1

sL
Sem School ?ear 2011Ŵ2012


Are||ano Un|vers|ty Schoo| Cf Law


@A8LL CI CCN@LN@S

IŦ Þroperty Cases

1 ÞrudenLlal vsŦ Þanls C8 # LŴ30003/ AugŦ 31ţ 1987 buLch
2 Serg'sŦ vsŦ ÞCl Leaslng C8# 137703 /AugŦ 22ţ 2000 buLch
3 1sal vsŦ CA C8# 1201098 /CcLŦ 02ţ 20 buLch
4 CalLex ÞhllsŦ vŦ C8AA C8# LŴ30466 May 31ţ 1982 buLch
3 ML8ALCC vsŦ C8AA C8# LŴ47943/ May 31ţ 1982 buLch
6 Laurel vŦ Abrogar C8# 133076/ !anŦ 13ţ 2009 May
7 Acap vsŦ CA C8# 118114 /uecŦ 07ţ 1993 May
8
CaLhollc 8lshop of 8alanga vsŦ
CA C8# 112319/ novŦ 14ţ 1996 May
9 Þecson vsŦ CA C8# 113814/ May 26ţ 1993 May
10 narvaez vŦ Alclso C8# 163907 /!uly 27ţ 2009 May
11 Cheng vŦ uonlnl C8# 167017/ !une 22ţ 2009 !oan 1usl
12 1uaLls vŦ Lscol C8# 173399 /CcLŦ 27ţ 2009 !oan 1usl
13 Lsmaquel vsŦ Coprada C8 # 132423/ uecŦ 13ţ 2010 !oan 1usl
14 8enedlcLo vsŦ vlllaflores C8# 183020/ CcLŦ 6ţ 2010 !oan 1usl
13 8rlones vsŦMacabagdal C8# 130666/ AugŦ 3ţ 2010 !oan 1usl
16 Llmense vsŦ vda de 8amos C8# 132319/ CcLŦ 28ţ 2010 uen
17 Mores vsŦ ?uŴCo C8# 172292/ !ulyŦ 23ţ 2010 uen
18 new 8egenL vŦ 1an[uaLco C8# 168800 /Aprll 16ţ 2009 uen
19 Meneses vsŦ CA C8# 83039/ !uly 14ţ 1993 uen
20 ClLy Mayor of Þaranaque vŦ Lblo C8#Ŧ 178411/!une 23ţ 2010 uen
21 Almagro vsŦ kwan
C8# 173806/173810/ CcLŦ 20ţ
2010 8em
22 Pelrs of Malabanan vŦ 8epubllc C8# 179987 /Aprll 29ţ 2009 8em
23 1an vsŦ 8ep C8# 177797/ uecŦ 04ţ 2008 8em
24 8ep vsŦ 1sal C8# 168184/ !uneŦ 22ţ 2009 8em
23 Llm vsŦ 8ep C8# 162047/ SepLŦ 4ţ 2009 8em
26 8ep vsŦ Chlng C8# 186166/ CcLŦ 20ţ 2010 Marle
27 8ep vsŦ uela Þaz C8# 171631/ novŦ 13ţ 2010 Marle
28 8ep vsŦ vega C8# 177790/ !anŦ 17ţ 2011 Marle
29 8ep vsŦ 8oche C8# 173846/ !uly 6ţ 2010 Marle
30 Calara vsŦ lranclsco C8# 136439/ SepLŦ 29ţ 2010 Marle
31 Carbonllla vsŦ Ablera C8# 177637/ !uly 26ţ 2010 Mar[
32 ModesLo vsŦ urblna C8# 189839/ CcLŦ 18ţ 2010 Mar[
33 8rlLo vsŦ ulanala C8# 171717/ uecŦ 13ţ 2010 Mar[
34 1an vsŦ 8amlrez C8# 138929/ AugŦ 3ţ 2010 Mar[
33 Lamsls vsŦ uongŴe C8# 173021/ CcLŦ 20ţ 2010 Mar[
36 ney vsŦ Cul[ano C8# 178609/ AugŦ 4ţ 2010 !oan naoe
37 1orlng vsŦ 8oqullaga C8# 163610/ SepLŦ 27ţ 2010 !oan naoe
38 Canezo vsŦ 8auLlsLa C8# 170189/ SepLŦ 1ţ 2010 !oan naoe
39 8epubllc vŦ Pelrs of Sorono C8 # 171371ţ MarŦ 24ţ 2008 !oan naoe
40 Cruz vŦ CaLapang C8 # 164110ţ lebŦ 12ţ 2008 !oan naoe
41 SanLos vŦ Pelrs of LusLre C8 # 131016ţ AugŦ 06ţ 2008 Crace
42 M81C vŦ Þascual C8 # 163744ţ lebŦ 29ţ 2008 Crace
43 Arrlola vŦ Arrlola C8 # 177703ţ !anŦ 28ţ 2008 Crace
44 Þadllla vsŦ Magdula C8# 176838/ SepLŦ 13ţ 2010 Crace
43 1aghoy vsŦ 1lgolţ !r C8# 139663/ AugŦ 3ţ 2010 Crace
46 MonLeroso vŦ CA C8 # 103608ţ AprŦ 30ţ 2008 Agelyn
47 SorlenLe vsŦ Concepclon C8# 160239/ novŦ 23ţ 2009 Agelyn
48 PulsL vŦ Þ8 8ullders C8 # 136364ţ SepLŦ 23ţ 2008 Agelyn
49 8unyl vŦ lacLor C8 # 172347ţ !unŦ 30ţ 2009 Agelyn
30 Cng vŦ 8epubllc C8 # 173746ţ MarŦ12ţ 2008 Agelyn
31 Þeople vŦ Þenaflorlda C8 # 173604ţ AprŦ 10ţ 2008 AnLhony
32 ChuaŴ8ruce vŦ CA C8 # 109393ţ AprŦ 27ţ 2000 AnLhony
33 uaclag vŦ uel 8osarlo C8 # 139378ţ leb 18ţ 2009 AnLhony
34 Laurora vŦ SLerllng 1echpark C8 # 146813ţ AprŦ 9ţ 2003 AnLhony
33 LuCA ÞublŦ vŦ SanLos C8 # 80298ţ AprŦ 26ţ 1990 AnLhony
36 8Þl lamlly vŦ lranco C8 # 123498ţ novŦ 23ţ 2007 buLch

37 la[ardo vŦ lreedom Lo 8ulld C8 # 134692ţ AugŦ 1ţ 2000 buLch
38 ColdcresL vŦ Cypress C8 # 171072ţ AprŦ 7ţ 2009 buLch
39 Abellana vŦ CA C8 # 97039ţ AprŦ 24ţ 1992 buLch
60 8lcol AgroŴlnd vŦ Cblas C8 # 172077ţ CcLŦ 09ţ 2009 buLch
61 Sallmbangon vŦ 1an C8 # 183240ţ !anŦ 20ţ 2010 May
62 Culmen vŦ CA C8 # 112331ţ May 29ţ 1996 May
63 SLaŦ Marla vŦ CA C8 # 127349ţ !anŦ 28ţ 1998 May
64 CulnLanllla vŦ Abangan C8 # 160613ţ lebŦ 12ţ 2008 May
63 valdez vŦ 1ablsula C8 # 173310ţ !uly 28ţ 2008 May
66 La vlsLa AssocŦ vŦ CA C8 # 93232ţ SepLŦ 3ţ 1997 !oan 1usl
67 unlsource vŦ Chung C8 # 173232ţ !ulŦ 17ţ 2009 !oan 1usl
68 1elmo vŦ 8usLamanLe C8 # 182367ţ !ulŦ 13ţ 2009 !oan 1usl
69 Acap vŦ CA C8 # 118114ţ uecŦ 7ţ 1993 !oan 1usl
70 Pelrs of Seraspl vŦ CA C8 # 133602ţ AprŦ 28ţ 2000 !oan 1usl
71 ÞaleroŴ1an vŦ urdaneLa AM # ÞŴ07Ŵ2399ţ !unŦ 18ţ 2008 uen
72 8ep vsŦ Cuzman C8# 132964/ lebŦ 18ţ 2000 uen
73 8Þ vŦ Slllm C8 # 140487ţ AprŦ 2ţ 2001 uen
74 Cul[ada vsŦ CA C8# 126444/ uecŦ 4ţ 1998 uen
73 Lagazo vsŦ CA C8# 112796/ MarŦ 3ţ 1998 uen
76 llorenclo vŦ ue Leon C8# 149370/ MarŦ 12ţ 2004 8em
77 Sevllla vsŦ Sevllla C8# 130179/ AprŦ 30ţ 2003 8em
78 CaLalan vsŦ 8asa C8# 139667/ !uly 31ţ 2007 8em
79 CesLopa vŦ Þllapll C8# 111904ţ CcLŦ 3ţ 2000 8em
80 MagaL vŦ CA C8 # 106733ţ lebŦ 1ţ 2002 8em
81 Maglasang vŦ CabaLlngan C8 # 131933ţ !unŦ 3ţ 2002 Marle
82 Aluad vŦ Aluad C8 # 176943ţ CcLŦ 17ţ 2008 Marle
83 Slcad vsŦ CA C8# 123888/ AugŦ 13ţ 1998 Marle
84 uel 8osarlo vsŦ lerrer C8# 187036/ SepLŦ 20ţ2010 Marle
83 Canuelas vŦ Cawed C8 # 123968ţ AprŦ 24ţ 2003 Marle
86 CenLral ÞhllŦ unlvŦ vŦ CA C8 #112127ţ !ul 17ţ 1993 Mar[
87 Pelrs of Maramag vŦ Maramag C8 # 181132ţ !unŦ 3ţ 2009 Mar[
88 lnsular Llfe vŦ Lbradoţ C8 # 44039ţ CcLŦ 28ţ 1977 Mar[
89 ArangoLe vŦ Maglunob C8 # 178906ţ lebŦ 18ţ 2009 Mar[
90 Cullala vŦ AlcanLaraţ C8 # 132681ţ uecŦ 3ţ 2001 Mar[
91 Arcaba vŦ 8aLocael C8 # 146683ţ novŦ 22ţ 2001 !oan naoe
92 Zamboanga vŦ ÞlagaLa C8 # 148433ţ SepLŦ 30ţ 2008 !oan naoe
93 Archblshop of Mla vŦ CA C8 # 77423ţ !unŦ 19ţ 1991 !oan naoe
94 ue Luna vŦ Abrlgo C8 # 37433ţ !anŦ 18ţ 1990 !oan naoe
93 1y vŦ 1y C8 # 163696ţ AprŦ 30ţ 2008 !oan naoe
96 LduarLe vsŦ CA C8# 103944/ lebŦ 9ţ 1996 Crace
97 velasquez vsŦ CA C8# 126996/ lebŦ 13ţ 2000 Crace

IIŦSUCCLSSICN CASLS
98 Alvarez vŦ lAC C8# 68033ţ May 7ţ 1990 Crace
99 venLura vsŦ MlllLanLeţ C8# 63143ţ CcLŦ 3ţ 1999 Crace
100 Sumal[ag vŦ LlLeraLo C8# 149787ţ !une 18ţ 2008 Crace
101 u8Þ vŦ Cagaranl C8# 172248ţ SepLŦ 17ţ 2008 Agelyn
102 8onllla vsŦ 8arcenaţ nCŦ LŴ41713ţ !une 18ţ 1976 Agelyn
103 Cruz vsŦ Cruz C8# 173292/SepLŦ 1ţ 2010 Agelyn
104 Pelrs of Sande[as vsŦ Llnaţ C8 # 141634ţ lebŦ 3ţ 2001 Agelyn
103 8alus vŦ 8alus C8# 168970ţ !anŦ 13ţ 2010 Agelyn
106 Arellano vsŦ Þascual C8# 189776/ uecŦ 13ţ 2010 AnLhony
107 8eyes vsŦ Lnrlquez C8# 162936/Aprll 10ţ 2008 AnLhony
108 ?apLlnchay vsŦ uel 8osarlo C8# 124320/ MarŦ 2ţ 1999 AnLhony
109 Llmos vsŦ Cdones C8# 186979/ AugŦ 11ţ 2010 AnLhony
110 Alfonso vsŦ Andres C8# 166236/ !uly 29ţ 2010 AnLhony
111 Acap vsŦ CAţ C8# 118114ţ uecŦ 7ţ 1993 buLch

112 Arrlola vŦ Arrlola C8# 177703ţ !anŦ 28ţ 2008 buLch
113 8eyes vŦ 81C MakaLl C8# 163744ţ AugŦ 11ţ 2008 buLch
114 Þuno vŦ Þuno LnLerprlses C8# 177066ţ SepLŦ 11ţ 2009 buLch
113 ukC Poldlngs CorpŦ vsŦ CA C8# 118248ţ AprllŦ 3ţ 2000 8uLch
116 8eyes vŦ Lnrlquez C8# 162936ţ Aprll 10ţ 2008 May
117 vlLug vsŦ CourL of Appealsţ C8# 82027ţ MarŦ 29ţ 1990 May
118 Slcad vsŦ CAţ C8# 123888ţ AugŦ 13ţ 1998 May
119 Aluad vŦ Aluad C8# 176943ţ CcLŦ 17ţ 2008 May
120 Suroza vsŦ Ponradoţ AM noŦ 2026ŴCllţ uecŦ 19ţ 1981 May
121 Lee vŦ 1ambago AŦCŦ noŦ 3281ţ lebŦ 12ţ 2008 !oan 1usl
122 Cuerrero vŦ 8lhls C8#174144ţ AprllŦ 17ţ 2007 !oan 1usl
123 Caneda vsŦ CAţ C8# 103334ţ MayŦ 28ţ 1993 !oan 1usl
124 Abangan vsŦ Abanganţ Cr # 13431ţ novŦ 12ţ 1919 !oan 1usl
123 Celada vŦ Abena C8# 143343ţ !uneŦ 30ţ 2008 !oan 1usl
126 !avellana vsŦ Ledesma C8#Ŧ LŴ7179ţ !uneŦ 30ţ 1933 uen
127 Cruz vsŦ vlllasorţ C8# LŴ32213ţ novŦ 26ţ 1973 uen
128 Azuela vŦ CA C8# 122880ţ AprllŦ 12ţ 2006 uen
129 Carcla vsŦ vasquezţ C8# LŴ26613ţ AprllŦ 30ţ 1970 uen
130 Alvarado vsŦ Cavlolaţ !rŦţ C8 # 74693ţ SepLŦ 14ţ 1993 uen
131 8oxas vsŦ ue !esusţ C8 #Ŧ LŴ38338ţ !anŦ 28ţ 1983 8em
132 Labrador vsŦ CAţ C8# 83843Ŵ44ţ AprllŦ 3ţ 1990 8em
133 kalaw vsŦ 8elovaţ C8 #Ŧ LŴ40207ţ SepLŦ 28ţ 1984 8em
134 Lchavez vsŦ uozen consŦ C8# 192916/ CcLŦ 11ţ 2010 8em
133 A[ero vsŦ CAţ C8# 106720ţ SepLŦ 13ţ 1994 8em
136 Codoy vsŦ Calugayţ C8# 123486ţ AugŦ 12ţ 1999 Marle
137 8odelas vsŦ Aranzaţ noŦ LŴ38309ţ uecŦ 7ţ 1982 Marle
138 vdaŦ ue Þerez vsŦ 1oleLeţ C8# 76714ţ !uneŦ 2ţ 1994 Marle
139 Adrlana MaloLo vsŦ CAţ noŦ LŴ76464ţ lebŦ 29ţ 1988 Marle
140 Cago vsŦ Mamuyacţ noŦ LŴ26317ţ !anŦ 29ţ 1927 Marle
141 Molo vsŦ Moloţ noŦ LŴ 2338ţ SepLŦ 21ţ 1931 Mar[
142 ulaz vsŦ ue Leonţ noŦ LŴ 17714Ŧ MayŦ 31ţ 1922 Mar[
143 uoroLheo vsŦ CAţ C8# 108381ţ uecŦ 8ţ 1999 Mar[
144 SanLos vsŦ 8uenavenLura C8 noŦ LŴ22797ţ SepLŦ 22ţ 1966 Mar[
143 8eyes vsŦ 8areLLoŴuaLuţ C8 # LŴ17818ţ !anŦ 23ţ 1967 Mar[
146 Aznar vsŦ uuncanţ C8 # LŴ 24363ţ !une 30ţ 1966 !oan naoe
147 Acaln vsŦ lAC C8 #LŴ 72706ţ CcLŦ 27ţ 1987 !oan naoe
148 nuguld vsŦ nuguld C8 # LŴ 23443ţ !une 23ţ 1966 !oan naoe
149 Seanglo vŦ 8eyes C8 # 140371Ŵ72ţ novŦ 27ţ 2006 !oan naoe
130 Þalaclos vsŦ 8amlrez C8 # LŴ 27932ţ lebŦ 13ţ 1982 !oan naoe
131 ÞCl8 vsŦ Lscolln
C8# LŴ27860ţ 27896ţ MarŦ 29ţ
1974 Crace
132 8abadllla vsŦ CourL of Appeals C8# 113723ţ !une 29ţ 2000 Crace
133 lranclsco vsŦ lranclscoŴAlfonsoţ C8# 138774ţ March 8ţ 2001 Crace
134 CaplLle vŦ Llbambuena C8# 169193ţ novŦ 30ţ 2006 Lrlc
133 Ldroso vsŦ Sablan C8 # LŴ6878ţ SepLŦ 13ţ 1913 Crace
136 Slenes vsŦ Lsparcla C8 #LŴ12937ţ March 24ţ 1961 Agelyn
137 Conzales vsŦ Cll C8 #LŴ34393ţ May 19ţ 1981 Agelyn
138 Cano vsŦ ulrecLor C8 #LŴ10701ţ !anŦ 16ţ 1939 Agelyn
139 vlzconde vŦ CA C8# 118449ţ lebŦ 11ţ 1998 !erome
160 Seanglo vŦ 8eyes C8# 140371Ŵ72ţ novŦ 27ţ 2006 Lrlc
161 8agunu vsŦ Þledadţ C8# 140973ţ uecŦ 8ţ 2000 AnLhony
162 Sayson vsŦ CAţ C8# 89224Ŵ23ţ !anŦ 23ţ 1992 AnLhony
163 Sayson vsŦ CAţ C8# 89224Ŵ23ţ !anŦ 23ţ 1992 AnLhony
164 Corpus vsŦ Corpus C8 # LŴ22469ţ CcLŦ 23ţ 1978 AnLhony
163 Leonardo vsŦ CA C8 #LŴ31263ţ lebŦ 28ţ 1983 !erome
166 ulaz vsŦ lAC C8 #LŴ66374ţ !une 17ţ 1987 !erome
167 ulaz vsŦ lAC C8 #LŴ66374ţ lebŦ 21ţ 1990 Lrlc
168 SunLay vŦ SunLay C8 # 183033ţ !une 16ţ 2010 !erome
169 verdad vsŦ CA C8# 109972ţ AprllŦ 29ţ 1996 Lrlc
170 Cabales vŦ CA C8# 162421ţ AugŦ 31ţ 2007 !erome

171 Pelrs of urlarLe vsŦ CA C8# 116773ţ !anŦ 22ţ 1998 Lrlc
172 Conzales vsŦ CA C8# 117740ţ CcLŦ 30ţ 1998 !erome
173 8epubllc vsŦ CAţ C8# 143483ţ !anŦ 31ţ 2002 Lrlc
174
Þarlsh ÞrlesL of vlcLorlaţ 1arlac
vsŦ 8lgor C8# LŴ22036ţ Aprll 30ţ 1979 !erome
173 Cuy vŦ CA C8# 163707ţ SepLŦ 13ţ 2006 Lrlc
176 Zaragoza vsŦ CAţ C8# 106401ţ SepLŦ 29ţ 2000 !erome
177 nazareno vsŦ CAţ C8# 138842ţ CcLŦ 18ţ 2000 Lrlc
178 vlzconde vsŦ CAţ C8# 118449ţ lebŦ 11ţ 1998 !erome
179 1y vŦ 1y C8# 163696ţ AprllŦ 30ţ 2008 Lrlc
180 noceda vsŦ CAţ C8# 119730ţ SepLŦ 2ţ 1999 !erome
181 Sllverlo vŦ CA C8# 178933ţ SepLŦ 16ţ 2009 Lrlc
182 Avellno vsŦ CAţ C8# 113181ţ March 31ţ 2000 !erome
183 Zaragoza vsŦ CAţ C8# 106401ţ SepLŦ 29ţ 2000 Lrlc
184 ArroganLe vŦ uellarLe C8# 132132ţ !ulyŦ 24ţ 2007 !erome
183 Crendaln !rŦ vsŦ 8odrlguez C8# 168660/ !une 30ţ 2009 AnLhony

8CCk II Ŵ ÞkCÞLk@ţ CWNLkSnIÞţ AND I@S MCDIIICA@ICNS (ArtsŦ 414 Ŷ 773)

@|t|e IŦŴ CLASSIIICA@ICN CI ÞkCÞLk@ (ArtsŦ 414 Ŷ 426)


ÞkLLIMINAk ÞkCVISICNS (ArtŦ 414)

See alsoť kA 349 as amended by kA 10S6 (Ao Act to leqollze letmlssloos to use
nomoo Otqoos ot Aoy lottloo ot pottloos of tbe nomoo 8oJy fot MeJlcolţ 5otqlcol ot
5cleotlflc lotposes ooJet cettolo cooJltloos)Ť kA 7170 (Ao Act Aotbotlzloq 1be leqocy ot
uoootloo of All ot lott of o nomoo 8oJy Aftet ueotb lot 5peclfleJ lotposes) as amended by
kA 787S (Ao Act to AJvooce cotoeol 1toosploototloos lo tbe lblllpploes)



Chapter 1Ŧ Immovab|e Þroperty (ArtŦ 41S)
Chapter 2Ŧ Movab|e Þroperty (ArtsŦ 416Ŵ418)

Þrudent|a| vsŦ Þan|s
Gk # LŴS0003] AugŦ 31ţ 1987
1S3 SCkA 391

lacLsť Cn november 19ţ 1971ţ plalnLlffsŴspouses lernando AŦ Magcale and 1eodula 8aluyuL
Magcale secured a loan ln Lhe sum of Þ70ţ000Ŧ00 from Lhe defendanL ÞrudenLlal 8ankŦ 1o secure
paymenL of Lhls loanţ plalnLlffs execuLed ln favor of defendanL on Lhe aforesald daLe a deed of 8eal
LsLaLe MorLgage over Lhe Seml Ŷ concreLe 2ŴsLorey resldenLlal bulldlng wlLh warehouse and a flrsL
class resldenLlal land evldenced only by Lax declaraLlon ln Lhe name of lernando Magcaleţ slLuaLed
ln Clongapo ClLyŦ Cn Lhe ueed of MorLgage a rlder Lyped aL Lhe boLLom of Lhe page ln whlch case
made ÞrudenLlal bank become aware LhaL Lhe morLgagee (defendanL ÞrudenLlal 8ank) was aL Lhe
ouLseL aware of Lhe facL LhaL Lhe morLgagors (plalnLlffs) have already flled a Mlscellaneous Sales
AppllcaLlon over Lhe loLţ possessory rlghLs over whlchţ were morLgaged Lo lLŦ ÞlalnLlffs secured an
addlLlonal loan from defendanL ÞrudenLlal 8ank ln Lhe sum of Þ20ţ000Ŧ00Ŧ 1o secure paymenL of
Lhls addlLlonal loanţ plalnLlffs execuLed ln favor of Lhe sald defendanL anoLher deed of 8eal LsLaLe
MorLgage over Lhe same properLles prevlously morLgagedŦ lor fallure of plalnLlffs Lo pay Lhelr
obllgaLlon Lo defendanL 8ank afLer lL became dueţ and upon appllcaLlon of sald defendanLţ Lhe
deeds of 8eal LsLaLe MorLgage were foreclosedŦ 1he aucLlon sale aforesald was held desplLe
wrlLLen requesL from plalnLlffs Lhrough counsel for Lhe defendanL ClLy Sherlff Lo deslsL from golng
wlLh Lhe scheduled publlc aucLlon saleŦ ln Lhe declslon of Cllţ lL declared LhaL Lhe 8eal LsLaLe
MorLgage ls null and voldŦ ÞrudenLlal flle for an M8 buL was also denled for lack of merlLŦ

lssueť WheLher or noL a valld real esLaLe morLgage can be consLlLuLed on Lhe bulldlng erecLed on
Lhe land belonglng Lo anoLherŦ WCn Lhe supervenlng lssuance ln favor of prlvaLe respondenLs of
mlscellaneous sales paLenL have Lhe effecL of lnvalldaLlng Lhe deeds of real esLaLe morLgageŦ

Peldť 1he answer ls ln Lhe afflrmaLlveŦ under ArLlcle 413 of Lhe Clvll Codeţ lL ls obvlous LhaL Lhe
lncluslon of ƍbulldlngƍ separaLe and dlsLlncL from Lhe landţ ln sald provlslon of law can only mean
LhaL a bulldlng ls by lLself an lmmovable properLyŦ Whlle lL ls Lrue LhaL a morLgage of land
necessarlly lncludesţ ln Lhe absence of sLlpulaLlon of Lhe lmprovemenLs Lhereonţ bulldlngsţ sLlll a
bulldlng by lLself may be morLgaged aparL from Lhe land on whlch lL has been bullLŦ Such a
morLgage would be sLlll a real esLaLe morLgage for Lhe bulldlng would sLlll be consldered
lmmovable properLy even lf dealL wlLh separaLely and aparL from Lhe landŦ ln Lhe same mannerţ
Lhls CourL has also esLabllshed LhaL possessory rlghLs over sald properLles before LlLle ls vesLed on
Lhe granLeeţ may be valldly Lransferred or conveyed as ln a deed of morLgageŦ under Lhe foregolng
conslderaLlonsţ lL ls evldenL LhaL Lhe morLgage execuLed by prlvaLe respondenL on hls own bulldlng
whlch was erecLed on Lhe land belonglng Lo Lhe governmenL ls Lo all lnLenLs and purposes a valld
morLgageŦ

8uL lL ls a dlfferenL maLLerţ as regards Lhe second morLgage execuLed over Lhe same properLles on
May 2ţ 1973 for an addlLlonal loan of Þ20ţ000Ŧ00 whlch was reglsLered wlLh Lhe 8eglsLry of ueeds
of Clongapo ClLy on Lhe same daLeŦ 8elaLlve LhereLoţ lL ls evldenL LhaL such morLgage execuLed
afLer Lhe lssuance of Lhe sales paLenL and of Lhe Crlglnal CerLlflcaLe of 1lLleţ falls squarely under Lhe
prohlblLlons sLaLed ln SecLlons 121ţ 122 and 124 of Lhe Þubllc Land AcL and SecLlon 2 of 8epubllc
AcL 730ţ and ls Lherefore null and voldŦ

We belleve LhaL as ln parl dellcLo may noL be lnvoked Lo defeaL Lhe pollcy of Lhe SLaLe nelLher may
Lhe docLrlne of esLoppel glve a valldaLlng effecL Lo a vold conLracLŦ lndeedţ lL ls generally consldered
LhaL as beLween parLles Lo a conLracLţ valldlLy cannoL be glven Lo lL by esLoppel lf lL ls prohlblLed by
law or ls agalnsL publlc pollcyŦ


Serg'sŦ vsŦ ÞCI Leas|ng
Gk# 13770S ]AugŦ 22ţ 2000
338 SCkA 499

lacLsť ÞCl Leaslngţ flled wlLh Lhe 81CŴCC a complalnL for collecLlon of sum of money wlLh an
appllcaLlon of a wrlL of replevlnŦ upon an exŴparLe appllcaLlon of ÞCl Leaslngţ respondenL [udge
lssued a wrlL of replevln dlrecLlng lLs sherlff Lo selze and dellver Lhe machlnerles and equlpmenL Lo
ÞCl Leaslng afLer 3 days and upon Lhe paymenL of Lhe necessary expensesŦ ln lmplemenLaLlon of
sald wrlLţ Lhe sherlff proceeded Lo peLlLloner's facLoryţ selzed one machlnery wlLh żLheŽ word LhaL
he żwouldŽ reLurn for Lhe oLher machlnerlesŦ ÞeLlLloner Serg's flled a moLlon for speclal proLecLlve
order lnvoklng Lhe power of Lhe courL Lo conLrol Lhe conducL of lLs offlcers and amend and conLrol
lLs processesţ praylng for a dlrecLlve for Lhe sherlff Lo defer enforcemenL of Lhe wrlL of replevlnŦ
1hls moLlon was opposed by ÞCl Leaslngţ on Lhe ground LhaL Lhe properLles żwereŽ sLlll personal
and Lherefore sLlll sub[ecL Lo selzure and a wrlL of replevlnŦ ln Lhelr 8eplyţ peLlLloners asserLed LhaL
Lhe properLles soughL Lo be selzed żwereŽ lmmovable as deflned ln ArLlcle 413 of Lhe Clvll Codeţ Lhe
parLles' agreemenL Lo Lhe conLrary noLwlLhsLandlngŦ 1hey argued LhaL Lo glve effecL Lo Lhe
agreemenL would be pre[udlclal Lo lnnocenL Lhlrd parLlesŦ 1hey furLher sLaLed LhaL ÞCl Leaslng
żwasŽ esLopped from LreaLlng Lhese machlnerles as personal because Lhe conLracLs ln whlch Lhe
alleged agreemenL żwereŽ embodled żwereŽ LoLally sham and farclcalŦ 1he sherlff agaln soughL Lo
enforce Lhe wrlL of selzure and Lake possesslon of Lhe remalnlng properLlesŦ Pe was able Lo Lake
Lwo moreţ buL was prevenLed by Lhe workers from Laklng Lhe resLŦ 1he CA held LhaL Lhe sub[ecL
machlnes were personal properLyţ and LhaL Lhey had only been leasedţ noL ownedţ by peLlLlonersŦ

lL also ruled LhaL Lhe ºwords of Lhe conLracL are clear and leave no doubL upon Lhe Lrue lnLenLlon of
Lhe conLracLlng parLlesŦ"

lssueť WheLher or noL Lhe machlnerles purchased and lmporLed by SL8C'S became real properLy by
vlrLue of lmmoblllzaLlon and Lhus should noL be sub[ecLed Lo Lhe wrlL of selzureŦ

Peldť under A81Ŧ 413Ŧ 1he followlng are lmmovable properLyť

xxx Ŵ (3) Machlneryţ recepLaclesţ lnsLrumenLs or lmplemenLs lnLended by Lhe owner of Lhe
LenemenL for an lndusLry or works whlch may be carrled on ln a bulldlng or on a plece of landţ and
whlch Lend dlrecLly Lo meeL Lhe needs of Lhe sald lndusLry or worksŤ
xxx

ln Lhe presenL caseţ Lhe machlnes LhaL were Lhe sub[ecLs of Lhe WrlL of Selzure were placed by
peLlLloners ln Lhe facLory bullL on Lhelr own landŦ lndlspuLablyţ Lhey were essenLlal and prlnclpal
elemenLs of Lhelr chocolaLeŴmaklng lndusLryŦ Penceţ alLhough each of Lhem was movable or
personal properLy on lLs ownţ all of Lhem have become ºlmmoblllzed by desLlnaLlon because Lhey
are essenLlal and prlnclpal elemenLs ln Lhe lndusLryŦ"ż16Ž ln LhaL senseţ peLlLloners are correcL ln
argulng LhaL Lhe sald machlnes are realţ noL personalţ properLy pursuanL Lo ArLlcle 413 (3) of Lhe
Clvll CodeŦ

8e LhaL as lL mayţ we dlsagree wlLh Lhe submlsslon of Lhe peLlLloners LhaL Lhe sald machlnes are noL
proper sub[ecLs of Lhe WrlL of SelzureŦ

1he CourL has held LhaL conLracLlng parLles may valldly sLlpulaLe LhaL a real properLy be consldered
as personalŦ AfLer agreelng Lo such sLlpulaLlonţ Lhey are consequenLly esLopped from clalmlng
oLherwlseŦ under Lhe prlnclple of esLoppelţ a parLy Lo a conLracL ls ordlnarlly precluded from
denylng Lhe LruLh of any maLerlal facL found LherelnŦ AlLhough Lhere ls no speclflc sLaLemenL
referrlng Lo Lhe sub[ecL house as personal properLyţ yeL by cedlngţ selllng or Lransferrlng a properLy
by way of chaLLel morLgage defendanLsŴappellanLs could only have meanL Lo convey Lhe house as
chaLLelţ or aL leasLţ lnLended Lo LreaL Lhe same as suchţ so LhaL Lhey should noL now be allowed Lo
make an lnconslsLenL sLand by clalmlng oLherwlseŦ ln Lhe presenL caseţ Lhe Lease AgreemenL clearly
provldes LhaL Lhe machlnes ln quesLlon are Lo be consldered as personal properLyŦ Clearly Lhenţ
peLlLloners are esLopped from denylng Lhe characLerlzaLlon of Lhe sub[ecL machlnes as personal
properLyŦ under Lhe clrcumsLancesţ Lhey are proper sub[ecLs of Lhe WrlL of SelzureŦ


@sa| vsŦ CA
Gk# 1201098 ]CctŦ 02ţ 20
366 SCkA 324

lacLsť 8espondenL Lver 1exLlle Mlllsţ lncŦ (LvL81Lx) obLalned a Lhree mllllon peso (Þ3ţ000ţ000Ŧ00)
loan from peLlLloner Þhlllpplne 8ank of CommunlcaLlons (Þ8Com)Ŧ As securlLy for Lhe loanţ
LvL81Lx execuLed ln favor of Þ8Comţ a deed of 8eal and ChaLLel MorLgage over Lhe loL where Lhe
facLory sLands and a llsL of machlnerles and equlpmenLŦ AfLer someLlmeţ Þ8Com granLed a second
loan of Þ3ţ336ţ000Ŧ00 Lo LvL81LxŦ 1he loan was secured by a ChaLLel MorLgage over personal
properLles enumeraLed ln a llsL aLLached LhereLoŦ 1hese llsLed properLles were slmllar Lo Lhose
llsLed ln Lhe flrsL morLgage deedŦ AfLer Lhe daLe of Lhe execuLlon of Lhe second morLgage
menLloned aboveţ LvL81Lx purchased varlous machlnes and equlpmenLsŦ uue Lo buslness
reversesţ LvL81Lx flled lnsolvency proceedlngsŦ All lLs asseLs were Laken lnLo Lhe cusLody of Lhe
lnsolvency CourLţ lncludlng Lhe collaLeralţ real and personalţ securlng Lhe Lwo morLgages as
abovemenLlonedŦ upon LvL81Lxƌs fallure Lo meeL lLs obllgaLlon Lo Þ8Comţ Lhe laLLer commenced
exLra[udlclal foreclosure proceedlngs agalnsL LvL81LxŦ Cn Lhe flrsL and second publlc aucLlonsţ Þ8
Com emerged Lo be Lhe hlghesL bldderŦ Þ8Com consolldaLed lLs ownershlp over Lhe loL and all Lhe
properLles ln lLŦ Þ8 Com leased Lhe properLy Lo 8ubl 1salŦ Cn 1988ţ Þ8Com sold Lhe facLoryţ lockţ
sLock and barrel Lo 1sal for Þ9ţ000ţ000Ŧ00ţ lncludlng Lhe conLesLed machlnerlesŦ LvL81Lx flled a
complalnL for annulmenL of saleţ reconveyanceţ and damages wlLh Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal CourL agalnsL
Þ8ComŦ LvL81Lx clalmed LhaL no rlghLs havlng been LransmlLLed Lo Þ8Com over Lhe asseLs of
lnsolvenL LvL81Lxţ Lherefore 1sal acqulred no rlghLs over such asseLs sold Lo herţ and should
reconvey Lhe asseLsŦ 1he 81C found LhaL Lhe lease and sale of sald personal properLles were
lrregular and lllegal because Lhey were noL duly foreclosed nor sold aL Lhe uecember 13ţ 1982
aucLlon sale slnce Lhese were noL lncluded ln Lhe schedules aLLached Lo Lhe morLgage conLracLsŦ
1he CA afflrmed Lhe [udgmenLŦ

lssueť WCn Lhe machlnerles llsLed are personal properLy ouLslde Lhe deed of real esLaLe morLgage
and LhaL lL should be excluded from Lhe real properLy forclosedţ desplLe Lhe provlslon ln Lhe deed
LhaL all afLerŴacqulred properLles durlng Lhe llfeLlme of Lhe morLgage shall form parL Lhere and
desplLe Lhe undlspuLed facL LhaL sald machlnerles are blg and heavyţ bolLed or cemenLed on Lhe
real properLyŦ

Peldť ÞeLlLloners conLend LhaL Lhe naLure of Lhe dlspuLed machlnerlesţ lŦeŦţ LhaL Lhey were heavyţ
bolLed or cemenLed on Lhe real properLy morLgaged by LvL81Lx Lo Þ8Comţ make Lhem lpso facLo
lmmovable under ArLlcle 413 (3) and (3) of Lhe new Clvll CodeŦ 1hls asserLlonţ howeverţ does noL
seLLle Lhe lssueŦ Mere nuLs and bolLs do noL foreclose Lhe conLroversyŦ We have Lo look aL Lhe
parLlesƌ lnLenLŦ

Whlle lL ls Lrue LhaL Lhe conLroverLed properLles appear Lo be lmmoblleţ a perusal of Lhe conLracL of
8eal and ChaLLel MorLgage execuLed by Lhe parLles hereln glves us a conLrary lndlcaLlonŦ ln Lhe case
aL barţ boLh Lhe Lrlal and Lhe appellaLe courLs reached Lhe same flndlng LhaL Lhe Lrue lnLenLlon of
Þ8CCM and Lhe ownerţ LvL81Lxţ ls Lo LreaL machlnery and equlpmenL as chaLLelsŦ We flnd no
reverslble error ln Lhe respondenL appellaLe courLƌs rullng LhaL lnasmuch as Lhe sub[ecL morLgages
were lnLended by Lhe parLles Lo lnvolve chaLLelsţ lnsofar as equlpmenL and machlnery were
concernedţ Lhe ChaLLel MorLgage Law appllesţ whlch provldes ln SecLlon 7 Lhereof LhaLť ƍa chaLLel
morLgage shall be deemed Lo cover only Lhe properLy descrlbed Lhereln and noL llke or subsLlLuLed
properLy LhereafLer acqulred by Lhe morLgagor and placed ln Lhe same deposlLory as Lhe properLy
orlglnally morLgagedţ anyLhlng ln Lhe morLgage Lo Lhe conLrary noLwlLhsLandlngŦ As Lhe aucLlon
sale of Lhe sub[ecL properLles Lo Þ8Com ls voldţ no valld LlLle passed ln lLs favorŦ ConsequenLlyţ Lhe
sale Lhereof Lo 1sal ls also a nulllLy under Lhe elemenLary prlnclple of nemo daL quod non habeLţ
one cannoL glve whaL one does noL haveŦ




Ca|tex Þh||sŦ vŦ C8AA

Gk# LŴS0466 May 31ţ 1982
114 SCkA 296

lacLsť CalLex lnsLalled machlnerles and equlpmenL conslsLlng of underground Lanksţ elevaLed Lankţ
elevaLed waLer Lanksţ waLer Lanksţ gasollne pumpsţ compuLlng pumpsţ waLer pumpsţ car washerţ
car holsLsţ Lruck holsLsţ alr compressors and LlreflaLorsŦ 1he sald machlnes and equlpmenL are
loaned by CalLex Lo gas sLaLlon operaLors under an approprlaLe lease agreemenL or recelpLŦ lL ls
sLlpulaLed ln Lhe lease conLracL LhaL Lhe operaLorsţ upon demandţ shall reLurn Lo CalLex Lhe
machlnes and equlpmenL ln good condlLlon as when recelvedţ excepL ordlnary wear and LearŦ
CalLex reLalns Lhe ownershlp Lhereof durlng Lhe Lerm of Lhe leaseŦ 1he clLy assessor of Þasay ClLy
characLerlzed Lhe sald lLems of gas sLaLlon equlpmenL and machlnery as Laxable realLyŦ 1he clLy
board of Lax appeals ruled LhaL Lhey are personalLyŦ Cn appeal Lhe CenLral 8oard of AssessmenL
Appeals held LhaL Lhe sald machlnes and equlpmenL are real properLy wlLhln Lhe meanlng of
secLlons 3(k) Ǝ (m) and 38 of Lhe 8eal ÞroperLy 1ax Codeţ ÞresldenLlal uecree noŦ 464ţ whlch Look
effecL on !une 1ţ 1974ţ and LhaL Lhe deflnlLlons of real properLy and personal properLy ln arLlcles
413 and 416 of Lhe Clvll Code are noL appllcable Lo Lhls caseŦ

lssueť WCn Lhe machlnes and equlpmenL are sub[ecL Lo 8eal ÞroperLy 1ax

Peldť We hold LhaL Lhe sald equlpmenL and machlneryţ as appurLenances Lo Lhe gas sLaLlon bulldlng
or shed owned by CalLex (as Lo whlch lL ls sub[ecL Lo realLy Lax) and whlch flxLures are necessary Lo
Lhe operaLlon of Lhe gas sLaLlonţ for wlLhouL Lhem Lhe gas sLaLlon would be uselessţ and whlch have
been aLLached or afflxed permanenLly Lo Lhe gas sLaLlon slLe or embedded Lherelnţ are Laxable
lmprovemenLs and machlnery wlLhln Lhe meanlng of Lhe AssessmenL Law and Lhe 8eal ÞroperLy
1ax CodeŦ

CalLex lnvokes Lhe rule LhaL machlnery whlch ls movable ln lLs naLure only becomes lmmoblllzed
when placed ln a planL by Lhe owner of Lhe properLy or planL buL noL when so placed by a LenanLţ a
usufrucLuaryţ or any person havlng only a Lemporary rlghLţ unless such person acLed as Lhe agenL of
Lhe owner (uavao Saw Mlll CoŦ vsŦ CasLllloţ 61 Þhll 709)Ŧ

lmprovemenLs on land are commonly Laxed as realLy even Lhough for some purposes Lhey mlghL be
consldered personalLy (84 CŦ!ŦSŦ 181Ŵ2ţ noLes 40 and 41)Ŧ ƍlL ls a famlllar phenomenon Lo see Lhlngs
classed as real properLy for purposes of LaxaLlon whlch on general prlnclple mlghL be consldered
personal properLyƍ (SLandard Cll CoŦ of new ?ork vsŦ !aramllloţ 44 ÞhllŦ 630ţ 633)Ŧ

1hls case ls also easlly dlsLlngulshable from 8oard of AssessmenL Appeals vsŦ Manlla LlecLrlc CoŦţ
119 ÞhllŦ 328ţ where Meralcoƌs sLeel Lowers were consldered poles wlLhln Lhe meanlng of
paragraph 9 of lLs franchlse whlch exempLs lLs poles from LaxaLlonŦ 1he sLeel Lowers were
consldered personalLy because Lhey were aLLached Lo square meLal frames by means of bolLs and
could be moved from place Lo place when unscrewed and dlsmanLledŦ

nor are CalLexƌs gas sLaLlon equlpmenL and machlnery Lhe same as Lools and equlpmenL ln Lhe
repalr shop of a bus company whlch were held Lo be personal properLy noL sub[ecL Lo realLy Lax
(Mlndanao 8us CoŦ vsŦ ClLy Assessorţ 116 ÞhllŦ 301)Ŧ

1he CenLral 8oard of AssessmenL Appeals dld noL commlL a grave abuse of dlscreLlon ln upholdlng
Lhe clLy assessorƌs ls lmposlLlon of Lhe realLy Lax on CalLexƌs gas sLaLlon and equlpmenLŦ


MLkALCC vsŦ C8AA
Gk# LŴ47943] May 31ţ 1982
114 SCkA 273

lacLsť 1hls case ls abouL Lhe lmposlLlon of Lhe realLy Lax on Lwo oll sLorage Lanks lnsLalled ln 1969
by Manlla LlecLrlc Company on a loL ln San Þascualţ 8aLangas whlch lL leased ln 1968 from CalLex
(ÞhllŦ)ţ lncŦ 1he Lanks are wlLhln Lhe CalLex reflnery compoundŦ 1hey are used for sLorlng fuel oll for
Meralcoƌs power planLsŦ Accordlng Lo Meralcoţ Lhe sLorage Lanks are made of sLeel plaLes welded
and assembled on Lhe spoLŦ 1helr boLLoms resL on a foundaLlon conslsLlng of compacLed earLh as
Lhe ouLermosL layerţ a sand pad as Lhe lnLermedlaLe layer and a LwoŴlnch Lhlck blLumlnous asphalL
sLraLum as Lhe Lop layerŦ 1he boLLom of each Lank ls ln conLacL wlLh Lhe asphalL layerţ

1he sLeel sldes of Lhe Lank are dlrecLly supporLed underneaLh by a clrcular wall made of concreLeţ
elghLeen lnches Lhlckţ Lo prevenL Lhe Lank from slldlngŦ Penceţ accordlng Lo Meralcoţ Lhe Lank ls noL
aLLached Lo lLs foundaLlonŦ lL ls noL anchored or welded Lo Lhe concreLe clrcular wallŦ lLs boLLom
plaLe ls noL aLLached Lo any parL of Lhe foundaLlon by bolLsţ screws or slmllar devlcesŦ 1he Lank
merely slLs on lLs foundaLlonŦ Lach empLy Lank can be floaLed by floodlng lLs dlkeŴlnclosed locaLlon
wlLh waLer four feeL deepŦ

Meralco flled Lhls speclal clvll acLlon of cerLlorarl Lo annul Lhe 8oardƌs declslon and resoluLlonŦ lL
conLends LhaL Lhe 8oard acLed wlLhouL [urlsdlcLlon and commlLLed a grave error of law ln holdlng
LhaL lLs sLorage Lanks are Laxable real properLyŦ

lssueť WCn Lhe sald fuel Lanks are sub[ecL Lo 8ealLy 1axŦ

Peldť 1he Lanks are consldered real properLles sub[ecL Lo 8ealLy 1axŦ We hold LhaL whlle Lhe Lwo
sLorage Lanks are noL embedded ln Lhe landţ Lhey mayţ neverLhelessţ be consldered as
lmprovemenLs on Lhe landţ enhanclng lLs uLlllLy and renderlng lL useful Lo Lhe oll lndusLryŦ lL ls
undenlable LhaL Lhe Lwo Lanks have been lnsLalled wlLh some degree of permanence as recepLacles
for Lhe conslderable quanLlLles of oll needed by Meralco for lLs operaLlonsŦ

Cll sLorage Lanks were held Lo be Laxable realLy ln SLandard Cll CoŦ of new !ersey vsŦ ALlanLlc ClLyţ
13 ALlŦ 2nd 271Ŧ

lor purposes of LaxaLlonţ Lhe Lerm ƍreal properLyƍ may lnclude Lhlngs whlch should generally be
regarded as personal properLy (84 CŦ!ŦSŦ 171ţ noLe 8)Ŧ lL ls a famlllar phenomenon Lo see Lhlngs
classed as real properLy for purposes of LaxaLlon whlch on general prlnclple mlghL be consldered
personal properLy (SLandard Cll CoŦ of new ?ork vsŦ !aramllloţ 44 ÞhllŦ 630ţ 633)Ŧ

1he case of 8oard of AssessmenL Appeals vsŦ Manlla LlecLrlc Companyţ 119 ÞhllŦ 328ţ whereln
Meralcoƌs sLeel Lowers were held noL Lo be sub[ecL Lo realLy Laxţ ls noL ln polnL because ln LhaL case
Lhe sLeel Lowers were regarded as poles and under lLs franchlse Meralcoƌs poles are exempL from

LaxaLlonŦ Moreoverţ Lhe sLeel Lowers were noL aLLached Lo any land or bulldlngŦ 1hey were
removable from Lhelr meLal framesŦ

nor ls Lhere any parallellsm beLween Lhls case and Mlndanao 8us CoŦ vsŦ ClLy Assessorţ 116 ÞhllŦ
301ţ where Lhe Lools and equlpmenL ln Lhe repalrţ carpenLry and blacksmlLh shops of a
LransporLaLlon company were held noL sub[ecL Lo realLy Lax because Lhey were personal properLyŦ

Laure| vŦ Abrogar
Gk# 1SS076] IanŦ 13ţ 2009
S76 SCkA 41

lAC1S

ÞLu1 sued peLlLloner for vlolaLlon of ArLŦ 308 of Lhe 8ÞCţ or LhefLţ for allegedly uslngţ wlLhouL lLs
prevlous knowledge and consenLţ Lhe lnLernaLlonal long dlsLance calls belonglng Lo ÞLu1 by
conducLlng lnLernaLlonal Slmple 8esale (lS8)ţ whlch ls a meLhod of rouLlng and compleLlng
lnLernaLlonal long dlsLance calls uslng llnesţ cablesţ anLenaeţ and/or alr wave frequency whlch
connecL dlrecLly Lo Lhe local or domesLlc exchange faclllLles of Lhe counLry where Lhe call ls
desLlnedţ effecLlvely sLeallng Lhls buslness from ÞLu1 whlle uslng lLs faclllLles ln Lhe esLlmaLed
amounL of Þ20ţ370ţ631Ŧ92 Lo Lhe damage and pre[udlce of ÞLu1ţ ln Lhe sald amounLŦ

ÞeLlLloner flled a ƍMoLlon Lo Cuash (wlLh MoLlon Lo uefer ArralgnmenL)ţƍ on Lhe ground LhaL Lhe
facLual allegaLlons ln Lhe Amended lnformaLlon do noL consLlLuLe Lhe felony of LhefLŦ 1he Lrlal courL
denled Lhe MoLlon Lo Cuash Lhe Amended lnformaLlonţ as well as peLlLloner's subsequenL MoLlon
for 8econslderaLlonŦ

ÞeLlLloner's speclal clvll acLlon for cerLlorarl was dlsmlssed by Lhe CourL of AppealsŦ 1husţ peLlLloner
flled Lhe lnsLanL peLlLlon for revlew wlLh Lhls CourLŦ ln hls peLlLlon for revlew peLlLloner argued LhaL
Lhe 8evlsed Þenal Code should be lnLerpreLed ln Lhe conLexL of Lhe Clvll Code's deflnlLlon of real
and personal properLyŦ 1he enumeraLlon of real properLles ln ArLlcle 413 of Lhe Clvll Code ls
excluslve such LhaL all Lhose noL lncluded Lhereln are personal properLlesŦ Slnce ArLlcle 308 of Lhe
8evlsed Þenal Code used Lhe words ƍpersonal properLyƍ wlLhouL quallflcaLlonţ lL follows LhaL all
ƍpersonal properLlesƍ as undersLood ln Lhe conLexL of Lhe Clvll Codeţ may be Lhe sub[ecL of LhefL
under ArLlcle 308 of Lhe 8evlsed Þenal CodeŦ ÞLu1 alleges LhaL Lhe lnLernaLlonal calls and buslness
of provldlng LelecommunlcaLlon or Lelephone servlce are personal properLles capable of
approprlaLlon and can be ob[ecLs of LhefLŦ

ln hls CommenLţ peLlLloner Laurel clalms LhaL a Lelephone call ls a conversaLlon on Lhe phone or a
communlcaLlon carrled ouL uslng Lhe LelephoneŦ lL ls noL synonymous Lo elecLrlc currenL or
lmpulsesŦ Penceţ lL may noL be consldered as personal properLy suscepLlble of approprlaLlonŦ Pe
also lnslsLs LhaL ƍbuslnessƍ ls noL personal properLyŦ lL ls noL Lhe ƍbuslnessƍ LhaL ls proLecLed buL
Lhe ƍrlghL Lo carry on a buslnessŦƍ 1hls rlghL ls whaL ls consldered as properLyŦ Slnce Lhe servlces of
ÞLu1 cannoL be consldered as ƍproperLyţƍ Lhe same may noL be sub[ecL of LhefLŦ


lSSuLť WCn Lhe lnLernaLlonal calls as well as Lhe buslness of provldlng LelecommunlcaLlon or
Lelephone servlce are personal properLles capable of approprlaLlon and can be ob[ecLs of LhefLŦ

PLLuť

1he courL granLed ÞLu1's peLlLlon buL remanded Lhe case Lo Lhe Lrlal courL and Lhe Þubllc
ÞrosecuLor of MakaLl ClLy ls hereby ul8LC1Lu Lo amend Lhe Amended lnformaLlon Lo show LhaL Lhe
properLy sub[ecL of Lhe LhefL were servlces and buslness of Lhe prlvaLe offended parLy because Lhe
lnLernaLlonal callsţ alLhough consldered as personal properLlesţ are noL owned by ÞLu1 hence
peLlLloner cannoL be llable for LhefL on LhaL maLLerŤ buL Lhe buslness of provldlng
LelecommunlcaLlon ls a personal properLy whlch ls capable of belng approprlaLed hence sub[ecL LoL
LhefLŦ ln explalnlng lLs declslonţ Lhe courL saldť

Þrlor Lo Lhe passage of Lhe 8evlsed Þenal Code on uecember 8ţ 1930ţ Lhe deflnlLlon of Lhe Lerm
ƍpersonal properLyƍ ln Lhe penal code provlslon on LhefL had been esLabllshed ln Þhlllpplne
[urlsprudenceŦ 1hls CourLţ ln unlLed SLaLes vŦ CenaLoţ unlLed SLaLes vŦ Carlosţ and unlLed SLaLes vŦ
1ambunLlngţ conslsLenLly ruled LhaL any personal properLyţ Langlble or lnLanglbleţ corporeal or
lncorporealţ capable of approprlaLlon can be Lhe ob[ecL of LhefLŦ

Moreoverţ slnce Lhe passage of Lhe 8evlsed Þenal Code on uecember 8ţ 1930ţ Lhe Lerm ƍpersonal
properLyƍ has had a generally accepLed deflnlLlon ln clvll lawŦ ln ArLlcle 333 of Lhe Clvll Code of
Spalnţ ƍpersonal properLyƍ ls deflned as ƍanyLhlng suscepLlble of approprlaLlon and noL lncluded ln
Lhe foregolng chapLer (noL real properLy)Ŧƍ 1husţ Lhe Lerm ƍpersonal properLyƍ ln Lhe 8evlsed Þenal
Code should be lnLerpreLed ln Lhe conLexL of Lhe Clvll Code provlslons ln accordance wlLh Lhe rule
on sLaLuLory consLrucLlon LhaL where words have been long used ln a Lechnlcal sense and have
been [udlclally consLrued Lo have a cerLaln meanlngţ and have been adopLed by Lhe leglslaLure as
havlng a cerLaln meanlng prlor Lo a parLlcular sLaLuLeţ ln whlch Lhey are usedţ Lhe words used ln
such sLaLuLe should be consLrued accordlng Lo Lhe sense ln whlch Lhey have been prevlously usedŦ
ln facLţ Lhls CourL used Lhe Clvll Code deflnlLlon of ƍpersonal properLyƍ ln lnLerpreLlng Lhe LhefL
provlslon of Lhe penal code ln unlLed SLaLes vŦ CarlosŦ

1he only requlremenL for a personal properLy Lo be Lhe ob[ecL of LhefL under Lhe penal code ls LhaL
lL be capable of approprlaLlonŦ lL need noL be capable of ƍasporLaLlonţƍ whlch ls deflned as
ƍcarrylng awayŦƍ7 !urlsprudence ls seLLled LhaL Lo ƍLakeƍ under Lhe LhefL provlslon of Lhe penal
code does noL requlre asporLaLlon or carrylng awayŦ

1o approprlaLe means Lo deprlve Lhe lawful owner of Lhe LhlngŦ9 1he word ƍLakeƍ ln Lhe 8evlsed
Þenal Code lncludes any acL lnLended Lo Lransfer possesslon whlchţ as held ln Lhe assalled ueclslonţ
may be commlLLed Lhrough Lhe use of Lhe offenders' own handsţ as well as any mechanlcal devlceţ
such as an access devlce or card as ln Lhe lnsLanL caseŦ 1hls lncludes conLrolllng Lhe desLlnaLlon of
Lhe properLy sLolen Lo deprlve Lhe owner of Lhe properLyţ such as Lhe use of a meLer Lamperlngţ as
held ln naLlvldad vŦ CourL of Appealsţ10 use of a devlce Lo fraudulenLly obLaln gasţ as held ln unlLed
SLaLes vŦ 1ambunLlngţ and Lhe use of a [umper Lo dlverL elecLrlclLyţ as held ln Lhe cases of unlLed
SLaLes vŦ CenaLoţ unlLed SLaLes vŦ Carlosţ and unlLed SLaLes vŦ MenagasŦ

As lllusLraLed ln Lhe above casesţ approprlaLlon of forces of naLure whlch are broughL under conLrol
by sclence such as elecLrlcal energy can be achleved by Lamperlng wlLh any apparaLus used for
generaLlng or measurlng such forces of naLureţ wrongfully redlrecLlng such forces of naLure from
such apparaLusţ or uslng any devlce Lo fraudulenLly obLaln such forces of naLureŦ ln Lhe lnsLanL

caseţ peLlLloner was charged wlLh engaglng ln lnLernaLlonal Slmple 8esale (lS8) or Lhe unauLhorlzed
rouLlng and compleLlng of lnLernaLlonal long dlsLance calls uslng llnesţ cablesţ anLennaeţ and/or alr
wave frequency and connecLlng Lhese calls dlrecLly Lo Lhe local or domesLlc exchange faclllLles of
Lhe counLry where desLlnedŦ

1he rlghL of Lhe ownershlp of elecLrlc currenL ls secured by arLlcles 317 and 318 of Lhe Þenal CodeŤ
Lhe appllcaLlon of Lhese arLlcles ln cases of subLracLlon of gasţ a fluld used for llghLlngţ and ln some
respecLs resembllng elecLrlclLyţ ls conflrmed by Lhe rule lald down ln Lhe declslons of Lhe supreme
courL of Spaln of !anuary 20ţ 1887ţ and Aprll 1ţ 1897ţ consLrulng and enforclng Lhe provlslons of
arLlcles 330 and 331 of Lhe Þenal Code of LhaL counLryţ arLlcles 317 and 318 of Lhe code ln force ln
Lhese lslandsŦ

1he acLs of ƍsubLracLlonƍ lncludeť (a) Lamperlng wlLh any wlreţ meLerţ or oLher apparaLus lnsLalled
or used for generaLlngţ conLalnlngţ conducLlngţ or measurlng elecLrlclLyţ Lelegraph or Lelephone
servlceŤ (b) Lapplng or oLherwlse wrongfully deflecLlng or Laklng any elecLrlc currenL from such
wlreţ meLerţ or oLher apparaLusŤ and (c) uslng or en[oylng Lhe beneflLs of any devlce by means of
whlch one may fraudulenLly obLaln any currenL of elecLrlclLy or any Lelegraph or Lelephone servlceŦ

ln Lhe lnsLanL caseţ Lhe acL of conducLlng lS8 operaLlons by lllegally connecLlng varlous equlpmenL
or apparaLus Lo prlvaLe respondenL ÞLu1's Lelephone sysLemţ Lhrough whlch peLlLloner ls able Lo
resell or reŴrouLe lnLernaLlonal long dlsLance calls uslng respondenL ÞLu1's faclllLles consLlLuLes all
Lhree acLs of subLracLlon menLloned aboveŦ

1he buslness of provldlng LelecommunlcaLlon or Lelephone servlce ls llkewlse personal properLy
whlch can be Lhe ob[ecL of LhefL under ArLlcle 308 of Lhe 8evlsed Þenal CodeŦ 8uslness may be
approprlaLed under SecLlon 2 of AcL noŦ 3932 (8ulk Sales Law)ţ henceţ could be ob[ecL of LhefLŦ
lnLeresL ln buslness was noL speclflcally enumeraLed as personal properLy ln Lhe Clvll Code ln force
aL Lhe Llme Lhe above declslon was renderedŦ ?eLţ lnLeresL ln buslness was declared Lo be personal
properLy slnce lL ls capable of approprlaLlon and noL lncluded ln Lhe enumeraLlon of real properLlesŦ
ArLlcle 414 of Lhe Clvll Code provldes LhaL all Lhlngs whlch are or may be Lhe ob[ecL of approprlaLlon
are consldered elLher real properLy or personal properLyŦ 8uslness ls llkewlse noL enumeraLed as
personal properLy under Lhe Clvll CodeŦ !usL llke lnLeresL ln buslnessţ howeverţ lL may be
approprlaLedŦ

lL was conceded LhaL ln maklng Lhe lnLernaLlonal phone callsţ Lhe human volce ls converLed lnLo
elecLrlcal lmpulses or elecLrlc currenL whlch are LransmlLLed Lo Lhe parLy calledŦ A Lelephone callţ
Lhereforeţ ls elecLrlcal energyŦ lL was also held ln Lhe assalled ueclslon LhaL lnLanglble properLy such
as elecLrlcal energy ls capable of approprlaLlon because lL may be Laken and carrled awayŦ
LlecLrlclLy ls personal properLy under ArLlcle 416 (3) of Lhe Clvll Codeţ whlch enumeraLes ƍforces of
naLure whlch are broughL under conLrol by sclenceŦƍ

lndeedţ whlle lL may be conceded LhaL ƍlnLernaLlonal long dlsLance callsţƍ Lhe maLLer alleged Lo be
sLolen ln Lhe lnsLanL caseţ Lake Lhe form of elecLrlcal energyţ lL cannoL be sald LhaL such
lnLernaLlonal long dlsLance calls were personal properLles belonglng Lo ÞLu1 slnce Lhe laLLer could
noL have acqulred ownershlp over such callsŦ ÞLu1 merely encodesţ augmenLsţ enhancesţ decodes
and LransmlLs sald calls uslng lLs complex communlcaLlons lnfrasLrucLure and faclllLlesŦ ÞLu1 noL
belng Lhe owner of sald Lelephone callsţ Lhen lL could noL valldly clalm LhaL such Lelephone calls
were Laken wlLhouL lLs consenLŦ lL ls Lhe use of Lhese communlcaLlons faclllLles wlLhouL Lhe consenL
of ÞLu1 LhaL consLlLuLes Lhe crlme of LhefLţ whlch ls Lhe unlawful Laklng of Lhe Lelephone servlces
and buslnessŦ


Chapter 3Ŧ Þroperty In ke|at|on to the Þerson to Whom |t 8e|ongs (ArtsŦ 419Ŵ42S)

Þrov|s|ons Common to the Þreced|ng Chapters (ArtŦ 426)

@|t|e IIŦ Cwnersh|p (ArtsŦ 427Ŵ483)


Chapter 1Ŧ Cwnersh|p |n Genera| (ArtsŦ 427Ŵ439)


Acap vsŦ CA
Gk# 118114 ]DecŦ 07ţ 199S
2S1 SCkA 30

lAC1S

lellxberLo vasquez lnherlLed a parcel of land from hls parenLsţ Lhe ownershlp of whlch he
Lransferred ln favor of Cosme Þldo by execuLlng a ºueclaraLlon of Pelrshlp and ueed of AbsoluLe
SaleŦ" Þldoţ howeverţ dled and was survlved by hls wlfeŦ All of Lhelr helrs execuLed ºueclaraLlon of
Pelrshlp wlLh walver of rlghLs" for Lhe Lransfer of sald land Lo prlvaLe respondenL ue los 8eyesŦ lL
appeared howeverţ LhaL even durlng Lhe Llme LhaL Lhe land was allegedly Lransferred Lo
respondenLţ peLlLloner Acap remalned as Lhe LenanL of Lhe landŦ 8y reason of Lhe Lransferţ
respondenL now wanLed Lhe lease renLals Lo be pald Lo hlmŦ lnlLlally boLh parLles allegedly agreed
buL when respondenL demanded for Lhe paymenLţ peLlLloner regused Lo recognlze respondenL as
owner of Lhe landŦ 8espondenL was Lhus prompLed Lo flle a complalnL for recovery of possesslon of
Lhe land agalnsL peLlLlonerŦ lL wasţ howeverţ Lhe conLenLlon of peLlLloner LhaL he had no knowledge
of any sale or Lransfer of Lhe land Lo respondenLŦ 1he Lrlal courL rendered a declslon ln favor of
respondenL and recognlzed Lhe laLLer's ownershlp over Lhe landŦ When peLlLloner appealedţ CA
afflrmed Lhe assalled declslonţ rullng LhaL respondenL acqulred ownershlp over Lhe land Lhrough
Lhe documenL execuLedŦ

lSSuLť WCn respondenL had acqulred ownershlp of Lhe land Lhrough Lhe ueclaraLlon of Pelrshlp
and ueed of AbsoluLe SaleŦ

PLLuť

noŦ
ln Lhe case aL benchţ Lhe Lrlal courL was obvlously confused as Lo Lhe naLure and effecL of Lhe
ueclaraLlon of Pelrshlp and Walver of 8lghLsţ equaLlng Lhe same wlLh a conLracL (deed) of saleŦ
1hey are noL Lhe sameŦ

ln a ConLracL of Saleţ one of Lhe conLracLlng parLles obllgaLes hlmself Lo Lransfer Lhe ownershlp of
and Lo dellver a deLermlnaLe Lhlngţ and Lhe oLher parLy Lo pay a prlce cerLaln ln money or lLs
equlvalenLŦ 9

upon Lhe oLher handţ a declaraLlon of helrshlp and walver of rlghLs operaLes as a publlc lnsLrumenL
when flled wlLh Lhe 8eglsLry of ueeds whereby Lhe lnLesLaLe helrs ad[udlcaLe and dlvlde Lhe esLaLe
lefL by Lhe decedenL among Lhemselves as Lhey see flLŦ lL ls ln effecL an exLra[udlclal seLLlemenL
beLween Lhe helrs under 8ule 74 of Lhe 8ules of CourLŦ 10

Penceţ Lhere ls a marked dlfference beLween a sale of heredlLary rlghLs and a walver of heredlLary
rlghLsŦ 1he flrsL presumes Lhe exlsLence of a conLracL or deed of sale beLween Lhe parLlesŦ 11 1he
second lsţ Lechnlcally speaklngţ a mode of exLlncLlon of ownershlp where Lhere ls an abdlcaLlon or
lnLenLlonal rellnqulshmenL of a known rlghL wlLh knowledge of lLs exlsLence and lnLenLlon Lo
rellnqulsh lLţ ln favor of oLher persons who are coŴhelrs ln Lhe successlonŦ 12 ÞrlvaLe respondenLţ
belng Lhen a sLranger Lo Lhe successlon of Cosme Þldoţ cannoL concluslvely clalm ownershlp over
Lhe sub[ecL loL on Lhe sole basls of Lhe walver documenL whlch nelLher reclLes Lhe elemenLs of
elLher a saleţ 13 or a donaLlonţ 14 or any oLher derlvaLlve mode of acqulrlng ownershlpŦ

lL ls even erroneous Lo sLaLe LhaL a sale had Lransplred beLween Lhe helrs of Þldo and respondenL
by vlrLue of sald ºdeclaraLlon"Ŧ
Cn recordţ LxhlblL ƍuƍţ whlch ls Lhe ƍueclaraLlon of Pelrshlp and Walver of 8lghLsƍ was excluded by
Lhe Lrlal courL ln lLs order daLed 27 AugusL 1990 because Lhe documenL was nelLher reglsLered wlLh
Lhe 8eglsLry of ueeds nor ldenLlfled by Lhe helrs of Cosme ÞldoŦ 1here ls no showlng LhaL prlvaLe
respondenL had Lhe same documenL aLLached Lo or made parL of Lhe recordŦ WhaL Lhe Lrlal courL
admlLLed was Annex ƍLƍţ a noLlce of adverse clalm flled wlLh Lhe 8eglsLry of ueeds whlch conLalned
Lhe ueclaraLlon of Pelrshlp wlLh Walver of rlghLs and was annoLaLed aL Lhe back of Lhe Crlglnal
CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle Lo Lhe land ln quesLlonŦ

A noLlce of adverse clalmţ by lLs naLureţ does noL however prove prlvaLe respondenLƌs ownershlp
over Lhe LenanLed loLŦ ƍA noLlce of adverse clalm ls noLhlng buL a noLlce of a clalm adverse Lo Lhe
reglsLered ownerţ Lhe valldlLy of whlch ls yeL Lo be esLabllshed ln courL aL some fuLure daLeţ and ls
no beLLer Lhan a noLlce of lls pendens whlch ls a noLlce of a case already pendlng ln courLŦƍ 13

lL ls Lo be noLed LhaL whlle Lhe exlsLence of sald adverse clalm was duly provenţ Lhere ls no
evldence whaLsoever LhaL a deed of sale was execuLed beLween Cosme Þldoƌs helrs and prlvaLe
respondenL Lransferrlng Lhe rlghLs of Þldoƌs helrs Lo Lhe land ln favor of prlvaLe respondenLŦ ÞrlvaLe
respondenLƌs rlghL or lnLeresL Lherefore ln Lhe LenanLed loL remalns an adverse clalm whlch cannoL
by lLself be sufflclenL Lo cancel Lhe CC1 Lo Lhe land and LlLle Lhe same ln prlvaLe respondenLƌs nameŦ

Catho||c 8|shop of 8a|anga vsŦ CA
Gk# 112S19] NovŦ 14ţ 1996
264 SCkA 181

lAC1S
A confllcL arose wlLh respecL Lo ownershlp of LoL 1272 locaLed somewhere ln 8alangaţ 8aLaanŦ Sald
loL was allegedly ceded Lhru donaLlon by Lhe Lhe Lhen parlsh prlesL of CaLhollc Archblshop of
Manllaţ prlor LhereLo or on AugusL 23ţ 1936ţ ln favor of Lhe predecessor of prlvaLe respondenLŦ Sald
predecessorţ before her deaLhţ was able Lo glve sald loL Lo prlvaLe respondenLţ also Lhrough a deed
of donaLlonŦ 1he deed was howeverţ refused Lo be reglsLeredţ for unknown reasonsţ by Lhe
8eglsLered of ueedsŦ uesplLe Lhlsţ howeverţ Lhe laLLerţ when hls predecessor dled ln 1943 wlLhouL
an lssuţ had allegedly been ln open and conLlnuous possesslon of sald loLţ bullL a house Lhereon and

declared lL for Lax purposes unLll hls ownershlp was dlsLurbed on november 3ţ 1983 or more Lhan
49 years afLer sald donaLlonţ by peLlLloner (who obLalned lL from 8oman CaLhollc 8lshop of
8alangaţ and Lhe laLLer from 8oman CaLhollc 8lshop of Manlla) when peLlLloner flled a complalnL
agalnsL prlvaLe respondenLŦ ln lLs complalnLţ peLlLloner alleged LhaL durlng Lhe !apanese
occupaLlonţ wlLhouL lLs knowledge and prlor consenLţ prlvaLe respondenL enLered and occupled Lhe
sub[ecL properLyŤ LhaL desplLe requesLs by peLlLlonerţ prlvaLe respondenL refused Lo vacaLe Lhe
properLy ln quesLlonŦ
ÞrlvaLe respondenL flled a moLlon Lo dlsmlss Lhe case on Lhe ground LhaL Lhe acLlon has been
barred by prescrlpLlon for havlng been flled afLer more Lhan 49 years afLer Lhe donaLlonŦ ÞeLlLloner
flled an opposlLlon LhereLo alleglng LhaL Lhe defense of prescrlpLlon was noL ralsed ln a Llmely flled
moLlon Lo dlsmlssţ and as an afflrmaLlve defense ln Lhe answerŦ

1he Lrlal courL ruled ln favor of peLlLlonerŦ Cn appealţ Lhe CA sLaLed LhaL prlvaLe respondenL could
noL have acqulred ownershlp over Lhe sub[ecL properLy Lhrough acqulslLlve prescrlpLlon because
Lhe same havlng been duly reglsLered under Lhe 1orrens sysLemţ LlLle LhereLo was lndefeaslbleŦ

noneLhelessţ respondenL CourL of Appeals ulLlmaLely ruled LhaL under Lhe docLrlne of lachesţ Lhe
consequence of peLlLlonerƌs lnacLlon for 49 years slnce Lhe execuLlon of Lhe deed of donaLlonţ
desplLe lLs apparenLly undenlable knowledge of prlvaLe respondenLƌs adverseţ peaceful and
conLlnuous possesslon of Lhe sub[ecL properLy ln Lhe concepL of an owner from 1936 Lo Lhe
lnsLlLuLlon of Lhe recovery sulL ln 1983ţ ls LhaL lL has losL lLs rlghLs Lo Lhe sub[ecL properLy and can
no longer recover Lhe same due Lo lLs own lnexcusable negllgence and grave lack of vlgllance ln
proLecLlng lLs rlghLs over a Lremendously long perlod of LlmeŦ

lSSuLť WCn Lhe ownershlp of Lhe sald loL by prlvaLe respondenL whlch ls premlsed on a duly
accepLed donaLlonţ alLhough unreglsLered prevall over Lhe LlLled ownershlp of peLlLlonerŦ

PLLuť ?esŦ
A [usLţ falr and compleLe resoluLlon of Lhe presenL case necesslLaLes Lhe conslderaLlon and Lhe
appllcaLlon of Lhe docLrlne of laches whlch ls noL Lhe same as buL ls undoubLedly closely relaLed Loţ
Lhe lssue of prescrlpLlon whlch was properly ralsed by prlvaLe respondenL before Lhe respondenL
CourL of AppealsŦ
Laches means Lhe fallure or neglecL for an unreasonable and unexplalned lengLh of Llmeţ Lo do LhaL
whlchţ by exerclslng due dlllgenceţ could or should have been done earllerŤ lL ls negllgence or
omlsslon Lo asserL a rlghL wlLhln a reasonable Llmeţ warranLlng Lhe presumpLlon LhaL Lhe parLy
enLlLled Lo asserL lL elLher has abandoned or decllned Lo asserL lLŦ lL has also been deflned as such
neglecL or omlsslon Lo asserL a rlghL Laken ln con[uncLlon wlLh Lhe lapse of Llme and oLher
clrcumsLances causlng pre[udlce Lo an adverse parLyţ as wlll operaLe as a bar ln equlLyŦ

1he prlnclple of laches ls a creaLlon of equlLy whlchţ as suchţ ls applled noL really Lo penallze neglecL
or sleeplng upon oneƌs rlghLţ buL raLher Lo avold recognlzlng a rlghL when Lo do so would resulL ln a
clearly lnequlLable slLuaLlonŦ As an equlLable defenseţ laches does noL concern lLself wlLh Lhe
characLer of Lhe defendanLƌs LlLleţ buL only wlLh wheLher or noL by reason of Lhe plalnLlffƌs long ln
acLlon or lnexcusable neglecLţ he should be barred from asserLlng Lhls clalm aL allţ because Lo allow
hlm Lo do so would be lnequlLable and un[usL Lo Lhe defendanLŦ

1he followlng are Lhe essenLlal elemenLs of lachesť

(1) ConducL on Lhe parL of Lhe defendanLţ or of one under whom he clalmsţ glvlng rlse Lo
Lhe slLuaLlon complalned ofŤ
(2) uelay ln asserLlng complalnanLƌs rlghL afLer he had knowledge of Lhe defendanLƌs
conducL and afLer he has an opporLunlLy Lo sueŤ
(3) Lack of knowledge or noLlce on Lhe parL of Lhe defendanL LhaL Lhe complalnanL would
asserL Lhe rlghL on whlch he bases hls sulLŤ and
(4) ln[ury or pre[udlce Lo Lhe defendanL ln Lhe evenL rellef ls accorded Lo Lhe complalnanLŦ

under Lhe presenL clrcumsLancesţ all of Lhe aforegolng elemenLs are aLLendanL ln Lhls caseŦ
Cn or some Llme before AugusL 23ţ 1936ţ 8evŦ lrŦ Marlano Sarlllţ Lhe parlsh prlesL and
admlnlsLraLor of Lhe church properLy ln Lhe MunlclpallLy of 8alangaţ 8aLaanţ execuLed a deed of
donaLlon over a 263Ŵsquare meLer church loL ln favor of Ana de los 8eyes and her helrs ln
recognlLlon of her long and saLlsfacLory servlce Lo Lhe church of 8alangaţ 8aLaanŦ lor some reason
or anoLherţ Lhe sald deed was refused reglsLraLlon by Lhe 8eglsLer of ueedsŦ Poweverţ she accepLed
Lhe donaLlonţ lndlcaLed such accepLance ln Lhe sald deedţ occupled Lhe donaLed properLyţ and
exerclsed acLs of ownershlp LhereuponŦ

ln 1943ţ Lhe doneeţ Ana de los 8eyesţ dled wlLhouL lssueŦ She hadţ howeverţ glven Lhe sub[ecL
properLy Lo her nephew who ls Lhe prlvaLe respondenL ln Lhe lnsLanL caseŦ upon accepLance of Lhe
glfLţ prlvaLe respondenL lmmedlaLely Look possesslon of Lhe sub[ecL properLy ln Lhe concepL of
ownerţ bullL hls house Lhereonţ and LhenceforLh pald land Laxes Lherefor afLer declarlng Lhe sub[ecL
properLy for LhaL purposeŦ

1he acL of peLlLlonerŴdefendanL LhaL culmlnaLed ln Lhe flllng of Lhe presenL acLlon ls Lhus clearly hls
occupaLlon slnce 1943 of Lhe sub[ecL properLy ln Lhe concepL of owner ln conLlnuaLlon of Lhe
occupaLlon of Lhe same naLure regardlng Lhe same properLy by Lhe donee Ana de los 8eyes sLarLlng
ln 1936Ŧ undoubLedlyţ Lhe flrsL elemenL of laches exlsLsŦ

1he second elemenL also exlsLs ln Lhls caseŦ 1he second elemenL ls LhreeŴLleredť (a) knowledge of
defendanLƌs acLlonŤ (b) opporLunlLy Lo sue defendanL afLer obLalnlng such knowledgeŤ and (c) delay
ln Lhe flllng of such sulLŦ ÞeLlLlonerţ ln hls complalnL flled ln Lhe Lrlal courLţ alleged LhaL wlLhouL lLs
consenLţ prlvaLe respondenL enLered and occupled Lhe sub[ecL properLy durlng Lhe Second World
WarŦ 8y lLs own admlsslonţ Lhereforeţ peLlLloner was clearly aware of prlvaLe respondenLƌs
possesslon of Lhe sub[ecL properLy ln Lhe concepL of ownerŦ ÞeLlLloner dld noL also rebuL Lhe
LesLlmony of lLs own auLhorlzed represenLaLlve and sole wlLnessţ one Crlspulo 1orrlcoţ LhaL Lhe
sub[ecL properLy was so proxlmaLely locaLed Lo Lhe resL of peLlLlonerƌs church properLy as Lo
foreclose asserLlon of lgnorance of prlvaLe respondenLƌs possesslon of Lhe sub[ecL properLyţ on Lhe
parL of peLlLlonerŦ

lrom LhaL Llme durlng Lhe Second World War Lo 1983 when peLlLloner acLually commenced sulL
agalnsL prlvaLe respondenLţ Lhere was doubLlessly all Lhe opporLunlLy Lo flle Lhe approprlaLe acLlon
Lo have Lhe donaLlon of Lhe sub[ecL properLy Lo Ana de los 8eyes and her helrsţ declared null and
vold and Lo demand reconveyance of sald properLy from lLs presenL occupanLsŦ

noLwlLhsLandlng such opporLunlLy avallable Lo peLlLlonerţ howeverţ forLy (40) years had Lo flrsL
pass by for peLlLloner Lo flnally lnsLlLuLe Lhe approprlaLe courL proceedlngsŦ As suchţ Lhe second

elemenL of knowledgeţ opporLunlLy Lo flle sulLţ and delay ln flllng such sulLţ ls undoubLedly presenL
ln Lhe lnsLanL conLroversyŦ

1he Lhlrd elemenL of laches ls llkewlse presenLŦ 1here ls noLhlng on Lhe record LhaL lmpresses us as
clear evldence of aL leasL an lnkllng on Lhe parL of prlvaLe respondenL as Lo peLlLlonerƌs serlous
lnLenLlon Lo revoke Lhe donaLed properLyŦ 1here was nelLher a demand leLLer nor poslLlve
LesLlmony of any person who acLually lnformed prlvaLe respondenL of peLlLlonerƌs lnLenLlonsŦ ln
oLher wordsţ prlvaLe respondenL manlfesLly had every reason Lo belleve LhaLţ wlLh Lhe passlng of
almosL half a cenLury slnce hls predecessorŴlnŴlnLeresL accepLed Lhe donaLed properLy and wlLhouL
unamblguous lnLlmaLlon of peLlLlonerƌs nonŴrecognlLlon of such donaLlonţ he was secure ln hls
possesslon of Lhe sub[ecL properLy ln Lhe concepL of ownerŦ

ln Lhe llghL of all Lhe aboveţ lL goes wlLhouL saylng LhaL prlvaLe respondenL wlll suffer lrreparable
ln[ury under Lhe mosL unfalr clrcumsLancesţ were we Lo dlsregard peLlLlonerƌs lnacLlon for more
Lhan forLy (40) years ln asserLlng lLs rlghLsŦ

ln Lhls caseţ peLlLloner flled lLs complalnL ln courL only afLer forLy nlne (49) years had lapsed slnce
Lhe donaLlon ln lLs behalf of Lhe sub[ecL properLy Lo prlvaLe respondenLƌs predecessorŴlnŴlnLeresLŦ
1here ls nary an explanaLlon for Lhe long delay ln Lhe flllng by peLlLloner of Lhe complalnL ln Lhe
case aL benchţ and LhaL lnacLlon for an unreasonable and unexplalned lengLh of Llme consLlLuLes
lachesŦ As suchţ peLlLloner cannoL clalm nulllLy of Lhe donaLlon as an excuse Lo avold Lhe
consequences of lLs own un[usLlfled lnacLlon and as a basls for Lhe asserLlon of a rlghL on whlch
Lhey had slepL for so longŦ 30 CourLs cannoL look wlLh favor aL parLles whoţ by Lhelr sllenceţ delay
and lnacLlonţ knowlngly lnduce anoLher Lo spend Llmeţ efforLţ and expense ln culLlvaLlng Lhe landţ
paylng Laxes and maklng lmprovemenLs Lhereon for an unreasonable perlod only Lo sprlng an
ambush and clalm LlLle when Lhe possessorƌs efforLs and Lhe rlse of land values offer an opporLunlLy
Lo make easy proflL aL Lhelr own expenseŦ 31 Conslderable delay ln asserLlng oneƌs rlghL before a
courL of [usLlce ls sLrongly persuaslve of Lhe lack of merlL of hls clalmţ slnce lL ls human naLure for a
person Lo enforce hls rlghL when same ls LhreaLened or lnvadedŤ Lhusţ lL can also be sald LhaL
peLlLloner ls esLopped by laches from quesLlonlng prlvaLe respondenLƌs ownershlp of Lhe sub[ecL
properLyŦ 32 AL any raLeţ peLlLlonerƌs rlghL Lo recover Lhe possesslon of Lhe sub[ecL properLy from
prlvaLe respondenL hasţ by Lhe laLLerƌs long perlod of possesslon and by peLlLlonerƌs lnacLlon and
neglecLţ been converLed lnLo a sLale demandŦ Such passlvlLy ln Lhe face of whaL mlghL have glven
rlse Lo an acLlon ln courL ls vlslLed wlLh Lhe loss of such rlghLţ and lgnorance resulLlng from
lnexcusable negllgence does noL sufflce Lo explaln such fallure Lo flle seasonably Lhe necessary sulLŦ

Chapter 2Ŧ k|ght of Access|onŦ (ArtŦ 440Ŵ47S)

Þecson vsŦ CA
Gk# 11S814] May 26ţ 199S
244 SCkA 407

lAC1S

ÞeLlLloner was Lhe reglsLered owner of a commerclal loL wlLh an aparLmenL bulldlngŦ lor fallure Lo
pay Lhe realLy Laxes Lhereonţ Lhe loL was sold aL a publlc aucLlon Lo nepumoceno who ln Lurn sold lL
Lo spouses naguldŦ ÞeLlLloner challenged Lhe valldlLy of Lhe sale and alleged LhaL Lhe sale dld noL
lnclude Lhe bulldlngŦ 1he 81C rendered a declslon ln favor of prlvaLe respondenL buL ruled LhaL
Lhere ls no legal basls Lo conclude LhaL Lhe sale lncluded Lhe bulldlngŦ When Lhe case was appealedţ
Lhe CA afflrmed Lhe 81C's declslon and also agreed wlLh Lhe 81C LhaL Lhe sale of Lhe loL dld noL
lnclude Lhe bulldlngŦ ln Lhe meanLlmeţ Lhe spouses naguld flled a moLlon for dellvery of possesslon
of Lhe loL and Lhe aparLmenL bulldlngţ clLlng arLlcle 346 of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ ln Lhelr complalnLţ Lhey
admlLLed LhaL Lhe bulldlng was under lease by some LenanLsŦ 1hey furLher agreed Lo comply wlLh
Lhe rules on relmbursemenL of Lhe value of Lhe bulldlng for accordlng Lo Lhemţ peLlLloner was a
bullder ln good falLhŦ 1he Lrlal courL rendered Lhe assalled declslon orderlng Lhe spousesţ among
oLhersţ Lo relmburse Lhe peLlLloner wlLh Lhe value of Lhe bulldlngŤ Lo offseL Lhe renLal paymenLs
prevlously collecLed by peLlLloner from Lhe LenanLs of Lhe loLţ from Lhe value of Lhe bulldlng whlch
wlll be relmbursed by Lhe spouses Lo peLlLlonerŦ ÞeLlLloner flled a speclal clvll acLlon for cerLlorarlŦ

lSSuLť WCn peLlLloner has a rlghL Lo be relmbursed for Lhe value of Lhe bulldlng and Lhe
lmprovemenLs LhereonŦ

PLLuť ?es
8y lLs clear languageţ ArLlcle 448 refers Lo a land whose ownershlp ls clalmed by Lwo or more
parLlesţ one of whom has bullL some worksţ or sown or planLed someLhlngŦ 1he bulldlngţ sowlng or
planLlng may have been made ln good falLh or ln bad falLhŦ 1he rule on good falLh lald down ln
ArLlcle 326 of Lhe Clvll Code shall be applled ln deLermlnlng wheLher a bullderţ sower or planLer had
acLed ln good falLhŦ

ArLlcle 448 does noL apply Lo a case where Lhe owner of Lhe land ls Lhe bullderţ sowerţ or planLer
who Lhen laLer loses ownershlp of Lhe land by sale or donaLlonŦ 1hls CourL sald so ln Coleongco vsŦ
8egaladoť

ArLlcle 361 of Lhe old Clvll Code ls noL appllcable ln Lhls caseţ for 8egalado consLrucLed Lhe house
on hls own land before he sold sald land Lo ColeongcoŦ ArLlcle 361 applles only ln cases where a
person consLrucLs a bulldlng on Lhe land of anoLher ln good or ln bad falLhţ as Lhe case may beŦ lL
does noL apply Lo a case where a person consLrucLs a bulldlng on hls own landţ for Lhen Lhere can
be no quesLlon as Lo good or bad falLh on Lhe parL of Lhe bullderŦ

Llsewlse sLaLedţ where Lhe Lrue owner hlmself ls Lhe bullder of works on hls own landţ Lhe lssue of
good falLh or bad falLh ls enLlrely lrrelevanLŦ

1hus ln sLrlcL polnL of lawţ ArLlcle 448 ls noL apposlLe Lo Lhe case aL barŦ neverLhelessţ we belleve
LhaL Lhe provlslon Lhereln on lndemnlLy may be applled by analogy conslderlng LhaL Lhe prlmary
lnLenL of ArLlcle 448 ls Lo avold a sLaLe of forced coŴownershlp and LhaL Lhe parLlesţ lncludlng Lhe
Lwo courLs belowţ ln Lhe maln agree LhaL ArLlcles 448 and 346 of Lhe Clvll Code are appllcable and
lndemnlLy for Lhe lmprovemenLs may be pald alLhough Lhey dlffer as Lo Lhe basls of Lhe lndemnlLyŦ

ArLlcle 346 does noL speclflcally sLaLe how Lhe value of Lhe useful lmprovemenLs should be
deLermlnedŦ 1he respondenL courL and Lhe prlvaLe respondenLs espouse Lhe bellef LhaL Lhe cosL of
consLrucLlon of Lhe aparLmenL bulldlng ln 1963ţ and noL lLs currenL markeL valueţ ls sufflclenL
relmbursemenL for necessary and useful lmprovemenLs made by Lhe peLlLlonerŦ 1hls poslLlon lsţ
howeverţ noL ln consonance wlLh prevlous rullngs of Lhls CourL ln slmllar casesŦ ln !avler vsŦ
Concepclonţ !rŦţ Lhls CourL pegged Lhe value of Lhe useful lmprovemenLs conslsLlng of varlous frulLsţ

bamboosţ a house and camarln made of sLrong maLerlal based on Lhe markeL value of Lhe sald
lmprovemenLsŦ ln SarmlenLo vsŦ Aganaţ desplLe Lhe flndlng LhaL Lhe useful lmprovemenLţ a
resldenLlal houseţ was bullL ln 1967 aL a cosL of beLween elghL Lhousand pesos (Þ8ţ000Ŧ00) Lo Len
Lhousand pesos(Þ10ţ000Ŧ00)ţ Lhe landowner was ordered Lo relmburse Lhe bullder ln Lhe amounL
of forLy Lhousand pesos (Þ40ţ000Ŧ00)ţ Lhe value of Lhe house aL Lhe Llme of Lhe LrlalŦ ln Lhe same
wayţ Lhe landowner was requlred Lo pay Lhe ƍpresenL valueƍ of Lhe houseţ a useful lmprovemenLţ
ln Lhe case of ue Cuzman vsŦ ue la luenLeţ clLed by Lhe peLlLlonerŦ

1he ob[ecLlve of ArLlcle 346 of Lhe Clvll Code ls Lo admlnlsLer [usLlce beLween Lhe parLles lnvolvedŦ
ln Lhls regardţ Lhls CourL had long ago sLaLed ln 8lvera vsŦ 8oman CaLhollc Archblshop of Manlla
LhaL Lhe sald provlslon was formulaLed ln Lrylng Lo ad[usL Lhe rlghLs of Lhe owner and possessor ln
good falLh of a plece of landţ Lo admlnlsLer compleLe [usLlce Lo boLh of Lhem ln such a way as
nelLher one nor Lhe oLher may enrlch hlmself of LhaL whlch does noL belong Lo hlmŦ Culded by Lhls
precepLţ lL ls Lherefore Lhe currenL markeL value of Lhe lmprovemenLs whlch should be made Lhe
basls of relmbursemenLŦ A conLrary rullng would un[usLly enrlch Lhe prlvaLe respondenLs who
would oLherwlse be allowed Lo acqulre a hlghly valued lncomeŴyleldlng fourŴunlL aparLmenL
bulldlng for a measly amounLŦ ConsequenLlyţ Lhe parLles should Lherefore be allowed Lo adduce
evldence on Lhe presenL markeL value of Lhe aparLmenL bulldlng upon whlch Lhe Lrlal courL should
base lLs flndlng as Lo Lhe amounL of relmbursemenL Lo be pald by Lhe landownerŦ

1he Lrlal courL also erred ln orderlng Lhe peLlLloner Lo pay monLhly renLals equal Lo Lhe aggregaLe
renLals pald by Lhe lessees of Lhe aparLmenL bulldlngŦ Slnce Lhe prlvaLe respondenLs have opLed Lo
approprlaLe Lhe aparLmenL bulldlngţ Lhe peLlLloner ls Lhus enLlLled Lo Lhe possesslon and en[oymenL
of Lhe aparLmenL bulldlngţ unLll he ls pald Lhe proper lndemnlLyţ as well as of Lhe porLlon of Lhe loL
where Lhe bulldlng has been consLrucLedŦ 1hls ls so because Lhe rlghL Lo reLaln Lhe lmprovemenLs
whlle Lhe correspondlng lndemnlLy ls noL pald lmplles Lhe Lenancy or possesslon ln facL of Lhe land
on whlch lL ls bullLţ planLed or sownŦ 18 1he peLlLloner noL havlng been so paldţ he was enLlLled Lo
reLaln ownershlp of Lhe bulldlng andţ necessarllyţ Lhe lncome LherefromŦ

lL followsţ Looţ LhaL Lhe CourL of Appeals erred noL only ln upholdlng Lhe Lrlal courLƌs deLermlnaLlon
of Lhe lndemnlLyţ buL also ln orderlng Lhe peLlLloner Lo accounL for Lhe renLals of Lhe aparLmenL
bulldlng from 23 !une 1993 Lo 23 SepLember 1993Ŧ


Narvaez vŦ A|c|so
Gk# 16S907 ]Iu|y 27ţ 2009
S94 SCkA 60

lAC1S
8espondenL owns a parcel of land slLuaLed ln 8engueL whlch she allegedly sold wlLh rlghL Lo
repurchaseţ flrsLţ Lo Sansano ln 1979ţ whlch he laLer repurchasedŤ and secondţ Lo 8aeL ln 1980Ŧ
8aeL ln Lurn sold Lhe land Lo spouses narvaez ln 1981Ŧ As per demand of respondenLţ howeverţ Lhe
deed of sale beLween 8aeL and narvaez conLalned a sLlpulaLlon whlch allows respondenL Lo
repurchase sald land from spouses narvaezŦ 1he Spouses narvaez furnlshed respondenL wlLh a
copy of Lhe ueedŦ Corollary Lo Lhe sald saleţ spouses narvaez bullL a commerclal bulldlng on Lhe
sald landŦ When respondenL was abouL Lo exerclse lLs rlghL Lo repurchaseţ she and Lhe spouses
narvaez dld noL agree wlLh Lhe selllng prlce prompLlng respondenL Lo flle a complalnL praylng for
Lhe cancellaLlon of Lhe 1979ţ 1980 and 1981 sale alleglng LhaL her Lrue lnLenLlon was Lo morLgage
Lhe land and noL Lo sell lL and also praylng LhaL spouses narvaez should reconvey Lhe land Lo herŦ
1he courL rendered a declslon declarlng LhaL Lhe repurchase ln Lhe 1979 sale becomes funcLus
offlclo when she repurchased Lhe properLyŤ Lhe acLlon Lo annul Lhe 1980 sale had prescrlbedŤ and
LhaL she had no legal personallLy Lo annul Lhe 1981 sale buL she could repurchase Lhe land and
approprlaLe Lhe commerclal bulldlng afLer paymenL of Lhe lndemnlLy equlvalenL Lo oneŴhalf of lLs
markeL value or sell Lhe land Lo spouses narvaezŦ 1he spouses appealedŦ 1he CA rendered a
declslon applylng ArLŦ 448 of Lhe Clvll Code Lo Lhe exLenL of declarlng LhaL Lhe Spouses narvaez
were bullders ln good falLh and LhaL respondenL could elLher approprlaLe Lhe commerclal bulldlng
afLer paymenL of Lhe lndemnlLy or obllge Lhe Spouses narvaez Lo pay Lhe prlce of Lhe landţ unless
Lhe prlce was conslderably more Lhan LhaL of Lhe bulldlngŦ


lSSuLť WCn ArLŦ 448 of Lhe Clvll Code ls appllcable ln Lhls case such LhaL respondenL could elLher
approprlaLe Lhe commerclal bulldlng afLer paymenL of Lhe lndemnlLy or obllge Lhe Spouses narvaez
Lo pay Lhe prlce of Lhe landţ unless Lhe prlce was conslderably more Lhan LhaL of Lhe bulldlngŦ

PLLuť noŦ

ArLlcle 448 ls lnappllcable ln cases lnvolvlng conLracLs of sale wlLh rlghL of repurchase Ÿ lL ls
lnappllcable when Lhe owner of Lhe land ls Lhe bullderţ sowerţ or planLerŦ ln Þecson vŦ CourL of
Appealsţ26 Lhe CourL held LhaLť

ArLlcle 448 does noL apply Lo a case where Lhe owner of Lhe land ls Lhe bullderţ sowerţ or planLer
who Lhen laLer loses ownershlp of Lhe land by sale or donaLlonŦ

ArLlcle 448 ls lnappllcable ln Lhe presenL case because Lhe Spouses narvaez bullL Lhe commerclal
bulldlng on Lhe land LhaL Lhey ownŦ 8esldesţ Lo compel Lhem Lo buy Lhe landţ whlch Lhey ownţ
would be absurdŦ

ln a sale wlLh rlghL of repurchaseţ Lhe appllcable provlslons are ArLlcles 1606 and 1616 of Lhe Clvll
Codeţ noL ArLlcle 448Ŧ ArLlcles 1606 and 1616 sLaLeť

ArLŦ 1606Ŧ 1he rlghL referred Lo ln ArLlcle 1601ţ ln Lhe absence of an express agreemenLţ shall lasL
four years from Lhe daLe of Lhe conLracLŦlawph!l

Should Lhere be an agreemenLţ Lhe perlod cannoL exceed Len yearsŦ

Poweverţ Lhe vendor may sLlll exerclse Lhe rlghL Lo repurchase wlLhln LhlrLy days from Lhe Llme
flnal [udgmenL was rendered ln a clvll acLlon on Lhe basls LhaL Lhe conLracL was a Lrue sale wlLh
rlghL Lo repurchaseŦ

ArLŦ 1616Ŧ 1he vendor cannoL avall hlmself of Lhe rlghL of repurchase wlLhouL reLurnlng Lo Lhe
vendee Lhe prlce of Lhe saleţ and ln addlLlonť

(1) 1he expenses of Lhe conLracLţ and any oLher leglLlmaLe paymenLs made by reason of Lhe saleŤ

(2) 1he necessary and useful expenses made on Lhe Lhlng soldŦ

under ArLlcle 1616ţ Alclso may exerclse her rlghL of redempLlon by paylng Lhe Spouses narvaez (1)
Lhe prlce of Lhe saleţ (2) Lhe expenses of Lhe conLracLţ (3) leglLlmaLe paymenLs made by reason of
Lhe saleţ and (4) Lhe necessary and useful expenses made on Lhe Lhlng soldŦ ln Lhe presenL caseţ Lhe
cosL of Lhe bulldlng consLlLuLes a useful expenseŦ useful expenses lnclude lmprovemenLs whlch
augmenL Lhe value of Lhe landŦ28

under Lhe flrsL paragraph of ArLlcle 1606ţ Alclso had four years from 1981 Lo repurchase Lhe
properLy slnce Lhere was no express agreemenL as Lo Lhe perlod when Lhe rlghL can be exerclsedŦ
1ender of paymenL of Lhe repurchase prlce ls necessary ln Lhe exerclse of Lhe rlghL of redempLlonŦ
1ender of paymenL ls Lhe seller's manlfesLaLlon of hls or her deslre Lo repurchase Lhe properLy wlLh
Lhe offer of lmmedlaLe performanceŦ

WPL8LlC8Lţ Lhe CourL uLnlLS Lhe peLlLlonŦ 1he CourL Alll8MS Lhe ueclslon of Lhe CourL of
Appeals ln wlLh MCulllCA1lCnŦ 8espondenL 8ose CŦ Alclso may exerclse her rlghL of redempLlon
by paylng Lhe peLlLloners Spouses uomlnador 8Ŧ narvaez and Lllla WŦ narvaez (1) Lhe prlce of Lhe
saleţ (2) Lhe expenses of Lhe conLracLţ (3) leglLlmaLe paymenLs made by reason of Lhe saleţ and (4)
Lhe necessary and useful expenses made on Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ 1he CourL ul8LC1S Lhe 8eglonal
1rlal CourLţ !udlclal 8eglon 1ţ 8ranch 8ţ La 1rlnldadţ 8engueLţ Lo deLermlne Lhe amounLs of Lhe
expenses of Lhe conLracLţ Lhe leglLlmaLe expenses made by reason of Lhe saleţ and Lhe necessary
and useful expenses made on Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ


Cheng vŦ Don|n|
Gk# 167017] Iune 22ţ 2009
S90 SCkA 406

lAC1Sť 1here was an oral lease agreemenL beLween Cheng and SpsŦ uonlnl on Lhe former's
properLy ln Mandaluyong ClLyŦ 8espondenLs uonlnlţ puL up a resLauranL ln Lhe leased properLy and
agreed Lo pay a monLhly renLal of Þ17ţ 000 from uecember 1990Ŧ LaLer onţ respondenLs proceeded
Lo lnLroduce lmprovemenLs ln Lhe premlsesŦ Poweverţ before respondenLs' buslness could Lake off
and before any flnal lease agreemenL could be drafLed and slgnedţ Lhe parLles began Lo have
serlous dlsagreemenLs regardlng lLs Lerms and condlLlonsŦ ÞeLlLloner Cheng Lhus wroLe
respondenLs on !anuary 28ţ 1991ţ demandlng paymenL of Lhe deposlL and renLalsţ and slgnlfylng
LhaL he had no lnLenLlon Lo conLlnue wlLh Lhe agreemenL should respondenLs fall Lo payŦ
8espondenLsţ howeverţ lgnorlng peLlLloner's demandţ conLlnued Lo occupy Lhe premlses unLll Aprll
17ţ 1991 when Lhelr careLaker volunLarlly surrendered Lhe properLy Lo peLlLlonerŦ

8espondenLs Lhen flled an acLlon for speclflc performance and damages before 81C Þaslg and
prayed LhaL peLlLloner be ordered Lo execuLe a wrlLLen lease conLracL for flve yearsţ deducLlng from
Lhe deposlL and renL Lhe cosL of repalrs ln Lhe amounL of Þ443ţ000ţ or Lo order peLlLloner Lo reLurn
Lhelr lnvesLmenL ln Lhe amounL of Þ964ţ000 and compensaLe for Lhelr unearned neL lncome of
Þ200ţ000 wlLh lnLeresLţ plus aLLorney's feesŦ

ÞeLlLlonerţ ln hls answerţ denled respondenLs' clalms and soughL Lhe award of moral and exemplary
damagesţ and aLLorney's feesŦ AfLer Lrlalţ Lhe 81C rendered lLs declslon ln favor of peLlLlonerŦ
8espondenLs appealed Lo Lhe CourL of Appeals (CA) whlchţ ln lLs declslon daLed March 31ţ 2004ţ
recalled and seL aslde Lhe 81C declslonţ and enLered a new one orderlng peLlLloner Lo pay
respondenLs Lhe amounL of Þ964ţ000 represenLlng Lhe laLLer's expenses lncurred for Lhe repalrs
and lmprovemenLs of Lhe premlsesŦ

ÞeLlLloner flled a moLlon for reconslderaLlon on Lhe ground LhaL Lhe award of relmbursemenL had
no facLual and legal basesţ buL Lhls was denled by Lhe CA ln lLs resoluLlon daLed lebruary 21ţ 2003Ŧ

Penceţ Lhls peLlLlon for cerLlorarl under 8ule 43 of Lhe 8ules of CourLŦ

lSSuLť WCn respondenLs are bullders or possessors ln good falLh?

PLLuť nCŦ SC held LhaL ArLlcles 448 and 346 of Lhe Clvll Code dld noL applyŦ under Lhese
provlslonsţ Lo be enLlLled Lo relmbursemenL for useful lmprovemenLs lnLroduced on Lhe properLyţ
respondenLs musL be consldered bullders ln good falLhŦ ArLlcles 448 and 346ţ whlch allow full
relmbursemenL of useful lmprovemenLs and reLenLlon of Lhe premlses unLll relmbursemenL ls
madeţ apply only Lo a possessor ln good falLh or one who bullds on land ln Lhe bellef LhaL he ls Lhe
owner LhereofŦ A bullder ln good falLh ls one who ls unaware of any flaw ln hls LlLle Lo Lhe land aL
Lhe Llme he bullds on lLŦ

Perelnţ respondenLs cannoL be consldered possessors or bullders ln good falLhŦ As early as 1936ţ ln
Lopez vŦ Þhlllpplne Ǝ LasLern 1radlng CoŦţ lncŦţ Lhe CourL clarlfled LhaL a lessee ls nelLher a bullder
nor a possessor ln good falLh Ŷ x x x 1hls prlnclple of possessor ln good falLh naLurally cannoL apply
Lo a lessee because as such lessee he knows LhaL he ls noL Lhe owner of Lhe leased properLyŦ
nelLher can he deny Lhe ownershlp or LlLle of hls lessorŦ knowlng LhaL hls occupaLlon of Lhe
premlses conLlnues only durlng Lhe llfe of Lhe lease conLracL and LhaL he musL vacaLe Lhe properLy
upon LermlnaLlon of Lhe lease or upon Lhe vlolaLlon by hlm of any of lLs Lermsţ he lnLroduces
lmprovemenLs on sald properLy aL hls own rlsk ln Lhe sense LhaL he cannoL recover Lhelr value from
Lhe lessorţ much less reLaln Lhe premlses unLll such relmbursemenLŦ

8elng mere lesseesţ respondenLs knew LhaL Lhelr rlghL Lo occupy Lhe premlses exlsLed only for Lhe
duraLlon of Lhe leaseŦ CorLez vŦ Manlmbo wenL furLher Lo sLaLe LhaLť lf Lhe rule were oLherwlseţ 'lL
would always be ln Lhe power of Lhe LenanL Lo lmprove hls landlord ouL of hls properLyŦ 1hese
prlnclples have been conslsLenLly adhered Lo and applled by Lhe CourL ln many casesŦ

lL appearsţ howeverţ LhaL as soon as respondenLs vacaLed Lhe premlsesţ peLlLloner lmmedlaLely
reclalmed Lhe properLy and barred respondenLs from enLerlng lLŦ 8espondenLs also allegedţ and
peLlLloner dld noL denyţ LhaL Lhe properLy sub[ecL of Lhls case had already been leased Lo anoLher
enLlLy slnce 1991Ŧ 1hls ls where conslderaLlons of equlLy should come lnLo playŦ lL ls obvlously no
longer feaslble for respondenLs Lo remove Lhe lmprovemenLs from Lhe properLyţ lf Lhey sLlll exlsLŦ
ÞeLlLloner shouldţ Lhereforeţ lndemnlfy respondenLs Lhe amounL of Þ171ţ630Ŧ93Ŧ 1hls ls ln accord
wlLh Lhe law's lnLenL of prevenLlng un[usL enrlchmenL of a lessor who now has Lo pay oneŴhalf of
Lhe value of Lhe useful lmprovemenLs aL Lhe end of Lhe lease because Lhe lessee has already
en[oyed Lhe sameţ whereas Lhe lessor can en[oy Lhem lndeflnlLely LhereafLerŦ


@uat|s vŦ Lsco|

Gk# 17S399 ]CctŦ 27ţ 2009
604 SCkA 471

lAC1Sť ln november 1989ţ vlsmlnda (seller) and 1uaLls (buyer)ţ enLered lnLo a ueed of Sale of a
ÞarL of a 8eglsLered Land by lnsLallmenL (ueed of Sale by lnsLallmenL) locaLed ln Þoblaclonţ
Slndanganţ Zamboanga del norLeŦ 1uaLls clalmed LhaL she had pald by lnsLallmenL Lhe agreed prlce
of 10ţ000 pesos buL vlsmlnda counLered LhaL 1uaLls made no oLher paymenL Lo her buL 4ţ000 pesos
onlyţ desplLe verbal demandsŦ

ln Lhe meanLlmeţ 1uaLls already Look possesslon of Lhe sub[ecL properLy and consLrucLed a
resldenLlal bulldlng LhereonŦ

Cn 18 !une 1996ţ 1uaLls flled a ComplalnL for Speclflc Þerformance wlLh uamages agalnsL vlsmlnda
before Lhe 81CŦ 1henţ 1uaLls requesLed vlsmlnda Lo slgn a prepared absoluLe deed of sale coverlng
Lhe sub[ecL properLyţ buL Lhe laLLer refusedţ conLendlng LhaL Lhe purchase prlce had noL yeL been
fully paldŦ 81C rendered a ueclslon ln vlsmlnda's favorŦ When lL was appealed Lo CAţ lL dlsmlssed
ouLrlghL 1uaLls' ÞeLlLlon for fallure Lo compleLely pay Lhe requlred dockeL feesţ Lo aLLach a cerLlfled
Lrue or auLhenLlcaLed copy of Lhe assalled 81C Crder and Lo lndlcaLe Lhe place of lssue of her
counsel's l8Þ and Þ18 Cfflclal 8ecelpLsŦ Penceţ 1uaLls flled Lhe lnsLanL ÞeLlLlonţ prlnclpally argulng
LhaL ArLlcle 448 of Lhe Clvll Code musL be applled Lo Lhe slLuaLlon beLween her and vlsmlndaŦ

lSSuLť WCn ArLlcle 448 of Lhe Clvll Code shall apply?

