You are on page 1of 38
ny cersentation resels 1 MSERG my ont ATHOLICCHURCH Ys REGING P THERON NO ITAIB Ag ZO2 ANTE ea SCRA 28 KJ: ‘he ouch ety the Ait oy va titted Soa ee Samer ne ace me eh Scere acoansinsal nd wpyhee caer Svs acarec Sears ny belee Sateen tesorecmmas FEL pressoompara nthe oe payable 3 years. = Ssnagutiy the Chsch sd in avr of the sou ecr an eel th posses Rob) a 21S auare eter bes ‘Stele pevay sl te Pete he eee ee Sere te unin eeting a ort fn ‘ie ante cece Dacng Este and hg ‘us th amly he fo he ipl roa a 8 et 8 & hate Stee he pres Pate Intute a 2 son ao these beeen the Church td ‘Pose atic th prey ton si aol SM lel ae wth a counter, seg ‘Excelent ts contrac with Pane The Church aged ELSES te cma was absined by Trad when ante [RR tereemed tthe ha beer an actual eccpal ee wen in wath he was merely esing 3 Popes i 4 Fssgceay fom his house tte 1 Sse fa apy to sl ssa Irene tt spouses Ruban thet predecess Induce 3 aig the 21S square ter jae rch od re the rel bers, 1061 coset The RTC riled i fr of the Church, dig tat the rh consent 1 the sale ae seed ee eepresetaion hat e ws am occupa he Sag es itp Caurs consent war Seed tegh ee ta at ante was 2 quale oeipae the Ret se Se seit Mpetweun the Church nd Pane purune oa iee ‘SUG code nih of Pate’ payment ely nde ae Meripeslet 1 had Been actual rll bythe en (Mer pradecessors, he RIC Upheld te Sl in tne oe spose ub ante appealed the RIC decion withthe CA. The CA pomed Panes appeal and reversed the Rots The CA eerie the cotrct between Pane and the Cheha ‘Gr sl, since the Charen made no expres reser fnrchip nt ull payne of the pice mae Tn fat the ‘Suc gave the Chute the righ to repurchase ese ate ae {epay the ntalimens wi the grace period prove the CA fda the ight 0 repurchase wnecersay ownership at fotalandy boon trafered to the buyer Even assumig ate {Enact ad Boon» contact sel the CA dered tr Pate lsd the condition precedet when fe conned the lace ‘whinge treesyearperiodallowed ubdr he pares apeement. ‘Gon i payment Pate fly compte te tems of ‘Enact the Church ‘The Church fied the preset pton fer review 0 cerorar to contest the CA ung The Gharch estens a e ‘Sof the lat o Pate is dale under Ate 190 of he Ct Cale wheter Arle 190 fining ose ele ronal eyo tag ee mayBee et omagethe orcng Fo (1) Dose war oe of te pres aed Tyan bre the eset iad toe ee tai we nt __ a ‘canned wih Carseanner ONS _—_ Any ale cael! cent Sm kas oon sot eee aro la sn se At ty TON ne wg, Pate terested hing Me Des cheaoe he une athe Church's poi to sl ang, Se ot reels there Ie ths clang thar Soon = Foc the Church the presence of fraud isersntaton that wold sufce tonal the a fay he al ae sol hve Fai Feel the CA oped to arate the contact bonnes Ghrhand Pots ouidereditasaconratofsale anda Eitceraatn peste forse the casein Panes a ‘he chrch eject ths approach onthe principal srs, ‘ete coud osthave bean scott atalcomsdeap ‘Snorer. ‘ou oar estes deny the ptton, omrpresenaton extedvitting the sellers onset and invalidating the contract Co. sone go fn pi seni rn pe ea ESeeonter inane eee sonsentat Safa vay asa Zumeorteietinccms howe eh Sic hdceiyrr ate ier SE hoe cease seni ot lr ttt tenia toca ek 1068 ost ove picipaly moved onto bth prs to ner econ Misa tothe ety sfx ofene oft parte wl atest on when moh ey aL Secifocons Rove ben th nal cu Ale mito gas For mistake 2 othe qualia of or ofthe pares t» salt cnsen two Fequlses must concur ‘the mistake mast be elthor with egard othe ny, a wis equ the ualifcaon of oe ofthe coavactng paren snd 2 the entity oF guaifation must hae been the pritcizl feasieraton forthe erlebration ofthe contract. Inthe present case the Church contends tht is cose © sal the lot was given othe mistaken Impression arg fom Fens oudslent misrepresentaton hat he ha ben the cl teria of he ot Wilf msrepresenatinexste becuse ois ety to sls lands only to trata oceapans resident. Fs consider the buyer’ scl ecupancy or resiece over ‘Bessjeclota quale necessary duce to sellthot Wether