Title
People vs. Rimon
Case
G.R. No. 6940
Decision Date
Aug 15, 1912
Rimon violated Chattel Mortgage Law by relocating a mortgaged piano without consent, leading to a fine upheld by the Supreme Court.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 131903)

Petitioner

The United States prosecuted the offense under the applicable statute (Act No. 1508) and appealed to sustain the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court.

Respondent

Rogaciano R. Rimon was the mortgagor who executed a chattel mortgage in favor of Jose Oliver to secure a debt and who subsequently removed the mortgaged property from the province without the mortgagee’s written consent, giving rise to the criminal charge.

Key Dates

Debt and execution of chattel mortgage: August 10, 1910.
Reported appellate decision: August 15, 1912.

Applicable Constitutional/Statutory Framework

Because the decision was rendered in 1912, the control and legal framework in force were those applicable to the Philippine Islands under the then existing insular government; the operative penal and property rules relied on Act No. 1508 (the Chattel Mortgage Law). The court’s ruling was made strictly on the basis of the statutory provisions quoted below.

Applicable Statutory Provisions

Section 9, Act No. 1508: No personal property upon which a chattel mortgage is in force shall be removed from the province in which it is located at the time of the execution of the mortgage without the written consent of the mortgagor and mortgagee, or their executors, administrators, or assigns.
Section 12, Act No. 1508: If a mortgagor violates either of the three last preceding sections he shall be fined a sum double the value of the property so wrongfully removed from the province, sold, pledged or mortgaged, one half to the use of the party injured and the other half to the use of the Treasury of the Philippine Islands, or he may be imprisoned for a period not exceeding six months, or punished by both such fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court.

Facts

On August 10, 1910, Rimon owed Jose Oliver P350 and executed a chattel mortgage on the piano identified as No. 20459 to secure that debt. Without the written consent of Oliver, Rimon removed the mortgaged piano from Manila and shipped it to Calivo, Province of Capiz. The mortgagee did not learn of the removal until the piano was already aboard the steamer bound for Calivo, at which point he could not obtain possession prior to the vessel’s departure.

Issue

Whether Rimon’s removal of the mortgaged chattel from the province where the mortgage was executed, without the mortgagee’s written consent, violated Sections 9 and 12 of Act No. 1508 and warranted the criminal conviction and penalty imposed by the trial court.

Ruling/Holding

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and sentence. The court held that the acts of removing the mortgaged property from the province without the mortgagee’s consent plainly violated Section 9, and that Section 12 provided the penal consequences for such a violation. The judgment of the lower court was upheld as being strictly in accordance with the law and the merits of the case.

Reasoning/Analysis

The statutory prohibition is clear and unconditional: a mortgagor may not remove mortgaged personal property from the province of its location at the time of the mortgage without the written consent of bot

...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.