AGENCY PARAS
its range of activity with others
764 1868 – by the contract of AGENCY, a person
binds himself to render some service or to do
something in representation of another, w/ the
consent or auth of the latter.
 Defective definition sabi ni PARAS. Dahil
very broad. Kasi iniinclude niya relationship
of master servant, er-ee, lessor and
independent contractor, BUT what agent
really does for the principal is a juridical
act. Agent exercises discretionary powers,
not ministerial like lessee of services.
 AGENT enters into judicial relations with or
without representation of the principal.
KINDS: GN PAGE 387
ELEMENTS:
1. CONSENT
2. OBJECT (execution of juridical act in
relation to 3rd persons)
3. Agent acts as rep, not for himself
4. Acts within scope of auth.
 NATURE: fiduciary: thus agent cannot
acquire interest adverse to that of his P.
Cases:
/ designate himself as the seller and not agent,
then he alone is liable.
/ own money used, does not necessarily mean na
hindi siya agent. As long as the principal had
exercised control over the agent’s activities. Agent
earns commission, while a broker brings buyer and
seller together and earns even if no sale is made.
 Pwedeng gratuitous
 As long as one party manifests his consent
that the other shall act in behalf of the
principal and under his control.
“mandante” = principal and “mandatario” = agent.
 IMPORTANCE = enables a man to increase
 Now, civil or commercial purposes, it is still
called a civil agency.
 CHARACTERISTICS:
1. PRINCIPAL, nominate, bilateral,
preparatory, commutative, onerous.
2. Representative relation, not inherent nor
permanent
3. FIDUCIARY, based on trust and confidence.
Case:
/ Mandamus can be issued to order a corporation
to allow inspection thru its agent. Thus, cannot
invoke as a defense na personal act ang inspection.
GR“what a man may do in person, he may do thru
another”
XPN: making of will. other strictly personal act.
Matrimonial oblis, vote, criminal acts,
 PARTIES:
/ principal – whom the agent represents and
derives auth, PRIMARILY concerned with the
contract
/ agent – representing, acts under specific
command. Acts in behalf of another. If pretending
lang to be another, not agent.
Case:
/ trustee may include atty prosecuting the case
note:
PRINCIPAL must be capacitated to act himself and
give consent.
/ may be natural or juridical. BUT Actually, corps or
PAT can only act thru agents.
/ MINOR? Can be a principal daw.
/ Conveyance of CP, is voidable without consent of
other spouse.
AGENT – able to bind himself, only ins'ofar as his
obli to his principal is concerned, but enough daw if
PRINCIPAL is capcitated, so kahit MINOR agent.
 Can a JURIDICAL person be an agent? YES.
Case:
/ P appoints A as agent. A sells property to B. Now
P wants recover the property on the ground that
sale is void because A is minor. Ruling: P cannot
avoid the contract. As long as P is capacitated.
AGENCY VS PAT – agent act for P, partner acts for
himself, firm and other parts.
Borrower, not an agent. Thus, cannot the
nagpautang cannot be sued.
Charts in 771. Vs Guardianship, vs judicial admin.
Cases:
/ son lend father’s land. Father cannot be held
liable as principal. Merely lessor lessee
relationship.
/ X = free board from hotel, duty to run the hotel,
authorize to hire bookkeeper, but cannot incur
debt In behalf of the hotel w/o permission. X is
agent based from facts. Agent subject to the
boards’ control.
/ agency v lease page 774
NOTE: agency may be terminated at the will of the
P or A.
AGENCY v NEGOTIORIUM GESTIO. No meeting in
nego, quasi contract eh. In nego, not controlled by
the principal directly. Created by law.
Vs trust page 776
NOTE: contract is what law defines it not according
to its DESIGNATION by the parties.
Case:
/ if there is agreement to return all unsold goods,
w/ no obli to pay, this is AGENCY to SELL, or
consignment.
/agent v broker. 780.
781 1869 – AGENCY may be express or implied
from the act of P, his silence, or failure to
repudiate agency, knowing that another person is
acting on his behalf w/o auth.
May be ORAL, unless the law requires a specific
form.
 KINDS – as to manner of constitution
/express
/implied - acts of P, silence, inaction, failure to
repudiate.
 Sa implied, P knows that another is acting
on his behalf w/o his auth.
Case:
/ Principal did not repudiate the turning over of the
admin to another. IMPLIED agency.
/ if insurance agent was allowed by applicant to fill
in the details of the policy. There is agency.
AS TO FORM: ORAL OR WRITTEN. EXAMPLE WHEN
SPECIFIC FORM REQUIRED: “1874, WHEN SALE OF
LAND OR INTEREST THEREIN, agent’s auth must be
in writing., otherwise VOID”
783 1870 - ACCEPTANCE by agent, may also be
EXPRESS or implied. (acts, silence, inaction)
783 1871 – between persons PRESENT, If P
delivers his Power of ATTY to the Agent and the
agent accepts w/o objection, THERE IS IMPLIED
AGENCY.
NOTE HERE: “BOTH MUST BE PRESENT”
ACCORDING sa provision mismo. “face to face” or
thru communication thru phone ganun. Sufficient.
783 1872 – IF absent, acceptance of agency cannot
be implied. UNLESS:
1. P transmits power of atty and agent
receives w/o objection
2. P entrusts to Agent by letter or telegram the
power of atty, with repsect to business in
 which agent is habitually engaged as an
agent, and agent did not reply.
“HERE ABSENT”
In #1: kapag di nagreply does not necessarily mean
nagACCEPT. So dapat at least I ack ni agent.
So sa #2: ung letter sinasabi lang na ineentrust
sakanila, not sending the SPA itself.
Or when the Agent, begins to act. Thus implied
acceptance.
784 1873 – DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT - If a
person informs another OR states by a PUBLIC AD
that he has given a power of atty to a 3rd person.
In the former, who received the special info. And in
the latter, with regard to any person.
Power shall be in full force UNTIL the notice is
rescinded in the same manner in which it was
given.
 “INFORMING OTHER OF EXISTENCE OF
AGENCY” 1. SPECIAL INFO 2. PUBLIC AD.
 TO forestall fraud, it must be added daw na;
“revocation effective against person having
actual knowledge thereof”
Case:
/ customers continued to deal with the AGENT
even after revocation of auth of agent. Thus,
Compnay still liable beec customers was in GF not
having been informed.
/ AGENCY by ESTOPPEL. P leads other to believe
that A is his agent kahit hindi. Can no longer deny.
ESTOPPEL vs. IMPLIED AGENCY.
Implied, agent is true agent. Estoppel, agent is not,
has no right.
 Agency by estoppel requisites:
1. ?????????????????????
As to 3rd persons, In estoppel, if agent is the cause,
it is only the agent who is liable. In implied, agent
never personally liable.
786 1874 – SALE of piece of land or interest, thru
an agent. Authority of the agent SHALL be in
WRITING, otherwise, SALE is Void.
 “sale of piece of land or interest therein”
example: usufruct, easement etc. does not
include buildings. Thus, selling building not
need agency in writing. Daw.
 VOID if article violated. Thus cannot be
ratified. If ratified, no retro effect.
 NOTE also, if policy ng isang party na may
from, example sa bank, ganun etc.
Case:
/ brother wrote his sister to sell land. But sister did
not forward the proceeds. Here there is agency,
land cannot be recovered. Since there is agency
and in writing. Letter is sufficient.
/ Under the law president is auth to acquire private
lands and resale them at reasonable prices to
tenants and occupants. Sec of Agri and Natres in
making sale acts as presdinet’s agent. Thus
presumed to be acts of president himself.
787 1875 – AGENCY, presumed to be for a
COMPENSATION, unless there is proof to the
contrary.
“presumed to be onerous” pero old CC presumed
grat.
 Compensation may be in any form:
gratuitous use of real estate, cash. Etc
 In the absence of stip, agent is entitled to
compensation only after he has completely
or substantially completed his obligation as
agent. (may be contingent sa profit)
Case:
/ if the condition for compensation is “until such
time the company made a profit on the contract”
mere signing of the contract does not entitle agent
for compensation. There was still no profit kahit
binding na ang contract.
Broker: negotiator between parties, middleman.
Agent of both? Daw. Although agent, but not
within the meaning of CC, only an independent
contractor. Broker, not entitled to recover
expenses made during negotiations for the sale,
own risk daw.
Case:
/ case. A auth B to sell his land. B found C, but C is
willing to pay less than what A wants. So A denied.
A revoked B’s authority to sell. Howver, A and C
dealt with each other personally and made a
contract. B now contends that he is entitled for
commission. Ruling: NOT entitled. Sale was made
without her intervention. As long as A did not act
in BF! To avoid paying commission.
case/ another case, if with BF, then nireject for the
principal to deal personally. Then Agent is still
entitled commission. Broker ata dito. But NOTE:
not entitled if the person brought by the broker is
NOT: willing, able or ready to pay. Not entitled if
subsequently na sold pa din sa buyer na un.
792 1876 – Agency is either GENERAL or SPECIAL.
FORMER = comprises all business of the principal.
LATTER = one or more specific transactions.
 Kind as to “extent of business covered”
case:
/ Absent substantial evidence to show a special’s
agent’s auth to give consent to the creation of
tenancy relationship, cannot give rise to implied
tenancy.
792 1877 – Agency couched in GENERAL TERMS
comprises only acts of administration, even if the
principal should state that he withholds no power
or that the agent may execute acts as he may
consider appropriate, or even though the agency
should authorize a general and unlimited
management.
 General term, 1877
 Specific term 1878
Example:
1. “I make U my agent for all my properties, I
withhold no power from you. You may do as
you please. Unlimited management chenes”
here, ONLY acts of ADMIN. Notwithstanding
the stipulation. Why? Acts of strict
dominion need SPA. (like sell or mot land,
accept repudiate inheritance, enter into
compromise)
2. EXAMPLE of acts of admin:
/ sue for collection of debts, employ
workers, engage counsel to preserve
ownership or P’s property, lease RP to
another for 1 year or less and not
registered, borrow money for urgent and
indispensable purposes.
3. Thus, selling, needs SPA. Strict dominion
kasi.
794 1878 – SPA necessary in:
1. Payments for NOT acts of admin
2. Effect novations which ends oblis already
existing AT THE TIME OF agency
constitution
3. Compromise, arbitration, renounce right to
appeal from judgment, waive objections to
venue, abandon a prescription already
acquired
4. Waive any obli gratuitously
5. Enter into contract by which ownership of
an RP is transmitted or acquire either grat
or not.
6. Gifts, except customary ones for charity or
those made to employees in the business
managed by the agent.
7. Loan, unless for indispensable or urgent for
preservation of the things under his admin
8. Lease RP for more than 1 year
9. Bind the principal to render some service
w/o compensation
10. Bind principal in a contract of PAT
11. Obligate P as gurantor or surety
12. Create or convey real rights over RPs
13. Accept/ repudiate inheritance
14. Ratify or recognize oblis contracted before
the agency
15. Other acts of strict dominion
 Acts mentioned can be reduced to 3:
1. Acts of strict dominion
 2. Gratuitous contracts
3. Contracts where personal trust or
confidence is of the essence of the
agreement.
Case:
/ Payment made to agent. Must prove: 1. existence
of SPA and 2. Nature and extent of the power and
auth granted to him.
 SPA meaning: express or implied daw,
specifically authorizing the performance of
the act, and not just an agency couched in
general terms. Unless the general power
mentions or includes a special power. Ex “I
auth you to sell ALL my properties” here no
need for SPA since SP has already been
given.
Note: if payment is usually considered as mere
ACT of ADMIN, then no SPA needed.
Note: some acts of admin, carry with them exercise
of acts of dom like sale by an admin of fertile land
or products of land.
Case:
/ payment of claim of insured not acts of admin,
thus, needs a special power di pwedeng mere
general agency, kahit may nakalagay na “special” sa
document.
Par 2: obli existing at the time constitution of
agency
Par 3: power given for 1, does not auth power for
all mentioned.
Par 4: similar to donation or remission.
Par 5: refers to RP, but sale of PP is under the catch
all phrase in par15.
Par 6: custom gift, act of admin
Par 7: XPN refers to “borrow” only
Par 8: lease of RP not PP.
Par 9: reason: contract is grat.
Par 10: reason: principal has to personally have
trust and confidence in parts.
Par 11: cannot be inferred in general words.
Wife’s grant of SP does not auth husband to
contract for husband’s benefit.
Par12: ex: mortgage, create easement. Etc
Cases:
/ SPA cannot be basis of a valid mortgage contract
/ SPA granted for finding a money lender, does not
auth to procure mort.
 MUST be notarized ba SPA?
GR no. as long as writing. XPN: If required by law.
802 1879 – A special power to sell, excludes the
power to MORT, and special power to MORT does
not include power to sell.
 Power to sell: carries with it power:
1. Find buyer or sell directly
2. Deliver
3. Usual representation and warranty
4. Execute necessary transfer dox, like
contract of sale itself
5. Fix terms of sale, time place, mode of
delivery, price and mode of payment
6. Sell only for cash (cannot sell on credit w/o
consent)
7. Receive the price, unless not auth
NOT carry with it:
1. Barter / exchange
2. Mort / pledge
Power to MORT not include: 1. Sell, execute
second mort, mort for personal benefit or other’s
benefit
Cases:
/ power to mort does include power to agree to a
stipulation in the mort that bank could extra jud
forclose the property. Yata. See case in page 804