PLLuť ?LSŦ A81Ŧ 448Ŧ 1he owner of Lhe land on whlch anyLhlng has been bullLţ sown or planLed ln
good falLhţ shall have Lhe rlghL Lo approprlaLe as hls own Lhe worksţ sowlng or planLlngţ afLer
paymenL of Lhe lndemnlLy provlded for ln ArLlcles 346 and 348ţ or Lo obllge Lhe one who bullL or
planLed Lo pay Lhe prlce of Lhe landţ and Lhe one who sowedţ Lhe proper renLŦ Poweverţ Lhe bullder
or planLer cannoL be obllged Lo buy Lhe land lf lLs value ls conslderably more Lhan LhaL of Lhe
bulldlng or LreesŦ ln such caseţ he shall pay reasonable renLţ lf Lhe owner of Lhe land does noL
choose Lo approprlaLe Lhe bulldlng or Lrees afLer proper lndemnlLyŦ 1he parLles shall agree upon
Lhe Lerms of Lhe lease and ln case of dlsagreemenLţ Lhe courL shall flx Lhe Lerms LhereofŦ

Accordlng Lo Lhe aforequoLed provlslonţ Lhe landowner can choose beLween approprlaLlng Lhe
bulldlng by paylng Lhe proper lndemnlLy for Lhe sameţ as provlded for ln ArLlcles 346 and 348 of Lhe
Clvll CodeŤ or obllglng Lhe bullder Lo pay Lhe prlce of Lhe landţ unless lLs value ls conslderably more
Lhan LhaL of Lhe sLrucLuresţ ln whlch case Lhe bullder ln good falLh shall pay reasonable renLŦ

1he CourL hlghllghLs LhaL Lhe opLlons under ArLlcle 448 are avallable Lo vlsmlndaţ as Lhe owner of
Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ 1here ls no basls for 1uaLls' demand LhaLţ slnce Lhe value of Lhe bulldlng she
consLrucLed ls conslderably hlgher Lhan Lhe sub[ecL properLyţ she may choose beLween buylng Lhe
sub[ecL properLy from vlsmlnda and selllng Lhe bulldlng Lo vlsmlnda for Þ302ţ073Ŧ00Ŧ Agalnţ Lhe
cholce of opLlons ls for vlsmlndaţ noL 1uaLlsţ Lo makeŦ Andţ dependlng on vlsmlnda's cholceţ 1uaLls'
rlghLs as a bullder under ArLlcle 448 are llmlLed Lo Lhe followlngť (a) under Lhe flrsL opLlonţ a rlghL Lo
reLaln Lhe bulldlng and sub[ecL properLy unLll vlsmlnda pays proper lndemnlLyŤ and (b) under Lhe
second opLlonţ a rlghL noL Lo be obllged Lo pay for Lhe prlce of Lhe sub[ecL properLyţ lf lL ls
conslderably hlgher Lhan Lhe value of Lhe bulldlngţ ln whlch caseţ she can only be obllged Lo pay
reasonable renL for Lhe sameŦ

1he rule LhaL Lhe cholce under ArLlcle 448 of Lhe Clvll Code belongs Lo Lhe owner of Lhe land ls ln
accord wlLh Lhe prlnclple of accesslonţ lŦeŦţ LhaL Lhe accessory follows Lhe prlnclpal and noL Lhe
oLher way aroundŦ Lven as Lhe opLlon lles wlLh Lhe landownerţ Lhe granL Lo hlmţ neverLhelessţ ls
precluslveŦ 1he landowner cannoL refuse Lo exerclse elLher opLlon and compel lnsLead Lhe owner of
Lhe bulldlng Lo remove lL from Lhe landŦ 1he ralson d'eLre for Lhls provlslon has been enunclaLed
Lhusť Where Lhe bullderţ planLer or sower has acLed ln good falLhţ a confllcL of rlghLs arlses
beLween Lhe ownersţ and lL becomes necessary Lo proLecL Lhe owner of Lhe lmprovemenLs wlLhouL
causlng ln[usLlce Lo Lhe owner of Lhe landŦ ln vlew of Lhe lmpracLlcablllLy of creaLlng a sLaLe of
forced coŴownershlpţ Lhe law has provlded a [usL soluLlon by glvlng Lhe owner of Lhe land Lhe
opLlon Lo acqulre Lhe lmprovemenLs afLer paymenL of Lhe proper lndemnlLyţ or Lo obllge Lhe
bullder or planLer Lo pay for Lhe land and Lhe sower Lhe proper renLŦ Pe cannoL refuse Lo exerclse
elLher opLlonŦ lL ls Lhe owner of Lhe land who ls auLhorlzed Lo exerclse Lhe opLlonţ because hls rlghL
ls olderţ and becauseţ by Lhe prlnclple of accesslonţ he ls enLlLled Lo Lhe ownershlp of Lhe accessory
LhlngŦ


Lsmaque| vsŦ Coprada
Gk # 1S2423] DecŦ 1Sţ 2010
638 SCkA 428

lAC1Sť ln 1943ţ Marla Coprada (respondenL) was able Lo persuade spouses Marcos (peLlLloners
Lsmaquel and vlcLorla) Lo allow her and her famlly Lo use and occupy a parcel of land ln Laguna for
Lhelr resldenceţ under Lhe condlLlon LhaL Lhey wlll vacaLe Lhe premlses should Lhe
owners/peLlLloners need Lo use Lhe sameŦ 8espondenL and her famlly were allowed Lo consLrucL
Lhelr resldenLlal houseŦ Slnce Lhenţ Lhe peLlLloners dld noL obllge Lhe respondenLs Lo pay renL and
never made an aLLempL Lo drlve Lhem away ouL of plLyţ knowlng LhaL respondenL and her elghL
chlldren have no oLher place Lo llve lnŦ

8espondenL's presenL clrcumsLances have compleLely lmprovedţ lŦeŦţ some of her chlldren are
already worklngŤ Lhey are regularly sendlng her flnanclal asslsLanceŤ and she has acqulred her own
resldenLlal houseţ also ln LagunaŦ 8ecause of Lhlsţ peLlLloners verbally demanded LhaL respondenL
vacaLe Lhe sub[ecL landţ buL Lhe laLLer refusedŦ

Cn lebruary 24ţ 1997ţ peLlLloners flled an e[ecLmenL case agalnsL respondenL before MC1C of
Magdalenaţ Llllw and Ma[ay[ay LagunaŦ MC1C dlsmlssed Lhe complalnL as laches had already seL lnŦ
Cn appealţ Lhe 81C reversed and ruled LhaL respondenL's occupaLlon of Lhe sub[ecL properLy was by
vlrLue of peLlLloners' Lolerance and permlsslonŦ Penceţ respondenL ls bound by an lmplled promlse
LhaL she wlll vacaLe Lhe properLy upon demandţ Lhus ordered respondenL and her famlly Lo vacaLe
and surrender Lhe possesslon of Lhe sub[ecL land Lo Lhe peLlLloners and Lo remove any and all
lmprovemenLs she lnLroduced on Lhe parcel of landŦ When broughL Lo CAţ Lhe declslon of 81C was
reversed and granLed respondenL's peLlLlonŦ Penceţ Lhls lnsLanL peLlLlonŦ

lSSuLť WCn peLlLloners have a valld ground Lo evlcL respondenL from Lhe sub[ecL properLy

PLLuť ?LSŦ Slnce respondenL's occupaLlon of Lhe sub[ecL properLy was by mere Loleranceţ she
has no rlghL Lo reLaln lLs possesslon under ArLlcle 448 of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ She ls aware LhaL her

LoleraLed possesslon may be LermlnaLed any Llme and she cannoL be consldered as bullder ln good
falLhŦ lL ls well seLLled LhaL boLh ArLlcle 448 and ArLlcle 346 of Lhe new Clvll Codeţ whlch allow full
relmbursemenL of useful lmprovemenLs and reLenLlon of Lhe premlses unLll relmbursemenL ls
madeţ apply only Lo a possessor ln good falLhţ lŦeŦţ one who bullds on land wlLh Lhe bellef LhaL he ls
Lhe owner LhereofŦ verllyţ persons whose occupaLlon of a realLy ls by sheer Lolerance of lLs owners
are noL possessors ln good falLhŦ AL Lhe Llme respondenL bullL Lhe lmprovemenLs on Lhe premlses ln
1943ţ she knew LhaL her possesslon was by mere permlsslon and Lolerance of Lhe peLlLlonersŤ
henceţ she cannoL be sald Lo be a person who bullds on land wlLh Lhe bellef LhaL she ls Lhe owner
LhereofŦ

Cn Lhe oLher handţ lL ls undlspuLed LhaL Lhe sub[ecL properLy ls covered by 1ransfer CerLlflcaLe of
1lLle noŦ 1Ŵ93342ţ reglsLered ln Lhe name of Lhe peLlLlonersŦ As agalnsL Lhe respondenL's unproven
clalm LhaL she acqulred a porLlon of Lhe properLy from Lhe peLlLloners by vlrLue of an oral saleţ Lhe
1orrens LlLle of peLlLloners musL prevallŦ ÞeLlLloners' LlLle over Lhe sub[ecL properLy ls evldence of
Lhelr ownershlp LhereofŦ lL ls a fundamenLal prlnclple ln land reglsLraLlon LhaL Lhe cerLlflcaLe of LlLle
serves as evldence of an lndefeaslble and lnconLroverLlble LlLle Lo Lhe properLy ln favor of Lhe
person whose name appears LherelnŦ Moreoverţ Lhe ageŴold rule ls LhaL Lhe person who has a
1orrens LlLle over a land ls enLlLled Lo possesslon LhereofŦ

8ened|cto vsŦ V|||af|ores
Gk# 18S020] CctŦ 6ţ 2010
632 SCkA 446

lAC1Sť Marla vlllaflores (peLlLloner) owned a loL ln 8ulacanŦ Cn AugusL 31ţ 1994ţ Marla sold Lhe
same loL Lo lllomena as evldenced by a kasulaLan ng 8lllhang 1uluyanŦ lllomena reglsLered Lhe sale
wlLh Lhe 8eglsLry of ueeds of Meycauayan on SepLember 6ţ 1994Ŧ Slnce Lhen lllomena pald Lhe real
properLy Laxes for Lhe sub[ecL parcel of landŦ

Meanwhlleţ AnLonlo (respondenL and nephew of Marla) averred LhaL ln 1980ţ Marla sold lL Lo hlm
and he evenLually Look possesslon and consLrucLed a house LhereonŤ LhaL on AugusL 13ţ 1992ţ
Marla execuLed ln favor of hlm a kasulaLan ng 8lllhang 1uluyan coverlng Lhe enLlre loLţ Lhough he
falled Lo reglsLer lLŤ and LhaL lllomena was aware of Lhls prlor saleŤ henceţ Lhe subsequenL sale ln
favor of lllomena was resclsslbleţ fraudulenLţ flcLlLlousţ or slmulaLedŦ

Cn SepLember 28ţ 2000ţ lllomena flled a case for Acclon Þubllclana wlLh CancellaLlon of noLlce of
Adverse Clalmţ uamages and ALLorney's lees agalnsL AnLonloŦ AfLer Lrlalţ Lhe 81C rendered a
declslon susLalnlng lllomena's ownershlp on Lhe ground LhaL lL was lllomena who reglsLered Lhe
sale ln good falLhŤ as suchţ she has beLLer rlghL Lhan AnLonloŦ Cn Lhelr separaLe appeals wlLh Lhe
CAţ Lhe laLLer afflrmed Lhe 81C for upholdlng lllomena's ownershlp of Lhe loL ln quesLlon and for
declarlng AnLonlo a bullder ln good falLhŦ Poweverţ lL remanded Lhe case Lo Lhe 81C for furLher
proceedlngs Lo deLermlne Lhe respecLlve rlghLs of Lhe parLles under ArLlcles 448 and 346 of Lhe Clvll
Codeţ and Lhe amounL due AnLonloŦ Penceţ Lhls caseŦ

lSSuLť WCn respondenL AnLonlo ls a bullder ln good falLh?

PLLuť ?LSŦ AnLonlo ls a bullder ln good falLhŦ ln Lhls caseţ AnLonlo was noL aware of any flaw ln
hls LlLleŦ Pe belleved belng Lhe owner of Lhe sub[ecL premlses on accounL of Lhe ueed of Sale
Lhereof ln hls favor desplLe hls lnablllLy Lo reglsLer Lhe sameŦ 1he lmprovemenL wasţ ln facLţ
lnLroduced by AnLonlo prlor Lo lllomena's purchase of Lhe landŦ

under ArLlcle 448ţ a landowner ls glven Lhe opLlon Lo elLher approprlaLe Lhe lmprovemenL as hls
own upon paymenL of Lhe proper amounL of lndemnlLyţ or sell Lhe land Lo Lhe possessor ln good
falLhŦ 8elaLedlyţ ArLlcle 346 provldes LhaL a bullder ln good falLh ls enLlLled Lo full relmbursemenL
for all Lhe necessary and useful expenses lncurredŤ lL also glves hlm rlghL of reLenLlon unLll full
relmbursemenL ls madeŦ

1he ob[ecLlve of ArLlcle 346 of Lhe Clvll Code ls Lo admlnlsLer [usLlce beLween Lhe parLles lnvolvedŦ
ln Lhls regardţ Lhls CourL had long ago sLaLed ln 8lvera vsŦ 8oman CaLhollc Archblshop of Manlla ż40
ÞhllŦ 717 (1920)Ž LhaL Lhe sald provlslon was formulaLed ln Lrylng Lo ad[usL Lhe rlghLs of Lhe owner
and possessor ln good falLh of a plece of landţ Lo admlnlsLer compleLe [usLlce Lo boLh of Lhem ln
such a way as nelLher one nor Lhe oLher may enrlch hlmself of LhaL whlch does noL belong Lo hlmŦ
Culded by Lhls precepLţ lL ls Lherefore Lhe currenL markeL value of Lhe lmprovemenLs whlch should
be made Lhe basls of relmbursemenLŦ A conLrary rullng would un[usLly enrlch Lhe prlvaLe
respondenLs who would oLherwlse be allowed Lo acqulre a hlghly valued lncomeŴyleldlng fourŴunlL
aparLmenL bulldlng for a measly amounLŦ ConsequenLlyţ Lhe parLles should Lherefore be allowed Lo
adduce evldence on Lhe presenL markeL value of Lhe aparLmenL bulldlng upon whlch Lhe Lrlal courL
should base lLs flndlng as Lo Lhe amounL of relmbursemenL Lo be pald by Lhe landownerŦ

8r|ones vsŦMacabagda|
Gk# 1S0666] AugŦ 3ţ 2010
626 SCkA 300

lAC1Sť 8espondenLŴspouses Macabagdal purchased from vergon 8ealLy lnvesLmenLs CorporaLlon
(vergon) LoL noŦ 2Ŵ8ţ a 323ŴsquareŴmeLer land locaLed ln vergonvllle Subdlvlslon noŦ 10 aL Las
Þlnas ClLyţ MeLro Manlla and covered by 1ransfer CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle noŦ 62181 of Lhe 8eglsLry of
ueeds of Þasay ClLyŦ Cn Lhe oLher handţ peLlLloners are Lhe owners of LoL noŦ 2ŴSţ whlch ls ad[acenL
Lo LoL noŦ 2Ŵ8Ŧ

SomeLlme ln 1984ţ afLer obLalnlng Lhe necessary bulldlng permlL and Lhe approval of vergonţ
peLlLloners consLrucLed a house on LoL noŦ 2Ŵ8 whlch Lhey LhoughL was LoL noŦ 2ŴSŦ AfLer belng
lnformed of Lhe mlx up by vergon's managerţ respondenLŴspouses lmmedlaLely demanded
peLlLloners Lo demollsh Lhe house and vacaLe Lhe properLyŦ ÞeLlLlonersţ howeverţ refused Lo heed
Lhelr demandŦ 1husţ respondenLŴspouses flled an acLlon Lo recover ownershlp and possesslon of
Lhe sald parcel of land wlLh Lhe 81C of MakaLl ClLyŦ

ÞeLlLloners lnslsLed LhaL Lhe loL on whlch Lhey consLrucLed Lhelr house was Lhe loL whlch was
conslsLenLly polnLed Lo Lhem as Lhelrs by vergon's agenLs over Lhe seven (7)Ŵyear perlod Lhey were
paylng for Lhe loLŦ 1hey lnLerposed Lhe defense of belng buyers ln good falLh and lmpleaded vergon
as LhlrdŴparLy defendanL clalmlng LhaL because of Lhe warranLy agalnsL evlcLlonţ Lhey were enLlLled
Lo lndemnlLy from vergon ln case Lhe sulL ls declded agalnsL LhemŦ

1he 81C ruled ln favor of respondenLŴspousesţ orderlng peLlLloners Lo vacaLeŦ CA afflrmed Lhe 81C's
flndlngsŦ Penceţ Lhls peLlLlon for revlew on cerLlorarlŦ

lSSuLť WCn peLlLloners are bullders ln good falLh?

PLLuť ?LSŦ CA erred ln ouLrlghLly orderlng peLlLloners Lo vacaLe Lhe sub[ecL properLy or Lo pay
respondenL spouses Lhe prevalllng prlce of Lhe land as compensaLlonŦ ArLlcle 327 of Lhe Clvll Code
presumes good falLhţ and slnce no proof exlsLs Lo show LhaL Lhe mlsLake was done by peLlLloners ln
bad falLhţ Lhe laLLer should be presumed Lo have bullL Lhe house ln good falLhŦ When a person
bullds ln good falLh on Lhe land of anoLherţ ArLlcle 448 of Lhe Clvll Code governsŦ Sald arLlcle
provldes LhaL ºLhe owner of Lhe land on whlch anyLhlng has been bullLţ sown or planLed ln good
falLhţ shall have Lhe rlghL Lo approprlaLe as hls own Lhe worksţ sowlng or planLlngţ afLer paymenL of
Lhe lndemnlLy provlded for ln ArLlcles 346 and 348ţ or Lo obllge Lhe one who bullL or planLed Lo pay
Lhe prlce of Lhe landţ and Lhe one who sowedţ Lhe proper renLŦ Poweverţ Lhe bullder or planLer
cannoL be obllged Lo buy Lhe land lf lLs value ls conslderably more Lhan LhaL of Lhe bulldlng or LreesŦ
ln such caseţ he shall pay reasonable renLţ lf Lhe owner of Lhe land does noL choose Lo approprlaLe
Lhe bulldlng or Lrees afLer proper lndemnlLyŦ 1he parLles shall agree upon Lhe Lerms of Lhe lease
and ln case of dlsagreemenLţ Lhe courL shall flx Lhe Lerms LhereofŦ"

1he aboveŴclLed arLlcle covers cases ln whlch Lhe bulldersţ sowers or planLers belleve Lhemselves Lo
be owners of Lhe land orţ aL leasLţ Lo have a clalm of LlLle LhereLoŦ 1he bullder ln good falLh can
compel Lhe landowner Lo make a cholce beLween approprlaLlng Lhe bulldlng by paylng Lhe proper
lndemnlLy or obllglng Lhe bullder Lo pay Lhe prlce of Lhe landŦ 1he cholce belongs Lo Lhe owner of
Lhe landţ a rule LhaL accords wlLh Lhe prlnclple of accesslonţ lŦeŦţ LhaL Lhe accessory follows Lhe
prlnclpal and noL Lhe oLher way aroundŦ Poweverţ even as Lhe opLlon lles wlLh Lhe landownerţ Lhe
granL Lo hlmţ neverLhelessţ ls precluslveŦ Pe musL choose oneŦ16 Pe cannoLţ for lnsLanceţ compel
Lhe owner of Lhe bulldlng Lo remove Lhe bulldlng from Lhe land wlLhouL flrsL exerclslng elLher
opLlonŦ lL ls only lf Lhe owner chooses Lo sell hls landţ and Lhe bullder or planLer falls Lo purchase lL
where lLs value ls noL more Lhan Lhe value of Lhe lmprovemenLsţ LhaL Lhe owner may remove Lhe
lmprovemenLs from Lhe landŦ 1he owner ls enLlLled Lo such remoLlon only whenţ afLer havlng
chosen Lo sell hls landţ Lhe oLher parLy falls Lo pay for Lhe sameŦ
Moreoverţ peLlLloners have Lhe rlghL Lo be lndemnlfled for Lhe necessary and useful expenses Lhey
may have made on Lhe sub[ecL properLy ln accordance wlLh ArLlcles 346 and 348 of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ
1hls case was remanded Lo Lhe 81C Lo conducL Lhe approprlaLe proceedlngs Lo assess Lhe
respecLlve values of Lhe lmprovemenL and of Lhe landţ as well as Lhe amounLs of reasonable renLals
and lndemnlLyţ flx Lhe Lerms of Lhe lease lf Lhe parLles so agreeţ and Lo deLermlne oLher maLLers
necessary for Lhe proper appllcaLlon of ArLlcle 448ţ ln relaLlon Lo ArLlcles 346 and 348ţ of Lhe Clvll
CodeŦ


L|mense vsŦ Vda de kamos
Gk# 1S2319] CctŦ 28ţ 2010
604 SCkA S99

lacLsť
ualmaclo Lozada was Lhe reglsLered owner of a parcel of land ldenLlfled as LoL noŦ 12ţ 8lock noŦ
1074 locaLed ln 8eaLa SLreeLţ Þandacanţ ManllaŦ Pe subdlvlded hls properLy lnLo flve (3) loLsţ
namelyť LoL nosŦ 12ŴAţ 12Ŵ8ţ 12ŴCţ 12Ŵu and 12ŴLŦ 1hrough a ueed of uonaLlon daLed March 9ţ
1932ţ4 he donaLed Lhe subdlvlded loLs Lo hls daughLersţ namelyť lsabelţ Saludţ CaLallnaţ and
lellcldadţ all surnamed LozadaŦ LoL 12ŴCţ whlch was donaLed Lo CaLallnaţ lsabel and Salud and was
lssued 1C1 noŦ 40043Ŧ Cn LoL 12Ŵuţ whlch was donaLed Lo Saludţ Lhe respondenLs' predecessorsŴlnŴ
lnLeresL consLrucLed Lhelr resldenLlal bulldlng ln 1932ţ ad[acenL Lo LoL 12ŴCŦ

ln 1969ţ 1C1 noŦ 968866 was lssued ln Lhe name of !oaquln Llmense coverlng Lhe very
same area of LoL noŦ 12ŴCŦ And ln 1981ţ Llmense secured a bulldlng permlL for Lhe consLrucLlon of a
hollow block fence on Lhe boundary llne beLween hls aforesald properLy and LoL 12ŴuŦ 1he fenceţ
howeverţ could noL be consLrucLed because a subsLanLlal porLlon of respondenLsƌ resldenLlal
bulldlng ln LoL 12Ŵu encroached upon porLlons of Llmenseƌs properLy ln LoL 12ŴCŦ

Llmense demanded Lhe removal of Lhe encroached areaŤ howeverţ respondenL lgnored boLh oral
and wrlLLen demandsŦ 1he parLles falled Lo amlcably seLLle Lhe dlfferences beLween Lhem desplLe
referral Lo Lhe barangayŦ 1husţ ln 1983ţ Llmense lnsLlLuLed a ComplalnL agalnsL for removal of
obsLrucLlon and damagesŦ

8espondenLsţ on Lhe oLher handţ averred LhaL Lhey were Lhe survlvlng helrs of lranclsco 8amosţ
whoţ durlng hls llfeLlmeţ was marrled Lo Salud LozadaŦ LoL noŦ 12ŴC was donaLed ln favor of hls
daughLers CaLallnaţ marrled Lo SoLero naLlvldadŤ lsabelţ marrled Lo lsaac LlmenseŤ and Saludţ
marrled Lo lranclsco 8amosŦ 8elng Lhe survlvlng helrs of lranclsco 8amosţ respondenLs laLer
became coŴowners of LoL noŦ 12ŴCŦ LoL noŦ 12ŴC has served as rlghL of way or common alley of all
Lhe helrs of ualmaclo Lozada slnce 1932 up Lo Lhe presenLŦ As a common alleyţ lL could noL be
closed or fenced by !oaquln Llmense wlLhouL causlng damage and pre[udlce Lo respondenLsŦ

1he 81C ruled ln favor of Lhe respondenLs rullng LhaL an apparenL easemenL of rlghL of way exlsLed
ln favor of respondenLsţ whlch was afflrmed by Lhe CAŦ

lssueť
W/n Lhe respondenLs are bullders ln good falLh and lf soţ whaL are Lhe respecLlve rlghLs of Lhe
parLles relaLlve Lo Lhe porLlons encroachlng upon respondenLsƌ houseŦ

Peldť
(noLeť Lhe lssue of W/n respondenLs were enLlLled Lo an easemenL of rlghL of way was also
dlscussed by Lhe CourL and held LhaL Lhey areŦ Slnce LoL 12ŴC has conLlnuously been used as an
alley slnce Lhe Llme LhaL ualmaclo Lozada donaLed Lhe properLy Lo hls daughLersţ Lhe same musL be
respecLed by Lhe peLlLloners and also Lhe peLlLloners knew LhaL sald loL serves no oLher purpose
Lhan an alley slnce Lhe Llme LhaL Lhe 1C1 was lssued Lo LhemŦ 1hls lssueţ howeverţ ls noL relevanL
under whlch Lhls case was asslgned ln our ouLllneŦ)

?esţ Lhe respondenLs are bullders ln good falLhŦ 8espondenLs' rlghL Lo have access Lo Lhe
properLy of peLlLloners does noL lnclude Lhe rlghL Lo conLlnually encroach upon Lhe laLLer's
properLyŦ lL ls noL dlspuLed LhaL porLlons of respondenLsƌ house on LoL noŦ 12Ŵu encroach upon LoL
noŦ 12ŴCŦ 29 ln order Lo seLLle Lhe rlghLs of Lhe parLles relaLlve Lo Lhe encroachmenLţ Lhe CourL
deemed lL proper Lo deLermlne Lhe lssue aboveŦ

8espondenLsƌ predecessorŴlnŴlnLeresL owned Lhe 1/3 porLlon of LoL noŦ 12ŴC aL Lhe Llme Lhe
properLy was donaLed Lo Lhem by ualmaclo Lozada ln 1932Ŧ 1he porLlons of LoL noŦ 12Ŵuţ
parLlcularly Lhe overhangţ coverlng 1 meLer ln wldLh and 17 meLers ln lengLh are all wlLhln Lhe 1/3

share alloLed Lo Lhem by Lhelr donor ualmaclo Lozada andţ henceţ Lhere was absence of a showlng
LhaL respondenLs acLed ln bad falLh when Lhey bullL porLlons of Lhelr house on LoL noŦ 12ŴCŦ

1he CourL held LhaL when Lhe coŴownershlp ls LermlnaLed by a parLlLlonţ and lL appears LhaL Lhe
house of an ersLwhlle coŴowner has encroached upon a porLlon perLalnlng Lo anoLher coŴownerţ
buL Lhe encroachmenL was ln good falLhţ Lhen Lhe provlslons of ArLlcle 448 should apply Lo
deLermlne Lhe respecLlve rlghLs of Lhe parLlesŦ ln Lhls caseţ Lhe coŴownershlp was LermlnaLed due
Lo Lhe Lransfer of Lhe LlLle of Lhe whole properLy ln favor of !oaquln LlmenseŦ

under Lhe foregolng provlslonţ peLlLloners have Lhe rlghL Lo approprlaLe sald porLlon of Lhe house
of respondenLs upon paymenL of lndemnlLy Lo respondenLsţ as provlded for ln ArLlcle 346 of Lhe
Clvll CodeŦ CLherwlseţ peLlLloners may obllge respondenLs Lo pay Lhe prlce of Lhe land occupled by
Lhelr houseŦ Poweverţ lf Lhe prlce asked for ls conslderably much more Lhan Lhe value of Lhe
porLlon of Lhe house of respondenLs bullL Lhereonţ Lhen Lhe laLLer cannoL be obllged Lo buy Lhe
landŦ 8espondenLs shall Lhen pay Lhe reasonable renL Lo peLlLloners upon such Lerms and
condlLlons LhaL Lhey may agreeŦ ln case of dlsagreemenLţ Lhe Lrlal courL shall flx Lhe Lerms LhereofŦ
Cf courseţ respondenLs may demollsh or remove Lhe sald porLlon of Lhelr houseţ aL Lhelr own
expenseţ lf Lhey so decldeŦ 1he cholce belongs Lo Lhe owner of Lhe land (peLlLloners)ţ a rule LhaL
accords wlLh Lhe prlnclple of accesslon LhaL Lhe accessory follows Lhe prlnclpal and noL Lhe oLher
way aroundŦ

Mores vsŦ uŴGo
Gk# 172292] Iu|yŦ 23ţ 2010
62S SCkA 290

lacLsť
?uŴCoţ eLŦalŦ flled a ComplalnL for ln[uncLlon and uamages wlLh Þrayer for lssuance of a
1emporary 8esLralnlng Crder and Þrellmlnary ln[uncLlon agalnsL spouses AnLonlo and Allda MoresŦ
8espondenLs alleged LhaL Lhey coŴowned a parcel of land locaLed ln SLoŦ 1omasţ Magaraoţ
Camarlnes Sur on whlch a bulldlng of sLrong maLerlals was bullLŦ ln March 1983ţ peLlLloners
pleaded Lo respondenLs LhaL Lhey be allowed Lo sLay ln Lhe sub[ecL properLy ln Lhe meanLlme LhaL
Lhey dld noL own a house yeLŦ Slnce AnLonlo Mores used Lo be an errand boy of respondenLs'
famllyţ Lhey readlly agreed wlLhouL asklng for any renLal buL sub[ecL only Lo Lhe condlLlon LhaL Lhe
sald sLay would lasL unLll anyone of Lhe respondenLs would need Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ lorLhwlLhţ
peLlLloners and Lhelr chlldren occupled Lhe same as agreed uponŦ

ln november 1997ţ respondenLs made known Lo peLlLloners LhaL Lhey were already ln need of Lhe
sub[ecL properLyŦ 1hey explalned LhaL Shlrley ?uŴCo needed Lhe same andţ besldesţ peLlLloners
already have Lhelr own house ln vllla Crande Pomesţ naga ClLyŦ ?eLţ peLlLloners begged LhaL Lhey
be glven a 6ŴmonLh exLenslon Lo sLay LhereaL or unLll May 1998Ŧ Poweverţ even afLer May 1998ţ
peLlLloners falled Lo make good Lhelr promlse and even furLher asked LhaL Lhey be allowed Lo sLay
Lhereln unLll CcLober 1998ţ whlch was agaln exLended unLll Lhe end of Lhe same yearŦ 1husţ
someLlme ln Lhe flrsL week of !anuary 1999ţ respondenLs gave Lhelr flnal demand for peLlLloners Lo
vacaLe Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ Poweverţ lnsLead of heedlng such demandţ peLlLloners hlred some
laborers and sLarLed demollshlng Lhe lmprovemenLs on Lhe sub[ecL properLy on !anuary 20ţ 1999
and even Look away and approprlaLed for Lhemselves Lhe maLerlals derlved from such unlawful
demollLlonŦŦ

ln Lhelr Answer Lo Lhe complalnLţ peLlLloners averred LhaL Lhey were Lhe ones who
caused Lhe renovaLlon Lo Lhe properLy wlLh Lhe respondenLs' consenLŦ 1hey also alleged LhaL whaL
Lhey removed were merely Lhe lmprovemenLs made on Lhe properLy by Lhemţ whlch removal had
noL caused any subsLanLlal damage LhereLoŦ

lssueť
W/n Lhe spouses Mores were bullders ln good falLhŦ

Peldť
noŦ 1he relaLlonshlp beLween Lhe ?u slbllngs and Lhe spouses Mores ls one beLween a
lessor and a lesseeţ maklng ArLlcle 1678 of Lhe Clvll Code appllcable Lo Lhe presenL caseŦ 1enanLs
llke Lhe spouses Mores cannoL be sald Lo be bullders ln good falLh as Lhey have no preLenslon Lo be
owners of Lhe properLyŦ lndeedţ full relmbursemenL of useful lmprovemenLs and reLenLlon of Lhe
premlses unLll relmbursemenL ls made applles only Lo a possessor ln good falLhţ lŦeŦţ one who bullds
on land wlLh Lhe bellef LhaL he ls Lhe owner LhereofŦ lL does noL apply where one's only lnLeresL ls
LhaL of a lessee under a renLal conLracLŤ oLherwlseţ lL would always be ln Lhe power of Lhe LenanL Lo
ƍlmproveƍ hls landlord ouL of hls properLyŦ

ArLlcle 1678 reads ºlf Lhe lessee makesţ ln good falLhţ useful lmprovemenLs whlch are sulLable Lo
Lhe use for whlch Lhe lease ls lnLendedţ wlLhouL alLerlng Lhe form or subsLance of Lhe properLy
leasedţ Lhe lessor upon Lhe LermlnaLlon of Lhe lease shall pay Lhe lessee oneŴhalf of Lhe value of Lhe
lmprovemenLs aL LhaL LlmeŦ Should Lhe lessor refuse Lo relmburse sald amounLţ Lhe lessee may
remove Lhe lmprovemenLsţ even Lhough Lhe prlnclpal Lhlng may suffer damage LherebyŦ Pe shall
noLţ howeverţ cause any more lmpalrmenL upon Lhe properLy leased Lhan ls necessaryŦ

When Lhe spouses Mores demanded relmbursemenLţ Lhe ?u slbllngs should have offered Lo pay Lhe
spouses Mores oneŴhalf of Lhe value of Lhe lmprovemenLsŦ Slnce Lhe ?u slbllngs falled Lo make such
offerţ Lhe spouses Mores had Lhe rlghL Lo remove Lhe lmprovemenLsŦ

New kegent vŦ @an[uatco
Gk# 168800 ]Apr|| 16ţ 2009
S8S SCkA 329

lacLsť
new 8egenL Sourcesţ lncŦ (n8Sl) flled a ComplalnL for 8esclsslon/ueclaraLlon of nulllLy of ConLracLţ
8econveyance and uamages agalnsL respondenL 1an[uaLco and Lhe 8eglsLer of ueeds of CalambaŦ
n8Sl alleged LhaL ln 1994ţ lL auLhorlzed vlcenLe ÞŦ Cuevas lllţ lLs Chalrman and ÞresldenLţ Lo apply
on lLs behalfţ for Lhe acqulslLlon of Lwo parcels of land by vlrLue of lLs rlghL of accreLlonŦ Cuevas
purporLedly applled for Lhe loLs ln hls name by paylng Þ82ţ 400 Lo Lhe 8ureau of LandsŦ Cn !anuary
2ţ 1993ţ Cuevas and hls wlfe execuLed a voLlng 1rusL AgreemenL over Lhelr shares of sLock ln Lhe
corporaLlonŦ 1henţ pendlng approval of Lhe appllcaLlon wlLh Lhe 8ureau of Landsţ Cuevas asslgned
hls rlghL Lo 1an[uaLco for Lhe sum of Þ83ţ000Ŧ Cn March 12ţ 1996ţ Lhe ulrecLor of Lands released an
Crderţ whlch approved Lhe Lransfer of rlghLs from Cuevas Lo 1an[uaLcoŦ 1ransfer CerLlflcaLes of 1lLle
nosŦ 1Ŵ3694067 and 1Ŵ3694078 were Lhen lssued ln Lhe name of 1an[uaLcoŦ

lssueť

W/n n8Sl acqulred Lhe sub[ecL properLy by accreLlon and lf soţ W/n 1an[uaLco ls an lnnocenL
purchaser for valueŦ

Peldť
AccreLlon as a mode of acqulrlng properLy under ArLlcle 437 of Lhe Clvll Code requlres
Lhe concurrence of Lhe followlng requlslLesť (1) LhaL Lhe deposlLlon of soll or sedlmenL be gradual
and lmpercepLlbleŤ (2) LhaL lL be Lhe resulL of Lhe acLlon of Lhe waLers of Lhe rlverŤ and (3) LhaL Lhe
land where accreLlon Lakes place ls ad[acenL Lo Lhe banks of rlversŦ 1husţ lL ls noL enough Lo be a
rlparlan owner ln order Lo en[oy Lhe beneflLs of accreLlonŦ Cne who clalms Lhe rlghL of accreLlon
musL show by preponderanL evldence LhaL he has meL all Lhe condlLlons provlded by lawŦ ÞeLlLloner
has noLably falled ln Lhls regard as lL dld noL offer any evldence Lo prove LhaL lL has saLlsfled Lhe
foregolng requlslLesŦ

Alsoţ lL ls undlspuLed LhaL 1an[uaLco derlved hls LlLle Lo Lhe lands from Crlglnal
CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle (CC1) noŦ 243 reglsLered ln Lhe name of Lhe 8epubllc of Lhe ÞhlllpplnesŦ Sald
parcels of land formed parL of Lhe urled San !uan 8lver 8edţ whlch under ArLlcle 302 (1)34 of Lhe
Clvll Code rlghLly perLalns Lo Lhe publlc domlnlonŦ Clearlyţ Lhe 8epubllc ls Lhe enLlLy whlch had
every rlghL Lo Lransfer ownershlp Lhereof Lo respondenLŦ

1he lawţ no doubLţ conslders 1an[uaLco an lnnocenL purchaser for valueŦ An lnnocenL
purchaser for value ls one who buys Lhe properLy of anoLherţ wlLhouL noLlce LhaL some oLher
person has a rlghL or lnLeresL ln such properLy and pays Lhe full prlce for Lhe sameţ aL Lhe Llme of
such purchase or before he has noLlce of Lhe clalms or lnLeresL of some oLher person ln Lhe
properLyŦ

As regards Lhe conslderaLlon whlch 1an[uaLco pald Cuevas for Lhe asslgnmenL of rlghLs
Lo Lhe landsţ sufflce lL Lo sLaLe LhaL Lhe asslgnmenL merely vesLed upon 1an[uaLco all of Cuevas's
lnLanglble clalmsţ rlghLs and lnLeresLs over Lhe properLles and noL Lhe properLles LhemselvesŦ AL Lhe
Llme of Lhe asslgnmenLţ Lhe loLs were sLlll Lhe sub[ecLs of a pendlng sales appllcaLlon before Lhe
8ureau of LandsŦ lorţ lL was noL unLll May 24ţ 1996ţ LhaL LlLles were lssued ln 1an[uaLco's nameŦ 1he
asslgnmenL noL belng a sale of real properLyţ lL was noL surprlslng LhaL Cuevas demanded from
1an[uaLco only Þ83ţ000 for Lhe Lransfer of rlghLsŦ

Meneses vsŦ CA
Gk# 830S9] Iu|y 14ţ 199S
246 SCkA 162

lacLsť
ln 1977ţ ÞabllLo Meneses was lssued lree ÞaLenL and Crlglnal CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle over
Lwo parcels of land locaLed ln Los 8anosţ LagunaŦ ÞabllLo Meneses acqulred sald properLy from
Sllverlo 8auLlsLa Lhrough a ueed of Walver and 1ransfer of 8lghLs execuLed on May 3ţ 1973 ln
conslderaLlon of 8auLlsLaƌs ƍlove and affecLlonƍ for and ƍsome moneLary obllgaLlonsƍ ln favor of
ÞabllLo MenesesŦ AfLer Lhe execuLlon of sald documenLţ ÞabllLo Meneses Look possesslon of Lhe
landţ lnLroduced lmprovemenLs Lhereonţ declared Lhe land as hls own for Lax purposes and pald
Lhe correspondlng realLy LaxesŦ ln Lurnţ 8auLlsLa acqulred Lhe 900ŴsquareŴmeLer land from hls aunLţ
Sergla (Cllcerla) MŦ AlmedaŦ Pe had been occupylng Lhe land slnce 1936Ŧ

Cn Lhe oLher handţ Lhe Culsumblng famlly Lraces ownershlp of Lhe land as far back as SepLember 6ţ
1919 when Lhelr maLrlarchţ Clrlaca Arguelles vdaŦ de Culsumblng was lssued Crlglnal CerLlflcaLe of
1lLle noŦ 989 coverlng a loL wlLh an area of 839 square meLers locaLed ln Los 8anosţ Laguna wlLh
Lhe Laguna de 8ay as lLs norLhwesLern boundaryŦ 1he same parcel of land was reglsLered on AugusL
14ţ 1973 under 1ransfer CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle noŦ 1Ŵ33393 ln Lhe names of Clrlacaƌs helrsť Lmllloţ
Manuelţ Lduardoţ norberLoţ Þerlaţ !oseflnaţ napoleonţ PonoraLoţ 8emedlos and Alfonsoţ all
surnamed CulsumblngŦ 1he Culsumblngs applled for reglsLraLlon and conflrmaLlon of LlLle over an
addlLlonal area of 2ţ387 square meLers whlch had gradually accrued Lo Lhelr properLy by Lhe
naLural acLlon of Lhe waLers of Laguna de 8ayŦ

1he Culsumblngs Lhen flled a complalnL agalnsL Lorenzo and ÞabllLo Menesesţ 8raullo CŦ uarum
and Cesar 8Ŧ Almendral for nulllflcaLlon of Lhe free paLenLs and LlLles lssued Lo ÞabllLo MenesesŦ
1hey alleged LhaL Lorenzo Menesesţ Lhen Lhe Mayor of Los 8anosţ uslng hls broLher ÞabllLo as a
ƍLool and dummyţƍ lllegally occupled Lhelr ƍprlvaLe accreLlon landƍ an AugusL 6ţ 1976ţ andţ
confederaLlng wlLh ulsLrlcL Land Cfflcer uarum and Land lnspecLor Cesar Almendralţ obLalned free
paLenLs and orlglnal cerLlflcaLes of LlLle Lo Lhe landŦ

lssueť
W/n Lhe lands ln quesLlon are accreLlon lands of Lhe CulsumblngsŦ

Peldť
?esŦ AccreLlon as a mode of acqulrlng properLy under ArLlcle 437 of Lhe Clvll Code
requlres Lhe concurrence of Lhese requlslLesť (1) LhaL Lhe deposlLlon of soll or sedlmenL be gradual
and lmpercepLlbleŤ (2) LhaL lL be Lhe resulL of Lhe acLlon of Lhe waLers of Lhe rlver (or sea)Ť and (3)
LhaL Lhe land where accreLlon Lakes place ls ad[acenL Lo Lhe banks of rlvers (or Lhe sea coasL)Ŧ
ConsequenLlyţ Lhe lands held Lo be accreLlon lands could only beneflL Lhe Culsumblngsţ who own
Lhe properLy ad[acenL Lo Lhe lands ln conLroversy

Slnce Laguna de 8ay ls a lakeţ Lhe submerslon ln waLer of a porLlon of Lhe land ln quesLlon ls due Lo
Lhe ralns ƍfalllng dlrecLly on or flowlng lnLo Laguna de 8ay from dlfferenL sourcesŦƍ Slnce Lhe
lnundaLlon of a porLlon of Lhe land ls noL due Lo ƍflux and reflux of Lldesƍ lL cannoL be consldered a
foreshore land wlLhln Lhe meanlng of Lhe auLhorlLles clLed by peLlLloner ulrecLor of LandsŦ 1he land
soughL Lo be reglsLered noL belng parL of Lhe bed or basln of Laguna de 8ayţ nor a foreshore land as
clalmed by Lhe ulrecLor of Landsţ lL ls noL a publlc land and Lherefore capable of reglsLraLlon as
prlvaLe properLy provlded LhaL Lhe appllcanL proves LhaL he has a reglsLerable LlLleŦ

C|ty Mayor of Þarañaque vŦ Lb|o
Gk#Ŧ 178411]Iune 23ţ 2010
621 SCkA SSS

lacLsť
8espondenLs clalm LhaL Lhey are Lhe absoluLe owners of a parcel of land conslsLlng of
406 square meLersţ more or lessţ locaLed aL 9781 vlLalez Compound ln 8arangay vlLalezţ Þaranaque
ClLyŦ Sald land was an accreLlon of CuLŴcuL creekŦ 8espondenLs asserL LhaL Lhe orlglnal occupanL and
possessor of Lhe sald parcel of land was Lhelr greaL grandfaLherţ !ose vlLalezŦ SomeLlme ln 1930ţ
!ose gave Lhe land Lo hls sonţ Þedro vlLalezţ whose daughLer Zenalda marrled Marlo LbloŦ Cn Aprll
21ţ 1987ţ Þedro execuLed a noLarlzed 1ransfer of 8lghLs cedlng hls clalm over Lhe enLlre parcel of

land ln favor of Marlo LbloŦ SubsequenLlyţ Lhe Lax declaraLlons under Þedro's name were cancelled
and new ones were lssued ln Marlo Lblo's nameŦ

Cn March 30 1999ţ Sanggunlang 8arangay of vlLalez passed a 8esoluLlon seeklng
asslsLance from Lhe ClLy CovernmenL for Lhe consLrucLlon of an access road along CuLŴcuL Creekţ Lo
whlch Lhe respondenLs flled an opposlLlonŦ As a resulLţ Lhe pro[ecL was Lemporarlly suspendedŦ ln
!anuary 2003ţ howeverţ several offlclals from Lhe barangay and Lhe clLy plannlng offlce proceeded
Lo cuL 8 coconuL Lrees planLed on Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ 8espondenLs flled leLLerŴcomplalnLs before
Lhe 8eglonal ulrecLor of Lhe 8ureau of Landsţ ulLC and Cfflce of Lhe vlce MayorŦ Several meeLlng
were conducLed buL no deflnlLe agreemenL was reachedŦ

Poweverţ on March 28ţ 2003ţ Lhe ClLy AdmlnlsLraLor senL a leLLer Lo respondenLs orderlng Lhem Lo
vacaLe Lhe properLy wlLhln 30 days or be physlcally evlcLedŦ 8espondenLs flled a wrlL of prellmlnary
ln[uncLlon agalnsL peLlLloners on Aprll 21ţ 2003Ŧ ln Lhe course of Lhe proceedlngsţ respondenLs
admlLLed before Lhe Lrlal courL LhaL Lhey have a pendlng appllcaLlon for Lhe lssuance of a sales
paLenL before Lhe ueparLmenL of LnvlronmenL and naLural 8esources (uLn8)Ŧ 1he 81C lssued an
Crder denylng Lhe peLlLlon for lack of merlLŦ 1he Lrlal courL reasoned LhaL respondenLs were noL
able Lo prove successfully LhaL Lhey have an esLabllshed rlghL Lo Lhe properLy slnce Lhey have noL
lnsLlLuLed an acLlon for conflrmaLlon of LlLle and Lhelr appllcaLlon for sales paLenL has noL yeL been
granLedŦ CA reversedŦ

lssueť
W/n Lhe characLer of respondenLs' possesslon and occupaLlon of Lhe sub[ecL properLy enLlLles
Lhem Lo avall of Lhe rellef of prohlblLory ln[uncLlonŦ

Peldť
?esŦ lL ls an unconLesLed facL LhaL Lhe sub[ecL land was formed from Lhe alluvlal deposlLs
LhaL have gradually seLLled along Lhe banks of CuLŴcuL creekŦ 1hls belng Lhe caseţ Lhe law LhaL
governs ownershlp over Lhe accreLed porLlon ls ArLlcle 84 of Lhe Spanlsh Law of WaLers of 1866ţ
whlch remalns ln effecLţ ln relaLlon Lo ArLlcle 437 of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ
under Lhese provlslonsţ lLs ls clear LhaL alluvlal deposlLs along Lhe banks of a creek do
noL form parL of Lhe publlc domaln as Lhe alluvlal properLy auLomaLlcally belongs Lo Lhe owner of
Lhe esLaLe Lo whlch lL may have been addedŦ 1he only resLrlcLlon provlded for by law ls LhaL Lhe
owner of Lhe ad[olnlng properLy musL reglsLer Lhe same under Lhe 1orrens sysLemŤ oLherwlseţ Lhe
alluvlal properLy may be sub[ecL Lo acqulslLlon Lhrough prescrlpLlon by Lhlrd personsŦ Penceţ whlle
lL ls Lrue LhaL a creek ls a properLy of publlc domlnlonţ Lhe land whlch ls formed by Lhe gradual and
lmpercepLlble accumulaLlon of sedlmenLs along lLs banks does noL form parL of Lhe publlc domaln
by clear provlslon of lawŦ
Slnce for more Lhan LhlrLy (30) yearsţ nelLher CuaranLeed Pomesţ lncŦ nor Lhe local governmenL of
Þaranaque ln lLs corporaLe or prlvaLe capaclLy soughL Lo reglsLer Lhe accreLed porLlonŦ
undoubLedlyţ respondenLs are deemed Lo have acqulred ownershlp over Lhe sub[ecL properLy
Lhrough prescrlpLlonŦ


A|magro vsŦ kwan
Gk# 17S806]17S810] CctŦ 20ţ 2010
634 SCkA 2S0

lacLsť 8espondenLs are Lhe successorsŴ lnŴ lnLeresL of Lhe LoL noŦ 6278ŴMţ a 17ţ181 square meLer
parcel of land locaLed aL Maslogţ Slbulanţ negros CrlenLalŦ Cn 18 SepLember 1996ţ Lhey flled wlLh
Lhe M1C an acLlon for recovery of possesslon and damages agalnsL Lhe occupanLsţ on of whlch are
Lhe ÞeLlLlonersŦ M1C dlsmlssed Lhe complalnL on Lhe ground LhaL Lhe remalnlng dry porLlon of LoL
noŦ 6278ŴM has become foreshore land and should be reLurned Lo Lhe publlc domalnŦ
8espondenLs appealed Lo Lhe 81CŦ 1he 81C conducLed ocular lnspecLlons of sub[ecL loL
on Lwo separaLe daLesť on 3 CcLober 2001 durlng low Llde and on 13 CcLober 2001 when Lhe hlgh
Llde reglsLered 1Ŧ3 meLersŦ 81C concluded LhaL Lhe small porLlon of respondenL's properLy whlch
remalns as dry land ls noL wlLhln Lhe scope of Lhe wellŴseLLled deflnlLlon of foreshore and foreshore
landŤ Lhe small dry porLlon ls noL ad[acenL Lo Lhe seaŤ Lhus 8espondenL have Lhe rlghL Lo recover
possesslon of Lhe remalnlng small dry porLlon of Lhe sub[ecL properLy ln quesLlonŦ CA afflrmed sald
declslonŦ

lssueť WCn Lhe dlspuLed porLlon of LoL ls no longer prlvaLe land buL has become foreshore land
and ls now parL of Lhe publlc domaln?

Peldť 1he dlspuLed land ls noL foreshore landŦ 1o quallfy as foreshore landţ lL musL be shown LhaL
Lhe land lles beLween Lhe hlgh and low waLer marks and ls alLernaLely weL and dry accordlng Lo Lhe
flow of Lhe LldeŦż1he landƌs proxlmlLy Lo Lhe waLers alone does noL auLomaLlcally make lL a
foreshore landŦ
1husţ ln 8epubllc of Lhe Þhlllpplnes vŦ Lenslcoţ Lhe CourL held LhaL alLhough Lhe Lwo corners of
Lhe sub[ecL loL ad[olns Lhe seaţ Lhe loL cannoL be consldered as foreshore land slnce lL has noL been
proven LhaL Lhe loL was covered by waLer durlng hlgh LldeŦ
Slmllarly ln Lhls caseţ lL was clearly proven LhaL Lhe dlspuLed land remalned dry even durlng
hlgh LldeŦ lndeedţ all Lhe evldence supporLs Lhe concluslon LhaL Lhe dlspuLed porLlon of LoL noŦ
6278ŴM ls noL foreshore land buL remalns prlvaLe land owned by respondenLsŦ

Chapter 3Ŧ Çu|et|ng of @|t|e (ArtsŦ476Ŵ481) + Cther Modes of kecovery

ne|rs of Ma|abanan vŦ kepub||c
Gk# 179987 ]Apr|| 29ţ 2009
S87 SCkA 172

lacLsť Cn 20 lebruary 1998ţ Marlo Malabanan flled an appllcaLlon for land reglsLraLlon (land
slLuaLed ln 1lblgţ Sllang CavlLe)Ŧ Malabanan clalmed LhaL he had purchased Lhe properLy from
Lduardo velazcoţ and LhaL he and hls predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresL had been ln openţ noLorlousţ and
conLlnuous adverse and peaceful possesslon of Lhe land for more Lhan LhlrLy (30) yearsŦ
velazco LesLlfled LhaL Lhe properLy orlglnally belonged Lo a 22 hecLare properLy owned by hls greaLŴ
grandfaLherţ Llno velazcoŦ upon Llno's deaLhţ hls four sons lnherlLed Lhe properLyŦ ln 1966ţ
LsLeban's (1 of Lhe sons) wlfeţ Magdalenaţ had become Lhe admlnlsLraLorŦ AfLer Lhe deaLh of
LsLeban and Magdalenaţ Lhelr son vlrglllo succeeded Lhem ln admlnlsLerlng Lhe properLlesţ
lncludlng LoL 9864ŴAţ whlch orlglnally belonged Lo hls uncleţ Lduardo velazcoŦ lL was Lhls properLy
LhaL was sold by velazco Lo MalabananŦ
1he 8epubllc dld noL presenL any evldence Lo conLroverL Lhe appllcaLlonŦ
Among Lhe evldence presenLed by Malabanan was a CerLlflcaLlon daLed 11 !une 2001ţ
lssued by Lhe CommunlLy LnvlronmenL Ǝ naLural 8esources Cfflceţ (CLn8C) uLn8ţ whlch sLaLed

LhaL Lhe sub[ecL properLy was ƍverlfled Lo be wlLhln Lhe Allenable or ulsposable land approved as
such under on March 13ţ 1982Ŧƍ
81C rendered [udgmenL ln favor of MalabananŦ 1he 8epubllc lnLerposed an appeal Lo Lhe CAţ
argulng LhaL Malabanan had falled Lo prove LhaL Lhe properLy belonged Lo Lhe allenable and
dlsposable land of Lhe publlc domalnţ and LhaL Lhe 81C had erred ln flndlng LhaL he had been ln
possesslon of Lhe properLy ln Lhe manner and for Lhe lengLh of Llme requlred by law for
conflrmaLlon of lmperfecL LlLleŦ
CA reversed Lhe 81CŦ lL held LhaL under Sec 14(1) of Lhe ÞroperLy 8eglsLraLlon uecree any perlod of
possesslon prlor Lo Lhe classlflcaLlon of Lhe loLs as allenable and dlsposable was lnconsequenLlal
and should be excluded from Lhe compuLaLlon of Lhe perlod of possesslonŦ 1husţ lL noLed LhaL slnce
Lhe CLn8CŴuLn8 cerLlflcaLlon had verlfled LhaL Lhe properLy was declared allenable and dlsposable
only on 13 March 1982ţ Lhe velazcos' possesslon prlor Lo LhaL daLe could noL be facLored ln Lhe
compuLaLlon of Lhe perlod of possesslonŦ 1hls lnLerpreLaLlon of Lhe CA was based on Lhe CourL's
rullng ln 8epubllc vŦ PerbleLoŦ

Malabanan dled whlle Lhe case was pendlngŦ Pelrs appealed Lhe declslon

lssuesť Are peLlLloners enLlLled Lo Lhe reglsLraLlon of Lhe sub[ecL land ln Lhelr names under SecLlon
14(1) or SecLlon 14(2) of Lhe ÞroperLy 8eglsLraLlon uecree or boLh?

Peldť 1he ÞeLlLlon ls denledŦ ln connecLlon wlLh SecLlon 14(1) of Lhe ÞroperLy 8eglsLraLlon uecreeţ
SecLlon 48(b) of Lhe Þubllc Land AcL recognlzes and conflrms LhaL ºLhose who by Lhemselves or
Lhrough Lhelr predecessors ln lnLeresL have been ln openţ conLlnuousţ excluslveţ and noLorlous
possesslon and occupaLlon of allenable and dlsposable lands of Lhe publlc domalnţ under a bona
flde clalm of acqulslLlon of ownershlpţ slnce !une 12ţ 1943" have acqulred ownershlp ofţ and
reglsLrable LlLle Loţ such lands based on Lhe lengLh and quallLy of Lhelr possesslonŦ
Slnce SecLlon 48(b) merely requlres possesslon slnce 12 !une 1943 and does noL requlre LhaL Lhe
lands should have been allenable and dlsposable durlng Lhe enLlre perlod of possesslonţ Lhe
possessor ls enLlLled Lo secure [udlclal conflrmaLlon of hls LlLle LhereLo as soon as lL ls declared
allenable and dlsposableţ sub[ecL Lo Lhe Llmeframe lmposed by SecLlon 47 of Lhe Þubllc Land AcLŦ
1he rlghL Lo reglsLer granLed under SecLlon 48(b) of Lhe Þubllc Land AcL ls furLher conflrmed by
SecLlon 14(1) of Lhe ÞroperLy 8eglsLraLlon uecreeŦ
ln complylng wlLh SecLlon 14(2) of Lhe ÞroperLy 8eglsLraLlon uecreeţ conslder LhaL under Lhe Clvll
Codeţ prescrlpLlon ls recognlzed as a mode of acqulrlng ownershlp of paLrlmonlal properLyŦ
Poweverţ publlc domaln lands become only paLrlmonlal properLy noL only wlLh a declaraLlon LhaL
Lhese are allenable or dlsposableŦ 1here musL also be an express governmenL manlfesLaLlon LhaL
Lhe properLy ls already paLrlmonlal or no longer reLalned for publlc servlce or Lhe developmenL of
naLlonal wealLhţ under ArLlcle 422 of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ And only when Lhe properLy has become
paLrlmonlal can Lhe prescrlpLlve perlod for Lhe acqulslLlon of properLy of Lhe publlc domlnlon begln
Lo runŦ
ÞaLrlmonlal properLy ls prlvaLe properLy of Lhe governmenLŦ 1he person acqulres ownershlp of
paLrlmonlal properLy by prescrlpLlon under Lhe Clvll Code ls enLlLled Lo secure reglsLraLlon Lhereof
under SecLlon 14(2) of Lhe ÞroperLy 8eglsLraLlon uecreeŦ
1here are Lwo klnds of prescrlpLlon by whlch paLrlmonlal properLy may be acqulredţ one ordlnary
and oLher exLraordlnaryŦ under ordlnary acqulslLlve prescrlpLlonţ a person acqulres ownershlp of a
paLrlmonlal properLy Lhrough possesslon for aL leasL Len (10) yearsţ ln good falLh and wlLh [usL LlLleŦ
under exLraordlnary acqulslLlve prescrlpLlonţ a person's unlnLerrupLed adverse possesslon of
paLrlmonlal properLy for aL leasL LhlrLy (30) yearsţ regardless of good falLh or [usL LlLleţ rlpens lnLo
ownershlpŦ
lL ls clear LhaL Lhe evldence of peLlLloners ls lnsufflclenL Lo esLabllsh LhaL Malabanan has acqulred
ownershlp over Lhe sub[ecL properLy under SecLlon 48(b) of Lhe Þubllc Land AcLŦ 1here ls no
subsLanLlve evldence Lo esLabllsh LhaL Malabanan or peLlLloners as hls predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresL
have been ln possesslon of Lhe properLy slnce 12 !une 1943 or earllerŦ 1he earllesL LhaL peLlLloners
can daLe back Lhelr possesslonţ accordlng Lo Lhelr own evldenceŸLhe 1ax ueclaraLlons Lhey
presenLed ln parLlcularŸls Lo Lhe year 1948Ŧ 1husţ Lhey cannoL avall Lhemselves of reglsLraLlon
under SecLlon 14(1) of Lhe ÞroperLy 8eglsLraLlon uecreeŦ
nelLher can peLlLloners properly lnvoke SecLlon 14(2) as basls for reglsLraLlonŦ Whlle Lhe sub[ecL
properLy was declared as allenable or dlsposable ln 1982ţ Lhere ls no compeLenL evldence LhaL ls no
longer lnLended for publlc use servlce or for Lhe developmenL of Lhe naLlonal evldenceţ
conformably wlLh ArLlcle 422 of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ 1he classlflcaLlon of Lhe sub[ecL properLy as
allenable and dlsposable land of Lhe publlc domaln does noL change lLs sLaLus as properLy of Lhe
publlc domlnlon under ArLlcle 420(2) of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ 1husţ lL ls lnsuscepLlble Lo acqulslLlon by
prescrlpLlonŦ

@an vsŦ kep
Gk# 177797] DecŦ 04ţ 2008
S73 SCkA 89

lacLsť Spouses 1an were naLuralŴborn llllplno clLlzensţ who became AusLrallan clLlzensŦ 1hey seek
Lo have Lhe sub[ecL properLy reglsLered ln Lhelr namesŦ 1he sub[ecL properLy was declared allenable
and dlsposable ln 1923ţ as esLabllshed by a CerLlflcaLlon lssued by Lhe uLn8 and CommunlLy
LnvlronmenL and naLural 8esources Cfflce (CLn8C)ţ Cagayan de Cro ClLyŦ Spouses 1an acqulred
Lhe sub[ecL properLy from Luclo and !uanlLo nerl and Lhelr spouses by vlrLue of a duly noLarlzed
ueed of Sale of unreglsLered 8eal LsLaLe ÞroperLyŦ 1he spouses 1an Look lmmedlaLe possesslon of
Lhe sub[ecL properLy on whlch Lhey planLed rubberţ gemellnaţ and oLher frulLŴbearlng LreesŦ 1hey
declared Lhe sub[ecL properLy for LaxaLlon purposes ln Lhelr namesŦ Poweverţ a cerLaln ÞaLermaLeo
Caslno (Caslno) clalmed a porLlon of Lhe sub[ecL properLyţ prompLlng spouses 1an Lo flle a
ComplalnL for CuleLlng of 1lLle agalnsL hlm before Lhe 81CŦ 81C rendered a ueclslon favorlng Lhe
spouses 1an and declarlng Lhelr LlLle Lo Lhe sub[ecL properLy Lhus ƍquleLedŦƍ Caslno appealed Lo Lhe
CAţ whlch dlsmlssed Lhe appeal for lack of lnLeresL Lo prosecuLeŦ Caslno elevaLed hls case Lo Lhe SC
vla a ÞeLlLlon for 8evlewţ whlch was for belng lnsufflclenL ln form and subsLanceŦ 1he sald
8esoluLlon became flnal and execuLory ln 1991Ŧ

8efuslng Lo glve upţ Caslno flled an AppllcaLlon for lree ÞaLenL on Lhe sub[ecL properLy before Lhe
8ureau of LandsŦ Caslno's appllcaLlon was ordered cancelled by uLn8ŴCLn8CŦ ln 2000ţ Spouses 1an
flled Lhelr AppllcaLlon for 8eglsLraLlon of 1lLle Lo Lhe sub[ecL properLy before Lhe 81Cţ lnvoklng Lhe
provlslons of AcL noŦ 496 and/or SecLlon 48 of CommonwealLh AcL noŦ 141ţ as amendedŦ 81C
granLed Lhe appllcaLlon of Spouses 1anŦ CA reversed Lhe ueclslon of Lhe 81C on Lhe ground LhaL Lhe
spouses 1an falled Lo comply wlLh SecLlon 48(b) of CommonwealLh AcL noŦ 141 (Þubllc Land AcL)ţ as
amended by ÞresldenLlal uecree noŦ 1073ţ whlch requlres possesslon of Lhe sub[ecL properLy Lo
sLarL on or prlor Lo 12 !une 1943Ŧ Penceţ Lhe appellaLe courL ordered Lhe spouses 1an Lo reLurn Lhe
sub[ecL properLy Lo Lhe 8epubllcŦ

lssueť WheLher or noL Spouses 1an have been ln openţ conLlnuousţ excluslve and noLorlous
possesslon and occupaLlon of Lhe sub[ecL properLyţ under a bona flde clalm of acqulslLlon or
ownershlpţ slnce 12 !une 1943ţ or earllerţ lmmedlaLely precedlng Lhe flllng of Lhe appllcaLlon for
conflrmaLlon of LlLleŦ

8ullngť 1he Þubllc Land AcLţ as amended by ÞresldenLlal uecree noŦ 1073ţ governs lands of Lhe
publlc domalnţ excepL Llmber and mlneral landsţ frlar landsţ and prlvaLely owned lands whlch
reverLed Lo Lhe SLaLeŦ lL expllclLly enumeraLes Lhe means by whlch publlc lands may be dlsposed ofţ
Lo wlLť
(1) lor homesLead seLLlemenLŤ
(2) 8y saleŤ
(3) 8y leaseŤ and
(4) 8y conflrmaLlon of lmperfecL or lncompleLe LlLlesŤ
(a) 8y [udlclal legallzaLlonŦ
(b) 8y admlnlsLraLlve legallzaLlon (free paLenL)Ŧ

Slnce Lhe spouses 1an flled Lhelr appllcaLlon before Lhe 81Cţ Lhen lL can be reasonably lnferred LhaL
Lhey are seeklng Lhe [udlclal conflrmaLlon or legallzaLlon of Lhelr lmperfecL or lncompleLe LlLle over
Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ !udlclal conflrmaLlon or legallzaLlon of lmperfecL or lncompleLe LlLle Lo landţ
noL exceedlng 144 hecLaresţ may be avalled of by persons ldenLlfled under SecLlon 48 of Lhe Þubllc
Land AcLţ as amended by ÞresldenLlal uecree noŦ 1073
(b) 1hose who by Lhemselves or Lhrough Lhelr predecessorsŴlnŴ lnLeresL have been ln openţ
conLlnuousţ excluslveţ and noLorlous possesslon and occupaLlon of agrlculLural lands of Lhe publlc
domalnţ under a bona flde clalm of acqulslLlon of ownershlpţ slnce !une 12ţ 1943ţ or earllerţ
lmmedlaLely precedlng Lhe flllng of Lhe appllcaLlon for conflrmaLlon of LlLleţ excepL when prevenLed
by war or force ma[eureŦ 1hese shall be concluslvely presumed Lo have performed all Lhe
condlLlons essenLlal Lo a CovernmenL granL and shall be enLlLled Lo a cerLlflcaLe of LlLle under Lhe
provlslons of Lhls chapLerŦ

noL belng members of any naLlonal culLural mlnorlLlesţ spouses 1an may only be enLlLled Lo [udlclal
conflrmaLlon or legallzaLlon of Lhelr lmperfecL or lncompleLe LlLle under SecLlon 48(b) of Lhe Þubllc
Land AcLţ as amendedŦ under CommonwealLh AcL noŦ 141ţ as amendedţ Lhe Lwo requlslLes whlch
Lhe appllcanLs musL comply wlLh for Lhe granL of Lhelr AppllcaLlon for 8eglsLraLlon of 1lLle areť (1)
Lhe land applled for ls allenable and dlsposableŤ and (2) Lhe appllcanLs and Lhelr predecessorsŴlnŴ
lnLeresL have occupled and possessed Lhe land openlyţ conLlnuouslyţ excluslvelyţ and adversely
slnce 12 !une 1943Ŧ 1o prove LhaL Lhe land sub[ecL of an appllcaLlon for reglsLraLlon ls allenableţ an
appllcanL musL concluslvely esLabllsh Lhe exlsLence of a poslLlve acL of Lhe governmenL such as a
presldenLlal proclamaLlon or an execuLlve order or admlnlsLraLlve acLlonţ lnvesLlgaLlon reporLs of
Lhe 8ureau of Lands lnvesLlgaLor or a leglslaLlve acL or sLaLuLeŦ unLll Lhenţ Lhe rules on conflrmaLlon
of lmperfecL LlLle do noL applyŦ

A cerLlflcaLlon from Lhe uLn8 LhaL a loL ls allenable and dlsposable ls sufflclenL Lo esLabllsh Lhe Lrue
naLure and characLer of Lhe properLy and en[oys a presumpLlon of regularlLy ln Lhe absence of
conLradlcLory evldenceŦ44 Conslderlng LhaL no evldence was presenLed Lo dlsprove Lhe conLenLs of
Lhe aforesald uLn8ŴCLn8C CerLlflcaLlonţ Lhls CourL ls duLyŴbound Lo uphold Lhe sameŦ
noneLhelessţ even when Lhe spouses 1an were able Lo sufflclenLly prove LhaL Lhe sub[ecL properLy
ls parL of Lhe allenable and dlsposable lands of Lhe publlc domaln as early as 31 uecember 1923ţ
Lhey sLlll falled Lo saLlsfacLorlly esLabllsh compllance wlLh Lhe second requlslLe for [udlclal
conflrmaLlon of lmperfecL or lncompleLe LlLleţ lŦeŦţ openţ conLlnuousţ excluslve and noLorlous
possesslon and occupaLlon of Lhe sub[ecL properLy slnce 12 !une 1943 or earllerŦ A mere showlng of
possesslon for LhlrLy years or more ls noL sufflclenLŦ lL musL be shownţ Looţ LhaL possesslon and
occupaLlon had sLarLed on 12 !une 1943 or earllerŦ

ln addlLlonţ Lax declaraLlons and recelpLs are noL concluslve evldence of ownershlpŦ AL mosLţ Lhey
consLlLuLe mere prlma facle proofs of ownershlp of Lhe properLy for whlch Laxes have been paldŦ ln
Lhe absence of acLualţ publlc and adverse possesslonţ Lhe declaraLlon of Lhe land for Lax purposes
does noL prove ownershlpŦ 1hey may be good supporLlng or collaboraLlng evldence LogeLher wlLh
oLher acLs of possesslon and ownershlpŤ buL by Lhemselvesţ Lax declaraLlons are lnadequaLe Lo
esLabllsh possesslon of Lhe properLy ln Lhe naLure and for Lhe perlod requlred by sLaLuLe for
acqulrlng lmperfecL or lncompleLe LlLle Lo Lhe landŦ

lor fallure of Lhe Spouses 1an Lo saLlsfy Lhe requlremenLs prescrlbed by SecLlon 48(b) of Lhe Þubllc
Land AcLţ as amendedţ Lhls CourL has no oLher opLlon buL Lo deny Lhelr appllcaLlon for [udlclal
conflrmaLlon and reglsLraLlon of Lhelr LlLle Lo Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ

kep vsŦ @sa|
Gk# 168184] IuneŦ 22ţ 2009
S90 SCkA 423

lacLsť 1sal flled an appllcaLlon for Lhe conflrmaLlon and reglsLraLlon of Lhe sub[ecL properLy under
Þu 1329Ŧ 1sal sLaLed LhaL on 31 May 1993ţ she purchased Lhe properLy from ManollLa CarungcongŦ
1sal declared LhaL she and her predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresL have been ln openţ conLlnuousţ excluslve
and noLorlous possesslon and occupaLlon of Lhe sub[ecL properLy for more Lhan 30 yearsŦ

8epubllc opposed on Lhe followlng groundsť (1) LhaL 1sal and her predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresL
falled Lo presenL sufflclenL evldence Lo show LhaL Lhey have been ln openţ conLlnuousţ excluslve
and noLorlous possesslon and occupaLlon of Lhe sub[ecL properLy slnce 12 !une 1943 or earller (2)
LhaL Lhe Lax declaraLlons and Lax recelpL paymenLs do noL consLlLuLe compeLenL and sufflclenL
evldence and (3) LhaL Lhe properLy forms parL of Lhe publlc domaln and ls noL sub[ecL Lo prlvaLe
approprlaLlonŦ

1rlal courL granLed 1salƌs appllcaLlon for reglsLraLlonŦ 1he 8epubllc appealed Lo Lhe CAŦ CA
afflrmed Lhe Lrlal courL's declslonŦ

lssueť WheLher Lhe Lrlal courL can granL Lhe appllcaLlon for reglsLraLlon desplLe Lhe lack of proof of
1salƌs openţ conLlnuousţ excluslve and noLorlous possesslon of Lhe sub[ecL properLy slnce 12 !une
1943 or earllerŦ

Peldť 1he peLlLlon has merlLŦ

ln 1salƌs orlglnal appllcaLlon before Lhe Lrlal courLţ she clalmed LhaL she was enLlLled Lo Lhe
conflrmaLlon and reglsLraLlon of her LlLle Lo Lhe sub[ecL properLy under Þu 1329Ŧ Poweverţ she dld
noL speclfy under whaL paragraph of SecLlon 14 of Þu 1329 she was flllng Lhe appllcaLlonŦ lL
appears LhaL she flled her appllcaLlon under SecLlon 14(1) of Þu 1329ţ whlch sLaLesť

SLCŦ 14Ŧ Who may applyŦ Ŵ xxx
(1) 1hose who by Lhemselves or Lhrough Lhelr predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresL have been ln openţ
conLlnuousţ excluslve and noLorlous possesslon and occupaLlon of allenable and dlsposable lands of
Lhe publlc domaln under a bona flde clalm of ownershlp slnce !une 12ţ 1943ţ or earllerŦ

1husţ Lhere are Lhree requlslLesť (1) LhaL Lhe properLy ln quesLlon ls allenable and dlsposable
land of Lhe publlc domalnŤ (2) LhaL Lhe appllcanL by hlmself or Lhrough hls predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresL
have been ln openţ conLlnuousţ excluslve and noLorlous possesslon and occupaLlonŤ and (3) LhaL
such possesslon ls under a bona flde clalm of ownershlp slnce 12 !une 1943 or earllerŦ 1he rlghL Lo
flle Lhe appllcaLlon for reglsLraLlon derlves from a bona flde clalm of ownershlp golng back Lo 12
!une 1943 or earllerţ by reason of Lhe clalmanL's openţ conLlnuousţ excluslve and noLorlous
possesslon of allenable and dlsposable land of Lhe publlc domalnŦ

A slmllar rlghL ls glven under SecLlon 48(b) of CA 141ţ as amended by Þu 1073Ŧ

As Lhe law now sLandsţ a mere showlng of possesslon and occupaLlon for 30 years or
more ls noL sufflclenLŦ Slnce Lhe effecLlvlLy of Þu 1073 on 23 !anuary 1977ţ lL musL now be shown
LhaL possesslon and occupaLlon of Lhe plece of land by Lhe appllcanLţ by hlmself or Lhrough hls
predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresLţ sLarLed on 12 !une 1943 or earllerŦ 1hls provlslon ls ln LoLal conformlLy
wlLh SecLlon 14(1) of Þu 1329Ŧ

1sal falled Lo comply wlLh Lhe perlod of possesslon and occupaLlon of Lhe sub[ecL properLyţ as
requlred by boLh Þu 1329 and CA 141Ŧ 1salƌs evldence was noL enough Lo prove LhaL her
possesslon of Lhe properLy because Lhe earllesL evldence can be Lraced back Lo a Lax declaraLlon
lssued ln Lhe name of her predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresL only ln Lhe year 1948Ŧ ln vlew of Lhe lack of
sufflclenL showlng LhaL 1sal and her predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresL possessed Lhe sub[ecL properLy under
a bona flde clalm of ownershlp slnce 12 !une 1943 or earllerţ her appllcaLlon for conflrmaLlon and
reglsLraLlon of Lhe sub[ecL properLy under Þu 1329 and CA 141 should be denledŦ

1sal also falled Lo prove LhaL Lhe sub[ecL properLy has been declared allenable and dlsposable
by Lhe ÞresldenL or Lhe SecreLary of Lhe uLn8Ŧ

AppllcanL for land reglsLraLlon musL prove LhaL Lhe uLn8 SecreLary had approved Lhe
land classlflcaLlon and released Lhe land of Lhe publlc domaln as allenable and dlsposableţ and LhaL
Lhe land sub[ecL of Lhe appllcaLlon for reglsLraLlon falls wlLhln Lhe approved area per verlflcaLlon
Lhrough survey by Lhe ÞLn8C or CLn8CŦ ln addlLlonţ Lhe appllcanL for land reglsLraLlon musL
presenL a copy of Lhe orlglnal classlflcaLlon approved by Lhe uLn8 SecreLary and cerLlfled as a Lrue
copy by Lhe legal cusLodlan of Lhe offlclal recordsŦ 1hese facLs musL be esLabllshed Lo prove LhaL
Lhe land ls allenable and dlsposableŦ

L|m vsŦ kep
Gk# 162047] SeptŦ 4ţ 2009
S98 SCkA 247

lAC1Sť !oyce Llm (peLlLloner) flled on SepLember 7ţ 1998 before Lhe 81C of 1agayLay ClLy an
AppllcaLlon for 8eglsLraLlon of 1lLle (L8C Case noŦ 1CŴ837) over LoL 13687ţ a 9ţ638ŴsquareŴmeLer
and ad[acenL LoL 13686 conLalnlng 18ţ997ŴsquareŴmeLers locaLed ln Sllangţ CavlLeŦ

ÞeLlLlonerţ declarlng LhaL she purchased boLh loLs on Aprll 30ţ 1997 from Spouses Ldgardo and
!orglna Þagkallnawanţ soughL Lhe appllcaLlon of ÞresldenLlal uecree noŦ 1329 or Lhe ÞroperLy
8eglsLraLlon uecree for boLh appllcaLlonsţ clalmlng LhaL she and her predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresL
1rlnldad Mercadoţ lernanda 8elardoţ vlcLorla Abueg and Lhe Spouses Þagkallnawan have been ln
openţ conLlnuousţ excluslve and noLorlous possesslon and occupancy of Lhe loLs under a bona flde
clalm of ownershlp for more Lhan LhlrLy (30) yearsŦ ÞeLlLloner alLernaLlvely lnvoked Lhe provlslons
of CommonwealLh AcL noŦ 141ţ as amendedţ or Lhe Þubllc Land AcL as basls of her appllcaLlonsŦ
Poweverţ per CerLlflcaLlon from Lhe CommunlLy LnvlronmenL and naLural 8esources Cfflce
(CLn8C)ţ Lhe land was sald Lo be ºwlLhln Lhe Allenable or ulsposable Land per Land ClasslflcaLlon
Map noŦ 3013 esLabllshed under Þro[ecL noŦ 20ŴA lAC 4Ŵ1636 on March 13ţ 1982"Ŧ

1he 81C granLed peLlLlonerƌs appllcaLlonŦ 1he SollclLor Ceneralţ on behalf of Lhe 8epubllcţ appealed
Lo Lhe CA on Lhe ground LhaL peLlLloner falled Lo comply wlLh Lhe provlslons of Lhe ÞroperLy
8eglsLraLlon uecree and ArLlcle 1137 of Lhe Clvll Code boLh laws of whlch requlre aL leasL 30 years
of adverse possesslonţ counLed from March 13ţ 1982 when lL became parL of Lhe allenable and
dlsposable landŦ 1hls was granLedŦ Penceţ Lhls appealŦ

lSSuLť WheLher Lhe provlslons of Þu 1329 may defeaL peLlLloner's rlghL LhaL has already been
vesLed prlor Lo promulgaLlon LhereofŦ

PLLuť As for peLlLlonerƌs lnvocaLlon of Lhe provlslons of Lhe Þubllc Land AcL Lo have her appllcaLlons
consldered as conflrmaLlons of lmperfecL LlLlesţ Lhe same fallsŦ When SecLlon 48 (b) of Lhe Þubllc
Land AcL was amended by ÞresldenLlal uecree noŦ 1073ţ whlch made !une 12ţ 1943 as Lhe cuLŴoff
daLeţ Lhe amendmenL made Lhe law concordanL wlLh SecLlon 14 (1) of Lhe ÞroperLy 8eglsLraLlon
uecreeŦ

SecLlon 48 (b) of Lhe Þubllc Land AcL and SecLlon 14 (1) of Lhe ÞroperLy 8eglsLraLlon uecree varyţ
howeverţ wlLh respecL Lo Lhelr operaLlon slnce Lhe laLLer operaLes when Lhere exlsLs a LlLle whlch
only needs conflrmaLlonţ whlle Lhe former works under Lhe presumpLlon LhaL Lhe land applled for
sLlll belongs Lo Lhe SLaLeŦ Whlle Lhe sub[ecL loLs were verlfled Lo be allenable or dlsposable lands
slnce March 13ţ 1982ţ Lhere ls no sufflclenL proof LhaL openţ conLlnuous and adverse possesslon
over Lhem by peLlLloner and her predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresL commenced on !une 12ţ 1943 or earllerŦ
ÞeLlLlonerƌs appllcaLlons cannoL Lhus be granLedŦ

Whlle a properLy classlfled as allenable and dlsposable publlc land may be converLed lnLo prlvaLe
properLy by reason of openţ conLlnuousţ excluslve and noLorlous possesslon of aL leasL 30 yearsţ
publlc domlnlon lands become paLrlmonlal properLy noL only wlLh a declaraLlon LhaL Lhese are
allenable or dlsposable buL also wlLh an express governmenL manlfesLaLlon LhaL Lhe properLy ls
already paLrlmonlal or no longer reLalned for publlc useţ publlc servlce or Lhe developmenL of
naLlonal wealLhŦ 42 And only when Lhe properLy has become paLrlmonlal can Lhe prescrlpLlve
perlod for Lhe acqulslLlon of properLy of Lhe publlc domlnlon begln Lo runŦ

Whlle Lhe sub[ecL loLs were declared allenable or dlsposable on March 13ţ 1982ţ Lhere ls no
compeLenL evldence LhaL Lhey are no longer lnLended for publlc use or for publlc servlceŦ 1he
classlflcaLlon of Lhe loLs as allenable and dlsposable lands of Lhe publlc domaln does noL change lLs
sLaLus as properLles of Lhe publlc domlnlonŦ ÞeLlLloner cannoL Lhus acqulre LlLle Lo Lhem by
prescrlpLlon as yeLŦ

ln AddlLlonť
As gaLhered from Lhe CLn8C CerLlflcaLlonsţ Lhe loLs were verlfled Lo be allenable or dlsposable
lands on March 13ţ 1982Ŧ 1hese CerLlflcaLlons en[oy Lhe presumpLlon of regularlLy ln Lhe absence of
conLradlcLory evldenceŦ 1here ls also no sufflclenL proof LhaL peLlLlonerƌs predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresL
had been ln openţ conLlnuous and adverse possesslon of Lhe loLs slnce !une 12ţ 1943 or earllerŦ

As for peLlLlonerƌs rellance on Lhe Lax declaraLlons and recelpLs of realLy Lax paymenLsţ Lhe
documenLs Ÿ Lax declaraLlons for LoL noŦ 13687 and LoL noŦ 13686 whlch were lssued only ln 1991
and 1994ţ respecLlvelyţ are lndlcla of Lhe possesslon ln Lhe concepL of an ownerŦ 1here ls no
showlng of Lax paymenLs before Lhese yearsŦ

kep vsŦ Ch|ng
Gk# 186166] CctŦ 20ţ 2010
634 SCkA 41S

lAC1Sť
Cn AugusL 9ţ 1999ţ respondenL !ose Chlngţ represenLed by hls ALLorneyŴlnŴlacLţ AnLonlo Chlngţ
flled a verlfled AppllcaLlon for 8eglsLraLlon of 1lLle coverlng a parcel of land wlLh lmprovemenLsţ
before Lhe 81CŦ 1he sub[ecL loL ls a consolldaLlon of Lhree (3) conLlguous loLs slLuaLed ln 8anzaţ
8uLuan ClLyţ Agusan del norLeţ wlLh an area of 38ţ229 square meLersŦ 8espondenL alleged LhaL on
Aprll 10ţ 1979ţ he purchased Lhe sub[ecL land from Lhe laLe former governor and Congressman
uemocrlLo CŦ Þlaza as evldenced by a ueed of Sale of unreglsLered LandsŦ
lnlLlallyţ Lhe 81Cţ acLlng as a land reglsLraLlon courLţ ordered respondenL Lo show cause why hls
appllcaLlon for reglsLraLlon of LlLle should noL be dlsmlssed for hls fallure Lo sLaLe Lhe currenL
assessed value of Lhe sub[ecL land and hls nonŴcompllance wlLh Lhe lasL paragraph of SecLlon 17 of
ÞresldenLlal uecree (ÞŦuŦ) noŦ 1329Ŧ8
1he CSC duly depuLlzed Lhe Þrovlnclal ÞrosecuLor of Agusan del norLe flled an CpposlLlon Lo Lhe
appllcaLlon for reglsLraLlon of LlLle as well as Lhe ueparLmenL of LnvlronmenL and naLural
8esourcesŦ
Cn uecember 3ţ 2002ţ Lhe 81C resolved Lo dlsmlss Lhe respondenL's appllcaLlon for reglsLraLlonŦ
1he 81C was noL convlnced LhaL respondenL's ueed of Sale sufflclenLly esLabllshed LhaL he was Lhe
owner ln fee slmple of Lhe land soughL Lo be reglsLeredŦ 8espondenL flled a moLlon for
reconslderaLlon and a subsequenL supplemenLal moLlon for reconslderaLlon wlLh aLLached
addlLlonal Lax declaraLlonsŦ 1he 81C denledŦ 8espondenL appealed Lhe 81C rullng before Lhe CAŦ CA
reversed Lhe 81C's earller resoluLlon and granLed respondenL's appllcaLlon for reglsLraLlon of LlLleŦ
Penceţ Lhls peLlLlon for revlew on cerLlorarl flled by CSCŦ
lSSuLť
WheLher or noL Lhe respondenL appllcaLlon for reglsLraLlon of LlLle be granLedŦ
PLLuť
1he CourL flnds LhaL Lhe respondenL provlded no compeLenL and persuaslve evldence Lo show LhaL
Lhe land has been classlfled as allenable and dlsposableţ Lherefore Lhe appllcaLlon for reglsLraLlon
should be denledŦ
Llkewlseţ afLer revlewlng Lhe documenLs submlLLed by Lhe respondenLţ lL ls clear LhaL Lhere was no
subsLanLlve evldence Lo show LhaL he complled wlLh Lhe requlremenL of possesslon and occupaLlon
slnce !une 12ţ 1943 or earllerŦ 1he earllesL Lax declaraLlon LhaL respondenL Lrled Lo lncorporaLe ln
hls SupplemenLal MoLlon for 8econslderaLlon does noL measure up Lo Lhe Llme requlremenLŦ
8ased on Lhese legal parameLersţ appllcanLs for reglsLraLlon of LlLle under SecLlon 14(1) of ÞŦuŦ
1329 ln relaLlon Lo SecLlon 48(b) of CommonwealLh AcL 141ţ as amended by SecLlon 4 of ÞŦuŦ 1073
musL sufflclenLly esLabllshť (1) LhaL Lhe sub[ecL land forms parL of Lhe dlsposable and allenable
lands of Lhe publlc domalnŤ (2) LhaL Lhe appllcanL and hls predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresL have been ln
openţ conLlnuousţ excluslve and noLorlous possesslon and occupaLlon of Lhe sameŤ and (3) LhaL lL ls
under a bona flde clalm of ownershlp slnce !une 12ţ 1943ţ or earllerŦ
1husţ before an appllcanL can adduce evldence of openţ conLlnuousţ excluslve and noLorlous
possesslon and occupaLlon of Lhe properLy ln quesLlonţ he musL flrsL prove LhaL Lhe land belongs Lo
Lhe allenable and dlsposable lands of Lhe publlc domalnŦ lL ls docLrlnal LhaLţ under Lhe 8egallan
docLrlneţ all lands of Lhe publlc domaln perLaln Lo Lhe SLaLe and Lhe laLLer ls Lhe foundaLlon of any
asserLed rlghL Lo ownershlp ln landŦ Accordlnglyţ Lhe SLaLe presumably owns all lands noL oLherwlse
appearlng Lo be clearly wlLhln prlvaLe ownershlpŦ 1o overcome such presumpLlonţ lrrefuLable
evldence musL be shown by Lhe appllcanL LhaL Lhe land sub[ecL of reglsLraLlon has been declasslfled
and now belongs Lo Lhe allenable and dlsposable porLlon of Lhe publlc domalnŦ

kep vsŦ De|a Þaz
Gk# 171631] NovŦ 1Sţ 2010
634 SCkA 610

lAC1Sť
Cn november 13ţ 2003ţ respondenLs Avellno 8Ŧ dela Þazţ Arsenlo 8Ŧ dela Þazţ !ose 8Ŧ dela Þazţ and
Cllcerlo 8Ŧ dela Þazţ represenLed by !ose 8Ŧ dela Þaz (!ose)ţ flled wlLh Lhe 81C of Þaslg ClLy an
appllcaLlon for reglsLraLlon of land3 under ÞresldenLlal uecree noŦ 1329 (Þu 1329) oLherwlse
known as Lhe ÞroperLy 8eglsLraLlon uecreeŦ 1he appllcaLlon covered a parcel of land wlLh an area of
23ţ823 square meLersţ slLuaLed aL lbayoţ naplndanţ 1agulgţ MeLro ManllaŦ

8espondenLs alleged LhaL Lhey acqulred Lhe sub[ecL properLyţ whlch ls an agrlculLural landţ by
vlrLue of Salaysay ng Þagkakaloob4 daLed !une 18ţ 1987ţ execuLed by Lhelr parenLs Zoslmo dela Þaz
and LsLer dela Þaz (Zoslmo and LsLer)ţ who earller acqulred Lhe sald properLy from Lhelr deceased
parenL Ale[andro dela Þaz (Ale[andro) by vlrLue of a ƍSlnumpaang Þahayag sa ÞagllllpaL sa Sarlll ng
mga ÞagŴaarl ng namaLay3 daLed March 10ţ 1979Ŧ 1he respondenLs clalmed LhaL Lhey are coŴ
owners of Lhe sub[ecL properLy and Lhey are ln conLlnuousţ openţ excluslve and noLorlous
possesslon ln Lhe concepL of owner slnce Lhey acqulred lL ln 1987Ŧ

ÞeLlLloner 8epubllc of Lhe Þhlllpplnes (8epubllc)ţ Lhrough Lhe Cfflce of Lhe SollclLor Ceneral (CSC)ţ
opposed Lhe appllcaLlon for reglsLraLlonŦ Cn May 3ţ 2004ţ Lhe Lrlal courL lssued an Crder of Ceneral
uefaulL agalnsL Lhe whole world excepL as agalnsL Lhe 8epubllcŦ 1hereafLerţ respondenLs presenLed
Lhelr evldence ln supporL of Lhelr appllcaLlonŦ

ln lLs ueclslon daLed november 17ţ 2004ţ Lhe 81C granLed respondenLsƌ appllcaLlon for reglsLraLlon
of Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ

Aggrleved by Lhe ueclslonţ peLlLloner flled a noLlce of AppealŦ8 1he CAţ ln lLs ueclslon daLed
lebruary 13ţ 2006ţ dlsmlssed Lhe appeal and afflrmed Lhe declslon of Lhe 81CŦ 1he CA ruled LhaL
respondenLs were able Lo show LhaL Lhey have been 1he CA found LhaL respondenLs acqulred Lhe
sub[ecL land from Lhelr predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresLţ who have been ln acLualţ conLlnuousţ
unlnLerrupLedţ publlc and adverse possesslon ln Lhe concepL of an owner slnce Llme lmmemorlalŦ
1he CAţ llkewlseţ held LhaL respondenLs were able Lo presenL sufflclenL evldence Lo esLabllsh LhaL
Lhe sub[ecL properLy ls parL of Lhe allenable and dlsposable lands of Lhe publlc domalnŦ Penceţ Lhe
lnsLanL peLlLlon ralslng Lhe followlng groundsť

lSSuLť WheLher or noL Lhe appllcaLlon for reglsLraLlon of Lhe sub[ecL properLy should be granLedŦ

PLLuť

ln Lhe presenL caseţ Lhe records do noL supporL Lhe flndlngs made by Lhe CA LhaL Lhe sub[ecL land ls
parL of Lhe allenable and dlsposable porLlon of Lhe publlc domalnŦ
SecLlon 14 (1) of Þu 1329ţ oLherwlse known as Lhe ÞroperLy 8eglsLraLlon uecree provldesť

SLCŦ 14Ŧ Who may applyŦ Ŵ 1he followlng persons may flle ln Lhe proper CourL of llrsL lnsLance an
appllcaLlon for reglsLraLlon of LlLle Lo landţ wheLher personally or Lhrough Lhelr duly auLhorlzed
represenLaLlvesť
(1) 1hose who by Lhemselves or Lhrough Lhelr predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresL have been ln openţ
conLlnuousţ excluslve and noLorlous possesslon and occupaLlon of allenable and dlsposable lands of
Lhe publlc domaln under a bona flde clalm of ownershlp slnce !une 12ţ 1943ţ or earllerŦ

lrom Lhe foregolngţ respondenLs need Lo prove LhaL (1) Lhe land forms parL of Lhe allenable and
dlsposable land of Lhe publlc domalnŤ and (2) Lheyţ by Lhemselves or Lhrough Lhelr predecessorsŴlnŴ
lnLeresLţ have been ln openţ conLlnuousţ excluslveţ and noLorlous possesslon and occupaLlon of Lhe
sub[ecL land under a bona flde clalm of ownershlp from !une 12ţ 1943 or earllerŦ12 1hese Lhe
respondenLs musL prove by no less Lhan clearţ poslLlve and convlnclng evldenceŦ
under Lhe 8egallan docLrlneţ whlch ls embodled ln our ConsLlLuLlonţ all lands of Lhe publlc domaln
belong Lo Lhe SLaLeţ whlch ls Lhe source of any asserLed rlghL Lo any ownershlp of landŦ All lands noL
appearlng Lo be clearly wlLhln prlvaLe ownershlp are presumed Lo belong Lo Lhe SLaLeŦ Accordlnglyţ
publlc lands noL shown Lo have been reclasslfled or released as allenable agrlculLural landţ or
allenaLed Lo a prlvaLe person by Lhe SLaLeţ remaln parL of Lhe lnallenable publlc domalnŦ14 1he
burden of proof ln overcomlng Lhe presumpLlon of SLaLe ownershlp of Lhe lands of Lhe publlc
domaln ls on Lhe person applylng for reglsLraLlon (or clalmlng ownershlp)ţ who musL prove LhaL Lhe
land sub[ecL of Lhe appllcaLlon ls allenable or dlsposableŦ 1o overcome Lhls presumpLlonţ
lnconLroverLlble evldence musL be esLabllshed LhaL Lhe land sub[ecL of Lhe appllcaLlon (or clalm) ls
allenable or dlsposableŦ

1he noLaLlon of Lhe surveyorŴgeodeLlc englneer on Lhe blue prlnL copy of Lhe converslon and
subdlvlslon plan approved by Lhe 8ureau of loresL uevelopmenL ls lnsufflclenL and does noL
consLlLuLe lnconLroverLlble evldence Lo overcome Lhe presumpLlon LhaL Lhe land remalns parL of
Lhe lnallenable publlc domalnŦ

1o prove LhaL Lhe land sub[ecL of an appllcaLlon for reglsLraLlon ls allenableţ an appllcanL musL
esLabllsh Lhe exlsLence of a poslLlve acL of Lhe governmenLţ such as a presldenLlal proclamaLlon or
an execuLlve orderţ an admlnlsLraLlve acLlonţ lnvesLlgaLlon reporLs of 8ureau of Lands lnvesLlgaLorsţ
and a leglslaLlve acL or sLaLuLeŦ 1he appllcanL may also secure a cerLlflcaLlon from Lhe CovernmenL
LhaL Lhe lands applled for are allenable and dlsposableŦ

lurLherţ Lhe pleces of evldenceţ Laken LogeLherţ falled Lo palnL a clear plcLure LhaL respondenLs by
Lhemselves or Lhrough Lhelr predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresL have been ln openţ excluslveţ conLlnuous and
noLorlous possesslon and occupaLlon of Lhe sub[ecL landţ under a bona flde clalm of ownershlp
slnce !une 12ţ 1943 or earllerŦ

kep vsŦ Vega
Gk# 177790] IanŦ 17ţ 2011
639 SCkA S41
lAC1Sť

Cn 26 May 1993ţ respondenLs Carlos 8Ŧ vegaţ Marcos 8Ŧ vegaţ 8ogello 8Ŧ vegaţ Lubln 8Ŧ vega and
Pelrs of Clorla 8Ŧ vega Ŵ namelyţ lranclsco LŦ ?apţ MaŦ Wlnona ?Ŧ 8odrlguezţ MaŦ Wendelyn vŦ ?ap
and lranclsco vŦ ?apţ !rŦ (respondenLs vegas) Ŵ flled an appllcaLlon for reglsLraLlon of LlLleŦ 1he
appllcaLlon covered a parcel of landţ ldenLlfled as LoL noŦ 6191ţ CadasLre 430 of Los 8anosţ Lagunaţ
wlLh a LoLal area of slx Lhousand nlne hundred Lwo (6ţ902) square meLers (Lhe sub[ecL land)Ŧ

8espondenLs vegas alleged LhaL Lhey lnherlLed Lhe sub[ecL land from Lhelr moLherţ Marla 8evllleza
vdaŦ de vegaţ who ln Lurn lnherlLed lL from her faLherţ Lorenzo 8evlllezaŦ 1helr moLherƌs slbllngs
(Lwo broLhers and a slsLer) dled lnLesLaLeţ all wlLhouL leavlng any offsprlngŦ

Cn 21 !une 1993ţ peLlLloner 8epubllc flled an opposlLlon Lo respondenLs vegasƌ appllcaLlon for
reglsLraLlon on Lhe groundţ lnLer allaţ LhaL Lhe sub[ecL land or porLlons Lhereof were lands of Lhe
publlc domaln andţ as suchţ noL sub[ecL Lo prlvaLe approprlaLlonŦ

1he Lrlal courL granLed respondenLs vegasƌ appllcaLlon and dlrecLed Lhe Land 8eglsLraLlon AuLhorlLy
(L8A) Lo lssue Lhe correspondlng decree of reglsLraLlon ln Lhe name of respondenLs vegas and
respondenLsŴlnLervenors 8uhaysƌ predecessorsţ ln proporLlon Lo Lhelr clalms over Lhe sub[ecL landŦ
CA afflrmed ln LoLoŦ Aggrevled by Lhe rullngţ peLlLloner flled Lhe lnsLanL peLlLlonŦ

lSSuLť

WheLher Lhe evldence on record ls sufflclenL Lo supporL Lhe lower courLƌs concluslon LhaL Lhe
sub[ecL land ls allenable and dlsposableŦ

PLLuť

under SecLlon 14 Þu 1329ţ ÞroperLy 8eglsLraLlon uecreeţ appllcanLs for reglsLraLlon of LlLle musL
prove Lhe followlngť (1) LhaL Lhe sub[ecL land forms parL of Lhe dlsposable and allenable lands of
Lhe publlc domalnŤ and (2) LhaL Lhey have been ln openţ conLlnuousţ excluslve and noLorlous
possesslon and occupaLlon of Lhe land under a bona flde clalm of ownershlp slnce 12 !une 1943 or

earllerŦ SecLlon 14 (1) of Lhe law requlres LhaL Lhe properLy soughL Lo be reglsLered ls already
allenable and dlsposable aL Lhe Llme Lhe appllcaLlon for reglsLraLlon ls flledŦ

8alslng no lssue wlLh respecL Lo respondenLs vegasƌ openţ conLlnuousţ excluslve and noLorlous
possesslon of Lhe sub[ecL land ln Lhe presenL ÞeLlLlonţ Lhe CourL wlll llmlL lLs focus on Lhe flrsL
requlslLeť speclflcallyţ wheLher lL has sufflclenLly been demonsLraLed LhaL Lhe sub[ecL land ls
allenable and dlsposableŦ

unless a land ls reclasslfled and declared allenable and dlsposableţ occupaLlon of Lhe same ln Lhe
concepL of an owner Ŵ no maLLer how long ŴcannoL rlpen lnLo ownershlp and resulL ln a LlLleŤ publlc
lands noL shown Lo have been classlfled as allenable and dlsposable lands remaln parL of Lhe
lnallenable domaln and cannoL confer ownershlp or possessory rlghLsŦ

MaLLers of land classlflcaLlon or reclasslflcaLlon cannoL be assumedŤ Lhey call for proofŦ 1o prove
LhaL Lhe land sub[ecL of an appllcaLlon for reglsLraLlon ls allenableţ an appllcanL musL concluslvely
esLabllsh Lhe exlsLence of a poslLlve acL of Lhe governmenLţ such as any of Lhe followlngť a
presldenLlal proclamaLlon or an execuLlve orderŤ oLher admlnlsLraLlve acLlonsŤ lnvesLlgaLlon reporLs
of Lhe 8ureau of Lands lnvesLlgaLorŤ or a leglslaLlve acL or sLaLuLeŦ 1he appllcanL may also secure a
cerLlflcaLlon from Lhe governmenL LhaL Lhe lands applled for are allenable and dlsposableŦ

Þrevlouslyţ a cerLlflcaLlon from Lhe uLn8 LhaL a loL was allenable and dlsposable was sufflclenL Lo
esLabllsh Lhe Lrue naLure and characLer of Lhe properLy and en[oyed Lhe presumpLlon of regularlLy
ln Lhe absence of conLradlcLory evldenceŦ

kep vsŦ koche
Gk# 17S846] Iu|y 6ţ 2010
624 SCkA 116
lAC1Sť

Cn uecember 3ţ 1996 8oslla 8oche applled for reglsLraLlon of LlLle1 of her 13ţ333ŴsquareŴmeLer
land ln 8arrlo naplndanţ 1agulgţ MeLro Manllaţ2 denomlnaLed as LoL 8698ţ before Lhe 8eglonal
1rlal CourL (81C) of Þaslg ClLyţ 8ranch 133Ŧ 8oche alleged LhaL she lnherlLed Lhe land ln 1960 from
her faLherţ Mlguelţ who ln Lurn had held Lhe land ln Lhe concepL of an owner when 8oche was only
abouL slx years oldŦ She was born on LhaL land on !anuary 10ţ 1938 and had helped her faLher
culLlvaLe lLŦ3 8oche had also pald Lhe realLy Laxes on Lhe landţ whlch had an assessed value of
Þ490ţ000Ŧ00Ŧ

1o supporL her appllcaLlon for reglsLraLlonţ 8oche presenLedţ among oLhersţ a cerLlfled Lrue copy of
Lhe survey plan of Lhe landţ4 lLs Lechnlcal descrlpLlonţ3 a CerLlflcaLlon from Lhe ueparLmenL of
LnvlronmenL and naLural 8esources (uLn8) ln lleu of Lhe CeodeLlc Lnglneer's CerLlflcaLeţ6 Lax
declaraLlonsţ7 and real properLy Lax recelpLsŦ8 She also presenLed cerLlflcaLlons LhaL Lhe Land
8eglsLraLlon AuLhorlLy (L8A) and Lhe naLlonal ÞrlnLlng Cfflce lssued Lo show compllance wlLh
requlremenLs of servlce of noLlce Lo ad[olnlng owners and publlcaLlon of noLlce of lnlLlal hearlngŦ9
As proof of her openţ conLlnuousţ and unlnLerrupLed possesslon of Lhe landţ 8oche presenLed
Manuel Adrlanoţ a former resldenL of naplndan who owned an unreglsLered properLy ad[olnlng LoL
8698Ŧ

1he 8epubllc of Lhe Þhlllpplnes (Lhe CovernmenL)ţ Lhrough Lhe Cfflce of Lhe SollclLor Ceneral (CSC)ţ
opposed Lhe appllcaLlon on Lhe grounds a) LhaL nelLher 8oche nor her predecessorŴlnŴlnLeresL had
occupled Lhe land for Lhe requlred perlodŤ and b) LhaL Lhe land belonged Lo Lhe SLaLe and ls noL
sub[ecL Lo prlvaLe acqulslLlonŦ13 1he Laguna Lake uevelopmenL AuLhorlLy (LLuA) also opposed14
Cn SepLember 30ţ 1999 Lhe 81C rendered [udgmenLţ17 granLlng 8oche's appllcaLlonŦ Cn appeal by
Lhe CovernmenLţ19 Lhe CourL of Appeals (CA) afflrmed Lhe declslon of Lhe 81CŦ20 1he CSC flled a
moLlon for reconslderaLlon buL Lhe CA denled Lhe sameţ prompLlng Lhe CovernmenL Lo flle Lhe
presenL peLlLlonŦ

lSSuLť
WheLher or noL Lhe land sub[ecL of 8oche's appllcaLlon ls allenable or dlsposable land of Lhe publlc
domalnŦ

PLLuť

CA declslon ls reversed and seL asldeŦ

1he CovernmenL lnslsLs LhaL Lhe sub[ecL land forms parL of Lhe lake bed and LhaL lL has noL been
released lnLo Lhe mass of allenable and dlsposable land of Lhe publlc domalnŦ As suchţ 8oche
cannoL reglsLer LlLle Lo lL ln her nameŦ

8oche polnLs ouLţ on Lhe oLher handţ LhaL Lhe loL could noL posslbly be parL of Lhe Laguna Lake's
bed slnce lL has always been planLed Lo crops and ls noL covered by waLerŦ 8ŦAŦ 4830 provldes LhaL
Lhe Lake ls LhaL area covered wlLh waLer when lL ls aL Lhe average maxlmum lake level of 12Ŧ30
meLersŦ 1hls presupposed LhaL Lhe lake exLends only Lo lakeshore landsŦ 1he land ln Lhls case does
noL ad[oln Lhe Laguna LakeŦ
An appllcaLlon for reglsLraLlon of LlLle musLţ under SecLlon 14(1)ţ ÞŦuŦ 1329ţ meeL Lhree
requlremenLsť a) LhaL Lhe properLy ls allenable and dlsposable land of Lhe publlc domalnŤ b) LhaL
Lhe appllcanLs by Lhemselves or Lhrough Lhelr predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresL have been ln openţ
conLlnuousţ excluslve and noLorlous possesslon and occupaLlon of Lhe landŤ and c) LhaL such
possesslon ls under a bona flde clalm of ownershlp slnce !une 12ţ 1943 or earllerŦ

under Lhe 8egallan docLrlneţ all lands of Lhe publlc domaln belong Lo Lhe SLaLe and Lhe laLLer ls Lhe
source of any asserLed rlghL Lo ownershlp ln landŦ 1husţ Lhe SLaLe presumably owns all lands noL
oLherwlse appearlng Lo be clearly wlLhln prlvaLe ownershlpŦ 1o overcome such presumpLlonţ
lnconLroverLlble evldence musL be shown by Lhe appllcanL LhaL Lhe land sub[ecL of reglsLraLlon ls
allenable and dlsposableŦ

8especLlng Lhe Lhlrd requlremenLţ Lhe appllcanL bears Lhe burden of provlng Lhe sLaLus of Lhe
landŦ23 ln Lhls connecLlonţ Lhe CourL has held LhaL he musL presenL a cerLlflcaLe of land
classlflcaLlon sLaLus lssued by Lhe CommunlLy LnvlronmenL and naLural 8esources Cfflce
(CLn8C)26 or Lhe Þrovlnclal LnvlronmenL and naLural 8esources Cfflce (ÞLn8C)27 of Lhe uLn8Ŧ Pe
musL also prove LhaL Lhe uLn8 SecreLary had approved Lhe land classlflcaLlon and released Lhe land
as allenable and dlsposableţ and LhaL lL ls wlLhln Lhe approved area per verlflcaLlon Lhrough survey
by Lhe CLn8C or ÞLn8CŦ lurLherţ Lhe appllcanL musL presenL a copy of Lhe orlglnal classlflcaLlon
approved by Lhe uLn8 SecreLary and cerLlfled as Lrue copy by Lhe legal cusLodlan of Lhe offlclal

recordsŦ 1hese facLs musL be esLabllshed by Lhe appllcanL Lo prove LhaL Lhe land ls allenable and
dlsposableŦ

Pereţ 8oche dld noL presenL evldence LhaL Lhe land she applled for has been classlfled as allenable
or dlsposable land of Lhe publlc domalnŦ She submlLLed only Lhe survey map and Lechnlcal
descrlpLlon of Lhe land whlch bears no lnformaLlon regardlng Lhe land's classlflcaLlonŦ She dld noL
boLher Lo esLabllsh Lhe sLaLus of Lhe land by any cerLlflcaLlon from Lhe approprlaLe governmenL
agencyŦ 1husţ lL cannoL be sald LhaL she complled wlLh all requlslLes for reglsLraLlon of LlLle under
SecLlon 14(1) of ÞŦuŦ 1329Ŧ

Slnce 8oche was unable Lo overcome Lhe presumpLlon LhaL Lhe land she applled for ls lnallenable
land LhaL belongs Lo Lhe SLaLeţ Lhe CovernmenL dld noL have Lo adduce evldence Lo prove lLŦ

Ca|ara vsŦ Iranc|sco
Gk# 1S6439] SeptŦ 29ţ 2010
631 SCkA S0S

ƼnoL submlLLed yeLƽ
x
x
x
x
x


Carbon|||a vsŦ Ab|era
Gk# 177637] Iu|y 26ţ 2010
62S SCkA 461

lAC1Sť

ÞeLlLlonerţ urŦ uloscoro Carbonlllaţ flled a complalnL for e[ecLmenL agalnsL respondenLsţ Marcelo
Ablera and Marlcrls Ablera Þaredesţ wlLh Lhe Munlclpal 1rlal CourL ln ClLles (M1CC)ţ Maasln ClLyŦ
1he complalnL alleged LhaL peLlLloner ls Lhe reglsLered owner of a parcel of landţ locaLed ln
8arangay CanLurlngţ Maasln ClLyţ ldenLlfled as LoL noŦ 1781Ŵ8ŴÞŴ3Ŵ8Ŵ2Ŵ8 ÞSuŴ08Ŵ8432Ŵuţ Maasln
CadasLreŦ 1he land ls purporLedly covered by a cerLlflcaLe of LlLleţ and declared for assessmenL and
LaxaLlon purposes ln peLlLloner's nameŦ ÞeLlLloner furLher clalmed LhaL he ls also Lhe owner of Lhe
resldenLlal bulldlng sLandlng on Lhe landţ whlch bulldlng he acqulred Lhrough a ueed of
LxLra[udlclal SeLLlemenL of LsLaLe (8esldenLlal 8ulldlng) wlLh Walver and CulLclalm of CwnershlpŦ
Pe malnLalned LhaL Lhe bulldlng was belng occupled by respondenLs by mere Lolerance of Lhe
prevlous ownersŦ

ln Lhelr defenseţ respondenLs vehemenLly denled peLlLloner's allegaLlon LhaL Lhey possessed Lhe
bulldlng by mere Lolerance of Lhe prevlous ownersŦ lnsLeadţ Lhey asserLed LhaL Lhey occupled Lhe
bulldlng as ownersţ havlng lnherlLed Lhe same from Alfredo Ablera and 1eodorlca CaplsLranoţ
respondenL Marcelo's parenLs and respondenL Marlcrls' grandparenLsŦ 1hey malnLalned LhaL Lhey
have been ln possesslon of Lhe bulldlng slnce 1960ţ buL lL has noL been declared for LaxaLlon
purposesŦ

1he M1CC declded Lhe case ln favor of respondenLsŦ lL oplned LhaL peLlLloner's clalm of ownershlp
over Lhe sub[ecL parcel of land was noL successfully rebuLLed by respondenLsŤ henceţ peLlLloner's
ownershlp of Lhe same was deemed esLabllshedŦ Poweverţ wlLh respecL Lo Lhe bulldlngţ Lhe courL
declared respondenLs as havlng Lhe beLLer rlghL Lo lLs maLerlal possesslon ln llghL of peLlLloner's
fallure Lo refuLe respondenLs' clalm LhaL Lhelr predecessors had been ln prlor possesslon of Lhe
bulldlng slnce 1960 and LhaL Lhey have conLlnued such possesslon up Lo Lhe presenLŦ

1he 81C reversed Lhe M1CC declslonŦ 1he 81C agreed wlLh Lhe M1CC LhaL Lhe land ls owned by
peLlLlonerŦ 1he Lwo courLs dlfferedţ howeverţ ln Lhelr concluslon wlLh respecL Lo Lhe bulldlngŦ 1he
81C placed Lhe burden upon respondenLs Lo prove Lhelr clalm LhaL Lhey bullL lL prlor Lo peLlLloner's
acqulslLlon of Lhe landţ whlch burdenţ Lhe courL foundţ respondenLs falled Lo dlschargeŦ 1he 81C
held LhaLţ elLher wayŸwheLher Lhe bulldlng was consLrucLed before or afLer peLlLloner acqulred
ownershlp of Lhe landŸpeLlLlonerţ as owner of Lhe landţ would have every rlghL Lo evlcL
respondenLs from Lhe landŦ

1he CA reversed Lhe 81C declslon and ordered Lhe dlsmlssal of peLlLloner's complalnLŦ 8ecause of
Lhlsţ Lhe CAţ followlng Lhls CourL's rullng ln 1en lorLy 8ealLy and uevelopmenL CorporaLlon vŦ Cruzţ
caLegorlzed Lhe complalnL as one for forclble enLryŦ lL Lhen proceeded Lo declare LhaL Lhe acLlon
had prescrlbed slnce Lhe oneŴyear perlod for flllng Lhe forclble enLry case had already lapsedŦ

lSSuLť Who ls enLlLled Lo Lhe physlcal possesslon of Lhe premlsesţ LhaL lsţ Lo Lhe possesslon de facLo
and noL Lo Lhe possesslon de [ureŦ

PLLuť

1he courL held LhaL whlle peLlLloner may have proven hls ownershlp of Lhe landţ as Lhere can be no
oLher plece of evldence more worLhy of credence Lhan a 1orrens cerLlflcaLe of LlLleţ he falled Lo
presenL any evldence Lo subsLanLlaLe hls clalm of ownershlp or rlghL Lo Lhe possesslon of Lhe
bulldlngŦ Llke Lhe CAţ we cannoL accepL Lhe ueed of LxLra[udlclal SeLLlemenL of LsLaLe (8esldenLlal
8ulldlng) wlLh Walver and CulLclalm of Cwnershlp execuLed by Lhe Carclanos as proof LhaL
peLlLloner acqulred ownershlp of Lhe bulldlngŦ 1here ls no showlng LhaL Lhe Carclanos were Lhe
owners of Lhe bulldlng or LhaL Lhey had any proprleLary rlghL over lLŦ 8anged agalnsL respondenLs'
proof of possesslon of Lhe bulldlng slnce 1977ţ peLlLloner's evldence pales ln comparlson and leaves
us LoLally unconvlncedŦ WlLhouL a doubLţ Lhe reglsLered owner of real properLy ls enLlLled Lo lLs
possesslonŦ Poweverţ Lhe owner cannoL slmply wresL possesslon Lhereof from whoever ls ln acLual
occupaLlon of Lhe properLyŦ 1o recover possesslonţ he musL resorL Lo Lhe proper [udlclal remedy
andţ once he chooses whaL acLlon Lo flleţ he ls requlred Lo saLlsfy Lhe condlLlons necessary for such
acLlon Lo prosperŦ

ln Lhe presenL caseţ peLlLloner opLed Lo flle an e[ecLmenL case agalnsL respondenLsŦ L[ecLmenL
casesŸforclble enLry and unlawful deLalnerŸare summary proceedlngs deslgned Lo provlde
expedlLlous means Lo proLecL acLual possesslon or Lhe rlghL Lo possesslon of Lhe properLy lnvolvedŦ
lor Lhls reasonţ an e[ecLmenL case wlll noL necessarlly be declded ln favor of one who has

presenLed proof of ownershlp of Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ key [urlsdlcLlonal facLs consLlLuLlve of Lhe
parLlcular e[ecLmenL case flled musL be averred ln Lhe complalnL and sufflclenLly provenŦ

1he sLaLemenLs ln Lhe complalnL LhaL respondenLs' possesslon of Lhe bulldlng was by mere
Lolerance of peLlLloner clearly make ouL a case for unlawful deLalnerŦ unlawful deLalner lnvolves
Lhe person's wlLhholdlng from anoLher of Lhe possesslon of Lhe real properLy Lo whlch Lhe laLLer ls
enLlLledţ afLer Lhe explraLlon or LermlnaLlon of Lhe former's rlghL Lo hold possesslon under Lhe
conLracLţ elLher expressed or lmplledŦ

A requlslLe for a valld cause of acLlon ln an unlawful deLalner case ls LhaL possesslon musL be
orlglnally lawfulţ and such possesslon musL have Lurned unlawful only upon Lhe explraLlon of Lhe
rlghL Lo possessŦ lL musL be shown LhaL Lhe possesslon was lnlLlally lawfulŤ henceţ Lhe basls of such
lawful possesslon musL be esLabllshedŦ lfţ as ln Lhls caseţ Lhe clalm ls LhaL such possesslon ls by
mere Lolerance of Lhe plalnLlffţ Lhe acLs of Lolerance musL be provedŦ

ÞeLlLloner falled Lo prove LhaL respondenLs' possesslon was based on hls alleged LoleranceŦ Pe dld
noL offer any evldence or even only an affldavlL of Lhe Carclanos aLLesLlng LhaL Lhey LoleraLed
respondenLs' enLry Lo and occupaLlon of Lhe sub[ecL properLlesŦ A bare allegaLlon of Lolerance wlll
noL sufflceŦ ÞlalnLlff musLţ aL leasLţ show overL acLs lndlcaLlve of hls or hls predecessor's permlsslon
Lo occupy Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ 1husţ we musL agree wlLh Lhe CA when lL saldť

