Log In Create Account

Philippine Bar review · Question

Practice question: Extrajudicial Foreclosure (Act 3135, as amended by Act 4118; AM 99-10-05-0, as amended)

Multiple Choice Hard Jurisprudence

Practice question

Land in a province outside Metro Manila is to be sold under an Act3135 mortgage power. The creditor proposes holding the auction in a different province solely because its head office is there, with no applicable special legal basis. Which is correct?
  1. The head-office location overrides every statutory sale-location requirement.
  2. Act3135 §2 prohibits sale outside the property's province and regulates the place within that province.
  3. Any sale location chosen by the highest bidder is automatically valid.
  4. Only the Supreme Court may hold every auction.
  5. Extrajudicial foreclosure has no location rule.

Legal references

  • https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/28/20591 — Act3135 §§1–4, as amended by Act4118.
  • https://www.lawphil.net/courts/supreme/am/am_10_05_2001.html — AM99-10-05-0, further amended August7 2001 (filing and supervision provisions; later fee amendments retained).
  • https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2000/ra_8791_2000.html — RA8791 §47 bank-foreclosure redemption.
  • https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2020/sep2020/gr_226272_2020.html — Panacan Lumber v Solidbank, GR226272, September16 2020, main decision (sale notice and contractual personal notice).

Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.