805 1880 – a special power to compromise does
not authorize submission to arbitration
 And vice versa?
 Reason for article: kasi sa arbitration, an
arbitrator shall decide. But in compromise,
it shall be in the hands of the agent, which P
may trust.
 If empowers to submit in arbit, then P is
bound to the arbitral award. Note: tignan
kung authorized to submit to any
ARBITRATOR, or if may specified arbitrator
lang.
806 1881 – AGENT must act within scope of his
auth. He may do acts as may be conducive to the
accomplishment of the purpose of the agency.
Note:
1. Within scope of auth /
2. Act in behalf of his principal /
Thus 4 instances may arise:
1. Acts w/ auth in behalf of P
2. w/ auth, in behalf of himself
3. w/o auth, in behalf of P
4. w/o auth, in his own behalf. Page 807
In 3 and 4, agent is not really agent.
 Effects:
1. w/ auth: P’s behalf: valid ofc. P is bound,
agent not personally liable unless he bound
himself.
2. w/ auth, A’s behalf: apply 1883: generally
not binding on P; except regarding things
belonging to P.
3. w/o auth, P’s behalf. UNAUTHORIZED &
UNENFORCEABLE. But may be ratified, thus
retroacts and validated from the beginning.
4. w/o auth, A’s behalf: valid. WON the SM
belongs to the P, provided that at the time
of delivery is to be made, the agent can
transfer legally the ownership of the thing.
Otherwise, he will be liable for breach of
warranty against eviction. ?????????????
1883 not apply.
Examples in 808.
#2: “agent sells the thing in its own name,
wihout disclosing name of P, ordinarily buyer
only has recourse against agent and vice versa.
Under 1883. XPN: when the thing belongs to P,
then P have recourse against buyer and buyer
against P. second par in 1883.
Or if P auth A to find singer for a singing
engagement. A acts, in his own, applies for the
job. Here A and the opera house would be
bound to each other. This clearly illustrates
1883 frst par.
#3 example:
Agent sold thing owned by P, wihout auth. Thus
unauth and unenforc insofar as P is concerned.
P not bound.
#4 example:
Agent, wihout auth, and representing as owner
of car, sold it. Thus, A is liable for innocent
purchaser. Read provision.
 AUTHORITY: right of agent to effect legal
relations of his P.
 Kinds: express, implied, general, special,
apparent (principal’s conduct leads that
agent is really authorized)
 Implied ex: auth to collect debt usually auth
din to bring suit for enforcement of
payment.
 NO IMPLIED AUTH IN:
/ auth to borrow for business, no auth to pay own
personal debts.
/ novation, even if auth to collect debt, no power
to indorse check
/ auth to borrow, not auth to pay at maturity.
/auth collect, not auth to receive partial payment,
nor to accept commercial paper as payment.
Unless engaged in business of acceptance of checks
or notes.
/note in pre trial, need spa for client ng atty.

