TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. SSS vs. Moonwalk Devt. and Housing Corp., G.R. No. 73345, April 7, 1993) 2 2. RCBC vs. CA, G.R. No. 133107, March 25, 1999) 7 3. Barzaga vs. CA, February 12, 1997 11 4. Pantaleon vs. American Express, May 8, 2009 14 5. Lorenzo Shipping Corp. vs. BJ Mathel International Nov. 19, 2004 20 6. Solar Harvest vs. Davao Corrugated Carlon Corp. July 26, 2010 28 7. Cathay Pacific Airways vs. Vazquez March 2003 33 8. Meralco vs. Ramoy, March 4, 2008 39 9. Areola vs. CA & Prudential Guarantee Insurance 45 10. Tanguiling vs. CA, January 2, 1997 50 11. Nakpil & Sons vs. CA, October 3, 1986 53 12. Republic vs. Luzon Stevedoring 21 SCRA 279 67 13. Far East Bank & Trust Co. vs. CA 69 14. Salugada vs. FEU April 30, 2008 73 15. Fil Estate Properties Inc. vs. Sps. Ronquillo G.R. No. 185798, January 13, 2014 79 16. Metro Concast Steel Corp. vs. Allied Bank Corp. G.R. No. 177921, Dec. 13, 2013 85 17. Sene vs. Franco, 24 Phil 309 89 18. Jimmy Co vs. CA, Broadway Motors Corp, June 22, 1998 92 19. Sicam vs. Jorge 529 SCRA 443 94 20. Austria vs. CA 103 21. Hernandez vs. Chairman, COA 105 22. Yobido vs. CA Oct. 17, 1997 109 23. Juntilla vs. Fontanar, May 31, 1985 112 24. Perla Compania de Seguros vs. Sarangay, 474 SCRA 191 115 25. Fil-Estate Properties vs. Go, 530 SCRA 621 119 of 1122
CHAPTER II Nature and Effects of Obligations Cases: SSS vs. Moonwalk Devt. and Housing Corp., G.R. No. 73345, April 7, 1993) SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM, petitioner,vs.MOONWALK DEVELOPMENT & HOUSING CORPORATION, ROSITA U. ALBERTO, ROSITA U. ALBERTO, JMA HOUSE, INC., MILAGROS SANCHEZ SANTIAGO, in her capacity as Register of Deeds for the Province of Cavite, ARTURO SOLITO, in his capacity as Register of Deeds for Metro Manila District IV, Makati, Metro Manila and the INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, respondents. The Solicitor General for petitioner.K.V. Faylona & Associates for private respondents. D E C I S I O N CAMPOS, JR., J p: Before Us is a petition for review on certiorari of decision 1 of the then Intermediate Appellate Court affirming in toto the decision of the former Court of First Instance of Rizal, Seventh Judicial District, Branch XXIX, Pasay City. The facts as found by the Appellate Court are as follows: "On February 20, 1980, the Social Security System, SSS for brevity, filed a complaint in the Court of First Instance of Rizal against Moonwalk Development & Housing Corporation, Moonwalk for short, alleging that the former had committed an error in failing to compute the 12% interest due on delayed payments on the loan of Moonwalk — resulting in a chain of errors in the application of payments made by Moonwalk and, in an unpaid balance on the principal loan agreement in the amount of P7,053.77 and, also in not reflecting in its statement or account an unpaid balance on the said penalties for delayed payments in the amount of P7,517,178.21 as of October 10, 1979. Moonwalk answered denying SSS' claims and asserting that SSS had the opportunity to ascertain the truth but failed to do so. The trial court set the case for pre-trial at which pre-trial conference, the court issued an order giving both parties thirty (30) days within which to submit a stipulation of facts.