Scribd
Upload
174 views1 page

Severino vs. Severino

This case involves a dispute over an unpaid debt. Fabiola Severino sued Guillermo Severino and Enrique Echauz to recover 20,000 pesos owed to her. Guillermo had agreed to pay Fabiola in installments to settle a dispute over inheritance from their deceased relative Melecio Severino. Enrique acted as guarantor for Guillermo but claims he received no consideration. The court held that as guarantor, Enrique was bound by the same consideration between the principal parties, which was settling the inheritance dispute, even if he did not directly benefit.

Uploaded by

Rocky C. Baliao
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
174 views1 page

Severino vs. Severino

This case involves a dispute over an unpaid debt. Fabiola Severino sued Guillermo Severino and Enrique Echauz to recover 20,000 pesos owed to her. Guillermo had agreed to pay Fabiola in installments to settle a dispute over inheritance from their deceased relative Melecio Severino. Enrique acted as guarantor for Guillermo but claims he received no consideration. The court held that as guarantor, Enrique was bound by the same consideration between the principal parties, which was settling the inheritance dispute, even if he did not directly benefit.

Uploaded by

Rocky C. Baliao
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Severino vs.

Severino

Facts:

This action was instituted in the Court of First Instance of the Province of Iloilo by Fabiola
Severino, with whom is joined her husband Ricardo Vergara, for the purpose of recovering the
sum of P20,000 from Guillermo Severino and Enrique Echaus, the latter in the character of
guarantor for the former.

Melecio Severino upon his death, left considerable properties. To end litigation among heirs a
compromise was effected where defendant (son of MS) took over the property of deceased and
agreed to pay installment of 100K to plaintiff (wife of MS) payable first in 40K cash upon
execution of document in 3 equal installments. Enrique Echauz became guarantor. Upon failure
to pay the balance,plaintiff filed and action against the defendant and Echauz. Echauz contends
that he received nothing from affixing his signature in the document and the contract lacked the
consideration as to him.

Issue: WON there is a consideration for the guaranty?

Held: No

The guarantor or surety is bound by the same consideration that makes the contract effective
between the principal parties thereto.

It is neither necessary that guarantor or surety should receive any part of the benefit, if such there
be accruing to his principal.

The compromise and dismissal of a lawsuit is recognized in law as a valuable consideration

You might also like