Case Digest: Hongkong and Shanghai Bank vs Aldanese, 48 Phil 990, G.R. No. 22071

Hongkong and Shanghai Bank vs Aldanese, 48 Phil 990, G.R. No. 22071, October 9, 1924.

Subject: Obligations and Contracts

FACTS

Before receiving the bill of lading for the merchandise, Vamenta & Co. and Isidoro Vamenta declared the value of the merchandise to be P6,854.40. They were able to withdraw the merchandise from the customs by providing a bond executed by the Union Guarantee Co., Ltd. for the amount of P9,450, with a promise to present the bill of lading within four months. However, the deadline passed without the bill of lading being presented, despite repeated demands.

The plaintiff corporation later presented the bill of lading with an invoice showing the value of the merchandise to be P18,681.60. They claimed the merchandise from the Collector of Customs, but he could not deliver it as it had already been handed over to Vamenta & Co. and Isidoro Vamenta based on the earlier bond. The plaintiff then filed a lawsuit against the Collector of Customs.

At the request of the Collector of Customs, Vamenta & Co., Isidoro Vamenta, and the surety company, Union Guarantee Co., Ltd., were included as defendants. The Collector of Customs filed a cross-complaint against both the plaintiff and the aforementioned defendants.

After a trial, the Court of First Instance of Manila rendered a judgment. The judgment ordered the Collector of Customs to pay the Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corporation the sum of $9,340.80, along with costs. Vamenta & Co., Isidoro Vamenta, and Union Guarantee Co., Ltd. were also ordered to pay the same amount to the Collector of Customs, along with costs. If the Union Guarantee Co., Ltd. had to pay any part of the sum due to the insolvency or inability to pay of Vamenta & Co. and Isidoro Vamenta, the latter were ordered to reimburse the surety company, along with costs. All payments were to be made with a legal interest rate of 6% per annum from April 29, 1920.

This judgment became final, except for the Union Guarantee Co., Ltd., which appealed the decision. The Court of Appeals ordered a new trial to allow the introduction of further evidence regarding the alleged bond given by the Union Guarantee Co., Ltd.

During the new trial, the bond given by Vamenta & Co. and Isidoro Vamenta, as well as the Union Guarantee Co., Ltd., was presented as evidence. The Union Guarantee Co., Ltd. did not provide any evidence. Isidoro Vamenta paid the Collector of Customs P8,000 as partial payment according to the judgment. After the hearing, the court ordered Vamenta & Co., Isidoro Vamenta, and the Union Guarantee Co., Ltd. to jointly and severally pay the remaining balance of P20,334.91, minus the P8,000 paid by Isidoro Vamenta. This amounted to P12,334.91, with legal interest calculated from October 24, 1921 (the date of payment by the Collector of Customs), and additional interest at the legal rate on the P12,334.91 from August 30, 1922 (the day following Isidoro Vamenta's payment of P8,000).

In the judgment, the Union Guarantee Co., Ltd. was ordered to pay up to the amount of the bond, which was P9,450.

The Union Guarantee Co., Ltd. appealed the judgment, citing two errors: (a) being sentenced to pay the aforementioned sum, and (b) the denial of their motion for a new trial.

Regarding the first error, the appellant argues that the defendant Aldanese is not entitled to recover because the money paid belongs to the government and not to him personally. It should be noted that the judgment appealed from favors "Mr. Aldanese in his capacity as Collector of Customs," rather than as an individual.

The appellant also claims that since the liability of Vamenta & Co. and Isidoro Vamenta is joint and several, the P8,000 paid by Isidoro Vamenta should be applied to their bond of P9,450. By deducting the P8,000 from the bond amount, only P1,450 remains to be paid by the appellant.

ISSUE

Whether or not an exclusive debt (not solidary) is more onerous than a solidary debt.

RULING

Yes.

Vamenta & Co. and Isidoro Vamenta have acknowledged their obligation to indemnify the Collector of Customs for the amount he paid, which is P20,334.91. Isidoro Vamenta has already paid the Collector of Customs P8,000 towards this liability. Therefore, there is a remaining balance of P12,334.91 that the Collector of Customs is entitled to be reimbursed. To determine the extent of liability and who is responsible for this amount, the following points should be considered: (1) Vamenta & Co. and Isidoro Vamenta are jointly and severally liable, along with the appellant, for the total amount of P20,334.91; (2) Vamenta & Co. and Isidoro Vamenta's liability, separate from the surety company Union Guarantee Co., Ltd., is P10,884.91; and (3) The payment of P8,000 made by Vamenta & Co. and Isidoro Vamenta should be applied to the more onerous portion of their liability, which is the amount they are solely and individually responsible for. This is in accordance with Article 1174 of the Civil Code.

Therefore, Vamenta & Co., Isidoro Vamenta, and the Union Guarantee Co., Ltd. are jointly and severally liable for the remaining balance of P12,334.91, but only up to the amount of the bond, which is P9,450. Vamenta & Co. and Isidoro Vamenta are solely responsible for the remaining amount, which is P2,884.91.