the facts established daring tri, sppee hi ‘ooetion sal deerne fhe contact betwee be hrch and Fate should beamed in the. recess of weighing the ‘ideiory value ofthese ested fs he cuts oad ‘sider both the parr bjectives andthe sebectve specs of 1M eanaction, special, she pares. came ~ he ‘Sodom elastin strates ~ a thet condita {he ine af and subsequent ote aera. These conseatins ‘al show what nue he alleged er exerted on the artes Sdtherieligent ocean voluntary cansentothe contr Contrary tothe Charis contention the acta espe reside of ier aver the iat des ot spear t Be 8 tot ‘Scanned with CamScanner OS AR. ty pet ncn ren x sper indeed ts pole. then neither Pay rei sale reed on te eg ve fh pe on 0 2I6:meer sri of 2 Seen scout rel ntbleta conser that 2 2e1Gmeter stip gr eet ithe sone’ esdece. In fact the spouses fe a tet oe the e16meter lt when the 1994 sae ys Me fol ley tat ante 24 sey sera hat el scp of he SSE Si ph an es Sea See eon nea at 8 me SOLS rena aan ‘Soe rare nly ene ee Srnec See te ‘Toe aboe views supported by the sketch plan, sachets te cacract executed by the Church and Pante, which dee ‘bed the ax6meter ft as 2 "RIGHT OF WAY", below tos words was rten te nae of Mr. Regio Pant" Aske og {coseraminaion where the sketch plan came from, Pane sovered that ws from the Archbishops Palace lhe the ‘hares ote spouses Ru conzadcted ts statement ‘Toececods further revalthat he sales of the Chur ts EET Reeser senes of conferences with the occupants The thes arch priest of Canaman, Fr, Marcia, 5 ‘Beety avare tat Fonte was not an actual eccupans stiles be alowed he sale fhe lato Pane, subject 1 Archiicese'Oeconomous. Relying oF Fe tg amends and finding nating objectionable ‘eu eres sOxcnomoa)eppoved te sale Ps 104s FF const ro ete wa a feat tht her cols 2 literate, wilful oF fauduen oer Ue nt ret ile the Church into pings conse rae se asd vse ae et ste fasa ramen nan he Car n Seser ewer dosoby Pte re ener emet se seme mcalieerenae Seige ise ce ea iyo sn Fomine oa In the absence of any vation of coset, the contact. secant Church ad Pate and aan eating hy Sey Patapon the fl rc cold ot te cnr sn (Gorey soverve by the Ca) fas con oe yf {Sina the Contact not provide» spl tht he Charch ‘aed ownership antl payment of he pri. The et frpurcase gen ote Church nase Pete ast pay within he fae period provides woud have been unneesary bd Snership ot ready paseo Paste WHEREFORE, we deny the pettion fr review a certo ‘dati the decision te CA of contract by reson of dle esate ior forte agri pry trove at be Pat fr the ould not have entered ito the costae were o Taudest representation that wa peered on ova otto eed pry etn oe #282 ‘on a aud td sy moor A we In seeking the annulment ‘Scanned with CamScanner 05 propia aton fr the anu ea in bine TE ctasion that there haa’ encore hm ayo DevELOPMENT ING vs. RACHEL barenit (GR .No. 196182, 1 September 2014 rousing -MANDAp PERALTA: sce + ception ged Ite Dang evant of wads units In. 1995, i stanly SM scoot cae Se alate la hg So Sa es ae ae kat Loree elmer retiree See rreoe rage pprans eee See oi rete emer es ane ake een oe ae le i area yes er he xeon ofthe Contras Set Mandap, rough er counsel wrote BE a eter demsnay Serax’ 4220000 presenting the payment she mole ese ht se bseqenty covered. ta Be demon poet was beng bit In Psay City and fo Mia Gy dated in sprinted advertoements, Hower ‘a a we ani tr, ECE sw hr ea ‘enna orm heat ent edly fr nse ‘snd occupancy should sbe decide to move in. . “sige eer form of deal - farm of dental fer demanaor t SSG a dpi to ec. nap hed» compat REN Ete taal Cpt Rein ed Oe (ENCHO) SOSA tf de pry Bord (HLURD) seit Preece etych it mt with EE the retuno cost 2 Stang other cornet Neen Mandap led a pttion review with the HLURB Board onnislonets which rendered odkment dsmissog Maslass Cametint aad afeming the decison othe ENGR ote ‘Seer to the Contacto Sl excited by EEE and Maye $eFStcommissioners hed that when te pares rec one Sect in wing ther "igh and