Sample Civillaw 2 Cases

Oliveros, Alvan Stephenson G.Ci .Civil Law Review II Case Digests Crisostomo Uribe

Atty.

UNION BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, vs. DEVELOPMENT BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent. GR. No. 191555 2014-01-20

Facts: Facts:

Foodmasters, Inc. (FI) had otstandin! "oan o#"i!ations to #oth #oth

$nio $nion n

%an %an&'s &'s

pred predec eces esso sorr-in in-i -in nteres erestt,

%an %ancom com

ee"opment *orporation (%ancom), and to %P. +n a 21, 199, FI and %P, amon! others, entered into a eed o/ *ession o/ Propert In Pament o/ e#t (dacion en pa!o pa!o)) her here# e#  the the /orm /ormer er cede ceded d in /a /ao orr o/ the the "att "atter er certain certain properties properties (inc"din (inc"din! ! a processin! processin! p"ant in ari"ao, ari"ao, %"acan

processin!

p"ant)

in

consideration

o/

the

/o""oin!3 (a) the /"" and comp"ete satis/action o/ FI's "oan o#"i!ations to %P and (#) the direct assmption # %P o/ FI's o#"i!ations to %ancom in the amont o/P1,000,000.00 (assmed o#"i!ations). +n the same da, da, %P, %P, as the ne oner o/ the processin! p"an p"ant, t, "eas "eased ed #ac& #ac& /or /or 20 ear ears s the the said said prop proper ert t to FI (ea (ease se 6!re 6!reem emen ent) t) hic hich h as, as, in trn trn,, o#"i o#"i!e !ed d to pa pa month" renta"s to #e shared # %P and %ancom. %P a"so entered into a separate a!reement ith %ancom (6ssmption 6!reement) here# the /ormer3 (a) con7rmed its its ass assmp mpti tion on o/ FI's FI's o#"i o#"i!a !ati tion ons s to %anc %ancom om and and (#) (#) ndertoo& to remit p to 80 o/ an and a"" renta"s de /rom FI to %ancom (s#:ect renta"s) hich o"d sere as 1


Atty.

pament o/ the assmed o#"i!ations, to #e paid in month" inst insta" a""m "men ents ts.. ;he ;he pert pertin inen entt port portio ions ns o/ the the 6ss 6ssmp mpti tion on 6!reement reads as /o""os3 <=>R>6?, %P has a!reed and 7rm" committed in /aor o/ %ancom that the a#oe o#"i!ations to %ancom hich %P has assmed sha"" #e sett"ed, paid and@or "iAidated # %P ot o/ a portion o/ the "ease renta"s or part o/ the proceeds o/ sa"e o/ those properties o/ the 6ssi!nors coneed to %P prsant to the eed o/ *ession o/ Propert in Pament o/ e#t dated a 21, 199 and hich are the s#:ect o/ the ease 6!reement made and eBected # and #eteen %P and FI, the "ast herea/ter re/erred to as the CesseeC to #e eDectie as o/ E" 81, 19. eanhi"e, on a 28, 199, FI assi!ned its "easeho"d ri!hts nder the ease 6!reement to Foodmasters

;he petition is #ere/t o/ merit. *ompensation is de7ned as a mode o/ eBtin!ishin! o#"i!ations here# to persons in their capac pacit as principa"s are mta" de#tors and creditors o/ each other ith respect to eAa"" "iAidated and and dema demand nda# a#"e "e o#"i o#"i!a !ati tion ons s to hic hich h no rete retent ntio ion n or controers has #een time" commenced and commnicated # third parties. ;he r"e on "e!a" compensation is stated in 6rtic"e 1290 o/ the *ii" *ode hich proides that Chen 


Atty.

a"" the reAisites mentioned in 6rtic"e 129 are present, compen pensation

ta&es eDect

#

operat ration

o/

"a,

and

eBtin! eBtin!is ishes hes #oth #oth de#ts de#ts to the the conc concrren rrentt amont amont,, een een tho tho!h !h the the cred credit itor ors s and and de#t de#tor ors s are are not not aar aare e o/ the the compensation.C In this case, $nion %an& 7"ed a motion to see& aDirmation that hat "e!a "e!a"" compe ompen nsat sation ion had had ta& ta&en p"a p"ace in orde orderr to eDectie" oDset (a) its on o#"i!ation to retrn the /nds it pre preio io s" s" rec recei eied /rom /rom %P %P as dire direct cted ed nder nder the ?ept ?eptem em#e #err , 200 005 5 Bec Becttion ion ith ith (#) (#) %P %P's ass assme med d o#"i o#"i!a !ati tion ons s nder nder the the 6ss 6ssmpt mptio ion n 6!re 6!reem emen ent. t. =oee =oeerr, "e!a" "e!a" compen compensat sation ion co"d co"d not hae hae ta&en ta&en p"ace p"ace #eteen these de#ts /or the apparent reason that reAisites 8 and 4 nde nderr 6rt 6rtic"e ic"e 12 129 9 o/ the *i *ii" *ode ode are not present. ?ince %P's assmed o#"i!ations to $nion %an& /or remittance o/ the "ease paments are H in the *ort's ords in its ecision dated Eanar 18, 2004 in G.R. No. 1558 H C contin!ent on the prior pament thereo/ # F< to %P,C it cannot #e said that #oth de#ts are de (reAisite 8 o/ 6rtic"e 129 o/ the *ii" *ode). 6"so, in the same r"in!, the *ort o#sered that an de7cienc that %P had to ma&e p (# ecem#er 29, 199 as per the 6ssmption 6!reement) /or the /"" satis/action o/ the assmed o#"i!ations C cannot #e determined nti" a/ter the satis/action o/ Foodmasters' o#"i!ation o#"i!ation to %P.C In this re!ard, it cannot cannot #e conc"ded conc"ded that the same de#t had a"read #een "iAidated, and there# #ecame demanda#"e (reAisite 4 o/ 6rtic"e 129 o/ the *ii" *ode).

!


Atty.

FIRST UNITED CONSTRUCTORS CORPORATION and BLUE STAR CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION, Petitioners, vs. BAYANIHAN AUTOMOTIVE CORPORATION, Respondent. GR. No. 1495 Eanar 15, 2014

Facts: Facts:

Petitioner First $nited *onstrctors *orporation (F$**) and petiti petitione onerr %"e %"e ?tar ?tar *onstr *onstrc ctio tion n *orpor *orporati ation on (%"e (%"e ?tar) ?tar) ere ere associ associat ate e constr constrct ction ion 7rms 7rms sharin sharin! ! 7nanci 7nancia" a" "

Oliveros, Alvan Stephenson G.Civil Law Review II Case Digests Crisostomo Uribe

Atty.

resorces, eAipment and technica" personne" on a case-tocase #asis. From a 2, 1992 to E" , 1992, the ordered siB nits o/ dmp trc&s /rom the respondent, a domestic corporation en!a!ed in the #siness o/ importin! and reconditionin! sed Eapan-made trc&s, and o/ se""in! the trc&s to interested #ers ho ere most" en!a!ed in the constrction #siness. +n ?eptem#er 19, 1992, F$** ordered /rom the respondent one nit o/ =ino Prime oer that the respondent de"iered on the same date. +n ?eptem#er 29, 1992, F$** a!ain ordered /rom the respondent one nit o/ Is ;ransit iBer that as a"so de"iered to the petitioners. For the to prchases, F$** partia"" paid in cash, and the #a"ance thro!h post-dated chec&s. $pon presentment o/ the chec&s /or pament, the respondent "earned that F$** had ordered the pament stopped. ;he respondent immediate" demanded the /"" sett"ement o/ their o#"i!ation /rom the petitioners, #t to no aai". Instead, the petitioners in/ormed the respondent that the ere ithho"din! pament o/ the chec&s de to the #rea&don o/ one o/ the dmp trc&s the had ear"ier prchased /rom respondent, speci7ca"" the second dmp trc&

de"iered

on

a

2,

1992.

;he

respondent

commenced this action /or co""ection on 6pri" 29, 1998, see&in! pament o/ the npaid #a"ance in the amont o/ P85,000.00

represented

#

the

to

chec&s.

;he

petitioners aerred that the had stopped the pament on the

to

chec&s

orth P85,000.00

#ecase

o/

the

respondent's re/sa" to repair the second dmp trc& and that the had in/ormed the respondent o/ the de/ects in that nit #t the respondent had re/sed to comp" ith its arrant, compe""in! them to incr eBpenses /or the repair and spare parts. ;he praed that the respondent retrn the #


Atty.

price o/ the de/ectie dmp trc& orth P80,000.00 mins the amonts o/ their to chec&s orth P85,000.00, ith 12 per annm interest on the diDerence o/ P90,000.00 /rom a 1998 nti" the same is /"" paid that the respondent

sho"d

a"so

reim#rse

them

the

sm

o/ P24,950.00 as their eBpenses /or the repair o/ the dmp trc&, ith 12 per annm interest /rom ecem#er 1, 1992, the date o/ demand, nti" /"" paid and that the respondent pa eBemp"ar dama!es as determined to #e :st and reasona#"e #t not "ess than P500,000, and attorne's

/ees

o/ P50,000

p"s P1,000.00

per

cort

appearance and other "iti!ation eBpenses. Issue:

e!a" compensation as permissi#"e. e!a" compensation ta&es p"ace hen the reAirements set /orth in 6rtic"e 12 and 6rtic"e 129 o/ the *ii" *ode are present, to it3 6rtic"e 12. *ompensation sha"" ta&e p"ace hen to persons, in their on ri!ht, are creditors and de#tors o/ each other.C 6rtic"e 129. In order that compensation ma #e proper, it is necessar3 (1) ;hat each o/ the o#"i!ors #e #ond principa"", and that he #e at the same time a principa" creditor o/ the other (2) ;hat #oth de#ts consists in a sm o/ mone, or i/ the thin!s de are consma#"e, the #e o/ the same &ind, and a"so o/ the same Aa"it i/ the "atter has #een stated $


Atty.

(8) ;hat the to de#ts #e de (4) ;hat the #e "iAidated and demanda#"e (5) ;hat oer neither o/ them there #e an retention or controers,

commenced

#

third

persons

and

commnicated in de time to the de#tor.
%


Atty.

MONDRAGON PERSONAL SALES, INC., Petitioner,

vs. VICTORIANO S. SOLA, JR., Respondent. G.R. No. 142 Eanar 21, 2018

Facts:

6

*ontract

o/

?erices

as

eBected

#eteen

ondra!on Persona" ?a"es Inc., a compan en!a!ed in the #siness o/ se""in! arios consmer prodcts thro!h a netor& o/ sa"es representaties, and respondent Jictoriano ?. ?o"a, Er. /or a period o/ three ears. ;he respondent, as serice contractor, o"d proide serice /aci"ities, i.e., #ode!a cm oDice, to petitionerKs prodcts, sa"es /orce and cstomers in Genera" ?antos *it and as sch, he as entit"ed to commission or serice /ee. Prior to the eBection o/ the contract, respondent's i/e had an eBistin! o#"i!ation ith ondra!on arisin! /rom her Franchise istri#torship 6!reement. Respondent rote a "etter to the JP /or Finance o/ the petitioner, ac&no"ed!in! and con7rmin! his i/e's inde#tedness, and #ond himse"/ to pa on insta""ment #asis the said de#t. 6s a conseAence,

petitioner

ithhe"d

the

pament

o/ &


Atty.

respondentKs serice /ees and app"ied the same as partia" paments to the de#t hich he o#"i!ated to pa. Respondent c"osed and sspended operation o/ his oDice cm #ode!a here petitionerKs prodcts ere stored and cstomers ere #ein! dea"t ith. Respondent 7"ed a *omp"aint /or accontin! and rescission

a!ainst

petitioner

a""e!in!

that

petitioner

ithhe"d portions o/ his serice /ees /or /or months and his ho"e

serice

/ees

/or

the

scceedin!

months that

petitionerKs act !ross" hampered, i/ not para"ed, his #siness operation, ths "e/t ith no other recorse, he sspended operations to minimie "osses. =e praed /or the rescission o/ the contract o/ serices and /or petitioner to render an accontin! o/ his serice /ees. Issue:

the

act

o/

ithho"din!

and

app"in!

respondent's serice /ees to the o#"i!ation o/ his i/e ith the petitioner as n"a/" and does not constitte as a "e!a" compensationL Held:

N+, a"" the reAisites /or "e!a" compensation are present. ;he "etter o/ the respondent to the JP /or 7nance shos that respondent #ecomes a co-de#tor o/ his i/eKs acconta#i"ities ith petitioner. Nota#", the "ast para!raph o/ his "etter hich states CI /"" nderstand and o"ntari" a!ree to the a#oe nderta&in! ith /"" &no"ed!e o/ the conseAences hich ma arise there/romC and hich as si!ned # respondent a"one, shos that he so"idari" #ond himse"/ to pa sch de#t. 6s respondent #ond himse"/ to

'


Atty.

pa the amont o/ P1,98,154.8, he #ecomes petitionerKs principa" de#tor to sch amont.

+n the other hand, respondent, as petitionerKs serice contractor, as entit"ed to a pament o/ serice /ees as proided in their contract o/ serices , there co"d #e no other comptation o/ the rate o/ the serice /ees other than hat as proided in the contract o/ serices. PetitionerKs act o/ ithho"din! respondentKs serice /ees@commissions and app"in! them to the "atterKs otstandin! o#"i!ation ith the /ormer is mere" an ac&no"ed!ment o/ the "e!a" compensation that occrred # operation o/ "a #eteen the parties. *ompensation is a mode o/ eBtin!ishin! to the concrrent amont the o#"i!ations o/ persons ho in their on ri!ht and as principa"s are reciproca"" de#tors and creditors o/ each other. e!a" compensation ta&es p"ace # operation o/ "a hen a"" the reAisites are present, as opposed to conentiona" compensation hich ta&es p"ace hen the parties a!ree to compensate their mta" o#"i!ations een in the a#sence o/ some reAisites. e!a" compensation reAires the concrrence o/ the /o""oin! conditions3 (1) ;hat each one o/ the o#"i!ors #e #ond principa"", and that he #e at the same time a principa" creditor o/ the other (2) ;hat #oth de#ts consist in a sm o/ mone, or i/ the thin!s de are consma#"e, the #e o/ the same &ind, and a"so o/ the same Aa"it i/ the "atter has #een stated (8) ;hat the to de#ts #e de (4) ;hat the #e "iAidated and demanda#"e

1(


Atty.

(5) ;hat oer neither o/ them there #e an retention or controers,

commenced

#

third

persons

and

commnicated in de time to the de#tor.

PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK , Petitioner, s.

TERESITA TAN DEE, ANTIPOLO PROPERTIES, INC., (NO PRIME EAST PROPERTIES, INC.! AND AFP"RSBS, INC., Respondents. G.R. No. 1212 Fe#rar 19, 2014

11


Atty.

Facts:

?ome time in E" 1994, respondent ;eresita ;an ee (ee) #o!ht /rom respondent Prime >ast Properties Inc. (P>PI) on an insta""ment #asis a residentia" "ot "ocated in %inan!onan, Ria", ith an area o/ 204 sAare meters and coered # ;rans/er *erti7cate o/ ;it"e (;*;) No. 190. ?#seAent", P>PI assi!ned its ri!hts oer a 218,098HsA m propert on 6!st 199 to respondent 6rmed Forces o/ the Phi"ippinesHRetirement and ?eparation %ene7ts ?stem, Inc. (6FPHR?%?), hich inc"ded the propert prchased # ee. ;herea/ter, or on ?eptem#er 10, 199, P>PI o#tained a P205,000,000.00 "oan /rom petitioner Phi"ippine Nationa" %an& (petitioner), secred # a mort!a!e oer seera" properties, inc"din! ee's propert. ;he mort!a!e as c"eared # the =osin! and and $se Re!"ator %oard (=$R%)

on

?eptem#er

1,

199.cra"ared

6/ter ee's /"" pament o/ the prchase price, a deed o/ sa"e as eBected # respondents P>PI and 6FPHR?%? on E" 199 in ee's /aor. *onseAent", ee so!ht /rom the petitioner the de"ier o/ the oner's dp"icate tit"e oer the propert, to no aai". ;hs, she 7"ed ith the =$R% a comp"aint /or speci7c per/ormance to compe" de"ier o/ ;*; No. 190 # the petitioner, P>PI and 6FPHR?%?, amon! others. In its ecision dated a 21, 2008, the =$R% r"ed in /aor o/ ee. Issue:


Atty.

Ruling:

Mes. Dacion en pago or dation in pament is the de"ier and transmission o/ onership o/ a thin! # the de#tor to the creditor as an accepted eAia"ent o/ the per/ormance o/ the o#"i!ation. It is a mode o/ eBtin!ishin! an eBistin! o#"i!ation and parta&es the natre o/ sa"e as the creditor is rea"" #in! the thin! or propert o/ the de#tor, the pament /or hich is to #e char!ed a!ainst the de#tor's de#t. ation in pament eBtin!ishes the o#"i!ation to the eBtent o/ the a"e o/ the thin! de"iered, either as a!reed pon # the parties or as ma #e proed, n"ess the parties # a!reement H eBpress or imp"ied, or # their si"ence H consider the thin! as eAia"ent to the o#"i!ation, in hich case

the

o#"i!ation

is

tota""

eBtin!ished.48

;here is nothin! on record shoin! that the emorandm o/ 6!reement has #een n""i7ed or is the s#:ect o/ pendin! "iti!ation hence, it carries ith it the presmption o/ a"idit. *onseAent",

the eBection o/

the dation in

pament eDectie" eBtin!ished respondent P>PI's "oan o#"i!ation to the petitioner inso/ar as it coers the a"e o/ the

propert

prchased

#

ee.

;his

ne!ates

the

petitioner's c"aim that P>PI mst 7rst redeem the propert #e/ore it can cance" or re"ease the mort!a!e. 6s it no stands, the petitioner a"read stepped into the shoes o/ P>PI and there is no more reason /or the petitioner to re/se the cance""ation or re"ease o/ the mort!a!e, /or, as stated # the *ort in Luzon

Development

Bank,

in

acceptin!

the

assi!ned properties as pament o/ the o#"i!ation, the #an& has assmed the ris& that some o/ the assi!ned properties are coered # contracts to se"" hich mst #e honored nder P 95.O

Atty.

a!ainst P>PI and 6FPHR?%?, monetar or otherise, sho"d not pre:dice the ri!hts and interests o/ ee oer the propert, hich she has a"read /"" paid /or.

DEVELOPMENT BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, vs. GUARI#A AGRICULTURAL AND REALTY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, Respondent. GR. No. 105 Eanar 15, 2014

Facts:

In E" 19, Garia *orporation app"ied /or a "oan /rom %P to 7nance the dee"opment o/ its resort comp"eB sitated in ;rapiche, +ton, I"oi"o. Garia *orporation eBected a promissor note that o"d #e de on Noem#er 8, 19. +n +cto#er 5, 19, Garia *orporation eBected a rea" estate mort!a!e oer seera" rea" properties in /aor o/ %P as secrit /or the repament o/ the "oan. +n a 1, 19, Garia *orporation eBected a chatte" mort!a!e oer the persona" properties eBistin! at the resort comp"eB and those et to #e acAired ot o/ the proceeds o/ the "oan, a"so to secre the per/ormance o/ the o#"i!ation. Prior to the re"ease o/ the "oan, %P reAired Garia *orporation to

pt

p

a

cash

eAit

o/ P1,40,951.00

/or

the

constrction o/ the #i"din!s and other improements on the resort comp"eB.

1"


Atty.

;he "oan as re"eased in seera" insta"ments, and Garia *orporation sed the proceeds to de/ra the cost o/ additiona" improements in the resort comp"eB. In a"", the amont re"eased tota""ed P8,008,1.49, /rom hich %P ithhe"d P14,102.9 as interest. Garia *orporation demanded the re"ease o/ the #a"ance o/ the "oan, #t %P re/sed. Instead, %P direct" paid some spp"iers o/ Garia *orporation oer the "atterKs o#:ection. %P /ond pon inspection o/ the resort pro:ect, its

dee"opments

and

improements

that

Garia

*orporation had not comp"eted the constrction or&s. In a "etter dated Fe#rar 2, 19, and a te"e!ram dated Ene 9, 19, %P ths demanded that Garia *orporation eBpedite the comp"etion o/ the pro:ect, and arned that it o"d initiate /orec"osre proceedin!s sho"d Garia *orporation not do so. $nsatis7ed ith the non-action and o#:ection o/ Garia *orporation,

%P

initiated

eBtra:dicia"

/orec"osre

proceedin!s. 6 notice o/ /orec"osre sa"e as sent to Garia *orporation. ;he notice as eenta"" p#"ished, "eadin! the c"ients and patrons o/ Garia *orporation to thin& that its #siness operation had s"oed don, and that its resort had a"read c"osed. Issue:

*onsiderin! that it had et to re"ease the entire proceeds o/ the "oan, %P co"d not et ma&e an eDectie demand /or 1#


Atty.

pament pon Garia *orporation to per/orm its o#"i!ation nder the "oan. 6ccordin! to Development Bank of the Philippines v. Licuanan, it o"d on" #e hen a demand to

pa had #een made and as s#seAent" re/sed that a #orroer co"d #e considered in de/a"t, and the "ender co"d o#tain the ri!ht to co""ect the de#t or to /orec"ose the mort!a!e

ARCO PULP AND PAPER CO.,

INC. AND

CANDIDA A. SANTOS, Petitioners, .

vs

DAN T. LIM, DOING BUSINESS UNDER THE NAME AND STYLE OF $UALITY PAPERS % PLASTIC

PRODUCTS

ENTERPRISES, Respondent. G.R. No. 200 Ene 25, 2018

1$


Atty.

Facts:

an ;. im or&s in the #siness o/ spp"in! scrap papers, cartons, and other ra materia"s, nder the name Qa"it Paper and P"astic Prodcts, >nterprises, to /actories en!a!ed in the paper mi"" #siness. 4From Fe#rar 200 to arch

200,

he

de"iered

scrap

papers

orth

P,220,9.81 to 6rco P"p and Paper *ompan, Inc. (6rco P"p and Paper) thro!h its *hie/ >Bectie +Dicer and President, *andida 6. ?antos. ;he parties a""e!ed" a!reed that 6rco P"p and Paper o"d either pa an ;. im the a"e o/ the ra materia"s or de"ier to him their 7nished prodcts

o/

eAia"ent

a"e.cra"ared

an ;. im a""e!ed that hen he de"iered the ra materia"s, 6rco P"p and Paper issed a post-dated chec& dated 6pri" 1, 200 in the amont o/ P1,4,. as partia" pament, ith the assrance that the chec& o"d not #once. ric ? eBected a memorandm o/ a!reement here 6rco P"p and Paper #ond themse"es to de"ier their 7nished prodcts to e!apac& *ontainer *orporation, oned # >ric ?, /or his accont. 6ccordin! to the memorandm, the ra materia"s o"d #e spp"ied # an ;. im, thro!h his compan, Qa"it Paper and P"astic Prodcts. +n ?eptem#er 19, 200, the tria" cort rendered a :d!ment in /aor o/ 6rco P"p and Paper and dismissed the comp"aint, ho"din! that hen 6rco P"p and Paper and >ric 1%


Atty.

? entered into the memorandm o/ a!reement, noation too& p"ace, hich eBtin!ished 6rco P"p and Paper's o#"i!ation to an ;. im. Issue:

the

o#"i!ation

#eteen

the

parties

as

eBtin!ished # noation Ruling:

;he tria" cort erroneos" r"ed that the eBection o/ the memorandm o/ a!reement constitted a noation o/ the contract #eteen the parties.
;here

mst

#e

a

preios

a"id

o#"i!ation.

2) ;he parties concerned mst a!ree to a ne contract. 8)

;he

4)

;here

o"d

contract

mst

#e

mst a

a"id

#e

eBtin!ished. ne

contract.

Noation ma a"so #e eBpress or imp"ied. It is eBpress hen the ne o#"i!ation dec"ares in neAioca" terms that the o"d o#"i!ation is eBtin!ished. It is imp"ied hen the ne o#"i!ation is incompati#"e ith the o"d one on eer point. ;he test o/ incompati#i"it is hether the to o#"i!ations can stand to!ether, each one ith its on independent eBistence.

1&


Atty.

I/ the memorandm o/ a!reement as intended to noate the ori!ina" a!reement #eteen the parties, respondent mst hae 7rst a!reed to the s#stittion o/ >ric ? as his ne de#tor. ;he memorandm o/ a!reement mst a"so state in c"ear and neAioca" terms that it has rep"aced the ori!ina" o#"i!ation o/ petitioner 6rco P"p and Paper to respondent. Neither o/ these circmstances is present in this case.

1'


Atty.

PHILIPPINE RECLAMATION AUTHORITY (F&')'*+ n&-n as /) PUBLIC ESTATES AUTHORITY!, Petitioner, vs. ROMAGO, INCORPORATED, Respondent. G.R. No. 145 ?eptem#er 1, 2018

ROMAGO, INCORPORATED, Petitioner, vs. PHILIPPINE RECLAMATION AUTHORITY (F&')'*+ n&-n as /) PUBLIC ESTATES AUTHORITY!,Respondent. G.R. No. 15221

Facts:

;he %ases *onersion and ee"opment 6thorit (%*6) as created in order to conert /ormer mi"itar reserations and insta""ations to prodctie se and raise /nds ot o/ the sa"e o/ portions o/ the contr's mi"itar camps.

;he

6!reement

%*6 (+6)

entered ith

the

into

a

emorandm

Phi"ippine

o/

Rec"amation (


Atty.

6thorit (PR6), /ormer" the P#"ic >states 6thorit, desi!natin! it as the Pro:ect ana!er. ?#seAent" the %*6, PR6, and the Phi"ippine Nationa" %an& (PN%) eBected a Poo" Formation ;rst 6!reement (PF;6) nder hich %*6, as pro:ect oner, as to isse =erita!e Par& Inestment *erti7cates that o"d eidence the ho"ders' ri!ht to the perpeta" se and care o/ speci7c interment p"ots.

6/ter p#"ic #iddin!, the PR6 aarded the otdoor e"ectrica" and "i!htin! or&s /or the par& to respondent Roma!o, Inc. (Roma!o). =oeer a/ter the parties to the PF;6

or!anied

the

=erita!e

Par&

ana!ement

*orporation (=P*) to ta&e oer the mana!ement o/ the pro:ect, Roma!o as in/ormed o/ the termination o/ its serices. %ecase the =P* re/sed to reco!nie the PR6's contract ith it, Roma!o 7"ed ith the *onstrction Indstr

6r#itration

*ommission

(*I6*)

a

comp"aint,

see&in! to co""ect its c"aims tota"in! P24,4,21.4, p"s interest /rom the PR6, =P*, and Rosehi""s emoria" ana!ement (Phi"s.), Inc. (RI).

+n E" 22, 2004 the *I6* issed an order droppin! RI as respondent #t denin! the =P*'s motion to dismiss the case a!ainst it. ;he =P* e"eated the *I6* order to the *ort o/ 6ppea"s (*6) # specia" cii" action o/ certiorari and prohi#ition.

6/ter de proceedin!s, on +cto#er 22, 2004 the *I6* rendered a decision, ho"din! the PR6 and the =P* :oint" and seera"" "ia#"e to Roma!o. Not satis7ed ith the *I6*

1


Atty.

decision, the PR6 7"ed a petition /or reie o/ the same ith the *6.

;he *6 rendered a ecision in the specia" cii" action 7"ed # =P*, dismissin! Roma!o's comp"aint #e/ore the *I6* on the !rond that the "atter did not hae an ar#itration a!reement ith Roma!o.

+n ecem#er 20, 2005 the *6 rendered a ecision in the main case, 7ndin! that the npaid accomp"ishment o/ Roma!o

sho"d

#e

redced

/rom P22,191,249.88

to P1,41,20.9, and that interests on the dama!es aarded to Roma!o arisin! /rom the redction in pro:ect area and on its npaid accomp"ishment /rom a 15, 2002 to Eanar 81, 2004 sho"d #e de"eted, there/ore entit"in! it to acta" dama!es in the amont o/P,985,8. p"s interest /rom Fe#rar 1, 2004 to 6!st 81, 2004 and the costs o/ ar#itration.

;he

PR6

and

Roma!o

separate"

moed

/or

reconsideration o/ the decision #t the *6 denied #oth motions.

Issue:

Held:




Atty.

;here can #e no noation in this case since the proposed s#stitted parties did not a!ree to the PR6's spposed assi!nment o/ its o#"i!ations nder the contract /or the e"ectrica" and "i!ht or&s at =erita!e Par& to the =P*. ;he "atter de7nite" and c"ear" re:ected the PR6's assi!nment o/ its "ia#i"it nder that contract to the =P*. In noation, a s#seAent o#"i!ation eBtin!ishes a preios one thro!h s#stittion either # chan!in! the o#:ect or principa" conditions, # s#stittin! another in p"ace o/ the de#tor, or # s#ro!atin! a third person into the ri!hts o/ the creditor.

Noation reAires (a) the eBistence o/ a

preios a"id o#"i!ation (#) the a!reement o/ a"" parties to the ne contract (c) the eBtin!ishment o/ the o"d contract and (d) the a"idit o/ the ne one. Roma!o tried to /o""o p its c"aims ith the =P*, not #ecase o/ an ne contract it entered into ith the "atter, #t simp" #ecase the PR6 to"d it that the =P* o"d hence/orth assme the PR6's "ia#i"it nder its contract ith Roma!o.

%esides, ?ection 11.0 o/ the PF;6 ma&es it c"ear that the termination o/ the PR6's o#"i!ations is conditioned pon the trnoer o/ docments, eAipment, compter hardare and so/tare on the !eo!raphica" in/ormation sstem o/ the Par& and the comp"etion and /aith/" per/ormance o/ its respectie dties and responsi#i"ities nder the PF;6. ?aid section did not sa that the =P* sha"", assme the PR6's o#"i!ations. +n the contrar, ?ection .01 o/ the PF;6 reco!nies that contracts that the PR6 entered into in its on name and ma&es it "ia#"e /or the same.

!


Atty.

SPOUSES OSCAR and THELMA CACAYORIN, Petitioners, vs. A')d F&'0)s and P&*10) M22a* B)n)3 Ass&01a1&n, In0., Respondent. G.R. N&. 454678 A9'1* 4:, 6;4< Facts:

Petitioner +scar *acaorin is a mem#er o/ respondent 6rmed Forces and Po"ice ta" %ene7t 6ssociation, Inc. (6FP%6I), =e 7"ed an app"ication ith 6FP%6I to prchase a piece o/ propert hich the "atter oned thro!h a "oan /aci"it. +n E" 4, 1994, +scar and his i/e and co-petitioner herein, ;he"ma, and the Rra" %an& o/ ?an ;eodoro, eBected a oan and ort!a!e 6!reement ith the /ormer as #orroers and the Rra" %an& as "ender, nder the #ac&in! o/ Pa!-I%IG or =ome ee"opment ta" Fnd's =ome Financin! Pro!ram. ;he Rra" %an& issed an 6!st 22, 1994 "etter o/ !arant in/ormin! 6FP%6I that the proceeds o/ petitioners' approed "oan in the amont o/ P,41.00 sha"" #e re"eased to 6FP%6I a/ter tit"e to the propert is trans/erred in petitioners' name and a/ter the re!istration and annotation o/ the parties' mort!a!e a!reement. +n the #asis o/ the Rra" %an&'s "etter o/ !arant, 6FP%6I eBected in petitioners' /aor a eed o/ 6#so"te ?a"e, and a ne tit"e as issed in their name, ith the correspondin! annotation o/ their mort!a!e a!reement ith the Rra" %an&. $n/ortnate", the Pa!-I%IG "oan /aci"it did "


Atty.

not psh thro!h and the Rra" %an& c"osed and as p"aced nder receiership # the Phi"ippine eposit Insrance *orporation (PI*). eanhi"e, 6FP%6I someho as a#"e to ta&e possession o/ petitioners' "oan docments and ;*; No. 801, hi"e petitioners ere na#"e to pa the "oan@consideration /or the propert. 6FP%6I made ora" and ritten demands /or petitioners to pa the "oan@ consideration /or the propert. In E" 2008, petitioners 7"ed a *omp"aint /or consi!nation o/ "oan pament, recoer o/ tit"e and cance""ation o/ mort!a!e annotation a!ainst 6FP%6I, PI* and the Re!ister o/ eeds o/ Perto Princesa *it. Petitioners a""e!ed in their *omp"aint that as a res"t o/ the Rra" %an&'s c"osre and PI*'s c"aim that their "oan papers co"d not #e "ocated, the ere "e/t in a Aandar as to here the sho"d tender /"" pament o/ the "oan and ho to secre cance""ation o/ the mort!a!e annotation on ;*; No. 801. 6FP%6I 7"ed a otion to ismiss c"aimin! that petitioners' *omp"aint /a""s ithin the :risdiction o/ the =osin! and and $se Re!"ator %oard (=$R%) and not the Perto Princesa R;*, nder Presidentia" ecree No. 95 (P 95). It added that since no prior a"id tender o/ pament as made # petitioners, the consi!nation case as /ata"" de/ectie and sscepti#"e to dismissa". ;he tria" cort denied 6FP%6I's otion to ismiss, dec"arin! that since tit"e has #een trans/erred in the name o/ petitioners and the action ino"es consi!nation o/ "oan paments, it possessed :risdiction to contine ith the case. It /rther he"d that the on" remainin! nsett"ed transaction is #eteen petitioners and PI*

as the

appointed receier o/ the Rra" %an&.

#


Atty.

;he *6 reersed the decision o/ the tria" cort and he"d that since the case as /or speci7c per/ormance o/ 6FP%6I's

contracta"

and

stattor

o#"i!ations

as

oner@dee"oper o/ a"i&asan ta" =omes, ma&es P 95 app"ica#"e and ths p"aces the case ithin the :risdiction o/ the =$R%. Petitioners moed /or reconsideration hich as denied # the *6 in its Eanar 12, 200 Reso"tion. Issue:

Held:

M>?. 6s can #e read /rom the a""e!ations in the comp"aint, the *ort 7nds that a case /or consi!nation has #een made ot. *"ear", the a""e!ations in the *omp"aint present a sitation here the creditor is n&non, or that to or more entities appear to possess the same ri!ht to co""ect /rom petitioners, it appears that petitioners ere not in/ormed thereo/, nor made pri thereto. $nder 6rtic"e 125 o/ the *ii" *ode, the de#tor sha"" #e re"eased /rom responsi#i"it # the consi!nation o/ the thin! or sm de, ithot need o/ prior tender o/ pament, hen the creditor is a#sent or n&non, or hen he is incapacitated to receie the pament at the time it is de, or hen to or more persons c"aim the same ri!ht to co""ect, or hen the tit"e to the o#"i!ation has #een "ost. ;here are to entities hich petitioners mst dea" ith in order to /"" secre their tit"e to the propert3 the Rra" %an& and 6FP%6I. Frther petitioners' position is spported # 6FP%6I's $


Atty.

on admission that it made ora" and ritten demands pon the /ormer, hich natra"" a!!raated their con/sion as to ho as their ri!ht/" creditor to hom pament sho"d #e made.

*onsi!nation is necessari" :dicia", as the *ii" *ode itse"/ proides that consi!nation sha"" #e made # depositin! the thin! or thin!s de at the disposa" o/ :dicia" athorit.
BOSTON E$UITY RESOURCES, INC., Petitioner, s.

