This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2014-08-05 |
LEONEN, J. |
||||
| We add that Circular No. 799 is not applicable when there is a law that states otherwise. While the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas has the power to set or limit interest rates,[133] these interest rates do not apply when the law provides that a different interest rate shall be applied. "[A] Central Bank Circular cannot repeal a law. Only a law can repeal another law."[134] | |||||
|
2013-01-15 |
REYES, J. |
||||
| The power of the CB to effectively suspend the Usury Law pursuant to P.D. No. 1684 has long been recognized and upheld in many cases. As the Court explained in the landmark case of Medel v. CA,[36] citing several cases, CB Circular No. 905 "did not repeal nor in anyway amend the Usury Law but simply suspended the latter's effectivity;"[37] that "a [CB] Circular cannot repeal a law, [for] only a law can repeal another law;"[38] that "by virtue of CB Circular No. 905, the Usury Law has been rendered ineffective;"[39] and "Usury has been legally non-existent in our jurisdiction. Interest can now be charged as lender and borrower may agree upon."[40] | |||||