dies ust be found in he ‘Shea and nother part can pce a restr bight han what (fecotact provides Mandap fled an appeal with the Ofce ofthe Preset wich Mirmed fn toto the decision of the HLURB Board of Comnisioners Manda hen fed ptt fi review th tbeCA The srl te Sclerosis ie “Emre between Ec and anda cE wooed rere he Sess ef fezas0000 mae yon. wh Peet TheCA held ta EE employed and maton tc Man tear no erat The CA tras Sakon the dre sean of he Cana Se SErenthparce Hence, the presen petit or review on cron “The Court find the petition mrtorous. case is wheter ECE was Te hatte In he psn case hte ECE uly of fraud and ifs, whether suc ands "alt conrat wih Mandap. 1068 Scanned with Camcanner my seein Ot Cte ha eg pcos or machinations of gg’ eg ties pre nde To emer na go SEERA Oe el BE BEE og eiaeancne mmm val aaa svete ame toy mal, Walene Intimidation ‘the const ‘of the same Code nie we cpa vies Sr rate scnac vale shoul a thane een employed by Both contracting page eee stn hat nr costae ag expt ol cna itonst te et SEAS at be eb coerce, or mst be gee EES DS coef the pay Tis is relered to ads SSP etm te rou Th audi serious where Sek ro tprem cto lead an ordinary prodent pensar eS SEL out cme deceive pident person rece Sal tr nly Te cromsants of ea case aah Sues ty lt sour he personal condos ‘Som Svond ead mut be proven by cea and ema, ‘ocean ere bya preponderance hee te epee ese th Court nds that ECE Is aly of serena a Tiss eden by Hs red ‘Sreienens ndag hath sb condomni pe s ice tan Oy whe ncn Pasay Cty TC ‘Eesha er he NLR aed ers andthe Ofer ofthe President, In conden SEs dele at of malig misepresentatins eH Ssathedawthomeseeeye em Pe one st con ns tw he present cate concern 8 Sxe-mt Hsing nd and ne ce HS Smear of Pesan fs ad EE ms avec do SSIS Stal fad wich wou have been ald bas "uel ewe 20a None, 1069 costo bet 0 gi consent and ae to uy he nt en pee Sere ies tm tere ie eee mare ne ee Sree ee rey er Seer ‘With respect to the foregoing dsasions the Court quotes ‘wth approval the dsgulstlon of the Ofee of the President on the ‘ily ofthe claims of petitioner and respondent. owt Se Imietaon asm scr reset ou scons hs bon apd ‘tet of irae persons onthe pooh hat ch Ions ar una toa ey aren ey fal > Sethe oma thm apo coat Inarament teen uch Meat pra saneree ero ead nde oH ore he E {ul et read bere eed wer a {os ad hfe eo ebtam yg nd xan Of auch gros nese ow =P 1070 ‘Scanned with CamScanner Ay sng Hon he grin that HE gore of cen assuming that ECE mi any ost ese ceosssn and which oul bea ground for anes, Sr Sno ae of ating her signa a ay a ier Sache caes ucn oen sit Sac rains ile one ied de siete brs ey see 978, ey be eqn dred tha hrs FEC ain ee et Seeing anes Reece ent mace ee Sy ier Under Arle 1392 of the Gill Code, rate epee acon toatl wodable contrac: elt Ide 196 of the sane Cave provides that rata ‘Be conrad fom alls deere from the: moms ‘ac bused on the foregoing the findings and concsos fe Housng and Land Use Arbiter, the HLURB Bowe! of (nisons andthe fice ofthe Presiden shouldbe sustains, Fraud in relation to mistake cet he esa of aud When a contracting pays Tee i Src he seca fl fer levis that something itu when fat et Tha arty vo wa de net have ener ete ttaitauded woul at have entered into vane Ont mak ner rie 931 son as a vent tne ee rahi hit 6 econ ores a ot ‘moved one or bth partes ta inter into the controct” on coset ere @ mistake Is the result of fraud prcinfuence on COMED. herelabsea et sequistes of fraud tn order to annul a contrat wing requltes must oncur es ad ad 7 FeaSon of fru he mit ave been ployed yo consi pry on {QA ett Arle 1342 “praca he tos tte co ti 8 ne rr erate on roe ees Bt ‘lth cota Set Stott Ad hie ace ae eg mee ecomrat viable = shld at ae tana Shc oes? (a tmust have induced the oter party to ene it th coirace Neth on Ace 1336, (aud vite conse Ite her Intel enor nto a contact which tou hb weld not ovwagreed ta (cpkmastbeserious* (4) should result in damage or injury tthe pay detzuded Nett