COURT OF APPEALS AND LOLITA G. TOLEDO, Respondents. G.R. No. 1894 Ene 19, 2018

Facts:

%oston >Ait Resorces, Inc., 7"ed a comp"aint /or sm o/ mone ith a praer /or the issance o/ a rit o/ pre"iminar attachment a!ainst the sposes ane" and %


Atty.

o"ita ;o"edo, drin! pendenc o/ the case ane" died. ;he cort ordered /or the s#stittion # his chi"dren as partde/endants. ;he tria" o/ the case then proceeded. 6/ter the Petitioner comp"eted its presentation o/ eidence, a motion to dismiss as 7"ed citin! as one o/ the !ronds that the comp"aint /ai"ed to imp"ead an indispensa#"e part or a rea" part in interest hence, the case mst #e dismissed /or /ai"re to state a case o/ action. ;he tria" cort denied the motion to dismiss /or hain! #een 7"ed ot o/ time. 6!!rieed, respondent 7"ed a petition /or certiorari ith the *ort o/ 6ppea"s a""e!in! that the tria" cort serios" erred and !rae" a#sed its discretion in denin! her motion to dismiss despite discoer, drin! the tria" o/ the case, o/ eidence that o"d constitte a !rond /or dismissa" o/ the case. ;he appe""ate cort !ranted the respondent's

petition

/or

certiorari

and

denied

the

petitioner's motion /or reconsideration, hence this petition. Issue:

Held:

No. 6n indispensa#"e part is one ho has sch an interest in the controers or s#:ect matter o/ a case that a 7na" ad:dication cannot #e made in his or her a#sence, ithot in:rin! or aDectin! that interest. It is c"ear that the estate o/ ane" is not an indispensa#"e part to the co""ection case, /or the simp"e reason that the o#"i!ation o/ ane" and his i/e, respondent herein, is so"idar. ;he proisions and stip"ations o/ the contract ere then /o""oed # the respectie si!natres o/ respondent as &


Atty.

C6>RC and her hs#and as C*+-6>R.C ;hs, prsant to 6rtic"e 121 o/ the *ii" *ode, petitioner ma co""ect the entire amont o/ the o#"i!ation /rom respondent on". ;he a/orementioned proision states3 C;he creditor ma proceed a!ainst an one o/ the so"idar de#tors or some or a"" o/ them sim"taneos". ;he demand made a!ainst one o/ them sha"" not #e an o#stac"e to those hich ma s#seAent" #e directed a!ainst the others, so "on! as the de#t has not #een /"" co""ected.C In other ords, the co""ection case can proceed and the demands o/ petitioner can #e satis7ed # respondent on", een ithot imp"eadin! the estate o/ ane". It is crsta" c"ear that 6rtic"e 121 o/ the Ne *ii" *ode is the app"ica#"e proision in this matter. ?aid proision !ies the creditor the ri!ht to Cproceed a!ainst anone o/ the so"idar de#tors or some or a"" o/ them sim"taneos".C ;he choice is ndo#ted" "e/t to the so"idar creditor to determine a!ainst hom he i"" en/orce co""ection. In case o/ the death o/ one o/ the so"idar de#tors, he (the creditor) ma, i/ he so chooses, proceed a!ainst the sriin! so"idar de#tors ithot necessit o/ 7"in! a c"aim in the estate o/ the deceased de#tors. It is not mandator /or him to hae the case dismissed as a!ainst the sriin! de#tors and 7"e its c"aim a!ainst the estate o/ the deceased so"idar de#tor, B BB. For to reAire the creditor to proceed a!ainst the estate, ma&in! it a condition precedent /or an co""ection action a!ainst the sriin! de#tors to prosper, o"d deprie him o/ his s#stantie ri!hts proided # 6rtic"e 121 o/ the Ne *ii" *ode.

BIGNA Y E=>IM PHILIPPINES, INC., Petitioner, '


Atty.

s.

UNION BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent. G.R. No. 11590 Fe#rar 12, 2014

Facts:

In 194, 6"/onso de eon mort!a!ed in /aor o/ $nion %an& o/ the Phi"ippines ($nion %an&) rea" propert sitated at >ste#an 6#ada, oo"a =ei!hts, Qeon *it, hich as re!istered in his and his i/e Rosario's name. ;he propert as /orec"osed and so"d at action to $nion %an&. 6/ter the redemption period eBpired, the #an& conso"idated its onership, herepon ;*; 82405 as issed in its name in 19. In 19, Rosario 7"ed a!ainst 6"/onso and $nion %an&, *ii" *ase No. Q-5202 /or ann"ment o/ the 194 mort!a!e, c"aimin! that 6"/onso mort!a!ed the propert ithot her consent, and /or reconeance. In a ?eptem#er , 199 etter-Proposa", %i!na >B-Im Phi"ippines, Inc. (%i!na), thro!h its President, i"a!ros +n! ?i (?i), oDered to prchase the propert. ;he ritten oDer stated, amon! others, that H ;he propert is the s#:ect o/ a pendin! "iti!ation #eteen Rosario de eon and $nion %an& /or n""i7cation o/ the /orec"osre #e/ore the Re!iona" ;ria" *ort o/ Qeon *it. ?ho"d this oDer #e approed # or mana!ement, e s!!est that instead o/ the sa" conditiona" sa"e, a deed o/ !(


Atty.

a#so"te sa"e #e eBected to docment the transaction in or /aor s#:ect to a mort!a!e in /aor o/ the #an& to secre the #a"ance. ;his docmentation is intended to iso"ate the propert /rom an "is pendens that the /ormer oner ma annotate on the tit"e and to a""o immediate reconstittion thereo/ since the ori!ina" ;orrens tit"e as #rned in 19 hen the *it =a"" hosin! the Re!ister o/ eeds o/ Qeon *it as !tted # 7re. +n ecem#er 20, 199, a eed o/ 6#so"te ?a"e as eBected # and #eteen $nion %an& and %i!na here# the propert as coneed to %i!na /or P4 mi""ion. ;he deed o/ sa"e as eBected # the parties thro!h %i!na's ?i and $nion %an&'s ?enior Jice President 6nthon Ro#"es (Ro#"es). +n ecem#er 2, 199, %i!na mort!a!ed the propert to $nion %an&, presma#" to secre a "oan o#tained /rom the "atter. Issue:

Mes. ;he record reea"s, hoeer, that $nion %an& as !ross" ne!"i!ent in the hand"in! and prosection o/ *ii" *ase No. Q-5202. Its appea" o/ the ecem#er 12, 1991 ecision in said case as dismissed # the *6 /or /ai"re to 7"e the reAired appe""ant's #rie/.

NeBt, the ensin!

Petition /or Reie on *ertiorari 7"ed ith this *ort as "i&eise denied de to "ate 7"in! and pament o/ "e!a" /ees. Fina"", the #an& so!ht the ann"ment o/ the ecem#er 12, !1


Atty.

1991 :d!ment, et a!ain, the *6 dismissed the petition /or its /ai"re to comp" ith ?preme *ort *irc"ar No. 291. 6s a res"t, the ecem#er 12, 1991 ecision #ecame 7na" and eBector, and %i!na as eicted /rom the propert. ?ch ne!"i!ence in the hand"in! o/ the case is /ar /rom coincidenta" it is decided" !"arin!, and amonts to #ad /aith. Ne!"i!ence ma #e occasiona"" so !ross as to amont

toma"ice

or

#ad

/aith.O

Indeed,

in

c"pa

contracta" or #reach o/ contract, !ross ne!"i!ence o/ a part amontin! to #ad /aith is a !rond /or the recoer o/ ama!es # the in:red part.

ALVIN PATRIMONIO, Petitioner. s.

NAPOLEON GUTIERRE? and OCTAVIO MARASIGAN III, Respondents GR. No. 19 2014-0-04 Facts:

;he petitioner and the respondent Napo"eon Gtierre (Gtierre) entered into a #siness entre nder the name o/ ?"am n& *orporation. In the corse o/ their #siness, the petitioner pre-si!ned seera" chec&s to anser /or the eBpenses o/ ?"am n&. 6"tho!h si!ned, these chec&s had no paee's name, date or amont. ;he #"an& !


Atty.

chec&s ere entrsted to Gtierre ith the speci7c instrction not to 7"" them ot ithot preios noti7cation to and approa" # the petitioner. 6ccordin! to petitioner, the arran!ement as made so that he co"d eri/ the a"idit o/ the pament and ma&e the proper arran!ements to /nd the accont. In the midd"e o/ 1998, ithot the petitioner's &no"ed!e and consent, Gtierre ent to arasi!an (the petitioner's /ormer teammate), to secre a "oan in the amont o/ P200,000.00 on the eBcse that the petitioner needed the mone /or the constrction o/ his hose. In addition to the pament o/ the principa", Gtierre assred arasi!an that he o"d #e paid an interest o/ 5 per month /rom arch to a 1994. +n a 24, 1994, arasi!an deposited the chec& #t it as dishonored /or the reason 6**+$N; *+?>.O It as "ater reea"ed that petitioner's accont ith the #an& had #een c"osed since a 2, 1998. arasi!an so!ht recoer /rom Gtierre, to no aai". =e therea/ter sent seera" demand "etters to the petitioner as&in! /or the pament o/ P200,000.00, #t his demands "i&eise ent nheeded. *onseAent", he 7"ed a crimina" case /or io"ation o/ %.P. 22 a!ainst the petitioner, doc&eted as *rimina" *ase No. 421. +n ?eptem#er 10, 199, the petitioner 7"ed #e/ore the Re!iona" ;ria" *ort (R;*) a *omp"aint /or ec"aration o/ N""it o/ oan and Recoer o/ ama!es a!ainst Gtierre and co-respondent arasi!an. =e comp"ete" denied athoriin! the "oan or the chec&'s ne!otiation, and asserted that he as not pri !!


Atty.

to the parties' "oan a!reement. Issue:

Mes. 6rtic"e 181 o/ the *ii" *ode enmerates the essentia" reAisites /or a a"id contract, name"3 1. consent o/ the contractin! parties 2. o#:ect certain hich is the s#:ect matter o/ the contract and 8. case o/ the o#"i!ation hich is esta#"ished. In this case, the petitioner denied "ia#i"it on the !rond that the contract "ac&ed the essentia" e"ement o/ consent.
!"


Atty.

RODOLFO G. CRU? and ESPERAN?A IBIAS, Petitioners. s.

ATTY. DELFIN GRUSPE, Respondent. G.R. No. 191481 arch 18, 2018

Facts:

;he c"aim arose /rom an accident that occrred on +cto#er 24, 1999, hen the mini #s oned and operated # *r and drien # one 6rtro ain co""ided ith the ;oota *oro""a car o/ Grspe Grspe's car as a tota" rec&. ;he neBt da, on +cto#er 25, 1999, *r, a"on! ith eonardo Q. I#ias ent to Grspe's oDice, apo"o!ied /or the incident, and eBected a Eoint 6Didait o/ $nderta&in! promisin! :oint" and seera"" to rep"ace the Grspe's dama!ed car in 20 das, or nti" Noem#er 15, 1999, o/ the same

mode"

and

o/

at

"east

the

same

Aa"it

or,

a"ternatie", the o"d pa the cost o/ Grspe's car amontin! to P850,000.00, ith interest at12 per month /or an de"aed pament a/ter Noem#er 15, 1999, nti" /"" paid.
and

eonardo

denied

Grspe's

a""e!ation,

c"aimin! that Grspe, a "aer, prepared the Eoint 6Didait o/ $nderta&in! and /orced them to aDiB their si!natres ithot eBp"ainin! and in/ormin! them o/ its contents *r aDiBed his si!natre so that his mini #s co"d #e re"eased !#


Atty.

as it as his on" means o/ income eonardo, a #aran!a oDicia", accompanied *r to Grspe's oDice /or the re"ease o/ the mini #s, #t as a"so deceied into si!nin! the Eoint 6Didait o/ $nderta&in!.

eonardo died drin! the pendenc o/ the case and as s#stitted # his ido, >sperana. eanhi"e, Grspe so"d the rec&ed car /or P180,000.00. ;he R;* r"ed in /aor o/ Grspe and ordered *r and eonardo to paP220,000.00, p"s 15 per annm /rom Noem#er 15, 1999 nti" /"" paid, and the cost o/ sit. +n appea", the *6 aDirmed the R;* decision, #t redced the interest rate to 12 per annm prsant to the Eoint 6Didait o/ $nderta&in!. It dec"ared that despite its tit"e, the Eoint 6Didait o/ $nderta&in! is a contract, as it has a"" the essentia" e"ements o/ consent, o#:ect certain, and consideration reAired nder 6rtic"e 181 o/ the *ii" *ode. ;he *6 /rther said that *r and eonardo /ai"ed to present eidence to spport their contention o/ itiated consent. % si!nin! the Eoint 6Didait o/ $nderta&in!, the o"ntari" assmed the o#"i!ation /or the dama!e the cased to Grspe's car eonardo, ho as not a part to the incident, co"d hae re/sed to si!n the aDidait, #t he did not.

Issues:

1.
!$


Atty.

Held:

M>?. *ontracts are o#"i!ator no matter hat their /orms ma #e, heneer the essentia" reAisites /or their a"idit are present. In determinin! hether a docment is an aDidait or a contract, the *ort "oo&s #eond the tit"e o/ the docment, since the denomination or tit"e !ien # the parties in their docment is not conc"sie o/ the natre o/ its its cont conten ents ts.. In the the cons constr trc cti tion on or inte interpr rpret etat atio ion n o/ an instrment, the intention o/ the parties is primordia" and is to #e prsed. I/ the terms o/ the docment are c"ear and "eae no do#t on the intention o/ the contractin! parties, the "itera" meanin! o/ its stip"ations sha"" contro". I/ the ords rds appear to #e contrar to the parties' eident intention, the "atter sha"" preai" oer the /ormer. 6 simp"e readin! o/ the terms o/ the Eoint 6Didait o/ $nderta&in! readi" disc"oses that it contains stip"ations characteristic o/ a contract.

N+, N+, ther there e as as no iti itiat ated ed cons consen ent. t. 6n a""e a""e!a !ati tion on o/ itiated consent mst #e proen # preponderance o/ eid eiden ence ce *r *r and and eona eonard rdo o /a /aii"ed "ed to spp sppor ortt their eir a""e!ation. >en tho!h the responsi#i"it in the aDidait appears to #e oneros and n/air, this does not necessari" pro proe e the the a""e a""e!e !ed d iti itiat atio ion n o/ cons consen ent. t. ;he ;he peti petiti tion oner ers s acta"" admitted the !enineness and de eBection o/ the Eoint 6Didait and $nderta&in! hen the said that the si!ned the same in order to !et possession o/ their ehic"e. ;hat the re"ease o/ their mini #s as conditioned on their si!nin! the Eoint 6Didait o/ $nderta&in! does not, # itse"/, indicate that their consent as itiated H the ma hae !ien it re"ctant", #t it is not proo/ o/ itiated consent that is a !rond /or the ann"ment o/ a contract. !%


Atty.

DOMINGO GON?ALO, Petitioner. s.

JOHN TARNA TARNATE, TE, JR. , Respondent. GR. No. 1000 2014-01-15

Facts: Facts:

6/ter the epartment o/ P#"ic

Atty.

In /rtherance o/ their a!reement, Gona"o eBected a deed o/ assi!nment here# he as assi!nin! to ;arnate ;arnate an amont eAia"ent to 10 o/ the tota" co""ection /rom the P<= /or the the pro:ect. ;his 10 retention /ee as the rent /or /or ;arna arnate te's 's eAi eAipm pmen entt that that had had #een #een ti" ti"i ied ed in the the pro:e pro:ect ct.. Gon Gona" a"o o /rt /rthe herr ath athor ori ied ed ;arna arnate te to se se the the oDicia" receipt o/ Gona"o *onstrction in the processin! o/ the doc docments re"atie to the co""ection o/ the 10 retention /ee and in encashin! the chec& to #e issed # the P< P <= /or /or tha that prp prpo ose. se. ;he dee deed o/ assi! ssi!n nment ent as s#mitted to the P<= on 6pri" 15, 1999. ;arnate "earned that Gona"o had ni"atera"" rescinded the deed o/ assi!nment # means o/ an aDidait o/ cance""ation o/ deed o/ assi!n assi!nmen mentt and that that the dis#r dis#rsem sement ent oche ocherr /or the 10 retention /ee had then #een issed in the name o/ Gona"o, and the retention /ee re"eased to him. =e

insisted

that

the

assi!nment

co"d

not

stand

inde indepe pend nden ent" t"  de de to its its #ein #ein! ! a mere mere prod rodct ct o/ the the s#contract that had #een #ased on his contract ith the P<= and that ;arnate, hain! #een /"" aare o/ the i""e!a"it i""e!a"it and ineDect ineDecta"it a"it  o/ the deed o/ assi!nmen assi!nmentt /rom the time o/ its eBection, co"d not !o to cort ith nc"ean hand hands s to ino ino&e &e an an ri!h ri!htt #ase #ased d on the the ina ina"i "id d deed deed o/ assi!nment or on the prodct o/ sch deed o/ assi!nment. Issue:

Ruling:

!'


Atty.

6ccordin! to 6rtic"e 1412 (1) o/ the *ii" *ode, the !i"t part partie ies s to an i" i""e "e!a !a"" cont contra ract ct cann cannot ot reco recoe err /rom /rom one one another and are not entit"ed to an aDirmatie re"ie/ #ecase the are in pai delicto or in eAa" /a"t. ;he doctrine o/ in pai delicto is a niersa" doctrine that ho"ds that no action

arises, in eAit or at "a, /rom an i""e!a" contract no sit can can #e main mainttained ined /or /or its its spec peci7c i7c per/ per/or orma manc nce, e, or to recoer the propert a!reed to #e so"d or de"iered, or the mone a!reed to #e paid, or dama!es /or its io"ation and here the parties are in pai delicto, no aDirmatie re"ie/ o/ an &ind i"" #e !ien to one a!ainst the other. pai None Noneth the" e"es ess, s, the the app" app"ic icat atio ion n o/ the the doct doctri rine ne o/ in pa delicto is not not a"a a"as s ri!i ri!id. d. 6n acce accept pted ed eBce eBcept ptio ion n aris arises es

hen hen its app"ic app"icat ation ion contra contraen enes es e""e""-est esta#" a#"ish ished ed p#"ic p#"ic po"ic. In this :risdiction, p#"ic po"ic has #een de7ned as that princip"e o/ the "a hich ho"ds that no s#:ect or citien can "a/"" do that hich has a tendenc to #e in:rios to the p#"ic or a!ainst the p#"ic !ood.O

PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK, Petitioner. s.

SPOUSES ENRI$UE MANALO % ROSALINDA JACINTO, JACINTO, Respondents. "(


Atty.

G.R. No. 14488 Fe#rar 24, 2014

Facts:

Respondent ?poses ana"o app"ied /or an 6""-Prpose *redit

Faci"it

in

the

amont

o/ P1,000,000.00

ith

Phi"ippine Nationa" %an& to 7nance the constrction o/ their hose. 6/ter PN% !ranted their app"ication, the eBected a Rea" >state ort!a!e on Noem#er 8, 1998 in /aor o/ PN% oer their propert as secrit /or the "oan. ;he credit /aci"it as reneed and increased seera" times oer the ears. +n ?eptem#er 20, 199, the credit /aci"it as a!ain reneed /or P,000,000.00. 6s a conseAence, the parties eBected a ?pp"ement to and 6mendment o/ >Bistin! Rea" >state ort!a!e here# the propert coered # ;*; No. 1159 as added as secrit /or the "oan. ;he additiona" secrit as re!istered in the names o/ respondents

6rno"d,

6rne",

6nthon,

and

6rma,

a""

srnamed ana"o, ho ere their chi"dren. It as a!reed pon that the ?poses ana"o o"d ma&e month" paments on the interest. =oeer, PN% c"aimed that their "ast recorded pament as made on ecem#er, 199. ;hs, PN% sent a demand "etter to them on their oerde accont and reAired them to sett"e the accont. PN% sent another demand "etter #ecase the /ai"ed to heed the 7rst demand. 6/ter the ?poses ana"o sti"" /ai"ed to sett"e their npaid accont despite the to demand "etters, PN% /orec"ose the mort!a!e. rin! the /orec"osre sa"e, PN% as the hi!hest "1


Atty.

#idder /or P15,12,000.00 o/ the mort!a!ed properties o/ the ?poses ana"o. ;he sheriD issed to PN% the *erti7cate o/ ?a"e dated Noem#er 18, 2000. 6/ter more than a ear a/ter the *erti7cate o/ ?a"e had #een issed to PN%, the ?poses ana"o institted this action /or the

n""i7cation

o/

the

/orec"osre

proceedin!s

and

dama!es. Issue3

<=>;=>R

+R

N+;

;=>

*+$R;

+F

6PP>6?

*+RR>*;M R$> ;=6; ;=>R> <6? N+ $;$6I;M +F *+N?>N; IN ;=> IP+?I;I+N +F IN;>R>?; R6;>? +N ;=> R>?P+N>N; ?P+$?>?' +6N >?PI;> ;=> >SI?;>N*> +F F6*;? 6N *IR*$?;6N*>? *>6RM ?=+?P+N>N;?' 6??>N; ;+ ;=> R6;>? +F IN;>R>?; ?+ IP+?> %M PN% +N ;=> +6N. Ruling3

;he *ort has dec"ared that a contract here there is no mta"it #eteen the parties parta&es o/ the natre o/ a contract o/ adhesion, and an o#scrit i"" #e constred a!ainst the part ho prepared the contract, the "atter #ein! presmed the stron!er part to the a!reement, and ho cased the o#scrit.PN% sho"d then sDer the conseAences o/ its /ai"re to speci7ca"" indicate the rates o/ interest in the credit a!reement.

Atty.

parties its a"idit or comp"iance cannot #e "e/t to the i"" o/ one o/ them.' 6 persa" o/ the Promissor Note i"" readi" sho that the increase or decrease o/ interest rates hin!es so"e" on the discretion o/ petitioner. It does not reAire the con/ormit o/ the ma&er #e/ore a ne interest rate co"d #e en/orced. 6n contract hich appears to #e heai" ei!hed in /aor o/ one o/ the parties so as to "ead to an nconsciona#"e res"t, ths parta&in! o/ the natre o/ a contract o/ adhesion, is oid. 6n stip"ation re!ardin! the a"idit or comp"iance o/ the contract "e/t so"e" to the i"" o/ one o/ the parties is "i&eise ina"id.

"!


Atty.

PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK , Petitioner. s.


Facts:

?ome time in E" 1994, respondent ;eresita ;an ee (ee) #o!ht /rom respondent Prime >ast Properties Inc. (P>PI) on an insta""ment #asis a residentia" "ot "ocated in %inan!onan, Ria", ith an area o/ 204 sAare meters and coered # ;rans/er *erti7cate o/ ;it"e (;*;) No. 190. ?#seAent", P>PI assi!ned its ri!hts oer a 218,098HsA m propert on 6!st 199 to respondent 6rmed Forces o/ the Phi"ippinesHRetirement and ?eparation %ene7ts ?stem, Inc. (6FPHR?%?), hich inc"ded the propert prchased # ee. ;herea/ter, or on ?eptem#er 10, 199, P>PI o#tained a ""


Atty.

P205,000,000.00 "oan /rom petitioner Phi"ippine Nationa" %an& (petitioner), secred # a mort!a!e oer seera" properties, inc"din! ee's propert. ;he mort!a!e as c"eared # the =osin! and and $se Re!"ator %oard (=$R%)

on

?eptem#er

1,

199.cra"ared


PI and 6FP-R?%?. Ruling:

No. ;he petition mst #e >NI>. ;he petitioner is correct in ar!in! that it is not o#"i!ed to per/orm an o/ the nderta&in! o/ respondent P>PI and 6FPHR?%? in its transactions ith ee #ecase it is not a pri thereto. ;he #asic princip"e o/ re"atiit o/ contracts is that contracts can on" #ind the parties ho entered into it, 28 and cannot /aor or pre:dice a third person, een i/ he is aare o/ sch contract and has acted ith &no"ed!e thereo/. 24 
"#


Atty.

FIL>ESTATE PROPERTIES, INC. AND FIL> ESTATE NETORK INC., Petitioners. s.

SPOUSES CONRADO AND MARIA VICTORIA RON$UILLO, Respondents. GR. No. 159 Eanar 18, 2014

Facts:

"$


Atty.

Petitioner Fi"->state Properties, Inc. is the oner and dee"oper o/ the *entra" Par& P"ace ;oer hi"e copetitioner

Fi"->state

Netor&,

Inc.

is

its

athoried

mar&etin! a!ent. Respondent ?poses *onrado and aria Jictoria RonAi""o prchased /rom petitioners an 2-sAare meter condominim nit at *entra" Par& P"ace ;oer in anda"on! *it /or a pre-se""in! contract price o/ FIJ> II+N +N> =$NR> ?>J>N;M-F+$R ;=+$?6N +NM (P5,14,000.00). +n 29 6!st 199, respondents eBected and si!ned a Reseration 6pp"ication 6!reement herein the deposited P200,000.00 as reseration /ee. 6s a!reed pon, respondents paid the /"" donpament o/ P1,552,200.00 and had #een pain! the P8,88.88 month" amortiations nti" ?eptem#er 199. $pon "earnin! respondents

that constrction

"i&eise

stopped

or&s had stopped,

pain!

their

month"

amortiation. *"aimin! to hae paid a tota" o/ P2,19,949.9 to petitioners, respondents thro!h to (2) sccessie "etters, demanded a /"" re/nd o/ their pament ith interest.
(=$R%).

Respondents

praed

/or

reim#rsement@re/nd o/ P2,19,949.9 representin! the tota" amortiation paments, P200,000.00 as and # a o/ mora"

dama!es,

attorne's

/ees

and

other

"iti!ation

eBpenses. +n 21 +cto#er 2000, the =$R% issed an +rder o/ e/a"t a!ainst petitioners /or /ai"in! to 7"e their 6nser ithin the re!"ementar period despite serice o/ smmons.2

"%


Atty.

Petitioners 7"ed a motion to "i/t order o/ de/a"t and attached their position paper attri#tin! the de"a in constrction to the 199 6sian 7nancia" crisis. Petitioners denied committin! /rad or misrepresentation hich co"d entit"e respondents to an aard o/ mora" dama!es. Issue:

Mes. 6rtic"e 1191. ;he poer to rescind o#"i!ations is imp"ied in reciproca" ones, in case one o/ the o#"i!ors sho"d not comp" ith hat is incm#ent pon him. ;he in:red part ma choose #eteen the /"7""ment and the rescission o/ the o#"i!ation, ith pament o/ dama!es in either case. =e ma a"so see& rescission, een a/ter he has chosen /"7""ment, i/ the "atter sho"d #ecome impossi#"e.

"&


Atty.

GALILEO A. MAGLASANG, d&1n@ 2s1n)ss 2nd)' /) na) GL En)'9'1s)s, Petitioner, s.

NORTHESTERN

INC.,

UNIVERSITY,

Respondent. G.R. No. 19 arch 20, 2018

Facts:

+n 10 Ene 2004, respondent Northestern $niersit en!a!ed the serices o/ petitioner G >nterprises, to insta"" a ne inte!rated #rid!e sstem (I%?) in aoa! *it. ;he insta""ation o/ an I%?, sed as the stdents' trainin! "a#orator, as reAired # the *ommission on =i!her >dcation

#e/ore

transportation

a

schoo"

pro!rams.

?ince

co"d its

oDer I%?

as

maritime a"read

o#so"ete, respondent reAired petitioner to spp" and insta"" speci7c components in order to /orm the most modern I%? that o"d #e accepta#"e to *=> and o"d #e comp"iant ith the standards o/ the Internationa" aritime +r!aniation (I+). For this prpose, the parties eBected to contracts, hich essentia"" contains the same terms and conditions. *ommon to #oth contracts are the /o""oin! proisions3 (1) the I%? and its components mst #e comp"iant ith the I+ and *=> standard and ith mana"s /or sim"ators@ma:or eAipment (2) the contracts ma #e terminated i/ one part commits a s#stantia" #reach o/ its nderta&in! and (8) an dispte nder the "'


Atty.

a!re a!reem emen entt sha" sha""" 7rst 7rst #e sett sett"e "ed d mt mta" a"" " #et #etee een n the the parties, and i/ sett"ement is not o#tained, resort sha"" #e so!ht in the corts o/ "a.

Northestern paid P1 mi""ion as don pament to G >nter nterpr pris ise es. ;he /orm /ormer er then hen assm ssmed ed poss posses essi sion on o/ Northestern's o"d I%? as trade-in pament /or its serice. ;hs, ;hs, the #a"ance #a"ance o/ the contract contract price remained at P1.9 P1.9 mi""ion. ;o months a/ter the eBection o/ the contracts, G >nterprises technicians de"iered arios materia"s to the pro:e pro:ect ct site site.. =oe =oee err, hen hen the the star starte ted d inst insta" a""i "in! n! the the components, Northestern ha"ted the operations, it :sti7ed the the or& or& stop stoppa pa!e !e pon pon its its 7ndi 7ndin! n! that that the the de"i de"ie ere red d eAipment ere s#standard. It eBp"ained /rther that G >nter nterpr pris ise es io" io"a ated the terms erms and con condit ditions ions o/ the contracts, since the de"iered components (1) ere o"d (2) did not hae instrction mana"s and arrant certi7cates (8) contained indications o/ #ein! reconditioned machines and (4) did not meet the I+ and *=> standards. ;hs, North Northest estern ern demand demanded ed comp"i comp"ian ance ce ith ith the the a!reem a!reement ent and s!!ested that G >nterprises meet ith the /ormer's representaties to iron ot the sitation.

Inst Instea ead d o/ heed heedin in! ! this this s!!e s!!est stio ion, n, G >nte >nterpr rpris ises es 7"ed 7"ed on  ?ept eptem#e em#err 200 004 4 a *om *omp"a p"aint int /or /or #rea #reach ch o/ contract. Petitioner a""e!ed that Northestern #reached the contracts

#

orderin!

the

or&

stoppa!e

and

ths

preentin! the insta""ation o/ the materia"s /or the I%?.

Northestern in its de/ense, asserted that since the eAi eAipm pmen entt de"i de"ie ere red d ere ere not not in acco accord rdan ance ce ith ith the the

#(


Atty.

spec speci7 i7ca cati tion ons s proi proide ded d # the the cont contra ract cts, s, a"" a"" scc sccee eedi din! n! or& or&s o"d o"d #e /t /ti" i"e e and o o"d ent entai" nnec necessa essar r eBpenses. =ence, it pra raed /or the rescission o/ the contracts and made a comp"sor conterc"aim /or acta", mora", and eBemp"ar dama!es, and attorne's /ees.

;he ;he R;* he" he"d #oth #oth part partie ies s at /a /a "t. "t. In Ino&in o&in! ! the the eAita#"e princip"e that Ceach part mst #ear its on "oss,C the tria ria" co cort treat reated ed the contr ontra acts as impo imposs ssii#"e #"e o/ per/ormance ithot the /a"t o/ either part or as hain! #een disso"ed # mta" consent. *onseAent", it ordered mta" restittion, hich o"d there# restore the parties to their ori!ina" positions.

6!!rieed, #oth parties appea"ed to the *6. ;he *6 appreciated that since the parties essentia"" so!ht to hae an I%? comp"iant ith the *=> and I+ standards, it as G >nte >nterp rpri rise ses' s' de"i de"ie er r o/ de/e de/ect cti ie e eAi eAipm pmen entt that that mat materia eria"" "" 

and and

s#s s#sttant antia"" ia"" 

#rea #reac ched

the

cont ontract racts. s.

6"tho!h the contracts contemp"ated a comp"eted pro:ect to #e ea"ated # *=>, Northestern co"d not :st sit id" # hen hen it as as appa apparen rentt that that the the comp compon onen ents ts de"i de"ie ere red d ere s#standard.

;he *6 he"d that Northestern on" eBercised ordinar prde prdenc nce e to pre preen entt the the ine ineit ita# a#"e "e re:e re:ect ctio ion n o/ the the I%? I%? de"i de"ie ere red d # G >nte >nterp rpri rise ses. s. ;his ;his time time,, app" app"i in! n! 6rti 6rtic" c"e e 1191 o/ the *ii" *ode, the *6 dec"ared the rescission o/ the contracts. It then proceeded to aDirm the R;*'s order o/ mta" restittion.

#1


Atty.

Issue:

nterprises.

Held:

N+. N+. ;he ;he *6 corr correc ect" t"  app" app"ie ied d 6rti 6rtic" c"e e 11 1191 91,, hic hich h proides that the poer to rescind o#"i!ations is imp"ied in reci recipr proc oca" a" ones ones,, in case case one one o/ the the o#"i o#"i!o !ors rs sho sho"d "d not not comp" ith hat is incm#ent pon him. ;he in:red part ma choose #eteen the /"7""ment and the rescission o/ the o#"i!ation, ith the pament o/ dama!es in either case. =e ma a"so see& rescission, een a/te /ter he has chosen /"7""ment, i/ the "atter sho"d #ecome impossi#"e.

;he ;he to to cont contra ract cts s reA reAir ire e no "ess "ess than than s#s s#sta tant ntia ia"" #reach #e/ore the can #e rescinded. 6 s#stantia" #reach, n"i&e

s"i!ht

or

casa"

#reaches

o/

contract,

are

/ndamenta" #reaches that de/eat the o#:ect o/ the parties in enterin! into an a!reement, since the "a is not conc concer erne ned d ith ith triU triUes es.. In the the case case at #ar #ar, the the part partie ies s eBp"icit" a!reed that the materia"s to #e de"iered mst #e comp"iant ith the *=> and I+ standards and mst #e comp"ete ith mana"s. 6side /rom these c"ear proisions in the the cont contra ract cts, s, the the cor corts ts a Ao Ao simi simi"a "ar" r"  /on /ond d that that the the intent o/ the parties as to rep"ace the o"d I%? in order to o#tain o#tain *=> *=> accre accredit ditat ation ion /or North Northes ester tern's n's mariti maritimemere"ated corses. It as ths incm#ent pon G >nterprises to spp" the components that o"d create an I%? that o"d eDectie" /aci"itate the "earnin! o/ the stdents. G >nterprises misera#" /ai"ed in meetin! its responsi#i"it. 6s contained in the 7ndin!s o/ the *6 and the R;*, petitioner

#


spp"ied

s#st #standar dard

eAi Aipme pment

hen

it

Atty.

de"iered red

components that (1) ere o"d (2) did not hae instrction mana"s and arrant certi7cates (8) #ore indications o/ #ein! reconditioned machines and, a"" to"d, (4) mi!ht not hae hae met met the the I+ I+ and and *=> *=> stan standa dard rds. s.> >id iden ent" t" , the the mate materi ria" a"s s de"i de"ie ere red d ere ere "ess "ess "i "i&e &e" " to pass pass the the *=> *=> standa standards, rds, #ecas #ecase e the the nai! nai!at ation ion sstem sstem to #e insta insta""e ""ed d mi!h mi!htt not not acc accra rate" e" poin pointt to the the tr tre north orth and the stee steeri rin n! hee ee"" de"i de"i ered ered as one one that came ame /rom /rom an atomo#i"e, instead o/ one sed in ships. o!ica"", # no stretch o/ the ima!ination co"d these /orm part o/ the most modern I%? comp"iant ith the I+ and *=> standards.

Gien Gien that that petiti petitione onerr, itho ithott :sti7 :sti7cat cation ion,, spp"i spp"ied ed s#standard components /or the ne I%?, it is ths c"ear that that its io"at io"ation ion as as not mere" mere" incide incident nta", a", #t direct direct" " re"ated to the essence o/ the a!reement pertainin! to the insta""ation o/ an I%? comp"iant ith the *=> and I+ standards.

#!


Atty.

