G.R. No. L-1962
FACTS:
Plaintiffs-appellees Jose Pineda et al., heirs of Crisanto Pineda, filed an action to recover a sum of money from defendant-appellant Gabino Gasataya based on a written agreement dated April 1, 1887, wherein Gasataya promised to pay Crisanto Pineda 1,740 pesos and 14 centimos with 20% annual interest. The complaint was filed on August 19, 1902. The trial court rendered judgment in favor of the plaintiffs. On appeal, Gasataya contended that the plaintiffs’ right of action had already prescribed.
ISSUE:
Whether the plaintiffs’ action to recover the debt had prescribed at the time the complaint was filed.
RULING:
No, the action had not prescribed. The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s judgment.
The Court applied the transitory provision of Article 1939 of the Civil Code, which governs prescription that began before the Code’s effectivity. The cause of action accrued on April 1, 1887. The Civil Code took effect on December 8, 1889. Under the prior laws (Law 63 of Toro, Novisima Recopilacion), a personal action for money prescribed in twenty (20) years. Under Article 1964 of the Civil Code, the prescriptive period is fifteen (15) years.
Counting from the accrual of the action (April 1, 1887), the twenty-year period under the old law had not yet elapsed when the complaint was filed on August 19, 1902. Furthermore, counting from the effectivity of the Civil Code (December 8, 1889), the fifteen-year period under the new code had also not elapsed by the filing date. Therefore, the defense of prescription could not be sustained.
