REPUBLIC v.

CAPITAL RESOURCES CORPORATION

G.R. No. 217210. November 7, 2016, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
Section 121 of the Public Land Act pertains to acquisitions of public
land by a corporation from a grantee. In this case, the original grantee
was Dumuk and he subsequently transferred the subject property to
spouses Milo. In turn, the spouses were the ones who sold the subject
property to Capital Resources and Romeo Roxas. Evidently, Capital
Resources did not acquire the subject property from the original
grantee.

As to the provision of the 1973 Constitution proscribing corporations

from acquiring "alienable lands" of the public domain, the consistent
ruling of the Supreme Court is that the prohibition will not apply if the
property acquired by the corporation is private property and not
alienable lands of the public domain. The rule is that once a patent is
registered and the corresponding certificate of title is issued, the land
covered by it ceases to be part of the public domain and becomes
private property.

HEIRS OF TOMAKIN v. HERIS OF NAVARES

G.R. No. 223624, July 17, 2019, Second Division (Caguioa, J.)
It is well-settled that a party may not change his theory of the case on
appeal and this is expressly adopted in Section 15, Rule 44 of the
Rules. Defenses not pleaded in the answer may not be raised for the
first time on appeal. It is also well-settled that issues raised for the first
time on appeal and not raised in the proceedings in the lower court are
barred by estoppel.

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. POTENCIANO A.

LARRAZABAL, SR., VICTORIA LARRAZABAL LOCSIN and BETTY
LARRAZABAL MACATUAL
G.R. No. 204530, July 26, 2017, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
Just compensation is to be ascertained as of the time of the taking,
which usually coincides with the commencement of the expropriation
proceedings. Where the institution of the action precedes entry into the
property, the just compensation is to be ascertained as of the time of
the filing of the complaint.
AMA LAND, INC., vs. WACK WACK RESIDENTS' ASSOCIATION,
INC. G.R. No. 202342. July 19, 2017, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
The temporary easement of right of way under Article 656 of the Civil
Code, similar to the permanent easement of right of way pursuant to
its Articles 649 and 650, can only be granted after proof of compliance
with the prerequisites set forth in the articles duly adduced during a full-
blown trial.

G. HOLDINGS, INC vs. CEPALCO G.R. No. 226213. September 27,

2017, Second Division (Caguioa, J.)
Under Article 1345 of the Civil Code, simulation of a contract may be
absolute, when the parties do not intend to be bound at all, or relative,
when the parties conceal their true agreement. The characteristic of
simulation is the fact that the apparent contract is not really desired or
intended to produce legal effects or in any way alter the juridical
situation of the parties. Thus, where a person, in order to place his
property beyond the reach of his creditors, simulates a transfer of it to
another, he does not really intend to divest himself of his title and
control of the property; hence, the deed of transfer is but a sham.
Further, rescissible contracts and void or inexistent contracts belong to
two mutually exclusive groups.

PRIVATIZATION AND MANAGEMENT OFFICE vs. EDGARDO V.

QUESADA, et. al. G.R. No. 224507, September 20, 2017, Second
Division (Caguioa, J.)
Section 107 contemplates ONLY two situations when a petition for
surrender of withheld duplicate certificate of title may be availed of.
These are: (1) where it is necessary to issue a new certificate of title
pursuant to any involuntary instrument which divests the title of the
registered owner against his consent, and (2) where a voluntary
instrument cannot be registered by reason of the refusal or failure of
the holder to surrender the owner's duplicate certificate of title.

Further, Section 2 of P.D. No. 1529 has eliminated the distinction

between the general jurisdiction vested in the regional trial court and
the limited jurisdiction conferred upon it by the former law when acting
merely as a cadastral court. Under the former law (Act No. 496 or the
Land Registration Act), all summary reliefs such as the instant action
to compel surrender of owner's duplicate of Title could only be filed
with the RTC sitting as a land registration court only if there was
unanimity among the parties or there was no adverse claim or serious
objection on the part of any party in interest. Otherwise, if the case
became contentious and controversial, it should be threshed out in an
ordinary action or in the case where the incident properly belonged.
Under the amended law, the court is now authorized to hear and decide
not only such non-controversial cases but even the contentious and
substantial issues

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, vs. THE HEIRS OF MEYNARDO

CABRERA G.R. No. 218418. November 8, 2017, Second Division
(Caguioa, J.)
The classification and reclassification of public lands into alienable or
disposable, mineral or forest land is the exclusive prerogative of the
Executive Department, and is exercised by the latter through the
President. Further, owing to the nature of reversion proceedings and
the outcome which a favorable decision therein entails, the State bears
the burden to prove that the land previously decreed or adjudicated in
favor of the defendant constitutes land which cannot be owned by
private individuals.

PADAYHAG vs. DIRECTOR OF LANDS

SOUTHERN MINDANAO COLLEGES, vs. THE HON. COURT OF
APPEALS G.R. No. 202872, G.R. No. 206062, November 22, 2017,
Second Division (Caguioa, J.)
Anent the publication requirement in reconstitution proceedings under
Section 13, RA 26, mere submission of the subject Official Gazette
issues would evidence only the first element — publication in two
consecutive issues of the Official Gazette, and what must be proved is
not the content of the Order published in the Official Gazette but the
fact of two-time publication in successive issues at least 30 days before
the hearing date. Further, the probative value of certifications of the
Director of the National Printing Office in reconstitution cases. The
Court even quoted therein the lower court's observation that the Official
Gazette is an official publication of the government and consequently,
the Court can take judicial notice of its contents.

COCA-COLA BOTTLERS PHILS., INC., vs. ERNANI GUINGONA

MEÑEZ G.R. No. 209906. November 22, 2017, Second Division
(Caguioa, J.)
The cases when moral damages may be awarded are specific. Unless
the case falls under the enumeration as provided in Article 2219, which
is exclusive, and Article 2220 of the Civil Code, moral damages may
not be awarded. As to exemplary or corrective damages, these may be
granted in quasi-delicts if the defendant acted with gross negligence
pursuant to Article 2231 of the Civil Code.
ARACELI MAYUGA, vs. ANTONIO ATIENZA
G.R. No. 208197. January 10, 2018, Second Division (Caguioa, J.)
Assuming that Perfecto owned the disputed lots and the Confirmation
Affidavit was a deed of partition, Perfecto could have legally partitioned
his estate during his lifetime. Under Article 1080 of the Civil Code:
"should a person make a partition of his estate by an act inter vivos, or
by will, such partition shall be respected, insofar as it does not
prejudice the legitime of the compulsory heirs."

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. FILEMON SAROMO

G.R. No. 189803. March 14, 2018, Second Division (Caguioa, J.)
Testimonial evidence on the physical layout or condition of the subject
land — that it was planted with coconut trees and beach houses had
been constructed thereon — are not conclusive on the classification of
the subject land as alienable agricultural land. Rather, it is the official
proclamation releasing the land classified as public forest land to form
part of disposable agricultural lands of the public domain that is
definitive. Such official proclamation, if there is any, is conspicuously
missing in the instant case.

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. NORTHERN CEMENT

CORPORATION G.R. No. 200256, April 11, 2018, Second Division
(Caguioa, J.)
The phrase "adverse, continuous, open, public, and in concept of
owner," is a conclusion of law. Burden of proof is on the person seeking
original registration of land to prove by clear, positive and convincing
evidence that his possession and that of his predecessors-in-interest
was of the nature and duration required by law.

ASTRID A. VAN DE BRUG vs. PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK

G.R. No. 207004, June 6, 2018, Second Division (Caguioa, J.)
In order to be liable for damages under the abuse of rights principle,
the following requisites must concur: (a) the existence of a legal right
or duty; (b) which is exercised in bad faith; and (c) for the sole intent of
prejudicing or injuring another.

D.M. RAGASA ENTERPRISES, INC. vs. BANCO DE ORO, INC.

