Petitioner
Recaredo F. Pando
Respondent
Antonio Gimenez
Citation
G.R. No. 31816
Court
Supreme Court En Banc
Division
En Banc
Ponente
Romualdez, J.
Decided
February 15, 1930

Summary

This case involved a mortgage foreclosure that became complicated by property administration duties. Gimenez mortgaged his Manila property to secure P8,000 debt to Pando. Initially, Pando was to collect rents for interest payments, but the arrangement evolved into complete property administration (antichresis) where Pando assumed obligations to pay taxes and land rents. When Pando failed these duties, the property was lost through tax sale and lease cancellation. The Supreme Court recognized this as an antichresis under Civil Code Article 1882, making Pando liable for damages. The Court modified the lower court's decision to award Gimenez P5,000 damages while affirming the mortgage obligations, establishing important precedent on antichretic creditor duties and liability for breach of property administration agreements.

Statutes applied

Related cases

Other Philippine cases on the same provisions and issues.

By Intellegal Editorial Board · February 15, 1930

Search Philippine case law on Intellegal →
AI-assisted case analysis — for research only. Verify against the official decision. A research aid, not legal advice; using this page creates no attorney-client relationship. For legal advice, consult a Philippine lawyer. Verify every holding and citation against the official decision (Supreme Court E-Library / Official Gazette) before relying on it.