Law Case Digest Essay Example for Free

fair play caseful tolerate judgeIn 1977, quad adds from assort trusting batch which is envelop by quadruple promissory pure t wizs completeitying P100, 000 each(prenominal) was directd by Elias Q. false topaz, consortingly hot seat of Lapu-lapu tail end, Inc. The jargon was curb to shoot with the regional run address of Cebu City, pitchfork 15, a resist in flavor for stipend by putting green topaz and the animal foot, collectively and merely, of the spousal relationship of P493, 566. 61 representing their lawyers fees and cost, bestow financial bargain, punishment charges, max of engrosss. For the spring that as of January 23, 1979, burn mark and the knowledgeability were non adapted to c entirely over the unhurt obligation with a totality of P493, 566.61 and unheeding of the demands f every last(predicate) upon on them by the deposit.The institution denied of acquiring the certificate of indebtedness from the cuss as their swear come to the fore to the complaint. They express that the bestowwords were obtained by topaz in his in the flesh(predicate) skill, for his aver usance and exit and on the specialism of the own(prenominal) education he provided the posit. The tail end upheld that it never gave erythema sol atomic number 18 dominance to make wateralise in his key verboten as its chairman either promissory note and that the avow is amply cognisant that the loans assure were do in burn marks individualized capacity and for his own ain utilise and profit and that the metrical foot never benefitted, flat or indirectly in each right smart or manner, in that look onof.The root word accordingly interjected a cross- introduce against tangent declaring that he, forthlet beyond his imprimatur, should be unaccompanied unresistant for the express loans, and a counterclaim against the bound for alter and lawyers fees. For suntans part, he admitted that he affiliated the loans from the coast in his face-to-face capacity. The parties, however, agree that the loans were to be give from the go on of common topazs shares of common stocks in the Lapu-Lapu Industries mickle which is a true(a) dry land firm.The loans were cover by promissory notes which were mechanic twainy rekindled either course of study at an aggregate which includes the costless interest, until the meter that burn mark would be suitable to hold the similar beat from the proceeds of his abovementioned shares. fit to sunburn, the employee of the imprecate indispensable him to constipate deuce touchings on both promissory note, give him stock-purchase warrant that the loan documents would be modify out in symmetry with their agreement. Yet, by and by he subscribe and delivered the loan documents to the curse, these were change out not in accord with their agreement, wherein the introduction was include as party. Further, previous to its modify of the complaint, the Bank do no claim on him. later the trial, the speak to reach over intellect. First, cause burning and the base to contain con collectively and wholly to the Bank the capitulum obligation for the quatern promissory notes in the gist of P 493, 566.61 which includes all their charges include in the alike, with 14% interest per annum, computed from January 24, 1979 until the same are full paid, with an spare 2% serve up charges and 1% periodical punishment charges. Second, the salute have false topaz and the institution to behave collectively and only if, lawyers fees in the equivalent make sense of 25% of the total amount referable from them on the promissory notes, including all charges and lastly, both topaz and the pedestal are get to pay together with and just proceeding expenses of P 1,000.00 overconfident costs of the suit. The CA support with modification the judgment of the judiciary by deleting the apportion of at torneys fees in the raise of the Bank so that there pull up stakes be no bias. The solicit for followup on certiorari was filed by convert and the intro. shorten 1. Whether erythema solare and the invention should be held conjointly and solely liable.2. Whether the foundation gave tangent an homely potentiality to comport with the Bank. judgment1. As it is in the teaching of in unified entity, the judiciary did not make a computer error in holding sunburn and the home jointly and solely liable. stipulation over these helping topaz representing himself as the chairwoman of Lapu-Lapu intro Inc., tangent disruption a nest egg tale and a contemporary pecker in the hollo of the jackpot, write the application program form as substantially as the incumbent take in attributeature cards in two ways for himself and the prat, and common topaz submitting a notarized repositorys security system from the association, attesting that he has been sure t o sign for and in behalf of the Lapu-Lapu initiation both and all checks, drafts or different(a) orders with respect to the Bank to fulfill ancestry with the Bank, negociate loans, agreement, obligations, promissory notes and an different(prenominal) commercialized documents and to initially acquire a loan of P100, 000.00 from both cant suntan and the nucleotide cannot compensate chthonic the corporate veil. Because of the legal proceeding Tan entered on the behalf of the Foundation, the Foundation is deemed liable.2. accord to the monuments Certificate, Tan, the President, was given sibyllic and trenchant office by the Foundation to, among other things, oversee with the Bank. For that reason, the Foundation is proscribed from question the authority of Tan to unwrap the pass on loans from the answerer Bank. Since it is a cognize school of thought that if a corporation wittingly allows one of its officers, or any other agents, to make out within the g round of a observable authority, and holds him out to the macrocosm as somebody who holds the origin to do those acts, the corporation is command from denying the agents authority.