G.R. No. 190512, June 20, 2018, Second Division (Caguioa, J.)
Article 1170 of the Civil Code mandates that those who, in the
performance of their obligations, are guilty of fraud, negligence, or
delay, and those who, in any manner, contravene the tenor thereof, are
liable for damages. Thus, having contravened the tenor of the Lease
Contract regarding its term or period, the bank should be liable for
damages. However, how much in damages should the bank be liable?
Generally, if the lessor or the lessee should not comply with their
obligations, the aggrieved party may ask for either the rescission of the
contract and indemnification for damages, or only the latter, allowing
the contract to remain in force.

A penal clause is an accessory obligation which the parties attach to a

principal obligation for the purpose of insuring the performance thereof
by imposing on the debtor a special prestation (generally consisting in
the payment of a sum of money) in case the obligation is not fulfilled or
is irregularly or inadequately fulfilled. Evidently, the penal clause may
be considered either reparation, compensation or substitute for
damages, on one hand, or as a punishment in case of breach of the
obligation, on the other. When considered as reparation or
compensation, the question as to the appropriate amount of damages
is resolved once and for all because the stipulated indemnity
represents a legitimate estimate made by the contracting parties of the
damages caused by the nonfulfillment or breach of the obligation.
Proof of actual damages is, consequently, not necessary in order that
the stipulated penalty may be demanded. When considered as a
punishment, the question of damages is not yet resolved inasmuch as
the right to damages, besides the penalty, still subsists. Thus, if the
injured party desires to recover the damages actually suffered by him
in addition to the penalty, he must prove such damages.

BENEDICTO V. YUJUICO, vs. FAR EAST BANK AND TRUST

COMPANY G.R. No. 186196. August 15, 2018, Second Division
(Caguioa, J.)
Novation is governed principally by Articles 1291 and 1292 of the Civil
Code, which provide: ART. 1291. Obligations may be modified by: (1)
Changing their object or principal conditions; (2) Substituting the
person of the debtor; (3) Subrogating a third person in the rights of the
creditor. Further, ART. 1292 provides that in order that an obligation
may be extinguished by another which substitutes the same, it is
imperative that it be so declared in unequivocal terms, or that the old
and the new obligations be on every point incompatible with each
other.
SPOUSES BELTRAN vs. SPOUSES CANGAYDA
G.R. No. 225033, August 15, 2018, Second Division (Caguioa, J.)
In a contract of sale, title passes to the vendee upon the delivery of
the thing sold; whereas in a contract to sell, by agreement the
ownership is reserved in the vendor and is not to pass until the full
payment of the price. In a contract of sale, the vendor has lost and
cannot recover ownership until and unless the contract is resolved or
rescinded; whereas in a contract to sell, title is retained by the vendor
until the full payment of the price.

SPOUSES ABRAHAM AND MELCHORA ERMINO vs. GOLDEN

VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.
G.R. No. 180808, August 15, 2018, Second Division (Caguioa, J.)
The act of replacing the steel grille gate with a concrete fence was
within the legitimate exercise of GVHAI's proprietary rights over its
property. The law recognizes in the owner the right to enjoy and
dispose of a thing, without other limitations than those established by
law. Article 430 of the Civil Code provides that "(e)very owner may
enclose or fence his land or tenements by means of walls, ditches, live
or dead hedges, or by any other means without detriment to servitudes
constituted thereon."
Where the waters which flow from a higher state are those which are
artificially collected in man-made lagoons, any damage occasioned
thereby entitles the owner of the lower or servient estate to
compensation. Lower estates are only obliged to receive water
naturally flowing from higher estates and such should be free from any
human intervention. In the instant case, what flowed from Hilltop City
Subdivision was not water that naturally flowed from a higher estate.

SAMUEL AND EDGAR BUYCO v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

G.R. No. 197733, August 29, 2018, Second Division (Caguioa, J.)
A CENRO or PENRO certification is not enough to prove the alienable
and disposable nature of the property sought to be registered because
the only way to prove the classification of the land is through the
original classification approved by the DENR Secretary or the
President himself.
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES REPRESENTED BY DPWH v.
HEIRS OF ELIGIO CRUZ, REPRESENTED BY CRISANTA
OLIQUINO, AND HEIRS OF ELIGIO CRUZ, REPRESENTED BY
MAXIMINO AGALABIA
G.R. No. 208956, October 17, 2018, Second Division (Caguioa, J.)
Article 2028 of the Civil Code defines a compromise as a "contract
whereby the parties, by making reciprocal concessions, avoid litigation
or put an end to one already commenced.” Before approving a
compromise, courts are thus bound to strictly scrutinize the same to
ensure that the compromise and its execution are compliant with the
law and consistent with procedural rules.

INDUSTRIAL PERSONNEL AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC.

v. COUNTRY BANKERS INSURANCE CORPORATION
G.R. No. 194126, October 17, 2018, Second Division (Caguioa, J.)
According to the autonomy characteristic of contracts, the contracting
parties may establish such stipulations, clauses, terms and
conditions as they may deem convenient, provided they are not
contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order, or public policy.
Article 2199 of the Civil Code states: Except as provided by law or
by stipulation, one is entitled to an adequate compensation only for
such pecuniary loss suffered by him as he has duly proved. Such
compensation is referred to as actual or compensatory damages.

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES v. SPS. ILDEFONSO

ALEJANDRE AND ZENAIDA FERRER ALEJANDRE
G.R. No. 217336, October 17, 2018, Second Division (Caguioa J.)
Accordingly, public lands not shown to have been classified,
reclassified or released as alienable agricultural land or alienated to a
private person by the State remain part of the inalienable lands of
public domain. Therefore, the onus to overturn, by incontrovertible
evidence, the presumption that the land subject of an application for
registration is alienable and disposable rests with the applicant.

NARCISO MELENDRES, SUBSTITUTED BY HIS WIFE, OFELIA

MELENDRES AND CHILDREN JOSE MARI MELENDRES, AND
NARCISO MELENDRES, JR., PETITIONERS, v. ALICIA
CATAMBAY, LORENZA BENAVIDEZ, IN SUBSTITUTION OF HER
HUSBAND EDMUNDO BENAVIDEZ, AND THE REGISTER OF
DEEDS OF RIZAL (MORONG BRANCH) G.R. No. 198026,
November 28, 2018, Second Division, (Caguioa J.)
If the land in question is proven to be of private ownership and,
therefore, beyond the jurisdiction of the Director of Lands, the free
patent and subsequent title issued pursuant thereto are null and void.
The indefeasibility and imprescriptibility of a Torrens title issued
pursuant to a patent may be invoked only, when the land involved
originally formed part of the public domain. If it was a private land, the
patent and certificate of title issued upon the patent are a nullity.

Section 44, Chapter VI of Commonwealth Act No. 141 or the Public

Land Act, states that a free patent may issue in favor of an applicant
only if (1) the applicant has continuously occupied and cultivated,
either by himself or through his predecessors-in-interest, a tract or
tracts of agricultural public lands subject to disposition, or (2) who shall
have paid the real estate tax thereon while the same has not been
occupied by any person.

JUN MIRANDA v. SPS. ENGR. ERNESTO AND AIDA MALLARI

AND SPS. DOMICIANO C. REYES AND CARMELITA PANGAN
G.R. No. 218343, November 28, 2018, Second Division (Caguioa,
J.)
Accion publiciana is a plenary action to recover the better right of
possession (possession de jure), which should be brought in the
proper inferior court or Regional Trial Court (depending upon the value
of the property) when the dispossession has lasted for more than one
year (or for less than a year in cases other than those mentioned in
Rule 70 of the Rules). The issue in an accion publiciana is the "better
right of possession" of real property independently of title. This "better
right of possession" may or may not proceed from a Torrens Title.