Cases:
/ auth to collect money and exact payment by
“legal means” carries auth to bring court action for
collection.
/ auth to look for buyer of land of the company, not
carry with it auth to sell. Thus broker na hinire ni
agent, not entitled for commission.
/ auth to administer interest I possess within this
municipality, purchase, sell, collect and pay, as well
as sue and be sued, appear before courts” thus
may sell. Words of document should prevail.
/ auth to collect, not include release sureties.
/ FORGED power of atty. Thus, agent mort land and
able to register the land. Effect?? MORT and
registration are null and void. Cannot affect rights
of the registered owners.
/ payment to an UNAUTH agent does not exting the
obli.. payment not valid.
/ agents acting in BF, is presumed that P also acts in
BF.
Note:
Cannot be revoked. 1 bilateral contract,
DOCTRINE OF AGENCY BY NECESSITY:
“GR agency cannot be created by necessity”
XPN: in view of emergency, auth of agent enlarged
in order to cope w/ exigencies or necessities of the
moment. JURIS. Conditions:
1. Existence of emergency
2. Inability of agent to communicate to P
3. Exercise of additional auth protects the P
4. Means adopted is reasonable considering
the circs
5. Ceasing of the auth the moment the
emergency no longer demands the same.
Example: bus conductor seriously hurt, thus
driver auth to engage the services of a physician in
company’s name.
 AUTH V. POWER: auth is cause, power is
effect. Daw. Auth emanates from P and
agent given power.
 SPA is auth given in writing.
Note: notice to counsel is notice to party. But
notice to party is not notice in law.
 Auth v. instruction 817
817 1882 – limit of agent’s auth shall not be
considered exceeded should it have been
performed in a manner more advantageous to the
P than that specified by him.
 Deemed still auth, or justified if beneficial.
Financial gain or other gain. Offset ganun.
 Ex. A was asked to sell on installment for
100k. but able to sell whole. Deemed not
exceeded auth.
 Cannot sell at lower price if fixed. But may
sell higher price? Unless prohibited
specifically.
 What if sell to cash daw, pero sell to credit
is more beneficial? CANNOT! Not auth to do
so. 1905?
Case:
/ agent = general power of admin only. Sold land
for double the price. Agent exceeded? YES.
Important is he made a sale. Requires SPA. Ni
roght to alienate.
819 1883 – agent acts in his own name, P has no
right of action against persons with whom the
agent has contracted, neither does that 3 rd person
against P.
thus, agent, is the one directly bound, as if
transaction was his own, except when the
contract INVOLVES things BELONGING TO P.
w/o prejudice to actions between P against A.
 Here “agency” w/ undisclosed P.
AUTHORIZED!! but acting in A’s behalf.
Note: 1883 applies only if AUHTORIZED
AGENT.
Ex. A asked B to borrow from C. however, B did
not disclosed to C his Principal. thus, C cannot ask
A for payment. Only B has duty to pay.
Case:
/ if agent sign BOE. He must: indicate, that signing
as agent, name of principal, to be not personally
liable.
 Note the XPN: if P owns the thing.
 If A buys in his own name, but really in
behalf of P? seller has option to look to
either for payment unless:
1. He trusted the agent exclusively
2. Or usage and understanding of business,
the agent only is held
3. Or circs reveal that only agent was
intended to be bound and the seller
knew it. Page 820 #5
 When auth of agent is doubtful? Action
must be directed both against A and P.
 If things belonging to P:
Ex. agent buys, thru P’s money, auth, but in his own
name. P has still right of action against buyer and
vice versa.
But note:
If undisclosed principal but auth to sell. Buyer takes
title to the merchandise and the P cannot maintain
successfully an action against him for the recovery
pf the merchandise or for damages, but can only
proceed against the agent. In this cse, buyer has
NO KNOWLEDGE of the true principal. But! If
agent not auth to sell, whole transation is null and
void. Thus cannot be invoked 1883.
1883 cannot be invoked if, contract of sale did not
cover property of the supposed Principal but
involved prop of 3rd person.
Page 821.
OBLIGATIONS OF THE AGENT
General: GF and loyalty, Due diligence, follow or
instructions
If Negligent AGENT, who is liable? If mere
Mismanagement, P still liable. If BF or amounts to
tort, Agent liable.
When is an agent personally liable? EXCEED, own
name, or unauth.
Note libale when, within scope, agent’s name, for
agent’s benefit.
822 1884 – AGENT is BOUND by his acceptance to
carry out the agency and is liable for damages he
causes thru non-performance P may suffer.
He must also finish the business already
begun on the death of P, should delay entail any
danger.
 “DUTY of agent” = carry out the agency.
Case:
/ lawyer fails to perfect an appeal does not give rise
to damages in the absence of showing that the
decision, which is already final and executory, was
unjust.
 DEATH of P = As a rule, death of P
extinguishes Agency. But Agent is obliged to
finish business already begun if DELAY
should ENTAIL any danger.
 AGENT sells to himself = P not required to
fill such order unless P ratifies the sale after
he had full knowledge.
823 1885 – Person DECLINES an agency, he is
bound to observe DOAGFOAF in the custody and
preservation of goods forwarded to him until the
owner appoints another agent. Owner shall
appoint another agent or take charge of the goods.
 DOAGFOAF, equity demands said diligence,
kahit allowed to refuse.
 Duty of owner to act as soon as possible
to: appoint new agent, or take charge of
goods.
823 1886 – agent obliged to Advance necessary
funds only when there is stipulation, provided that
P is not insolvent.
 Thus, even if may stipulation, agent not
bound to advance if P subsequently became
insolvent. Why? IDK, wala sinabi. Probanly
bec wala na pambayad P kay Agent?
824 1887 - Agent shall ACT IN accordance w/ P’s
instructions.
If none, DOAGFOAF as required by the
nature of the business.
 “Duty to follow instructions”
 ACTS of agents beyond his powers would
still bind P if:
1. P’s acts have contributed to deceive a
3rd person
2. Limited power of A could not have been
known by a 3rd person
3. P has placed in the hands of agent
instruments signed by him in BLANK.
 If agent follows instructions, he cannot be
held personally liable. (responsible only if
exceeded auth, or acted with Negligence,
deceit, fraud)
 IF instructions unclear. P may be bound by
acts of agent relying in GF on his own
interpretation.
 Agent’s failure: exceeded, or negligent to
fully exercise its auth.
 If may excess, excess can be disregarded
and portion complete may be given effect.
 Can disobey: if illegal, will affect also agents’
interest, or next art.
826 1888 – An agent shall NOT CARRY out an
agency of its execution would MANIFESTLY RESULT
in LOSS or DAMAGES to the P.
 Why? Because Agent should exer Due
diligence.
 Also, because Agent generally acts for P’s
benefit and not to detriment P.
 Manifestly meaning would damage ANY
principal.
827 1889 – If there is conflict of interest between P
and A, should A prefer his own and causes damage,
Agent shall be liable for damages.
 APPLIES whether the Agency is grat or oner.
827 1890 – Agent empowered to borrow money,
he may himself be the lender at the current rate
of interest. If he has been auth to lend money at
interest, he cannot borrow it w/o P’s consent.
 here borrowing is for P’s benefit.
 NOTE: under 1491; agents cannot acquire
by purchase, even at a public or jud auction,
property whose admin or sale may have
been entrusted to him, unless the consent
of P has been given.
828 1891 – Agents are bound to render an account
of his transactions and to deliver to P whatever he
may receive by virtue of the agency, even though it
may not be owing to the P.
Stip. exempting Agent from obli. to render
account shall be VOID! (against pub pol, bec it
shall be conducive to fraud)
 Duty to account
 When need not duty to account? Acted only
acted as middleman, if agent informed the
principal of the gift bonus or profit, right of
lien exist in favor of the agent. NOTE: mali
ata daw.
Case:
/ Secret profit made by agent. Such breach of
loyalty forfeits the AGENT’s entitlement to collect
commission ordinarily due to him. Regardless of
agency being grat or oner. Because agent has
absolute duty to make full disclosure or
accounting of all transactions and material facts
relevant to the agency.

