Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 68 views

    Intestate of Luther Young and Pacita Young, PACIFICA JIMENEZ vs. BUCOY

    Uploaded by

    Kaye Miranda Laurente
    (1) The promissory notes signed by Pacita Young were valid and negotiable even though they did not contain the exact words "I promise to pay" because they included terms like "payable" which implied a promise to pay. (2) The administrator of the estate, Dr. Jose Bucoy, was incorrect in arguing that the amounts owed on the notes should be reduced according to the Ballantyne schedule since the notes specified they were payable after the war, not during the Japanese occupation. (3) As the notes were agreed to be paid after the war, peso for peso payment in Philippine currency was ordered without any reduction, based on prior legal precedent.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Intestate of Luther Young and Pacita Young, PACIFICA JIMENEZ vs. BUCOY

    Uploaded by

    Kaye Miranda Laurente
    68 views2 pages
    (1) The promissory notes signed by Pacita Young were valid and negotiable even though they did not contain the exact words "I promise to pay" because they included terms like "payable" which implied a promise to pay. (2) The administrator of the estate, Dr. Jose Bucoy, was incorrect in arguing that the amounts owed on the notes should be reduced according to the Ballantyne schedule since the notes specified they were payable after the war, not during the Japanese occupation. (3) As the notes were agreed to be paid after the war, peso for peso payment in Philippine currency was ordered without any reduction, based on prior legal precedent.

    Original Description:

    #NegotiableInstrument

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    (1) The promissory notes signed by Pacita Young were valid and negotiable even though they did not contain the exact words "I promise to pay" because they included terms like "payable" which implied a promise to pay. (2) The administrator of the estate, Dr. Jose Bucoy, was incorrect in arguing that the amounts owed on the notes should be reduced according to the Ballantyne schedule since the notes specified they were payable after the war, not during the Japanese occupation. (3) As the notes were agreed to be paid after the war, peso for peso payment in Philippine currency was ordered without any reduction, based on prior legal precedent.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    68 views2 pages

    Intestate of Luther Young and Pacita Young, PACIFICA JIMENEZ vs. BUCOY

    Uploaded by

    Kaye Miranda Laurente
    (1) The promissory notes signed by Pacita Young were valid and negotiable even though they did not contain the exact words "I promise to pay" because they included terms like "payable" which implied a promise to pay. (2) The administrator of the estate, Dr. Jose Bucoy, was incorrect in arguing that the amounts owed on the notes should be reduced according to the Ballantyne schedule since the notes specified they were payable after the war, not during the Japanese occupation. (3) As the notes were agreed to be paid after the war, peso for peso payment in Philippine currency was ordered without any reduction, based on prior legal precedent.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    No. L-10221.

    February 28, 1958

    Intestate of Luther Young and Pacita Young, spouses.


    PACIFICA JIMENEZ, petitioner and appellee,
    vs.
    Dr. JOSE BUCOY, administrator and appellant.

    Digested by: Kathleen Kaye M. Laurente

    Doctrine:
    The entire sum in a note is certain if the principal sum is certain and the amount of interest due at
    any given time can easily be computed.

    Facts:
    During the Japanese Occupation, Pacifica Jimenez presented for payment four promissory notes
    signed by Pacita Young for different amounts totalling twenty-one thousand pesos (P21,000).
    Executed in the month of August 1944, the first promissory note read as follows:

    "Received from Miss Pacifica Jimenez the total amount of (P10,000) ten thousand pesos
    payable six months after the war, without interest.

    The other three notes were couched in the same terms, except as to amounts and dates.

    When the promissory notes became due, Jimenez presented the notes for payment. Pacita and
    her husband died and so the notes were presented to the administrator of the estate of the
    spouses, Dr. Jose Bucoy. Bucoy manifested his willingness to pay but he said that since the loan
    was contracted during the Japanee occupation the amount should be deducted and the
    Ballantyne Schedule should be used, that is peso-for-yen (which would lower the amount due
    from P21k).

    Also, Bucoy pointed out that nowhere in the note can be seen an expressed promise to pay a
    specified amount because of the absence of the words I promise to pay

    Issues:
    (1) Whether or not the promissory note issued is non-negotiable as it is claimed to be lacking on
    its face

    (2) Whether or not Bucoy is correct in saying that a reduction should be made in payment of
    amount due in accordance with the Ballantyne schedule.

    Held:
    (1) No. The Supreme Court held that an acknowledgment of a debt becomes a promise to pay by
    the addition of words implying a promise of payment, such as, "payable," "payable on a given
    day," "payable on demand. . . when called for,".

    In accordance with doctrines on the matter, the note herein-above quoted amounted in effect to
    "a promise to pay ten thousand pesos six months after the war, without interest." And so of the
    other notes.

    To constitute a good promissory note, no precise words of contract are necessary, provided they
    amount, in legal effect, to a promise to pay. In other words, if over and above the mere
    acknowledgment of the debt there may be collected from the words used a promise to pay it, the
    instrument may be regarded as a promissory note.

    1 Daniel, Neg. Inst. sec. 36 et seq.; Byles, Bills, 10, 11, and cases cited * * *.
    "Due A. B. $325, payable on demand," or, "I acknowledge myself to be indebted to A in $109, to
    be paid on demand, for value received," or, "I O. U. $85 to be paid on May 5th," are held to be
    promissory notes, significance being given to words of payment as indicating a promise to
    pay." (Cowan vs. Hallack)

    (2) No. If the loan could be paid during the Japanese occupation, the Ballantyne schedule should
    apply with corresponding reduction of the amount. However, if the loan was expressly agreed to
    be payable only after the war or after liberation, or became payable after those dates, no
    reduction could be effected, and peso-for-peso payment shall be ordered in Philippine currency.

    As in the case before us, the debtor undertook to pay "six months after the war," peso for peso
    payment is indicated.

    In the case of Kare et al. vs. Imperial et al., (102 Phil., 173.), the Court held that "When a
    monetary obligation is contracted during the Japanese occupation, to be discharged after the war,
    the payment should be made in Philippine Currency."

    You might also like