SANDOVAL SHIPYARDS, INC. and RIMPORT INDUSTRIES, INC. ')9')s)n)d + ENGR. REYNALDO G. IMPORTANTE, Petitioners, s.

PHILIPPINE MERCHANT MARINE ACADEMY (PMMA!, Respondent. G.R. No. 188 6pri" 10, 2018

Facts:

Phi"ippine erchant arine 6cadem (respondent) entered into a ?hip %i"din! *ontract (contract) ith ?andoa" ?hipards, Inc. thro!h the "atterKs a!ent, Rimport Indstries, Inc. (petitioners) on 19 ecem#er 1994. ;he contract states that petitioners o"d constrct to nits o/ 9.1 0-meter "i/e#oats ("i/e#oats) to #e sed as trainin! #oats /or the stdents o/ respondent. ;hese "i/e#oats sho"d hae 45-=P Gra arine diese" en!ines and sho"d #e de"iered ithin 45 or&in! das /rom the date o/ the contractsi!nin! and pament o/ the mo#i"iation@or!aniation /nd. Respondent, /or its part, o"d pa petitioners P1,5,200 in insta"ments #ased on the pro!ress accomp"ishment o/ the or& as stated in the contract. 6s

a!reed

pon,

respondent

paid

petitioners P28,94.00 on 0 arch 1995 as mo#i"iation #"


Atty.

/nd /or the "i/e#oats P504,94.20 on 15 arch 1995 /or its 7rst pro!ress #i""in! and P8,00.00 on 25 arch 1995 as 7na" pament /or the "i/e#oats.+n 10 6!st 1995, 6n!e" Rosario (Rosario), a /ac"t mem#er o/ respondent ho c"aimed to hae #een er#a"" athoried # its president, a""e!ed" receied the "i/e#oats at the Phi"ippine Na
respondentKs

dean

s#mitted

a

report

and

recommendation to the president o/ petitioners statin! the "atterKs constrction io"ations and as&in! /or recti7cation. ;herea/ter,

a

meetin!

as

representaties o/ respondent and

he"d petitioners

#eteen on

01

ecem#er 1995. Petitioners ere reminded that the sho"d strict" comp" ith the a!reed p"an and speci7cations o/ the "i/e#oats, as there ere no athoried a"terations thereo/. Petitioners ere a"so adised to pt into ritin! their reAest /or an eBtension o/ time /or the de"ier o/ the "i/e#oats. In comp"iance, the rote a "etter dated 1 ecem#er 1995, reAestin! an eBtension o/ time /or the de"ier, /rom 01 ecem#er 1995 to Eanar 199. +n 1 E" 199, the *ommission on 6dit (*+6), thro!h its technica" adit specia"ist %enedict ?. Gantero (Gantero), condcted an oc"ar inspection o/ the "i/e#oats. =is report indicated that the "i/e#oats ere corroded and deterioratin! #ecase o/ their eBposre to a"" tpes o/ eather e"ements that the p"an&in!s and the #enches ere a"so deterioratin!, as the ere not coated ith 7#er!"ass ##


Atty.

that the "i/e#oats had no mast sai"s or ro "oc&s insta""ed on the #oats that the insta""ed prime moer as an Is en!ine, contrar to the a!reed p"ans and speci7cations and that the "i/e#oats had #een paid in /"" eBcept /or the 10 percent retention.

espite

repeated

demands

/rom

respondent,

petitioners re/sed to de"ier the "i/e#oats that o"d comp"

ith

the

a!reed

p"ans

and

speci7cations.

Respondent then 7"ed a *omp"aint /or Rescission o/ *ontract ith ama!es a!ainst petitioners #e/ore the R;*.

;he R;* he"d in /aor o/ the respondents and petitioners ere made :oint" and seera"" "ia#"e /or acta" dama!es in the amont o/ P1,51,0 and a pena"t o/ one percent o/ the tota" contract price /or eer da o/ de"a. ;he R;* a"so directed petitioners to pa attorneKs /ees p"s the costs o/ sit, #ecase their n:sti7ed re/sa" to pa respondent compe""ed it to resort to cort action /or the protection and indication o/ its ri!hts. It a"so r"ed that petitioners ere estopped /rom Aestionin! respondentKs noncomp"iance ith mediation proceedin!s, #ecase the actie" participated in the tria" o/ the case. Petitioners #ro!ht an ordinar appea" to the *6 ia R"e 41. ;he *6 r"ed that petitioners committed a c"ear s#stantia" #reach o/ the contract, hich arranted its rescission. Rescission reAires a mta" restoration o/ #ene7ts receied. =oeer, petitioners /ai"ed to de"ier the "i/e#oats their a""e!ed de"ier to Rosario as ina"id, as he as not a d" athoried representatie named in the contract. =ence, petitioners co"d not compe" respondent to retrn somethin! it neer had possession or cstod o/. #$


Atty.

Nonethe"ess, the *6 de"eted the aard o/ attorneKs /ees, as it /ond that the R;* /ai"ed to cite an speci7c /acta" #asis to :sti/ the aard. issatis7ed,

petitioners

7"ed

a

otion

/or

Reconsideration hich the *6 denied. R"in! that the /act that the en!ines insta""ed ere diDerent /rom hat had #een a!reed as a #reach o/ the speci7cations in the contract.

6dditiona"",

docmentar

and

testimonia"

eidenced proDered # #oth parties esta#"ished that the "i/e#oats remained doc&ed at Naotas in the possession o/ petitioners.

Issue:

M>?, there can #e rescission o/ the contract. %oth the R;* and the *6 /ond that petitioners io"ated the terms o/ the contract # insta""in! srp"s diese" en!ines, contrar to the a!reed p"ans and speci7cations, and # /ai"in! to de"ier the "i/e#oats ithin the a!reed time. ;he #reach as /ond to #e s#stantia" and sDicient to arrant a rescission o/ the contract. Rescission entai"s a mta" restittion o/ #ene7ts receied. 6n in:red part ho has chosen rescission is a"so entit"ed

to

the

circmstances,

pament

hoeer,

o/

dama!es.

rendered

;he

mta"

/acta"

restittion

impossi#"e. %oth the R;* and the *6 /ond that petitioners de"iered the "i/e#oats to Rosario. 6"tho!h he as an en!ineer o/ respondent, it neer athoried him to receie the "i/e#oats /rom petitioners. =ence, as the de"ier to #%


Atty.

Rosario as ina"id, it as as i/ respondent neer receied the "i/e#oats. 6s it neer receied the o#:ect o/ the contract, it cannot retrn the o#:ect. $n/ortnate", the same thin! cannot #e said o/ petitioners. ;he admit that the receied a tota" amont o/ P1,51,0 /rom respondent as pament /or the constrction o/ the "i/e#oats. For this reason, the sho"d retrn the same amont to respondent.

TEODORO A. REYES, Petitioner, v. ETTORE ROSSI, Respondent. G.R. N&. 4:786<

F)'2a'+ 48, 6;4<

#&


Atty.

Facts:

+n +cto#er 81, 199, petitioner ;eodoro 6. Rees and 6danced Fondation *onstrction ?stems *orporation (6danced

Fondation),

represented

#

its

>Bectie

Pro:ect irector, respondent >ttore Rossi, eBected a deed o/ conditiona" sa"e ino"in! the prchase # Rees o/ eAipment consistin! o/ a
o"d

pa

the

sm

o/

P8,000,000.00

as

donpament, and the #a"ance o/ P,000,000.00 thro!h /or post-dated chec&s. Rees comp"ied, #t in Eanar 199, he reAested the restrctrin! o/ his o#"i!ation nder the deed o/ conditiona" sa"e # rep"acin! the /or post-dated chec&s ith nine post-dated chec&s that o"d inc"de interest at the rate o/ P25,000.00@month accrin! on the npaid portion o/ the o#"i!ation on 6pri" 80, 199, Ene 80, 199, E" 81, 199, ?eptem#er 80, 199 and +cto#er 81, 199. 6danced Fondation assented to Rees' reAest, and retrned the /or chec&s. In trn, petitioner issed and de"iered nine postdated chec&s in the a!!re!ate sm o/ P,125,000.00 dran a!ainst the $nited *ocont P"anters %an&. =oeer some o/ the chec&s ere s#seAent" dishonored.

eanhi"e, Rees commenced an action /or rescission o/ contract and dama!es in the R;* in Qeon *it. =is comp"aint

so!ht

:d!ment

dec"arin!

the

deed

o/

conditiona" sa"e Crescinded and o/ no /rther /orce and eDect,C and orderin! 6danced Fondation to retrn the P8,000,000.00 don pament ith "e!a" interest /rom Ene 4, 199 nti" /"" paid a"on! ith other /ees and dama!es. #'


Atty.

+n ?eptem#er , 199, Rossi char!ed Rees ith 7e conts o/ esta/a and 7e conts o/ io"ation o/ %atas Pam#ansa %"!. 22 in the +Dice o/ the *it Prosector o/ a&ati /or the dishonored chec&s. 6nother crimina" char!e /or io"ation o/ %atas Pam#ansa %"!. 22 as "od!ed a!ainst Rees in the +Dice o/ the *it Prosector o/ Qeon *it /or the other dishonored chec&.

Rees s#mitted his conter-aDidait c"aimin! that the chec&s had not #een issed /or an a"a#"e consideration #ecase 6danced Fondation has /ai"ed to act pon his comp"aints a#ot the de/ects o/ the machiner that he has #o!ht een threatenin! him ith "e!a" action.

+n Eanar 5, 1999, the *it Prosector o/ a&ati, #ased on the recommendation o/ the hand"in! 6ssistant *it Prosector, dismissed the >sta/a case. Rossi appea"ed the reso"tion o/ the *it Prosector to the epartment o/ Estice, #t this as a"so denied.

Rossi then ent to the *6 hich s#seAent" !ranted Rossi's petition in so /ar as the eBistence o/ pre:dicia" Aestion is concerned #t aDirmed the dismissa" o/ the comp"aint /or esta/a.

Issue:


Atty.

Held:

N+. 6 pre:dicia" Aestion !enera"" comes into p"a in a sitation here a cii" action and a crimina" action are #oth pendin!, and there eBists in the /ormer an isse that mst 7rst #e determined #e/ore the "atter ma proceed. ;he rationa"e /or the sspension on the !rond o/ a pre:dicia" Aestion is to aoid conUictin! decisions. For a cii" action to #e considered pre:dicia" to a crimina" case as to case the sspension o/ the crimina" proceedin!s nti" the 7na" reso"tion o/ the cii", the /o""oin! reAisites mst #e present3 (1) the cii" case ino"es /acts intimate" re"ated to those pon hich the crimina" prosection o"d #e #ased (2) in the reso"tion o/ the isse or isses raised in the cii" action, the !i"t or innocence o/ the accsed o"d necessari" #e determined and (8) :risdiction to tr said Aestion mst #e "od!ed in another tri#na". It mst appear not on" that the cii" case ino"es the same /acts pon hich the crimina" prosection o"d #e #ased, #t a"so that the reso"tion o/ the isses raised in the cii" action o"d #e necessari" determinatie o/ the !i"t or innocence o/ the accsed.

*ontendin! that the rescission o/ the contract o/ sa"e constittes a pre:dicia" Aestion, Rees posits that the reso"tion o/ the cii" action i"" #e determinatie o/ hether or not he as crimina"" "ia#"e /or the io"ations o/ %atas Pam#ansa %"!. 22. =e states that i/ the contract o"d #e rescinded, his o#"i!ation to pa nder the conditiona" deed o/ sa"e o"d #e eBtin!ished, and sch otcome o"d necessari" res"t in the dismissa" o/ the crimina" proceedin!s /or the io"ations o/ %atas Pam#ansa $1


Atty.

%"!. 22.

;he action /or the rescission o/ the deed o/ sa"e on the !rond that 6danced Fondation did not comp" ith its o#"i!ation acta"" see&s one o/ the a"ternatie remedies aai"a#"e to a contractin! part nder 6rtic"e 1191 o/ the *ii" *ode. ;his is nderstood to #e ithot pre:dice to the ri!hts o/ third persons ho hae acAired the thin!, in accordance ith 6rtic"es 185 and 18 and the ort!a!e a. 6rtic"e 1191 o/ the *ii" *ode reco!nies an imp"ied or tacit reso"tor condition in reciproca" o#"i!ations. ;he condition is imposed # "a, and app"ies een i/ there is no correspondin! a!reement thereon #eteen the parties. ;he eBp"anation /or this is that in reciproca" o#"i!ations a part incrs in de"a once the other part has per/ormed his part o/ the contract hence, the part ho has per/ormed or is read and i""in! to per/orm ma rescind the o#"i!ation i/ the other does not per/orm, or is not read and i""in! to per/orm. It is tre that the rescission o/ a contract res"ts in the eBtin!ishment o/ the o#"i!ator re"ation as i/ it as neer created, the eBtin!ishment hain! a retroactie eDect. ;he rescission is eAia"ent to ina"idatin! and nma&in! the :ridica" tie, "eain! thin!s in their stats #e/ore the ce"e#ration o/ the contract. =oeer, nti" the contract is rescinded, the :ridica" tie and the concomitant o#"i!ations s#sist.

$nder the a on contracts, itiated consent does not ma&e a contract nen/orcea#"e #t mere" oida#"e, the remed o/ hich o"d #e to ann" the contract since oida#"e contracts prodce "e!a" eDects nti" the are $


Atty.

ann""ed. +n the other hand, rescission o/ contracts in case o/ #reach prsant to 6rtic"e 1191 o/ the *ii" *ode o/ the Phi"ippines a"so

prespposes a

a"id

contract n"ess

rescinded or ann""ed. In this "i!ht, it is c"ear that the pendenc o/ the cii" case does not #ar the contination o/ the proceedin!s in the pre"iminar inesti!ation on the !rond that it poses a pre:dicia" Aestion. *onsiderin! that the contracts are deemed to #e a"id nti" rescinded, the consideration and o#"i!ator eDect thereo/ are a"so deemed to hae #een a"id" made, ths demanda#"e. *onseAent", there as no /ai"re o/ consideration at the time hen the s#:ect chec&s ere dishonored.

GOTESCO PROPERTIES, In0., ) a*. Petitioner s.

S9s. E2@)n1& and An@)*1na Faa'd&, Respondent Fe#rar 2, 2018 $!


Atty.

G.R. No. 2011

Facts:

?poses >!enio ad 6n!e"ina Fa:ardo entered into a contract o/ sa"e ith Gotesco Properties, Inc (G;I).

;he

sposes nderta&e to # a parce" o/ "ot oned and #ein! dee"oped # G;I. 6ccordin! to the contract, the sposes sha"" pa the tota" amont in insta""ment /or a period o/ 10 ears.

G;I, on its part, sha"" eBecte a eed o/ 6#so"te

?a"e in /aor o/ the sposes.

+n 2000, the soses ere a#"e to /"" pa the prchase price. =oeer, G;I /ai"ed to eBecte the eed o/ 6#so"te ?a"e and proide the tit"e to the sposes. 6 *omp"aint /or ?peci7c

Per/ormance or

Rescission o/ *ontract

ith

ama!es a!ainst GPI as 7"ed # the sposes #e/ore the =$R%.

;he sposes, in their comp"aint, a""e!ed that GPI /ai"ed to proide and constrct ater /aci"ities, improements and in/rastrctre as part o/ its s#diision pro:ect. GPI a"so /ai"ed to pt #ondar mar&s on the parce"s o/ "ot. ;here ere no technica" descriptions !ien.

GPI ansered that the sposes ere e"" aare o/ the "ac& o/ technica" description o/ the "ot on the *erti7cate o/ ;it"e.

;he de"a in de"ierin! the tit"e as de to the

reersa" o/ the *ort o/ 6ppea"s in its decision /or Petition /or Inscription o/ ;echnica" escription 7"ed # GPI. GPI /rther a""e!ed that rescission /or dama!es nder 6rt 11911 is not app"ica#"e #ecase GPI is i""in! to comp" ith its $"


Atty.

o#"i!ations #t as on" preented /rom doin! so # an eent that is #eond its contro".

Issue:

Held:

M>?, the sposes hae the ri!ht to rescind the contract in accordance ith 6rt 1191. It cannot #e denied that on" GPI #ene7ted /rom the contract, hain! receied /"" pament o/ the contract price p"s interests as ear" as Eanar 1, 2000, hi"e ?ps. Fa:ardo remained pre:diced # the persistin! non-de"ier o/ the s#:ect "ot despite /"" pament. 6s a necessar conseAence, considerin! the propriet o/ the rescission as ear"ier discssed, ?ps. Fa:ardo mst #e a#"e to recoer the price o/ the propert pe!!ed at its preai"in! mar&et a"e consistent ith the *ort's prononcement in ?o"id =omes,

Rescission does not mere" terminate the contract and re"ease the parties /rom /rther o#"i!ations to each other, #t a#ro!ates the contract /rom its inception and restores the parties to their ori!ina" positions as i/ no contract has #een made. ;o #e sre, it has #een sett"ed that the eDects o/ rescission as proided /or in 6rtic"e 185 o/ the *ode are eAa"" app"ica#"e to cases nder 6rtic"e 1191. ta" restittion is reAired in cases ino"in! rescission nder 6rtic"e 1191. ;his means #rin!in! the parties #ac& to their ori!ina" stats prior to the inception o/ the contract. 6rtic"e 185 proides that rescission creates the o#"i!ation to $#


Atty.

retrn the thin!s hich ere the o#:ect o/ the contract, to!ether ith their /rits, and the price ith its interest conseAent", it can #e carried ot on" hen he ho demands rescission can retrn hateer he ma #e o#"i!ated to restore.

Neither sha"" rescission ta&e p"ace

hen the thin!s hich are the o#:ect o/ the contract are "e!a"" in the possession o/ third persons ho did not act in #ad /aith. In this case, indemnit /or dama!es ma #e demanded /rom the person casin! the "oss.

MANUEL UY % SONS, INC., Petitioner, s.

VALBUECO, INCORPORATED, Respondent. G.R. No. 19594 ?eptem#er 11, 2018

F!"#$:

Petitioner ane" $ V ?ons, Inc. is the re!istered oner o/ parce"s o/ "and "ocated in ;eresa, Ria". +n Noem#er 29, 198, to *onditiona" eeds o/ ?a"e ere eBected # petitioner, as endor, in /aor o/ respondent Ja"#eco, Incorporated, as endee. ;he 7rst *onditiona" eed o/ ?a"e contained the conditions that the "ots i"" #e re"eased /rom mort!a!es and that the properties i"" #e /reed on an occpants or "eases. 6 second *onditiona" eed o/ ?a"e /or another piece o/ "and as eBected ith the condition that the "essees, tenants, aderse occpants or sAatters ithin 100 das /rom the eBection o/ this conditiona" deed o/ sa"e. $$


Atty.

Respondent as a#"e to pa petitioner the amont o/ P25,055.55 as partia" pament /or the to properties correspondin!

to

the

initia"

paments

and

the

7rst

insta""ments o/ the said properties. ;he petitioner comp"ied ith its o#"i!ation nder the conditiona" deeds o/ sa"e # re"easin!

the

"ots

/rom

mort!a!e

and

the

n"a/"

occpants ere made to "eae and demo"ition o/ their shanties

ere

a!reed

pon.

=oeer,

respondent

sspended /rther pament as it as not satis7ed ith the manner petitioner comp"ied ith its o#"i!ations nder the conditiona" deeds o/ sa"e and on arch 1, 19, petitioner sent

respondent

a

"etter in/ormin!

respondent

o/ its

intention to rescind the conditiona" deeds o/ sa"e and attachin! thereith the ori!ina" cop o/ the respectie notaria" rescission. Respondent 7"ed a *omp"aint /or speci7c per/ormance and dama!es a!ainst petitioner ith the R;* o/ 6ntipo"o *it. =oeer, on Eanar 15, 199, the case as dismissed ithot pre:dice /or "ac& o/ interest, as respondentKs conse" /ai"ed to attend the pre-tria" con/erence. Fie ears "ater, respondent a!ain 7"ed ith the R;* o/ ani"a, %ranch 1 (tria" cort) a *omp"aint /or speci7c per/ormance and dama!es, see&in! to compe" petitioner to accept the #a"ance o/ the prchase price /or the to conditiona" deeds o/ sa"e and to eBecte the correspondin! deeds o/ a#so"te sa"e. Petitioner ar!ed that the case sho"d #e dismissed, as it as #arred # prior :d!ment. oreoer, petitioner contended that it co"d not #e compe""ed to eBecte an deed o/ a#so"te sa"e, #ecase respondent /ai"ed to pa in /"" the prchase price o/ the s#:ect "ots. Petitioner c"aimed

%$ Oliveros, Alvan Stephenson G.Civil Law Review II Case Digests Crisostomo Uribe

Atty.

that it !ae respondent a notice o/ notaria" rescission o/ #oth conditiona" deeds o/ sa"e that o"d ta&e eDect 80 das /rom receipt thereo/. Respondent denied that it receied the a""e!ed notice o/ notaria" rescission that the a""e!ed recipient o/ the notice as not an emp"oee and that the address as not the !ien address o/ respondent. ;he tria" cort dismissed the comp"aint /or "ac& o/ merit, as petitioner had eBercised its ri!ht to rescind the contracts. Respondent appea"ed the decision o/ the tria" cort to the *ort o/ 6ppea"s. ;he *ort o/ 6ppea"s reersed and set aside the ecision o/ the tria" cort. It reinstated the comp"aint o/ respondent, and directed petitioner to eBecte deeds o/ a#so"te sa"e in /aor o/ respondent a/ter pament o/ the #a"ance o/ the prchase price o/ the s#:ect "ots. ;he *ort o/ 6ppea"s he"d that the to conditiona" deeds o/ sa"e in this case are contracts to se"". It stated that the "a app"ica#"e to the said contracts to se"" on insta""ments is R.6. No. 552, speci7ca"" ?ection 4thereo/, as respondent paid "ess than to ears in insta""ments. It he"d that pon repeated de/a"ts in pament # respondent, petitioner had the ri!ht to cance" the said contracts, #t s#:ect to the proper receipt o/ respondent o/ the notice o/ cance""ation or the demand /or the rescission o/ the contracts # notaria" act. ;he *ort o/ 6ppea"s he"d that the contracts to se"" on insta""ment ere a"id and s#sistin!, and respondent has the ri!ht to oDer to pa /or the #a"ance o/ the prchase price #e/ore acta" cance""ation. PetitionerKs motion /or reconsideration as denied /or "ac& o/ merit # the *ort o/ 6ppea"s.

$&


Atty.

I$$%&:

H&LD:

M>?. ;he to conditiona" deeds o/ sa"e entered into # the parties are contracts to se"", as the #oth contained a stip"ation that onership o/ the properties sha"" not pass to the endee nti" a/ter /"" pament o/ the prchase price. In a conditiona" sa"e, as in a contract to se"", onership remains ith the endor and does not pass to the endee nti" /"" pament o/ the prchase price. ;he /"" pament o/ the prchase price parta&es o/ a sspensie condition, and non-/"7""ment o/ the condition preents the o#"i!ation to se"" /rom arisin!.

Atty.

?ince respondent a"read receied notices o/ the notaria" rescission o/ the conditiona" deeds o/ sa"e, to!ether ith petitioner's 6nser to the 7rst *omp"aint 7e ears #e/ore it 7"ed this case, it can no "on!er den hain! receied notices o/ the notaria" rescission in this case, as respondent admitted the same hen it attached the notices o/ notaria" rescission to its Rep" in this case. *onseAent", respondent is not entit"ed to the re"ie/ !ranted # the *ort o/ 6ppea"s.

IGLESIA FILIPINA INDEPENDIENTE, Petitioner, %(


Atty.

vs. HEIRS & BERNARDINO TAE?A, Respondents. G.R. No. 1959 Fe#rar 8, 2014

Facts:

;he p"aintiD-appe""ee I!"esia Fi"ipina Independiente (IFI), a d" re!istered re"i!ios corporation, as the oner o/ a parce"

o/

"and

sitated

at

R

(no

eonarda),

;!e!arao, *a!aan.;he said "ot is s#diided as /o""os3 ot Nos. 858-6, 858-%, 858-*, and 858-. %eteen 198 and 194, the p"aintiD-appe""ee, thro!h its then ?preme %ishop Re. acario Ga, so"d ot 858-, ith an area o/ 15,000 sAare meters, to one %ienenido de Gman.+n Fe#rar 5, 19, ot Nos. 858-6 and 858-%, ith a tota" area o/ 10,000 sAare meters, ere "i&eise so"d # Re. acario Ga, in his capacit as the ?preme %ishop o/ the p"aintiD-appe""ee, to the de/endant %ernardino ;aea. In 19, a comp"aint /or the ann"ment o/ the Fe#rar 5, 19 eed o/ ?a"e ith ort!a!e as 7"ed # the Parish *onci" o/ ;!e!arao, *a!aan, represented # Froi"an *a"a!i and ante ?antos, the President and the ?ecretar, respectie", o/ the amenKs *ommittee, ith the then *ort o/ First Instance o/ ;!e!arao, *a!aan, a!ainst their ?preme %ishop acario Ga and the de/endant %ernardino ;aea. Issue3

%1


Atty.

Mes. ;he *ort 7nds it erroneos /or the *6 to i!nore the /act that the "amen's committee o#:ected to the sa"e o/ the "ot in Aestion. ;he *anons reAire that 6 the chrch entities "isted in 6rtic"e IJ (a) thereo/ sho"d !ie its approa" to the transaction. ;hs, hen the ?preme %ishop eBected the contract o/ sa"e o/ petitioner's "ot despite the opposition made # the "amen's committee, he acted #eond his poers. ;his case c"ear" /a""s nder the cate!or o/ nen/orcea#"e contracts mentioned in 6rtic"e 1408, para!raph (1) o/ the *ii" *ode, hich proides, ths3 6rt. 1408. ;he /o""oin! contracts are nen/orcea#"e, n"ess the are rati7ed3 (1) ;hose entered into in the name o/ another person # one ho has #een !ien no athorit or "e!a" representation, or ho has acted #eond his poers In ercado . 6""ied %an&in! *orporation, the *ort eBp"ained that3 B B B $nen/orcea#"e contracts are those hich cannot #e en/orced # a proper action in cort, n"ess the are rati7ed, #ecase either the are entered into ithot or in eBcess o/ athorit or the do not comp" ith the statte o/ /rads or #oth o/ the contractin! parties do not possess the reAired "e!a" capacit.

%


Atty.

BIGNA Y E=>IM PHILIPPINES, INC., Petitioner, s.

UNION BANK PIDLIPPINES, Respondent.

OF

THE

G.R. No. 11590 Fe#rar 12, 2014

Facts:

In 194, 6"/onso de eon mort!a!ed in /aor o/ $nion %an& o/ the Phi"ippines ($nion %an&) rea" propert sitated at >ste#an 6#ada, oo"a =ei!hts, Qeon *it, hich as re!istered in his and his i/e Rosario's name. ;he propert as /orec"osed and so"d at action to $nion %an&. 6/ter the redemption period eBpired, the #an& conso"idated its onership, herepon ;*; 82405 as issed in its name in 19. In 19, Rosario 7"ed a!ainst 6"/onso and $nion %an&, *ii" *ase No. Q-5202 /or ann"ment o/ the 194 mort!a!e, %!


Atty.

c"aimin! that 6"/onso mort!a!ed the propert ithot her consent, and /or reconeance. In a ?eptem#er , 199 etter-Proposa", %i!na >B-Im Phi"ippines, Inc. (%i!na), thro!h its President, i"a!ros +n! ?i (?i), oDered to prchase the propert. ;he ritten oDer stated, amon! others, that H ;he propert is the s#:ect o/ a pendin! "iti!ation #eteen Rosario de eon and $nion %an& /or n""i7cation o/ the /orec"osre #e/ore the Re!iona" ;ria" *ort o/ Qeon *it. ?ho"d this oDer #e approed # or mana!ement, e s!!est that instead o/ the sa" conditiona" sa"e, a deed o/ a#so"te sa"e #e eBected to docment the transaction in or /aor s#:ect to a mort!a!e in /aor o/ the #an& to secre the #a"ance. ;his docmentation is intended to iso"ate the propert /rom an "is pendens that the /ormer oner ma annotate on the tit"e and to a""o immediate reconstittion thereo/ since the ori!ina" ;orrens tit"e as #rned in 19 hen the *it =a"" hosin! the Re!ister o/ eeds o/ Qeon *it as !tted # 7re. +n ecem#er 20, 199, a eed o/ 6#so"te ?a"e as eBected # and #eteen $nion %an& and %i!na here# the propert as coneed to %i!na /or P4 mi""ion. ;he deed o/ sa"e as eBected # the parties thro!h %i!na's ?i and $nion %an&'s ?enior Jice President 6nthon Ro#"es (Ro#"es). +n ecem#er 2, 199, %i!na mort!a!ed the propert to $nion %an&, presma#" to secre a "oan o#tained /rom the "atter. Issue: %"


Atty.

Mes. Indeed, this *ort is coninced H /rom an eBamination o/ the eidence and # the concrrin! opinions o/ the corts #e"o H that %i!na prchased the propert ithot &no"ed!e o/ the pendin! *ii" *ase No. Q-5202. $nion %an& is there/ore ansera#"e /or its eBpress nderta&in! nder the ecem#er 20, 199 deed o/ sa"e to de/end its tit"e to the Parce"@s o/ and ith improement thereon a!ainst the c"aims o/ an person hatsoeer.O

% this

arrant, $nion %an& represented to %i!na that it had tit"e to the propert, and # assmin! the o#"i!ation to de/end sch tit"e, it promised to do so at "east in !ood /aith and ith sDicient prdence, i/ not to the #est o/ its a#i"ities.

JOSELITO C. BORROMEO, Petitioner, vs. JUAN T. MINA, Respondent. G.R. No. 1984 Ene 5, 2018

%#


Atty.

F!"#$:

?#:ect o/ this case is a 1.105 hectare parce" o/ a!ric"tre

"and,

sitated

in

%aran!a

a!sasa,

Na!i"ian, Isa#e"a, re!istered in the name o/ respondent. It appears /rom the /ore!oin! ;*; that respondent's tit"e oer the said propert is #ased on >mancipation Patent No. 8981 issed # the epartment o/ 6!rarian Re/orm (6R) on a 2, 1990. Petitioner a""e!ed that he prchased the a/oresaid propert /rom its preios oner, one ?era7n . Garcia (Garcia), as eidenced # a deed o/ sa"e notaried on Fe#rar 19, 192 (192 deed o/ sa"e). =oeer, he as not a#"e to aDect the trans/er o/ tit"e in his name. ?#seAent", he "earned that an emancipation patent as issed in respondent's /aor ithot an notice to him. Petitioner therea/ter 7"ed a petition prain! /or the cance""ation o/ respondent's emancipation patent. 6/ter de inesti!ation, the nicipa" 6!rarian Re/orm +Dicer (6R+) Eoe Ro"ando . $n#"as issed a Report, 7ndin! that the s#:ect propert as erroneos" identi7ed # the same oDice as the propert o/ petitioner's /ather, the "ate *ipriano %orromeo. In a"" acta"it, hoeer, the s#:ect propert as neer oned # *ipriano %orromeo as its tre oner as Garcia H nota#", a perennia" P 2 "andoner ho "ater so"d the same to petitioner.

%ased on these 7ndin!s, the 6R+ recommended that3 (a) the s#:ect "andho"din! #e eBempted /rom the coera!e o/ the +; and (#) petitioner #e a""oed to ithdra an amortiations deposited # respondent ith the and %an& o/ the Phi"ippines (%P) to sere as renta" paments /or the "atter's se o/ the s#:ect propert. %$


Atty.

P6R+ adopted the recommendation o/ the 6R+ and accordin!" (a) cance""ed respondentKs emancipation patent (#) directed petitioner to a""o respondent to contine in the peace/" possession and c"tiation o/ the s#:ect propert and to eBecte a "easeho"d contract oer the same prsant to the proisions o/ Rep#"ic 6ct No. 844 (R6 844), otherise &non as the C6!ric"tra" and Re/orm *odeC and (c) athoried petitioner to ithdra /rom the %P a"" amortiations deposited # respondent as renta" paments /or the "atterKs se o/ the said propert. 6!!rieed, respondent 7"ed an administratie appea" to the 6R Re!iona" irector. ;he 6R Re!iona" irector Renato R. Naata issed an +rder, 7ndin! that petitioner, #ein! the tre oner o/ the s#:ect propert, had the ri!ht to imp!n its coera!e /rom the !oernment's +; pro!ram.
respondent

moed

/or

reconsideration, cha""en!in! petitionerKs onership o/ the s#:ect propert /or "ac& o/ sDicient #asis to sho that his aerred predecessor-in-interest, Garcia, as its acta" oner. In addition, respondent pointed ot that petitioner neer

7"ed

a

protest

a!ainst

the

issance

o/

an

emancipation patent in his /aor. =ence, petitioner sho"d #e deemed to hae s"ept on his ri!hts on accont o/ his inaction /or 21 ears.

%%


otion

/or

reconsideration

as

hoeer

Atty.

denied

promptin! respondent to e"eate the matter to the 6R ?ecretar.

;hen 6R ?ecretar Nasser *. Pa!andaman aDirmed the 6R Re!iona" irector's r"in!. $ndanted, respondent 7"ed a petition /or reie ith the *6. ;he *6 reersed and set aside the 6R ?ecretarKs r"in!. It do#ted petitioner's c"aim o/ onership #ased on the 192 deed o/ sa"e de to the inconsistent a""e!ations re!ardin! the dates o/ its notariation dier!ent" stated in the to (2) P6R+ Petitions, this a"on!side the /act that a cop o/ the same as not een attached to the records o/ the case /or its eBamination. In an case, the *6 /ond the said sa"e to #e n"" and oid /or #ein! a prohi#ited transaction nder P 2 hich /or#ids the trans/ers or a"ienation o/ coered a!ric"tra" "ands a/ter +cto#er 21, 192 eBcept to the tenant-#ene7ciaries thereo/, o/ hich petitioner as not. 22 It a"so he"d that petitioner cannot mont an co""atera" attac& a!ainst respondent's tit"e to the s#:ect propert as the same is prohi#ited nder ?ection 4 o/ the Presidentia" ecree No. 1529 (P 1529), otherise &non as the CPropert Re!istration ecree.C Petitioner

moed

/or

reconsideration

hich

as,

hoeer, denied. Issue:

N+. P 2 prohi#its the trans/er o/ onership oer tenanted rice and@or corn "ands a/ter +cto#er 21, 192 %&


Atty.

eBcept on" in /aor o/ the acta" tenant ti""ers o/ the "and. Records reea" that the s#:ect "andho"din! /e"" nder the coera!e o/ P 2 on +cto#er 21, 192 and as sch, co"d hae #een s#seAent" so"d on" to the tenant thereo/, i.e., the respondent. Nota#", the stats o/ respondent as tenant is no #eond dispte considerin! petitioner's admission o/ sch /act. i&eise, as ear"ier discssed, petitioner is tied don to his initia" theor that his c"aim o/ onership oer the s#:ect propert as #ased on the 192 deed o/ sa"e. ;here/ore, as Garcia so"d the propert in 192 to the petitioner ho is c"ear" not the tenant-#ene7ciar o/ the same, the said transaction is n"" and oid /or #ein! contrar to "a. In conseAence, petitioner cannot assert an ri!ht oer the s#:ect "andho"din!, sch as his present c"aim /or "andho"din! eBemption, #ecase his tit"e sprin!s /rom a n"" and oid sorce. 6 oid contract is eAia"ent to nothin! it prodces no cii" eDect and it does not create, modi/ or eBtin!ish a :ridica" re"ation. =ence, petitioner had no ri!ht to 7"e a petition /or "andho"din! eBemption since the sa"e o/ the said propert to him # Garcia in 192 is n"" and oid.