VDM TRADING, INC. AND SPOUSES LUIS AND NENA DOMINGO,

REPRESENTED BY THEIR ATTORNEY-IN-FACT, ATTY. F.
WILLIAM L. VILLAREAL v. LEONITA CARUNGCONG AND WACK
WACK TWIN TOWERS CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. G.R.
No. 206709, February 06, 2019, Second Division (Caguioa J.)
According to Article 2176 of the Civil Code, whoever by act or omission
causes damage to another, there being fault or negligence, is obliged
to pay for the damage done. Such fault or negligence, if there is no pre-
existing contractual relation between the parties, is called a quasi-
delict. A quasi-delict has the following elements: a) the damage
suffered by the plaintiff; b) the act or omission of the defendant
supposedly constituting fault or negligence; and c) the causal
connection between the act and the damage sustained by the plaintiff,
or proximate cause.
D.M. CONSUNJI, INC. v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES AND
THE HEIRS OF JULIAN CRUZ, REPRESENTED BY MACARIA
CRUZ ESTACIO G.R. No. 233339, February 13, 2019, Second
Division (Caguioa J.)
Mere notations appearing in survey plans are inadequate proof of the
covered properties' alienable and disposable character. The applicant,
however, must also present a copy of the original classification of the
land into alienable and disposable land, as declared by the DENR
Secretary or as proclaimed by the President.

ANACLETO ALDEN MENESES v. JUNG SOON LINDA LEE-

MENESES G.R. No. 200182, March 13, 2019, Second Division
(Caguioa J.)
DOCTRINE
In a long line of cases, the Court has ruled that psychological incapacity
under Article 36 must be characterized by gravity, juridical
antecedence, and incurability. The incapacity must be grave or serious
such that the party would be incapable of carrying out the ordinary
duties required in marriage; it must be rooted in the history of the party
antedating the marriage although the overt manifestations may emerge
only after the marriage; and it must be incurable or even if it were
otherwise, the cure would be beyond the means of the party involved.

HEIR OF PASTORA T. CARDENAS AND EUSTAQUIO CARDENAS,

NAMELY REMEDIOS CARDENAS-TUMLOS, REPRESENTED BY
HER ATTORNEY-IN-FACT JANET TUMLOS-QUIZON v. THE
CHRISTIAN AND MISSIONARY ALLIANCE CHURCHES OF THE
PHILIPPINES, INC., REPRESENTED BY REO REPOLLO AND
LEOCADIO DUQUE, JR.
G.R. No. 222614, March 20, 2019, Second Division (Caguioa J.)
As a general rule, a certificate of title serves as evidence of an
indefeasible and incontrovertible title to the property in favor of the
person whose name appears therein.

According to Section 47 of Presidential Decree No. 1529, "no title to

registered land in derogation of the title of the registered owner shall
be acquired by prescription or adverse possession." There can be no
acquisitive prescription with respect to a titled parcel of land. The Court
has explained that, by express provision of Section 47 of P.D. 1529,
no title to registered land in derogation to that of the registered owner
shall be acquired by prescription or adverse possession
ROGELIO LOGROSA v. SPOUSES CLEOFE AND CESAR
AZARES, SPOUSES ABUNDIO, JR. AND ANTONIETA TORRES,
SPOUSES NELSON SALA AND ARLENE ANG, AND SPOUSES
BONIFACIO, JR., AND WELHELMINA BARUIZ
G.R. No. 217611, March 27, 2019, Second Division (Caguioa J.)
It is a fundamental principle in land registration that the certificate of
title serves as evidence of an indefeasible and incontrovertible
title to the property in favor of the person whose name appears
therein. It becomes the best proof of ownership of a parcel of land.
Such principle of indefeasibility has long been well-settled in this
jurisdiction and it is only when the acquisition of the title is attended
with fraud or bad faith that the doctrine finds no application.

A person may exercise the right to compel the partition of real estate if
he/she sets forth in his/her complaint the nature and extent of his title
and subsequently proves the same. The law does not make a
distinction as to how the co-owner derived his/her title, may it be
through gratuity or through onerous consideration. In other words, a
person who derived his title and was granted co-ownership rights
through gratuity may compel partition.

HUN HYUNG PARK v. EUNG WON CHOI

G.R. No. 220826, March 27, 2019, Second Division (Caguioa J.)
In accordance with Article 1956 of the Civil Code, no interest shall be
due unless it has been expressly stipulated in writing. Here, without
further proof of any express agreement that P375,000.00 of the
P1,875,000.00 pertains to interest, the Court is predisposed, based on
the facts of the case, to rule that the entire principal amount owed by
Choi to Park is the face value of the check, or P1,875,000.00.

FIL-ESTATE MANAGEMENT, INC., MEGATOP REALTY

DEVELOPMENT, INC., PEAKSUN ENTERPRISES AND EXPORT
CORPORATION, ARTURO E. DY AND ELENA DY JAO v.
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES AND SPOUSES SANTIAGO T.
GO, AND NORMA C. GO, REPRESENTED BY THEIR SON AND
ATTORNEY-IN-FACT KENDRICK C. GO
G.R. No. 192393, March 27, 2019, Second Division (Caguioa J.)
To the mind of the Court, the RTC acted conformably with Section 25
of PD 1529, which provides that "if the opposition or the adverse claim
of any person covers only a portion of the lot and said portion is not
properly delimited on the plan attached to the application, conflicting
claims of ownership or possession, or overlapping of boundaries, the
court may require the parties to submit a subdivision plan duly
approved by the Director of Lands."
As worded, it is discretionary on the part of the land registration court
to require the parties to submit a subdivision plan duly approved by the
appropriate government agency. Regardless of how the said court
exercises its discretion, the burden remains with the oppositor or
adverse claimant to convince by preponderance of evidence the land
registration court that there is an overlapping of boundaries. In this
case, petitioners failed.

VIVENCIO DALIT v. SPOUSES ROLANDO E. BALAGTAS, SR. AND

CARMELITA G. BALAGTAS, ROLANDO G. BALAGTAS, JR.,
CLARINA G. BALAGTAS, CARLOTA G. BALAGTAS, CARMELA G.
BALAGTAS, SOFRONIO SARIENTE AND METROPOLITAN BANK
AND TRUST COMPANY
G.R. No. 202799, March 27, 2019, Second Division (Caguioa J.)
One of the modes by which DAR implements the distribution of
agricultural lands under the CARP is through the issuance of a CLOA.
A CLOA is a document evidencing ownership of the land granted or
awarded to the qualified ARB, and contains the restrictions and
conditions of such grant. The issuance of CLOA No. T-2165 in Dalit's
favor thus confirms his right to retain possession over the portion
of the Disputed Lot identified thereunder, such possession being
an attribute of ownership granted in his favor. the State recognizes
the indefeasibility of CLOAs issued in accordance with applicable law.
Under DAR Administrative Order No. 07-14, the cancellation of
erroneously issued CLOAs may be allowed only in the manner and
under the conditions prescribed thereunder. Until duly cancelled in
accordance with the prescribed procedure, CLOAs issued by the
DAR shall remain valid and subsisting and enjoy the same
respect accorded to those issued through other modes of
acquisition of title.

KAREN NUÑEZ VITO, LYNETTE NUÑEZ MASINDA, WARREN

NUÑEZ, AND ALDEN NUÑEZ v. NORMA MOISES-PALMA
G.R. No. 224466 (Formerly UDK-15574), March 27, 2019, Second
Division (Caguioa J.)
Under Article 1245 of the Civil Code, there is dation in payment when
property is alienated to the creditor in satisfaction of a debt in money
and is governed by the law of sales.

To summarize, the remedies of the unpaid seller, after ownership of

the real property not covered by Republic Act No. 6552 or the Maceda
Law, has been vested to the buyer, are:
1. To compel specific performance by filing an action against the buyer
for the agreed purchase price; or
2. To rescind or resolve the contract of sale either judicially or by a
notarial act; and
3. In either (1) or (2), to recover damages for the breach of the contract

DOMESTIC PETROLEUM RETAILER CORP. v. MANILA

INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY
G.R. No. 210641, March 27, 2019, En Banc (Caguioa, J.)
In order to establish the application of solutio indebiti in a given
situation, two conditions must concur: (1) a payment is made when
there exists no binding relation between the payor who has no duty to
pay, and the person who received the payment, and (2) the payment
is made through mistake, and not through liberality or some other
cause.18 In the instant case, the Court finds that the essential
requisites of solutio indebiti are not present.

