Scribd Logo
Carica

Benvenuto in Scribd!

  • Ong v IAC: Pledge Agreement Binding Despite Third Party Purchase

    Caricato da

    Boyet Cariaga
    117 visualizzazioni1 pagina
    Madrigal Shipping Co. took out a loan from Solidbank and pledged its barge and tugboat as collateral. When it failed to pay back the loan, Solidbank held an auction to sell the pledged properties, but the tugboat and barge had been removed without Solidbank's consent. Petitioner Ong later bought the barge from the successful bidder at the auction. The Supreme Court held that the contract of pledge was binding on Ong because the pledge agreement was a public instrument and Solidbank had taken possession of the pledged properties, as required for third parties to be bound by a contract of pledge.

    Descrizione originale:

    Titolo originale

    Ong v IAC

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Formati disponibili

    DOCX, PDF, TXT o leggi online da Scribd

    Hai trovato utile questo documento?

    Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

    Segnala questo documento
    Madrigal Shipping Co. took out a loan from Solidbank and pledged its barge and tugboat as collateral. When it failed to pay back the loan, Solidbank held an auction to sell the pledged properties, but the tugboat and barge had been removed without Solidbank's consent. Petitioner Ong later bought the barge from the successful bidder at the auction. The Supreme Court held that the contract of pledge was binding on Ong because the pledge agreement was a public instrument and Solidbank had taken possession of the pledged properties, as required for third parties to be bound by a contract of pledge.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Scarica in formato DOCX, PDF, TXT o leggi online su Scribd
    Segnala contenuti inappropriati
    117 visualizzazioni1 pagina

    Ong v IAC: Pledge Agreement Binding Despite Third Party Purchase

    Caricato da

    Boyet Cariaga
    Madrigal Shipping Co. took out a loan from Solidbank and pledged its barge and tugboat as collateral. When it failed to pay back the loan, Solidbank held an auction to sell the pledged properties, but the tugboat and barge had been removed without Solidbank's consent. Petitioner Ong later bought the barge from the successful bidder at the auction. The Supreme Court held that the contract of pledge was binding on Ong because the pledge agreement was a public instrument and Solidbank had taken possession of the pledged properties, as required for third parties to be bound by a contract of pledge.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Scarica in formato DOCX, PDF, TXT o leggi online su Scribd
    Segnala contenuti inappropriati
    di 1

    Ong v IAC G.R. No.

    74073 September 13, 1991

    Facts: Madrigal Shipping Co., Inc. was granted a loan by Solidbank, and the former pledged its barge and tugboat to secure the fulfillment of its obligation. When it failed to pay, the bank had to sell the pledged properties. However, the tugboat and the barge had surreptitiously been taken without the knowledge and consent of Solidbank. Meanwhile, petitioner Ong bought the barge which was subject of the pledge from Santiago S. Ocampo, a successful bidder in a public auction by virtue of a writ of execution issued by NLRC against Madrigal Shipping Co., Inc.

    Issue: Whether or not the contract of pledge is binding on petitioner Ong

    Held: For the contract of pledge to affect third persons, apart from being in a public instrument, possession of the thing pledged must in addition be delivered to the pledgee. All these requirements have been complied with, in the case at bar. The pledge agreement is a public instrument, the same having been notarized. The subject of the pledge was delivered to the Solidbank.

    Potrebbero piacerti anche