Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

SPS. RAMON ESTANISLAO v. CA

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 169541 2009-10-09	GERMAN CAYTON v. ZEONNIX TRADING CORPORATION NACHURA, J.
In exercising the right of redemption, the tender of payment must be for the full amount of the purchase price. Otherwise, to allow payment by installments would be to allow the indefinite extension of the redemption period.[37]
	GR No. 169541 2009-10-09	GERMAN CAYTON v. ZEONNIX TRADING CORPORATION NACHURA, J.
In exercising the right of redemption, the tender of payment must be for the full amount of the purchase price. Otherwise, to allow payment by installments would be to allow the indefinite extension of the redemption period.[37]
	GR No. 148173 2004-12-10	SUPERCARS MANAGEMENT v. LATE FILEMON FLORES SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.
As to the award of attorney's fees, the same must be deleted since the award of moral and exemplary damages are eliminated.[21] Moreover, the trial court did not give any justification for granting it in its decision. It is now settled that awards of attorney's fees must be based on findings of fact and law, stated in the decision of the trial court.[22]
	GR No. 147324 and GR No. 147334 2004-05-25	PHILIPPINE COMMUNICATIONS SATELLITE CORPORATION v. GLOBE TELECOM TINGA, J,
The award of attorney's fees is the exception rather than the rule, and must be supported by factual, legal and equitable justifications.[36] In previously decided cases, the Court awarded attorney's fees where a party acted in gross and evident bad faith in refusing to satisfy the other party's claims and compelled the former to litigate to protect his rights;[37] when the action filed is clearly unfounded,[38] or where moral or exemplary damages are awarded. [39] However, in cases where both parties have legitimate claims against each other and no party actually prevailed, such as in the present case where the claims of both parties were sustained in part, an award of attorney's fees would not be warranted.[40]