Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Kaunlaran Lending Investors V Uy
Kaunlaran Lending Investors V Uy
CASE SUMMARY Long case. Essentially Loreta Uy and her son/nephew tried
to set up a company (buy and sell, 2nd hand cars). Wilfredo (also part of the
company being formed) acted with the loaning company (P) and used the
loan application and REM for the company to pay off his debts instead. Now
Uy and co are suing for damages/annulment of the REM. There was an
estafa case but the Court itself said the records dont show what happened
there. TC Ruled IFO KLII, CA Reversed. Went up to SC but Loreta brought up
the defective certificate of non-forum shopping since no proof that the
company authorized its president to sign (Rule is that authorization requires
proof). SC Said yes correct but coz of the merits of this case, theyll relax
the rules.
DOCTRINE GENERAL RULE: In case of a corporation, it has long been settled that the
certificate [of non-forum shopping] must be signed for and on its behalf by a
specifically authorized officer or agent who has personal knowledge of the facts
required to be disclosed.
Consequently, without the needed proof from the board of directors, the certificate
would be considered defective. Thus, xxx even the regular officers of a corporation,
like the chairman and president, may not even know the details required in a
certificate of non-forum shopping; they must therefore be authorized by the board of
directors just like any other officer or agent
ISSUE state all issues first. Bold the one related to the subject
1. WON case should be dismissed for the defective verification and
certificate of non-forum shopping? NO
GENERAL RULE: In case of a corporation, it has long been settled that the
certificate [of non-forum shopping] must be signed for and on its behalf by a
specifically authorized officer or agent who has personal knowledge of the facts
required to be disclosed.
Consequently, without the needed proof from the board of directors, the
certificate would be considered defective. Thus, xxx even the regular officers of
a corporation, like the chairman and president, may not even know the details
required in a certificate of non-forum shopping; they must therefore be
authorized by the board of directors just like any other officer or agent
Merits of the petition justify relaxing of the rules
From a review of the records Loreta has not proven by preponderance of
evidence that she was deceived into signing the documents required for the
release of the proceeds of the loan
o CA credited testimony of Magno as hostile witness for Loreta WHICH WAS
THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT TC DID
Offered no reason why they did this
Doctrine that findings of the Trial court are entitled to respect absent
any cogent/strong reason to the contrary
In addition, Magnos testimony should be received w/ caution coz it
contradicts his earlier counter-affidavit [C]ourts do not generally
look with favor on any retraction or recanted testimony, for it could
have been secured by considerations other than to tell the truth and
would make solemn trials a mockery and place the investigation of
the truth at the mercy of unscrupulous witnesses. A recantation
does not necessarily cancel an earlier declaration, but like any other
testimony the same is subject to the test of credibility and should be
received with caution
NOTES:
o These documents were entrusted to Wilfredo who delivered such to Lelia
Lelia then sent Jose to Manila together with a certain Ed and Doc of KLII
to appraise the land
o Wilfredo had Loreta then sign loan forms: 1) promissory note he pre-
signed as co-maker 2) REM 3) loan disclosure
o Jose and Virgilio then went to Manila to canvass 2nd-hand vehicle prices
while there, Magno, manager of KLII went to Loretas residence w/ the
forms previously signed + some more loan forms and a Solidbank check.
explained in presence of Joses wife that the new loan forms would be
sent to Manila and that the proceeds of the loan would be promptly
delivered to her residence once she affixes her signature on the said
check and voucher.
o Jose confronted Magno about this and was told that it was Lelias
instructions when they tried to withdraw the loan applications and
titles, Lelia told them it was not possible at a later conference, Lelia
admitted applying the P800k loan proceeds to Wilfredos debt to her
o Later verified at Register of Deeds that the REM in favor of KLII for P800k
was annotated on Loretas titles the copy of the document bore only
Loretas signature and was notarized w/o her
o So they sent telegrams to KLII to set aside the transaction/deny the
registration of the mortgage