R. No. 213666, March 27, 2019, En Banc (Caguioa, J.)

Independent and in spite of the statute of frauds, courts of equity have
enforced oral partition when it has been completely or partly
performed. In the instant case, there is no refutation on the part of
petitioner Victoria as to respondent Belen's assertion that the terms of
the Compromise Agreement have already been partially performed by
the parties.

FILIPINAS ESLON MANUFACTURING CORP. v. HEIRS OF

BASILIO LLANES, NAMELY: CASIANO LLANES, DOMINGO
LLANES, FABIAN LLANES, VICTORINA L. TAGALIMOT,
PACENCIA L. MANALES, NORMA L. BACALARES, LOURDES L.
PAJARDO, JOSEPHINE LLANES, JOSEFA LLANES AND
JOVENCITA LLANES; ROLYNWIN Q. LAMSON; PHILIPPINE
AMANAH BANK, ALSO KNOWN AS AL-AMANAH ISLAMIC
INVESTMENT BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES; SPOUSES MEDEL
AND CARMEN JUSTINIANO A.K.A. CARMEN & MEDEL
JUSTINIANO; RUFINO V. GENILO; MARIA SOL A. SEVESES;
SPOUSES SALVADOR AND CHEQUETHELMA GERONA;
CRESOGONO R. SEVESES, MONERA M. LALANTO; CLAUDIO M.
CLOSAS; SPOUSES SERAFIN AND ELSA FERRAREN;
EDILBERTO V. PAZA* AND GENEROSO EMPUESTO
G.R. No. 194114, March 27, 2019, En Banc (Caguioa, J.)
Raising the invalidity of a certificate of title in an action for quieting of
title is NOT a collateral attack because it is central, imperative, and
essential in such an action that the complainant shows the invalidity of
the deed which casts cloud on his title. In other words, at the heart of
the Complaint for Quieting of Title instituted by petitioner FEMCO is
the nullification of OCT No. 0- 1040 in order to remove the cloud
besetting its own title. This is manifestly a direct attack.

HIPOLITO AGUSTIN AND IMELDA AGUSTIN v. ROMANA DE

VERA G.R. No. 233455, April 03, 2019, En Banc (Caguioa, J.)
While a stipulation or promise to the effect that a seller shall execute a
deed of sale upon the completion of payment of the purchase price by
the buyer may be considered a factor or a sign that a contract might
possibly be a contract to sell, such stipulation in itself, taken in isolation,
is by no means determinative and conclusive as to the contract being
a contract to sell. Still controlling are (1) the lack of any stipulation in
the sale contract reserving the title of the property on the vendors and
(2) the lack of any stipulation giving the sellers the right to unilaterally
rescind the contract upon non-payment of the balance thereof within a
fixed period. The absence of such stipulations in a sale contract makes
the said contract a contract of sale. Hence, the Contract to Purchase
and Sale entered into by Gregorio and Hipolito is a contract of sale.

SPOUSES JOHN T. SY AND LENY N. SY, AND VALENTINO T. SY

v. MA. LOURDES DE VERA-NAVARRO AND BENJAEMY HO TAN
LANDHOLDINGS, INC., HEREIN REPRESENTED BY GRACE T.
MOLINA, IN HER CAPACITY AS CORPORATE SECRETARY
G.R. No. 239088, April 03, 2019, En Banc (Caguioa, J.)
An equitable mortgage is defined as one which although lacking in
some formality, or form or words, or other requisites demanded by a
statute, nevertheless reveals the intention of the parties to charge real
property as security for a debt, and contains nothing impossible or
contrary to law. Its essential requisites are: (1) that the parties entered
into a contract denominated as a contract of sale; and (2) that their
intention was to secure an existing debt by way of a mortgage.

GENEROSO SEPE v. HEIRS OF ANASTACIA* KILANG, REP. BY

HER CHILDREN MARIA, DONATA, FELICIANA, DOMINGA AND
SEVERO ALL SURNAMED SOLIJON
G.R. No. 199766, April 10, 2019, En Banc (Caguioa, J.)
Article 1354 of the Civil Code provides: "Although the cause is not
stated in the contract, it is presumed that it exists and is lawful, unless
the debtor proves the contrary." Otherwise stated, the law presumes
that even if the contract does not state a cause, one exists and is
lawful; and it is incumbent on the party impugning the contract to prove
the contrary. If the cause is stated in the contract and it is shown to be
false, then it is incumbent upon the party enforcing the contract to
prove the legality of the cause.

SEBASTIAN M. QUINOL,* ALIMITA RENDAL-QUINOL, PORFERIA

QUINOL-MACATIGUIB, MARCELO MACATIGUIB, BALTAZAR
QUINOL, ELAINE KILAPKILAP-QUINOL, AND PATRICIA QUINOL
v. LORENZA INOCENCIO, EPIFANIA POA, JIMMY POA, ARTEMIO
QUINOL, AND JESUS QUINOL
G.R. No. 213517, April 10, 2019, En Banc (Caguioa, J.)
Tax declarations and tax receipts as evidence of ownership cannot
prevail over a certificate of title which, to reiterate, is a presumptive
proof of ownership.

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. SUSAN SAYO Y REYES AND

ALFREDO ROXAS Y SAGON
G.R. No. 227704, April 10, 2019, En Banc (Caguioa, J.)
Moral and exemplary damages of P500,000.00 and P100,000.00,
respectively, are ordinarily awarded in cases of Trafficking in Persons
as a prostitute. The ratio for the award of damages was explained by
the Court in People v. Lalli, where it ruled that “the criminal case of
Trafficking in Persons as a Prostitute is an analogous case to the
crimes of seduction, abduction, rape, or other lascivious acts.

SPOUSES ISIDRO R. SALITICO AND CONRADA C. SALITICO

v. HEIRS OF RESURRECCION• MARTINEZ FELIX, NAMELY:
LUCIANO, CORAZON AND CONCEPCION, ALL SURNAMED
FELIX, RECAREDO P. HERNANDEZ, IN HIS CAPACITY AS
ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF AMANDA H. BURGOS,
AND THE REGISTER OF DEEDS
G.R. No. 240199, April 10, 2019, En Banc (Caguioa, J.)
Reading Article 777 of the Civil Code together with the pertinent
provisions of PD 1529 and the Rules of Court, while an heir may
dispose and transfer his/her hereditary share to another person, before
the transferee may compel the issuance of a new certificate of title
covering specific property in his/her name, a final order of distribution
of the estate or the order in anticipation of the final distribution issued
by the testate or intestate court must first be had.

MA. LUISA A. PINEDA v. VIRGINIA ZUÑIGA VDA. DE VEGA

G.R. No. 233774, April 10, 2019, En Banc (Caguioa, J.)
1. While delay on the part of respondent was not triggered by an
extrajudicial demand because petitioner had failed to so establish
receipt of her demand letter, this delay was triggered when petitioner
judicially demanded the payment of respondent's loan from petitioner.
2. In Cerna v. CA, the Court ruled that the filing of a collection suit
barred the foreclosure of the mortgage.

TRANQUILINO AGBAYANI v. LUPA REALTY HOLDING

CORPORATION
G.R. No. 201193, June 10, 2019, En Banc (Caguioa, J.)
Simulation requires the following: (1) A deliberate declaration contrary
to the will of the parties; (2) Agreement of the parties to the apparently
valid act; and (3) The purpose is to deceive or to hide from third
persons although it is not necessary that the purpose be illicit or for
purposes of fraud. The above three requisites must concur in order that
simulation may exist.

SPS. TEDY GARCIA AND PILAR GARCIA v. LORETA T. SANTOS,

WINSTON SANTOS AND CONCHITA TAN
G.R. No. 228334, June 17, 2019, En Banc (Caguioa, J.)
According to Article 624, there arises a title to an easement of light and
view, even in the absence of any formal act undertaken by the owner
of the dominant estate, if this apparent visible sign, such as the
existence of a door and windows, continues to remain and subsist,
unless, at the time the ownership of the two estates is divided, (1) the
contrary should be provided in the title of conveyance of either of them,
or (2) the sign aforesaid should be removed before the execution of
the deed.