;he

7ndin!

that

petitioner's

tota"

a!ric"tra"

"andho"din!s is a #e"o the retention "imits set /orth # "a

there/ore,

#ecomes

irre"eant

to

his

c"aim

/or

"andho"din! eBemption precise" #ecase he has no ri!ht oer the a/oresaid "and.

%'


Atty.

S9&2s)s J)s2s and C&'&na01&n Caa/2@, Petitioners, s.

Na1&na* P&-)' C&'9&'a1&n, Respondent. G.R. No. 109 Eanar 80, 2018

Facts:

Eess *a#ah! #ein! the re!istered oner o/ the parce"s o/ "and, eBected to docments, Ri!ht o/

Atty.

continos easement o/ ri!ht o/ a and a!reed not to constrct an #i"din! or strctre, nor p"ant in an area ithin the Ri!ht o/
#

the

ete

Proincia"

6ppraisa"

*ommittee,

amonted to P1,202,404.50. %t NP* aerred that it a"read paid the /"" easement /ee mandated nder ?ection 8-6 o/ R6 895 and that the reseration in the !rant re/erred to additiona" compensation /or easement /ee, not the /"" :st compensation so!ht # the sposes.

6ctin! on the motion /or :d!ment on the p"eadin!s, the cort render a decision #rshin! aside NP*'s contention and r"ed that the eDect o/ the easement o/ ri!ht o/ a inde7nite" depries the sposes o/ their proprietar ri!hts oer their propert /a""s ithin the prie o/ the poer o/ eminent domain, ths NP* sha"" pa the sm /or :st compensation "ess the easement /ees a"read paid. *ort o/ 6ppea"s rendered a decision reersin! the said r"in! o/ the "oer cort, hence, this petition. Issue:

&1


Atty.

N+, the /orth para!raph o/ the Grant eBected # Eess *a#ah! hich eBpress" states as /o""os3 ;hat I here# resere the option to see& additiona" compensation /or >asement Fee, #ased on the ?preme *ort ecision in G.R. No. 00, prom"!ated on Eanar 1, 1991, hich :risprdence is desi!nated as CNP* s. GtierreC case.

?aid reseration is eident that the ?poses' receipt o/ the easement /ee did not #ar them /rom see&in! /rther compensation /rom NP*. >en # the #asic r"es in the interpretation o/ contracts, the pament o/ additiona" sms to the ?poses o"d not #e io"atie o/ the parties' contract and amont to n:st enrichment. Indeed, the r"e is sett"ed that a contract constittes the "a #eteen the parties ho are #ond # its stip"ations hich, hen coched in c"ear and p"ain "an!a!e, sho"d #e app"ied accordin! to their "itera" tenor. *orts cannot spp" materia" stip"ations, read into the contract ords it does not contain or, /or that matter, read into it an other intention that o"d contradict its p"ain import. Neither can the rerite contracts #ecase the operate harsh" or ineAita#" as to one o/ the parties, or a"ter them /or the #ene7t o/ one part and to the detriment o/ the other, or # constrction, re"iee one o/ the parties /rom the terms

&


Atty.

hich he o"ntari" consented to, or impose on him those hich he did not.

*onsiderin! that Gtierre as speci7ca"" made the point o/ re/erence /or *a#ah!'s reseration to see& /rther compensation /rom NP*, the r"in! in said case does app" to the case at #ench. *onceded", the NP* as constrained to 7"e an eBpropriation comp"aint in Gtierre de to the /ai"re o/ the ne!otiations /or its acAisition o/ an easement o/ ri!ht o/ a /or its transmission "ines. ;he isse that as eenta"" presented /or this *ort's reso"tion, hoeer, as the propriet o/ ma&in! NP* "ia#"e /or the pament o/ the /"" mar&et a"e o/ the aDected propert despite the /act that trans/er o/ tit"e thereto as not reAired # said easement. In pho"din! the "andoners' ri!ht to /"" :st compensation, the *ort r"ed that the poer o/ eminent domain ma #e eBercised a"tho!h tit"e is not trans/erred to the eBpropriator in an easement o/ ri!ht o/ a. Est compensation hich sho"d #e neither more nor "ess than the mone eAia"ent o/ the propert is, moreoer, de here the natre and eDect o/ the easement is to impose "imitations a!ainst the se o/ the "and /or an inde7nite period and deprie the "andoner its ordinar se.

>en ithot the reseration made # *a#ah! in the Grant o/ Ri!ht o/

Atty.

#e compensated /or the monetar eAia"ent o/ the "and i/, as here, the easement is intended to perpeta"" or inde7nite" deprie the oner o/ his proprietar ri!hts thro!h the imposition o/ conditions that aDect the ordinar se, /ree en:oment and disposa" o/ the propert or thro!h restrictions and "imitations that are inconsistent ith the eBercise o/ the attri#tes o/ onership, or hen the introdction o/ strctres or o#:ects hich, # their natre, create or increase the pro#a#i"it o/ in:r, death pon or destrction o/ "i/e and propert /ond on the "and is necessar. easred not # the ta&er's !ain #t the oner's "oss, :st compensation is de7ned as the /"" and /air eAia"ent o/ the propert ta&en /rom its oner # the eBpropriator.

&"


Atty.

ROBERN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION and RODOLFO M. BERNARDO, JR., Petitioners, s.

PEOPLES LANDLESS ASSOCIATION ')9')s)n)d + FLORIDA RAMOS and NARDO LABORA, Respondent. G.R. No. 1822 arch 11, 2018

Facts:

6"-6manah oned a 2000-sAare meter "ot "ocated in a!t-od, aao *it. +n ecem#er 12, 1992, 6"-6manah aao %ranch, thr its oDicer-in-char!e Fe#e +. a"i! (+I* a"i!), as&ed some o/ the mem#ers o/ P>6 to stop /rom #i"din! their hoses on the "ot and to acate the same, n"ess the are interested to # it. ;he in/orma" sett"ers ths eBpressed their interest to # the "ot at P100.00 per sAare meter, hich 6"-6manah trned don /or #ein! /ar #e"o its as&in! price. ;herea/ter, 6"-6manah restated its demand that the "ot #e acated. In a "etter dated arch 1, 1998, the in/orma" sett"ers to!ether ith other mem#ers comprisin! P>6 oDered to prchase the "ot /or P800,000.00, ha"/ o/ hich sha"" #e paid as don pament and the remainin! ha"/ to #e paid ithin &#


Atty.

one ear. 6"-6manah, thr aao %ranch ana!er 6#raham . $tta"m-6" =a:, rote then P>6 President %oni/acio *ion, ?r. in/ormin! him o/ the =ead +Dice's disapproa" o/ P>6's oDer to # the said 2,000-sAare meter "ot. +n "etters dated ecem#er 14, 1998, 6"-6manah sent to 19 P>6 mem#ers demandin! that the acate the "ot. ?#seAent" 6"-6manah entered into a contract o/ sa"e ith Ro#ern. 6"-6manah stressed that it is Ro#ern's responsi#i"it to e:ect the occpants in the s#:ect "ot, i/ an, as e"" as the pament o/ the remainin! amont ithin 15

das

otherise,

the P0,000.00

deposit

sha""

#e

/or/eited. Ro#ern eBpressed to 6"-6manah its ncertaint on the stats o/ the s#:ect "ot #ecase o/ the c"aim o/ P>6 oer the s#:ect "and. In order to conince Ro#ern that it has no eBistin! contract ith P>6. +n arch 4, 1994, Ro#ern paid the #a"ance o/ the prchase price. ;he eed o/ ?a"e oer the rea"t as eBected on 6pri" , 1994 and a ne ;*; as issed in Ro#ern's name the /o""oin! da. 6 ee& "ater, P>6 consi!ned P150,000.00 in the R;* o/ aao *it. ;hree months "ater, as its mem#ers ere a"read /acin! eiction and possi#"e demo"ition o/ their hoses, P>6 7"ed a sit /or 6nn"ment and *ance""ation o/ Joid eed o/ ?a"e a!ainst 6"-6manah, its irector >n!r. Faro& *arpio (>n!r. *arpio), +I* a"i!, Ro#ern, and Ro#ern's President and Genera" ana!er, petitioner Rodo"/o %ernardo (%ernardo) #e/ore the R;* o/ aao *it. It insisted that as ear" as arch 1998 it has a per/ected contract o/ sa"e ith 6"-6manah. =oeer, in an apparent act o/ #ad /aith and in cahoots ith Ro#ern, 6"-6manah proceeded ith the sa"e o/ the "ot despite the prior sa"e to P>6.

&$


Atty.

;he tria" cort !ranted P>6's praer /or a temporar restrainin! order and s#seAent", issed an +rder 7ndin! merit in the issance o/ the rit o/ pre"iminar in:nction. ;he R;*'s !rant o/ in:nctie re"ie/ as aDirmed # the *6. In their anser 6"-6manah and >n!r. *arpio c"aimed that the #an& has eer ri!ht to se"" its "ot to an interested #er ith the #est oDer and ths the chose Ro#ern. ;he c"ari7ed that the P150,000.00 P>6 handed to them is not part o/ the pament #t mere" a deposit in connection ith its oDer. ;he asserted that P>6 as proper" apprised that its oDer to # as s#:ect to the approa" o/ 6" 6manah's =ead +Dice. ;he stressed that 6"-6manah neer entered into a sa"e ith P>6 /or there as no per/ected a!reement as to the price since the =ead +Dice re:ected

;he R;* dismissed P>6's *omp"aint. It opined that the arch 1, 1998 "etter P>6 has #een re"in! pon as proo/ o/ a per/ected contract o/ sa"e as a mere oDer hich as a"read re:ected. Re/sin! to accept the ecision, P>6 e"eated its case to the *6. ;he *6 reersed the decision o/ the R;* and r"ed that there as a"read a per/ected contract o/ sa"e #eteen P>6 and 6"-6manah. *onseAent", the *6 ina"idated the sa"e #eteen Ro#ern and 6"-6manah. ;he *6 a"so conc"ded that 6"-6manah is !i"t o/ #ad /aith in dea"in! ith P>6 #ecase it too& 6"-6manah a"most seen months

to

re:ect

P>6's

oDer

hi"e

ho"din!

on

to

the P150,000.00 deposit. Ro#ern

and

Reconsideration

%ernardo

hich

7"ed

6"-6manah

a

otion

adopted.

;he

/or *6,

hoeer, as 7rm in its decision and ths denied the motion /or reconsideration. &%


Atty.

Issue:

6 and 6"-6manah. Held:

;here is no per/ected contract o/ sa"e #eteen P>6 and 6"-6manah /or "ac& o/ consent and a!reement on the price. 6 contract o/ sa"e is per/ected at the moment there is a meetin! o/ minds pon the thin! hich is the o#:ect o/ the contract and pon the price. 6ccordin!", /or a contract o/ sa"e to #e a"id, a"" o/ the /o""oin! essentia" e"ements mst concr3 a) consent or meetin! o/ the minds #) determinate s#:ect matter and c) price certain in mone or its eAia"ent. 6/ter eBaminin! the testimonia" and docmentar eidence in the records o/ the case, e 7nd no proo/ o/ a per/ected contract o/ sa"e #eteen 6"-6manah and P>6. ;he parties did not a!ree on the price and no consent as !ien, hether eBpress or imp"ied. 6 ?ecretar F"orida Ramos (Ramos) testi7ed, she re/erred to the arch 1, 1998 "etter hich P>6 sent to 6"-6manah as the docment spposed" em#odin! the per/ected contract o/ sa"e. =oeer, e 7nd that the re/erred to as mere" an oDer to #. +I* a"i! made it c"ear that the acceptance o/ the oDer, notithstandin! the deposit, is s#:ect to the approa" o/ the =ead +Dice. ;his /act is not dispted P>6. Reco!niin! the corporate natre o/ the #an& and that the poer to se"" its rea" properties is "od!ed in the hi!her athorities, she neer /a"se" represented to the #idders that she has athorit to se"" the #an&'s propert.

&&


;he

transaction

#eteen

6"-6manah

Atty.

and

P>6

remained in the ne!otiation sta!e. ;he oDer neer #ecame a per/ected sa"e, /or no ora" or docmentar eidence cate!orica"" proes that 6"-6manah eBpressed amena#i"it to the oDered P800,000.00 prchase price. %e/ore the "apse o/ the 1-ear period P>6 had set to pa the remainin! T#a"ance,' 6"-6manah eBpress" re:ected its oDered prchase price, a"tho!h it too& the "atter arond seen months to in/orm the P>6. 6"-6manah's act o/ se""in! the "ot to another #er is the 7na" nai" in the coDin o/ the ne!otiation ith P>6.

SPOUSES BERNADETTE and RODULFO VILBAR, Petitioners, s.

ANGELITO L. OPINION, Respondent. &'


Atty.

G.R. No. 1048 Eanar 15, 2014

Facts:

?poses Ji"#ar and "os Rea"t and ee"opment *orporation entered into a *ontract to ?e"" ino"in! a 10sAare meter "ot desi!nated as ot 20-% "ocated in 6irmen's Ji""a!e, as Pias *it is a"so coered and em#raced # the same certi7cate o/ tit"e is the s#:ect o/ another *ontract to ?e"" #eteen >"ena Gin!on and "os Rea"t. ?ometime in 6!st 199, sposes Ji"#ar too& possession o/ ot 20-% in the concept o/ oners and eBercised acts o/ onership thereon ith the permission o/ "os Rea"t a/ter ma&in! some adance pament. $pon /"" pament o/ the prchase price /or ot 20, or on Ene 1, 191, "os Rea"t eBected a d" notaried eed o/ 6#so"te ?a"e in /aor o/ sposes Ji"#ar and their coprchaser >"ena. =oeer, sposes Ji"#ar and >"ena ere not a#"e to re!ister and trans/er the tit"e in their names #ecase "os Rea"t a""e!ed" /ai"ed to hae the "ot /orma"" s#diided despite its commitment to do so, nti" its President, Ean %. "os (Ean), died ithot the s#diision #ein! accomp"ished. In contrast, +pinion c"aimed that he "e!a"" acAired ots 20 and 21 thro!h eBtra-:dicia" /orec"osre o/ mort!a!e constitted oer the said properties # +ti"io Gorospe, ?r. and +ti"io CitoC Gorospe, Er. in his /aor. +pinion a""e!ed that

on

Eanar

12,

1995,

the

Gorospes

#orroed P440,000.00 and, to secre the "oan, eBected a eed o/ Rea" >state ort!a!e oer the s#:ect "ots. ;he '(


Atty.

Gorospes de/a"ted, promptin! +pinion to 7"e a Petition /or >Btra-Edicia" Forec"osre o/ Rea" >state ort!a!e ith the +Dice o/ the Notar P#"ic o/ as Pias *it. ?#seAent", the s#:ect properties ere so"d at a p#"ic action here +pinion emer!ed as the hi!hest #idder. 6 *erti7cate o/ ?a"e as issed in his /aor on ecem#er 1, 1995 and s#seAent" annotated on the ;*;s o/ the properties. ;he Gorospes /ai"ed to redeem the properties ithin the re!"ementar period res"tin! in the eenta" cance""ation o/ their tit"es. +pinion, :sti7ed the "e!a"it o/ his c"aim oer the properties # tac&in! his ri!hts on the ri!hts passed on to him # the Gorospes. =e traced his ri!hts oer the properties # c"aimin! that Gorospe, ?r. as the /ormer chairman o/ the %oard o/ irectors and *hie/ >Bectie +Dicer (*>+) o/ "os Rea"t Issue:

Respondent +pinion is a %er in Good Faith. ;his *ort a"so treats +pinion as a #er in !ood /aith. 6dmitted", +pinion stated that prior to the eBection o/ the mort!a!e, he on" ent to ots 20 and 21 once and sa that the properties had occpants. =e "i&eise admitted that he neer ta"&ed to the sposes Ji"#ar and Gin!on to determine the natre o/ their possession o/ the properties, #t mere" re"ied on the representation o/ Gorospe, ?r. that the occpants ere mere tenants. =e neer #othered to reAest /or an &ind o/ proo/, docmentar or otherise, to '1


Atty.

con7rm this c"aim. Neerthe"ess, this *ort a!rees ith the *6 that +pinion is not reAired to !o #eond the ;orrens tit"e, i3 *ontrar to the ?poses Ji"#ar's c"aim, +pinion as neer remiss in his dt o/ ensrin! that the Gorospes had c"ean tit"e oer the propert. +pinion had een condcted an inesti!ation. =e had, in this re!ard, no reason not to #e"iee in the assrance o/ the Gorospes, more so that the c"aimed ri!ht o/ ?poses Ji"#ar as neer annotated on the certi7cate o/ tit"e coerin! "ot 20, #ecase it is sett"ed that a part dea"in! ith a re!istered "and does not hae to inAire #eond the *erti7cate o/ ;it"e in determinin! the tre oner thereo/, and in !ardin! or protectin! his interest, /or a"" that he has to "oo& into and re" on are the entries in the *erti7cate o/ ;it"e.  Inar!a#", +pinion acted in !ood /aith in dea"in! ith the re!istered oners o/ the properties. =e re"ied on the tit"es presented to him, hich ere con7rmed # the Re!istr o/ eeds to #e athentic, issed in accordance ith the "a, and ithot an "iens or encm#rances.

'


Atty.

HOMEONERS SAVINGS AND LOAN BANK , Petitioner-6ppe""ant, s.

ASUNCION P. FELONIA and LYDIA C. DE GU?MAN, ')9')s)n)d + MARIBEL FRIAS, Respondents 6ppe""ees. MARIE MICHELLE P. DELGADO, REGISTER OF DEEDS OF LAS PINAS CITY and RHANDOLFO B. AMANSEC, 1n /1s 0a9a01+ as C*)' & C&2' E> O101& S/)'1, O10) & /) C*)' & C&2', Las P1as C1+, Respondents-e/endants. G.R. No. 194 Fe#rar 2, 2014

'!


Atty.

Facts:

Fe"onia and e Gman ere the re!istered oners o/ a parce" o/ "and consistin! o/ 582 sAare meters ith a 7e#edroom hose, coered # ;rans/er o/ *erti7cate o/ ;it"e (;*;) No. ;-402 issed # the re!ister o/ deeds o/ as Pias *it. ?ometime in Ene 1990, Fe"onia and e Gman mort!a!ed the propert to e"!ado to secre the "oan in the amont o/ P1,55,000.00.

=oeer,

instead

o/

a

rea"

estate

mort!a!e, the parties eBected a eed o/ 6#so"te ?a"e ith an +ption to Reprchase. +n 20 ecem#er 1991, Fe"onia and e Gman 7"ed an action /or Re/ormation o/ *ontract (Re/ormation case), doc&eted as *ii" *ase No. 91-5954, #e/ore the R;* o/ ani"a. +n the 7ndin!s that it is Cer apparent that the transaction had #eteen the parties is one o/ a mort!a!e and not a deed o/ sa"e ith ri!ht to reprchase,C the R;*, on 21 arch 1995 rendered a :d!ment /aora#"e to Fe"onia and e Gman. +n 2 Ene 1995, e"!ado mort!a!ed the s#:ect propert to =omeoners ?ain!s and oan %an& sin! her ne" re!istered tit"e. ;hree

das "ater,

=?% cased

the

annotation o/ the mort!a!e. Issue:

=?% is not sch a prchaser.

'"


Atty.

6 prchaser in !ood /aith is de7ned as one ho #s a propert ithot notice that some other person has a ri!ht to, or interest in, the propert and pas /"" and /air price at the time o/ prchase or #e/ore he has notice o/ the c"aim or interest o/ other persons in the propert.19
a

prospectie

#er

is

/aced

ith

/acts

and

circmstances as to arose his sspicion, he mst ta&e precationar steps to Aa"i/ as a prchaser in !ood /aith. In ?poses atha . *6,20 e determined the dt o/ a prospectie #er3 6"tho!h it is a reco!nied princip"e that a person dea"in! on a re!istered "and need not !o #eond its certi7cate o/ tit"e, it is a"so a 7rm" sett"ed r"e that here there are circmstances hich o"d pt a part on !ard and prompt him to inesti!ate or inspect the propert #ein! so"d to him, sch as the presence o/ occpants@tenants thereon, it is o/ corse, eBpected /rom the prchaser o/ a a"ed piece o/ "and to inAire 7rst into the stats or natre o/ possession o/ the occpants, i.e., hether or not the occpants possess the "and en concepto de deo, in the concept o/ the oner. 6s is the common practice in the rea" estate indstr, an oc"ar inspection o/ the premises ino"ed is a sa/e!ard a catios and prdent prchaser sa"" ta&es. ?ho"d he 7nd ot that the "and he intends to # is occpied # an#od e"se other than the se""er ho, as in this case, is not in acta" possession, it o"d then #e incm#ent pon the prchaser to eri/ the eBtent o/ the occpant's possessor ri!hts. ;he /ai"re o/ a prospectie #er to ta&e sch precationar steps o"d mean ne!"i!ence on his part and o"d there# prec"de him

'#


Atty.

/rom c"aimin! or ino&in! the ri!hts o/ a prchaser in !ood /aith. In the case at #ar, =?% tter" /ai"ed to ta&e the necessar precations. 6t

the

time

the

s#:ect

propert

as

mort!a!ed, there as et no annotated Notice o/ is Pendens. =oeer, at the time =?% prchased the s#:ect propert, the Notice o/ is Pendens as a"read annotated on the tit"e.21

'$


Atty.

HOSPICIO D. ROSAROSO, ANTONIO D. ROSAROSO, MANUEL D. ROSAROSO, ALGERICA D. ROSAROSO, and CLEOFE R. LABINDAO, Petitioners, s.

LUCILA LABORTE SORIA, SPOUSES HAM SOLUTAN and LAILA SOLUTAN, and MERIDIAN REALTY CORPORATION, Respondents. G.R. No. 1944

Ene 19, 2018

F!"#$:

6 comp"aint /or ec"aration o/ N""it o/ ocments ith ama!es as 7"ed # is, as one o/ the p"aintiDs, a!ainst his da!hter, ci"a R. ?oria ci"a's da!hter, ai"a ?. ?o"tan and eridian Rea"t *orporation. =oeer de to is' ntime" death, an amended comp"aint as 7"ed on Eanar , 199, ith the spose o/ ai"a, =am ?o"tan and is' second i/e, ordes, inc"ded as de/endants. In

the

petitioners

6mended =ospicio,

*omp"aint, 6ntonio,

it

as

6n!e"ica,

a""e!ed and

#

*"eo/e

(petitioners) that on Noem#er 4, 1991, is, ith the /"" &no"ed!e and consent o/ his second i/e, ordes, eBected the eed o/ 6#so"te ?a"e /or "ands "ocated at aan#antaan, *e#, in their /aor. ;he a"so a""e!ed that, despite the /act that the said properties had a"read #een so"d to them, respondent ai"a, in conspirac ith her mother, ci"a, o#tained the ?pecia" Poer o/ 6ttorne (?P6), dated 6pri" 8, 1998, /rom is ho as then sic&, '%


Atty.

in7rm, #"ind, and o/ nsond mind in order to hae the poer to cone the "ands and that on the stren!th o/ another ?P6 # is, dated E" 21, 1998 (?econd ?P6), respondents ai"a and =am mort!a!ed ot No. 19 to Jita" endin! Inestors, Inc. /or and in consideration o/ the amont o/ P150,000.00 ith the concrrence o/ ordes.

Respondents contested the First ?a"e in /aor o/ petitioners. ;he s#mitted that een assmin! that it as a"id, petitioners ere estopped #ecase the /ai"ed in eDectin! the necessar trans/er o/ the tit"e, #t a"so in annotatin! their interests on the tit"es o/ the Aestioned properties.
'&


Atty.

=oeer the *6 reersed and set aside the R;* decision. It r"ed that the 7rst deed o/ sa"e in /aor o/ petitioners as oid #ecase the /ai"ed to proe that the indeed tendered a consideration /or the /or (4) parce"s o/ "and. It re"ied on the testimon o/ ordes that petitioners did not pa her hs#and. ;he price or consideration /or the sa"e as sim"ated to ma&e it appear that pament had #een tendered hen in /act no pament as made at a"".
1.
H&LD:

;he 7rst deed o/ sa"e in /aor o/ petitioners is a"id. ;he /act that the 7rst deed o/ sa"e as eBected, conein! the s#:ect properties in /aor o/ petitioners, as neer contested # the respondents.

Atty.

6side /rom their #are a""e!ation that the sa"e as made ithot a consideration, the /ai"ed to spp" c"ear and conincin! eidence to #ac& p this c"aim. It is e"ementar in procedra" "a that #are a""e!ations, ns#stantiated # eidence, are not eAia"ent to proo/ nder the R"es o/ *ort. ;he testimon o/ ordes on hich the *6 re"ied heai" on is se"/-serin! and o"d not amont to c"ear and conincin!

eidence

reAired

to

dispte

the

said

presmption. =ence, the presmption that there as sDicient consideration i"" stand. Grantin! that there as no de"ier o/ the consideration, the se""er o"d hae no ri!ht to se"" a!ain hat he no "on!er oned. =is remed o"d #e to rescind the sa"e /or /ai"re on the part o/ the #er to per/orm his part o/ their o#"i!ation prsant to 6rtic"e 1191 o/ the Ne *ii" *ode. eridian is not a #er in !ood /aith.

Atty.

then is to-/o"d3 acAisition in !ood /aith and re!istration in !ood /aith. Good /aith mst concr ith the re!istration. 6""e!ed re!istration hen made in #ad /aith i"" amont to no re!istration at a"".
S9&2s)s A*&ns& and Ma'1a An@)*)s C2s1, Petitioners 1(1


Atty.

s.

I*1a V. D&1n@&, Respondent. Fe#rar 2, 2018 G.R. No. 19525 F!"#$:

i"ia omin!o is the oner o/ the n/enced parce" o/ "and that is the s#:ect o/ dispte.

?he "earned that a

constrction as #ein! made on her propert # a certain de Jera sposes. $pon inesti!ation, she /ond ot that the propert as so"d ha"/ to sposes de Jera and the other ha"/ to sposes *si. ?he discoered that a certain Rade"ia ? /a"si7ed a eed o/ ?a"e ith omin!o's si!natre /or!ed thereon on E" 14, 199.

For das therea/ter, ? eBected an

6Didait o/ oss prportin! that the ;*; coerin! said propert as "ost hen her #a! as snatched /rom her. ? petitioned the R;* /or the issance o/ a ne oner's certi7cate o/ tit"e. ;he petition as !ranted # the R;*. ;herea/ter, ? diided the propert in and so"d these to de Jera sposes and to *si sposes. omin!o 7"ed a comp"aint a!ainst the de Jera sposes, the *si sposes and ?. ?he petitioned /or the cance""ation o/ the ;*;s issed to the respondents. ;he #ers o/ the propert a""e!ed that the ere #ers in !ood /aith and /or a"e. I$$%&:

1(


Atty.

N+, the sposes ere not #ers in !ood /aith and /or a"e there/ore the hae no "e!a" ri!ht oer the propert. 6 person dea"in! in re!istered "and has the ri!ht to re" on the ;orrens certi7cate o/ tit"e and to dispense ith the need o/ inAirin! /rther, eBcept hen the part has acta" &no"ed!e o/ /acts and circmstances that o"d impe" a reasona#" catios man to ma&e sch inAir. ;o o#tain a !rasp o/ hether a person has acta" &no"ed!e o/ /acts and circmstances that o"d impe" a reasona#" catios man to ma&e sch inAir, an interna" matter, necessitates an ana"sis o/ eidence o/ a person's condct.

;hat renders the determination o/ intent as a

/acta" isse, somethin! that the *ort does not norma"" ino"e itse"/ in #ecase o/ its not #ein! a trier o/ /acts. Indeed, as a r"e, the reie /nction o/ the *ort is "imited to a reie o/ the "a ino"ed.

;here is no Aestion that the petitioners eBerted some eDort as #ers to determine hether the propert did ri!ht/"" #e"on! to ?. For one, the did not 7nd an encm#rance, "i&e a notice o/ "is pendens, #ein! annotated on the ;*; o/ ?. Nonethe"ess, their o#serance o/ a certain de!ree o/ di"i!ence ithin the conteBt o/ the princip"es nder"in! the ;orrens sstem as not their on" #arometer nder the "a and :risprdence # hich to !a!e the a"idit o/ their acAisition o/ tit"e. 6s the prchasers o/ the propert, the a"so came nder the c"ear o#"i!ation to prchase the propert not on" in !ood /aith #t a"so /or a"e.

1(!


Atty.

;he petitioners ere shon to hae #een de7cient in their i!i"ance as #ers o/ the propert. It as not eno!h /or them to sho that the propert as n/enced and acant otherise, it o"d #e too eas /or an re!istered oner to "ose her propert, inc"din! its possession, thro!h i""e!a" occpation. Nor as it sa/e /or them to simp" re" on the /ace o/ ?'s tit"e in ie o/ the /act that the ere aare that her ;*; as deried /rom a dp"icate oner's cop reissed # irte o/ the "oss o/ the ori!ina" dp"icate oner's cop. ;hat circmstance sho"d hae a"read a"erted them to the need to inAire #eond the /ace o/ the tit"e. ;here ere other circmstances, "i&e the a"most sim"taneos transactions aDectin! the propert ithin a short span o/ time, as e"" as the !ross ndera"ation o/ the propert in the deeds o/ sa"e, ostensi#" at the #ehest o/ ? to minimie her "ia#i"ities /or the capita" !ains taB, that a"so eBcited sspicion, and reAired them to #e eBtracatios in dea"in! ith ? on the propert.

1("


Atty.

PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK, Petitioner, vs.


Facts

3 ?ome time in E" 1994, respondent ;eresita ;an ee (ee) #o!ht /rom respondent Prime >ast Properties Inc. (P>PI) on an insta""ment #asis a residentia" "ot "ocated in %inan!onan, Ria", ith an area o/ 204 sAare meters and coered # ;rans/er *erti7cate o/ ;it"e (;*;) No. 190. ?#seAent", P>PI assi!ned its ri!hts oer a 218,098HsA m propert on 6!st 199 to respondent 6rmed Forces o/ the Phi"ippinesHRetirement and ?eparation %ene7ts ?stem, Inc. (6FPHR?%?), hich inc"ded the propert prchased # ee. 1(#


Atty.

;herea/ter, or on ?eptem#er 10, 199, P>PI o#tained a P205,000,000.00 "oan /rom petitioner Phi"ippine Nationa" %an& (petitioner), secred # a mort!a!e oer seera" properties, inc"din! ee's propert. ;he mort!a!e as c"eared # the =osin! and and $se Re!"ator %oard (=$R%)

on

?eptem#er

1,

199.cra"ared


PI is sti"" the oner o/ the propert nder contract to se"". Ruling:

Mes. Note that at the time P>PI mort!a!ed the propert to the petitioner, the preai"in! contract #eteen respondents P>PI and ee as sti"" the *ontract to ?e"", as ee as et to /"" pa the prchase price o/ the propert. +n this point, P>PI as actin! /"" e"" ithin its ri!ht hen it mort!a!ed the propert to the petitioner, /or in a contract to se"", onership is retained # the se""er and is not to pass nti" /"" pament o/ the prchase price. In other ords, at the time o/ the mort!a!e, P>PI as sti"" the oner o/ the 1($


Atty.

propert. ;hs, in *hina %an&in! *orporation . ?poses oada the *ort aDirmed the ri!ht o/ the oner@dee"oper to mort!a!e the propert s#:ect o/ dee"opment, to it3 P.. No. 95 cannot tota"" preent the oner or dee"oper

/rom

mort!a!in!

the

s#diision

"ot

or

condominim nit hen the tit"e thereto sti"" resides in the oner or dee"oper aaitin! the /"" pament o/ the prchase price # the insta""ment #er.O

HEIRS OF MARGARITA PRODON, Petitioners. s.

HEIRS OF MA=IMO S. ALVARE? AND VALENTINA CLAVE, REPRESENTED BY REV. MA=IMO ALVARE?, JR., Respondents. G.R. No. 1004 ?eptem#er 2, 2018

1(%


Atty.

F!"#$:

In their comp"aint /or Aietin! o/ tit"e and dama!es a!ainst ar!arita Prodon, the respondents aerred as the p"aintiDs that their parents, the "ate sposes aBimo ?. 6"are, ?r. and Ja"entina *"ae, ere the re!istered oners o/ that parce" o/ "and coered # ;rans/er *erti7cate o/ ;it"e (;*;) No. 49. ;he a""e!e that their parents had #een in possession o/ the propert drin! their "i/etime that pon their parents' deaths, the had contined the possession o/ the propert as heirs, pain! the rea" propert taBes de thereon that the co"d not "ocate the oner's dp"icate cop o/ ;*; No. 49, #t the ori!ina" cop o/ ;*; No. 49 on 7"e ith the Re!ister o/ eeds o/ ani"a as intact that the ori!ina" cop contained an entr statin! that the propert had #een so"d to de/endant Prodon s#:ect to the ri!ht o/ reprchase and that the entr had #een ma"icios" done # Prodon #ecase the deed o/ sa"e ith ri!ht to reprchase coerin! the propert did not eBist. *onseAent", the praed that the entr #e cance""ed, and that Prodon #e ad:d!ed "ia#"e /or dama!es. Prodon hoeer c"aimed that the "ate aBimo 6"are, ?r. had eBected on ?eptem#er 9, 195 the deed o/ sa"e ith ri!ht to reprchase that the deed had #een re!istered ith the Re!ister o/ eeds and d" annotated on the tit"e that the "ate aBimo 6"are, ?r. had #een !ranted siB months /rom ?eptem#er 9, 195 ithin hich to reprchase the propert and that she had then #ecome the a#so"te oner o/ the propert de to its non-reprchase ithin the !ien -month period. 1(&


Atty.

rin! tria", the cstodian o/ the records o/ the propert attested that the cop o/ the deed o/ sa"e ith ri!ht to reprchase co"d not #e /ond in the 7"es o/ the Re!ister o/ eeds o/ ani"a. I$$%&:

N+. Prodon did not preponderant" esta#"ish the eBistence and de eBection o/ the deed o/ sa"e ith ri!ht to reprchase. =er ina#i"it to prodce the ori!ina" "o!ica"" !ae rise to the need /or her to proe its eBistence and de eBection # other means that co"d on" #e secondar nder the r"es on eidence. =oeer another "oo& at the records reea"s that Prodon did not addce proo/ sDicient to sho the "oss or eBp"ain the naai"a#i"it o/ the ori!ina" as to :sti/ the presentation o/ secondar eidence. *ami"on, one o/ her itnesses, testi7ed that he had !ien the ori!ina" to her "aer, 6tt. 6nac"eto acani"ao, #t that he co"d not anmore retriee the ori!ina" #ecase 6tt. acani"ao had #een recperatin! /rom his heart ai"ment. ?ch eidence ithot shoin! the ina#i"it to "ocate the ori!ina" /rom amon! 6tt. acani"ao's #e"on!in!s # himse"/ or

#

an

o/

his

assistants

or

representaties

as

inadeAate. oreoer, a dp"icate ori!ina" co"d hae #een secred /rom Notar P#"ic Raon, #t no eDort as shon to hae #een eBerted in that direction. +n the contrar, the records contained amp"e indicia o/ the impro#a#i"it o/ the eBistence o/ the deed. *ami"on 1('


Atty.

c"aimed that the "ate aBimo 6"are, ?r. had tice !one to his

residence

in

ecaaan,

%"acan,

the

7rst

on

?eptem#er 5, 195, to ne!otiate the sa"e o/ the propert in Aestion, and the second on ?eptem#er 9, 195, to eBecte the deed o/ sa"e ith ri!ht to reprchase. ;he medica" histor shoin! the nm#er o/ er serios ai"ments the "ate aBimo 6"are, ?r. had #een sDerin! /rom rendered it hi!h" impro#a#"e /or him to trae" /rom ani"a a"" the a to ecaaan, %"acan, here Prodon and *ami"on ere

then

consmmate

residin! the

in

sa"e

order o/

on" to

the

ne!otiate

propert.