 Duty to deliver funds. All funds collected,
thus kahit di stipulated.
 Note: although agent entitled to
commission, there exist no co-ownership
regarding the money collected by virtue of
P’s business. No co-ownership established.
If agent subtracts prior to giving the funds
to P, ESTAFA.
 Neither is agent allowed to make profit for
his own benefit as long as agency exists.
 DOCTRINES: (duty to account)
1. Duty comes from the representative
relation and fiduciary nature
2. Duty to account may be demanded by P’s
heirs, thus kahit namatay na si P and
terminated na agency, such duty still exists
3. P or his legal rep has right to pass upon
correctness of the accounting
4. Also P has right to make reasonable
inspection of books etc
5. Agent cannot dispute P’s title to the
property in agent’s possession.
Cases:
/ if P approved the fraudulent accounting fully
knowing the fraudulent act, the heirs cannot
subsequently invoke it to set aside the accounting
made. Because P had already ratified.
/ agent, somehow got the land registerd in his own
name with a torrens title and decree became final.
Reconveyance can still be made if proven na agent
was only a trustee/ admin agent with respect to
the land. Since agency is fiduciary nature, agent is
estopped from acquiring a title adverse to that of
his P. By the registration of the land, it is true that
the agent is the owner as to 3rd persons are
concerned, but as against P, no. Cert of title cannot
shield fraudulent acts. Page 832 case
833 1892 – Agent may appoint a substitute if P has
not prohibited it, but agent is responsible for acts
of his sub when:
1. He was not given power to appoint one
2. Given such power but sub appointed was
notoriously incompetent and insolvent.
All acts of sub appointed against prohibition of
P shall be void.
 If Agent appointed, even if nothing was
mentioned kung pwede or not, acts of sub
are valid but A shall be responsible for the
acts of sub.
 If the Sub violated the instruction, P can
hold A and sub liable. (1893)
 If, P agreed na pwedeing magsub. A can be
held liable, subsidirialy or primarily, if A
appointed a notoriously income and
isolvent sub. If not, P cannot hold A liable.
 If A prohibited to appoint, but A appointed.
Acts of sub is void.
834 1893 – in cases mentioned in 1 and 2 in 1894,
the P may furthermore bring an action against the
SUB with respect to the obli which the latter has
contracted under the sub.
 Here, if P has not prohibited A to appoint.
 P can sue both A and Sub.
 Only XPN to sa article 1311, respecting
privity of contracts.
835 1894 – responsibility of 2 or more agents, even
if appointed simultaneously, is not SOLIDARY,
unless otherwise stipulated.
 JOINT not solidary
 Liability here refers to agents towards P.
and not to 3rd parties.
 But only if each can act separately, meaning
if All agents should ACT, and 1 is unable,
only that one unable to act is liable.
835 1895 – if solidarity has been agreed upon,
each A are b responsible for non-fulfillment of
agency, and for fault or neg of his fellow A, XPN: if
1 acted beyond the scope of his auth.
Ex. when 1 acts beyond auth. If sold another thing
stipulated, 1 acting beyond auth is the only liable.

