Practice question
A debtor argues that a mortgage prescribed because the full calendar interval elapsed. The governing facts match the moratorium situation in De Agbayani, and subtracting the period recognized there leaves the foreclosure timely. The debtor’s sole objection is that later invalidation forbids any tolling. Which conclusion best follows the case?
- The debtor necessarily wins because calendars cannot be adjusted by law.
- The bank must abandon the debt regardless of tolling.
- Every moratorium is constitutional forever.
- The sole objection fails because the operative period’s tolling consequence must be considered in computing prescription.
- The court must refuse to read the precedent.
Legal references
- De Agbayani v. Philippine National Bank, G.R. No. L-23127, April 29, 1971, main decision: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1971/apr1971/gr_23127_1971.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.