Thursday, June 12, 2014

Trust Receipt; Validity of the Security Interest as Against the Creditors of the Entrustee/Innocent Purchasers for Value

What does “security interest” mean?

            Security Interest means a property interest in goods, documents or instruments to secure performance of some obligations of the entrustee or of some third persons to the entruster and includes title, whether or not expressed to be absolute, whenever such title is in substance taken or retained for security only. (ibid)

Validity of the Security Interest as Against the Creditors of the Entrustee/Innocent Purchasers for Value

            [T]he security interest of the entruster is not merely an empty or idle title. To a certain extent, such interest becomes a "lien" on the goods because the entruster's advances will have to be settled first before the entrustee can consolidate his ownership over the goods. A contrary view would be disastrous. For to refuse to recognize the title of the banker under the trust receipt as security for the advance of the purchase price would be to strike down a bona fide and honest transaction of great commercial benefit and advantage founded upon a well-recognized custom by which banking credit is officially mobilized for manufacturers and importers of small means.[1]

            The mechanics and effects flowing from a trust receipt transaction, particularly the importance given to the security held by the entruster, i.e., the person holding title over the goods, were fully discussed in earlier decisions, as follows —

By this arrangement a banker advances money to an intending importer, and thereby lends the aid of capital, of credit, or of business facilities and agencies abroad, to the enterprise of foreign commerce. Much of this trade could hardly be carried on by any other means, and therefore it is of the first importance that the fundamental factor in the transaction, the banker's advance of money and credit, should receive the amplest protection. Accordingly, in order to secure that the banker shall be repaid at the critical point — that is, when the imported goods finally reach the hands of the intended vendee — the banker takes the full title to the goods at the very beginning; he takes it as soon as the goods are bought and settled for by his payments or acceptances in the foreign country, and he continues to hold that title as his indispensable security until the goods are sold in the United States and the vendee is called upon to pay for them. This security is not an ordinary pledge by the importer to the banker, for the importer has never owned the goods, and moreover, he is not able to deliver the possession; but the security is the complete title vested originally in the bankers, and this characteristic of the transaction has again and again been recognized and protected by the courts. Of course, the title is at bottom a security title, as it has sometimes been called, and the banker is always under the obligation to reconvey; but only after his advances have been fully repaid and after the importer has fulfilled the other terms of the contract (emphasis supplied).[2]

. . . . [I]n a certain manner, (trust receipt contracts) partake of the nature of a conditional sale as provided by the Chattel Mortgage Law, that is, the importer becomes absolute owner of the imported merchandise as soon as he has paid its price. The ownership of the merchandise continues to be vested in the owner thereof or in the person who has advanced payment, until he has been paid in full, or if the merchandise has already been sold, the proceeds of the sale should be turned over to him by the importer or by his representative or successor in interest (emphasis supplied).[3]

            More importantly, owing to the vital role trust receipts play in international and domestic commerce, Sec. 12 of P.D. No. 115[4] assures the entruster of the validity of his claim against all creditors —

              Sec. 12. Validity of entruster's security interest as against creditors. — The entruster's security interest in goods, documents, or instruments pursuant to the written terms of a trust receipt shall be valid as against all creditors of the entrustee for the duration of the trust receipt agreement. (Prudential Bank vs. NLRC, G.R. No. 112592, December 19, 1995, [Bellosillo])


[1] 49 A.L.R. 285
[2] People v. Yu Chai Ho. 53 Phil. 874, 876-877 (1929), quoting the case of In re Dunlap Carpet Co., Fed. 726
[3] National Bank v. Viuda e Hijos de Angel Jose, 63 Phil. 814, 821 (1936)
[4] Providing for the Regulation of Trust Receipts Transactions

No comments:

Post a Comment