Cited Laws
TL;DR — Ruling
WHEREFORE , premises considered, preponderance of evidence having been established by plaintiff to prove its cause of action, defendants ATCI Overseas Corporation and Amalia G. Ikdal are ordered to solidarily pay plaintiff ASSET POOL A (SPV-AMC) INC., the following amount: 1. ONE MILLION US DOLLARS (USD1,000,000.
Accordingly, Ikdal caused the refund of the amount of US$500,000.00, including interest earned in the amount of US$2,265.41, by depositing said amount to ATCI's account with UCPB. UCPB was authorized to the said amount from ATCI's account, as shown from Dejoras' letter dated 22 July 1996 (Exh. 11, also plaintiff's Exh. E). [27] On August 16, 2001, VIEC had to close down due to continued losses. After VIEC's closure on August 16, 2001, petitioners never heard any word from UCPB. On December 13, 2005, they received APA's demand letter dated December 13, 2005 for the payment of US$1,000,000.00. [28] Petitioners presented ATCI's Financial Reports for the years 1990 to 1993 prior to the purported loan showing the corporation's total assets and net worth in the following amounts: P4,970,940.10 and P16,056.95 in 1990; P3,507,446.53 and P27,164. 31 in 1991; P7,644,907.12 and P64,738.05 in 1992; P6,499.402.69 and P33,020.57 in 1993; and P5,007,501.93 and P54,430.40 in 1994. To petitioners, ATCI's financial capacity prior to the supposed loan transactions could not have merited a loan in the amount of US$1,500,000.00, more so without collateral to secure it. [29] Submitted for the RTC's resolution are the following issues, thus: Whether or not the agreement entered into by UCPB and ATCI was a contract of loan; Whether or not ATCI made partial payments acknowledging the loan; Whether or not the transaction in question was validly transferred from UCPB to APA pursuant to the SPY Act of 2002; and Whether or not APA's cause of action had been barred by prescription. Ruling of the RTC On April 17, 2015, the RTC rendered a Decision in favor of APA, disposing as follows: WHEREFORE , premises considered, preponderance of evidence having been established by plaintiff to prove its cause of action, defendants ATCI Overseas Corporation and Amalia G. Ikdal are ordered to solidarily pay plaintiff ASSET POOL A (SPV-AMC) INC., the following amount: 1. ONE MILLION US DOLLARS (USD1,000,000.00), plus interest of twelve percent (12%) per annum from November 2, 2006 to June 30, 2013, and six percent (6%) per annum from July 1, 2013, until the said amount is fully paid; 2. ONE MILLION TWO HUNDRED FIFTY EIGHT THOUSAND SEVENTY TWO PESOS AND THIRTY CENTAVOS (Php 1,258,072.30) as reimbursement of litigation expenses; 3. TWO PERCEN[T] (2%) of the total monetary award by way of attorney's fees; and 4. Costs of suit. The counterclaims of defendants are dismissed for lack of merit. SO ORDERED.
G.R. No. 116216 - NATALIA S. MENDOZA, VS. COURT OF APPEALS, THOMAS B. ASUNCION AND NENA T. ASUNCION.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. No. 116216 -
CaseG.R. NO. 155099 - SECURITY BANK CORPORATION, VS. JUDGE MANUEL D. VICTORIO, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, MAKATI CITY, BRANCH 141; THE TRADE AND INVESTMENT DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF THE PHILIPPINES, AND THE MAR FISHING COMPANY, INC..D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. NO. 155099 -
CaseG.R. No. 179880 - ROBERTO TOTANES, VS. CHINA BANKING CORPORATION.R E S O L U T I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. No. 179880 -