836 1896 – Agent owes interest on the sums he has
applied to his own use from the day on which he
did so, and on those which he still owes after
extinguishment of the agency
 Pertains to liability of the AGENT for
interest
 Those converted for AGENTS own use, or
not converted pero not yet remitted at the
time of expiration of Agency
836 1897 – Agent not liable personally, unless he
expressly binds himself or exceeds the limits
of his AUTH w/o giving such party notice of
his powers.
 NO PERSONAL LIABILITY –
WHY? Representative only.
 If AGENT obligates himself personally, aside
from acting on behalf of P, BOTH are
BOUND.
Case:
/ if exec or admin, w/o court auth, contracts on
behalf of estate, he imposes upon himself a
personal obli. True even if not signing the contract
himself.
/ agent bound himself to pay debt. Will not relieve
P of his liability. Liability of agent merely security.
/ Agent prohibited to do acts that could prevent
fulfillment on the part of P.
 Proper parties to the suit – suit should be
against the P. not agent, XPN when agent
acts in his own name, or exceeds limit. Juris
din.
/ SPA allowing agent to sell all prop, sufficient to
validate sale.
839 1898 – Agent contracts in the name of P,
exceeding scope, and the P does not ratify.
Contract is VOID if the party whom the agent is
aware of the limit. Agent is liable if he undertook
to secure the P’s ratification.
 P bound only if ratified.
 And 3rd person, knows the defect.
840 1899 – Agent acts in accordance w/ order of P,
latter cannot set up the ignorance of the agent as
to the circs where himself was, or ought to be
aware.
 Equity, dahil Agent complied naman with
his duty
 Pertains to agent’s ignorance.
 Why? Kasi P should have appointed an
agent not ignorant.
 HERE, AGENT complies w/in auth, complies
w/ instructions.
840 1900 – as 3rd persons are concerned, ACT IS
DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN PERFORMED WITHIN
SCOPE OF AGENT’S AUTHORITY. If such act is
within the terms of the power of ATTY, (WRITTEN)
even if the agent has in fact exceeded the limits of
his auth according to an understanding bet. P and
A.
 “to protect interest of innocent 3rd persons”
 NOTE: this applies if AUTH IS IN WRITING!
 THUS, not required to go beyond the terms
of the written SPA. So kahit may agreement
si P and A na sila lang nakakaalam.
841 1901 – 3rd person cannot set up the fact that
the agent exceeded the powers, if P has ratified, or
has signified his willingness to ratify agent’s acts.
 Ratification grants AUTH.
842 1902 – 3rd person may require presentation of
power of ATTY, or the instructions as regards the
agency. Private or secret orders cannot prejudice
3rd persons.
Case:
/ if may defect, should make necessary inquiry
verification as to the auth of the applicants and to
find out WON parties are actually the Principal.
843 1903 – Commission agent responsible for the
goods received by him, if may damage sa goods,
presumed na goods were damaged while in
custody of the AGENT. Disputable
 “commission agent” merchant or broker,
having option to act in his own name or P’s
name.
 So magkaiba pa daw comm agent and
broker.
 Com agent = engaged in sale or purchase
for P of personal property. Things placed at
his disposal.
844 1904 – COMM agent, handling goods
belonging to different owners shall place
countermarks to distinguish ofc.
844 1905 – COMM agent CANNOT SELL ON CREDIT
W/O P’S CONSENT. Should he do so, P may
demand from A payment in cash, but comm agent
shall be entitled to any interest or benefit resulting
from the sale.
 P may demand A payment in cash if sold on
credit w/o consent. Or ratify.
 Agent cannot invoke defense that konti ang
profit kapag cash basis.
846 1906 – if allowed to sell on credit, agent shall
inform P such selling on credit to be made, with
names of buyer. If A failed to do so, sale shall be
deemed to have been made in cash insofar as P is
concerned.
 “DUTY to inform P”
 So di pwedeng sabihin na on cash pero In
reality credit.
846 1907 – If COMM agent, received additional for
ordinary commission, or guarantee commission, he
shall bear the risk of collection and shall pay the P
the proceed agreed upon w/ the purchaser.
 In sum, if may guarantee comm = agent
shall Pay P in case 3 person failed to. Agent
bears the risk of collecting.
 Note: ang Guarant comm ata, is paid in
advance.

847 1908 – COMM agent who does not collect the
credits of his P when due and demandable na, shall
be liable for DAMAGES, unless proved na he exer
DUE dilig to collect.
 Article applies if no guarantee commission.
But if meron, then failed, liable for interest
in lieu of damages.
 DUE DILIG= legal means, and reasonable
time.
 NOTE: sa GUARANTEE COMMISISN, if
meron = every time purchaser fails to pay,
AGENT pays or assumes the risk. Kaya may
guarantee comm.
848 1909 – Agent is responsible not only for fraud,
but also for NEG.
 If NEG, consider kung grat or oner. Kung
grat lang, not liable? NOT SURE.
 If fraud, liable always.
 AGENT no duty to insure the Goods, unless
agreed upon.
Cases:
/ 849
case/
P said sold this tomorrow for 1 peso.
A = sold the thing for 1 peso but at said date the
price was 2 pesos.
Thus, A is liable for the difference. Did not act with
due diligence.
Case/
Agent, entrusted to hold diamond pendant.
However, it was robbed, robber not yet convicted.
A liable? No., excused because of fortuitous event
took place without A’s fault. As long as proven by
preponderance of evidence.