YOUNG BUILDERS CORP. v. BENSON INDUSTRIES, INC.

G.R. No. 198998, June 19, 2019, En Banc (Caguioa, J.)
The complaint filed by YBC is an action for a sum of money arising
from its main contract with BII for the construction of a building. YBC's
cause of action is primarily based on BII's alleged non-payment of its
outstanding debts to YBC arising from their main contract, despite
demand. If there was a written building or construction contract that
was executed between BII and YBC, then that would be the actionable
document because its terms and stipulations would spell out the rights
and obligations of the parties. However, no such contract or agreement
was attached to YBC's Complaint. Clearly, the subject
Accomplishment Billing is not an actionable document contemplated
by the Rules, but is merely evidentiary in nature.
CHEVRON PHILIPPINES, INC. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS CALTEX
PHILIPPINES, INC. v. LEO Z. MENDOZA
G.R. Nos. 211533 & 212071, June 19, 2019, En Banc (Caguioa, J.)
Jurisprudence has held that the elements of an abuse of right under
Article 19 of the Civil Code are the following: (1) the existence of a legal
right or duty, (2) which is exercised in bad faith, and (3) for the sole
intent of prejudicing or injuring another. Malice or bad faith is at the
core of an abuse of right. Malice or bad faith implies a conscious and
intentional design to do a wrongful act for a dishonest purpose or moral
obliquity. Such must be substantiated by evidence. In the instant case,
as noted by the CA, "Mendoza utterly failed in this regard, and was
unable to prove the alleged indications of bad faith on the part of
Chevron."

HEIRS OF SPOUSES MONICO SUYAM AND CARMEN BASUYAO*

(BOTH DECEASED), NAMELY: OLIVER B. SUYAM, MABLE B.
SUYAM, CHRISTOPHER B. SUYAM, ABEL B. SUYAM, AND
CHESTER B. SUYAM, REPRESENTED BY THEIR ATTORNEY-
INFACT AND ON HIS OWN BEHALF, TELESFORO B. SUYAM
HEIRS OF FELICIANO JULATON @ PONCIANO, NAMELY:
LUCINA J. BADUA, SEMEON JULATON, JULIANA J. BUCASAS,
ISABEL** J. ALLAS, RODOLFO JULATON, CANDIDA*** J. GAMIT,
REPRESENTED BY THEIR ATTORNEY-IN FACT AND ON HER
OWN BEHALF, CONSOLACION JULATON
G.R. No. 209081, June 19, 2019, En Banc (Caguioa, J.)
According to Section 14 of the Public Land Act, no certificate of title
shall be issued pursuant to a homestead patent application made
under Section 13 unless one-fifth of the land has been improved and
cultivated by the applicant within no less than one and no more than
five years from and after the date of the approval of the application.
The certificate shall issue only when the applicant shall prove that he
has resided continuously for at least one year in the municipality in
which the land is located, or in a municipality adjacent to the same, and
has cultivated at least one-fifth of the land continuously since the
approval of the application. The subject property was clearly acquired
by Isabel through a fraudulently issued homestead patent.

RIZAL COMMERCIAL BANKING CORP. v. PLAST-PRINT

INDUSTRIES INC.
G.R. No. 199308, June 19, 2019, Second Division (Caguioa, J.)
Our Civil Code now admits of the so-called imperfect or modificatory
novation where the original obligation is not extinguished but modified
or changed in some of the principal conditions of the obligation. Thus,
Article 1291 provides that obligations may be modified.
MAKATI WATER, INC. v. AGUA VIDA SYSTEMS, INC.
G.R. No. 205604, June 26, 2019, Second Division (Caguioa, J.)
The Court has previously held that in construing an instrument with
several provisions, a construction must be adopted as will give effect
to all. Under Article 1374 of the Civil Code, contracts cannot be
construed by parts, but clauses must be interpreted in relation to one
another to give effect to the whole. The legal effect of a contract is not
determined alone by any particular provision disconnected from all
others, but from the whole read together.

SACLOLO v. MARQUITO
G.R. No. 229243, June 26, 2019, Second Division (Caguioa, J.)
An equitable mortgage, like any other mortgage, is a mere accessory
contract "constituted to secure the fulfillment of a principal obligation,"
i.e., the full payment of the loan. Since the true transaction between
the parties was an equitable mortgage and not a sale with right of
repurchase, there is no "redemption" or "repurchase" to speak of and
the periods provided under Article 1606 do not apply. Instead, the
prescriptive period under Article 1144 of the Civil Code is applicable.
In other words, the parties had 10 years from the time the cause of
action accrued to file the appropriate action.

SPS. BELVIS v. SPS. EROLA

G.R. No. 239727, July 24, 2019, Second Division (Caguioa, J.)
While petitioners cannot be deemed to be builders in good faith, it
being undisputed that the land in question is titled land in the name of
respondents, the CA and the lower courts overlooked the fact that
petitioners constructed improvements on the subject lot with the
knowledge and consent of respondents. In exceptional cases, the
Court has applied Article 448 to instances where a builder, planter, or
sower introduces improvements on titled land if with the knowledge
and consent of the owner.

HEIRS OF SPOUSES RAMIREZ v. ABON

G.R. No. 222916, July 24, 2019, Second Division (Caguioa, J.)
Section 109 of PD 1529 also contemplates a situation wherein the
petition for reconstitution is filed by another person having an interest
in the property who is not the registered owner. In other words, when
an owner's duplicate certificate of title is lost or destroyed, a person
who is a transferee of the ownership over the property, who is not
necessarily the registered owner, may also file the petition for
reconstitution. Similarly, in this situation, the other persons having
interest in the property should be notified of the proceedings. In this
situation, the registered owner must also be duly notified of the
proceedings. By his or her very status as registered owner, the latter
is an interested party in the petition for reconstitution case.

HEIRS OF CULLADO v. GUTIERREZ

G.R. No. 212938, July 30, 2019, En Banc (Caguioa, J.)
While the RTC could have resolved the issue of ownership
provisionally to determine the "better right of possession," which is
allowed in an accion publiciana, it was without any power or jurisdiction
to order the reconveyance of the land in dispute because that can be
done only upon a definitive ruling on the said issue - something that
cannot be done in an accion publiciana.

SPOUSES MODOMO v. SPOUSES LAYUG

G.R. No. 197722, August 14, 2019, Second Division (Caguioa, J.)
While the Civil Code permits the subsequent modification of existing
obligations, these obligations cannot be deemed modified in the
absence of clear evidence to this effect. Novation is never presumed,
and the animus novandi, whether total or partial, must appear by
express agreement of the parties, or by their acts that are too clear and
unequivocal to be mistaken. Accordingly, the burden to show the
existence of novation lies on the party alleging the same.

ENGR. RICARDO O. VASQUEZ v. PNB AND NOTARY PUBLIC

JUDE* JOSE F. LATORRE, JR.
G.R. No. 228355, 28 August 2019, Second Division (Caguioa, J.)
The principle of mutuality of contracts is pronounced in Article 1308 of
the Civil Code, which states that a contract "must bind both contracting
parties; its validity or compliance cannot be left to the will of one of
them." The principle of mutuality of contracts dictates that a contract
must be rendered void when the execution of its terms is skewed in
favor of one party.

THE MERCANTILE INSURANCE CO., INC. v. DMCI-LAING

CONSTRUCTION, INC. G.R. No. 205007, 16 September 2019,
Second Division (Caguioa, J.)
Altech's obligation to perform the specified works under the Sub
Contract constitutes an obligation to do. Obligations to do have as their
object a prestation consisting of a performance of a certain activity
which, in turn, cannot be exacted without exercising violence against
the person of the debtor. Accordingly, the debtor's failure to fulfill the
prestation gives rise to the creditor's right to obtain from the latter's
assets the satisfaction of the money value of the prestation.

