Friday, January 15, 2021

E. Zobel, Inc. v. CA

Facts: 
Respondent spouses Raul and Elea Claveria, doing business under the name "Agro Brokers," applied for a loan with respondent Consolidated Bank and Trust Corporation (now SOLIDBANK) in the amount of P2,875,000.00 to finance the purchase of two (2) maritime barges and one tugboat 3 which would be used in their molasses business. The loan was granted subject to the condition that respondent spouses execute a chattel mortgage over the three (3) vessels to be acquired and that a continuing guarantee be executed by Ayala International Philippines, Inc., now herein petitioner E. Zobel, Inc., in favor of SOLIDBANK. The respondent spouses agreed to the arrangement. Consequently, a chattel mortgage and a Continuing Guaranty 4 were executed.

Respondent spouses defaulted in the payment. SOLIDBANK filed a complaint in RTC Manila.


Petitioner moved to dismiss the complaint but was denied.


Petitioner moved for MR but was denied.


CA affirmed the RTC decision. MR was denied.


Issue: 

Whether or not petitioner under the "Continuing Guaranty" obligated itself to SOLIDBANK as a guarantor or a surety.


Held:

A contract of surety is an accessory promise by which a person binds himself for another already bound, and agrees with the creditor to satisfy the obligation if the debtor does not. 7 A contract of guaranty, on the other hand, is a collateral undertaking to pay the debt of another in case the latter does not pay the debt. 


A surety is distinguished from a guaranty in that a guarantor is the insurer of the solvency of the debtor and thus binds himself to pay if the principal is unable to pay while a surety is the insurer of the debt, and he obligates himself to pay if the principal does not pay.

No comments:

Post a Comment