the bass of annuling the veda ona ste damage [esued to the defrauded party Io dariage shown (sae ‘ae where fraud benefited hi), there Would Be wo Bast se (econo se Whar consent of party oa contrac was ese by dle eure the contract vidal ay bale dt party tia perpetrated the frau may be bel Table to the dtaued Paty forthe damanges ste by the ater. Tha na OnEA At fe insurance whese the insured concealed 2 pre-nting "ed onion whch Hf ba een nce fo the Ise ‘Scanned with CamScanner Ang Se erste trot bere repairer etn tt esr tt SEER are fo fd nt merely a prepongg ene, TET nthe ee sought by the defauded arty ENCES ich wout have oterse been voy 222 SESSEEE ceetecasthe fre offay benreen nee SScrcccees Caen ee eatemew SST Ye oe Foc whih aso Its Alc fr a well-educated secon cour that he has Ben dccived into entering wt {Sasa epecly ihe was assisted by competent couneg ia ego rot zn ei familar ith the ebjoa oro, METROPOLITAN FABRIS, NC vs, PROSPERITY CREDIT ‘RESOURCES INC. GR No. 15438017 March 2014 7195cRA 260 ews: ewopaan Fabs (MF owned 7 lots. MFI sought fo Pr i eta FRE Gt Racers, tn (PR a Toon Inthe aunt FRI approved the lan with an Interest ant {om 2% 16 20% per anrum anda term of between Sad Toe cot nae i credence to the uncorroorated Yt the Hak an forms, consisting of the eal madeietetam Se Sig La Hef Aa, No 207808 ton oxen os cena promi nay st, Gol se ageemtirerest and schedules of amor ca ee dn ai bank forms. The court ‘see and Vicky (Enrique’s daught raion ne se en amano he 7 Ma cart uP ei cnr tye ma setae omprchesive sn 90 entre specisng oe tation. Eng, Ne mand (oer of cepted the testimony tne eho Was not sgn a RCI thee 7 es, od to es those whieh would be fom and once PR had choses wage, PRCT would retun the FL also secured an addoral tan of about ‘ari9900000 to pay fr real estate tas and se agen ‘ey tested that MF delivered to PERI 24 checks bese {Garand amounts, to cover the amortization panei or inlakby Earique and Natividad, ened ta September 1984, the frst amartzation check bounced fornsullent fund It was then that MEL aed lared tet aha led up the 24 Bank eheks wth dtes sl aru that feo a 35% interest eate per annum nea ous 20% a yer repayment period instead of 0 years ‘The 25 March 1986 eaten from PCRI showed tht ll7 ‘es were placeascllaterl for the PRP3¢ millon oa, 4 September 196, Eng resved Note of Sheri Se amnovcing the. ation of the 7 ls ue to una intense of PHPIO3 son, MEL proesedthe rear, fn th action was reset they sured PRI hat hey a ‘Sa serous bayer tor 3a he te Or 1 October 19862 PRT cfc the bay, inston Wang, nd snr ere pres ‘speedo ekease the morgage ee TCT NH ST705 37706 {1317707 upon payment of PoP lon ane woud py NH FxPS00.00000 a down-payment wtch NR woul rm yt PR a paral stent ofthe am Wag en 15 ‘atom 16 ctaber 1986 to pay the Fa?500 00000, 0 ‘Scanned with CamScanner a ny sr, Wang ont Vey ay cee man mh reed ace tha Pa he sagen tT Fee tad be Tere atin err Pape Eisen tal eee me SSS tr ats lon Ate Seer at rior 85 ee mon fom Wane SS cine (HH mah PAPO AD at Se ee peda and We ee Sees SSS) A al ure the seston icemmerndb )NM alee seer TeEeEiin eerning PERS ight of Way. over ete ocarisas bated be sated sng Se me sash tra only PAP? millon. Ae a meeting ese te prod to pay was extended to 26 October et ‘enjetto 0K res per ature MFI wae ale to race ey ‘les pls PAPS400000 representing the 18% interest Ute ester 98 Vik nd Enriuntendeed the same to PR pe, wee ised tt the re die sine 1988 wes ss PAP eon computed 35% pr enn, Jantar 1980 and again on S March 1990, PCR set alee ening tt hey act the 4 emaiing ts PO ‘stow sg fo PPIOS mallon On 18 March £930, FOR ‘Seseed an aha of oorredmption of TCT Nos, 376%, 52772 317705 ad 387904. On 7 Jone 1990, PERI wrote Vly ‘gteeig the demand to vacate the premises and remove pst sachin, eipmant abd persons there whic sey ‘herein which MAL real ET dered ts dco in favor of MI detaringthe regia sod he ssbsequnt foreclosure made by PR) Peace 2OT all an void and the ties