Title
Bank of the Philippine Islands vs. LCL Capital, Inc.
Case
G.R. No. 243396
Decision Date
Sep 14, 2021
LCL defaulted on a P3M loan secured by mortgaged properties. BPI foreclosed, consolidated ownership prematurely, and disputed the redemption price. SC ruled in favor of BPI, mandating 17% interest and real estate taxes in the redemption price, remanding for recomputation.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 220605)

Antecedents

In 1997, LCL obtained a loan from Far East Bank & Trust Co. (FEBTC), amounting to P3,000,000.00, secured by a real estate mortgage on two condominium units. Following a merger in 2000, BPI absorbed FEBTC's assets and liabilities. Upon LCL’s non-payment, BPI pursued extrajudicial foreclosure. After winning the public auction and consolidating ownership of the properties, LCL challenged the consolidation, claiming it was premature and filed for annulment in the Regional Trial Court of Pasig City.

RTC Ruling

The Regional Trial Court ruled in favor of LCL on November 14, 2008, declaring BPI's consolidation of ownership void, reinstating LCL’s certificates of title, and affirming LCL’s right to redeem the properties within one year. The court ordered BPI to determine the amount LCL must pay for redemption.

Computation of Redemption Price

BPI provided a redemption amount of P9,339,362.93, while the RTC calculated it at P2,513,583.15, applying a 6% interest rate and excluding BPI's real estate tax expenses. Subsequently, BPI contested the RTC’s computation, asserting that the stipulated interest rate of 17% per annum was applicable.

Court of Appeals Decision

The Court of Appeals partially granted BPI’s petition on May 17, 2018. The appellate court ruled that Section 78 of the General Banking Act governs computations when a banking institution is the mortgagee. The appellate court thus mandated the imposition of a 17% interest rate corresponding to the mortgage agreement while keeping the exclusion of real estate taxes in the redemption price computation.

Conflict of Interests and Reconsiderations

Both parties sought partial reconsideration regarding the inclusion of real estate taxes and the applicable interest rate. LCL argued against further recomputation violating the final judgment, while BPI contended that LCL should reimburse the real estate taxes since it retained possession of the properties.

Legal Principles on Final Judgments

Referring to established legal tenets, the court emphasized that the immutability of a final judgment precludes altering its content to correct perceived errors. The RTC's November 14, 2008, decision became final, which did not specify the redemption amount, prompting the court to state that recomputation did not violate immutability principles.

Determinants of Redemption Price

The Court reiterated that the redemption price under the General Banking Act should consist of the principal obligation, mandated interest, and foreclosure expenses. It clarified discrepancies in previous rulings regarding the bid price used for the computation, which the law did not support, promoting clarity in lawful financial obligations.

Real Estate Taxes and Liabi

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.