ACUÑA, Kaisser John P.

20180200515

Estoppel is a bar which precludes a person from, denying or

asserting anything contrary to that which has been in contemplation
of law, established the truth either acts of judicial or representation
either express or implied. If one person speaks, acts or leads one to
believe him and the latter reasonably relied on those acts, words and
behavior the former cannot later on back out and hide behind the
clock of denial. Its purpose is to forbid one to speak against his own
act, representations, or commitments to the injury of one who has
relied on them. It concludes the truth in order to prevent fraud and
falsehood and imposes silence on a party only when in conscience
and honesty he should not be allowed to speak. The principles of
Estoppel are only suppletory.

There are different kinds of estoppel. One is Estoppel by Record

where it is a preclusion to deny the truth of matters set forth in a
record, whether judicial or legislative, and also to deny the facts
adjudicated by a court of competent jurisdiction. Second is Estoppel
by deed where it precludes one party to a deed and his privies from
asserting against the other party and his privies any right ot title in
derogation of the deed or from denying the truth of an material facts
asserted in it. There is Estoppel in pais where it arises from conduct
or misrepresentation and includes all forms of estoppel not arising
from a record, deed, written instrument. It is found on morality and
has for its purpose to serve justice. Lastly would be Estoppel by
laches where it arises from silence or inaction. It requisites are the
following, first, Conduct on the part of the defendant or of one under
whom he claims, giving rise to the situation complained of. Second,
delay in asserting complainant’s rights after he had knowledge of the
defendant’s conduct and after he has had an opportunity to sue. Third
is lack of knowledge or notice on the part of the defendant that the
complainant would assert the right on which he bases his suit, andl
lastly if there is injury or prejudice to the defendant in the event relief
is accorded to the complainant.

Next article talks about when there is an Estoppel against

vendor who subsequently acquires title which shall then after become
validated if he becomes the owner of the property. In Art 1345, it
ACUÑA, Kaisser John P.
20180200515

explains that the person who acted as agent or representative of

another in the sale or alienation of a thing, cannot question the
validity of the transfer and claim title to the thing sold or alienated as
against the buyer or grantee because he does not have the right to
decide for he merely acts as a representative of the obligee.

With regard to Estoppel against tenant or bailee, he does not

have the right to be heard and assail the title of the title even if the
landlord had no title from the time the creation of the lessor and
lessee is created, and also the bailor is estopped to assert title to the
thing received as against the bailor, for their rights toward their
property are mere temporary.

When it comes an owner of an immovable property, by

intentional misrepresentation, an assumed owner of that property can
be precluded himself to his assertion to his legal title on the land if
these elements are present:

a. There must be fraudulent representation or wrongful

concealment of facts known to the party estopped;

b. The party precluded must intend that the other should act
upon the facts as misrepresented;

c. The party misled must have been unaware of the true facts;
and

d. The party defrauded must have acted in accordance with the

misrepresentation.

The succeeding article talks about personal property through

the acceptance of benefits where one due to his fraudulent act of
misrepresentation of the ownership on a personal property, is
precluded from denying his association on the resulting obligation
which eventually arises to profiting himself due to his own wrong.

Lastly, Estoppel is only effective as between the parties and

their successors in interest because the latter has an inchoate right
with regard to the properties in interest in event of demise of the
ACUÑA, Kaisser John P.
20180200515

former. Therefore, this article excludes strangers or third parties as to

Estoppel is concerned.