A careful scruLlny of Lhe records revealed LhaL hereln respondenL mlserably falled Lo prove hls
clalm LhaL peLlLloners' possesslon of Lhe sub[ecL bulldlng was by mere Lolerance as alleged ln Lhe
complalnLŦ 1olerance musL be żpresenLŽ rlghL from Lhe sLarL of possesslon soughL Lo be recovered
Lo be wlLhln Lhe purvlew of unlawful deLalnerŦ Mere Lolerance always carrles wlLh lL ƍpermlsslonƍ
and noL merely sllence or lnacLlon for sllence or lnacLlon ls negllgenceţ noL LoleranceŦ ln addlLlonţ
plalnLlff musL also show LhaL Lhe supposed acLs of Lolerance have been presenL rlghL from Lhe very
sLarL of Lhe possesslonŸfrom enLry Lo Lhe properLyŦ CLherwlseţ lf Lhe possesslon was unlawful
from Lhe sLarLţ an acLlon for unlawful deLalner would be an lmproper remedyŦ noLablyţ no menLlon
was made ln Lhe complalnL of how enLry by respondenLs was effecLed or how and when
dlspossesslon sLarLedŦ nelLher was Lhere any evldence showlng such deLallsŦ

ln any evenLţ peLlLloner has some oLher recourseŦ Pe may pursue recoverlng possesslon of hls
properLy by flllng an acclon publlclanaţ whlch ls a plenary acLlon lnLended Lo recover Lhe beLLer
rlghL Lo possessŤ or an acclon relvlndlcaLorlaţ a sulL Lo recover ownershlp of real properLyŦ We
sLressţ howeverţ LhaL Lhe pronouncemenL ln Lhls case as Lo Lhe ownershlp of Lhe land should be
regarded as merely provlslonal andţ Lhereforeţ would noL bar or pre[udlce an acLlon beLween Lhe
same parLles lnvolvlng LlLle Lo Lhe landŦ

Modesto vsŦ Urb|na
Gk# 1898S9] CctŦ 18ţ 2010
633 SCkA 383

lAC1Sť

ln hls complalnLţ urblna alleged LhaL he ls Lhe owner of a parcel of land slLuaLed aL Lower 8lcuLanţ
1agulgţ deslgnaLed as LoL 36ţ ÞLS 272Ŧ Accordlng Lo urblnaţ Lhe ModesLosţ Lhrough sLealLhţ schemeţ
and machlnaLlonţ were able Lo occupy a porLlon of Lhls properLyţ deslgnaLed as LoL 336ţ ÞLS 272Ŧ
1hereafLerţ Lhe ModesLos negoLlaLed wlLh urblna for Lhe sale of Lhls loLŦ Poweverţ before Lhe
parLles could flnallze Lhe saleţ Lhe ModesLos allegedly cancelled Lhe LransacLlon and began clalmlng
ownershlp over Lhe loLŦ urblna made several demands on Lhe ModesLos Lo vacaLe Lhe properLyţ Lhe
lasL of whlch was Lhrough a demand leLLer senL on !uly 22ţ 1983Ŧ When Lhe ModesLos sLlll refused
Lo vacaLeţ urblna flled Lhe presenL acLlon agalnsL LhemŦ

ln Lhelr answerţ Lhe ModesLos clalmed LhaL urblna could noL be Lhe lawful owner of Lhe properLy
because lL was sLlll governmenL properLyţ belng a parL of Lhe lorL 8onlfaclo MlllLary 8eservaLlonŦ
1he 81C of Þaslg ClLy rendered a declslon ln favor of urblna on Aprll 24ţ 2000ţ orderlng Lhe
peLlLloners Lo lmmedlaLely vacaLe and surrender Lhe loL Lo urblna and Lo pay hlm Þ200Ŧ00 monLhly
as compensaLlon for Lhe use of Lhe properLy from !uly 22ţ 1983 unLll Lhey flnally vacaLeŦ 1he 81C
noLed LhaL Lhe peLlLloners recognlzed urblna's possessory rlghLs over Lhe properLy when Lhey
enLered lnLo a negoLlaLed conLracL of sale wlLh hlm for Lhe properLyŦ 1husţ Lhe ModesLos were
esLopped from subsequenLly assalllng or dlsclalmlng urblna's possessory rlghLs over Lhls loLŦ

urblna's clalm of ownershlp over LoL 36 ls based prlmarlly on hls Mlscellaneous Sales AppllcaLlon
noŦ (lllŴ1) 460 (Mlscellaneous Sales AppllcaLlon)ţ whlch he flled on !uly 21ţ 1966Ŧ 1he CA afflrmed ln
LoLo Lhe 81C declslon ln Clvll Case noŦ 33483 on !anuary 26ţ 2009Ŧ 1he CA agreed wlLh Lhe 81C's
observaLlon LhaL Lhe ModesLos were esLopped from challenglng urblna's rlghL Lo possess Lhe
properLy afLer Lhey acknowledged Lhls rlghL when Lhey enLered lnLo Lhe negoLlaLed conLracL of
saleŦ 1he CA also gave credence Lo Lhe !anuary 31ţ 2008 LM8 order ln LM8 ConfllcL noŦ 110ţ rullng
LhaL Lhls LM8 order bolsLered urblna's possessory rlghLs over Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ


lSSuLť WheLher or noL Lhe urblna's had possessory rlghLs over Lhe properLyŦ

PLLuť

An acclon publlclana ls an ordlnary clvll proceedlng Lo deLermlne Lhe beLLer rlghL of possesslon of
realLy lndependenLly of LlLleŦ Acclon publlclana ls also used Lo refer Lo an e[ecLmenL sulL where Lhe
cause of dlspossesslon ls noL among Lhe grounds for forclble enLry and unlawful deLalnerţ or when
possesslon has been losL for more Lhan one year and can no longer be malnLalned under 8ule 70 of
Lhe 8ules of CourLŦ 1he ob[ecLlve of a plalnLlff ln acclon publlclana ls Lo recover possesslon onlyţ noL
ownershlpŦ

As Lhe courL explalned ln Solls vŦ lnLermedlaLe AppellaLe CourLť We hold LhaL Lhe power and
auLhorlLy glven Lo Lhe ulrecLor of Lands Lo allenaLe and dlspose of publlc lands does noL dlvesL Lhe
regular courLs of Lhelr [urlsdlcLlon over possessory acLlons lnsLlLuLed by occupanLs or appllcanLs
agalnsL oLhers Lo proLecL Lhelr respecLlve possesslons and occupaLlonsŦ Whlle Lhe [urlsdlcLlon of Lhe
8ureau of Lands żnow Lhe Land ManagemenL 8ureauŽ ls conflned Lo Lhe deLermlnaLlon of Lhe
respecLlve rlghLs of rlval clalmanLs Lo publlc lands or Lo cases whlch lnvolve dlsposlLlon of publlc
landsţ Lhe power Lo deLermlne who has Lhe acLualţ physlcal possesslon or occupaLlon or Lhe beLLer
rlghL of possesslon over publlc lands remalns wlLh Lhe courLsŦ

1he raLlonale ls evldenLŦ 1he 8ureau of Lands does noL have Lhe wherewlLhal Lo pollce publlc landsŦ
nelLher does lL have Lhe means Lo prevenL dlsorders or breaches of peace among Lhe occupanLsŦ lLs

power ls clearly llmlLed Lo dlsposlLlon and allenaLlon and whlle lL may declde dlspuLes over
possesslonţ Lhls ls buL ln ald of maklng Lhe proper awardsŦ 1he ulLlmaLe power Lo resolve confllcLs
of possesslon ls recognlzed Lo be wlLhln Lhe legal compeLence of Lhe clvll courLs and lLs purpose ls
Lo exLend proLecLlon Lo Lhe acLual possessors and occupanLs wlLh a vlew Lo quell soclal unresLŦ
ConsequenLlyţ whlle we leave lL Lo Lhe LM8 Lo deLermlne Lhe lssue of who among Lhe parLles
should be awarded Lhe LlLle Lo Lhe sub[ecL properLyţ Lhere ls no quesLlon LhaL we have sufflclenL
auLhorlLy Lo resolve whlch of Lhe parLles ls enLlLled Lo rlghLful possesslonŦ

Cn Lhe lssue of possessory rlghLs

ÞrefaLorllyţ Lhe courL observe LhaL Lhe sub[ecL properLy has noL yeL been LlLledţ nor has lL been Lhe
sub[ecL of a valldly lssued paLenL by Lhe LM8Ŧ 1hereforeţ Lhe land remalns parL of Lhe publlc
domalnţ and nelLher urblna nor Lhe ModesLos can legally clalm ownershlp over lLŦ 1hls does noL
meanţ howeverţ LhaL nelLher of Lhe parLles have Lhe rlghL Lo possess Lhe properLyŦ urblna alleged
LhaL he ls Lhe rlghLful possessor of Lhe properLy slnce he has a pendlng Mlscellaneous Sales
AppllcaLlonţ as well as Lax declaraLlons over Lhe properLyŦ Pe also relledţ Lo supporL hls clalm of a
beLLer rlghL Lo possess Lhe properLyţ on Lhe admlsslon on Lhe parL of Lhe ModesLos LhaL Lhey
negoLlaLed wlLh hlm for Lhe sale of Lhe loL ln quesLlonŦ Cn Lhe oLher handţ Lhe ModesLos anchored
Lhelr rlghL Lo possess Lhe same on Lhelr acLual possesslon of Lhe properLyŦ 1hey also quesLloned Lhe
legallLy of urblna's Mlscellaneous Sales AppllcaLlonţ and hls Lax declaraLlons over Lhe properLyţ
argulng LhaL slnce Lhese were obLalned when Lhe land was sLlll noL allenable and dlsposableţ Lhey
could noL be Lhe source of any legal rlghLsŦ

AfLer revlewlng Lhe records of Lhls caseţ Lhe courL flnds Lhe reasonlng of Lhe ModesLos Lo be more
ln accord wlLh appllcable laws and [urlsprudenceŦ 1he courL held LhaL urblna uLLerly falled Lo prove
LhaL he has a beLLer rlghL Lo possess Lhe properLyŦ 1husţ Lhe courL cannoL susLaln hls complalnL for
e[ecLmenL agalnsL Lhe ModesLos andţ perforceţ musL dlsmlss Lhe same for lack of merlLŦ

8r|to vsŦ D|ana|a
Gk# 171717] DecŦ 1Sţ 2010
638 SCkA S29

lAC1Sť

Cn SepLember 27ţ 1976ţ MargarlLa ulchlmoţ asslsLed by her husbandţ 8amon 8rlLoţ SrŦţ LogeLher
wlLh 8lenvenldo ulchlmoţ lranclsco ulchlmoţ LdlLo ulchlmoţ Marla ulchlmoţ Permlnla ulchlmoţ
asslsLed by her husbandţ Angellno Mlsslonţ Leonora uechlmoţ asslsLed by her husbandţ lgmedlo
Mlsslonţ lellclLoţ and Merllnda uechlmoţ asslsLed by her husbandţ lausLo uollenoţ flled a
ComplalnL for 8ecovery of Þossesslon and uamages wlLh Lhe Lhen CourL of llrsL lnsLance (now
8eglonal 1rlal CourL) of negros CccldenLalţ agalnsL a cerLaln !ose Marla ColezŦ 1he case was
dockeLed as Clvll Case noŦ 12887Ŧ

ÞeLlLlonerƌs wlfeţ MargarlLaţ LogeLher wlLh 8lenvenldo and lranclscoţ alleged LhaL Lhey are Lhe helrs
of a cerLaln vlcenLe ulchlmoţ whlle LdlLoţ Marlaţ Permlnlaţ Leonoraţ lellclLo and Merllnda clalmed
Lo be Lhe helrs of one Luseblo ulchlmoŤ LhaL vlcenLe and Luseblo are Lhe only helrs of LsLeban and
LufemlaŤ LhaL LsLeban and Lufemla dled lnLesLaLe and upon Lhelr deaLh vlcenLe and Lusebloţ as
compulsory helrsţ lnherlLed LoL noŦ 1336Ŵ8Ť LhaLţ ln Lurnţ vlcenLe and Lusebloţ and Lhelr respecLlve
spousesţ also dled lnLesLaLe leavlng Lhelr pro lndlvlso shares of LoL noŦ 1336Ŵ8 as parL of Lhe
lnherlLance of Lhe complalnanLs ln Clvll Case noŦ 12887Ŧ

Cn !uly 29ţ 1983ţ hereln respondenLs flled an AnswerŴlnŴlnLervenLlon clalmlng LhaL prlor Lo hls
marrlage Lo Lufemlaţ LsLeban was marrled Lo a cerLaln lranclsca uumalaganŤ LhaL LsLeban and
lranclsca bore flve chlldrenţ all of whom are already deceasedŤ LhaL hereln respondenLs are Lhe
helrs of LsLeban and lranclscaƌs chlldrenŤ LhaL Lhey are ln openţ acLualţ publlc and unlnLerrupLed
possesslon of a porLlon of LoL noŦ 1336Ŵ8 for more Lhan 30 yearsŤ LhaL Lhelr legal lnLeresLs over Lhe
sub[ecL loL prevalls over Lhose of peLlLloner and hls coŴhelrsŤ LhaLţ ln facLţ peLlLloner and hls coŴhelrs
have already dlsposed of Lhelr shares ln Lhe sald properLy a long Llme agoŦ

SubsequenLlyţ Lhe parLles ln Clvll Case noŦ 12887 agreed Lo enLer lnLo a Compromlse AgreemenL
whereln LoL noŦ 1336Ŵ8 was dlvlded beLween !ose Marla Colezţ on one handţ and Lhe helrs of
vlcenLeţ namelyť MargarlLaţ 8lenvenldoţ and lranclscoţ on Lhe oLherŦ lL was sLaLed ln Lhe sald
agreemenL LhaL Lhe helrs of Luseblo had sold Lhelr share ln Lhe sald loL Lo Lhe moLher of ColezŦ
1husţ on SepLember 9ţ 1998ţ Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal CourL (81C) of 8acolod ClLyţ 8ranch 43 rendered a
declslon approvlng Lhe sald Compromlse AgreemenLŦ Cn !anuary 18ţ 1999ţ hereln peLlLloner and
hls coŴhelrs flled anoLher ComplalnL for 8ecovery of Þossesslon and uamagesţ Lhls Llme agalnsL
hereln respondenLsŦ 1he caseţ flled wlLh Lhe 81C of Cadlz ClLyţ 8ranch 60ţ was dockeLed as Clvll
Case noŦ 348ŴCŦ Pereln respondenLsţ on Lhe oLher handţ flled wlLh Lhe same courLţ on AugusL 18ţ
1999ţ a ComplalnL for 8econveyance and uamages agalnsL peLlLloner and hls coŴhelrsŦ

lSSuLť WheLher Lhe honorable courL of appeals erred when lL ruled LhaL Lhe lower courL has Lhe
[urlsdlcLlon Lo hear Lhe reconveyance case of Lhe hereln plalnLlffsŴappellanLs before Lhe reglonal
Lrlal courLŦ

PLLuť

1he courL held LhaL lL ls Lrue LhaL Lhe flllng of moLlons seeklng afflrmaLlve rellefţ such asţ Lo admlL
answerţ for addlLlonal Llme Lo flle answerţ for reconslderaLlon of a defaulL [udgmenLţ and Lo llfL
order of defaulL wlLh moLlon for reconslderaLlonţ are consldered volunLary submlsslon Lo Lhe
[urlsdlcLlon of Lhe courLŦ ln Lhe presenL caseţ when respondenLs flled Lhelr AnswerŴlnŴlnLervenLlon
Lhey submlLLed Lhemselves Lo Lhe [urlsdlcLlon of Lhe courL and Lhe courLţ ln Lurnţ acqulred
[urlsdlcLlon over Lhelr personsŦ 8espondenLsţ Lhusţ became parLles Lo Lhe acLlonŦ SubsequenLlyţ
howeverţ respondenLsƌ AnswerŴlnŴlnLervenLlon was dlsmlssed wlLhouL pre[udlceŦ lrom Lhen onţ
Lhey ceased Lo be parLles ln Lhe case so much so LhaL Lhey dld noL have Lhe opporLunlLy Lo presenL
evldence Lo supporL Lhelr clalmsţ much less parLlclpaLe ln Lhe compromlse agreemenL enLered lnLo
by and beLween hereln peLlLloner and hls coŴhelrs on one hand and Lhe defendanL ln Clvll Case noŦ
12887 on Lhe oLherŦ SLaLed dlfferenLlyţ when Lhelr AnswerŴlnŴlnLervenLlon was dlsmlssedţ hereln
respondenLs losL Lhelr sLandlng ln courL andţ consequenLlyţ became sLrangers Lo Clvll Case noŦ
12887Ŧ lL ls baslc LhaL no man shall be affecLed by any proceedlng Lo whlch he ls a sLrangerţ and
sLrangers Lo a case are noL bound by [udgmenL rendered by Lhe courLŦ 1husţ belng sLrangers Lo Clvll
Case noŦ 12887ţ respondenLs are noL bound by Lhe [udgmenL rendered LherelnŦ

nelLher does Lhe CourL concur wlLh peLlLlonerƌs argumenL LhaL respondenLs are barred by
prescrlpLlon for havlng flled Lhelr complalnL for reconveyance only afLer more Lhan elghL years
from Lhe dlscovery of Lhe fraud allegedly commlLLed by peLlLloner and hls coŴhelrsţ argulng LhaL

under Lhe law an acLlon for reconveyance of real properLy resulLlng from fraud prescrlbes ln four
yearsţ whlch perlod ls reckoned from Lhe dlscovery of Lhe fraudŦ ln Lhelr complalnL for
reconveyance and damagesţ respondenLs alleged LhaL peLlLloner and hls coŴhelrs acqulred Lhe
sub[ecL properLy by means of fraudŦ ArLlcle 1436 of Lhe Clvll Code provldes LhaL a person acqulrlng
properLy Lhrough fraud becomesţ by operaLlon of lawţ a LrusLee of an lmplled LrusL for Lhe beneflL
of Lhe real owner of Lhe properLyŦ An acLlon for reconveyance based on an lmplled LrusL prescrlbes
ln Len yearsţ Lhe reckonlng polnL of whlch ls Lhe daLe of reglsLraLlon of Lhe deed or Lhe daLe of
lssuance of Lhe cerLlflcaLe of LlLle over Lhe properLyŦ 1husţ ln Caro vŦ CourL of Appealsţ Lhls CourL
held as followsť

x x x 1he case of Llwalug Amerolţ eL alŦ vŦ Molok 8agumbaranţ CŦ8Ŧ noŦ LŴ33261ţ SepLember 30ţ
1987ţ134 SC8A 396ţ lllumlnaLed whaL used Lo be a gray area on Lhe prescrlpLlve perlod for an
acLlon Lo reconvey Lhe LlLle Lo real properLy andţ corollarllyţ lLs polnL of referenceť
x x x lL musL be remembered LhaL before AugusL 30ţ 1930ţ Lhe daLe of Lhe effecLlvlLy of Lhe new
Clvll Codeţ Lhe old Code of Clvll Þrocedure (AcL noŦ 190) governed prescrlpLlonŦ lL provldedť
SLCŦ 43Ŧ CLher clvll acLlonsŤ how llmlLedŦŴ Clvll acLlons oLher Lhan for Lhe recovery of real properLy
can only be broughL wlLhln Lhe followlng perlods afLer Lhe rlghL of acLlon accruesť
x x x xx
3Ŧ WlLhln four yearsť xxx An acLlon for rellef on Lhe ground of fraudţ buL Lhe rlghL of acLlon
ln such case shall noL be deemed Lo have accrued unLll Lhe dlscovery of Lhe fraudŤ
x x x x x x x x x
ln conLrasLţ under Lhe presenL Clvll Codeţ we flnd LhaL [usL as an lmplled or consLrucLlve LrusL ls an
offsprlng of Lhe law (ArLŦ 1436ţ Clvll Code)ţ so ls Lhe correspondlng obllgaLlon Lo reconvey Lhe
properLy and Lhe LlLle LhereLo ln favor of Lhe Lrue ownerŦ ln Lhls conLexLţ and vlsŴaŴvls prescrlpLlonţ
ArLlcle 1144 of Lhe Clvll Code ls appllcableŦ

ArLlcle 1144Ŧ 1he followlng acLlons musL be broughL wlLhln Len years from Lhe Llme Lhe rlghL of
acLlon accruesť
(1) upon a wrlLLen conLracLŤ
(2) upon an obllgaLlon creaLed by lawŤ
(3) upon a [udgmenLŦ
x x x x x x x x xŦ (lLallcs supplledŦ)
An acLlon for reconveyance based on an lmplled or consLrucLlve LrusL musL perforce prescrlbe ln
Len years and noL oLherwlseŦ A long llne of declslons of Lhls CourLţ and of very recenL vlnLage aL
LhaLţ lllusLraLes Lhls ruleŦ undoubLedlyţ lL ls now well seLLled LhaL an acLlon for reconveyance based
on an lmplled or consLrucLlve LrusL prescrlbes ln Len years from Lhe lssuance of Lhe 1orrens LlLle
over Lhe properLyŦ 1he only dlscordanL noLeţ lL seemsţ ls 8albln vsŦ Medallaţ whlch sLaLes LhaL Lhe
prescrlpLlve perlod for a reconveyance acLlon ls four yearsŦ Poweverţ Lhls varlance can be explalned
by Lhe erroneous rellance on Cerona vsŦ de CuzmanŦ 8uL ln Ceronaţ Lhe fraud was dlscovered on
!une 23ţ 1948ţ hence SecLlon 43(3) of AcL noŦ 190ţ was applledţ Lhe new Clvll Code noL comlng lnLo
effecL unLll AugusL 30ţ 1930 as menLloned earllerŦ lL musL be sLressedţ aL Lhls [uncLureţ LhaL arLlcle
1144 and arLlcle 1436ţ are new provlslonsŦ 1hey have no counLerparLs ln Lhe old Clvll Code or ln Lhe
old Code of Clvll Þrocedureţ Lhe laLLer belng Lhen resorLed Lo as legal basls of Lhe fourŴyear
prescrlpLlve perlod for an acLlon for reconveyance of LlLle of real properLy acqulred under false
preLensesŦ

An acLlon for reconveyance has lLs basls ln SecLlon 33ţ paragraph 3 of ÞresldenLlal uecree noŦ 1329ţ
whlch provldesť ln all cases of reglsLraLlon procured by fraudţ Lhe owner may pursue all hls legal
and equlLable remedles agalnsL Lhe parLles Lo such fraud wlLhouL pre[udlceţ howeverţ Lo Lhe rlghLs
of any lnnocenL holder of Lhe decree of reglsLraLlon on Lhe orlglnal peLlLlon or appllcaLlonŦ

1he law Lhereby creaLes Lhe obllgaLlon of Lhe LrusLee Lo reconvey Lhe properLy and Lhe LlLle LhereLo
ln favor of Lhe Lrue ownerŦ CorrelaLlng SecLlon 33ţ paragraph 3 of ÞresldenLlal uecree noŦ 1329 and
ArLlcle 1436 of Lhe Clvll Code wlLh ArLlcle 1144(2) of Lhe Clvll Codeţ supraţ Lhe prescrlpLlve perlod
for Lhe reconveyance of fraudulenLly reglsLered real properLy ls Len (10) years reckoned from Lhe
daLe of Lhe lssuance of Lhe cerLlflcaLe of LlLleŦ x x xŦ ln Lhe lnsLanL caseţ 1C1 noŦ 1Ŵ12361 was
obLalned by peLlLloner and hls coŴhelrs on SepLember 28ţ 1990ţ whlle respondenLs flled Lhelr
complalnL for reconveyance on AugusL 18ţ 1999Ŧ Penceţ lL ls clear LhaL Lhe LenŴyear prescrlpLlve
perlod has noL yeL explredŦ

1he CourLţ llkewlseţ does noL agree wlLh peLlLlonerƌs conLenLlon LhaL respondenLs are gullLy of
laches and are already esLopped from quesLlonlng Lhe declslon of Lhe 81C ln Clvll Case noŦ 12887
on Lhe ground LhaL Lhey slepL on Lhelr rlghLs and allowed Lhe sald declslon Lo become flnalŦ
ln Lhe flrsL placeţ respondenLs cannoL be faulLed for noL appeallng Lhe declslon of Lhe 81C ln Clvll
Case noŦ 12887 slmply because Lhey are no longer parLles Lo Lhe case andţ as suchţ have no
personallLy Lo assall Lhe sald [udgmenLŦ Secondlyţ respondenLsƌ acL of flllng Lhelr acLlon for
reconveyance wlLhln Lhe LenŴyear prescrlpLlve perlod does noL consLlLuLe an unreasonable delay ln
asserLlng Lhelr rlghLŦ 1he CourL has ruled LhaLţ unless reasons of lnequlLable proporLlons are
adducedţ a delay wlLhln Lhe prescrlpLlve perlod ls sancLloned by law and ls noL consldered Lo be a
delay LhaL would bar rellefŦ Laches ls recourse ln equlLyŦ LqulLyţ howeverţ ls applled only ln Lhe
absenceţ never ln conLravenLlonţ of sLaLuLory lawŦ

Moreoverţ Lhe prescrlpLlve perlod applles only lf Lhere ls an acLual need Lo reconvey Lhe properLy
as when Lhe plalnLlff ls noL ln possesslon LhereofŦ CLherwlseţ lf Lhe plalnLlff ls ln possesslon of Lhe
properLyţ prescrlpLlon does noL commence Lo run agalnsL hlmŦ 1husţ when an acLlon for
reconveyance ls noneLheless flledţ lL would be ln Lhe naLure of a sulL for quleLlng of LlLleţ an acLlon
LhaL ls lmprescrlpLlbleŦ 1he reason for Lhls ls LhaL one who ls ln acLual possesslon of a plece of land
clalmlng Lo be Lhe owner Lhereof may walL unLll hls possesslon ls dlsLurbed or hls LlLle ls aLLacked
before Laklng sLeps Lo vlndlcaLe hls rlghLţ Lhe raLlonale for Lhe rule belngţ LhaL hls undlsLurbed
possesslon provldes hlm a conLlnulng rlghL Lo seek Lhe ald of a courL of equlLy Lo ascerLaln and
deLermlne Lhe naLure of Lhe adverse clalm of a Lhlrd parLy and lLs effecL on hls own LlLleţ whlch
rlghL can be clalmed only by Lhe one who ls ln possesslonŦ

ln Lhe presenL caseţ Lhere ls no dlspuLe LhaL respondenLs are ln possesslon of Lhe sub[ecL properLy
as evldenced by Lhe facL LhaL peLlLloner and hls coŴhelrs flled a separaLe acLlon agalnsL respondenLs
for recovery of possesslon LhereofŦ 1husţ owlng Lo respondenLsƌ possesslon of Lhe dlspuLed
properLyţ lL follows LhaL Lhelr complalnL for reconveyance lsţ ln facLţ lmprescrlpLlbleŦ As suchţ wlLh
more reason should respondenLs noL be held gullLy of laches as Lhe sald docLrlneţ whlch ls one ln
equlLyţ cannoL be seL up Lo reslsL Lhe enforcemenL of an lmprescrlpLlble legal rlghLŦ

@an vsŦ kam|rez
Gk# 1S8929] AugŦ 3ţ 2010
626 SCkA 327

lAC1Sť
Cn AugusL 11ţ 1998ţ Lhe peLlLlonerţ represenLlng her parenLs (spouses Crlspo and nlcomedesa ÞŦ
Alumbro)ţ flled wlLh Lhe Munlclpal ClrculL 1rlal CourL (MC1C) of PlndangŴlnopacanţ LeyLe a
complalnL for Lhe recovery of ownershlp and possesslon and/or quleLlng of LlLle of a oneŴhalf
porLlon of Lhe sub[ecL properLy agalnsL Lhe respondenLsŦ
1he peLlLloner alleged LhaL her greaLŴgrandfaLher CaLallno !aca valenzona was Lhe owner of Lhe
sub[ecL properLy under a 1913 1ax ueclaraLlon (1u) noŦ 2724Ŧ CaLallno had four chlldrenť Cllcerlaţ
valenLlnaţ 1omasaţ and !ullanŤ Cllcerla lnherlLed Lhe sub[ecL properLy when CaLallno dledŤ Cllcerla
marrled Cavlno Cyaoţ buL Lhelr unlon bore no chlldrenŤ when Cllcerla dled on Aprll 23ţ 1932ţ
Cavlno lnherlLed a oneŴhalf porLlon of Lhe sub[ecL properLyţ whlle nlcomedesa acqulred Lhe oLher
half Lhrough lnherlLanceţ ln represenLaLlon of her moLherţ valenLlnaţ who had predeceased
Cllcerlaţ and Lhrough her purchase of Lhe shares of her broLhers and slsLersŦ ln 1961ţ nlcomedesa
consLlLuLed 8oberLo as LenanL of her half of Lhe sub[ecL properLyŤ on !une 30ţ 1963ţ nlcomedesa
boughL Cavlno's oneŴhalf porLlon of Lhe sub[ecL properLy from Lhe laLLer's helrsţ 8onlLo and
Wllfredo Cyaoţ evldenced by a ueed of AbsoluLe Sale of AgrlculLural LandŤż7Ž on AugusL 3ţ 1963ţ
nlcomedesa sold Lo 8oberLo Lhls oneŴhalf porLlon ln a ueed of AbsoluLe Sale of AgrlculLural LandŤ
and ln 1997ţ nlcomedesa dlscovered LhaL slnce 1974ţ 8oberLo had been reflecLlng Lhe sub[ecL
properLy solely ln hls name under 1u noŦ 4193Ŧ
1he respondenLsţ on Lhe oLher handţ Lraced ownershlp of Lhe sub[ecL properLy Lo Cavlno who
culLlvaLed lL slnce 1936Ť 8oberLo boughL half of Lhe sub[ecL properLy from nlcomedesa on AugusL 3ţ
1963ţ and Lhe remalnlng half from Cavlno's helrsţ 8onlLo and Wllfredo Cyaoţ on CcLober 16ţ 1972Ŧ
Cn !anuary 9ţ 1973ţ a cerLaln SanLa 8elachoţ clalmlng Lo be Cavlno's naLural chlldţ flled a complalnL
wlLh Lhe CourL of llrsL lnsLance of 8aybayţ LeyLe agalnsL 8oberLoţ nlcomedesaţ 8onlLo and Wllfredo
Cyaoţ dockeLed as Clvll Case noŦ 8Ŵ363ţ for recovery of possesslon and ownershlp of Lwo (2) parcels
of landţ lncludlng Lhe sub[ecL properLyŤż11Ž on SepLember 16ţ 1977ţ 8oberLo boughL Lhe sub[ecL
properLy from 8elacho Lhrough a ueed of AbsoluLe Sale of LandŤ and on CcLober 3ţ 1977ţ 8oberLo
and nlcomedesa enLered lnLo a Compromlse AgreemenL wlLh 8elacho Lo seLLle Clvll Case noŦ 8Ŵ
363Ŧ 8elacho agreed ln Lhls seLLlemenL Lo dlsmlss Lhe case and Lo walve her lnLeresL over Lhe
sub[ecL properLy ln favor of 8oberLoţ and Lhe oLher parcel of land ln favor of nlcomedesa ln
conslderaLlon of Þ1ţ800Ŧ00
1he MC1C found LhaL CaLallno's 1913 1u noŦ 2724 was noL Lhe source of Cavlno's 1943 1u noŦ
3237 because lL lnvolved Lhe oLher parcel of land sub[ecL of Clvll Case noŦ 8Ŵ363Ŧ Ŧ lL held LhaL
8oberLo was enLlLled Lo only LhreeŴfourLhsţ as Lhls was Cavlno's enLlre shareţ whlle Lhe peLlLloner
was enLlLled Lo oneŴfourLh of Lhe sub[ecL properLyţ and gave Lhe parLles slxLy days Lo effecL Lhe
parLlLlonŦ
1he 81C held LhaL Lhe shares of Lhe parLles shall be dlvlded and apporLloned ln Lhe followlng
mannerť plalnLlff shall own oneŴfourLh (1/4) of LoL 3483 and defendanLs shall collecLlvely own
LhreeŴfourLh (3/4) of LoL 3483Ŧ
CA declared 8oberLo as Lhe lawful owner of Lhe enLlre area of Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ 1he appellaLe
courL found LhaL Lhe CcLober 3ţ 1977 Compromlse AgreemenL execuLed by 8elacho gave 8oberLo's
possesslon of Lhe sub[ecL properLy Lhe characLers of possesslon ln good falLh and wlLh [usL LlLleŤ Lhe
respondenLs' LwenLyŴone years of possesslonţ from execuLlon of Lhe compromlse agreemenL ln
1977 unLll Lhe flllng of Lhe case ln 1998ţ ls more Lhan Lhe requlred LenŴyear possesslon for ordlnary
acqulslLlve prescrlpLlonŦ 1he CA also noLed LhaL 8oberLo also en[oyed [usL LlLle because 8elacho
execuLed a conLracL of sale ln hls favor on SepLember 16ţ 1977Ŧ
Penceţ Lhls peLlLlonŦ
lSSuLť wheLher Lhe CA erred ln relylng upon Lhe compromlse agreemenL and Lhe conLracL of sale Lo
conclude LhaL Lhe respondenLs had been possessors ln good falLh and wlLh [usL LlLle and could
acqulre Lhe sub[ecL properLy Lhrough ordlnary acqulslLlve prescrlpLlonŦ
PLLuť
ÞrescrlpLlonţ as a mode of acqulrlng ownershlp and oLher real rlghLs over lmmovable properLyţ ls
concerned wlLh lapse of Llme ln Lhe manner and under condlLlons lald down by lawţ namelyţ LhaL
Lhe possesslon should be ln Lhe concepL of an ownerţ publlcţ peacefulţ unlnLerrupLedţ and adverseŦ
1he parLy who asserLs ownershlp by adverse possesslon musL prove Lhe presence of Lhe essenLlal
elemenLs of acqulslLlve prescrlpLlonŦ
AcqulslLlve prescrlpLlon of real rlghLs may be ordlnary or exLraordlnaryŦ Crdlnary acqulslLlve
prescrlpLlon requlres possesslon ln good falLh and wlLh [usL LlLle for Len yearsŦ ln exLraordlnary
prescrlpLlonţ ownershlp and oLher real rlghLs over lmmovable properLy are acqulred Lhrough
unlnLerrupLed adverse possesslon for LhlrLy years wlLhouL need of LlLle or of good falLhŦ
Þossesslon ºln good falLh" conslsLs ln Lhe reasonable bellef LhaL Lhe person from whom Lhe Lhlng ls
recelved has been Lhe owner Lhereofţ and could LransmlL hls ownershlpŦ 1here ls º[usL LlLle" when
Lhe adverse clalmanL came lnLo possesslon of Lhe properLy Lhrough one of Lhe modes recognlzed
by law for Lhe acqulslLlon of ownershlp or oLher real rlghLsţ buL Lhe granLor was noL Lhe owner or
could noL LransmlL any rlghLŦ
1he courL furLher held LhaL Lhe CA mlsLakenly relled upon Lhe compromlse agreemenLţ execuLed by
8elacho Lo conclude LhaL Lhe respondenLs were possessors ln good falLh and wlLh [usL LlLle who
acqulred Lhe properLy Lhrough ordlnary acqulslLlve prescrlpLlonŦ ln 8amnanl vŦ CourL of Appealsţ
we held LhaL Lhe maln purpose of a compromlse agreemenL ls Lo puL an end Lo llLlgaLlon because of
Lhe uncerLalnLy LhaL may arlse from lLŦ 8eclprocal concesslons are Lhe very hearL and llfe of every
compromlse agreemenLŦ 8y Lhe naLure of a compromlse agreemenLţ lL brlngs Lhe parLles Lo agree
Lo someLhlng LhaL nelLher of Lhem may acLually wanLţ buL for Lhe peace lL wlll brlng Lhem wlLhouL a
proLracLed llLlgaLlonŦ
ln Lhe presenL caseţ Lo avold any confllcL wlLh 8elachoţ 8oberLo and nlcomedesa pald Þ1ţ800Ŧ00 ln
conslderaLlon of 8elacho's deslsLance from furLher pursulng her clalm over Lwo (2) parcels of landţ
lncludlng Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ 1husţ no rlghL can arlse from Lhe compromlse agreemenL because
Lhe parLles execuLed Lhe same only Lo buy peace and Lo wrlLe flnls Lo Lhe conLroversyŤ lL dld noL
creaLe or LransmlL ownershlp rlghLs over Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ ln execuLlng Lhe compromlse
agreemenLţ Lhe parLlesţ ln effecLţ merely reverLed Lo Lhelr slLuaLlon before Clvll Case noŦ 8Ŵ363 was
flledŦ nelLher can Lhe respondenLs beneflL from Lhe conLracL of sale of Lhe sub[ecL properLyţ
execuLed by 8elacho ln favor of 8oberLoţ Lo supporL Lhelr clalm of possesslon ln good falLh and wlLh
[usL LlLleŦ ln Lhe vlnLage case of Leung ?ee vŦ lŦLŦ SLrong Machlnery CoŦ and Wllllamsonţ we
explalned good falLh ln Lhls mannerť Cne who purchases real esLaLe wlLh knowledge of a defecL or
lack of LlLle ln hls vendor cannoL clalm LhaL he has acqulred LlLle LhereLo ln good falLh as agalnsL Lhe
Lrue owner of Lhe land or of an lnLeresL LherelnŤ and Lhe same rule musL be applled Lo one who has
knowledge of facLs whlch should have puL hlm upon such lnqulry and lnvesLlgaLlon as mlghL be
necessary Lo acqualnL hlm wlLh Lhe defecLs ln Lhe LlLle of hls vendorŦ Cood falLhţ or Lhe wanL of lLţ
can be ascerLalned only from Lhe acLs of Lhe one clalmlng lLţ as lL ls a condlLlon of mlnd LhaL can
only be [udged by acLual or fancled Loken or slgnsŦ
ln Lhe presenL caseţ no dlspuLe exlsLs LhaL 8oberLoţ wlLhouL nlcomedesa's knowledge or
parLlclpaLlonţ boughL Lhe sub[ecL properLy on SepLember 16ţ 1977 or durlng Lhe pendency of Clvll
Case noŦ 8Ŵ363Ŧ 8oberLoţ Lhereforeţ had acLual knowledge LhaL 8elacho's clalm Lo ownershlp of Lhe
sub[ecL properLyţ as Cavlno's purporLed helrţ was dlspuLed because he (8oberLo) and nlcomedesa
were Lhe defendanLs ln Clvll Case noŦ 8Ŵ363Ŧ 8oberLo even admlLLed LhaL he boughL Lhe sub[ecL

properLy from 8elacho Lo ºavold any LroubleŦ"ż33Ž Peţ Lhusţ cannoL clalm LhaL he acLed ln good
falLh under Lhe bellef LhaL Lhere was no defecL or dlspuLe ln Lhe LlLle of Lhe vendorţ 8elachoŦ
noL belng a possessor ln good falLh and wlLh [usL LlLleţ Lhe LenŴyear perlod requlred for ordlnary
acqulslLlve prescrlpLlon cannoL apply ln 8oberLo's favorŦ Lven Lhe LhlrLyŴyear perlod under
exLraordlnary acqulslLlve prescrlpLlon has noL been meL because of Lhe respondenLs' clalm Lo have
been ln possesslonţ ln Lhe concepL of ownerţ of Lhe sub[ecL properLy for only LwenLyŴfour yearsţ
from Lhe Llme Lhe sub[ecL properLy was Lax declared ln 1974 Lo Lhe Llme of Lhe flllng of Lhe
complalnL ln 1998Ŧ 8ased on Lhe foregolngţ Lhe CA erred ln flndlng LhaL Lhe respondenLs acqulred
Lhe peLlLloner's oneŴfourLh porLlon of Lhe sub[ecL properLy Lhrough acqulslLlve prescrlpLlonŦ As
apLly found by Lhe MC1Cţ Lhe respondenLs are only enLlLled Lo LhreeŴfourLhs of Lhe sub[ecL
properLy because Lhls was Cavlno's rlghLful share of Lhe con[ugal esLaLe LhaL 8oberLo boughL from
8onlLo and Wllfredo CyaoŦ

Lams|s vsŦ DongŴe
Gk# 173021] CctŦ 20ţ 2010
634 SCkA 1S4
lAC1Sť
1hls case lnvolves a confllcL of ownershlp and possesslon over an unLlLled parcel of landţ
denomlnaLed as LoL noŦ 1ţ wlLh an area of 80ţ736 square meLersŦ 1he properLy ls locaLed along kmŦ
3 Asln 8oadţ 8agulo ClLy and ls parL of a larger parcel of land wlLh an area of 186ţ090 square
meLersŦ Whlle peLlLloners are Lhe acLual occupanLs of LoL noŦ 1ţ respondenL ls clalmlng ownershlp
Lhereof and ls seeklng Lo recover lLs possesslon from peLlLlonersŦ
Accordlng Lo respondenL MargarlLa Semon uongŴL (MargarlLa)ţ her famlly's ownershlp and
occupaLlon of LoL noŦ 1 can be Lraced as far back as 1922 Lo her laLe grandfaLherţ ApŴapŦ upon ApŴ
ap's deaLhţ Lhe properLy was lnherlLed by hls chlldrenţ who obLalned a survey plan ln 1964 of Lhe
186ţ090Ŵsquare meLer properLyţ whlch lncluded LoL noŦ 1Ŧ Cn Lhe same yearţ Lhey declared Lhe
properLy for LaxaLlon purposes ln Lhe name of º1he Pelrs of ApŴapŦ" 1he 1964 Lax declaraLlon bears
a noLaLlon LhaL readsť º8econsLrucLed from an old 1ax ueclaraLlon noŦ 363 daLed May 10ţ 1922 per
Lrue of same presenLedŦ"
SomeLlme beLween 1976 and 1978ţ CllberL Semon LogeLher wlLh hls wlfe Mary Lamslsţ allowed hls
lnŴlaws Manolo Lamsls and nancy LamslsŴklLmaţ Lo sLay on a porLlon of LoL noŦ 1 LogeLher wlLh
Lhelr respecLlve famlllesŦ 1hey were allowed Lo erecL Lhelr housesţ lnLroduce lmprovemenLsţ and
planL Lrees LhereonŦ When Manolo Lamsls and nancy LamslsŴklLma dled someLlme ln Lhe 1980sţ
Lhelr chlldrenţ peLlLloners uelfln Lamsls (uelfln) and AgusLln klLma (AgusLln)ţ Look possesslon of
cerLaln porLlons of LoL noŦ 1Ŧ uelfln possessed 4ţ000 square meLers of LoL noŦ 1ţ whlle AgusLln
occupled 3ţ000 square meLers LhereofŦ neverLhelessţ Lhe helrs of CllberL Semon LoleraLed Lhe acLs
of Lhelr flrsL couslnsŦ When CllberL Semon dled ln 1983ţ hls chlldren exLra[udlclally parLlLloned Lhe
properLy among Lhemselves and alloLLed LoL noŦ 1 Lhereof ln favor of MargarlLaŦ Slnce Lhenţ
MargarlLa allegedly pald Lhe realLy Lax over LoL noŦ 1 and occupled and lmproved Lhe properLy
LogeLher wlLh her husbandŤ whlle aL Lhe same Llmeţ LoleraLlng her flrsL couslns' occupaLlon of
porLlons of Lhe same loLŦ
1hls sLaLe of affalrs changed when peLlLloners uelfln and AgusLln allegedly began expandlng Lhelr
occupaLlon on Lhe sub[ecL properLy and selllng porLlons LhereofŦ uelfln allegedly sold a 400Ŵsquare
meLer porLlon of LoL noŦ 1 Lo peLlLloner Maynard Mondlgulng (Maynard) whlle AgusLln sold
anoLher porLlon Lo peLlLloner !ose valdez (!ose)Ŧ
WlLh such developmenLsţ MargarlLa flled a complalnL for recovery of ownershlpţ possesslonţ
reconveyance and damages agalnsL all four occupanLs of LoL noŦ 1 before Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal CourL
(81C) of 8agulo ClLyŦ ÞeLlLloners denled MargarlLa's clalms of ownershlp and possesslon over LoL
noŦ 1Ŧ Accordlng Lo uelfln and AgusLlnţ LoL noŦ 1 ls a publlc land clalmed by Lhe helrs of !oaquln
SmlLh (noL parLles Lo Lhe case)Ŧ 1he SmlLhs gave Lhelr permlsslon for uelfln and AgusLln's parenLs Lo
occupy Lhe land someLlme ln 1969 or 1970Ŧ 1hey also presenLed Lhelr nelghbors who LesLlfled LhaL
lL was uelfln and AgusLln as well as Lhelr respecLlve parenLs who occupled LoL noŦ 1ţ noL MargarlLa
and her parenLsŦ uelfln and AgusLln also assalled Lhe munlmenLs of ownershlp presenLed by
MargarlLa as fabrlcaLedţ unauLhenLlcaLedţ and lnvalldŦ lL was polnLed ouL LhaL Lhe ueed of
CulLclalmţ allegedly execuLed by all of ApŴap's chlldrenţ falled Lo lnclude Lwo Ŷ 8lLa 8ocahan and
SLewarL SlLoŦ MargarlLa admlLLed durlng Lrlal LhaL 8lLa 8ocahan and SLewarL SlLo were her uncle
and aunLţ buL dld noL explaln why Lhey were excluded from Lhe qulLclalmŦ ln order Lo debunk
peLlLloners' clalm LhaL Lhe SmlLhs owned Lhe sub[ecL properLyţ MargarlLa presenLed a cerLlfled copy
of a 8esoluLlon from Lhe Land ManagemenL Cfflce denylng Lhe SmlLhs' appllcaLlon for recognlLlon
of Lhe sub[ecL properLy as parL of Lhelr ancesLral landŦ 1he resoluLlon explalns LhaL Lhe appllcaLlon
had Lo be denled because Lhe SmlLhs dld noL ºpossessţ occupy or uLlllze all or a porLlon of Lhe
properLy x x xŦ 1he acLual occupanLs (who were noL named ln Lhe resoluLlon) whose lmprovemenLs
are vlslble are noL ln any way relaLed Lo Lhe appllcanL or hls coŴhelrsŦ" 1o bolsLer her clalm of
ownershlp and possesslonţ MargarlLa lnLroduced as evldence an unnumbered resoluLlon of Lhe
CommunlLy Speclal 1ask lorce on AncesLral Lands (CS1lAL) of Lhe ueparLmenL of LnvlronmenL and
naLural 8esources (uLn8)ţ acLlng favorably on her and her slbllngs' ancesLral land clalm over a
porLlon of Lhe 186ţ090Ŵsquare meLer properLyŦ 1he sald resoluLlon sLaLesť
1he land sub[ecL of Lhe lnsLanL appllcaLlon ls Lhe ancesLral land of Lhe hereln appllcanLsŦ WellŴ
esLabllshed ls Lhe facL LhaL Lhe land LreaLed hereln was flrsL declared for LaxaLlon purposes ln 1922
under 1ax ueclaraLlon noŦ 363 by Lhe appllcanL's grandfaLher ApŴAp (one name)Ŧ Sald appllcaLlon
was reconsLrucLed ln 1963 afLer Lhe orlglnal goL losL durlng Lhe warŦ 1hese Lax declaraLlons were
lssued and recorded ln Lhe MunlclpallLy of 1ubaţ 8engueLţ conslderlng LhaL Lhe land was Lhen
wlLhln Lhe LerrlLorlal [urlsdlcLlon of Lhe sald munlclpallLyŦ 1haL upon Lhe deaLh of declaranL ApŴAp
hls helrs x x x Lransferred Lhe Lax declaraLlon ln Lhelr nameţ żwhlch Lax declaraLlon lsŽ now wlLh Lhe
ClLy assessor's offlce of 8aguloŦ Cn Lhe maLLer of Lhe appllcanLżs'Ž lndlgulnlLy żslcŽ and
quallflcaLlonsţ Lhere ls no doubL LhaL Lhey are members of Lhe naLlonal CulLural CommunlLlesţ
parLlcularly Lhe lbalol LrlbeŦ 1hey are Lhe leglLlmaLe grandchlldren of ApŴAp (one name) who llved
along Lhe Asln 8oad areaŦ Pls legal helrs areť Cranl ApŴApţ marrled Lo Calado SaldaŤ 8lLa ApŴApţ
marrled Lo !ose 8acacanŤ Sucdad ApŴApţ marrled Lo Cragon WaklLŤ and CllberL Semonţ a former
vlceŴmayor of 1ubaţ 8engueLţ żwhoŽ adopLed Lhe common name of Lhelr faLher Semonţ as lL ls Lhe
cusLomary pracLlce among Lhe early lbalolsŦ x x x
Cn Lhe maLLer regardlng Lhe lnherlLance of Lhe helrs of ApŴApţ lL ls lmporLanL Lo sLaLe żLhaLŽ CllberL
Semon consolldaLed ownershlp Lhereof and became Lhe sole helr ln 1964ţ by way of a ºueed of
CulLclalm" execuLed by Lhe helrs ln hls favorŦ As Lo Lhe respecLlve share of Lhe appllcanLsż'Ž coŴ
helrsţ Lhe same was properly ad[udlcaLed ln 1989 wlLh Lhe execuLlon of an ºLxLra[udlclal
SeLLlemenL/ ÞarLlLlon of LsLaLe wlLh Walver of 8lghLsŦ"
1he Lrlal courL found LhaL lL preponderaLes ln favor of respondenL's longŴLlme possesslon of and
clalm of ownershlp over Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ 1he survey plan of Lhe sub[ecL properLy ln Lhe name
of Lhe Pelrs of ApŴap execuLed way back ln 1962 and Lhe Lax declaraLlons LhereafLer lssued Lo Lhe
respondenL and her slbllngs all supporL her clalm LhaL her famlly and Lhelr predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresL
have all been ln possesslon of Lhe properLy Lo Lhe excluslon of oLhersŦ 1he CA held LhaL Lhe
respondenL was able Lo dlscharge her burden ln provlng her LlLle and lnLeresL Lo Lhe sub[ecL
properLyŦ Per documenLary evldence were amply supporLed by Lhe LesLlmonlal evldence of her
wlLnessŦ

lSSuLť WheLher peLlLloners have acqulred Lhe sub[ecL properLy by prescrlpLlonŦ

PLLuť

1he courL held LhaL Lhey cannoL accepL peLlLloners' clalm of acqulslLlon by prescrlpLlonŦ ÞeLlLloners
admlLLed LhaL Lhey had occupled Lhe properLy by Lolerance of Lhe owner LhereofŦ Pavlng made Lhls
admlsslonţ Lhey cannoL clalm LhaL Lhey have acqulred Lhe properLy by prescrlpLlon unless Lhey can
prove acLs of repudlaLlonŦ lL ls seLLled LhaL possesslonţ ln order Lo rlpen lnLo ownershlpţ musL be ln
Lhe concepL of an ownerţ publlcţ peaceful and unlnLerrupLedŦ Þossesslon noL ln Lhe concepL of
ownerţ such as Lhe one clalmed by peLlLlonersţ cannoL rlpen lnLo ownershlp by acqulslLlve
prescrlpLlonţ unless Lhe [urldlcal relaLlon ls flrsL expressly repudlaLed and such repudlaLlon has been
communlcaLed Lo Lhe oLher parLyŦ AcLs of possessory characLer execuLed due Lo llcense or by mere
Lolerance of Lhe owner are lnadequaLe for purposes of acqulslLlve prescrlpLlonŦ Þossesslon by
Lolerance ls noL adverse and such possessory acLsţ no maLLer how long performedţ do noL sLarL Lhe
runnlng of Lhe perlod of prescrlpLlonŦ ln Lhe lnsLanL caseţ peLlLloners made no efforL Lo allege much
less prove any acL of repudlaLlon sufflclenL for Lhe reckonlng of Lhe acqulslLlve prescrlpLlonŦ AL
mosLţ Lhe courL can flnd on record Lhe sale by peLlLloners uelfln and AgusLln of parLs of Lhe
properLy Lo peLlLloners Maynard and !oseŤ buL Lhe same was done only ln 1998ţ shorLly before
respondenL flled a case agalnsL LhemŦ Penceţ Lhe 30Ŵyear perlod necessary for Lhe operaLlon of
acqulslLve prescrlpLlon had yeL Lo be aLLalnedŦ WheLher Lhe ancesLral land clalm pendlng before
Lhe naLlonal Commlsslon on lndlgenous Þeoples (nClÞ) should Lake precedence over Lhe
relvlndlcaLory acLlon
1he appllcaLlon for lssuance of a CerLlflcaLe of AncesLral Land 1lLle pendlng before Lhe nClÞ ls akln
Lo a reglsLraLlon proceedlngŦ lL also seeks an offlclal recognlLlon of one's clalm Lo a parLlcular land
and ls also ln remŦ 1he LlLllng of ancesLral lands ls for Lhe purpose of ºofflclally esLabllshlng" one's
land as an ancesLral landŦ !usL llke a reglsLraLlon proceedlngţ Lhe LlLllng of ancesLral lands does noL
vesL ownershlp upon Lhe appllcanL buL only recognlzes ownershlp LhaL has already vesLed ln Lhe
appllcanL by vlrLue of hls and hls predecessorŴlnŴlnLeresL's possesslon of Lhe properLy slnce Llme
lmmemorlalŦ As apLly explalned ln anoLher caseť lL bears sLresslng aL Lhls polnL LhaL ownershlp
should noL be confused wlLh a cerLlflcaLe of LlLleŦ 8eglsLerlng land under Lhe 1orrens sysLem does
noL creaLe or vesL LlLle because reglsLraLlon ls noL a mode of acqulrlng ownershlpŦ A cerLlflcaLe of
LlLle ls merely an evldence of ownershlp or LlLle over Lhe parLlcular properLy descrlbed LherelnŦ
Corollarllyţ any quesLlon lnvolvlng Lhe lssue of ownershlp musL be Lhreshed ouL ln a separaLe sulL x
x x 1he Lrlal courL wlll Lhen conducL a fullŴblown Lrlal whereln Lhe parLles wlll presenL Lhelr
respecLlve evldence on Lhe lssue of ownershlp of Lhe sub[ecL properLles Lo enable Lhe courL Lo
resolve Lhe sald lssueŦ x x x (Lmphasls supplled)
Llkewlse apropos ls Lhe followlng explanaLlonť 1he facL LhaL Lhe żrespondenLsŽ were able Lo secure
ż1C1s over Lhe properLyŽ dld noL operaLe Lo vesL upon Lhem ownershlp of Lhe properLyŦ 1he
1orrens sysLem does noL creaLe or vesL LlLleŦ lL has never been recognlzed as a mode of acqulrlng
ownershlp x x x lf Lhe żrespondenLsŽ wlshed Lo asserL Lhelr ownershlpţ Lhey should have flled a
[udlclal acLlon for recovery of possesslon and noL merely Lo have Lhe land reglsLered under Lhelr
respecLlve namesŦ x x x CerLlflcaLes of LlLle do noL esLabllsh ownershlpŦ (Lmphasls supplled) A
reglsLraLlon proceedlng ls noL a concluslve ad[udlcaLlon of ownershlpŦ ln facLţ lf lL ls laLer on found
ln anoLher case (where Lhe lssue of ownershlp ls squarely ad[udlcaLed) LhaL Lhe reglsLranL ls noL Lhe
owner of Lhe properLyţ Lhe real owner can flle a reconveyance case and have Lhe LlLle Lransferred
Lo hls nameŦ
Clven LhaL a reglsLraLlon proceedlng (such as Lhe cerLlflcaLlon of ancesLral lands) ls noL a concluslve
ad[udlcaLlon of ownershlpţ lL wlll noL consLlLuLe llLls pendenLla on a relvlndlcaLory case where Lhe
lssue ls ownershlpŦ ºlor llLls pendenLla Lo be a ground for Lhe dlsmlssal of an acLlonţ Lhe followlng
requlslLes musL concurť (a) ldenLlLy of parLlesţ or aL leasL such parLles who represenL Lhe same
lnLeresLs ln boLh acLlonsŤ (b) ldenLlLy of rlghLs asserLed and rellef prayed forţ Lhe rellef belng
founded on Lhe same facLsŤ and (c) Lhe ldenLlLy wlLh respecL Lo Lhe Lwo precedlng parLlculars ln Lhe
Lwo cases ls such LhaL any [udgmenL LhaL may be rendered ln Lhe pendlng caseţ regardless of whlch
parLy ls successfulţ would amounL Lo res [udlcaLa ln Lhe oLher caseŦ" 1he Lhlrd elemenL ls mlsslngţ
for any [udgmenL ln Lhe cerLlflcaLlon case would noL consLlLuLe res [udlcaLa or be concluslve on Lhe
ownershlp lssue lnvolved ln Lhe relvlndlcaLory caseŦ Slnce Lhere ls no llLls pendenLlaţ Lhere ls no
reason for Lhe relvlndlcaLory case Lo be suspended or dlsmlssed ln favor of Lhe cerLlflcaLlon caseŦ
Moreoverţ slnce Lhere ls no llLls pendenLlaţ we cannoL agree wlLh peLlLloners' conLenLlon LhaL
respondenL commlLLed forumŴshopplngŦ SeLLled ls Lhe rule LhaL ºforum shopplng exlsLs where Lhe
elemenLs of llLls pendenLla are presenL or where a flnal [udgmenL ln one case wlll amounL Lo res
[udlcaLa ln Lhe oLherŦ"
WPL8LlC8Lţ premlses conslderedţ Lhe peLlLlon ls denled for lack of merlLŦ 1he March 30ţ 2006
ueclslon of Lhe CourL of Appeals ln CAŴCŦ8Ŧ Cv noŦ 78987 and lLs May 26ţ 2006 8esoluLlon denylng
Lhe moLlon for reconslderaLlon are Alll8MLuŦ

Ney vsŦ Çu|[ano
Gk# 178609] AugŦ 4ţ 2010
626 SCkA 800

lacLsť
1hls ls an appeal Lo Lhe ueclslon of Lhe CourL of Appealsţ seLLlng aslde Lhe ueclslon of Lhe 81C of
Manllaţ 8ranch 43Ŧ

ÞeLlLloners Manuel and 8omulo ney are Lhe reglsLered owners of a resldenLlal loL locaLed aL 1648
Maln SLreeLţ Þaco Manllaţ wlLh an area of 120 square meLers more or lessţ covered by 1C1 noŦ
122489Ŧ A Lhree (3) door aparLmenL was consLrucLed on Lhe sub[ecL loL Ŷ 1 for Manuelţ Lhe oLher
for 8omuloŤ and Lhe lasL one for Lhelr slsLerţ 8espondenLs Mlna nŦ Cul[ano and her husband Celso
Cul[anoŦ
Cn CcLober 8ţ 1999ţ respondenLs flled wlLh Lhe 81C of Manlla a sulL for reconveyanceţ parLlLlon and
damages agalnsL peLlLlonersŦ 1hey averred LhaL Lhey are coŴowners of Lhe sub[ecL properLy havlng
pald parL of lLs purchase prlceŤ LhaL Celso's name was lnadverLenLly omlLLed as one of Lhe buyers ln
Lhe execuLlon of Lhe deed of saleŦ ConsequenLlyţ 1C1 noŦ 122489 coverlng Lhe sub[ecL properLy was
lssued only ln Lhe names of Manuel and 8omuloŦ 1o obLaln a separaLe cerLlflcaLe of LlLleţ Lhey
requesLed from peLlLloners Lhe segregaLlon of Lhe porLlon alloLLed Lo Lhemţ buL Lhe laLLer refusedŦ
1hey laLer dlscovered LhaL Lhe enLlre properLy was morLgaged wlLh MeLropollLan 8ank Ǝ 1rusL
Companyţ prompLlng Lhem Lo execuLe and reglsLer Lhelr adverse clalm wlLh Lhe 8eglsLer of ueedsŤ
and Lo flle Lhe lnsLanL complalnLŦ
ÞeLlLlonersţ ln Lhelr answerţ denled respondenLs' allegaLlon of coŴownershlpŦ 1hey averred LhaL
Celso Cul[ano was noL a vendee of Lhe sub[ecL loLŤ Lhusţ hls name dld noL appear on Lhe LlLleŦ 1hey
asserLed LhaL respondenLs cannoL valldly malnLaln an acLlon agalnsL Lhem because Lhe laLLer
possessed Lhe properLy by mere LoleranceŤ and even assumlng LhaL respondenLs had a valld cause
of acLlonţ Lhe same had already been barred by prescrlpLlon and/or lachesŦ ÞeLlLlonersţ Lhereforeţ
prayed for Lhe dlsmlssal of Lhe complalnLŦ

AfLer Lrlalţ Lhe 81C rendered a ueclslon dlsmlsslng Lhe complalnLŦ lL re[ecLed respondenLs' clalm of
coŴownershlpţ and declared Lhelr documenLary and LesLlmonlal evldence unrellableŦ 1he 81C
susLalned peLlLloners' asserLlon LhaL respondenLs possessed parL of Lhe properLy Lhrough mere
LoleranceŤ and LhaL Lhelr cause of acLlonţ lf anyţ already prescrlbedŦ 1he 81C Lhus ruled LhaL
respondenLs can no longer demand Lhe segregaLlon or reconveyance of Lhe clalmed porLlon of Lhe
properLyŦ llnallyţ Lhe 81C granLed peLlLloners' counLerclalm and ordered Lhe relmbursemenL of Lhe
expenses Lhey lncurred ln defendlng Lhe caseŦ

8espondenLs wenL Lo Lhe CAŦ 1hey faulLed Lhe 81C for dlsmlsslng Lhelr complalnL and lnslsLed LhaL
Lhey are coŴowners of Lhe sub[ecL loLŤ and LhaL Lhelr share was erroneously lncluded ln peLlLloners'
LlLleŦ ClLlng Pelrs of !ose Clvlga vŦ CourL of Appealsţ respondenLs asserLed LhaL Lhelr rlghL Lo
lnsLlLuLe an acLlon for reconveyance ls lmprescrlpLlble because Lhey are ln possesslon of Lhe
clalmed porLlon of Lhe properLyŦ

Cn !une 29ţ 2007ţ Lhe CA rendered Lhe now challenged ueclslonţ reverslng Lhe 81CŦ 1he CA
consldered respondenLs' complalnL as one for quleLlng of LlLle whlch ls lmprescrlpLlbleŤ and granLed
Lo respondenLs Lhe rellefs LhaL Lhey prayed forŦ

1he CA declared żrespondenLsŽţ spouses Celso and Mlna Cul[anoţ as coŴowners of Lhe sub[ecL loL Lo
Lhe exLenL of oneŴLhlrd (1/3) Lhereof whlch corresponds Lo LhaL porLlon where Lhelr house sLandsŦ
Accordlnglyţ żpeLlLlonersŽ are hereby orderedť
1) Lo parLlLlon Lhe sub[ecL loL lnLo Lhree (3) equal porLlons of forLy square meLers (40 sqŦmŦ) eachţ
speclflcally alloLLlng Lo żrespondenLsŽ Lhe porLlon where Lhelr house sLandsŤ
2) Lo reconvey Lo żrespondenLsŽ Lhe clean LlLle Lo Lhelr porLlon of Lhe sub[ecL loLŤ
3) Lo surrender Lhe owner's copy of 1C1 noŦ 122489 Lo Lhe 8eglsLer of ueeds of Manlla for Lhe
annoLaLlon of żrespondenLs'Ž share LhereonŤ and
4) Lo pay żrespondenLsŽ aLLorney's fees and Lhe cosLs of sulL ln Lhe reasonable amounL of
Þ30ţ000Ŧ00Ŧ

1husţ Lhls peLlLlon for revlewŦ 1hey ascrlbe reverslble error Lo Lhe CA for LreaLlng respondenLs'
acLlon as one for quleLlng of LlLleŦ 1hey clalm LhaL nowhere ln Lhe complalnL does lL sLaLe LhaL
respondenLs seek Lo quleL Lhelr LlLle Lo Lhe properLyŦ All LhaL respondenLs averred and prayed for ln
Lhelr complalnL was for peLlLloners Lo surrender Lhelr cerLlflcaLe of LlLleţ and for Lhe parLlLlon of Lhe
sub[ecL properLyŦ ÞeLlLloners asserL LhaL Lhe CA ruled on an lssue noL ralsed ln Lhe pleadlngsŤ and
subsLlLuLed Lhe respondenLs' acLlon wlLh an enLlrely new acLlon for quleLlng of LlLleŦ

lssue/sť
1Ŧ WheLher Lhe CA erred ln LreaLlng Lhe complalnL as quleLlng of LlLleŦ
2Ŧ WheLher Lhe CA faulLed ln susLalnlng respondenL's clalm for coŴownershlpŦ

1he argumenL ls erroneousŦ
1Ŧ 1hese allegaLlons make ouL a case for reconveyanceŦ 1haL reconveyance was one of Lhe rellefs
soughL was made abundanLly clear by respondenLs ln Lhelr prayerŦ


8espondenLs dld noL only seek Lhe parLlLlon of Lhe properLy and Lhe dellvery of Lhe LlLleţ buL also
Lhe reconveyance of Lhelr share whlch was lnadverLenLly lncluded ln peLlLloners' 1C1Ŧ

An acLlon for reconveyance ls one LhaL seeks Lo Lransfer properLyţ wrongfully reglsLered by
anoLherţ Lo lLs rlghLful and legal ownerŦ lndeedţ reconveyance ls an acLlon dlsLlncL from an acLlon
for quleLlng of LlLleţ whlch ls flled whenever Lhere ls a cloud on LlLle Lo real properLy or any lnLeresL
Lherelnţ by reason of any lnsLrumenLţ recordţ clalmţ encumbrance or proceedlng whlch ls
apparenLly valld or effecLlve buL ls ln LruLh and ln facLţ lnvalldţ lneffecLlveţ voldableţ or
unenforceableţ and may be pre[udlclal Lo sald LlLle for purposes of removlng such cloud or Lo quleL
LlLleŦ Poweverţ we flnd noLhlng erroneous ln Lhe CA's rullng LreaLlng respondenLs' acLlon for
reconveyance as an acLlon Lo quleL LlLleŦ

ln Mendlzabel vŦ Apaoţ we LreaLed a slmllar acLlon for reconveyance as an acLlon Lo quleL LlLleţ
explalnlngţ Lhusť
1he CourL has ruled LhaL Lhe 10Ŵyear prescrlpLlve perlod applles only when Lhe person enforclng
Lhe LrusL ls noL ln possesslon of Lhe properLyŦ lf a person clalmlng Lo be lLs owner ls ln acLual
possesslon of Lhe properLyţ Lhe rlghL Lo seek reconveyanceţ whlch ln effecL seeks Lo quleL LlLle Lo
Lhe properLyţ does noL prescrlbeŦ 1he reason ls LhaL Lhe one who ls ln acLual possesslon of Lhe land
clalmlng Lo be lLs owner may walL unLll hls possesslon ls dlsLurbed or hls LlLle ls aLLacked before
Laklng sLeps Lo vlndlcaLe hls rlghLŦ Pls undlsLurbed possesslon glves hlm a conLlnulng rlghL Lo seek
Lhe ald of a courL of equlLy Lo ascerLaln and deLermlne Lhe naLure of Lhe adverse clalm of a Lhlrd
parLy and lLs effecL on hls own LlLleţ whlch rlghL can be clalmed only by one who ls ln possesslonŦ

1he rullng was relLeraLed ln LasqulLe vŦ vlcLory Plllsţ lncŦţ"An acLlon for reconveyance based on an
lmplled LrusL prescrlbes ln 10 yearsŦ 1he reference polnL of Lhe 10Ŵyear prescrlpLlve perlod ls Lhe
daLe of reglsLraLlon of Lhe deed or Lhe lssuance of Lhe LlLleŦ 1he prescrlpLlve perlod applles only lf
Lhere ls an acLual need Lo reconvey Lhe properLy as when Lhe plalnLlff ls noL ln possesslon of Lhe
properLyŦ Poweverţ lf Lhe plalnLlffţ as Lhe real owner of Lhe properLy also remalns ln possesslon of
Lhe properLyţ Lhe prescrlpLlve perlod Lo recover LlLle and possesslon of Lhe properLy does noL run
agalnsL hlmŦ ln such a caseţ an acLlon for reconveyanceţ lf noneLheless flledţ would be ln Lhe naLure
of a sulL for quleLlng of LlLleţ an acLlon LhaL ls lmprescrlpLlbleŦ

lndublLablyţ Lhe characLerlzaLlon by Lhe CA of respondenLs' acLlon as ln Lhe naLure of an acLlon for
quleLlng of LlLle cannoL be consldered a reverslble errorŦ

2Ŧ 1he ueed of 8econveyance execuLed by Manuel and 8omulo expllclLly sLaLes LhaLť
żWŽe acknowledge and recognlzed Lhe rlghLsţ lnLeresLs and parLlclpaLlon of Celso ÞŦ Cul[anoţ
llllplnoţ of legal ageţ marrled Lo Mlna ÞŦ ney and resldenL of 1648 Maln SLreeLţ Þacoţ Manllaţ as a
coŴowner of Lhe oneŴLhlrd (1/3) porLlon of Lhe sald loL whereln hls resldenLlal house ls now
consLrucLed aL Lhe aboveŴsLaLed addressţ havlng pald Lhe correspondlng amounL over Lhe sald 1/3
porLlon of Lhe properLy for Lhe acqulslLlon cosLs buL whose name does noL appear ln Lhe ueed of
Sale execuLed ln our favorţ Lhus resulLlng ln Lhe nonŴconcluslon (slc) of hls name ln Lhe aboveŴ
sLaLed 1ransfer CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle when lssued as a coŴownerŦ1avvphl1
nCWţ 1PL8LlC8Lţ for and ln conslderaLlon of Lhe foregolng premlses WLţ MAnuLL ÞŦ nL? and
8CMuLC ÞŦ nL?ţ do hereby Lransfer and convey unLo sald Spouses Celso ÞŦ Cul[ano and MlnA ÞŦ
nL? Lhelr oneŴLhlrd (1/3) porLlon share of Lhe aforedescrlbed (slc) parcel of land where Lhelr
resldenLlal house ls now slLuaLed aL Lhelr aboveŴglven address wlLh an area of forLy (40) square
meLers more or less by vlrLue of Lhls ueed of 8econveyanceŦ

ÞeLlLloners never denled Lhe due execuLlon of Lhe ueed of 8econveyanceŦ ln facL Lhey admlLLed
LhaL Lhe slgnaLures appearlng Lhereln are LhelrsŦ 1he CA cannoLţ Lhereforeţ be faulLed for declarlng
respondenLs as coŴowners of Lhe sub[ecL properLy because lL merely conflrmed and enforced Lhe
ueed of 8econveyance volunLarlly execuLed by peLlLloners ln favor of respondenLsŦ

As apLly pronounced by Lhe CAť
ż1Žhe ueed of 8econveyanceţ duly slgned by żpeLlLlonersŽ Lhemselvesţ puL Lo resL Lhe focal lssue
beLween Lhe parLlesŦ 1here ls no denylng LhaL lL ouLwelghs Lhe evldence relled upon by
żpeLlLlonersŽ desplLe Lhe facL LhaL Lhey have Lhe Lransfer cerLlflcaLe of LlLle over Lhe enLlre sub[ecL
loLŦ lL ls seLLled LhaL lL ls noL Lhe cerLlflcaLe of LlLle LhaL vesLs ownershlpŦ lL merely evldences such
LlLleŦ
ln a number of casesţ Lhe CourL has ordered reconveyance of properLy Lo Lhe Lrue owner or Lo one
wlLh a beLLer rlghLţ where Lhe properLy had been erroneously or fraudulenLly LlLled ln anoLher
personƌs nameŦ AfLer allţ Lhe 1orrens sysLem was noL deslgned Lo shleld and proLecL one who had
commlLLed fraud or mlsrepresenLaLlon and Lhus holds LlLle ln bad falLhŦ 1husţ Lhe CA acLed correcLly
ln renderlng Lhe challenged declslonŦ

@or|ng vsŦ 8oqu||aga
Gk# 163610] SeptŦ 27ţ 2010
631 SCkA 278
lacLsť
lor revlew under 8ule 43 of Lhe 1997 8ules of Clvll Þrocedureţ as amendedţ are Lhe ueclslon of Lhe
CA whlch afflrmed Lhe ueclslon of Lhe 81C excepL as Lo Lhe land covered by reconsLlLuLed 1C1 noŦ
81Ŵ3989 (1Ŵ16803) ln Lhe name of Lnrlque 1orlng

Cn CcLober 10ţ 1996ţ Lhe helrs of Lnrlque 1orlng (peLlLloners) flled before Lhe Lrlal courL a peLlLlon
for ƍproducLlonţ dellveryţ surrender of documenLsţ annulmenL of documenLƍ agalnsL Lhe helrs of
1eodosla 8oqullaga (respondenLs)Ŧ


Cn !une 3ţ 1927ţ 1eodosla 8oqullaga sold Lo Lnrlque 1orlng now deceasedţ parcels of land for a
conslderaLlon of llve Pundred and Lleven Þesos (Þ311Ŧ00)ţ evldenced by a deed of absoluLe sale
wrlLLen ln Spanlsh

1hls deed of absoluLe sale was duly reglsLered wlLh Lhe ż8eglsLerŽ of ueedsţ and Lhe fees for Lhe
reglsLraLlon were duly paldŦ 1hereafLerţ new 1ransfer CerLlflcaLes of 1lLle were lssued by Lhe Cfflce
of Lhe 8eglsLer of ueeds ln Lhe Þrovlnce of Cebuţ for all Lhe parcels of landţ ln Lhe name of Lnrlque
1orlngŦ

lrom Lhe lssuance of 1C1 on AugusL 20ţ 1927ţ plalnLlffs have been ln possesslon and rellglously pald
Lhe real Laxes due on sald descrlbed loLsţ and collecLlng Lhe proceeds of Lhe frulLs of Lhe landŦ
Poweverţ durlng World War llţ Lhe canceled Crlglnal CerLlflcaLe ln Lhe name of 1eodosla
ż8oqullagaŽţ and Lhe 1ransfer żCerLlflcaLesŽ of ż1lLleŽ ln Lhe name of Lnrlque 1orlng ln Lhe books of
Lhe 8eglsLer of ueeds were desLroyedŤ

LaLelyţ whlle peLlLloners were exerclslng Lhelr rlghL over Lhe sald loLsţ defendanLs refused Lo share
Lhe frulLs of Lhe loL reasonlng LhaL Lhey are Lhe owners LhereofŦ ÞeLlLloners learned LhaL defendanLs
flled peLlLlon for Lhe reconsLlLuLlon of Lhe CC1s of sald landŦ

ÞeLlLloners Lhus soughL Lhe lssuance of an order dlrecLlng Lhe defendanLs Lo dellverţ produce and
surrender Lhe reconsLlLuLed Crlglnal CerLlflcaLes of 1lLleŦ Should Lhe defendanLs refuse Lo dellver
Lhe sald LlLlesţ lL ls prayed LhaL Lhe courL (a) declare CC1's null and voldŤ (b) dlrecL Lhe 8eglsLer of
ueeds Lo cancel sald LlLles and ln lleu Lhereof lssue new 1C1s ln Lhe name of Lnrlque 1orlngŤ and (c)
declare CC1 noŦ 13237 null and vold for belng cancelled by 1C1 noŦ 81Ŵ3989Ŧ

As speclal and afflrmaLlve defensesţ defendanLs conLended LhaL Lhe 81C has no [urlsdlcLlon ln Lhls
case slnce Lhe assessed value of Lhe properLles lnvolved does noL exceed Þ20ţ000Ŧ00ţ and LhaL
peLlLloners are gullLy of laches for falllng Lo acL and Lake correcLlve measures wlLh Lhe 8eglsLer of
ueeds for slxLyŴnlne (69) years on Lhe alleged desLrucLlon of Lhe documenLsŦ

1he parLles agreed Lo submlL Lhe case for declslon on Lhe basls of poslLlon papersţ
memoranda/commenL and oLher documenLary evldence ln supporL of Lhelr respecLlve clalmsŦ

Cn !anuary 27ţ 1998ţ Lhe Lrlal courL dlsmlssed Lhe case on Lhe ground LhaL lL cannoL lnLerfere wlLh
or render null and vold Lhe declslon made by a coŴequal and coordlnaLe branch of Lhe courL whlch
ordered Lhe reconsLlLuLlon of Lhe CC1s ln Lhe name of 1eodosla 8oqullagaŦ under Lhe
clrcumsLancesţ peLlLloners' owner's dupllcaLe cerLlflcaLes of LlLle ln Lhe name of Lnrlque 1orlng are
deemed ƍoverLaken by Lhe reconsLlLuLed LlLleżsŽŦƍ lurLherţ Lhe Lrlal courL found peLlLloners gullLy of
laches ln noL reconsLlLuLlng Lhe orlglnal 1C1s ln Lhe name of Lnrlque 1orlng and ln noL maklng any
opposlLlon Lo Lhe reconsLlLuLlon proceedlngs flled by Lhe helrs of 1eodosla 8oqullagaŦ Poweverţ lL
was declared LhaL Lhe dlsmlssal of Lhe case wlll noL affecL Lhe reconsLlLuLed 1C1 noŦ 81Ŵ3989 ln Lhe
name of Lnrlque 1orlngŦ

ÞeLlLloners appealed Lo Lhe CA argulng LhaLť
1Ŧ Lhe Lrlal courL erred ln concludlng LhaL Lhe acLlon ls one for Lhe annulmenL of Lhe order
of Lhe courL whlch granLed reconsLlLuLlonţ when ln LruLh Lhe peLlLloners merely soughL Lhe dellvery
of Lhe owner's dupllcaLe coples of Lhe reconsLlLuLed CC1sŦ
2Ŧ Lhe Lrlal courL faulLed ln falllng Lo conslder LhaL Lhe defendanLs' predecessorŴlnŴlnLeresL
had long ago sold Lhe loLs Lo Lnrlque 1orlngţ whlch documenL of sale defendanLs have noL denledţ
and Lherefore defendanLŴhelrs are no longer ownersŦ
3Ŧ Lhe Lrlal courL erred ln flndlng Lhem gullLy of laches desplLe recognlzlng Lhe exlsLence of
Lhe owner's dupllcaLe of 1C1s ln Lhe name of Lnrlque 1orlngŤ Lhe submlsslon by Lhe peLlLloners of
annexes ln Lhelr CommenL/8eply Lo defendanLs' memorandum showlng LhaL Lhere were prevlous
cases whereln peLlLloners have asserLed and defended Lhelr rlghL over Lhe sub[ecL properLles and
prevalledŤ and Lhe facL LhaL Lhe CC1s were reconsLlLuLed by defendanLs only ln 1993 and Lhe
peLlLloners lnsLlLuLed Lhls case ln 1996Ŧ

1he CA dlsmlssed Lhe appeal and afflrmed Lhe Lrlal courL's rullngŦ
A moLlon for reconslderaLlon was flled by Lhe peLlLloners buL Lhe CA denled Lhe sameŦ

ÞeLlLloners submlL Lhe followlng argumenLs ln Lhls peLlLlon for revlew on cerLlorarlť

1PL CCu81 Cl AÞÞLALS CvL8LCCkLu Anu ulS8LCA8uLu CCnCLuSlvL LvluLnCL Cn 8LCC8u
1PA1 1PL Su8!LC1 LAnuS WL8L AL8LAu? SCLu AS LA8L? AS !unL 3ţ 1927 8? 1LCuCSlA
8CCulLACAţ 8LSÞCnuLn1S' Þ8LuLCLSSC8ţ 1C Ln8lCuL 1C8lnCţ ÞL1l1lCnL8S' Þ8LuLCLSSC8ţ AS
LvluLnCLu 8? 1PL AnClLn1 uLLu Cl SALL ln SÞAnlSP LAnCuACL uA1Lu !unL 3ţ 1927 Ŷ WPlCP
LvluLnCLţ ll Þ8CÞL8L? CCnSluL8Luţ WCuLu PAvL CPAnCLu 1PL Cu1CCML Cl 1PL CASLŦ
llŦ
1PL CCu81 Cl AÞÞLALS CvL8LCCkLu Anu ulS8LCA8uLu CCnCLuSlvL LvluLnCL Cn 8LCC8u
1PA1 1PL ÞL1l1lCnL8S A8L ln AC1uAL ÞCSSLSSlCn Cl 1PL C8lClnAL CWnL8S' uuÞLlCA1L
18AnSlL8 CL81lllCA1LS Cl 1l1LL ln 1PL nAML Cl Ln8lCuL 1C8lnC WPlCP A8L CCCu Þ8CCl Cl
ÞL1l1lCnL8S' CWnL8SPlÞ Cl Su8!LC1 LAnuS Ŵ WPlCP LvluLnCLţ ll Þ8CÞL8L? CCnSluL8Luţ
WCuLu PAvL AL1L8Lu 1PL Cu1CCML Cl 1PL CASLŦ
lllŦ
1PL CCu81 Cl AÞÞLALS CvL8LCCkLu 1PL lAC1 1PA1 1PL 1l1LLS 1PA1 ÞL1l1lCnL8S PAu
8LCCnS1l1u1Lu WL8L 1PL CAnCLLLLu C8lClnAL CL81lllCA1LS Cl 1l1LL ln 1PL nAML Cl
1LCuCSlA 8CCulLACA WPlCP uC nC1 Þ8CvL CWnL8SPlÞ Cl 1PL LAnuS 8LCAuSL 1PL? WL8L
AL8LAu? CAnCLLLLu 8? Ln8lCuL 1C8lnC'S 18AnSlL8 CL81lllCA1LS Cl 1l1LLŦ
lvŦ
1PL CCu81 Cl AÞÞLALS L88Lu ln PCLulnC ÞL1l1lCnL8S CulL1? Cl LACPLS !uS1 8LCAuSL 1PL?
lAlLLu 1C 8LCCnS1l1u1L 1C8lnC'S C8lClnAL 18AnSlL8 CL81lllCA1LS Cl 1l1LL Cn llLL ln 1PL
8LCC8uS Cl 1PL 8LClS18? Cl uLLuSţ l1 AÞÞLA8lnC 1PA1 1PL? Anu 1PLl8 Þ8LuLCLSSC8 PAvL
8LLn ln AC1uAL ÞCSSLSSlCn Cl 1PL LAnu SlnCL 1927 Anu A8L ln ÞCSSLSSlCn Cl 1PL C8lClnAL
CWnL8'S uuÞLlCA1L 18AnSlL8 CL81lllCA1LS Cl 1l1LL ln 1PL nAML Cl 1PLl8 Þ8LuLCLSSC8ţ
Ln8lCuL 1C8lnCŦ

1PL CCu81 Cl AÞÞLALS L88Lu ln nC1 8LvL8SlnC 1PL 18lAL CCu81'S 8uLlnC 1PA1 1PL
CCMÞLAln1/ÞL1l1lCn llLLu 8? ÞL1l1lCnL8S Wl1P 1PL 18lAL CCu81 WAS 1An1AMCun1 1C An
AC1lCn 1C ASSAlL 1PL uLClSlCn Cl A CCŴLCuAL CCu81ţ l1 AÞÞLA8lnC 1PA1 1PL SAlu
CCMÞLAln1/ÞL1l1lCn WAS ML8LL? 1C CCMÞLL uLLlvL8? C8 Su88LnuL8 8? 8LSÞCnuLn1S Cl
1PL 8LCCnS1l1u1Lu CL81lllCA1LS Cl 1l1LLŦ

Peldť
1he lssues ralsed are purely quesLlons of facL LhaL Lhls CourL cannoL revlew ln a peLlLlon flled under
8ule 43Ŧ ulLlmaLelyţ we are asked Lo deLermlne Lhe ownershlp of Lhe sub[ecL loLs orlglnally
reglsLered ln Lhe name of 1eodosla 8oqullagaţ respondenLs' predecessorŴlnŴlnLeresLŦ

1he CA declared LhaL peLlLloners falled Lo esLabllsh any rlghL over Lhe loLs oLher Lhan Lhelr bare
asserLlon LhaL Lhelr predecessorŴlnŴlnLeresL purchased Lhese properLles from 1eodosla 8oqullaga
and subsequenLly LlLles ln hls name were lssued buL were losL durlng Lhe lasL world warŦ lL agreed
wlLh Lhe Lrlal courL ln flndlng LhaL whaLever clalm peLlLloners have on Lhe sub[ecL properLles was
losL by Lhelr unexplalned neglecL for more Lhan flfLy (30) years slnce Lhe desLrucLlon of Lhe records
ln Lhe reglsLry of deeds durlng Lhe lasL world warţ under Lhe prlnclple of lachesŦ As Lo Lhe naLure of
Lhe acLlon flled by peLlLlonersţ Lhe CA llkewlse afflrmed Lhe Lrlal courL's rullng LhaL lL ls one for
annulmenL of Lhe reconsLlLuLed LlLleţ whlch essenLlally assalls Lhe [udgmenL or order of a coŴequal
courLŦ

As a general ruleţ facLual flndlngs of Lhe Lrlal courLţ especlally Lhose afflrmed by Lhe CAţ are
concluslve on Lhls CourL when supporLed by Lhe evldence on recordŦ

ln Lhe case aL barţ Lhe records showed LhaL Lhe orlglnal peLlLlon was flled ln Lhe Munlclpal ClrculL
1rlal CourL of 8ogoŴSan 8emlgloţ Cebu buL was subsequenLly Lransferred Lo Lhe 81C on moLlon of
Lhe peLlLlonersŦ 1C1 nosŦ 16802ţ 16803ţ 16804 and 81Ŵ3989 (1Ŵ16803) were aLLached Lo Lhe
peLlLlon LogeLher wlLh annexes ƍAƍţ ƍCƍ Lo ƍCƍ menLloned LherelnŦ

Poweverţ upon elevaLlon Lo Lhe CAţ Lhe records LransmlLLed had mlsslng pagesţ lncludlng Lhe pages
subsequenL Lo Lhe orlglnal peLlLlon where coples of Lhe aforesald 1C1s should have been aLLachedŦ
AL any raLeţ Lhere appears Lo be no lndlcaLlon from Lhe pleadlngs flled and orders/declslon lssued
by Lhe Lrlal courL LhroughouL Lhe proceedlngs LhaL such documenLary evldence was noL submlLLed
by peLlLlonersŦ Penceţ Lhe CA could have been mlsled by Lhe absence of Lhese annexes from Lhe
records LransmlLLed on appealŦ ÞeLlLloners submlLLed Lo Lhls CourL Lhe phoLocoples of 1C1 nosŦ
16802ţ 16803 and 16804 cerLlfled as Lrue copy from Lhe records by Lhe 81C of 8ogoţ 8ranch 61
Clerk of CourL vl ALLyŦ 8ey uadula CaayonŦ

lL musL be noLed LhaL peLlLloners presenLed before Lhe Lrlal courL Lhe owner's dupllcaLe coples of
Lhe sald 1C1s ln Lhe name of Lnrlque 1orlngŦ lndeedţ had Lhese pleces of evldence been duly
consldered on appealţ Lhe resoluLlon of Lhe lssue of ownershlp would have LllLed ln peLlLloners'
favorŦ

8uL flrsLţ we resolve Lhe lssue of Lhe proprleLy of Lhe sulL flled by Lhe peLlLlonersŦ 1he naLure of an
acLlon ls deLermlned by Lhe maLerlal allegaLlons of Lhe complalnL and Lhe characLer of Lhe rellef
soughL by plalnLlffţ and Lhe law ln effecL when Lhe acLlon was flled lrrespecLlve of wheLher he ls
enLlLled Lo all or only some of such rellefŦ As gleaned from Lhe avermenLs of Lhe peLlLlon flled
before Lhe Lrlal courLţ Lhough capLloned as for dellvery or producLlon of documenLs and annulmenL
of documenLţ peLlLloners' acLlon was really for quleLlng of LlLle and cancellaLlon of reconsLlLuLed
LlLlesŦ

ÞeLlLloners had prayed for Lhe followlng rellefs before Lhe Lrlal courLť
WPL8LlC8Lţ lL ls respecLfully prayed LhaL an order be lssuedŤ
aŦ ulrecLlng defendanLs Lo dellverţ produceţ and surrender Crlglnal żCerLlflcaLesŽ of 1lLle nosŦ 8CŴ
13240ţ 13238ţ 13239ţ and 1ransfer CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle żnoŦŽ 97613 Lo plalnLlffsţ and should
defendanLs refuse Lo surrender Lhese documenLsţ Lo declare Crlglnal CerLlflcaLe of 1lLles nosŦ Ŷ 8CŴ
13238ţ 13239ţ 13240ţ and 1ransfer CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle 97613 null and voldţ and dlrecLlng Lhe
8eglsLer of ueeds of Lhe Þrovlnce of Cebuţ Lo cancel sald Crlglnal CerLlflcaLes of 1lLleţ and 1ransfer
CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle and ln lleu Lhereof lssue new 1ransfer CerLlflcaLes of 1lLle ln Lhe name of Lnrlque
1orlngŤ
bŦ ueclare as null and vold Crlglnal CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle 13237ţ belng canceled by 1ransfer CerLlflcaLe
of 1lLle 81Ŵ3989Ť
cŦ ulrecLlng defendanLs helrs of 1eodosla ż8oqullagaŽ Lo pay Þ20ţ000Ŧ00 as aLLorney's feesŦ

ÞlalnLlffsţ pray for oLher remedles [usL and equlLable appllcable Lo Lhelr caseţ perLlnenL wlLh law
and equlLyŦ

ÞeLlLloners conLend LhaL Lhe dellvery of Lhe reconsLlLuLed CC1s ln Lhe name of 1eodosla 8oqullaga
was necessary Lo conflrm and reglsLer Lhe 1927 sale ln favor of Lhelr predecessorŴlnŴlnLeresLţ

Lnrlque 1orlngŦ lL appears LhaL Lhe remedy conLemplaLed ls a peLlLlon for surrender of wlLhheld
owner's dupllcaLe cerLlflcaLes provlded ln SecLlon 107 of ÞresldenLlal uecree (ÞŦuŦ) noŦ 1329Ŧ

SLC1lCn 107Ŧ Surrender of wlLhheld dupllcaLe cerLlflcaLesŦ ŴŴ Where lL ls necessary Lo lssue a new
cerLlflcaLe of LlLle pursuanL Lo any lnvolunLary lnsLrumenL whlch dlvesLs Lhe LlLle of Lhe reglsLered
owner agalnsL hls consenL or where a volunLary lnsLrumenL cannoL be reglsLered by reason of Lhe
refusal or fallure of Lhe holder Lo surrender Lhe owner's dupllcaLe cerLlflcaLe of LlLleţ Lhe parLy ln
lnLeresL may flle a peLlLlon ln courL Lo compel surrender of Lhe same Lo Lhe 8eglsLer of ueedsŦ 1he
courLţ afLer hearlngţ may order Lhe reglsLered owner or any person wlLhholdlng Lhe dupllcaLe
cerLlflcaLe Lo surrender Lhe sameţ and dlrecL Lhe enLry of a new cerLlflcaLe or memorandum upon
such surrenderŦ lf Lhe person wlLhholdlng Lhe dupllcaLe cerLlflcaLe ls noL amenable Lo Lhe process
of Lhe courLţ or lf żforŽ any reason Lhe ouLsLandlng owner's dupllcaLe cerLlflcaLe cannoL be
dellveredţ Lhe courL may order Lhe annulmenL of Lhe same as well as Lhe lssuance of a new
cerLlflcaLe of LlLle ln lleu LhereofŦ Such new cerLlflcaLe and all dupllcaLes Lhereof shall conLaln a
memorandum of Lhe annulmenL of Lhe ouLsLandlng dupllcaLeŦ (Lmphasls supplledŦ)

Poweverţ peLlLloners Lhemselves alleged LhaL Lhe 1927 sale had long been duly reglsLered Ŷ CC1 ln
Lhe name of 1eodosla 8oqullagaţ as menLloned ln Lhe LscrlLura de venLa AbsoluLa daLed !une 3ţ
1927ţ were cancelled and ln lleu Lhereof 1C1s have been lssued ln Lhe name of Lnrlque 1orlng on
AugusL 20ţ 1927Ŧ 1helr predecessorŴlnŴlnLeresL havlng already succeeded ln reglsLerlng Lhe deed of
sale as early as 1927ţ lL ls clear LhaL Lhe procedure under SecLlon 107 of ÞŦuŦ noŦ 1329 ls
lnappllcableŦ

CuleLlng of LlLle ls a common law remedy for Lhe removal of any cloud upon or doubL or
uncerLalnLy wlLh respecL Lo LlLle Lo real properLyŦ CrlglnaLlng ln equlLy [urlsprudenceţ lLs purpose ls
Lo secure ƍŧ an ad[udlcaLlon LhaL a clalm of LlLle Lo or an lnLeresL ln properLyţ adverse Lo LhaL of Lhe
complalnanLţ ls lnvalldţ so LhaL Lhe complalnanL and Lhose clalmlng under hlm may be forever
afLerward free from any danger of hosLlle clalmŦƍ ln such acLlonţ Lhe compeLenL courL ls Lasked Lo
deLermlne Lhe respecLlve rlghLs of Lhe complalnanL and oLher clalmanLsţ noL only Lo place Lhlngs ln
Lhelr proper placesţ and Lo make Lhe clalmanLţ who has no rlghLs Lo sald lmmovableţ respecL and
noL dlsLurb Lhe one so enLlLledţ buL also for Lhe beneflL of boLhţ so LhaL whoever has Lhe rlghL wlll
see every cloud of doubL over Lhe properLy dlsslpaLedţ and he can LhereafLer fearlessly lnLroduce
Lhe lmprovemenLs he may deslreţ as well as useţ and even abuse Lhe properLy as he deems flLŦ

ln alleglng LhaL peLlLloners were noL served any noLlce as acLual possessors or ad[acenL owners of
Lhe peLlLlon for reconsLlLuLlon (Cad Case noŦ 7ţ CadŦ 8ecŦ noŦ 442ţ uecree nosŦ 230739ţ 230740ţ
231111 and 231112) flled by Lhe respondenLs for reconsLlLuLlon of CC1s ln Lhe name of 1eodosla
8oqullaga whlch was granLed by Lhe courLŤ and LhaL Lhe sald CC1s have already been cancelled by
Lhe lssuance of 1C1s ln Lhe name of Lnrlque 1orlng by vlrLue of a deed of sale execuLed ln 1927 by
1eodosla 8oqullaga Ŷ peLlLloners dld noL [usL seek Lo remove any doubL or uncerLalnLy ln Lhe LlLle of
Lhelr predecessorŴlnŴlnLeresL over Lhe sub[ecL real properLlesţ buL also clalmed lrregularlLy and
defecLs ln Lhe reconsLlLuLlon proceedlngs whlch resulLed ln Lhe lssuance of reconsLlLuLed CC1 nosŦ
8CŴ13237ţ 8CŴ13238ţ 8CŴ13239 and 8CŴ13240 ln Lhe name of 1eodosla 8oqullagaŦ

lf lndeedţ as peLlLloners clalmedţ Lhe CC1s ln Lhe name of 1eodosla 8oqullaga were already
cancelled and new 1C1s have already been lssued ln Lhe name of Lnrlque 1orlng as early as 1927ţ
Lhen Lhe reconsLlLuLed CC1 nosŦ 8CŴ13237ţ 8CŴ13238ţ 8CŴ13239 and 8CŴ13240 lssued ln Cad Case
noŦ 7ţ Cad 8ecŦ noŦ 442 are null and voldŦ

lL may also be noLed LhaL Lhe peLlLlon for reconsLlLuLlon flled by respondenLs and Lhe CerLlflcaLlons
lssued by Lhe L8A sLaLed only Lhe reglsLraLlon decree numbers lssued ln favor of 1eodosla
8oqullaga wlLhouL menLlonlng Lhe numbers of Lhe CC1s and daLes of Lhelr lssuanceŦ 1he
reconsLlLuLed CC1s on Lhelr face conLalned no enLry whaLsoever as Lo Lhe number of Lhe CC1
lssued pursuanL Lo Lhe decrees of reglsLraLlonţ nor Lhe daLe of lLs lssuanceŦ We have held LhaL such
absence of any documenLţ prlvaLe or offlclalţ menLlonlng Lhe number of Lhe cerLlflcaLe of LlLle and
daLe when Lhe cerLlflcaLe of LlLle was lssuedţ does noL warranL Lhe granLlng of a peLlLlon for
reconsLlLuLlonŦ Moreoverţ noLlce of hearlng of Lhe peLlLlon for reconsLlLuLlon of LlLle musL be served
on Lhe acLual possessors of Lhe properLyŦ noLlce Lhereof by publlcaLlon ls lnsufflclenLŦ
!urlsprudence ls Lo Lhe effecL seLLled LhaL ln peLlLlons for reconsLlLuLlon of LlLlesţ acLual owners and
possessors of Lhe land lnvolved musL be duly served wlLh acLual and personal noLlce of Lhe peLlLlonŦ

1he declslon granLlng Lhe peLlLlon for reconsLlLuLlon flled by Lhe respondenLs was promulgaLed on
May 9ţ 1996Ŧ 1here ls no allegaLlon or proof LhaL peLlLloners avalled of Lhe remedles of appealţ
peLlLlon for rellefţ cerLlorarl or annulmenL of [udgmenL before Lhe CA quesLlonlng Lhe valldlLy of Lhe
sald reconsLlLuLlon orderŦ

noLwlLhsLandlng peLlLloners' fallure Lo avall of Lhe aforeŴmenLloned remedlesţ Lhe declslon ln Lhe
reconsLlLuLlon case ls noL a bar Lo Lhe ad[udlcaLlon of Lhe lssue of ownershlp ralsed ln Lhe presenL
caseŦ 1he naLure of [udlclal reconsLlLuLlon proceedlngs ls Lhe resLoraLlon of an lnsLrumenL or Lhe
relssuance of a new dupllcaLe cerLlflcaLe of LlLle whlch ls supposed Lo have been losL or desLroyed
ln lLs orlglnal form and condlLlonŦ lLs purpose ls Lo have Lhe LlLle reproduced afLer proper
proceedlngs ln Lhe same form Lhey were when Lhe loss or desLrucLlon occurred and noL Lo pass
upon Lhe ownershlp of Lhe land covered by Lhe losL or desLroyed LlLleŦ

AfLer a careful revlewţ we hold LhaL peLlLloners have saLlsfacLorlly esLabllshed Lhelr clalm of
ownershlp over Lhe sub[ecL loLs by preponderance of evldenceŦ 1he exlsLence and due execuLlon of
Lhe LscrlLura de venLa AbsoluLa was never dlspuLed by Lhe respondenLsŦ ÞeLlLloners' documenLary
evldence showed LhaL Lhe reglsLraLlon fees for Lhe Lransfer of Lhe loLs menLloned ln Lhe sald deed
of absoluLe sale was duly paldţ resulLlng ln Lhe lssuance of 1C1s ln Lhe name of Lnrlque 1orlngŦ
1hereafLerţ peLlLloners Look possesslon of Lhe landţ sharlng ln Lhe frulLs Lhereof and paylng Lhe
realLy Laxes due on Lhe landsŦ Whlle Lhe orlglnal owner's dupllcaLe 1C1s were ln Lhe possesslon of
peLlLlonersţ Lhe orlglnal Lransfer cerLlflcaLes of LlLle on flle wlLh Lhe reglsLry of deeds were losL or
desLroyed durlng Lhe lasL world warŦ ÞeLlLloners were also able Lo [udlclally reconsLlLuLe 1C1 noŦ 1Ŵ
16803 (81Ŵ3989) on november 11ţ 1994ţ as per Lhe annoLaLlon LhereonŦ

Laches means Lhe fallure or neglecLţ for an unreasonable lengLh of Llmeţ Lo do LhaL whlch by
exerclslng due dlllgence could or should have been done earllerŤ lL ls negllgence or omlsslon Lo
asserL a rlghL wlLhln a reasonable Llmeţ warranLlng a presumpLlon LhaL Lhe parLy enLlLled Lo asserL lL
elLher has abandoned lL or decllned Lo asserL lLŦ 1hls equlLable defense ls based upon grounds of
publlc pollcyţ whlch requlres Lhe dlscouragemenL of sLale clalms for Lhe peace of socleLyŦ lndeedţ
whlle lL ls Lrue LhaL a 1orrens 1lLle ls lndefeaslble and lmprescrlpLlbleţ Lhe reglsLered landowner
may lose hls rlghL Lo recover Lhe possesslon of hls reglsLered properLy by reason of lachesŦ

ln Lhls caseţ howeverţ laches cannoL be appreclaLed ln respondenLs' favorŦ
lL should be sLressed LhaL laches ls noL concerned only wlLh Lhe mere lapse of LlmeŦ 1he followlng
elemenLs musL be presenL ln order Lo consLlLuLe lachesť
(1) conducL on Lhe parL of Lhe defendanLţ or of one under whom he clalmsţ glvlng rlse Lo Lhe
slLuaLlon of whlch complalnL ls made for whlch Lhe complalnL seeks a remedyŤ
(2) delay ln asserLlng Lhe complalnanL's rlghLsţ Lhe complalnanL havlng had knowledge or noLlceţ of
Lhe defendanL's conducL and havlng been afforded an opporLunlLy Lo lnsLlLuLe a sulLŤ
(3) lack of knowledge or noLlce on Lhe parL of Lhe defendanL LhaL Lhe complalnanL would asserL Lhe
rlghL on whlch he bases hls sulLŤ and
(4) ln[ury or pre[udlce Lo Lhe defendanL ln Lhe evenL rellef ls accorded Lo Lhe complalnanLţ or Lhe
sulL ls noL held Lo be barredŦ37

Cnly Lhe flrsL elemenL was presenL ln Lhls caseţ whlch occurred from Lhe momenL respondenLs
refused Lo glve peLlLloners' share ln Lhe frulLs and proceeds of Lhe landţ clalmlng LhaL Lhey are
owners LhereofŦ ln Lhe ensulng barangay proceedlngsţ respondenLs presenLed Lhe reconsLlLuLed
CC1s prompLlng peLlLloners Lo verlfy wlLh Lhe offlce of Lhe reglsLry of deedsŦ lL was only Lhen LhaL
peLlLloners dlscovered LhaL respondenLs lndeed flled a peLlLlon for [udlclal reconsLlLuLlonŦ 1here
belng no personal noLlce Lo Lhem as acLual possessors or ad[acenL loL ownersţ peLlLloners never
had Lhe opporLunlLy Lo flle Lhelr opposlLlonŦ 1he order of reconsLlLuLlon was lssued ln May 1996Ŧ
ÞeLlLloners' flllng of Lhe presenL sulL for Lhe dellvery and cancellaLlon of sald reconsLlLuLed CC1s ln
Lhe possesslon of respondenLs on CcLober 20ţ 1996ţ afLer Lhe lapse of only flve monLhsţ cannoL be
consldered as unreasonable delay amounLlng Lo lachesŦ
AddlLlonallyţ peLlLloners showed LhaL Lhey were never amlss ln asserLlng Lhelr rlghLs over Lhe
sub[ecL loLs whenever any lncldenL LhreaLened Lhelr peaceful possesslon and ownershlpŦ

Cañezo vsŦ 8aut|sta
Gk# 170189] SeptŦ 1ţ 2010
629 SCkA S80
lacLsť
1hls ls a peLlLlon for revlew of Lhe declslon of Lhe CourL of AppealsŦ

Spouses Lleglo and uolla Canezo are Lhe reglsLered ownerżsŽ of a land wlLh an area of 186 sq mŦ
covered by 1C1 noŦ 32911Ŧ Spouses Apollnarlo and Consorcla 8auLlsLa are Lhe reglsLered owners of
a land wlLh an area of 181 sq mŦ covered by 1C1 noŦ 31727Ŧ 8oLh are locaLed aL Coronado PelghLsţ
8arangka lbabaţ Mandaluyong ClLy and reglsLered wlLh Lhe 8eglsLry of ueeds of Mandaluyong ClLyŦ
AppellanLs' loL ls ad[acenL Lo LhaL of appelleesŦ

ln 1993ţ appellees sLarLed Lhe consLrucLlon of a bulldlng on Lhelr loLŦ uurlng Lhe consLrucLlonţ
appellees dlscovered LhaL Lhelr loL was encroached upon by Lhe sLrucLures bullL by appellanLs
wlLhouL appellees' knowledge and consenLŦ Poweverţ desplLe oral and wrlLLen demandsţ appellanLs
falled and refused Lo remove Lhe sLrucLures encroachlng appellees' loLŦ

ALLempLs were made Lo seLLle Lhelr dlspuLe wlLh Lhe barangay luponţ buL Lo no avallŦ Appellees
lnlLlaLed a complalnL wlLh Lhe 81C for Lhe lssuance of a wrlL of demollLlonŦ AppellanLs were
declared ln defaulL for fallure Lo flle an Answer wlLhln Lhe exLended perlod granLed by Lhe courLţ
Appellees were allowed Lo presenL Lhelr evldence ex parLe before an appolnLed commlsslonerŦ
1hereafLer Lhe 81C rendered Lhe assalled declslon ln Lhe Lerms earller seL forLhŦ

Cn 23 March 2002ţ Lhe Lrlal courL promulgaLed lLs ueclslon ln favor of Lhe spouses CanezoŦ 1he Lrlal
courL found LhaL Lhe spouses 8auLlsLa bullL sLrucLures encroachlng on Lhe land owned by Lhe
spouses CanezoŦ 1he spouses 8auLlsLa also refused Lo remove Lhe sLrucLures and respecL Lhe
boundarles as esLabllshed by Lhe varlous surveyorsŦ A referral Lo Lhe 8arangay Lupon falled Lo
seLLle Lhe conLroversy amlcablyŦ 1he Lrlal courL Lhus ruled LhaL Lhe spouses 8auLlsLa are bullders ln
bad falLhţ such LhaL Lhe spouses Canezo are enLlLled Lo an lssuance of a wrlL of demollLlon wlLh
damagesŦ

!udgmenL ls rendered ln favor of Lhe plalnLlffs and agalnsL Lhe defendanLsŦ A wrlL of demollLlon be
was lssued dlrecLlng Lhe removal/demollLlon of Lhe sLrucLures bullL by Lhe defendanLs upon Lhe
porLlon of land belonglng żLoŽ Lhe plalnLlffs aL Lhe former's expenseŦ
lurLherţ
1Ŧ Lhe defendanL ls ordered Lo pay Þ30ţ000Ŧ00 (Þhlllpplne Currency) as and by way of moral
damagesżŤ andŽ
2Ŧ Lhe defendanL ls hereby ordered Lo pay Þ30ţ000Ŧ00 as and by way of aLLorney's feesŦ

1he spouses 8auLlsLa flled a noLlce of appeal

Cn 17 CcLober 2003ţ Lhe appellaLe courL reversed Lhe ueclslon of Lhe Lrlal courLŦ 1he appellaLe
courL ruled LhaL slnce Lhe lasL demand was made on 27 March 2000ţ or more Lhan a year before
Lhe flllng of Lhe complalnLţ Lhe spouses Canezo should have flled a sulL for recovery of possesslon
and noL for Lhe lssuance of a wrlL of demollLlonŦ A wrlL of demollLlon can be granLed only as an
effecL of a flnal [udgmenL or orderţ hence Lhe spouses Canezo's complalnL should be dlsmlssedŦ 1he
spouses Canezo falled Lo speclfy Lhe assessed value of Lhe encroached porLlon of Lhelr properLyŦ
8ecause of Lhls fallureţ Lhe complalnL lacked sufflclenL basls Lo consLlLuLe a cause of acLlonŦ llnallyţ
Lhe appellaLe courL ruled LhaL should Lhere be a flndlng of encroachmenL ln Lhe acLlon for recovery
of possesslon and LhaL Lhe encroachmenL was bullL ln good falLhţ Lhe markeL value of Lhe
encroached porLlon should be proved Lo deLermlne Lhe approprlaLe lndemnlLyŦ
1he CA granLed Lhe appeal and Lhe case was ulSMlSSLu wlLhouL pre[udlce Lo Lhe flllng of Lhe
approprlaLe acLlon wlLh Lhe proper forumŦ

lssuesť
lŦ WheLher Lhe Ponorable CourL of Appeals gravely erred ln granLlng Lhe peLlLlon of Lhe żspouses
8auLlsLaŽ and reverslng Lhe ueclslon of Lhe CourL a quoŤ żandŽ

llŦ WheLher Lhe Ponorable CourL of Appeals gravely erred ln sLaLlng LhaL Lhe peLlLloners should
have flled recovery of possesslon and noL wrlL of demollLlonŦ

Peldť
1he peLlLlon has merlLŦ
1he presenL caseţ whlle lnaccuraLely capLloned as an acLlon for a ƍWrlL of uemollLlon wlLh
uamagesƍ ls ln reallLy an acLlon Lo recover a parcel of land or an acclon relvlndlcaLorla under ArLlcle
434 of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ ArLlcle 434 of Lhe Clvll Code readsť ƍln an acLlon Lo recoverţ Lhe properLy
musL be ldenLlfledţ and Lhe plalnLlff musL rely on Lhe sLrengLh of hls LlLle and noL on Lhe weakness
of Lhe defendanL's clalmŦƍ Acclon relvlndlcaLorla seeks Lhe recovery of ownershlp and lncludes Lhe
[us uLendl and Lhe [us fruendl broughL ln Lhe proper reglonal Lrlal courLŦ Acclon relvlndlcaLorla ls an

acLlon whereby plalnLlff alleges ownershlp over a parcel of land and seeks recovery of lLs full
possesslonŦ
ln order LhaL an acLlon for Lhe recovery of LlLle may prosperţ lL ls lndlspensableţ ln accordance wlLh
Lhe precedenLs esLabllshed by Lhe courLs LhaL Lhe parLy who prosecuLes lL musL fully proveţ noL
only hls ownershlp of Lhe Lhlng clalmedţ buL also Lhe ldenLlLy of Lhe sameŦ Poweverţ alLhough Lhe
ldenLlLy of Lhe Lhlng LhaL a parLy deslres Lo recover musL be esLabllshedţ lf Lhe plalnLlff has already
proved hls rlghL of ownershlp over a LracL of landţ and Lhe defendanL ls occupylng wlLhouL rlghL any
parL of such LracLţ lL ls noL necessary for plalnLlff Lo esLabllsh Lhe preclse locaLlon and exLenL of Lhe
porLlons occupled by Lhe defendanL wlLhln Lhe plalnLlff's properLyŦ

Clven Lhe efforLs made by Lhe spouses Canezo Lo seLLle Lhe presenL lssue prlor Lo Lhe flllng of a
ComplalnLţ Lhe Lrlal courL was [usLlfled ln rullng LhaL Lhe spouses 8auLlsLa were ln defaulL and ln noL
admlLLlng Lhelr AnswerŦ 1he ComplalnL was noL Lhe spouses 8auLlsLa's flrsL encounLer wlLh Lhe
presenL lssueŦ Moreoverţ Lhe spouses 8auLlsLa falled Lo flle Lhelr Answer even afLer Lhe explry of
Lhe moLlon of exLenslon granLed Lo LhemŦ
1he LesLlmony and Lhe relocaLlon survey plan boLh show LhaL Lhe spouses 8auLlsLa were aware of
Lhe encroachmenL upon Lhelr loL by Lhe owner of LoL 13 and Lhus Lhey made a correspondlng
encroachmenL upon Lhe loL of Lhe spouses CanezoŦ 1hls awareness of Lhe Lwo encroachmenLs
made Lhe spouses 8auLlsLa bullders ln bad falLhŦ 1he spouses Canezo are enLlLled Lo Lhe lssuance of
a wrlL of demollLlon ln Lhelr favor and agalnsL Lhe spouses 8auLlsLaţ ln accordance wlLh ArLlcle 430
of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ

A wrlL of demollLlon of Lhe encroachlng sLrucLures should be lssued agalnsL and aL Lhe expense of
Spouses Apollnarlo and Consorcla LŦ 8auLlsLa upon Lhe flnallLy of Lhls [udgmenLŦ Spouses Apollnarlo
and Consorcla LŦ 8auLlsLa are furLher ordered Lo pay Spouses Lleglo and uolla Canezo Þ30ţ000 as
acLual damagesŤ Þ30ţ000 as moral damagesŤ and Þ30ţ000 as aLLorney's feesŦ 1he lnLeresL raLe of
12Ʒ per annum shall apply from Lhe flnallLy of [udgmenL unLll Lhe LoLal amounL awarded ls fully
paldŦ

ArLlcle 430Ŧ 1he owner of Lhe land on whlch anyLhlng has been bullLţ planLed or sown ln bad falLh
may demand Lhe demollLlon of Lhe workţ or LhaL Lhe planLlng or sowlng be removedţ ln order Lo
replace Lhlngs ln Lhelr former condlLlon aL Lhe expense of Lhe person who bullLţ planLed or sowedŤ
or he may compel Lhe bullder or planLer Lo pay Lhe prlce of Lhe landţ and Lhe sower Lhe proper
renLŦ