;his

and hi!h

impro#a#i"it as /"" con7rmed # his son, aBimo, Er., ho attested that his /ather had #een serios" i"", and had #een in and ot o/ the hospita" in 195. ;he medica" records reea"ed, too, that on ?eptem#er 12, 195, or three das prior to his 7na" admission to the hospita", the "ate aBimo 6"are,

?r.

had

sDered

/rom

Chi!h

!rade

/eer,

accompanied # chi""s, omitin! and co!h prodctie o/ hitish stic& sptmChad #een o#sered to #e CconsciosC #t Cea&C and C#edriddenC ith his heart hain! C/aintC sonds, irre!"ar rhthm, #t no mrmrs and his "e/t pper eBtremit and "e/t "oer eBtremit had sDered 90 motor "oss. ;r", Prodon's a""e!ation that the deed o/ sa"e ith ri!ht to reprchase had #een eBected on ?eptem#er 9, 195 co"d not command #e"ie/.

11(


Atty.

SPOUSES CLEMENCIO C. SABITSANA, JR. and MA. ROSARIO M. SABITSANA, Petitioners, s.

JUANITO F. MUERTEGUI, ')9')s)n)d + /1s A&'n)+>1n>Fa0 DOMINGO A. MUERTEGUI, JR.,Respondent. G.R. No. 11859 6!st 5, 2018

F!"#$:

+n ?eptem#er 2, 191, 6"#erto Garcia eBected an nnotaried eed o/ ?a"e in /aor o/ respondent Eanito erte!i oer a ,500-sAare meter parce" o/ nre!istered "and (the "ot) "ocated in ete de" Norte hich as coered # a taB dec"aration. Eanito's /ather omin!o erte!i, ?r. and #rother omin!o Er. too& acta" possession o/ the "ot and p"anted thereon cocont and ipi"-ipi" trees. ;he a"so

111


Atty.

paid the rea" propert taBes on the "ot /or the ears 190 p to 199. +n +cto#er 1, 1991, Garcia so"d the "ot to the erte!i /ami" "aer, petitioner 6tt. *"emencio *. ?a#itsana, Er., thro!h a notaried deed o/ a#so"te sa"e. ;he sa"e as re!istered ith the Re!ister o/ eeds on Fe#rar , 1992. ; No. 199 as cance""ed and a ne one, ; No. 582, as issed in 6tt. ?a#itsana's name. 6"tho!h omin!o Er. and ?r. paid the rea" estate taBes, 6tt. ?a#itsana a"so paid rea" propert taBes in 1992, 1998, and 1999. In 199, he introdced concrete improements on the propert, hich short" therea/ter ere destroed # a tphoon.

N+. 6rtic"e 1544 o/ the *ii" *ode does not app" to sa"es ino"in! nre!istered "and. %oth the tria" cort and 11


Atty.

the *6 seem to hae /or!otten that the proision does not app" to sa"es ino"in! nre!istered "and. ?Dice it to state that the isse o/ the #er's !ood or #ad /aith is re"eant on" here the s#:ect o/ the sa"e is re!istered "and, and the prchaser is #in! the same /rom the re!istered oner hose tit"e to the "and is c"ean. In sch case, the prchaser ho re"ies on the c"ean tit"e o/ the re!istered oner is protected i/ he is a prchaser in !ood /aith /or a"e.
docment

nder

the

*ii"

*ode,

is

on"

/or

conenience, and not /or a"idit or en/orcea#i"it. 6nd #ecase it remained a"id as #eteen Eanito and Garcia, the "atter no "on!er had the ri!ht to se"" the "ot to petitioners, /or his onership thereo/ had ceased. Nor can petitioners' re!istration o/ their prchase hae an eDect on Eanito's ri!hts. ;he mere re!istration o/ a sa"e in one's /aor does not !ie him an ri!ht oer the "and i/ the endor 11!


Atty.

as no "on!er the oner o/ the "and, hain! preios" so"d the

same

to

another

een

i/

the

ear"ier

sa"e

as

nrecorded. Neither co"d it a"idate the prchase thereo/ # petitioners, hich is n"" and oid. Re!istration does not est tit"e it is mere" the eidence o/ sch tit"e. +r "and re!istration "as do not !ie the ho"der an #etter tit"e than hat he acta"" has.

11"


Atty.

SPS. ESMERALDO D. VALLIDO and ARSENIA M. V ALLIDO, ')9. + ATTY. SERGIO C. SUMAYOD, Petitioners, s.

SPS. ELMER PONO and JULIET PONO, and PURIFICACION CERNA>PONG and SPS.MARIANITO PONO and ESPERAN?A MERO>PONO, Respondents. G.R. No. 20018

6pri" 15, 2018

F!"#$:

artino andan as the re!istered oner o/ the parce" o/ "and in ete, !ranted nder =omestead Patent and coered # an ori!ina" certi7cate o/ tit"e. artino so"d a portion o/ the s#:ect propert to Pri7cacion *erna pon eBection o/ the eed o/ ?a"e. artino !ae Pri7cacion the ori!ina" oner's cop o/ the tit"e #t the trans/er as not recorded in the Re!istr o/ eeds. ater Pri7cacion so"d the portion o/ the s#:ect propert to arianito and a"so de"iered the ori!ina" ti"e, he re!istered the sa"e /or taBation prposes, too& possession and a""oed his son >"mer and his i/e, E"iet contrct a hose. ;he trans/er, hoeer, as a"so not recorded in the Re!istr o/ eeds. artino "e/t ete and ent and resett"ed to Noe"eta, *aite. =e so"d the ho"e s#:ect propert to his !randson, >smera"do, a"so a resident o/ Noe"eta, *aite. *onsiderin! that artino had de"iered the ori!ina" tit"e to Pri7cacion in 190, he no "on!er had an certi7cate o/ tit"e to hand 11#


Atty.

oer to >smera"do. artino 7"ed a petition see&in! /or the issance o/ a ne oner's dp"icate cop o/ the said tit"e, hich he c"aimed as "ost. =e stated that he co"d not reca"" hain! de"iered the said oner's dp"icate cop to an#od to secre pament or per/ormance o/ an "e!a" o#"i!ation. ;he "oer cort !ranted the petition, so >smera"do re!istered the deed o/ sa"e in the Re!istr o/ eeds and ;rans/er *erti7cate o/ ;it"e as therea/ter issed in the name o/ the petitioners. ?#seAent", the petitioners 7"ed #e/ore the R;* a comp"aint /or Aietin! o/ tit"e, recoer o/ possession o/ rea" propert and dama!es a!ainst the respondents. ;he cort r"ed in /aor o/ >smera"do #ein! #ers in !ood /aith #ecase drin! the sa"e the said tit"e as c"ean and /ree /rom a"" "iens. ;he ere a"so deemed re!istrants in !ood /aith #ecase at the time o/ the re!istration o/ the deed o/ sa"es, #oth +*; and ;*; did not #ear na annotation or mar& o/ an "ien or encm#rance. ;hs, the had a #etter ri!ht oer the respondents. %t pon appea", *ort o/ 6ppea"s r"ed in /aor o/ the respondents and a!reed that there as a do#"e sa"e #t since respondents indispta#" occpin! the "and, possession o/ "and other than the endor, the prchaser mst !o #eond the certi7cate o/ tit"e and ma&e inAiries concernin! the ri!hts o/ the acta" possessors. It /rther stated that mere re!istration o/ the sa"e as not eno!h as !ood /aith mst concr ith the re!istration. ;hs, it r"ed that the petitioners /ai"ed to dischar!e the #rden o/ proin! that the ere #ers and re!istrants in !ood /aith. It a"so conc"ded that #ecase the sa"e to Pri7caciontoo& p"ace in 190, thirt (80) ears prior to >smera"do's acAisition in 1990, the respondents had a #etter ri!ht to the propert. 11$


Atty.

I$$%&:

N+. ;he #rden o/ proin! !ood /aith "ies ith the second #er (petitioners herein) hich is not dischar!ed # simp" ino&in! the ordinar presmption o/ !ood /aith. ;he are N+; #ers in !ood /aith as the /ai"ed to dischar!e their #rden o/ proo/. ;he second #er ho has acta" or constrctie &no"ed!e o/ the prior sa"e cannot #e a re!istrant in !ood /aith. 6"tho!h it is a reco!nied princip"e that a person dea"in! on a re!istered "and need not !o #eond its certi7cate o/ tit"e, it is a"so a 7rm" sett"ed r"e that here there are circmstances hich o"d pt a part on !ard and prompt him to inesti!ate or inspect the propert #ein! so"d to him, sch as the presence o/ occpants@tenants thereon, it is eBpected /rom the prchaser o/ a a"ed piece o/ "and to inAire 7rst into the stats or natre o/ possession o/ the occpants. ?ho"d he 7nd ot that the "and he intends to # is occpied # an#od e"se other than the se""er ho, as in this case, is not in acta" possession, it o"d then #e incm#ent pon the prchaser to eri/ the eBtent o/ the occpant's possessor ri!hts. ;he /ai"re o/ a prospectie #er to ta&e sch precationar steps o"d mean ne!"i!ence on his part and o"d prec"de him /rom c"aimin! or ino&in! the ri!hts o/ a Cprchaser in !ood /aith.C It has #een he"d that Cthe re!istration o/ a "ater sa"e mst #e done in !ood /aith to entit"e the re!istrant to priorit in onership oer the endee in an ear"ier sa"e.C

11%


Atty.

;here are seera" indicia that sho"d hae p"aced the petitioners on !ard and prompted them to inesti!ate or inspect the propert #ein! so"d to them. First, artino, as se""er, did not hae possession o/ the s#:ect propert. ?econd, drin! the sa"e, artino did not hae the oner's dp"icate cop o/ the tit"e. ;hird, there ere eBistin! permanent

improements

on

the

"and.

Forth,

the

respondents ere in acta" possession o/ the "and. ;hese circmstances are too !"arin! to #e oer"oo&ed and sho"d hae prompted the petitioners, as prospectie #ers, to inesti!ate or inspect the "and.
permanent materia"s thereon, hich as

a"so

admitted # the petitioners. ;he respondents, ithot a do#t, are possessors in !ood /aith. +nership sho"d there/ore est in the respondents #ecase the ere 7rst in possession o/ the propert in !ood /aith.

11&


Atty.

EASTERN SHIPPING LINES INC., Petitioner, s.

BPIMS INSURANCE CORP. and MITSUI SUM TOMO INSURANCE CO. LTD., Respondents. 11'


Atty.

G.R. No. 1989 Eanar 15, 2014

Facts:

+n 6!st 29, 2008, ?mitomo *orporation shipped thro!h J >astern *ha""en!er J-9-?, a esse" oned # petitioner >astern ?hippin! ines, Inc., 81 arios stee" sheets in coi" ei!hin! 21,2 &i"o!rams /rom Mo&ohama, Eapan /or de"ier in /aor o/ the consi!nee *a"am#a ?tee" *enter Inc. ;he car!o had a dec"ared a"e o/ $?W125,41.2 and as insred a!ainst a"" ris& # ?mitomo ith respondent itsi ?mitomo Insrance *o., td. +n or a#ot ?eptem#er  2008, the shipment arried at the port o/ ani"a. $pon n"oadin! /rom the esse", nine coi"s ere o#sered to #e in #ad condition as eidenced # the ;rn +er ?re o/ %ad +rder *ar!o No. 82. ;he car!o as then trned oer to 6sian ;ermina"s, Inc. (6;I) /or steedorin!, stora!e and sa/e&eepin! pendin! *a"am#a ?tee"'s ithdraa" o/ the !oods.
1(


Atty.

ast", on ?eptem#er 29, 2008, ?mitomo a!ain shipped 11 arios stee" sheets in coi" ei!hin! 980,1 &i"o!rams thro!h petitioner's esse", J >astern Jens J-1-?, a!ain in /aor o/ *a"am#a ?tee". ;his third shipment had a dec"ared a"e o/ $?W4,41.90 and as a"so insred # ?mitomo ith itsi. ;he same arried at the port o/ ani"a on or a#ot +cto#er 11, 2008. $pon its dischar!e, siB coi"s ere o#sered to #e in #ad condition. ;herea/ter, the possession o/ the car!o as trned oer to 6;I /or steedorin!, stora!e and sa/e&eepin! pendin! ithdraa" thereo/ # *a"am#a ?tee". ;he dama!ed portion o/ the !oods #ein! n7t /or its intended prpose, *a"am#a ?tee" re:ected the dama!ed portion, a"ed at $?W14,2.05, pon 6;I's de"ier o/ the third shipment. Issue:

No. Jeri", it is sett"ed in maritime "a :risprdence that car!oes hi"e #ein! n"oaded !enera"" remain nder the cstod o/ the carrier.80 6s herein#e/ore /ond # the R;* and aDirmed # the *6 #ased on the eidence presented, the !oods ere dama!ed een #e/ore the ere trned oer to 6;I. ?ch dama!e as een componded # the ne!"i!ent acts o/ petitioner and 6;I hich #oth mishand"ed the !oods drin! the dischar!in! operations. ;hs, it #ears stressin! nto petitioner that common carriers, /rom the natre o/ their #siness and /or reasons o/ p#"ic po"ic, are #ond to o#sere eBtraordinar di"i!ence in the i!i"ance oer the !oods transported # them. ?#:ect to certain 11


Atty.

eBceptions enmerated nder 6rtic"e 18481 o/ the *ii" *ode, common carriers are responsi#"e /or the "oss, destrction,

or

deterioration

o/

the

!oods.

;he

eBtraordinar responsi#i"it o/ the common carrier "asts /rom the time the !oods are nconditiona"" p"aced in the possession o/, and receied # the carrier /or transportation nti" the same are de"iered, acta"" or constrctie", # the carrier to the consi!nee, or to the person ho has a ri!ht to receie them.82 +in! to this hi!h de!ree o/ di"i!ence reAired o/ them, common carriers, as a !enera" r"e, are presmed to hae #een at /a"t or ne!"i!ent i/ the !oods

the

transported

deteriorated

or

!ot

"ost

or

destroed. ;hat is, n"ess the proe that the eBercised eBtraordinar di"i!ence in transportin! the !oods. In order to aoid responsi#i"it /or an "oss or dama!e, there/ore, the hae the #rden o/ proin! that the o#sered sch hi!h "ee" o/ di"i!ence.88 In this case, petitioner /ai"ed to hrd"e sch #rden.

1


Atty.

OPTIMA REALTY CORPORATION, Petitioner, s.

HERT? PHIL. E=CLUSIVE CARS, INC., Respondent. G.R. No. 18085

Eanar 9, 2018

F!"#$:

6 contract o/ "ease as entered into # +ptima and =ert oer an oDice nit and a par&in! s"ot /or a period o/ three ears #t as shortened to to ears and 7e months. +ptima renoated the said #i"din! /or ten months ths =ert a""e!ed that it eBperienced a drop in its month" sa"es ths reAested /or 50 discont on its rent /or /or months. espite the discont !ien, sti"" =ert /ai"ed to pa its renta" /or seen months p"s its ti"it #i""s /or /or months. +ptima then #e/ore the eBpiration o/ the contract inAired

1!


Atty.

o/ =ert's intention to rene #t its /ai"re made +ptima to in/orm it that it o"d eBpire and o"d not #e reneed. =ert 7"ed a *omp"aint /or ?peci7c Per/ormance, In:nction and ama!es and@or ?m o/ one ith praer /or the issance o/ a ;emporar Restrainin! +rder (;R+) and
I$$%&:

M>?, /ai"re to pa time" renta"s and ti"it char!es is an eent o/ de/a"t nder the *ontract o/ ease, entit"in! the "essor to terminate the "ease. oreoer, the /ai"re o/ =ert to pa time" renta"s and ti"it char!es entit"es the "essor to :dicia"" e:ect it nder the proisions o/ the *ii" *ode. ;he records "i&eise sho that the "ease had a"read eBpired on 2 Fe#rar 200 #ecase o/ =ert's /ai"re to reAest a rene!otiation at "east 90 das prior to the termination o/ the "ease period. ;he "ease can #e reneed 1"


Atty.

on" # a ne ne!otiation #eteen the parties pon ritten notice # the >??>> to #e !ien to the >??+R at "east 90 das prior to termination o/ the a#oe "ease period. 6s the "ease as set to eBpire on 2 Fe#rar 200, =ert had nti" 80 Noem#er 2005 ithin hich to eBpress its interest in ne!otiatin! an eBtension o/ the "ease ith +ptima. =oeer, =ert /ai"ed to commnicate its intention to ne!otiate /or an eBtension o/ the "ease ithin the time a!reed pon # the parties. ;hs, # its on proisions, the *ontract o/ ease eBpired on 2 Fe#rar 200.1Yphi1 $nder the *ii" *ode, the eBpir o/ the period a!reed pon # the parties is "i&eise a !rond /or :dicia" e:ectment.

PURIFICACION ESTANISLAO and RUPERTO ESTANISLAO, Petitioners, s.

SPOUSES NORMA GUDITO and DAMIANO GUDITO, Respondents. G.R. No. 181

arch 18, 2018

F!"#$:

1#


Atty.

Respondents are the oners o/ a residentia" "ot #ein! "eased # petitioners on a month-to-month #asis. Petitioners had #een rentin! and occpin! the s#:ect "ot since 1984 and ere the ones ho #i"t the hose on the s#:ect "ot in accordance ith their "ease a!reement ith one Gaspar JasAe. ster JasAe. ?#seAent" the JasAe cop"e anted the >stanis"ao /ami" and the other tenants to acate the said propert, #t the tenants re/sed #ecase o/ "as a""e!ed" prohi#itin! their e:ectment there/rom. Res"tant", the JasAe cop"e re/sed to accept their renta" paments. ;hs, petitioner Pri7cacion >stanis"ao, ith de notice to >ster JasAe, deposited the amont o/ her month" renta"s at 6""ied %an&in! *orporation nder a sain!s accont in the name o/ >ster JasAe as "essor. eanhi"e, a eed o/ onation as eBected # the JasAe cop"e in /aor o/ respondent Norma JasAe Gdito. Respondents thera/ter noti7ed petitioners to remoe their hose and acate the premises ithin three months or p to Eanar 81, 1995, #ecase o/ their r!ent need o/ the residentia" "ot, this reAest as reiterated #t petitioners /ai"ed to comp". Respondents then 7"ed a *omp"aint /or $n"a/" etainer@>:ectment

a!ainst

petitioners

#e/ore

the

etropo"itan ;ria" *ort (e;*) o/ ani"a. ;he e;* o/ ani"a rendered a ecision in /aor o/ respondents. Petitioners ent #e/ore the Re!iona" ;ria" *ort (R;*) o/ ani"a hich reersed the e;*'s decision.

1$


Atty.

;he respondents then ent to the *6 /or an appea". ;he *6 ann""ed and set aside the R;*'s decision and reinstated the e;*'s decision. I$$%&:

;he respondents hae oerhe"min!" esta#"ished their ri!ht o/ possession # irte o/ the eed o/ onation made in their /aor. oreoer, the hae comp"ied ith the proisions o/ the "a in order /or them to "e!a"" e:ect the petitioners. It is ndispted that respondents do not on an other "ot or rea" propert eBcept the herein s#:ect "ot. ;he hae r!ent need o/ the same to #i"d their on hose to #e sed as their residence. 6"so, petitioners had a"read #een as&ed to "eae the premises as ear" as 192, #t stern" re/sed, hence, its /ormer oners re/sed to accept their renta" paments. *"ear", since respondents hae comp"ied ith the reAirements o/ the "a, their ri!ht to possess the s#:ect propert /or their on se as /ami" residence cannot #e denied. It is a sett"ed r"e in or :risdiction that a notaried docment has in its /aor the presmption o/ re!"arit and it carries the eidentiar ei!ht con/erred pon it ith respect to its de eBection. It is admissi#"e in eidence and is entit"ed to /"" /aith and credit pon its /ace. =ain! #een prepared and ac&no"ed!ed #e/ore a notar p#"ic, the said eed is ested ith p#"ic interest, the sanctit o/ hich deseres to #e phe"d n"ess oerhe"med # c"ear and 1%


Atty.

conincin! eidence. ;hs, the donation made # the JasAe cop"e is a a"id eBercise o/ their ri!ht as oners o/ the s#:ect propert and respondents are "e!a"" entit"ed to the said propert as donees. Fina"" the *6 correct" re"ed that nder P.. 151, in re"ation to P.. 201, the "essee is !ien the ri!ht o/ 7rst re/sa" oer the "and the hae "eased and occpied /or more than ten ears and on hich the constrcted their hoses. %t the ri!ht o/ 7rst re/sa" app"ies on" to a case here the oner o/ the propert intends to se"" it to a third part. I/ the oner o/ the "eased premises do not intend to se"" the propert in Aestion #t see&s to e:ect the tenant on the !rond that the /ormer needs the premises /or residentia" prposes, the tenant cannot ino&e the "and re/orm "a. ?ince respondents had no intention o/ se""in! the s#:ect propert to third parties, #t see& the eiction o/ petitioners on the a"id !rond that the need the propert /or residentia" prposes the circmstances reAired /or the app"ication o/ P.. 151 are "ac&in!.

1&


Atty.

LICOMCEN, INC., Petitioner, s.

ENGR. SALVADOR ABAIN?A, d&1n@ 2s1n)ss 2nd)' /) na) and s+*) ADS INDUSTRIAL E$UIPMENT, Respondent. G.R. No. 1991

Fe#rar 1, 2018

F!"#$:

;his is a#ot an action 7"ed # the respondent /or sm o/ mone and dama!es a!ainst i#ert *ommercia" *entre, Inc. 6#aina as hired # i#ert to do arios pro:ects in their commercia" centers in Na!a *it /or the spp", /a#rication and insta""ation o/ air-conditionin! dctor&s. It comp"eted the pro:ect inc"din! some chan!es and reisions o/ the ori!ina" p"an. %t despite seera" demands, i#ert /ai"ed to pa the remainin! #a"ance de. i#ert

denied

the

materia"

a""e!ations

o/

the

comp"aint and contered that the co""ection sit as not 7"ed a!ainst the rea" part-in-interest. ;hs, respondent amended

his

comp"aint

to

inc"de

petitioner

as 1'


Atty.

de/endant.5 ;he =R 6dministratie ana!er o/ i#ert testi7ed that petitioner I*+*>N, Inc. is a sister compan o/ i#ert and that the incorporators and directors o/ #oth companies are the same. i#ert c"aimed that it has /"" paid the tota" cost o/ the pro:ect #t sch pament pertains on" to the cost o/ the ori!ina" p"an o/ the pro:ect. ;he additiona" cost incrred /or "a#or, materia"s, and eAipment on the reised p"an ere not et paid. I$$%&:

H&LD:

Petitioner ino&ed 6rtic"e 124 o/ the *ii" *ode as a de/ense a!ainst respondent's c"aim. Petitioner a""e!ed that respondent cannot recoer additiona" costs since the a!reement in the chan!e o/ p"ans and speci7cations o/ the pro:ect, the pricin! and cost o/ materia"s and "a#or as not in ritin!. 6rtic"e 124 o/ the *ii" *ode is not een app"ica#"e to this case.1Yphi1 It is eident /rom the records that the ori!ina" contract a!reement, s#mitted # respondent as eidence, hich stated a tota" contract price o/ P5,800,000, as neer si!ned # the parties considerin! that there ere s#stantia" chan!es in the p"an imposed # petitioner in the corse o/ the or& on the pro:ect. Petitioner admitted pain! P,00,000 to respondent hich as a""e!ed" the a!reed cost o/ the pro:ect. =oeer, petitioner did not s#mit an ritten contract si!ned # #oth parties hich o"d s#stantiate its c"aim that the a!reed cost o/ the

1!(


Atty.

pro:ect as on" P,00,000. *"ear", petitioner cannot ino&e 6rtic"e 124 o/ the *ii" *ode to aoid pain! its o#"i!ation considerin! that the a""e!ed ori!ina" contract as neer een si!ned # #oth parties #ecase o/ the arios chan!es imposed # petitioner on the ori!ina" p"an. ;he /act that petitioner paid P1,400,000 more than the amont stated in the nsi!ned contract a!reement c"ear" indicates that there ere indeed additiona" costs drin! the corse o/ the or& on the pro:ect. It is :st n/ortnate that petitioner is no ino&in! 6rtic"e 124 o/ the *ii" *ide to aoid /rther pament o/ the additiona" costs incrred on the pro:ect.
petitioner's

en!ineerin!

cons"tant

and

a""

the

paperor&s re"atin! to the pro:ect ere approed # petitioner thro!h its representaties. ;here is no :sti7a#"e reason to deiate /rom the 7ndin!s and r"in! o/ the tria" cort, hich ere a"so phe"d # the *ort o/ 6ppea"s that petitioner sho"d #e he"d "ia#"e /or the additiona" costs incrred /or "a#or, materia"s, and eAipment on the reised pro:ect.

EASTERN SHIPPING LINES INC., Petitioner, s.

BPIMS INSURANCE CORP. and MITSUI SUM TOMO INSURANCE CO. LTD., Respondents. G.R. No. 1989 Eanar 15, 2014

1!1


Atty.

Facts:

+n 6!st 29, 2008, ?mitomo *orporation shipped thro!h J >astern *ha""en!er J-9-?, a esse" oned # petitioner >astern ?hippin! ines, Inc., 81 arios stee" sheets in coi" ei!hin! 21,2 &i"o!rams /rom Mo&ohama, Eapan /or de"ier in /aor o/ the consi!nee *a"am#a ?tee" *enter Inc. ;he car!o had a dec"ared a"e o/ $?W125,41.2 and as insred a!ainst a"" ris& # ?mitomo ith respondent itsi ?mitomo Insrance *o., td. +n or a#ot ?eptem#er  2008, the shipment arried at the port o/ ani"a. $pon n"oadin! /rom the esse", nine coi"s ere o#sered to #e in #ad condition as eidenced # the ;rn +er ?re o/ %ad +rder *ar!o No. 82. ;he car!o as then trned oer to 6sian ;ermina"s, Inc. (6;I) /or steedorin!, stora!e and sa/e&eepin! pendin! *a"am#a ?tee"'s ithdraa" o/ the !oods. astern Jens J-1-?, a!ain in /aor o/ *a"am#a ?tee". ;his third shipment had a 1!


Atty.

dec"ared a"e o/ $?W4,41.90 and as a"so insred # ?mitomo ith itsi. ;he same arried at the port o/ ani"a on or a#ot +cto#er 11, 2008. $pon its dischar!e, siB coi"s ere o#sered to #e in #ad condition. ;herea/ter, the possession o/ the car!o as trned oer to 6;I /or steedorin!, stora!e and sa/e&eepin! pendin! ithdraa" thereo/ # *a"am#a ?tee". ;he dama!ed portion o/ the !oods #ein! n7t /or its intended prpose, *a"am#a ?tee" re:ected the dama!ed portion, a"ed at $?W14,2.05, pon 6;I's de"ier o/ the third shipment. Issue:

No. Jeri", it is sett"ed in maritime "a :risprdence that car!oes hi"e #ein! n"oaded !enera"" remain nder the cstod o/ the carrier.80 6s herein#e/ore /ond # the R;* and aDirmed # the *6 #ased on the eidence presented, the !oods ere dama!ed een #e/ore the ere trned oer to 6;I. ?ch dama!e as een componded # the ne!"i!ent acts o/ petitioner and 6;I hich #oth mishand"ed the !oods drin! the dischar!in! operations. ;hs, it #ears stressin! nto petitioner that common carriers, /rom the natre o/ their #siness and /or reasons o/ p#"ic po"ic, are #ond to o#sere eBtraordinar di"i!ence in the i!i"ance oer the !oods transported # them. ?#:ect to certain eBceptions enmerated nder 6rtic"e 18481 o/ the *ii" *ode, common carriers are responsi#"e /or the "oss, destrction,

or

deterioration

o/

the

!oods.

;he

eBtraordinar responsi#i"it o/ the common carrier "asts 1!!


Atty.

/rom the time the !oods are nconditiona"" p"aced in the possession o/, and receied # the carrier /or transportation nti" the same are de"iered, acta"" or constrctie", # the carrier to the consi!nee, or to the person ho has a ri!ht to receie them.82 +in! to this hi!h de!ree o/ di"i!ence reAired o/ them, common carriers, as a !enera" r"e, are presmed to hae #een at /a"t or ne!"i!ent i/ the !oods

the

transported

deteriorated

or

!ot

"ost

or

destroed. ;hat is, n"ess the proe that the eBercised eBtraordinar di"i!ence in transportin! the !oods. In order to aoid responsi#i"it /or an "oss or dama!e, there/ore, the hae the #rden o/ proin! that the o#sered sch hi!h "ee" o/ di"i!ence.88 In this case, petitioner /ai"ed to hrd"e sch #rden.

1!"


Atty.

ALVIN PATRIMONIO, Petitioner. s.

NAPOLEON GUTIERRE? and OCTAVIO MARASIGAN III, Respondents GR. No. 19 2014-0-04 Facts:

;he petitioner and the respondent Napo"eon Gtierre (Gtierre) entered into a #siness entre nder the name o/ ?"am n& *orporation. In the corse o/ their #siness, the petitioner pre-si!ned seera" chec&s to anser /or the eBpenses o/ ?"am n&. 6"tho!h si!ned, these chec&s had no paee's name, date or amont. ;he #"an& chec&s ere entrsted to Gtierre ith the speci7c instrction not to 7"" them ot ithot preios noti7cation to and approa" # the petitioner. 6ccordin! to petitioner, the arran!ement as made so that he co"d eri/ the a"idit o/ the pament and ma&e the proper arran!ements to /nd the accont. 1!#


Atty.

+n 1998, ithot the petitioner's &no"ed!e and consent, Gtierre ent to arasi!an to secre a "oan in the amont o/ P200,000.00 on the eBcse that the petitioner needed the mone /or the constrction o/ his hose. In addition to the pament o/ the principa", Gtierre assred arasi!an that he o"d #e paid an interest o/ 5 per month /rom arch to a 1994. +n a 24, 1994, arasi!an deposited the chec& #t it as dishonored /or the reason 6**+$N; *+?>.O It as "ater reea"ed that petitioner's accont ith the #an& had #een c"osed since a 2, 1998. arasi!an so!ht recoer /rom Gtierre, to no aai". =e therea/ter sent seera" demand "etters to the petitioner as&in! /or the pament o/ P200,000.00, #t his demands "i&eise ent nheeded. *onseAent", he 7"ed a crimina" case /or io"ation o/ %.P. 22 a!ainst the petitioner, doc&eted as *rimina" *ase No. 421. +n ?eptem#er 10, 199, the petitioner 7"ed #e/ore the Re!iona" ;ria" *ort (R;*) a *omp"aint /or ec"aration o/ N""it o/ oan and Recoer o/ ama!es a!ainst Gtierre and co-respondent arasi!an. =e comp"ete" denied athoriin! the "oan or the chec&'s ne!otiation, and asserted that he as not pri to the parties' "oan a!reement. Issue:


Atty.

Mes. ;he contract o/ "oan entered into # Gtierre in #eha"/ o/ the Petitioner sho"d #e n""i7ed /or #ein! oid Petitioner is not #ond # the *ontract o/ oan. 6 reie o/ the records reea"s that Gtierre did not hae an athorit to #orro mone in #eha"/ o/ the petitioner. Records do not sho that the petitioner eBected an specia" poer o/ attorne (?P6) in /aor o/ Gtierre. In /act, the petitioner's testimon con7rmed that he neer athoried Gtierre (or anone /or that matter), hether er#a"" or in ritin!, to #orro mone in his #eha"/, nor as he aare o/ an sch transaction 6rtic"e 1 para!raph  o/ the *ii" *ode eBpress" reAires a specia" poer o/ athorit #e/ore an a!ent can "oan or #orro mone in #eha"/ o/ the principa", to it3 6rt. 1. ?pecia" poers o/ attorne are necessar in the /o""oin! cases3 BBBB () ;o "oan or #orro mone, n"ess the "atter act #e r!ent and indispensa#"e /or the preseration o/ the thin!s hich are nder administration. (emphasis spp"ied) 6rtic"e 1 does not state that the athorit #e in ritin!. 6s "on! as the mandate is eBpress, sch athorit ma #e either ora" or ritten.
1!%


Atty.

Land Ban & /) P/1*1991n)s, Petitioner s.

Ed2a'd& Ca0a+2'1n, Respondent 6pri" 1, 2018

G.R. No. 191

F!"#$:

1!&


Atty.

;he ?an!!nian! %aan o/ the nicipa"it o/ 6!oo passed to imp"ement a Redee"opment P"an.

;his o"d

commercia"ie the 6!oo P"aa herein the Ime"da Garden and the Eose Ria" onment are sitated.

;o "oan 7nancin! p"ans ere acAired # aor >/ranio >ri!e" /rom and %an& /rom 2005 to 200. 6s a co""atera", the ?an!!nian! %aan, thro!h the maor, mort!a!ed a portion o/ the p#"ic p"aa to and %an&. 6ssi!nment o/ interna" reene a""otment (IR6) o/ the mnicipa"it as athoried in /aor o/ the #an&, as e"" eBpected month" income o/ the proposed pro:ect as to #e !ien to the same #an&.

;he second phase o/ the dee"opment as opposed # the residents o/ the mnicipa"it.

;he c"amor to a#andon

the second phase o/ dee"opment as "ed # >dardo *acaran.

;he "atter reAested /or a cop o/ the

reso"tions, as e"" as the "oan transactions acAired # the maor ith the and %an&.

?ince the "etter reAest ent nheeded, *acaran 7"ed

a

taBpaer's

sit

a!ainst

the

oDicers

o/

the

?an!!nian! %aan o/ the nicipa"it o/ 6!oo and and %an&. *acaran contented that the s#:ect propert is a p#"ic domain and as sch, cannot #e the s#:ect o/ the "oan a!reement. It can #e the o#:ect o/ mort!a!e or sed as a co""atera" /or #ein! otside the commerce o/ man.

1!'


Atty.

;he #an&, in its de/ense, ar!ed that *acaran has no case o/ action #ecase he is not a pri to the "oan transactions.

I$$%&:

H&LD:

M>?, the redee"opment p"an o/ the ?an!!nian! %aan o/ the nicipa"it o/ 6!oo as an "tra ires act. =ence, it is oid and ineDectie. ;he conersion o/ the said p"aa is #eond the nicipa"it's :risdiction considerin! the propert's natre as one /or p#"ic se and there#, /ormin! part o/ the p#"ic dominion. 6ccordin!", it cannot #e the o#:ect o/ appropriation either # the ?tate or # priate persons. Nor can it #e the s#:ect o/ "ease or an other contracta" nderta&in!. 6rtic"e 1409 o/ the *ii" *ode proides that a contract hose prpose is contrar to "a, mora"s, !ood cstoms, p#"ic order or p#"ic po"ic is considered

oid

and

as

sch,

creates

no

ri!hts

or

o#"i!ations or an :ridica" re"ations.