ELMER MONTERO v. SANTIAGO MONTERO, JR. AND CHARLIE

MONTERO G.R. No. 217755, 18 September 2019, Second Division
(Caguioa, J.)
According to jurisprudence, "in a number of cases, the Court has held
that actions for reconveyance of or for cancellation of title to or to quiet
title over real property are actions that fall under the classification of
cases that involve title to, or possession of, real property, or any
interest therein." Hence, the instant case is clearly one involving title
to, possession of, and interest in real property. As the subject matter
of petitioner Elmer's Complaint involves title to, possession of, and
interest in real property which indisputably has an assessed value of
below P20,000.00, the CA was correct in finding that the RTC had no
jurisdiction to hear, try and decide the case.

CAMARINES SUR TEACHERS AND EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION,

INC. v. PROVINCE OF CAMARINES SUR, REPRESENTED BY
GOVERNOR LUIS RAYMUND F. VILLAFUERTE, JR.
G.R. No. 199666, 07 October 2019, Second Division (Caguioa, J.)
It must be emphasized that the right to rescind or resolve by the injured
party is not absolute as the third paragraph of Article 1191 authorizes
the court to fix a period; thus, rescission will not be granted in the
following cases: (1) where the breach is only slight or casual; (2) where
there has been substantial compliance; and (3) where the court finds
valid reason for giving a period of fulfillment of the obligation. Likewise,
the courts may deny revocation of a donation based on non-fulfillment
of "conditions" under Article 764 when the unperformed part is
insignificant.

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES v. TANDUAY LUMBER, INC.

G.R. No. 223822, 16 October 2019, Second Division (Caguioa, J.)
Clearly, the State's complaint for reversion is based solely on Section
118 of CA 141. Since the restriction on the conveyance, transfer or
disposition of the patented land subject of this case within five years
from and after the issuance of the patent pursuant to Section 118 of
CA 141 has been removed and the title of the patentee Epifania San
Pedro is, under RA 11231, now considered as title in fee simple, which
is not subject to any restriction on alienation or encumbrance, the
Government no longer has any legal basis to seek the reversion or
reconveyance of the subject land.

CHUA PING HIAN ALSO KNOWN AS JIMMY CHING v. SILVERIO

MANAS (DECEASED), SUBSTITUTED BY HIS HEIRS
G.R. No. 198867, October 16, 2019, Second Division (Caguioa, J.)
In a reciprocal obligation, the performance of one is conditioned on the
simultaneous fulfillment of the other obligation. Neither party incurs in
delay if the other does not comply or is not ready to comply in a manner
with what is incumbent upon him. In the instant case, it is not of serious
dispute that respondent Manas reneged on his obligations as seller,
justifying petitioner Ching's refusal to pay the balance of the purchase
price.

PABLO UY, as substituted by his heirs, namely: MYLENE D. UY,

PAUL D. UY and PAMELA UY DACUMA v. HEIRS OF JULITA UY-
RENALES G.R. No. 227460, December 5, 2019, First Division
(Caguioa, J.)
The notarization of a document does not guarantee its validity because
it is not the function of the notary public to validate an instrument that
was never intended by the parties to have any binding legal effect.
Neither is the notarization of a document conclusive as to the nature of
the transaction, nor is it conclusive of the true agreement of the parties
thereto.

ATTY. LEONARD FLORENT BULATAO v. ZENAIDA

ESTONACTOC G.R. No. 235020, December 10, 2019, First
Division (Caguioa, J.)
A 5% per month or 60% per annum interest rate is highly iniquitous
and unreasonable. However, the invalidity of the 5% per month interest
rate does not affect the obligation of the debtor to repay her loan. Since
the obligation of making interest payments is illegal and thus non-
demandable, the payment of the principal loan obligation was not yet
demandable. With the debtor not being in a state of default, the
foreclosure of the subject properties should not have proceeded.

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES v. SPOUSES MARCELINO AND

NENITA BUNSAY
G.R. No. 205473, December 10, 2019, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
Capital Gains Tax and other transfer taxes may not be awarded in the
form of consequential damages since the term assumes a fixed
definition in the context of expropriation proceedings; it is limited
to the impairment or decrease in value of the portion which remains
with the affected owner after expropriation. It must be clarified,
however, that the courts are not precluded from considering the value
of CGT and other transfer taxes in determining the amount of just
compensation to be awarded to the affected owner.

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES v. REMAR QUIÑONEZ

G.R. No. 237412, January 6, 2020, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
Article 41 of the Family Code places upon the present spouse the
burden of proving the additional and more stringent requirement of
"well-founded belief" which can only be discharged upon a showing of
proper and honest-to-goodness inquiries and efforts to ascertain not
only the absent spouse's whereabouts but, more importantly, that the
absent spouse is still alive or is already dead.
To be able to comply with this requirement, the present spouse must
prove that his/her belief was the result of diligent and reasonable
efforts and inquiries to locate the absent spouse and that based on
these efforts and inquiries, he/she believes that under the
circumstances, the absent spouse is already dead. It requires exertion
of active effort (not a mere passive one).

RICARIDO GOLEZ, in his own behalf and his children, in

substitution of the deceased PRESENTACION GOLEZ v.
MARIANO ABAIS
G.R. No. 191376, January 6, 2020, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
Under MC 19, while the succession or transfer of farmholdings granted
under PD 27 recognized the pertinent provisions of the Civil Code on
succession, such was subject to certain limitations. Accordingly, even
as the successional rights of the original farmer-beneficiary were
recognized, MC 19 prescribed the manner through which the
succeeding sole owner-cultivator should be identified.

THE HEIRS OF MARSELLA LUPENA v. PASTORA MEDINA et al.

G.R. No. 231639, January 22, 2020, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
Under paragraph "d" of Section 4.3 of the Revised Manual for Land
Surveying Regulations in the Philippines, a geodetic engineer, in the
conduct of relocation survey, must indicate in his plan the positions of
buildings, fences wall and other permanent improvements adversely
affected by the determination of the boundaries. Absent indication in
the Relocation Plan of any encroachment, the same cannot be
considered as competent proof that the lot was unlawfully occupied.
DANILO ROMERO et al. v. CRISPINA SOMBRINO
G.R. No. 241353, January 22, 2020, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
Security of tenure may be invoked only by tenants de jure and not by
those who are not true and lawful tenants but became so only through
the acts of a supposed landholder who had no right to the landholdings.
Tenancy relation can only be created with the consent of the
landholder who is either the owner, lessee, usufructuary or legal
possessor of the land.

CYNTHIA A. GALAPON v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

G.R. No. 243722 (formerly UDK-16060), January 22, 2020, First
Division (Caguioa, J.)
Article 26 (2) of the Family Code applies to mixed marriages where the
divorce decree is: (i) obtained by the foreign spouse; (ii) obtained
jointly by the Filipino and foreign spouse; and (iii) obtained solely
by the Filipino spouse.

REDENTOR CATAPANG et al. v. LIPA BANK

G.R. No. 240645, January 22, 2020, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
Article 1332 of the Civil Code shifts the burden of proof from the party
alleging the mistake to the party enforcing the contract. It also alters
the rule that a party is presumed to know the meaning of a document
which he signed. Hence, if one of the parties is unable to read or if the
contract is in a language not understood by him, and he alleges fraud
or mistake, the burden of proving that the terms of the contract have
been fully explained to the former is shifted to the person enforcing the
contract. If this burden is not satisfied, the presumption of mistake or
fraud stands unrebutted.

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES v. JULIANA SAN MIGUEL VDA.

DE RAMOS et al. G.R. No. 211576, February 19, 2020, First
Division (Caguioa, J.)
The sheer fact that there is a remaining portion of real property after
the expropriation is not enough, by and of itself, to be basis for the
award of consequential damages. To be sure, it must still be proven by
sufficient evidence that the remaining portion suffers from an
impairment or decrease in value.
PHILIPPINE BANK OF COMMUNICATIONS v. THE REGISTER OF
DEEDS FOR THE PROVINCE OF BENGUET
G.R. No. 222958, March 11, 2020, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
A registered owner who fails to prove the loss or destruction of his/her
owner's duplicate certificate of title may not be barred from refiling a
new petition to replace the same.

