AGRA, ET. AL.

VS PNB
G.R. No. 133317, June 29, 1999

PROVISION
Article 1144. The following actions must be brought within ten years from the time
the right of action accrues:
(1) Upon a written contract;
(2) Upon an obligation created by law;
(3) Upon a judgment.

FACTS:
On August 30, 1976, an action for collection of a sum of money was filed by
the Philippine National Bank (PNB, for brevity) against Fil-Eastern Wood Industries,
Inc. (Fil-Eastern, for short) in its capacity as principal debtor and against Cayetano
Ferreria, Pedro Atienza, Vicente O. Novales, Antonio R. Agra, and Napoleon M. Gamo
in their capacity as sureties. Plaintiff PNB alleged that on July 17, 1967 Fil-Eastern
was granted a loan in the amount (P2,500,000.00) with interest at twelve percent
(12%) per annum as evidenced by several promissory notes and were credited to
the account of FilEastern. It was further alleged that as of May 31, 1976 the total
indebtedness of Fil-Eastern and its sureties on subject loan amounted to
[ (P5,297,976.17), excluding attorneys fees. Notwithstanding repeated demands,
the defendants refused and failed to pay their loans. October 30, 1978, defendant
Fil-Eastern was declared in default for its failure to answer the complaint within the
reglementary period.

I SSUE:
Whether petitioners may invoke the defense of laches, considering that PNBs
claim had not yet prescribed.

HELD:
No. While it is true that prescription is different from laches, petitioners
reliance on Nielson case is misplaced. As held in the aforecited case, laches is
principally a question of equity. Necessarily, there is no absolute rule as to what
constitutes laches or staleness of demand; each case is to be determined according
to its particular circumstances. Petitioners failed to prove the presence of all the
four established requisites of laches. CA ruled that laches was inapplicable because
the claim was brought within the ten-year prescriptive period provided by law.
pub//ems3//e u m o n a