Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

DARIO NACAR v. GALLERY FRAMES

This case has been cited 74 times or more.

	GR No. 208293 2014-12-10	PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK v. CARMELITA S. SANTOS LEONEN, J.
The Court of Appeals' award of interest should be modified to 12% from demand on April 26, 1998 until June 30, 2013, and 6% from July 1, 2013 until fully paid. In Nacar v. Gallery Frames:[116]
	GR No. 204944-45 2014-12-03	FUJI TELEVISION NETWORK v. ARLENE S. ESPIRITU LEONEN, J.
In the dispositive portion of its decision, the Court of Appeals awarded legal interest at the rate of 12% per annum.[256] In view of this court's ruling in Nacar v. Gallery Frames,[257] the legal interest shall be reducd to a rate of 6% per annum from July 1, 2013 until full satisfaction.
	GR No. 189405 2014-11-19	SHERWIN DELA CRUZ v. PEOPLE PERALTA, J.
Finally, pursuant to this Court's ruling in Nacar v. Gallery Frames,[41] an interest of six percent (6%) per annum on the aggregate amount awarded for civil indemnity and damages for loss of earning capacity shall be imposed, computed from the time of finality of this Decision until full payment thereof.
	GR No. 211228 2014-11-12	UNIVERSITY OF PANGASINAN v. FLORENTINO FERNANDEZ REYES, J.
Lastly, the petitioners cite Nacar v. Gallery Frames[23] to argue that legal interest should only be 6% and not 12%.[24]
	GR No. 183272 2014-10-15	SUN LIFE OF CANADA v. SANDRA TAN KIT DEL CASTILLO, J.
Considering the prevailing circumstances of the case, we hereby direct petitioner to reimburse the premium paid within 15 days from date of finality of this Decision. If petitioner fails to pay within the said period, then the amount shall be deemed equivalent to a forbearance of credit.[32] In such a case, the rate of interest shall be 6% per annum.[33]
	GR No. 187240 2014-10-15	CARLOS A. LORIA v. LUDOLFO P. MUÑOZ LEONEN, J.
WHEREFORE, the petition for review on certiorari is DENIED. The Court of Appeals' decision and resolution in CA-G.R. CV No. 81882 are AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION as to interest rate. Petitioner Carlos A. Loria shall pay respondent Ludolfo P. Muñoz, Jr. P2,000,000.00 in actual damages, with interest of 12% interest per annum from the filing of the complaint until June 30, 2013, and 6% interest per annum from July 1, 2013 until full payment.[76]
	GR No. 194507 2014-09-08	FEDERAL BUILDERS v. FOUNDATION SPECIALISTS PERALTA, J.
In line, however, with the recent circular of the Monetary Board of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP-MB) No. 799, we have modified the guidelines in Nacar v. Gallery Frames,[22] as follows: I. When an obligation, regardless of its source, i.e., law, contracts, quasi-contracts, delicts or quasi-delicts is breached, the contravenor can be held liable for damages. The provisions under Title XVIII on "Damages" of the Civil Code govern in determining the measure of recoverable damages.
	GR No. 200250 2014-08-06	UPSI PROPERTY HOLDINGS v. DIESEL CONSTRUCTION CO. MENDOZA, J.
Consequently, the Court, in Nacar vs. Gallery Frames,[35] instructs: To recapitulate and for future guidance, the guidelines laid down in the case of Eastern Shipping Lines are accordingly modified to embody BSP-MB Circular No. 799, as follows:
	GR No. 170139 2014-08-05	SAMEER OVERSEAS PLACEMENT AGENCY v. JOY C. CABILES LEONEN, J.
Through the able ponencia of Justice Diosdado Peralta, we laid down the guidelines in computing legal interest in Nacar v. Gallery Frames:[130]
	GR No. 170139 2014-08-05	SAMEER OVERSEAS PLACEMENT AGENCY v. JOY C. CABILES LEONEN, J.
Circular No. 799 is applicable only in loans and forbearance of money, goods, or credits, and in judgments when there is no stipulation on the applicable interest rate. Further, it is only applicable if the judgment did not become final and executory before July 1, 2013.[132]
	GR No. 201483 2014-08-04	CONRADO A. LIM v. HMR PHILIPPINES MENDOZA, J.
