Scribd
Upload
117 views9 pages

Practice Court 1

The legal opinion addresses whether a Deed of Redemption is sufficient in lieu of a Deed of Release of Real Estate Mortgage when applying for a loan. The opinion concludes that a Deed of Redemption is not sufficient, as banks must exercise the highest degree of diligence by ensuring there are no other encumbrances on properties offered as collateral for a loan. A Deed of Release clears all prior claims and liens to protect the bank.

Uploaded by

John Patrick Nazarrea
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
117 views9 pages

Practice Court 1

The legal opinion addresses whether a Deed of Redemption is sufficient in lieu of a Deed of Release of Real Estate Mortgage when applying for a loan. The opinion concludes that a Deed of Redemption is not sufficient, as banks must exercise the highest degree of diligence by ensuring there are no other encumbrances on properties offered as collateral for a loan. A Deed of Release clears all prior claims and liens to protect the bank.

Uploaded by

John Patrick Nazarrea
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 9

Republic of the Philippines

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT


Fourth Judicial Region
Bacoor City, Cavite

JONES PAUL VARGAS


Plaintiff,
-versus- Docket No. CV-6969
ROMMARIE ANGELI DELA ROSA For: Collection of Sum of
Defendant. Money
x----------------------------------------------x
COMMENT

Defendant, through her counsel, respectfully avers:

1. Defendant admits the allegation of the Plaintiff, as stated in


his Verified Statement of Claims, only insofar as her personal
circumstance is concerned, that she had a debt of three hundred and
ten thousand pesos (P310, 000) in 2016 when she bought a car.

2. Defendant denies the rest of his allegations in his claims, for


lack of knowledge sufficient to form a belief as to the truth thereof.

3. Defendant opposes that the Notice of Appeal should be


given due course. This opposition is hereby based on the ground that
the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter. Furthermore, as
settled in the Rules of Procedure of Small Claims cases, once the
decision is rendered, the same shall be final and unappealable.

4. Assuming, arguendo, that the action for collection for sum of


money is appealed to the Regional Trial Court, the same shall be
denied even if the assessed value of P310, 000 is within the
threshold of the latter court. It is settled that the action instituted in the
above-mentioned rule, the judgment shall become final, and
unappealable.

Prayer
WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully
prayed of this Honorable Court that the Notice of Appeal of the
Plaintiff should not given due course on the ground that the court has
no jurisdiction over the subject matter.

Other reliefs just and equitable are also prayed for.

Bacoor City, Cavite, 22 May 2019.


1
(SGD.) ATTY. JOHN PATRICK M. NAZARREA
Counsel for the Defendant
620 Quirino Highway, Bagbag,
Cavite City, Cavite
Roll of Attorney No. 789456
MCLE Compliance No. 11801 1-1-18
IBP No. 84586 1-1-18; Manila
PTR No. 16482 1-1-18; Manila

VERIFICATION
I, Rommarie Angeli dela Rosa, state under oath that I have
read the above Comment and the allegations in it are true and correct
of my personal knowledge and/or based on authentic record.

22 May 2019, Bacoor City, Cavite.

(SGD.)ROMMARIE ANGELI DELA ROSA


Affiant

JURAT

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 22nd day of


May 2019 in the City of Bacoor, affiant exhibiting to me her
Community Tax Certificate No. 12345678 issued on April 3, 2019 in
the City of Bacoor.

(SGD.) MAY A. SANTOS


Notary Public
Until December 29, 2019
IBP No. 184856 2-2-2017
PTR No. 784662 3-6-2017

Doc. No. ____


Page No. ____
Book No. ____
Series No. ____

2
Copy Furnished:
ATTY. AAA B. CHAN
Counsel for the Plaintiff
Matalino St. Sta. Cruz, Manila

EXPLANATION
The foregoing Comment is being served by registered mail
since personal service is not practicable, because of distance and
limited number of messengers in the undersigned’s office.

(SGD.) ATTY. JOHN PATRICK M. NAZARREA

3
Republic of the Philippines
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
National Capital Judicial Region
Branch 69, Manila

INTESTATE ESTATE OF
GINA LOPEZ,
Plaintiff,
-versus- G.R. No. 112233
JENNIFER LOPEZ,
Defendant.
x----------------------------------x

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE MEMORANDUM

COMES NOW, the plaintiffs, through the undersigned counsel


and unto this Honorable Court, most avers:

1. That on February 15, 2019, MATATAPANG AT


DALUBHASA (MAD) LAW OFFICES, counsel for plaintiffs, received a
copy of the Order issued by this Honorable Court, requiring the
plaintiffs to file their Memorandum within fifteen (15) days from receipt
of notice;

2. That the MATATAPANG AT DALUBHASA (MAD) LAW


OFFICES hired the undersigned as a new counsel only on February
28, 2019.

3. Considering, however, that the undersigned counsel,


needs time to study the case, the required Memorandum may not be
filed on or before its due date, for which it begs the kind indulgence of
this Honorable Court to grant the additional time of fifteen (15) days
to file said Memorandum.

