United Coconut Planters Bank v. Yap
NEW DOCTRINEFacts
The Antecedents: The underlying dispute concerns the amount of notarial commission petitioner United Coconut Planters Bank (UCPB) was required to pay in connection with the extrajudicial foreclosure of real estate mortgages. UCPB was the highest bidder in an auction sale held on April 13, 2000, for properties it had sought to foreclose. However, the issuance of the certificate of sale was contingent upon UCPB's payment of P18,089,900.00 as a notary public's commission. Procedural History: UCPB filed a petition for extrajudicial foreclosure on February 28, 2000. Following the auction sale and its status as the highest bidder, UCPB requested approval of the certificate of sale without paying the commission. Respondent Judge Vicente L. Yap denied this request, requiring payment. UCPB then filed a petition for certiorari and mandamus with the Supreme Court, which was referred to the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals dismissed UCPB's petition, affirming the trial court's order. This decision was subsequently denied reconsideration, leading to the present appeal. The Petition: Petitioner UCPB seeks review on certiorari of the Court of Appeals' decision. UCPB contends that Administrative Circular No. 00-2-01-SC, which increased the notarial commission rates, should not apply because its foreclosure application was filed before the circular's effective date of March 1, 2000. Alternatively, UCPB argues that the commission cannot exceed P100,000.00, as provided by a later amendment that took effect on March 1, 2001.
Issue(s)
Whether Administrative Circular No. 00-2-01-SC, increasing fees for notarial commissions in extrajudicial foreclosure sales, can be applied to a case where the application for foreclosure was filed before its effectivity but the auction sale was conducted after. Whether the P100,000.00 cap on sheriff's fees is applicable to the present case.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals. The petition for review on certiorari was denied. SO ORDERED.
Ratio Decidendi
On the applicability of Administrative Circular No. 00-2-01-SC: The Court held that the increased fees prescribed by Administrative Circular No. 00-2-01-SC, which amended Section 9(l) and Section 20(e) of Rule 141 of the Rules of Court, are applicable to the case. Although UCPB filed its application for extrajudicial foreclosure on February 28, 2000, prior to the circular's effectivity on March 1, 2000, the auction sale was conducted on April 13, 2000, after the new rates took effect. The Court clarified that the collection of fees for money collected by sheriffs or notaries public in extrajudicial foreclosures is contingent on the receipt of proceeds and the issuance of the certificate of sale. Therefore, it is the date of the auction sale and the issuance of the certificate of sale that determine the applicable fees, not the date of filing the application. The Court distinguished between filing fees, which are determined by the rates at the time of filing, and fees for receipt of money or issuance of a certificate of sale, which are determined by the rates in effect at the time these acts occur. Thus, the increased fees under Circular A.M. No. 00-2-01-SC were correctly applied. On the applicability of the P100,000.00 cap on sheriff's fees: The Court ruled that the amendment providing a P100,000.00 cap on sheriff's fees, which took effect on March 1, 2001, cannot be retroactively applied to the present case. The auction sale in this case occurred on April 13, 2000, prior to the effectivity of the amendment imposing the cap. The Court reasoned that applying the cap retroactively would adversely affect collections already made between March 1, 2000, and March 1, 2001, when the new rates were in effect without the cap. Therefore, UCPB could not claim a refund for payments made in excess of P100,000.00 for the foreclosure sale conducted before the cap was introduced.
Main Doctrine
The increased fees prescribed by Administrative Circular No. 00-2-01-SC, which amended Rule 141 of the Rules of Court regarding notarial commissions in extrajudicial foreclosure sales, are applicable to foreclosure proceedings where the auction sale was conducted after the effectivity of the circular, even if the application for foreclosure was filed prior to such effectivity. The date of receipt of proceeds and issuance of the certificate of sale, not the filing date, determines the applicable fees.