This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2007-02-06 |
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J. |
||||
| ART. 1155. The prescription of actions is interrupted when they are filed before the Court, when there is a written extrajudicial demand by the creditors, and when there is any written acknowledgment of the debt by the debtor. Thus, the prescription of an action is interrupted by (a) the filing of an action, (b) a written extrajudicial demand by the creditor, and (c) a written acknowledgment of the debt by the debtor. On this point, the Court ruled that although the commencement of a civil action stops the running of the statute of prescription or limitations, its dismissal or voluntary abandonment by plaintiff leaves the parties in exactly the same position as though no action had been commenced at all.[16] | |||||
|
2006-12-18 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| [23] Laureano v. Court of Appeals, 381 Phil. 403, 411-412 (2000). | |||||