;he contract o/ "oan eBected # the ?an!!nian ith the #an& as secred # assi!nment o/ a portion o/ the interna" reene a""otment (IR6) and o/ the proceeds o/ the pro:ect. ;he assi!ned IR6 is taB paid # the residents o/ the mnicipa"it o/ 6!oo and to hich *acaran is a"so a 1"(


Atty.

taBpaer o/. ;he proceeds o/ the pro:ect #ecame a p#"ic /nd hich as eident" made co""atera" o/ the assai"ed pro:ect. 6 taBpaer need not #e a part to the contract to cha""en!e its a"idit as "on! as taBes are ino"ed, peop"e hae a ri!ht to Aestion contracts entered into # the !oernment.

S9s. $21'1n& and G*&'1a D)*a C'2, Petitioner s.

P*an)'s P'&d20s, In0, Respondent Fe#rar 1, 2018 G.R. No. 1549

F!"#$:

?poses de"a *r ere in the #siness o/ distri#tion and sa"e o/ /erti"iers. ;he ere !ranted a credit "ine o/ P200,000

/or

a 0-da term

ith trst receipts

as

co""atera"s. G"oria de"a *r s#mitted a "ist o/ assets to secre their credit.

?he si!ned a ;rst Receipt@?pecia"

*redit ?cheme containin! a "ist o/ a!ric"tra" assets and their a"e. It as a"so indicated therein that G"oria sha"" sperise the co""ection o/ the caans o/ pa"a o/ /armerparticipants, insred the /erti"iers a!ainst 7re and other casa"ties prior

to the de"ier o/ /amer-participants

proided that the cost incrred on the said !oods sha"" not 1"1


Atty.

#e char!ed a!ainst P"anters Prodcts, Inc (PPI) and to reAire the /armer-participant to deposit the pa"a or corn sDicient to coer their respectie acconts, proided /rther that /ai"re o/ the participant-/armer to do so o"d reAire G"oria to report the same to PPI ithin 2 hors.

In addition, G"oria o#"i!ed herse"/ to pa 12 per annm interest p"s 2 char!es rec&oned /rom the date the ea"er de"iers to /armer-participant the !oods. For more order /orms /or /erti"iers and a!ric"tra" prodcts ere si!ned # G"oria on ?eptem#er 19.

;he 0-da credit-term "apsed ithot the sposes pain! their credit term. ?eera" demand "etters ere sent to G"oria. +n +cto#er 199, a 7na" demand "etter as sent to her demandin! /or the pament o/ interest, serice and pena"t char!es.

PPI 7"ed a comp"aint /or the co""ection o/ sm o/ mone a!ainst the sposes /or a tota" amont o/ Php 245,855.10 inc"sie o/ interest and serice char!es. ;he sposes ar!ed that it is on" a mar&etin! ot"et nder the ?*? pro!ram and not a dea"er primari" o#"i!ed to PPI /or the prodcts to de"ier to them.

I$$%&:

H&LD: 1"


Atty.

M>?. ;he ?preme *ort he"d in this case hat a credit "ine app"ied # the sposes ith PPI is in /act in the natre o/ a "oan a!ree. 6 trst receipt is a secrit transaction intended to aid in 7nancin! importers and retai" dea"ers ho do not hae sDicient /nds or resorces to 7nance the importation or prchase o/ merchandise, and ho ma not #e a#"e to acAire credit eBcept thro!h ti"iation, as co""atera", o/ the merchandise imported or prchased. It is a secrit a!reement that secres inde#tedness and there can #e no sch thin! as secrit interest that secres no o#"i!ation.

;he oDer o/ the con:!a" properties to #e set p as co""atera" to secre the "oans # the PPI, in eDect, ma&es G"oria a dea"er.O ;he "atter si!ned and prported herse"/ to #e a dea"er o/ PPI. G"oria entered into a # and se""O #siness.

6 c"ose "oo& at the ;rst Receipt@?*? indicates that the /armer-participants ere mentioned therein on" ith respect to the dties and responsi#i"ities that G"oria persona"" assmed to nderta&e in ho"din! !oods in trst /or PPI.O $nder the notion o/ re"atiit o/ contracts em#odied in 6rtic"e 1811 o/ the *ii" *ode, contracts ta&e eDect on" #eteen the parties, their assi!ns and heirs. =ence, the

/armer-participants, not

#ein!

themse"es

parties to the contracta" docments si!ned # G"oria, ere not to #e there# "ia#"e.

1"!


Atty.

;here/ore, sposes de"a *r are de#tors o/ PPI to the eBtent o/ the !oods de"iered to them /or their resa"e.

;he contract, its "a#e" notithstandin!, as not a trst receipt transaction in "e!a" contemp"ation or ithin the prie o/ the ;rst Receipts a sch that its #reach o"d render G"oria crimina"" "ia#"e /or esta/a. $nder ?ection 4 o/ the ;rst Receipts a, the sa"e o/ !oods # a person in the #siness o/ se""in! !oods /or pro7t ho, at the otset o/ the transaction, has, as a!ainst the #er, !enera" propert ri!hts in sch !oods, or ho se""s the !oods to the #er on credit, retainin! tit"e or other interest as secrit /or the pament o/ the prchase price, does not constitte a trst receipt transaction and is otside the prie and coera!e o/ the "a.

1""


Atty.

HUR TIN YANG, P>;I;I+N>R. s.

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, R>?P+N>N;. G.R. No. 19511 6!st 14, 2018

F!"#$:

?permaB Phi"ippines, Inc. (?permaB) is a domestic corporation en!a!ed in the constrction #siness. +n arios occasions in the month o/ 6pri", a, E", 6!st, ?eptem#er, +cto#er and Noem#er 199, etropo"itan %an& and ;rst *ompan, a!da"ena %ranch, ani"a, eBtended seera" commercia" "etters o/ credit to ?permaB. ;hese commercia" *s ere sed # ?permaB to pa /or the de"ier o/ seera" constrction materia"s hich i"" #e sed in their constrction #siness. ;herea/ter, etro#an& reAired petitioner, as representatie and Jice-President /or Interna" 6Dairs o/ ?permaB, to si!n tent-/or trst receipts as secrit /or the constrction materia"s and to ho"d those materia"s or the proceeds o/ the sa"es in trst /or etro#an&. ?permaB /ai"ed to pa or de"ier the !oods or proceeds to etro#an& hen the 24 trst receipts /e"" de. Instead o/ pain! etro#an& a/ter receipt o/ demands, ?permaB, thro!h petitioner, reAested the restrctrin! o/ the "oan. =oeer the intended restrctrin! o/ the "oan did not materia"ie therea/ter etro#an& sent another demand "etter dated +cto#er 11, 2001. 6s the demands /e"" on

dea/

ears,

etro#an&,

7"ed

the

instant

crimina"

comp"aints o/ esta/a a!ainst petitioner. 1"#


Atty.

I$$%&:

;he /acta" 7ndin!s o/ the tria" and appe""ate corts reea" that the dea"in! #eteen petitioner and etro#an& as not a trst receipt transaction #t one o/ simp"e "oan. Petitioner's admission that he si!ned the trst receipts on #eha"/ o/ ?permaB, hich /ai"ed to pa the "oan or trn oer the proceeds o/ the sa"e or the !oods to etro#an& pon

demand

does

not

conc"sie"

proe

that

the

transaction as, indeed, a trst receipts transaction. In contrast to the nomenc"atre o/ the transaction, the parties rea"" intended a contract o/ "oan.
parties.

;he

decisie

/actor

in

ea"atin!

sch

a!reement is the intention o/ the parties, as shon not necessari" # the termino"o! sed in the contract #t # their condct, ords, actions and deeds prior to, drin! and immediate" a/ter eBectin! the a!reement.

1"$


Atty.

TRADE AND INVESTMENT DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, s.

ASIA PACES CORPORATION, PACES INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION, NICOLAS C. BALDERRAMA, SIDDCOR INSURANCE CORPORATION, Respondents. G.R. No. 1408 Fe#rar 12, 2014

Facts:

+n Eanar 19, 191, respondents 6sia Paces *orporation (6?P6*) and Paces Indstria" *orporation (PI*+) entered into a s#-contractin! a!reement, denominated as C200 J ;ransmission ines *ontract No. 20-@0-II *ii" "ectrica" >rection,C ith the >"ectrica" Pro:ects *ompan o/ 1"%


Atty.

i#a (>P*+), as main contractor, /or the constrction and erection o/ a do#"e circit #nd"e phase condctor transmission "ine in the contr o/ i#a. ;o 7nance its or&in! capita" reAirements, 6?P6* o#tained "oans /rom /orei!n #an&s %anAe Indose and P*I *apita" (=on! on!) imited (P*I *apita") hich, pon the "atter's reAest, ere secred # seera" etters o/ Garantee issed # petitioner ;rade and Inestment ee"opment *orporation o/ the Phi"ippines (;I*+RP), then Phi"ippine >Bport and Forei!n oan Garantee *orp., a !oernment oned and contro""ed corporation created /or the primar prpose o/, amon! others, C!aranteein!, ith the prior concrrence o/ the onetar %oard, s#:ect to the r"es and re!"ations that

the

onetar %oard ma

prescri#e,

approed /orei!n "oans, in ho"e or in part, !ranted to an entit, enterprise or corporation or!anied or "icensed to en!a!e in #siness in the Phi"ippines.C $nder the etters o/ Garantee,

;I*+RP

irreoca#"

and

nconditiona""

!aranteed /"" pament o/ 6?P6*'s "oan o#"i!ations to %anAe Indose and P*I *apita" in the eent o/ de/a"t # the "atter. 6s a condition precedent to the issance # ;I*+RP o/ the etters o/ Garantee, 6?P6*, PI*+, and 6?P6*'s President, respondent Nico"as *. %a"derrama had to

eBecte

seera"

eeds

o/

$nderta&in!, #indin!

themse"es to :oint" and seera"" pa ;I*+RP /or hateer dama!es or "ia#i"ities it ma incr nder the a/orementioned "etters. In the same "i!ht, 6?P6*, as principa" de#tor, entered into sret a!reements ith Paramont, PhoeniB, e!a Paci7c and Fortne as sreties, a"so ho"din! themse"es so"idari" "ia#"e to ;I*+RP, as creditor, /or hateer dama!es or "ia#i"ities the "atter ma incr nder the etters o/ Garantee. 6?P6* eenta"" 1"&


Atty.

de/a"ted on its "oan o#"i!ations to %anAe Indose and P*I *apita", promptin! them to demand pament /rom ;I*+RP nder the etters o/ Garantee. ;he demand "etter o/ %anAe Indose as sent to ;I*+RP on arch 5, 194, hi"e that o/ P*I *apita" as sent on Fe#rar 21, 195. In

trn,

;I*+RP

demanded

pament

/rom

Paramont, PhoeniB, e!a Paci7c, and Fortne nder the ?ret %onds. ;I*+RP's demand "etters to the #ondin! companies ere sent on a 2, 195, or #e/ore the 7na" eBpiration dates o/ a"" the ?ret %onds, #t to no aai". Issue:

Mes. 6 sret is considered in "a as #ein! the same part as the de#tor in re"ation to hateer is ad:d!ed tochin! the o#"i!ation o/ the "atter, and their "ia#i"ities are interoen as to #e insepara#"e. 6"tho!h the contract o/ a sret is in essence secondar on" to a a"id principa" o#"i!ation, his "ia#i"it to the creditor is direct, primar and a#so"te he #ecomes "ia#"e /or the de#t and dt o/ another a"tho!h he possesses no direct or persona" interest oer the

o#"i!ations

nor

does

he

receie

an

#ene7t

there/rom.52 ;he /ndamenta" reason there/or is that a contract o/ sretship eDectie" #inds the sret as a so"idar de#tor. ;his is proided nder 6rtic"e 204 o/ the *ii" *ode hich states3 1"'


Atty.

6rtic"e 204. % !arant a person, ca""ed the !arantor, #inds himse"/ to the creditor to /"7"" the o#"i!ation o/ the principa" de#tor in case the "atter sho"d /ai" to do so. I/ a person #inds himse"/ so"idari" ith the principa" de#tor, the proisions o/ ?ection 4, *hapter 8, ;it"e I o/ this %oo& sha"" #e o#sered. In sch case the contract is ca""ed a sretship. (>mphasis and nderscorin! spp"ied) ;hs, since the sret is a so"idar de#tor, it is not necessar that the ori!ina" de#tor 7rst /ai"ed to pa #e/ore the sret co"d #e made "ia#"e it is eno!h that a demand /or pament is made # the creditor /or the sret's "ia#i"it to attach.58

1#(


Atty.

MARIANO LIM, Petitioner, s.

SECURITY BANK CORPORATION, Respondent. G.R. No. 1589 arch 12, 2014

Facts:

Petitioner eBected a *ontinin! ?retship in /aor o/ respondent

to

secre

Can

and

a""

tpes

o/

credit

accommodation that ma #e !ranted # the #an& hereinto and hereina/terC in /aor o/ Ra" 6rroo /or the amont o/P2,000,000.00

hich

is

coered

#

a

*redit

6!reement@Promissor Note. ?aid promissor note stated that the interest on the "oan sha"" #e 19 per annm, componded month", /or the 7rst 80 das /rom the date thereo/, and i/ the note is not /"" paid hen de, an additiona" pena"t o/ 2 per month o/ the tota" otstandin! principa" and interest de and npaid, sha"" #e imposed. In trn, the *ontinin! ?retship eBected # petitioner stip"ated that3 8. ia#i"it o/ the ?ret. - ;he "ia#i"it o/ the ?ret is so"idar and not contin!ent pon the prsit o/ the %an& o/ hateer remedies it ma hae a!ainst the e#tor or the co""atera"s@"iens it ma possess. I/ an o/ the Garanteed +#"i!ations is not paid or per/ormed on de date (at stated matrit or # acce"eration), the ?ret sha"", ithot need /or an notice, demand or an other act or deed, 1#1


Atty.

immediate" #ecome "ia#"e there/or and the ?ret sha"" pa and per/orm the same. ;he de#tor, Ra" 6rroo, de/a"ted on his "oan o#"i!ation. ;herea/ter, petitioner receied a Notice o/ Fina" emand dated 6!st 2, 2001, in/ormin! him that he as "ia#"e to pa the "oan o#tained # Ra" and >dina 6rroo, inc"din! the interests and pena"t /ees amontin! to P,08,15.54, and demandin! pament thereo/. For /ai"re o/ petitioner to comp" ith said demand, respondent 7"ed a comp"aint /or co""ection o/ sm o/ mone a!ainst him and the 6rroo sposes. ?ince the 6rroo sposes can no "on!er #e "ocated, smmons as not sered on them, hence, on" petitioner actie" participated in the case. Issue:

In this case, hat petitioner eBected as a *ontinin! ?retship, hich the *ort descri#ed in ?a"do, Er. . ?ecrit %an& *orporation18 as /o""os3 ;he essence o/ a continin! sret has #een hi!h"i!hted in the case o/ ;otanes . *hina %an&in! *orporation in this ise3 *omprehensie or continin! sret a!reements are, in /act, Aite commonp"ace in present da 7nancia" and commercia" practice. 6 #an& or 7nancin! compan hich anticipates enterin! into a series o/ credit transactions ith 1#


Atty.

a partic"ar compan, norma"" reAires the pro:ected principa" de#tor to eBecte a continin! sret a!reement a"on! ith its sreties. % eBectin! sch an a!reement, the principa" p"aces itse"/ in a position to enter into the pro:ected series o/ transactions ith its creditor ith sch sretship a!reement, there o"d #e no need to eBecte a separate sret contract or #ond /or each 7nancin! or credit accommodation eBtended to the principa" de#tor.14 ;he terms o/ the *ontinin! ?retship eBected # petitioner, Aoted ear"ier, are er c"ear. It states that petitioner, as sret, sha"", ithot need /or an notice, demand or an other act or deed, immediate" #ecome "ia#"e and sha"" pa Ca"" credit accommodations eBtended # the %an& to the e#tor, inc"din! increases, renea"s, ro""oers, eBtensions, restrctrin!s, amendments or noations thereo/, as e"" as (i) a"" o#"i!ations o/ the e#tor present" or herea/ter oin! to the %an&, as appears in the acconts, #oo&s and records o/ the %an&, hether direct or indirect.

NICANORA G. BUCTON (d)0)as)d!, s2s12)d + RE$UILDA B. YRAY, Petitioner. s.

RURAL MISAMIS

BANK

OF

EL

ORIENTAL,

CUYONG, Respondents, vs. CONCEPCION

AND

HER

SALVADOR, and

INC.,

REYNALDO ERLINDA

HUSBAND

AND

AGNES BUCTON LUGOD, ;hird Part e/endants. G.R. No. 1925 Fe#rar 24, 2014

1#!


Atty.

Facts:

+n 6pri" 29, 19, petitioner Nicanora G. %cton 7"ed ith the Re!iona" ;ria" *ort o/ *a!aan de +ro a case /or 6nn"ment o/ ort!a!e, Forec"osre, and ?pecia" Poer o/ 6ttorne a!ainst >r"inda *oncepcion and respondents Rra" %an& o/ >" ?a"ador, isamis +rienta", and ?heriD Rena"do *on!. Petitioner a""e!ed that she is the oner o/ a parce" o/ "and, "ocated in *a!aan de +ro *it that on Ene , 192, *oncepcion #orroed the tit"e on the preteBt that she as !oin! to sho it to an interested #er that *oncepcion o#tained

a

"oan

in

the

amont

o/ P80,000.00

/rom

respondent #an& that as secrit /or the "oan, *oncepcion mort!a!ed petitioner's hose and "ot to respondent #an& sin! a ?P6 a""e!ed" eBected # petitioner in /aor o/ *oncepcion that *oncepcion /ai"ed to pa the "oan that petitioner's hose and "ot ere /orec"osed # respondent sheriD ithot a Notice o/ >Btra-Edicia" Forec"osre or Notice o/ 6ction ?a"e and that petitioner's hose and "ot ere so"d in an action sa"e in /aor o/ respondent #an&. Respondent #an& 7"ed an 6nser interposin! "ac& o/ case o/ action as a de/ense. It denied the a""e!ation o/ petitioner that the ?P6 as /or!ed and aerred that on Ene 22, 19, petitioner ent to the #an& and promised to sett"e the "oan o/ *oncepcion #e/ore ?eptem#er 80, 19. 6s to the a""e!ed irre!"arities in the /orec"osre proceedin!s, respondent #an& asserted that it comp"ied ith the reAirements o/ the "a in /orec"osin! the hose and "ot. % a o/ cross-c"aim, respondent #an& praed that in the eent o/ an aderse :d!ment a!ainst it, *oncepcion, its co-de/endant, #e ordered to indemni/ it /or a"" dama!es 1#"


Atty.

?ince petitioner did not mort!a!e an o/ her properties nor did she o#tain a "oan /rom respondent #an&, she decided to !o to respondent #an& on Ene 22, 19 to inAire a#ot the matter. It as on" then that she discoered that her hose and "ot as mort!a!ed # irte o/ a /or!ed ?P6. ?he insisted that her si!natre and her hs#and's si!natre on the ?P6 ere /or!ed and that eer since she !ot married, she no "on!er sed her maiden name, Nicanora Ga#ar, in si!nin! docments. Petitioner a"so denied appearin! #e/ore the notar p#"ic, ho notaried the ?P6. ?he a"so testi7ed that the propert re/erred to in the ?P6, is a acant "ot and that the hose, hich as mort!a!ed and /orec"osed, is coered # a diDerent tit"e. Issue:

No. ?imi"ar", in this case, the athoried a!ent /ai"ed to indicate in the mort!a!e that she as actin! /or and on #eha"/ o/ her principa". ;he Rea" >state ort!a!e, eBp"icit" shos on its /ace, that it as si!ned # *oncepcion in her on name and in her on persona" capacit. In /act, there is nothin! in the docment to sho that she as actin! or si!nin! as an a!ent o/ petitioner. ;hs, consistent ith the "a on a!enc and esta#"ished :risprdence, petitioner cannot #e #ond # the acts o/ *oncepcion. In "i!ht o/ the /ore!oin!, there is no need to de"e on the isses o/ /or!er o/ the ?P6 and the n""it o/ the /orec"osre sa"e. For een i/ the ?P6 as a"id, the Rea" >state ort!a!e o"d sti"" not #ind petitioner as it as si!ned # *oncepcion in her 1##


Atty.

persona" capacit and not as an a!ent o/ petitioner. ?imp" pt, the Rea" >state ort!a!e is oid and nen/orcea#"e a!ainst petitioner.

HOMEONERS SAVINGS AND LOAN BANK, Petitioner-6ppe""ant, s.

ASUNCION P. FELONIA and LYDIA C. DE GU?MAN, ')9')s)n)d + MARIBEL FRIAS, Respondents 6ppe""ees. MARIE MICHELLE P. DELGADO, REGISTER OF DEEDS OF LAS PINAS CITY and RHANDOLFO B. AMANSEC, 1n /1s 0a9a01+ as C*)' & C&2' E> O101& S/)'1, O10) & /) C*)' & C&2', Las P1as C1+,Respondents-e/endants. G.R. No. 194 Fe#rar 2, 2014

Facts:

Fe"onia and e Gman ere the re!istered oners o/ a parce" o/ "and consistin! o/ 582 sAare meters ith a 7e#edroom hose, coered # ;rans/er o/ *erti7cate o/ ;it"e (;*;) No. ;-402 issed # the re!ister o/ deeds o/ as Pias *it. ?ometime in Ene 1990, Fe"onia and e Gman mort!a!ed the propert to e"!ado to secre the "oan in the amont o/ P1,55,000.00.

=oeer,

instead

o/

a

rea"

estate

1#$


Atty.

mort!a!e, the parties eBected a eed o/ 6#so"te ?a"e ith an +ption to Reprchase. +n 20 ecem#er 1991, Fe"onia and e Gman 7"ed an action /or Re/ormation o/ *ontract (Re/ormation case), doc&eted as *ii" *ase No. 91-5954, #e/ore the R;* o/ ani"a. +n the 7ndin!s that it is Cer apparent that the transaction had #eteen the parties is one o/ a mort!a!e and not a deed o/ sa"e ith ri!ht to reprchase,C the R;*, on 21 arch 1995 rendered a :d!ment /aora#"e to Fe"onia and e Gman. +n 2 Ene 1995, e"!ado mort!a!ed the s#:ect propert to =omeoners ?ain!s and oan %an& (=?%) sin! her ne" re!istered tit"e. ;hree das "ater, =?% cased the annotation o/ the mort!a!e. Issue:

Mes. In %an& o/ *ommerce . ?an Pa#"o, Er., the doctrine o/ mort!a!ee in !ood /aith as eBp"ained3;here is, hoeer, a sitation here, despite the /act that the mort!a!or is not the oner o/ the mort!a!ed propert, his tit"e #ein! /rad"ent, the mort!a!e contract and an /orec"osre sa"e arisin! there /rom are !ien eDect # reason o/ p#"ic po"ic. ;his is the doctrine o/ the mort!a!ee in !ood /aithO #ased on the r"e that a"" persons dea"in! ith propert coered # the ;orrens *erti7cates o/ ;it"e, as #ers or mort!a!ees, are not reAired to !o #eond hat appears on the /ace o/ the tit"e. ;he p#"ic interest in pho"din! 1#%


Atty.

inde/easi#i"it o/ a certi7cate o/ tit"e, as eidence o/ "a/" onership o/ the "and or o/ an encm#rance thereon, protects a #er or mort!a!ee ho, in !ood /aith, re"ied pon hat appears on the /ace o/ the certi7cate o/ tit"e.

PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK , Petitioner, s.


Facts:

?ome time in E" 1994, respondent ;eresita ;an ee (ee) #o!ht /rom respondent Prime >ast Properties Inc. (P>PI) on an insta""ment #asis a residentia" "ot "ocated in %inan!onan, Ria", ith an area o/ 204 sAare meters and coered # ;rans/er *erti7cate o/ ;it"e (;*;) No. 190. 1#&


Atty.

?#seAent", P>PI assi!ned its ri!hts oer a 218,098HsA m propert on 6!st 199 to respondent 6rmed Forces o/ the Phi"ippinesHRetirement and ?eparation %ene7ts ?stem, Inc. (6FPHR?%?), hich inc"ded the propert prchased # ee. ;herea/ter, or on ?eptem#er 10, 199, P>PI o#tained a P205,000,000.00 "oan /rom petitioner Phi"ippine Nationa" %an& (petitioner), secred # a mort!a!e oer seera" properties, inc"din! ee's propert. ;he mort!a!e as c"eared # the =osin! and and $se Re!"ator %oard (=$R%)

on

?eptem#er

1,

199.cra"ared


PI ma sti"" mort!a!e the propert to petitioner een it as nder a contract to se"". Ruling:

Mes. Note that at the time P>PI mort!a!ed the propert to the petitioner, the preai"in! contract #eteen respondents P>PI and ee as sti"" the *ontract to ?e"", as ee as et to /"" pa the prchase price o/ the propert. +n this 1#'


Atty.

point, P>PI as actin! /"" e"" ithin its ri!ht hen it mort!a!ed the propert to the petitioner, /or in a contract to se"", onership is retained # the se""er and is not to pass nti" /"" pament o/ the prchase price. In other ords, at the time o/ the mort!a!e, P>PI as sti"" the oner o/ the propert. ;hs, in *hina %an&in! *orporation . ?poses oada the *ort aDirmed the ri!ht o/ the oner@dee"oper to mort!a!e the propert s#:ect o/ dee"opment, to it3 P.. No. 95 cannot tota"" preent the oner or dee"oper

/rom

mort!a!in!

the

s#diision

"ot

or

condominim nit hen the tit"e thereto sti"" resides in the oner or dee"oper aaitin! the /"" pament o/ the prchase price # the insta""ment #er.O

S9&2s)s L)/n)' and L2d+ Ma'1')s, Petitioners, s.

M)n)*1a C/2a, Respondent. G.R. No. 14240 1$(


Atty.

arch 20, 2018

F!"#$:

?#:ect o/ the instant controers are tent-/or memoria" "ots "ocated at the =o" *ross emoria" Par& in %aran!a %a!#a!, Noa"iches, Qeon *it. Respondent, to!ether ith her mother, F"orencia R. *a"a!os, on the dispted propert. ;heir co-onership is eidenced # a eed o/ ?a"e and *erti7cate o/ Perpeta" *are, denominated as *ontract No. 810, hich as eBected on Ene 4, 1992.

+n ecem#er 1, 1995, respondent #orroed /rom petitioner sposes the amont o/ P150,000.00. ;he "oan as secred # a rea" estate mort!a!e oer the a#oementioned propert. Respondent committed to pa a month" interest o/  and an additiona" 10 month" interest in case o/ de/a"t.

Respondent ?#seAent",

/ai"ed

ithot

to

/"" sett"e

/orec"osre

o/

her

o#"i!ation.

the

mort!a!e,

onership o/ the s#:ect "ots ere trans/erred in the name o/ petitioners ia a eed o/ ;rans/er.

+n Ene 28, 199, respondent 7"ed ith the R;* o/ Qeon *it a *omp"aint a!ainst petitioners, ani"a emoria" Par& Inc., the compan hich ons the =o" *ross emoria" Par&, and the Re!ister o/ eeds o/ Qeon *it, prain! /or the ann"ment o/ the contract o/ mort!a!e #eteen her and petitioners on the !rond that the interest rates imposed are n:st and eBor#itant. Respondent a"so 1$1


Atty.

so!ht accontin! to determine her "ia#i"it nder the "a. ?he "i&eise praed that the Re!ister o/ eeds o/ Qeon *it and ani"a emoria" Par&, Inc. #e directed to recone the dispted propert to her.

+n Noem#er 20, 199, respondent moed /or the amendment o/ her comp"aint to inc"de the a""e!ation that she "ater discoered that onership o/ the s#:ect "ots as trans/erred in the name o/ petitioners # irte o/ a /or!ed eed o/ ;rans/er and 6Didait o/
;he R;* o/ Qeon *it rendered a ecision in /aor o/ petitioners, dismissin! the comp"aint o/ ene"ia *ha. +n appea", the *6 aDirmed, ith modi7cation, the :d!ment o/ the R;*. ;he *6 r"ed that respondent o"ntari" entered into a contract o/ "oan and that the eBection o/ the eed o/ ;rans/er is sDicient eidence o/ petitionersK acAisition o/ onership o/ the s#:ect propert.

Respondent 7"ed a otion /or Reconsideration. ;he *6 reconsidered its 7ndin!s and conc"ded that the eed o/ ;rans/er hich, on its /ace, trans/ers onership o/ the s#:ect propert to petitioner is, in /act, an eAita#"e mort!a!e. ;he *6 he"d that the tre intention o/ respondent as mere" to proide secrit /or her "oan and not to trans/er onership o/ the propert to petitioners.

1$


Atty.

I$$%&$:

HELD N+, the *6 did not err hen it r"ed that the eed o/ ;rans/er is acta"" an eAita#"e mort!a!e. 6n eAita#"e mort!a!e has #een de7ned as one hich, a"tho!h "ac&in! in some /orma"it, or /orm or ords, or other reAisites demanded # a statte, neerthe"ess reea"s the intention o/ the parties to char!e rea" propert as secrit /or a de#t, there #ein! no impossi#i"it nor anthin! contrar to "a in this intent.

+ne o/ the circmstances proided /or nder 6rtic"e 102 o/ the *ii" *ode, here a contract sha"" #e presmed to #e an eAita#"e mort!a!e, is Chere it ma #e /air" in/erred that the rea" intention o/ the parties is that the transaction sha"" secre the pament o/ a de#t or the per/ormance o/ an other o#"i!ation.C In the instant case, it has #een esta#"ished that the intent o/ #oth petitioners and respondent is that the s#:ect propert sha"" sere as secrit /or the "atterKs o#"i!ation to the /ormer. 6s correct" pointed ot # the *6, the circmstances srrondin! the eBection o/ the dispted eed o/ ;rans/er o"d sho that the said docment as eBected to circment the terms o/ the ori!ina" a!reement and deprie respondent o/ her mort!a!ed propert ithot the reAisite /orec"osre. 1$!


Atty.

In the instant case, eidence points to the /act that the sa"e o/ the s#:ect propert, as proen # the dispted eed o/ ;rans/er, as sim"ated to coer p the atomatic trans/er o/ onership in petitionersK /aor.
atomatic

appropriation

o/

the

s#:ect

mort!a!ed propert in the eent that respondent /ai"s to pa her o#"i!ation, the s#seAent acts o/ the parties and the circmstances srrondin! sch acts point to no other conc"sion than that petitioners ere empoered to acAire onership o/ the dispted propert ithot need o/ an /orec"osre.

Indeed, the *ort a!rees ith the *6 in not !iin! credence to petitionersK contention in their 6nser 7"ed ith the R;* that respondent oDered to trans/er onership o/ the s#:ect propert in their name as pament /or her otstandin! o#"i!ation. 6s this *ort has he"d, a"" persons in need o/ mone are "ia#"e to enter into contracta" re"ationships hateer the condition i/ on" to a""eiate their 7nancia" #rden a"#eit temporari".

*onsiderin! that the dispted propert as mort!a!ed to secre the pament o/ her o#"i!ation, the most "o!ica" and practica" thin! that she co"d hae done, i/ she is na#"e to pa her de#t, is to ait /or it to #e /orec"osed. ?he stands to "ose "ess o/ the a"e o/ the s#:ect propert i/ the same is /orec"osed, rather than i/ the tit"e thereto is direct" trans/erred to petitioners. ;his is so #ecase in /orec"osre, n"i&e in the present case here onership o/ the propert as assi!ned to petitioners, respondent can sti"" c"aim the 1$"


Atty.

#a"ance /rom the proceeds o/ the /orec"osre sa"e, i/ there #e an. In sch a case, she co"d sti"" recoer a portion o/ the a"e o/ the s#:ect propert rather than "osin! it comp"ete" # assi!nin! its onership to petitioners.

HEIRS OF FAUSTO C. IGNACIO, na)*+ MARFEL D. IGNACIO>MANALO, MILFA D. IGNACIO>MANALO AND FAUSTINO D. IGNACIO, Petitioners, s.

HOME BANKERS SAVINGS AND TRUST COMPANY, SPOUSES PHILLIP AND THELMA 1$#


Atty.

RODRIGUE?, CATHERINE, REYNOLD % JEANETTE, a** s2'na)d ?UNIGA, Respondents. G.R. No. 18

Eanar 28, 2018

F!"#$:

;o

parce"s

o/

"and

in

*a#ao,

a!na

ere

mort!a!ed as secrit /or the "oan eBtended to the petitioner, Fasto *. I!nacio # =ome ?ain!s %an& and ;rst *ompan.
er#a" reprchase@compromise

a!reement

as

acta"" reached and imp"emented # the parties. Petitioner eBpressed his i""in!ness thro!h a "etter, to pa the amont o/ P00,000.00 in /"", as #a"ance o/ the reprchase price, and reAested respondent #an& to re"ease to him the remainin! parce"s o/ "and. ;he #an&, hoeer, trned don his reAest. ;his prompted petitioner to case the annotation o/ an aderse c"aim on the said tit"es. %t 1$$


Atty.

then, the #an& as a#"e to so"d the properties ith the priate respondents. ?o the petitioner 7"ed an action /or speci7c per/ormance and dama!es a!ainst the #an&, as principa" re"ie/ /or reconeance o/ the s#:ect properties a/ter his pament o/ P00,000. I$$%&:

a

contract

/or

the

reprchase

o/

the

/orec"osed properties as per/ected #eteen petitioner and respondent #an&L H&LD:

*ontracts are per/ected # mere consent, hich is mani/ested # the meetin! o/ the oDer and the acceptance pon the thin! and the case hich are to constitte the contract. 6rtic"e 1819 o/ the *ii" *ode proides that consent is mani/ested # the meetin! o/ the oDer and the acceptance pon the thin! and the case hich are to constitte the contract. ;he oDer mst #e certain and the acceptance a#so"te. 6 Aa"i7ed acceptance constittes a conter-oDer. In Pa"attao . *ort o/ 6ppea"s, this *ort he"d that i/ the acceptance o/ the oDer as not a#so"te, sch acceptance is insDicient to !enerate consent that o"d per/ect a contract. ;hs3 *ontracts that are consensa" in natre, "i&e a contract o/ sa"e, are per/ected pon mere meetin! o/ the minds. +nce there is concrrence #eteen the oDer and the acceptance pon the s#:ect matter, consideration, and terms o/ pament, a contract is prodced. ;he oDer mst #e certain. ;o

conert

the

oDer

into

a

contract,

the

acceptance mst #e a#so"te and mst not Aa"i/

1

%$ Oliveros, Alvan Stephenson G.Ci .Civil Law Review II Case Digests Crisostomo Uribe

the

terms

o/

the

oDer

it

mst

#e

Atty.

p"ain,

neAioca", nconditiona", and ithot ariance o/ an sort /rom the proposa". 6 Aa"i7ed acceptance, or one that ino"es a ne proposa", constittes a conter-oDer and is a re:ection o/ the ori!ina" oDer. *onseAent", hen somethin! is desired hich is not eBact" hat is proposed in the the oDer oDer,, sch sch acce accept ptan ance ce is not not sDi sDici cien entt to !ener !enerat ate e cons consen entt #eca #ecase se an an modi modi7c 7cat ation ion or ariation /rom the terms o/ the oDer ann"s the oDer. ;he

/ore!oin!

c"ear"

shos

that

petitionerKs

acceptance o/ the respondent #an&Ks terms and conditions /or /or the the rep reprc rcha hase se o/ the the /ore /orec" c"os osed ed prop propert ertie ies s as as not not a#so" a#so"te. te. Petitio etitioner ner set a diDere diDerent nt reprc reprcha hase se price price and and a"so modi7ed the terms o/ pament, hich een contained a ni"atera" condition /or pament o/ the #a"ance (P00,000), (P 00,000), that is, dependin! on petitionerKs C7nancia" position.C ;he Aa"i7ed acceptance # petitioner as a conter-proposa" hic hich h mst mst #e acce accept pted ed # resp respon onde dent nt #an& #an&.. =oe =oee err, there as no eidence o/ an docment or ritin! shoin! the con/ormit o/ respondent #an&Ks oDicers to this conterproposa".