@|t|e IIIŦ CoŴCwnersh|p (ArtsŦ 484ŴS01)


kepub||c vŦ ne|rs of Sorono
Gk # 171S71ţ MarŦ 24ţ 2008
S49 SCkA S8

1hls ls a ÞeLlLlon for revlew on cerLlorarl Lo Lhe aardeclslon of Lhe CA afflrmlng LhaL of Lhe 81C
CadasLral Survey of Cponţ LapuŴlapu ClLy were ad[udlcaLed on uecember 7ţ 1929 by Lhe Lhen Cll of
Cebu ln four equal sharesŦ 1he Lwo loLs were noL parLlLloned by Lhe ad[udlcaLeesŦ

lL appears furLher LhaL Lhe helrs of 1lLo ulgnosţ who was awarded x share ln Lhe Lwo loLsţ sold for
Þ2ţ363Ŧ39 Lhe enLlre Lwo loLs Lo Lhe Lhen Clvll AeronauLlcs AdmlnlsLraLlon (CAA) vla a publlc
lnsLrumenL enLlLled ƍLxLra[udlclal SeLLlemenL and Saleƍ execuLed on CcLober 11ţ 1937ţ wlLhouL Lhe
knowledge of respondenLs whose predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresL were Lhe ad[udlcaLees of Lhe resL of Lhe
ư porLlon of Lhe Lwo loLsŦ

ln 1996ţ CAA's successorŴlnŴlnLeresLţ Lhe MacLan Cebu lnLernaLlonal AlrporL AuLhorlLy (MClAA)ţ
erecLed a securlLy fence Lraverslng LoL noŦ 2316 and relocaLed a number of famlllesţ who had bullL
Lhelr dwelllngs wlLhln Lhe alrporL perlmeLerţ Lo a porLlon of sald loL Lo enhance alrporL securlLy ln
llne wlLh Lhe sLandards seL by Lhe lnLernaLlonal Clvll AvlaLlon CrganlzaLlon and Lhe lederal AvlaLlon
AuLhorlLyŦ

MClAA laLer caused Lhe lssuance ln lLs name of 1ax ueclaraLlon noŦ 00348 coverlng LoL noŦ 2296
and 1ax ueclaraLlon noŦ 00368 coverlng LoL noŦ 2316Ŧ
8espondenLs soon asked Lhe agenLs of MClAA Lo cease glvlng Lhlrd persons permlsslon Lo occupy
Lhe loLs buL Lhe same was lgnoredŦ

8espondenLs Lhereupon flled on !anuary 8ţ 1996 a ComplalnL for CuleLlng of 1lLleţ Legal
8edempLlon wlLh Þrayer for a WrlL of Þrellmlnary ln[uncLlon agalnsL MClAA before Lhe 81C of LapuŴ
lapu ClLyţ alleglng LhaL Lhe exlsLence of Lhe Lax declaraLlons ƍwould casL a cloud on Lhelr valld and
exlsLlng LlLlesƍ Lo Lhe loLsŦ 1hey alleged LhaL ƍcorrespondlng orlglnal cerLlflcaLes of LlLle ln favor of
Lhe decreed owners were Ŧ Ŧ Ŧ lssued buL Lhe same could no longer be found and locaLedţ and ln all
probablllLyţ were losL durlng Lhe Second World WarŦƍ (1hls clalm was noL speclflcally denled by
peLlLloner ln lLs Answer wlLh CounLerclalmŦ)

8espondenLs furLher alleged LhaL nelLher Lhey nor Lhelr predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresLs soldţ allenaLed or
dlsposed of Lhelr shares ln Lhe loLs of whlch Lhey have been ln conLlnuous peaceful possesslonŦ
8espondenLs furLhermore alleged LhaL nelLher peLlLloner nor lLs predecessorŴlnŴlnLeresL had glven
Lhem any wrlLLen noLlce of lLs acqulslLlon of Lhe x share of 1lLo ulgnosŦ

1he Lrlal courL found for respondenLsŦ lL held LhaL respondenLs and Lhelr predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresL
were ln peaceful and conLlnuous possesslon of Lhelr shares ln Lhe loLsţ and were dlsLurbed of such
possesslon only ln 1996 when peLlLloner puL up Lhe securlLy fence LhaL Lraversed LoL noŦ 2316 and
relocaLed famllles LhaL had bullL Lhelr houses wlLhln Lhe alrporL perlmeLer Lo a porLlon of sald loLŦ

Cn peLlLloner's clalm LhaL lL had acqulred ownershlp by exLraordlnary prescrlpLlonţ Lhe Lrlal courL
brushed lL aslde on Lhe ground LhaL reglsLered lands cannoL be Lhe sub[ecL of acqulslLlve
prescrlpLlonŦ

nelLherţ held Lhe Lrlal courLţ had respondenLs' acLlon prescrlbedţ as acLlons for quleLlng of LlLle
cannoL prescrlbe lf Lhe plalnLlffs are ln possesslon of Lhe properLy ln quesLlonţ as ln Lhe case of
hereln respondenLsŦ
Cn peLlLloner's defense of lachesţ Lhe Lrlal courL also brushed Lhe same aslde ln llghL of lLs flndlng
LhaL respondenLsţ who have long been ln possesslon of Lhe loLsţ came Lo know of Lhe sale only ln
1996Ŧ 1he Lrlal courL added LhaL respondenLs could noL be charged wlLh consLrucLlve noLlce of Lhe
1937 LxLra[udlclal SeLLlemenL and Sale of Lhe loLs Lo CAA as lL was erroneously reglsLered under AcL
noŦ 3344ţ Lhe law governlng recordlng of lnsLrumenLs or deeds relaLlng Lo real esLaLe whlch are noL

reglsLered under Lhe 1orrens sysLemŦ 1he sub[ecL loLs belng reglsLeredţ Lhe Lrlal courL foundţ Lhe
reglsLraLlon of Lhe deed should have been made under AcL noŦ 496ţ Lhe appllcable law ln 1937Ŧ ln
flneţ Lhe Lrlal courL held LhaL Lhe reglsLraLlon of Lhe deed under AcL noŦ 3344 dld noL operaLe as
consLrucLlve noLlce Lo Lhe whole worldŦ

Concludlngţ Lhe Lrlal courL held LhaL Lhe quesLloned sale was valld only wlLh respecL Lo 1lLo ulgnos'
x share of Lhe loLsţ and LhaL Lhe sale Lhereof was sub[ecL Lo Lhe rlghL of legal redempLlon by
respondenLs followlng ArLlcle 1088 of Lhe Clvll Codeţ readlngť
Should any of Lhe helrs sell hls heredlLary rlghLs Lo a sLranger before parLlLlonţ any or all of Lhe coŴ
helrs may be subrogaLed Lo Lhe rlghLs of Lhe purchaser by relmburslng hlm for Lhe prlce of Lhe saleţ
provlded Lhey do so wlLhln Lhe perlod of one monLh from Lhe Llme Lhey were noLlfled ln wrlLlng of
Lhe sale by Lhe vendorŦ
ln llghL of lLs flndlng LhaL Lhe helrs of 1lLo ulgnos dld noL glve noLlce of Lhe sale Lo respondenLsţ Lhe
Lrlal courL held LhaL Lhe perlod for legal redempLlon had noL yeL lapsedŤ and Lhe redempLlon prlce
should be x of Lhe purchase prlce pald by Lhe CAA for Lhe Lwo loLsŦ
1he Lrlal courL Lhus dlsposedť

Penceţ Lhe presenL peLlLlon for revlew on cerLlorarlŦ

lssueť
1PL CCu81 Cl AÞÞLALS C8AvLL? L88Lu ln Alll8MlnC 1PL 18lAL CCu81'S uLClSlCn WPLn
8LSÞCnuLn1S nC LCnCL8 PAvL An? 8lCP1 1C 8LCCvL8 LC1S 2296 Anu 2316 uuL 1C 1PL
Þ8lC8 SALL 1PL8LCl 1C 1PL 8LÞu8LlC Anu uÞCn 1PL LCul1A8LL C8CunuS Cl LS1CÞÞLL Anu
LACPLSŦ

Peldť
ArLlcle 493 of Lhe Clvll Code provldesť
Lach coŴowner shall have Lhe full ownershlp of hls parL and of Lhe frulLs and beneflLs perLalnlng
LhereLoţ and he may Lherefore allenaLeţ asslgn or morLgage lLţ and even subsLlLuLe anoLher person
ln lLs en[oymenLţ excepL when personal rlghLs are lnvolvedŦ 8uL Lhe effecL of Lhe allenaLlon of Lhe
morLgageţ wlLh respecL Lo Lhe coŴownersţ shall be llmlLed Lo Lhe porLlon whlch may be alloLLed Lo
hlm ln Lhe dlvlslon upon Lhe LermlnaLlon of Lhe coŴownershlpŦ

lrom Lhe foregolngţ lL may be deduced LhaL slnce a coŴowner ls enLlLled Lo sell hls undlvlded shareţ
a sale of Lhe enLlre properLy by one coŴowner wlLhouL Lhe consenL of Lhe oLher coŴowners ls noL
null and voldŦ Poweverţ only Lhe rlghLs of Lhe coŴownerŴseller are Lransferredţ Lhereby maklng Lhe
buyer a coŴowner of Lhe properLyŦ

ÞeLlLloner's predecessorŴlnŴlnLeresL CAA Lhus acqulred only Lhe rlghLs perLalnlng Lo Lhe sellersŴhelrs
of 1lLo ulgnosţ whlch ls only x undlvlded share of Lhe Lwo loLsŦ

ÞeLlLloner's lnslsLence LhaL lL acqulred Lhe properLy Lhrough acqulslLlve prescrlpLlonţ lf noL ordlnaryţ
Lhen exLraordlnaryţ does noL lleŦ 1he Lrlal courL's dlscredlLlng Lhereof ls well LakenŦ lL bears
emphasls aL Lhls [uncLure LhaL ln Lhe LxLra[udlclal SeLLlemenL and Sale forged by CAA and 1lLo
ulgnos' helrs ln 1937Ŧ

1he Lrlal courL's dlscredlLlng of peLlLloner's lnvocaLlon of laches and prescrlpLlon of acLlon ls wellŴ
Laken LooŦ
As for peLlLloner's argumenL LhaL Lhe redempLlon prlce should be x of Lhe prevalllng markeL valueţ
noL of Lhe acLual purchase prlceţ slnceţ so lL clalmsţ ƍ(1) Lhey recelved [usL compensaLlon for Lhe
properLy aL Lhe Llme lL was purchased by Lhe CovernmenLŤ andţ (2) Lhe properLyţ due Lo
lmprovemenLs lnLroduced by peLlLloner ln lLs vlclnlLyţ ls now worLh several hundreds of mllllons of
pesosţ" Lhe law ls noL on lLs sldeŦ

1husţ ArLlcle 1088 of Lhe Clvll Code provldesť
Should any of Lhe helrs sell hls heredlLary rlghLs Lo a sLranger before Lhe parLlLlonţ any or all of Lhe
coŴhelrs may be subrogaLed Lo Lhe rlghLs of Lhe purchaser by relmburslng hlm for Lhe prlce of Lhe
saleţ provlded Lhey do so wlLhln Lhe perlod of one monLh from Lhe Llme Lhey were noLlfled ln
wrlLlng of Lhe sale by Lhe vendorŦ

1he CourL may Lake [udlclal noLlce of Lhe lncrease ln value of Lhe loLsŦ As menLloned earllerţ
howeverţ Lhe helrs of 1lLo ulgnos dld noL noLlfy respondenLs abouL Lhe saleŦ AL any raLeţ slnce Lhe
LxLra[udlclal SeLLlemenL and Sale sLlpulaLesţ Lhusť
1haL Lhe PLl8SŴvLnuC8Sţ Lhelr helrsţ asslgns and successorsţ underLake and agree Lo warranL and
defend Lhe possesslon and ownershlp of Lhe properLy/les hereln sold agalnsL any and all [usL clalms
of all persons whomsoever and should Lhe vLnuLL be dlsLurbed ln lLs possesslonţ Lo prosecuLe and
defend Lhe same ln Lhe CourLs of !usLlceŦ

ÞeLlLloner ls noL wlLhouL any remedyŦ 1hls declslon lsţ Lhereforeţ wlLhouL pre[udlce Lo peLlLloner's
rlghL Lo seek redress agalnsL Lhe vendorsŴhelrs of 1lLo ulgnos and Lhelr successorsŴlnŴlnLeresLŦ

Cruz vŦ Catapang
Gk # 164110ţ IebŦ 12ţ 2008
S44 SCkA S12

lacLsť
1hls peLlLlon for revlew seeks Lhe reversal of Lhe ueclslon and Lhe 8esoluLlon of Lhe CourL of
Appeals whlch reversed Lhe ueclslon 81Cţ whlch had earller afflrmed Lhe ueclslon of Lhe 7Lh MC1C
orderlng respondenL Lo vacaLe and dellver possesslon of a porLlon of Lhe loL coŴowned by
peLlLlonerţ Luz Cruz and norma MallgayaŦ
1he anLecedenL facLs of Lhe case are as followsŦ

ÞeLlLloner Leonor 8Ŧ Cruzţ Luz Cruz and norma Mallgaya are Lhe coŴowners of a parcel of land
coverlng an area of 1ţ433 square meLers locaLed aL 8arangay Mahabang Ludlodţ 1aalţ 8aLangasŦ
WlLh Lhe consenL of norma Mallgayaţ one of Lhe aforemenLloned coŴownersţ respondenL 1eoflla MŦ
CaLapang bullL a house on a loL ad[acenL Lo Lhe abovemenLloned parcel of land someLlme ln 1992Ŧ
1he house lnLrudedţ howeverţ on a porLlon of Lhe coŴowned properLyŦ

When peLlLloner Leonor 8Ŧ Cruz vlslLed Lhe properLy durlng Lhe flrsL week of SepLember 1993ţ she
was surprlsed Lo see a parL of respondenL's house lnLrudlng unLo a porLlon of Lhe coŴowned
properLyŦ She Lhen made several demands upon respondenL Lo demollsh Lhe lnLrudlng sLrucLure
and Lo vacaLe Lhe porLlon encroachlng on Lhelr properLyŦ 1he respondenLţ howeverţ refused and
dlsregarded her demandsŦ

Cn !anuary 23ţ 1996ţ Lhe peLlLloner flled a complalnL for forclble enLry agalnsL respondenL before
Lhe 7Lh MC1C of 1aalţ 8aLangasŦ 1he MC1C declded ln favor of peLlLlonerţ rullng LhaL consenL of
only one of Lhe coŴowners ls noL sufflclenL Lo [usLlfy defendanL's consLrucLlon of Lhe house and
possesslon of Lhe porLlon of Lhe loL ln quesLlonŦ

Cn appealţ Lhe 81C afflrmed Lhe MC1C's rullng and denled Lhe moLlon for reconslderaLlon flled by
CaLapangŦ

8espondenL flled a peLlLlon for revlew wlLh Lhe CourL of Appealsţ whlch reversed Lhe 81C's
declslonŦ 1he CA held LhaL Lhere ls no cause of acLlon for forclble enLry ln Lhls case because
respondenL's enLry lnLo Lhe properLyţ conslderlng Lhe consenL glven by coŴowner norma Mallgayaţ
cannoL be characLerlzed as one made Lhrough sLraLegy or sLealLh whlch glves rlse Lo a cause of
acLlon for forclble enLryŦ 1he CA furLher held LhaL peLlLloner's remedy ls noL an acLlon for e[ecLmenL
buL an enLlrely dlfferenL recourse wlLh Lhe approprlaLe forumŦ

AfLer peLlLloner's moLlon for reconslderaLlon was denled by Lhe CAţ she flled Lhe lnsLanL peLlLlon
and ralsed before us for conslderaLlon Lhe followlng lssuesť

WPL1PL8 C8 nC1 1PL knCWLLuCL Anu CCnSLn1 Cl CCŴCWnL8 nC8MA MALlCA?A lS A vALlu
LlCLnSL lC8 1PL 8LSÞCnuLn1 1C L8LC1 1PL 8unCALCW PCuSL Cn 1PL Þ8LMlSLS CWnLu
Þ8CŴlnulvlSC SAnS CCnSLn1 l8CM 1PL ÞL1l1lCnL8 Anu C1PLż8Ž CCŴCWnL8żŦŽ
llŦ
WPL1PL8 C8 nC1 8LSÞCnuLn1ţ 8? PL8 AC1Sţ PAS ACCul8Lu LxCLuSlvL CWnL8SPlÞ CvL8 1PL
ÞC81lCn Cl 1PL LC1 Su8!LC1 Cl 1PL Þ8LMlSLS Þu8SuAn1 1C 1PL CCnSLn1 C8An1Lu un1C
PL8 8? CCŴCWnL8 nC8MA MALlCA?A 1C 1PL LxCLuSlCn Cl 1PL ÞL1l1lCnL8 Anu 1PL C1PL8
CCŴCWnL8Ŧ
lllŦ
Ŧ Ŧ Ŧ WPL1PL8 C8 nC1 8LSÞCnuLn1 ln lAC1 C81AlnLu ÞCSSLSSlCn Cl 1PL Þ8CÞL81? ln
CuLS1lCn 8? MLAnS Cl SlMÞLL S18A1LC?Ŧ

ÞeLlLloner conLends LhaL Lhe consenL and knowledge of coŴowner norma Mallgaya cannoL defeaL
Lhe acLlon for forclble enLry slnce lL ls a baslc prlnclple ln Lhe law of coŴownershlp LhaL no lndlvldual
coŴowner can clalm LlLle Lo any deflnlLe porLlon of Lhe land or Lhlng owned ln common unLll
parLlLlonŦ

Cn Lhe oLher handţ respondenL ln her memorandum counLers LhaL Lhe complalnL for forclble enLry
cannoL prosper because her enLry lnLo Lhe properLy was noL Lhrough sLraLegy or sLealLh due Lo Lhe
consenL of one of Lhe coŴownersŦ She furLher argues LhaL slnce norma Mallgaya ls resldlng ln Lhe
house she bullLţ Lhe lssue ls noL [usL possesslon de facLo buL also one of possesslon de [ure slnce lL
lnvolves rlghLs of coŴowners Lo en[oy Lhe properLyŦ


lssueť
WheLher consenL glven by a coŴowner of a parcel of land Lo a person Lo consLrucL a house on Lhe
coŴowned properLy warranLs Lhe dlsmlssal of a forclble enLry case flled by anoLher coŴowner
agalnsL LhaL personŦ

Peldť
As Lo Lhe lssue of wheLher or noL Lhe consenL of one coŴowner wlll warranL Lhe dlsmlssal of a
forclble enLry case flled by anoLher coŴowner agalnsL Lhe person who was glven Lhe consenL Lo
consLrucL a house on Lhe coŴowned properLyţ we have held LhaL a coŴowner cannoL devoLe
common properLy Lo hls or her excluslve use Lo Lhe pre[udlce of Lhe coŴownershlpŦ ln our vlewţ a
coŴowner cannoL glve valld consenL Lo anoLher Lo bulld a house on Lhe coŴowned properLyţ whlch ls
an acL LanLamounL Lo devoLlng Lhe properLy Lo hls or her excluslve useŦ
lurLhermoreţ ArLlcles 486 and 491 of Lhe Clvll Code provldeť
ArLŦ 486Ŧ Lach coŴowner may use Lhe Lhlng owned ln commonţ provlded he does so ln accordance
wlLh Lhe purpose for whlch lL ls lnLended and ln such a way as noL Lo ln[ure Lhe lnLeresL of Lhe coŴ
ownershlp or prevenL Lhe oLher coŴowners from uslng lL accordlng Lo Lhelr rlghLsŦ 1he purpose of
Lhe coŴownershlp may be changed by agreemenLţ express or lmplledŦ
ArLŦ 491Ŧ none of Lhe coŴowners shallţ wlLhouL Lhe consenL of Lhe oLhersţ make alLeraLlons ln Lhe
Lhlng owned ln commonţ even Lhough beneflLs for all would resulL LherefromŦ Poweverţ lf Lhe
wlLhholdlng of Lhe consenL by one or more of Lhe coŴowners ls clearly pre[udlclal Lo Lhe common
lnLeresLţ Lhe courLs may afford adequaLe rellefŦ

ArLlcle 486 sLaLes each coŴowner may use Lhe Lhlng owned ln common provlded he does so ln
accordance wlLh Lhe purpose for whlch lL ls lnLended and ln such a way as noL Lo ln[ure Lhe lnLeresL
of Lhe coŴownershlp or prevenL Lhe oLher coŴowners from uslng lL accordlng Lo Lhelr rlghLsŦ Clvlng
consenL Lo a Lhlrd person Lo consLrucL a house on Lhe coŴowned properLy wlll ln[ure Lhe lnLeresL of
Lhe coŴownershlp and prevenL oLher coŴowners from uslng Lhe properLy ln accordance wlLh Lhelr
rlghLsŦ

under ArLlcle 491ţ none of Lhe coŴowners shallţ wlLhouL Lhe consenL of Lhe oLhersţ make alLeraLlons
ln Lhe Lhlng owned ln commonŦ lL necessarlly follows LhaL none of Lhe coŴowners canţ wlLhouL Lhe
consenL of Lhe oLher coŴownersţ valldly consenL Lo Lhe maklng of an alLeraLlon by anoLher personţ
such as respondenLţ ln Lhe Lhlng owned ln commonŦ AlLeraLlons lnclude any acL of sLrlcL domlnlon
or ownershlp and any encumbrance or dlsposlLlon has been held lmpllclLly Lo be an acL of
alLeraLlonŦ 1he consLrucLlon of a house on Lhe coŴowned properLy ls an acL of domlnlonŦ 1hereforeţ
lL ls an alLeraLlon falllng under ArLlcle 491 of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ 1here belng no consenL from all coŴ
ownersţ respondenL had no rlghL Lo consLrucL her house on Lhe coŴowned properLyŦ

ConsenL of only one coŴowner wlll noL warranL Lhe dlsmlssal of Lhe complalnL for forclble enLry flled
agalnsL Lhe bullderŦ 1he consenL glven by norma Mallgaya ln Lhe absence of Lhe consenL of
peLlLloner and Luz Cruz dld noL vesL upon respondenL any rlghL Lo enLer lnLo Lhe coŴowned
properLyŦ Per enLry lnLo Lhe properLy sLlll falls under Lhe classlflcaLlon ƍLhrough sLraLegy or sLealLhŦƍ

1he CA held LhaL Lhere ls no forclble enLry because respondenL's enLry lnLo Lhe properLy was noL
Lhrough sLraLegy or sLealLh due Lo Lhe consenL glven Lo her by one of Lhe coŴownersŦ We cannoL
glve our lmprlmaLur Lo Lhls sweeplng concluslonŦ 8espondenL's enLry lnLo Lhe properLy wlLhouL Lhe
permlsslon of peLlLloner could appear Lo be a secreL and clandesLlne acL done ln connlvance wlLh
coŴowner norma Mallgaya whom respondenL allowed Lo sLay ln her houseŦ LnLry lnLo Lhe land
effecLed clandesLlnely wlLhouL Lhe knowledge of Lhe oLher coŴowners could be caLegorlzed as
possesslon by sLealLhŦ Moreoverţ respondenL's acL of geLLlng only Lhe consenL of one coŴownerţ her
slsLer norma Mallgayaţ and allowlng Lhe laLLer Lo sLay ln Lhe consLrucLed houseţ can ln facL be

consldered as a sLraLegy whlch she uLlllzed ln order Lo enLer lnLo Lhe coŴowned properLyŦ As suchţ
respondenL's acLs consLlLuLe forclble enLryŦ

ÞeLlLloner's flllng of a complalnL for forclble enLryţ ln our vlewţ was wlLhln Lhe oneŴyear perlod for
flllng Lhe complalnLŦ 1he oneŴyear perlod wlLhln whlch Lo brlng an acLlon for forclble enLry ls
generally counLed from Lhe daLe of acLual enLry Lo Lhe landŦ Poweverţ when enLry ls made Lhrough
sLealLhţ Lhen Lhe oneŴyear perlod ls counLed from Lhe Llme Lhe peLlLloner learned abouL lLŦ21
AlLhough respondenL consLrucLed her house ln 1992ţ lL was only ln SepLember 1993 LhaL peLlLloner
learned of lL when she vlslLed Lhe properLyŦ Accordlnglyţ she Lhen made demands on respondenL Lo
vacaLe Lhe premlsesŦ lalllng Lo geL a favorable responseţ peLlLloner flled Lhe complalnL on !anuary
23ţ 1996ţ whlch ls wlLhln Lhe oneŴyear perlod from Lhe Llme peLlLloner learned of Lhe consLrucLlonŦ

Santos vŦ ne|rs of Lustre
Gk # 1S1016ţ AugŦ 06ţ 2008
S61 SCkA 120

lacLsť

LusLre owned a loL whlch she morLgaged Ǝ laLer on sold Lo naLlvldad SanLos who subsequenLly sold
lL Lo her son
lrollan for whlch a 1C1 was lssued ln hls nameŦ LusLre's helrs Macaspac Ǝ Manlqulz flled w/ 81C of
Capanţ nueva Lcl[a a ComplalnL for ueclaraLlon of Lhe lnexlsLence of ConLracLţ AnnulmenL of 1lLleţ
8econveyance and uamages agalnsL lrollan SanLosŦ LusLre's oLher helrs flled a ComplalnL for
AnnulmenL of 1ransfer CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle and ueed of AbsoluLe Sale agalnsL spouses SanLosţ lrollan
SanLosţ 8 1ransporL Corpţ Cecllla Macaspac wlLh Lhe same 81CŦ Macaspac was lmpleaded as
defendanL ln Lhe 2nd case because she refused Lo [oln Lhe oLher helrs as plalnLlffsŦ

Alleglng LhaL Lhe plalnLlffs' rlghL of acLlon for annulmenL of Lhe ueed of Sale and 1C1 had long
prescrlbed and was
barred by lachesţ peLlLloners flled a MoLlon Lo ulsmlssţ also on Lhe ground of llLls pendenLlaŦ 1he
81C denled Lhe MoLlon Lo ulsmlssŦ 1hey Lhen flled a peLlLlon for cerLlorarl wlLh Lhe CourL of Appeals
(CA) whlch dlsmlssed Lhe peLlLlon for lack of merlLŦ

lssue 1ť Was Lhere forum shopplng?

ueclslonť no
8aLloť
lorum shopplng exlsLs when Lhe elemenLs of llLls pendenLla are presenL or when a flnal [udgmenL
ln one case wlll
amounL Lo res [udlcaLa ln Lhe oLherŦ lLs elemenLs are ldenLlLy of Lhe sub[ecL maLLerţ ldenLlLy of Lhe
causes of acLlon and ldenLlLy of Lhe parLles ln Lhe Lwo casesŦ 1here ls subsLanLlal ldenLlLy of parLles
when Lhere ls a communlLy of lnLeresL beLween a parLy ln Lhe flrsL case and a parLy ln Lhe second
caseŦ

1here ls no forum shopplng because Lhere ls no ldenLlLy of parLles because Lhe plalnLlff ln Lhe 1sL
case (Macaspac) does noLţ ln facLţ share a common lnLeresL wlLh Lhe plalnLlffs ln Lhe 2nd caseŦ
ÞlalnLlffs ln boLh cases are Lhe helrs of LusLreŤ Lhey are Lherefore coŴowners of Lhe properLyŦ
Poweverţ Lhe facL of belng a coŴowner does noL necessarlly mean LhaL a plalnLlff ls acLlng for Lhe
beneflL of Lhe coŴownershlp when he flles an acLlon respecLlng Lhe coŴowned properLyŦ CoŴowners
are noL parLles lnLer se ln relaLlon Lo Lhe properLy owned ln commonŦ 1he LesL ls wheLher Lhe
ºaddlLlonal" parLyţ Lhe coŴowner ln Lhls caseţ acLs ln Lhe same capaclLy or ls ln prlvlLy wlLh Lhe
parLles ln Lhe former acLlonŦ ż28Ž

Macaspac flled Lhe 1sL case seeklng Lhe reconveyance of Lhe properLy Lo herţ and noL Lo LusLre or
her helrsŦ 1hls ls a clear acL of repudlaLlon of Lhe coŴownershlp whlch would negaLe a concluslon
LhaL she acLed ln prlvlLy wlLh Lhe oLher helrs or LhaL she flled Lhe complalnL ln behalf of Lhe coŴ
ownershlpŦ ln conLrasLţ respondenLs were evldenLly acLlng for Lhe beneflL of Lhe coŴownershlp
when Lhey flled Lhe 2nd case whereln Lhey prayed LhaL 1C1 LusLre be relnsLaLedţ or a new
cerLlflcaLe of LlLle be lssued ln her nameŦ lssue #1ť uoes prescrlpLlon or laches apply?

lssue 2ť uoes prescrlpLlon or laches apply?

ueclslonť no
8aLloť

1he acLlon for reconveyance on Lhe ground LhaL Lhe cerLlflcaLe of LlLle was obLalned by means of a
flcLlLlous deed
of sale ls vlrLually an acLlon for Lhe declaraLlon of lLs nulllLyţ whlch does noL prescrlbeŦ Moreoverţ a
person acqulrlng
properLy Lhrough fraud becomesţ by operaLlon of lawţ a LrusLee of an lmplled LrusL for Lhe beneflL
of Lhe real owner of Lhe properLyŦ An acLlon for reconveyance based on an lmplled LrusL prescrlbes
ln Len yearsŦ And ln such caseţ Lhe prescrlpLlve perlod applles only lf Lhere ls an acLual need Lo
reconvey Lhe properLy as when Lhe plalnLlff ls noL ln possesslon of Lhe properLyŦ CLherwlseţ lf
plalnLlff ls ln possesslon of Lhe properLyţ prescrlpLlon does noL commence Lo run agalnsL hlmŦ 1husţ
when an acLlon for reconveyance ls noneLheless flledţ lL would be ln Lhe naLure of a sulL for
quleLlng of LlLleţ an acLlon LhaL ls lmprescrlpLlbleŦ

lL follows Lhen LhaL Lhe respondenLs' presenL acLlon should noL be barred by lachesŦ Laches ls a
docLrlne ln equlLyţ
whlch may be used only ln Lhe absence ofţ and never agalnsLţ sLaLuLory lawŦ Cbvlouslyţ lL cannoL be
seL up Lo
reslsL Lhe enforcemenL of an lmprescrlpLlble legal rlghLŦx

M8@C vŦ Þascua|
Gk # 163744ţ IebŦ 29ţ 2008
S47 SCkA 246

lacLsť

8espondenL nlcholson Þascual and llorencla nevalga were marrled on !anuary 19ţ 1983Ŧ uurlng
Lhe unlonţ llorencla boughL from spouses ClarlLo and 8elen Serlng a 230Ŵsquare meLer loL wlLh a
LhreeŴdoor aparLmenL sLandlng Lhereon locaLed ln MakaLl ClLyŦ SubsequenLlyţ 1ransfer CerLlflcaLe
of 1lLle (1C1) noŦ SŴ101473/1Ŵ310 coverlng Lhe purchased loL was cancelled andţ ln lleu Lhereofţ 1C1

noŦ 136283ż1Ž of Lhe 8eglsLry of ueeds of MakaLl ClLy was lssued ln Lhe name of llorenclaţ ºmarrled
Lo nelson Þascual" aŦkŦaŦ nlcholson ÞascualŦ

ln 1994ţ llorencla flled a sulL for Lhe declaraLlon of nulllLy of marrlage under ArLlcle 36 of Lhe lamlly
Codeţ dockeLed as Clvll Case noŦ CŴ93Ŵ23333Ŧ AfLer Lrlalţ Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal CourL (81C)ţ 8ranch 94
ln Cuezon ClLy renderedţ on !uly 31ţ 1993ţ a ueclslonţż2Ž declarlng Lhe marrlage of nlcholson and
llorencla null and vold on Lhe ground of psychologlcal lncapaclLy on Lhe parL of nlcholsonŦ ln Lhe
same declslonţ Lhe 81Cţ lnLer allaţ ordered Lhe dlssoluLlon and llquldaLlon of Lhe exŴspouses'
con[ugal parLnershlp of galnsŦ SubsequenL evenLs saw Lhe couple golng Lhelr separaLe ways wlLhouL
llquldaLlng Lhelr con[ugal parLnershlpŦ

Cn Aprll 30ţ 1997ţ llorenclaţ LogeLher wlLh spouses norberLo and Llvlra Cllverosţ obLalned a ÞhÞ 38
mllllon loan from peLlLloner MeLropollLan 8ank and 1rusL CoŦ (MeLrobank)Ŧ 1o secure Lhe
obllgaLlonţ llorencla and Lhe spouses Cllveros execuLed several real esLaLe morLgages (8LMs) on
Lhelr properLlesţ lncludlng one lnvolvlng Lhe loL covered by 1C1 noŦ 136283Ŧ Among Lhe documenLs
llorencla submlLLed Lo procure Lhe loan were a copy of 1C1 noŦ 136283ţ a phoLocopy of Lhe
marrlageŴnulllfylng 81C declslonţ and a documenL denomlnaLed as ºWalver" LhaL nlcholson
purporLedly execuLed on Aprll 9ţ 1993Ŧ 1he walverţ made ln favor of llorenclaţ covered Lhe
con[ugal properLles of Lhe exŴspouses llsLed Lherelnţ buL dld noL lncldenLally lnclude Lhe loL ln
quesLlonŦ

uue Lo Lhe fallure of llorencla and Lhe spouses Cllveros Lo pay Lhelr loan obllgaLlon when lL fell
dueţ MeLrobankţ on november 29ţ 1999ţ lnlLlaLed foreclosure proceedlngs under AcL noŦ 3133ţ as
amendedţ before Lhe Cfflce of Lhe noLary Þubllc of MakaLl ClLyŦ SubsequenLlyţ MeLrobank caused
Lhe publlcaLlon of Lhe noLlce of sale on Lhree lssues of 8emaLeŦż3Ž AL Lhe aucLlon sale on !anuary
21ţ 2000ţ MeLrobank emerged as Lhe hlghesL bldderŦ

CeLLlng wlnd of Lhe foreclosure proceedlngsţ nlcholson flled on !une 28ţ 2000ţ before Lhe 81C ln
MakaLl ClLyţ a ComplalnL Lo declare Lhe nulllLy of Lhe morLgage of Lhe dlspuLed properLyţ dockeLed
as Clvll Case noŦ 00Ŵ789 and evenLually raffled Lo 8ranch 63 of Lhe courLŦ ln lLţ nlcholson alleged
LhaL Lhe properLyţ whlch ls sLlll con[ugal properLyţ was morLgaged wlLhouL hls consenLŦ

MeLrobankţ ln lLs Answer wlLh CounLerclalm and CrossŴClalmţ alleged LhaL Lhe dlspuLed loLţ belng
reglsLered ln llorencla's nameţ was paraphernalŦ MeLrobank also asserLed havlng approved Lhe
morLgage ln good falLhŦ

llorencla dld noL flle an answer wlLhln Lhe reglemenLary perlod andţ henceţ was subsequenLly
declared ln defaulLŦ

1he 81C ueclared Lhe 8LM lnvalld




lssueť

aŦ WheLher or noL Lhe żCAŽ erred ln declarlng sub[ecL properLy as con[ugal by applylng
ArLlcle 116 of Lhe lamlly CodeŦ

bŦ WheLher or noL Lhe żCAŽ erred ln noL holdlng LhaL Lhe declaraLlon of nulllLy of marrlage
beLween Lhe respondenL nlcholson Þascual and llorencla nevalga lpso facLo dlssolved Lhe reglme
of communlLy of properLy of Lhe spousesŦ

cŦ WheLher or noL Lhe żCAŽ erred ln rullng LhaL Lhe peLlLloner ls an lnnocenL purchaser for
valueŦ

Peldť

1he ulspuLed ÞroperLy ls Con[ugal

lL ls MeLrobank's Lhreshold posLure LhaL ArLŦ 160 of Lhe Clvll Code provldlng LhaL ºżaŽll properLy of
Lhe marrlage ls presumed Lo belong Lo Lhe con[ugal parLnershlpţ unless lL be proveżnŽ LhaL lL
perLalns excluslvely Lo Lhe husband or Lo Lhe wlfeţ" appllesŦ 1o MeLrobankţ ArLŦ 116 of Lhe lamlly
Code could noL be of governlng appllcaLlon lnasmuch as nlcholson and llorencla conLracLed
marrlage before Lhe effecLlvlLy of Lhe lamlly Code on AugusL 3ţ 1988Ŧ ClLlng Manongsong vŦ
LsLlmoţż8Ž MeLrobank asserLs LhaL Lhe presumpLlon of con[ugal ownershlp under ArLŦ 160 of Lhe
Clvll Code applles when Lhere ls proof LhaL Lhe properLy was acqulred durlng Lhe marrlageŦ
MeLrobank addsţ howeverţ LhaL for Lhe presumpLlon of con[ugal ownershlp Lo operaLeţ evldence
musL be adduced Lo prove LhaL noL only was Lhe properLy acqulred durlng Lhe marrlage buL LhaL
con[ugal funds were used for Lhe acqulslLlonţ a burden nlcholson allegedly falled Lo dlschargeŦ

1o bolsLer lLs Lhesls on Lhe paraphernal naLure of Lhe dlspuLed properLyţ MeLrobank clLes lranclsco
vŦ CourL of Appealsż9Ž and !ocson vŦ CourL of Appealsţż10Ž among oLher casesţ where Lhls CourL
held LhaL a properLy reglsLered ln Lhe name of a cerLaln person wlLh a descrlpLlon of belng marrled
ls no proof LhaL Lhe properLy was acqulred durlng Lhe spouses' marrlageŦ

Cn Lhe oLher handţ nlcholsonţ banklng on ue Leon vŦ 8ehablllLaLlon llnance CorporaLlonż11Ž and
Wong vŦ lACţż12Ž conLends LhaL MeLrobank falled Lo overcome Lhe legal presumpLlon LhaL Lhe
dlspuLed properLy ls con[ugalŦ Pe asserLs LhaL MeLrobank's argumenLs on Lhe maLLer of
presumpLlon are mlsleadlng as only one posLulaLe needs Lo be shown for Lhe presumpLlon ln favor
of con[ugal ownershlp Lo arlseţ LhaL lsţ Lhe facL of acqulslLlon durlng marrlageŦ nlcholson dlsmlssesţ
as lnappllcableţ lranclsco and !ocsonţ noLlng LhaL Lhey are relevanL only when Lhere ls no lndlcaLlon
as Lo Lhe exacL daLe of acqulslLlon of Lhe properLy alleged Lo be con[ugalŦ

As a flnal polnLţ nlcholson lnvlLes aLLenLlon Lo Lhe facL LhaL MeLrobank had vlrLually recognlzed Lhe
con[ugal naLure of Lhe properLy ln aL leasL Lhree lnsLancesŦ 1he flrsL was when Lhe bank lumped hlm
wlLh llorencla ln Clvll Case noŦ 00Ŵ789 as coŴmorLgagors and when Lhey were referred Lo as
ºspouses" ln Lhe peLlLlon for exLra[udlclal foreclosure of morLgageŦ 1hen came Lhe publlshed noLlce
of foreclosure sale where nlcholson was agaln deslgnaLed as coŴmorLgagorŦ And Lhlrdţ ln lLs
demandŴleLLerż13Ž Lo vacaLe Lhe dlspuLed loLţ MeLrobank addressed nlcholson and llorencla as
ºspousesţ" albelL Lhe flnallLy of Lhe decree of nulllLy of marrlage beLween Lhem had long seL lnŦ

We flnd for nlcholsonŦ

llrsLţ whlle MeLrobank ls correcL ln saylng LhaL ArLŦ 160 of Lhe Clvll Codeţ noL ArLŦ 116 of Lhe lamlly
Codeţ ls Lhe appllcable legal provlslon slnce Lhe properLy was acqulred prlor Lo Lhe enacLmenL of
Lhe lamlly Codeţ lL errs ln lLs Lheory LhaLţ before con[ugal ownershlp could be legally presumedţ
Lhere musL be a showlng LhaL Lhe properLy was acqulred durlng marrlage uslng con[ugal fundsŦ
ConLrary Lo MeLrobank's submlsslonţ Lhe CourL dld noLţ ln Manongsongţż14Ž add Lhe maLLer of Lhe
use of con[ugal funds as an essenLlal requlremenL for Lhe presumpLlon of con[ugal ownershlp Lo
arlseŦ nlcholson ls correcL ln polnLlng ouL LhaL only proof of acqulslLlon durlng Lhe marrlage ls
needed Lo ralse Lhe presumpLlon LhaL Lhe properLy ls con[ugalŦ lndeedţ lf proof on Lhe use of
con[ugal ls sLlll requlred as a necessary condlLlon before Lhe presumpLlon can arlseţ Lhen Lhe legal
presumpLlon seL forLh ln Lhe law would verlLably be a superflulLyŦ As we sLressed ln CasLro vŦ MlaLť
ÞeLlLloners also overlook ArLlcle 160 of Lhe new Clvll CodeŦ lL provldes LhaL ºall properLy of Lhe
marrlage ls presumed Lo be con[ugal parLnershlpţ unless lL be proveżnŽ LhaL lL perLalns excluslvely Lo
Lhe husband or Lo Lhe wlfeŦ" 1hls arLlcle does noL requlre proof LhaL Lhe properLy was acqulred
wlLh funds of Lhe parLnershlpŦ 1he presumpLlon applles even when Lhe manner ln whlch Lhe
properLy was acqulred does noL appearŦż13Ž (Lmphasls supplledŦ)

Secondţ lranclsco and !ocson do noL relnforce MeLrobank's LheoryŦ MeLrobank would LhrusL on Lhe
CourLţ lnvoklng Lhe Lwo casesţ Lhe argumenL LhaL Lhe reglsLraLlon of Lhe properLy ln Lhe name of
ºllorencla nevalgaţ marrled Lo nelson Þascual" operaLes Lo descrlbe only Lhe marlLal sLaLus of Lhe
LlLle holderţ buL noL as proof LhaL Lhe properLy was acqulred durlng Lhe exlsLence of Lhe marrlageŦ
MeLrobank ls wrongŦ As nlcholson apLly polnLs ouLţ lf proof obLalns on Lhe acqulslLlon of Lhe
properLy durlng Lhe exlsLence of Lhe marrlageţ Lhen Lhe presumpLlon of con[ugal ownershlp
appllesŦ 1he correcL lesson of lranclsco and !ocson ls LhaL proof of acqulslLlon durlng Lhe marlLal
coverLure ls a condlLlon slne qua non for Lhe operaLlon of Lhe presumpLlon ln favor of con[ugal
ownershlpŦ When Lhere ls no showlng as Lo when Lhe properLy was acqulred by Lhe spouseţ Lhe
facL LhaL a LlLle ls ln Lhe name of Lhe spouse ls an lndlcaLlon LhaL Lhe properLy belongs excluslvely Lo
sald spouseŦż16Ž

1he CourLţ Lo be sureţ has Laken sLock of nlcholson's argumenLs regardlng MeLrobank havlng
lmpllclLly acknowledgedţ Lhus belng ln vlrLual esLoppel Lo quesLlonţ Lhe con[ugal ownershlp of Lhe
dlspuLed loLţ Lhe bank havlng named Lhe former ln Lhe foreclosure proceedlngs below as elLher Lhe
spouse of llorencla or her coŴmorLgagorŦ lL ls felLţ howeverţ LhaL Lhere ls no compelllng reason Lo
delve lnLo Lhe maLLer of esLoppelţ Lhe same havlng been ralsed only for Lhe flrsL Llme ln Lhls
peLlLlonŦ 8esldesţ however nlcholson was deslgnaLed below does noL really changeţ one way or
anoLherţ Lhe classlflcaLlon of Lhe loL ln quesLlonŦ

1ermlnaLlon of Con[ugal ÞroperLy 8eglme does noL lpso facLo Lnd Lhe naLure of Con[ugal
Cwnershlp
MeLrobank nexL malnLalns LhaLţ conLrary Lo Lhe CA's holdlngţ ArLŦ 129 of Lhe lamlly Code ls
lnappllcableŦ ArLŦ 129 ln parL readsť

ArLŦ 129Ŧ upon Lhe dlssoluLlon of Lhe con[ugal parLnershlp reglmeţ Lhe followlng procedure shall
applyť
(7) 1he neL remalnder of Lhe con[ugal parLnershlp properLles shall consLlLuLe Lhe proflLsţ whlch
shall be dlvlded equally beLween husband and wlfeţ unless a dlfferenL proporLlon or dlvlslon was
agreed upon ln Lhe marrlage seLLlemenLs or unless Lhere has been a volunLary walver or forfelLure
of such share as provlded ln Lhls CodeŦ
Apropos Lhe aforequoLed provlslonţ MeLrobank asserLs LhaL Lhe walver execuLed by nlcholsonţ
effecLed as lL were before Lhe dlssoluLlon of Lhe con[ugal properLy reglmeţ vesLed on llorencla full
ownershlp of all Lhe properLles acqulred durlng Lhe marrlageŦ

nlcholson counLers LhaL Lhe mere declaraLlon of nulllLy of marrlageţ wlLhouL moreţ does noL
auLomaLlcally resulL ln a reglme of compleLe separaLlon when lL ls shown LhaL Lhere was no
llquldaLlon of Lhe con[ugal asseLsŦ

We agaln flnd for nlcholsonŦ

Whlle Lhe declared nulllLy of marrlage of nlcholson and llorencla severed Lhelr marlLal bond and
dlssolved Lhe con[ugal parLnershlpţ Lhe characLer of Lhe properLles acqulred before such
declaraLlon conLlnues Lo subslsL as con[ugal properLles unLll and afLer Lhe llquldaLlon and parLlLlon
of Lhe parLnershlpŦ 1hls concluslon holds Lrue wheLher we apply ArLŦ 129 of Lhe lamlly Code on
llquldaLlon of Lhe con[ugal parLnershlp's asseLs and llablllLles whlch ls generally prospecLlve ln
appllcaLlonţ or SecLlon 7ţ ChapLer 4ţ 1lLle lvţ 8ook l (ArLsŦ 179 Lo 183) of Lhe Clvll Code on Lhe
sub[ecLţ Con[ugal ÞarLnershlp of CalnsŦ lorţ Lhe relevanL provlslons of boLh Codes flrsL requlre Lhe
llquldaLlon of Lhe con[ugal properLles before a reglme of separaLlon of properLy relgnsŦ

ln uael vŦ lnLermedlaLe AppellaLe CourLţ we ruled LhaL pendlng lLs llquldaLlon followlng lLs
dlssoluLlonţ Lhe con[ugal parLnershlp of galns ls converLed lnLo an lmplled ordlnary coŴownershlp
among Lhe survlvlng spouse and Lhe oLher helrs of Lhe deceasedŦż17Ž

ln Lhls preŴllquldaLlon scenarloţ ArLŦ 493 of Lhe Clvll Code shall govern Lhe properLy relaLlonshlp
beLween Lhe former spousesţ whereť

Lach coŴowner shall have Lhe full ownershlp of hls parL and of Lhe frulLs and beneflLs perLalnlng
LhereLoţ and he may Lherefore allenaLeţ asslgn or morLgage lLţ and even subsLlLuLe anoLher person
ln lLs en[oymenLţ excepL when personal rlghLs are lnvolvedŦ 8uL Lhe effecL of Lhe allenaLlon or Lhe
morLgageţ wlLh respecL Lo Lhe coŴownersţ shall be llmlLed Lo Lhe porLlon whlch may be alloLLed Lo
hlm ln Lhe dlvlslon upon Lhe LermlnaLlon of Lhe coŴownershlpŦ (Lmphasls supplledŦ)

ln Lhe case aL barţ llorencla consLlLuLed Lhe morLgage on Lhe dlspuLed loL on Aprll 30ţ 1997ţ or a
llLLle less Lhan Lwo years afLer Lhe dlssoluLlon of Lhe con[ugal parLnershlp on !uly 31ţ 1993ţ buL
before Lhe llquldaLlon of Lhe parLnershlpŦ 8e LhaL as lL mayţ whaL governed Lhe properLy relaLlons
of Lhe former spouses when Lhe morLgage was glven ls Lhe aforequoLed ArLŦ 493Ŧ under lLţ
llorencla has Lhe rlghL Lo morLgage or even sell her oneŴhalf (1/2) undlvlded lnLeresL ln Lhe
dlspuLed properLy even wlLhouL Lhe consenL of nlcholsonŦ Poweverţ Lhe rlghLs of MeLrobankţ as
morLgageeţ are llmlLed only Lo Lhe 1/2 undlvlded porLlon LhaL llorencla ownedŦ Accordlnglyţ Lhe
morLgage conLracL lnsofar as lL covered Lhe remalnlng 1/2 undlvlded porLlon of Lhe loL ls null and
voldţ nlcholson noL havlng consenLed Lo Lhe morLgage of hls undlvlded halfŦ

1he concluslon would haveţ howeverţ been dlfferenL lf nlcholson lndeed duly walved hls share ln
Lhe con[ugal parLnershlpŦ 8uLţ as found by Lhe courLs a quoţ Lhe Aprll 9ţ 1993 deed of walver
allegedly execuLed by nlcholson Lhree monLhs prlor Lo Lhe dlssoluLlon of Lhe marrlage and Lhe

con[ugal parLnershlp of galns on !uly 31ţ 1993 bore hls forged slgnaLureţ noL Lo menLlon LhaL of Lhe
noLarlzlng offlcerŦ A spurlous deed of walver does noL Lransfer any rlghL aL allţ albelL lL may become
Lhe rooL of a valld LlLle ln Lhe hands of an lnnocenL buyer for valueŦ

upon Lhe foregolng perspecLlveţ MeLrobank's rlghLţ as morLgagee and as Lhe successful bldder aL
Lhe aucLlon of Lhe loLţ ls conflned only Lo Lhe 1/2 undlvlded porLlon Lhereof hereLofore perLalnlng
ln ownershlp Lo llorenclaŦ 1he oLher undlvlded half belongs Lo nlcholsonŦ As owner pro lndlvlso of
a porLlon of Lhe loL ln quesLlonţ MeLrobank may ask for Lhe parLlLlon of Lhe loL and lLs properLy
rlghLs ºshall be llmlLed Lo Lhe porLlon whlch may be alloLLed Lo żLhe bankŽ ln Lhe dlvlslon upon Lhe
LermlnaLlon of Lhe coŴownershlpŦ"ż18Ž 1hls dlsposlLlon ls ln llne wlLh Lhe wellŴesLabllshed prlnclple
LhaL Lhe blndlng force of a conLracL musL be recognlzed as far as lL ls legally posslble Lo do soŶŶ
quando res non valeL uL agoţ valeaL quanLum valere poLesLŦż19Ž

ln vlew of our resoluLlon on Lhe valldlLy of Lhe aucLlon of Lhe loL ln favor of MeLrobankţ Lhere ls
hardly a need Lo dlscuss aL lengLh wheLher or noL MeLrobank was a morLgagee ln good falLhŦ Sufflce
lL Lo sLaLe for Lhe nonce LhaL where Lhe morLgagee ls a banklng lnsLlLuLlonţ Lhe general rule LhaL a
purchaser or morLgagee of Lhe land need noL look beyond Lhe four corners of Lhe LlLle ls
lnappllcableŦż20Ž unllke prlvaLe lndlvldualsţ lL behooves banks Lo exerclse greaLer care and due
dlllgence before enLerlng lnLo a morLgage conLracLŦ 1he ascerLalnmenL of Lhe sLaLus or condlLlon of
Lhe properLy offered as securlLy and Lhe valldlLy of Lhe morLgagor's LlLle musL be sLandard and
lndlspensable parL of Lhe bank's operaLlonŦż21Ž A bank LhaL falled Lo observe due dlllgence cannoL
be accorded Lhe sLaLus of a bona flde morLgageeţż22Ž as hereŦ

8uL as found by Lhe CAţ howeverţ MeLrobank's fallure Lo comply wlLh Lhe due dlllgence
requlremenL was noL Lhe resulL of a dlshonesL purposeţ some moral obllqulLy or breach of a known
duLy for some lnLeresL or lllŴwlll LhaL parLakes of fraud LhaL would [usLlfy damagesŦ

WPL8LlC8Lţ Lhe peLlLlon ls ÞA81L? C8An1LuŦ 1he appealed ueclslon of Lhe CA daLed !anuary 28ţ
2004ţ upholdlng wlLh modlflcaLlon Lhe ueclslon of Lhe 81Cţ 8ranch 63 ln MakaLl ClLyţ ln Clvll Case
noŦ 00Ŵ789ţ ls Alll8MLu wlLh Lhe MCulllCA1lCn LhaL Lhe 8LM over Lhe loL covered by 1C1 noŦ
136283 of Lhe 8eglsLry of ueeds of MakaLl ClLy ls hereby declared valld only lnsofar as Lhe pro
lndlvlso share of llorencla Lhereon ls concernedŦ

As modlfledţ Lhe ueclslon of Lhe 81C shall readť

Þ8LMlSLS CCnSluL8Luţ Lhe real esLaLe morLgage on Lhe properLy covered by 1C1 noŦ 136283
of Lhe 8eglsLry of ueeds of MakaLl ClLy and all proceedlngs Lhereon are nuLL and vClu wlLh respecL
Lo Lhe undlvlded 1/2 porLlon of Lhe dlspuLed properLy owned by nlcholsonţ buL vALlu wlLh respecL
Lo Lhe oLher undlvlded 1/2 porLlon belonglng Lo llorenclaŦ

1he clalms of nlcholson for moral damages and aLLorney's fees are uLnlLu for lack of merlLŦ
no pronouncemenL as Lo cosLsŦ SC C8uL8LuŦ

Arr|o|a vŦ Arr|o|a
Gk # 177703ţ IanŦ 28ţ 2008
S42 SCkA 666
lacLsť

1hls ls a ÞeLlLlon for 8evlew on CerLlorarl under 8ule 43 of Lhe 8ules of CourLţ assalllng Lhe ueclslon
and 8esoluLlon of Lhe CourL of AppealsŦ

!ohn nabor CŦ Arrlola flled Speclal Clvll AcLlon wlLh Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal CourLţ 8ranch 234ţ Las Þlnas
ClLy (81C) agalnsL vllma CŦ Arrlola and AnLhony 8onald CŦ Arrlola for [udlclal parLlLlon of Lhe
properLles of decedenL lldel ArrlolaŦ 8espondenL ls Lhe son of decedenL lldel wlLh hls flrsL wlfe
vlcLorla CŦ Calablaţ whlle peLlLloner AnLhony ls Lhe son of decedenL lldel wlLh hls second wlfeţ
peLlLloner vllmaŦ

Cn lebruary 16ţ 2004ţ Lhe 81C rendered a ueclslonţ orderlng Lhe parLlLlon of Lhe parcel of land lefL
by Lhe decedenL lldel SŦ Arrlola by and among hls helrs !ohn nabor CŦ Arrlolaţ vllma CŦ Arrlola and
AnLhony 8onald CŦ Arrlola ln equal shares of oneŴLhlrd (1/3) each wlLhouL pre[udlce Lo Lhe rlghLs of
credlLors or morLgagees Lhereonţ lf anyŤ

As Lhe parLles falled Lo agree how Lo parLlLlon among Lhem Lhe landţ !ohn nabor soughL Lhe sale
Lhrough publlc aucLlon and peLlLloners acceded Lo lLŦ Sald aucLlon had Lo be reseL when peLlLloners
refused Lo lnclude Lhe house sLandlng on Lhe sub[ecL landŦ

lssueť

WheLher Lhe sub[ecL house ls covered ln Lhe [udgmenL of parLlLlon of Lhe loL and should be
lncluded ln Lhe sale Lhrough publlc aucLlonŦ

Peldť

1he sub[ecL house ls covered by Lhe [udgmenL of parLlLlonŦ

llrsLţ as correcLly held by Lhe CAţ under Lhe provlslons of Lhe Clvll Codeţ Lhe sub[ecL house ls
deemed parL of Lhe sub[ecL landŦ

ln generalţ Lhe rlghL Lo accesslon ls auLomaLlc (lpso [ure)ţ requlrlng no prlor acL on Lhe parL of Lhe
owner or Lhe prlnclpalŦ So LhaL even lf Lhe lmprovemenLs lncludlng Lhe house were noL alleged ln
Lhe complalnL for parLlLlonţ Lhey are deemed lncluded ln Lhe loL on whlch Lhey sLandţ followlng Lhe
prlnclple of accesslonŦ ConsequenLlyţ Lhe loL sub[ecL of [udlclal parLlLlon ln Lhls case lncludes Lhe
house whlch ls permanenLly aLLached LhereLoţ oLherwlseţ lL would be absurd Lo dlvlde Lhe prlnclpalţ
lŦeŦţ Lhe loLţ wlLhouL dlvldlng Lhe house whlch ls permanenLly aLLached LhereLoŦ

Secondţ respondenL has repeaLedly clalmed LhaL Lhe sub[ecL house was bullL by Lhe deceasedŦ
ÞeLlLloners never conLroverLed such clalmŦ 1here ls Lhen no dlspuLe LhaL Lhe sub[ecL house ls parL
of Lhe esLaLe of Lhe deceasedŤ as suchţ lL ls owned ln common by Lhe laLLerƌs helrsţ Lhe parLles
herelnţ any one of whomţ under ArLlcle 494 of Lhe Clvll Codeţ mayţ aL any Llmeţ demand Lhe
parLlLlon of Lhe sub[ecL houseŦ 1hereforeţ respondenLƌs recourse Lo Lhe parLlLlon of Lhe sub[ecL
house cannoL be hlnderedţ leasL of all by Lhe mere Lechnlcal omlsslon of sald common properLy
from Lhe complalnL for parLlLlonŦ

1haL sald noLwlLhsLandlngţ we musL emphaslze LhaLţ whlle we LreaL Lhe sub[ecL house as parL of Lhe
coŴownershlp of Lhe parLlesţ we sLop shorL of auLhorlzlng lLs acLual parLlLlon by publlc aucLlon aL
Lhls LlmeŦ lL bears emphasls LhaL an acLlon for parLlLlon lnvolves Lwo phasesť flrsLţ Lhe declaraLlon of
Lhe exlsLence of a sLaLe of coŴownershlpŤ and secondţ Lhe acLual LermlnaLlon of LhaL sLaLe of coŴ
ownershlp Lhrough Lhe segregaLlon of Lhe common properLyŦ WhaL ls seLLled Lhus far ls only Lhe
facL LhaL Lhe sub[ecL house ls under Lhe coŴownershlp of Lhe parLlesţ and Lherefore suscepLlble of
parLlLlon among LhemŦ

WheLher Lhe sub[ecL house should be sold aL publlc aucLlon as ordered by Lhe 81C ls an enLlrely
dlfferenL maLLerŦ
8espondenL clalms LhaL Lhe sub[ecL house was bullL by decedenL lldel on hls excluslve properLyŦ
ÞeLlLloners add LhaL sald house has been Lhelr resldence for 20 yearsŦ 1aken LogeLherţ Lhese
avermenLs on record esLabllsh LhaL Lhe sub[ecL house ls a famlly home wlLhln Lhe conLemplaLlon of
Lhe provlslons of 1he lamlly Codeţ parLlcularlyť

ArLlcle 132Ŧ 1he famlly homeţ consLlLuLed [olnLly by Lhe husband and Lhe wlfe or by an unmarrled
head of a famllyţ ls Lhe dwelllng house where Lhey and Lhelr famlly resldeţ and Lhe land on whlch lL
ls slLuaLedŦ

ArLlcle 133Ŧ 1he famlly home ls deemed consLlLuLed on a house and loL from Lhe Llme lL ls occupled
as a famlly resldenceŦ lrom Lhe Llme of lLs consLlLuLlon and so long as any of lLs beneflclarles
acLually resldes Lherelnţ Lhe famlly home conLlnues Lo be such and ls exempL from execuLlonţ
forced sale or aLLachmenL excepL as herelnafLer provlded and Lo Lhe exLenL of Lhe value allowed by
lawŦ

Cne slgnlflcanL lnnovaLlon lnLroduced by 1he lamlly Code ls Lhe auLomaLlc consLlLuLlon of Lhe
famlly home from Lhe Llme of lLs occupaLlon as a famlly resldenceţ wlLhouL need anymore for Lhe
[udlclal or exLra[udlclal processes provlded under Lhe defuncL ArLlcles 224 Lo 231 of Lhe Clvll Code
and 8ule 106 of Lhe 8ules of CourLŦ lurLhermoreţ ArLlcles 132 and 133 speclflcally exLend Lhe scope
of Lhe famlly home noL [usL Lo Lhe dwelllng sLrucLure ln whlch Lhe famlly resldes buL also Lo Lhe loL
on whlch lL sLandsŦ 1husţ applylng Lhese concepLsţ Lhe sub[ecL house as well as Lhe speclflc porLlon
of Lhe sub[ecL land on whlch lL sLands are deemed consLlLuLed as a famlly home by Lhe deceased
and peLlLloner vllma from Lhe momenL Lhey began occupylng Lhe same as a famlly resldence 20
years backŦ

lL belng seLLled LhaL Lhe sub[ecL house (and Lhe sub[ecL loL on whlch lL sLands) ls Lhe famlly home of
Lhe deceased and hls helrsţ Lhe same ls shlelded from lmmedlaLe parLlLlon under ArLlcle 139 of 1he
lamlly Codeţ vlzť
ArLlcle 139Ŧ 1he famlly home shall conLlnue desplLe Lhe deaLh of one or boLh spouses or of Lhe
unmarrled head of Lhe famlly for a perlod of Len years or for as long as Lhere ls a mlnor beneflclaryţ
and Lhe helrs cannoL parLlLlon Lhe same unless Lhe courL flnds compelllng reasons LhereforŦ 1hls
rule shall apply regardless of whoever owns Lhe properLy or consLlLuLed Lhe famlly homeŦ

1he purpose of ArLlcle 139 ls Lo averL Lhe dlslnLegraLlon of Lhe famlly unlL followlng Lhe deaLh of lLs
headŦ 1o Lhls endţ lL preserves Lhe famlly home as Lhe physlcal symbol of famlly loveţ securlLy and
unlLy by lmposlng Lhe followlng resLrlcLlons on lLs parLlLlonť flrsLţ LhaL Lhe helrs cannoL exLraŴ
[udlclally parLlLlon lL for a perlod of 10 years from Lhe deaLh of one or boLh spouses or of Lhe
unmarrled head of Lhe famllyţ or for a longer perlodţ lf Lhere ls sLlll a mlnor beneflclary resldlng
LherelnŤ and secondţ LhaL Lhe helrs cannoL [udlclally parLlLlon lL durlng Lhe aforesald perlods unless
Lhe courL flnds compelllng reasons LhereforŦ no compelllng reason has been alleged by Lhe parLlesŤ
nor has Lhe 81C found any compelllng reason Lo order Lhe parLlLlon of Lhe famlly homeţ elLher by
physlcal segregaLlon or asslgnmenL Lo any of Lhe helrs or Lhrough aucLlon sale as suggesLed by Lhe
parLlesŦ

More lmporLanLlyţ ArLlcle 139 lmposes Lhe proscrlpLlon agalnsL Lhe lmmedlaLe parLlLlon of Lhe
famlly home regardless of lLs ownershlpŦ 1hls slgnlfles LhaL even lf Lhe famlly home has passed by
successlon Lo Lhe coŴownershlp of Lhe helrsţ or has been wllled Lo any one of Lhemţ Lhls facL alone
cannoL Lransform Lhe famlly home lnLo an ordlnary properLyţ much less dlspel Lhe proLecLlon casL
upon lL by Lhe lawŦ 1he rlghLs of Lhe lndlvldual coŴowner or owner of Lhe famlly home cannoL
sub[ugaLe Lhe rlghLs granLed under ArLlcle 139 Lo Lhe beneflclarles of Lhe famlly homeŦ

SeL agalnsL Lhe foregolng rulesţ Lhe famlly home ŴŴ conslsLlng of Lhe sub[ecL house and loL on whlch
lL sLands ŴŴ cannoL be parLlLloned aL Lhls Llmeţ even lf lL has passed Lo Lhe coŴownershlp of hls helrsţ
Lhe parLles herelnŦ uecedenL lldel dled on March 10ţ 2003Ŧ 1husţ for 10 years from sald daLe or
unLll March 10ţ 2013ţ or for a longer perlodţ lf Lhere ls sLlll a mlnor beneflclary resldlng Lherelnţ Lhe
famlly home he consLlLuLed cannoL be parLlLlonedţ much less when no compelllng reason exlsLs for
Lhe courL Lo oLherwlse seL aslde Lhe resLrlcLlon and order Lhe parLlLlon of Lhe properLyŦ

1he CourL ruled ln Ponrado vŦ CourL of Appeals LhaL a clalm for excepLlon from execuLlon or forced
sale under ArLlcle 133 should be seL up and proved Lo Lhe Sherlff before Lhe sale of Lhe properLy aL
publlc aucLlonŦ Pereln peLlLloners Llmely ob[ecLed Lo Lhe lncluslon of Lhe sub[ecL house alLhough for
a dlfferenL reasonŦ

1o recaplLulaLeţ Lhe evldence of record susLaln Lhe CA rullng LhaL Lhe sub[ecL house ls parL of Lhe
[udgmenL of coŴownershlp and parLlLlonŦ 1he same evldence also esLabllshes LhaL Lhe sub[ecL house
and Lhe porLlon of Lhe sub[ecL land on whlch lL ls sLandlng have been consLlLuLed as Lhe famlly
home of decedenL lldel and hls helrsŦ ConsequenLlyţ lLs acLual and lmmedlaLe parLlLlon cannoL be
sancLloned unLll Lhe lapse of a perlod of 10 years from Lhe deaLh of lldel Arrlolaţ or unLll March 10ţ
2013Ŧ

lL bears emphaslsţ howeverţ LhaL ln Lhe meanLlmeţ Lhere ls no obsLacle Lo Lhe lmmedlaLe publlc
aucLlon of Lhe porLlon of Lhe sub[ecL land covered by 1C1 noŦ 383714ţ whlch falls ouLslde Lhe
speclflc area of Lhe famlly homeŦ

WPL8LlC8Lţ Lhe peLlLlon ls ÞA81L? C8An1Lu and Lhe november 30ţ 2006 ueclslon and Aprll 30ţ
2007 8esoluLlon of Lhe CourL of Appeals are MCulllLu ln LhaL Lhe house sLandlng on Lhe land
covered by 1ransfer CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle noŦ 383714 ls uLCLA8Lu parL of Lhe coŴownershlp of Lhe
parLles !ohn nabor CŦ Arrlolaţ vllma CŦ Arrlola and AnLhony 8onald CŦ Arrlola buL LxLMÞ1Lu from
parLlLlon by publlc aucLlon wlLhln Lhe perlod provlded for ln ArLlcle 139 of Lhe lamlly CodeŦ

Þad|||a vsŦ Magdu|a
Gk# 1768S8] SeptŦ 1Sţ 2010
630 SCkA S73

lacLsť

8efore Lhe CourL ls a peLlLlon for revlew on cerLlorarlż1Ž assalllng Lhe Crders daLed 8 SepLember
2006ż2Ž and 13 lebruary 2007ż3Ž of Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal CourL (81C) of 1acloban ClLyţ 8ranch 34ţ ln
Clvll Case noŦ 2001Ŵ10Ŵ161Ŧ

!uanlLa Þadllla (!uanlLa)ţ Lhe moLher of peLlLlonersţ owned a plece of land locaLed ln San 8oqueţ
1anauanţ LeyLeŦ AfLer !uanlLa's deaLh on 23 March 1989ţ peLlLlonersţ as legal helrs of !uanlLaţ
soughL Lo have Lhe land parLlLlonedŦ ÞeLlLloners senL word Lo Lhelr eldesL broLher 8lcardo 8ahla
(8lcardo) regardlng Lhelr plans for Lhe parLlLlon of Lhe landŦ ln a leLLer daLed 3 !une 1998 wrlLLen by
8lcardo addressed Lo Lhemţ peLlLloners were surprlsed Lo flnd ouL LhaL 8lcardo had declared Lhe
land for hlmselfţ pre[udlclng Lhelr rlghLs as coŴhelrsŦ lL was Lhen dlscovered LhaL !uanlLa had
allegedly execuLed a noLarlzed AffldavlL of 1ransfer of 8eal ÞroperLyż4Ž (AffldavlL) ln favor of
8lcardo on 4 !une 1966 maklng hlm Lhe sole owner of Lhe landŦ 1he records do noL show LhaL Lhe
land was reglsLered under Lhe 1orrens sysLemŦ

Cn 26 CcLober 2001ţ peLlLloners flled an acLlon wlLh Lhe 81C of 1acloban ClLyţ 8ranch 34ţ for
recovery of ownershlpţ possesslonţ parLlLlon and damagesŦ ÞeLlLloners soughL Lo declare vold Lhe
sale of Lhe land by 8lcardo's daughLersţ !osephlne 8ahla and vlrglnla 8ahlaŴAbasţ Lo respondenL
uomlnador Magdua (uomlnador)Ŧ 1he sale was made durlng Lhe llfeLlme of 8lcardoŦ

ÞeLlLloners alleged LhaL 8lcardoţ Lhrough mlsrepresenLaLlonţ had Lhe land Lransferred ln hls name
wlLhouL Lhe consenL and knowledge of hls coŴhelrsŦ ÞeLlLloners also sLaLed LhaL prlor Lo 1966ţ
8lcardo had a house consLrucLed on Lhe landŦ Poweverţ when 8lcardo and hls wlfe Zoslma
separaLedţ 8lcardo lefL for lnasuyanţ kawayanţ 8lllran and Lhe house was leased Lo Lhlrd parLlesŦ

ÞeLlLloners furLher alleged LhaL Lhe slgnaLure of !uanlLa ln Lhe AffldavlL ls hlghly quesLlonable
because on 13 May 1978 !uanlLa execuLed a wrlLLen lnsLrumenL sLaLlng LhaL she would be leavlng
behlnd Lo her chlldren Lhe land whlch she had lnherlLed from her parenLsŦ

uomlnador flled a moLlon Lo dlsmlss on Lhe ground of lack of [urlsdlcLlon slnce Lhe assessed value
of Lhe land was wlLhln Lhe [urlsdlcLlon of Lhe Munlclpal 1rlal CourL of 1anauanţ LeyLeŦ

ln an Crder daLed 20 lebruary 2006ţż3Ž Lhe 81C dlsmlssed Lhe case for lack of [urlsdlcLlonŦ 1he 81C
explalned LhaL Lhe assessed value of Lhe land ln Lhe amounL of Þ390Ŧ00 was less Lhan Lhe amounL
cognlzable by Lhe 81C Lo acqulre [urlsdlcLlon over Lhe caseŦż6Ž

ÞeLlLloners flled a moLlon for reconslderaLlonŦ ÞeLlLloners argued LhaL Lhe acLlon was noL merely
for recovery of ownershlp and possesslonţ parLlLlon and damages buL also for annulmenL of deed of
saleŦ Slnce acLlons Lo annul conLracLs are acLlons beyond pecunlary esLlmaLlonţ Lhe case was well
wlLhln Lhe [urlsdlcLlon of Lhe 81CŦ

uomlnador flled anoLher moLlon Lo dlsmlss on Lhe ground of prescrlpLlonŦ

ln an Crder daLed 8 SepLember 2006ţ Lhe 81C reconsldered lLs prevlous sLand and Look cognlzance
of Lhe caseŦ noneLhelessţ Lhe 81C denled Lhe moLlon for reconslderaLlon and dlsmlssed Lhe case on
Lhe ground of prescrlpLlon pursuanL Lo SecLlon 1ţ 8ule 9 of Lhe 8ules of CourLŦ 1he 81C ruled LhaL
Lhe case was flled only ln 2001 or more Lhan 30 years slnce Lhe AffldavlL was execuLed ln 1966Ŧ 1he
81C explalned LhaL whlle Lhe rlghL of an helr Lo hls lnherlLance ls lmprescrlpLlbleţ yeL when one of
Lhe coŴhelrs approprlaLes Lhe properLy as hls own Lo Lhe excluslon of all oLher helrsţ Lhen
prescrlpLlon can seL lnŦ 1he 81C added LhaL slnce prescrlpLlon had seL ln Lo quesLlon Lhe Lransfer of
Lhe land under Lhe AffldavlLţ lL would seem loglcal LhaL no acLlon could also be Laken agalnsL Lhe
deed of sale execuLed by 8lcardo's daughLers ln favor of uomlnadorŦ 1he dlsposlLlve porLlon of Lhe
order sLaLesť

WPL8LlC8Lţ premlses conslderedţ Lhe order of Lhe CourL ls reconsldered ln so far as Lhe
pronouncemenL of Lhe CourL LhaL lL has no [urlsdlcLlon over Lhe naLure of Lhe acLlonŦ 1he dlsmlssal
of Lhe acLlonţ howeverţ ls malnLalned noL by reason of lack of [urlsdlcLlon buL by reason of
prescrlpLlonŦ

lssueť

1he maln lssue ls wheLher Lhe presenL acLlon ls already barred by prescrlpLlonŦ

Peldť

AL Lhe ouLseLţ only quesLlons of law may be ralsed ln a peLlLlon for revlew on cerLlorarl under 8ule
43 of Lhe 8ules of CourLŦ 1he facLual flndlngs of Lhe lower courLs are flnal and concluslve and may
noL be revlewed on appeal excepL under any of Lhe followlng clrcumsLancesť (1) Lhe concluslon ls
grounded on speculaLlonsţ surmlses or con[ecLuresŤ (2) Lhe lnference ls manlfesLly mlsLakenţ absurd
or lmposslbleŤ (3) Lhere ls grave abuse of dlscreLlonŤ (4) Lhe [udgmenL ls based on a
mlsapprehenslon of facLsŤ (3) Lhe flndlngs of facL are confllcLlngŤ (6) Lhere ls no clLaLlon of speclflc
evldence on whlch Lhe facLual flndlngs are basedŤ (7) Lhe flndlng of absence of facLs ls conLradlcLed
by Lhe presence of evldence on recordŤ (8) Lhe flndlngs of Lhe CourL of Appeals are conLrary Lo
Lhose of Lhe Lrlal courLŤ (9) Lhe CourL of Appeals manlfesLly overlooked cerLaln relevanL and
undlspuLed facLs LhaLţ lf properly conslderedţ would [usLlfy a dlfferenL concluslonŤ (10) Lhe flndlngs
of Lhe CourL of Appeals are beyond Lhe lssues of Lhe caseŤ and (11) such flndlngs are conLrary Lo Lhe
admlsslons of boLh parLlesŦż8Ž

We flnd LhaL Lhe concluslon of Lhe 81C ln dlsmlsslng Lhe case on Lhe ground of prescrlpLlon based
solely on Lhe AffldavlL execuLed by !uanlLa ln favor of 8lcardoţ Lhe alleged seller of Lhe properLy
from whom uomlnador asserLs hls ownershlpţ ls speculaLlveŦ 1husţ a revlew of Lhe case ls
necessaryŦ

Pereţ Lhe 81C granLed Lhe moLlon Lo dlsmlss flled by uomlnador based on SecLlon 1ţ 8ule 9 of Lhe
8ules of CourL whlch sLaLesť

SecLlon 1Ŧ uefenses and ob[ecLlons noL pleadedŦ Ŷ uefenses and ob[ecLlons noL pleaded elLher ln a
moLlon Lo dlsmlss or ln Lhe answer are deemed walvedŦ Poweverţ when lL appears from Lhe
pleadlngs or Lhe evldence on record LhaL Lhe courL has no [urlsdlcLlon over Lhe sub[ecL maLLerţ LhaL
Lhere ls anoLher acLlon pendlng beLween Lhe same parLles for Lhe same causeţ or LhaL Lhe acLlon ls
barred by a prlor [udgmenL or by sLaLuLe of llmlLaLlonsţ Lhe courL shall dlsmlss Lhe caseŦ (Lmphasls
supplled)

1he 81C explalned LhaL prescrlpLlon had already seL ln slnce Lhe AffldavlL was execuLed on 31 May
1966 and peLlLloners flled Lhe presenL case only on 26 CcLober 2001ţ a lapse of more Lhan 30 yearsŦ
no acLlon could be Laken agalnsL Lhe deed of sale made ln favor of uomlnador wlLhouL assalllng Lhe
AffldavlLţ and Lhe acLlon Lo quesLlon Lhe AffldavlL had already prescrlbedŦ

AfLer a perusal of Lhe recordsţ we flnd LhaL Lhe 81C lncorrecLly relled on Lhe AffldavlL alone ln order
Lo dlsmlss Lhe case wlLhouL conslderlng peLlLloners' evldenceŦ 1he facLs show LhaL Lhe land was
sold Lo uomlnador by 8lcardo's daughLersţ namely !osephlne 8ahla and vlrglnla 8ahlaŴAbasţ durlng
Lhe llfeLlme of 8lcardoŦ Poweverţ Lhe alleged deed of sale was noL presenLed as evldence and
nelLher was lL shown LhaL 8lcardo's daughLers had any auLhorlLy from 8lcardo Lo dlspose of Lhe
landŦ no cogenL evldence was ever presenLed LhaL 8lcardo gave hls consenL Loţ acqulesced lnţ or
raLlfled Lhe sale made by hls daughLers Lo uomlnadorŦ ln lLs 8 SepLember 2006 Crderţ Lhe 81C
hasLlly concluded LhaL 8lcardo's daughLers had legal personallLy Lo sell Lhe properLyť

Cn Lhe allegaLlon of Lhe plalnLlffs (peLlLloners) LhaL !osephlne 8ahla and vlrglnla 8ahlaŴAbas had no
legal personallLy or rlghL Lo żsellŽ Lhe sub[ecL properLy ls of no momenL ln Lhls caseŦ lL should be
8lcardo 8ahla who has a cause of acLlon agalnsL żhlsŽ daughLers and noL Lhe hereln plalnLlffsŦ AfLer
allţ 8lcardo 8ahla mlghL have already consenLed Lo or raLlfled Lhe alleged deed of saleŦż9Ž

Alsoţ aslde from Lhe AffldavlLţ uomlnador dld noL presenL any proof Lo show LhaL 8lcardo's
possesslon of Lhe land had been openţ conLlnuous and excluslve for more Lhan 30 years ln order Lo
esLabllsh exLraordlnary acqulslLlve prescrlpLlonŦż10Ž uomlnador merely assumed LhaL 8lcardo had
been ln possesslon of Lhe land for 30 years based on Lhe AffldavlL submlLLed Lo Lhe 81CŦ 1he
peLlLlonersţ on Lhe oLher handţ ln Lhelr pleadlng flled wlLh Lhe 81C for recovery of ownershlpţ
possesslonţ parLlLlon and damagesţ alleged LhaL 8lcardo lefL Lhe land afLer he separaLed from hls
wlfe someLlme afLer 1966 and moved Lo anoLher placeŦ 1he records do noL menLlonţ howeverţ
wheLher 8lcardo had any lnLenLlon Lo go back Lo Lhe land or wheLher 8lcardo's famlly ever llved
LhereŦ

lurLherţ uomlnador falled Lo show LhaL 8lcardo had Lhe land declared ln hls name for LaxaLlon
purposes from 1966 afLer Lhe AffldavlL was execuLed unLll 2001 when Lhe case was flledŦ AlLhough
a Lax declaraLlon does noL prove ownershlpţ lL ls evldence of clalm Lo possesslon of Lhe landŦ

Moreoverţ 8lcardo and peLlLloners are coŴhelrs or coŴowners of Lhe landŦ CoŴhelrs or coŴowners
cannoL acqulre by acqulslLlve prescrlpLlon Lhe share of Lhe oLher coŴhelrs or coŴowners absenL a
clear repudlaLlon of Lhe coŴownershlpţ as expressed ln ArLlcle 494 of Lhe Clvll Code whlch sLaLesť

ArLŦ 494Ŧ x x x no prescrlpLlon shall run ln favor of a coŴowner or coŴhelr agalnsL hls coŴowners or
coŴhelrs as long as he expressly or lmplledly recognlzes Lhe coŴownershlpŦ

Slnce possesslon of coŴowners ls llke LhaL of a LrusLeeţ ln order LhaL a coŴowner's possesslon may be
deemed adverse Lo Lhe cesLul que LrusL or oLher coŴownersţ Lhe followlng requlslLes musL concurť
(1) LhaL he has performed unequlvocal acLs of repudlaLlon amounLlng Lo an ousLer of Lhe cesLul que
LrusL or oLher coŴownersţ (2) LhaL such poslLlve acLs of repudlaLlon have been made known Lo Lhe
cesLul que LrusL or oLher coŴownersţ and (3) LhaL Lhe evldence Lhereon musL be clear and
convlnclngŦż11Ž

ln Lhe presenL caseţ all Lhree requlslLes have been meLŦ AfLer !uanlLa's deaLh ln 1989ţ peLlLloners
soughL for Lhe parLlLlon of Lhelr moLher's landŦ 1he helrsţ lncludlng 8lcardoţ were noLlfled abouL
Lhe planŦ 8lcardoţ Lhrough a leLLer daLed 3 !une 1998ţ noLlfled peLlLlonersţ as hls coŴhelrsţ LhaL he
ad[udlcaLed Lhe land solely for hlmselfŦ Accordlnglyţ 8lcardo's lnLeresL ln Lhe land had now
become adverse Lo Lhe clalm of hls coŴhelrs afLer repudlaLlng Lhelr clalm of enLlLlemenL Lo Lhe landŦ
ln Cenerosa vŦ ÞranganŴvaleraţż12Ž we held LhaL ln order LhaL LlLle may prescrlbe ln favor of one of
Lhe coŴownersţ lL musL be clearly shown LhaL he had repudlaLed Lhe clalms of Lhe oLhersţ and LhaL
Lhey were apprlsed of hls clalm of adverse and excluslve ownershlpţ before Lhe prescrlpLlve perlod
beglns Lo runŦ

Poweverţ ln Lhe presenL caseţ Lhe prescrlpLlve perlod began Lo run only from 3 !une 1998ţ Lhe daLe
peLlLloners recelved noLlce of 8lcardo's repudlaLlon of Lhelr clalms Lo Lhe landŦ Slnce peLlLloners
flled an acLlon for recovery of ownershlp and possesslonţ parLlLlon and damages wlLh Lhe 81C on 26
CcLober 2001ţ only a mere Lhree years had lapsedŦ 1hls LhreeŴyear perlod falls shorL of Lhe 10Ŵyear
or 30Ŵyear acqulslLlve prescrlpLlon perlod requlred by law ln order Lo be enLlLled Lo clalm legal
ownershlp over Lhe landŦ 1husţ uomlnador cannoL lnvoke acqulslLlve prescrlpLlonŦ

lurLherţ uomlnador's argumenL LhaL prescrlpLlon began Lo commence ln 1966ţ afLer Lhe AffldavlL
was execuLedţ ls erroneousŦ uomlnador merely relled on Lhe AffldavlL submlLLed Lo Lhe 81C LhaL
8lcardo had been ln possesslon of Lhe land for more Lhan 30 yearsŦ uomlnador dld noL submlL any
oLher corroboraLlve evldence Lo esLabllsh 8lcardo's alleged possesslon slnce 1966Ŧ ln Pelrs of
Manlngdlng vŦ CourL of Appealsţż13Ž we held LhaL Lhe evldence relaLlve Lo Lhe possesslonţ as a facLţ
upon whlch Lhe alleged prescrlpLlon ls basedţ musL be clearţ compleLe and concluslve ln order Lo
esLabllsh Lhe prescrlpLlonŦ Pereţ uomlnador falled Lo presenL any oLher compeLenL evldence Lo
prove Lhe alleged exLraordlnary acqulslLlve prescrlpLlon of 8lcardo over Lhe landŦ Slnce Lhe
properLy ls an unreglsLered landţ uomlnador boughL Lhe land aL hls own rlskţ belng aware as buyer
LhaL no LlLle had been lssued over Lhe landŦ As a consequenceţ uomlnador ls noL afforded
proLecLlon unless he can manlfesLly prove hls legal enLlLlemenL Lo hls clalmŦ

WlLh regard Lo Lhe lssue of Lhe [urlsdlcLlon of Lhe 81Cţ we hold LhaL Lhe 81C dld noL err ln Laklng
cognlzance of Lhe caseŦ

under SecLlon 1 of 8epubllc AcL noŦ 7691 (8A 7691)ţż14Ž amendlng 8aLas Þambansa 8lgŦ 129ţ Lhe
81C shall exerclse excluslve [urlsdlcLlon on Lhe followlng acLlonsť

SecLlon 1Ŧ SecLlon 19 of 8aLas Þambansa 8lgŦ 129ţ oLherwlse known as Lhe º!udlclary
8eorganlzaLlon AcL of 1980"ţ ls hereby amended Lo read as followsť

ºSecŦ 19Ŧ !urlsdlcLlon ln clvll casesŦ Ŷ 8eglonal 1rlal CourLs shall exerclse excluslve orlglnal
[urlsdlcLlonŦ

º(1) ln all clvll acLlons ln whlch Lhe sub[ecL of Lhe llLlgaLlon ls lncapable of pecunlary esLlmaLlonŤ

º(2) ln all clvll acLlons whlch lnvolve Lhe LlLle Loţ or possesslon ofţ real properLyţ or any lnLeresL
Lherelnţ where Lhe assessed value of Lhe properLy lnvolved exceeds 1wenLy 1housand Þesos
(Þ20ţ000Ŧ00) orţ for clvll acLlons ln MeLro Manllaţ where such value exceeds llfLy 1housand Þesos
(Þ30ţ000Ŧ00) excepL acLlons for forclble enLry lnLo and unlawful deLalner of lands or bulldlngsţ

orlglnal [urlsdlcLlon over whlch ls conferred upon Lhe MeLropollLan 1rlal CourLsţ Munlclpal 1rlal
CourLsţ and Munlclpal ClrculL 1rlal CourLsŤ x x x


Cn Lhe oLher handţ SecLlon 3 of 8A 7691 expanded Lhe [urlsdlcLlon of Lhe MeLropollLan 1rlal CourLsţ
Munlclpal 1rlal CourLs and Munlclpal ClrculL 1rlal CourLs over all clvll acLlons whlch lnvolve LlLle Lo
or possesslon of real properLyţ or any lnLeresLţ ouLslde MeLro Manlla where Lhe assessed value
does noL exceed 1wenLy Lhousand pesos (Þ20ţ000Ŧ00)Ŧ 1he provlslon sLaLesť

SecLlon 3Ŧ SecLlon 33 of Lhe same law ls hereby amended Lo read as followsť

ºSecŦ 33Ŧ !urlsdlcLlon of MeLropollLan 1rlal CourLsţ Munlclpal 1rlal CourLs and Munlclpal ClrculL 1rlal
CourLs ln Clvll CasesŦ Ŵ MeLropollLan 1rlal CourLsţ Munlclpal 1rlal CourLsţ and Munlclpal 1rlal ClrculL
1rlal CourLs shall exerclseť

x x x

º(3) Lxcluslve orlglnal [urlsdlcLlon ln all clvll acLlons whlch lnvolve LlLle Loţ or possesslon ofţ real
properLyţ or any lnLeresL Lhereln where Lhe assessed value of Lhe properLy or lnLeresL Lhereln does
noL exceed 1wenLy Lhousand pesos (Þ20ţ000Ŧ00) orţ ln clvll acLlons ln MeLro Manllaţ where such
assessed value does noL exceed llfLy Lhousand pesos (Þ30ţ000Ŧ00) excluslve of lnLeresLţ damages of
whaLever klndţ aLLorney's feesţ llLlgaLlon expenses and cosLsť Þrovldedţ 1haL ln cases of land noL
declared for LaxaLlon purposesţ Lhe value of such properLy shall be deLermlned by Lhe assessed
value of Lhe ad[acenL loLsŦ"

ln Lhe presenL caseţ Lhe records show LhaL Lhe assessed value of Lhe land was Þ390Ŧ00 accordlng Lo
Lhe ueclaraLlon of ÞroperLy as of 23 March 2000 flled wlLh Lhe 81CŦ 8ased on Lhe value aloneţ
belng way below Þ20ţ000Ŧ00ţ Lhe M1C has [urlsdlcLlon over Lhe caseŦ Poweverţ peLlLloners argued
LhaL Lhe acLlon was noL merely for recovery of ownershlp and possesslonţ parLlLlon and damages
buL also for annulmenL of deed of saleŦ Slnce annulmenL of conLracLs are acLlons lncapable of
pecunlary esLlmaLlonţ Lhe 81C has [urlsdlcLlon over Lhe caseŦż13Ž

ÞeLlLloners are correcLŦ ln Slngson vŦ lsabela Sawmlllţż16Ž we held LhaLť

ln deLermlnlng wheLher an acLlon ls one Lhe sub[ecL maLLer of whlch ls noL capable of pecunlary
esLlmaLlon Lhls CourL has adopLed Lhe crlLerlon of flrsL ascerLalnlng Lhe naLure of Lhe prlnclpal
acLlon or remedy soughLŦ lf lL ls prlmarlly for Lhe recovery of a sum of moneyţ Lhe clalm ls
consldered capable of pecunlary esLlmaLlonţ and wheLher [urlsdlcLlon ls ln Lhe munlclpal courLs or
ln Lhe courLs of flrsL lnsLance would depend on Lhe amounL of Lhe clalmŦ Poweverţ where Lhe baslc
lssue ls someLhlng oLher Lhan Lhe rlghL Lo recover a sum of moneyţ where Lhe money clalm ls
purely lncldenLal Loţ or a consequence ofţ Lhe prlnclpal rellef soughLţ Lhls CourL has consldered such
acLlons as cases where Lhe sub[ecL of Lhe llLlgaLlon may noL be esLlmaLed ln Lerms of moneyţ and
are cognlzable by courLs of flrsL lnsLance (now 8eglonal 1rlal CourLs)Ŧ

When peLlLloners flled Lhe acLlon wlLh Lhe 81C Lhey soughL Lo recover ownershlp and possesslon of
Lhe land by quesLlonlng (1) Lhe due execuLlon and auLhenLlclLy of Lhe AffldavlL execuLed by !uanlLa
ln favor of 8lcardo whlch caused 8lcardo Lo be Lhe sole owner of Lhe land Lo Lhe excluslon of
peLlLloners who also clalm Lo be legal helrs and enLlLled Lo Lhe landţ and (2) Lhe valldlLy of Lhe
deed of sale execuLed beLween 8lcardo's daughLers and uomlnadorŦ Slnce Lhe prlnclpal acLlon
soughL here ls someLhlng oLher Lhan Lhe recovery of a sum of moneyţ Lhe acLlon ls lncapable of
pecunlary esLlmaLlon and Lhus cognlzable by Lhe 81CŦ WellŴenLrenched ls Lhe rule LhaL [urlsdlcLlon
over Lhe sub[ecL maLLer of a case ls conferred by law and ls deLermlned by Lhe allegaLlons ln Lhe
complalnL and Lhe characLer of Lhe rellef soughLţ lrrespecLlve of wheLher Lhe parLy ls enLlLled Lo all
or some of Lhe clalms asserLedŦż17Ž

ln sumţ we flnd LhaL Lhe AffldavlLţ as Lhe prlnclpal evldence relled upon by Lhe 81C Lo dlsmlss Lhe
case on Lhe ground of prescrlpLlonţ lnsufflclenLly esLabllshed uomlnador's rlghLful clalm of
ownershlp Lo Lhe landŦ 1husţ we dlrecL Lhe 81C Lo Lry Lhe case on Lhe merlLs Lo deLermlne who
among Lhe parLles are legally enLlLled Lo Lhe landŦ

@aghoy vsŦ @|go|ţ Ir
Gk# 1S966S] AugŦ 3ţ 2010
626 SCkA 341
lacLsť

Spouses Leoncla de Cuzman and Cornello Aqulno dled lnLesLaLe someLlme ln 1943 and 1947ţ
respecLlvely and were chlldlessŦ Leoncla de Cuzman was survlved by her slsLers AnaLalla de Cuzman
(moLher of Lhe plalnLlffs) and 1ranqulllna de Cuzman (grandmoLher of Lhe defendanLs)Ŧ uurlng Lhe
exlsLence of Lhelr marrlageţ spouses Aqulno were able Lo acqulre several properLlesŦ

SomeLlme ln 1989ţ Lhe helrs of AnaLalla de Cuzman represenLed by SanLlagoţ Andresţ lellcldad and
Apolonloţ all surnamed Meneses flled a complalnL for annulmenLţ parLlLlon and damages agalnsL
Lhe helrs of Cesarlo velasquez (son of 1ranqulllna de Cuzman) for Lhe laLLers refusal Lo parLlLlon Lhe
aboveŴmenLloned con[ugal properLles of Lhe Spouses AqulnoŦ 1he complalnL alleged LhaL Leoncla
de Cuzmanţ before her deaLhţ had a Lalk wlLh Lhe plalnLlffs moLherţ AnaLalla de Cuzmanţ wlLh
plalnLlff SanLlago Meneses and 1ranqulllna de Cuzman and hls son Cesarlo velasquez ln
aLLendanceŤ LhaL ln Lhe conference Leoncla Lold AnaLalla de Cuzmanţ 1ranqulllna de Cuzman and
Cesarlo velaquez LhaL Lhe documenLs of donaLlon and parLlLlon whlch she and her husband earller
execuLed were noL slgned by Lhem as lL was noL Lhelr lnLenLlon Lo glve away all Lhe properLles Lo
Cesarlo velasquez because AnaLalla de Cuzman who ls one of her slsLers had several chlldren Lo
supporLŤ Cesarlo velasquez LogeLher wlLh hls moLher allegedly promlsed Lo dlvlde Lhe properLles
equally and Lo glve Lhe plalnLlffs oneŴhalf (1/2) LhereofŤ LhaL Lhey are enLlLled Lo of each of all Lhe
properLles ln quesLlon belng Lhe chlldren of AnaLalla de Cuzmanţ full blood slsLer of Leoncla de
CuzmanŦ ÞlalnLlffs furLher clalm LhaL afLer Lhe deaLh of Leonclaţ defendanLs forclbly Look
possesslon of all Lhe properLles and desplLe plalnLlffs repeaLed demands for parLlLlonţ defendanLs
refusedŦ ÞlalnLlffs pray for Lhe nulllLy of any documenLs coverlng Lhe properLles ln quesLlon slnce
Lhey do noL bear Lhe genulne slgnaLures of Lhe Aqulno spousesţ Lo order Lhe parLlLlon of Lhe
properLles beLween plalnLlffs and defendanLs ln equal shares and Lo order Lhe defendanLs Lo
render an accounLlng of Lhe produce of Lhe land ln quesLlon from Lhe Llme defendanLs forclbly Look
possesslon unLll parLlLlon shall have been effecLedŦ

uefendanLs flled Lhelr Amended Answer wlLh counLerclalm alleglng among oLhers LhaL durlng Lhe
llfeLlme of spouses Cornello Aqulno and Leoncla de Cuzmanţ Lhey had already dlsposed of Lhelr

properLles ln favor of peLlLloners predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresLţ Cesarlo velasquez and Camlla de
Cuzmanţ and peLlLloners AnasLacla and !ose velasquez ln Lhe followlng mannerť

(1) 1he Lhlrd and slxLh parcels were conveyed Lo defendanLs laLe parenLs Cesarlo velasquez and
Camlla de Cuzmanţ by vlrLue of a LscrlLura de uonaLlon ÞropLer nupLlas daLed lebruary 13ţ 1919Ť

(2) 1he second parcel was conveyed Lo defendanLs laLe parenLs Cesarlo velasquez and Camlla de
Cuzman by vlrLue of a deed of conveyance daLed !uly 14ţ 1939ţ for whlch 1ransfer CerLlflcaLe of
1lLle noŦ 13129 was lssued by Lhe 8eglsLry of ueeds of Þangaslnan ln Lhe names of Cesarlo
velasquez and Camlla de CuzmanŤ

(3) 1he flrsL parcel was llkewlse conveyed Lo defendanLs !ose velasquez and AnasLacla velasquez by
vlrLue of a deed of conveyance (uonaLlon lnLer vlvos) daLed Aprll 10ţ 1939Ť

(4) As Lo Lhe fourLh and flfLh parcelsţ Lhe same were owned and possessed by Lhlrd parLlesŦ

uefendanLs denled LhaL a conference Look place beLween Leoncla de Cuzman and plalnLlff SanLlago
Meneses and hls moLher AnaLalla wlLh 1ranqulllna (defendanLs grandmoLher) and Cesarlo
velasquez (defendanLs faLher)ţ nor dld Lhe laLLer promlse Lo dlvlde Lhe properLles equally wlLh Lhe
plalnLlffs or Lo execuLe a deed of parLlLlonŤ LhaL Lhey dld noL forclbly Lake possesslon of Lhe sub[ecL
properLles slnce Lhelr possesslon Lhereof has been peacefulţ openţ conLlnuous and adverse ln
characLer Lo Lhe excluslon of all oLhersŦ 8y way of afflrmaLlve defensesţ defendanLs clalm LhaL Lhe
lnsLanL case ls already barred by res [udlcaLa slnce Lhere had been Lhree prevlous cases lnvolvlng
Lhe same parLlesţ sub[ecL maLLer and cause of acLlon whlch were all dlsmlssedţ Lhe lasL of whlch
was dlsmlssed for fallure Lo prosecuLeŤ LhaL plalnLlffs acLlon Lo annul Lhe documenLs coverlng Lhe
dlsposlLlon of Lhe properLles ls also barred by Lhe sLaLuLe of llmlLaLlonsŤ LhaL Lhe acLlon for parLlLlon
presupposes Lhe exlsLence of a properLy held ln common as agreed upon or admlLLed by Lhe parLles
buL Lhe coŴownershlp ceases when one of Lhe parLles alleges excluslve ownershlpţ Lhus Lhe acLlon
becomes one for a LlLle and recovery of ownershlp and Lhe acLlon prescrlbes ln four yearsŦ

AfLer Lrlalţ Lhe declslon was rendered on Aprll 8ţ 1992 whlch ruled as followsť8

ƍlrom Lhe evldenceţ Lhe CourL flnds LhaL Lhe plalnLlffs are broLhers and slsLers who are Lhe chlldren
of LsLanlslao Meneses and AnaLalla de Cuzman and Lhe defendanLs are Lhe chlldren of plalnLlffs
counsln Cesarlo velasquez and Camlla de CuzmanŦ 1he defendanLs moLher 1ranqulllna de Cuzman
and plalnLlffs moLher AnaLalla de Cuzman and Leoncla de Cuzman are full blooded slsLersŦ 1he
sub[ecL slx (6) parcels of land were con[ugal properLles of Leoncla de Cuzman and her husband
Cornello Aqulno were ln Lhelr possesslon unLll Lhelr deaLh ln 1943 and 1947ţ respecLlvelyŦ AfLer Lhe
deaLh of plalnLlffs moLher AnaLalla de Cuzman on SepLember 14ţ 1978ţ plalnLlff SanLlago Meneses
came across an affldavlL of Cesarlo velasquez noLarlzed by ALLyŦ Llpldlo 8arrozo sLaLlng LhaL he ls an
adopLed son of sald spouses Cornello Aqulno and Leoncla de Cuzman (LxhlblL ƍAƍ) whlchţ ls
howeverţ noL supporLed by evldence (a courL order)Ŧ 1he sald affldavlL menLlonedţ among oLher
Lhlngsţ a house and a parcel of land covered by 1ax ueclaraLlon noŦ 699 locaLed aL Culgullonenţ
Mangaldanţ Þangaslnanţ (LxhlblL ƍ8ƍ)Ŧ 1he sugar cane and coconuL land slLuaLed aL Þoblaclonţ
Mangaldanţ Þangaslnanţ conLalnlng an area of 27ţ849 square meLers covered by 1ax ueclaraLlon
noŦ 978 (LxhlblL ƍCƍ) whlch was ln Lhe possesslon of spouses Cornello Aqulno and Leoncla de
Cuzman unLll Lhelr deaLhŦ SomeLlme ln 1944 Leoncla de Cuzman called a conference among Lhe
plalnLlffs and spouses Cesarlo velasquez and Camlla de Cuzman and Lold Lhem LhaL all Lhelr
con[ugal properLles shall be dlvlded equally beLween AnaLalla de Cuzman and 1ranqulllna de
Cuzman and LhaL she dld noL slgn documenLs regardlng Lhe conveyance of Lhelr properLlesŤ and
LhaL Lhe properLy (parcel 8) ln Malabagoţ Mangaldanţ Þangaslnanţ whlch yleldlng an annual
produce worLh Þ13ţ000Ŧ00 was dlvlded beLween AnaLalla de Cuzman and 1ranqulllna de CuzmanŦ

Spouses Cornello Aqulno and Leoncla de Cuzman who were chlldless had AnaLalla de Cuzman and
1ranqulllna de Cuzman as Lhelr legal helrsŦ 1he laLLer succeeded Lhe former over Lhe sub[ecL slx (6)
parcels of land ln equal shares Ŵ belongs Lo AnaLalla de Cuzman and Lhe oLher halfţ Lo 1ranqulllna
de CuzmanŦƍ

1hlsţ noLwlLhsLandlng Lhe clalm of defendanLs LhaL Lhe flrsL parcel was donaLed Lo !ose velasquez
and AnasLacla velasquez by way of ƍuonaLlon lnLervlvosŦƍ

1he second parcelţ sold Lo Cesarlo velasquez and Camlla de CuzmanŤ

1he Lhlrd and 6Lh parcelsţ donaLed Lo Cesarlo velasquez and Camlla de CuzmanŤ and

1he 4Lh and 3Lh parcelsţ sold Lo Lhlrd parLlesŦ

1he clalm of Cesarlo velasquez LhaL he was adopLed by Lhe Spouses Cornello Aqulno and Leoncla
de Cuzman ls noL supporLed by evldenceŦ

1he CourL flnds plalnLlff SanLlago Meneses credlbleŤ and hls LesLlmonyţ credlble by lLselfŦ SanLlago
Meneses who ls 80 years old LesLlfled sponLaneously ln a clearţ sLralghL forward and convlnclng
mannerŦ

1he verslon of Lhe defendanLs Lo Lhe effecL LhaL spouses Cornello de Cuzman and Leoncla de
Cuzman lefL no properLles cannoL be glven serlous conslderaLlonŦ lL ls lncredlble and unbellevableŦ

Pow dld Lhe spouses Cornello Aqulno and Leoncla de Cuzman supporL and malnLaln Lhemselves lf
Lhey dlsposed of Lhelr valuable properLlesţ Lhe slx (6) parcels of land ln quesLlonţ durlng Lhelr
llfeLlme? uld Lhey really leave no properLles? 1hese quesLlons remalned unansweredŦ

1he defendanLs falled Lo prove Lhelr allegaLlons LhaL Lhe Spouses Cornello Aqulno and Leoncla de
Cuzman dlsposed of Lhelr properLles durlng Lhelr llfeLlmeŦ

uefendanL Lllseo velasquez ls a lawyer and hls coŴdefendanL broLhers are reLlred governmenL
offlclalsŦ

Cn Lhe oLher handţ Lhe plalnLlffs are slmpleţ lnnocenL counLry folks who have noL obLalned
subsLanLlal level of educaLlonŦ

1he CourL belleves and so holds LhaL Lhe defendanLs manlpulaLed Lhe Lransfer unLo Lhemselves all
Lhe properLles of Spouses Cornello Aqulno and Leoncla de CuzmanŤ Lhusţ deprlvlng Lhe plalnLlffs
Lhelr shares ln Lhe lnherlLanceţ Lo Lhelr pre[udlce and damageŦ

lnsofar as Lhe lssue of wheLher or noL parLlLlon prescrlbesţ Lhe courL belleves and so rules LhaL lL
does noLŦ

ƍWPL8LlC8Lţ [udgmenL ls hereby rendered ln favor of Lhe plalnLlffsŦ

lssueť

lŦ WheLher or noL Lhe lnsLanL case ls barred by res [udlcaLa and by Lhe sLaLuLe of llmlLaLlonsŦ

llŦ WheLher or noL Lhe properLles menLloned ln Lhe complalnL form parL of Lhe esLaLe of Lhe
Spouses Cornello Aqulno and Leoncla ue CuzmanŦ

lllŦ WheLher or noL Lhe peLlLloners have acqulred absoluLe and excluslve ownershlp of Lhe
properLles ln quesLlonŦ

lvŦ WheLher or noL prlvaLe respondenL helrs of anaLalla de guzman are legal helrs of spouses
cornello aqulno and leoncla de guzmanŦ

vŦ WheLher or noL parLlLlon ls Lhe proper acLlon ln Lhe lnsLanL caseŦ

Peldť

ÞeLlLloners conLend LhaL publlc respondenL erred when lL held LhaL Lhe lssue of res [udlcaLa was
never ralsed elLher ln Lhe Answer or aL Lhe ÞreŴLrlal such LhaL lL was noL under conslderaLlonŦ We
agree wlLh Lhe peLlLlonerŦ 1he records show LhaL Lhe defense of res [udlcaLa was ralsed ln Lhe
peLlLloners Amended Answer flled before Lhe Lrlal courL more parLlcularly under paragraph 18ţ Lo
wlLť

ƍ18Ŧ bŦ 1he case aL bar ls already barred by 8LS !uulCA1Aţ Lhere havlng been Lhree (3) prevlous
cases lnvolvlng elLher Lhe predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresL of Lhe parLles hereln or of Lhe presenL parLles
Lhemselvesţ Lhe same sub[ecL maLLerţ and Lhe same cause of acLlonţ whlch were all dlsmlssedţ Lhe
lasL dlsmlssal havlng been ordered by Lhls very same Ponorable CourL ln Clvll Case noŦ uŴ8811 on
CcLober 21ţ 1988 for fallure Lo prosecuLe whlch dlsmlssal has Lhe effecL of an ad[udlcaLlon on Lhe
merlLs and Lherefore wlLh pre[udlce as Lhls Ponorable CourL dld noL provlde oLherwlse (SecŦ 3ţ 8ule
17) and Lhe ÞlalnLlffs ln sald caseţ who are Lhe same plalnLlffs ln Lhe presenL case dld noL appeal
from sald order of dlsmlssalŦƍ

Sald Amended Answer was admlLLed by Lhe Lrlal courL ln lLs Crder daLed March 2ţ 199011 and was
one of Lhe lssues sLlpulaLed for resoluLlon ln lLs ÞreŴLrlal Crder daLed May 18ţ 1990Ŧ 1husţ lL was
clear error for respondenL courL Lo conclude LhaL res [udlcaLa was never ralsed ln Lhe lower courLŦ

1he nexL quesLlon ls wheLher res [udlcaLa ls presenL ln Lhe lnsLanL caseŦ We rule ln Lhe afflrmaLlveŦ
ÞeLlLloners ln Lhelr Memorandum esLabllshed LhaL Lhere were Lhree (3) earller cases flled by prlvaLe
respondenLs agalnsL peLlLloners lnvolvlng Lhe same sub[ecL maLLer and lssues as ln Lhe lnsLanL case
whlch were all dlsmlssedţ Lo wlLť

ƍ1he flrsL ComplalnL flled by AnaLalla de Cuzmanţ moLher of prlvaLe respondenL SanLlago Menesesţ
agalnsL 1ranqulllna de Cuzman and hls son Cesarlo velasquezţ dockeLed as Clvll Case noŦ 11378 of
Lhe Lhen CourL of llrsL lnsLance of ÞangaslnanŦ Sald acLlon was dlsmlssed on AugusL 18ţ 1930Ŧ

1hlrLy four (34) years afLerţ or on CcLober 9ţ 1984ţ prlvaLe respondenL SanLlago Meneses flled a
second ComplalnL slmllar Lo Lhe ComplalnL of hls moLher (Clvll Case noŦ 11378) whlch was
dockeLed as Clvll Case noŦ uŴ7384ţ enLlLled ƍPelrs of AnaLalla de Cuzmanţ represenLed by SanLlago
Meneses vsŦ Cesarlo velasquezţ defendanLŦ ln Lhe order of Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal CourLţ 8ranch 41ţ
uagupan ClLyţ daLed May 28ţ 1986ţ Lhls ComplalnL was dlsmlssed for fallure Lo prosecuLe wlLhouL
pre[udlce (LxhŦ ƍ16ƍ)Ŧ

ÞrlvaLe respondenL SanLlago Meneses reflled Lhe ComplalnL allegedly [olned Lhls Llme by hls slbllngs
on CcLober 23ţ 1987Ť whlch was dockeLed as Clvll Case noŦ ÞŴ8811 and enLlLled ƍPelrs of AnaLalla
de Cuzmanţ namelyť SanLlago Menesesţ Apolonlo Menesesţ Andres Menesesţ Luls Menesesţ
lellcldad Menesesţ ÞlalnLlffsţ versus Pelrs of Cesarlo velasquezţ namelyť AnasLacla velasquezţ Sofla
velasquezţ Lllseo velasquezţ !ose velasquezţ Leonora velasquezţ nleves velasquezţ uefendanLsŦƍ
(LxhŦ ƍ17ƍ)Ŧ Cn CcLober 21ţ 1988ţ Lhe CourL a quo dlsmlssed Lhls ComplalnL as followsť ƍlor fallure
Lo prosecuLeţ Lhe case ls hereby dlsmlssed wlLhouL cosLsŦƍ (LxhŦ ƍ18ƍ)Ŧƍ

ÞeLlLloners allegaLlons were never rebuLLed by prlvaLe respondenLs ln Lhelr CommenL as Lhe only
defense ralsed Lhereln was LhaL Lhe appllcaLlon of Lhe prlnclple of res [udlcaLa should noL sacrlflce
[usLlce Lo LechnlcallLy and lL ls wlLhln Lhe power of Lhe courL Lo suspend lLs own rules or Lo excepL a
parLlcular case from lLs operaLlons whenever Lhe purpose of [usLlce requlres lLŦ We have examlned
Lhe Lhlrd complalnL flled by prlvaLe respondenLs on CcLober 23ţ 1987 and compared lL wlLh Lhe
lnsLanL caseţ and we found LhaL Lhe allegaLlons conLalned ln boLh complalnLs are Lhe sameţ and
LhaL Lhere ls ldenLlLy of parLlesţ sub[ecL maLLer and cause of acLlonŦ 1hus Lhe requlslLes of res
[udlcaLa are presenLţ namely (a) Lhe former [udgmenL or order musL be flnalŤ (b) lL musL be a
[udgmenL or order on Lhe merlLsŤ (c) lL musL have been rendered by a courL havlng [urlsdlcLlon over
Lhe sub[ecL maLLer and Lhe parLlesŤ and (d) Lhere musL be beLween Lhe flrsL and Lhe second acLlonsţ
ldenLlLy of parLlesţ of sub[ecL maLLer and of cause of acLlonŦ Slnce Lhe dlsmlssal of Lhe Lhlrd case dld
noL conLaln any condlLlon aL allţ lL has Lhe effecL of an ad[udlcaLlon on Lhe merlLs as lL ls undersLood
Lo be wlLh pre[udlceŦ12 Cn Lhls ground aloneţ Lhe Lrlal courL should have already dlsmlssed Lhls
caseŦ Poweverţ conslderlng LhaL Lhls case had already reached Lhls CourL by way of a peLlLlon for
revlew on cerLlorarlţ lL would be more ln keeplng wlLh subsLanLlal [usLlce lf Lhe conLroversy
beLween Lhe parLles were Lo be resolved on Lhe merlLs raLher Lhan on a procedural LechnlcallLy ln
Lhe llghL of Lhe express mandaLe of Lhe rules LhaL Lhey be ƍllberally consLrued ln order Lo promoLe
Lhelr ob[ecL and Lo asslsL Lhe parLles ln obLalnlng [usLţ speedy and lnexpenslve deLermlnaLlon of
every acLlon and proceedlngŦƍ13

ÞeLlLloners nexL conLend LhaL prlvaLe respondenL SanLlago Meneses falled Lo prove Lhe nulllLy of
Lhe ueeds of Conveyance execuLed by Lhe Aqulno spouses ln favor of peLlLloners !ose and
AnasLacla velasquez and Lhelr predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresL Cesarlo velasquez and Camlla de Cuzman
slnce he falled Lo adduce any evldence Lo supporL hls clalm oLher Lhan hls bare allegaLlons of lLs
nulllLyŦ ÞeLlLloners clalm LhaL Lhey were able Lo show by documenLary evldence LhaL Lhe Aqulno
spouses durlng Lhelr llfeLlme dlsposed of Lhe four parcels of land sub[ecL of Lhe complalnLţ Lo wlLť
(a) LscrlLura de donaLlon propLer nupLlas daLed lebruary 13ţ 1919 ln favor of Lhen fuLure spouses
Cesarlo velasquez and Camlla de Cuzman (peLlLloners parenLs) conveylng Lo Lhem a porLlon of Lhe

second parcel and Lhe enLlreLy of Lhe Lhlrd and slxLh parcels ln Lhe complalnLŤ (b) ueed of donaLlon
lnLer vlvos daLed Aprll 10ţ 1939 conveylng Lhe flrsL parcel ln favor of peLlLloners AnasLacla
velasquez and !ose velasquezŤ (c) LscrlLura de CompravenLa daLed AugusL 23ţ 1924 conveylng
anoLher porLlon of Lhe second parcel ln favor of Cesarlo velasquez and Camlla de Cuzman wlLh a
Þ300 conslderaLlonŤ (d) ueed of Conveyance daLed !uly 14ţ 1939 ln favor of Cesarlo velasquez and
Camlla de Cuzman conveylng Lo Lhem Lhe remalnlng porLlon of Lhe second parcel for a
conslderaLlon of Þ600 and conflrmlng ln Lhe same ueed Lhe LscrlLura de donaLlon propLer nupLlas
and LscrlLura de compravenLa abovemenLlonedŦ ÞeLlLloners clalm LhaL Lhe record ls berefL of any
evldence showlng Lhe lnflrmlLles ln Lhese formldable array of documenLary evldence buL Lhe courLs
below declared Lhelr nulllLy on Lhe basls of Lhe ƍLellLaleƍ sLory of SanLlago MenesesŦ 1hey conLend
LhaL ln glvlng credence Lo Lhe LesLlmony of SanLlago Meneses LhaL all Lhe deeds of conveyances
execuLed by Lhe Aqulno spouses ln favor of Lhe peLlLloners were a nulllLyţ SanLlago would wanL Lo
make lL appear LhaL Lhe spouses Aqulnoţ ln glvlng dowry Lhru escrlLura de donaLlon propLer nupLlas
and donaLlon lnLer vlvosţ were only foollng Lhe lnnocenL youngsLers and Lhen fuLure spouses
Cesarlo velasquez and Camlla de Cuzmanţ and Lhe lnnocenL mlnors donees !ose and AnaLascla
velasquez respecLlvelyŦ

