Lyman A Manzanares, Esq
Lifetime Member, Integrated Bar of the Philippines, Makati City Chapter, and the Philippine Bar Association. U.P. College of Law, Class of 2004
A Case A Day
Your daily dose of insights into the world of jurisprudence and law, whether you're a legal enthusiast, casual observer, or just someone curious about the twists and turns of the Philippine and international justice system.
STANDARD CHARTERED BANK, PHILIPPINE BRANCH v. PHILIPPINE INVESTMENT TWO (SPV-AMC), INC., et al.; PHILIPPINE INVESTMENT TWO (SPV-AMC), INC. v. STANDARD CHARTERED BANK, etc.
We are therefore faced with a situation where (1) the principal contract is governed by Philippine law but (2) the accessory contracts, and the modifications thereon, are governed by New York law.The question now is: when the Stipulation, Agreement and Order was executed, has the principal obligation under the promissory notes been extinguished? A threshold question is whether the fact of extinguishment of the principal obligation should be governed by the choice of law stipulation in the principal contract or the choice of law stipulation in the accessory contracts.We rule that the extinguishment of a principal obligation is a matter incidental to that obligation, and not to the supporting accessory obligations. Thus, issues on extinguishment of the principal obligation should be governed by the law governing the principal obligation, and not the law governing the accessory obligations.x x x xTo harmonize the laws of different jurisdictions in cross-border insolvency proceedings, the principle of lex loci intentionis must be applied, as it relates to choice of law stipulations in various lending and security contracts. In this case, to harmonize these apparently conflicting choice of law stipulations, We rule that the extinguishment of the loan itself is to be governed by Philippine law, but questions involving the redemption, foreclosure or appropriation of the pledged collaterals are to be governed by New York law. Incidentally, since the loan and the security obligation are both connected, in that one is a principal obligation and the other is an accessory obligation, questions involving the redemption, foreclosure or appropriation of the pledged collaterals will necessarily determine the fact of the extinguishment of the loan under Philippine law.
Supreme Court, Second Division. G.R. Nos. 216608 & 216625; and 216702-03, April 26, 2023
Case Updates
Lyman A Manzanares, Esq
Lifetime Member, Integrated Bar of the Philippines, Makati City Chapter, and the Philippine Bar Association. U.P. College of Law, Class of 2004
New Archives
Selected new case archives of A Case A Day.
SERGIO R. OSMEÑA III v. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS SECRETARY JOSEPH EMILIO A. ABAYA, et al.; BUSINESS FOR PROGRESS MOVEMENT etc. v. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS, et al.
The Supreme Court has the power to relax the rules on standing in exceptional cases where there are serious legal questions involved and their impact on public interest. The petitioners have standing to question the award of the Mactan-Cebu International Airport Project to GMR and MCC because of the serious legal questions involved and their impact on public interest.However, the Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC) complied with the requirements of the Build-Operate-and-Transfer (BOT) Law in the bidding process for the Mactan-Cebu International Airport Project. The Court finds no grave abuse of discretion on the part of the DOTC and the Mactan-Cebu International Airport Authority (MCIAA) in awarding the project to GMR and MCC. The Court denies the consolidated petitions for certiorari and injunction and upholds the validity of the award of the Mactan-Cebu International Airport Project to GMR and MCC.
Consolidated Petitions at the Supreme Court, Third Division. G.R. Nos. 211737 and 214756, January 13, 2016
Case Updates