1$&


Atty.

BOBBY TAN, TAN, P>;I;I+N>R, s.

GRACE ANDRADE, PROCESO ANDRADE, JR., CHARITY A. SANTIAGO, HENRY ANDRADE, ANDRE ANDRADE, JASMIN BLA?A, GLORY ANDRADE, MIRIAM ROSE ANDRADE, AND JOSEPH ANDRADE,R>?P+N>N;?.  > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  G.R. No. 1201

GRACE ANDRADE, CHARITY A. SANTIAGO, HENRY ANDRADE, ANDRE ANDRADE, JASMIN BLA?A, MIRIAM ROSE ANDRADE, AND JOSEPH ANDRADE, P>;I;I+N>R?, vs. BOBBY TAN, TAN, R>?P+N>N;. G.R. No. 11904

6!st , 2018

1$'


Atty.

F!"#$: F!"#$:

Rosario Jda. e 6ndrade as the re!istered oner o/ /or parce"s o/ "and &non as ots 1, 1, 19, and 20 sit sitat ated ed in *e *e# # *it *it hic hich h she she mort mort!a !a!e !ed d to and and s#s s#seA eAe ent nt" "

/ore /orec" c"os osed ed

# one one

?imo ?imon n i. i.
the the

redemption period as a#ot to eBpire, Rosario so!ht the assistance o/ %o## ;an ho a!reed to redeem the s#:ect properties. ;herea/ter, Rosario so"d the same to %o## and her son, Proceso 6ndrade, Er. /or P100,000.00 as eidenced # a eed o/ 6#so"te ?a"e dated 6pri" 29, 198. +n E" 2, 198, Proceso, Er. eBected a eed o/ 6ssi!nment, cedin! nto nto %o## %o##  his ri!h ri!htts and int interes erestts oer oer the s#: s#:ec ectt prope propert rtie ies s in cons consid idera erati tion on o/ P5 P50, 0,00 000. 0.00 00.. ;he ;he e eed ed o/ 6ssi!nment as si!ned #, #, amon! others, =enr 6ndrade, one o/ Rosario's sons, as instrmenta" itness. espite the eed o/ 6ssi!nment, %o## eBtended an +ption to % the s#:ect properties in /aor o/ Proceso, Er., !iin! the "atter nti" 300 in the eenin! o/ E" 81, 194 to prchase the same /or the sm o/ P810,000.00.

Atty.

the s#:ect properties ere con:!a" in natre, and ths, Rosario had no ri!ht to dispose o/ their respectie shares therein. In this "i!ht, the ar!ed that the remained as coone oners rs o/ the the s#: s#:ec ectt prop proper erti ties es to!e to!eth ther er ith ith %o## %o## , despite the issance o/ the ;*;s ;*;s in his name. %o## on the other hand contended that the s#:ect prop proper erti ties es ere ere so"e so"e" " one oned d # Rosa Rosari rio o per per the the ;* ;*; ;s issed in her name and that he had a"id" acAired the same pon Proceso, Er.'s Er.'s /ai"re to eBercise eBe rcise his option to # #ac& the s#:ect properties. I$$%&:

;he transaction is that o/ a sa"e and not an eAita#"e mort!a!e. ;his can #e seen /rom the terms and conditions o/ the transaction, /rther that the s#:ect deed o/ sa"e as not een Aestioned # the 6ndrades at the time o/ its eBection. 6s Proceso, Er. Er. /ai"ed to eBercise his option to # #ac& the s#:ect properties, the tit"es thereto ere a"id" conso"idated in %o##'s /aor, res"tin! to the issance o/ ;*;s in his name hich are deemed to #e conc"sie proo/ o/ his onership thereto. ;he R;* /ond that the s#:ect properties Cappeared to #e the eBc"sie properties o/ Rosario.C Fina"", it /ond that the 6ndrades' c"aim oer the s#:ect properties had a"read prescri#ed and that "aches had a"read set in.

1%1


Atty.

S9&2s)s N1*& and E*1ad&'a Ra&s, Petitioners vs.

1%


Atty.

Ra2* O1s9& and Fa' Eas Ban and T'2s C&9an+, Respondents. Fe#rar 2, 2018 G.R. No. 19804 F!"#$:

?poses Ramos entrsted their rea" propert to respondent +#ispo so that the "atter i"" /aci"itate a "oan /rom Far >astern %an& (F>%;*) in their /aor. ;he "oan as approed # F>%;* and re"eased the "oan amont o/ Php 250,000 to the sposes. ;he Rea" >state ort!a!e as annotated on the tit"e o/ the parce" o/ "ot. ;he sposes s#seAent" paid the "oan amont to +#ispo in the amont o/ Php 250,000. ;he a"so demanded that the tit"e #e re"eased to them #ecase their o#"i!ation as a"read /"7""ed.

=oeer, the /ond ot that the

amont re"eased # F>%;* as not Php 250,000 #t Php 1,150,09.00. +#ispo /ai"ed to re"ease the tit"e to the sposes and he co"d no "on!er #e /ond. Petitioner sposes 7"ed a comp"aint /or dec"aration o/ mort!a!e as oid. F>%;* aerred that the contract cannot #e dec"ared as oid #ecase a tota" amont o/ Php 2.5 as sti"" otstandin!.

I$$%&:

state ort!a!e is oid on the !rond that the sposes did not !ie their consent.

H&LD:

1%!


Atty.

N+, there as a a"id accommodation mort!a!e. ;he a"idit o/ an accommodation mort!a!e is a""oed nder 6rtic"e 205 o/ the *ii" *ode hich proides that Cthird persons ho are not parties to the principa" o#"i!ation ma secre the "atter # p"ed!in! or mort!a!in! their on propert.C 6n accommodation mort!a!or, ordinari", is not himse"/ a recipient o/ the "oan, otherise that o"d #e contrar to his desi!nation as sch.

%;* the i"" secre a "oan, it as n#e"iea#"e /or them to simp" accept the P250,000.00 "oan proceeds ithot seein! an docment or ocher eidencin! re"ease o/ sch amont # the #an& containin! the detai"s o/ the transaction sch as month" amortiation, interest rate and added char!es. It is diDic"t to #e"iee petitioners' simp"istic eBp"anation that the reAested docments /rom +#ispo #t the "atter o"d not !ie them an. ?ch /ai"re o/ +#ispo to prodce an receipt or docment at a"" comin! /rom the #an& sho"d hae, at the 7rst instance, a"erted the petitioners that somethin! as amiss in the "oan transaction /or hich the o"ntari" eBected the R> ith their on propert as co""atera". Not on" that, despite #ein! aare o/ the a#sence o/ an docment to ascertain i/ +#ispo indeed 7""ed p the R> contract /orm in accordance ith their instrctions,

petitioners

accepted

the

spposed

"oan

proceeds in the /orm o/ persona" chec&s issed # +#ispo ho c"aimed to hae an accont ith F>%;*, instead o/ chec&s issed # the #an& itse"/. ;hese a""e!ed chec&s ere not s#mitted in eidence # the petitioners ho co"d hae easi" o#tained copies or record proin! their issance and encashment. 1%"


Atty.

6nother distr#in! /act is h, despite hain! si!ned the R> contract in their name as mort!a!ors, petitioners did not !o direct" to the #an& to pa their "oan. +ne is a"so tempted to as& ho petitioners co"d hae possi#" arried at the amont o/ amortiation paments ithot hain! seen an docment /rom F>%;* pertainin! to their "oan accont. ?ch condct o/ petitioners in not #otherin! to appear #e/ore the #an& or direct" dea"in! ith it re!ardin! their otstandin! o#"i!ation stron!" s!!ests that there as no sch "oan accont in their name and it as rea"" +#ispo ho as the #orroer and petitioners ere mere" accommodation mort!a!ors.

1%#


Atty.

DAVID A. RAYMUNDO, Petitioner, s.

GALEN REALTY AND MINING CORPORATION, Respondent G.R. No. 191594 +cto#er 1, 2018

F!"#$:

*ii" *ase No. 10 is an action /or Reconeance ith ama!es 7"ed # respondent Ga"en Rea"t and inin! *orporation a!ainst Ramndo and ;ensoreB *orporation . % irte o/ a eed o/ ?a"e dated ?eptem#er 9, 19 eBected #eteen Ga"en and Ramndo, tit"e to the propert as trans/erred to the "atter, ho "ater on so"d the propert to ;ensoreB ho s#seAent" trans/erred tit"e pon itse"/. ;he Re!iona" ;ria" *ort o/ a&ati *it, r"ed that the transaction #eteen Ramndo and Ga"en as acta"" an 1%$


Atty.

eAita#"e mort!a!e. +n appea", the *6 phe"d the R;* decision #t modi7ed the "oan o#"i!ation o/ Ga"en and redced the same to P8,5,000.00. Ga"en moed /or the eBection o/ the *6 decision, s#mittin!

that

the

rit

o/

eBection

sho"d

order

Ramndo and ;ensoreB to so"idari" pa the /air mar&et a"e o/ the propert, dama!es and costs o/ the sit. Ramndo and ;ensoreB opposed the motion, ar!in! that the *6 decision proides /or to a"ternaties H one, /or Ramndo to recone the propert to Ga"en a/ter pament o/ P8,5,000.00 ith "e!a" interest or, to, i/ reconeance is no "on!er /easi#"e, /or Ramndo and ;ensoreB to so"idari" pa Ga"en the /air mar&et a"e o/ the propert. In its +rder dated Fe#rar 8, 200, the R;* !ranted Ga"en's motion and ordered the issance o/ a rit o/ eBection. Ramndo 7"ed a *omp"iance@*omment to the R;*'s order, contendin! that his o#"i!ation to recone is not et de pendin! pament o/ Ga"en's on o#"i!ation. +n ecem#er 12, 200, the R;* issed an +rder "i/tin! the sspension o/ the action sa"e and directin! Ga"en to coordinate ith the dept sheriD /or the en/orcement o/ the decision. ;he R;* r"ed that Ramndo /ai"ed to sho proo/ that the tit"e as a"read re!istered in his name and ths, it reso"es to den his comp"iance@comment. Ramndo 7"ed a otion /or Reconsideration o/ the R;*'s order #t it as denied. 6s a res"t, the propert as so"d

at

a

p#"ic

action

on

Noem#er

2,

200

/or P8,10,50.00, ith Ga"en as the hi!hest #idder, and a certi7cate o/ sa"e as issed # the sheriD. 1%%


Atty.

Ramndo then 7"ed a specia" cii" action /or certiorari ith the *6 hich as dismissed /or "ac& o/ merit. =e 7"ed /or reconsideration #t as "i&eise denied. I$$%&:

propert

is

proper

despite

the

/act

that

reconeance is sti"" /easi#"e.

H&LD:

N+. It does not deo"e pon Ramndo to determine hether he is i""in! to recone the propert or not #ecase it as not his to #e!in ith. I/ Ramndo re/ses to recone the propert, then the cort ma direct that the act #e done # some other person appointed # it as athoried # ?ection 10 o/ R"e 89 o/ the R"es o/ *ort. Ga"en's o#"i!ation to pa the mort!a!e o#"i!ation is not s#:ect to Ramndo's reconeance o/ the propert. I/ Ga"en re/ses to pa, it is on" then that the cort ma direct the /orec"osre o/ the mort!a!e on the propert and order its sa"e at p#"ic action to satis/ Ga"en's :d!ment de#t a!ainst Ramndo. I/ Ramndo, meanhi"e, n:st" re/ses to accept Ga"en's pament, the "atter's remed is to consi!n the pament ith the cort in accordance ith the *ii" *ode proisions on consi!nment. It is on" hen reconeance is no "on!er /easi#"e that Ramndo and ;ensoreB sho"d pa Ga"en the /air mar&et a"e o/ the propert. In other ords, it is hen the propert has passed on to an innocent prchaser /or a"e and in !ood /aith, has #een dissipated, or has #een s#:ected to an ana"o!os circmstance hich renders the 1%&


Atty.

retrn retrn o/ the the proper propert t imposs impossi#" i#"e e that that Ramn Ramndo do and@or and@or ;ensoreB, is o#"i!ed to pa Ga"en the /air mar&et a"e o/ the propert proper t.. ;he

R;*,

there/ore,

committed

!ra rae

a#s #se

o/

discretion in orderin! the pament o/ the /air mar&et a"e o/ the s#:ect propert despite the /act that reconeance is sti""

/easi#"e

nder

the

circmstances

o/

this

case.

*ons *onseA eAe ent nt" ",, the the *6 comm commit itte ted d a ree reers rsi# i#"e "e erro errorr in sst sstai aini nin! n! the the assa assai" i"ed ed R;* orde orders rs and and in dism dismis issi sin! n! Ram Ramnd ndo' o's s spec specia ia"" cii cii"" acti action on /or cert certio iora rari ri /or /or "ac& "ac& o/ merit

Sa' T-& (SPV>AMC!, In0., Petitioner s.

1%'


Atty.

Pa9)' C1+ C&'9&'a1&n & /) P/1*1991n)s, Respondent arch , 2018 G.R. No. 19211

F!"#$: F!"#$:

Ria Ria"" *omm *ommer erci cia" a" %an& %an&in in! ! *o. *o. (R*% (R*%*) *) eBec eBect ted ed a ort!a!e ;rst Indentre (;I) ith respondent Paper *it *o. o/ the Phi"ippines (Paper (Paper *it). ;he "oan as as secred # mort!a!e mort!a!e oer seera" parce"s parce"s o/ "ot. ?#seAent ?#seAent" ",, R*%* cance""ed ni"atera"" the mort!a!e oer the machineries and eAipments thereon. 6 second and third "oan as app"ied /or and !ranted in /ao /a orr o/ Paper per *it *it.

6s a con conseA seAen enc ce, the the ;I ;I as as

amend mended ed to sho sho that thes these e ere ere sec secred red # cha chatte" te" mort!a!e

oer

eAi Aipments

and

machineries

o/

the

respondent.
;he

respondent a""e!ed that the sa"e sho"d #e dec"ared as n"" and oid /or #ein! condcted ithot prior notice to the respondent. ;he "atter "atter a"so a""e!e that that the machineries and and the eAipments in the p"ants sho"d not #e inc"ded in the sa"e #ecase these ere not part o/ the ;I.

I$$%&: 1&(


Atty.

M>?,

the

said

machineries

and

eAipments

are

inc"ded in the ;I eBected #eteen the respondent and the #an&. #an&. ;he contract contract stated stated persona" persona" properties propertiesO O hich proper" inc"des the machineries and eAipments o/ the respon responden dent. t.

;he contr contract actin! in! partie parties s ma esta#" esta#"ish ish an an

a!reement, term, and condition the ma deem adisa#"e, proi proide ded d the the are are not not cont contra rar r to "a "a, mora mora"s "s or p#" p#"ic ic po"ic. ;he ri!ht to enter into "a/" contracts constittes one one o/ the the "i "i#e #ert rtie ies s !ar !aran ante teed ed # the the *ons *onsti tit tti tion on.. 6 cortKs prpose in eBaminin! a contract is to interpret the intent o/ the contractin! parties, as o#:ectie" mani/ested # them. ;he process o/ interpretin! a contract reAires the cor cortt to ma&e ma&e a pre" pre"im imin inar ar  inA inAir ir  as to het hethe herr the the cont contra ract ct #e/o #e/ore re it is am#i am#i! !o os. s. 6 cont contra ract ct pro prois isio ion n is am#i!os i/ it is sscepti#"e o/ to reasona#"e a"ternatie interpretations.
;he ;he p"ain p"ain "an! "an!a a!e !e and and "i "ite tera ra"" inte interp rpre reta tati tion on o/ the the ;Is mst #e app"ied. ;he petitioner, other creditor #an&s and Paper *it intended /rom the er 7rst eBection o/ the indentres

that

the

machineries

and

eAipments

enmerated in 6nneBes C6C and C%C are inc"ded. +#ios", +#ios", ith ith the the cont contin ine ed d incr increa ease se in the the amo amont nt o/ the the "oan "oan,, 1&1


Atty.

tota"in! hndreds o/ mi""ions o/ pesos, Paper *it had to oDer oDer a"" a"" a" a"a# a#"e "e prop propert ertie ies s acce accept pta# a#"e "e to the the credi credito torr #an&s.

R&+a* Sav1n@s Ban, Petitioner s.

F)'nand& As1a, ) a*. , Respondent G.R. No. 185 6pri" 10, 2018

F!"#$: F!"#$:

Pacen acenci cia a ?a"i ?a"ita ta eBec eBect ted ed a mort mort!a !a!e !e oer oer her her rea" rea" propert as a secrit /or "oans in the amonts o/ P25,000 and an additiona" o/ P20,000 /rom Roa" ?ain!s %an&, the de#ts

ere

incrred

ith

her

hs#and

Ja"endaria.

=oeer, the de#ts /e"" de and #oth de#tors /ai"ed to pa. =enc =ence e the the #an& #an& /orec" /orec"os osed ed the prop proper ert t..

6t the the p#"i p#"ic c

actio action, n, Roa" Roa" ?ain! ?ain!s s %an& as the hi!hest hi!hest #idder #idder..

6s

?a"ita and Ja"endaria /ai"ed to redeem the propert, the ;*; as can cance"" ce""ed ed and anothe otherr as iss ssed in /a /a or o/ the the petitioner #an&.

6 Notice to Jacate as sent to the occpants o/ the propert proper t.. =oeer, =oeer, the occpant respondents respondent s contested the notice statin! that the ere not aare o/ the proceedin!s oer the dispted dispted "ot. ;he c"aim that that the hae hae #een in an open, continos, eBc"sie and notorios possession o/ the prope propert rt  /or /or 40 ear ears s and and s#s s#seA eAe ent nt" " 7"ed 7"ed an $r!e $r!ent nt otion to Qash Bection. 1&


Atty.

;he tria" cort !ranted the otion to Qash 7"ed # the respondents. Petitioner #an& 7"ed a Petition /or Reie on *ertiorari nder R"e 45 ar!in! that since it is a !oernment-oned 7nancia" instittion, 6rt 8185 o/ the *ii" *ode does not app" to it.

It cannot #e en:oined in

/orec"osin! de"inAent acconts prsant to P.. 85.

I$$%&:

H&LD:

N+. ;he !enera" r"e that once the propert o/ a de#tor is /orec"osed and so"d to a !oernment 7nancia" instittion, it o"d #e mandator /or the cort to p"ace the !oernment 7nancia" instittion in the possession and contro" o/ the propert prsant to ?ection 4 o/ P.. No. 85 is not ithot eBception. ;he r"e app"ies on" hen it is the de#tor ho occpies the propert. %t i/ a parce" o/ "and is occpied # a part other than the :d!ment de#tor, the proper procedre is /or the cort to order a hearin! to determine the natre o/ said aderse possession #e/ore it isses a rit o/ possession. ;his is #ecase a third part, ho is not pri to the de#tor, is protected # the "a. ?ch third part ma #e e:ected /rom the premises on" a/ter he has #een !ien an opportnit to #e heard, to comp" ith the time-honored princip"e o/ de process.

;he c"aim o/ the respondents as not as "essees or that their ri!hts ere anthin! "ess than that o/ Pacencia ?a"ita's. ;he respondents c"aim that the are oners o/ the 1&!


Atty.

propert in dispte and hae #een /or the past 40 ears. ;he o#"i!ation o/ a cort to isse a rit o/ possession in /aor o/ the prchaser in an eBtra:dicia" /orec"osre sa"e ceases to #e ministeria", once it appears that there is a third part ho is in possession o/ the propert and is c"aimin! a ri!ht aderse to that o/ the de#tor@mort!a!or. +ne ho c"aims to #e the oner o/ a propert possessed # another mst #rin! the appropriate :dicia" action /or its phsica" recoer. ;he term C:dicia" processC co"d mean no "ess than an e:ectment sit or reiindicator action, in hich the onership c"aims o/ the contendin! parties ma #e proper" heard and ad:dicated.

NICANORA G. BUCTON (d)0)as)d!, s2s12)d + RE$UILDA B. YRAY, Petitioner, s.

RURAL BANK OF EL SALVADOR, INC., MISAMIS ORIENTAL, and REYNALDO CUYONG, Respondents, s.

ERLINDA CONCEPCION AND HER HUSBAND AND AGNES BUCTON LUGOD, ;hird Part e/endants. G.R. No. 1925 1&"


Atty.

Fe#rar 24, 2014

Facts:


a

"oan

in

the

amont

o/ P80,000.00

/rom

respondent #an& that as secrit /or the "oan, *oncepcion mort!a!ed petitioner's hose and "ot to respondent #an& sin! a ?P6 a""e!ed" eBected # petitioner in /aor o/ *oncepcion that *oncepcion /ai"ed to pa the "oan that petitioner's hose and "ot ere /orec"osed # respondent sheriD ithot a Notice o/ >Btra-Edicia" Forec"osre or Notice o/ 6ction ?a"e and that petitioner's hose and "ot ere so"d in an action sa"e in /aor o/ respondent #an&. Respondent #an& 7"ed an 6nser interposin! "ac& o/ case o/ action as a de/ense. It denied the a""e!ation o/ petitioner that the ?P6 as /or!ed and aerred that on Ene 22, 19, petitioner ent to the #an& and promised to sett"e the "oan o/ *oncepcion #e/ore ?eptem#er 80, 19. 6s to the a""e!ed irre!"arities in the /orec"osre proceedin!s, respondent #an& asserted that it comp"ied ith the reAirements o/ the "a in /orec"osin! the hose and "ot. % a o/ cross-c"aim, 1&#


Atty.

respondent #an& praed that in the eent o/ an aderse :d!ment a!ainst it, *oncepcion, its co-de/endant, #e ordered to indemni/ it /or a"" dama!es ?ince petitioner did not mort!a!e an o/ her properties nor did she o#tain a "oan /rom respondent #an&, she decided to !o to respondent #an& on Ene 22, 19 to inAire a#ot the matter. It as on" then that she discoered that her hose and "ot as mort!a!ed # irte o/ a /or!ed ?P6. ?he insisted that her si!natre and her hs#and's si!natre on the ?P6 ere /or!ed and that eer since she !ot married, she no "on!er sed her maiden name, Nicanora Ga#ar, in si!nin! docments. Petitioner a"so denied appearin! #e/ore the notar p#"ic, ho notaried the ?P6. ?he a"so testi7ed that the propert re/erred to in the ?P6, is a acant "ot and that the hose, hich as mort!a!ed and /orec"osed, is coered # a diDerent tit"e. Issue:

Mes. *oncepcion, on the other hand, is "ia#"e to pa respondent

#an&

her

npaid

o#"i!ation

nder

the

Promissor Note dated Ene 11, 192, ith interest. 6s e hae said, *oncepcion si!ned the Promissor Note in her on persona" capacit ths, she cannot escape "ia#i"it. ?he is a"so "ia#"e to reim#rse respondent #an& /or a"" dama!es, attornes' /ees, and costs the "atter is ad:d!ed to pa petitioner in this case.

1&$


Atty.

SALLY YOSHI?AKI, Petitioner, s.

JOY TRAINING CENTER OF AURORA, INC., Respondent. G.R. No. 149 E" 81, 2018

F!"#$:

Respondent Eo ;rainin! *enter o/ 6rora, Inc. is a non-stoc&, non-pro7t re"i!ios edcationa" instittion. It as the re!istered oner o/ a parce" o/ "and and the #i"din! thereon "ocated in ?an is >Btension Pro& No. 1, %aran!a %han!in, %a"er, 6rora. +n Noem#er 10, 199, the sposes Richard and inda Eohnson so"d the rea" properties, a

Atty.

*omp"aint ith the attached 6mended *omp"aint. ;he amended comp"aint imp"eaded *eci"ia 6. 6#ordo, oDicer-inchar!e o/ the Re!ister o/ eeds o/ %a"er, 6rora, as additiona" de/endant. ;he R;* !ranted the motion on the same date. ;he comp"aint a""e!ed that the sposes Eohnson so"d its properties ithot the reAisite athorit /rom the #oard o/ directors. It assai"ed the a"idit o/ the #oard reso"tion hich

prported" !ranted

the

sposes

Eohnson

the

athorit to se"" its rea" properties. It aerred that on" a minorit o/ the #oard, athoried the sa"e thro!h the reso"tion. ;he

sposes

Moshia&i

7"ed

their

6nser

ith

*omp"sor *onterc"aims on Ene 28, 1999. ;he c"aimed that Eo ;rainin! athoried the sposes Eohnson to se"" the parce" o/ "and. ;he asserted that a ma:orit o/ the #oard o/ trstees

approed

the

reso"tion.

Frthermore,

the

hi!h"i!hted that the
co!nia#"e

#

the

?ecrities

and

>Bchan!e

*ommission (?>*). ;he R;* r"ed in /aor o/ the sposes Moshia&i. It /ond that Eo ;rainin! oned the rea" properties. =oeer, it he"d that the sa"e as a"id #ecase Eo ;rainin! athoried the sposes Eohnson to se"" the rea" properties. It reco!nied that there ere on" 7e acta" mem#ers o/ the #oard o/ trstees conseAent", a ma:orit o/ the #oard o/ trstees a"id" athoried the sa"e. It a"so r"ed that the sa"e o/ persona" properties as a"id #ecase the ere re!istered in the sposes Eohnson's name. 1&&


Atty.

Eo ;rainin! appea"ed the R;* decision to the *6. ;he *6 phe"d the R;*'s :risdiction oer the case #t reersed its r"in! ith respect to the sa"e o/ rea" properties. It maintained that the present action is co!nia#"e # the R;* #ecase it ino"es recoer o/ onership /rom third parties. It r"ed that the reso"tion is oid #ecase it as not approed # a ma:orit o/ the #oard o/ trstees. It stated that nder ?ection 25 o/ the *orporation *ode, the #asis /or determinin! the composition o/ the #oard o/ trstees is the "ist 7Bed in the artic"es o/ incorporation. ;he *6 did not a"so !ie an pro#atie a"e to the certi7cation. It stated that the certi7cation /ai"ed to indicate the date and the names o/ the trstees present in the meetin!. oreoer, the sposes Moshia&i did not present the mintes that o"d proe that the certi7cation had #een issed prsant to a #oard reso"tion.

;he *6 a"so denied the sposes Moshia&i's motion /or reconsideration. I$$%&:

;here is no contract o/ a!enc #eteen Eo ;rainin! and the sposes Eohnson to se"" the parce" o/ "and ith its improements. 6rtic"e 14 o/ the *ii" *ode proides that the contract o/ a!enc mst #e ritten /or the a"idit o/ the sa"e o/ a piece o/ "and or an interest therein. +therise, the sa"e sha"" #e oid. 6 re"ated proision, 6rtic"e 1 o/

1&'


Atty.

the *ii" *ode, states that specia" poers o/ attorne are necessar to cone rea" ri!hts oer immoa#"e properties. ;he reso"tion hich as proided # the petitioner hich a""e!ed" !rants the sposes Eohnson a specia" poer o/ attorne is ne!ated # the phrase C"and and #i"din! oned # sposes Richard 6. and inda E. Eohnson.C
in

!enera"

terms

comprises

on"

acts

o/

administration, een i/ the principa" sho"d state that he ithho"ds no poer or that the a!ent ma eBecte sch acts as he ma consider appropriate, or een tho!h the a!enc sho"d athorie a !enera" and n"imited mana!ement.C

;he a#sence o/ a contract o/ a!enc renders the contract o/ sa"e nen/orcea#"eEo ;rainin! eDectie" did not enter into a a"id contract o/ sa"e ith the sposes Moshia&i. Petitioner c"aim o/ !ood /aith is o/ no moment, the r"e that persons dea"in! ith a re!istered "and hae the "e!a" ri!ht to re" on the /ace o/ the tit"e and to dispense ith the need to inAire /rther, on" app"ies hen the onership o/ a parce" o/ "and is dispted and not hen the /act o/ a!enc is contested. 1'(


Atty.

SPOUSES EUGENE L. LIM and CONSTANCIA LIM, Petitioners, s.

THE COURT OF APPEALS>M1nadana& Sa1&n, HON. FLORENCIA D. SEALANA>ABBU, 1'1


Atty.

P')s1d1n@ J2d@) & B'an0/ 6;, R)@1&na* T'1a* C&2' & Ca@a+an d) O'& C1+, and T/) BANK OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, Respondents. G.R. No. 19215

Eanar 80, 2018

F!"#$:

+n

Eanar

2,

1999,

respondent

%an&

o/

the

Phi"ippine Is"ands 7"ed #e/ore the Re!iona" ;ria" *ort a comp"aint

/or

pre"iminar eri7cation

co""ection

in:nction and

o/

mone

a!ainst

certi7cation

ith

the

praer

petitioners.

a!ainst

/or ;he

/orm-shoppin!

attached to the comp"aint ere si!ned # Francisco R. Ramos (Ramos), then %PI 6ssistant Jice-President and indanao Re!ion endin! =ead. +n 6pri" 22, 1999, the petitioners moed to dismiss %PI's comp"aint on the !rond that there as a pendin! action /or /orec"osre proceedin!s #e/ore the R;* o/ +amis *it, 7"ed # %PI a!ainst Phi"compa&, a corporation here the petitioners are the ma:orit stoc&ho"ders. R;* denied

the

petitioners'

motion

to

dismiss

and

the

s#seAent motion /or reconsideration. $ndeterred, the petitioners 7"ed another motion to dismiss, this time, on the !rond that eri7cation and certi7cation did not state or dec"are that Ramos as 7"in! the s#:ect comp"aint in a representatie capacit or as an athoried oDicer o/ %PI nor did it state that Ramos as athoried # %PI's %oard o/ irectors to 7"e the comp"aint thro!h a #oard reso"tion made speci7ca"" /or the prpose

1'


Atty.

%PI s#mitted a cop o/ the ?pecia" Poer o/ 6ttorne (?P6) si!ned and eBected # Rosario Erado-%enedicto (%enedicto), the 6ssistant Jice-President o/ %PI, !rantin! Ramos the athorit to represent the #an& and si!n the eri7cation and certi7cation a!ainst /orm shoppin! on %PI's #eha"/. 6"so, it s#mitted a cop o/ the certi7ed tre cop o/ %PI's *orporate ?ecretar's *erti7cate shoin! that %enedicto as amon! those athoried # the #an&'s >Bectie *ommittee to !rant and eBtend a ?P6 to other #an& oDicers to appear in cort in cases here %PI is the comp"ainant or p"aintiD. %PI contended that its s#missions a"read

constitted

s#stantia"

comp"iance

ith

the

procedra" r"es and sho"d #e app"ied in this case to /aci"itate and eDectate the ends o/ s#stantia" :stice. ;he R;* denied the petitioners' second motion to dismiss and the s#seAent motion /or reconsideration. ;he petitioners assai"ed these orders o/ denia" in the petition /or certiorari the 7"ed ith the *6. ;he *6 dismissed the petitioners' certiorari petition. I$$%&:

secretarKs comp"iance

certi7cate ith

the

o"d

constitte

reAirements

on

eri7cation@certi7cation. H&LD:

M>?. 6tho!h a c"oser "oo& into the ?P6 and the *orporate ?ecretar's *erti7cate s#mitted # %PI reea"s that at the time the s#:ect comp"aint as 7"ed on Ramos did not hae the eBpress athorit to 7"e and si!n the eri7cation

and

certi7cation

a!ainst

/orm

shoppin! 1'!


Atty.

attached to %PI's comp"aint. %PI's s#seAent eBection o/ the ?P6, constitted a rati7cation o/ Ramos' nathoried representation in the co""ection case 7"ed a!ainst the petitioners. ;he act o/ rati7cation is con7rmation o/ hat its a!ent or de"e!ate has done ithot or ith insDicient athorit. 6"so at the time the comp"aint a!ainst the petitioners as 7"ed, Ramos a"so he"d the position o/ 6ssistant JicePresident /or %PI Northern indanao and as then the hi!hest oDicia" representin! the #an& in the Northern indanao area. ;his position and his standin! in the %PI hierach, p"ace him in a sDicient" hi!h and athoritatie position to eri/ the trth/"ness and correctness o/ the a""e!ations in the s#:ect comp"aint, to :sti/ his athorit in 7"in! the comp"aint and to si!n the eri7cation and certi7cation a!ainst /orm shoppin!.
Non-comp"iance

ith

the

eri7cation

reAirement does not necessari" render the p"eadin! /ata"" de/ectie, and is s#stantia"" comp"ied ith hen si!ned # one ho has amp"e &no"ed!e o/ the trth o/ the a""e!ations in the comp"aint or petition, and hen matters a""e!ed in the petition hae #een made in !ood /aith or are tre and correct.

Atty.

REMAN RECIO, Petitioner, s.

HEIRS OF THE SPOUSES AGUEDO and MARIA ALTAMIRANO, na)*+ ALEJANDRO, ADELAIDA, CATALINA, ALFREDO, FRANCISCO, a** s2'na)d ALTAMIRANO VIOLETAALTAMIRANO OLFATO, and LORETAALTAMIRANO VDA. DE MARALIT and SPOUSES LAURO and MARCELINA LAJARCA, Respondents. G.R. No. 12849

E" 24, 2018 1'#


Atty.

F!"#$:

In the 1950's, Nena Recio, the mother o/ Reman Recio, "eased /rom the respondents 6"e:andro, 6de"aida, *ata"ina, 6"/redo,

Francisco,

a""

srnamed

6"tamirano,

Jio"eta

6"tamirano +"/ato, and oreto 6"tamirano Jda. e ara"it a parce" o/ "and ipa *it, %atan!as. ;he 6"tamiranos inherited the s#:ect "and /rom their deceased parents, the sposes 6!edo 6"tamirano and aria Ja"dia. ;he petitioner c"aimed that in 19, the 6"tamiranos oDered to se"" the s#:ect propert to Nena /or P500,000.00. ;he "atter accepted sch oDer, hich prompted the 6"tamiranos to aie the renta"s /or the s#:ect propert. =oeer, the sa"e did not occr at that time de to the /a"t o/ the 6"tamiranos. >en so Nena contined to occp and se the propert ith the consent o/ the 6"tamiranos. ;he 6"tamiranos then conso"idated the to (2) parce"s o/ "and hich ere eenta"" s#diided into three parce"s o/ "and hich ere then denominated as ots 1, 2, and 8. ;he petitioner and his /ami" remained in peace/" possession o/ ot No. 8.

;he petitioner then reneed Nena's option to # the s#:ect propert. ;he petitioner condcted a series o/ ne!otiations ith respondent 6"e:andro ho introdced himse"/ as representin! the other heirs. 6/ter the said ne!otiations, the 6"tamiranos thro!h 6"e:andro entered into an ora" contract o/ sa"e ith the petitioner oer the s#:ect propert. e to the ora" contract o/ sa"e, the petitioner made partia" paments to the 6"tamiranos in the tota" amont o/ P110,000.00. 6"e:andro d" receied and ac&no"ed!ed a"" the partia" paments made # the 1'$


petitioner.

6/terard

the

petitioner

oDered

Atty.

in

man

instances to pa the remainin! #a"ance o/ the a!reed prchase price o/ the s#:ect propert #t 6"e:andro &ept on aoidin! the petitioner. %ecase o/ this, the petitioner demanded /rom the 6"tamiranos, thro!h 6"e:andro, the eBection o/ a eed o/ 6#so"te ?a"e in eBchan!e /or the /"" pament o/ the a!reed price. ;hs, on Fe#rar 24, 199, the petitioner 7"ed a comp"aint /or ?peci7c Per/ormance ith ama!es. +n arch 14, 199, the petitioner a"so cased to annotate on the ;*; No. ;-10258 a Notice o/ is Pendens.

