ChanRobles Virtual law Library
[G.R. No. 150978.
POWTON CONGLOMERATE, INC., vs. AGCOLICOL
FIRST DIVISION
Gentlemen:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this
Court dated
G.R. No. 150978(Powton Conglomerate, Incorporated and Philip C. Chien vs. Johnny Agcolicol.)
This resolves respondent's motion for clarification of the
Considering that Powton Conglomerate Incorporated's obligation to pay respondent the balance of the contract price, i.e., P268,139.60, does not constitute a loan or forbearance of money, but rather, one that arose from a contract for the installation of electrical works, the applicable rate of interest is 6% per annum, [1] cralaw which is considered as a form of indemnity for the delay in the performance of an obligation. [2] cralaw Furthermore, since the amount payable to respondent could be established with certainty at the time of the filing of' the complaint, the six percent (6%) interest should be computed from the date of filing of the said complaint. After the judgment became final and executory, the amount due shall earn interest at 12% per year, the interim period being deemed equivalent to a forbearance of credit. [3] cralaw
IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, the April 3, 2003 Decision in G.R. No. 150978 is CLARIFIED as follows: The rate of interest on the amount of P268,139.60, payable by petitioner to respondent, is six percent (6%) per annum, from the time of the filing of the complaint until the finality of the judgment. If the adjudged principal, and the interest (or any part thereof) remain unpaid thereafter, the interest rate shall be twelve percent (12%) per annum computed from the time the judgment becomes final and executory until it is fully satisfied.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) VIRGINIA ANCHETA-SORIANO
Clerk of Court
Endnotes:
[1] cralaw Crismina Garments, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 363 Phil. 702, 707 (1999), citing Eastern Shipping Lines, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 97412, 12 July 1994, 234 SCRA 78.
[2] cralaw Id citing Castelo v. Court of Appeals, 314 Phil. 1 (1995); Pacific Mills, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 87182, 17 February 1992, 206 SCRA 317; Civil Code, Article 2209.
[3] cralaw Crismina Garments, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, supra at 708-709, citing Keng Hua Paper Products Co., Inc. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 116863, 12 February 1998, 286 SCRA 257; Philippine National Bank v. Court of Appeals, 331 Phil. 1079 (1996); Food Terminal, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 330 Phil. 903 (1996).
HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
QUICK SEARCH
