Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 232 views

    Tropical Homes Inc V CA

    Uploaded by

    Karla Ayco
    Tropical Homes Inc failed to pay amounts owed to PHHC for land purchases according to their contract. PHHC demanded payment of remaining balances while Tropical Homes claimed overpayment. The lower courts ruled in favor of PHHC, ordering payment of amounts due plus legal interest and damages. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision, finding that Tropical Homes admitted the material allegations in the complaint by not objecting to a decision based on pleadings alone. The decision was upheld except for adjusting the interest rate.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Tropical Homes Inc V CA

    Uploaded by

    Karla Ayco
    232 views1 page
    Tropical Homes Inc failed to pay amounts owed to PHHC for land purchases according to their contract. PHHC demanded payment of remaining balances while Tropical Homes claimed overpayment. The lower courts ruled in favor of PHHC, ordering payment of amounts due plus legal interest and damages. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision, finding that Tropical Homes admitted the material allegations in the complaint by not objecting to a decision based on pleadings alone. The decision was upheld except for adjusting the interest rate.

    Original Title

    Tropical Homes Inc v CA

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Tropical Homes Inc failed to pay amounts owed to PHHC for land purchases according to their contract. PHHC demanded payment of remaining balances while Tropical Homes claimed overpayment. The lower courts ruled in favor of PHHC, ordering payment of amounts due plus legal interest and damages. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision, finding that Tropical Homes admitted the material allegations in the complaint by not objecting to a decision based on pleadings alone. The decision was upheld except for adjusting the interest rate.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    232 views1 page

    Tropical Homes Inc V CA

    Uploaded by

    Karla Ayco
    Tropical Homes Inc failed to pay amounts owed to PHHC for land purchases according to their contract. PHHC demanded payment of remaining balances while Tropical Homes claimed overpayment. The lower courts ruled in favor of PHHC, ordering payment of amounts due plus legal interest and damages. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision, finding that Tropical Homes admitted the material allegations in the complaint by not objecting to a decision based on pleadings alone. The decision was upheld except for adjusting the interest rate.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    Tropical Homes Inc v CA Facts: Respondent PHHC sold 12 parcels of land to petitioner for 4.20M reduced to 3.45M.

    The contract stipulated that the manner in which the amount would be paid (p.111) The parties agreed that failure to pay the first amortization as agreed would render immediately due and demandable the whole amount of the consideration and that PHHC may foreclose the mortgage and that it shall be further entitled to liquidated damages equivalent to 25% of the entire amount due without need of proving actual damages in addition to legal interests and other legal charges. Petitioner failed to pay the agreed amount upon registration of the deed of absolute sale, as agreed upon. Several payments were later made but not in accordance with the manner of payment. PHHC did not foreclose the mortgage despite these breaches. It made a written demand for payment and settlement of the account. The demand went unheeded. Petitioner moved to settle the total account with its approved GSIS loan of 1.714M and with respect to the balance it offered as security 2 time deposit certs. PHHC accepted the proposal and the proceeds of the loan were applied to the outstanding account. PHHC demanded payment of a remaining 154k which P objected to claiming that it had made an overpayment of 29k. The conflicting claims reached the office of the Auditor General which denied both claims In the Office of the Pres, resp secured a favorable judgment. Petitioner still refused to settle its obligation so respondent filed an action for collection of credit. RTC scheduled a pre-trial conference where Petitioner did not appear (only its counsel did) so the RTC declared P in default. P filed a special civil action for certiorari. Decision granting the writ prayed for came out. Following the directive of the SC, the trial judge scheduled a pre-trial. The parties agreed to submit the case for judgment on the pleadings. After their respective memoranda were filed the RTC rendered its decision ordering Defendant (Tropical Homes) to pay Plaintiff (PHHC) the amount of 216k plus legal interest of 154k, pay liquidated damages and the interest accrued. P elevated case to CA.

    Issue: WON the decision of the lower court was proper. Held: Yes. Ratio: on the substantive part the court discussed the issue on legal interest. As to procedure the court said that aside from the legal interest other items prayed for in the complaint should also be granted because the case is based on a judgment on the pleadings. Proof of allegations in the Complaint as well as items prayed for is no longer required. This rule holds true in this case though it appears that P denied its liability to the amount and legal interest because it was not actually a denial but an admission of facts which it intended to negate on the basis of its (petitioner s) interpretation of the resolution. Even categorized it as special and affirmative defenses in the answer which means that the defendant admitted the material allegations. But since its theory or interpretation of the resolution was rejected it stands as a plain admission. Cited Santiago v Basilan Lumber: when P moved to have the case decided on the pleadings the D interposed no objection and has practically assented thereto. Defendant deemed to have admitted the allegations of facts of the complaint so that there was no necessity for the plaintiff to submit evidence of his claim.

    Decision affirmed except for the interest rate.

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy