Scribd
Upload
2K views2 pages

Garcia Vs Thio Case Digest

This case involves a dispute over two loans totaling $100,000 and $500,000 from Garcia to Thio. Garcia claimed the loans were directly to Thio, while Thio argued the money was actually lent to Santiago. The Court ruled in favor of Garcia, finding several factors indicated the loans were between Garcia and Thio, including that Garcia did not personally know Santiago, a witness testified Thio planned to borrow from Garcia to lend to Santiago, and Thio issued checks covering interest payments from her own funds. The Court did not find Thio's explanation that Santiago would replace the interest checks credible.

Uploaded by

Jet Siang
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
2K views2 pages

Garcia Vs Thio Case Digest

This case involves a dispute over two loans totaling $100,000 and $500,000 from Garcia to Thio. Garcia claimed the loans were directly to Thio, while Thio argued the money was actually lent to Santiago. The Court ruled in favor of Garcia, finding several factors indicated the loans were between Garcia and Thio, including that Garcia did not personally know Santiago, a witness testified Thio planned to borrow from Garcia to lend to Santiago, and Thio issued checks covering interest payments from her own funds. The Court did not find Thio's explanation that Santiago would replace the interest checks credible.

Uploaded by

Jet Siang
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

2.

Garcia vs Thio
16 March 2007 J. Corona
FACTS: Petitioner Garcia Respondent Thio In February 1995, Thio received from Garcia a crossed check amounting to $100,000 payable to the order of Marilou Santiago. o Garcia the received from Thio $3,000 for 4 months and P76,500 on July, August, September and October (Representing interest due) In June 1995, Thio received again from Garcia P500,000 o Garcia the received from Thio P20,000 on August, September October and November. (Represent interest due) According to Garcia, Thio failed to pay the $100,000 and P500,000 amount opting him to file a case for sum of money and damages. Both loans are not covered by a promissory note as the two are close friends Thio countered that it was Marilou Santiago whom the money was lent by Garcia. She issued the checks for P76,000 and P20,000 not as payment of interest but to accommodate petitioners request that respondent use her own checks instead of Santiago RTC ruled in favor of Garcia CA reversed RTC.

ISSUE: 1. Who borrowed the money (Santiago or Thio) HELD: 1. Thio

RATIO:

A loan is a real contract as it is perfected upon delivery of the object. This is different from a consensual contract which only requires consent. An accepted promise to deliver by way of commodatum or simple loan is binding upon parties, however, the loan itself is only perfected upon delivery of the object. Petitioner insisted that it was upon respondents instruction that both checks were made payable to Santiago. o It was also argued that upon delivery of the checks, respondents acquired control and possession of it and can choose to retain or delivery it to Santiago Factors that supported the conclusions are: o Petitioner did not know Santiago personally o Leticia Ruiz (friend of both petitioner and respondent) testified that the plan of Thio is to borrow money from Garcia then subsequently lend it out to Santiago. o for the US$100,000 loan, respondent admitted issuing her own checks in the amount of P76,000 each (peso equivalent of US$3,000) for eight months to cover

the monthly interest. For the P500,000 loan, she also issued her own checks in the amount of P20,000 each for four months. She claimed, however, that Santiago would replace the checks with cash. Her explanation is simply incredible. It is difficult to believe that respondent would put herself in a position where she would be compelled to pay interest, from her own funds, for loans she allegedly did not contract. o In the petition of insolvency filed by Santiago, the one listed as creditor is Thio rather than Garcia. o No corroborative evidence was presented by Thio

You might also like