ÞeLlLloners submlsslon ls lmpressed wlLh merlLŦ

AfLer an examlnaLlon of Lhe recordsţ we flnd LhaL Lhere ls no preponderance of evldence adduced
durlng Lhe Lrlal Lo supporL Lhe flndlngs and concluslons of Lhe courLs belowţ whlch error [usLlfles a
revlew of sald evldenceŦ As a ruleţ facLual flndlngs of Lhe lower courLs are flnal and blndlng upon
Lhls CourLŦ 1hls CourL ls noL expecLed nor requlred Lo examlne or conLrasL Lhe oral and
documenLary evldence submlLLed by Lhe parLlesŦ14 Poweverţ alLhough Lhls CourL ls noL a Lrler of
facLsţ lL has Lhe auLhorlLy Lo revlew and reverse Lhe facLual flndlngs of Lhe lower courLs lf lL flnds
LhaL Lhese do noL conform Lo Lhe evldence on recordţ13 ln Lhe lnsLanL caseţ we are noL bound Lo
adhere Lo Lhe general rule slnce boLh courLs clearly falled Lo conslder facLs and clrcumsLances
whlch should have drawn a dlfferenL concluslonŦ16

ln acLlons for parLlLlonţ Lhe courL cannoL properly lssue an order Lo dlvlde Lhe properLy unless lL
flrsL makes a deLermlnaLlon as Lo Lhe exlsLence of coŴownershlpŦ 1he courL musL lnlLlally seLLle Lhe
lssue of ownershlpţ Lhe flrsL sLage ln an acLlon for parLlLlonŦ17 needless Lo sLaLeţ an acLlon for
parLlLlon wlll noL lle lf Lhe clalmanL has no rlghLful lnLeresL over Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ ln facLţ
SecLlon 1 of 8ule 69 requlres Lhe parLy flllng Lhe acLlon Lo sLaLe ln hls complalnL Lhe ƍnaLure and Lhe
exLenL of hls LlLleƍ Lo Lhe real esLaLeŦ unLll and unless Lhe lssue of ownershlp ls deflnlLely resolvedţ
lL would be premaLure Lo effecL a parLlLlon of Lhe properLlesŦ18

We are unable Lo susLaln Lhe flndlngs of Lhe respondenL CourL LhaL lL has been adequaLely shown
LhaL Lhe alleged Lransfers of properLles Lo Lhe peLlLloners predecessorŴlnŴlnLeresL made by Lhe
Aqulno spouses were repudlaLed before Leonclas deaLhŤ Lhus prlvaLe respondenLs are sLlll enLlLled
Lo share ln Lhe sub[ecL properLlesŦ 1here ls no preponderance of evldence Lo supporL Lhe flndlngs
and concluslons of boLh courLsŦ 1he Lrlal courL declared Lhe nulllLy of Lhe donaLlon lnLer vlvos ln
favor of peLlLloners !ose and AnasLacla velasquez over Lhe flrsL parcel of land descrlbed ln Lhe
complalnLţ Lhe deed of sale Lo Cesarlo velasquez and Camlla de Cuzman over Lhe second parcel
and Lhe deed of donaLlon propLer nupLlas over Lhe Lhlrd and slxLh parcels and Lhe sale Lo Lhlrd
parLles of fourLh and flfLh parcels lnsofar as Lhe of Lhese parcels of land are concerned whlch
ƍleglLlmaLely belong Lo plalnLlffŦƍ lL would appear LhaL Lhe Lrlal courL relled solely on Lhe basls of
SanLlago Meneses LesLlmony ƍLhaL ln 1944 when hls aunL Leoncla de Cuzman was sLlll allveţ she
called a conference among Lhemţ Lhe plalnLlffs and Lhelr moLher AnaLallaţ Cesarlo velasquez and
hls moLher 1ranqulllnaţ Lelllng Lhem LhaL all Lhelr properLles whlch are con[ugal ln naLure shall be
dlvlded equally beLween AnaLalla and 1ranqulllna and noL Lo belleve Lhe documenLs purporLedly
slgned by her because she dld noL slgn LhemƍŦ19 ÞrlvaLe respondenL SanLlago Meneses LesLlmony ls
Lo Lhe effecL LhaL Leoncla never slgned any deed of conveyance of Lhe sub[ecL properLles ln favor of
Lhe peLlLlonersŦ Poweverţ SanLlago Meneses LesLlmony was never corroboraLed by any oLher
evldence desplLe hls LesLlmony LhaL Lhe alleged conference was also made ln Lhe presence of Lhlrd
parLlesŦ Moreoverţ lf Lhe alleged conference really Look place ln 1944ţ a year before Leonclas deaLhţ
Leoncla could have execuLed anoLher seL of documenLs revoklng or repudlaLlng whaLever
dlsposlLlons she had earller made Lo show her alleged lnLenLlon of glvlng her properLles ln equal
shares Lo her slsLers AnaLalla and 1ranqulllna de Cuzman buL Lhere was noneŦ 1he Lrlal courL found
Lhe LesLlmony of SanLlago Meneses who ls elghLy years old Lo be credlbleţ and Lhls was afflrmed by
Lhe respondenL courL whlch sLaLed LhaL Lhe maLLer of ascrlblng credlblllLy belongs Lo Lhe Lrlal courLŦ
Poweverţ Lhe facL LhaL a person has reached Lhe ƍLwlllghL of hls llfeƍ ls noL always a guaranLy LhaL
he would Lell Lhe LruLhŦ lL ls also qulLe common LhaL advanced age makes a person menLally dull
and compleLely hazy abouL Lhlngs whlch has appeared Lo hlmţ and aL Llmes lL weakens hls
reslsLance Lo ouLslde lnfluenceŦ20

Cn Lhe oLher handţ peLlLloners were able Lo adduce Lhe unconLroverLed and anclenL documenLary
evldence showlng LhaL durlng Lhe llfeLlme of Lhe Aqulno spouses Lhey had already dlsposed of four
of Lhe slx parcels of land sub[ecL of Lhe complalnL sLarLlng ln Lhe year 1919ţ and Lhe laLesL was ln
1939 as followsť (a) LscrlLura de donaLlon propLer nupLlas daLed lebruary 13ţ 1919 ln favor of Lhe
fuLure spouses Cesarlo velasquez and Camlla de Cuzman (peLlLloners parenLs) conveylng Lo Lhem a
porLlon of Lhe second parcel ln Lhe complalnL and Lhe enLlreLy of Lhe Lhlrd and slxLh parcelsŤ21 (b)
ueed of donaLlon lnLer vlvos daLed Aprll 10ţ 1939 conveylng Lhe flrsL parcel ln favor of peLlLloners
AnasLacla velasquez and !ose velasquezŤ22 (c) LscrlLura de CompravenLa daLed AugusL 23ţ 1924
conveylng anoLher porLlon of Lhe second parcel ln favor of Cesarlo velasquez and Camlla de
Cuzman wlLh a Þ300 conslderaLlonŤ23 (d) ueed of Conveyance daLed !uly 14ţ 1939 ln favor of
Cesarlo velasquez and Camlla de Cuzman conveylng Lo Lhem Lhe remalnlng porLlon of Lhe second
parcel for a conslderaLlon of Þ600 and conflrmlng ln Lhe same ueed Lhe LscrlLura de donaLlon
propLer nupLlas and LscrlLura de compravenLa abovemenLlonedŦ24 lL was reverslble error for Lhe
courL Lo overlook Lhe probaLlve value of Lhese noLarlzed documenLsŦ

A donaLlon as a mode of acqulrlng ownershlp resulLs ln an effecLlve Lransfer of LlLle over Lhe
properLy from Lhe donor Lo Lhe donee23 and Lhe donaLlon ls perfecLed from Lhe momenL Lhe
donor knows of Lhe accepLance by Lhe doneeŦ26 And once a donaLlon ls accepLedţ Lhe donee
becomes Lhe absoluLe owner of Lhe properLy donaLedŦ27 1he donaLlon of Lhe flrsL parcel made by
Lhe Aqulno spouses Lo peLlLloners !ose and AnasLacla velasquez who were Lhen nlneLeen (19) and
Len (10) years old respecLlvely was accepLed Lhrough Lhelr faLher Cesarlo velasquezţ and Lhe
accepLance was lncorporaLed ln Lhe body of Lhe same deed of donaLlon and made parL of lLţ and
was slgned by Lhe donor and Lhe accepLorŦ Legally speaklng Lhere was dellvery and accepLance of
Lhe deedţ and Lhe donaLlon exlsLed perfecLly and lrrevocablyŦ 1he donaLlon lnLer vlvos may be
revoked only for Lhe reasons provlded ln ArLlcles 760ţ 764 and 763 of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ28 1he
donaLlon propLer nupLlas ln favor of Cesarlo velasquez and Camlla de Cuzman over Lhe Lhlrd and
slxLh parcels lncludlng a porLlon of Lhe second parcel became Lhe properLles of Lhe spouses
velasquez slnce 1919Ŧ 1he deed of donaLlon propLer nupLlas can be revoked by Lhe nonŴ

performance of Lhe marrlage and Lhe oLher causes menLloned ln arLlcle 86 of Lhe lamlly CodeŦ29
1he alleged reason for Lhe repudlaLlon of Lhe deedţ lŦeţ LhaL Lhe Aqulno spouses dld noL lnLend Lo
glve away all Lhelr properLles slnce AnaLalla (Leonclas slsLer) had several chlldren Lo supporL ls noL
one of Lhe grounds for revocaLlon of donaLlon elLher lnLer vlvos or propLer nupLlasţ alLhough Lhe
donaLlon mlghL be lnofflclousŦ

1he LscrlLura compravenLa over anoLher porLlon of Lhe second parcel and Lhe ueed of conveyance
daLed !uly 14ţ 1939 ln favor of Cesarlo and Camlla velasquez over Lhe remalnlng porLlon of Lhe
second parcel ls also valldŦ ln facL ln Lhe deed of sale daLed !uly 14ţ 1939ţ Lhe Aqulno spouses
raLlfled and conflrmed Lhe rlghLs and lnLeresLs of Cesarlo velasquez and Camlla de Cuzman
lncludlng Lhe prevlous deeds of conveyance execuLed by Lhe Aqulno spouses over Lhe second
parcel ln Lhe complalnL and such deed of sale became Lhe basls for Lhe lssuance of 1C1 noŦ 13129
ln Lhe names of Cesarlo velasquez and Camlla de Cuzman on !uly 23ţ 1939Ŧ 1he besL proof of Lhe
ownershlp of Lhe land ls Lhe cerLlflcaLe of LlLle30 and lL requlres more Lhan a bare allegaLlon Lo
defeaL Lhe face value of 1C1 noŦ 13129 whlch en[oys a legal presumpLlon of regularlLy of
lssuanceŦ31 noLablyţ durlng Lhe llfeLlme of Cesarlo velasquezţ he enLered lnLo conLracLs of
morLgage and lease over Lhe properLy as annoLaLed aL Lhe back of Lhe cerLlflcaLe of LlLle whlch
clearly esLabllshed LhaL he exerclsed full ownershlp and conLrol over Lhe properLyŦ lL ls qulLe
surprlslng LhaL lL was only afLer more Lhan flfLy years LhaL prlvaLe respondenLs asserLed coŴ
ownershlp clalm over Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ

1he Aqulno spouses had dlsposed Lhe four parcels of land durlng Lhelr llfeLlme and Lhe documenLs
were duly noLarlzed so LhaL Lhese documenLs en[oy Lhe presumpLlon of valldlLyŦ32 Such
presumpLlon has noL been overcome by prlvaLe respondenL SanLlago Meneses wlLh clear and
convlnclng evldenceŦ ln clvll casesţ Lhe parLy havlng Lhe burden of proof musL esLabllsh hls case by a
preponderance of evldenceŦ33 ÞeLlLloners were able Lo esLabllsh LhaL Lhese four parcels of land
were valldly conveyed Lo Lhem by Lhe Aqulno spouses hence Lhey no longer formed parL of Lhe
con[ugal properLles of Lhe spouses aL Lhe Llme of Lhelr deaLhsŦ As regards Lhe fourLh and flfLh
parcelsţ peLlLloners alleged LhaL Lhese were also conveyed Lo Lhlrd persons and Lhey do noL clalm
any rlghL LhereLoŦ

ln vlew of Lhe foregolngţ we conclude LhaL Lhls acLlon of parLlLlon cannoL be malnLalnedŦ 1he
properLles soughL Lo be parLlLloned by prlvaLe respondenLs have already been dellvered Lo
peLlLloners and Lherefore no longer parL of Lhe heredlLary esLaLe whlch could be parLlLlonedŦ AfLer
flndlng LhaL no coŴownershlp exlsLs beLween prlvaLe respondenLs and peLlLlonersţ we flnd no
reason Lo dlscuss Lhe oLher argumenLs ralsed by Lhe peLlLloners ln supporL of Lhelr peLlLlonŦ

WPL8LlC8Lţ Lhe peLlLlon ls C8An1LuŦ 1he quesLloned declslon and resoluLlon of respondenL CourL
of Appeals as well as Lhe declslon of Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal CourL of uagupan ClLy are SL1 ASluLŦ 1he
complalnL ln Lhe Lrlal courL agalnsL peLlLloner ls C8uL8Lu ulSMlSSLuŦ

Monteroso vŦ CA
Gk # 10S608ţ AprŦ 30ţ 2008
SS3 SCkA 66
lacLs
When uon lablan dled ln 1948ţ he lefL behlnd as parL of hls esLaLe 12 parcels of landŦ Sub[ecL
properLles under dlspuLe beLween Soledad Cagampang and her slbllngs lnvolved 6 loLs deslgnaLed
as l1ţl2ţl3ţl3ţl7 and l8Ŧ Soledad alleged LhaL she owned Lhese properLles by acqulslLlon Lhrough
deeds of absoluLe sale excuLed by her faLher (uon lablan) and her on 1939Ŧ Poweverţ evldence are
presenLed by her slbllngs on Lhe lnvalldlLy of sald sale such asť
uon lablan afLer Lhe execuLlon of Lhe ueed never rellnqulshed possesslon over Lhese properLlesŦ
1herebyţ parLles never lnLended Lo be boundŦ
1haL Lhere ls no evldence Lo supporL LhaL uon lablan recelved valuable conslderaLlon ln exchange
of hls properLlesŦ
1C1s are amended [udlclallyţ LhaL only Lhe name of Soledad appear ln Lhe 1C1's and form parL of
her paraphernal properLyŦ (sarlllng wonder langť slguro nalslp nl uon lablanţ kung nakapangalan
lang sa anak nya yung properLy hlndl yun mahahabol ng manugang)
8ased from Lhe aboveţ 81C declded for Lhe lnvalldlLy of sald sale whlch Lhe CA afflrmedŦ Pence Lhls
caseŦ

lssueť

Þrovlded LhaL sald sale ls lnvalldţ does Lhls make 1lrso and hls slbllng coŴowners over Lhese
properLlesŦ

lf yesţ ls lL faLal Lo Lhe flled case of ÞarLlLlon by 1lrso and hls slbllngs hls omlsslon Lo expressly
lndlcaLe Lhe facL LhaL Lhey are coŴownersŦ

Peldť
8elng a compulsory helr of uon lablanţ 1lrso has Lhe rlghL Lo compel parLlLlon of Lhe properLles
comprlslng Lhe lnLesLaLe esLaLe of uon lablan as a measure Lo geL hls heredlLary shareŦ Pls rlghL as
an helr Lo a share of Lhe lnherlLance covers all Lhe properLles comprlslng Lhe lnLesLaLe esLaLe of uon
lablan aL Lhe momenL of hls deaLh (1948)Ŧ unLll Lhenţ before parLlLlon and evenLual dlsLrlbuLlon of
uon lablan's lnLesLaLe esLaLeţ a reglme of coŴownershlp among Lhe compulsory helrs exlsLed over
Lhe undlvlded esLaLe of uon lablanŦ And as a coŴownerţ hls rlghL ls lmprescrlpLlble excepL when he
expressly repudlaLes hls shareŦ And Soledadţ by lnvoklng as defense of prescrlpLlon over 1lrso and
Lhelr oLher slbllngsţ Lherefore admlLLed LhaL coŴownershlp exlsLedŦ

8esolvlng Lhe lssue regardlng Lhe exlsLence of coŴownershlp among Lhe helrsţ wlll 1lrso eL al can
avall Lhe remedy of ÞarLlLlonţ when coŴownershlp ls noL properly allegedŦ

SC held ?esŦ Whlle 1lrso may noL have expressly pleaded Lhe Lheory of coŴownershlpţ hls demand
fromţ and acL of lnlLlaLlng ÞarLlLlon necessarlly lmplles LhaL he was asserLlng hls rlghL as coŴowner
of Lhe properLles un[usLly wlLhheld by Lhe Cagampang spouses and LhaL he ls a coŴowner of all sald
properLles Lo Lhe exLenL of hls legal share or leglLlme LhereonŦ An acLlon for parLlLlon ls aL once an
acLlon for declaraLlon of coŴownershlp and for segregaLlon and conveyance of a deLermlnaLe
porLlon of Lhe properLles lnvolvedŦ

Sor|ente vsŦ Concepc|on
Gk# 160239] NovŦ 2Sţ 2009
60S SCkA 31S
lacLsť ln 1978 Arsenlo Concepclonţ husband of nenlLaţ acqulred Lhe sub[ecL loL and LoleraLed Lhe
occupancy of SorlenLe for free and on Lemporary baslsŦ AfLer Arsenlo dled ln 1989ţ hls famlly
lnlLlaLed Lo develop Lhe loL buL SorlenLe refused Lo vacaLe Lhe properLyŦ ln 2000ţ afLer LllzabeLhţ

daughLer of nenlLa and SorlenLe falled Lo meeL seLLlemenLţ a ComplalnL for unlawful deLalner was
flled ln Me1C and prayed for monLhly renL and damagesŦ AfLer Lrlalţ sald lower courL declded ln
favor of ConcepclonŦ SorlenLe appealed Lo 81C on Lhe groundţ among oLhersţ LhaL Concepclon
have no legal capaclLy Lo sue belng noL Lhe reglsLered owner appearlng ln Lhe loL's 1C1Ŧ 81C upheld
Me1C and so dld Lhe CAŦ Pence Lhls caseŦ

lssueť
WheLher or noL Lhe wlfe of Lhe reglsLered ownerţ whose name dld noL appear ln Lhe sub[ecL loL's
1C1 have Lhe capaclLy Lo sueŦ

Peld
8y all means of courseŦ nenlLa as Lhe successorŴlnŴlnLeresL of her husband Arsenlo Concepclon and
coŴowner of Lhe sub[ecL properLyţ ls enLlLled Lo prosecuLe Lhe e[ecLmenL case noL only ln a
represenLaLlve capaclLyţ buL as a real parLyŴlnŴlnLeresLŦ ArL 487 of CC sLaLes ŧ"Any one of Lhe coŴ
owners may brlng an acLlon ln e[ecLmenL"Ŧ

nu|st vŦ Þk 8u||ders
Gk # 1S6364ţ SeptŦ 2Sţ 2008
S66 SCkA 333
lacLs
PulsL flled a MoLlon for ÞarLlal 8econslderaLlon when he was ordered Lo reLurn Lo respondenL Lhe
2Ŧ12 M ln excess of Lhe proceeds of Lhe aucLlon sale dellvered Lo hlmŦ Pe conLends LhaL Lhe
ConLracL Lo Sell beLween hlm and Lhe 8espondenL does noL lnvolve land buL merely shareholdlng
over Lhe Condomlnlum CorporaLlon LhaL acLually owned Lhe loLsŦ 8y Lhls seL upţ Lhere ls no
vlolaLlon on ConsLlLuLlonal prohlblLlon of forelgners ownlng land over our CounLryŦ

lssue
WheLher or noL a forelgner can acqulre condomlnlum unlLţ wlLh lLs undlvlded lnLeresL over Lhe
common properLles of Lhe Condomlnlum CorporaLlon wlLhouL vlolaLlng Lhe prohlblLlon of
lorelgners ownlng real properLles ln Lhe ÞhlllpplnesŦ

Peld
?esţ alLhough lL ls prohlblLed for forelgners Lo own real properLy ln Lhe Þhllllplnesţ Lhls ls noL
wlLhouL excepLlonŦ Cne of whlch ls Lhe Condomlnlum AcL 8A 4726 where forelgners are allowed Lo
own a unlLţ and Lhereby havlng an undlvlded rlghL over Lhe common areas held by Lhe
Condomlnlum CorporaLlonŦ
1he law provldes LhaL no condomlnlum unlL can be sold wlLhouL aL Lhe same Llme selllng Lhe
correspondlng amounL of rlghLsţ shares or oLher lnLeresLs ln Lhe condomlnlum corporaLlonţ and no
one can buy shares ln a condomlnlum corporaLlon wlLhouL aL Lhe same Llme buylng a condomlnlum
unlLŦ lL expressly allows forelgners Lo acqulre condomlnlum unlLs and shares ln condomlnlum
corporaLlon up Lo noL more Lhan 40Ʒ of Lhe LoLal ouLsLandlng caplLal sLock of a llllplnoŴowned or
ConLrolled CorporaLlonŦ under Lhls seL upţ Lhe ownershlp of Lhe land ls legally separaLed from Lhe
unlL lLselfŦ 1he land ls owned by a Condomlnlum CorporaLlon and Lhe unlL owner ls slmply a
member ln Lhls Condomlnlum CorporaLlonŦ As long as 60Ʒ of Lhe members of Lhls Condo Corp are
llllplnoŦ

@|t|e VŦ Þossess|on


Chapter 1ŦÞossess|on and the k|nds @hereof (ArtsŦ S23ŴS30)
ChapterŦ2 Acqu|s|t|on of Þossess|on (ArtsŦ
S31ŴS38)


8uny| vŦ Iactor
Gk # 172S47ţ IunŦ 30ţ 2009
S91 SCkA 3S0
lacLs
ConsLanLlno and Maura lacLorţ husband and wlfeţ had been ln acLualţ conLlnuousţ peacefulţ publlcţ
adverse and excluslve possesslon and occupaLlon of Lhe sub[ecL 18 hecLare of land ln Las Þlnas
before 1906Ŧ ln 1973ţ upon peLlLlonţ Lhelr chlldren granLed Crlglnal 8eglsLraLlon and ConflrmaLlon
of lmperfecL 1lLle Lhus maklng Lhe 7 chllren coŴowners of Lhe sub[ecL landŦ Lnrlque as one of Lhe 7
chlldrenţ lnsLead of Laklng hls share over Lhe proceeds of Lhe land when lL was soldţ by agreemenL
wlLh hls slbllngsţ he lnsLead Lake Lhe lacLor Compound as hls shareŦ
Pe Lhen consLrucLed several houses over Lhe properLy lncludlng Lhe resL house under dlspuLeŦ
Þrecy 8unyl and Mlla 8unylţ peLlLlonersţ were LenanLs lnslde Lhe compound slnce 1999Ŧ When
Lnrlque dledţ admlnlsLraLlon on Lhe properLy was enLrusLed Lo Clorlaţ hls eldesL chlldŦ She and her
famlly (husband and son) llved ln 1agulg buL oversaw Lhe properLy and vlslL lL from Llme Lo Llme Lo
collecL renLal paymenLsŦ When she dledţ her daughLerţ le lacLor Look over Lhe admlnlsLraLlon as a
coŴownerŦ She also allowed 8uben Labao marrled Lo Þrecy Lo sLay for free on Lhe properLyŦ When
he dledţ she asserLed LhaL Lhe properLy was owned by 8uben Labao and quesLloned le's
ownershlpŦ 81C ruled ln favor of le lacLorŦ CA afflrmed Lhe declslon hence Lhls caseŦ

lssue
WheLher or noL le lacLor have beLLer rlghL over Lhe properLy who vlslLs lL from Llme Llme over
8unyl who acLually resldlng ln Lhe properLyŦ

Peld
le lacLor have Lhe beLLer rlghLŦ 1he facL of her resldence somewhere elseţ by lLselfţ does noL resulL
ln loss of possesslon of Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ 1he law does noL requlre one ln possesslon of a house
Lo reslde ln Lhe house Lo malnLaln hls possesslonŦ27 lorţ agalnţ possesslon ln Lhe eyes of Lhe law
does noL mean LhaL a man has Lo have hls feeL on every square meLer of Lhe ground before he ls
deemed ln possesslonŦ28 1here ls no cogenL reason Lo devlaLe from Lhls docLrlneŦ 8espondenL's
rlghL Lo Lhe properLy was vesLed ln her along wlLh her slbllngs from Lhe momenL of Lhelr faLher's
deaLhŦ23 As helrţ respondenL had Lhe rlghL Lo Lhe possesslon of Lhe properLyţ whlch ls one of Lhe
aLLrlbuLes of ownershlpŦ Such rlghLs are enforced and proLecLed from encroachmenLs made or
aLLempLed before Lhe [udlclal declaraLlon slnce respondenL acqulred heredlLary rlghLs even before
[udlclal declaraLlon ln LesLaLe or lnLesLaLe proceedlngsŦ

Cng vŦ kepub||c
Gk # 17S746ţ MarŦ12ţ 2008
S48 SCkA 160

lacLsť

8elow ls Lhe hlsLory of 1ransfer of Cwnershlp of Lhe 374 sqm loL slLuaLed ln 8rgy Anolld Mangaldan
Þangaslnanť
1971Ŵ AgusLln Cacho and Lufroslnla 8auLlsLa owned sub[ecL landŦ 1hey have duly pald 1ax
ueclaraLlon over Lhe properLlesŦ
1979Ŵ Sold Lo CynLhlaţ AgusLln !rŦţ !asmlnţ Cmlr and LauroŦ
1997Ŵ Sold Lo 1eofllo Abellera and Abella Sarmen
1998Ŵ Sold Lo 1ony 8auLlsLa and Allcla vlllamllŦ
1999Ŵ Sold Lo Cng and hls broLhersŦ As such Lhey flled an AppllcaLlon for 8eglsLraLlon of 1lLle over
sub[ecL loLŦ 1hey alleged LhaL Lhey are Lhe coŴowners of Lhe sald loL and LhaL lL ls Lhelr Lhelr
excluslve properLyŦ 1haL Lhe properLy ls unoccupledţ and LhaL Lhelr predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresL have
been ln openţ conLlnuous and peaceful possesslon of Lhe sub[ecL loL ln Lhe concepL of owners for
more Lhan 30 yearsŦ

Þroved LhaL sub[ecL properLy ls allenable and dlsposable land of Lhe publlc domaln byť
1927Ŵ 8ureau of Lands lncluded sald land as wlLhln allenable and dlsposable zone
1999Ŵ uLn8 and naLural 8esources CommunlLy LnvlronmenL and naLural 8esources CfflceŦ
81C ruled ln favor of reglsLraLlonţ whlch Lhe CA reversedŦ Pence Lhls caseŦ

lssueť

WheLher or noL Cng and hls coŴowners can reglsLer sald properLy under Lhelr name desplLe lL belng
lncluded ln publlc domalnŦ

Peldť

noŦ As a general ruleţ properLles parL of publlc domaln cannoL be prlvaLely approprlaLed excepL
when Lhe appllcanLs or Lhelr predecessors ŴlnŴlnLeresL have been ln openţ conLlnuousţ excluslve and
noLorlous possesslon and occupaLlon of Lhe sub[ecL log slnce !une 12ţ 1943 or earller as requlred by
SecLlon 48(b) of CommonwealLh AcL noŦ 141ţ as amended by Þu 1073Ŧ ÞeLlLloners falled Lo prove
LhaL Lhey and Lhelr predecessor ln lnLeresL CCCuÞ? sad properLlesŦ Þossesslon alone ls noL
sufflclenL Lo acqulre LlLle Lo allenable lands of Lhe publlc domaln because Lhe law requlres
possesslon Anu occupaLlonŦ 1he law speaks of possesslon and occupaLlonŦ Slnce Lhese words are
separaLed by Lhe con[uncLlon andţ Lhe clear lnLenLlon of Lhe law ls noL Lo make one synonymous
wlLh Lhe oLherŦ Þossesslon ls broader Lhan occupaLlon because lL lncludes consLrucLlve possesslonŦ
Whenţ Lherefore Lhe law adds Lhe word occupaLlonţ lL seeks Lo dellmlL Lhe all encompasslng effecL
of consLrucLlve possesslonŦ 1aken LogeLher wlLh Lhe wordsţ openţ conLlnuousţ excluslve and
noLorlousţ Lhe word occupaLlon serves Lo hlghllghL Lhe facL LhaL for an appllcanL Lo quallfyţ hls
possesslon musL noL be a mere flcLlonŦ AcLual possesslon of a land conslsLs ln Lhe manlfesLaLlon of
acLs of domlnlon over lL of such a naLure as a parLy would naLurally exerclse over hls own properLyŦ

Þeop|e vŦ Þeñaf|or|da
Gk # 17S604ţ AprŦ 10ţ 2008
SS1 SCkA 111

lAC1Sť
SÞC3 vlcenLe CompeLenLe narraLed LhaL ln hls capaclLy as chlef of Lhe lnvesLlgaLlon and
CperaLlon ulvlslon of Lhe Þhlllpplne naLlonal Þollce (ÞnÞ) sLaLlon ln 1lgaonţ Camarlnes Surţ LhaL he
recelved a Llp from an asseL LhaL a bundle of marl[uana was belng LransporLed by appellanL Lo
PuyonŴhuyon from anoLher barangay ln 1lgaonţ Camarlnes SurŦ Ma[or uomlngo AgravanLe
(AgravanLe)ţ chlef of pollce of 1lgaonţ Lhen organlzed a Leam composed of CompeLenLe as Leam
leaderŤ Lhe Leam boarded Lhe pollce moblle car and proceeded Lo SlLlo nasulan ln 8arangay PuyonŴ
huyonŦ 1hey overLook appellanL who was on a blcycleŦ 1he pollce offlcers flagged appellanL down
and found marl[uana wrapped ln a cellophane and newspaper LogeLher wlLh oLher grocery lLemsŦ
1he amounL of Þ1330Ŧ00 was also found ln appellanL's possesslonŦ 1he pollce offlcers conflscaLed
Lhese lLems and Look phoLographs LhereofŦ
1he Lrlal courL found appellanL Salvador Þenaflorlda y Clldoro gullLy of LransporLlng marl[uana and
senLenced hlm Lo suffer Lhe penalLy of recluslon perpeLua and Lo pay a flne of one mllllon pesosŦ
lSSuLť WheLher or noL appellanL had freely and consclously possessed Lhe marl[uana?
PLLuť ?esŦappelanL freely and consclously possessed Lhe marl[uanaŦ
ln crlmlnal cases lnvolvlng prohlblLed drugsţ Lhere can be no convlcLlon unless Lhe prosecuLlon
shows LhaL Lhe accused knowlngly possessed Lhe prohlblLed arLlcles ln hls personţ or LhaL anlmus
possldendl ls shown Lo be presenL LogeLher wlLh hls possesslon or conLrol of such arLlcleŦ Anlmus
possldendl ls only prlma facleŦ lL ls sub[ecL Lo conLrary proof and may be rebuLLed by evldence LhaL
Lhe accused dld noL ln facL exerclse power and conLrol over Lhe Lhlng ln quesLlonţ and dld noL
lnLend Lo do soŦ 1he burden of evldence ls Lhus shlfLed Lo Lhe possessor Lo explaln absence of
anlmus possldendlŦ
knowledge refers Lo a menLal sLaLe of awareness of a facLŦ Slnce courLs cannoL peneLraLe Lhe mlnd
of an accused and LhereafLer sLaLe lLs percepLlons wlLh cerLalnLyţ resorL Lo oLher evldence ls
necessaryŦ Anlmus possldendlţ as a sLaLe of mlndţ may be deLermlned on a caseŴLoŴcase basls by
Laklng lnLo conslderaLlon Lhe prlor or conLemporaneous acLs of Lhe accusedţ as well as Lhe
surroundlng clrcumsLancesŦ lLs exlsLence may and usually musL be lnferred from Lhe aLLendanL
evenLs ln each parLlcular caseŦ
AppellanL falled Lo saLlsfacLorlly esLabllsh hls lack of knowledge of possesslon ln Lhe lnsLanL caseŦ
llrsLţ Lhe marl[uana was found ln Lhe blcycle he hlmself was drlvlngŦ Secondţ Lhe pollce offlcers flrsL
readlly saw ln plaln vlew Lhe edges of Lhe marl[uana leaves [uLLlng ouL of Lhe packageŦ 1hlrdţ lL ls
lncredulous LhaL appellanL dld noL ask Cblas whaL Lhe package conLalned when Lhe laLLer requesLed
hlm Lo do Lhe dellvery errand slnce Lhe package was wrapped ln a newspaper and welghed almosL
one kllogramŦ

ChuaŴ8ruce vŦ CA
Gk # 109S9Sţ AprŦ 27ţ 2000
331 SCkA 1

lAC1Sť
Cn AugusL 16ţ 1983ţ 8amon 8ocamoraţ Lhe Manager (of MeLropollLan 8ank and 1rusL
Companyţ Calapan 8ranchţ CrlenLal Mlndoro) requesLed lrucLuoso Þenaflorţ AsslsLanL Cashlerţ Lo
conducL a physlcal bundle counL of Lhe cash lnslde Lhe vaulLţ whlch should LoLal Þ4ţ000ţ000Ŧ00ţ
more or lessŦ uurlng Lhls lnlLlal cash counLţ Lhey dlscovered a shorLage of flfLeen bundles of Cne
Pundred Þesos denomlnaLed bllls LoLalllng Þ130ţ000Ŧ00Ŧ 1he Cne Pundred Þeso bllls acLually
counLed was Þ3ţ830ţ000Ŧ00 as agalnsL Lhe balance of Þ4ţ000ţ000Ŧ00 ln Lhe Cash ln vaulL (Clv)
Summary SheeLţ or a LoLal shorLage of Þ130ţ000Ŧ00Ŧ 1he nexL dayţ Lo deLermlne lf Lhere was

acLually a shorLageţ a reŴverlflcaLlon of Lhe records and documenLs of Lhe LransacLlons ln Lhe bank
was conducLedŦ 1here was sLlll a shorLage of Þ130ţ000Ŧ00Ŧ
1he bank lnlLlaLed lnvesLlgaLlons LoLalllng four (4) ln allŦ 1he flrsL was by 8amon 8ocamoraţ Lhe
ManagerŦ 1he second was by Lhe bank's lnLernal audlLors headed by AnLonlo 8aLungbakalŦ 1henţ
Lhe bank's ueparLmenL of lnLernal Affalrs conducLed an lndependenL lnvesLlgaLlonŦ 1hereafLerţ Lhe
naLlonal 8ureau of lnvesLlgaLlon (n8l) came ln Lo lnvesLlgaLeŦ All of Lhese lnvesLlgaLlons concluded
LhaL Lhere was a shorLage of Þ130ţ000Ŧ00ţ and Lhe person prlmarlly responslble was Lhe bank's
Cash CusLodlanţ CrlsLeLa ChuaŴ8urceţ Lhe hereln accusedŦ !ksmCn november 4ţ 1983ţ unable Lo
saLlsfacLorlly explaln Lhe shorLage of Þ130ţ000Ŧ00ţ Lhe accused's servlce wlLh Lhe bank was
LermlnaLedŦ
1o recover Lhe mlsslng amounLţ MeLropollLan 8ank and 1rusL Company (MeLrobank) flled a Clvll
Case for Sum of Money and uamages wlLh Þrellmlnary ALLachmenL and CarnlshmenL dockeLed as
Clvll Case noŦ 8Ŵ3733 agalnsL peLlLloner and her husbandţ AnLonlo 8urceŦ Lsm
Þrlor Lo Lhe flllng of Lhe Answerţ Lhe followlng lnformaLlon for LsLafa was flled agalnsL peLlLloner
1he Lrlal courL found Lhe appelanL gullLy as chargedţ applelannL seasonably flled hls appealŦ
lSSuLť WheLher or noL Lhe appelanL was gullLy or noLŦ
PLLuť noŦ yhe appalenL was noL gullLyŦ
1he elemenLs of esLafa Lhrough converslon or mlsapproprlaLlon under ArLŦ 313 (1) (b) of
Lhe 8evlsed Þenal Code areť
(1) LhaL personal properLy ls recelved ln LrusLţ on commlsslonţ for admlnlsLraLlon or under any
oLher clrcumsLance lnvolvlng Lhe duLy Lo make dellvery of or Lo reLurn Lhe sameţ even Lhough Lhe
obllgaLlon ls guaranLeed by a bondŤ
(2) LhaL Lhere ls converslon or dlverslon of such properLy by Lhe person who has so recelved lL or a
denlal on hls parL LhaL he recelved lLŤ
(3) LhaL such converslonţ dlverslon or denlal ls Lo Lhe ln[ury of anoLher and
(4) LhaL Lhere be demand for Lhe reLurn of Lhe properLyŦ
Pave Lhe foregolng elemenLs been meL ln Lhe case aL bar? We flnd Lhe flrsL elemenL absenLŦ When
Lhe moneyţ goodsţ or any oLher personal properLy ls recelved by Lhe offender from Lhe offended
parLy (1) ln LrusL or (2) on commlsslon or (3) for admlnlsLraLlonţ Lhe offender acqulres boLh maLerlal
or physlcal possesslon and [urldlcal possesslon of Lhe Lhlng recelvedŦ !urldlcal possesslon means a
possesslon whlch glves Lhe Lransferee a rlghL over Lhe Lhlng whlch Lhe Lransferee may seL up even
agalnsL Lhe ownerŦ ln Lhls caseţ peLlLloner was a cash cusLodlan who was prlmarlly responslble for
Lhe cashŴlnŴvaulLŦ Per possesslon of Lhe cash belonglng Lo Lhe bank ls akln Lo LhaL of a bank Lellerţ
boLh belng mere bank employeesŦ Calrky
ÞeLlLloner hereln belng a mere cash cusLodlan had no [urldlcal possesslon over Lhe mlsslng fundsŦ
Penceţ Lhe elemenL of [urldlcal possesslon belng absenLţ peLlLloner cannoL be convlcLed of Lhe
crlme of esLafa under ArLlcle 313ţ noŦ 1 (b) of Lhe 8evlsed Þenal Code

Dac|ag vŦ De| kosar|o
Gk # 1S9S78ţ Ieb 18ţ 2009
S79 SCkA SS6

lAC1Sť 1hls ls a MoLlon for 8econslderaLlon on Lhe ueclslon daLed !uly 28ţ 2008 where Lhe
Supreme CourL afflrmed Lhe ueclslon daLed CcLober 17ţ 2001 and Lhe 8esoluLlon daLed AugusL 7ţ
2003 of Lhe CourL of Appeals (CA) ln CAŴCŦ8Ŧ Cv noŦ 48498Ŧ8ecords show LhaL whlle Lhe land was
reglsLered ln Lhe name of peLlLloner 8ogella ln 1984ţ respondenLs' complalnL for reconveyance was
flled ln 1991ţ whlch was wlLhln Lhe 10Ŵyear prescrlpLlve perlodŦ
he Supreme CourL ruled LhaL slnce peLlLloners boughL Lhe properLy when lL was sLlll an unreglsLered
landţ Lhe defense of havlng purchased Lhe properLy ln good falLh ls unavalllng ŦlL afflrmed Lhe
8eglonal 1rlal CourL (81C) ln flndlng LhaL peLlLloners should pay respondenLs Lhelr correspondlng
share ln Lhe produce of Lhe sub[ecL land from Lhe Llme Lhey were deprlved Lhereof unLll Lhe
possesslon ls resLored Lo LhemŦ
ln Lhelr MoLlon for 8econslderaLlonţ peLlLloners conLend LhaL Lhe 10Ŵyear perlod for reconveyance
ls appllcable lf Lhe acLlon ls based on an lmplled or a consLrucLlve LrusLŤ LhaL slnce respondenLsƌ
acLlon for reconveyance was based on fraudţ Lhe acLlon musL be flled wlLhln four years from Lhe
dlscovery of Lhe fraudŦ
lSSuLť WheLher or noL Lhe peLlLloners are possessor ln good falLhŦ
PLLuť ?es Lhe peLlLloners are possessor ln good falLhŦ
ArLlcle 328 of Lhe Clvll Code provldes LhaL possesslon acqulred ln good falLh does noL
lose Lhls characLerţ excepL ln a case and from Lhe momenL facLs exlsL whlch show LhaL Lhe
possessor ls noL unaware LhaL he possesses Lhe Lhlng lmproperly or wrongfullyŦ Þossesslon ln good
falLh ceases from Lhe momenL defecLs ln Lhe LlLle are made known Lo Lhe possessorsţ by exLraneous
evldence or by sulL for recovery of Lhe properLy by Lhe Lrue ownerŦ WhaLever may be Lhe cause or
Lhe facL from whlch lL can be deduced LhaL Lhe possessor has knowledge of Lhe defecLs of hls LlLle
or mode of acqulslLlonţ lL musL be consldered sufflclenL Lo show bad falLhŦ Such lnLerrupLlon Lakes
place upon servlce of summonsŦ
ArLlcle 344 of Lhe same Code provldes LhaL a possessor ln good falLh ls enLlLled Lo Lhe frulLs only so
long as hls possesslon ls noL legally lnLerrupLedŦ 8ecords show LhaL peLlLloners recelved a
summons LogeLher wlLh respondenLsƌ complalnL on AugusL 3ţ 1991Ť Lhusţ peLlLlonersƌ good falLh
ceased on Lhe day Lhey recelved Lhe summonsŦ ConsequenLlyţ peLlLloners should pay respondenLs
10 cavans of palay per annum beglnnlng AugusL 3ţ 1991 lnsLead of 1984Ŧ


Chapter 3ŦLffects of Þossess|on (ArtsŦ S39ŴS61)

Laurora vŦ Ster||ng @echpark
Gk # 14681Sţ AprŦ 9ţ 2003
401 SCkA 181

lAC1Sť ln a żCŽomplalnL for lorclble LnLry wlLh uamages flled on 27 SepLember 1997 before Lhe
llfLh Munlclpal ClrculL 1rlal CourL of Carmona and CenŦ Marlano Alvarezţ plalnLlffs Lherelnţ x x x
Þedro Laurora and Leonora Laurora żhereln peLlLlonersŽ alleged LhaL Lhey żwereŽ Lhe owners of LoL
1313ŴCţ SWuŴ40763 of Lhe ?apLlnchay LsLaLe wlLh an area of 39ţ771 sqŦ meLers and locaLed ln
Carmonaţ CavlLeŦ Þedro Laurora planLed Lrees and has possessed Lhe land up Lo Lhe presenLŦ Cn
13 SepLember 1997ţ żrespondenLsŽ SLerllng 1echnopark lll and SŦÞŦ ÞroperLlesţ lncŦ x x x Lhrough
Lhelr LngrŦ 8ernle CaLchallan bulldozed and uprooLed Lhe Lrees and planLsţ and wlLh Lhe use of
armed men and by means of LhreaLs and lnLlmldaLlonţ succeeded ln forclbly e[ecLlng żpeLlLlonersŽŦ
As a resulL of Lhelr dlspossesslonţ żpeLlLlonersŽ suffered acLual damages ln Lhe amounL of
Þ3ţ000ţ000Ŧ00 and Þ10ţ000Ŧ00 as aLLorney's feesŦ
ºAfLer summary proceedlngs ln Lhe MC1Cţ x x xţ a [udgmenL was rendered dlsmlsslng Lhe
complalnLŦ 1he case was elevaLed Lo Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal CourLŦ ln due courseţ Lhe sald courL
rendered a declslon reverslng Lhe MC1C [udgmenLŦ x x x"
1he CA reversed Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal CourL (81C) and relnsLaLed Lhe Crder of dlsmlssal lssued by Lhe
Munlclpal ClrculL 1rlal CourL (MC1C)Ŧ lL held LhaL Lhere was no evldence Lo supporL Lhe clalm of

peLlLloners Lo Lhe prlor physlcal possesslon of Lhe properLyŦ 1he evldence allegedly showed LhaL
Lhey had already sold Lhe land wlLh Lhe approval of Lhe ueparLmenL of Agrarlan 8eform (uA8)Ŧ
Accordlnglyţ Lhelr subsequenL enLry lnLo and possesslon of Lhe land consLlLuLed plaln usurpaLlonţ
whlch could noL be Lhe source of any rlghL Lo occupy lLŦ 8elng planLers ln bad falLhţ Lhey had no
rlghL Lo be relmbursed for lmprovemenLs on Lhe landţ ln accordance wlLh ArLlcle 449 of Lhe new
Clvll CodeŦ
lSSuLť
uoes Lhe respondenL have a valld and legal rlghL Lo forclbly e[ecL peLlLloners from Lhe premlses
desplLe Lhelr reslsLance and ob[ecLlonţ Lhrough Lhe use of armżedŽ men and by bulldozlngţ cuLLlngţ
and desLroylng Lrees and planLs planLed by peLlLlonersţ wlLhouL courL orderţ Lo Lhe damage and
pre[udlce of Lhe laLLerŦ"
PLLuť noŦ Lhey do noLŦ
1he only lssue ln forclble enLry cases ls Lhe physlcal or maLerlal possesslon of real properLy ŴŴ
possesslon de facLoţ noL possesslon de [ureŦ Cnly prlor physlcal possesslonţ noL LlLleţ ls Lhe lssueŦ lf
ownershlp ls ralsed ln Lhe pleadlngsţ Lhe courL may pass upon such quesLlonţ buL only Lo deLermlne
Lhe quesLlon of possesslonŦ
We sLress LhaL Lhe lssue of ownershlp ln e[ecLmenL cases ls Lo be resolved only when lL ls lnLlmaLely
lnLerLwlned wlLh Lhe lssue of possesslonţ Lo such an exLenL LhaL Lhe quesLlon of who had prlor
possesslon cannoL be deLermlned wlLhouL rullng on Lhe quesLlon of who Lhe owner of Lhe land lsŦ
no such lnLerLwlnemenL has been shown ln Lhe case before usŦ Slnce respondenLs' clalm of
ownershlp ls noL belng made ln order Lo prove prlor possesslonţ Lhe e[ecLmenL courL cannoL
lnLrude or dwell upon Lhe lssue of ownershlpŦCranLlng arguendo LhaL peLlLloners lllegally enLered
lnLo and occupled Lhe properLy ln quesLlonţ respondenLs had no rlghL Lo Lake Lhe law lnLo Lhelr own
hands and summarlly or forclbly e[ecL Lhe occupanLs LherefromŦ
verllyţ even lf peLlLloners were mere usurpers of Lhe land owned by respondenLsţ sLlll Lhey are
enLlLled Lo remaln on lL unLll Lhey are lawfully e[ecLed LherefromŦ under approprlaLe
clrcumsLancesţ respondenLs may flleţ oLher Lhan an e[ecLmenL sulLţ an acclon publlclana ŴŴ a plenary
acLlon lnLended Lo recover Lhe beLLer rlghL Lo possessŤ or an acclon relvlndlcaLorla ŴŴ an acLlon Lo
recover ownershlp of real properLyŦ

LDCA Þub|Ŧ vŦ Santos
Gk # 80298ţ AprŦ 26ţ 1990
184 SCkA 614
lAC1S
1hls case arose when on CcLober 3ţ 1981ţ a person ldenLlfylng hlmself as Þrofessor !ose Cruz placed
an order by Lelephone wlLh Lhe peLlLloner company for 406 booksţ payable on dellveryŦ 4 LuCA
prepared Lhe correspondlng lnvolce and dellvered Lhe books as orderedţ for whlch Cruz lssued a
personal check coverlng Lhe purchase prlce 3 Cn CcLober 7ţ 1981ţ Cruz sold 120 of Lhe books Lo
prlvaLe respondenL Leonor SanLos whoţ afLer verlfylng Lhe sellerƌs ownershlp from Lhe lnvolce he
showed herţ pald hlmŦ
lL Lurned ouL Lhe Cruz was noL connecLed wlLh ue La sale Collegeţ and Lhe accounL was already
closedŦÞollce arresLed Cruz and laLLer wenL Lo Lhe sLore of SanLos and selzed Lhe 120 books wlLhouL
a warranL
ÞroLesLlng Lhls hlghŴhanded acLlonţ Lhe prlvaLe respondenLs sued for recovery of Lhe books afLer
demand for Lhelr reLurn was re[ecLed by LuCAŦ A wrlL of prellmlnary aLLachmenL was lssued and
Lhe peLlLlonerţ afLer lnlLlal refusalţ flnally surrendered Lhe books Lo Lhe prlvaLe respondenLsŦ
lSSuLť
WheLher or noL Lhe respondenL ls unlawfully deprlved of Lhe lawfull possesslon of Lhe
Lhe books
PLLuť
?esŦ 8espondenL ls unlawfully deprlved of her lawful possesslon of Lhe booksŦ
ArLŦ 339Ŧ 1he possesslon of movable properLy acqulred ln good falLh ls equlvalenL Lo a LlLleŦ
neverLhelessţ one who has losL any movable or has been unlawfully deprlved Lhereofţ may recover
lL from Lhe person ln possesslon of Lhe sameŦ
lf Lhe possessor of a movable losL or of whlch Lhe owner has been unlawfully deprlved has acqulred
lL ln good falLh aL a publlc saleţ Lhe owner cannoL obLaln lLs reLurn wlLhouL relmburslng Lhe prlce
pald LhereforŦ
AcLual dellvery of Lhe books havlng been madeţ Cruz acqulred ownershlp over Lhe books
whlch he could Lhen valldly Lransfer Lo Lhe prlvaLe respondenLsŦ 1he facL LhaL he had noL yeL pald
for Lhem Lo LuCA was a maLLer beLween hlm and LuCA and dld noL lmpalr Lhe LlLle acqulred by Lhe
prlvaLe respondenLs Lo Lhe booksŦ
Cne may well lmaglne Lhe adverse consequences lf Lhe phrase ƍunlawfully deprlvedƍ were Lo be
lnLerpreLed ln Lhe manner suggesLed by Lhe peLlLlonerŦ A person relylng on Lhe sellerƌs LlLle who
buys a movable properLy from hlm would have Lo surrender lL Lo anoLher person clalmlng Lo be Lhe
orlglnal owner who had noL yeL been pald Lhe purchase prlce LhereforŦ 1he buyer ln Lhe second sale
would be lefL holdlng Lhe bagţ so Lo speakţ and would be compelled Lo reLurn Lhe Lhlng boughL by
hlm ln good falLh wlLhouL even Lhe rlghL Lo relmbursemenL of Lhe amounL he had pald for lLŦ
lL bears repeaLlng LhaL ln Lhe case before usţ Leonor SanLos Look care Lo ascerLaln flrsL LhaL Lhe
books belonged Lo Cruz before she agreed Lo purchase LhemŦ 1he LuCA lnvolce Cruz showed her
assured her LhaL Lhe books had been pald for on dellveryŦ 8y conLrasLţ LuCA was less Lhan cauLlous
Ÿ ln facLţ Loo LrusLlng ln deallng wlLh Lhe lmposLorŦ AlLhough lL had never LransacLed wlLh hlm
beforeţ lL readlly dellvered Lhe books he had ordered (by Lelephone) and as readlly accepLed hls
personal check ln paymenLŦ lL dld noL verlfy hls ldenLlLy alLhough lL was easy enough Lo do LhlsŦ lL
dld noL walL Lo clear Lhe check of Lhls unknown drawerŦ Worseţ lL lndlcaLed ln Lhe sales lnvolce
lssued Lo hlmţ by Lhe prlnLed Lerms Lhereonţ LhaL Lhe books had been pald for on dellveryţ Lhereby
vesLlng ownershlp ln Lhe buyerŦ
Surelyţ Lhe prlvaLe respondenL dld noL have Lo go beyond LhaL lnvolce Lo saLlsfy herself LhaL Lhe
books belng offered for sale by Cruz belonged Lo hlmŤ yeL she dldŦ AlLhough Lhe LlLle of Cruz was
presumed under ArLlcle 339 by hls mere possesslon of Lhe booksţ Lhese belng movable properLyţ
Leonor SanLos neverLheless demanded more proof before decldlng Lo buy LhemŦ
lL would cerLalnly be unfalr now Lo make Lhe prlvaLe respondenLs bear Lhe pre[udlce susLalned by
LuCA as a resulL of lLs own negllgenceŦ We cannoL see Lhe [usLlce ln Lransferrlng LuCAƌs loss Lo Lhe
SanLoses who had acLed ln good falLhţ and wlLh proper careţ when Lhey boughL Lhe books from
CruzŦ
Whlle we sympaLhlze wlLh Lhe peLlLloner for lLs pllghLţ lL ls clear LhaL lLs remedy ls noL agalnsL Lhe
prlvaLe respondenLs buL agalnsL 1omas de la Þenaţ who has apparenLly caused all Lhls LroubleŦ 1he
prlvaLe respondenLs have Lhemselves been unduly lnconvenlencedţ and for merely LransacLlng a
cusLomary deal noL really unusual ln Lhelr klnd of buslnessŦ lL ls Lhey and noL LuCA who have a rlghL
Lo complalnŦ


8ÞI Iam||y vŦ Iranco
Gk # 123498ţ NovŦ 23ţ 2007
S38 SCkA 186

lacLsť 1hls case has lLs genesls ln an osLenslble fraud perpeLraLed on Lhe peLlLloner 8Þl lamlly 8ank
(8ÞlŴl8) allegedly by respondenL Amado lranco (lranco) ln consplracy wlLh oLher lndlvldualsţ some
of whom opened and malnLalned separaLe accounLs wlLh 8ÞlŴl8ţ San lranclsco del MonLe (SluM)
branchţ ln a serles of LransacLlonsŦ Cn AugusL 13ţ 1989ţ 1evesLeco ArrasLreŴSLevedorlng CoŦţ lncŦ
(1evesLeco) opened a savlngs and currenL accounL wlLh 8ÞlŴl8Ŧ Soon LhereafLerţ or on AugusL 23ţ
1989ţ llrsL MeLro lnvesLmenL CorporaLlon (lMlC) also opened a Llme deposlL accounL wlLh Lhe
same branch of 8ÞlŴl8 wlLh a deposlL of Þ100ţ000ţ000Ŧ00ţ Lo maLure one year LhenceŦ

SubsequenLlyţ on AugusL 31ţ 1989ţ lranco opened Lhree accounLsţ namelyţ a currenLţ savlngsţ
and Llme deposlLţ wlLh 8ÞlŴl8Ŧ 1he LoLal amounL of Þ2ţ000ţ000Ŧ00 used Lo open Lhese accounLs ls
Lraceable Lo a check lssued by 1evesLeco allegedly ln conslderaLlon of lranco's lnLroducLlon of
Lladlo 1evesţ who was looklng for a condulL bank Lo faclllLaLe 1evesLeco's buslness LransacLlonsţ Lo
!alme SebasLlanţ who was Lhen 8ÞlŴl8 SluM's 8ranch ManagerŦ ln Lurnţ Lhe fundlng for Lhe
Þ2ţ000ţ000Ŧ00 check was parL of Lhe Þ80ţ000ţ000Ŧ00 deblLed by 8ÞlŴl8 from lMlC's Llme deposlL
accounL and credlLed Lo 1evesLeco's currenL accounL pursuanL Lo an AuLhorlLy Lo ueblL purporLedly
slgned by lMlC's offlcersŦ lL appearsţ howeverţ LhaL Lhe slgnaLures of lMlC's offlcers on Lhe
AuLhorlLy Lo ueblL were forgedŦ Cn SepLember 4ţ 1989ţ AnLonlo Cngţ upon belng shown Lhe
AuLhorlLy Lo ueblLţ personally declared hls slgnaLure Lhereln Lo be a forgeryŦ unforLunaLelyţ
1evesLeco had already effecLed several wlLhdrawals from lLs currenL accounL (Lo whlch had been
credlLed Lhe Þ80ţ000ţ000Ŧ00 covered by Lhe forged AuLhorlLy Lo ueblL) amounLlng Lo
Þ37ţ433ţ410Ŧ34ţ lncludlng Lhe Þ2ţ000ţ000Ŧ00 pald Lo lrancoŦ

Cn SepLember 8ţ 1989ţ lmpelled by Lhe need Lo proLecL lLs lnLeresLs ln llghL of lMlC's forgery clalmţ
8ÞlŴl8ţ Lhru lLs Senlor vlceŴÞresldenLţ Severlno Coronaclonţ lnsLrucLed !esus Arangorln Lo deblL
lranco's savlngs and currenL accounLs for Lhe amounLs remalnlng LherelnŦ ln Lhe meanLlmeţ Lwo
checks drawn by lranco agalnsL hls 8ÞlŴl8 currenL accounL were dlshonored upon presenLmenL for
paymenLţ and sLamped wlLh a noLaLlon ºaccounL under garnlshmenLŦ"


lssueť WCn lranco had a beLLer rlghL Lo Lhe deposlLs ln Lhe sub[ecL accounLs whlch are parL of Lhe
proceeds of a forged AuLhorlLy Lo ueblL
Peldť

ln Lhls caseţ Lhe deposlL ln lranco's accounLs conslsLs of money whlchţ albelL characLerlzed as a
movableţ ls generlc and funglbleŦ 1he quallLy of belng funglble depends upon Lhe posslblllLy of Lhe
properLyţ because of lLs naLure or Lhe wlll of Lhe parLlesţ belng subsLlLuLed by oLhers of Lhe same
klndţ noL havlng a dlsLlncL lndlvlduallLyŦ

SlgnlflcanLlyţ whlle ArLlcle 339 permlLs an owner who has losL or has been unlawfully deprlved of a
movable Lo recover Lhe exacL same Lhlng from Lhe currenL possessorţ 8ÞlŴl8 slmply clalms
ownershlp of Lhe equlvalenL amounL of moneyţ lŦeŦţ Lhe value Lhereofţ whlch lL had mlsLakenly
deblLed from lMlC's accounL and credlLed Lo 1evesLeco'sţ and subsequenLly Lraced Lo lranco's
accounLŦ ln facLţ Lhls ls whaL 8ÞlŴl8 dld ln flllng Lhe MakaLl Case agalnsL lrancoţ eL alŦ lL sLaked lLs
clalm on Lhe money lLself whlch passed from one accounL Lo anoLherţ commenclng wlLh Lhe forged
AuLhorlLy Lo ueblLŦ

lL bears emphaslzlng LhaL money bears no earmarks of pecullar ownershlpţ and Lhls characLerlsLlc ls
all Lhe more manlfesL ln Lhe lnsLanL case whlch lnvolves money ln a banklng LransacLlon gone awryŦ
lLs prlmary funcLlon ls Lo pass from hand Lo hand as a medlum of exchangeţ wlLhouL oLher evldence
of lLs LlLleŦż33Ž Moneyţ whlch had passed Lhrough varlous LransacLlons ln Lhe general course of
banklng buslnessţ even lf of Lraceable orlglnţ ls no excepLlonŦ

1husţ lnasmuch as whaL ls lnvolved ls noL a speclflc or deLermlnaLe personal properLyţ 8ÞlŴl8's
lllusLraLlve exampleţ osLenslbly based on ArLlcle 339ţ ls lnappllcable Lo Lhe lnsLanL caseŦ

1here ls no doubL LhaL 8ÞlŴl8 owns Lhe deposlLed monles ln Lhe accounLs of lrancoţ buL noL as a
legal consequence of lLs unauLhorlzed Lransfer of lMlC's deposlLs Lo 1evesLeco's accounLŦ 8ÞlŴl8
convenlenLly forgeLs LhaL Lhe deposlL of money ln banks ls governed by Lhe Clvll Code provlslons on
slmple loan or muLuumŦ As Lhere ls a debLorŴcredlLor relaLlonshlp beLween a bank and lLs
deposlLorţ 8ÞlŴl8 ulLlmaLely acqulred ownershlp of lranco's deposlLsţ buL such ownershlp ls
coupled wlLh a correspondlng obllgaLlon Lo pay hlm an equal amounL on demandŦż37Ž AlLhough
8ÞlŴl8 owns Lhe deposlLs ln lranco's accounLsţ lL cannoL prevenL hlm from demandlng paymenL of
8ÞlŴl8's obllgaLlon by drawlng checks agalnsL hls currenL accounLţ or asklng for Lhe release of Lhe
funds ln hls savlngs accounLŦ 1husţ when lranco lssued checks drawn agalnsL hls currenL accounLţ
he had every rlghL as credlLor Lo expecL LhaL Lhose checks would be honored by 8ÞlŴl8 as debLorŦ

More lmporLanLlyţ 8ÞlŴl8 does noL have a unllaLeral rlghL Lo freeze Lhe accounLs of lranco based
on lLs mere susplclon LhaL Lhe funds Lhereln were proceeds of Lhe mulLlŴmllllon peso scam lranco
was allegedly lnvolved lnŦ 1o granL 8ÞlŴl8ţ or any bank for LhaL maLLerţ Lhe rlghL Lo Lake whaLever
acLlon lL pleases on deposlLs whlch lL supposes are derlved from shady LransacLlonsţ would open
Lhe floodgaLes of publlc dlsLrusL ln Lhe banklng lndusLryŦ

Cur pronouncemenL ln Slmex lnLernaLlonal (Manlla)ţ lncŦ vŦ CourL of Appealsż38Ž conLlnues Lo
resonaLeţ Lhusť

xxxx
1he bank musL record every slngle LransacLlon accuraLelyţ down Lo Lhe lasL cenLavoţ and as
prompLly as posslbleŦ 1hls has Lo be done lf Lhe accounL ls Lo reflecL aL any glven Llme Lhe amounL
of money Lhe deposlLor can dlspose of as he sees flLţ confldenL LhaL Lhe bank wlll dellver lL as and Lo
whomever dlrecLsŦ A blunder on Lhe parL of Lhe bankţ such as Lhe dlshonor of Lhe check wlLhouL
good reasonţ can cause Lhe deposlLor noL a llLLle embarrassmenL lf noL also flnanclal loss and
perhaps even clvll and crlmlnal llLlgaLlonŦ

1he polnL ls LhaL as a buslness affecLed wlLh publlc lnLeresL and because of Lhe naLure of lLs
funcLlonsţ Lhe bank ls under obllgaLlon Lo LreaL Lhe accounLs of lLs deposlLors wlLh meLlculous careţ
always havlng ln mlnd Lhe flduclary naLure of Lhelr relaLlonshlpŦ x x xŦ


lnelucLablyţ 8ÞlŴl8ţ as Lhe LrusLee ln Lhe flduclary relaLlonshlpţ ls duLy bound Lo know Lhe
slgnaLures of lLs cusLomersŦ Pavlng falled Lo deLecL Lhe forgery ln Lhe AuLhorlLy Lo ueblL and ln Lhe
process lnadverLenLly faclllLaLe Lhe lMlCŴ1evesLeco Lransferţ 8ÞlŴl8 cannoL now shlfL llablllLy
Lhereon Lo lranco and Lhe oLher payees of checks lssued by 1evesLecoţ or prevenL wlLhdrawals
from Lhelr respecLlve accounLs wlLhouL Lhe approprlaLe courL wrlL or a favorable flnal [udgmenLŦ

lurLherţ lL boggles Lhe mlnd why 8ÞlŴl8ţ even wlLhouL delvlng lnLo Lhe auLhenLlclLy of Lhe slgnaLure
ln Lhe AuLhorlLy Lo ueblLţ effecLed Lhe Lransfer of Þ80ţ000ţ000Ŧ00 from lMlC's Lo 1evesLeco's
accounLţ when lMlC's accounL was a Llme deposlL and lL had already pald advance lnLeresL Lo lMlCŦ
Conslderlng LhaL Lhere ls as yeL no lndublLable evldence esLabllshlng lranco's parLlclpaLlon ln Lhe
forgeryţ he remalns an lnnocenL parLyŦ As beLween hlm and 8ÞlŴl8ţ Lhe laLLerţ whlch made posslble
Lhe presenL predlcamenLţ musL bear Lhe resulLlng loss or lnconvenlenceŦ

@|t|e VIŦ Usufruct

Chapter 1Ŧ Usufruct |n Genera| (ArtsŦ S62ŴS6S)
Chapter 2Ŧ k|ghts of the Usufruct (ArtsŦ S66ŴS82)
Chapter 3Ŧ Cb||gat|ons of the Usufruct (ArtsŦ S83Ŵ602)
Chapter 4Ŧ Lxt|ngu|shment of Usufruct (ArtsŦ 603Ŵ612)


@|t|e VIIŦ Lasements or Serv|tudes


Chapter 1Ŧ Lasements |n Genera| (ArtsŦ 613Ŵ633)


Ia[ardo vŦ Ireedom to 8u||d
Gk # 134692ţ AugŦ 1ţ 2000
337 SCkA 11S

lacLsť lreedom 1o 8ulldţ lncorporaLedţ an ownerŴdeveloper and seller of lowŴcosL houslngţ
sold Lo peLlLlonerŴspousesţ a house and loL ln ue la CosLa Pomes ln 8arangkaţ MarlklnaŦ 1he
ConLracL Lo Sell execuLed beLween Lhe parLlesţ conLalned a 8esLrlcLlve CovenanL provldlng
cerLaln prohlblLlonsţ Lo wlLť

1Ŧ LasemenLsŦ lor Lhe homeowner musL observe a LwoŴmeLer easemenL ln fronLŦ no sLrucLure
of any klnd (sLoreţ garageţ bodegaţ eLcŦ) may be bullL on Lhe fronL easemenLŦ
2Ŧ upward expanslonŦ Second sLorey expanslon musL be placed above Lhe back porLlon of Lhe
house and should noL exLend forward beyond Lhe apex of Lhe orlglnal bulldlngŦ
3Ŧ lronL expanslonť 2nd floor expanslonţ ln fronLţ ls 6 meLers back from Lhe fronL properLy llne
and 4 meLers back from Lhe fronL wall of Lhe houseţ [usL as provlded ln Lhe 60 sqŦ mŦ unlLsŦ

1he above resLrlcLlons were also conLalned ln 1ransfer CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle coverlng Lhe loL
lssued ln Lhe name of peLlLlonerŴspousesŦ

uesplLe repeaLed warnlngs from respondenLţ exLended Lhe roof of Lhelr house Lo Lhe
properLy llne and expanded Lhe second floor of Lhelr house Lo a polnL dlrecLly above Lhe
orlglnal fronL wallŦ 8espondenL flled before Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal CourL of Þaslg ClLyţ an acLlon Lo
demollsh Lhe unauLhorlzed sLrucLuresŦ

1he 81C dlrecLed Lhe spouses la[ardo Lo lmmedlaLely demollsh and remove Lhe exLenslon of
Lhelr expanded houslng unlL LhaL exceeds Lhe llmlLaLlons lmposed by Lhe 8esLrlcLlve
CovenanLţ oLherwlse Lhe 8ranch Sherlff of Lhls CourL shall execuLe Lhls declslon aL Lhe expense
of Lhe defendanLsŦ CA afflrmed Lhe declslonŦ

lssueť
WheLher or noL Lhe resLrlcLlve covenanL conLalned ln Lhe ConLracL Lo Sell and 1ransfer
CerLlflcaLe valldŦ

Peldť

8esLrlcLlve covenanLs are noLţ sLrlcLly speaklngţ synonymous wlLh easemenLsŦ Whlle lL may be
correcL Lo sLaLe LhaL resLrlcLlve covenanLs on Lhe use of land or Lhe locaLlon or characLer of
bulldlngs or oLher sLrucLures Lhereon may broadly be sald Lo creaLe easemenLs or rlghLsţ lL
can also be conLended LhaL such covenanLsţ belng llmlLaLlons on Lhe manner ln whlch one
may use hls own properLyţ do noL resulL ln Lrue easemenLsţ buL a case of servlLudes (burden)ţ
someLlmes characLerlzed Lo be negaLlve easemenLs or reclprocal negaLlve easemenLsŦ
negaLlve easemenL ls Lhe mosL common easemenL creaLed by covenanL or agreemenL whose
effecL ls Lo preclude Lhe owner of Lhe land from dolng an acLţ whlchţ lf no easemenL exlsLedţ
he would be enLlLled Lo doŦ

Courts wh|ch genera||y v|ew restr|ct|ve covenants w|th d|sfavor for be|ng a restr|ct|on on
the use of oneƌs propertyţ haveţ neverthe|essţ susta|ned them where the covenants are
reasonab|eţ not contrary to pub||c po||cyţ or to |awţ and not |n restra|nt of tradeŦ Sub[ecL Lo
Lhese llmlLaLlonsţ courLs enforce resLrlcLlons Lo Lhe same exLenL LhaL wlll lend [udlclal sancLlon
Lo any oLher valld conLracLual relaLlonshlpŦ ln generalţ fronLllne resLrlcLlons on consLrucLlons
have been held Lo be valld sLlpulaLlonsŦ

1he provlslons ln a resLrlcLlve covenanL prescrlblng Lhe Lype of Lhe bulldlng Lo be erecLed are
crafLed noL solely for Lhe purpose of creaLlng easemenLsţ generally of llghL and vlewţ nor as a
resLrlcLlon as Lo Lhe Lype of consLrucLlonţ buL may also be almed as a check on Lhe
subsequenL uses of Lhe bulldlng conformably wlLh whaL Lhe developer orlglnally mlghL have
lnLended Lhe sLlpulaLlons Lo beŦ ln lLs Memorandumţ respondenL sLaLes ln argulng for Lhe
valldlLy of Lhe resLrlcLlve covenanL LhaL Lhe Ŵ

ƍx x x resLrlcLlons are noL wlLhouL speclflc purposeŦ ln a low cosLŴsoclallzed houslngţ lL ls of
publlc knowledge LhaL ownersŴdevelopers are consLralned Lo bulld as many number of houses
on a llmlLed land area preclsely Lo accommodaLe marglnallzed loL buyersţ provldlng as much
as posslble Lhe safeLyţ aesLheLlc and decenL llvlng condlLlon by conLrolllng overcrowdlngŦ Such
pro[ecL has been deslgned Lo accommodaLe aL leasL 100 famllles per hecLareŦƍ

1here appears Lo be no cogenL reasons for noL upholdlng resLrlcLlve covenanLs almed Lo
promoLe aesLheLlcsţ healLhţ and prlvacy or Lo prevenL overcrowdlngŦ

1he sLaLemenL of peLlLloners LhaL Lhelr lmmedlaLe nelghbors have noL opposed Lhe
consLrucLlon ls unavalllng Lo Lhelr causeţ Lhe sub[ecL resLrlcLlve covenanL ls noL lnLended for
Lhe beneflL of ad[acenL owners buL Lo prescrlbe Lhe uses of Lhe bulldlngţ lŦeŦţ Lo ensureţ
among oLher Lhlngsţ LhaL Lhe sLrucLures bullL on ue la CosLa Pomes Subdlvlslon would prevenL
overcrowdlng and promoLe prlvacy among subdlvlslon dwellersŦ 1he argumenL Lhen of
peLlLloners LhaL expanslon ls necessary ln order Lo accommodaLe Lhe lndlvldual famllles of
Lhelr Lwo chlldren musL fall for llke reasonŦ nor can peLlLloners clalm good falLhŤ Lhe
resLrlcLlve covenanLs are expllclLly wrlLLen ln Lhe ConLracL 1o Sell and annoLaLed aL Lhe back of
Lhe 1ransfer CerLlflcaLe of 1lLleŦ

ln sumţ Lhe CourL holds LhaL Ŵ

(1)ŦŦŦŦ1he provlslons of Lhe 8esLrlcLlve CovenanL are valldŤ
(2)ŦŦŦŦÞeLlLloners musL be held Lo be bound LherebyŤ and
(3)ŦŦŦŦSlnce Lhe exLenslon consLrucLed exceeds Lhe floor area llmlLs of Lhe 8esLrlcLlve
CovenanLţ peLlLlonerŴspouses can be requlred Lo demollsh Lhe sLrucLure Lo Lhe exLenL LhaL lL
exceeds Lhe prescrlbed floor area llmlLsŦ

Go|dcrest vŦ Cypress
Gk # 171072ţ AprŦ 7ţ 2009
S84 SCkA 43S

lacLsť ÞeLlLloner ColdcresL 8ealLy CorporaLlon (ColdcresL) ls Lhe developer of Cypress
Cardensţ a LenŴsLorey bulldlng locaLed aL Perrera SLreeLţ Legaspl vlllageţ MakaLl ClLyŦ Cn Aprll
26ţ 1977ţ ColdcresL execuLed a MasLer ueed and ueclaraLlon of 8esLrlcLlons whlch
consLlLuLed Cypress Cardens lnLo a condomlnlum pro[ecL and lncorporaLed respondenL
Cypress Cardens Condomlnlum CorporaLlon (Cypress) Lo manage Lhe condomlnlum pro[ecL
and Lo hold LlLle Lo all Lhe common areasŦ ColdcresL reLalned ownershlp of Lhe LwoŴlevel
penLhouse unlL on Lhe nlnLh and LenLh floors of Lhe condomlnlumŦ lollowlng Lhe Lurnover of
Lhe admlnlsLraLlon and managemenL of Lhe Condomlnlum Lo Lhe board of dlrecLors of Cypress
ln 1993ţ lL was dlscovered LhaL cerLaln common areas perLalnlng Lo Cypress were belng
occupled and encroached upon by ColdcresLŦ Cypress flled a complalnL wlLh damages agalnsL
ColdcresL before Lhe Pouslng and Land use 8egulaLory 8oard (PLu88)Ŧ Cypress soughL Lo
remove Lhe door erecLed by ColdcresL along Lhe sLalrway beLween Lhe 8Lh and 9Lh floorsţ as
well as Lhe door bullL ln fronL of Lhe 9Lh floor elevaLor lobbyţ and Lhe removal of Lhe cyclone
wlre fence on Lhe roof deckŦ ColdcresL averred LhaL lL was granLed Lhe excluslve use of Lhe
roof deck's llmlLed common area by SecLlon 4(c)
4
of Lhe condomlnlum's MasLer ueedŦ lL
llkewlse argued LhaL lL consLrucLed Lhe conLesLed doors for prlvacy and securlLy purposesţ and
LhaLţ noneLhelessţ Lhe common areas occupled by lL are unusable and lnaccesslble Lo oLher
condomlnlum unlL ownersŦ uurlng Lhe flrsL lnspecLlon of Lhe PLu88ţ lL was found LhaL
ColdcresL enclosed and used Lhe common area fronLlng Lhe Lwo elevaLors on Lhe nlnLh floor
as a sLorage roomŦ lL was llkewlse dlscovered LhaL ColdcresL consLrucLed a permanenL
sLrucLure whlch encroached 68Ŧ01 square meLers of Lhe roof deck's common areaŦ uurlng Lhe
second lnspecLlonţ lL was noLed LhaL ColdcresL falled Lo secure an alLeraLlon approval for Lhe
sald permanenL sLrucLureŦ ArblLer San vlcenLe ruled ln favor of CypressŦ PLu88 Speclal
ulvlslon modlfled Lhe declslon of ArblLer San vlcenLe deleLlng Lhe award for damages buL sLlll
dlrecLed ColdcresL Lo remove any or all Lhe sLrucLures whlch obsLrucL Lhe use of Lhe sLalrway
from Lhe elghLh Lo LenLh floorţ Lhe passage and use of Lhe lobbles aL Lhe nlnLh and LenLh
floors of Lhe Cypress Cardens CondomlnlumŤ and Lo remove any or all sLrucLures LhaL lmpede
Lhe use of Lhe unllmlLed common areasŦ Cypress appealed Lo Lhe Cfflce of Lhe ÞresldenL for
Lhe lncluslon of acLual damagesţ CÞ denledŦ Cn appeal Lo Lhe CAţ Cypress was parLlally
favoredŦ ColdcresL essenLlally conLends LhaL slnce Lhe roof deck's common llmlLed area ls for
lLs excluslve useŤ bulldlng sLrucLures Lhereon and leaslng Lhe same Lo Lhlrd persons do noL
lmpalr Lhe sub[ecL easemenLŦ
lssueť WheLher or noL Lhe conLenLlon of Lhe Lhlrd persons do noL lmpalr Lhe sub[ecL
easemenLŦ

Peldť ColdcresL has no rlghL Lo erecL an offlce sLrucLure on Lhe llmlLed common area desplLe
lLs excluslve rlghL Lo use Lhe sameŦ We noLe LhaL noL only dld ColdcresL's acL lmpalr Lhe
easemenLţ lL also lllegally alLered Lhe condomlnlum planţ ln vlolaLlon of SecLlon 22 of
ÞresldenLlal uecree noŦ 937Ŧ

1he owner of Lhe domlnanL esLaLe cannoL vlolaLe any of Lhe followlng prescrlbed resLrlcLlons
on lLs rlghLs on Lhe servlenL esLaLeţ Lo wlLť
(1) lL can only exerclse rlghLs necessary for Lhe use of Lhe easemenLŤ

(2) lL cannoL use Lhe easemenL excepL for Lhe beneflL of Lhe lmmovable orlglnally
conLemplaLedŤ
(3) lL cannoL exerclse Lhe easemenL ln any oLher manner Lhan LhaL prevlously esLabllshedŤ
(4) lL cannoL consLrucL anyLhlng on lL whlch ls noL necessary for Lhe use and preservaLlon of
Lhe easemenLŤ
(3) lL cannoL alLer or make Lhe easemenL more burdensomeŤ
(6) lL musL noLlfy Lhe servlenL esLaLe owner of lLs lnLenLlon Lo make necessary works on Lhe
servlenL esLaLeŤ and
(7) lL should choose Lhe mosL convenlenL Llme and manner Lo bulld sald works so as Lo cause
Lhe leasL convenlence Lo Lhe owner of Lhe servlenL esLaLeŦ

Any vlolaLlon of Lhe above consLlLuLes lmpalrmenL of Lhe easemenLŦ

A careful scruLlny of ColdcresL's acLs shows LhaL lL breached a number of Lhe aforemenLloned
resLrlcLlonsŦ llrsLţ lL ls obvlous LhaL Lhe consLrucLlon and Lhe lease of Lhe offlce sLrucLure were
nelLher necessary for Lhe use or preservaLlon of Lhe roof deck's llmlLed areaŦ Secondţ Lhe welghL of
Lhe offlce sLrucLure lncreased Lhe sLraln on Lhe condomlnlum's foundaLlon and on Lhe roof deck's
common llmlLed areaţ maklng Lhe easemenL more burdensome and addlng unnecessary safeLy rlsk
Lo all Lhe condomlnlum unlL ownersŦ LasLlyţ Lhe consLrucLlon of Lhe sald offlce sLrucLure clearly
wenL beyond Lhe lnLendmenL of Lhe easemenL slnce lL lllegally alLered Lhe approved condomlnlum
pro[ecL plan and vlolaLed SecLlon 4 of Lhe condomlnlum's ueclaraLlon of 8esLrlcLlonsŦ



Abe||ana vŦ CA
Gk # 97039ţ AprŦ 24ţ 1992
208 SCkA 316

lacLsť 1he peLlLloners who llve on a parcel of land abuLLlng Lhe norLhwesLern slde of Lhe
nonoc Pomes Subdlvlslonţ sued Lo esLabllsh an easemenL of rlghL of way over a subdlvlslon
road whlchţ accordlng Lo Lhe peLlLlonersţ used Lo be a mere fooLpaLh whlch Lhey and Lhelr
ancesLors had been uslng slnce Llme lmmemorlalţ and LhaLţ henceţ Lhey had acqulredţ
Lhrough prescrlpLlonţ an easemenL of rlghL of way LherelnŦ 1he consLrucLlon of a wall by Lhe
respondenLs around Lhe subdlvlslon deprlved Lhe peLlLloners of Lhe use of Lhe subdlvlslon
road whlch glves Lhe subdlvlslon resldenLs access Lo Lhe publlc hlghwayŦ 1hey asked LhaL Lhe
hlgh concreLe walls encloslng Lhe subdlvlslon and cuLLlng of Lhelr access Lo Lhe subdlvlslon
road be removed and LhaL Lhe road be opened Lo LhemŦ

1he prlvaLe respondenLs denled LhaL Lhere was a preŴexlsLlng fooLpaLh ln Lhe place before lL
was developed lnLo a subdlvlslonŦ 1hey alleged furLhermore LhaL Lhe nonoc Subdlvlslon roads
are noL Lhe shorLesL way Lo a publlc road for Lhere ls a more dlrecL rouLe from Lhe peLlLlonersƌ
land Lo Lhe publlc hlghwayŦ
lssueť WheLher or noL easemenL may be acqulred by prescrlpLlonŦ

Peldť
1he appellaLe courL dld noL err ln holdlng LhaL Lhe road loLs ln a prlvaLe subdlvlslon are prlvaLe
properLyţ henceţ Lhe local governmenL should flrsL acqulre Lhem by donaLlonţ purchaseţ or
exproprlaLlonţ lf Lhey are Lo be uLlllzed as a publlc roadŦ
ÞeLlLlonersƌ assumpLlon LhaL an easemenL of rlghL of way ls conLlnuous and apparenL and may
be acqulred by prescrlpLlon under ArLlcle 620 of Lhe Clvll Codeţ ls erroneousŦ 1he use of a
fooLpaLh or road may be apparenL buL lL ls oot o cootloooos eosemeot
(Jlscootloooos) because lLs use ls aL lnLervals and depends upon Lhe acLs of manŦ lL can be
exerclsed only lf a man passes or puLs hls feeL over somebody elseƌs land (4 Manresa 397Ť
Paffman vsŦ Shoemakerţ 71 SL 198ţ boLh clLed on pŦ 434ţ volŦ 2ţ 6Lh LdŦţ Þarasţ Clvll Code of
Lhe Þhlllpplnes)Ŧ
Penceţ a rlghL of way ls noL acqulrable by prescrlpLlon (Cuaycongţ eL alţ vs 8enedlcLoţ eL alŦţ 37
ÞhllŦ 781Ť 8onqullloţ eL alŦ vsŦ 8ocoţ eL alŦţ 103 ÞhllŦ 84Ť Ayala de 8oxas vsŦ Caseţ 8 ÞhllŦ 197)Ŧ
nelLher may peLlLloners lnvoke SecLlon 29 of ÞŦuŦ 937 whlch provldesť
SecŦ 29Ŧ klqbt of woy to lobllc kooJŦ Ÿ 1he owner or developer of a
subdlvlslon wlLhouL access Lo any exlsLlng publlc road or sLreeL musL
secure a rlghL of way Lo a publlc road or sLreeL and such rlghL of way
musL be developed and malnLalned accordlng Lo Lhe requlremenL of
Lhe governmenL auLhorlLles concernedŦ
1he above provlslon applles Lo Lhe owner or developer of a subdlvlslon (whlch peLlLloners are
noL) wlLhouL access Lo a publlc hlghwayŦ

8|co| AgroŴInd vŦ Cb|as
Gk # 172077ţ CctŦ 09ţ 2009
603 SCkA 173

lacLsť 8lcol Sugar uevelopmenL CorporaLlon (8lSuuLCC) consLrucLed a road (ºLhe dlspuLed
road") Ŷ measurlng approxlmaLely 7 meLers wlde and 2Ŧ9 kllomeLers longŦ 1he dlspuLed road
was used by 8lSuuLCC ln haullng and LransporLlng sugarcane Lo and from lLs mlll slLe
(Þensumll) and has Lhus become lndlspensable Lo lLs sugar mllllng operaLlonsŦ Cn CcLober 30ţ
1992ţ peLlLloner 8lcol AgroŴlndusLrlal Þroducers CooperaLlveţ lncŦ acqulred Lhe asseLs of
8lSuuLCCŦ peLlLloner flled a ComplalnL agalnsL respondenLs alleglng LhaL Lhey un[usLlflably
barrlcaded Lhe dlspuLed road by placlng bamboosţ woodsţ placards and sLones across lLţ
prevenLlng peLlLloner's and Lhe oLher sugar planLer's vehlcles from passlng Lhrough Lhe
dlspuLed roadţ Lhereby causlng serlous damage and pre[udlce Lo peLlLlonerŦ ÞeLlLloner alleged
LhaL 8lSuuLCC consLrucLed Lhe dlspuLed road pursuanL Lo an agreemenL wlLh Lhe owners of
Lhe rlceflelds Lhe road LraversedŦ 1he agreemenL provldes LhaL 8lSuuLCC shall employ Lhe
chlldren and relaLlves of Lhe landowners ln exchange for Lhe consLrucLlon of Lhe road on Lhelr
properLlesŦ ÞeLlLloner conLends LhaL Lhrough prolonged and conLlnuous use of Lhe dlspuLed
roadţ 8lSuuLCC acqulred a rlghL of way over Lhe properLles of Lhe landownersţ whlch rlghL of
way ln Lurn was acqulred by lL when lL boughL 8lSuuLCC's asseLsŦ respondenLs denled
havlng enLered lnLo an agreemenL wlLh 8lSuuLCC regardlng Lhe consLrucLlon and Lhe use
of Lhe dlspuLed roadŦ 1hey alleged LhaL 8lSuuLCCţ surrepLlLlously and wlLhouL Lhelr
knowledge and consenLţ consLrucLed Lhe dlspuLed road on Lhelr properLles and has slnce Lhen
lnLermlLLenLly and dlsconLlnuously used Lhe dlspuLed road for haullng sugarcane desplLe Lhelr
repeaLed proLesLsŦ 8espondenLs clalmed Lhey LoleraLed 8lSuuLCC ln Lhe consLrucLlon and Lhe
use of Lhe road slnce 8lSuuLCC was a governmenLŴowned and conLrolled corporaLlonţ and
Lhe enLlre counLry was Lhen under MarLlal LawŦ

1he CA afflrmed Lhe flndlng of Lhe 81C LhaL Lhere was no concluslve proof Lo sufflclenLly
esLabllsh Lhe exlsLence of an agreemenL beLween 8lSuuLCC and respondenLs regardlng Lhe
consLrucLlon of Lhe dlspuLed roadŦ Moreoverţ Lhe CA also declared LhaL an easemenL of rlghL
of way ls dlsconLlnuous and as such cannoL be acqulred by prescrlpLlonŦ 1he CA llkewlse
afflrmed Lhe flndlng of Lhe 81C LhaL peLlLloner was enLlLled Lo a compulsory easemenL of rlghL
of way upon paymenL of proper lndemnlLy Lo respondenLsŦ

lssueť WheLher or noL Lhe road ls a valld rlghL of way acqulred by 8lSuuLCC vlsŴàŴvls 8lcol
AgroŴlndusLrlalŦ

Peldť

LasemenL or servlLude ls an encumbrance lmposed upon an lmmovable for Lhe beneflL of
anoLher lmmovable belonglng Lo a dlfferenL ownerŦ 8y lLs creaLlonţ easemenL ls esLabllshed
elLher by law (ln whlch case lL ls a legal easemenL) or by wlll of Lhe parLles (a volunLary
easemenL)Ŧ ln Lerms of useţ easemenL may elLher be conLlnuous or dlsconLlnuousŦ 1he
easemenL of rlghL of way Ŷ Lhe prlvllege of persons or a parLlcular class of persons Lo pass
over anoLher's landţ usually Lhrough one parLlcular paLh or llnen Ŷ ls characLerlzed as a
dlsconLlnuous easemenL because lLs use ls ln lnLervals and depends on Lhe acL of manŦ
8ecause of Lhls characLerţ an easemenL of a rlghL of way may only be acqulred by vlrLue of a
LlLleŦ

ArLlcle 622 of Lhe new Clvll Code ls Lhe appllcable law ln Lhe case aL barţ vlzť

ArLŦ 622Ŧ ConLlnuous nonŴapparenL easemenLsţ and dlsconLlnuous onesţ wheLher apparenL or
noLţ may be acqulred only by vlrLue of a LlLleŦ

ln CosLabella CorporaLlon vŦ CourL of Appeals (CosLabella) Lhe CourL held LhaLţ ºlL ls already
wellŴesLabllshed LhaL a rlghL of way ls dlsconLlnuous andţ as suchţ cannoL be acqulred
by prescrlpLlonŦ"

ln 8ogoŴMedelllnţ Lhls CourL dlscussed Lhe dlsconLlnuous naLure of an easemenL of
rlghL of way and Lhe rule LhaL Lhe same cannoL be acqulred by prescrlpLlonţ Lo wlLť
ConLlnuous and apparenL easemenLs are acqulred elLher by vlrLue of a LlLle
or by prescrlpLlon of Len yearsŦ

1he Lrlal courL and Lhe CourL of Appeals boLh upheld Lhls vlew for Lhe reason LhaL
Lhe rallroad rlghL of way wasţ accordlng Lo Lhemţ conLlnuous and apparenL ln
naLureŦ 1he more or less permanenL rallroad Lracks were vlsually apparenL and
Lhey conLlnuously occupled Lhe sub[ecL sLrlp of land from 1939 (Lhe year Lhe
easemenL granLed by lellclana SanLlllan Lo peLlLloner explred)Ŧ 1husţ wlLh Lhe
lapse of Lhe 10Ŵyear prescrlpLlve perlod ln 1969ţ peLlLloner supposedly acqulred
Lhe easemenL of rlghL of way over Lhe sub[ecL landŦ

lollowlng Lhe loglc of Lhe courLs a quoţ lf a road for Lhe use of vehlcles or Lhe
passage of persons ls permanenLly cemenLed or asphalLedţ Lhen Lhe rlghL of way
over lL becomes conLlnuous ln naLureŦ 1he reasonlng ls erroneousŦ

under clvll law and lLs [urlsprudenceţ easemenLs are elLher conLlnuous or
dlsconLlnuous accordlng Lo Lhe manner Lhey are exerclsedţ noL accordlng Lo Lhe
presence of apparenL slgns or physlcal lndlcaLlons of Lhe exlsLence of such
easemenLsŦ 1husţ easemenL ls conLlnuous lf lLs use lsţ or may beţ lncessanL wlLhouL
Lhe lnLervenLlon of any acL of manţ llke Lhe easemenL of dralnageŤ and lL ls
dlsconLlnuous lf lL ls used aL lnLervals and depends on Lhe acL of manţ llke Lhe
easemenL of rlghL of wayŦ

1he easemenL of rlghL of way ls consldered dlsconLlnuous because lL ls exerclsed
only lf a person passes or seLs fooL on somebody else's landŦ Llke a road for Lhe
passage of vehlcles or personsţ an easemenL of rlghL of way of rallroad Lracks ls
dlsconLlnuous because Lhe rlghL ls exerclsed only lf and when a Lraln operaLed by a
person passes over anoLherƌs properLyŦ ln oLher wordsţ Lhe very exerclse of Lhe
servlLude depends upon Lhe acL or lnLervenLlon of man whlch ls Lhe very essence
of dlsconLlnuous easemenLsŦ

1he presence of more or less permanenL rallroad Lracks does noLţ ln any wayţ
converL Lhe naLure of an easemenL of rlghL of way Lo one LhaL ls conLlnuousŦ lL ls
noL Lhe presence of apparenL slgns or physlcal lndlcaLlons showlng Lhe exlsLence of
an easemenLţ buL raLher Lhe manner of exerclse Lhereofţ LhaL caLegorlzes such
easemenL lnLo conLlnuous or dlsconLlnuousŦ 1he presence of physlcal or vlsual
slgns only classlfles an easemenL lnLo apparenL or nonŴapparenLŦ 1husţ a road
(whlch reveals a rlghL of way) and a wlndow (whlch evldences a rlghL Lo llghL and
vlew) are apparenL easemenLsţ whlle an easemenL of noL bulldlng beyond a cerLaln
helghL ls nonŴapparenLŦ

App|y|ng 8ogoŴMede|||n to the case at barţ Lhe concluslon ls lnevlLable LhaL Lhe road ln
dlspuLe ls a dlsconLlnuous easemenL noLwlLhsLandlng LhaL Lhe same may be apparenLŦ 1o
relLeraLeţ easemenLs are elLher conLlnuous or dlsconLlnuous accordlng Lo Lhe manner Lhey
are exerclsedţ noL accordlng Lo Lhe presence of apparenL slgns or physlcal lndlcaLlons of Lhe
exlsLence of such easemenLsŦ Penceţ even lf Lhe road ln dlspuLe has been lmproved and
malnLalned over a number of yearsţ lL wlll noL change lLs dlsconLlnuous naLure buL slmply
make Lhe same apparenLŦ 1o sLressţ ArLlcle 622 of Lhe new Clvll Code sLaLes LhaL
dlsconLlnuous easemenLsţ wheLher apparenL or noLţ may be acqulred only by vlrLue of a LlLleŦ

1he facL LhaL Lhe law ls caLegorlcal LhaL dlsconLlnuous easemenLs cannoL be acqulred by
prescrlpLlon mlllLaLes agalnsL peLlLloner's clalm of lachesŦ



Sa||mbangon vŦ @an
Gk # 18S240ţ IanŦ 20ţ 2010
610 SCkA 426

lAC1S
Culllermo Cenlza dled lnLesLaLe Ŧ 1wenLy years laLer hls chlldren 8enedlcLaţ Culllermoţ !rŦţ vlcLorlaţ
Lduardoţ and Carlos execuLed an exLra[udlclal declaraLlon of helrs and parLlLlonţ ad[udlcaLlng and
dlvldlng Lhe land among Lhemselves as followsť
1Ŧ 1o 8enedlcLa 1Ŧ Cabahugţ LoL A sub[ecL Lo a rlghL of way 1Ŧ30 mŦ wlde along lLs nWŦ boundary ln
favor of LoLs 8ţ Lţ and uţ of Lhe subdlvlslonŤ
2Ŧ 1o Lduardo Cenlzaţ LoL 8 sub[ecL Lo a rlghL of way 1Ŧ30 mŦ wlde along lLs SWŦ boundary ln favor
of LoLs Aţ u Ǝ L of Lhe subdlvlslonŤ
3Ŧ 1o Carlos Cenlzaţ LoL CŤ
4Ŧ 1o Culllermo Cenlza !rŦţ LoL u sub[ecL Lo a perpeLual and graLulLous road rlghL of way 1Ŧ30 mŦ
wlde along lLs nLŦ boundary ln favor of LoL 8 and L of Lhe subdlvlslonŤ and
3Ŧ 1o vlcLorla Cenlzaţ LoL Lţ sub[ecL Lo a perpeLual and graLulLous road rlghL of way 1Ŧ30 mŦ wlde
along lLs SWŦ boundary ln favor of LoL u of Lhe subdlvlslonŦ
LoLs Aţ 8ţ and C were ad[acenL Lo a clLy sLreeLŦ 8uL LoLs u and L were noLţ Lhey belng lnLerlor loLsŦ
1o glve Lhese lnLerlor loLs access Lo Lhe sLreeLţ Lhe helrs esLabllshed ln Lhelr exLra[udlclal parLlLlon
an easemenL of rlghL of way conslsLlng of a 3ŴmeLer wlde alley beLween LoLs u and L LhaL
conLlnued on beLween LoLs A and 8 and on Lo Lhe sLreeLŦ 1he parLlLlon LhaL embodled Lhls
easemenL of rlghL of way was annoLaLed on Lhe lndlvldual LlLles lssued Lo Lhe helrsŦ
8uLţ reallzlng LhaL Lhe parLlLlon resulLed ln an unequal dlvlslon of Lhe properLyţ Lhe helrs modlfled
Lhelr agreemenL by ellmlnaLlng Lhe easemenL of rlghL of way along LoLs Aţ uţ and Lţ and ln lLs placeţ
lmposed a 3ŴmeLer wlde alleyţ an easemenL of rlghL of wayţ LhaL ran excluslvely along Lhe
souLhwesL boundary of LoL 8 from LoLs u and L Lo Lhe sLreeLŦ
vlcLorla (now peLlLloner vlcLorla Sallmbangon) laLer swapped loLs wlLh 8enedlcLa wlLh Lhe resulL
LhaL vlcLorla became Lhe owner of LoL Aţ one of Lhe Lhree loLs ad[acenL Lo Lhe clLy sLreeLŦ vlcLorla
and her husband (Lhe Sallmbangons) consLrucLed a resldenLlal house on Lhls loL and bullL Lwo
garages on lLŦ
SubsequenLlyţ howeverţ respondenL spouses SanLos and Lrllnda 1an (Lhe 1ans) boughL LoLs 8ţ Cţ uţ
and L from all Lhelr ownersŦ 1he 1ans bullL lmprovemenLs on LoL 8 LhaL spllled lnLo Lhe easemenL
areaŦ Spouses Sallmbangon lnsLlLuLed an acLlon agalnsL Lhe 1ansŦ 1he Lrlal courL ruled ln favor of

Lhe Sallmbangons by upholdlng Lhelr easemenL of rlghL of way over Lhe alley on LoL 8ţ Lhe loL LhaL
belonged Lo Lhe 1ansŦ 1he courL polnLed ouL LhaL slnce Lhe easemenL ln Lhls case was esLabllshed
by agreemenL of Lhe parLles for Lhe beneflL of LoLs Aţ uţ and Lţ Lhen only by muLual agreemenL of
Lhe parLles could such easemenL be exLlngulshedŦ
Cn Appealţ Lhe CA reversed Lhe declslonţ rullng LhaL Lhe sale had exLlngulshed Lhe easemenL of
rlghL of way by operaLlon of lawŦ
lSSuLť
WheLher or noL Lhe easemenL whlch was esLabllshed by Lhe parLlLlon agreemenL wlll also be
exLlngulshed Lhrough an agreemenLŦ
PLLuť
noŦ
As orlglnally consLlLuLed ln LhaL agreemenLţ each of LoLs A and 8 was Lo conLrlbuLe a sLrlp of 1Ŧ3
meLers beLween Lhem LhaL when comblned formed a 3ŴmeLer wlde alley leadlng from LoLs u and L
Lo Lhe sLreeLŦ 1o Lhe exLenL LhaL LoLs A and 8 reLalned Lhe rlghL Lo use Lhe 1Ŧ3ŴmeLer porLlon LhaL
Lhey conLrlbuLed Lo Lhe esLabllshmenL of Lhe easemenLţ Lhe agreemenL gave Lhelr owners Lhe rlghL
Lo use Lhe common alley as wellŦ As Lduardo LesLlfledţ howeverţ Lhe Lrue lnLenL of Lhe helrs was Lo
glve LoLs u and L access Lo Lhe sLreeLŦ LoLs A and 8 dld noL need Lhls alley slnce Lhey were faclng
Lhe sLreeLŦ1avvphl1
ConsequenLlyţ when Lhe owner of LoLs u and L also became Lhe owner of LoL 8ţ Lhe easemenL of
rlghL of way on LoL 8 became exLlncL by operaLlon of lawŦ8 1he exlsLence of a domlnanL esLaLe and
a servlenL esLaLe ls lncompaLlble wlLh Lhe ldea LhaL boLh esLaLes belong Lo Lhe same personŦ
Alsoţ Lhere ls no quesLlon LhaL when Lhe helrs reallzed LhaL lL was noL falr Lo Lake sLrlps of 1Ŧ3
meLers from each of LoLs Aţ uţ and L for Lhe easemenL of rlghL of way when Lhese loLs were already
smallţ Lhe helrs execuLed a ƍCancellaLlon of AnnoLaLlon of 8lghL of Wayţ eLcŦƍ LhaL cancelled Lhe
easemenL of rlghL of way Lhey earller esLabllshed on LoLs Aţ uţ and L and ln lLs place lmposed a 3Ŵ
meLer wlde easemenL of rlghL of way solely on LoL 8Ŧ
AlLhough Lhe ƍcancellaLlonƍ documenL dld noL say soţ lL was lmpllclL LhaL Lhe changed locaLlon of
Lhe easemenL cancelled noL only Lhe 1Ŧ3ŴmeLer sLrlp of easemenL lmposed on LoL A of Lhe
Sallmbangons buL also Lhelr rlghL Lo use Lhe new 3ŴmeLer easemenL alley LhaL lay enLlrely on LoL 8Ŧ
SLrlcLly speaklngţ lf Lhe Sallmbangons lnslsL LhaL Lhelr rlghL as domlnanL esLaLe under Lhe orlglnal
parLlLlon agreemenL remalnsţ Lhen LhaL would be parLly on a 1Ŧ3ŴmeLer sLrlp of Lhelr own LoL A and
parLly on Lhe equlvalenL 1Ŧ3ŴmeLer sLrlp on Lhe slde of LoL 8ţ noL on Lhe new 3ŴmeLer alley
esLabllshed enLlrely on LoL 8Ŧ
1he polnL ls LhaLţ obvlouslyţ ln esLabllshlng Lhe new easemenL of rlghL of wayţ Lhe helrs lnLended Lo
abandon Lhe old oneŦ Slnce Lhls 3ŴmeLer alley on LoL 8 dlrecLly connecLed LoLs u and L Lo Lhe
sLreeLţ lL ls also obvlous LhaL only Lhe laLLer loLs were lLs lnLended beneflclaryŦ Andţ wlLh Lhe
ownershlp of LoLs 8ţ uţ and L now consolldaLed ln a common ownerţ namelyţ Lhe 1ansţ Lhen Lhe
easemenL of rlghL of way on LoL 8 may be sald Lo have been exLlngulshed by operaLlon of lawŦ


Chapter 2Ŧ Lega| Lasements (ArtsŦ 634Ŵ687)

Çu|men vŦ CA
Gk # 112331ţ May 29ţ 1996
2S7 SCkA 163

lAC1Sť
ÞeLlLloner AnasLacla Culmen LogeLher wlLh her broLhers SoLeroţ Sulplcloţ AnLonlo and slsLer 8uflna
lnherlLed a plece of properLy slLuaLed ln Þandlţ 8ulacanŦ 1hey agreed Lo subdlvlde Lhe properLy
equally among Lhemselvesţ as Lhey dldţ wlLh Lhe shares of AnasLaclaţ SoLeroţ Sulplclo and 8uflna
abuLLlng Lhe munlclpal roadŦ
1he share of AnasLaclaţ locaLed aL Lhe exLreme lefLţ was deslgnaLed as LoL noŦ 1448Ŵ8Ŵ1Ŧ lL ls
bounded on Lhe rlghL by Lhe properLy of SoLero deslgnaLed as LoLŦ noŦ 14413Ŵ8Ŵ2Ŧ Ad[olnlng
SoLeroƌs properLy on Lhe rlghL are LoLs nosŦ 1448Ŵ8Ŵ3 and 1448Ŵ8Ŵ4 orlglnally owned by 8uflna and
Sulplcloţ respecLlvelyţ buL whlch were laLer acqulred by a cerLaln CaLallna SanLosŦ LocaLed dlrecLly
behlnd Lhe loLs of AnasLacla and SoLero ls Lhe share of Lhelr broLher AnLonlo deslgnaLed as LoL noŦ
1448Ŵ8ŴC whlch Lhe laLLer dlvlded lnLo Lwo (2) equal parLsţ now LoLs nosŦ 1448Ŵ8Ŵ6ŴA and 1448Ŵ8Ŵ6Ŵ
8ţ each wlLh an area of 92 square meLersŦ LoL noŦ 1448Ŵ8Ŵ6ŴA ls locaLed behlnd AnasLaclaƌs LoL noŦ
1448Ŵ8Ŵ1ţ whlle LoL noŦ 1448Ŵ8Ŵ6Ŵ8 ls behlnd Lhe properLy of SoLeroţ faLher of respondenL ?olandaŦ
ln lebruary 1982 ?olanda purchased LoL noŦ 1448Ŵ8Ŵ6ŴA from her uncle AnLonlo Lhrough her aunL
AnasLacla who was Lhen acLlng as hls admlnlsLraLrlxŦ 1he laLLer allegedly assured her LhaL she would
glve her a rlghL of way on her ad[olnlng properLy aL a cerLaln prlceŦ
1hereafLerţ ?olanda consLrucLed a house on Lhe loL she boughL uslng as her passageway Lo Lhe
publlc hlghway a porLlon of AnasLaclaƌs properLyŦ 8uL when ?olanda flnally offered Lo pay for Lhe
use of Lhe paLhway AnasLacla refused Lo accepL Lhe paymenLŦ ln facL she was LhereafLer barred by
AnasLacla from passlng Lhrough her properLyŦ
ln Lhe meanLlmeţ ?olanda purchased Lhe oLher loL of AnLonlo Culmenţ LoL noŦ 1448Ŵ8Ŵ6Ŵ8ţ locaLed
dlrecLly behlnd Lhe properLy of her parenLs who provlded her a paLhway graLls eL amore beLween
Lhelr houseţ exLendlng abouL nlneLeen (19) meLers from Lhe loL of ?olanda behlnd Lhe sarl sarl
sLore of SoLeroţ and AnasLaclaƌs perlmeLer fenceŦ AlLhough Lhe paLhway leads Lo Lhe munlclpal road
lL ls noL adequaLe for lngress and egressŦ 1he munlclpal road cannoL be reached wlLh faclllLy
because Lhe sLore lLself obsLrucLs Lhe paLh so LhaL one has Lo pass Lhrough Lhe back enLrance and
Lhe facade of Lhe sLore Lo reach Lhe roadŦ
lor Lhls reasonţ ?olanda flled an acLlon wlLh Lhe proper courL praylng for a rlghL of way Lhrough
AnasLaclaƌs properLyŦ 1he courL dlsmlssed her peLlLlonŦ Cn appeal by respondenL ?olandaţ Lhe CourL
of Appeals reversed Lhe lower courL and held LhaL she was enLlLled Lo a rlghL of way on peLlLlonerƌs
properLy and LhaL Lhe way proposed by ?olanda would cause Lhe leasL damage and deLrlmenL Lo
Lhe servlenL esLaLeŦ
lSSuLť WCn ?olanda may be glven a rlghL of way on Lhe properLy of peLlLlonerŦ
PLLuť ?LS
We flnd no cogenL reason Lo dlsLurb Lhe rullng of respondenL appellaLe courL granLlng a rlghL of
way Lo prlvaLe respondenL Lhrough peLlLlonerƌs properLyŦ ln facLţ as beLween peLlLloner AnasLacla
and respondenL ?olanda Lhelr agreemenL has already been rendered mooL lnsofar as lL concerns
Lhe deLermlnaLlon of Lhe prlnclpal lssue hereln presenLedŦ 1he volunLary easemenL ln favor of
prlvaLe respondenLţ whlch peLlLloner now denles buL whlch Lhe courL ls lncllned Lo belleveţ has ln
facL become a legal easemenL or an easemenL by necesslLy consLlLuLed by lawŦ
As deflnedţ an easemenL ls a real rlghL on anoLherƌs properLyţ corporeal and lmmovableţ whereby
Lhe owner of Lhe laLLer musL refraln from dolng or allowlng somebody else Lo do or someLhlng Lo
be done on hls properLyţ for Lhe beneflL of anoLher person or LenemenLŦ lL ls [us ln re allenaţ
lnseparableţ lndlvlslble and perpeLualţ unless exLlngulshed by causes provlded by lawŦ A rlghL of
way ln parLlcular ls a prlvllege consLlLuLed by covenanL or granLed by law Lo a person or class of
persons Lo pass over anoLherƌs properLy when hls LenemenL ls surrounded by realLles belonglng Lo
oLhers wlLhouL an adequaLe ouLleL Lo Lhe publlc hlghwayŦ 1he owner of Lhe domlnanL esLaLe can

demand a rlghL of way Lhrough Lhe servlenL esLaLe provlded he lndemnlfles Lhe owner Lhereof for
Lhe beneflclal use of hls properLyŦ
1he condlLlons slne quo non for a valld granL of an easemenL of rlghL of way areť (a) Lhe domlnanL
esLaLe ls surrounded by oLher lmmovables wlLhouL an adequaLe ouLleL Lo a publlc hlghwayŤ (b) Lhe
domlnanL esLaLe ls wllllng Lo pay Lhe proper lndemnlLyŤ (c) Lhe lsolaLlon was noL due Lo Lhe acLs of
Lhe domlnanL esLaLeŤ andţ (d) Lhe rlghL of way belng clalmed ls aL a polnL leasL pre[udlclal Lo Lhe
servlenL esLaLeŦ
1he evldence clearly shows LhaL Lhe properLy of prlvaLe respondenL ls hemmed ln by Lhe esLaLes of
oLher persons lncludlng LhaL of peLlLlonerŤ LhaL she offered Lo pay Þ200Ŧ00 per square meLer for her
rlghL of way as agreed beLween her and peLlLlonerŤ LhaL she dld noL cause Lhe lsolaLlon of her
properLyŤ LhaL Lhe rlghL of way ls Lhe leasL pre[udlclal Lo Lhe servlenL esLaLeŦ 14 1hese facLs are
conflrmed ln Lhe ocular lnspecLlon reporL of Lhe clerk of courLţ more so LhaL Lhe Lrlal courL lLself
declared LhaL ƍżLŽhe sald properLles of AnLonlo Culmen whlch were purchased by plalnLlff ?olanda
Culmen Cllveros were LoLally lsolaLed from Lhe publlc hlghway and Lhere appears an lmperaLlve
need for an easemenL of rlghL of way Lo Lhe publlc hlghwayŦƍ
ÞeLlLloner flnally lnslsLs LhaL respondenL courL erroneously concluded LhaL Lhe rlghL of way
proposed by prlvaLe respondenL ls Lhe leasL onerous Lo Lhe parLlesŦ We cannoL agreeŦ ArLlcle 630 of
Lhe new Clvll Code expllclLly sLaLes LhaL Lhe easemenL of rlghL of way shall be esLabllshed aL Lhe
polnL leasL pre[udlclal Lo Lhe servlenL esLaLe andţ lnsofar as conslsLenL wlLh Lhls ruleţ where Lhe
dlsLance from Lhe domlnanL esLaLe Lo a publlc hlghway may be Lhe shorLesLŦ 1he crlLerlon of leasL
pre[udlce Lo Lhe servlenL esLaLe musL prevall over Lhe crlLerlon of shorLesL dlsLance alLhough Lhls ls
a maLLer of [udlclal appreclaLlonŦ Whlle shorLesL dlsLance may ordlnarlly lmply leasL pre[udlceţ lL ls
noL always so as when Lhere are permanenL sLrucLures obsLrucLlng Lhe shorLesL dlsLanceŤ whlle on
Lhe oLher handţ Lhe longesL dlsLance may be free of obsLrucLlons and Lhe easlesL or mosL
convenlenL Lo pass LhroughŦ ln oLher wordsţ where Lhe easemenL may be esLabllshed on any of
several LenemenLs surroundlng Lhe domlnanL esLaLeţ Lhe one where Lhe way ls shorLesL and wlll
cause Lhe leasL damage should be chosenŦ Poweverţ as elsewhere sLaLedţ lf Lhese Lwo (2)
clrcumsLances do noL concur ln a slngle LenemenLţ Lhe way whlch wlll cause Lhe leasL damage
should be usedţ even lf lL wlll noL be Lhe shorLesLŦ 1hls ls Lhe LesLŦ
ln applylng ArLŦ 630 of Lhe new Clvll Codeţ respondenL CourL of Appeals declared LhaL Lhe proposed
rlghL of way of ?olandaţ whlch ls one (1) meLer wlde and flve (3) meLers long aL Lhe exLreme rlghL of
peLlLlonerƌs properLyţ wlll cause Lhe leasL pre[udlce and/or damage as compared Lo Lhe suggesLed
passage Lhrough Lhe properLy of ?olandaƌs faLher whlch would mean desLroylng Lhe sarl sarl sLore
made of sLrong maLerlalsŦ AbsenL any showlng LhaL Lhese flndlngs and concluslon are devold of
facLual supporL ln Lhe recordsţ or are so glarlngly erroneousţ Lhls CourL accepLs and adopLs LhemŦ

