Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

C.F. SHARP v. NORTHWEST AIRLINES

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	GR No. 160827 2014-06-18	NETLINK COMPUTER INCORPORATED v. ERIC DELMO BERSAMIN, J.
We remarked in C.F. Sharp & Co. v. Northwest Airlines, Inc.[11] that the repeal of Republic Act No. 529 had the effect of removing the prohibition on the stipulation of currency other than Philippine currency, such that obligations or transactions could already be paid in the currency agreed upon by the parties. However, both Republic Act No. 529 and Republic Act No. 8183 did not stipulate the applicable rate of exchange for the conversion of foreign currency-incurred obligations to their peso equivalent. It follows, therefore, that the jurisprudence established under Republic Act No. 529 with regard to the rate of conversion remains applicable. In C.F. Sharp, the Court cited Asia World Recruitment, Inc. v. NLRC,[12] to the effect that the real value of the foreign exchange-incurred obligation up to the date of its payment should be preserved.
	GR No. 137147 AND GR No. 137148 2003-11-18	BANK OF PHILIPPINE ISLANDS v. CARLOS LEOBRERA YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
In C.F. Sharp & Co. v. Northwest Airlines, Inc.,[7] it was held:The repeal of R.A. 529 by R.A. 8183 has the effect of removing the prohibition on the stipulation of currency other than Philippine currency, such that obligations or transactions may now be paid in the currency agreed upon by the parties. Just like R.A. 529, however, the new law does not provide for the applicable rate of exchange for the conversion of foreign currency- incurred obligations in their peso equivalent. It follows, therefore, that the jurisprudence established in R.A. No. 529 regarding the rate of conversion remains applicable. Thus, in Asia World Recruitment, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Commission (313 SCRA 1, 17 [1999]), the Court, applying R.A. No. 8183, sustained the ruling of the NLRC that obligations in foreign currency may be discharged in Philippines currency based on the prevailing rate at the time of payment. The wisdom on which the jurisprudence interpreting R.A. No. 529 is based equally holds true with R.A. No. 8183. Verily, it is just and fair to preserve the real value of the foreign exchange-incurred obligation to the date of its payment.[8]