Scribd
Upload
379 views1 page

Court Ruling on Debt Dispute Case

This case involves a dispute over loans and a proposed property sale between Rosena Fontelar Ogawa and Elizabeth Gache Menigishi. Ogawa claimed Menigishi borrowed money from her and then offered to sell her property to settle the debt. However, Menigishi denied owing money and instead claimed Ogawa owed her money as evidenced by a receipt. The court ruled the receipt alone was not sufficient to establish Menigishi's counterclaim that Ogawa owed her money, as it was unclear who was the obligor or obligee. The burden was on Menigishi to prove her counterclaim by a preponderance of evidence, which she failed to do based on the evidence provided.

Uploaded by

anon_421571815
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
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
379 views1 page

Court Ruling on Debt Dispute Case

This case involves a dispute over loans and a proposed property sale between Rosena Fontelar Ogawa and Elizabeth Gache Menigishi. Ogawa claimed Menigishi borrowed money from her and then offered to sell her property to settle the debt. However, Menigishi denied owing money and instead claimed Ogawa owed her money as evidenced by a receipt. The court ruled the receipt alone was not sufficient to establish Menigishi's counterclaim that Ogawa owed her money, as it was unclear who was the obligor or obligee. The burden was on Menigishi to prove her counterclaim by a preponderance of evidence, which she failed to do based on the evidence provided.

Uploaded by

anon_421571815
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
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

ROSENA FONTELAR OGAWA vs.

ELIZABETH GACHE MENIGISHI


G.R. No. 193089
July 9, 2012

PERLAS-BERNABE, J.

FACTS: Petitioner filed a complaint for sum of money, damages, breach of good human relation
and unjust enrichment against respondent, docketed as Civil Case No. 2004-7299, alleging that
the latter borrowed from her the amounts of P15,000.00, P100,000.00 and P8,000.00. Unable to
pay, respondent offered to sell her building and its improvements in Sorsogon to petitioner for a
consideration of P1,500,000.00 with the agreement that her outstanding loans with petitioner be
deducted from the purchase price and the balance payable in installments.
As partial payment for the properties, petitioner remitted amounts of money to respondent.
Having paid huge amounts and in order to protect her proprietary rights, petitioner then
demanded for the execution of the corresponding deed of sale, but respondent backed out from
the deal.

Respondent denied her indebtedness and claimed that it was petitioner who owed her
1,000,000.00 Yen, as evidenced by a receipt. In partial payment of her indebtedness, petitioner,
thus, remitted the amounts of P150,000.00 and P250,000.00 to respondent, leaving a balance
of P100,000.00.

ISSUE: Whether or not the disputed receipt sufficiently established respondent's counterclaim
that petitioner owed her 1,000,000.00 Yen?

RULING: NO. According to the court, it cannot be clearly ascertained who between the two
signatories is the obligor and obligee. Atty. Gerona's statement that the one who usually
prepares the receipt is the obligor or the creditor did not conclusively imply that petitioner owed
respondent 1,000,000.00 Yen, or vice versa. Hence, absent any other evidence to prove the
transaction for which the receipt was issued, the Court cannot consider said receipt as evidence
of a purported loan between petitioner and respondent which the former categorically denied. It
is settled that the burden of proof lies with the party who asserts his/her right. In a counterclaim,
the burden of proving the existence of the claim lies with the defendant, by the quantum of
evidence required by law, which in this case is preponderance of evidence.

"Preponderance of evidence" is the weight, credit, and value of the aggregate evidence on
either side and is usually considered to be synonymous with the term "greater weight of
evidence" or "greater weight of credible evidence."

From the evidence on record, it is clear that respondent failed to prove her counterclaim by
preponderance of evidence.

You might also like