StaŦ Mar|a vŦ CA
Gk # 127S49ţ IanŦ 28ţ 1998
28S SCkA 3S1

lAC1Sť
ÞlalnLlff spouses Arsenlo and 8oslynn la[ardo are Lhe reglsLered owners of a plece of landţ LoL noŦ
124Ŧ Sald loL ls surrounded by LoL 1ţ a flshpondţ on Lhe norLheasL porLlon LhereofŤ by LoL 126ţ
owned by llorenLlno Cruzţ on Lhe souLheasL porLlonŤ by LoL 6Ŵa and a porLlon of LoL 6Ŵb owned
respecLlvely by Spouses Cesar and 8aquel SLaŦ Marla and llorcerflda SLaŦ Marlaţ on Lhe souLhwesLŤ
and by LoL 122ţ owned by Lhe !aclnLo famllyţ on Lhe norLhwesLŦ
ÞlalnLlff spouses la[ardo flled a complalnL agalnsL defendanLs Cesar and 8aquel SLaŦ Marla or
llorcerflda SLaŦ Marla for Lhe esLabllshmenL of an easemenL of rlghL of wayŦ ÞlalnLlffs alleged LhaL
Lhelr loLţ LoL 124ţ ls surrounded by properLles belonglng Lo oLher personsţ lncludlng Lhose of Lhe
defendanLsŤ LhaL slnce plalnLlffs have no adequaLe ouLleL Lo Lhe provlnclal roadţ an easemenL of a
rlghL of way passlng Lhrough elLher of Lhe alLernaLlve defendanLsƌ properLles whlch are dlrecLly
abuLLlng Lhe provlnclal road would be plalnLlffsƌ only convenlenLţ dlrecL and shorLesL access Lo and
from Lhe provlnclal roadŤ LhaL plalnLlffsƌ predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresL have been passlng Lhrough Lhe
properLles of defendanLs ln golng Lo and from Lhelr loLŤ LhaL defendanLsƌ moLher even promlsed
plalnLlffsƌ predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresL Lo granL Lhe laLLer an easemenL of rlghL of way as she
acknowledged Lhe absence of an access from Lhelr properLy Lo Lhe roadŤ and LhaL alLernaLlve
defendanLsţ desplLe plalnLlffsƌ requesL for a rlghL of way and referral of Lhe dlspuLe Lo Lhe barangay
offlclalsţ refused Lo granL Lhem an easemenLŦ 1husţ plalnLlffs prayed LhaL an easemenL of rlghL of
way on Lhe loLs of defendanLs be esLabllshed ln Lhelr favorŦ
1he Lrlal courL declded ln favor of respondenLs and found LhaL based on Lhe Ccular lnspecLlon
8eporL Lhere was no oLher way Lhrough whlch Lhe prlvaLe respondenLs could esLabllsh a rlghL of
way ln order Lo reach Lhe provlnclal road excepL by Lraverslng dlrecLly Lhe properLy of Lhe
peLlLlonersŦ Cn appealţ Lhe CourL of Appeals agreed wlLh Lhe Lrlal courL LhaL Lhe prlvaLe
respondenLs had sufflclenLly esLabllshed Lhe exlsLence of Lhe four requlslLes for compulsory
easemenL of rlghL of wayŦ
lSSuLť
WCn a compulsory rlghL of way can be granLed Lo prlvaLe respondenLs who have Lwo oLher
exlsLlng passage ways oLher Lhan LhaL of peLlLloners and an alLernaLlve vacanL loL fronLlng Lhe
provlnclal road also ad[acenL Lo prlvaLe respondenLsƌ properLyţ whlch can be used ln golng Lo and
from prlvaLe respondenLsƌ properLyŦ
PLLuť
?LSŦ All Loldţ Lhe flndlngs of facL of boLh courLs saLlsfled Lhe followlng requlremenLs for an esLaLe Lo
be enLlLled Lo a compulsory servlLude of rlghL of way under Lhe Clvll Codeţ Lo wlLť
1Ŧ Lhe domlnanL esLaLe ls surrounded by oLher lmmovables and has no adequaLe ouLleL Lo
a publlc hlghway (ArLŦ 649ţ parŦ 1)Ť
2Ŧ Lhere ls paymenL of proper lndemnlLy (ArLŦ 649ţ parŦ 1)Ť
3Ŧ Lhe lsolaLlon ls noL due Lo Lhe acLs of Lhe proprleLor of Lhe domlnanL esLaLe (ArLŦ 649ţ
lasL parŦ)Ť and
4Ŧ Lhe rlghL of way clalmed ls aL Lhe polnL leasL pre[udlclal Lo Lhe servlenL esLaLeŤ and
lnsofar as conslsLenL wlLh Lhls ruleţ where Lhe dlsLance from Lhe domlnanL esLaLe Lo a publlc
hlghway may be Lhe shorLesL (ArLŦ 630)Ŧ
1he properLy of Lhe plalnLlffsţ spouses Arsenlo and 8oslynn la[ardoţ ls compleLely surrounded wlLh
adobe fence wlLhouL any polnL of egress and lngress Lo Lhe naLlonal roadŦ lL has been commenLed
upon LhaL where Lhere are several LenemenLs surroundlng Lhe domlnanL esLaLeţ and Lhe easemenL
may be esLabllshed on any of Lhemţ Lhe one where Lhe way ls shorLesL and wlll cause Lhe leasL
damage should be chosenŦ 8uL lf Lhese Lwo clrcumsLances do noL concur ln a slngle LenemenLţ Lhe
way whlch wlll cause Lhe leasL damage should be usedţ even lf lL wlll noL be Lhe shorLesLŦ And lf Lhe
condlLlons of Lhe varlous LenemenLs are Lhe sameţ all Lhe ad[olnlng owners should be clLed and
experLs uLlllzed Lo deLermlne where Lhe easemenL shall be esLabllshedŦ
ln Lhe case aL barţ Lhe ocular lnspecLlon dlsclosed LhaL Lhere are Lhree opLlons open Lo Lhe
plalnLlffsŴappellees as a rouLe Lo reach Lhe naLlonal roadţ Lo wlLť
(1) 1o Lraverse dlrecLly Lhrough defendanLsƌ properLy whlch ls Lhe shorLesL rouLe of
approxlmaLely 20 Lo 23 meLers away from Lhe naLlonal roadŤ

(2) 1o purchase a rlghL of way from Lhe ad[olnlng properLy of llorenLlno Cruz on Lhe lefL
slde of Lhelr properLyŤ and
(3) 1o negoLlaLe wlLh !aclnLo famlly on Lhe rlghL slde of Lhelr properLyŦ
ln all lnsLancesţ no slgnlflcanL sLrucLures would be adversely affecLedŦ 1here ls sufflclenL vacanL
space beLween defendanLsƌ houses of approxlmaLely 11 meLersŦ 1he dlsLance of defendanL
llorcerfldaƌs house wlLh Lhe ad[olnlng adobe wall separaLlng LhaL of Lhe properLy of defendanLs
Cesar and 8acquel SLaŦ Marla ls abouL 4 meLersţ whlle Lhe space beLween Lhe adobe wall and LhaL
of Lhe laLLerƌs house ls abouL 7 meLers or a LoLal of 11 meLers vacanL space for purposes of a rlghL
of wayŦ Cn Lhe oLher handţ plalnLlffs may negoLlaLe wlLh a rlghL of way wlLh llorenLlno Cruz on Lhe
lefL slde of Lhelr properLy alLhough Lhe same ls qulLe clrculLousŦ LasLlyţ Lhe opLlon Lhrough Lhe
properLy of Lhe !aclnLo on Lhe rlghL slde ls very clrculLous and longerŦ 1he rouLe lnvolves a LoLal of
abouL 30 yards as lL has Lo go sLralghL Lo Lhe rlghL of abouL 33 yards and Lurn lefL of abouL anoLher
13 yards before reachlng Lhe common rlghL of wayŦ
Among Lhe Lhree (3) posslble servlenL esLaLesţ lL ls clear LhaL defendanLsŴappellanLsƌ properLy
would afford Lhe shorLesL dlsLance from plalnLlffsŴappelleesƌ properLy Lo Lhe provlnclal roadŦ
Moreoverţ lL ls Lhe leasL pre[udlclal slnce as found by Lhe lower courLţ ƍ(l)L appears LhaL Lhere would
be no slgnlflcanL sLrucLures Lo be ln[ured ln Lhe defendanLsƌ properLy and Lhe rlghLŴofŴway Lo be
consLrucLed Lhereon would be Lhe shorLesL of all Lhe alLernaLlve rouLes polnLed Lo by Lhe
defendanLsƍ
Çu|ntan|||a vŦ Abangan
Gk # 160613ţ IebŦ 12ţ 2008
S44 SCkA 494

lAC1Sť
ÞerfecLa boughL LoL noŦ 3771Ŵ8Ŵ1ŴAţ (Lhe domlnanL esLaLe) from one ulonlslo AbasoloŦ 1hereafLerţ
ÞerfecLa donaLed Lhe domlnanL esLaLe Lo ApollnardlLo (peLlLloner)ţ her sonţ who ls now Lhe
reglsLered owner LhereofŦ ÞeLlLloners own CC 8aLLan lncŦţ a domesLlc corporaLlon engaged ln Lhe
manufacLure and exporL of raLLanŴmade furnlLureŦ ln Lhe conducL of Lhelr buslnessţ Lhey use vans
Lo haul and LransporL raw maLerlals and flnlshed producLsŦ As Lhey wanLed Lo expand Lhelr buslness
and consLrucL a warehouse on Lhelr properLy (Lhe domlnanL esLaLe)ţ Lhey flled an acLlon asklng for
a rlghL of way from respondenL ÞedroŦ
Poweverţ lL appears LhaL Þedroţ who was Lhe owner of LoL noŦ 3771ŴAŴ1ţ (Lhe servlenL esLaLe) and
a loL near Lhe domlnanL esLaLeţ had earller sold Lhe same Lo uA8?LƌS ţ and LhereafLerţ uA8?LƌS
consLrucLed a warehouse over Lhe servlenL esLaLeţ encloslng Lhe same wlLh a concreLe fenceŦ
1he Lrlal courL dlsmlssed Lhe peLlLlon for lack of merlL rullng LhaL held LhaL peLlLloners falled Lo
esLabllsh LhaL Lhe lmposlLlon of Lhe rlghL of way was Lhe leasL pre[udlclal Lo Lhe servlenL esLaLeŦ Cn
appealţ Lhe CA afflrmed Lhe adverse declslon holdlng LhaL Lhe crlLerlon of leasL pre[udlce Lo Lhe
servlenL esLaLe musL prevall over Lhe shorLesL dlsLanceŦ
lSSuLť
WCn compllance wlLh Lhe precondlLlons seL forLh ln arLlcles 649 and 630 of Lhe new clvll code ls
superlor Lo Lhe ƍmere convenlence rule agalnsL Lhe owner of Lhe domlnanL esLaLeŦ
PLLuť
?LSŦ
As provlded for under Lhe provlslons of ArLlcle 630 of Lhe new Clvll Codeţ Lhe easemenL of rlghL of
way shall be esLabllshed aL Lhe polnL leasL pre[udlclal Lo Lhe servlenL esLaLeţ andţ lnsofar as
conslsLenL wlLh Lhls ruleţ where Lhe dlsLance from Lhe domlnanL esLaLe Lo a publlc hlghway may be
Lhe shorLesLŦ Where Lhere are several LenemenLs surroundlng Lhe domlnanL esLaLeţ and Lhe
easemenL may be esLabllshed on any of Lhemţ Lhe one where Lhe way ls shorLesL and wlll cause Lhe
leasL damage should be chosenŦ 8uL lf Lhese Lwo clrcumsLances do noL concur ln a slngle LenemenLţ
as ln Lhe lnsLanL caseţ Lhe way whlch wlll cause Lhe leasL damage should be usedţ even lf lL wlll noL
be Lhe shorLesLŦ 1he crlLerlon of leasL pre[udlce Lo Lhe servlenL esLaLe musL prevall over Lhe
crlLerlon of shorLesL dlsLanceŦ 1he courL ls noL bound Lo esLabllsh whaL ls Lhe shorLesLŤ a longer way
may be esLabllshed Lo avold ln[ury Lo Lhe servlenL LenemenLţ such as when Lhere are consLrucLlons
or walls whlch can be avolded by a roundŴabouL wayţ as ln Lhe case aL barŦ

As beLween a rlghL of way LhaL would demollsh a fence of sLrong maLerlals Lo provlde lngress and
egress Lo a publlc hlghway and anoLher rlghL of way whlch alLhough longer wlll only requlre a van
or vehlcle Lo make a Lurnţ Lhe second alLernaLlve should be preferredŦ Mere convenlence for Lhe
domlnanL esLaLe ls noL whaL ls requlred by law as Lhe basls for seLLlng up a compulsory easemenLŦ
Lven ln Lhe face of necesslLyţ lf lL can be saLlsfled wlLhouL lmposlng Lhe easemenLţ Lhe same should
noL be lmposedŦ
llnallyţ worLhy of noLeţ ls Lhe undlspuLed facL LhaL Lhere ls already a newly opened publlc road
barely flfLy (30) meLers away from Lhe properLy of appellanLsţ whlch only shows LhaL anoLher
requlremenL of Lhe lawţ LhaL lsţ Lhere ls no adequaLe ouLleLţ has noL been meL Lo esLabllsh a
compulsory rlghL of wayŦ

Va|dez vŦ @ab|su|a
Gk # 17SS10ţ Iu|y 28ţ 2008
S60 SCkA 332
lAC1SŤ
ÞeLlLlonerŴspouses vlcLor and !ocelyn valdez purchased from respondenLŴspouses lranclsco
1ablsula and Carldad 1ablsula a parcel of landţ bounded on Lhe norLh by LoL noŦ 23369ţ on Lhe
LasLţ by LoL noŦ 247ţ 231ţ on Lhe SouLhţ by a Creek and on Lhe WesLţ by LoL noŦ 223ŴAŦ ln Lhelr
conLracL of saleţ Lhey have agreed LhaL peLlLloners shall be provlded ºa 2 1/2 meLers żslcŽ wlde road
rlghLŴofŴway on Lhe wesLern slde of Lhelr loL whlch ls noL lncluded ln Lhls saleŦ"
8espondenLs subsequenLly bullL a concreLe wall on Lhe wesLern slde of Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ
8ellevlng LhaL LhaL slde ls Lhe lnLended road rlghL of way menLloned ln Lhe deedţ peLlLlonersţ
Lhrough Lhelr represenLaLlveţ reporLed Lhe maLLer Lo Lhe barangay for medlaLlon and conclllaLlonŦ
8espondenLs falled Lo aLLend Lhe conferences scheduled by Lhe barangayţ howeverţ drawlng
peLlLloners Lo flle a ComplalnL for Speclflc Þerformance wlLh uamages agalnsL respondenLs before
Lhe 81CŦ
8espondenLsţ ln Lhelr Answer wlLh Compulsory CounLerclalm (for damages and aLLorney's fees)ţ
averred LhaL Lhe 2 ZŴmeLer easemenL should be Laken from Lhe wesLern porLlon of Lhe sub[ecL
properLy and noL from LhelrsŤ6 and peLlLloners and Lhelr famlly are also Lhe owners of Lwo
properLles ad[olnlng Lhe sub[ecL properLyţ whlch ad[olnlng properLles have access Lo Lwo publlc
roads or hlghways Ŷ Lhe blgger one whlch ad[olns ÞŦ 8urgos SLŦ on Lhe norLhţ and Lhe smaller one
whlch abuLs an exlsLlng barangay road on Lhe norLhŦ
1he 81C dlsmlssed peLlLloners' complalnL and granLed respondenLs' CounLerclalmŦ Cn appealţ Lhe
CAţ afflrmed Lhe Lrlal courL's declslonŦ
1he appellaLe courL wenL on Lo hold LhaL peLlLloners are nelLher enLlLled Lo a legal or compulsory
easemenL of rlghL of way as Lhey falled Lo presenL clrcumsLances [usLlfylng Lhelr enLlLlemenL Lo lL
under ArLlcle 649 of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ
lSSuLť WCn peLlLloners may demand for a rlghL of way based on Lhe clause ln Lhelr conLracL of
saleŦ

PLLuť
nCŦ
ÞeLlLloners are nelLher enLlLled Lo a legal or compulsory easemenL of rlghL of wayŦ lor Lo be enLlLled
Lo such klnd of easemenLţ Lhe precondlLlons under ArLlcles 649 and 630 of Lhe Clvll Code musL be
esLabllshedţ vlzť
ArLŦ 649Ŧ 1he ownerţ or any person who by vlrLue of a real rlghL may culLlvaLe or use any
lmmovableţ whlch ls surrounded by oLher lmmovables perLalnlng Lo oLher personsţ and wlLhouL
adequaLe ouLleL Lo a publlc hlghwayţ ls enLlLled Lo demand a rlghL of way Lhrough Lhe nelghborlng
esLaLesţ afLer paymenL of Lhe proper lndemnlLyŦ
x x x x

1hls easemenL ls noL compulsory lf Lhe lsolaLlon of Lhe lmmovable ls due Lo Lhe proprleLor's own
acLsŦ (underscorlng supplled)
ArLŦ 630Ŧ 1he easemenL of rlghL of way shall be esLabllshed aL Lhe polnL leasL pre[udlclal Lo Lhe
servlenL esLaLeţ andţ lnsofar as conslsLenL wlLh Lhls ruleţ where Lhe dlsLance from Lhe domlnanL
esLaLe Lo a publlc hlghway may be Lhe shorLesLŦ (underscorlng supplled)
1husţ Lo be conferred a legal easemenL of rlghL of way under ArLlcle 649ţ Lhe followlng requlslLes
musL be complled wlLhť (1) Lhe properLy ls surrounded by oLher lmmovables and has no adequaLe
ouLleL Lo a publlc hlghwayŤ (2) proper lndemnlLy musL be paldŤ (3) Lhe lsolaLlon ls noL Lhe resulL of
Lhe owner of Lhe domlnanL esLaLe's own acLsŤ (4) Lhe rlghL of way clalmed ls aL Lhe polnL leasL
pre[udlclal Lo Lhe servlenL esLaLeŤ and (3) Lo Lhe exLenL conslsLenL wlLh Lhe foregolng ruleţ Lhe
dlsLance from Lhe domlnanL esLaLe Lo a publlc hlghway may be Lhe shorLesLŦ 1he onus of provlng
Lhe exlsLence of Lhese prerequlslLes lles on Lhe owner of Lhe domlnanL esLaLeţ hereln peLlLlonersŦ
As foundţ howeverţ by Lhe Lrlal courLţ peLlLloners and Lhelr famlly are also Lhe owners of Lwo
properLles ad[olnlng Lhe sub[ecL properLy whlch have access Lo Lwo publlc roads or hlghwaysŦ
Slnce peLlLloners Lhen have more Lhan adequaLe passage Lo Lwo publlc roadsţ Lhey have no rlghL Lo
demand Lhe granL by respondenLs of an easemenL on Lhe ƍwesLern slde of żrespondenLs'Ž loLŦƍ


Chapter 3Ŧ Vo|untary Lasements (ArtsŦ 688 Ŵ693)

La V|sta AssocŦ vŦ CA
Gk # 9S2S2ţ SeptŦ Sţ 1997
278 SCkA 498
lacLsť Mangyan 8oad ls Lhe boundary beLween Lhe La vlsLa Subdlvlslon on one slde and ALeneo
and Maryknoll (Mlrlam) on Lhe oLherŦ 1he road exLends Lo Lhe enLrance gaLe of Loyola Crand vlllasŦ
1he area comprlslng Lhe 13ŴmeLer wlde roadway was orlglnally parL of a vasL LracL of land owned
by Lhe 1uasonsŦ 1he 1uasons sold Lo Þhlllpplne 8ulldlng CorporaLlon a porLlon of Lhelr landholdlngsŦ
1he Þhlllpplne 8ulldlng CorporaLlon Lransferredţ wlLh Lhe consenL of Lhe 1uasonsţ Lhe sub[ecL parcel
of land Lo ALeneoŦ 1he 1uasons developed a parL of Lhe esLaLe ad[olnlng Lhe porLlon sold Lo
Þhlllpplne 8ulldlng CorporaLlon lnLo La vlsLa SubdlvlslonŦ

La vlsLa seeks Lhe lssuance of a wrlL of ln[uncLlon Lo flnally en[oln prlvaLe respondenLs Solld Pomesţ
lncŦţ developers of Loyola Crand vlllas Subdlvlslonţ Lhe laLLer's predecessorŴlnŴlnLeresLţ ALeneoţ and
Lhe resldenLs of Lhe sald subdlvlslon from en[oylng an easemenL of rlghLŴofŴway over Mangyan
8oadŦ

La vlsLa conLends LhaL ºmere convenlence for Lhe domlnanL esLaLe ls noL enough Lo serve as lLs (Lhe
easemenL of rlghLŴofŴway) baslsŦ 1o [usLlfy Lhe lmposlLlon of Lhls servlLudeţ Lhere musL be a realţ
noL a flcLlLlous or arLlflclalţ necesslLy for lL"

lssueť WheLher or noL La vlsLa may wlLhhold from Lhe prlvaLe respondenLs Lhe use of Lhe Mangyan
8oad

Peldť 1he rule clLed by La vlsLaţ enunclaLed ln 8amosţ SrŦţ vŦ CaLchallan 8ealLyţ lncŦţ concerns a legal
or compulsory easemenL of rlghLŴofŴwayŦ A legal or compulsory easemenL ls LhaL whlch ls
consLlLuLed by law for publlc use or for prlvaLe lnLeresLŦ A volunLary easemenL on Lhe oLher hand ls
consLlLuLed slmply by wlll or agreemenL of Lhe parLlesŦ

lrom Lhe facLs of Lhe lnsLanL case lL ls very apparenL LhaL Lhe parLles and Lhelr respecLlve
predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresL lnLended Lo esLabllsh an easemenL of rlghLŴofŴway over Mangyan 8oad for
Lhelr muLual beneflLţ boLh as domlnanL and servlenL esLaLesŦ 1hls ls qulLe evldenL whenť

(a) Lhe 1uasons and Lhe Þhlllpplne 8ulldlng CorporaLlon sLlpulaLed ln parŦ 3 of Lhelr ueed of
Sale wlLh MorLgage LhaL Lhe ƍboundary llne beLween Lhe properLy hereln sold and Lhe ad[olnlng
properLy of Lhe vLnuC8S shall be a road flfLeen (13)meLers wldeţ oneŴhalf of whlch shall be Laken
from Lhe properLy hereln sold Lo LhevLnuLL and Lhe oLher half from Lhe porLlon ad[olnlng
belonglng Lo Lhe vendorsŤƍ

(b) Lhe 1uasons expressly agreed and consenLed Lo Lhe asslgnmenL of Lhe land Loţ and Lhe
assumpLlon of all Lhe rlghLs and obllgaLlons by ALeneoţ lncludlng Lhe obllgaLlon Lo conLrlbuLe seven
and oneŴhalf meLers of Lhe properLy sold Lo form parL of Lhe 13ŴmeLer wlde roadwayŤ

(c) Lhe 1uasons flled a complalnL agalnsL Maryknoll and ALeneo for breach of conLracL and
Lhe enforcemenL Lhe reclprocal easemenL on Mangyan 8oadţ and demanded LhaL Maryknoll seL
back lLs wall Lo resLore Mangyan 8oad Lo lLs orlglnal wldLh of 13 meLersţ afLer Maryknoll
consLrucLed a wall ln Lhe mlddle of Lhe 13ŴmeLer wlde roadwayŤ

(d) La vlsLa ÞresldenL Manuel !Ŧ Conzales admlLLed and clarlfledţ ln a leLLer Lo ALeneo
ÞresldenL lrŦ !ose AŦ Cruzţ SŦ!Ŧţ LhaL ƍMangyan 8oad ls a road flfLeen meLers wldeţ oneŴhalf of whlch
ls Laken from your properLy and Lhe oLher half from Lhe La vlsLa SubdlvlslonŦ So LhaL Lhe easemenL
of a rlghLŴofŴway on your 7 1/2 mŦ porLlon was creaLed ln our favor and llkewlse an easemenL of
rlghLŴofŴway was creaLed on our7 1/2 mŦ porLlon of Lhe road ln your favorŤƍ

(e) La vlsLaţ ln lLs offer Lo buy Lhe hlllslde porLlon of Lhe ALeneo properLyţ acknowledged
Lhe exlsLence of Lhe conLracLual rlghLŴofŴway as lL manlfesLed LhaL Lhe muLual rlghLŴofŴway beLween
Lhe ALeneo de Manlla unlverslLy and La vlsLa Pomeownersƌ AssoclaLlon would be exLlngulshed lf lL
boughL Lhe ad[acenL A1LnLC properLy and would Lhus become Lhe owner of boLh Lhe domlnanL
and servlenL esLaLesŤ andţ

(f) La vlsLa ÞresldenL Luls CŦ Culmsonţ ln a leLLer addressed Lo Lhe Chlef !usLlceţ
acknowledged LhaL ƍoneŴhalf of Lhe whole lengLh of (Mangyan 8oad) belongs Lo LavlsLa AssnŦţ lncŦ
1he oLher half ls owned by Mlrlam (Maryknoll) and Lhe ALeneo lnequal porLlonsŤƍ

1hese cerLalnly are lndublLable proofs LhaL Lhe parLles concerned had lndeed consLlLuLed a
volunLary easemenL of rlghLŴofŴway over Mangyan 8oad andţ llke any oLher conLracLŤ Lhe same
could be exLlngulshed only by muLual agreemenL or by renunclaLlon of Lhe owner of Lhe domlnanL
esLaLeŦ

1he argumenL of peLlLloner LhaL Lhere are oLher rouLes Lo Loyola Crand vlllas from Mangyan 8oad
ls merlLlessŦ 1he openlng of an adequaLe ouLleL Lo a hlghway can exLlngulsh only legal or
compulsory easemenLsţ noL volunLary easemenLsŦ

1haL Lhere ls no conLracL beLween La vlsLa and Solld Pomesţ lncŦţ and Lhus Lhe courL could noL have
declared Lhe exlsLence of an easemenL creaLed by Lhe manlfesL wlll of Lhe parLlesţ ls devold of
merlLŦ 1he predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresL of boLh La vlsLa and Solld PomesţlncŦţlŦeŦţ Lhe 1uasons and Lhe
Þhlllpplne 8ulldlng CorporaLlonţ respecLlvelyţ clearly esLabllshed a conLracLual easemenL of rlghLŴofŴ
way over Mangyan 8oadŦ

Un|source vŦ Chung
Gk # 1732S2ţ Iu|Ŧ 17ţ 2009
S93 SCkA 230
lacLsť ÞeLlLloner unlsource Commerclal and uevelopmenL CorporaLlon ls Lhe reglsLered owner of a
parcel of land covered by 1ransfer CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle (1C1) noŦ 176233 of Lhe 8eglsLer of ueeds of
ManllaŦ 1he LlLle conLalns a memorandum of encumbrance of a volunLary easemenL whlch has
been carrled over from Lhe Crlglnal CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle of Lncarnaclon SŦ SandlcoŦ
As Sandlco's properLy was Lransferred Lo several ownersţ Lhe memorandum of encumbrance of a
volunLary easemenL ln favor of lranclsco MŦ Pldalgo was conslsLenLly annoLaLed aL Lhe back of
every LlLle coverlng Sandlco's properLy unLll 1C1 noŦ 176233 was lssued ln peLlLloner's favorŦ Cn Lhe
oLher handţ Pldalgo's properLy was evenLually Lransferred Lo respondenLs !oseph Chungţ klaL
Chung and CleLo Chung under 1C1 noŦ 121488Ŧ
Cn May 26ţ 2000ţ peLlLloner flled a ÞeLlLlon Lo Cancel Lhe Lncumbrance of volunLary LasemenL of
8lghL of Way on Lhe ground LhaL Lhe domlnanL esLaLe has an adequaLe access Lo a publlc road
whlch ls MaLlenza SLreeLŦ 1he Lrlal courL dlsmlssed Lhe peLlLlon on Lhe ground LhaL lL ls a land
reglsLraLlon caseŦ ÞeLlLloner moved for reconslderaLlonŦ 1hereafLerţ Lhe Lrlal courL conducLed an
ocular lnspecLlon of Lhe properLyŦ ln an Crder daLed november 24ţ 2000ţ Lhe Lrlal courL granLed Lhe
moLlonŦ ln Lhelr Answerţ respondenLs counLered LhaL Lhe exLlngulshmenL of Lhe easemenL wlll be of
greaL pre[udlce Lo Lhe locallLy and LhaL peLlLloner ls gullLy of laches slnce lL Look peLlLloner 13 years
from acqulslLlon of Lhe properLy Lo flle Lhe peLlLlonŦ
1he Lrlal courL ordered Lhe cancellaLlon of Lhe encumbrance of volunLary easemenL of rlghL of way
ln favor of Lhe domlnanL esLaLe owned by respondenLsŦ lL found LhaL Lhe domlnanL esLaLe has no
more use for Lhe easemenL slnce lL has anoLher adequaLe ouLleL Lo a publlc road whlch ls MaLlenza
SLreeLŦ 8espondenLs appealed Lo Lhe CourL of AppealsŤ Lhe laLLerţ howeverţ reversed Lhe declslon of
Lhe Lrlal courL and dlsmlssed Lhe peLlLlon Lo cancel Lhe encumbrance of volunLary easemenL of rlghL
of wayŦ
lssueť WheLher or noL Lhe easemenL ls personal slnce Lhe annoLaLlon dld noL prove LhaL lL ls blndlng
on Lhe helrs or asslgns of Sandlco
Peldť 1he peLlLlon lacks merlLŦ
As deflnedţ an easemenL ls a real rlghL on anoLher's properLyţ corporeal and lmmovableţ whereby
Lhe owner of Lhe laLLer musL refraln from dolng or allowlng somebody else Lo do or someLhlng Lo
be done on hls properLyţ for Lhe beneflL of anoLher person or LenemenLŦ LasemenLs are esLabllshed
elLher by law or by Lhe wlll of Lhe ownerŦ 1he former are called legalţ and Lhe laLLerţ volunLary
easemenLsŦ
ln Lhls caseţ peLlLloner lLself admlLLed LhaL a volunLary easemenL of rlghL of way exlsLs ln favor of
respondenLsŦ ln lLs peLlLlon Lo cancel Lhe encumbrance of volunLary easemenL of rlghL of wayţ
peLlLloner alleged LhaL ºżLŽhe easemenL ls personalŦ lL was volunLarlly consLlLuLed ln favor of a
cerLaln lranclsco Pldalgo y Magnlflcoţ Lhe owner of żLhe loLŽ descrlbed as LoL noŦ 2ţ 8lock 2630Ŧ" lL
furLher sLaLed LhaL ºLhe volunLary easemenL of Lhe rlghL of way ln favor of lranclsco Pldalgo y
Magnlflco was consLlLuLed slmply by wlll or agreemenL of Lhe parLlesŦ lL was noL a sLaLuLory
easemenL and deflnlLely noL an easemenL creaLed by such courL order because 'żLheŽ CourL merely
declares Lhe exlsLence of an easemenL creaLed by Lhe parLlesŦ" ln lLs Memorandum daLed
SepLember 27ţ 2001ţ before Lhe Lrlal courLţ peLlLloner relLeraLed LhaL ºżLŽhe annoLaLlon found aL
Lhe back of Lhe 1C1 of unlsource ls a volunLary easemenLŦ"
Pavlng made such an admlsslonţ peLlLloner cannoL now clalm LhaL whaL exlsLs ls a legal easemenL
and LhaL Lhe same should be cancelled slnce Lhe domlnanL esLaLe ls noL an enclosed esLaLe as lL has
an adequaLe access Lo a publlc road whlch ls Calle[on MaLlenza SLreeLŦ As we have saldţ Lhe openlng
of an adequaLe ouLleL Lo a hlghway can exLlngulsh only legal or compulsory easemenLsţ noL
volunLary easemenLs llke ln Lhe case aL barŦ 1he facL LhaL an easemenL by granL may have also
quallfled as an easemenL of necesslLy does noL deLracL from lLs permanency as a properLy rlghLţ
whlch survlves Lhe LermlnaLlon of Lhe necesslLyŦ A volunLary easemenL of rlghL of wayţ llke any
oLher conLracLţ could be exLlngulshed only by muLual agreemenL or by renunclaLlon of Lhe owner of
Lhe domlnanL esLaLeŦ
lL ls seLLled LhaL Lhe reglsLraLlon of Lhe domlnanL esLaLe under Lhe 1orrens sysLem wlLhouL Lhe
annoLaLlon of Lhe volunLary easemenL ln lLs favor does noL exLlngulsh Lhe easemenLŦ Cn Lhe
conLraryţ lL ls Lhe reglsLraLlon of Lhe servlenL esLaLe as freeţ LhaL lsţ wlLhouL Lhe annoLaLlon of Lhe
volunLary easemenLţ whlch exLlngulshes Lhe easemenLŦ
1he mere facL LhaL respondenLs subdlvlded Lhe properLy does noL exLlngulsh Lhe easemenLŦ ArLlcle
618 of Lhe Clvll Code provldes LhaL lf Lhe domlnanL esLaLe ls dlvlded beLween Lwo or more personsţ
each of Lhem may use Lhe easemenL ln lLs enLlreLyţ wlLhouL changlng Lhe place of lLs useţ or maklng
lL more burdensome ln any oLher wayŦ

@|t|e VIIIŦ Nu|sance (ArtsŦ 694Ŵ707)

@e|mo vŦ 8ustamante
Gk # 182S67ţ Iu|Ŧ 13ţ 2009
S92 SCkA SS2
lacLsť 8espondenL ls a coŴowner of a real properLy of 616 square meLers ln 8rgyŦ Palangţ nalcţ
CavlLeţ known as LoL 932ŴA and covered by 1ransfer CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle noŦ 1Ŵ937643 of Lhe 8eglsLer
of ueeds of CavlLeŦ ÞeLlLloner and Lllzalde 1elmo (1elmos) are Lhe owners of Lhe Lwo (2) parcels of
land denomlnaLed as LoL 932Ŵ8 and 932ŴCţ respecLlvelyţ locaLed aL Lhe back of respondenL's loLŦ
When hls loL was Lransgressed by Lhe consLrucLlon of Lhe noveleLaŴnalcŴ1agayLay 8oadţ
respondenL offered for sale Lhe remalnlng loL Lo Lhe 1elmosŦ 1he laLLer refused because Lhey sald
Lhey would have no use for lLţ Lhe remalnlng porLlon belng covered by Lhe road's 10ŴmeLer
easemenLŦ

1he complalnL furLher alleged LhaLţ on May 8ţ 2003ţ respondenL caused Lhe resurvey of LoL 932ŴA ln
Lhe presence of Lhe 1elmosŦ 1he resurvey showed LhaL Lhe 1elmos encroached upon respondenL's
loLŦ ÞeLlLloner Lhen uLLeredţ ºPangga'L ako ang munlclpal englneer ng nalcţ CavlLeţ hlndl kayo
makakapagLayo ng anuman sa lupa n'yoŤ hlndl ko kayo blblgyan ng bulldlng permlLŦ"

Cn May 10ţ 2003ţ respondenL puL up concreLe poles on hls loLŦ Poweverţ around 7ť00 pŦmŦ of Lhe
same dayţ Lhe 1elmos and Lhelr men allegedly desLroyed Lhe concreLe polesŦ 1he followlng dayţ
respondenL's relaLlves wenL Lo 8rgyŦ Chalrman Consumo Lo reporL Lhe desLrucLlon of Lhe concreLe
polesŦ Consumo Lold Lhem LhaL he would noL record Lhe sameţ because he was presenL when Lhe
lncldenL occurredŦ Consumo never recorded Lhe lncldenL ln Lhe barangay bloLLerŦ

8espondenL complalned LhaL he and hls coŴowners dld noL recelve any [usL compensaLlon from Lhe
governmenL when lL Look a porLlon of Lhelr properLy for Lhe consLrucLlon of Lhe noveleLaŴnalcŴ
1agayLay 8oadŦ Worseţ Lhey could noL en[oy Lhe use of Lhe remalnlng parL of Lhelr loL due Lo Lhe
abuslveţ lllegalţ and un[usL acLs of Lhe 1elmos and ConsumoŦ 8espondenL charged Lhe laLLer
crlmlnallyŸfor vlolaLlon of ArLlcle 312 of Lhe 8evlsed Þenal Code and SecLlon 3(e) of 8epubllc AcL
noŦ 3019Ÿ and admlnlsLraLlvelyŸfor vlolaLlon of SecLlon 4 (a) (b)ţ (c)ţ and (e) of 8epubllc AcL noŦ
6713Ŧ

AfLer submlLLlng Lhelr own counLerŴaffldavlLsţ Lhe Cfflce of Lhe uepuLy Cmbudsman for Luzon
found peLlLloner and uanllo Consumo admlnlsLraLlvely llableţ buL dlsmlssed Lhe charge agalnsL
Lllzalde 1elmo for lack of [urlsdlcLlon over hls personţ he belng a prlvaLe lndlvldualŦ ÞeLlLloner flled
a MoLlon for 8econslderaLlon buL was denledŦ Penceţ Lhls peLlLlonŦ

lssueť
(1) WheLher or noL Lhe Ponorable uepuLy Cmbudsman for Luzon serlously erred when he
declared LhaL Lhere was no valld Laklng of respondenL's loL by means of exproprlaLlon

(2) WheLher or noL respondenL's concreLe posLs were ln Lhe naLure of a nulsance per se

Peldť
(1) nCŦ

SecŦ 213Ŧ AbaLemenL of uangerous 8ulldlngsŦŸWhen any bulldlng or sLrucLure ls found or declared
Lo be dangerous or rulnousţ Lhe 8ulldlng Cfflclal shall order lLs repalrţ vacaLlon or demollLlon
dependlng upon Lhe decree of danger Lo llfeţ healLhţ or safeLyŦ 1hls ls wlLhouL pre[udlce Lo furLher
acLlon LhaL may be Laken under Lhe provlslons of ArLlcles 482 and 694 Lo 707 of Lhe Clvll Code of
Lhe ÞhlllpplnesŦ
SecŦ 214Ŧ uangerous and 8ulnous 8ulldlngs or SLrucLuresŦ uangerous bulldlngs are Lhose whlch are
hereln declared as such or are sLrucLurally unsafe or noL provlded wlLh safe egressţ or whlch
consLlLuLe a flre hazardţ or are oLherwlse dangerous Lo human llfeţ or whlch ln relaLlon Lo exlsLlng
useţ consLlLuLe a hazard Lo safeLy or healLh or publlc welfare because of lnadequaLe malnLenanceţ
dllapldaLlonţ obsolescenceţ or abandonmenLţ or whlch oLherwlse conLrlbuLe Lo Lhe polluLlon of Lhe
slLe or Lhe communlLy Lo an lnLolerable degreeŦ

A careful readlng of Lhe foregolng provlslons would readlly show LhaL Lhey do noL apply Lo Lhe
respondenL's slLuaLlonŦ nowhere was lL shown LhaL Lhe concreLe posLs puL up by respondenL ln
whaL he belleved was hls and hls coŴowners' properLy were ever declared dangerous or rulnousţ
such LhaL Lhey can be summarlly demollshed by peLlLlonerŦ

WhaL ls moreţ lL appears LhaL Lhe concreLe posLs do noL even fall wlLhln Lhe scope of Lhe provlslons
of Lhe naLlonal 8ulldlng CodeŦ 1he Code does noL expressly deflne Lhe word ºbulldlngŦ" Poweverţ
we flnd helpful Lhe dlcLlonary deflnlLlon of Lhe word ºbulldlngţ" vlzť żAŽ consLrucLed edlflce
deslgned usually covered by a roof and more or less compleLely enclosed by wallsţ and servlng as a
dwelllngţ sLorehouseţ facLoryţ shelLer for anlmalsţ or oLher useful sLrucLure Ŷ dlsLlngulshed from
sLrucLures noL deslgned for occupancy (as fences or monumenLs) and from sLrucLures noL lnLended
for use ln one place (as boaLs or Lrallers) even Lhough sub[ecL Lo occupancyŦ

(2) nCŦ

A nulsance per se ls LhaL whlch affecLs Lhe lmmedlaLe safeLy of persons and properLy and may be
summarlly abaLed under Lhe undeflned law of necesslLyŦ LvldenLlyţ Lhe concreLe posLs summarlly
removed by peLlLloner dld noL aL all pose a hazard Lo Lhe safeLy of persons and properLlesţ whlch
would have necesslLaLed lmmedlaLe and summary abaLemenLŦ WhaL Lhey dldţ aL mosLţ was Lo pose
an lnconvenlence Lo Lhe publlc by blocklng Lhe free passage of people Lo and from Lhe naLlonal
roadŦ


8CCk III Ŵ DIIILkLN@ MCDLS CI ACÇUIkING CWNLkSnIÞ

ÞkLLIMINAk ÞkCVISICN (ArtŦ 712)


@|t|e IŦ CCCUÞA@ICN (ArtsŦ 713Ŵ720)

Acap vŦ CA
Gk # 118114ţ DecŦ 7ţ 199S
2S1 SCkA 30

lacLsť lellxberLo Cruma sold hls lnherlLed land Lo Cosme Þldoţ whlch land ls renLed by peLlLloner
1eodoro AcapŦ When Cosme dled lnLesLaLeţ hls helrs execuLed a ºueclaraLlon of Pelrshlp and
Walver of 8lghLs" ln favor of prlvaLe respondenL Ldy delos 8eyesŦ 8espondenL lnformed peLlLloner
of hls clalm over Lhe landţ and peLlLloner pald Lhe renLal Lo hlm ln 1982Ŧ Powever ln subsequenL
yearsţ peLlLloner refused Lo pay Lhe renLalţ whlch prompLed respondenL Lo flle a complalnL for Lhe
recovery of possesslon and damagesŦ ÞeLlLloner averred LhaL he conLlnues Lo recognlze Þldo as Lhe
owner of Lhe landţ and LhaL he wlll pay Lhe accumulaLed renLals Lo Þldo's wldow upon her reLurn
from abroadŦ 1he lower courL ruled ln favor of prlvaLe respondenLŦ
lssuesť
(1) WheLher Lhe ºueclaraLlon of Pelrshlp and Walver of 8lghLs" ls a recognlzed mode of acqulrlng
ownershlp by prlvaLe respondenL
(2) WheLher Lhe sald documenL can be consldered a deed of sale ln favor of prlvaLe respondenL
Peldť An asserLed rlghL or clalm Lo ownershlp or a real rlghL over a Lhlng arlslng from a [urldlcal
acLţ however [usLlfledţ ls noL per se sufflclenL Lo glve rlse Lo ownershlp over Lhe resŦ 1haL rlghL or
LlLle musL be compleLed by fulfllllng cerLaln condlLlons lmposed by lawŦ Penceţ ownershlp and real
rlghLs are acqulred only pursuanL Lo a legal mode or processŦ Whlle LlLle ls Lhe [urldlcal [usLlflcaLlonţ
mode ls Lhe acLual process of acqulslLlon or Lransfer of ownershlp over a Lhlng ln quesLlonŦ
ln a ConLracL of Saleţ one of Lhe conLracLlng parLles obllgaLes hlmself Lo Lransfer Lhe ownershlp of
and Lo dellver a deLermlnaLe Lhlngţ and Lhe oLher parLy Lo pay a prlce cerLaln ln money or lLs
equlvalenLŦ upon Lhe oLher handţ a declaraLlon of helrshlp and walver of rlghLs operaLes as a publlc
lnsLrumenL when flled wlLh Lhe 8eglsLry of ueeds whereby Lhe lnLesLaLe helrs ad[udlcaLe and dlvlde
Lhe esLaLe lefL by Lhe decedenL among Lhemselves as Lhey see flLŦ lL ls ln effecL an exLra[udlclal
seLLlemenL beLween Lhe helrs under 8ule 74 of Lhe 8ules of CourLŦ Penceţ Lhere ls a marked
dlfference beLween a sale of heredlLary rlghLs and a walver of heredlLary rlghLsŦ 1he flrsL presumes
Lhe exlsLence of a conLracL or deed of sale beLween Lhe parLlesŦ 1he second lsţ Lechnlcally speaklngţ
a mode of exLlncLlon of ownershlp where Lhere ls an abdlcaLlon or lnLenLlonal rellnqulshmenL of a
known rlghL wlLh knowledge of lLs exlsLence and lnLenLlon Lo rellnqulsh lLţ ln favor of oLher persons
who are coŴhelrs ln Lhe successlonŦ ÞrlvaLe respondenLţ belng Lhen a sLranger Lo Lhe successlon of
Cosme Þldoţ cannoL concluslvely clalm ownershlp over Lhe sub[ecL loL on Lhe sole basls of Lhe
walver documenL whlch nelLher reclLes Lhe elemenLs of elLher a saleţ or a donaLlonţ or any oLher
derlvaLlve mode of acqulrlng ownershlpŦ

A noLlce of adverse clalm ls noLhlng buL a noLlce of a clalm adverse Lo Lhe reglsLered ownerţ Lhe
valldlLy of whlch ls yeL Lo be esLabllshed ln courL aL some fuLure daLeţ and ls no beLLer Lhan a noLlce
of lls pendens whlch ls a noLlce of a case already pendlng ln courLŦ lL ls Lo be noLed LhaL whlle Lhe
exlsLence of sald adverse clalm was duly provenţ Lhere ls no evldence whaLsoever LhaL a deed of
sale was execuLed beLween Cosme Þldoƌs helrs and prlvaLe respondenL Lransferrlng Lhe rlghLs of
Þldoƌs helrs Lo Lhe land ln favor of prlvaLe respondenLŦ ÞrlvaLe respondenLƌs rlghL or lnLeresL
Lherefore ln Lhe LenanLed loL remalns an adverse clalm whlch cannoL by lLself be sufflclenL Lo cancel
Lhe CC1 Lo Lhe land and LlLle Lhe same ln prlvaLe respondenLƌs nameŦ ConsequenLlyţ whlle Lhe
LransacLlon beLween Þldoƌs helrs and prlvaLe respondenL may be blndlng on boLh parLlesţ Lhe rlghL
of peLlLloner as a reglsLered LenanL Lo Lhe land cannoL be perfuncLorlly forfelLed on a mere
allegaLlon of prlvaLe respondenLƌs ownershlp wlLhouL Lhe correspondlng proof LhereofŦ

ne|rs of Serasp| vŦ CA
Gk # 13S602ţ AprŦ 28ţ 2000
331SCkA 293

lacLsť Marcellno 8ecasa was Lhe owner of Lwo parcels of landŦ uurlng hls llfeLlmeţ Marcellno
conLracLed Lhree (3) marrlagesŦ AL Lhe Llme of hls deaLh ln 1943ţ he had flfLeen (13) chlldren from
hls Lhree marrlagesŦ ln 1948ţ hls lnLesLaLe esLaLe was parLlLloned lnLo Lhree parLs by hls helrsţ each
parL correspondlng Lo Lhe share of Lhe helrs ln each marrlageŦ
ln Lhe same yearţ ÞaLronlclo 8ecasaţ represenLlng Lhe helrs of Lhe flrsL marrlageţ sold Lhe share of
Lhe helrs ln Lhe esLaLe Lo uomlnador 8ecasaţ an helr of Lhe second marrlageŦ Cn !une 13ţ 1930ţ
uomlnadorţ represenLlng Lhe helrs of Lhe second marrlageţ ln Lurn sold Lhe share of Lhe helrs Lo
Culrlco and Þurlflcaclon Seraspl whose helrs are Lhe presenL peLlLlonersŦ lncluded ln Lhls sale was
Lhe properLy sold by ÞaLronlclo Lo uomlnadorŦ Sdaad
ln 1938ţ Lhe Seraspls obLalned a loan from Lhe kallbo 8ural 8ankţ lncŦ (k88l) on Lhe securlLy of Lhe
lands ln quesLlon Lo flnance lmprovemenLs on Lhe landsŦ Poweverţ Lhey falled Lo pay Lhe loan for
whlch reason Lhe morLgage was foreclosed and Lhe lands were sold Lo k88l as Lhe hlghesL bldderŦ
SubsequenLlyţ Lhe lands were sold by k88l Lo Manuel 8aLaţ broLherŴlnŴlaw of Culrlco SerasplŦ lL
appears LhaL 8aLaţ as owner of Lhe properLyţ allowed Culrlco Seraspl Lo admlnlsLer Lhe properLyŦ
ln 1974ţ prlvaLe respondenL Slmeon 8ecasaţ Marcellno's chlld by hls Lhlrd wlfeţ Laklng advanLage of
Lhe lllness of Culrlco Serasplţ who had been paralyzed due Lo a sLrokeţ forclbly enLered Lhe lands ln
quesLlon and Look possesslon LhereofŦ
ln 1983ţ Lhe Seraspls purchased Lhe lands from Manuel 8aLa and afLerwards flled a complalnL
agalnsL Slmeon 8ecasa for recovery of possesslon of Lhe landsŦ
1he Lrlal courL ruled ln favor of Lhe Serasplsţ sLaLlng LhaL Lhey had acqulred Lhe properLy Lhrough a
sale and acqulslLlve prescrlpLlonŦ Poweverţ on appealţ Lhe CourL of Appeals reversed on Lhe ground
LhaL Lhe acLlon of Lhe Seraspls was barred by Lhe sLaLuLe of llmlLaLlonsŦ Penceţ Lhls peLlLlon flled by
Culrlco Seraspl whoţ ln Lhe meanLlmeţ had passed away and was Lhus subsLlLuLed by hls helrsŦ
lssuesť
(1) WheLher or noL peLlLloners' acLlon ls barred by exLlncLlve prescrlpLlonŤ and
(2) WheLher or noL prlvaLe respondenL Slmeon 8ecasa acqulred ownershlp of Lhe properLles ln
quesLlon Lhrough acqulslLlve prescrlpLlon
Peldť SC ruled for peLlLlonersŦ
(1)ClLlng Arradaza vŦ CourL of Appealsţ lL held LhaL an acLlon for recovery of LlLle or possesslon of
real properLy or an lnLeresL Lhereln can only be broughL wlLhln Len (10) years afLer Lhe cause of
acLlon has accruedŦ Slnce Lhe acLlon for recovery of possesslon and ownershlp was flled by
peLlLloners only on Aprll 12ţ 1987ţ lŦeŦţ LhlrLeen (13) years afLer Lhelr predecessorŴlnŴlnLeresL had
been allegedly deprlved of Lhe possesslon of Lhe properLy by prlvaLe respondenLţ lL was held LhaL
Lhe acLlon had prescrlbedŦ 1hls case lnvolves acqulslLlveţ noL exLlncLlveţ prescrlpLlonŦ WhaL ls moreţ
Lhe facLs ln LhaL case arose before Lhe effecLlvlLy of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ Accordlnglyţ whaL was applled
was Ƈ41 of Lhe Code of Clvll Þrocedure whlch provldes LhaL LlLle by prescrlpLlon ls acqulred afLer
Len (10) yearsţ ln whaLever manner possesslon may have been commenced or conLlnuedţ and
regardless of good falLh or wlLh [usL LlLleŦ
Cn Lhe oLher handţ whaL ls lnvolved here ls exLlncLlve prescrlpLlonţ and Lhe appllcable law ls ArLŦ
1141 of Lhe Clvll Code whlch provldesť 8eal acLlons over lmmovables prescrlbe afLer LhlrLy yearsŦ
1hls provlslon ls wlLhouL pre[udlce Lo whaL ls esLabllshed for Lhe acqulslLlon of ownershlp and oLher
real rlghLs by prescrlpLlonŦ
ArLŦ 1117Ŧ AcqulslLlve prescrlpLlon of domlnlon and oLher real rlghLs may be ordlnary or
exLraordlnaryŦ Crdlnary acqulslLlve prescrlpLlon requlres possesslon of Lhlngs ln good falLh and wlLh
[usL LlLle for Lhe Llme flxed by lawŦ

ArLŦ 1134Ŧ Cwnershlp and oLher real rlghLs over lmmovable properLy are acqulred by ordlnary
prescrlpLlon Lhrough possesslon of Len yearsŦ
ArLŦ 1137Ŧ Cwnershlp and oLher real rlghLs over lmmovables also prescrlbe Lhrough unlnLerrupLed
adverse possesslon Lhereof for LhlrLy yearsţ wlLhouL need of LlLle or of good falLhŦ
1husţ acqulslLlve prescrlpLlon of domlnlon and oLher real rlghLs may be ordlnary or exLraordlnaryţ
dependlng on wheLher Lhe properLy ls possessed ln good falLh and wlLh [usL LlLle for Lhe Llme flxed
by lawŦ ÞrlvaLe respondenL conLends LhaL he acqulred Lhe ownershlp of Lhe quesLloned properLy by
ordlnary prescrlpLlon Lhrough adverse possesslon for Len (10) yearsŦ
(2) 8espondenL Slmeon 8ecasa has nelLher [usL LlLle nor good falLhŦ As ArLŦ 1129 provldesť lor Lhe
purposes of prescrlpLlonţ Lhere ls [usL LlLle when Lhe adverse clalmanL came lnLo possesslon of Lhe
properLy Lhrough one of Lhe modes recognlzed by law for Lhe acqulslLlon of ownershlp or oLher real
rlghLsţ buL Lhe granLor was noL Lhe owner or could noL LransmlL any rlghLŦ
ln Lhe case aL barţ prlvaLe respondenL dld noL acqulre possesslon of Lhe properLy Lhrough any of
Lhe modes recognlzed by Lhe Clvll Codeţ Lo wlLť (1) occupaLlonţ (2) lnLellecLual creaLlonţ (3) lawţ (4)
donaLlonţ (3) successlonţ (6) LradlLlon ln consequence of cerLaln conLracLsţ and (7) prescrlpLlonŦ
ÞrlvaLe respondenL could noL have acqulred ownershlp over Lhe properLy Lhrough occupaLlon
slnceţ under ArLŦ 714 of Lhe Clvll Codeţ Lhe ownershlp of a plece of land cannoL be acqulred by
occupaLlonŦ nor can he base hls ownershlp on successlon for Lhe properLy was noL parL of Lhose
dlsLrlbuLed Lo Lhe helrs of Lhe Lhlrd marrlageţ Lo whlch prlvaLe respondenL belongsŦ
nelLher can prlvaLe respondenL clalm good falLh ln hls favorŦ Cood falLh conslsLs ln Lhe reasonable
bellef LhaL Lhe person from whom Lhe possessor recelved Lhe Lhlng was lLs owner buL could noL
LransmlL Lhe ownershlp LhereofŦ ÞrlvaLe respondenL enLered Lhe properLy wlLhouL Lhe consenL of
Lhe prevlous ownerŦ lor all lnLenLs and purposesţ he ls a mere usurperŦ
Llke prlvaLe respondenLţ peLlLloners have noL acqulred Lhe properLy Lhrough any of Lhe modes
recognlzed by law for Lhe acqulslLlon of ownershlpŦ 1he basls of peLlLloners' clalm of ownershlp ls
Lhe conLracL of sale Lhey had wlLh 8aLaţ buL Lhls by lLself ls lnsufflclenL Lo make Lhem owners of Lhe
properLyŦ lor whlle a conLracL of sale ls perfecLed by Lhe meeLlng of mlnds upon Lhe Lhlng whlch ls
Lhe ob[ecL of Lhe conLracL and upon Lhe prlceţ Lhe ownershlp of Lhe Lhlng sold ls noL Lransferred Lo
Lhe vendee unLll acLual or consLrucLlve dellvery of Lhe properLyŦ Penceţ Lhe maxlm non nudls
pacLlsţ sed LradlLlone domlnla domlnlca rerum LransferunLur (noL mere agreemenLs buL LradlLlon
Lransfers Lhe ownershlp of Lhlngs)Ŧ
ConsequenLlyţ peLlLloners are noL Lhe owners of Lhe properLy slnce lL has noL been dellvered Lo
LhemŦ AL Lhe Llme Lhey boughL Lhe properLy from 8aLa ln 1983ţ Lhe properLy was ln Lhe possesslon
of prlvaLe respondenLŦ
Poweverţ Lhls does noL glve prlvaLe respondenL a rlghL Lo remaln ln possesslon of Lhe properLyŦ
ÞeLlLloners' LlLle Lo Lhe properLy prevalls over prlvaLe respondenLs' possesslon ln facL buL wlLhouL
basls ln lawŦ As held ln WalLe vŦ ÞeLersonţ when Lhe properLy belonglng Lo a person ls unlawfully
Laken by anoLherţ Lhe former has Lhe rlghL of acLlon agalnsL Lhe laLLer for Lhe recovery of Lhe
properLyŦ Such rlghL may be Lransferred by Lhe sale or asslgnmenL of Lhe properLyţ and Lhe
Lransferee can malnLaln such acLlon agalnsL Lhe wrongdoerŦ

Þa|eroŴ@an vŦ Urdaneta
AM # ÞŴ07Ŵ2399ţ IunŦ 18ţ 2008
SSS SCkA 28
lacLsť
Ldna ÞaleroŴ1an a CourL SLenographer charged Clrlaco lŦ urdaneLaţ !rŦ a uLlllLy Worker of Lhe
same courLţ wlLh ConducL unbecomlng a CourL Þersonnelţ for sLeallng her rlng and braceleLŦ
Ldna clalmed LhaL lL has been her pracLlce Lo keep her and her slsLer's pleces of [ewelry ln Lhe
locked drawer of her Lable aL her 81C offlce because she fears LhaL Lhey mlghL be losL aL Lhe
boardlng house she ls renLlngŦ And LhaL Lhe only person who was presenL and saw her Lake
ouL Lhe [ewelry from her Lable drawer was respondenLţ whose Lable ls ad[acenL Lo hersŦ
Cn 28 !uly 2003ţ an offlcemaLeţ AneclLo uŦ AlLone (AlLone)ţ conflded Lo her LhaL he heard
from hls landladyţ AnasLacla 8Ŧ nable (nable)ţ LhaL respondenL and hls wlfeţ Mllagrosţ had a
quarrel because Lhe laLLer dlscovered a rlng and a braceleL ln respondenL's coln purseŦ
urdaneLa denled LhaL he sLole complalnanL's [ewelryŦ Pe clalmed LhaL he found a small plasLlc
sacheL conLalnlng a rlng and a braceleL under hls Lableţ aL Lhe slde nearesL Lhe ad[acenL Lable
of Lhe complalnanLţ and Lhlnklng LhaL Lhe [ewelry belonged Lo one of Lhe llLlganLs who
approached hlm LhaL mornlngţ he Look Lhem for safekeeplng wlLh Lhe lnLenLlon of reLurnlng
Lhem Lo whoever was Lhe ownerŦ Pe LhoughL LhaL Lhe rlng and braceleL were ƍfancyƍ [ewelry
as Lhey were merely placed ln an ordlnary plasLlc sacheLŦ When nobody clalmed Lhe [ewelryţ
he placed Lhem lnslde hls coln purse and Look Lhem homeŦ Poweverţ hls wlfeţ on 30 !une
2003ţ found Lhem and accused hlm of buylng Lhe pleces of [ewelry for hls mlsLressţ and Lo
sLop hls wlfe's nagglngţ he Lhrew Lhe pleces of [ewelry aL a grassy loL beslde Lhelr houseŦ

lssueť
W/n flndlng a ºlosL properLy" charges Lhe flnder Lhe duLy Lo resLore Lhe same Lo
lLs ownerŦ

Peldť
?esŦ When a person who flnds a Lhlng LhaL has been losL or mlslald by Lhe owner
Lakes Lhe Lhlng lnLo hls handsţ he acqulres physlcal cusLody only and does noL become vesLed
wlLh legal possesslonŦ ln assumlng such cusLodyţ Lhe flnder ls charged wlLh Lhe obllgaLlon of
resLorlng Lhe Lhlng Lo lLs ownerŦ lL ls Lhus respondenL's duLy Lo reporL Lo hls superlor or hls
offlcemaLes LhaL he found someLhlngŦ 1he Clvll Codeţ ln ArLlcle 719ţ expllclLly requlres Lhe
flnder of a losL properLy Lo reporL lL Lo Lhe proper auLhorlLlesţ Lhusť

ArLlcle 719Ŧ Whoever flnds a movableţ whlch ls noL Lreasureţ musL reLurn lL Lo lLs prevlous
possessorŦ lf Lhe laLLer ls unknownţ Lhe flnder shall lmmedlaLely deposlL lL wlLh Lhe mayor of
Lhe clLy or munlclpallLy where Lhe flndlng has Laken placeŦ
1he flndlng shall be publlcly announced by Lhe mayor for Lwo consecuLlve weeks ln Lhe way
he deems besLŦ
lf Lhe movables cannoL be kepL wlLhouL deLerloraLlonţ or wlLhouL Lhe expenses whlch
conslderably dlmlnlsh lLs valueţ lL shall be sold aL publlc aucLlon elghL days afLer Lhe
publlcaLlonŦ
Slx monLhs from Lhe publlcaLlon havlng elapsed wlLhouL Lhe owner havlng appearedţ Lhe
Lhlng foundţ or lLs valueţ shall be awarded Lo Lhe flnderŦ 1he flnder and Lhe owner shall be
obllgedţ as Lhe case may beţ Lo relmburse Lhe expensesŦ

ConLrary Lo respondenL's clalmţ Lhls CourL ls convlnced LhaL respondenL had Lhe lnLenLlon Lo
approprlaLe Lhe [ewelry Lo hlmself had Lhese noL been dlscovered by hls wlfeŦ Pls clalm LhaL
Lhe rlng and braceleL were worLhless ƍfancyƍ [ewelry ls lmmaLerlal because Lhe basls for hls
llablllLy ls hls acL of Laklng someLhlng whlch does noL belong Lo hlmŦ

@|t|e IIIŦ DCNA@ICN (ArtsŦ 72SŴ773)


Chapter 1Ŧ Nature of Donat|ons (ArtsŦ 72SŴ734)

kep vsŦ Guzman
Gk# 132964] IebŦ 18ţ 2000
326 SCkA 90

lacLsť
Slmeon Cuzmanţ a naLurallzed Amerlcan ClLlzen dled lnLesLaLe leavlng an Amerlcan Wlfeţ Pelen
and an Amerlcan Sonţ uavldţ Lhe hereln respondenLŦ uavld and Pelen execuLed an LxLra[udlclal
SeLLlemenL of Lhe LsLaLe of Slmeon ln Lhe ÞhlllpplnesŦ SubsequenLlyţ Pelen execuLed a CulLclalm
leavlng everyLhlng Lo Lhe dlsposal of uavldŦ uavld Lhen owned everyLhlngŦ
A concerned Lawyer wroLe Lhe Cfflce of Lhe SollclLor Ceneral LhaL Lhe ownershlp of uavld Lo Lhe
exLenL of Z of Lhe esLaLe of Slmeon was defecLlveŦ 1he reason ls LhaLţ belng a ClLlzen of Amerlcaţ he
was prohlblLed Lo be a donee of properLles ln Lhe ÞhlllpplnesŦ 1he deed of CulLclalm was
lnLerpreLed Lo be LhaL of Lhe uonaLlonŦ 1he governmenL flled for LscheaL Þroceedlng ln so far as Lhe
Z porLlon was concernedŦ under ArLlcle 12 of Lhe ConsLlLuLlonţ a forelgner ls dlsquallfled Lo have a
properLy save ln cases of heredlLary successlonŦ 8elng a donee of Lhe Zţ Lhe same ls vold and would
necessarlly perLaln Lo Lhe republlc of Lhe ÞhlllpplnesŦ

lssueť
WheLher or noL Lhe Z ownershlp of Lhe properLles be escheaLed ln favor of Lhe governmenL?

Peldť
noţ ln order LhaL a uonaLlon ls valldţ Lhe followlng requlslLes musL concurť Lhere musL be a
decrease ln Lhe properLy lf Lhe donorţ Lhere musL be an lncrease ln Lhe properLy of Lhe donee and
Lhere musL be lnLenL Lo donaLeŦ 1he CulLclalm made by Pelen negaLed Lhe lnLenL Lo donaLe LhaL
musL be saLlsfledŦ Pelen meanL LhaL Lhe qulLclalm was noL a donaLlon because she was prohlblLed
Lo donaLe under LhaL Þhlllpplne Laws and she sad LhaL lL was absurd for he Lo do LhaLŦ 1here was no
donaLlonŦ lL was merely a walver of rlghL ln favor of Lhe doneeţ Lhe sonŦ Lven lf Lhere has been LhaL
lnLenLţ Lhe same should noL be a valld donaLlon slnce Lhe accepLance requlred for ln ArLlcle 748 was
absenLŦ 1he escheaL proceedlng ls noL properŦ

kÞ vŦ S|||m
Gk # 140487ţ AprŦ 2ţ 2001
3S6 SCkA 1

lacLsť
Spouses Slllm and MangubaL donaLed a 3ţ600 sqŦ m parcel of land ln favour of Lhe 8ureau of Þubllc
Schoolsţ Malangasţ Zamboanga del SurŦ ln Lhe ueed of uonaLlonţ respondenLs lmposed Lhe
condlLlon LhaL Lhe sald properLy should ƍbe used excluslvely and forever for school purposes onlyŦƍ
1hls donaLlon was accepLed by Cregorlo 8uendlaţ Lhe ulsLrlcL Supervlsor of 8ÞSţ Lhrough an
AffldavlL of AccepLance and/or ConflrmaLlon of uonaLlonŦ
A school bulldlng was consLrucLed on Lhe donaLed landŦ Poweverţ Lhe 8agong Llpunan school
bulldlng LhaL was supposed Lo be allocaLed for Lhe donaLed parcel of land could noL be released
slnce Lhe governmenL requlred LhaL lL be bullL upon a one (1) hecLare parcel of landŦ 1o remedy Lhls
predlcamenL 8uendla was auLhorlzed Lo offlclally LransacL for Lhe exchange of Lhe old school slLe Lo
a new and sulLable locaLlon whlch would flL Lhe speclflcaLlons of Lhe governmenLŦ ÞursuanL Lo Lhlsţ
8uendla and 1ereslLa Þalma enLered lnLo a ueed of Lxchange whereby Lhe donaLed loL was
exchanged wlLh Lhe blgger loL owned by Lhe laLLerŦ 1he 8agong Llpunan school bulldlngs were
consLrucLed on Lhe new school slLe and Lhe school bulldlng prevlously erecLed on Lhe donaLed loL
was dlsmanLled and Lransferred Lo Lhe new locaLlonŦ
1he Slllm spouses learned of Lhe ueed of Lxchange when Lhay learned LhaL vlceŴMayor Wllfredo
Þalma was consLrucLlng a house on Lhe donaLed properLyŦ 1hey flled a complalnL Lo annul Lhe
donaLlon clalmlng LhaL Lhere was no valld accepLance made by Lhe donee and LhaL Lhere was a
vlolaLlon of Lhe condlLlon ln Lhe donaLlonŦ

lssuesť
1Ŧ Was Lhere a valld accepLance based on ArLsŦ 743 and 749 of Lhe nCC?
2Ŧ Was Lhe condlLlon ln Lhe donaLlon vlolaLed?

Peldť
1Ŧ ?esŦ 1here was a valld accepLanceŦ
1he lasL paragraph of ArLŦ 749 readsť ºlf Lhe accepLance ls made ln a separaLe lnsLrumenLţ Lhe
donor shall be noLlfled Lhereof ln an auLhenLlc formţ and Lhls sLep shall be noLed ln boLh
lnsLrumenLsŦ" 1he purpose of Lhe formal requlremenL for accepLance of a donaLlon ls Lo ensure
LhaL such accepLance ls duly communlcaLed Lo Lhe donorŦ
Pereţ a school bulldlng was lmmedlaLely consLrucLed afLer Lhe donaLlon was execuLedŦ
8espondenLs had knowledge of Lhe exlsLence of Lhe school bulldlngŦ lL was when Lhe school
bulldlng was belng dlsmanLled and Lransferred Lo Lhe new slLe and when vlceŴMayor Wllfredo
Þalma was consLrucLlng a house on Lhe donaLed properLy LhaL respondenLs came Lo know of Lhe
ueed of LxchangeŦ 1he acLual knowledge by respondenLs of Lhe consLrucLlon and exlsLence of Lhe
school bulldlng fulfllled Lhe legal requlremenL LhaL Lhe accepLance of Lhe donaLlon by Lhe donee be
communlcaLed Lo Lhe donorŦ
under ArLŦ 743ţ Lhe law requlres Lhe donee Lo ºaccepL Lhe donaLlon personallyţ or Lhrough an
auLhorlzed person wlLh a speclal power for Lhe purposeţ or wlLh a general and sufflclenL powerŤ
oLherwlse Lhe donaLlon shall be voldŦ"
1he respondenLs clalm LhaL Lhe accepLance by 8uendla of Lhe donaLlon was lneffecLlve because of
Lhe absence of a speclal power of aLLorney from Lhe 8epubllc of Lhe ÞhlllpplnesŦ 1he donaLlon was
made ln favor of Lhe 8ureau of Þubllc SchoolsŦ Such belng Lhe caseţ 8uendla's accepLance was
auLhorlzed under SecLlon 47 of Lhe 1987 AdmlnlsLraLlve Code whlch sLaLesť
SLCŦ 47Ŧ ConLracLs and ConveyancesŦ Ŵ ConLracLs or conveyances may be execuLed for and ln behalf
of Lhe CovernmenL or of any of lLs branchesţ subdlvlslonsţ agenclesţ or lnsLrumenLallLlesţ whenever
demanded by Lhe exlgency or exlgencles of Lhe servlce and as long as Lhe same are noL prohlblLed
by lawŦ

2Ŧ noŦ 1he condlLlon was noL vlolaLedŦ
1he excluslvlLy of Lhe purpose of Lhe donaLlon was noL alLered or affecLed when 8uendla
exchanged Lhe loL for a much blgger oneŦ lL was ln furLherance and enhancemenL of Lhe purpose of
Lhe donaLlonŦ 1he acqulslLlon of Lhe blgger loL paved Lhe way for Lhe release of funds for Lhe
consLrucLlon of 8agong Llpunan school bulldlng whlch could noL be accommodaLed by Lhe llmlLed
area of Lhe donaLed loLŦ

Çu|[ada vsŦ CA
Gk# 126444] DecŦ 4ţ 1998
299 SCkA 6

lacLsť
1rlnldad Cul[ada wlLh her slbllngs lnherlLed a 2ŴhecLare land ln Agusan uel SurŦ Cn 1936ţ
Lhey execuLed a condlLlonal deed of donaLlon ln favor of Lhe MunlclpallLy of 1alacogon for Lhe
sub[ecL landŦ 1he donaLlon was sub[ecL Lo Lhe condlLlon LhaL Lhe donaLed properLy shall be used
solely and excluslvely as parL of Lhe campus of Lhe proposed Þrovlnclal Plgh SchoolŦ lf such
proposal be dlsconLlnuedţ Lhe properLy shall auLomaLlcally reverL Lo Lhe donorŦ uesplLe Lhls
donaLlonţ 1rlnldad Cul[ada possessed Lhe landŦ Cn 1962ţ she sold 1ŴhecLare of Lhe land Lo 8egalado
Monde[ar Lhrough a deed of saleŦ 1he remalnlng area was sold Lo Lhe same person verbally
evldenced by recelpLs of paymenLŦ ln 1987ţ Lhe Þrovlnclal Plgh School falled Lo maLerlallzeŦ 1he
Sanggunlang 8ayan of Lhe munlclpallLy enacLed a resoluLlon reverLlng Lhe land back Lo Lhe donorsŦ
uurlng LhaL Llmeţ Monde[ar subsequenLly sold porLlons of Lhe properLy Lo buyersŦupon Lhe deaLh
of 1rlnldad Cul[adaţ her helrs now seeks Lo recover possesslon and ownershlp of Lhe sub[ecL land
by flllng a peLlLlon for quleLlng Lhe LlLleŦ ÞeLlLloners conLend LhaL Lhere was no valld sale slnce Lhe
land was sold when ownershlp was already Lransferred Lo Lhe MunlclpallLy by Lhe deed of
donaLlonŦ 8espondenLs conLend oLherwlseŦ

lssueť
W/n Lhere ls a valld sale by Lhe donorţ Cul[ada Lo a Lhlrd personţ Monde[arţ even lf lL was
condlLlonally donaLed Lo a doneeţ Lhe MunlclpallLy of 1alacoganŦ

Peldť
1here ls a valld sale by Lhe donorŦ
When Lhe MunlclpallLy's accepLance of Lhe donaLlon was made known Lo Lhe donorţ Lhe
MunlclpallLy became Lhe new owner of Lhe properLy desplLe Lhe condlLlons ln Lhe deed of
donaLlonŦ Cwnershlp ls lmmedlaLely Lransferred and wlll only reverL lf Lhe resoluLory condlLlon ls
noL fulfllledŦ
When a person donaLes a land Lo anoLher on Lhe condlLlon LhaL Lhe laLLer would bulld upon Lhe
land a schoolţ Lhe condlLlon lmposed ls a resoluLory oneŦ
uesplLe Lhese and as provlded for by Lhe Law on Salesţ ownershlp by Lhe seller of Lhe Lhlng sold aL
Lhe Llme of Lhe perfecLlon of Lhe conLracL ls noL necessaryŦ Cwnershlp ls only relevanL durlng lLs
consummaLlon where Lhe Lhlng sold wlll be dellveredŦ Such dellveryţ ln Lhls caseţ happened when
Lhe donor became Lhe owner upon Lhe reverslon of Lhe properLyŦ Such LlLleţ ln accordance Lo
ArLlcle 1434 of Lhe new Clvll Codeţ passes by operaLlon of law Lo Lhe buyerŦ
noLeť Lands whlch were prevlously donaLed may sLlll be sold Lo a Lhlrd personŦ Such sale ls sLlll valld
even lf aL Lhe Llme Lhe sale was perfecLedţ Lhe donorŴseller dld noL own Lhe landŦ lL ls upon Lhe
consummaLlon of a perfecLed sale where Lhe donorŴseller ls obllged Lo dellver Lhe Lhlng soldŦ
Lagazo vsŦ CA
Gk# 112796] MarŦ Sţ 1998
287 SCkA 18

lacLsť
CaLallna !acob vdaŦ de 8eyesţ a wldow and grandmoLher of 1lLo Lagazo was Lhe granLee of Lhe
MonserraL esLaLeŦ She had Lo leave for Canada Lo become a permanenL resldenL Lhereln and she
appolnLed one Lduardo Lspanol Lo be her aLLorneyŴlnŴfacL on CcLober 3ţ 1977ţ Lo flx Lhe
requlremenLs neededŦ
lalllng Lo accompllsh whaL he oughL Lo doţ CaLallna appolnLed Lagazo as her new aLLorneyŴlnŴfacL ln
Aprll 16ţ 1984Ŧ 1he granL was subsequenLly glven and laLerţ Lhe land was donaLed Lo Lagazo on
!anuary 30ţ 1983Ŧ
Lagazo Lhen soughL Lo remove CabanllL from Lhe properLyŦ 1he laLLer clalms ownershlp over Lhe
land by vlrLue of a deed of sale execuLed ln favor of hlm by LspanolŦ Pe clalmed LhaL Lhe house and
loL ln conLroversy were hls by vlrLue of Lhe followlng documenLsť

1Ŧ ueed of AbsoluLe Sale execuLed by CaLallna !acob daLed CcLober 7ţ 1977 ln favor of Lduardo 8Ŧ
Lspanol coverlng Lhe resldenLlal house locaLed aL Lhe premlsesŤ
2Ŧ ueed of AsslgnmenL over LoL 8W execuLed by CaLallna !acob ln favor of Lduardo Lspanol daLed
SepLember 30ţ 1980Ť and
3Ŧ ueed of AsslgnmenL execuLed by Lduardo 8Ŧ Lspanol over LoL 8W and a resldenLlal house
Lhereon ln favor of defendanLŴappellanL daLed CcLober 2ţ 1982Ŧ

1he 81C ruled ln favor of Lagazo whlle Lhe CA reversed sLaLlng LhaL Lagazo's fallure Lo accepL Lhe
donaLlon wheLher ln Lhe same deed of donaLlon or ln a separaLe lnsLrumenL renders Lhe donaLlon
null and voldŦ Lagazo conLends LhaL Lhe formallLles for a donaLlon of real properLy should noL apply
Lo hls case slnce lL was an onerous one because he pald for Lhe amorLlzaLlons due on Lhe land
before and afLer Lhe execuLlon of Lhe deed of donaLlonŦ

lssueť
W/n Lhe donaLlon was slmple or onerousŦ

Peldť
1he donaLlon was a slmpleţ noL onerousŦ A slmple or pure donaLlon ls one whose cause ls pure
llberallLy (no sLrlngs aLLached)ţ whlle an onerous donaLlon ls one whlch ls sub[ecL Lo burdensţ
charges or fuLure servlces equal Lo or more ln value Lhan Lhe Lhlng donaLedŦ under ArLlcle 733 of
Lhe Clvll Codeţ donaLlons wlLh an onerous cause shall be governed by Lhe rules on conLracLsŤ henceţ
Lhe formallLles requlred for a valld slmple donaLlon are noL appllcableŦ
Lven concedlng LhaL peLlLlonerƌs full paymenL of Lhe purchase prlce of Lhe loL mlghL have been a
burden Lo hlmţ such paymenL was noL however lmposed by Lhe donor as a condlLlon for Lhe
donaLlonŦ 8aLherţ Lhe deed expllclLly sLaLedť
º1haL for and ln conslderaLlon of Lhe love and affecLlon whlch Lhe uCnLL lnsplres ln Lhe uCnC8ţ
and as an acL of llberallLy and generoslLy and conslderlng furLher LhaL Lhe uCnLL ls a grandson of
Lhe uCnC8ţ Lhe uCnC8 hereby volunLarlly and freely glvesţ LransferżsŽ and conveysţ by way of
donaLlon unLo sald uCnLLţ hls helrsţ execuLorsţ admlnlsLraLors and asslgnsţ all Lhe rlghLţ LlLle and
lnLeresL whlch Lhe sald uCnC8 has ln Lhe above descrlbed real properLyţ LogeLher wlLh all Lhe
bulldlngs and lmprovemenLs found Lherelnţ free from all llnes żslcŽ and encumbrances and charges
whaLsoeverŤ"
lL ls clear LhaL Lhe donor dld noL have any lnLenLlon Lo burden or charge peLlLloner as Lhe doneeŦ
1he words ln Lhe deed are ln facL Lyplcal of a pure donaLlonŦ We agree wlLh 8espondenL CourL LhaL
Lhe paymenLs made by peLlLloner were merely hls volunLary acLsŦ
Llke any oLher conLracLţ an agreemenL of Lhe parLles ls essenLlalŦ 1he donaLlonţ followlng Lhe Lheory
of cognlLlon (ArLlcle 1319ţ Clvll Code)ţ ls perfecLed only upon Lhe momenL Lhe donor knows of Lhe
accepLance by Lhe doneeŦƍ lurLhermoreţ ƍżlŽf Lhe accepLance ls made ln a separaLe lnsLrumenLţ Lhe

donor shall be noLlfled Lhereof ln an auLhenLlc formţ and Lhls sLep shall be noLed ln boLh
lnsLrumenLsŦƍ

AccepLance of Lhe donaLlon by Lhe donee lsţ Lhereforeţ lndlspensableŤ lLs absence makes Lhe
donaLlon null and voldŦ


I|orenc|o vŦ De Leon
Gk# 149S70] MarŦ 12ţ 2004
42S SCkA 447

lAC1Sť ÞeLlLloner 1eresa Sevllla de Leonţ owned a resldenLlal loL wlLh an area of 828 square meLers
locaLed ln San Mlguelţ 8ulacanŦ ln Lhe 1960sţ ue Leon allowed Lhe spouses 8espondenL 8osendo
and Consuelo llorenclo Lo consLrucL a house on Lhe sald properLy and sLay Lhereln wlLhouL any
renLals LhereforeŦ
ln november 1978ţ ÞeLŦ ue Leonţ dled lnLesLaLeŦ Per helrs allowed 8osendo llorenclo Lo conLlnue
sLaylng ln Lhe properLyŦ ln March 1993ţ llorenclo dled lnLesLaLeŦ Cn Aprll 26ţ 1993ţ Lhe helrs of ue
Leonţ Lhrough counselţ senL a leLLer Lo Lhe helrs of llorencloţ demandlng LhaL Lhey vacaLe Lhe
properLy wlLhln nlneLy (90) days from recelpL LhereofŦ 1he laLLer refused and falled Lo vacaLe Lhe
properLyŦ 1hey flled a complalnL for e[ecLmenL agalnsL Lhe helrs of llorenclo before Lhe M1CŦ
1he helrs of llorencloţ ln Lhelr answerţ alleged LhaL Lhe plalnLlffs had no cause of acLlon agalnsL
Lhemţ as 1eresa de Leon had execuLed a ueed of uonaLlon on CcLober 1ţ 1976 over Lhe sald parcel
of land ln favor of Lhelr predecessorţ 8osendo llorencloŦ 1he laLLer accepLed Lhe donaLlonţ as
shown by hls slgnaLure above hls LypewrlLLen name on page one of Lhe deedŦ Poweverţ Lhe orlglnal
ueed cannoL be produced by Lhe laLLerŦ 1he lower and Lhe appellaLe courL ruled ln favor or
8espondenLsŦ
lSSuLť1) WCn Lhere ls donaLlon?Ť 2)WCn ÞeLlLlonersţ who appears Lo be Lhe donee under Lhe
unreglsLered ueed of uonaLlonţ have a beLLer rlghL Lo Lhe physlcal or maLerlal possesslon of Lhe
properLy over Lhe respondenLs who ls Lhe reglsLered owner of Lhe properLy?

PLLuť 1here ls no donaLlonŦ under Lhe new Clvll Codeţ donaLlon ls one of Lhe modes of acqulrlng
ownershlpŦ Among Lhe aLLrlbuLes of ownershlp ls Lhe rlghL Lo possess Lhe properLyŦ
1he essenLlal elemenLs of donaLlon are as followsť
(a) Lhe essenLlal reducLlon of Lhe paLrlmony of Lhe donorŤ
(b) Lhe lncrease ln Lhe paLrlmony of Lhe doneeŤ and
(c) Lhe lnLenL Lo do an acL of llberallLy or anlmus donandlŦ
When applled Lo a donaLlon of an lmmovable properLyţ Lhe law furLher requlres LhaL Lhe donaLlon
be made ln a publlc documenL and LhaL Lhe accepLance Lhereof be made ln Lhe same deed or ln a
separaLe publlc lnsLrumenLŤ ln cases where Lhe accepLance ls made ln a separaLe lnsLrumenLţ lL ls
mandaLed LhaL Lhe donor be noLlfled Lhereof ln an auLhenLlc formţ Lo be noLed ln boLh lnsLrumenLsŦ
As a mode of acqulrlng ownershlpţ donaLlon resulLs ln an effecLlve Lransfer of LlLle over Lhe
properLy from Lhe donor Lo Lhe doneeţ and ls perfecLed from Lhe momenL Lhe donor ls made aware
of Lhe accepLance by Lhe doneeţ provlded LhaL Lhe donee ls noL dlsquallfled or prohlblLed by law
from accepLlng Lhe donaLlonŦ Cnce Lhe donaLlon ls accepLedţ lL ls generally consldered lrrevocableţ
and Lhe donee becomes Lhe absoluLe owner of Lhe properLyţ excepL on accounL of offlclousnessţ
fallure by Lhe donee Lo comply wlLh Lhe charge lmposed ln Lhe donaLlonţ or lngraLlLudeŦ 1he
accepLanceţ Lo be valldţ musL be made durlng Lhe llfeLlme of boLh Lhe donor and Lhe doneeŦ lL
musL be made ln Lhe same deed or ln a separaLe publlc documenLţ and Lhe donee's accepLance
musL come Lo Lhe knowledge of Lhe donorŦ
ln order LhaL Lhe donaLlon of an lmmovable properLy may be valldţ lL musL be made ln a publlc
documenLŦ 8eglsLraLlon of Lhe deed ln Lhe Cfflce of Lhe 8eglsLer of ueeds or ln Lhe Assessor's Cfflce
ls noL necessary for lL Lo be consldered valld and offlclalŦ 8eglsLraLlon does noL vesL LlLleŤ lL ls
merely evldence of such LlLle over a parLlcular parcel of landŦ 1he necesslLy of reglsLraLlon comes
lnLo play only when Lhe rlghLs of Lhlrd persons are affecLedŦ lurLhermoreţ Lhe helrs are bound by
Lhe deed of conLracLs execuLed by Lhelr predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresLŦ
Poweverţ as polnLed ouL by Lhe 81C and Lhe CourL of Appealsţ Lhere are cogenL facLs and
clrcumsLances of subsLance whlch engender verlLable doubLs as Lo wheLher Lhe peLlLloners have a
beLLer rlghL of possesslon over Lhe properLy oLher Lhan Lhe respondenLsţ Lhe lawful helrs of Lhe
deceased reglsLered owner of Lhe properLyţ 1eresa de Leonţ based on Lhe ueed of uonaLlonŦ
llrsLŦ 1eresa de Leon dld noL Lurned over Lhe owner's dupllcaLe of 1C1ţ Lo llorencloţ Lo faclllLaLe
Lhe lssuance of a new LlLle over Lhe properLy ln hls favorŦ AL Lhe very leasLţ he should have caused
Lhe annoLaLlon of Lhe deed lmmedlaLely afLer Lhe donaLlon or shorLly LhereafLerţ aL Lhe dorsal
porLlon of 1C1Ŧ
SecondŦ llorenclo falled Lo lnform Lhe helrs of ue Leon LhaL Lhe laLLerţ before her deaLhţ had
execuLed a deed of donaLlon on CcLober 1ţ 1976 over Lhe properLy ln hls favorŦ lL was only ln 1996ţ
or elghLeen years afLer Lhe deaLh of ue Leon when Lhe respondenLs sued Lhe peLlLloners for
e[ecLmenL
1hlrdŦ ln Lhe meanLlmeţ Lhe respondenLs conslsLenLly pald Lhe realLy Laxes for Lhe properLy from
1978 up Lo 1996Ŧ
lourLhŦ 1he peLlLloners never adduced ln evldence Lhe owner's dupllcaLe of 1C1Ŧ
llfLhŦ 1he respondenLs adduced ln evldence Lhe affldavlLŴcomplalnL of valerlana MorenLe daLed
May 8ţ 1996ţ one of Lhe wlLnesses Lo Lhe deedţ for falslflcaLlon and per[ury agalnsL llorenclo and
ALLyŦ 1lrso MangulaLŦ
SlxLhŦ A readlng of Lhe deed wlll show LhaL aL Lhe boLLom of page one Lhereofţ llorenclo was Lo
subscrlbe and swear Lo Lhe LruLh of hls accepLance of Lhe donaLlon before Munlclpal Mayor
Marcelo CŦ Aure of San Mlguelţ 8ulacanŦ Poweverţ Lhe mayor dld noL afflx hls slgnaLure above hls
LypewrlLLen nameŦ
Sev|||a vsŦ Sev|||a
Gk# 1S0179] AprŦ 30ţ 2003
402 SCkA S01

lacLsť Cn uecember 10ţ 1973ţ lllomena Almlrol de Sevllla dled lnLesLaLe leavlng 8 chlldrenţ namelyť
Wllllamţ ÞeLerţ Leopoldoţ lellpeţ 8osaţ Marlaţ Luzvlllaţ and !lmmyţ all surnamed SevlllaŦ Wllllamţ
!lmmy and Marla are now deceased and are survlved by Lhelr respecLlve spouses and chlldrenţ
hereln peLlLlonersŦ lllomena lefL properLlesţ one of whlch a parcel of land whlch she coŴowned wlLh
her 2 slsLersţ PonoraLa Almlrol and lellsa Almlrolţ who were boLh slngle and wlLhouL lssueŦ
When PonoraLa dled ln 1982ţ her 1/3 undlvlded share ln LoL 633ţ was LransmlLLed Lo her
helrsţ lellsa Almlrol and lllomenaŦ
uurlng Lhe llfeLlme of lellsa and PonoraLa Almlrolţ Lhey llved ln Lhe house of lllomena
Almlrol de Sevlllaţ LogeLher wlLh Lhelr nephewţ respondenL Leopoldo Sevllla and hls famllyŦ
Leopoldo aLLended Lo Lhe needs of hls moLherţ lllomenaţ and hls Lwo aunLsţ PonoraLa and lellsaŦ
Cn !uly 6ţ 1988ţ lellsa dledŦ 8uL prlor LhereLoţ on november 23ţ 1983ţ she execuLed a
lasL wlll and LesLamenL devlslng her 1/2 share ln LoL noŦ 633 Lo 8espondenL Leopoldo and hls wlfeŦ
Cn AugusL 8ţ 1986ţ lellsa execuLed anoLher documenL denomlnaLed as ºuonaLlon lnLer vlvos"

cedlng Lo Leopoldo Sevllla her 1/2 undlvlded share ln LoL noŦ 633ţ whlch was accepLed by Leopoldo
ln Lhe same documenLŦ
ÞeLlLloners flled a case agalnsL respondenLs Leopoldo for annulmenL of Lhe ueed of uonaLlon and
Lhe ueed of LxLra[udlclal ÞarLlLlonţ alleglng LhaL Lhe ueed of uonaLlon ls LalnLed wlLh fraud because
lellsa Almlrolţ who was Lhen 81 years of ageţ was serlously lll and of unsound mlnd aL Lhe Llme of
Lhe execuLlon LhereofŦ

81C uphold Lhe valldlLy of Lhe ueed of uonaLlon and declarlng Lhe ueed of LxLraŴ[udlclal ÞarLlLlon
unenforceableŦ
lssueť WheLher Lhe deed of donaLlon ls valld?
Peldť ?esŦ
uonaLlon ls an acL of llberallLy whereby a person dlsposes graLulLously of a Lhlng or rlghL ln favor of
anoLher who accepLs lLŦ under ArLlcle 737 of Lhe Clvll Codeţ Lhe donor's capaclLy shall be
deLermlned as of Lhe Llme of Lhe maklng of Lhe donaLlonŦ Llke any oLher conLracLţ an agreemenL of
Lhe parLles ls essenLlalţ and Lhe aLLendance of a vlce of consenL renders Lhe donaLlon voldableŦ
ln Lhe case aL barţ Lhere ls no quesLlon LhaL aL Lhe Llme lellsa Almlrol execuLed Lhe deed of
donaLlon she was already Lhe owner of 1/2 undlvlded porLlon of LoL noŦ 633Ŧ Per 1/3 undlvlded
share Lhereln was lncreased by 1/2 when she and lllomena lnherlLed Lhe 1/3 share of Lhelr slsLer
PonoraLa afLer Lhe laLLer's deaLhŦ Penceţ Lhe 1/2 undlvlded share of lellsa ln LoL noŦ 633 ls
consldered a presenL properLy whlch she can valldly dlspose of aL Lhe Llme of Lhe execuLlon of Lhe
deed of donaLlonŦ
1he lnslsLence LhaL respondenL Leopoldo Sevllla employed fraud and undue lnfluence on
Lhe person of Lhe donor ls noL presenL ln Lhe case aL barŦ Pe who asserLsţ noL he who denlesţ musL
proveŦ
ÞeLlLloners falled Lo show proof why lellsa should be held lncapable of exerclslng sufflclenL
[udgmenL ln cedlng her share Lo respondenL LeopoldoŦ As LesLlfled by Lhe noLary publlc who
noLarlzed Lhe ueed of uonaLlonţ lellsa conflrmed Lo hlm her lnLenLlon Lo donaLe her share ln LoL
noŦ 633 Lo LeopoldoŦ Pe sLressed LhaL Lhough Lhe donor was oldţ she was of sound mlnd and could
Lalk senslblyŦ SlgnlflcanLlyţ Lhere ls noLhlng ln Lhe record LhaL dlscloses even an aLLempL by
peLlLloners Lo rebuL sald declaraLlon of Lhe noLary publlcŦ

Cata|an vsŦ 8asa
Gk# 1S9667] Iu|y 31ţ 2007
S28 SCkA 64S

lacLsť Cn !une 16ţ 1931ţ lLLlClAnC CA1ALAn (lellclano) donaLed Lo hls slsLer ML8CLuLS CA1ALAn
(Mercedes) oneŴhalf of Lhe sub[ecL parcel of landŦ
Cn March 26ţ 1979ţ Mercedes sold Lhe same properLy ln favor of her chlldren uella and !esus 8asaŦ
1he ueed of AbsoluLe Sale was reglsLered wlLh Lhe 8eglsLer of ueeds on lebruary 20ţ 1992ţ and 1ax
ueclaraLlon noŦ 12911 was lssued ln Lhe name of respondenLsŦ
Cn Aprll 1ţ 1997ţ 8Þlţ acLlng as lellclanoƌs guardlanţ flled a case for ueclaraLlon of nulllLy of
uocumenLsţ 8ecovery of Þossesslon and Cwnershlpţ as well as damages agalnsL Lhe hereln
respondenLsŦ 8Þl alleged LhaL Lhe ueed of AbsoluLe uonaLlon Lo Mercedes was voldţ as lellclano
was noL of sound mlnd and was Lherefore lncapable of glvlng valld consenLŦ 1husţ lL clalmed LhaL lf
Lhe ueed of AbsoluLe uonaLlon was vold ab lnlLloţ Lhe subsequenL ueed of AbsoluLe Sale Lo uella
and !esus 8asa should llkewlse be nulllfled for Mercedes CaLalan had no rlghL Lo sell Lhe properLy Lo
anyoneŦ
Cn AugusL 14ţ 1997ţ lellclano passed awayŦ 1he orlglnal complalnL was amended Lo subsLlLuLe hls
helrsţ ln lleu of 8Þlţ as complalnanLsŦ
1he Lrlal courL found LhaL Lhe evldence presenLed by Lhe complalnanLs was lnsufflclenL Lo
overcome Lhe presumpLlon LhaL lellclano was sane and compeLenL aL Lhe Llme he execuLed Lhe
deed of donaLlon ln favor of Mercedes CaLalanŦ 1husţ Lhe courL declaredţ Lhe presumpLlon of sanlLy
or compeLency noL havlng been duly lmpugnedţ Lhe presumpLlon of due execuLlon of Lhe donaLlon
ln quesLlon musL be upheldŦ CA afflrmed Lhe [udgmenL of Lhe Lrlal courL and held LhaL all Lhe
elemenLs for valldlLy of conLracLs havlng been presenL ln Lhe 1931 donaLlonţ Mercedes acqulred
valld LlLle of ownershlp over Lhe properLy ln dlspuLeţ and Lhe subsequenL sale of Lhe properLy musL
be upheldŦ
lssueť WheLher Lhe Lrlal courL and Lhe CA were correcL ln flndlng LhaL Lhe deed of donaLlon
execuLed by lellclano ln favor of Mercedes was valldŦ
Peldť ?esŦ A donaLlon ls an acL of llberallLy whereby a person dlsposes graLulLously a Lhlng or rlghL
ln favor of anoLherţ who accepLs lLŦ Llke any oLher conLracLţ an agreemenL of Lhe parLles ls
essenLlalŦ ConsenL ln conLracLs presupposes Lhe followlng requlslLesť (1) lL should be lnLelllgenL or
wlLh an exacL noLlon of Lhe maLLer Lo whlch lL refersŤ (2) lL should be freeŤ and (3) lL should be
sponLaneousŦ 1he parLlesƌ lnLenLlon musL be clear and Lhe aLLendance of a vlce of consenLţ llke any
conLracLţ renders Lhe donaLlon voldableŦ
ln order for donaLlon of properLy Lo be valldţ whaL ls cruclal ls Lhe donorƌs capaclLy Lo glve consenL
aL Lhe Llme of Lhe donaLlonŦ CerLalnlyţ Lhere lles no doubL ln Lhe facL LhaL lnsanlLy lmplnges on
consenL freely glvenŦ Poweverţ Lhe burden of provlng such lncapaclLy resLs upon Lhe person who
alleges lLŤ lf no sufflclenL proof Lo Lhls effecL ls presenLedţ capaclLy wlll be presumedŦ
A Lhorough perusal of Lhe records of Lhe case aL bar lndublLably shows LhaL Lhe evldence presenLed
by Lhe peLlLloners was lnsufflclenL Lo overcome Lhe presumpLlon LhaL lellclano was compeLenL
when he donaLed Lhe properLy ln quesLlon Lo MercedesŦ ÞeLlLloners make much ado of Lhe facL
LhaLţ as early as 1948ţ lellclano had been found Lo be sufferlng from schlzophrenla by Lhe 8oard of
Medlcal Cfflcers of Lhe ueparLmenL of veLeran AffalrsŦ 8y lLselfţ howeverţ Lhe allegaLlon cannoL
prove Lhe lncompeLence of lellclanoŦ A sLudy of Lhe naLure of schlzophrenla wlll show LhaL
lellclano could sLlll be presumed capable of aLLendlng Lo hls properLy rlghLsŦ
lrom Lhe sclenLlflc sLudlesţ lL can be deduced LhaL a person sufferlng from schlzophrenla does noL
necessarlly lose hls compeLence Lo lnLelllgenLly dlspose hls properLyŦ 8y merely alleglng Lhe
exlsLence of schlzophrenlaţ peLlLloners falled Lo show subsLanLlal proof LhaL aL Lhe daLe of Lhe
donaLlonţ !une 16ţ 1931ţ lellclano CaLalan had losL LoLal conLrol of hls menLal faculLlesŦ 1husţ Lhe
lower courLs correcLly held LhaL lellclano was of sound mlnd aL LhaL Llme and LhaL Lhls condlLlon
conLlnued Lo exlsL unLll proof Lo Lhe conLrary was adducedŦ

Gestopa vŦ Þ||ap||
Gk# 111904ţ CctŦ Sţ 2000
342 SCkA 10S

lacLsť Spouses ulego and CaLallna uanlag were Lhe owners of slx parcels of unreglsLered landsŦ
1hey execuLed Lhree deeds of donaLlon morLls causaţ Lwo of whlch are daLed March 4ţ 1963 and
anoLher daLed CcLober 13ţ 1966ţ ln favor of prlvaLe respondenL Mercedes uanlagŴÞllapllŦ 1he flrsL
deed perLalned Lo parcels 1 Ǝ 2Ŧ 1he second deed perLalned Lo parcel 3Ŧ 1he lasL deed perLalned Lo
parcel 4Ŧ All deeds conLalned Lhe reservaLlon of Lhe rlghLs of Lhe donors (1) Lo amendţ cancel or
revoke Lhe donaLlon durlng Lhelr llfeLlmeţ and (2) Lo sellţ morLgageţ or encumber Lhe properLles
donaLed durlng Lhe donorsƌ llfeLlmeţ lf deemed necessaryŦ Cn !anuary 16ţ 1973ţ ulego uanlagţ wlLh

Lhe consenL of hls wlfeţ CaLallna uanlagţ execuLed a deed of donaLlon lnLer vlvos coverlng Lhe
aforemenLloned parcels of land plus Lwo oLher parcels (6 parcels ln all) agaln ln favor of prlvaLe
respondenL MercedesŦ 1hls conLalned Lwo condlLlonsť LhaL (1) Lhe uanlag spouses shall conLlnue Lo
en[oy Lhe frulLs of Lhe land durlng Lhelr llfeLlmeţ and LhaL (2) Lhe donee cannoL sell or dlspose of Lhe
land durlng Lhe llfeLlme of Lhe sald spousesţ wlLhouL Lhelr prlor consenL and approvalŦ Mercedes
caused Lhe Lransfer of Lhe parcelsƌ Lax declaraLlon Lo her name and pald Lhe Laxes on LhemŦ

Cn !une 28ţ 1979 and AugusL 21ţ 1979ţ ulego and CaLallna uanlag sold parcels 3 and 4 Lo hereln
peLlLlonersţ SpsŦ CesLopaŦ Cn SepLember 29ţ 1979ţ Lhe uanlags execuLed a deed of revocaLlon
recoverlng Lhe slx parcels of land sub[ecL of Lhe aforeclLed deed of donaLlon lnLer vlvosŦ Cn March
1ţ 1983ţ Mercedes Þllapll flled wlLh Lhe 81C a peLlLlon agalnsL Lhe CesLopas and Lhe uanlagsţ for
quleLlng of LlLle over Lhe above parcels of landŦ ln Lhelr opposlLlonţ Lhe CesLopas and Lhe uanlags
averred LhaL Lhe deed of donaLlon daLed !anuary 16ţ 1973 was null and vold because lL was
obLalned by Mercedes Lhrough machlnaLlons and undue lnfluenceŦ Lven assumlng lL was valldly
execuLedţ Lhe lnLenLlon was for Lhe donaLlon Lo Lake effecL upon Lhe deaLh of Lhe donorŦ lurLherţ
Lhe donaLlon was vold for lL lefL Lhe donorţ ulego uanlagţ wlLhouL any properLy aL allŦ Cn uecember
27ţ 1991ţ Lhe Lrlal courL rendered a declslon ln favor of Lhe CesLopas and Lhe uanlagsŦ Mercedes
appealed Lo Lhe CourL of AppealsŦ Cn AugusL 31ţ 1993ţ Lhe appellaLe courL reversed Lhe Lrlal courLŦ

lssueť WheLher Lhe donaLlon was lnLer vlvos or morLls causaŦ

Peldť 1he donaLlon was lnLer vlvos for Lhe followlng reasonsť
(1) 1he granLlng clause shows LhaL ulego donaLed Lhe properLles ouL of love and affecLlon for Lhe
doneeŦ 1hls ls a mark of a donaLlon lnLer vlvosŦ
(2) 1he reservaLlon of llfeLlme usufrucL lndlcaLes LhaL Lhe donor lnLended Lo Lransfer Lhe naked
ownershlp over Lhe properLlesŦ As correcLly posed by Lhe CourL of Appealsţ whaL was Lhe need for
such reservaLlon lf Lhe donor and hls spouse remalned Lhe owners of Lhe properLles?
(3) 1he donor reserved sufflclenL properLles for hls malnLenance ln accordance wlLh hls sLandlng ln
socleLyţ lndlcaLlng LhaL Lhe donor lnLended Lo parL wlLh Lhe slx parcels of landŦ (4) 1he donee
accepLed Lhe donaLlonŦ ln Lhe case of Ale[andro vsŦ Ceraldezţ 78 SC8A 243 (1977)ţ we sald LhaL an
accepLance clause ls a mark LhaL Lhe donaLlon ls lnLer vlvosŦ AccepLance ls a requlremenL for
donaLlons lnLer vlvosŦ uonaLlons morLls causaţ belng ln Lhe form of a wlllţ are noL requlred Lo be
accepLed by Lhe donees durlng Lhe donorsƌ llfeLlmeŦ

ConsequenLlyţ Lhe CourL of Appeals dld noL err ln concludlng LhaL Lhe rlghL Lo dlspose of Lhe
properLles belonged Lo Lhe doneeŦ 1he donorƌs rlghL Lo glve consenL was merely lnLended Lo
proLecL hls usufrucLuary lnLeresLsŦ ln Ale[androţ we ruled LhaL a llmlLaLlon on Lhe rlghL Lo sell durlng
Lhe donorsƌ llfeLlme lmplled LhaL ownershlp had passed Lo Lhe donees and donaLlon was already
effecLlve durlng Lhe donorsƌ llfeLlmeŦ 1he aLLendlng clrcumsLances ln Lhe execuLlon of Lhe sub[ecL
donaLlon also demonsLraLed Lhe real lnLenL of Lhe donor Lo Lransfer Lhe ownershlp over Lhe sub[ecL
properLles upon lLs execuLlonŦ Þrlor Lo Lhe execuLlon of donaLlon lnLer vlvosţ Lhe uanlag spouses
already execuLed Lhree donaLlons morLls causaŦ As correcLly observed by Lhe CourL of Appealsţ Lhe
uanlag spouses were aware of Lhe dlfference beLween Lhe Lwo donaLlonsŦ lf Lhey dld noL lnLend Lo
donaLe lnLer vlvosţ Lhey would noL agaln donaLe Lhe four loLs already donaLed morLls causaŦ

Was Lhe revocaLlon valld? A valld donaLlonţ once accepLedţ becomes lrrevocableţ excepL on
accounL of offlclousnessţ fallure by Lhe donee Lo comply wlLh Lhe charges lmposed ln Lhe donaLlonţ
or lngraLlLudeŦ 1he donorŴspouses dld noL lnvoke any of Lhese reasons ln Lhe deed of revocaLlonŦ
Pence Lhe revocaLlon made was noL valldŦ llnallyţ Lhe records do noL show LhaL Lhe donorŴspouses
lnsLlLuLed any acLlon Lo revoke Lhe donaLlon ln accordance wlLh ArLlcle 769 of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ
ConsequenLlyţ Lhe supposed revocaLlon on SepLember 29ţ 1979ţ had no legal effecLŦ

Magat vŦ CA
Gk # 1067SSţ IebŦ 1ţ 2002
37S SCkA SS6

lacLsť 8aslllsa ComerclanLe ls a moLher of 3 chlldrenţ namelyţ 8osarlo AusLrlaţ Consolaclon AusLrlaţ
peLlLloner Apollnarla AusLrlaŴMagaLţ Leonardoţ and one of respondenLsţ llorenLlno LumubosŦ
Leonardo dled ln a !apanese concenLraLlon camp aL 1arlac durlng World War llŦ
ln 1933ţ 8aslllsa boughL a parcel of resldenLlal land LogeLher wlLh Lhe lmprovemenL Lhereon
covered ln 1C1 noŦ 81Ŵ4036 (1Ŵ3268) and known as LoL 1ţ 8lock 1ţ CavlLe 8each SubdŦţ wlLh an area
of 130 sq mţ locaLed ln 8agong Þookţ San AnLonloţ CavlLe ClLyŦ Cn uecember 17ţ 1973ţ 8aslllsa
execuLed a documenL deslgnaLed as ºkasulaLan sa kaloobpala (uonaLlon)"Ŧ
Cn lebruary 6ţ 1979ţ 8aslllsa execuLed a ueed of AbsoluLe Sale of Lhe sub[ecL house and loL ln favor
of hereln peLlLloner Apollnarla AusLrlaŴMagaL for Þ3ţ000Ŧ00Ŧ 1he 1C1 noŦ 81Ŵ4036 ln Lhe name of
Lhe donor was cancelled and ln lleu Lhereof 1C1 noŦ 1Ŵ10434 was lssued by Lhe 8eglsLer of ueeds of
CavlLe ClLy ln favor of peLlLloner Apollnarla AusLrlaŴMagaLŦ
Cn SepLember 21ţ 1983ţ respondenLs 1eodora CarampoLţ uomlngo Comlaţ and LrnesLo Apolo
(represenLlng Lhelr deceased moLher Consolaclon AusLrla)ţ 8lcardoţ MamerLo and Segundaţ all
surnamed Sumpelo (represenLlng Lhelr deceased moLher 8osarlo AusLrla) and llorenLlno Lumubos
flled before Lhe 81C CavlLe an acLlon agalnsL Lhe peLlLloner for annulmenL of 1C1 noŦ 1Ŵ10434 and
oLher relevanL documenLsţ and for reconveyance and damagesŦ
81C dlsmlssed Lhe caseŦ CA reversed Lhe 81CŦ
lssueť WCn 1PL CA CnC8Lu 1PL 8uLLS Cl ln1L8Þ8L1A1lCn Cl CCn18AC1S WPLn l1
CCnSluL8Lu 1PL uCnA1lCn ln CuLS1lCn AS ln1L8 vlvCSŦ
Peldť CA ls afflrmedŦ 1he provlslons ln Lhe sub[ecL deed of donaLlon LhaL are cruclal for Lhe
deLermlnaLlon of Lhe class Lo whlch Lhe donaLlon belongs areţ as followsť
xxx xxx
xxx(l)blnlblgay ko aL lplnagkakaloob ng ganap aL hlndl mababawl sa naullL na apaL na anak ko aL sa
kanllang mga Lagapagmanaţ ang aklng lupang resldenLlal o Llrahan sampu ng aklng bahay nakaLlrlk
doon na nasa 8agong Þook dlnţ San AnLonloţ Lungsod ng kablLe
xxx xxx
na ang kaloob palang lLo ay magkakablsa lamang slmula sa araw na ako'y pumanaw sa mundoţ xxxŦ
xxx xxx
na ang LlLulo numero 1C1Ŵ1Ŵ2260 (81Ŵ4036) ng Lungsod ng kablLeţ bahay sa loLeng Llrahan ng
8agong Þook na nababangglL sa nasablng kasulaLanţ ay mananaLlll sa poder o posseslon ng lnaţ na
sl 8aslllsa ComerclanLe habang slya ay nabubuhay aL
Cayon dln ang nasablng 1lLulo ay hlndl mapapasangla o malpagblblll ang lupa habang maybuhay
ang nasablng 8aslllsa ComerclanLe xxxŦ

lL has been held LhaL wheLher Lhe donaLlon ls lnLer vlvos or morLls causa depends on wheLher Lhe
donor lnLended Lo Lransfer ownershlp over Lhe properLles upon Lhe execuLlon of Lhe deedŦ ln
8onsaLo vŦ CourL of Appealsţ Lhe characLerlsLlcs of a donaLlon morLls causaţ was enumeraLedţ Lo
wlLť

(1) lL conveys no LlLle or ownershlp Lo Lhe Lransferee before Lhe deaLh of Lhe LransferorŤ orţ
whaL amounLs Lo Lhe same Lhlngţ LhaL Lhe Lransferor should reLaln Lhe ownershlp (full or naked)
and conLrol of Lhe properLy whlle allveŤ
(2) 1haL before hls deaLhţ Lhe Lransfer should be revocable by Lhe Lransferor aL wlllţ ad
nuLumŤ buL revocablllLy may be provlded for lndlrecLly by means of a reserved power ln Lhe donor
Lo dlspose of Lhe properLles conveyedŤ
(3) 1haL Lhe Lransfer should be vold lf Lhe Lransferor should survlve Lhe LransfereeŦ
1husţ Lhe peLlLloner's clLed provlslons are only necessary assurances LhaL durlng Lhe donor's
llfeLlmeţ Lhe laLLer would sLlll en[oy Lhe rlghL of possesslon over Lhe properLyŤ buLţ hls naked LlLle of
ownershlp has been passed on Lo Lhe doneesŤ and LhaL upon Lhe donor's deaLhţ Lhe donees would
geL all Lhe rlghLs of ownershlp over Lhe same lncludlng Lhe rlghL Lo use and possess Lhe sameŦ
lurLhermoreţ lL also appeared LhaL Lhe provlslon ln Lhe deed of donaLlon regardlng Lhe prohlblLlon
Lo allenaLe Lhe sub[ecL properLy ls couched ln general Lerms such LhaL even Lhe donor ls deemed
lncluded ln Lhe sald prohlblLlonŦ lf Lhe donor lnLended Lo malnLaln full ownershlp over Lhe sald
properLy unLll her deaLhţ she could have expressly sLaLed Lhereln a reservaLlon of her rlghL Lo
dlspose of Lhe sameŦ 1he prohlblLlon on Lhe donor Lo allenaLe Lhe sald properLy durlng her llfeLlme
ls proof LhaL naked ownershlp over Lhe properLy has been Lransferred Lo Lhe doneesŦ
AnoLher lndlcaLlon ln Lhe deed of donaLlon LhaL Lhe donaLlon ls lnLer vlvos ls Lhe accepLance clause
Lhereln of Lhe doneesŦ We have ruled LhaL an accepLance clause ls a mark LhaL Lhe donaLlon ls
lnLer vlvosŦ AccepLance ls a requlremenL for donaLlons lnLer vlvosŦ

Mag|asang vŦ Cabat|ngan
Gk # 1319S3ţ IunŦ Sţ 2002
383 SCkA 6

ƼnoL submlLLedƽ
x
x
x
x
x

A|uad vŦ A|uad
Gk # 176943ţ CctŦ 17ţ 2008
S69 SCkA 697
lAC1Sť
Spouses MaLllde and Crlspln Aluad were chlldless buL durlng Lhelr llfeLlmeţ ralsed peLlLloners'
moLher Marla (Aluad) and respondenL Zenaldo (Aluad)Ŧ When Crlspln dledţ MaLllde lnherlLed from
hlm 6 parcels of landţ all of whlchţ she donaLed Lo MarlaŦ 1he ueed provldedť
1haLţ for and ln conslderaLlon of Lhe love and affecLlon of Lhe uCnC8 żMaLlldeŽ for Lhe uCnLL
żMarlaŽţ Lhe laLLer belng adopLed and havżlngŽ been broughL up by Lhe former Lhe uCnC8ţ by Lhese
presenLsţ Lransfer and conveyţ 8? WA? Cl uCnA1lCnţ unLo Lhe uCnLL Lhe properLy aboveŴ
descrlbedţ Lo become effecLlve upon Lhe deaLh of Lhe uCnC8ţ buL ln Lhe evenL LhaL Lhe uCnLL
should dle before Lhe uCnC8ţ Lhe presenL donaLlon shall be deemed resclnded and żofŽ no furLher
force and effecLŤ Þrovldedţ howeverţ LhaL anyLlme durlng Lhe llfeLlme of Lhe uCnC8 or anyone of
Lhem who should survlveţ Lhey could useżţŽ encumber or even dlspose of any or even all of Lhe
parcels of land hereln donaLedŦ
8ecause of Lhe agreemenL ln Lhe deed of donaLlon MaLllde was sLlll able Lo Lransfer ln her name Lhe
LlLles over 2 parcels of land (LoL 674 and LoL 676) ouL of Lhe 6 donaLed Lo MarlaŦ 1 (LoL 676) of
Lhose Lwo was laLer on sold by her Lo respondenLŦ
A year afLer LhaLţ MaLllde execuLed a lasL wlll and LesLamenL devlslng Lhe remalnlng four parcels of
land Lo Marla whlle her remalnlng properLlesţ lncludlng Lhe land Lhe LlLle of whlch was ln her name
(LoL 674)ţ Lo respondenLŦ
MaLllde dledŦ Marla followed her durlng Lhe same yearŦ Marla's helrsţ hereln peLlLlonersţ LhereafLer
lnsLlLuLed a case before Lhe 81C for Lhe recovery of Lhe Lwo loLs ln respondenL's possesslonŦ lor hls
defenseţ respondenL alleged LhaL Lhe flrsL loL was obLalned by hlm Lhrough sale whlle Lhe second
loL Lhrough lnherlLance based on Lhe wlll execuLed by MaLlldeŦ
1he Lrlal courL ruled ln favor of Lhe peLlLloners explalnlng LhaL lL was lmposslble for respondenL Lo
have a valld clalm over Lhe Lwo loLs as Lhose were prevlously donaLed ln favor of Lhe moLher of
peLlLlonersŦ
1he CA on appeal reversed Lhe Lrlal courL's declslon rullng LhaL Lhe donaLlon made Lo Lhe moLher of
peLlLloners was noL lnLer vlvos buL a morLls causa hence lnvalld for falllng Lo comply wlLh Lhe
requlslLes for lLs valldlLy as provlded under ArLŦ 803 of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ
Pence Lhe presenL appealŦ

lSSuLť WCn Lhe donaLlon made Lo peLlLloners was lnLer vlvosŦ

PLLuť
nCŦ

As dld Lhe appellaLe courLţ Lhe CourL flnds Lhe donaLlon Lo peLlLloners' moLher one of morLls causaţ
lL havlng Lhe followlng characLerlsLlcsť

(1) lL conveys no LlLle or ownershlp Lo Lhe Lransferee before Lhe deaLh of Lhe LransferorŤ or whaL
amounLs Lo Lhe same Lhlngţ LhaL Lhe Lransferor should reLaln Lhe ownershlp (full or naked) and
conLrol of Lhe properLy whlle allveŤ

(2) 1haL before Lhe deaLh of Lhe Lransferorţ Lhe Lransfer should be revocable by Lhe Lransferor aL
wlllţ ad nuLumŤ buL revocablllLy may be provlded for lndlrecLly by means of a reserved power ln Lhe
donor Lo dlspose of Lhe properLles conveyedŤ and

(3) 1haL Lhe Lransfer should be vold lf Lhe Lransferor should survlve Lhe LransfereeŦ
1he phrase ln Lhe earllerŴquoLed ueed of uonaLlon ƍLo become effecLlve upon Lhe deaLh of Lhe
uCnC8ƍ admlLs of no oLher lnLerpreLaLlon Lhan Lo mean LhaL MaLllde dld noL lnLend Lo Lransfer Lhe
ownershlp of Lhe slx loLs Lo peLlLloners' moLher durlng her (MaLllde's) llfeLlmeŦ

1he sLaLemenL ln Lhe ueed of uonaLlon readlng ƍanyLlme durlng Lhe llfeLlme of Lhe uCnC8 or
anyone of Lhem who should survlveţ Lhey could useţ encumber or even dlspose of any or even all
Lhe parcels of land hereln donaLedƍ means LhaL MaLllde reLalned ownershlp of Lhe loLs and
reserved ln her Lhe rlghL Lo dlspose LhemŦ lor Lhe rlghL Lo dlspose of a Lhlng wlLhouL oLher
llmlLaLlons Lhan Lhose esLabllshed by law ls an aLLrlbuLe of ownershlpŦ1he phrase ln Lhe ueed of
uonaLlon ƍor anyone of Lhem who should survlveƍ ls of course ouL of syncŦ lor Lhe ueed of
uonaLlon clearly sLaLed LhaL lL would Lake effecL upon Lhe deaLh of Lhe donorţ henceţ sald phrase

could only have referred Lo Lhe donor MaLlldeŦ ÞeLlLloners Lhemselves concede LhaL such phrase
does noL refer Lo Lhe doneeţ Lhusť

x x x żlŽL ls well Lo polnL ouL LhaL Lhe lasL provlslon (senLence) ln Lhe dlspuLed paragraph should only
refer Lo MaLllde Aluadţ Lhe donorţ because she was Lhe only survlvlng spouse aL Lhe Llme Lhe
donaLlon was execuLed on 14 november 1981ţ as her husband Ŷ Crlspln Aluad żŶŽ had long been
dead as early as 1973Ŧ

1he Lrlal courLţ ln holdlng LhaL Lhe donaLlon was lnLer vlvosţ reasonedť

x x x 1he donaLlon ln quesLlon ls sub[ecL Lo a resoluLory Lerm or perlod when Lhe donor provldes ln
Lhe aforequoLed provlslonsţ ƍbuL ln Lhe evenL LhaL Lhe uCnLL should dle before Lhe uCnC8ţ Lhe
presenL donaLlon shall be deemed resclnded and żofŽ no furLher force and effecLƍŦ When Lhe donor
provldes LhaL should Lhe ƍuCnLLƍ xxx dle before Lhe uCnC8ţ Lhe presenL donaLlon shall be
deemed resclnded and żofŽ no furLher force and effecLƍ Lhe loglcal consLrucLlon Lhereof ls LhaL afLer
Lhe execuLlon of Lhe sub[ecL donaLlonţ Lhe same became effecLlve lmmedlaLely and shall be
ƍdeemed resclnded and żofŽ no furLher force and effecLƍ upon Lhe arrlval of a resoluLory Lerm or
perlodţ lŦeŦţ Lhe deaLh of Lhe donee whlch shall occur before LhaL of Lhe donorŦ undersLandablyţ Lhe
arrlval of Lhls resoluLory Lerm or perlod cannoL resclnd and render of no furLher force and effecL a
donaLlon whlch has never become effecLlveţ becauseţ cerLalnly whaL donaLlon ls Lhere Lo be
resclnded and rendered of no furLher force and effecL upon Lhe arrlval of sald resoluLory Lerm or
perlod lf Lhere was no donaLlon whlch was already effecLlve aL Lhe Llme when Lhe donee dled?