The cases of Session Delights Ice Cream and Fast Foods v. Court of Appeals (Session Delights)[23] and Nacar v. Gallery Frames (Nacar)[24] shed much light on the apparent discrepancy in the case at hand. As in the present case, both involve labor cases finding that the employees therein were illegally dismissed. At the LA level, in awarding backwages, a precise computation was provided from the time of illegal dismissal up to the promulgation of the LA decision.[25] Additionally, the dispositive portion of the LA decision in Nacar also made a declaration that separation pay in lieu of reinstatement be "computed only up to promulgation of this decision."[26] The LA decisions in these cases were affirmed by the NLRC and the CA and subsequently became final and executory. At the execution stage, the computation of backwages came into issue.
	GR No. 201483 2014-08-04	CONRADO A. LIM v. HMR PHILIPPINES MENDOZA, J.
The cases of Session Delights Ice Cream and Fast Foods v. Court of Appeals (Session Delights)[23] and Nacar v. Gallery Frames (Nacar)[24] shed much light on the apparent discrepancy in the case at hand. As in the present case, both involve labor cases finding that the employees therein were illegally dismissed. At the LA level, in awarding backwages, a precise computation was provided from the time of illegal dismissal up to the promulgation of the LA decision.[25] Additionally, the dispositive portion of the LA decision in Nacar also made a declaration that separation pay in lieu of reinstatement be "computed only up to promulgation of this decision."[26] The LA decisions in these cases were affirmed by the NLRC and the CA and subsequently became final and executory. At the execution stage, the computation of backwages came into issue.
	GR No. 201483 2014-08-04	CONRADO A. LIM v. HMR PHILIPPINES MENDOZA, J.
The rules on legal interest in Eastern Shipping have, however, been recently modified by Nacar in accordance with Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas Monetary Board (BSP-MB) Circular No. 799, which became effective on July 1, 2013. Pertinently, it amended the rate of legal interest in judgments from 12% to 6% per annum, with the qualification that the new rate be applied prospectively. Thus, the 12% per annum legal interest in judgments under Eastern Shipping shall apply only until June 30, 2013, and the new rate of 6% per annum shall be applied from July 1, 2013 onwards.[50]
	GR No. 198093 2014-07-28	FLP ENTERPRISES INC. – FRANCESCO SHOES v. MA. JOERALYN D. DELA CRUZ PERALTA, J.
For lack of any clear, valid, and just cause in terminating respondents' employment, FLPE is indubitably guilty of illegal dismissal. The rate of interest, however, should be changed to 6% starting July 1, 2013, pursuant to the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas Circular No. 799, Series of 2013.[22]
	GR No. 187701 2014-07-23	PHILAM INSURANCE COMPANY v. HEUNG-A SHIPPING CORPORATION REYES, J.
The amount which PHILAM is entitled to receive shall earn a legal interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the date of finality of this judgment until its full satisfaction pursuant to Nacar v. Gallery Frames.[49]
	GR No. 182705 2014-07-18	VICENTE JOSEFA v. MANILA ELECTRIC COMPANY BRION, J.
Finally, we impose an interest rate of 6% per annum on temperate damages pursuant to the guidelines enunciated in Eastern Shipping Lines v. CA,[64] as modified by Nacar v. Gallery Frames.[65] The interest rate shall commence to run from the promulgation of this decision, the date when the amount of temperate damages has been determined with certainty.
	GR No. 196251 2014-07-09	OLIVAREZ REALTY CORPORATION v. BENJAMIN CASTILLO LEONEN, J.
Petitioner Olivarez Realty Corporation shall PAY respondent Benjamin Castillo P500,000.00 as moral damages, P50,000.00 as exemplary damages, and P50,000.00 as attorney's fees with interest at 6% per annum from the time this decision becomes final and executory until petitioner corporation fully pays the amount of damages.[144]
	GR No. 178145 2014-07-07	REYNALDO S. MARIANO v. PEOPLE BERSAMIN, J.
In addition, we impose an interest of 6% per annum on the actual and moral damages reckoned from the finality of this decision until the full payment of the obligation. This is because the damages thus fixed thereby become a forbearance. The rate of 6% per annum is pursuant to Circular No. 799, series of 2013, issued by the Office of the Governor of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas on June 21, 2013, and the pronouncement in Nacar v. Gallery Frames.[18]
	GR No. 181045 2014-07-02	SPS. EDUARDO v. PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK DEL CASTILLO, J.