Case/
Agent signed receipt as witness. But never received
said amount. NOT liable.
OBLI OF THE PRINICIPAL
Liability of principal in case of mismanagement or
tort.
852 1910. P must comply with all the obli which the
A contracted within the scope of his auth.
P not bound, to those contracted by A
exceeding its auth, unless RATIFIED expressly or
impliedly.
 “duty to comply w/ agent’s commitments”
Note:
1. agent acting within the scope of his auth
2. acting in the name of P (not in his own
name, otherwise P not bound, xpn:
remember? When things belonging to P)
1883
 Impliedly ratifies, “P accept benefits of the
misrepresentation”
 Requisite of ratification:
1. Unauth act
2. P consents
3. P accepts benefits and oblis, acceptance
must be absolute,or accepted in entirety.
4. P has full knowledge of what he is ratifying
 Effects of ratification:
1. A relieved
2. P now bound
854 1911. Even if A exceeded his auth, P is
solidarily liable with A if P allowed A to act as
though he had full powers.
 “Estoppel” – failed to adopt the needed
measures to prevent misrepresentation.
 SOLIDARY LIABILITY is imposed by law.
855 1912. P must advance to A, necessary sum for
execution of the agency, if A requests.
If A advance them, instead of P, P must
reimburse him, even if the business was not
successful, PROVIDED that A is free from all fault.
REIMBURSEMENT shall include interest, from the
day the advance was made.
 “duty to advance necessary funds”
 Even if Agency is grat. This applies, interest
and reimbursement.
855 1913. P must indemnify the A for all the
damages which the “execution of the agency” may
have caused to A, w/o fault ofc on A’s part.
 “duty to compensate damages caused by
the Agency contract”
 based on EQUITY, applies in grat or oner.
 Note: here, Agency actually exists. If not
then none.
856 1914. Agent may retain in pledge the things
object of the Agency until P reimburses and pays
the sum set forth in 1912 and 1913.
 Agent’s right to retain things, by way of
pledge.
 Thus, pledge by operation of LAW.
856 1915. If 2 or more person, appointed an A for
aa common transaction, they shall be solidarily
liable to said A for all the consequence of the
agency.
 Thus, kahit A have been appointed
separately. This applies. Basta for same
transactions. (meaning kahit di jointly
chinena siya as agent nung dalawa)
Ex. W, X, and Y employed A, agent, to sell land
owned by them three. A promised to receive
commission. If A is successful, A can collect from
ANY. Solidary. Ofc subject to reimbursement sa
mga may ari.
Ofc, not apply, if WXY appointed one A, to sell their
separate properties. Kahit nasa one instrument
lang. NOT a common transaction.
Case:
Applies if made in separate acts, as long as for
same transactions.
857 1916. If a Person contracts with Agents and P
separately, but for the same transactions. And the
two contracts are incompatible. That of the PRIOR
date shall be preferred, w/o prejudice to 1544.
 1544 – provision on SALES, about property
sold to different person. To the first seller, if
RP, first who records. If none, first
possessor in GF, oldest title.
Case:
X owner.
A1 = agent w/ general power of atty
A2 = special power to sell land
Both sold the land on same date.
Thus, sale made by A2 is valid and enforceable.
Since A1 had no right nor auth to sell. Selling is not
mere act of admin. Thus need special power. A1
liable for damages.
Case/
P = authorized A to sell his land. A sold and buyer
registered.
P subsequently sold the land and buyer managed
to title the land.
First transaction must prevail, since it was registred
in GF of the sale in registry of property.
Prejudiced second buyer may sue, for breach of
warranty against eviction. The value of the land
sold must be returned. Even if said value be greater
or less than the price of sale.
859 1917. In the preceding article, If A acted in GF,
P shall be liable for damages to the third person
whose contract must be rejected. If in BF, A alone
shall be responsible.
859 1918. P NOT liable for expnses incurred by A in
the FF cases:
1. A acted contrary to P’s instructions, unless P
ratified.
2. Expenses resulted from A’s fault
3. A incurred them w/ knowledge that an
UNFAVORABLE RESULT would ensue, if P
was not aware thereof.
4. Stipulated that expenses would borne by
the A, or that A would be allowed only for A
certain SUM.
Reasons:
1 = punish agent
2 = punish agent
3 = kasi tantamount to BF and lack of due diligence.
4 = stipulation is valid, not against good morals and
pub pol.
EXTINGUISHMENT OF AGENCY
860 1919.
So kahit namatay. Valid pa din SPA? NO. kung may
sale na before death, valid.
TRUST OBLICON PARAS 888
DEFINED: right to the benficial enjoyment of
property, the legal title to which is vested in
another.
Charactertisitcs:
- Fiduciary
- Created by law, or agreement
- Legal title held by trustee, beneficial title
held by beneficiary.
GUARdianship – holder does not hold legal title
In pour autrui – arise only in contracts, refers to
specific property or other things, trsut specific
property lang.
COwonrship – is a form of trust. Each co owner
being a trustee for each other.
889 1440 – establishes a trust = trustor
holding the property fro benefit of another,
confidence repose = trustee
whose beefit the trust has bee created =
beneficiary
“parties”
beneficiary = “cestui que trust”
note: trustor may be the beneficiary himself.
Elements:
Parties and property or “trust estate” or subject
matter.
Case ni sir:
/ co-heirs porp mort sa bank. Naforclsoe. Thus,
napunta na sa bank ownership.
Bank allowed redeem kahit beyond period.
1 paid, and said 1 heir sakanya na name. (pero
hinandle niya muna bayad since wala pambayad
co-heir)
/ lilipat ni A ung haws ni B kunwari skanya. Para
may prop kunwari si A para maapporve ung visa
niya na kunwari mayaman siya haha. is it a trust?
can co heir may say that 1 is holding the property
in trust?? Yrs. 1452
/ what if alien, pinahgalan niya sayo land, para
kunwari hindi skanaya, kasi bawal alien dba. Kanino
iaaward? Kasi sabi ni Chinese ibalik sakanya since
pera niya.
NO cannot be used trust to circumvent the law.
dismissed. Title name = ownership. Not alien.
890 1441 – may be EXPRESS or implied.
Express = agreement of parties
IMPLIED = law
 Kinds of implied:
1. Resulting – (bare or passive) there is intent
to create a trust but not considered as
express trust. (1451)
Sample: inherits a property but he register
it in anothers name, so he wants the
beneficial use, only title to said person.
2. Constructive – no intention to create trust,
but nevertheless created to prevent unjust
enrichment. (sample: acquires property by
mistake, 1456)
Elememts:
Trust res
Sufficiently certain beneficiary
890 1442 – principles of general law of trusts are
adopted. (basta di in conflict with CC,
COCommerce, ROC other special laws)
suppletory.
Meaning ata neto’ = adopts Amercian Law on
Trusts
Cases:
/Lawyer acts as trustee of his client pending
litigation with respect to matters in litigation ofc.
/see 891
EXPRESS TIWALA
893 1443 – NO EXPRESS TRUSTS CONCERNING RP
OR INTEREST THEREIN MAY BE PROVED BY PAROL
EVIDENCE.
“parol” = Christmas, char. ORAL evidence.
Thus, EXPRESS trust MUST be WRITTEN to be
enforceable. Note necessarily for validity. (so may
be valid but unenforceable)
 Only for RP, so for PP oral agreement is
valid and enforceable.
 To affect 3rd persons, ofc, ulit ulit. Must be
in a public instrument and registered in the
ROP, IF RP.