Atty.

No. 8 did not #ind his co-oners #ecase a sa"e o/ rea" propert # one prportin! to #e an a!ent o/ the oner ithot an ritten athorit /rom the "atter is n"" and oid. 6n ?P6 /rom the co-oners prsant to 6rtic"e 1 o/ the Ne *ii" *ode is necessar. Not satis7ed ith the decision, the petitioner so!ht reconsideration #t his motion as denied. I$$%&:

N+. Gien the eBpressed reAirement nder the 6rtic"es 14 and 1 o/ the *ii" *ode that there mst #e a ritten athorit to se"" an immoa#"e propert, the /act that 6"e:andro did not hae an ?P6 is detrimenta" to the case o/ the petitioner. It cannot #e denied that the ora" contract o/ sa"e entered into #eteen the petitioner and 6"e:andro as a"id. =oeer, the *6 /ond that it as on" 6"e:andro ho a!reed to the sa"e. ;here is no eidence to sho that the other co-oners consented to 6"e:andro's sa"e transaction ith the petitioner. ;hs, /or ant o/ athorit to se"" ot No. 8 6"e:andro on" so"d his a"iAot share o/ the s#:ect propert to the petitioner. ;he petitioner insists that the athorit o/ 6"e:andro to represent his co-heirs in the contract o/ sa"e entered into ith the petitioner had #een adeAate" proen, he posits that the other 6"tamiranos are deemed to hae &no"ed!e o/ the contract o/ sa"e entered into # 6"e:andro ith the petitioner since a"" o/ them, either persona"" or thro!h their athoried representaties participated in the sa"e 1'&


Atty.

transaction ith the ?poses a:arca ino"in! the same propert. =oeer, the petitioner cannot re" pon these acts or condct to #e"iee that 6"e:andro had the same athorit to ne!otiate /or the sa"e o/ the s#:ect propert to him. ;he case at #ar shos no eidence on record o/ speci7c acts hich the 6"tamiranos made #e/ore the sa"e o/ the s#:ect propert to the petitioner, indicatin! that the /"" &ne o/ the representation o/ 6"e:andro. 6"" that the petitioner re"ied pon ere acts that happened a/ter the sa"e to him. 6#sent the consent o/ 6"e:androKs co-oners, the sa"e #eteen the other 6"tamiranos and the petitioner is n"" and oid. =oeer,

the

sa"e

#eteen

the

petitioner

and

6"e:andro is a"id inso/ar as the a"iAot share o/ respondent 6"e:andro is concerned. %ein! a co-oner, 6"e:andro can a"id" and "e!a"" dispose o/ his share een ithot the consent o/ a"" the other co-heirs. ;his then "eaes the sa"e o/ the "ot o/ the 6"tamiranos to the ?poses a:arca a"id on" inso/ar as their shares are concerned, eBc"sie o/ the a"iAot part o/ 6"e:andro.

1''


Atty.

BJDC CONSTRUCTION, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGERPROPRIETOR JANET S. DELA CRU? , Petitioner, s.

NENA E. LANU?O, CLAUDETTE E. LANU?O, JANET E. LANU?O, JOAN BERNABE E. LANU?O, AND RYAN JOSE E. LANU?O, Respondents. GR. No. 11151 arch 24, 2014

Facts:

+n Eanar 5, 199, Nena >. ano 7"ed a comp"aint /or dama!es a!ainst %E* *onstrction, a sin!"e proprietorship en!a!ed

in

the

constrction

#siness

nder

its

ana!er@Proprietor Eanet ?. de "a *r. ;he compan as the contractor o/ the reH#"oc&in! pro:ect to repair the dama!ed portion o/ one "ane o/ the nationa" hi!ha at ?an 6!stin, Pi"i, *amarines ?r /rom ?eptem#er 199to Noem#er

199.

Nena a""e!ed that she as the sriin! spose o/ the "ate %a"#ino os %aos ano ho 7!red in the accident that transpired at the site o/ the reH#"oc&in! or& at a#ot 380 ((


Atty.

p.m. on +cto#er 80, 199 that %a"#ino's =onda motorcc"e sidesiped the road #arricade p"aced # the compan in the ri!ht "ane portion o/ the road, casin! him to "ose contro" o/ his motorcc"e and to crash on the ne" cemented road, res"tin! in his instant death and that the compan's /ai"re to p"ace i""minated arnin! si!ns on the site o/ the pro:ect, especia"" drin! ni!ht time, as the proBimate case o/ the death o/ %a"#ino. ?he praed that the compan #e he"d "ia#"e /or dama!es, to it3 (a) P5,000.00 as the acta" dama!e to %a"#ino's motorcc"e ( ') P100,000.00 as /nera" and #ria" eBpenses (c) P559,.00 representin! the nearned P100,000.00

income as

in

mora"

eBpectancO dama!es

( e)

o/

%a"#ino P5,000.00

(d) as

attorne's /ees, p"s P1,500.00 per cort appearance and ( f ) P20,000.00 as "iti!ation costs and other incidenta" eBpenses. In its anser, the compan denied Nena's a""e!ations o/ ne!"i!ence, insistin! that it had insta""ed arnin! si!ns and "i!hts a"on! the hi!ha and on the #arricades o/ the pro:ect that at the time o/ the incident, the "i!hts ere or&in! and sitched on that its pro:ect as d" inspected # the epartment o/ P#"ic


Atty.

No. 6ccordin! to r. 6#i"a, the case o/ death o/ %a"#ino as the /ata" depressed /ractre at the #ac& o/ his head, an in:r that r. 6#i"a opined to #e attri#ta#"e to his head "andin! on the cemented road a/ter #ein! thron oD his motorcc"e. *onsiderin! that it as shon that %a"#ino as not earin! an protectie head !ear or he"met at the time o/ the accident, he as !i"t o/ ne!"i!ence in that respect. =ad he orn the protectie head !ear or he"met, his ntime"

death

o"d

not

hae

occrred.

;he R;* as correct on its conc"sions and 7ndin!s that the compan as not ne!"i!ent in ensrin! sa/et at the pro:ect site. 6"" the esta#"ished circmstances shoed that the proBimate and immediate case o/ the death o/ %a"#ino as his on ne!"i!ence. =ence, the ano heirs co"d not recoer dama!es

INTERNATIONAL CONTAINER TERMINAL SERVICES, INC., Petitioner, s.

CELESTE M. CHUA , Respondent. GR. No. 195081 arch 2, 2014

Facts:

(


Atty.

+n 6pri" 2, 199, the tent /eet container an "oaded ith the persona" eDects o/ *e"este . *ha arried at the North =ar#or, ani"a, /rom +a&"and, *a"i/ornia. +n een date, it as n"oaded /rom the esse" and as p"aced in the depot #e"on!in! to petitioner /or sa/e&eepin! pendin! the cstoms inspection. +n 6pri" , 199, the container an as stripped and partia""

inspected

#

cstom

athorities.

Frther

inspection thereo/ as sched"ed on a , 199. =oeer, on the date sched"ed, petitioner's depot as !tted # 7re and respondent's container an, to!ether ith /ortH/or others, ere #rned. In the sre condcted therea/ter, seent percent o/ the contents o/ the an as /ond to #e tota"" #rnt hi"e thirt percent thereo/ as et, dirt, and nsa#"e. Respondent demanded reim#rsement /or the a"e o/ the !oods. =oeer, her demands /e"" on dea/ ears. +n 6!st 28, 1999, respondent 7"ed the sit #e"o a""e!in!, in essence, that the proBimate case o/ the 7re that en!"/ed petitioner's depot as the com#sti#"e chemica"s stored thereat and, that petitioner, in storin! the said Uamma#"e chemica"s in its depot, /ai"ed to eBercise de di"i!ence in the se"ection and sperision o/ its emp"oees and@or o/ their or&. ?he a"so c"aims that, hi"e the a"e o/ the !oods destroed is $?W,.00, she has in her possession on" the machineHcopies o/ receipts shoin! an a!!re!ate a"e o/ on" $?W,585.1 #ecase, prsant to petitioner's reAest, she !ae to the "atter's representatie the

ori!ina"

receipts.

Petitioner admits that it accepted respondent's container (!


Atty.

an /or stora!e and sa/e&eepin! at its depot #t denies that there as ne!"i!ence on its part or that o/ its emp"oees. It asserts that the 7re that !tted its depot as de to a /ortitos eent #ecase it eBercised the de di"i!ence reAired # "a. It maintains that respondent is not entit"ed to her c"aim #ecase she did not dec"are the tre and correct a"e o/ the !oods. Issue:

No. 6rtic"e 2199 o/ the *ii" *ode states that eBcept as proided # "a or # stip"ation, one is entit"ed to an adeAate compensation on" /or

sch pecniar "oss

sDered # him a he has d" proed. ?ch compensation is re/erred to as acta" or compensator dama!es.O 6cta" dama!es are compensation /or an in:r that i"" pt the in:red part in the position here it as #e/ore the in:r. ;he pertain to sch in:ries or "osses that are acta"" sstained and sscepti#"e o/ measrement. >Bcept as proided # "a or # stip"ation, a part is entit"ed to adeAate compensation on" /or sch pecniar "oss as is d" proen. %asic is the r"e that to recoer acta" dama!es, not on" mst the amont o/ "oss #e capa#"e o/ proo/ it mst a"so #e acta"" proen ith a reasona#"e de!ree o/ certaint, premised pon competent proo/ or the #est eidence o#taina#"e.O In the case #e/ore s, respondent /ai"ed to addce eidence adeAate eno!h to satis/actori" proe the amont o/ acta" dama!es c"aimed. ;he receipts she s#mitted cannot #e considered competent proo/ since ("


Atty.

she /ai"ed to proe that the items "isted therein are indeed the items that ere in her container an and ice ersa. 6s pointed ot a#oe, there are discrepancies #eteen the items "isted in the s#mitted receipts and those contained in the respectie inspection reports o/ the marine sreors. =ence, the said receipts cannot #e made the #asis /or the !rant o/ acta" dama!es.

THE HEIRS OF VICTORINO SARILI, NAMELY ISABEL A. SARILI,MELENCIA S. MA=IMO, ALBERTO A. SARILI, IMELDA S. HIDALGO, a** /)')1n ')9')s)n)d + CELSO A. SARILI, Petitioners, s

PEDRO F. LAGROSA, ')9')s)n)d 1n /1s a0 + /1s A&'n)+>1n>Fa0 LOURDES LABIOS MOJICA ,Respondent. GR. No. 19851 Eanar 15, 2014

Facts:

+n Fe#rar 1, 2000, respondent, represented # his attorne-in-/act ordes a#ios o:ica (ordes) ia a specia"

poer

o/

attorne

dated

Noem#er

25,

1999 (Noem#er 25, 1999 ?P6), 7"ed a comp"aint  a!ainst ?ps. ?ari"i and the Re!ister o/ eeds o/ *a"oocan *it (R) #e/ore the R;*, a""e!in!, amon! others, that he is the oner o/ a certain parce" o/ "and sitated in *a"oocan *it coered # ;*; No. 5599 (s#:ect propert) and has #een re"i!ios" pain! the rea" estate taBes there/or since its (#


Atty.

acAisition on Noem#er 29, 194. Respondent c"aimed that he is a resident o/ *a"i/ornia, $?6, and that drin! his acation in the Phi"ippines, he discoered that a ne certi7cate o/ tit"e to the s#:ect propert as issed # the R in the name o/ Jictorino married to Isa#e" 6mparo (Isa#e"), i.e., ;*; No. 2221, # irte o/ a /a"si7ed eed o/ 6#so"te ?a"e9 dated Fe#rar 1, 19 (Fe#rar 1, 19 deed o/ sa"e) prported" eBected # him and his i/e, 6me"ia $. a!rosa (6me"ia). =e aerred that the /a"si7cation o/ the said deed o/ sa"e as a res"t o/ the /rad"ent, i""e!a", and ma"icios acts committed # ?ps. ?ari"i and the R in order to acAire the s#:ect propert and, as sch, praed /or the ann"ment o/ ;*; No. 2221, and that ?ps. ?ari"i de"ier to him the possession o/ the s#:ect propert, or, in the a"ternatie, that ?ps. ?ari"i and the

R

:oint"

and

seera""

pa

him

the

amont

o/ P1,000,000.00, inc"din! mora" dama!es as e"" as attorne's /ees. In their anser, ?ps. ?ari"i maintained that the are innocent prchasers /or a"e, hain! prchased the s#:ect propert /rom Ramon %. Rodri!e (Ramon), ho possessed and presented a ?pecia" Poer o/ 6ttorne (s#:ect ?P6) to se""@dispose o/ the same, and, in sch capacit, eBected a eed o/ 6#so"te ?a"e dated Noem#er 20, 1992 (Noem#er 20, 1992 deed o/ sa"e) conein! the said propert in their /aor. In this re"ation, the denied an participation in the preparation o/ the Fe#rar 1, 19 deed o/ sa"e, hich ma hae #een mere" deised # the C7BerC the hired to /aci"itate the issance o/ the tit"e in their names. Frther, the interposed a conterc"aim /or mora" and eBemp"ar dama!es, as e"" as attorne's /ees, /or the 7"in! o/ the #ase"ess sit. ($


Atty.

rin! the pendenc o/ the proceedin!s, Jictorino passed aa and as s#stitted # his heirs, herein petitioners. Issue:

Mes. 6nent the aard o/ mora" dama!es, sDice it to sa that the

dispte

oer

the

s#:ect

propert

had

cased

respondent serios anBiet, menta" an!ish and s"eep"ess ni!hts, there# :sti/in! the a/oresaid aard. i&eise, since respondent as constrained to en!a!e the serices o/ conse" to 7"e this sit and de/end his interests, the aards o/ attorne's /ees and "iti!ation eBpenses are a"so sstained.

NICANORA G. BUCTON (d)0)as)d!, s2s12)d + RE$UILDA B. YRAY, Petitioner, s.

RURAL BANK OF EL SALVADOR, INC., MISAMIS ORIENTAL, and REYNALDO CUYONG, Respondents, s.

(%


Atty.

ERLINDA CONCEPCION AND HER HUSBAND AND AGNES BUCTON LUGOD, ;hird Part e/endants. G.R. No. 1925 Fe#rar 24, 2014

Facts:


a

"oan

in

the

amont

o/ P80,000.00

/rom

respondent #an& that as secrit /or the "oan, *oncepcion mort!a!ed petitioner's hose and "ot to respondent #an& sin! a ?P6 a""e!ed" eBected # petitioner in /aor o/ *oncepcion that *oncepcion /ai"ed to pa the "oan that petitioner's hose and "ot ere /orec"osed # respondent sheriD ithot a Notice o/ >Btra-Edicia" Forec"osre or Notice o/ 6ction ?a"e and that petitioner's hose and "ot ere so"d in an action sa"e in /aor o/ respondent #an&. Respondent #an& 7"ed an 6nser interposin! "ac& o/ case o/ action as a de/ense. It denied the a""e!ation o/ petitioner that the ?P6 as /or!ed and aerred that on Ene 22, 19, petitioner ent to the #an& and promised to sett"e the "oan (&


Atty.

o/ *oncepcion #e/ore ?eptem#er 80, 19. 6s to the a""e!ed irre!"arities in the /orec"osre proceedin!s, respondent #an& asserted that it comp"ied ith the reAirements o/ the "a in /orec"osin! the hose and "ot. % a o/ cross-c"aim, respondent #an& praed that in the eent o/ an aderse :d!ment a!ainst it, *oncepcion, its co-de/endant, #e ordered to indemni/ it /or a"" dama!es ?ince petitioner did not mort!a!e an o/ her properties nor did she o#tain a "oan /rom respondent #an&, she decided to !o to respondent #an& on Ene 22, 19 to inAire a#ot the matter. It as on" then that she discoered that her hose and "ot as mort!a!ed # irte o/ a /or!ed ?P6. ?he insisted that her si!natre and her hs#and's si!natre on the ?P6 ere /or!ed and that eer since she !ot married, she no "on!er sed her maiden name, Nicanora Ga#ar, in si!nin! docments. Petitioner a"so denied appearin! #e/ore the notar p#"ic, ho notaried the ?P6. ?he a"so testi7ed that the propert re/erred to in the ?P6, is a acant "ot and that the hose, hich as mort!a!ed and /orec"osed, is coered # a diDerent tit"e. Issue:

*onsiderin! that petitioner as compe""ed to "iti!ate or to incr eBpenses to protect her interest, 1 the R;* as ri!ht hen it r"ed that respondent #an& is "ia#"e to pa petitioner attorne's /ees in the amont o/ P20,000.00. =oeer, e are not coninced that petitioner is entit"ed to ('


Atty.

an aard o/ mora" dama!es as it as not satis/actori" shon that respondent #an& acted in #ad /aith or ith ma"ice. Neither as it proen that respondent #an&'s acts ere the proBimate case o/ petitioner's onded /ee"in!s. +n the contrar, e note that petitioner is not entire" /ree o/ #"ame considerin! her ne!"i!ence in entrstin! her tit"e to *oncepcion. In an case, the R;* did not /"" eBp"ain h petitioner is entit"ed to sch aard.

DR. FERNANDO P. SOLIDUM, Petitioner, s.

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent. G.R. No. 192128 arch 10, 2014 Facts:

Gera"d 6"#ert Gercao as ith an imper/orate ans. ;o das a/ter his #irth, Gera"d nderent co"ostom, a sr!ica" procedre to #rin! one end o/ the "ar!e intestine ot thro!h the a#domina" a"", ena#"in! him to eBcrete thro!h a co"ostom #a! attached to the side o/ his #od. +n a 1, 1995, Gera"d, then three ears o"d, as admitted at the +spita" n! ani"a /or a p""-thro!h operation. r. eandro Resrreccion headed the sr!ica" team, and as assisted # r. Eose"ito ceo, r. onate""a Ja"ea and r. Eoseph ;i#io. ;he anesthesio"o!ists inc"ded r. arich 6#e""a, r. 6rne" Raon and petitioner r. Fernando ?o"idm. rin! the operation, Gera"d eBperienced #radcardia, and ent into a coma. =is coma "asted /or to ee&s, #t he re!ained consciosness on" a/ter a month. =e co"d no "on!er see, hear or moe. 6!itated # 1(


Atty.

her son's he"p"ess and neBpected condition, a.  Gercao "od!ed a comp"aint /or rec&"ess imprdence res"tin! in serios phsica" in:ries ith the *it Prosector's +Dice o/ ani"a a!ainst the attendin! phsicians. Issue:

Mes. ;he *ort considers the app"ication here o/ the doctrine o/ res ipsa "oAitr inappropriate. 6"tho!h it sho"d #e conceded ithot diDic"t that the second and third

e"ements

ere

present,

considerin!

that

the

anesthetic a!ent and the instrments ere eBc"sie" ithin the contro" o/ r. ?o"idm, and that the patient, #ein! then nconscios drin! the operation, co"d not hae #een !i"t o/ contri#tor ne!"i!ence, the 7rst e"ement as ndenia#" antin!.  de"iered Gera"d to the care, cstod and contro" o/ his phsicians /or a p""-thro!h operation. >Bcept /or the imper/orate ans, Gera"d as then o/ sond #od and mind at the time o/ his s#mission to the phsicians. Met, he eBperienced #radcardia drin! the operation, casin! "oss o/ his senses and renderin! him immo#i"e. =poBia, or the insDicienc o/ oB!en spp" to the #rain that cased the s"oin! o/ the heart rate, scienti7ca"" termed as #radcardia, o"d not ordinari" occr in the process o/ a p""-thro!h operation, or drin! the administration o/ anesthesia to the patient, #t sch /act a"one did not proe that the ne!"i!ence o/ an o/ his 11


Atty.

attendin! phsicians, inc"din! the anesthesio"o!ists, had cased the in:r. In /act, the anesthesio"o!ists attendin! to him had sensed in the corse o/ the operation that the "ac& o/ oB!en co"d hae #een tri!!ered # the a!o-a!a" reUeB, promptin! them to administer atropine to the patient.

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, P"aintiD 6ppe""ee, s.

ALBERTO DELIGERO + BACASMOT, 6ccsed 6ppe""ant. G.R. No. 1920 6pri" 1, 2018 1


Atty.

F!"#$:

;he /acts asseerated #e"o are in accordance ith the

case

o/

Aa"i7ed

rape

committed

a!ainst

the

comp"ainant, 666, minor, 18 ears o"d, perpretrated # 6"#erto e"i!ero, her !randnc"e, #ein! the #rother o/ her paterna" !rand/ather. In the ear" part o/ 2000, appe""ant resided ith 666's /ami" /or a#ot /or (4) months, 666 /ond" ca"" him, PapaO. %t a/ter #i"din! his on hose, appe""ant moe in and as e"" as 666. 6ppe""ant promised 666's parents to send 666 to schoo". 666 "ied ith the appe""ant /or a#ot three (8) ears and drin! those ears, 666 c"aimed to hae #een raped # the appe""ant man times. 6ccsed-appe""ant p"eaded not !i"t to the oDense char!ed. 666's parents on" came to &no o/ her de7"ement hen appe""ant started to te"" the nei!h#orhood that 666 as pre!nant. 6t the instance o/ her /ather, 666 and the appe""ant

as

inited

to

the

po"ice

station

to

#e

inesti!ated. In her aDidait, she admitted that appe""ant instrcted her that it as her #o/riend, %oet, ho as responsi#"e /or her pre!nanc. 6ppe""ant's de/ense as that hen he moed in to his ne hose, 666 moed in ith him as e"". 6ppe""ant c"aimed that /rom that time on, he and 666 ere a"read "iin! to!ether as hs#and and i/e. ;he a""e!ed amoros re"ationship #eteen him and 666 as &non to the p#"ic, partic"ar" their nei!h#ors.%t the cort 7nd him !i"t o/ the crime o/ rape, ths sentenced him to sDer an imprisonment o/ Rec"sion Perpeta. =e as a"so ordered to pa the comp"ainant and her /ami" the sm o/ P5,000 as cii" indemnit and P50,000 as mora" dama!es. +n 1!


Atty.

appea", the *ort o/ 6ppea"s sstained the 7ndin!s o/ /act # the tria" cort, it he"d that the crime committed # the accsed-appe""ant as on" simp"e rape #ecase the a!e o/ 666 as not sDicient" proed and a"so ordered the aard o/ eBemp"ar dama!es. I$$%&:

enied. ;he *ort 7nds accsed-appe""ant's contentions too /ee#"e to arrant a reersa" o/ his coniction and it a!rees ith the modi7cation o/ the *ort o/ 6ppea"s. oreoer, it note that een i/ the correct #"ood re"ationship o/ #ein! 666's !randnc"e as a""e!ed in the In/ormation, and the a!e o/ 666 as proen # sDicient eidence, accsed-appe""ant o"d sti"" #e "ia#"e /or simp"e rape. ;he !randnc"e, or more speci7ca"" the #rother o/ the ictim's !rand/ather, is a re"atie o/ the ictim in the /orth cii" de!ree, and is ths not coered # 6rtic"e 2-%, para!raph 5(1). Fina"", the *ort 7nds it appropriate to ho"d accsedappe""ant "ia#"e to 666 /or eBemp"ar dama!es. In Peop"e . Rante,28 the *ort he"d that eBemp"ar dama!es can #e aarded, not on" in the presence o/ an a!!raatin! circmstance, #t a"so here the circmstances o/ the case sho the hi!h" reprehensi#"e or otra!eos condct o/ the oDender. In the case at #ar, accsed-appe""ant eBhi#ited an eBtreme" appa""in! #ehaior in /orcin! himse"/ pon his 1"


Atty.

thirteen-ear o"d !randniece, threatenin! to &i"" her, and een persisted in hmi"iatin! her # depictin! her as a !ir" ith er "oose mora"s. 6ccordin!", Cto set a p#"ic eBamp"e and sere as deterrent to e"ders ho a#se and corrpt the oth,C 24 e here# aard eBemp"ar dama!es in the amont o/ P80,000.00 to 666 in accordance ith 6rtic"e 222925 o/ the *ii" *ode.


JONATHAN UTO VELOSO + RAMA, 6ccsed 6ppe""ant. G.R. No. 149 Fe#rar 18, 2018 F!"#$:

;he case reo"es arond the rape o/ a 12 ear o"d 666 a!ainst 6ccsed Eonathan $taO Je"oso. ;he said incident happened in one a/ternoon, appe""ant ent "oo&in! /or %%%'s #rother, and insisted that #e accompanied # 666 and ***. ;he too& a #oat, hen the ere in the midd"e o/ the rier, appe""ant threatened to hit *** ith a padd"e i/ he o"d not :mp oD the #oat. 6/ter *** :mped oD the #oat, he steered the #oat toards the rier#an& and p""ed 66 ot o/ the #oat. =e then satis7ed his "st tice and #oBed 666 on her /ace, "ips, stomach and thi!hs. =e &ic&ed 1#


Atty.

666 on the stomach, s"apped and smashed her /ace to the !rond, and cho&ed her nti" she #ecame nconscios. 6/ter she as then /ond a"on! the !rass portion o/ the rier #an&, she as then #ro!ht to the near# hospita" and as eBamined # r.%adon! and r.;a"a!. In his de/ense, appe""ant said that he ent to Pi"i, *amarines ?r to attend a #irthda part ith his cosin Francisco Rama. 6/ter considerin! the eidence presented # #oth parties, the cort rendered a decision 7ndin! the appe""ant !i"t o/ the crime o/ rape. =e as sentenced to sDer the pena"t o/ Rec"sion Perpeta and ordered to pa 100,000 /or mora" dama!es, 100,000 /or cii" indemnit and 0,000 as eBemp"ar dama!es /or the to conts o/ rape. +n appea", *ort o/ 6ppea"s aDirmed the 7ndin!s o/ the tria" cort #t modi7ed the aard o/ dama!es # de"etin! eBemp"ar dama!es de to the "ac& o/ an a!!raatin! circmstance to :sti/ its aard. I$$%&:

;he *ort cannot a!ree ith the *ort o/ 6ppea"s re!ardin! its de"etion o/ eBemp"ar dama!es. ;his *ort has said in People v. !lfedo3 Neerthe"ess, # /ocsin! on" on 6rtic"e 2280 as the "e!a" #asis /or the !rant o/ eBemp"ar dama!es -- ta&in! into accont simp" the attendance o/ an a!!raatin! circmstance in the commission o/ a crime, corts hae "ost 1$


si!ht

o/

the

er

reason

h

Atty.

eBemp"ar

dama!es are aarded. *at#i! is en"i!htenin! on this point, ths H 6"so &non as CpnitieC or CindictieC dama!es, eBemp"ar or correctie dama!es are intended to sere as a deterrent to serios ron! doin!s, and as a indication o/ nde sDerin!s and anton inasion o/ the ri!hts o/ an in:red or a pnishment /or those !i"t o/ otra!eos condct. ;hese terms are !enera"", #t not a"as, sed interchan!ea#". In common "a, there is pre/erence in the se o/ eBemp"ar dama!es hen the aard is to accont /or in:r to /ee"in!s and /or the sense o/ indi!nit and hmi"iation sDered # a person as a res"t o/ an in:r that has #een ma"icios" and anton" inUicted, the theor #ein! that there sho"d #e compensation /or the hrt cased

#

de/endant i""/"ness,

the --

hi!h"

reprehensi#"e

associated

antonness,

ith

sch

ma"ice,

condct

o/

circmstances

!ross

ne!"i!ence

the as or

rec&"essness, oppression, ins"t or /rad or !ross /rad -that intensi7es the in:r. ;he terms pnitie or indictie dama!es are o/ten sed to re/er to those species o/ dama!es that ma #e aarded a!ainst a person to pnish him /or his otra!eos condct. In either case, these dama!es are intended in !ood measre to deter the ron!doer and others "i&e him /rom simi"ar condct in the /tre. %ein!

correctie

in natre,

eBemp"ar

dama!es,

there/ore, can #e aarded, not on" in the presence o/ an a!!raatin!

circmstance,

#t

a"so

here

the

circmstances o/ the case sho the hi!h" reprehensi#"e or otra!eos condct o/ the oDender. In mch the same a 1%


Atty.

as 6rtic"e 2280 prescri#es an instance hen eBemp"ar dama!es ma #e aarded, 6rtic"e 2229, the main proision, "as don the er #asis o/ the aard. B BB Recent", in People of the Philippines v. "istino"a(ada , People of the Philippines

v.

Pepito)eveio and #he

People

of

the

Philippines v. Loenzo La*co, $. , the *ort aarded

eBemp"ar dama!es to set a p#"ic eBamp"e, to sere as deterrent to e"ders ho a#se and corrpt the oth, and to protect the "atter /rom seBa" a#se. It mst #e noted that, in the said cases, the *ort sed as #asis 6rtic"e 2229, rather than 6rtic"e 2280, to :sti/ the aard o/ eBemp"ar dama!es. Indeed, to #orro Estice *arpio ora"esK ords in her separate opinion in People of the Philippines v. Dante +agasin * Pa , Cthe app"ication o/

6rtic"e 2280 o/ the *ii" *ode stictissimiuis in sch cases, as in the present one, de/eats the nder"in! p#"ic po"ic #ehind the aard o/ eBemp"ar dama!es -- to set a p#"ic eBamp"e or correction /or the p#"ic !ood.C ;hs, the *ort reinstate the R;* aard /or eBemp"ar dama!es

hich

sho"d

#e

;hirt

;hosand

Pesos

(P80,000.00) /or each cont o/rape. In addition, and in con/ormit ith crrent po"ic, the *ort a"so impose on a"" the monetar aards /or dama!es interest at the "e!a" rate o/  per annm /rom date o/ 7na"it o/ this ecision nti" /"" paid.

1&


Atty.


RAMIL RARUGAL a*1as AMAY BISAYA, 6ccsed-6ppe""ant. G.R. No. 108 Eanar 1, 2018

Facts:

;he #rie/ antecedent /acts are as /o""os. ;his is an appea" /rom the ecision o/ the *ort o/ 6ppea"s hich aDirmed ith modi7cation the ecision o/ the Re!iona" ;ria" *ort (R;*), that /ond appe""ant Rami" Rar!a" a"ias C6ma %isaaC !i"t #eond reasona#"e do#t /or the crime o/ mrder. ;he *ort o/ 6ppea"s aDirmed ith modi7cation the decision o/ the R;*, orderin! the appe""ant to pa the heirs o/ the ictim the amont o/ P2,9.00 as acta" dama!es and the amont o/ P25,000.00 as eBemp"ar dama!es. 1'


Atty.

Issue:

;he ?preme *ort stated that the aard is not proper. ;o con/orm to eBistin! :risprdence, the ?preme *ort modi7ed the amont o/ indemnit /or death and eBemp"ar dama!es aarded # the cort a Ao. 6nent the aard o/ dama!es, hen death occrs de to a crime, the /o""oin! ma #e recoered3 (1) cii" indemnit eB de"icto /or the death o/ the ictim (2) acta" or compensator dama!es (8) mora" dama!es (4) eBemp"ar dama!es (5) attorneKs /ees and eBpenses o/ "iti!ation and () interest, in proper cases.

;he ?preme *ort a!reed ith the *ort o/ 6ppea"s that the heirs o/ the ictim ere a#"e to proe #e/ore the tria" cort acta" dama!es in the amont o/ P2,9.00 #ased on the receipts the s#mitted. ;he *ort, hoeer, increased the aard o/ eBemp"ar dama!es to P80,000.00 and the aard /or mandator cii" indemnit to P5,000.00 to con/orm to recent :risprdence.;he *ort sstained the R;*'s

aard

/or

mora"

dama!es

in

the

amont

o/

P50,000.00 een in the a#sence o/ proo/ o/ menta" and emotiona" sDerin! o/ the ictim's heirs. 6s #orne ot # hman natre and eBperience, a io"ent death inaria#" and necessari" #rin!s a#ot emotiona" pain and an!ish on the part o/ the ictim's /ami". In addition, and in con/ormit ith crrent po"ic, the ?preme *ort a"so impose on a"" the monetar aards /or dama!es interest at the "e!a" rate o/  per annm /rom date o/ 7na"it o/ this ecision. (


Atty.


BENJAMIN PETELUNA AND ABUNDIO BINONDO, 6ccsed-6ppe""ants. G.R. No. 104 Eanar 28, 2018

Facts:

1


Atty.

Qic& /acts as proided in the case. ;his is a reie the 11 E" 200 ecision o/ the *ort o/ 6ppea"s, hich aDirmed ith modi7cation the tria" cortKs coniction o/ appe""ants %en:amin

Pete"na

(%en:amin)

and

6#ndio

%inondo

(6#ndio) /or the mrder o/ an e"der" man named Pa#"o >stomo (Pa#"o). Issue

;he ?preme *ort r"ed that appe""ant is "ia#"e /or cii" indemnit, mora" dama!es, eBemp"ar dama!es and  interest on a"" dama!es. ;he cii" indemnit in the amont o/ P50,000.00 aarded # the *ort o/ 6ppea"s is in order. ;here is, hoeer, a need to increase the aard o/ eBemp"ar dama!es /rom P25,000.00 to P80,000.00 to con/orm to eBistin! :risprdence. In addition, the ictim's heirs sha"" #e entit"ed to mora" dama!es een in the a#sence o/ proo/ that the sDered menta"" and emotiona"" considerin! that Ca io"ent death inaria#" and necessari" #rin!s a#ot emotiona" pain and an!ish on the part o/ the ictim's /ami".C6  interest on a"" the monetar aards /or dama!es to #e rec&oned /rom the date o/ 7na"it o/ this decision nti" /"" paid sha"" "i&eise #e imposed. 6ccordin!", 6#ndio

%inondo

appe""ants are

%en:amin

here#

/ond

Pete"na G$I;M

and

#eond

reasona#"e do#t o/ the crime o/ rder and are sentenced to sDer the pena"t o/ rec"sion perpeta. ;he are /rther ordered to pa, :oint" and seera"", the heirs o/ Pa#"o >stomo the amonts o/ Fi/t ;hosand Pesos (P50,000.00) as cii" indemnit, Fi/t ;hosand Pesos (P50,000.00) as 


Atty.

mora" dama!es, ;hirt ;hosand Pesos (P80,000.00) as eBemp"ar dama!es, and interest on a"" dama!es at the rate o/ siB percent () per annm /rom the 7na"it o/ :d!ment nti" /"" paid.

!


Atty.

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, P"aintiD@6ppe""ee, s.

ROLANDO CABUNGAN, 6ccsed@6ppe""ant. G.R. No. 19855 Eanar 28, 2018

Facts:

;he /acts o/ this case reo"es arond the

appea"

interposed # Ro"ando *a#n!an (appe""ant) /rom the E" 9, 2009 ecision o/ the *ort o/ 6ppea"s (*6) in *6-G.R. *R-=.*. No. 08142 hich aDirmed ith modi7cation the Noem#er , 200 ecision o/ the Re!iona" ;ria" *ort (R;*), %ranch 54, 6"aminos *it, Pan!asinan, 7ndin! him !i"t #eond reasona#"e do#t o/ the crime o/ rape.

Issue:

;he crime committed in this case is simp"e rape on" in ie o/ the /ai"re o/ the prosection to proe ith c"arit the specia" Aa"i/in! circmstance o/ re"ationship. ;he *ort redced the cii" indemnit aarded # the tria" cort /rom P5,000.00 to P50,000.00 in ie o/ the 7ndin! that appe""ant is !i"t on" o/ simp"e rape. 6"so, the ?preme *ort respected the aard o/ mora" dama!es made # the "

Sample Civillaw 2 Cases

Recommend Documents