Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1K views

    Buenaventura V Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company

    Uploaded by

    Angelo Tiglao
    1) A contract of adhesion is a standard form contract prepared by one party that the other party must accept or reject in full. Such contracts are valid and enforceable like ordinary contracts. 2) While courts have occasionally struck down contracts of adhesion that take advantage of the weaker party, contracts of adhesion are not invalid per se. The adhering party is free to reject the contract entirely. 3) Even if the promissory notes were contracts of adhesion, that does not allow the petitioner to avoid their literal enforcement if the terms are clear and unambiguous, as was the case here. Courts cannot rewrite unambiguous contract terms to avoid perceived hardships.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Buenaventura V Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company

    Uploaded by

    Angelo Tiglao
    1K views1 page
    1) A contract of adhesion is a standard form contract prepared by one party that the other party must accept or reject in full. Such contracts are valid and enforceable like ordinary contracts. 2) While courts have occasionally struck down contracts of adhesion that take advantage of the weaker party, contracts of adhesion are not invalid per se. The adhering party is free to reject the contract entirely. 3) Even if the promissory notes were contracts of adhesion, that does not allow the petitioner to avoid their literal enforcement if the terms are clear and unambiguous, as was the case here. Courts cannot rewrite unambiguous contract terms to avoid perceived hardships.

    Original Description:

    CLR2 Digest

    Original Title

    Buenaventura v Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) A contract of adhesion is a standard form contract prepared by one party that the other party must accept or reject in full. Such contracts are valid and enforceable like ordinary contracts. 2) While courts have occasionally struck down contracts of adhesion that take advantage of the weaker party, contracts of adhesion are not invalid per se. The adhering party is free to reject the contract entirely. 3) Even if the promissory notes were contracts of adhesion, that does not allow the petitioner to avoid their literal enforcement if the terms are clear and unambiguous, as was the case here. Courts cannot rewrite unambiguous contract terms to avoid perceived hardships.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    1K views1 page

    Buenaventura V Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company

    Uploaded by

    Angelo Tiglao
    1) A contract of adhesion is a standard form contract prepared by one party that the other party must accept or reject in full. Such contracts are valid and enforceable like ordinary contracts. 2) While courts have occasionally struck down contracts of adhesion that take advantage of the weaker party, contracts of adhesion are not invalid per se. The adhering party is free to reject the contract entirely. 3) Even if the promissory notes were contracts of adhesion, that does not allow the petitioner to avoid their literal enforcement if the terms are clear and unambiguous, as was the case here. Courts cannot rewrite unambiguous contract terms to avoid perceived hardships.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    194 BUENAVENTURA v METROPOLITAN BANK AND TRUST COMPANY of adhesion, for she thereby seems to forget that the

    hereby seems to forget that the validity and enforceability


    G.R. No. 167082 | 03 August 2016 | J. Bersamin | TIGLAO of contracts of adhesion were the same as those of other valid contracts.
    TOPIC: Contracts of Adhesion
    As a rule, indeed, the contract of adhesion is no different from any other
    DOCTRINE: A contract of adhesion is so-called because its terms are prepared contract. Its interpretation still aligns with the literal meaning of its terms and
    by only one party while the other party merely affixes his signature signifying his conditions absent any ambiguity, or with the intention of the parties. The terms
    adhesion thereto. Such contract is just as binding as ordinary contracts. and conditions of the promissory notes involved herein, being clear and beyond
    doubt, should then be enforced accordingly.
    It is true that we have, on occasion, struck down such contracts as void when
    the weaker party is imposed upon in dealing with the dominant bargaining As fittingly declared in The Insular Life Assurance Company, Ltd. vs. Court of
    party and is reduced to the alternative of taking it or leaving it, completely Appeals and Sun Brothers & Company, "[w]hen the language of the contract is
    deprived of the opportunity to bargain on equal footing. Nevertheless, explicit leaving no doubt as to the intention of the drafters thereof, the courts
    contracts of adhesion are not invalid per se and they are not entirely prohibited. may not read into it any other intention that would contradict its plain import."
    The one who adheres to the contract is in reality free to reject it entirely, if he Accordingly, no court, even this Court, can "make new contracts for the parties
    adheres, he gives his consent. or ignore those already made by them, simply to avoid seeming hardships.
    Neither abstract justice nor the rule of liberal construction justifies the creation
    of a contract for the parties which they did not make themselves or the
    FACTS: imposition upon one party to a contract of an obligation not assumed."
    1. Buenaventure executed a PN payable to Metrobank.
    2. For having failed to fully pay, Metrobank filed an action for collection
    against Buenaventura.
    3. Buenaventura argues that the PNs she executed were a contract of
    adhesion because her only participation was affixing her signature and
    that the terms of the PN should be strictly construed against Metrobank.
    4. Metrobank counters that the terms and conditions of the PNs were
    clear and unambigious; hence, there was no need or room for
    interpretation.

    ISSUE/S: W/N the promissory notes were contracts of adhesion – NO. But even
    assuming that it was a contract of adhesion, such did not entitle her to bar their
    literal enforcement.

    HELD/RULING:
    The promissory notes were written as follows:
    FOR VALUE RECEIVED, I/we jointly and severally promise to pay
    Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company, at its office x x x the principal
    sum of PESOS xx x, Philippine currency, together with interest and credit
    evaluation and supervision fee (CESF) thereon at the effective rate of•
    x x x per centum x x x per annum, inclusive, from date hereof and until
    fully paid.

    What the petitioner advocates is for the Court to now read into the promissory
    notes terms and conditions that would contradict their clear and unambiguous
    terms in the guise of such promissory notes being contracts of adhesion. This
    cannot be permitted, for, even assuming that the promissory notes were
    contracts of adhesion, such circumstance alone did not necessarily entitle her
    to bar their literal enforcement against her if their terms were unequivocal. It is
    preposterous on her part to disparage the promissory notes for being contracts

    You might also like