MERCEDES GATMAYTAN v. MISIBIS LAND, INC.

G.R. No. 222166, June 10, 2020, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
In all cases of registration procured by fraud, the owner may pursue all
his legal and equitable remedies against the parties to such fraud and
that registration procured by the presentation of a forged deed or other
instrument shall be null and void. A Torrens title issued without prior
presentation and cancellation of the existing owner's duplicate title
does not bind the property to which it pertains. The title so issued does
not produce the effects of a Torrens title contemplated under PD 1529,
including the effects of constructive notice. It is literally a scrap of
paper.

THE ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP OF MALOLOS, INC. v. THE

HEIRS OF MARIANO MARCOS
G.R. No. 225971, June 17, 2020, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies, in and of itself,
is grounded on practical reasons, including allowing the administrative
agencies concerned to take every opportunity to correct its own errors,
as well as affording the litigants the opportunity to avail of speedy relief
through the administrative processes and sparing them of the laborious
and costly resort to courts. However, this principle is not inflexible, and
admits of several exceptions that include situations where the very
rationale of the doctrine has been defeated.

NIEVES SELERIO et al. v. TREGIDIO BANCASAN

G.R. No. 222442, June 23, 2020, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
Article 1144 must be read in conjunction with Article 1155 of the Civil
Code. Article 1155 states that "[t]he prescription of actions is
interrupted when they are filed before the court, when there is a written
extrajudicial demand by the creditors, and when there is any written
acknowledgment of the debt by the debtor." Jurisprudence holds that
an interruption of the prescriptive period wipes out the period that has
elapsed, sets the same running anew, and creates a fresh period for
the filing of an action. Thus, in Republic v. Bañez, the Court held that
a written acknowledgment of a debt by the debtor effectively restarts
the prescriptive period.

USUSAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION v. REPUBLIC OF THE

PHILIPPINES
G.R. No. 209462, July 15, 2020, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
The burden to prove a property's alienable and disposable
classification rests with the petitioner. The CA found that petitioner was
unable to do so. Not being a trier of facts and with no additional
evidence presented by petitioner to refute the CA's factual finding in
respect of the three documents that it submitted for the CA's
consideration to convince the CA that the subject lot has indeed been
classified as AnD land of public domain, the Court is left with no option
but to deny its Petition.

SPS. ANASTACIO SR v. HEIRS OF COLOMA

G.R. No. 224572, August 27, 2020, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
A rebuttable presumption is established in Article 116 of the Family
Code and the party who invokes that presumption must first establish
that the property was acquired during the marriage because the proof
of acquisition during the marriage is a condition sine qua non for the
operation of the presumption in favor of the conjugal partnership. It is
not necessary to prove that the property was acquired with conjugal
funds and the presumption still applies even when the manner in which
the property was acquired does not appear. Once the condition sine
qua non is established, then the presumption that all properties
acquired during the marriage, whether the acquisition appears to have
been made, contracted or registered in the name of one spouse or both
spouses, are conjugal, remains until the contrary is proved.

TIROL v. NOLASCO
G.R. No. 230103, August 27, 2020, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
As far as respondent Sol is concerned, she would inherit from Roberto
Jr. pursuant to Article 887(3) and part of his estate would be his share
in the estate of her mother, Gloria. Respondent Sol could not inherit
from the estate of Roberto Sr. because Roberto Jr. predeceased
Roberto Sr., his father, and the children of Roberto Jr. would succeed
by right of representation from their grandfather pursuant to Article 972
of the Civil Code. Moreover, respondent Sol is not related by blood, but
only by affinity, to Roberto Sr.
DR. NIXON L. TREYES v. ANTONIO L. LARLAR, REV. FR. EMILIO
L. LARLAR, et.al.
G.R. No. 232579, September 8, 2020, En Banc (Caguioa, J.)
Article 777 of the Civil Code states that the rights of succession are
transmitted from the moment of the death of the decedent. The
operation of Article 777 occurs at the very moment of the decedent's
death – the transmission by succession occurs at the precise moment
of death and, therefore, the heir is legally deemed to have acquired
ownership of his/her share in the inheritance at that very moment, and
not at the time of declaration of heirs, or partition, or distribution.

YON MITORI INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIES v. UNION BANK OF

THE PHILIPPINES
G.R. No. 225538, October 14, 2020, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
For the principle of unjust enrichment to apply, the following requisites
must concur: (i) a person is unjustly benefited; and (ii) such benefit is
derived at the expense of or with damages to another. Moreover, to
substantiate a claim for unjust enrichment, the claimant must
unequivocally prove that another party knowingly received something
of value to which he was not entitled and that the state of affairs are
such that it would be unjust for the person to keep the benefit.

TAMAYAO v. LACAMBRA
G.R. No. 244232, November 3, 2020, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
The provision contemplates a case of double or multiple sales by a
single vendor. More specifically, it covers a situation where a single
vendor sold one and the same immovable property to two or more
buyers. According to a noted civil law author, it is necessary that the
conveyance must have been made by a party who has an existing right
in the thing and the power to dispose of it. It cannot be invoked where
the two different contracts of sale are made by two different persons,
one of them not being the owner of the property sold. And even if the
sale was made by the same person, if the second sale was made when
such person was no longer the owner of the property, because it had
been acquired by the first purchaser in full dominion, the second
purchaser cannot acquire any right.

BERNARDO v. FERNANDO
G.R. No. 211034, November 18, 2020, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
The law requires that every reasonable presumption leans towards
legitimacy, and establishes the status of a child from the moment of his
birth. In case of the need to prove filiation, the same may only be raised
in a direct and separate action instituted to prove the filiation of the
child.

Relatedly, as provided by Article 173 of the Family Code, an action to

claim legitimate filiation is strictly personal to the child whose filiation is
in question, and he or she may exercise such anytime within his
lifetime. The only three instances when such right passes to the child's
heirs are: (1) when the child dies during minority; (2) when the child
dies in a state of insanity; or (3) when the child dies after the
commencement of the action.

A birth certificate, being a public document, is an important piece of

evidence, and offers prima facie evidence of filiation in accordance with
the rule that entries in official records made in the performance of the
duties of a public officer are prima facie evidence of the facts therein
stated. However, as the Court has held in several cases, for a birth
certificate to prove paternity, it must be shown that the putative father
had a hand in its preparation.

MACUTAY v. SAMOY
G.R. No. 205559, December 2, 2020, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
As to accion publiciana, this is an ordinary civil proceeding to determine
the better right of possession of real property independently of title. It
also refers to an ejectment suit filed after the expiration of one year
from the accrual of the cause of action or from the unlawful withholding
of possession of the real property. The issue in an accion publiciana is
the "better right of possession" of real property independently of title.
This "better right of possession" may or may not proceed from a
Torrens title.

While there is no express grant in the Rules of Court that the court
wherein an accion publiciana is lodged can provisionally resolve the
issue of ownership, there is ample jurisprudential support for upholding
the power of a court hearing an accion publiciana to also rule on the
issue of ownership. This adjudication is not a final determination of the
issue of ownership; it is only for the purpose of resolving the issue of
possession, where the issue of ownership is inseparably linked to the
issue of possession.

HEIRS OF CABURNAY v. HEIRS OF SISON

G.R. No. 230934, December 2, 2020, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
When Perpetua died, the conjugal partnership between her and
Teodulo was terminated pursuant to Article 126 (1) of the Family Code.
With Perpetua's death, the liquidation of the conjugal partnership
between her and Teodulo should have ensued. In many instances,
however, the surviving spouse and the heirs of the deceased spouse
do not liquidate the conjugal properties and they keep them undivided.
In such case, a co-ownership is deemed established for the
management, control and enjoyment of the common property. Since
the conjugal partnership no longer subsists, the fruits of the common
property are divided according to the law on co-ownership; that is, in
proportion to the share or interest of each party.

