properties to APT in exchange for the cancellation of any deficiency owed to PNB.
  • UPSUMCO later filed a suit against PNB and APT, alleging illegal appropriation of its funds, including account deposits and sugar sale proceeds.
  • The trial court ruled in favor of UPSUMCO, ordering PNB and APT to pay various amounts owed, leading to an appeal and remand by the Court of Appeals.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • The petition should not be denied outright despite raising factual questions due to conflicting findings from lower courts.
  • UPSUMCO has no outstanding obligations to PNB and APT.
  • UPSUMCO is entitled to the monetary a...(Unlock)

Ratio:

  • The Supreme Court found merit in UPSUMCO's petition, reinstating the trial court's ruling with modifications.
  • The Court clarified that UPSUMCO's obligations to PNB and APT arose from two types of loans: take-off loans and operational loans.
  • The Deed of Assignment executed on September 3, 1987, effectively condoned UPSUMCO's deficiency obligations, including amounts owed after the foreclosure sale.
  • ...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.