4. That the filing of this motion is done in good faith and not
for purposes of delaying the proceedings of this case but for the
reason above-stated.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is respectfully prayed


that the PLAINTIFF be granted an additional time of fifteen (15) days
from today within which to submit the Memorandum.

Such other relief and remedies as may be deemed just and


equitable under the premises are likewise prayed for.

City of Manila, 1 March 2019.

4
MATATAPANG AT DALUBHASA (MAD) LAW OFFICES
Counsel for the Plaintiff
Suite 804, 8F La Azotea
Bldg., Brgy. 143, Sampaloc,
Manila

By:

ATTY. JOHN PATRICK M. NAZARREA


Roll No.: 12345; 04/08/2016
MCLE Compliance No. 1234; 01/08/18
IBP No: 1234567; 02/04/2017; Manila
PTR No. 12345; 02/04/2016; Manila

Copy Furnished:
ATTY. MARIA DELA CRUZ
Counsel for the Defendant
301 Osmena Bldg., 2068 Mabini St.,
Novaliches, Quezon City

NOTICE OF HEARING

TO: ATTY. MARIA DELA CRUZ


Counsel for the Defendant

Greetings:

Due to the non-litigious character of the foregoing motion,


please submit the same to the Court for its immediate consideration
and approval.

ATTY. JOHN PATRICK M. NAZARREA


Roll No.: 12345; 04/08/2016
MCLE Compliance No. 1234; 01/08/18
IBP No: 1234567; 02/04/2017; Manila
PTR No. 12345; 02/04/2016; Manila

5
EXPLANATION OF SERVICE
Copy of the Motion for the Extension of Time to File
Memorandum was served to Defendant’s counsel by registered mail
due to time constraints, and for lack of the undersigned’s staff who
can serve the same in person.

ATTY. JOHN PATRICK M. NAZARREA


Roll No.: 12345; 04/08/2016
MCLE Compliance No. 1234; 01/08/18
IBP No: 1234567; 02/04/2017; Manila
PTR No. 12345; 02/04/2016; Manila

6
August 21, 2019

Ms. Ma. Krishina Joy Amigo


Head, Loan Department
Banko Yayamanin

Dear Ms. Amigo:

This legal opinion seeks to answer your question as to whether


or not Deed of Redemption is sufficient lieu of the submission of Deed
of Release of Real Estate Mortgage as a requirement before the
approval of application of loan by Banko Yayamanin (BY).

Per our discussion and the documents you have shown me, the
following are the pertinent facts:

Spouses Maria Veronica and Ronaldjerick Baclig (Spouses


Baclig) applied for loan with BY on August 13, 2019 in order to finance
their business of selling of KPop Merchandise. One of the
requirements of the BY before the approval of the loan is to provide a
Real Estate Mortgage contract in favor of BY as collateral. Also, if the
property to be mortgage is subject to earlier encumbrance, the
prospective buyer must be able to provide “Deed of Release of Real
Estate Mortgage” over the property offered as collateral.

Sometime in 2008, it was shown that Spouses Baclig executed


a Real Estate Mortgage with Marc Kevin Constantino (Constantino).
The spouses initially defaulted on the agreed date of their payment of
the loan so Constantino extrajudicially foreclosed the mortgage.
However, within the period prescribed by law, the spouses were able
to return the property from Constantino. Hence, “Deed of Redemption”
was later on executed by the parties.

The answer to your query is that Deed of Redemption is not a


sufficient requirement in exchange of the Deed of Release of Release
Estate Mortgage for the application of loan.

In the case of Land Bank of the Philippines vs. Belle Corporation


as cited in PNB vs. Villa1, the banks shall exercise the highest degree
of diligence in its dealing with the properties offered as collaterals for
the loan obligation, to wit:

When the purchaser or the mortgagee is a bank, the rule on


innocent purchasers or mortgagees for value is applied more
strictly. Being in the business of extending loans secured by
real estate mortgage, banks are presumed to be familiar with
the rules on land registration. Since the banking business is
1
G.R. No. 213241, August 1, 2016

7
impressed with public interest, they are expected to be more
cautious, to exercise a higher degree of diligence, care and
prudence, than private individuals in their dealings, even those
involving registered lands. Banks may not simply rely on the
face of the certificate of title. Hence, they cannot assume that,
the title offered as security is on its face free of any
encumbrances or lien, they are relieved of the responsibility of
taking further steps to verify the title and inspect the properties
to be mortgaged. As expected, the ascertainment of the status
or condition of a property offered to it as security for a loan
must be a standard and indispensable part of the bank's
operations.

Considering the foregoing, BY should observe the required


degree of caution in readily approving the loan and accepting the
collateral offered by the Spouses Baclig without first ascertaining the
real ownership of the property. It should not have simply relied on the
face of title but went further physically ascertain the actual condition
of the property. 

We find it necessary to mention that this opinion is solely based


on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. The
opinion may vary when the facts are altered or detailed.

We hope we were able to enlighten you on the matter.

Sincerely yours,

JOHN PATRICK M. NAZARREA


Legal Officer, Banko Yayamanin

8
9

You might also like