1he ueed of uonaLlon whlch lsţ as already dlscussedţ one of morLls causaţ noL havlng followed Lhe
formallLles of a wlllţ lL ls vold and LransmlLLed no rlghL Lo peLlLloners' moLherŦ 8uL even assumlng
arguendo LhaL Lhe formallLles were observedţ slnce lL was noL probaLedţ no rlghL Lo LoL nosŦ 674
and 676 was LransmlLLed Lo MarlaŦ MaLllde Lhus valldly dlsposed of LoL noŦ 674 Lo respondenL by
her lasL wlll and LesLamenLţ sub[ecL of course Lo Lhe quallflcaLlon LhaL her (MaLllde's) wlll musL be
probaLedŦ WlLh respecL Lo LoL noŦ 676ţ Lhe same hadţ as menLloned earllerţ been sold by MaLllde Lo
respondenL on AugusL 26ţ 1991Ŧ

ÞeLlLloners neverLheless argue LhaL assumlng LhaL Lhe donaLlon of LoL noŦ 674 ln favor of Lhelr
moLher ls lndeed morLls causaţ henceţ MaLllde could devlse lL Lo respondenLţ Lhe loL should
neverLheless have been awarded Lo Lhem because Lhey had acqulred lL by acqulslLlve prescrlpLlonţ
Lhey havlng been ln conLlnuousţ unlnLerrupLedţ adverseţ openţ and publlc possesslon of lL ln good
falLh and ln Lhe concepL of an owner slnce 1978Ŧ

ÞeLlLloners falled Lo ralse Lhe lssue of acqulslLlve prescrlpLlon before Lhe lower courLsţ howeverţ
Lhey havlng lald Lhelr clalm on Lhe basls of lnherlLance from Lhelr moLherŦ As a general ruleţ polnLs
of lawţ Lheorlesţ and lssues noL broughL Lo Lhe aLLenLlon of Lhe Lrlal courL cannoL be ralsed for Lhe
flrsL Llme on appealŦ lor a conLrary rule would be unfalr Lo Lhe adverse parLy who would have no
opporLunlLy Lo presenL furLher evldence maLerlal Lo Lhe new Lheoryţ whlch lL could have done had
lL been aware of lL aL Lhe Llme of Lhe hearlng before Lhe Lrlal courLŦ

S|cad vsŦ CA
Gk# 12S888] AugŦ 13ţ 1998
294 SCkA 183

lAC1Sť
A documenL denomlnaLed as ƍuLLu Cl uCnA1lCn ln1L8 vlvCSţƍ was execuLed by MonLlnola
namlng as donees her grandchlldrenţ namelyť CaLallno valderramaţ !udy CrlsLlna valderrama and
!esus AnLonlo valderramať and LreaLed of a parcel of land locaLed aL Caplzţ covered by 1ransfer
CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle noŦ 1Ŵ16103 ln Lhe name of MonLlnolaŦ 1he deed also conLalned Lhe slgnaLures
of Lhe donees ln acknowledgmenL of Lhelr accepLance of Lhe donaLlonŦ Sald deed was reglsLeredŦ
MonLlnola however reLalned Lhe ownerƌs dupllcaLe copy of Lhe new LlLle (noŦ 1Ŵ16622)ţ as well as
Lhe properLy lLselfţ unLll she Lransferred Lhe same Len (10) years laLerţ on !uly 10ţ 1990ţ Lo Lhe
spousesţ LrnesLo and Lvelyn SlcadŦ

1henţ on AugusL 24ţ 1990ţ she flled a peLlLlon wlLh Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal CourL ln 8oxas ClLy for Lhe
cancellaLlon of sald 1C1 noŦ 1Ŵ16622 and Lhe relnsLaLemenL of 1C1 noŦ 1Ŵ 16103 (ln her name)ţ Lhe
case belng dockeLed as Speclal ÞroceedlngŦ Per peLlLlon was founded on Lhe Lheory LhaL Lhe
donaLlon Lo her Lhree (3) grandchlldren was one morLls causa whlch Lhus had Lo comply wlLh Lhe
formallLles of a wlllŤ and slnce lL had noLţ Lhe donaLlon was vold and could noL effecLlvely serve as
basls for Lhe cancellaLlon of 1C1 noŦ 1Ŵ16103 and Lhe lssuance ln lLs place of 1C1 noŦ 1Ŵ16622Ŧ

Per peLlLlon was opposed by her grandchlldren (donees) alleglng LhaL lL was an lnLer vlvos
donaLlonţ havlng fully complled wlLh Lhe requlremenLs Lherefor seL ouL ln ArLlcle 729 of Lhe Clvll
CodeŦ 1he case was subsequenLly changed lnLo an ordlnary clvll acLlonŦ 1he courL held LhaL Lhe
donaLlon was lndeed one lnLer vlvosţ and dlsmlsslng Aurora MonLlnolaƌs peLlLlon for lack of merlLŦ

ln Lhe meanLlmeţ MonLlnola dledŦ An appeal was made by hereln peLlLlonerŴspouses Slcad who
subsLlLuLed MonLlnola afLer her legal helrs had expressed Lhelr dlslnLeresL over Lhe caseŦ 1he CA
however afflrmed Lhe Lrlal courL's declslon hence Lhe presenL peLlLlonŦ

lSSuLť WCn Lhe deed of donaLlon ls ln Lhe characLer of lnLer vlvosŦ


PLLuť

nCţ lL ls ln Lhe characLer of a morLls causa dlsposlLlonŦ

1he evldence esLabllshes LhaL on uecember 11ţ 1979ţ when Lhe deed of donaLlon prepared by
MonLlnolaƌs lawyer (ALLyŦ 1renas) was read and explalned by Lhe laLLer Lo Lhe parLlesţ MonLlnola
expressed her wlsh LhaL Lhe donaLlon Lake effecL only afLer Len (10) years from her deaLhţ and LhaL
Lhe deed lnclude a prohlblLlon on Lhe sale of Lhe properLy for such perlodŦ Accordlnglyţ a new
provlso was lnserLed ln Lhe deed readlngť ƍhoweverţ Lhe donees shall noL sell or encumber Lhe
properLles hereln donaLed wlLhln 10 years afLer Lhe deaLh of Lhe donorŦƍ 1he acLuallLy of Lhe
subsequenL lnserLlon of Lhls new provlso ls apparenL on Lhe face of Lhe lnsLrumenLť Lhe
lnLercalaLlon ls easlly percelved and ldenLlfled Ÿ lL was clearly Lyped on a dlfferenL machlneţ and ls
crammed lnLo Lhe space beLween Lhe penulLlmaLe paragraph of Lhe deed and LhaL lmmedlaLely
precedlng lLŦ

A donaLlon whlch purporLs Lo be one lnLer vlvos buL wlLhholds from Lhe donee Lhe rlghL Lo dlspose
of Lhe donaLed properLy durlng Lhe donorƌs llfeLlme ls ln LruLh one morLls causaŦ ln a donaLlon
morLls causa ƍLhe rlghL of dlsposlLlon ls noL Lransferred Lo Lhe donee whlle Lhe donor ls sLlll allveŦƍ

ln Lhe lnsLanL caseţ noLhlng of any consequence was Lransferred by Lhe deed of donaLlon ln
quesLlon Lo MonLlnolaƌs grandchlldrenţ Lhe osLenslble doneesŦ 1hey dld noL geL possesslon of Lhe
properLy donaLedŦ 1hey dld noL acqulre Lhe rlghL Lo Lhe frulLs Lhereofţ or any oLher rlghL of
domlnlon over Lhe properLyŦ More lmporLanLlyţ Lhey dld noL acqulre Lhe rlghL Lo dlspose of Lhe
properLy Ÿ Lhls would accrue Lo Lhem only afLer Len (10) years from MonLlnolaƌs deaLhŦ lndeedţ
Lhey never even lald hands on Lhe cerLlflcaLe of LlLle Lo Lhe sameŦ 1hey were Lherefore slmply
ƍpaper ownersƍ of Lhe donaLed properLyŦ All Lhese clrcumsLancesţ lncludlngţ Lo repeaLţ Lhe expllclL
provlslons of Lhe deed of donaLlon Ÿ reservlng Lhe exerclse of rlghLs of ownershlp Lo Lhe donee
and prohlblLlng Lhe sale or encumbrance of Lhe properLy unLll Len (10) years afLer her deaLh Ÿ
lnelucLably lead Lo Lhe concluslon LhaL Lhe donaLlon ln quesLlon was a donaLlon morLls causaţ
conLemplaLlng a Lransfer of ownershlp Lo Lhe donees only afLer Lhe donorƌs demlseŦ

1he valderramasƌ argumenL LhaL Lhe donaLlon ls lnLer vlvos ln characLer and LhaL Lhe prohlblLlon
agalnsL Lhelr dlsposlLlon of Lhe donaLed properLy ls merely a condlLlon whlchţ lf vlolaLedţ would
glve cause for lLs revocaLlonţ begs Lhe quesLlonŦ lL assumes LhaL Lhey have Lhe rlghL Lo make a
dlsposlLlon of Lhe properLyţ whlch Lhey do noLŦ 1he argumenL also makes no senseţ because lf Lhey
had Lhe rlghL Lo dlspose of Lhe properLy and dld ln facL dlspose of lL Lo a Lhlrd personţ Lhe
revocaLlon of Lhe donaLlon Lhey speak of would be of no uLlllLy or beneflL Lo Lhe donorţ slnce such a
revocaLlon would noL necessarlly resulL ln Lhe resLoraLlon of Lhe donorƌs ownershlp and en[oymenL
of Lhe properLyŦ

lL ls also error Lo suppose LhaL Lhe donaLlon under revlew should be deemed one lnLer vlvos slmply
because founded on conslderaLlons of love and affecLlonŦ ln Ale[andro vŦ Ceraldezţ supra Lhls CourL
also observed LhaL ƍLhe facL LhaL Lhe donaLlon ls glven ln conslderaLlon of love and affecLlon ** ls
noL a characLerlsLlc of donaLlons lnLer vlvos (solely) because Lransfers morLls causa may also be
made for Lhe same reasonŦƍ Slmllarlyţ ln 8onsaLo vŦ CourL of Appealsţ supraţ Lhls CourL oplned LhaL
Lhe facL ƍLhaL Lhe conveyance was due Lo Lhe affecLlon of Lhe donor for Lhe donees and Lhe servlces
rendered by Lhe laLLerţ ls of no parLlcular slgnlflcance ln deLermlnlng wheLher Lhe deedsţ LxhsŦ ƍ1ƍ
and ƍ2ţƍ consLlLuLe Lransfers lnLer vlvos or noLţ because a legacy may have ldenLlcal moLlvaLlonŦƍ

llnallyţ lL ls germane Lo adverL Lo Lhe legal prlnclple ln ArLlcle 1378 of Lhe Clvll Code Lo Lhe effecL
LhaL ln case of doubL relaLlve Lo a graLulLous conLracLţ Lhe consLrucLlon musL be LhaL enLalllng ƍLhe
leasL Lransmlsslon of rlghLs and
lnLeresLsƍŦ

1he donaLlon ln quesLlonţ Lhough denomlnaLed lnLer vlvosţ ls ln LruLh one morLls causaŤ lL ls vold
because Lhe essenLlal requlslLes for lLs valldlLy have noL been complled wlLhŦ

De| kosar|o vsŦ Ierrer
Gk# 1870S6] SeptŦ 20ţ2010
630 SCkA 683

ƼnoL submlLLedƽ
x
x
x
x
x


Ganue|as vŦ Cawed
Gk # 123968ţ AprŦ 24ţ 2003
401 SCkA 447

ƼnoL submlLLedƽ
x
x
x
x
x

Centra| Þh||Ŧ Un|vŦ vŦ CA
Gk #112127ţ Iu| 17ţ 199S
246 SCkA S11

ƼnoL submlLLedƽ
x
x
x
x
x


Chapter 2Ŧ Þersons Who May G|ve or kece|ve a Donat|on (ArtsŦ 73SŴ749)
Chapter 3Ŧ Lffect of Donat|ons and L|m|tat|ons @hereof (ArtsŦ 7S0Ŵ7S9)


ne|rs of Maramag vŦ Maramag
Gk # 181132ţ IunŦ Sţ 2009
S88 SCkA 774

ƼnoL submlLLedƽ
x
x
x
x
x

Insu|ar L|fe vŦ Lbradoţ
Gk # 440S9ţ CctŦ 28ţ 1977

80 SCkA 181

ƼnoL submlLLedƽ
x
x
x
x
x


Arangote vŦ Mag|unob
Gk # 178906ţ IebŦ 18ţ 2009
S79 SCkA 620

ƼnoL submlLLedƽ
x
x
x
x
x

Çu||a|a vŦ A|cantaraţ
Gk # 132681ţ DecŦ 3ţ 2001
371 SCkA 311

ƼnoL submlLLedƽ
x
x
x
x
x

Arcaba vŦ 8atocae|
Gk # 146683ţ NovŦ 22ţ 2001
370 SCkA 414

lacLsť
ÞeLlLloner Clrlla Arcaba seeks revlew on cerLlorarl of Lhe declslon of Lhe CAţ whlch afflrmed wlLh
modlflcaLlon Lhe declslon of Lhe 81Cţ declarlng as vold a deed of donaLlon lnLer vlvos execuLed by
Lhe laLe lranclsco 1Ŧ Comllle ln her favor and lLs subsequenL resoluLlon denylng reconslderaLlonŦ

lranclsco Comllle and hls wlfe Zoslma MonLallana became Lhe reglsLered owners of LoL noŦ 437ŴA
ln ulpolog ClLyţ Zamboanga del norLe wlLh a LoLal loL area of 418 sq mŦ AfLer Lhe deaLh of Zoslmaţ
lranclsco and hls moLherŴlnŴlawţ !ullana 8usLallno MonLallanaţ execuLed a deed of exLra[udlclal
parLlLlon wlLh walver of rlghLsţ ln whlch Lhe laLLer walved her share of oneŴfourLh (1/4) of Lhe
properLy Lo lranclscoŦ lranclsco reglsLered Lhe loL ln hls name wlLh Lhe 8eglsLry of ueedsŦ

Pavlng no chlldren Lo Lake care of hlm afLer hls reLlremenLţ lranclsco asked hls nlece LeLlcla
8ellosllloţ Lhe laLLerƌs couslnţ Luzvlmlnda Þaghaclanţ and peLlLloner Clrlla Arcabaţ Lhen a wldowţ Lo
Lake care of hls houseţ as well as Lhe sLore lnsldeŦ

ConfllcLlng LesLlmonles were offered as Lo Lhe naLure of Lhe relaLlonshlp beLween Clrlla and
lranclscoŦ She denled Lhey ever had sexual lnLercourseŦ lL appears LhaL when LeLlcla and
Luzvlmlnda were marrledţ only Clrlla was lefL Lo Lake care of lranclscoŦ Clrlla LesLlfled LhaL she was
a 34Ŵyear old wldow whlle lranclsco was a 73Ŵyear old wldower when she began worklng for Lhe
laLLerŤ LhaL he could sLlll walk wlLh her asslsLance aL LhaL LlmeŤ and LhaL hls healLh evenLually
deLerloraLed and he became bedrlddenŦ Lrllnda 1abancura LesLlfled LhaL lranclscoƌs sole source of
lncome conslsLed of renLals from hls loL near Lhe publlc sLreeLsŦ Pe dld noL pay Clrlla a regular cash
wage as a househelperţ Lhough he provlded her famlly wlLh food and lodglngŦ

A few monLhs before hls deaLhţ lranclsco execuLed an lnsLrumenL denomlnaLed ƍueed of uonaLlon
lnLer vlvosţƍ glvlng 130 sq m of hls loLţ LogeLher wlLh hls houseţ Lo Clrllaţ who accepLed Lhe
donaLlon ln Lhe same lnsLrumenLŦ lranclsco lefL Lhe larger porLlon of 268 square meLers ln hls
nameŦ 1he deed sLaLed LhaL Lhe donaLlon was belng made ln conslderaLlon of ƍLhe falLhful servlces
żClrlla ArcabaŽ had rendered over Lhe pasL Len (10) yearsŦƍ 1he deed was noLarlzed by ALLyŦ vlc 1Ŧ
Lacayaţ SrŦ and laLer reglsLered by Clrlla as lLs absoluLe ownerŦ

lranclsco dled wlLhouL any chlldrenŦ Cn lebruary 18ţ 1993ţ respondenLs flled a complalnL agalnsL
peLlLloner ƌfor declaraLlon of nulllLy of a deed of donaLlon lnLer vlvosţ recovery of possesslonţ and
damagesŦ 8espondenLsţ who are Lhe decedenLƌs nephews and nleces and hls helrs by lnLesLaLe
successlonţ alleged LhaL Clrlla was Lhe commonŴlaw wlfe of lranclsco and Lhe donaLlon lnLer vlvos
made by lranclsco ln her favor ls vold under ArLlcle 87 of Lhe lamlly CodeŦ

Cn lebruary 23ţ 1999ţ Lhe Lrlal courL rendered [udgmenL ln favor of respondenLsţ holdlng Lhe
donaLlon vold under Lhls provlslon of Lhe lamlly Code based on LesLlmonles and cerLaln documenLs
bearlng Lhe slgnaLure of one ƍClrlla ComllleŦƍ

ÞeLlLloner appealed Lo Lhe CourL of AppealsŦ As already sLaLedţ Lhe appeals courL denled
reconslderaLlonŦ lLs concluslon was based on (1) Lhe LesLlmonles of LeLlclaţ Lrllndaţ and ClrllaŤ (2)
Lhe coples of documenLs purporLedly showlng Clrllaƌs use of lranclscoƌs surnameŤ (3) a pleadlng ln
anoLher clvll case menLlonlng paymenL of renLals Lo Clrlla as lranclscoƌs commonŴlaw wlfeŤ and (4)
Lhe facL LhaL Clrlla dld noL recelve a regular cash wageŦ

lssueť
WheLher Lhe CourL of Appeals correcLly applled ArL 87 of Lhe lamlly Code Lo Lhe clrcumsLances of
Lhls caseŦ

Peldť
ln 8lLangcor vŦ 1anţ we held LhaL Lhe Lerm ƍcohablLaLlonƍ or ƍllvlng LogeLher as husband and wlfeƍ
means noL only resldlng under one roofţ buL also havlng repeaLed sexual lnLercourseŦ CohablLaLlonţ
of courseţ means more Lhan sexual lnLercourseţ especlally when one of Lhe parLles ls already old
and may no longer be lnLeresLed ln sexŦ AL Lhe very leasLţ cohablLaLlon ls publlc assumpLlon by a
man and a woman of Lhe marlLal relaLlonţ and dwelllng LogeLher as man and wlfeţ Lhereby holdlng
Lhemselves ouL Lo Lhe publlc as suchŦ SecreL meeLlngs or nlghLs clandesLlnely spenL LogeLherţ even

lf ofLen repeaLedţ do noL consLlLuLe such klnd of cohablLaLlonŤ Lhey are merely mereLrlclousŦ ln Lhls
[urlsdlcLlonţ Lhls CourL has consldered as sufflclenL proof of commonŴlaw relaLlonshlp Lhe
sLlpulaLlons beLween Lhe parLlesţ a convlcLlon of concublnageţ or Lhe exlsLence of leglLlmaLe
chlldrenŦ

Clrlla admlLLed LhaL she and lranclsco reslded under one roof for a long Llmeţ lL ls very posslble LhaL
Lhe Lwo consummaLed Lhelr relaLlonshlpţ slnce Clrlla gave lranclsco LherapeuLlc massage and
LeLlcla sald Lhey slepL ln Lhe same bedroomŦ AL Lhe very leasLţ Lhelr publlc conducL lndlcaLed LhaL
Lhelrs was noL [usL a relaLlonshlp of careglver and paLlenLţ buL LhaL of excluslve parLners akln Lo
husband and wlfeŦ

llnallyţ Lhe facL LhaL Clrlla dld noL demand from lranclsco a regular cash wage ls an lndlcaLlon LhaL
she was noL slmply a careglverŴemployeeţ buL lranclscoƌs common law spouseŦ She wasţ afLer allţ
enLlLled Lo a regular cash wage under Lhe lawŦ lL ls dlfflculL Lo belleve LhaL she sLayed wlLh lranclsco
and served hlm ouL of pure beneflcenceŦ Puman reason would Lhus lead Lo Lhe concluslon LhaL she
was lranclscoƌs commonŴlaw spouseŦ

8espondenLs havlng proven by a preponderance of evldence LhaL Clrlla and lranclsco llved LogeLher
as husband and wlfe wlLhouL a valld marrlageţ Lhe lnescapable concluslon ls LhaL Lhe donaLlon
made by lranclsco ln favor of Clrlla ls vold under ArL 87 of Lhe lamlly CodeŦ


Chapter 4Ŧ kevocat|on and keduct|on of Donat|ons (ArtsŦ 760Ŵ773)

2amboanga vŦ Þ|agata
Gk # 148433ţ SeptŦ 30ţ 2008
S67 SCkA 163
lacLsť
1hls ls a ÞeLlLlon for 8evlew on CerLlorarl under 8ule 43 of Lhe 1997 8ules of Clvll Þrocedure whlch
seeks Lo seL aslde Lhe declslon of Lhe CA and lLs 8esoluLlon denylng peLlLloner's moLlon for
reconslderaLlonŦ lL llkewlse asked LhaL Lhe second allas wrlL of execuLlon lssued by PonŦ !ullus 8heLL
!Ŧ ÞlagaLaţ LxecuLlve Labor ArblLer of nL8CŴ8A8 lxţ be annulled and declared wlLhouL any legal
effecLţ as well as Lhe ensulng levyţ sale on execuLlon of Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ

Cn 9 !anuary 1973ţ ÞresldenL lerdlnand LŦ Marcos lssued Þu noŦ 93 whlch legallzed barLer Lradlng
ln Lhe Sulu Archlpelago and ad[acenL areasţ and empowered Lhe Commander of Lhe SouLhwesL
Command of Lhe AlÞ Lo coordlnaLe all acLlvlLles and Lo underLake all measures for Lhe
lmplemenLaLlon of sald decreeŦ

Cn 17 !une 1981ţ Z81k8lţ Lhru lLs ÞresldenLţ ALLyŦ Passan CŦ Alamţ donaLed Lo Lhe 8epubllc of Lhe
Þhlllpplnesţ represenLed by Ma[Ŧ CenŦ uelfln CŦ CasLroţ Commanderţ SouLhern Command of Lhe
AlÞţ and Chalrmanţ LxecuLlve CommlLLee for 8arLer 1radeţ a parcel of land covered by C1C noŦ 1Ŵ
61ţ628 of Lhe 8eglsLry of ueeds of Zamboanga ClLyţ ldenLlfled as LoL noŦ 6 of consolldaLlon
subdlvlslon plan ÞcsŴ09Ŵ000184ţ slLuaLed ln Lhe 8arrlo of Canelarţ ClLy of Zamboangaţ conLalnlng an
area of 13ţ643 sq mŦ 1he 8epubllc accepLed Lhe donaLlon wlLh condlLlons conLalned ln Lhe ueed of
uonaLlonŦ

WlLh Lhe accepLance of Lhe donaLlonţ 1C1 noŦ 1Ŵ61ţ628 ln Lhe name of Z81k8l was cancelled andţ ln
lleu Lhereofţ 1C1Ŧ noŦ 1Ŵ66ţ696 coverlng Lhe same properLy was lssued ln Lhe name of Lhe 8epubllc
of Lhe ÞhlllpplnesŦ

ÞursuanL Lo condlLlon noŦ 1 of Lhe ueed of uonaLlonţ Lhe CovernmenL and Lhe uÞWP 8C lx
consLrucLed a 8arLer 1rade MarkeL 8ulldlng worLh Þ3ţ000ţ000Ŧ00 aL Lhe sald LoL noŦ 6Ŧ 1he bulldlng
was compleLed on 30 March 1983 and was occupled by members of Z81k8lţ as well as by oLher
persons engaged ln barLer LradeŦ

Þrlor Lo sald donaLlonţ on 16 March 1977ţ prlvaLe respondenL 1eoplsLo Mendoza was hlred by
Z81k8l as clerkŦ SubsequenLlyţ ln a leLLer daLed 1 Aprll 1981ţ Z81k8lţ Lhrough lLs ÞresldenLţ ALLyŦ
Pasan CŦ Alamţ lnformed Mendoza LhaL hls servlces were belng LermlnaLed on Lhe ground of
abandonmenL of workŦ

Mendoza flled a ComplalnL for lllegal ulsmlssal wlLh paymenL of backwages and separaLlon pay aL
Lhe uCLL 8Clx on !uly 29ţ 1981Ŧ 1he case was asslgned Lo LxecuLlve Labor ArblLer Paklm SŦ
AbdulwahldŦ

Cn 31 Mayţ 1983ţ LxecuLlve Labor ArblLer Abdulwahld rendered hls declslon flndlng Lhe dlsmlssal
of Mendoza lllegal and ordered Z81k8l Lo relnsLaLe Mendoza Lo hls former poslLlon or any
equlvalenL poslLlonţ and Lo pay hlm backwagesŦ

Cn 17 !une 1983ţ Z81k8l flled a noLlce of Appeal wlLh Lhe nL8CŦ Cn 13 !uly 1983ţ Mendoza flled
wlLh Lhe nL8C a ManlfesLaLlon wlLh MoLlon for LxecuLlon praylng LhaL peLlLloner's appeal noL be
glven due courseţ and LhaL a wrlL of execuLlon enforclng Lhe declslon of Lhe Labor ArblLer be lssuedŦ

Cn 17 !une 1988ţ Lhe Cfflce of Lhe ÞresldenL lssued Memorandum Clrcular noŦ 1 whlch LoLally
phased ouL Lhe Zamboanga ClLy barLer Lrade area effecLlve 1 CcLober 1988Ŧ

Cn 18 uecember 1989ţ Mendoza flled a MoLlon for lssuance of (Second) Allas WrlL of LxecuLlonţ
whlch publlc respondenL LxecuLlve Labor ArblLer !ullus 8heLL !Ŧ ÞlagaLa lssued on 2 !anuary 1990Ŧ
Sherlff AnLhony 8Ŧ Cavlola levled whaLever lnLeresLţ shareţ rlghLţ clalm and/or parLlclpaLlon of
Z81k8l had over a parcel of landţ LogeLher wlLh all Lhe bulldlngs and lmprovemenLs exlsLlng
Lhereonţ covered by 1ransfer CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle (1C1) noŦ 66ţ696 (formerly 1C1 noŦ 61ţ628) ln
compllance of sald wrlLŦ

Cn 13 !une 1990ţ Lhe aforeŴdescrlbed properLy was sold aL publlc aucLlon for Þ96ţ443Ŧ33ţ wlLh
Mendoza as Lhe sole hlghesL bldderŦ 1he properLy was noL redeemedŦ As a consequenceţ Sherlff
Cavlola lssued on 23 !une 1991 a Sherlff's llnal CerLlflcaLe of Sale ln favor of Mendoza over
whaLever lnLeresLţ shareţ rlghLţ clalm and/or parLlclpaLlon Z81k8l had over Lhe parcel of landŦ

Pavlng falled Lo Lake possesslon of Lhe land ln quesLlonţ Mendoza flled a ÞeLlLlon (for lssuance of
WrlL of Þossesslon) on 14 lebruary 2000ţ whlch was granLed on 3 May 2000ţ by LxecuLlve Labor
ArblLer ÞlagaLaŦ 1he wrlL was lssued Lo place Lhe complalnanL ln possesslon (of) Lhe rlghLsţ
lnLeresLsţ sharesţ clalmsţ and parLlclpaLlons of Zamboanga 8arLer 1raders kllusan 8ayanţ lncŦ ln LhaL
parcel of land covered by 1ransfer CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle noŦ 1Ŵ66ţ696 of Lhe 8eglsLry of ueeds for
Zamboanga ClLyţ whlch were sold on execuLlon Lo Lhe complalnanL on 13 !une 1990ţ and ln whose

favor a flnal cerLlflcaLe of sale for such rlghLsţ lnLeresLsţ sharesţ clalmsţ and/or parLlclpaLlon was
execuLed and lssued on 23 !une 1991Ŧ

Sherlff 1e[ada submlLLed a Sherlff's Servlce 8eporL daLed 22 !une 2000 lnformlng LxecuLlve Labor
ArblLer ÞlagaLa LhaL Lhe wrlL of possesslon was reLurned duly served and fully saLlsfledŦ Cn Lhe
same daLeţ Mendozaţ Lhru a leLLerţ acknowledged LhaL Lhe wrlL of possesslon had been saLlsfled
and lmplemenLedŦ

A peLlLlon for revlew on cerLlorarl flled on 27 !une 2001 whlch was denled by Lhls CourL on 13
AugusL 2001ţ for fallure Lo show LhaL a reverslble error had been commlLLed by Lhe CourL of
AppealsŦ ÞeLlLloner flled a moLlon for reconslderaLlon on 8 SepLember 2001ţ whlch Mendoza
opposedŦ

lssue/sť
WheLher Lhe CA erred LhaL Lhe donaLed properLy has already reverLed Lo peLlLlonerŴdonor

Peldť
Cn Lhe lssue of ownershlp over Lhe 13ţ643 square meLers of land locaLed aL 8arrlo Canelarţ ClLy of
ZamboangaŦ

ÞeLlLloner argues LhaL Lhe CourL of Appeals erred ln rullng LhaL Lhe donaLed properLy was no longer
owned by Lhe 8epubllc of Lhe Þhlllpplnes because ownershlp Lhereof had already reverLed Lo lL
(peLlLloner)Ŧ

lrom Lhe recordsţ Lhe sub[ecL properLy was donaLed by peLlLloner (donor) Lo Lhe 8epubllc (donee)
wlLh Lhe followlng condlLlons already adverLed hereLofore buL are belng relLeraLed for emphaslsť
1Ŧ 1haL upon Lhe effecLlvlLy or accepLance hereof Lhe uCnLL shallţ Lhru Lhe auLhorlzed
agency/mlnlsLryţ consLrucL a Þ3 Mllllon 8arLer 1rade markeL bulldlng aL Lhe aforeŴdescrlbed parcel
of landŤ
2Ŧ 1haL Lhe aforesald 8arLer 1rade MarkeL bulldlng shall accommodaLe aL leasL 1ţ000 sLallsţ Lhe
allocaLlon of whlch shall be deLermlned by Lhe LxecuLlve CommlLLee for 8arLer 1rade ln
coordlnaLlon wlLh Lhe Cfflcers and 8oard of ulrecLors Lhe Zamboanga 8arLer 1raders' kllusang
8ayanţ lncŦţ provldedţ howeverţ LhaL each member of Lhe uCnC8 shall be glven prlorlLyŤ
3Ŧ 1haL Lhe sald 8arLer 1rade MarkeL bulldlng Lo be consLrucLed as aboveŴsLaLedţ shall be Lo Lhe
sLrlcL excluslon of any oLher bulldlng for barLer Lradlng ln Zamboanga ClLyţ ÞhlllpplnesŤ
4Ŧ 1haL ln Lhe evenL barLer Lradlng shall be phased ouLţ prohlblLedţ or suspended for more Lhan one
(1) year ln Zamboanga ClLyţ Þhlllpplnesţ Lhe aforeŴdescrlbed parcel of land shall reverL back Lo Lhe
uCnC8 wlLhouL need of any furLher formallLy or documenLaLlonţ and Lhe uCnC8 shall have Lhe
flrsL opLlon Lo purchase Lhe bulldlng and lmprovemenLs LhereonŦ
3Ŧ 1haL Lhe uCnLL hereby accepLs Lhls donaLlon made ln lLs favor by Lhe uCnC8ţ LogeLher wlLh Lhe
condlLlons Lhereln provldedŦ (underscorlng supplled)

1husţ when Lhe properLy was levled and sold on 1 March 1990 and 13 !une 1990ţ respecLlvelyţ lL
was already peLlLloner LhaL owned Lhe sameŦ lL should be clear LhaL reverslon applled only Lo Lhe
land and noL Lo Lhe bulldlng and lmprovemenLs made by Lhe 8epubllc on Lhe land worLh
Þ3ţ000ţ000Ŧ00Ŧ

ÞeLlLloner furLher clalms LhaL Lhe CourL of Appeals erred ln rullng LhaL Lhere was auLomaLlc
reverslon of Lhe landţ because lL puL Lhe 8epubllc ln a dlsadvanLageous slLuaLlon when lL had a Þ3
mllllon bulldlng on a land owned by anoLherŦ

1hls clalm ls unLenableŦ 1he CourL of Appeals merely enforced or applled Lhe condlLlons conLalned
ln Lhe deed of donaLlonŦ 1he 8epubllc accepLed Lhe donaLlon sub[ecL Lo condlLlons lmposed by Lhe
donorŦ ln condlLlon number 4ţ Lhe 8epubllc ls glven Lhe rlghL Lo sell Lhe bulldlng lL consLrucLed on
Lhe land and Lhe lmprovemenLs LhereonŦ lf ever such condlLlon ls dlsadvanLageous Lo Lhe 8epubllcţ
Lhere ls noLhlng LhaL can be done abouL lLţ slnce lL ls one of Lhe condlLlons LhaL are conLalned ln Lhe
donaLlon whlch lL accepLedŦ 1here belng noLhlng amblguous ln Lhe conLenLs of Lhe documenLţ Lhere
ls no room for lnLerpreLaLlon buL only slmple appllcaLlon LhereofŦ

We llkewlse flnd Lo be wlLhouL basls peLlLloner's clalm LhaL Lhe 8epubllc should be relmbursed of
Lhe cosL of Lhe consLrucLlon of Lhe barLer Lrade bulldlng pursuanL Lo condlLlon number 4Ŧ 1here ls
noLhlng Lhere LhaL shows LhaL Lhe 8epubllc wlll be relmbursedŦ WhaL ls sLaLed Lhere ls LhaL
peLlLloner has Lhe flrsL opLlon Lo purchase Lhe bulldlngs and lmprovemenLs LhereonŦ ln oLher
wordsţ Lhe 8epubllc can sell Lhe bulldlngs and lmprovemenLs LhaL lL made or bullLŦ

ÞeLlLloner's sLaLemenL LhaL nelLher parLy Lo Lhe donaLlon has expressly resclnded Lhe conLracL ls
flawedŦ As above ruledţ Lhe deed of donaLlon conLalns a sLlpulaLlon LhaL allows auLomaLlc
reverslonŦ Such sLlpulaLlonţ noL belng conLrary Lo lawţ moralsţ good cusLomsţ publlc order or publlc
pollcyţ ls valld and blndlng on Lhe parLles Lo Lhe donaLlonŦ As held ln uolar vŦ 8arangay Lublub (now
ÞŦuŦ MonforL norLh) MunlclpallLy of uumangasţ clLlng

8oman CaLhollc Archblshop of Manlla vŦ CourL of Appealsť
1he raLlonale for Lhe foregolng ls LhaL ln conLracLs provldlng for auLomaLlc revocaLlonţ [udlclal
lnLervenLlon ls necessary noL for purposes of obLalnlng a [udlclal declaraLlon resclndlng a conLracL
already deemed resclnded by vlrLue of an agreemenL provldlng for resclsslon even wlLhouL [udlclal
lnLervenLlonţ buL ln order Lo deLermlne wheLher or noL Lhe resclsslon was properŦ

1he auLomaLlc reverslon of Lhe sub[ecL land Lo Lhe donor upon phase ouL of barLer Lradlng ln
Zamboanga ClLy cannoL be doubLedŦ Sald auLomaLlc reverslon cannoL be averLedţ merely because
peLlLlonerŴdonor has noL yeL exerclsed lLs opLlon Lo purchase Lhe bulldlngs and lmprovemenLs
made and lnLroduced on Lhe land by Lhe 8epubllcŤ or because Lhe 8epubllc has noL yeL sold Lhe
same Lo oLher lnLeresLed buyersŦ CLherwlseţ Lhere would be gross vlolaLlon of Lhe clear lmporL of
Lhe condlLlons seL forLh ln Lhe deed of donaLlonŦ

ÞeLlLlon ls uLnlLu and Lhe declslon of Lhe CA ls Alll8MLuŦ

Archb|shop of M|a vŦ CA
Gk # 7742Sţ IunŦ 19ţ 1991
198 SCkA 300

lacLsť
1hese Lwo peLlLlons for revlew on cerLlorarl seek Lo overLurn Lhe declslon of Lhe CA whlch reversed
and seL aslde Lhe order of Lhe 81Cţ as well as Lhe order of sald respondenL courL denylng
peLlLlonerƌs moLlons for Lhe reconslderaLlon of lLs aforesald declslonŦ

Cn november 29ţ 1984ţ prlvaLe respondenLs as plalnLlffs flled a complalnL for nulllflcaLlon of deed
of donaLlonţ resclsslon of conLracL and reconveyance of real properLy wlLh damages agalnsL
peLlLloners llorenclo and Soledad CŦ lgnao and Lhe 8oman CaLhollc 8lshop of lmusţ CavlLeţ LogeLher
wlLh Lhe 8oman CaLhollc Archblshop of Manllaţ before Lhe 81C of lmusţ CavlLeŦ

ÞrlvaLe respondenLs alleged LhaL Lhe spouses Luseblo de CasLro and MarLlna 8leLaţ now boLh
deceasedţ execuLed a deed of donaLlon ln favor of defendanL 8oman CaLhollc Archblshop of Manlla
coverlng a parcel of land locaLed aL kawlLţ CavlLe wlLh an area of approx 964 sq mŦ 1he deed of
donaLlon allegedly provldes LhaL Lhe donee shall noL dlspose or sell Lhe properLy wlLhln a perlod of
one hundred (100) years from Lhe execuLlon of Lhe deed of donaLlonţ oLherwlse a vlolaLlon of such
condlLlon would render lpso facLo null and vold Lhe deed of donaLlon and Lhe properLy would
reverL Lo Lhe esLaLe of Lhe donorsŦ

lL ls furLher alleged LhaL on or abouL !une 30ţ 1980ţ and whlle sLlll wlLhln Lhe prohlblLlve perlod Lo
dlspose of Lhe properLyţ peLlLloner 8oman CaLhollc 8lshop of lmusţ ln whose admlnlsLraLlon all
properLles wlLhln Lhe provlnce of CavlLe owned by Lhe Archdlocese of Manlla was allegedly
Lransferred on Aprll 26ţ 1962ţ execuLed a deed of absoluLe sale of Lhe properLy sub[ecL of Lhe
donaLlon ln favor of peLlLloners llorenclo and Soledad CŦ lgnao ln conslderaLlon of Lhe sum of
Þ114ţ000Ŧ00Ŧ As a consequence of Lhe saleţ 1C1 noŦ 113990 was lssued by Lhe 8eglsLer of ueeds of
CavlLe on november 13ţ 1980 ln Lhe name of sald peLlLloner spousesŦ
WhaL Lransplred LhereafLer ls narraLed by respondenL courL ln lLs assalled declslonŦ Cn uecember
17ţ 1984ţ peLlLloners llorenclo lgnao and Soledad CŦ lgnao flled a moLlon Lo dlsmlss based on Lhe
grounds LhaL (1) hereln prlvaLe respondenLsţ as plalnLlffs Lherelnţ have no legal capaclLy Lo sueŤ and
(2) Lhe complalnL sLaLes no cause of acLlonŦ

Cn uecember 19ţ 1984ţ peLlLloner 8oman CaLhollc 8lshop of lmus also flled a moLlon Lo dlsmlss on
Lhree (3) groundsţ Lhe flrsL Lwo (2) grounds of whlch were ldenLlcal Lo LhaL of Lhe moLlon Lo dlsmlss
flled by Lhe lgnao spousesţ and Lhe Lhlrd ground belng LhaL Lhe cause of acLlon has prescrlbedŦ

Cn !anuary 9ţ 1983ţ Lhe 8oman CaLhollc Archblshop of Manlla llkewlse flled a moLlon Lo dlsmlss on
Lhe ground LhaL he ls noL a real parLy ln lnLeresL andţ Lhereforeţ Lhe complalnL does noL sLaLe a
cause of acLlon agalnsL hlmŦ
AfLer prlvaLe respondenLs had flled Lhelr opposlLlons Lo Lhe sald moLlons Lo dlsmlss and Lhe
peLlLloners had counLered wlLh Lhelr respecLlve repllesţ wlLh re[olnders LhereLo by prlvaLe
respondenLsţ Lhe Lrlal courL lssued an order daLed !anuary 31ţ 1983ţ dlsmlsslng Lhe complalnL on
Lhe ground LhaL Lhe cause of acLlon has prescrlbedŦ

ÞrlvaLe respondenLs appealed Lo Lhe CA ralslng Lhe lssues on (a) wheLher or noL Lhe acLlon for
resclsslon of conLracLs (deed of donaLlon and deed of sale) has prescrlbedŤ and (b) wheLher or noL
Lhe dlsmlssal of Lhe acLlon for resclsslon of conLracLs (deed of donaLlon and deed of sale) on Lhe
ground of prescrlpLlon carrles wlLh lL Lhe dlsmlssal of Lhe maln acLlon for reconveyance of real
properLyŦ

CA held LhaL Lhe acLlon has noL yeL prescrlbedţ relnsLaLed and remanded Lhe clvll case Lo Lhe lower
courL for furLher proceedlngsŦ

CA denled Lhe separaLe moLlons for reconslderaLlon of peLlLlonersţ henceţ Lhe flllng of Lhese
appeals by cerLlorarlŦ

lssueť wheLher or noL Lhe cause of acLlon has already prescrlbed

Peldť 1he CourL does noL agreeŦ

AlLhough lL ls Lrue LhaL under ArLlcle 764 of Lhe Clvll Code an acLlon for Lhe revocaLlon of a
donaLlon musL be broughL wlLhln four (4) years from Lhe nonŴcompllance of Lhe condlLlons of Lhe
donaLlonţ Lhe same ls noL appllcable ln Lhe case aL barŦ 1he deed of donaLlon lnvolved hereln
expressly provldes for auLomaLlc reverslon of Lhe properLy donaLed ln case of vlolaLlon of Lhe
condlLlon Lherelnţ hence a [udlclal declaraLlon revoklng Lhe same ls noL necessaryţ As apLly sLaLed
by Lhe CourL of Appealsť

8y Lhe very express provlslon ln Lhe deed of donaLlon lLself LhaL Lhe vlolaLlon of Lhe condlLlon
Lhereof would render lpso facLo null and vold Lhe deed of donaLlonţ WL are of Lhe oplnlon LhaL
Lhere would be no legal necesslLy anymore Lo have Lhe donaLlon [udlclally declared null and vold
for Lhe reason LhaL Lhe very deed of donaLlon lLself declares lL soŦ lor where (slc) lL oLherwlse and
LhaL Lhe donors and Lhe donee conLemplaLed a courL acLlon durlng Lhe execuLlon of Lhe deed of
donaLlon Lo have Lhe donaLlon [udlclally resclnded or declared null and vold should Lhe condlLlon
be vlolaLedţ Lhen Lhe phrase readlng ƍwould render lpso facLo null and voldƍ would noL appear ln
Lhe deed of donaLlonŦ

ln supporL of lLs aforesald poslLlonţ respondenL courL relled on Lhe rule LhaL a [udlclal acLlon for
resclsslon of a conLracL ls noL necessary where Lhe conLracL provldes LhaL lL may be revoked and
cancelled for vlolaLlon of any of lLs Lerms and condlLlonsŦ lL called aLLenLlon Lo Lhe holdlng LhaL
Lhere ls noLhlng ln Lhe law LhaL prohlblLs Lhe parLles from enLerlng lnLo an agreemenL LhaL a
vlolaLlon of Lhe Lerms of Lhe conLracL would cause lLs cancellaLlon even wlLhouL courL lnLervenLlonţ
and LhaL lL ls noL always necessary for Lhe ln[ured parLy Lo resorL Lo courL for resclsslon of Lhe
conLracLŦ lL relLeraLed Lhe docLrlne LhaL a [udlclal acLlon ls proper only when Lhere ls absence of a
speclal provlslon granLlng Lhe power of cancellaLlonŦ

lL ls Lrue LhaL Lhe aforesald rules were applled Lo Lhe conLracLs lnvolved Lherelnţ buL we see no
reason why Lhe same should noL apply Lo Lhe donaLlon ln Lhe presenL caseŦ ArLlcle 732 of Lhe Clvll
Code provldes LhaL donaLlons lnLer vlvos shall be governed by Lhe general provlslons on conLracLs
and obllgaLlons ln all LhaL ls noL deLermlned ln 1lLle lllţ 8ook lll on donaLlonsŦ nowţ sald 1lLle lll does
noL have an expllclL provlslon on Lhe maLLer of a donaLlon wlLh a resoluLory condlLlon and whlch ls
sub[ecL Lo an express provlslon LhaL Lhe same shall be consldered lpso facLo revoked upon Lhe
breach of sald resoluLory condlLlon lmposed ln Lhe deed Lhereforţ as ls Lhe case of Lhe deed
presenLly ln quesLlonŦ 1he suppleLory appllcaLlon of Lhe foregolng docLrlnal rullngs Lo Lhe presenL
conLroversy ls consequenLly [usLlfledŦ

1he valldlLy of such a sLlpulaLlon ln Lhe deed of donaLlon provldlng for Lhe auLomaLlc reverslon of
Lhe donaLed properLy Lo Lhe donor upon nonŴcompllance of Lhe condlLlon was upheld ln Lhe recenL
case of ue Lunaţ eL alŦ vsŦ Abrlgoţ eL alŦ

1he raLlonale for Lhe foregolng ls LhaL ln conLracLs provldlng for auLomaLlc revocaLlonţ [udlclal
lnLervenLlon ls necessary noL for purposes of obLalnlng a [udlclal declaraLlon resclndlng a conLracL
already deemed resclnded by vlrLue of an agreemenL provldlng for resclsslon even wlLhouL [udlclal
lnLervenLlonţ buL ln order Lo deLermlne wheLher or noL Lhe resclsslon was properŦ

When a deed of donaLlonţ as ln Lhls caseţ expressly provldes for auLomaLlc revocaLlon and
reverslon of Lhe properLy donaLedţ Lhe rules on conLracL and Lhe general rules on prescrlpLlon
should applyţ and noL ArLlcle 764 of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ Slnce ArLlcle 1306 of sald Code auLhorlzes Lhe
parLles Lo a conLracL Lo esLabllsh such sLlpulaLlonsţ clausesţ Lerms and condlLlons noL conLrary Lo
lawţ moralsţ good cusLomsţ publlc order or publlc pollcyţ we are of Lhe oplnlon LhaLţ aL Lhe very
leasLţ LhaL sLlpulaLlon of Lhe parLles provldlng for auLomaLlc revocaLlon of Lhe deed of donaLlonţ
wlLhouL prlor [udlclal acLlon for LhaL purposeţ ls valld sub[ecL Lo Lhe deLermlnaLlon of Lhe proprleLy
of Lhe resclsslon soughLŦ Where such proprleLy ls susLalnedţ Lhe declslon of Lhe courL wlll be merely
declaraLory of Lhe revocaLlonţ buL lL ls noL ln lLself Lhe revocaLory acLŦ

Cn Lhe foregolng raLloclnaLlonsţ Lhe CA commlLLed no error ln holdlng LhaL Lhe cause of acLlon of
hereln prlvaLe respondenLs has noL yeL prescrlbed slnce an acLlon Lo enforce a wrlLLen conLracL
prescrlbes ln Len (10) yearsŦ lL ls our vlew LhaL ArLlcle 764 was lnLended Lo provlde a [udlclal
remedy ln case of nonŴfulflllmenL or conLravenLlon of condlLlons speclfled ln Lhe deed of donaLlon lf
and when Lhe parLles have noL agreed on Lhe auLomaLlc revocaLlon of such donaLlon upon Lhe
occurrence of Lhe conLlngency conLemplaLed LherelnŦ 1haL ls noL Lhe slLuaLlon ln Lhe case aL barŦ

noneLhelessţ we flnd LhaL alLhough Lhe acLlon flled by prlvaLe respondenLs may noL be dlsmlssed by
reason of prescrlpLlonţ Lhe same should be dlsmlssed on Lhe ground LhaL prlvaLe respondenLs have
no cause of acLlon agalnsL peLlLlonersŦ

1he cause of acLlon of prlvaLe respondenLs ls based on Lhe alleged breach by peLlLloners of Lhe
resoluLory condlLlon ln Lhe deed of donaLlon LhaL Lhe properLy donaLed should noL be sold wlLhln a
perlod of one hundred (100) years from Lhe daLe of execuLlon of Lhe deed of donaLlonŦ Sald
condlLlonţ ln our oplnlonţ consLlLuLes an undue resLrlcLlon on Lhe rlghLs arlslng from ownershlp of
peLlLloners and lsţ Lhereforeţ conLrary Lo publlc pollcyŦ

uonaLlonţ as a mode of acqulrlng ownershlpţ resulLs ln an effecLlve Lransfer of LlLle over Lhe
properLy from Lhe donor Lo Lhe doneeŦ Cnce a donaLlon ls accepLedţ Lhe donee becomes Lhe
absoluLe owner of Lhe properLy donaLedŦ AlLhough Lhe donor may lmpose cerLaln condlLlons ln Lhe
deed of donaLlonţ Lhe same musL noL be conLrary Lo lawţ moralsţ good cusLomsţ publlc order and
publlc pollcyŦ 1he condlLlon lmposed ln Lhe deed of donaLlon ln Lhe case before us consLlLuLes a
paLenLly unreasonable and undue resLrlcLlon on Lhe rlghL of Lhe donee Lo dlspose of Lhe properLy
donaLedţ whlch rlghL ls an lndlspensable aLLrlbuLe of ownershlpŦ Such a prohlblLlon agalnsL
allenaLlonţ ln order Lo be valldţ musL noL be perpeLual or for an unreasonable perlod of LlmeŦ
CerLaln provlslons of Lhe Clvll Code lllusLraLlve of Lhe aforesald pollcy may be consldered appllcable
by analogyŦ under Lhe Lhlrd paragraph of ArLlcle 494ţ a donor or LesLaLor may prohlblL parLlLlon for
a perlod whlch shall noL exceed LwenLy (20) yearsŦ ArLlcle 870ţ on lLs parLţ declares LhaL Lhe
dlsposlLlons of Lhe LesLaLor declarlng all or parL of Lhe esLaLe lnallenable for more Lhan LwenLy (20)
years are voldŦ

ln Lhe case aL barţ we hold LhaL Lhe prohlblLlon ln Lhe deed of donaLlon agalnsL Lhe allenaLlon of Lhe
properLy for an enLlre cenLuryţ belng an unreasonable emasculaLlon and denlal of an lnLegral
aLLrlbuLe of ownershlpţ should be declared as an lllegal or lmposslble condlLlon wlLhln Lhe
conLemplaLlon of ArLlcle 727 of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ ConsequenLlyţ as speclflcally sLaLed ln sald sLaLuLory
provlslonţ such condlLlon shall be consldered as noL lmposedŦ no rellance may accordlngly be
placed on sald prohlblLory paragraph ln Lhe deed of donaLlonŦ 1he neL resulL ls LhaLţ absenL sald
proscrlpLlonţ Lhe deed of sale supposedly consLlLuLlve of Lhe cause of acLlon for Lhe nulllflcaLlon of
Lhe deed of donaLlon ls noL ln LruLh vlolaLlve of Lhe laLLer henceţ for lack of cause of acLlonţ Lhe case
for prlvaLe respondenLs musL fallŦ

lL may be argued LhaL Lhe valldlLy of such prohlblLory provlslon ln Lhe deed of donaLlon was noL
speclflcally puL ln lssue ln Lhe pleadlngs of Lhe parLlesŦ 1haL may be Lrueţ buL such overslghL or
lnacLlon does noL prevenL Lhls CourL from passlng upon and resolvlng Lhe sameŦ

lL wlll readlly be noLed LhaL Lhe provlslon ln Lhe deed of donaLlon agalnsL allenaLlon of Lhe land for
one hundred (100) years was Lhe very basls for Lhe acLlon Lo nulllfy Lhe deed of donaLlonŦ AL Lhe
same Llmeţ lL was llkewlse Lhe conLroverLed fundamenL of Lhe moLlon Lo dlsmlss Lhe case a quoţ
whlch moLlon was susLalned by Lhe Lrlal courL and seL aslde by respondenL courLţ boLh on Lhe lssue
of prescrlpLlonŦ 1haL rullng of respondenL courL lnLerpreLlng sald provlslon was asslgned as an error
ln Lhe presenL peLlLlonŦ Whlle Lhe lssue of Lhe valldlLy of Lhe same provlslon was noL squarely
ralsedţ lL ls lnelucLably relaLed Lo peLlLlonerƌs aforesald asslgnmenL of error slnce boLh lssues are
grounded on and refer Lo Lhe very same provlslonŦ

1hls CourL ls cloLhed wlLh ample auLhorlLy Lo revlew maLLersţ even lf Lhey are noL asslgned as errors
on appealţ lf lL flnds LhaL Lhelr conslderaLlon ls necessary ln arrlvlng aL a [usL declslon of Lhe caseť
1husţ we have held LhaL an unasslgned error closely relaLed Lo an error properly asslgnedţ or upon
whlch Lhe deLermlnaLlon of Lhe quesLlon properly asslgned ls dependenLţ wlll be consldered by Lhe
appellaLe courL noLwlLhsLandlng Lhe fallure Lo asslgn lL as errorŦ

AddlLlonallyţ we have lald down Lhe rule LhaL Lhe remand of Lhe case Lo Lhe lower courL for furLher
recepLlon of evldence ls noL necessary where Lhe CourL ls ln a poslLlon Lo resolve Lhe dlspuLe based
on Lhe records before lLŦ Cn many occaslonsţ Lhe CourLţ ln Lhe publlc lnLeresL and for Lhe
expedlLlous admlnlsLraLlon of [usLlceţ has resolved acLlons on Lhe merlLs lnsLead of remandlng Lhem
Lo Lhe Lrlal courL for furLher proceedlngsţ such as where Lhe ends of [usLlceţ would noL be
subserved by Lhe remand of Lhe caseŦ 1he aforesLaLed conslderaLlons obLaln ln and apply Lo Lhe
presenL case wlLh respecL Lo Lhe maLLer of Lhe valldlLy of Lhe resoluLory condlLlon ln quesLlonŦ

Case ls dlsmlssedŦ


De Luna vŦ Abr|go
Gk # S74SSţ IanŦ 18ţ 1990
181 SCkA 1S0

lacLsť
1hls ls a peLlLlon for revlew on cerLlorarl of Lhe Crder of respondenL [udge Sofronlo lŦ Abrlgo of Lhe
Cll of Cuezonţ dlsmlsslng Lhe complalnL of peLlLloners on Lhe ground of prescrlpLlon of acLlonŦ

Cn !anuary 24ţ 1963ţ Þrudenclo de Luna donaLed a porLlon of 7ţ300 square meLers of LoL of Lhe
CadasLral Survey of Lucena covered by 1ransfer CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle noŦ 1Ŵ3773 Lo Lhe Luzonlan
Collegesţ lncŦţ (now Luzonlan unlverslLy loundaLlonţ lncŦţ hereln referred Lo as Lhe foundaLlon)Ŧ 1he
donaLlonţ embodled ln a ueed of uonaLlon lnLervlvos was sub[ecL Lo cerLaln Lerms and condlLlons
and provlded for Lhe auLomaLlc reverslon Lo Lhe donor of Lhe donaLed properLy ln case of vlolaLlon
or nonŴcompllanceŦ 1he foundaLlon falled Lo comply wlLh Lhe condlLlons of Lhe donaLlonŦ Cn Aprll
9ţ 1971ţ Þrudenclo de Luna ƍrevlvedƍ Lhe sald donaLlon ln favor of Lhe foundaLlonţ ln a documenL
enLlLled ƍ8evlval of uonaLlon lnLervlvosƍ sub[ecL Lo Lerms and condlLlons whlch among oLhersţ
requlredť
xxx xxx xxx
3Ŧ 1haL Lhe uCnLL shall consLrucL aL lLs own expense a Chapelţ a nursery and klndergarLen Schoolţ
Lo be named afLer SLŦ veronlcaţ and oLher consLrucLlons and Accessorles shall be consLrucLed on
Lhe land hereln belng donaLed sLrlcLly ln accordance wlLh Lhe plans and speclflcaLlons prepared by
Lhe CŦ8Ŧ CulnLo Ǝ AssoclaLes and made parL of Lhls donaLlonŤ provlded LhaL Lhe floorlng of Lhe AlLar
and parLs of Lhe Chapel shall be of granoleLlc marbleŦ
4Ŧ 1haL Lhe consLrucLlon of Lhe Chapelţ nursery and klndergarLen School shall sLarL lmmedlaLely
and musL be aL leasL SLvLn1? (70) ÞL8 CLn1uM flnlshed by Lhe end of 1P8LL (3) ?LA8S from Lhe
daLe hereofţ howeverţ Lhe whole pro[ecL as drawn ln Lhe plans and speclflcaLlons made parLs of Lhls
donaLlon musL be compleLed wlLhln llvL (3) ?LA8S from Lhe daLe hereonţ unless exLenslons are
granLed by Lhe uCnC8 ln wrlLlngŤ

As ln Lhe orlglnal deed of donaLlonţ Lhe ƍ8evlval of uonaLlon lnLervlvosƍ also provlded for Lhe
auLomaLlc reverslon Lo Lhe donor of Lhe donaLed area ln case of vlolaLlon of Lhe condlLlons Lhereofţ
couched ln Lhe followlng Lermsť
xxx xxx xxxŦ
11Ŧ 1haL vlolaLlon of any of Lhe condlLlons hereln provlded shall cause Lhe auLomaLlc reverslon of
Lhe donaLed area Lo Lhe donorţ hls helrsţ asslgns and represenLaLlvesţ wlLhouL Lhe need of
execuLlng any oLher documenL for LhaL purpose and wlLhouL obllgaLlon whaLever on Lhe parL of Lhe
uCnC8Ŧ

1he foundaLlonţ Lhrough lLs presldenLţ accepLed Lhe donaLlon ln Lhe same documenLţ sub[ecL Lo all
Lhe Lerms and condlLlons sLaLed ln Lhe donaLlonŦ 1he donaLlon was reglsLered and annoLaLed on
Aprll 13ţ 1971 ln Lhe memorandum of encumbrances as LnLry noŦ 17939 of 1ransfer CerLlflcaLe of
1lLle noŦ 1Ŵ3773Ŧ

Cn AugusL 3ţ 1971ţ Þrudenclo de Luna and Lhe foundaLlon execuLed a ƌueed of SegregaLlonƍ
whereby Lhe area donaLed whlch ls now known as LoL noŦ 3707Ŵ8 of Subdlvlslon Þlan ÞsdŴ40392
was ad[udlcaLed Lo Lhe foundaLlonŦ As a resulLţ Lransfer cerLlflcaLe of LlLle noŦ 1Ŵ16132 was lssued ln
Lhe name of Lhe foundaLlonŦ 1he remalnlng porLlon known as LoL noŦ 3707ŴA was reLalned by Lhe
donorŦ

Cn SepLember 23ţ 1980ţ hereln peLlLlonersţ Lvelynţ 8osallnaţ Þrudencloţ !rŦţ Wlllardţ AnLonlo and
!osellLoţ all surnamed de Lunaţ who clalm Lo be Lhe chlldren and only helrs of Lhe laLe Þrudenclo de
Luna who dled on AugusL 18ţ 1980ţ flled a complalnL wlLh Lhe 81C of Cuezon alleglng LhaL Lhe
Lerms and condlLlons of Lhe donaLlon were noL complled wlLh by Lhe foundaLlonŦ Among oLhersţ lL
prayed for Lhe cancellaLlon of Lhe donaLlon and Lhe reverslon of Lhe donaLed land Lo Lhe helrsŦ

1he assalled order of Lhe Lrlal courL sLaLed LhaL revocaLlon (of a donaLlon) wlll be effecLlve only
elLher upon courL [udgmenL or upon consenL of Lhe donee as held ln Lhe case of Þarks vŦ Þrovlnce
of 1arlacţ noŦ 24190ţ !uly 13ţ 1926ţ 49 ÞhllŦ 143Ŧ 1he Lrlal courL dlsmlssed Lhe clalm of peLlLloners
LhaL Lhe sLlpulaLlon ln Lhe donaLlon provldlng for revocaLlon ln case of nonŴcompllance of
condlLlons ln Lhe donaLlon ls LanLamounL Lo Lhe consenL of Lhe doneeţ oplnlng LhaL Lhe consenL
conLemplaLed by law should be such consenL glven by Lhe donee subsequenL Lo Lhe effecLlvlLy of
Lhe donaLlon or vlolaLlon of Lhe condlLlons lmposed LherelnŦ 1he Lrlal courL furLher held LhaLţ far
from consenLlng Lo Lhe revocaLlonţ Lhe donee clalmed LhaL lL had already subsLanLlally complled
wlLh Lhe condlLlons of Lhe donaLlon by lnLroduclng lmprovemenLs ln Lhe properLy donaLed valued
aL more Lhan Lhe amounL of Lhe donaLed landŦ ln vlew Lhereofţ a [udlclal decree revoklng Lhe
sub[ecL donaLlon ls necessaryŦ Accordlnglyţ under ArLlcle 764 of Lhe new Clvll Codeţ acLlons Lo
revoke a donaLlon on Lhe ground of nonŴcompllance wlLh any of Lhe condlLlons of Lhe donaLlon
shall prescrlbe ln four years counLed from such nonŴcompllanceŦ ln Lhe lnsLanL caseţ Lhe fourŴyear
perlod for flllng Lhe complalnL for revocaLlon commenced on Aprll 9ţ 1976 and explred on Aprll 9ţ
1980Ŧ Slnce Lhe complalnL was broughL on SepLember 23ţ 1980 or more Lhan flve (3) monLhs
beyond Lhe prescrlpLlve perlodţ lL was already barred by prescrlpLlonŦ

Cn Lhe oLher handţ peLlLloners argue LhaL ArLlcle 764 of Lhe new Clvll Code was adopLed Lo provlde
a [udlclal remedy ln case of nonŴfulflllmenL of condlLlons when revocaLlon of Lhe donaLlon has noL
been agreed upon by Lhe parLlesŦ 8y way of conLrasLţ when Lhere ls a sLlpulaLlon agreed upon by
Lhe parLles provldlng for revocaLlon ln case of nonŴcompllanceţ no [udlclal acLlon ls necessaryŦ lL ls
Lhen peLlLlonersƌ clalm LhaL Lhe acLlon flled before Lhe CourL of llrsL lnsLance of Cuezon ls noL one
for revocaLlon of Lhe donaLlon under ArLlcle 764 of Lhe new Clvll Code whlch prescrlbes ln four (4)
yearsţ buL one Lo enforce a wrlLLen conLracL whlch prescrlbes ln Len (10) yearsŦ

lssueť
WheLher Lhe acLlon ls Lo enforce a wrlLLen conLracL lnsLead of ArL 764

Peldť
1he peLlLlon ls lmpressed wlLh merlLŦ
lrom Lhe vlewpolnL of moLlveţ purpose or causeţ donaLlons may be 1) slmpleţ 2) remuneraLory or
3) onerousŦ A slmple donaLlon ls one Lhe cause of whlch ls pure llberallLy (no sLrlngs aLLached)Ŧ A
remuneraLory donaLlon ls one where Lhe donee glves someLhlng Lo reward pasL or fuLure servlces
or because of fuLure charges or burdensţ when Lhe value of sald servlcesţ burdens or charges ls less
Lhan Lhe value of Lhe donaLlonŦ An onerous donaLlon ls one whlch ls sub[ecL Lo burdensţ charges or
fuLure servlces equal (or more) ln value Lhan LhaL of Lhe Lhlng donaLedŦ

lL ls Lhe flndlng of Lhe Lrlal courLţ whlch ls noL dlspuLed by Lhe parLlesţ LhaL Lhe donaLlon sub[ecL of
Lhls case ls one wlLh an onerous causeŦ lL was made sub[ecL Lo Lhe burden requlrlng Lhe donee Lo
consLrucL a chapelţ a nursery and a klndergarLen school ln Lhe donaLed properLy wlLhln flve years
from execuLlon of Lhe deed of donaLlonŦ

under Lhe old Clvll Codeţ lL ls a seLLled rule LhaL donaLlons wlLh an onerous cause are governed noL
by Lhe law on donaLlons buL by Lhe rules on conLracLsţ as held ln cases declded by Lhe SCŦ Cn Lhe
maLLer of prescrlpLlon of acLlons for Lhe revocaLlon of onerous donaLlonţ lL was held LhaL Lhe
general rules on prescrlpLlon appllesŦ

lL ls Lrue LhaL under ArLlcle 764 of Lhe new Clvll Codeţ acLlons for Lhe revocaLlon of a donaLlon musL
be broughL wlLhln four (4) years from Lhe nonŴcompllance of Lhe condlLlons of Lhe donaLlonŦ
Poweverţ lL ls Cur oplnlon LhaL sald arLlcle does noL apply Lo onerous donaLlons ln vlew of Lhe
speclflc provlslon of ArLlcle 733 provldlng LhaL onerous donaLlons are governed by Lhe rules on
conLracLsŦ

ln Lhe llghL of Lhe aboveţ Lhe rules on conLracLs and Lhe general rules on prescrlpLlon and noL Lhe
rules on donaLlons are appllcable ln Lhe case aL barŦ

under ArLlcle 1306 of Lhe new Clvll Codeţ Lhe parLles Lo a conLracL have Lhe rlghL ƍLo esLabllsh such
sLlpulaLlonsţ clausesţ Lerms and condlLlons as Lhey may deem convenlenLţ provlded Lhey are noL
conLrary Lo lawţ moralsţ good cusLomsţ publlc order or publlc pollcyŦƍ Þaragraph 11 of Lhe ƍ8evlval
of uonaLlon lnLervlvosţ has provlded LhaL ƍvlolaLlon of any of Lhe condlLlons (hereln) shall cause Lhe
auLomaLlc reverslon of Lhe donaLed area Lo Lhe donorţ hls helrsţ Ŧ Ŧ Ŧţ wlLhouL Lhe need of execuLlng
any oLher documenL for LhaL purpose and wlLhouL obllgaLlon on Lhe parL of Lhe uCnC8ƍŦ Sald
sLlpulaLlon noL belng conLrary Lo lawţ moralsţ good cusLomsţ publlc order or publlc pollcyţ ls valld
and blndlng upon Lhe foundaLlon who volunLarlly consenLed LhereLoŦ

1he valldlLy of Lhe sLlpulaLlon ln Lhe conLracL provldlng for Lhe auLomaLlc reverslon of Lhe donaLed
properLy Lo Lhe donor upon nonŴcompllance cannoL be doubLedŦ lL ls ln Lhe naLure of an agreemenL
granLlng a parLy Lhe rlghL Lo resclnd a conLracL unllaLerally ln case of breachţ wlLhouL need of golng
Lo courLŦ upon Lhe happenlng of Lhe resoluLory condlLlon of nonŴcompllance wlLh Lhe condlLlons of
Lhe conLracLţ Lhe donaLlon ls auLomaLlcally revoked wlLhouL need of a [udlclal declaraLlon Lo LhaL
effecLŦ

lL ls clearţ howeverţ LhaL [udlclal lnLervenLlon ls necessary noL for purposes of obLalnlng a [udlclal
declaraLlon resclndlng a conLracL already deemed resclnded by vlrLue of an agreemenL provldlng
for resclsslon even wlLhouL [udlclal lnLervenLlonţ buL ln order Lo deLermlne wheLher or noL Lhe
recesslon was properŦ

1he Lrlal courL was noL correcL ln holdlng LhaL Lhe complalnL ln Lhe case aL bar ls barred by
prescrlpLlon under ArLlcle 764 of Lhe new Clvll Code because ArLlcle 764 does noL apply Lo onerous
donaLlonsŦ

As provlded ln Lhe donaLlon execuLed on Aprll 9ţ 1971ţ complalnce wlLh Lhe Lerms and condlLlons
of Lhe conLracL of donaLlonţ shall be made wlLhln flve (3) years from lLs execuLlonŦ 1he complalnL
whlch was flled on SepLember 23ţ 1980 was Lhen well wlLhln Lhe Len (10) year prescrlpLlve perlod
Lo enforce a wrlLLen conLracL (ArLlcle 1144ż1Žţ new Clvll Code)ţ counLed from Aprll 9ţ 1976Ŧ

llnallyţ conslderlng LhaL Lhe allegaLlons ln Lhe complalnL on Lhe maLLer of Lhe doneeƌs nonŴ
compllance wlLh Lhe condlLlons of Lhe donaLlon have been conLesLed by prlvaLe respondenLs who
clalmed LhaL lmprovemenLs more valuable Lhan Lhe donaLed properLy had been lnLroducedţ a
[udgmenL on Lhe pleadlngs ls noL properŦ Moreoverţ ln Lhe absence of a moLlon for [udgmenL on
Lhe pleadlngsţ Lhe courL cannoL moLu proprlo render such [udgmenLŦ SecLlon 1 of 8ule 19 provldesť
ƍWhere an answer falls Lo Lender an lssueţ or oLherwlse admlLs Lhe maLerlal allegaLlons of Lhe
adverse parLyƌs pleadlngţ Lhe courL mayţ on moLlon of LhaL parLyţ dlrecL [udgmenL on such
pleadlngŦƍ (Lmphasls supplled)

ÞeLlLlon ls C8An1Luţ case ls hereby ordered relnsLaLed and respondenL [udge ls ordered Lo conducL
a Lrlal on Lhe merlLs Lo deLermlne Lhe proprleLy of Lhe revocaLlon of Lhe sub[ecL donaLlonŦ


@y vŦ @y
Gk # 16S696ţ AprŦ 30ţ 2008
SS3 SCkA 306
lacLsť
1hls ls a peLlLlon for revlew on cerLlorarl under 8ule 43 of Lhe 8ules of CourL agalnsL Lhe ueclslon of
Lhe CA and Lhe 8esoluLlon Lhereln daLed CcLober 18ţ 2004Ŧ

Cn May 19ţ 1988ţ Alexander 1yţ son of Ale[andro 8Ŧ 1y and 8ella 1orresţ dled of cancer aL Lhe age of
34Ŧ Pe was survlved by hls wlfeţ Sylvla 1yţ and hls only daughLerţ krlzla kaLrlna 1yŦ A few monLhs
afLer hls deaLhţ a peLlLlon for Lhe seLLlemenL of hls lnLesLaLe esLaLe was flled by Sylvla 1y ln Lhe 81C
of Cuezon ClLyŦ

upon peLlLlon of Sylvla 1yţ as AdmlnlsLraLrlxţ for seLLlemenL and dlsLrlbuLlon of Lhe lnLesLaLe esLaLe
of Alexander ln Lhe CounLy of Los Angelesţ Lhe Superlor CourL of Callfornla ordered Lhe dlsLrlbuLlon
of Lhe Pollywood condomlnlum unlLţ Lhe MonLebello loLţ and Lhe 1986 1oyoLa plckŴup Lruck Lo
Sylvla 1y and krlzla kaLrlna 1yŦ

Cn november 23ţ 1990ţ Sylvla 1y submlLLed Lo Lhe lnLesLaLe CourL ln Cuezon ClLy an lnvenLory of
Lhe asseLs of Alexander's esLaLeţ conslsLlng of shares of sLocks and a schedule of real esLaLe
properLlesţ whlch lncluded Lhe followlngť

1Ŧ LuSA ÞroperLy Ŷ a parcel of land wlLh an area of 1ţ728 square meLers slLuaLed ln LuSAţ
Creenhlllsţ Mandaluyongţ MeLro Manllaţ reglsLered ln Lhe name of Alexander 1y when he was sLlll
slngleţ and covered by 1C1 noŦ 0006383Ť
2Ŧ Merldlen Condomlnlum Ŷ A resldenLlal condomlnlum wlLh an area of 167Ŧ3 square meLers
slLuaLed ln 29 Annapolls SLreeLţ Creenhlllsţ Mandaluyongţ MeLro Manllaţ reglsLered ln Lhe name of
Lhe spouses Alexander 1y and Sylvla 1yţ and covered by Condomlnlum CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle noŦ 3393Ť
3Ŧ WackŴWack ÞroperLy Ŷ A resldenLlal land wlLh an area of 1ţ384 square meLers slLuaLed ln noLre
uameţ WackŴWackţ Mandaluyongţ MeLro Manllaţ reglsLered ln Lhe name of Lhe spouses Alexander
1y and Sylvla 1yţ and covered by 1C1 noŦ 62670Ŧ

Cn november 4ţ 1992ţ Sylvla 1y asked Lhe lnLesLaLe CourL Lo sell or morLgage Lhe properLles of Lhe
esLaLe ln order Lo pay Lhe addlLlonal esLaLe Lax of Þ4ţ714ţ360Ŧ02 assessed by Lhe 8l8Ŧ

ApparenLlyţ Lhls acLlon dld noL slL well wlLh her faLherŴlnŴlawţ Lhe plalnLlffŴappelleeţ for on
uecember 16ţ 1992ţ Ale[andro 1yţ faLher of Lhe deceased Alexander 1yţ flled a complalnL for
recovery of properLles wlLh prayer for prellmlnary ln[uncLlon and/or Lemporary resLralnlng order
agalnsL Sylvla 1y as defendanL ln her capaclLy as żAdmlnlsLraLrlxŽ of Lhe lnLesLaLe LsLaLe of
Alexander 1yŦ

Cn lebruary 26ţ 1993ţ Lhe 81C granLed Lhe appllcaLlon for a wrlL of prellmlnary ln[uncLlonŦ

ÞlalnLlff added LhaL defendanL acLed ln bad falLh ln lncludlng Lhe sub[ecL properLles ln Lhe lnvenLory
of Alexander 1y's esLaLeţ for she was well aware LhaL Alexander was slmply holdlng Lhe sald
properLles ln LrusL for hls slbllngsŦ

Cn !anuary 7ţ 2000ţ Lhe 81C rendered lLs declslon ln favor of plalnLlffŦ

8espondenLţ Sylvla SŦ 1yţ appealed from Lhe 81C ueclslon Lo Lhe CAŦ

1he CA Lackled ƍLhe crlLlcalţ cruclal and plvoLal lssue of wheLher a LrusLţ express or lmplledţ was
esLabllshed by Lhe plalnLlffŴappellee ln favor of hls laLe son and nameŴsake Alexander 1yŦƍ

1he CA proceeded Lo dlsLlngulsh express from lmplled LrusLţ Lhen found LhaL no express LrusL can
be lnvolved here slnce noLhlng ln wrlLlng was presenLed Lo prove lL and Lhe case lnvolves real
properLyŦ lL Lhen sLaLed LhaL lL dlsagrees wlLh Lhe courL a quo's appllcaLlon of ArLŦ 1448 of Lhe Clvll
Code on lmplled LrusLţ Lhe soŴcalled purchase money resulLlng LrusLţ sLaLlng LhaL Lhe very ArLlcle
provldes Lhe excepLlon LhaL obLalns when Lhe person Lo whom Lhe LlLle ls conveyed ls Lhe chlldţ
leglLlmaLe or llleglLlmaLeţ of Lhe one paylng Lhe prlce of Lhe saleţ ln whlch case no LrusL ls lmplled
by lawţ lL belng dlspuLably presumed LhaL Lhere ls a glfL ln favor of Lhe chlldŦ

1he CA Lherefore reasoned LhaL even assumlng LhaL plalnLlffŴappellee pald aL leasL parL of Lhe prlce
of Lhe LuSA properLyţ Lhe law sLlll presumes LhaL Lhe conveyance was a dlscreLlon (a glfL of devlse)
ln favor of AlexanderŦ

As Lo plalnLlffŴappellee's argumenL LhaL Lhere was no donaLlon as shown by hls exerclse of
domlnlon over Lhe properLyţ Lhe CA held LhaL no credlble evldence was presenLed Lo subsLanLlaLe
Lhe clalmŦ

8egardlng Lhe resldence condomlnlum and Lhe WackŴWack properLyţ Lhe CA sLaLed LhaL lL dld noL
agree elLher wlLh Lhe flndlngs of Lhe Lrlal courL LhaL an lmplled LrusL was creaLed over Lhese
properLlesŦ

As a flnal polnLţ Lhe CourL found LhaL Lhe plalnLlffŴappellee ls noL enLlLled Lo moral damagesţ
aLLorney's fees and cosLs of llLlgaLlonţ conslderlng LhaL Lhe lnsLanL case ls clearly a vexaLlous and
unfounded sulL by hlm flled agalnsL Lhe esLaLe of Lhe laLe Ale[andro 1yŦ Penceţ all Lhese awards ln
Lhe [udgmenL a quo are hereby uLLL1LuŦ

1he CA Lherefore reversed and seL aslde Lhe [udgmenL appealed from and enLered anoLher one
dlsmlsslng Lhe complalnLŦ

Cn CcLober 18ţ 2004 Lhe CA resolved Lo deny Lhereln plalnLlffŴappellee's moLlon for
reconslderaLlonŦ
Penceţ Lhls peLlLlonŦ

lssueť
WheLher an lmplled LrusL under ArL 1448 was consLlLuLed over Lhe sub[ecL properLlesŦ

Peldť
1he CourL dlsposes of Lhe peLlLlonţ as followsť

1he LuSA ÞroperLy
ÞeLlLloner conLends LhaL Lhe LuSA properLyţ whlle reglsLered ln Lhe name of hls son Alexander 1yţ ls
covered by an lmplled LrusL ln hls favor under ArLlcle 1448 of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ 1hlsţ peLlLloner arguesţ
ls because he pald Lhe prlce when Lhe properLy was purchased and dld so for Lhe purpose of havlng
Lhe beneflclal lnLeresL of Lhe properLyŦ
ArLlcle 1448 of Lhe Clvll Code provldesť
ArLŦ 1448Ŧ 1here ls an lmplled LrusL when properLy ls soldţ and Lhe legal esLaLe ls granLed Lo one
parLy buL Lhe prlce ls pald by anoLher for Lhe purpose of havlng Lhe beneflclal lnLeresL of Lhe
properLyŦ 1he former ls Lhe LrusLeeţ whlle Lhe laLLer ls Lhe beneflclaryŦ Poweverţ lf Lhe person Lo
whom Lhe LlLle ls conveyed ls a chlldţ leglLlmaLe or llleglLlmaLeţ of one paylng Lhe prlce of Lhe saleţ
no LrusL ls lmplled by lawţ lL belng dlspuLably presumed LhaL Lhere ls a glfL ln favor of Lhe chlldŦ

1he CA conceded LhaL aL leasL parL of Lhe purchase prlce of Lhe LuSA properLy came from
peLlLlonerŦ Poweverţ lL ruled ouL Lhe exlsLence of an lmplled LrusL because of Lhe lasL senLence of
ArLlcle 1448ť x x x Poweverţ lf Lhe person Lo whom Lhe LlLle ls conveyed ls a chlldţ leglLlmaLe or
llleglLlmaLeţ of Lhe one paylng Lhe prlce of Lhe saleţ no LrusL ls lmplled by lawţ lL belng dlspuLably
presumed LhaL Lhere ls a glfL ln favor of Lhe chlldŦ

ÞeLlLloner now clalms LhaL ln so rullngţ Lhe CA deparLed from [urlsprudence ln LhaL such was noL
Lhe Lheory of Lhe parLlesŦ

ÞeLlLlonerţ howeverţ forgeLs LhaL lL was he who lnvoked ArLlcle 1448 of Lhe Clvll Code Lo clalm Lhe
exlsLence of an lmplled LrusLŦ 8uL ArLlcle 1448 lLselfţ ln provldlng for Lhe soŴcalled purchase money
resulLlng LrusLţ also provldes Lhe parameLers of such LrusL and addsţ ln Lhe same breaLhţ Lhe
provlsoť ƍPoweverţ lf Lhe person Lo whom Lhe LlLle ls conveyed ls a chlldţ leglLlmaLe or llleglLlmaLeţ
of Lhe one paylng Lhe prlce of Lhe saleţ nC 18uS1 lS lMÞLlLu 8? LAWţ lL belng dlspuLably presumed
LhaL Lhere ls a glfL ln favor of Lhe chlldŦƍ (Lmphasls supplledŦ)

SLaLed oLherwlseţ Lhe ouLcome ls Lhe necessary consequence of peLlLloner's Lheory and argumenL
and ls lnexLrlcably llnked Lo lL by Lhe law lLselfŦ
1he CAţ Lhereforeţ dld noL err ln slmply applylng Lhe lawŦ

ArLlcle 1448 of Lhe Clvll Code ls clearŦ lf Lhe person Lo whom Lhe LlLle ls conveyed ls Lhe chlld of Lhe
one paylng Lhe prlce of Lhe saleţ and ln Lhls case Lhls ls undlspuLedţ nC 18uS1 lS lMÞLlLu 8? LAWŦ
1he lawţ lnsLeadţ dlspuLably presumes a donaLlon ln favor of Lhe chlldŦ

Cn Lhe quesLlon of wheLher or noL peLlLloner lnLended a donaLlonţ Lhe CA found LhaL peLlLloner
falled Lo prove Lhe conLraryŦ 1hls ls a facLual flndlng whlch Lhls CourL sees no reason Lhe record Lo
reverseŦ

1he neL effecL of all Lhe foregolng ls LhaL respondenL ls obllged Lo collaLe lnLo Lhe mass of Lhe
esLaLe of peLlLlonerţ ln Lhe evenL of hls deaLhţ Lhe LuSA properLy as an advance of Alexander's
share ln Lhe esLaLe of hls faLherţ Lo Lhe exLenL LhaL peLlLloner provlded a parL of lLs purchase prlceŦ

1he Merldlen Condomlnlum and Lhe WackŴWack properLyŦ
ÞeLlLloner would have Lhls CourL overLurn Lhe flndlng of Lhe CA LhaL as regards Lhe Merldlen
Condomlnlum and Lhe WackŴWack properLyţ peLlLloner falled Lo show LhaL Lhe money used Lo
purchase Lhe same came from hlmŦ
Agalnţ Lhls ls clearly a facLual flndlng and peLlLloner has advanced no convlnclng argumenL for Lhls
CourL Lo alLer Lhe flndlngs reached by Lhe CAŦ

Among Lhe facLs clLed by Lhe CA are Lhe sources of lncome of Alexander 1y who had been worklng
for nlne years when he purchased Lhese Lwo properLlesţ who had a car care buslnessţ and was
acLlvely engaged ln Lhe buslness deallngs of several famlly corporaLlonsţ from whlch he recelved
emolumenLs and oLher beneflLsŦ

1he CAţ Lhereforeţ ruled LhaL wlLh respecL Lo Lhe Merldlen Condomlnlum and Lhe WackŴWack
properLyţ no lmplled LrusL was creaLed because Lhere was no showlng LhaL parL of Lhe purchase
prlce was pald by peLlLloner andţ on Lhe conLraryţ Lhe evldence showed LhaL Alexander 1y had Lhe
means Lo pay for Lhe sameŦ

ÞeLlLlon ls ÞA81L? C8An1Luţ Lhe ueclslon of Lhe CA ls Alll8MLuţ wlLh Lhe MCulllCA1lCn LhaL
respondenL ls obllged Lo collaLe lnLo Lhe mass of Lhe esLaLe of peLlLlonerţ ln Lhe evenL of hls deaLhţ
Lhe LuSA properLy as an advance of Alexander 1y's share ln Lhe esLaLe of hls faLherţ Lo Lhe exLenL
LhaL peLlLloner provlded a parL of lLs purchase prlceŦ

Lduarte vsŦ CA
Gk# 10S944] IebŦ 9ţ 1996
2S3 SCkA 391
lacLsť

A peLlLlon for cerLlorarl assalllng Lhe declslon of Lhe CAŦlacLsť uomlngo 8elda and LsLellLa Ana were
Lhe reglsLered owners of a parcel of land denomlnaLed as LoL 118 locaLed aL Sorsogon and covered
by Crlglnal CerLlflcaLe of 1lLlenoŦ ÞŴ4991 lssued on CcLober 3ţ 1962ŦCn March 1ţ 1963ţ a leLLer was
senL by Lhe Land lnvesLlgaLor Serafln valcarcel of Lhe8ureau of Lands Lo uomlngo and Clprlano
8ulan calllng Lhem Lo a conference Lo seLLle Lhe wrongful lssuance of LlLle Lo Lhe properLy Lhey boLh
occupyŦ AL Lhls conferenceţ nelLher uomlngo nor 8ulan appeared buL 1eoLlmo LduarLe dldŦ Cn
AugusL 9ţ 1963ţ LduarLe wroLe a leLLer Lo Lhe ulrecLor of Lands requesLlng hlm noL Lo glve due
course Lo uomlngo and LsLellLa's appllcaLlon for a free paLenL LlLle over loL 118slnce whaL uomlngo
and LsLellLa are occupylng ls LoL 138 whlch was LlLled ln Lhe name of 8ulan who refused Lo accepL
sald LlLleŦ AfLer Lhe Cfflce of Lhe ulrecLor of lands Look noLe of LduarLe's proLesLţ an lnvesLlgaLlon
was conducLed whlch revealed LhaL LduarLe ls ln acLual possesslon of loL 118 whlle uomlngo and
LsLellLa occupy loL 138Ŧ

1he ulsLrlcL Land Cfflcer recommended LhaL Lhe free paLenL appllcaLlon of respondenLs should
refer Lo loL 138 and Lhe homesLead appllcaLlon of peLlLloner should refer Lo loL 118Ŧ LduarLe
remalned and conLlnuously occupled loL 118 unLll on uecember 10ţ 1986uomlngo and LsLellLa flled
wlLh Lhe 81C of lroslnţ a complalnL for recovery of possesslon and damages agalnsL LduarLeţ
averrlng LhaL someLlme ln AugusL 1983ţ LduarLe by means of forceţ LhreaLs and lnLlmldaLlon
enLered Lhe sub[ecL Lo loL wlLhouL Lhelr consenL Lhereby deprlvlng Lhem of Lhelr possesslon of Lhe
premlsesŦ 1raverslng Lhe complalnLţ LduarLe asserLs LhaL he ls Lhe rlghLful owner of Lhe properLy ln
quesLlonŤ LhaL he has been ln possesslon of Lhe same slnce 1942Ť LhaL Lhe LlLle relled upon by
uomlngo and LsLellLa was erroneously lssued ln Lhelr name whlch was acknowledged by Lhe
8ureau of LandsŤ LhaL uomlngo and LsLellLa fully know LhaL Lhey are noL Lhe owners of Lhe loL ln
dlspuLeŦ1he lower courL also ruled LhaL peLlLloner can aLLack Lhe valldlLy of respondenLsƌ LlLle
onlyLhrough a dlrecL and noL by a collaLeral proceedlngŦ ueclslon afflrmed by CAţ wlLh
modlflcaLlonsŦ

lssueť

WheLher or noL LduarLe canţ ln an ordlnary clvll acLlon for recovery of possesslon flled by uomlngo
and LsLellLaţ Lhe reglsLered ownersţ assall Lhe valldlLy of Lhelr LlLleŦ

Peldť
lL musL be sLressed LhaL a cerLlflcaLe of LlLle serves as evldence of an lndefeaslble LlLle Lo Lhe
properLy ln favor of Lhe person whose name appears LherelnŦ AfLer Lhe explraLlon of Lhe one year
perlod from Lhe lssuance of Lhe decree of reglsLraLlon upon whlch lL basedţ lL becomes
lnconLroverLlbleŦ 1he decree of reglsLraLlon and Lhe cerLlflcaLe of LlLle lssued pursuanL LhereLo may
be aLLacked on Lhe ground of fraud wlLhln one year from Lhe daLe of lLs enLry and such an aLLack
musL be dlrecL and noL by a collaLeral proceedlngŦ ln Lhe case aL benchţ peLlLloner ralsed Lhe
followlng afflrmaLlve defense ln hls answerť3Ŧ 1haL Lhe defendanL ls Lhe Lrue and lawful owner and
ln acLual possesslon of LhaL cerLaln parcel of land whlch ls more parLlcularly descrlbed as followsť
xxx xxx xxx3Ŧ 1haL Lhe sole basls of Lhe plalnLlff ln adversely clalmlng Lhe aforesald properLy ls due
Lo Lhe erroneous lssuance of CC1 noŦ ÞŴ4991 ln hls name whlch covers sald LoL noŦ 118 and Lhls
mlsLaken and erroneous lssuance has been duly acknowledged and lnvesLlgaLed no less by Lhe
8ureau of LandsŤ6Ŧ 1haL plalnLlff has never been ln acLual possesslon of sald LoL noŦ 118and
Lherefore he ls noL lawfully enLlLled Lo such cerLlflcaLe of LlLle noŦ ÞŴ4991ţ whlch under Lhe
clrcumsLances he ls obllged Lo reconvey Lhe same Lo Lhe defendanLŤ 1he foregolng allegaLlons
aLLack Lhe valldlLy of Lhe orlglnal cerLlflcaLe of LlLle lssued ln favor of prlvaLe respondenLs by Lhe
8eglsLry of ueeds of SorsogonŦ 1hls ls noL permlLLed under Lhe prlnclple of lndefeaslblllLy of a
1orrens LlLleŦ 1he lssue of Lhe valldlLy of LlLleţ lŦeŦţwheLher or noL lL was fraudulenLly lssuedţ can be
ralsed ln an acLlon expressly lnsLlLuLed for LhaL purposesŦ WheLher or noL respondenLs have Lhe
rlghL Lo clalm ownershlp of Lhe sub[ecL land ls beyond Lhe provlnce of Lhe lnsLanL peLlLlonŦ

Ve|asquez vsŦ CA
Gk# 126996] IebŦ 1Sţ 2000
32S SCkA SS2

lacLsť

Spouses Leoncla de Cuzman and Cornello Aqulno dled lnLesLaLe someLlme ln 1943 and 1947ţ
respecLlvely and were chlldlessŦ Leoncla de Cuzman was survlved by her slsLers AnaLalla de Cuzman
(moLher of Lhe plalnLlffs) and 1ranqulllna de Cuzman (grandmoLher of Lhe defendanLs)Ŧ uurlng Lhe
exlsLence of Lhelr marrlageţ spouses Aqulno were able Lo acqulre several properLlesŦ

SomeLlme ln 1989ţ Lhe helrs of AnaLalla de Cuzman represenLed by SanLlagoţ Andresţ lellcldad and
Apolonloţ all surnamed Meneses flled a complalnL for annulmenLţ parLlLlon and damages agalnsL

Lhe helrs of Cesarlo velasquez (son of 1ranqulllna de Cuzman) for Lhe laLLers refusal Lo parLlLlon Lhe
aboveŴmenLloned con[ugal properLles of Lhe Spouses AqulnoŦ 1he complalnL alleged LhaL Leoncla
de Cuzmanţ before her deaLhţ had a Lalk wlLh Lhe plalnLlffs moLherţ AnaLalla de Cuzmanţ wlLh
plalnLlff SanLlago Meneses and 1ranqulllna de Cuzman and hls son Cesarlo velasquez ln
aLLendanceŤ LhaL ln Lhe conference Leoncla Lold AnaLalla de Cuzmanţ 1ranqulllna de Cuzman and
Cesarlo velaquez LhaL Lhe documenLs of donaLlon and parLlLlon whlch she and her husband earller
execuLed were noL slgned by Lhem as lL was noL Lhelr lnLenLlon Lo glve away all Lhe properLles Lo
Cesarlo velasquez because AnaLalla de Cuzman who ls one of her slsLers had several chlldren Lo
supporLŤ Cesarlo velasquez LogeLher wlLh hls moLher allegedly promlsed Lo dlvlde Lhe properLles
equally and Lo glve Lhe plalnLlffs oneŴhalf (1/2) LhereofŤ LhaL Lhey are enLlLled Lo of each of all Lhe
properLles ln quesLlon belng Lhe chlldren of AnaLalla de Cuzmanţ full blood slsLer of Leoncla de
CuzmanŦ ÞlalnLlffs furLher clalm LhaL afLer Lhe deaLh of Leonclaţ defendanLs forclbly Look
possesslon of all Lhe properLles and desplLe plalnLlffs repeaLed demands for parLlLlonţ defendanLs
refusedŦ ÞlalnLlffs pray for Lhe nulllLy of any documenLs coverlng Lhe properLles ln quesLlon slnce
Lhey do noL bear Lhe genulne slgnaLures of Lhe Aqulno spousesţ Lo order Lhe parLlLlon of Lhe
properLles beLween plalnLlffs and defendanLs ln equal shares and Lo order Lhe defendanLs Lo
render an accounLlng of Lhe produce of Lhe land ln quesLlon from Lhe Llme defendanLs forclbly Look
possesslon unLll parLlLlon shall have been effecLedŦ

uefendanLs flled Lhelr Amended Answer wlLh counLerclalm alleglng among oLhers LhaL durlng Lhe
llfeLlme of spouses Cornello Aqulno and Leoncla de Cuzmanţ Lhey had already dlsposed of Lhelr
properLles ln favor of peLlLloners predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresLţ Cesarlo velasquez and Camlla de
Cuzmanţ and peLlLloners AnasLacla and !ose velasquezŦ

uefendanLs denled LhaL a conference Look place beLween Leoncla de Cuzman and plalnLlff SanLlago
Meneses and hls moLher AnaLalla wlLh 1ranqulllna (defendanLs grandmoLher) and Cesarlo
velasquez (defendanLs faLher)ţ nor dld Lhe laLLer promlse Lo dlvlde Lhe properLles equally wlLh Lhe
plalnLlffs or Lo execuLe a deed of parLlLlonŤ LhaL Lhey dld noL forclbly Lake possesslon of Lhe sub[ecL
properLles slnce Lhelr possesslon Lhereof has been peacefulţ openţ conLlnuous and adverse ln
characLer Lo Lhe excluslon of all oLhersŦ 8y way of afflrmaLlve defensesţ defendanLs clalm LhaL Lhe
lnsLanL case ls already barred by res [udlcaLa slnce Lhere had been Lhree prevlous cases lnvolvlng
Lhe same parLlesţ sub[ecL maLLer and cause of acLlon whlch were all dlsmlssedţ Lhe lasL of whlch
was dlsmlssed for fallure Lo prosecuLeŤ LhaL plalnLlffs acLlon Lo annul Lhe documenLs coverlng Lhe
dlsposlLlon of Lhe properLles ls also barred by Lhe sLaLuLe of llmlLaLlonsŤ LhaL Lhe acLlon for parLlLlon
presupposes Lhe exlsLence of a properLy held ln common as agreed upon or admlLLed by Lhe parLles
buL Lhe coŴownershlp ceases when one of Lhe parLles alleges excluslve ownershlpţ Lhus Lhe acLlon
becomes one for a LlLle and recovery of ownershlp and Lhe acLlon prescrlbes ln four yearsŦ
lssueť

lŦ WheLher or noL Lhe lnsLanL case ls barred by res [udlcaLa and by Lhe sLaLuLe of llmlLaLlonsŦ

llŦ WheLher or noL Lhe properLles menLloned ln Lhe complalnL form parL of Lhe esLaLe of Lhe
Spouses Cornello Aqulno and Leoncla ue CuzmanŦ

lllŦ WheLher or noL Lhe peLlLloners have acqulred absoluLe and excluslve ownershlp of Lhe
properLles ln quesLlonŦ

lvŦ WheLher or noL prlvaLe respondenL helrs of anaLalla de guzman are legal helrs of spouses
cornello aqulno and leoncla de guzmanŦ

vŦ WheLher or noL parLlLlon ls Lhe proper acLlon ln Lhe lnsLanL caseŦ

Peldť

ÞeLlLloners allegaLlons were never rebuLLed by prlvaLe respondenLs ln Lhelr CommenL as Lhe only
defense ralsed Lhereln was LhaL Lhe appllcaLlon of Lhe prlnclple of res [udlcaLa should noL sacrlflce
[usLlce Lo LechnlcallLy and lL ls wlLhln Lhe power of Lhe courL Lo suspend lLs own rules or Lo excepL a
parLlcular case from lLs operaLlons whenever Lhe purpose of [usLlce requlres lLŦ We have examlned
Lhe Lhlrd complalnL flled by prlvaLe respondenLs on CcLober 23ţ 1987 and compared lL wlLh Lhe
lnsLanL caseţ and we found LhaL Lhe allegaLlons conLalned ln boLh complalnLs are Lhe sameţ and
LhaL Lhere ls ldenLlLy of parLlesţ sub[ecL maLLer and cause of acLlonŦ 1hus Lhe requlslLes of res
[udlcaLa are presenLţ namely (a) Lhe former [udgmenL or order musL be flnalŤ (b) lL musL be a
[udgmenL or order on Lhe merlLsŤ (c) lL musL have been rendered by a courL havlng [urlsdlcLlon over
Lhe sub[ecL maLLer and Lhe parLlesŤ and (d) Lhere musL be beLween Lhe flrsL and Lhe second acLlonsţ
ldenLlLy of parLlesţ of sub[ecL maLLer and of cause of acLlonŦ Slnce Lhe dlsmlssal of Lhe Lhlrd case dld
noL conLaln any condlLlon aL allţ lL has Lhe effecL of an ad[udlcaLlon on Lhe merlLs as lL ls undersLood
Lo be wlLh pre[udlceŦ12 Cn Lhls ground aloneţ Lhe Lrlal courL should have already dlsmlssed Lhls
caseŦ Poweverţ conslderlng LhaL Lhls case had already reached Lhls CourL by way of a peLlLlon for
revlew on cerLlorarlţ lL would be more ln keeplng wlLh subsLanLlal [usLlce lf Lhe conLroversy
beLween Lhe parLles were Lo be resolved on Lhe merlLs raLher Lhan on a procedural LechnlcallLy ln
Lhe llghL of Lhe express mandaLe of Lhe rules LhaL Lhey be ƍllberally consLrued ln order Lo promoLe
Lhelr ob[ecL and Lo asslsL Lhe parLles ln obLalnlng [usLţ speedy and lnexpenslve deLermlnaLlon of
every acLlon and proceedlngŦƍ13

AfLer an examlnaLlon of Lhe recordsţ we flnd LhaL Lhere ls no preponderance of evldence adduced
durlng Lhe Lrlal Lo supporL Lhe flndlngs and concluslons of Lhe courLs belowţ whlch error [usLlfles a
revlew of sald evldenceŦ As a ruleţ facLual flndlngs of Lhe lower courLs are flnal and blndlng upon
Lhls CourLŦ 1hls CourL ls noL expecLed nor requlred Lo examlne or conLrasL Lhe oral and
documenLary evldence submlLLed by Lhe parLlesŦ14 Poweverţ alLhough Lhls CourL ls noL a Lrler of
facLsţ lL has Lhe auLhorlLy Lo revlew and reverse Lhe facLual flndlngs of Lhe lower courLs lf lL flnds
LhaL Lhese do noL conform Lo Lhe evldence on recordţ13 ln Lhe lnsLanL caseţ we are noL bound Lo
adhere Lo Lhe general rule slnce boLh courLs clearly falled Lo conslder facLs and clrcumsLances
whlch should have drawn a dlfferenL concluslonŦ16

ln acLlons for parLlLlonţ Lhe courL cannoL properly lssue an order Lo dlvlde Lhe properLy unless lL
flrsL makes a deLermlnaLlon as Lo Lhe exlsLence of coŴownershlpŦ 1he courL musL lnlLlally seLLle Lhe
lssue of ownershlpţ Lhe flrsL sLage ln an acLlon for parLlLlonŦ17 needless Lo sLaLeţ an acLlon for
parLlLlon wlll noL lle lf Lhe clalmanL has no rlghLful lnLeresL over Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ ln facLţ
SecLlon 1 of 8ule 69 requlres Lhe parLy flllng Lhe acLlon Lo sLaLe ln hls complalnL Lhe ƍnaLure and Lhe
exLenL of hls LlLleƍ Lo Lhe real esLaLeŦ unLll and unless Lhe lssue of ownershlp ls deflnlLely resolvedţ
lL would be premaLure Lo effecL a parLlLlon of Lhe properLlesŦ18

We are unable Lo susLaln Lhe flndlngs of Lhe respondenL CourL LhaL lL has been adequaLely shown
LhaL Lhe alleged Lransfers of properLles Lo Lhe peLlLloners predecessorŴlnŴlnLeresL made by Lhe

Aqulno spouses were repudlaLed before Leonclas deaLhŤ Lhus prlvaLe respondenLs are sLlll enLlLled
Lo share ln Lhe sub[ecL properLlesŦ 1here ls no preponderance of evldence Lo supporL Lhe flndlngs
and concluslons of boLh courLsŦ 1he Lrlal courL declared Lhe nulllLy of Lhe donaLlon lnLer vlvos ln
favor of peLlLloners !ose and AnasLacla velasquez over Lhe flrsL parcel of land descrlbed ln Lhe
complalnLţ Lhe deed of sale Lo Cesarlo velasquez and Camlla de Cuzman over Lhe second parcel
and Lhe deed of donaLlon propLer nupLlas over Lhe Lhlrd and slxLh parcels and Lhe sale Lo Lhlrd
parLles of fourLh and flfLh parcels lnsofar as Lhe of Lhese parcels of land are concerned whlch
ƍleglLlmaLely belong Lo plalnLlffŦƍ lL would appear LhaL Lhe Lrlal courL relled solely on Lhe basls of
SanLlago Meneses LesLlmony ƍLhaL ln 1944 when hls aunL Leoncla de Cuzman was sLlll allveţ she
called a conference among Lhemţ Lhe plalnLlffs and Lhelr moLher AnaLallaţ Cesarlo velasquez and
hls moLher 1ranqulllnaţ Lelllng Lhem LhaL all Lhelr properLles whlch are con[ugal ln naLure shall be
dlvlded equally beLween AnaLalla and 1ranqulllna and noL Lo belleve Lhe documenLs purporLedly
slgned by her because she dld noL slgn LhemƍŦ19 ÞrlvaLe respondenL SanLlago Meneses LesLlmony ls
Lo Lhe effecL LhaL Leoncla never slgned any deed of conveyance of Lhe sub[ecL properLles ln favor of
Lhe peLlLlonersŦ Poweverţ SanLlago Meneses LesLlmony was never corroboraLed by any oLher
evldence desplLe hls LesLlmony LhaL Lhe alleged conference was also made ln Lhe presence of Lhlrd
parLlesŦ Moreoverţ lf Lhe alleged conference really Look place ln 1944ţ a year before Leonclas deaLhţ
Leoncla could have execuLed anoLher seL of documenLs revoklng or repudlaLlng whaLever
dlsposlLlons she had earller made Lo show her alleged lnLenLlon of glvlng her properLles ln equal
shares Lo her slsLers AnaLalla and 1ranqulllna de Cuzman buL Lhere was noneŦ 1he Lrlal courL found
Lhe LesLlmony of SanLlago Meneses who ls elghLy years old Lo be credlbleţ and Lhls was afflrmed by
Lhe respondenL courL whlch sLaLed LhaL Lhe maLLer of ascrlblng credlblllLy belongs Lo Lhe Lrlal courLŦ
Poweverţ Lhe facL LhaL a person has reached Lhe ƍLwlllghL of hls llfeƍ ls noL always a guaranLy LhaL
he would Lell Lhe LruLhŦ lL ls also qulLe common LhaL advanced age makes a person menLally dull
and compleLely hazy abouL Lhlngs whlch has appeared Lo hlmţ and aL Llmes lL weakens hls
reslsLance Lo ouLslde lnfluenceŦ20

Cn Lhe oLher handţ peLlLloners were able Lo adduce Lhe unconLroverLed and anclenL documenLary
evldence showlng LhaL durlng Lhe llfeLlme of Lhe Aqulno spouses Lhey had already dlsposed of four
of Lhe slx parcels of land sub[ecL of Lhe complalnL sLarLlng ln Lhe year 1919ţ and Lhe laLesL was ln
1939 as followsť (a) LscrlLura de donaLlon propLer nupLlas daLed lebruary 13ţ 1919 ln favor of Lhe
fuLure spouses Cesarlo velasquez and Camlla de Cuzman (peLlLloners parenLs) conveylng Lo Lhem a
porLlon of Lhe second parcel ln Lhe complalnL and Lhe enLlreLy of Lhe Lhlrd and slxLh parcelsŤ21 (b)
ueed of donaLlon lnLer vlvos daLed Aprll 10ţ 1939 conveylng Lhe flrsL parcel ln favor of peLlLloners
AnasLacla velasquez and !ose velasquezŤ22 (c) LscrlLura de CompravenLa daLed AugusL 23ţ 1924
conveylng anoLher porLlon of Lhe second parcel ln favor of Cesarlo velasquez and Camlla de
Cuzman wlLh a Þ300 conslderaLlonŤ23 (d) ueed of Conveyance daLed !uly 14ţ 1939 ln favor of
Cesarlo velasquez and Camlla de Cuzman conveylng Lo Lhem Lhe remalnlng porLlon of Lhe second
parcel for a conslderaLlon of Þ600 and conflrmlng ln Lhe same ueed Lhe LscrlLura de donaLlon
propLer nupLlas and LscrlLura de compravenLa abovemenLlonedŦ24 lL was reverslble error for Lhe
courL Lo overlook Lhe probaLlve value of Lhese noLarlzed documenLsŦ

A donaLlon as a mode of acqulrlng ownershlp resulLs ln an effecLlve Lransfer of LlLle over Lhe
properLy from Lhe donor Lo Lhe donee23 and Lhe donaLlon ls perfecLed from Lhe momenL Lhe
donor knows of Lhe accepLance by Lhe doneeŦ26 And once a donaLlon ls accepLedţ Lhe donee
becomes Lhe absoluLe owner of Lhe properLy donaLedŦ27 1he donaLlon of Lhe flrsL parcel made by
Lhe Aqulno spouses Lo peLlLloners !ose and AnasLacla velasquez who were Lhen nlneLeen (19) and
Len (10) years old respecLlvely was accepLed Lhrough Lhelr faLher Cesarlo velasquezţ and Lhe
accepLance was lncorporaLed ln Lhe body of Lhe same deed of donaLlon and made parL of lLţ and
was slgned by Lhe donor and Lhe accepLorŦ Legally speaklng Lhere was dellvery and accepLance of
Lhe deedţ and Lhe donaLlon exlsLed perfecLly and lrrevocablyŦ 1he donaLlon lnLer vlvos may be
revoked only for Lhe reasons provlded ln ArLlcles 760ţ 764 and 763 of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ28 1he
donaLlon propLer nupLlas ln favor of Cesarlo velasquez and Camlla de Cuzman over Lhe Lhlrd and
slxLh parcels lncludlng a porLlon of Lhe second parcel became Lhe properLles of Lhe spouses
velasquez slnce 1919Ŧ 1he deed of donaLlon propLer nupLlas can be revoked by Lhe nonŴ
performance of Lhe marrlage and Lhe oLher causes menLloned ln arLlcle 86 of Lhe lamlly CodeŦ29
1he alleged reason for Lhe repudlaLlon of Lhe deedţ lŦeţ LhaL Lhe Aqulno spouses dld noL lnLend Lo
glve away all Lhelr properLles slnce AnaLalla (Leonclas slsLer) had several chlldren Lo supporL ls noL
one of Lhe grounds for revocaLlon of donaLlon elLher lnLer vlvos or propLer nupLlasţ alLhough Lhe
donaLlon mlghL be lnofflclousŦ