With regard to interest, the Court finds that since the escalation clause is annulled, the principal amount of the loan is subject to the original or stipulated rate of interest, and upon maturity, the amount due shall be subject to legal interest at the rate of 12% per annum. This is the uniform ruling adopted in previous cases, including those cited here.[96] The interests paid by petitioners should be applied first to the payment of the stipulated or legal and unpaid interest, as the case may be, and later, to the capital or principal.[97] Respondent should then refund the excess amount of interest that it has illegally imposed upon petitioners; "[t]he amount to be refunded refers to that paid by petitioners when they had no obligation to do so."[98] Thus, the parties' original agreement stipulated the payment of 19.5% interest; however, this rate was intended to apply only to the first promissory note which expired on November 21, 1989 and was paid by petitioners; it was not intended to apply to the whole duration of the loan. Subsequent higher interest rates have been declared illegal; but because only the rates are found to be improper, the obligation to pay interest subsists, the same to be fixed at the legal rate of 12% per annum. However, the 12% interest shall apply only until June 30, 2013. Starting July 1, 2013, the prevailing rate of interest shall be 6% per annum pursuant to our ruling in Nacar v. Gallery Frames[99] and Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas-Monetary Board Circular No. 799.
	GR No. 156208 2014-06-30	NPC DRIVERS v. NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION BRION, J.
The passage of Central Bank Circular No. 799[118] (effective July 1, 2013), which lowered the rate of interest for judgments from 12% to 6%, will not apply in this case because the circular may only be applied prospectively.[119] Since our ruling in this case had become final and executory on October 10, 2008 when the entry of judgment was made, the original legal interest of 12% shall apply from that date up to June 30, 2013, and only thereafter be reduced to 6%.
	GR No. 206806 2014-06-25	ARCO PULP v. DAN T. LIM LEONEN, J.
Frames[58]
	GR No. 206806 2014-06-25	ARCO PULP v. DAN T. LIM LEONEN, J.
And, in addition to the above, judgments that have become final and executory prior to July 1, 2013, shall not be disturbed and shall continue to be implemented applying the rate of interest fixed therein.[61] (Emphasis supplied; citations omitted.)
	GR No. 185964 2014-06-16	ASIAN TERMINALS v. FIRST LEPANTO-TAISHO INSURANCE CORPORATION REYES, J.
All told, ATI is liable to pay FIRST LEPANTO the amount of the P165,772.40 representing the insurance indemnity paid by the latter to GASI. Pursuant to Nacar v. Gallery Frames,[62] the said amount shall earn a legal interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the date of finality of this judgment until its full satisfaction.
	GR No. 205278 2014-06-11	PHILIPPINE SPRING WATER RESOURCES INC. v. CA MENDOZA, J.
For said reason, Mahilum's backwages must be pegged at his basic salary, excluding the commissions mentioned by the NLRC, to be computed from the time of his dismissal up to the finality of this decision. Nonetheless, the award of backwages shall earn legal interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum in accordance with prevailing jurisprudence.[23]
	GR No. 189563 2014-04-07	GILAT SATELLITE NETWORKS v. UNITED COCONUT PLANTERS BANK GENERAL INSURANCE CO. SERENO, C.J.
With regard to the interest rate to be imposed, we take cue from Nacar v. Gallery Frames,[62] which modified the guidelines established in Eastern Shipping Lines v. CA[63] in relation to Bangko Sentral-Monetary Board Circular No. 799 (Series of 2013), to wit: 1. When the obligation is breached, and it consists in the payment of a sum of money, i.e., a loan or forbearance of money, the interest due should be that which may have been stipulated in writing. Furthermore, the interest due shall itself earn legal interest from the time it is judicially demanded. In the absence of stipulation, the rate of interest shall be 6% per annum to be computed from default, i.e., from judicial or extrajudicial demand under and subject to the provisions of Article 1169 of the Civil Code.
	GR No. 174433 2014-02-24	PHILIPPPINE NATIONAL BANK v. SPS. ENRIQUE MANALO AND ROSALINDA JACINTO BERSAMIN, J.
Anent the correct rates of interest to be applied on the amount to be refunded by PNB, the Court, in Nacar v. Gallery Frames[45] and S.C. Megaworld Construction v. Parada,[46] already applied Monetary Board Circular No. 799 by reducing the interest rates allowed in judgments from 12% per annum to 6% per annum.[47] According to Nacar v. Gallery Frames, MB Circular No. 799 is applied prospectively, and judgments that became final and executory prior to its effectivity on July 1, 2013 are not to be disturbed but continue to be implemented applying the old legal rate of 12% per annum. Hence, the old legal rate of 12% per annum applied to judgments becoming final and executory prior to July 1, 2013, but the new rate of 6% per annum applies to judgments becoming final and executory after said dater.
	GR No. 178184 2014-01-29	GRAND ASIAN SHIPPING LINES v. WILFREDO GALVEZ DEL CASTILLO, J.
