Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PHILIPPINE CHARTER INSURANCE CORPORATION v. CENTRAL COLLEGES OF PHILIPPINES

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 191710 2015-01-14	DEMETRIA DE GUZMAN v. FBLINVEST DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION DEL CASTILLO, J.
"A party may make judicial admissions in (a) the pleadings; (b) during the trial, either by verbal or written manifestations or stipulations; or (c) in other stages of the judicial proceeding. It is an established principle that judicial admissions cannot be contradicted by the admitter who is the party himself and binds the person who makes the same, and absent any showing that this was made thru palpable mistake, no amount of rationalization can offset it."[41] Since petitioners already judicially admitted that the right of way affects a number of road lots, they cannot not now claim that it only comprises Road Lot 15. Their admission is binding on them.
	GR No. 168903 2014-06-18	MA. ANA CONSUELO A.S. MADRIGAL v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE SERENO, J.
The existence of two (2) documents is irrelevant in this case as the original intention of the parties is evident - that petitioner and Luis P. Lorenzo, in their personal capacities are co-sureties of MTI's loan. Pursuant to Article 2047 of the Civil Code, a surety undertakes to be bound solidarily with the principal debtor to assure the fulfillment of the obligation.[20] It would therefore be absurd to conclude that petitioner signed the CSA in her capacity as president of MTI considering that the principle behind suretyship will be negated. Otherwise stated, the borrower cannot at the same time be a guarantor/surety to assure the fulfillment of its own loan application. Moreover, the CSA is a continuing guarantee that petitioner, upon executing the said document, bound herself to the contract "until the full and due payment and performance of all the obligations of the borrower."[21] Undisputedly, there was only one loan transaction, and FEBTC does not intend to collect from both loan documents. Thus, we find no abuse of confidence or deceit committed by respondents in the foregoing circumstances.
	GR No. 127206 2003-09-12	PERLA PALMA GIL v. CA CALLEJO, SR., J.
On April 21, 1980, TCT No. 73412 was issued by the Register of Deeds of Davao City in favor of Constancio Maglana over Lot 59-C-1 only.[17] The next day, Constancio Maglana executed a deed of sale not only over Lot 59-C-1 but also Lot 59-C-2, in favor of Emilio Matulac for the purchase price of P150,000.00.[18] On the basis of the said deed, the Register of Deeds issued TCT No. 80631 to and under the name of Emilio Matulac over the two lots.