 On the other hand, if implied trust, wether
real or personal involved, may be proved by
parol evidence. (1457)
893 1444 – No PARTICULAR words needed, as long
as there is clear intention to create.
 Need not even to include the word “trust”
 So how created:
1. Conveyance to the trustee by act inter vivos
or MC
2. By admission of the trustee that he holds
the property , in his capacity as a TRSUTEE.
Case:
/ plaintiff allowed defendants and permitted to
occupy and take possession of RP. Thus, there is
recognition, although still in plaintiff’s name, was
held in trust for the defendant. To be conveyed to
him on payment of the purchase price (express
trust).
/ naked ownership of land passed to the creditor,
while usufruct remaind w/ children for an
undetermined period of time. Thus children held
the land as trustees of the creditor of deceased
father. (thus imprescriptible daw) page 895
(kaso parang wala trust daw kasi walang fiduciary
relationship created?) so more like DATION in
payment daw. (court should have fixed transfer of
property)
 “clear intention”
 as to capacity:
1. TRSTR must be capacitated to convey (note
joit owner may be trstr and other owner as
trstee)
2. TRSTEE capcitated to hold and enter into
contracts
3. Beneficiary – capcitated to receive
gratuitously
ADMINISTRATION of the trust:
1. Trustee must file a bod. (ROC)
2. Also make inventory of RP and PP in trust
(ROC)
3. Must manage and dispose of the estate ad
faithfully discharge his trust in realtion
thereto, according to the law or according
to the terms of the trust (ROC)
4. Render true and clear account ROC
5. Trustee cannot acquire the property held
in trst by PRESCRIPTION as long as the
trust is admitted. (if repudiated however,
and made knonw to party involved, PWEDE
PRESCRIPTION) juris
Notes:
/ Trustee is personally liable GR. XPN:
stipulation na liable ang TRUST ESTATE.
/ trustee may sue or be sued alone if his trust is
express. In writing deed will or by court
proceedings ganun daw di ko gets. 897 juris
897 1445 – NO trust shall fail because the trstee
appointed declines the designation, UNLESS the
contrary intention appears in the instrument.
 When trustee declines
GR: trust continues even if declined. Why??? Court
may appoint new trustee, unless provided sa
instrument na, wala na, finish na, di pwede new
appointmet.
Why? No trustee = No trust.
Mother > Uncle = for trustee in insurance proceeds
of a minor.
898 1446 – ACCEPTANCE by the BEN is necessary.
BUT!! If it imposes no ONEROUS condiditons, trust
is presumed, if NO proof to the contrary.
 Acceptance – express/ implied/ presumed/
 Presumed if it is PURELY GRAT.
 NOTE: not need formalities of acceptance
for donation. (kasi sa donation of property,
dat pub ins din dba) thus, kahit RP involved,
acceptance need not pub ins.
 FORMER IS TRUSTEE.
 END of trusts: LATTER BENEFICIARY

1. Mutual agreement of ALL IF HOWEVER, THE PROPERTY IS CONVEYED TO

2. Expiration of term CHILD, LEG OR ILLEG, OF THE ONE PAYING THE
3. Resolutory condition PRICE OF SALE, NO IMPLIED TRUST. PRESUMED NA
4. Rescission or annulment GIFT IN FAVOR OF THE CHILD.
5. Loss of subject matter (physic of legal imp)
6. Court order  HERE property is purchased by title is given
7. Merger to another, NOT the payer.
8. Accomplishment of purpose  Here trust is intended.
 Sample: A buys land from B. A pays so that
Note: he have beneficial interest but legal title to
Testamentary trust for administration and C. C is trustee, A is ben.
eventual sale of certain proeprties of T ENDS, at  Suppose: C is legitimate child of A? then no.
the time SAID SALE was actually made and presumed gift kay child,
proceeds distributed. (trusteeship of Estate of  Formalities of donation not required daw.
diaz) Kasi presumption. Kasi if need formalities
then no need to be presumed.
 ALSO! Not implied trust if dox expresses
IMPLIED TRUSTS different intention like: “like if the purchase
paid because he was lending money to B”
Doctrine of implied trust is founded on EQUITY. Fair “b having the legal title”
dealing demands establishment of trust.
903 1449 – implied trust: donation made to a
person but DONEE does not get full ownership of
900 1447 – enumeration of implied trust does not benefit.
exclude others. But limitation in 1442 shall be
applicable.  Sample: a donated to B. but was agreed
upon that: “only 1/3 of the products of said
 As long as not in conflict with: cc, land shall belong to B. there is a trust here,
commerce, ROC, special laws other. B as trustee”

Case 904 1450 – one bought the property for another,

/ city holds I trust for the NATNL government, lands but the title is in his name although bought for
or community properties. another.