Petitioner Grand Asian Shipping Lines, Inc. is also ordered to pay respondents Wilfredo Galvez, Danilo Arguelles, Renato Batayola, Patricio Fresnillo, Jovy Noble, Emilio Dominico, Benny Nilmao and Jose Austral unpaid salaries from February 16 to 29, 2000, as computed by the Labor Arbiter; and to pay respondents Danilo Arguelles, Renato Batayola, Patricio Fresmillo, Jovy Noble, Emilio Dominico and Benny Nilmao salary differentials plus double indemnity, as computed by the Labor Arbiter. Ten percent (10%) of the monetary award should be added as and by way of attorney's fees. Interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum shall be imposed on all monetary awards from date of finality of this Decision until full payment pursuant to Nacar v. Gallery Frames.[78]
	GR No. 201011 2014-01-27	DIMAGUILA v. JOSE MENDOZA, J.
The Court, however, finds that the award of rentals should be reckoned from January 2, 2001, the date the Spouses Monteiro filed their Amended Complaint seeking recovery of the subject portion. Interest at the rate of 6% per annum shall also be imposed on the total amount of rent due from finality of this Decision until fully paid.[37]
	GR No. 180972 2014-01-20	JONAS MICHAEL R. GARZA v. COCA-COLA BOTTLERS PEREZ DEL CASTILLO, J.
Finally, consistent with the Court's pronouncement in Nacar v. Gallery Frames,[63] the awards herein are subject to interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum, to be computed from the finality of the Decision in this case until the total award is fully paid.
	GR No. 185798 2014-01-13	FIL-ESTATE PROPERTIES v. SPS. CONRADO AND MARIA VICTORIA RONQUILLO PEREZ, J.
The resulting modification of the award of legal interest is, also, in line with our recent ruling in Nacar v. Gallery Frames,[17] embodying the amendment introduced by the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas Monetary Board in BSP-MB Circular No. 799
	GR No. 173331 2013-12-11	FLORPINA BENAVIDEZ v. NESTOR SALVADOR MENDOZA, J.
Accordingly, in this case, the Court considers the compounded interest rate of 5% per month as iniquitous and unconscionable and void and inexistent from the beginning. The debt is to be considered without the stipulation of the iniquitous and unconscionable interest rate.[34] In line with the ruling in the recent case of Nacar v. Gallery Frames,[35] the legal interest of 6% per annum must be imposed in lieu of the excessive interest stipulated in the agreement.
	GR No. 194201 2013-11-27	SPS. BAYANI H. ANDAL AND GRACIA G. ANDAL v. PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK PEREZ, J.
In addition, pursuant to Circular No. 799, series of 2013, issued by the Office of the Governor of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas on 21 June 2013, and in accordance with the ruling of the Supreme Court in the recent case of Dario Nacar v. Gallery Frames and/or Felipe Bordey, Jr.,[20] effective 1 July 2013, the rate of interest for the loan or forbearance of any money, goods or credits and the rate allowed in judgments, in the absence of an express contract as to such rate of interest, shall be six percent (6%) per annum. Accordingly, the rate of interest of 12% per annum on petitioners-spouses' obligation shall apply from 20 May 2011 the date of default until 30 June 2013 only. From 1 July 2013 until fully paid, the legal rate of 6% per annum shall be applied to petitioners-spouses' unpaid obligation.
	GR No. 199067 2013-11-11	NISSAN GALLERY-ORTIGAS v. PURIFICACION F. FELIPE MENDOZA, J.
WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The June 30, 2011 Decision and the October 21, 2011 Resolution of the Court of Appeals are hereby SET ASIDE. The Decision of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 105, Quezon City, in Criminal Case No. Q-08-151734, dated December 22, 2008, affirming the Judgment of the Metropolitan Trial Court, Branch 41, Quezon City, for Violation of B.P. 22 is REINSTATED with MODIFICATION with respect to the legal interest which shall be reduced to 6% per annum from finality of this judgment until its satisfaction.[26]
	GR No. 186332 2013-10-23	PLANTERS DEVELOPMENT BANK v. SPS. ERNESTO LOPEZ AND FLORENTINA LOPEZ BRION, J.
Pursuant to these changes, this Court modified the guidelines in Eastern Shipping Lines, Inc. v. Court of Appeals[50] in the case of Dario Nacar v. Gallery Frames, et al.[51] (Nacar). In Nacar, we established the following guidelines: When an obligation, regardless of its source, i.e., law, contracts, quasi- contracts, delicts or quasi-delicts is breached, the contravenor can be held liable for damages. The provisions under Title XVIII on "Damages" of the Civil Code govern in determining the measure of recoverable damages.