sed In avo toed antordeed conveyed othe plait sfonde speed tothe CA whi dst siete dea 10 the CA which reversed 3 Eamandaght fe RTC and snssd the complaint and pins the ser consideration tic -rueappeal has no merit FLiasits that PCR commited fad when the oer of etweremade sign the deed of realestate manque a ged to take ordinary cae of is ences and ine Seong ef id MFI clearly and convincingly etabish tht atleation ct in the exceton ofthe ded of eae mortange Tacoma ded of te mr wat ie rameit by ve of being Slnowleiged foe Sry pe Ass noaraed document the deed eared he every {ah confered upon wth respect de exci, ba Tistvr te remo egress in eee wathout frter prot of fis authentty, and was Cros t.fall fat and credit upon ts foe To rebut ‘ihn andgensingness the contr enc st be ea. ‘coving and tore than merely preponderant, otherwise the ‘fed sbeula be opel, MF ude fad wo lice ca an ening etna te fees se tbe of Tot tt es Ser! ot en ‘het teen rps rey ‘Sonera ‘To start with, the evdence adduced by Vichy, te fone nes or MPL rd to cas doubt om the comets and cin te deed ofa eat mort yo cen “Steaultien Bat she. could not be eect fr he Purse Sects head not bean rong the strife de ‘Scanned with CamScanner oot ON ~ my ela tele og nc seein roan the ere to sal the Benuinenca’s Ey Peete retrent 5 cosa Wily to svbetontate the ae OPE a ec The sence refit th ana SEE mpi ahenity and genet SESRES IN cane murage. As Viky admitied geet Siemon ie hd fo KEN "sho a ME Spnmoevrasated be ded sat tty wd hry arene an a ara rr en rss ther tenon (0 ofer the lets at collstera yr Fersonance of thir obligations contracted with PCR re cs cats tee th FO Sites seep wet soe chee Sherrer aes rt Td ete ecm bing the commie fs FH ss peti th PR fr the eg ‘Scan le of he properis ner rceig the me ie iSpy ule 44th sl was tetra Sarge eisfecie en arearonale or ue Sectltewintnd ctl omesed Ponts moveteionee tye rei et Lae Hes Si acne seer tebe d esi = i he realestate morgage andthe foreleve sa om at : sein rn ent a sess a of on cost rium eed nt a faring the transactions betwoes he ras not sett pe duly exceed teal te rates VY at se ton a fu cca seaneath ee weer ‘WHEREFORE, the Court denies the petion fr resew o sora. andar the decision promulgated yea Art. 1339, Fallre to dlsclse facts, when there Isa duty to reveal them, as when the ries are bound by confdentialrelston onsite rad 7 Fraud by concealment “Te lence of a person on matters which 2s 2 mater of ool fh should be dosed, may eonatate rad weve tit cs tat there shouldbe 2 specie duty to make ieee tetain facts or ehere a daconsreerequred by god fh aed the umge of commerce. Fang which, nan-ulnie of cerain ‘te canot constitute oud “hiss not ogo thatthe son dcln of mater fox woulinal aes const ud When a mater aan be tseraied bythe exer of igence whch he par eng fa fale to execs, he cannot sucess alg aud a stort set siete contrat Thus archer ofa pare fd tzmot ve rau shuld torn tht he et esate aon teland he purchased in acres for a numberof years. The Ferchaer, by merely visting the mutica or cy ester cok fetacuratenarmaton on thax amen ae yh Selo fhe erative, te purchaser may demand » Crest of Ta Alsace hse The paca of pot ‘oupanycanot see au fh anh othe Bus company Pe rca had been revoked He could hve realy veied the ‘Star the rahe by making an ingly ith th LTR ‘Scanned with CamScanner oN At ny aac nthe Slated ee 2g seu Soar al ie oe Sere aed OMENS ee open a ineroiapne siete ena ‘Sop wns» ed exainaton The abcse™ ‘Seis de an o bah ofthe insured. Bar gee Spent Serr crate nine ieee ey aeons Sore nemeeaartiae te es = te uses acustons fad commited by conceanen, stanatrl ean be acanovers ise. The purcare a ccm ere a a conion precedent tothe closing sat Ssecien te cmpleon ef 2 due diligence remea fe ses rer and afi of the target company. Lawges _Seocas anda prlesonale ate engaged Uy the poe, ‘Beontuchde dbgnce review. The objective ofthe reien ‘ofl (0) eee the acaracy ofthe records, and (0)

You might also like