A+ A A-

PLEDGE OR MORTGAGE INDIVISIBLE, EXCEPTIONS

PLEDGE OR MORTGAGE INDIVISIBLE, EXCEPTIONS

Art. 2089. A pledge or mortgage is indivisible, even though the debt may be divided among the successors in interest of the debtor or of the creditor.
 
Therefore, the debtor’s heir who has paid a part of the debt cannot  ask  for  the  proportionate  extinguishment  of  the pledge  or  mortgage  as  long  as  the  debt  is  not  completely satisfied.
 
Neither can the creditor’s heir who received his share of the debt  return  the  pledge  or  cancel  the  mortgage,  to  the prejudice of the other heirs who have not been paid.
 
From these provisions is expected
the case in which, there being several things given in mortgage or pledge, each one of them guarantees only a determinate portion of the credit.

The   debtor,   in   this   case,   shall   have   a   right   to   the extinguishment of the pledge or mortgage as the portion of the  debt  for  which  each  thing  is  specially  answerable  is satisfied. (1860)
 
Art. 2090. The indivisibility  of a  pledge  or  mortgage is  not affected  by  the  fact  that  the  debtors  are  not  solidarily liable. (n)
 

PLEDGE OR MORTGAGE INDIVISIBLE

> Rule applies even if the obligation is joint and not solidary
> The divisibility of the principal obligation doesn't affect the indivisibility of the mortgage or pledge
 

EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE OF INDIVISIBILITY

1.   Where each one of several things guarantees determinate portions of credit
2.   Where only a portion of the loan was released
3.   Where there was failure of consideration
4.   Where there is no debtor-creditor relationship
 

FORECLOSURE  OF  MORTGAGE  CONSTITUTED  ON  SEVERAL PROPERTIES

> A mortgage even constituted on  several properties is  one and  indivisible,  that  is,  it  cannot  be  divided  among  the several properties and the mortgagee has the right to have the  properties  either  or  both,  jointly  or  singly,  sold  to satisfy his claim

> Further,  the  sale  of  the  mortgaged  properties  cannot  be set aside in the absence of evidence to show that a better price   could   have   been   obtained   if   they   were   sold separately,  or  the  sale  of  one  or  some  alone  would  bring sufficient proceeds to satisfy the mortgage credit 


PLEDGE OR MORTGAGE INDIVISIBLE, EXCEPTIONS

PLEDGE OR MORTGAGE INDIVISIBLE, EXCEPTIONS

Art. 2089. A pledge or mortgage is indivisible, even though the debt may be divided among the successors in interest of the debtor or of the creditor.
 
Therefore, the debtor’s heir who has paid a part of the debt cannot  ask  for  the  proportionate  extinguishment  of  the pledge  or  mortgage  as  long  as  the  debt  is  not  completely satisfied.
 
Neither can the creditor’s heir who received his share of the debt  return  the  pledge  or  cancel  the  mortgage,  to  the prejudice of the other heirs who have not been paid.
 
From these provisions is expected
the case in which, there being several things given in mortgage or pledge, each one of them guarantees only a determinate portion of the credit.

The   debtor,   in   this   case,   shall   have   a   right   to   the extinguishment of the pledge or mortgage as the portion of the  debt  for  which  each  thing  is  specially  answerable  is satisfied. (1860)
 
Art. 2090. The indivisibility  of a  pledge  or  mortgage is  not affected  by  the  fact  that  the  debtors  are  not  solidarily liable. (n)
 

PLEDGE OR MORTGAGE INDIVISIBLE

> Rule applies even if the obligation is joint and not solidary
> The divisibility of the principal obligation doesn't affect the indivisibility of the mortgage or pledge
 

EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE OF INDIVISIBILITY

1.   Where each one of several things guarantees determinate portions of credit
2.   Where only a portion of the loan was released
3.   Where there was failure of consideration
4.   Where there is no debtor-creditor relationship
 

FORECLOSURE  OF  MORTGAGE  CONSTITUTED  ON  SEVERAL PROPERTIES

> A mortgage even constituted on  several properties is  one and  indivisible,  that  is,  it  cannot  be  divided  among  the several properties and the mortgagee has the right to have the  properties  either  or  both,  jointly  or  singly,  sold  to satisfy his claim

> Further,  the  sale  of  the  mortgaged  properties  cannot  be set aside in the absence of evidence to show that a better price   could   have   been   obtained   if   they   were   sold separately,  or  the  sale  of  one  or  some  alone  would  bring sufficient proceeds to satisfy the mortgage credit 


BATASnatin The Firm

Lawyers in the Philippines

Latest @ Forums

Popular

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Prev Next

SUGGESTED ANSWERS …

ANSWERS TO BAR EXAMINATION QUESTIONS IN POLITICAL LAW ARRANGED BY TOPIC (1990 – 2006) Edited and Arranged by:Silliman University College of Law Batch 2005Updated by:DondeeD’ BAR-Retake 2007 From the ANSWERS TO BAR EXAMINATION QUESTIONS by the UP LAW COMPLEX & PHILIPPINE ASSOCIATION OF LAW SCHO...

Read more

Oral Defamation l S…

Kinds and Definition of Slander or Oral Defamation   Definition: Speaking of base and defamatory words which tend to prejudice another in his reputation, office, trade, business or means of livelihood   Two kinds of oral or verbal defamation: (1) Grave Slander (2) Simple Slander   A. Factor...

Read more

Article I – THE NAT…

Article I – THE NATIONAL TERRITORYThe national territory of the Philippines comprises:1) the Philippine archipelago;2) all other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdictionPHILIPPINE ARCHIPELAGO – that body of water studded with islands which is delineated in the Treaty of...

Read more

Random

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Prev Next

Who may be an insur…

Who may be an insurer? A foreign or domestic insurance company may transact business in the Philippines but must first obtain a certificate of authority for that purpose from the Insurance Commissioner who has the discretion to refuse to issue such ...

Read more

THE MEANING OF THE …

THE MEANING OF THE TERM “REGULAR COURTS”> It refers to civil courts as opposed to military courts> Military  courts  cannot  try  and  exercise  jurisdiction  over  civilians for  offenses  allegedly  committed  by  them  as  long  as  civil  courts ...

Read more

VILLANUEVA v. CASTA…

VILLANUEVA v. CASTAÑEDA, JR.FACTSPetitioners are owners of stalls in a talipapa located in a land owned by the municipal government. They were ed to lease the said land through a municipal council resolution in 1961.The municipal government demolishe...

Read more

Featured

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Prev Next

Right to Strike

SSSEA v. CA – right to strike – At present, in the absence of any legislation in government employees the right to strike, recognizing their right to do so, or regulating the exercise of such right, they are prohibited form striking by express prohi...

Read more

People vs. Tolentin…

G.R. No. 176385, February 26, 2008 FACTS: On 13 February 1998, three separate informations of Murder and two counts of Frustrated Murder were filed before the RTC against appellants, together with accused Jimmy Trinidad and Arnel Trinidad. The murd...

Read more

Perfection Of A Con…

In Oesmer, Jr., et al. v. Paraiso Dev. Corp., G.R. No. 157493, February 5, 2007, a contract to sell was entered into by the owners of a real property. They affixed their signatures but contested its validity later contending that their co-owner had n...

Read more


BATASnatin.com- The Best Philippine Law Library

Login

Sign in with Facebook