/ land was held in trust by NL (kasi si L nainheirt
daw niya sa lolo nya, pero alam niyann sold na sa
municipality, pero for some reason naka title siya)
evidence of ownership lang ung land, not chena to
acquire ownership
Said property them shall be considered as
security, for the payment of “another” of the
purchase price thur redemption. (so parang loan
lang ung pera for said “another”)

902 1448 – implied trust when: PROPERTY IS SOLD,
AND THE LEGAL ESTATE IS GRANTED TO 1 PARTY
BUT THE PRICE IS PAID BY ANOTHER FOR THE
PURPOSE OF HAVING THE BENEFICIAL INTEREST OF
THE PROPERTY.
 “constructive trust” here, to prevent unjust
enrishcment. How unjdt enrichment?
 But if nagloan ng money, the siya mismo
nagbuy, then seciruty, in this case,
MORTGAGEnot, trust. Page 904
Case:
/ no ficusciary in trustee and trustor in constructive
trust.
/ trust receipt: importer magiging owner only if he
paid price.
/trust receipt is a security rtransactio where
dealers who do not have sufficient funds to finance
imporatition of merchandise. Here collateral ung
merchandise imported.
/ cases in 905
906 1451 – when land passes by succession to any
person and he causes the legal title to be put in
the name of another, a trust is established by
implication of law for the benefit of the true
owner.
 Here “resulting trust”
 Sample; A inherited. But he caused the
legal title to be in the name of X, his
borther. Thus, here, X is trustee and A
beneficiary.
 CO-onwer, or co-heir, are truestees and of
each other.
Case/
Cannot acquire shares of co-heirs and owners by
prescription. As long as not repudiated and ack the
existence of co ownership
/trust din kapag wife regisyered under husbands
name properties. Wife may claim them as her own
upons husbands death.
/ co-heri nakauha ng title, may be compelled to
surrender for partition.
908 1452 – if 2 or more agree to purchase, and
legal title is in the name of 1, for the benefit of all.
There is also trust created by law, in proportion to
the interest of each.
 Resulting trust also.
 Case/
One with the title, is the trustee.
Note: shares of co-onwers are presumed equal.
Article 485 second par.
909 1453 – person declared his intent to hold the
property for someone else, there is implied trust in
favor of the person whose benefit is contemplated.
Rsulting trust.
Sample:
A bought lanf from B and it was conveyed to jA on
A’s statement that he would hold it in behalf of C.
here A trustee, and C is ben,
So, if sabi ni jose “he is the real owner” after such
declaration. He cannot be allowed to do so. Kasi
estopped na siya aksi sabi niya held in trust for C.
 Applies also if person promised to hold
property until it be free from all debts and
encumb. Here he is mere trustee.
Case/
Page 909 910.
910 1454 – trust if: the ben sold his property to
trustee, in order to secure ben’s obli to trustee.
Here, if the obli was fulfilled, the trustee then shall
reconvey the property to ben. In other words ben
may demand resale of the property to her.
910 1455 – when any trustee, guardian, or other
holding a fiduciary relationship uses trust funds
for the purchase of property and causes the
conveyance to be made to him or to a third
person, a trust is established by op of law in favor
of the person to whom the funds belong.
 Constructive trust. Prevent unjust
enrichment.
 Applies to:
 Trustee, guardian other.
Sample:
Agent used his principals money to purchase land
in his onw name. and register the land in his onw
name. here, he will be considered only as TRUSTEE,
and principal is BEN. P can bring action for
conveyance to himself, so long as no innocent
parties shall be prejudiced.
Why?
Estopple. Fiduciary relations, remove temptation to
enrich oneself at the expense of another. Or one’s
own integiryt and duty.
Case/
Person, should have been helping an illiterate,
enriched himself. There is breach of trust.
1456 912 – if property acquire thru mistake or
fraud, person obtaining is considered as trustee of
an implied trust. For the benefit of the true
owner.
Constructive din kasi tp prevent unjust
enrichment.
 Trustee may be compelled to exeute a deed
of reconveyance of prop. Improperly
obtained Provided that tru owner is not
barred by laches.
 “mistake” here means mistake of 3rd
person, kasi kung party, then no trust.
 “farud” here extra contractual fraud.
 Action is against the trustee Not against the
innocent purchaser. (within 4 year from
doscvery of fraud) or form date of
registration if registered.
Case:
/  How to prove trusts: express: NOT oral! See
NOT APPLY if: donee, breaks the condition of the
donation, she does not become a trustee. Still hers,
subject to revocation. Unles prescribed na.
/ torrens cannot be shiled for fraud. Where 1 heir
said only heir siya, and nagpatitle siya. Here cannot
say na precirbed na. kahit registered na and may
torrens na. kasi only as trustee lang siya. Sa pag
title. May reconvey! Page 915
/do trusts PRESCRIBE??
a. Express trust NO. as long as not repudiated.
b. Implied – not sure “confusing” sabi ni paras.
Haha page 915.
Implied may be barred by lapse of time daw.
Kasi sa express trust may intention na holding
as trustee lang. NOT ADVERSE, unlike in
implied. Dba? Onga naman.
In implied, NO PROMISE or fiduciary relation.
niya Not holding for the ben, kasi adverse.
Inaangkin niya nga eh dba.
However, may cases na imprescriptible, if co-
heir? So kahit adverse. Ata. Or resulting FROM
FRAUD. May be barred by prescription. 4 years.
Basta if di adverse, imprescriptible. No laches.
Sa express. Thus can recover anytime.
Cases/ page 916 onwards.
In implied trust. Imprescriptible if: resulting
trust. Intended na trust. Xpn: if repudiated ni
ben.
In constructive: do pescribe.
“sabi whether resulting or constructive, its
ENFORCEMENT may be barred by laches DAW.
Nacalaban vs. CA and Duque v. domingo wut. “
page 917
/ reconveyance of registered land based on
implied trust, prescirbes in 10 years.
page 920 salao v. salao
 NOTE movables acquire thru a crime,
cannot be acquired by the offender thru
PRESSCRIPTION. 1133 civil code.
 CREATIVE TRUSTS: oage 922\
1457 922 – implied = may be proved by PAROL.
Wether RP and PP involved,
BUT! Ofc, oral evidence must stil, be trustworthy!
Kasi easily fabriscated mga oral chenes.
BAKA ITANONG!

LOSS V LIABILITY
DOCTRINE OF UNLIMITED LIABILITY
DOCTRINES

WHEN GENERAL, HWNE NEED SPA, ACTS OF STRICT

DOM, ACTS OF ADMIN,. KELAN LIABLE.

TRUST, RESULTING IMPLIED, AND CONSTRUTIVE.

TRUST BA OR HINDI.