03-19-2023, 08:44 PM
Gonzales-Asdala vs. Metrobank
GR#257982
Feb. 23, 2023
Highlights
-Loan taken by the wife with land as collateral. Mortgage redemption was taken by the wife. But the husband died. Now the wife wanted to MRI to apply to the balance of the Loan.
-No Receipts Issued
-The only proof of payment of MRI is the debit memo by the bank
-Property acquired during marriage is presumed conjugal. The presumption of conjugality is rebuttable, but only with strong, clear and convincing evidence. (359 Phil 519 [1998]).
-Since petitioner failed to present strict proof of her husband’s exclusive ownership over the property, Metrobank, the lower courts, and SC cannot be faulted for relying on the TCT, the sole document presented by petitioner. After all, the question of whether petitioner was able to adduce proof to overthrow the presumption of conjugality is a factual issue best addressed the trial court. I cannot be over-emphasized that factual determination of the trial courts, especially when confirmed by the appellate court are accorded great weight by the Court and, as a rule, will not be disturbed on appeal, except for the most compelling reasons. (Ko v. Aramburo, 816 Phil 121, 134 [2017])
GR#257982
Feb. 23, 2023
Highlights
-Loan taken by the wife with land as collateral. Mortgage redemption was taken by the wife. But the husband died. Now the wife wanted to MRI to apply to the balance of the Loan.
-No Receipts Issued
-The only proof of payment of MRI is the debit memo by the bank
-Property acquired during marriage is presumed conjugal. The presumption of conjugality is rebuttable, but only with strong, clear and convincing evidence. (359 Phil 519 [1998]).
-Since petitioner failed to present strict proof of her husband’s exclusive ownership over the property, Metrobank, the lower courts, and SC cannot be faulted for relying on the TCT, the sole document presented by petitioner. After all, the question of whether petitioner was able to adduce proof to overthrow the presumption of conjugality is a factual issue best addressed the trial court. I cannot be over-emphasized that factual determination of the trial courts, especially when confirmed by the appellate court are accorded great weight by the Court and, as a rule, will not be disturbed on appeal, except for the most compelling reasons. (Ko v. Aramburo, 816 Phil 121, 134 [2017])