112 TLG International Continental Enterprising Inc v Flores

This contention ignores the fact that the deposit was

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: ing that according to Respondent, the Court "has not ordered the intervenor to make any deposit in connection" with the case. There is no question that in cases of consignation the debtor is entitled as a matter of right to withdraw the deposit made with the court, before the consignation is accepted by the creditor or prior to the judicial approval of such consignation. This is explicit from the second paragraph of Article 1260 of the new Civil Code which states that: "Before the creditor has accepted the consignation, or before a judicial declaration that the consignation has been properly made, the debtor may withdraw the thing or the sum deposited, allowing the obligation to remain in force". In the case at bar, the case was dismissed before the amount deposited was either accepted by the creditor or a declaration made by the Court approving such consignation. Such dismissal rendered the consignation ineffectual (Bravo v. Barreras, 92 Phil. 679, 681). Under such circumstances it was incumbent upon Respondent to have allowed the withdrawal b...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 07/12/2013 for the course LAW 101 taught by Professor Tan during the Winter '11 term at University of the Philippines Diliman.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online