Practice question
A plaintiff proves a debtor’s assets were moved only for documented ordinary storage, with no intent to defraud creditors. No recovery-property concealment or other ground exists. It invokes Section 1(e) solely from physical movement. Which is correct?
- Every change of storage location conclusively proves fraud.
- The required fraudulent-creditor intent cannot be omitted.
- The word moved alone satisfies every attachment ground.
- An unpaid debt automatically proves dishonest intent.
- The court may disregard the paragraph’s mental element.
Legal references
- Rules of Court, Rule 57 Sections 1-4 and 12-13, attachment grounds, issuance and discharge: https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/rc_1-71_civil.html
- Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corp. v. Pobre, G.R. No. 259709, August 30, 2023, main decision, distinct attachment requirements and discharge avenues: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2023/aug2023/gr_259709_2023.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.