Given that complete separation of property governed the subsequent

marriage of Teodulo and Perla, the 9/16 undivided share or interest in
the subject property of Teodulo belonged to him and remained with him
as his separate property when he married Perla. Thus, he could have
disposed of this without need of consent from Perla. However, this
disposition or encumbrance is valid only to the extent of the share or
interest of the surviving spouse in the terminated marriage property,
and cannot in no way bind the shares or interests therein of the other
heirs of the deceased spouse.

HEIRS OF VILLEZA v. ALIANGAN

G.R. No. 244667-69, December 2, 2020, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
The provision where the seller agrees to execute a deed of absolute
sale when the buyer has paid in full the purchase price has been
construed by the Court to signify that the seller has withheld the
transfer of ownership until the purchase price has been paid in full,
making the agreement between the seller and the buyer a contract to
sell and not a contract of sale. The aforecited stipulation shows that
the vendors reserved title to the subject property until full payment of
the purchase price.

MARASIGAN, JR v. PROVINCIAL AGRARIAN REFORM OFFICCER

G.R. No. 22282, December 2, 2020, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
Under R.A. No. 6657, the Land Bank of the Philippines is charged with
the preliminary determination of the value of lands placed under land
reform program and the compensation to be paid for their taking. Within
30 days from receipt of notice, the landowner shall inform the DAR of
his acceptance or rejection of the offer. In the event the landowner
rejects the offer, a summary administrative proceeding is held by the
provincial (PARAD), the regional (RARAD) or the central (DARAB)
adjudicator, as the case may be, depending on the value of the land,
for the purpose of determining the compensation for the land. The
landowner, the Land Bank, and other interested parties are then
required to submit evidence as to the just compensation for the land.
The DAR adjudicator decides the case within 30 days after it is
submitted for decision. If the landowner finds the price unsatisfactory,
he may bring the matter directly to the appropriate Regional Trial Court.

Spouses Gaspar v. Herminio Angel E. Disini, Jr.

G.R. No. 239644. February 3, 2021, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
By filing a third-party complaint against Yu for the purpose of seeking
reimbursement of the purchase price they had paid for the subject
Pajero, Spouses Gaspar effectively sought to declare the COS null and
void ab initio and recover what they had given on account of said void
COS. The third-party complaint thus assumes the nature of an
action to declare the inexistence of a contract which does not
prescribe.

SPOUSES CUENO vs. SPOUSES BAUTISTA

G.R. No. 246445. March 2, 2021, Division, Caguioa, J.:
All dispositions, alienations or encumbrances of conjugal real property
acquired after the effectivity of the New Civil Code needs the consent
of the wife. Also, all donations of real or personal property require the
consent of the wife except those to the common children for securing
their future or finishing a career, and moderate donations for charity.
But should the wife refuse unreasonably to give her consent, the court
may compel her to grant the same.

JESUS E. ULAY v. MARANGUYOD BUSTAMANTE

G.R. No. 231721-22, March 18, 2021, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
Prior to partition, a sale of a definite portion of a common property
requires the consent of all co-owners because it operates to partition
the land with respect to the co-owner selling his or her specific share
therein. Operatively, a co-owner is an owner of the whole and over the
whole he exercises the right of dominion, but he is at the same time
the owner of a portion which is truly abstract.

CONSTANTINO Y. BELIZARIO v. DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES AND THE
REGISTRY OF DEEDS OF NASUGBU, BATANGAS
G.R. No. 231001, March 24, 2021, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
The well-settled doctrine is that indefeasibility of a title does not attach
to titles issued pursuant to patents that have been secured by fraud or
misrepresentation inasmuch as the registration of a patent under the
Torrens system is not a mode of acquiring ownership and does not by
itself vest title; but it merely confirms the registrant's already existing
one. The certificates of title registered in the names of petitioners not
being indefeasible can be ordered cancelled.

NICXON L. PEREZ, JR. v. AVEGAIL PEREZ-SENERPIDA,

ASSISTED BY HER HUSBAND MR. SENERPIDA
G.R. No. 233365, March 24, 2021, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
However, Article 493 of the Civil Code cannot supersede, and must
yield to, Article 147 of the Family Code, which expressly mandates that:
"Neither party can encumber or dispose by acts inter vivos of his or her
share in the property acquired during cohabitation and owned in
common, without the consent of the other, until after the termination of
their cohabitation

FRANCIS LUIGI G. SANTOS v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

G.R. No. 250520, May 5, 2021, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
It must be stressed once again that a change of name is a privilege not
a matter of right, addressed to the sound discretion of the court which
has the duty to consider carefully the consequences of a change of
name and to deny the same unless weighty reasons are shown. Before
a person can be authorized to change his name, that is, his true or
official name or that which appears in his birth certificate or is entered
in the civil register, he must show proper and reasonable cause or any
convincing reason which may justify such change.

REPUBLIC v. MANANSALA
G.R. No. 241890, May 3, 2021, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
The established legal principle in actions involving land registration is
that a party must prove its allegations not merely by a preponderance
of evidence, but by clear and convincing evidence. Evidence is clear
and convincing if it produces in the mind of the trier of fact a firm belief
or conviction as to the allegation sought to be established. It is
indeterminate, being more than preponderance, but not to the extent
of such certainty as is required beyond reasonable doubt in criminal
cases. Appropriately, this is the standard of proof that is required in
reconstitution proceedings.
SPOUSES ROLANDO AND CYNTHIA RODRIGUEZ v. EXPORT
AND INDUSTRY BANK, INC.
G.R. No. 214520, June 14, 2021, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
Without a prior valid demand, the mortgagee-creditor's resort to extra-
judicial foreclosure is premature and thus, void. For the creditor's
demand to be considered valid, it must: (i) specifically relate to the
obligation that is due and demandable; and (ii) fully apprise the debtor
of the amount due to the creditor, including any accrued interest and
penalties imposed on the obligation. It follows that an incomplete
demand, or one that leaves the debtor unable to make a valid payment,
is ineffective and is insufficient for the purpose of rendering the debtor
in default of the obligation.

TAN v. MALAYAN LEASING AND FINANCE CORP.

G.R. No. 254510, June 16, 2021, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
Although the suretyship itself is a contract that is ancillary to the main
financial accommodation contract between the principal and the
creditor, what sets the surety apart from a mere guaranty is that in a
suretyship, the surety is principally liable, as opposed to a guarantor
who is only secondarily liable. So much so that with a suretyship
agreement securing the loan transaction, a creditor may go directly
against the surety even without a prior demand on the principal debtor,
although the latter may be solvent or otherwise able to pay. A surety's
liability stands irrespective of the principal debtor's ability to perform
his obligations under the contract which is subject of the suretyship.

REPUBLIC v. VILLACORTA
G.R. No. 249953, June 23, 2021, First Division (Caguioa, J.)
Article 45(3) of the Family Code provides that a marriage may be
annulled for any of the following causes, existing at the time of the
marriage: xxx (3) That the consent of either party was obtained by
fraud, unless such party afterwards, with full knowledge of the facts
constituting the fraud, freely cohabited with the other as husband and
wife."

To constitute fraud that warrants annulment under Article 46(2): 1) the

wife must have been pregnant by a man other than her husband at the
time of the marriage and 2) the wife must have fraudulently concealed
the same.
HEIRS OF HENRY LEUNG, REPRESENTED BY HIS WIDOW,
MARILYN LEUNG v. HEIRS OF MIGUEL MADIO, REPRESENTED
BY EDDIE MADIO
G.R. No. 224991, June 23, 2021 (Caguioa, J.)
According to Section 24, CA 141, “the Director of Lands shall
announce the sale thereof by publishing the proper notice once a week
for six consecutive weeks in the Official Gazette, and in two
newspapers one published in Manila and the other published in the
municipality or in the province where the lands are located, or in a
neighboring province, and the same notice shall be posted on the
bulletin board of the Bureau of Lands in Manila, and in the most
conspicuous place in the provincial building and the municipal building
of the province and municipality, respectively, where the land is
located”.

Source: USTFCL Dean’s Circe for AY 21-22 Case Digests on

Ponencias of J. Caguioa in Civil Law