1he LscrlLura compravenLa over anoLher porLlon of Lhe second parcel and Lhe ueed of conveyance
daLed !uly 14ţ 1939 ln favor of Cesarlo and Camlla velasquez over Lhe remalnlng porLlon of Lhe
second parcel ls also valldŦ ln facL ln Lhe deed of sale daLed !uly 14ţ 1939ţ Lhe Aqulno spouses
raLlfled and conflrmed Lhe rlghLs and lnLeresLs of Cesarlo velasquez and Camlla de Cuzman
lncludlng Lhe prevlous deeds of conveyance execuLed by Lhe Aqulno spouses over Lhe second
parcel ln Lhe complalnL and such deed of sale became Lhe basls for Lhe lssuance of 1C1 noŦ 13129
ln Lhe names of Cesarlo velasquez and Camlla de Cuzman on !uly 23ţ 1939Ŧ 1he besL proof of Lhe
ownershlp of Lhe land ls Lhe cerLlflcaLe of LlLle30 and lL requlres more Lhan a bare allegaLlon Lo
defeaL Lhe face value of 1C1 noŦ 13129 whlch en[oys a legal presumpLlon of regularlLy of
lssuanceŦ31 noLablyţ durlng Lhe llfeLlme of Cesarlo velasquezţ he enLered lnLo conLracLs of
morLgage and lease over Lhe properLy as annoLaLed aL Lhe back of Lhe cerLlflcaLe of LlLle whlch
clearly esLabllshed LhaL he exerclsed full ownershlp and conLrol over Lhe properLyŦ lL ls qulLe
surprlslng LhaL lL was only afLer more Lhan flfLy years LhaL prlvaLe respondenLs asserLed coŴ
ownershlp clalm over Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ

1he Aqulno spouses had dlsposed Lhe four parcels of land durlng Lhelr llfeLlme and Lhe documenLs
were duly noLarlzed so LhaL Lhese documenLs en[oy Lhe presumpLlon of valldlLyŦ32 Such
presumpLlon has noL been overcome by prlvaLe respondenL SanLlago Meneses wlLh clear and
convlnclng evldenceŦ ln clvll casesţ Lhe parLy havlng Lhe burden of proof musL esLabllsh hls case by a
preponderance of evldenceŦ33 ÞeLlLloners were able Lo esLabllsh LhaL Lhese four parcels of land
were valldly conveyed Lo Lhem by Lhe Aqulno spouses hence Lhey no longer formed parL of Lhe
con[ugal properLles of Lhe spouses aL Lhe Llme of Lhelr deaLhsŦ As regards Lhe fourLh and flfLh
parcelsţ peLlLloners alleged LhaL Lhese were also conveyed Lo Lhlrd persons and Lhey do noL clalm
any rlghL LhereLoŦ

SUCCLSSICN


Genera| Þrov|s|ons żArtsŦ 774Ŵ782Ž


A|varez vŦ IAC
Gk# 680S3ţ May 7ţ 1990
18S SCkA 8

lacLsť

AnlceLo ?anes was survlved by hls chlldrenţ 8uflnoţ lellpe and 1eodoraŦ Pereln prlvaLe
respondenLsţ LsLellLaţ llumlnado and !esusţ are Lhe chlldren of 8uflno who dled ln 1962 whlle Lhe
oLher prlvaLe respondenLsţ AnLonlo and 8osarlo ?anesţ are chlldren of lellpeŦ 1eodora was survlved
by her chlldţ !ovlLa (!ovlLo) AllbŦ lL ls noL clear why Lhe laLLer ls noL lncluded as a parLy ln Lhls caseŦ

AnlceLo lefL hls chlldren LoLs 773 and 823Ŧ 1eodora culLlvaLed only Lhree hecLares of LoL 823 as she
could noL aLLend Lo Lhe oLher porLlons of Lhe Lwo loLs whlch had a LoLal area of around LwenLyŴfour
hecLaresŦ 1he record does noL show wheLher Lhe chlldren of lellpe also culLlvaLed some porLlons of
Lhe loLs buL lL ls esLabllshed LhaL 8uflno and hls chlldren lefL Lhe provlnce Lo seLLle ln oLher places as
a resulL of Lhe ouLbreak of World War llŦ Accordlng Lo LsLellLaţ from Lhe ƍ!apanese Llme up Lo peace
Llmeƍţ Lhey dld noL vlslL Lhe parcels of land ln quesLlon buL ƍafLer llberaLlonƍţ when her broLher
wenL Lhere Lo geL Lhelr share of Lhe sugar produced Lherelnţ he was lnformed LhaL lorLunaLo
SanLlagoţ luenLebella (ÞuenLevella) and Alvarez were ln possesslon of LoL 773Ŧ

lL ls on record LhaL on May 19ţ 1938ţ lorLunaLo uŦ SanLlago was lssued 1ransfer CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle
noŦ 8l 2694 (29797) coverlng LoL 773ŴA wlLh an area of 37ţ818 square meLersŦ 3 1C1 noŦ 8l 2694
descrlbes LoL 773ŴA as a porLlon of LoL 773 of Lhe cadasLral survey of Murcla and as orlglnally
reglsLered under CC1 noŦ 8804Ŧ
1he blgger porLlon of LoL 773 wlLh an area of 118ţ831 square meLers was also reglsLered ln Lhe
name of lorLunaLo uŦ SanLlago on SepLember 6ţ 1938 under 1C1 noŦ 81Ŵ2693 (28192 )Ŧ 4 Sald
Lransfer cerLlflcaLe of LlLle also conLalns a cerLlflcaLlon Lo Lhe effecL LhaL LoL 773Ŵ8 was orlglnally
reglsLered under CC1 noŦ 8804Ŧ

Cn May 30ţ 1933ţ SanLlago sold LoLs 773ŴA and 773Ŵ8 Lo Monlco 8Ŧ luenLebellaţ !rŦ ln conslderaLlon
of Lhe sum of Þ7ţ000Ŧ00Ŧ 3 ConsequenLlyţ on lebruary 20ţ 1936ţ 1C1 nosŦ 1Ŵ19291 and 1Ŵ19292
were lssued ln luenLebellaƌs nameŦ 6

AfLer luenLebellaƌs deaLh and durlng Lhe seLLlemenL of hls esLaLeţ Lhe admlnlsLraLrlx Lhereof
(Arsenla 8Ŧ vdaŦ de luenLebellaţ hls wlfe) flled ln Speclal Þroceedlngs noŦ 4373 ln Lhe CourL of llrsL
lnsLance of negros CccldenLalţ a moLlon requesLlng auLhorlLy Lo sell LoLs 773ŴA and 773Ŵ8Ŧ 8y
vlrLue of a courL order granLlng sald moLlonţ 8 on March 24ţ 1938ţ Arsenla vdaŦ de luenLebella sold
sald loLs for Þ6ţ000Ŧ00 Lo 8osendo AlvarezŦ 9 Penceţ on Aprll 1ţ 1938 1C1 nosŦ 1Ŵ23163 and 1Ŵ23166
coverlng LoLs 773ŴA and 773Ŵ8 were respecLlvely lssued Lo 8osendo AlvarezŦ 10

1wo years laLer or on May 26ţ 1960ţ 1eodora ?anes and Lhe chlldren of her broLher 8uflnoţ namelyţ
LsLellLaţ llumlnado and !esusţ flled ln Lhe CourL of llrsL lnsLance of negros CccldenLal a complalnL
agalnsL lorLunaLo SanLlagoţ Arsenla vdaŦ de luenLebellaţ Alvarez and Lhe 8eglsLer of ueeds of
negros CccldenLal for Lhe ƍreLurnƍ of Lhe ownershlp and possesslon of LoLs 773 and 823Ŧ 1hey also
prayed LhaL an accounLlng of Lhe produce of Lhe land from 1944 up Lo Lhe flllng of Lhe complalnL be
made by Lhe defendanLsţ LhaL afLer courL approval of sald accounLlngţ Lhe share or money
equlvalenL due Lhe plalnLlffs be dellvered Lo Lhemţ and LhaL defendanLs be ordered Lo pay plalnLlffs
Þ300Ŧ00 as damages ln Lhe form of aLLorneyƌs feesŦ 11

uurlng Lhe pendency ln courL of sald case or on november 13ţ 1961ţ Alvarez sold LoLs 773ŴAţ 773Ŵ8
and anoLher loL for Þ23ţ000Ŧ00 Lo urŦ 8odolfo SlasonŦ 12 Accordlnglyţ 1C1 nosŦ 30919 and 30920
were lssued Lo Slasonţ 13 who LhereafLerţ declared Lhe Lwo loLs ln hls name for assessmenL
purposesŦ 14

Meanwhlleţ on november 6ţ 1962ţ !esus ?anesţ ln hls own behalf and ln behalf of Lhe oLher
plalnLlffsţ and asslsLed by Lhelr counselţ flled a manlfesLaLlon ln Clvll Case noŦ 3022 sLaLlng LhaL Lhe
Lhereln plalnLlffs ƍrenounceţ forfelL and qulLclalms (slc) any clalmţ moneLary or oLherwlseţ agalnsL
Lhe defendanL Arsenla vdaŦ de luenLebella ln connecLlon wlLh Lhe aboveŴenLlLled caseŦƍ 13

Cn CcLober 11ţ 1963ţ a declslon was rendered by Lhe CourL of llrsL lnsLance of negros CccldenLal ln
Clvll Case noŦ 3022ţ Lhe dlsposlLlve porLlon of whlch readsť

WPL8LlC8Lţ [udgmenL ls renderedţ orderlng Lhe defendanL 8osendo Alvarez Lo reconvey Lo Lhe
plalnLlffs loLs nosŦ 773 and 823 of Lhe CadasLral Survey of Murclaţ negros CccldenLalţ now covered
by 1ransfer CerLlflcaLes of 1lLle nosŦ 1Ŵ23163 and 1Ŵ23166 ln Lhe name of sald defendanLţ and
LhereafLer Lo dellver Lhe possesslon of sald loLs Lo Lhe plalnLlffsŦ no speclal pronouncemenL as Lo
cosLsŦ

lL wlll be noLed LhaL Lhe aboveŴmenLloned manlfesLaLlon of !esus ?anes was noL menLloned ln Lhe
aforesald declslonŦ

Poweverţ execuLlon of sald declslon proved unsuccessful wlLh respecL Lo LoL 773Ŧ ln hls reLurn of
servlce daLed CcLober 20ţ 1963ţ Lhe sherlff sLaLed LhaL he dlscovered LhaL LoL 773 had been
subdlvlded lnLo LoLs 773ŴA and 773Ŵ8Ť LhaL Lhey were ƍln Lhe nameƍ of 8odolfo Slason who had
purchased Lhem from Alvarezţ and LhaL LoL 773 could noL be dellvered Lo Lhe plalnLlffs as Slason
was ƍnoL a parLy per wrlL of execuLlonŦƍ 17

1he execuLlon of Lhe declslon ln Clvll Case noŦ 3022 havlng meL a hlndranceţ hereln prlvaLe
respondenLs (Lhe ?aneses) flled on !uly 31ţ 1963ţ ln Lhe CourL of llrsL lnsLance of negros CccldenLal
a peLlLlon for Lhe lssuance of a new cerLlflcaLe of LlLle and for a declaraLlon of nulllLy of 1C1 nosŦ 1Ŵ
23163 and 1Ŵ23166 lssued Lo 8osendo AlvarezŦ 18 1hereafLerţ Lhe courL requlred 8odolfo Slason Lo
produce Lhe cerLlflcaLes of LlLle coverlng LoLs 773 and 823Ŧ

LxpecLedlyţ Slason flled a manlfesLaLlon sLaLlng LhaL he purchased LoLs 773ŴAţ 773Ŵ8 and 638ţ noL
LoLs 773 and 823ţ ƍln good falLh and for a valuable conslderaLlon wlLhouL any knowledge of any llen
or encumbrances agalnsL sald properLlesƍŤ LhaL Lhe declslon ln Lhe cadasLral proceedlng 19 could
noL be enforced agalnsL hlm as he was noL a parLy LhereLoŤ and LhaL Lhe declslon ln Clvll Case noŦ

3022 could nelLher be enforced agalnsL hlm noL only because he was noL a parLyŴllLlganL Lhereln
buL also because lL had long become flnal and execuLoryŦ 20 llndlng sald manlfesLaLlon Lo be wellŴ
foundedţ Lhe cadasLral courLţ ln lLs order of SepLember 4ţ 1963ţ nulllfled lLs prevlous order
requlrlng Slason Lo surrender Lhe cerLlflcaLes of LlLle menLloned LherelnŦ 21

ln 1968ţ Lhe ?aneses flled an exŴparLe moLlon for Lhe lssuance of an allas wrlL of execuLlon ln Clvll
Case noŦ 3022Ŧ Slason opposed lLŦ 22 ln lLs order of SepLember 28ţ 1968 ln Clvll Case noŦ 3022ţ Lhe
lower courLţ noLlng LhaL Lhe ?aneses had lnsLlLuLed anoLher acLlon for Lhe recovery of Lhe land ln
quesLlonţ ruled LhaL aL Lhe [udgmenL Lhereln could noL be enforced agalnsL Slason as he was noL a
parLy ln Lhe caseŦ 23

1he acLlon flled by Lhe ?aneses on lebruary 21ţ 1968 was for recovery of real properLy wlLh
damagesŦ 24

named defendanLs Lhereln were urŦ 8odolfo Slasonţ Laura Alvarezţ llora Alvarezţ 8aymundo
Alvarez and Lhe 8eglsLer of ueeds of negros CccldenLalŦ 1he ?aneses prayed for Lhe cancellaLlon of
1C1 nosŦ 1Ŵ19291 and 19292 lssued Lo Slason (slc) for belng null and voldŤ Lhe lssuance of a new
cerLlflcaLe of LlLle ln Lhe name of Lhe ?aneses ƍln accordance wlLh Lhe sherlffs reLurn of servlce
daLed CcLober 20ţ 1963Ťƍ Slasonƌs dellvery of possesslon of LoL 773 Lo Lhe ?anesesŤ and lfţ dellvery
Lhereof could noL be effecLedţ orţ lf Lhe lssuance of a new LlLle could noL be madeţ LhaL Lhe Alvarez
and Slason [olnLly and severally pay Lhe ?aneses Lhe sum of Þ43ţ000Ŧ00Ŧ 1hey also prayed LhaL
Slason render an accounLlng of Lhe frulLs of LoL 773 from november 13ţ 1961 unLll Lhe flllng of Lhe
complalnLŤ and LhaL Lhe defendanLs [olnLly and severally pay Lhe ?aneses moral damages of
Þ20ţ000Ŧ00 and exemplary damages of Þ10ţ000Ŧ00 plus aLLorneyƌs fees of Þ4ţ 000Ŧ00Ŧ 23

ln hls answer Lo Lhe complalnLţ Slason alleged LhaL Lhe valldlLy of hls LlLles Lo LoLs 773ŴA and 773Ŵ8ţ
havlng been passed upon by Lhe courL ln lLs order of SepLember 4ţ 1963ţ had become res [udlcaLa
and Lhe ?aneses were esLopped from quesLlonlng sald orderŦ 26 Cn Lhelr parLţ Lhe Alvarez sLaLed ln
Lhelr answer LhaL Lhe ?anesesƌ cause of acLlon had been ƍbarred by res [udlcaLaţ sLaLuLe of
llmlLaLlon and esLoppelŦƍ 27

ln lLs declslon of !uly 8ţ 1974ţ Lhe lower courL found LhaL 8odolfo Slasonţ who purchased Lhe
properLles ln quesLlon Lhru an agenL as he was Lhen ln Mexlco pursulng furLher medlcal sLudlesţ
was a buyer ln good falLh for a valuable conslderaLlonŦ AlLhough Lhe ?aneses were negllgenL ln Lhelr
fallure Lo place a noLlce of lls pendens ƍbefore Lhe 8eglsLer of ueeds of negros CccldenLal ln order
Lo proLecL Lhelr rlghLs over Lhe properLy ln quesLlonƍ ln Clvll Case noŦ 3022ţ equlLy demanded LhaL
Lhey recover Lhe acLual value of Lhe land because Lhe sale Lhereof execuLed beLween Alvarez and
Slason was wlLhouL courL approvalŦ

lssuesť

1Ŧ WheLhere or noL Lhe defense of prescrlpLlon and esLoppel had been Llmely and properly
lnvoked and ralsed by Lhe peLlLloners ln Lhe lower courLŦ

2Ŧ WheLher or noL Lhe cause and/or causes of acLlon of Lhe prlvaLe respondenLsţ lf ever
Lhere are anyţ as alleged ln Lhelr complalnL daLed lebruary 21ţ 1968 whlch has been dockeLed ln
Lhe Lrlal courL as Clvll Case noŦ 8474 supraţ are forever barred by sLaLuLe of llmlLaLlon and/or
prescrlpLlon of acLlon and esLoppelŦ

3Ŧ WheLher or noL Lhe laLe 8osendo Alvarezţ a defendanL ln Clvll Case noŦ 3022ţ supra and
faLher of Lhe peLlLloners become a prlvy and/or parLy Lo Lhe walver (LxhlblL 4ŴdefendanL Slason) ln
Clvll Case noŦ 8474ţ supra where Lhe prlvaLe respondenLs had unquallfledly and absoluLely walvedţ
renounced and qulLclalmed all Lhelr alleged rlghLs and lnLeresLsţ lf ever Lhere ls anyţ on LoLs nosŦ
773ŴA and 773Ŵ8 of Murcla CadasLre as appearlng ln Lhelr wrlLLen manlfesLaLlon daLed november 6ţ
1962 (LxhlblLs ƍ4ƍ Slason) whlch had noL been conLroverLed or even lmplledly or lndlrecLly denled
by LhemŦ

4Ŧ WheLher or noL Lhe llablllLy or llablllLles of 8osendo Alvarez arlslng from Lhe sale of LoLs
nosŦ 773ŴA and 773Ŵ8 of Murcla CadasLre Lo urŦ 8odolfo Slasonţ lf ever Lhere ls anyţ could be legally
passed or LransmlLLed by operaLlons (slc) of law Lo Lhe peLlLloners wlLhouL vlolaLlon of law and due
process Ŧ 33

Peldť

1he peLlLlon ls devold of merlLŦ

As correcLly ruled by Lhe CourL of Appealsţ lL ls powerless and for LhaL maLLer so ls Lhe Supreme
CourLţ Lo revlew Lhe declslon ln Clvll Case noŦ 3022 orderlng Alvarez Lo reconvey Lhe loLs ln dlspuLe
Lo hereln prlvaLe respondenLsŦ Sald declslon had long become flnal and execuLory and wlLh Lhe
posslble excepLlon of urŦ Slasonţ who was noL a parLy Lo sald caseţ Lhe declslon ln Clvll Case noŦ
3022 ls Lhe law of Lhe case beLween Lhe parLles LhereLoŦ lL ended when Alvarez or hls helrs falled Lo
appeal Lhe declslon agalnsL LhemŦ 34

1husţ lL ls axlomaLlc LhaL when a rlghL or facL has been [udlclally Lrled and deLermlned by a courL of
compeLenL [urlsdlcLlonţ so long as lL remalns unreversedţ lL should be concluslve upon Lhe parLles
and Lhose ln prlvlLy wlLh Lhem ln law or esLaLeŦ 33 As conslsLenLly ruled by Lhls CourLţ every
llLlgaLlon musL come Lo an endŦ Access Lo Lhe courL ls guaranLeedŦ 8uL Lhere musL be a llmlL Lo lLŦ
Cnce a llLlganLƌs rlghL has been ad[udlcaLed ln a valld flnal [udgmenL of a compeLenL courLţ he
should noL be granLed an unbrldled llcense Lo reLurn for anoLher LryŦ 1he prevalllng parLy should
noL be harassed by subsequenL sulLsŦ lorţ lf endless llLlgaLlon were Lo be allowedţ unscrupulous
llLlgaLlons wlll mulLlply ln number Lo Lhe deLrlmenL of Lhe admlnlsLraLlon of [usLlceŦ 36

1here ls no dlspuLe LhaL Lhe rlghLs of Lhe ?aneses Lo Lhe properLles ln quesLlon have been flnally
ad[udlcaLed ln Clvll Case noŦ 3022Ŧ As found by Lhe lower courLţ from Lhe unconLroverLed evldence
presenLedţ Lhe ?aneses have been lllegally deprlved of ownershlp and possesslon of Lhe loLs ln
quesLlonŦ

ln facLţ Clvll Case noŦ 8474 now under revlewţ arose from Lhe fallure Lo execuLe Clvll Case noŦ 3022ţ
as sub[ecL loLs can no longer be reconveyed Lo prlvaLe respondenLs ?anesesţ Lhe same havlng been
sold durlng Lhe pendency of Lhe case by Lhe peLlLlonersƌ faLher Lo urŦ Slason who dld noL know
abouL Lhe conLroversyţ Lhere belng no lls pendens annoLaLed on Lhe LlLlesŦ Penceţ lL was also
seLLled beyond quesLlon LhaL urŦ Slason ls a purchaser ln good falLhŦ

under Lhe clrcumsLancesţ Lhe Lrlal courL dld noL annul Lhe sale execuLed by Alvarez ln favor of urŦ
Slason on november 11ţ 1961 buL ln facL susLalned lLŦ 1he Lrlal courL ordered Lhe helrs of 8osendo
Alvarez who losL ln Clvll Case noŦ 3022 Lo pay Lhe plalnLlffs (prlvaLe respondenLs hereln) Lhe
amounL of Þ20ţ000Ŧ00 represenLlng Lhe acLual value of Lhe subdlvlded loLs ln dlspuLeŦ lL dld noL
order defendanL Slason Lo pay sald amounLŦ 38

As Lo Lhe proprleLy of Lhe presenL caseţ lL has long been esLabllshed LhaL Lhe sole remedy of Lhe
landowner whose properLy has been wrongfully or erroneously reglsLered ln anoLherƌs name ls Lo
brlng an ordlnary acLlon ln Lhe ordlnary courL of [usLlce for reconveyance orţ lf Lhe properLy has
passed lnLo Lhe hands of an lnnocenL purchaser for valueţ for damagesŦ 39 ƍlL ls one Lhlng Lo
proLecL an lnnocenL Lhlrd parLyŤ lL ls enLlrely a dlfferenL maLLer and one devold of [usLlflcaLlon lf
decelL would be rewarded by allowlng Lhe perpeLraLor Lo en[oy Lhe frulLs of hls nefarlous declded
As clearly revealed by Lhe undevlaLlng llne of declslons comlng from Lhls CourLţ such an undeslrable
evenLuallLy ls preclsely soughL Lo be guarded agalnsLŦƍ 40

1he lssue on Lhe rlghL Lo Lhe properLles ln llLlgaLlon havlng been flnally ad[udlcaLed ln Clvll Case noŦ
3022 ln favor of prlvaLe respondenLsţ lL cannoL now be reopened ln Lhe lnsLanL case on Lhe preLexL
LhaL Lhe defenses of prescrlpLlon and esLoppel have noL been properly consldered by Lhe lower
courLŦ ÞeLlLloners could have appealed ln Lhe former case buL Lhey dld noLŦ 1hey have Lherefore
foreclosed Lhelr rlghLsţ lf anyţ and Lhey cannoL now be heard Lo complaln ln anoLher case ln order
Lo defeaL Lhe enforcemenL of a [udgmenL whlch has longlng become flnal and execuLoryŦ

ÞeLlLloners furLher conLend LhaL Lhe llablllLy arlslng from Lhe sale of LoLs noŦ 773ŴA and 773Ŵ8 made
by 8osendo Alvarez Lo urŦ 8odolfo Slason should be Lhe sole llablllLy of Lhe laLe 8osendo Alvarez or
of hls esLaLeţ afLer hls deaLhŦ

Such conLenLlon ls unLenable for lL overlooks Lhe docLrlne obLalnlng ln Lhls [urlsdlcLlon on Lhe
general LransmlsslblllLy of Lhe rlghLs and obllgaLlons of Lhe deceased Lo hls leglLlmaLe chlldren and
helrsŦ 1husţ Lhe perLlnenL provlslons of Lhe Clvll Code sLaLeť

ArLŦ 774Ŧ Successlon ls a mode of acqulslLlon by vlrLue of whlch Lhe properLyţ rlghLs and obllgaLlons
Lo Lhe exLenL of Lhe value of Lhe lnherlLanceţ of a person are LransmlLLed Lhrough hls deaLh Lo
anoLher or oLhers elLher by hls wlll or by operaLlon of lawŦ

ArLŦ 776Ŧ 1he lnherlLance lncludes all Lhe properLyţ rlghLs and obllgaLlons of a person whlch are noL
exLlngulshed by hls deaLhŦ

ArLŦ 1311Ŧ ConLracL sLake effecL only beLween Lhe parLlesţ Lhelr asslgns and helrs excepL ln case
where Lhe rlghLs and obllgaLlons arlslng from Lhe conLracL are noL Lransmlsslble by Lhelr naLureţ or
by sLlpulaLlon or by provlslon of lawŦ 1he helr ls noL llable beyond Lhe value of Lhe properLy
recelved from Lhe decedenLŦ

As explalned by Lhls CourL Lhrough AssoclaLe !usLlce !Ŧ8ŦLŦ 8eyes ln Lhe case of LsLaLe of Pemady vsŦ
Luzon SureLy CoŦţ lncŦ 41

1he blndlng effecL of conLracLs upon Lhe helrs of Lhe deceased parLy ls noL alLered by Lhe provlslon
of our 8ules of CourL LhaL money debLs of a deceased musL be llquldaLed and pald from hls esLaLe
before Lhe resldue ls dlsLrlbuLed among sald helrs (8ule 89)Ŧ 1he reason ls LhaL whaLever paymenL
ls Lhus made from Lhe sLaLe ls ulLlmaLely a paymenL by Lhe helrs or dlsLrlbuLeesţ slnce Lhe amounL
of Lhe pald clalm ln facL dlmlnlshes or reduces Lhe shares LhaL Lhe helrs would have been enLlLled Lo
recelveŦ

under our lawţ LhereforeŦ Lhe general rule ls LhaL a parLyƌs conLracLual rlghLs and obllgaLlons are
Lransmlsslble Lo Lhe successorsŦ

1he rule ls a consequence of Lhe progresslve ƍdepersonallzaLlonƍ of paLrlmonlal rlghLs and duLles
LhaLţ as observed by vlcLorlo Þolacco has characLerlzed Lhe hlsLory of Lhese lnsLlLuLlonsŦ lrom Lhe
8oman concepL of a relaLlon from person Lo personţ Lhe obllgaLlon has evolved lnLo a relaLlon from
paLrlmony Lo paLrlmony wlLh Lhe persons occupylng only a represenLaLlve poslLlonţ barrlng Lhose
rare cases where Lhe obllgaLlon ls sLrlcLly personalţ lŦeŦţ ls conLracLed lnLulLu personaeţ ln
conslderaLlon of lLs performance by a speclflc person and by no oLherŦ
ÞeLlLloners belng Lhe helrs of Lhe laLe 8osendo Alvarezţ Lhey cannoL escape Lhe legal consequences
of Lhelr faLherƌs LransacLlonţ whlch gave rlse Lo Lhe presenL clalm for damagesŦ 1haL peLlLloners dld
noL lnherlL Lhe properLy lnvolved hereln ls of no momenL because by legal flcLlonţ Lhe moneLary
equlvalenL Lhereof devolved lnLo Lhe mass of Lhelr faLherƌs heredlLary esLaLeţ and we have ruled
LhaL Lhe heredlLary asseLs are always llable ln Lhelr LoLallLy for Lhe paymenL of Lhe debLs of Lhe
esLaLeŦ 42

lL musLţ howeverţ be made clear LhaL peLlLloners are llable only Lo Lhe exLenL of Lhe value of Lhelr
lnherlLanceŦ WlLh Lhls clarlflcaLlon and conslderlng peLlLlonersƌ admlsslon LhaL Lhere are oLher
properLles lefL by Lhe deceased whlch are sufflclenL Lo cover Lhe amounL ad[udged ln favor of
prlvaLe respondenLsţ we see no cogenL reason Lo dlsLurb Lhe flndlngs and concluslons of Lhe CourL
of AppealsŦ

Ventura vsŦ M|||tanteţ
Gk# 6314Sţ CctŦ Sţ 1999
316 SCkA 226

lacLsť

1here ls no dlspuLe as Lo Lhe followlng relevanL facLsť

ÞrlvaLe respondenL flled a ComplalnL for a Sum of Money and uamages agalnsL peLlLloner whlch
readsť

ÞLAln1lllţ Lhru counselţ unLo Lhls Ponorable CourLţ mosL respecLfully sLaLes LhaLť

Pe ls of legal ageţ llllplno and proprleLor of Cebu 1exLar AuLo Supply whose posLal address ls aL 177
Leon kllaL SLŦţ Cebu ClLyţ whlle Lhe defendanL ls Lhe esLaLe of Carlos ngo as represenLed by
survlvlng spouse MsŦ Sulplcla venLura wlLh resldence and posLal address aL 8ack of Chong Pua
PosplLalţ Cebu ClLy where summons and oLher processes of Lhe CourL could be effecLedŦ

uurlng Lhe llfeLlme of Carlos ngo he was lndebLed wlLh Lhe plalnLlff ln Lhe amounL of Þ48ţ889Ŧ70 as
evldenced by Lhe hereLo aLLached sLaLemenL marked as Annexes A and AŴ1 whlch accounL was
obLalned by hlm for Lhe beneflL of hls famllyŦ

Sald obllgaLlon ls already due and demandable and Lhe defendanL Lhru MsŦ venLura who ls
osLenslbly Laklng care of Lhe properLles/esLaLe of deceased Carlos ngoţ refusedţ falled and
neglecLed and sLlll conLlnues Lo refuseţ fall and neglecL Lo pay desplLe repeaLed demandsŤ

As a consequence of Lhe refusal Lo pay Lhe plalnLlff was compelled Lo reLaln Lhe servlces of counsel
wlLh whom he conLracLed Lo pay Þ10ţ000Ŧ00 as aLLorneyƌs feesŦ upon lnsLlLuLlon of Lhls complalnLţ
he has furLher lncurred lnlLlal llLlgaLlon expendlLures ln Lhe sum of Þ4ţ000Ŧ00Ŧ

ÞeLlLloner moved Lo dlsmlss Lhe foregolng complalnL on Lhe ground LhaL ƍLhe esLaLe of Carlos ngo
has no legal personallLyţƍ Lhe same belng ƍnelLher a naLural nor legal person ln conLemplaLlon of
lawƍ 4Ŧ

ÞeLlLloner flled a MoLlon for 8econslderaLlon 8 of Lhe order of publlc respondenL permlLLlng prlvaLe
respondenL Lo amend hls complalnLŦ llrsLţ she argued LhaL Lhe acLlon lnsLlLuLed by Lhe prlvaLe
respondenL Lo recover Þ48ţ889Ŧ70ţ represenLlng Lhe unpald prlce of Lhe auLomoLlve spare parLs
purchased by her deceased husband durlng hls llfeLlmeţ ls a money clalm whlchţ under SecLlon 21ţ
8ule 3 of Lhe 8evlsed 8ules of CourLţ does noL survlveţ Lhe same havlng been flled afLer Carlos ngo
had already dledŦ Secondţ she clalmed LhaL Lhe publlc respondenL never acqulred [urlsdlcLlon over
Lhe sub[ecL maLLer of Lhe case whlchţ belng an acLlon Lo recover a sum of money from a deceased
personţ may only be heard by a probaLe courLŦ

ÞrlvaLe respondenL opposed Lhe foregolng moLlonŦ 9 Pe lnslsLed LhaL peLlLlonerţ belng Lhe wlfe of
Lhe deceased Carlos ngoţ ls llable Lo pay Lhe obllgaLlon whlch beneflLed Lhelr famllyŦ

Þubllc respondenL lssued an Crder glvlng prlvaLe respondenL LwenLy four (24) hours Lo flle hls
amended complalnL ƍso LhaL Lhe CourL can deLermlne for lLself wheLher Lhere ls really a cause of
acLlon agalnsL Lhe defendanL who would be subsLlLuLed Lo Lhe LsLaLe of Carlos ngoţƍ conslderlng
LhaL ƍlL would seem from Lhe argumenLs of counsel for plalnLlff Ŧ Ŧ Ŧ LhaL Lhe debL lncurred by Lhe
deceased Carlos żslcŽ ngo was ln behalf of Lhe con[ugal parLnershlp so LhaL Lhe wlfe of Carlos ngo
mlghL be llable Lo pay Lhe obllgaLlonŦƍ 10

ÞrlvaLe respondenL Lhen flled hls Amended ComplalnL 11 wlLh Lhe new allegaLlonsŦ

ÞeLlLloner flled a CommenL Lo ÞlalnLlffƌs Amended ComplalnLŦ 13 She relLeraLed LhaL wheLher Lhe
unsecured debL was conLracLed by her husband alone or as a charge agalnsL Lhe con[ugal
parLnershlp of galnsţ lL cannoL be denled LhaL her husband was now deceasedţ Lhe sald debL does
noL survlve hlmţ Lhe con[ugal parLnershlp of galns ls LermlnaLed upon Lhe deaLh of one of Lhe
spousesţ and Lhe debLs and charges agalnsL Lhe con[ugal parLnershlp of galns may only be pald
afLer an lnvenLory ls made ln Lhe approprlaLe LesLaLe or lnLesLaLe proceedlngŦ

ÞrlvaLe respondenL flled a 8e[olnder Lo uefendanLƌs CommenLŦ 14 Pe counLered LhaL Lhe defendanL
ln hls amended complalnL was now peLlLloner and LhaL she was noL deceasedţ hence Lhe
lnappllcablllLy of Lhe legal rules on Lhe abaLemenL of money clalms ln case Lhe defendanL dles
pendlng Lhelr prosecuLlonŦ

ln lLs order of november 16ţ 1982ţ Lhe CourL ln Lhe lnLeresL of [usLlce advlsed Lhe plalnLlff Lo make
Lhe proper amendmenL so LhaL Lhe proper parLy defendanL may be lmpleaded conslderlng LhaL Lhe
moLlon Lo dlsmlss Lhen was anchored on Lhe ground LhaL Lhe esLaLe of Carlos ngo was noL a naLural
nor [urldlcal personţ hence lL could noL be suedŦ Cn uecember 23ţ 1982ţ Lhe plalnLlff amended lLs
complalnL and Lhls Llme Lhe defendanL ls already Sulplcla venLuraŦ 1he defendanL now argues LhaL
even Lhe amended complalnL would show LhaL Lhls ls really a collecLlon of a debL of Lhe con[ugal
parLnershlp of deceased Carlong żslcŽ ngo and hls wlfeŦ

Þeruslng Lhe amended complalnLţ Lhe CourL flnds LhaL ln Þaragraph 2 Lhe allegaLlon sLaLesť ƍuurlng
Lhe llfeLlme of Carlos ngoţ he and hls wlfeţ Lhe defendanLţ are lndebLed wlLh Lhe plalnLlff ln Lhe
amounL of Þ48ţ689Ŧ70ţ (slc) eLcŦţƍ so LhaL Lhe lndebLedness was lncurred by Carlos ngo and
defendanL Sulplcla venLura and slnce Carlos ngo ls now dead LhaL wlll noL preclude Lhe plalnLlff
from flllng a case agalnsL Lhe llvlng defendanLţ Sulplcla venLuraŦ

lssueť
WheLher Lhere ls really a cause of acLlon agalnsL Lhe defendanL who would be subsLlLuLed Lo Lhe
LsLaLe of Carlos ngoţƍ conslderlng LhaL ƍ LhaL Lhe debL lncurred by Lhe deceased Carlos żslcŽ ngo
was ln behalf of Lhe con[ugal parLnershlp so LhaL Lhe wlfe of Carlos ngo mlghL be llable Lo pay Lhe
obllgaLlonŦ

Peldť

llrsLŦ SecŦ 1ţ 8ule 3 of Lhe 8evlsed 8ules of CourL provlded LhaL ƍonly naLural or [udlclal personsţ or
enLlLles auLhorlzed by law may be parLles ln a clvll acLlonƍŦ 1hls was Lhe rule ln 1982 aL Lhe Llme
LhaL prlvaLe respondenL flled hls complalnL agalnsL peLlLlonerŦ ln 1997ţ Lhe rules on clvll procedure
were revlsedţ buL SecŦ 1ţ 8ule 3 remalned largely unalLeredţ excepL for Lhe change of Lhe wordţ
ƍ[udlclalƍ Lo ƍ[urldlcalƍŦ

ÞarLles may be elLher plalnLlffs or defendanLsŦ 1he plalnLlff ln an acLlon ls Lhe parLy complalnlngţ
and a proper parLy plalnLlff ls essenLlal Lo confer [urlsdlcLlon on Lhe courLŦ 17 ln order Lo malnLaln
an acLlon ln a courL of [usLlceţ Lhe plalnLlff musL have an acLual legal exlsLenceţ LhaL lsţ heţ she or lL
musL be a person ln law and possessed of a legal enLlLy as elLher a naLural or an arLlflclal personţ
and no sulL can be lawfully prosecuLed save ln Lhe name of such a personŦ 18

1he rule ls no dlfferenL as regards parLy defendanLsŦ lL ls lncumbenL upon a plalnLlffţ when he
lnsLlLuLes a [udlclal proceedlngţ Lo name Lhe proper parLy defendanL Lo hls cause of acLlonŦ 19 ln a
sulL or proceedlng ln personam of an adversary characLerţ Lhe courL can acqulre no [urlsdlcLlon for
Lhe purpose of Lrlal or [udgmenL unLll a parLy defendanL who acLually or legally exlsLs and ls legally
capable of belng suedţ ls broughL before lLŦ 20 lL has even been held LhaL Lhe quesLlon of Lhe legal
personallLy of a parLy defendanL ls a quesLlon of subsLance golng Lo Lhe [urlsdlcLlon of Lhe courL and
noL one of procedureŦ 21

1he orlglnal complalnL of peLlLloner named Lhe ƍesLaLe of Carlos ngo as represenLed by survlvlng
spouse MsŦ Sulplcla venLuraƍ as Lhe defendanLŦ ÞeLlLloner moved Lo dlsmlss Lhe same on Lhe
ground LhaL Lhe defendanL as named ln Lhe complalnL had no legal personallLyŦ We agreeŦ

nelLher a dead person nor hls esLaLe may be a parLy plalnLlff ln a courL acLlonŦ A deceased person
does noL have such legal enLlLy as ls necessary Lo brlng acLlon so much so LhaL a moLlon Lo
subsLlLuLe cannoL lle and should be denled by Lhe courLŦ 22 An acLlon begun by a decedenLƌs esLaLe
cannoL be sald Lo have been begun by a legal personţ slnce an esLaLe ls noL a legal enLlLyŤ such an
acLlon ls a nulllLy and a moLlon Lo amend Lhe parLy plalnLlff wlll noL llkewlse lleţ Lhere belng noLhlng
before Lhe courL Lo amendŦ 23 Conslderlng LhaL capaclLy Lo be sued ls a correlaLlve of Lhe capaclLy
Lo sueţ Lo Lhe same exLenLţ a decedenL does noL have Lhe capaclLy Lo be sued and may noL be
named a parLy defendanL ln a courL acLlonŦ 24

SecondŦ lL ls clear LhaL Lhe orlglnal complalnL of prlvaLe respondenL agalnsL Lhe esLaLe of Carlos ngo
was a sulL agalnsL Carlos ngo hlmself who was already dead aL Lhe Llme of Lhe flllng of sald
complalnLŦ AL LhaL Llmeţ and Lhls prlvaLe respondenL admlLLedţ no speclal proceedlng Lo seLLle hls
esLaLe had been flled ln courLŦ As suchţ Lhe Lrlal courL dld noL acqulre [urlsdlcLlon over elLher Lhe
deceased Carlos ngo or hls esLaLeŦ

1o cure Lhls faLal defecLţ prlvaLe respondenL amended hls orlglnal complalnLŦ ln hls amended
complalnLţ prlvaLe respondenL deleLed Lhe esLaLe of Carlos ngo and named peLlLloner as Lhe
defendanLŦ When peLlLlonerţ ln her commenL Lo Lhe amended complalnLţ reasoned LhaL Lhe
con[ugal parLnershlp of galns beLween her and Carlos ngo was LermlnaLed upon Lhe laLLerƌs deaLh
and LhaL Lhe debL whlch he conLracLedţ assumlng lL was a charge agalnsL Lhe con[ugal properLyţ
could only be pald afLer an lnvenLory ls made ln Lhe approprlaLe LesLaLe or lnLesLaLe proceedlngţ
prlvaLe respondenL slmply relLeraLed hls demand LhaL peLlLloner pay her husbandƌs debL whlchţ he
lnslsLedţ redounded Lo Lhe beneflL of everyone ln her famllyŦ

lL ls Lrue LhaL amendmenLs Lo pleadlngs are llberally allowed ln furLherance of [usLlceţ ln order LhaL
every case may so far as posslble be deLermlned on lLs real facLsţ and ln order Lo speed Lhe Lrlal of
causes or prevenL Lhe clrculLry of acLlon and unnecessary expenseŦ 23 8uL amendmenLs cannoL be
allowed so as Lo confer [urlsdlcLlon upon a courL LhaL never acqulred lL ln Lhe flrsL placeŦ 26 When lL
ls evldenL LhaL Lhe courL has no [urlsdlcLlon over Lhe person and Lhe sub[ecL maLLer and LhaL Lhe
pleadlng ls so faLally defecLlve as noL Lo be suscepLlble of amendmenLţ or LhaL Lo permlL such
amendmenL would radlcally alLer Lhe Lheory and Lhe naLure of Lhe acLlonţ Lhen Lhe courL should
refuse Lhe amendmenL of Lhe defecLlve pleadlng and order Lhe dlsmlssal of Lhe caseŦ 27

Moreoverţ as correcLly argued by peLlLlonerţ Lhe con[ugal parLnershlp LermlnaLes upon Lhe deaLh of
elLher spouseŦ 28 AfLer Lhe deaLh of one of Lhe spousesţ ln case lL ls necessary Lo sell any porLlon of
Lhe con[ugal properLy ln order Lo pay ouLsLandlng obllgaLlons of Lhe parLnershlpţ such sale musL be
made ln Lhe manner and wlLh Lhe formallLles esLabllshed by Lhe 8ules of CourL for Lhe sale of Lhe
properLy of deceased personsŦ 29 Where a complalnL ls broughL agalnsL Lhe survlvlng spouse for
Lhe recovery of an lndebLedness chargeable agalnsL sald con[ugal properLyţ any [udgmenL obLalned
Lhereby ls voldŦ 30 1he proper acLlon should be ln Lhe form of a clalm Lo be flled ln Lhe LesLaLe or
lnLesLaLe proceedlngs of Lhe deceased spouseŦ 31

ln many cases as ln Lhe lnsLanL oneţ even afLer Lhe deaLh of one of Lhe spousesţ Lhere ls no
llquldaLlon of Lhe con[ugal parLnershlpŦ 1hls does noL meanţ howeverţ LhaL Lhe con[ugal parLnershlp
conLlnuesŦ 32 And prlvaLe respondenL cannoL be sald Lo have no remedyŦ under SecŦ 6ţ 8ule 78 of
Lhe 8evlsed 8ules of CourLţ he may apply ln courL for leLLers of admlnlsLraLlon ln hls capaclLy as a
prlnclpal credlLor of Lhe deceased Carlos ngo lf afLer LhlrLy (30) days from hls deaLhţ peLlLloner
falled Lo apply for admlnlsLraLlon or requesL LhaL admlnlsLraLlon be granLed Lo some oLher personŦ

Suma|[ag vŦ L|terato
Gk# 149787ţ Iune 18ţ 2008
SSS SCkA S3

lacLsť

Cn november 16ţ 1993ţ !osefa uŦ Maglasang (ƍ!osefaƍ) flled wlLh Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal CourL (ƍ81Cƍ)ţ
8ranch 14ţ 8aybayţ LeyLe a complalnL3 (dockeLed as Clvll Case noŦ 8Ŵ1239) for Lhe nulllLy of Lhe
deed of sale of real properLy purporLedly execuLed beLween her as vendor and Lhe spouses
ulosdldlL and Menendez LlLeraLo (Lhe ƍrespondenL spousesƍ) as vendeesŦ 1he complalnL alleged
LhaL Lhls deed of sale daLed CcLober 13ţ 1971 of LoL 1220Ŵu ls spurlousŦ !osefa was Lhe slsLer of
Menendez Maglasang LlLeraLo (ƍMenendezƍ)Ŧ 1hey were Lwo (2) of Lhe slx (6) helrs who lnherlLed
equal parLs of a 6Ŧ3906ŴhecLare properLy (LoL 1220) passed on Lo Lhem by Lhelr parenLs CrlsLlLo and
lneclLa ulano MaglasangŦ4 LoL 1220Ŵu was parLlLloned Lo !osefaţ whlle LoL 1220ŴL was glven Lo
MenendezŦ

1he respondenL spousesƌ response Lo Lhe complalnL was an amended answer wlLh counLerclalm3
denylng LhaL Lhe deed of sale was falslfledŦ 1hey lmpleaded Lhe peLlLloner wlLh !osefa as
counLerclalm defendanL on Lhe allegaLlon LhaL Lhe peLlLlonerţ aL Lhe lnsLance of !osefaţ occupled
LoL 1220Ŵu and LoL 1220ŴL wlLhouL Lhelr (Lhe respondenL spousesƌ) auLhorlLyŤ LoL 1220ŴL ls Lhelrs
by lnherlLance whlle 1220Ŵu had been sold Lo Lhem by !osefaŦ 1hey also alleged LhaL Lhe peLlLloner
acLed ln bad falLh ln acqulrlng Lhe Lwo (2) loLs because he prepared and noLarlzed on SepLember
26ţ 1986 Lhe conLracL of lease over Lhe whole of LoL 1220 beLween all Lhe Maglasang helrs (buL
excludlng !osefa) and vlcenLe 1oloţ wlLh Lhe lease runnlng from 1986 Lo 1991Ť Lhusţ Lhe peLlLloner
Lhen knew LhaL !osefa no longer owned LoL 1220ŴuŦ

Clvll Case noŦ 12816 ls a complalnL LhaL Menendez flled on Aprll 4ţ 1996 wlLh Lhe 81C for Lhe
declaraLlon of Lhe lnexlsLence of lease conLracLţ recovery of possesslon of landţ and damages
agalnsL Lhe peLlLloner and !osefa afLer Lhe 81C dlsmlssed Lhe respondenL spousesƌ counLerclalm ln
Clvll Case noŦ 1239Ŧ 1he complalnL alleged LhaL !osefaţ who had prevlously sold LoL 1220Ŵu Lo
Menendezţ leased lLţ LogeLher wlLh LoL 1220ŴLţ Lo Lhe peLlLlonerŦ Menendez furLher averred LhaL
Lhe peLlLloner and !osefa were ln bad falLh ln enLerlng Lhelr conLracL of lease as Lhey boLh knew
LhaL !osefa dld noL own Lhe leased loLsŦ Menendez prayedţ among oLhersţ LhaL Lhls lease conLracL
beLween !osefa and Lhe peLlLloner be declared null and voldŦ

!osefa dled on May 3ţ 1999 durlng Lhe pendency of Clvll Case nosŦ 8Ŵ1239 and 8Ŵ1281Ŧ

Cn AugusL 13ţ 1999ţ ALLyŦ Zenen AŦ Þuray (ƍALLyŦ Þurayƍ) Ŵ Lhe peLlLlonerƌs and !osefaƌs common
counsel Ŵ asked Lhe 81C ln Clvll Case noŦ 1239 LhaL he be glven an exLended perlod or up Lo
SepLember 10ţ 1999 wlLhln whlch Lo flle a formal noLlce of deaLh and subsLlLuLlon of parLyŦ

1he submlsslon alleged LhaL prlor Lo !osefaƌs deaLhţ she execuLed a CulLclalm ueed9 over LoL 1220Ŵ
u ln favor of 8emlsmundo uŦ Maglasang10 who ln Lurn sold Lhls properLy Lo Lhe peLlLlonerŦ

Menendezţ Lhrough counselţ ob[ecLed Lo Lhe proposed subsLlLuLlonţ alleglng LhaL ALLyŦ Þuray flled
Lhe noLlce of deaLh and subsLlLuLlon of parLy beyond Lhe LhlrLyŴday perlod provlded under SecLlon
16ţ 8ule 3 of Lhe 1997 8ules of Clvll Þrocedureţ as amendedŦ She recommended lnsLead LhaL !osefa
be subsLlLuLed by Lhe laLLerƌs fullŴblood slsLerţ Mlchaeles Maglasang 8odrlgo (ƍMlchaelesƍ)Ŧ

1he 81C denled ALLyŦ Þurayƌs moLlon for subsLlLuLlon and lnsLead ordered Lhe appearance of
Mlchaeles as represenLaLlve of Lhe deceased !osefaŦ

lssuesť

WheLher or noLť (a) Lhe properLy under llLlgaLlon was no longer parL of !osefaƌs esLaLe slnce she was
no longer lLs owner aL Lhe Llme of her deaLhŤ (b) Lhe peLlLloner had effecLlvely been subrogaLed Lo
Lhe rlghLs of !osefa over Lhe properLy under llLlgaLlon aL Lhe Llme she dledŤ (c) wlLhouL an esLaLeţ
Lhe helr who was appolnLed by Lhe lower courL no longer had any lnLeresL Lo represenLŤ (d) Lhe
noLlce of deaLh was seasonably submlLLed by Lhe counsel of !osefa Lo Lhe 81C wlLhln Lhe exLended
perlod granLedŤ and (e) Lhe peLlLloner ls a Lransferee pendenLe llLe who Lhe courLs should recognlze
pursuanL Lo 8ule 3ţ SecLlon 20 of Lhe 8ules of CourLŦ

Peldť

1he rule on subsLlLuLlon ln case of deaLh of a parLy ls governed by SecLlon 16ţ 8ule 3 of Lhe 1997
8ules of Clvll Þrocedureţ as amendedţ whlch provldesť

SecLlon 16Ŧ ueaLh of a parLyŤ duLy of counselŦ ŴWhenever a parLy Lo a pendlng acLlon dlesţ and Lhe
clalm ls noL Lhereby exLlngulshedţ lL shall be Lhe duLy of hls counsel Lo lnform Lhe courL wlLhln LhlrLy
(30) days afLer such deaLh of Lhe facL Lhereofţ and Lo glve Lhe name and address of hls legal
represenLaLlve or represenLaLlvesŦ lallure of counsel Lo comply wlLh Lhls duLy shall be a ground for
dlsclpllnary acLlonŦ

1he helrs of Lhe deceased may be allowed Lo be subsLlLuLed for Lhe deceasedţ wlLhouL requlrlng Lhe
appolnLmenL of an execuLor or admlnlsLraLor and Lhe courL may appolnL a guardlan ad llLem for Lhe
mlnor helrsŦ

1he courL shall forLhwlLh order sald legal represenLaLlve or represenLaLlves Lo appear and be
subsLlLuLed wlLhln a perlod of LhlrLy (30) days from noLlceŦ

lf no legal represenLaLlve ls named by Lhe counsel for Lhe deceased parLyţ or lf Lhe one so named
shall fall Lo appear wlLhln Lhe speclfled perlodţ Lhe courL may order Lhe opposlng parLyţ wlLhln a
speclfled Llmeţ Lo procure Lhe appolnLmenL of an execuLor or admlnlsLraLor for Lhe esLaLe of Lhe
deceasedţ and Lhe laLLer shall lmmedlaLely appear for and on behalf of Lhe deceasedŦ 1he courL
charges ln procurlng such appolnLmenLţ lf defrayed by Lhe opposlng parLyţ may be recovered as
cosLsŦ (Lmphasls ours)

1he purpose behlnd Lhls rule ls Lhe proLecLlon of Lhe rlghL Lo due process of every parLy Lo Lhe
llLlgaLlon who may be affecLed by Lhe lnLervenlng deaLhŦ 1he deceased llLlganL ls herself or hlmself
proLecLed as he/she conLlnues Lo be properly represenLed ln Lhe sulL Lhrough Lhe duly appolnLed
legal represenLaLlve of hls esLaLeŦ13

AppllcaLlon of Lhe Covernlng 8uleŦ

aŦ Survlval of Lhe pendlng acLlon

A quesLlon prellmlnary Lo Lhe appllcaLlon of Lhe above provlslon ls wheLher Clvll Case nosŦ 8Ŵ1239
and 8Ŵ1281 are acLlons LhaL survlve Lhe deaLh of !osefaŦ We sald ln Conzalez vŦ Þagcorť16

ƍ1he crlLerla for deLermlnlng wheLher an acLlon survlves Lhe deaLh of a plalnLlff or peLlLloner was
elucldaLed upon ln 8onllla vŦ 8arcena (71 SC8A 491 (1976)Ŧ as followsť

Ŧ Ŧ Ŧ 1he quesLlon as Lo wheLher an acLlon survlves or noL depends on Lhe naLure of Lhe acLlon and
Lhe damage sued forŦ ln Lhe causes of acLlon whlch survlveţ Lhe wrong complalned żofŽ affecLs
prlmarlly and prlnclpally properLy and properLy rlghLsţ Lhe ln[urles Lo Lhe person belng merely
lncldenLalţ whlle ln Lhe causes of acLlon whlch do noL survlveţ Lhe ln[ury complalned of ls Lo Lhe
personţ Lhe properLy and rlghLs of properLy affecLed belng lncldenLalŦ Ŧ Ŧ Ŧ

Slnce Lhe quesLlon lnvolved ln Lhese cases relaLe Lo properLy and properLy rlghLsţ Lhen we are
deallng wlLh acLlons LhaL survlve so LhaL SecLlon 16ţ 8ule 3 musL necessarlly applyŦ

bŦ uuLy of Counsel under Lhe 8uleŦ

1he duLy of counsel under Lhe aforeclLed provlslon ls Lo lnform Lhe courL wlLhln LhlrLy (30) days
afLer Lhe deaLh of hls cllenL of Lhe facL of deaLhţ and Lo glve Lhe name and address of Lhe
deceasedƌs legal represenLaLlve or represenLaLlvesŦ lncldenLallyţ Lhls ls Lhe only represenLaLlon LhaL
counsel can underLake afLer Lhe deaLh of a cllenL as Lhe facL of deaLh LermlnaLed any furLher
lawyerŴcllenL relaLlonshlpŦ17

ln Lhe presenL caseţ lL ls undlspuLed LhaL Lhe counsel for !osefa dld ln facL noLlfy Lhe lower courLţ
alLhough belaLedlyţ of Lhe facL of her deaLhŦ18

1hls noLlflcaLlonţ alLhough flled laLeţ effecLlvely lnformed Lhe lower courL of Lhe deaLh of llLlganL
!osefa Maglasang so as Lo free her counsel of any llablllLy for fallure Lo make a reporL of deaLh
under SecLlon 16ţ 8ule 3 of Lhe 8ules of CourLŦ ln our vlewţ counsel saLlsfacLorlly explalned Lo Lhe
lower courL Lhe clrcumsLances of Lhe laLe reporLlngţ and Lhe laLLer ln facL granLed counsel an
exLended perlodŦ 1he Llmellness of Lhe reporL ls Lherefore a nonŴlssueŦ

1he reporLlng lssue LhaL goes lnLo Lhe core of Lhls case ls wheLher counsel properly gave Lhe courL
Lhe name and address of Lhe legal represenLaLlve of Lhe deceased LhaL SecLlon 16ţ 8ule 3 speclflesŦ
We rule LhaL he dld noLŦ 1he ƍlegal represenLaLlvesƍ LhaL Lhe provlslon speaks ofţ refer Lo Lhose
auLhorlzed by law Ŵ Lhe admlnlsLraLorţ execuLor or guardlan19 whoţ under Lhe rule on seLLlemenL of
esLaLe of deceased personsţ20 ls consLlLuLed Lo Lake over Lhe esLaLe of Lhe deceasedŦ SecLlon 16ţ
8ule 3 llkewlse expressly provldes LhaL ƍLhe helrs of Lhe deceased may be allowed Lo be subsLlLuLed

for Lhe deceasedţ wlLhouL requlrlng Lhe appolnLmenL of an execuLor or admlnlsLraLor Ŧ Ŧ ŦƍŦ
SlgnlflcanLlyţ Lhe person Ŵ now Lhe presenL peLlLloner Ŵ LhaL counsel gave as subsLlLuLe was noL one
of Lhose menLloned under SecLlon 16ţ 8ule 3Ŧ 8aLherţ he ls a counLerclalm coŴdefendanL of Lhe
deceased whose proferred [usLlflcaLlon for Lhe requesLed subsLlLuLlon ls Lhe Lransfer Lo hlm of Lhe
lnLeresLs of Lhe deceased ln Lhe llLlgaLlon prlor Lo her deaLhŦ

under Lhe clrcumsLancesţ boLh Lhe lower courL and Lhe CA were legally correcL ln noL glvlng effecL
Lo counselƌs suggesLed subsLlLuLeŦ

llrsLţ Lhe peLlLloner ls noL one of Lhose allowed by Lhe 8ules Lo be a subsLlLuLeŦ SecLlon 16ţ 8ule 3
speaks for lLself ln Lhls respecLŦ

Secondţ as already menLloned aboveţ Lhe reason for Lhe 8ule ls Lo proLecL all concerned who may
be affecLed by Lhe lnLervenlng deaLhţ parLlcularly Lhe deceased and her esLaLeŦ We noLe ln Lhls
respecL LhaL Lhe noLlce LhaL counsel flled ln facL reflecLs a clalm agalnsL Lhe lnLeresL of Lhe
deceased Lhrough Lhe Lransfer of her remalnlng lnLeresL ln Lhe llLlgaLlon Lo anoLher parLyŦ
lnLeresLlnglyţ Lhe Lransfer ls ln favor of Lhe very same person who ls suggesLed Lo Lhe courL as Lhe
subsLlLuLeŦ 1o sLaLe Lhe obvlousţ Lhe suggesLed subsLlLuLlon effecLlvely brlngs Lo naughL Lhe
proLecLlon LhaL Lhe 8ules lnLendŤ plaln common sense Lells us LhaL Lhe Lransferee who has hls own
lnLeresL Lo proLecLţ cannoL aL Lhe same Llme represenL and fully proLecL Lhe lnLeresL of Lhe
deceased LransferorŦ

1hlrdţ counsel has every auLhorlLy Lo manlfesL Lo Lhe courL changes ln lnLeresL LhaL Lransplre ln Lhe
course of llLlgaLlonŦ 1husţ counsel could have valldly manlfesLed Lo Lhe courL Lhe Lransfer of !osefaƌs
lnLeresLs ln Lhe sub[ecL maLLer of llLlgaLlon pursuanL Lo SecLlon 19ţ 8ule 3Ŧ21 8uL Lhls can happen
only whlle Lhe cllenLŴLransferor was allve and whlle Lhe manlfesLlng counsel was sLlll Lhe effecLlve
and auLhorlzed counsel for Lhe cllenLŴLransferorţ noL afLer Lhe deaLh of Lhe cllenL when Lhe lawyerŴ
cllenL relaLlonshlp has LermlnaLedŦ 1he facL LhaL Lhe alleged Lransfer may have acLually Laken place
ls lmmaLerlal Lo Lhls concluslonţ lf only for Lhe reason LhaL lL ls noL for counselţ afLer Lhe deaLh of
hls cllenLţ Lo make such manlfesLaLlon because he Lhen has losL Lhe auLhorlLy Lo speak for and blnd
hls cllenLŦ 1husţ aL mosLţ Lhe peLlLloner can be sald Lo be a Lransferee pendenLe llLe whose sLaLus ls
pendlng wlLh Lhe lower courLŦ

LasLlyţ a close examlnaLlon of Lhe documenLs aLLached Lo Lhe records dlsclose LhaL Lhe sub[ecL
maLLer of Lhe CulLclalm allegedly execuLed by !osefa ln favor of 8emlsmundo ls LoL 1220ŴLţ whlle
Lhe sub[ecL maLLer of Lhe deed of sale execuLed by 8emlsmundo ln Lhe peLlLlonerƌs favor ls LoL
1220ŴuŦ 1hls clrcumsLance alone ralses Lhe posslblllLy LhaL Lhere ls more Lhan meeLs Lhe eye ln Lhe
LransacLlons relaLed Lo Lhls caseŦ

cŦ 1he Pelrs as Legal 8epresenLaLlvesŦ

1he CA correcLly harked back Lo Lhe plaln Lerms of SecLlon 16ţ 8ule 3 ln deLermlnlng who Lhe
approprlaLe legal represenLaLlve/s should be ln Lhe absence of an execuLor or admlnlsLraLorŦ 1he
second paragraph of Lhe SecLlon 16ţ 8ule 3 of Lhe 1997 8ules of CourLţ as amendedţ ls clear Ŵ Lhe
helrs of Lhe deceased may be allowed Lo be subsLlLuLed for Lhe deceasedţ wlLhouL requlrlng Lhe
appolnLmenL of an execuLor or admlnlsLraLorŦ Cur declslons on Lhls maLLer have been clear and
unequlvocalŦ ln San !uanţ !rŦ vŦ Cruzţ Lhls CourL heldť

1he pronouncemenL of Lhls CourL ln Lawas vŦ CourL of Appeals x x x LhaL prlorlLy ls glven Lo Lhe legal
represenLaLlve of Lhe deceased (Lhe execuLor or admlnlsLraLor) and LhaL lL ls only ln case of
unreasonable delay ln Lhe appolnLmenL of an execuLor or admlnlsLraLorţ or ln cases where Lhe helrs
resorL Lo an exLraŴ[udlclal seLLlemenL of Lhe esLaLe LhaL Lhe courL may adopL Lhe alLernaLlve of
allowlng Lhe helrs of Lhe deceased Lo be subsLlLuLed for Lhe deceasedţ ls no longer LrueŦ22
(Lmphasls ours)

We llkewlse sald ln Cochan vŦ ?oungť 23

lor Lhe proLecLlon of Lhe lnLeresLs of Lhe decedenLţ Lhls CourL has ln prevlous lnsLances recognlzed
Lhe helrs as proper represenLaLlves of Lhe decedenLţ even when Lhere ls already an admlnlsLraLor
appolnLed by Lhe courLŦ When no admlnlsLraLor has been appolnLedţ as ln Lhls caseţ Lhere ls all Lhe
more reason Lo recognlze Lhe helrs as Lhe proper represenLaLlves of Lhe deceasedŦ

!osefaƌs deaLh cerLlflcaLe24 shows LhaL she was slngle aL Lhe Llme of her deaLhŦ 1he records do noL
show LhaL she lefL a wlllŦ 1hereforeţ as correcLly held by Lhe CAţ ln applylng SecLlon 16ţ 8ule 3ţ her
helrs are her survlvlng slsLers (Mlchaellsţ Marlaţ Zoslmaţ and Consolaclon) and Lhe chlldren of her
deceased slsLerţ Lourdes (Manuelţ Cesarţ Puros and 8egulo) who should be her legal
represenLaLlvesŦ Menendezţ alLhough also a slsLerţ should be excluded for belng one of Lhe adverse
parLles ln Lhe cases before Lhe 81CŦ

D8Þ vŦ Gagaran|
Gk# 172248ţ SeptŦ 17ţ 2008
S6S SCkA S4
lacLsť
Spouses uloneslo and MaLea SŦ Asok are husband and wlfe who owned several parcels of landŦ
upon Lhelr deaLhţ Lhelr 11 chlldren lnherlLed Lhelr properLles whlch were subsequenLly seLLled
exLra[udlclallyŦ Sub[ecL properLy acqulred Lhrough free paLenL ls a parcel of land locaLed aL
Þagawanţ ManLlcao Mlsamls CrlenLalŦ 1hls was ad[udlcaLed Lo uenlson belng 1 of Lhe 11 helrsŦ Pe
was marrled Lo LllaŦ 1hereafLerţ Lhe land's CC1 was cancelled and 1C1 ln hls name was lssuedŦ
uenlson and Lllaţ upon borrowlng Þ100k from u8Þ sub[ecLed sald land as colaLLeralŦ upon fallure lf
Lhe spouses Lo repay Lhe loanţ Lhe morLgage was exLra[udlclally foreclosedŦ lL was sold Lo u8Þ
belng Lhe hlghesL bldder and an evenLual 1C1 was lssued ln lLs nameŦ When uenlson dledţ he was
survlved by Llla and Lhelr chlldrenŦ 1hey flled a complalnL for repurchase of Lhe sald loL ln 81C
lnvoklng Lhelr rlghL Lo repurchase as provlded ln Sec 119 of CA 141 whlch readsţ ºLvery conveyance
of land acqulred under Lhe free paLenL or homesLead provlslonsţ when proper ţ shall be sub[ecL Lo
repurchase by Lhe appllcanLţ hls wldowţ or legal helrsţ wlLhln a perlod of 3 years from daLe of Lhe
conveyanceŦ 81C dlsmlssed Lhe complalnL and denled Lhe M8 flled on Lhe ground LhaL flllng of Lhe
complalnL was beyond Lhe 3 year perlodŦ (nov 28ţ 1992 and May 13ţ1998 as Lhe perlods used)Ŧ
upon appeal Lo CAţ 81C declslon was reversed on Lhe ground LhaL Lhe 3 year perlod should be
counLed from Lhe reglsLraLlon of Lhe cerLlflcaLe of sale (uec 24ţ 1992) and noL from nov 28ţ 1992Ŧ
llllng of Lhe complalnL on May 1998 ls sLlll wlLhln Lhe redempLlon perlodŦ

lssue
WheLher or noL Lhe daughLer ln law and grandchlldren of Lhe paLenLees have Lhe rlghL Lo redeem
Lhe properLlesŦ

Peld
?esţ 1he plaln lnLenL of SecŦ 119 ls Lo glve Lhe homesLeader or paLenLee every chance Lo preserve
and keep ln Lhe famlly Lhe land LhaL Lhe SLaLe has graLulLously glven hlm as a reward for hls labor ln
cleanlngţ developlng and culLlvaLlng lLŦ17 Penceţ Lhe facL LhaL Lhe land had been lnherlLed by Lhe
paLenLees' son (and a new LlLle ln hls name lssued) does noL brlng lL ouLslde Lhe purvlew of SecŦ
119Ŧ ln facLţ Lhe pollcy behlnd Lhe law ls fulfllled because Lhe land remalns ln Lhe famlly of Lhe
paLenLeeŦ As we explalned lnlerrer vŦ MangenLe lL was held LhaL 1he Lerm ƍlegal helrsƍ ls used ln
SecLlon 119 ln a generlc senseŦ lL ls broad enough Lo cover any person who ls called Lo Lhe
successlon elLher by provlslon of a wlll or by operaLlon of lawŦ 1husţ legal helrs lnclude boLh LesLaLe
and lnLesLaLe helrs dependlng upon wheLher successlon ls by Lhe wlll of Lhe LesLaLor or by lawŦ
Legal helrs are noL necessarlly compulsory helrs buL Lhey may be so lf Lhe law reserves a leglLlme
for LhemŦ verllyţ peLlLloners are legal helrsŦ Pavlng been decreed under Lhe rules on lnLesLacy as
enLlLled Lo succeed Lo Lhe esLaLe of Lhe CaLaln spouses due Lo Lhe absence of compulsory helrsţ
Lhey now sLep lnLo Lhe shoes of Lhe decedenLsŦ 1hey should be consldered as among Lhe legal helrs
conLemplaLed by SecLlon 119 as enLlLled Lo redeem Lhe homesLeadŦ
1he above lnLerpreLaLlon of ƍlegal helrsƍ as conLraŴdlsLlngulshed from Lhe resLrlcLlve consLrucLlon
glven lL by Lhe lower courL ls more ln keeplng wlLh Lhe saluLary purpose behlnd Lhe enacLmenL of
SecLlon 119 and Lhe [urlsprudence lald down on Lhe maLLerŦ lndeedţ lL ls noL farŴfeLched Lo arrlve aL
a more llberal concluslon lf Lhe secLlon ls analyzed ln accordance wlLh lLs purpose xxxx22
8espondenLs lnherlLed Lhe properLy from Asokţ Lhelr husband and faLherţ who ln Lurn lnherlLed lL
from hls parenLsŦ 8espondenL Llla Cagaranl Asokţ as daughLerŴlnŴlaw of Lhe paLenLeesţ can be
consldered as among Lhe legal helrs who can repurchase Lhe land ln accordance wlLh Salenlllas vŦ
CAŦ23 ln LhaL caseţ we allowed Lhe daughLer and sonŴlnŴlaw of Lhe paLenLees Lo repurchase Lhe
properLy because Lhls would be ƍmore ln keeplng wlLh Lhe splrlL of Lhe lawŦ We have Llme and
agaln sald LhaL beLween Lwo sLaLuLory lnLerpreLaLlonsţ LhaL whlch beLLer serves Lhe purpose of Lhe
law should prevallŦƍ24 lurLhermoreţ Lhe law musL be llberally consLrued ln order Lo carry ouL lLs
purposeŦ

8on|||a vsŦ 8arcenaţ
NCŦ LŴ4171Sţ Iune 18ţ 1976
71 SCkA 491

lacLsť
Cn March 31ţ 1973 lorLunaLa 8arcenaţ moLher of mlnors 8osallo 8onllla and Salvaclon 8onllla and
wlfe of Þonclano 8onlllaţ lnsLlLuLed a clvll acLlon ln Lhe CourL of llrsL lnsLance ţ Lo quleL LlLle over
cerLaln parcels of land locaLed ln AbraŦ Poweverţ she dled durlng Lhe pendency of Lhe case and 81C
dlsmlssed Lhe peLlLlon on Lhe ground LhaL a dead person cannoL be a real parLy ln lnLeresL and has
no legal capaclLy Lo sueŦ SubsLlLuLlon of Lhe chlldren as legal helrs for lorLunaLa was flled buL
denledţ and so wlLh Lhe M8sŦ Pence Lhls peLlLlon for revlewŦ

lssue
WheLher or noL Lhe complalnanLţ who dled durlng Lhe pendency of a case can be subsLlLuLed by
hls/ her helrsŦ

Peld
?esŦ 8efore Lhe deaLh of Lhe deceasedţ Lhe courL already acqulred [urlsdlcLlon upon her personţ as
suchţ Lhe case may proceed subsLlLuLlng Lhe helrs as a real parLy ln lnLeresL (8ules of CourL
prescrlbes such Lhe procedure ln 8ule 3 SecLlon 16)Ŧ 1hls ls ln compllance wlLh ArLlcle 777 of Lhe CC
whlch provldes LhaL ºLhaL Lhe rlghLs Lo Lhe successlon are LransmlLLed from Lhe momenL of Lhe
deaLh of Lhe decedenLŦƍ lrom Lhe momenL of Lhe deaLh of Lhe decedenLţ Lhe helrs become Lhe
absoluLe owners of hls properLyţ sub[ecL Lo Lhe rlghLs and obllgaLlons of Lhe decedenLţ and Lhey
cannoL be deprlved of Lhelr rlghLs LhereLo excepL by Lhe meLhods provlded for by lawŦ 3 1he
momenL of deaLh ls Lhe deLermlnlng facLor when Lhe helrs acqulre a deflnlLe rlghL Lo Lhe
lnherlLance wheLher such rlghL be pure or conLlngenLŦ 4 1he rlghL of Lhe helrs Lo Lhe properLy of Lhe
deceased vesLs ln Lhem even before [udlclal declaraLlon of Lhelr belng helrs ln Lhe LesLaLe or
lnLesLaLe proceedlngsŦ 1he deceased's clalmţ upon hls/her deaLh does noL exLlngulshed by hls/her
deaLh buL was LransmlLLed Lo her helrs upon her deaLhŦ Per helrs have Lhus acqulred lnLeresL ln
Lhe properLles ln llLlgaLlon and became parLles ln lnLeresL ln Lhe caseŦ

Cruz vsŦ Cruz
Gk# 173292]SeptŦ 1ţ 2010
629 SCkA 60S

lacLs
uurlng Lhe llfeLlme of Memoraclon Cruzţ she flled wlLh 81C a complalnL agalnsL her sonţ Cswaldo
Cruzţ an ºAnnulmenL of Saleţ 8econveyance and uamages"Ŧ She clalmed LhaL she acqulred Lhe
sub[ecL land locaLed ln 1abora 1ondo Mla Lhrough purchase and lLs 1C1 was duly reglsLered under
her nameŦ Poweverţ lL was Lransferred Lo her son Cswaldo and wlfe by vlrLue of a fraudulenL ueed
of SaleŦ Þendlng sald caseţ Memoraclon dledŦ Cswaldo moved for a MoLlon Lo ulsmlss and was
granLed by 81CŦ AnoLher sonŴhelr of Memoraclonţ Ldgardo Cruz flled an M8 represenLlng hls
deceased moLher buL was denledŦ CA afflrmed 81C upon appealŦ Pence Lhls caseŦ
lssue
WheLher or noL Lhe complalnL flled can survlve complalnanL's deaLhŦ
lf yesţ wheLher or noL an helr can subsLlLuLe Lhe deceased ln pursulng Lhe caseŦ

Peld
?es Lo boLh quesLlonsŦ Slnce Lhe complalnL affecLs properLy and properLy rlghLs and Lhe ln[urles Lo
a person ls only lncldenLalţ Lhe causes of acLlon wlll survlve deaLhŦ As suchţ complalnanL can be
subsLlLuLed by her helrsŦ And alLhough Cswaldo was an helrţ he ls dlsquallfled Lo represenL Lhe
deceased belng Lhe adverse parLy Lo Lhe complalnLŦ Ldgardo Cruzţ also a sonŴhelrţ wlLhouL Lhe
dlsquallflcaLlons provlded by lawţ by all means could represenL MemoraclonŦ As provlded ln
ArLlcle 777 of Lhe Clvll Code provldes ƍLhaL Lhe rlghLs Lo Lhe successlon are LransmlLLed from Lhe
momenL of Lhe deaLh of Lhe decedenLŦƍ lrom Lhe momenL of Lhe deaLh of Lhe decedenLţ Lhe helrs
become Lhe absoluLe owners of hls properLyţ sub[ecL Lo Lhe rlghLs and obllgaLlons of Lhe decedenLţ
and Lhey cannoL be deprlved of Lhelr rlghLs LhereLo excepL by Lhe meLhods provlded for by lawŦ 1he
momenL of deaLh ls Lhe deLermlnlng facLor when Lhe helrs acqulre a deflnlLe rlghL Lo Lhe
lnherlLance wheLher such rlghL be pure or conLlngenLŦ 1he rlghL of Lhe helrs Lo Lhe properLy of Lhe
deceased vesLs ln Lhem even before [udlclal declaraLlon of Lhelr belng helrs ln Lhe LesLaLe or
lnLesLaLe proceedlngsŦ When żplalnLlffŽţ Lhereforeţ dledżţŽ her clalm or rlghL Lo Lhe parcels of land x
x x was noL exLlngulshed by her deaLh buL was LransmlLLed Lo her helrs upon her deaLhŦ Per helrs
have Lhus acqulred lnLeresL ln Lhe properLles ln llLlgaLlon and became parLles ln lnLeresL ln Lhe caseŦ
1here lsţ Lhereforeţ no reason for Lhe respondenL CourL noL Lo allow Lhelr subsLlLuLlon as parLles ln

lnLeresL for Lhe deceased plalnLlffŦ 1he MoLlon Lo dlsmlss by 81C and as afflrmed by CA was
reversed by SC and Lhe case was remanded Lo 81C for furLher proceedlngsŦ


ne|rs of Sande[as vsŦ L|naţ
Gk # 141634ţ IebŦ Sţ 2001
3S1 SCkA 183

lacLs
Lllodoro Sande[as SrŦţ husband of Lhe deceased 8emedlos Sande[as was appolnLed admlnlsLraLor of
her esLaLeŦ As suchţ he bound and obllgaLed hlmselfţ hls helrsţ admlnlsLraLors and asslgnsţ Lo sell
forever and absoluLely and ln Lhelr enLlreLy 4 parcels of landţ of whlch half of eachţ as 8emedlos'
con[ugal share belonged Lo Lhe her esLaLeŦ Poweverţ Lllodoro dled before a ueed of AbsoluLe Sale
was enLered lnLo by hlm and LlnaŦ Llna moved LhaL he be appolnLed as Lllodoro's subsLlLuLe Lo
represenL esLaLe of 8emedlos slnce Lhelr chlldrenŴhelrs have noL yeL appolnLed oneŦ Lower CourL
granLed Lhe moLlonŦ SlxLoţ belng sonŴhelr evenLually replaced Llna upon courL approvalţ as
admlnlsLraLorŦ Llna moved LhaL a deed of absoluLe sale now be execuLed ln hls favorŦ 81C granLed
Lhe peLlLlon whlch Lhe CA overLurned holdlng LhaL slnce Lhe naLure of Lhe conLracL beLween
Sande[as and Llna ls noL a perfecLed ConLacL of SaleŦ As suchţ sald 4 loLs musL sLlll form parL of Lhe
deceased's esLaLeŦ Pence Lhls caseŦ

lssue
WheLher or noL Lllodoro Sande[asţ spouse of Lhe deceased could sell Lhe properLles of Lhe esLaLe
sLlll undergolng probaLe proceedlngs
Peld
Whlle lL may noL render Lhe conLracL lnvalldţ lL sLlll needed a courL approval ls requlred ln any
dlsposlLlon of Lhe decedenLƌs esLaLe per 8ule 89 of Lhe 8ules of CourLŦ 8eference Lo [udlclal
approvalţ howeverţ cannoL adversely affecL Lhe subsLanLlve rlghLs of helrs Lo dlspose of Lhelr own
pro lndlvlso shares ln Lhe coŴhelrshlp or coŴownershlpŦ12 ln oLher wordsţ Lhey can sell Lhelr rlghLsţ
lnLeresLs or parLlclpaLlon ln Lhe properLy under admlnlsLraLlonŦ A sLlpulaLlon requlrlng courL
approval does noL affecL Lhe valldlLy and Lhe effecLlvlLy of Lhe sale as regards Lhe selllng helrsŦ lL
merely lmplles LhaL Lhe properLy may be Laken ouL ofcusLodla leglsţ buL only wlLh Lhe courLƌs
permlsslonŦ13 lL would seem LhaL Lhe suspenslve condlLlon ln Lhe presenL condlLlonal sale was
lmposed only for Lhls reasonŦ

8a|us vŦ 8a|us
Gk# 168970ţ IanŦ 1Sţ 2010
610 SCkA 178

lacLs
1he peLlLloner and respondenLs of Lhls case are Lhe chlldren of 8ufo and SebasLlanceţ husband and
wlfeŦ uurlng Lhe llfeLlme of 8ufoţ he morLgaged hls own parcel of landţ as securlLy for a loan
obLalned from Lhe 8ural 8ank of Malgo Lanao del norLeŦ ln hls fallure Lo pay Lhe loanţ Lhe
morLgaged properLy was foreclosed and sold subsequenLly aL publlc aucLlonţ where lL was sold Lo
8ural 8ank as Lhe sole bldderŦ CerLlflcaLe of Sale was warded Lo Lhe 8ank and 1C1 was lssued under
lLs name upon fallure of Lhe helrs of 8ufo Lo repurchase Lhe properLy wlLhln Lhe redempLlon
perlodŦ Poweverţ ln Lhe exLra[udlclal seLLlemenL of Lhe esLaLe of 8ufoţ sald land was ad[ucaLed Lo
Lhe helrs who remalned ln possesslon of Lhe loLs and refused Lo surrender Lo respondenLsŦ 81C
hold LhaL Lhe peLlLloner have Lhe rlghL Lo purchase sald properLy Lo respondenLs as provlded ln Lhe
LxLra[udlclal SeLLlemenL of LsLaLeŦ Cn appeal Lo CAţ Lhe declslon was reversed and ruled LhaL
coƹownershlp was exLlngulshed when peLlLloner and respondenLs dld noL redeem Lhe sub[ecL
properLy wlLhln Lhe redempLlon perlod and allowed Lhe consolldaLlon of ownershlp and Lhe
lssuance of a new LlLle ln Lhe name of Lhe 8ankŦ Pence Lhls caseŦ

lssue
WheLher or noL peLlLloners sLlll have Lhe rlghL of redempLlon afLer sub[ecL properLy was already
sold and Lransferred Lo Lhe buyer (8ank)Ŧ
Peld
no moreŦ 1he rlghLs Lo a personƌs successlon are LransmlLLed from Lhe momenL of hls deaLhŦ14 ln
addlLlonţ Lhe lnherlLance of a person conslsLs of Lhe properLy and Lransmlsslble rlghLs and
obllgaLlons exlsLlng aL Lhe Llme of hls deaLhţ as well as Lhose whlch have accrued LhereLo slnce Lhe
openlng of Lhe successlonŦ13 ln Lhe presenL caseţ slnce 8ufo losL ownershlp of Lhe sub[ecL properLy
durlng hls llfeLlmeţ lL only follows LhaL aL Lhe Llme of hls deaLhţ Lhe dlspuLed parcel of land no
longer formed parL of hls esLaLe Lo whlch hls helrs may lay clalmŦ SLaLed dlfferenLlyţ peLlLloner and
respondenLs never lnherlLed Lhe sub[ecL loL from Lhelr faLherŦ
ÞeLlLloner and respondenLsţ Lhereforeţ were wrong ln assumlng LhaL Lhey became coŴowners of Lhe
sub[ecL loLŦ 1husţ any lssue arlslng from Lhe supposed rlghL of peLlLloner as coŴowner of Lhe
conLesLed parcel of land ls negaLed by Lhe facL LhaLţ ln Lhe eyes of Lhe lawţ Lhe dlspuLed loL dld noL
pass lnLo Lhe hands of peLlLloner and respondenLs as compulsory helrs of 8ufo aL any glven polnL ln
LlmeŦ

Are||ano vsŦ Þascua|
Gk# 189776] DecŦ 1Sţ 2010
638 SCkA 826

lAC1Sť Angel nŦ Þascual !rŦ dled lnLesLaLe on !anuary 2ţ 1999 leavlng as helrs hls slbllngsţ
namelyť peLlLloner Amella ÞŦ Arellano who ls represenLed by her daughLers Agnes ÞŦ Arellano
(Agnes) and nona ÞŦ Arellanoţ and respondenLs lranclsco Þascual and Mlguel nŦ ÞascualŦ
ln a peLlLlon for º!udlclal SeLLlemenL of lnLesLaLe LsLaLe and lssuance of LeLLers of
AdmlnlsLraLlonţ" dockeLed as Speclal Þroceedlng Case noŦ MŴ3034ţ flled by respondenLs on Aprll
28ţ 2000 before Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal CourL (81C) of MakaLlţ respondenLs allegedţ lnLer allaţ LhaL a
parcel of land (Lhe donaLed properLy) locaLed ln 1eresa vlllageţ MakaLlţ whlch wasţ by ueed of
uonaLlonţ Lransferred by Lhe decedenL Lo peLlLloner Lhe valldlLy of whlch donaLlon respondenLs
assalledţ ºmay be consldered as an advance leglLlme" of peLlLlonerŦ
8especLlng Lhe donaLed properLyţ now covered ln Lhe name of peLlLloner by 1ransfer CerLlflcaLe of
1lLle noŦ 181889 of Lhe 8eglsLer of ueeds of MakaLlţ whlch respondenLs assalled buL whlch Lheyţ ln
any evenLţ poslLed LhaL lL ºmay be consldered as an advance leglLlme" Lo peLlLlonerţ Lhe Lrlal courLţ
acLlng as probaLe courLţ held LhaL lL was precluded from deLermlnlng Lhe valldlLy of Lhe donaLlonŦ
Þrovlslonally passlngţ howeverţ upon Lhe quesLlon of LlLle Lo Lhe donaLed properLy only for Lhe
purpose of deLermlnlng wheLher lL formed parL of Lhe decedenL's esLaLeţ Lhe probaLe courL found
Lhe ueed of uonaLlon valld ln llghL of Lhe presumpLlon of valldlLy of noLarlzed documenLsŦ lL Lhus
wenL on Lo hold LhaL lL ls sub[ecL Lo collaLlon followlng ArLlcle 1061 of Lhe new Clvll Code whlch
readsť

Lvery compulsory helrţ who succeeds wlLh oLher compulsory helrsţ musL brlng lnLo Lhe mass of Lhe
esLaLe any properLy or rlghL whlch he may have recelved from Lhe decedenLţ durlng Lhe llfeLlme of
Lhe laLLerţ by way of donaLlonţ or any oLher graLulLous LlLle ln order LhaL lL may be compuLed ln Lhe
deLermlnaLlon of Lhe leglLlme of each helrţ and ln Lhe accounL of Lhe parLlLlonŦ

Appealed Lo Lhe CourL of Appealsţ Lhe case was remanded Lo Lhe lower courLţ moLlon
for reconslderaLlon was denledŦ Pence Lhe peLlLloner flled a peLlLlon for cerLlorarlŦ
lSSuLť WheLher Lhe honorable CourL of Appeals ls CorrecL ln declarlngť
1PA1 1PL Þ8CÞL81? uCnA1Lu 1C ÞL1l1lCnL8 lS Su8!LC1 1C CCLLA1lCn unuL8 A81lCLL 1061 Cl
1PL nLW ClvlL CCuLŦ
1PA1 8LSÞCnuLn1S A8L CCMÞuLSC8? PLl8S Cl 1PLl8 uLCLASLu 88C1PL8 AnCLL nŦ ÞASCuAL
!8Ŧ Anu A8L Ln1l1LLu 1C LLCl1lMLSŦ

ln nC1 ÞA81l1lCnlnC 1PL LS1A1L Cl AnCLL nŦ ÞASCuALţ !8Ŧ LCuALL? AMCnC ÞL1l1lCnL8 Anu
8LSÞCnuLn1Sţ AS PlS LLCAL C8 ln1LS1A1L PLl8SŦ

PLLuť ÞeLlon granLedŦ 1he declslon orderlng Lhe collaLlon of properLy donaLed Lo Amella Arellano
ls seL asldeŦ Case was remanded Lo lower courL for furLher proceedlngsŦ 1he Lerm collaLlon has Lwo
dlsLlncL concepLsť flrsLţ lL ls a mere maLhemaLlcal operaLlon by Lhe addlLlon of Lhe value of
donaLlons made by Lhe LesLaLor Lo Lhe value of Lhe heredlLary esLaLeŤ and secondţ lL ls Lhe reLurn
Lo Lhe heredlLary esLaLe of properLy dlsposed of by lucraLlve LlLle by Lhe LesLaLor durlng hls
llfeLlmeŦ1he purposes of collaLlon are Lo secure equallLy among Lhe compulsory helrs ln so far as ls
posslbleţ and Lo deLermlne Lhe free porLlonţ afLer flndlng Lhe leglLlmeţ so LhaL lnofflclous donaLlons
may be reducedŦ CollaLlon Lakes place when Lhere are compulsory helrsţ one of lLs purposes belng
Lo deLermlne Lhe leglLlme and Lhe free porLlonŦ lf Lhere ls no compulsory helrţ Lhere ls no leglLlme
Lo be safeguardedŦ
1he records do noL show LhaL Lhe decedenL lefL any prlmaryţ secondaryţ or concurrlng compulsory
helrsŦ Pe was only survlved by hls slbllngsţ who are hls collaLeral relaLlves andţ Lhereforeţ are noL
enLlLled Lo any leglLlme Ŷ LhaL parL of Lhe LesLaLor's properLy whlch he cannoL dlspose of because
Lhe law has reserved lL for compulsory helrsŦ
1he compulsory helrs may be classlfled lnLo (1) prlmaryţ (2) secondaryţ and (3) concurrlngŦ 1he
prlmary compulsory helrs are Lhose who have precedence over and exclude oLher compulsory
helrsŤ leglLlmaLe chlldren and descendanLs are prlmary compulsory helrsŦ 1he secondary
compulsory helrs are Lhose who succeed only ln Lhe absence of Lhe prlmary helrsŤ Lhe leglLlmaLe
parenLs and ascendanLs are secondary compulsory helrsŦ 1he concurrlng compulsory helrs are
Lhose who succeed LogeLher wlLh Lhe prlmary or Lhe secondary compulsory helrsŤ Lhe llleglLlmaLe
chlldrenţ and Lhe survlvlng spouse are concurrlng compulsory helrsŦ1he decedenL noL havlng lefL
any compulsory helr who ls enLlLled Lo any leglLlmeţ he was aL llberLy Lo donaLe all hls properLlesţ
even lf noLhlng was lefL for hls slbllngsŴcollaLeral relaLlves Lo lnherlLŦ Pls donaLlon Lo peLlLlonerţ
assumlng LhaL lL was valldţ ls deemed as donaLlon made Lo a ºsLrangerţ" chargeable agalnsL Lhe free
porLlon of Lhe esLaLeŦ 1here belng no compulsory helrţ howeverţ Lhe donaLed properLy ls noL
sub[ecL Lo collaLlonŦ 1he decedenL's remalnlng esLaLe should Lhus be parLlLloned equally among hls
helrsŴslbllngsŴcollaLeral relaLlvesţ hereln peLlLloner and respondenLsţ pursuanL Lo Lhe provlslons of
Lhe Clvll Codeţ vlzťArLŦ 1003Ŧ lf Lhere are no descendanLsţ ascendanLsţ llleglLlmaLe chlldrenţ or a
survlvlng spouseţ Lhe collaLeral relaLlves shall succeed Lo Lhe enLlre esLaLe of Lhe deceased ln
accordance wlLh Lhe followlng arLlclesŦ ArLŦ 1004Ŧ Should Lhe only survlvors be broLhers and slsLers
of Lhe full bloodţ Lhey shall lnherlL ln equal sharesŦ

keyes vsŦ Lnr|quez
Gk# 1629S6]Apr|| 10ţ 2008
SS1 SCkA 86
lacLsť
ÞeLlLloners are Lhe lawful helrs of ulonlsla 8eyes who coŴowned Lhe sub[ecL parcel of land wlLh
AnacleLo CabreraŦ 1hey execuLed an LxLra[udlclal SeLLlemenL wlLh Sale of Lhe LsLaLe of ulonlsla
8eyes lnvolvlng a porLlon of Lhe sub[ecL parcel of landŦ SubsequenLlyţ peLlLloners and Lhe known
helrs of AnacleLo Cabrera execuLed a SegregaLlon of 8eal LsLaLe and ConflrmaLlon of Sale over Lhe
same properLyŦ
8espondenLsţ on Lhe oLher handţ allege LhaL Lhelr predecessorŴlnŴlnLeresL AnacleLo Cabrera and hls
wlfe ÞaLrlcla Seguera Cabrera (collecLlvely Lhe Spouses Cabrera) owned ÂZ proŴlndlvlso share ln Lhe
sub[ecL parcel of landŦ 1hey laLer flled a complalnL for annulmenL or nulllflcaLlon of Lhe affldavlLs of
AnacleLo Cabrera and ulonlsla 8eyesţ Lhe LxLraŴ!udlclal SeLLlemenL wlLh Lhe Sale of LsLaLe of
ulonlsla 8eyesţ and Lhe ueed of SegregaLlon of 8eal LsLaLe and ConflrmaLlon of Sale execuLed by
Lhe helrs of ulonlsla 8eyes and Lhe helrs of AnacleLo Cabreraţ as well as Lo cancel Lhe new Lransfer
cerLlflcaLes of LlLle lssued by vlrLue of Lhe aboveŴquesLloned documenLsŦ
1he 81C dlsmlssed Lhe case on Lhe ground LhaL Lhe respondenLsŴplalnLlffs were acLually seeklng
flrsL and foremosL Lo be declared helrs of AnacleLo Cabrera slnce Lhey cannoL demand Lhe parLlLlon
of Lhe real properLy wlLhouL flrsL belng declared as legal helrs and such may noL be done ln an
ordlnary clvll acLlonţ as ln Lhls caseţ buL Lhrough a speclal proceedlng speclflcally lnsLlLuLed for Lhe
purposeŦ
Cn appealţ CA reversed Lhe 81C and dlrecLed Lhe Lrlal courL Lo proceed wlLh Lhe hearlng of Lhe
caseŦ

lssueť
WheLher Lhe respondenLs have Lo lnsLlLuLe a speclal proceedlng Lo deLermlne Lhelr sLaLus as helrs
of AnacleLo Cabrera before Lhey can flle an ordlnary clvll acLlon Lo nulllfy Lhe aforemenLloned
documenLsŦ
Peldť
?esŦ
ln cases whereln alleged helrs of a decedenL ln whose name a properLy was reglsLered sue Lo
recover Lhe sald properLy Lhrough Lhe lnsLlLuLlon of an ordlnary clvll acLlonţ such as a complalnL for
reconveyance and parLlLlonţ or nulllflcaLlon of Lransfer cerLlflcaLe of LlLles and oLher deeds or
documenLs relaLed LhereLoţ Lhls CourL has conslsLenLly ruled LhaL a declaraLlon of helrshlp ls
lmproper ln an ordlnary clvll acLlon slnce Lhe maLLer ls ƍwlLhln Lhe excluslve compeLence of Lhe
courL ln a speclal proceedlngŦƍ
ln Lhe same mannerţ Lhe respondenLs herelnţ excepL for Lhelr allegaLlonsţ have yeL Lo subsLanLlaLe
Lhelr clalm as Lhe legal helrs of AnacleLo Cabrera who areţ Lhusţ enLlLled Lo Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ
nelLher ls Lhere anyLhlng ln Lhe records of Lhls case whlch would show LhaL a speclal proceedlng Lo
have Lhemselves declared as helrs of AnacleLo Cabrera had been lnsLlLuLedŦ As suchţ Lhe Lrlal courL
correcLly dlsmlssed Lhe case for Lhere ls a lack of cause of acLlon when a case ls lnsLlLuLed by parLles
who are noL real parLles ln lnLeresLŦ Whlle a declaraLlon of helrshlp was noL prayed for ln Lhe
complalnLţ lL ls clear from Lhe allegaLlons Lhereln LhaL Lhe rlghL Lhe respondenLs soughL Lo proLecL
or enforce ls LhaL of an helr of one of Lhe reglsLered coŴowners of Lhe properLy prlor Lo Lhe lssuance
of Lhe new Lransfer cerLlflcaLes of LlLle LhaL Lhey seek Lo cancelŦ 1husţ Lhere ls a need Lo esLabllsh
Lhelr sLaLus as such helrs ln Lhe proper forumŦ

apt|nchay vsŦ De| kosar|o
Gk# 124320] MarŦ 2ţ 1999
304 SCkA 18

lAC1Sť ÞeLlLloners clalm LhaL Lhey are Lhe legal helrs of Lhe laLe Culdo and lsabel ?apLlnchayţ Lhe
ownersŴclalmanLs of LoL noŦ 1131 wlLh an area of 320ţ638 and LoL noŦ 1132 wlLh an area of 96ţ233
square meLersţ more or less slLuaLed ln 8ancalţ Carmonaţ CavlLeŦCn March 17ţ 1994ţ peLlLloners
execuLed an LxLraŴ!udlclal SeLLlemenL of Lhe esLaLe of Lhe deceased Culdo and lsabel ?apLlnchayŦ
Cn AugusL 26ţ 1994ţ peLlLloners dlscovered LhaL a porLlonţ lf noL allţ of Lhe aforesald properLles
were LlLled ln Lhe name of respondenL Colden 8ay 8ealLy and uevelopmenL CorporaLlon (ºColden
8ay") under 1ransfer CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle nosŦ (º1C1") 223234 and 223233Ŧ WlLh Lhe dlscovery of
whaL happened Lo sub[ecL parcels of landţ peLlLloners flled a complalnL for AnnuLMLn1 and/or
uLCLA8A1lCn Cl nuLLl1? Cl 1C1 nCŦ 493363ţ 493364ţ 493663ţ 493366ţ 493367Ť and lLs
uerlvaLlvesŤ As AlLernaLlve 8econveyance of 8ealLy Wl1P A Þ8A?L8 lC8 A W8l1 Cl Þ8LLlMlnA8?
ln!unC1lCn and/or 8LS18AlnlnC C8uL8 Wl1P uAMACLSţ dockeLed as 81C 8CvŴ94Ŵ127 before
8ranch 21 of Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal CourL ln lmusţ CavlLeŦupon learnlng LhaL ºColden 8ay" sold porLlons
of Lhe parcels of land ln quesLlonţ peLlLloners flled wlLh Lhe º81C" an Amended ComplalnL Lo
lmplead new and addlLlonal defendanLs and Lo menLlon Lhe 1C1s Lo be annulledŦ 8uL Lhe
respondenL courL dlsmlssed Lhe Amended ComplalnLŦCn AugusL 12ţ 1993ţ Lhe prlvaLe respondenLs
presenLed a MoLlon Lo ulsmlss on Lhe grounds LhaL Lhe complalnL falled Lo sLaLe a cause of acLlonţ
LhaL plalnLlffs dld noL have a rlghL of acLlonţ LhaL Lhey have noL esLabllshed Lhelr sLaLus as helrsţ
LhaL Lhe land belng clalmed ls dlfferenL from LhaL of Lhe defendanLsţ and LhaL plalnLlffs' clalm was
barred by lachesŦ 1he sald MoLlon Lo ulsmlss was granLed by Lhe respondenL courL ln lLs Crder
daLed CcLober 23ţ 1993ţ holdlng LhaL peLlLloners ºhave noL shown any proof or even a semblance
of lL Ŵ excepL Lhe allegaLlons LhaL Lhey are Lhe legal helrs of Lhe aboveŴnamed ?apLlnchays Ŵ LhaL
Lhey have been declared Lhe legal helrs of Lhe deceased coupleŦ"
lSSuLť WheLher Lhe respondenL courL acLed wlLh grave abuse of dlscreLlon ln rullng LhaL Lhe lssue
of helrshlp should flrsL be deLermlned before Lrlal of Lhe case could proceedŦ
PLLuť 1o begln wlLhţ peLlLloners' ÞeLlLlon for CerLlorarl before Lhls CourL ls an lmproper recourseŦ
1helr proper remedy should have been an appealŦ An order of dlsmlssalţ be lL rlghL or wrongţ ls a
flnal orderţ whlch ls sub[ecL Lo appeal and noL a proper sub[ecL of cerLlorarlŦ Where appeal ls
avallable as a remedyţ cerLlorarl wlll noL lleŦ
nelLher dld Lhe respondenL courL commlL grave abuse of dlscreLlon ln lssulng Lhe quesLloned Crder
dlsmlsslng Lhe Second Amended ComplalnL of peLlLlonersţ as lL apLly raLloclnaLed and ruledť
º8uL Lhe plalnLlffs who clalmed Lo be Lhe legal helrs of Lhe sald Culdo and lsabel ?apLlnchay have
noL shown any proof or even a semblance of lL Ŵ excepL Lhe allegaLlons LhaL Lhey are Lhe legal helrs
of Lhe aforemenLloned ?apLlnchays Ŵ LhaL Lhey have been declared Lhe legal helrs of Lhe deceased
coupleŦ nowţ Lhe deLermlnaLlon of who are Lhe legal helrs of Lhe deceased couple musL be made ln
Lhe proper speclal proceedlngs ln courLţ and noL ln an ordlnary sulL for reconveyance of properLyŦ
he Lrlal courL cannoL make a declaraLlon of helrshlp ln Lhe clvll acLlon for Lhe reason LhaL such a
declaraLlon can only be made ln a speclal proceedlngŦ under SecLlon 3ţ 8ule 1 of Lhe 1997 8evlsed
8ules of CourLţ a clvll acLlon ls deflned as ºone by whlch a parLy sues anoLher for Lhe enforcemenL
or proLecLlon of a rlghLţ or Lhe prevenLlon or redress of a wrong" whlle a speclal proceedlng ls ºa
remedy by whlch a parLy seeks Lo esLabllsh a sLaLusţ a rlghLţ or a parLlcular facLŦ" lL ls Lhen
declslvely clear LhaL Lhe declaraLlon of helrshlp can be made only ln a speclal proceedlng lnasmuch
as Lhe peLlLloners here are seeklng Lhe esLabllshmenL of a sLaLus or rlghLŦ

L|mos vsŦ Cdones
Gk# 186979] AugŦ 11ţ 2010
628 SCkA 288
lAC1Sť Cn !une 17ţ 2003ţ prlvaLe respondenLsŴspouses lranclsco Cdones and Arwenla Cdonesţ
flled a complalnL for AnnulmenL of ueedţ 1lLle and uamages agalnsL peLlLloners Socorro Llmosţ
8osa uelos 8eyes and Spouses 8olando uelos 8eyes and Lugene uelos 8eyesţ dockeLed as Clvll Case
noŦ 03Ŵ33 before Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal CourL (81C) of Camlllngţ 1arlacţ 8ranch 68Ŧ
1he complalnL alleged LhaL spouses Cdones are Lhe owners of a 940Ŵ square meLer parcel of land
locaLed aL Þao 1sLţ Camlllngţ 1arlac by vlrLue of an LxLra[udlclal Successlon of LsLaLe and Sale daLedţ
!anuary 29ţ 2004ţ execuLed by Lhe survlvlng grandchlldren and helrs of uonaLa Lardlzabal ln whom
Lhe orlglnal LlLle Lo Lhe land was reglsLeredŦ 1hese helrs were Soledad 8azalan Lagascaţ Ceferlna
8azalan CaLlvoţ 8ogello Lagasca 8azalan and uomlnador 8azalanŦ
lL Look a whlle before respondenLs declded Lo reglsLer Lhe documenL of conveyanceŤ and when
Lhey dldţ Lhey found ouL LhaL Lhe land's Crlglnal CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle (CC1) was cancelled on Aprll 27ţ
2003 and replaced by 1ransfer CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle (1C1) noŦ 329427 ln Lhe name of hereln
peLlLlonersŦÞeLlLloners were able Lo secure 1C1 noŦ 329427 by vlrLue of a ueed of AbsoluLe Sale
allegedly execuLed by uonaLa Lardlzabal and her husband lranclsco 8azalan on Aprll 18ţ 1972Ŧ
ÞeLlLloners Lhen subdlvlded Lhe loL among Lhemselves and had 1C1 noŦ 329427 cancelledŦ ln lleu
Lhereofţ Lhree new 1C1s were lssuedť 1C1 noŦ 392428 ln Lhe names of Socorro Llmos and spouses
8olando uelos 8eyes and Lugene uelos 8eyesţ 1C1 noŦ 392429 ln Lhe names of Spouses delos
8eyes and 1C1 noŦ 392430 ln Lhe name of 8osa uelos 8eyesŦ8espondenLs soughL Lhe cancellaLlon
of Lhese new 1C1s on Lhe ground LhaL Lhe slgnaLures of uonaLa Lardlzabal and lranclsco 8azalan ln
Lhe 1972 ueed of AbsoluLe Sale were forgerlesţ because Lhey dled on !une 30ţ 1926 and !une 3ţ
1971ţ respecLlvelyŦ
ln Lhelr answerţ peLlLloners pleaded afflrmaLlve defensesţ whlch also consLlLuLe grounds for
dlsmlssal of Lhe complalnLŦ 1hese grounds wereť (1) fallure Lo sLaLe a cause of acLlon lnasmuch as
Lhe basls of respondenLs' alleged LlLle ls voldţ slnce Lhe LxLra[udlclal Successlon of LsLaLe and Sale
was noL publlshed and lL conLalned formal defecLsţ Lhe vendors are noL Lhe legal helrs of uonaLa
Lardlzabalţ and respondenLs are noL Lhe real parLlesŴlnŴlnLeresL Lo quesLlon Lhe LlLle of peLlLlonersţ
because no LransacLlon ever occurred beLween LhemŤ (2) nonŴ[olnder of Lhe oLher helrs of uonaLa
Lardlzabal as lndlspensable 1rlal courL parLlesŤ and (3) respondenLs' clalm ls barred by lachesŦ ln lLs
8esoluLlon daLed november 16ţ 2006ţ Lhe 81C denled Lhe MoLlon and held LhaL lLem nosŦ 1 Lo 4 ln
Lhe 8equesL for Admlsslon were earller pleaded as afflrmaLlve defenses ln peLlLloners' Answerţ Lo
whlch respondenLs already replled on !uly 17ţ 2006Ŧ Penceţ lL would be redundanL for respondenLs
Lo make anoLher denlalŦ 1he Lrlal courL furLher observed LhaL lLem nosŦ 3ţ 6ţ and 7 ln Lhe 8equesL
for Admlsslon were already effecLlvely denled by Lhe LxLra[udlclal Successlon of LsLaLe and Sale
appended Lo Lhe complalnLŦ Cn AugusL 14ţ 2008ţ Lhe CA dlsmlssed Lhe peLlLlon rullng LhaL Lhe
afflrmaLlve defenses ralsed by peLlLloners were noL lndublLableţ and could be besL proven ln a fullŴ
blown hearlngŦ1helr moLlon for reconslderaLlon havlng been denledţ peLlLloners are now before
Lhls CourL seeklng a revlew of Lhe CA's pronouncemenLsŦ
lSSuLť WheLher Lhe afflrmaLlve defenses ralsed ln Lhelr MoLlon are lndublLableţ as Lhey were
lmplledly admlLLed by respondenLs when Lhey falled Lo respond Lo Lhe 8equesL for AdmlsslonŦ
PLLuť ÞeLlLlon denledŦ As correcLly observed by Lhe Lrlal courLţ Lhe maLLers seL forLh ln peLlLloners'
8equesL for Admlsslon were Lhe same afflrmaLlve defenses pleaded ln Lhelr Answer whlch
respondenLs already Lraversed ln Lhelr 8eplyŦ 1he sald defenses were llkewlse sufflclenLly
conLroverLed ln Lhe complalnL and lLs annexesŦ ln effecLţ peLlLloners soughL Lo compel respondenLs

Lo deny once agaln Lhe very maLLers Lhey had already denledţ a redundancyţ whlch lf abeLLedţ wlll
serve no purpose buL Lo delay Lhe proceedlngs and Lhus defeaL Lhe purpose of Lhe rule on
admlsslon as a mode of dlscovery whlch ls ºLo expedlLe Lrlal and relleve parLles of Lhe cosLs of
provlng facLs whlch wlll noL be dlspuLed on Lrlal and Lhe LruLh of whlch can be ascerLalned by
reasonable lnqulryŦ"
A requesL for admlsslon ls noL lnLended Lo merely reproduce or relLeraLe Lhe allegaLlons of Lhe
requesLlng parLy's pleadlng buL should seL forLh relevanL evldenLlary maLLers of facL descrlbed ln
Lhe requesLţ whose purpose ls Lo esLabllsh sald parLy's cause of acLlon or defenseŦ unless lL serves
LhaL purposeţ lL ls polnLlessţ uselessţ and a mere redundancyŦ
verlly Lhenţ lf Lhe Lrlal courL flnds LhaL Lhe maLLers ln a 8equesL for Admlsslon were already
admlLLed or denled ln prevlous pleadlngs by Lhe requesLed parLyţ Lhe laLLer cannoL be compelled Lo
admlL or deny Lhem anewŦ ln Lurnţ Lhe requesLlng parLy cannoL reasonably expecL a response Lo Lhe
requesL and LhereafLerţ assume or even demand Lhe appllcaLlon of Lhe lmplled admlsslon rule ln
SecLlon 2ţ 8ule 26Ŧ
ln an acLlon for annulmenL of LlLleţ Lhe complalnL musL conLaln Lhe followlng allegaLlonsť (1) LhaL
Lhe conLesLed land was prlvaLely owned by Lhe plalnLlff prlor Lo Lhe lssuance of Lhe assalled
cerLlflcaLe of LlLle Lo Lhe defendanLŤ and (2) LhaL Lhe defendanL perpeLuaLed a fraud or commlLLed a
mlsLake ln obLalnlng a documenL of LlLle over Lhe parcel of land clalmed by Lhe plalnLlffŦ As Lo Lhe
valldlLy of Lhe LxLra[udlclal Successlon of LsLaLe and Sale and Lhe sLaLus of peLlLloners'
predecessorsŴlnŴlnLeresL as Lhe only helrs of uonaLa Lardlzabalţ Lhese lssues go lnLo Lhe merlLs of
Lhe parLles' respecLlve clalms and defenses LhaL can be besL deLermlned on Lhe basls of
preponderance of Lhe evldence Lhey wlll adduce ln a fullŴblown LrlalŦ A prellmlnary hearlngţ Lhe
ob[ecLlve of whlch ls for Lhe courL Lo deLermlne wheLher or noL Lhe case should proceed Lo Lrlalţ
wlll noL sufflclenLly address such lssuesŦ
AnenL Lhe alleged nonŴ[olnder of lndlspensable parLlesţ lL ls seLLled LhaL Lhe nonŴ[olnder of
lndlspensable parLles ls noL a ground for Lhe dlsmlssal of an acLlonŦ 1he remedy ls Lo lmplead Lhe
nonŴparLy clalmed Lo be lndlspensableŦ ÞarLles may be added by order of Lhe courL on moLlon of
Lhe parLy or on lLs own lnlLlaLlve aL any sLage of Lhe acLlon and/or such Llmes as are [usLŦ lL ls only
when Lhe plalnLlff refuses Lo lmplead an lndlspensable parLy desplLe Lhe order of Lhe courLţ LhaL Lhe
laLLer may dlsmlss Lhe complalnLŦ ln Lhls caseţ no such order was lssued by Lhe Lrlal courLŦLqually
seLLled ls Lhe facL LhaL laches ls evldenLlary ln naLure and lL may noL be esLabllshed by mere
allegaLlons ln Lhe pleadlngs and can noL be resolved ln a moLlon Lo dlsmlssŦ

A|fonso vsŦ Andres
Gk# 166236] Iu|y 29ţ 2010
626 SCkA 149

lAC1Sť 1he presenL case sLemmed from a complalnL for acclon publlclana wlLh damages flled by
respondenL spouses Penry and Llwanag Andres agalnsL noll Alfonso and spouses 8eynaldo and
Lrllnda lundlalan before Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal CourL (81C)ţ 8ranch 77ţ San MaLeoţ 8lzalŦ ÞeLlLloners
conLend LhaL Lhelr fallure Lo flle Lhelr appellanLsƌ brlef wlLhln Lhe requlred perlod was due Lo Lhelr
lndlgency and poverLyŦ 1hey submlL LhaL Lhere ls no [usLlflcaLlon for Lhe dlsmlssal of Lhelr appeal
speclally slnce Lhe ÞAC had [usL enLered lLs appearance as new counsel for peLlLloners as dlrecLed
by Lhe CAţ and had as yeL no opporLunlLy Lo prepare Lhe brlefŦ 1hey conLend LhaL appeal should be
allowed slnce Lhe brlef had anyway already been prepared and flled by Lhe ÞAC before lL soughL
reconslderaLlon of Lhe dlsmlssal of Lhe appeal and ls already parL of Lhe recordsŦ 1hey conLend LhaL
Lhe laLe flllng of Lhe brlef should be excused under Lhe clrcumsLances so LhaL Lhe case may be
declded on Lhe merlLs and noL merely on LechnlcallLlesŦ Cn Lhe oLher handţ respondenLs conLend
LhaL fallure Lo flle appellanLsƌ brlef on Llme ls one lnsLance where Lhe CA may dlsmlss an appealŦ ln
Lhe presenL caseţ Lhey conLend LhaL Lhe CA exerclsed sound dlscreLlon when lL dlsmlssed Lhe appeal
upon peLlLloners' fallure Lo flle Lhelr appellanLsƌ brlef wlLhln Lhe exLended perlod of 73 days afLer
Lhe orlglnal 43Ŵday perlod explredŦ
lSSuLť WheLher Lhe appeal should be allowed beyond Lhe perlod prescrlbed on ground of poverLyŦ
PLLuť overLy cannoL be used as an excuse Lo [usLlfy peLlLlonersƌ complacency ln allowlng
monLhs Lo pass by before exerLlng Lhe requlred efforL Lo flnd a replacemenL lawyerŦ ÞoverLy ls noL
a [usLlflcaLlon for delaylng a caseŦ 8oLh parLles have a rlghL Lo a speedy resoluLlon of Lhelr caseŦ
noL only peLlLlonersţ buL also Lhe respondenLsţ have a rlghL Lo have Lhe case flnally seLLled wlLhouL
delayŦ lurLhermoreţ Lhe fallure Lo flle a brlef on Llme was due prlmarlly Lo peLlLlonersƌ unwlse
cholces and noL really due Lo poverLyŦ ÞeLlLloners were able Lo geL a lawyer Lo represenL Lhem
desplLe Lhelr poverLyŦ 1hey were able Lo geL Lwo oLher lawyers afLer Lhey consenLed Lo Lhe
wlLhdrawal of Lhelr flrsL lawyerŦ 8uL Lhey hlred Lhelr subsequenL lawyers Loo laLeŦ
lL musL be polnLed ouL LhaL peLlLloners had a cholce of wheLher Lo conLlnue Lhe servlces of Lhelr
orlglnal lawyer or consenL Lo leL hlm goŦ 1hey could also have requesLed Lhe sald lawyer Lo flle Lhe
requlred appellanLsƌ brlef before consenLlng Lo hls wlLhdrawal from Lhe caseŦ 8uL Lhey dld nelLher
of LheseŦ 1henţ noL havlng done soţ Lhey delayed ln engaglng Lhelr replacemenL lawyerŦ 1helr poor
cholces and lack of sufflclenL dlllgenceţ noL poverLyţ are Lhe maln culprlLs for Lhe slLuaLlon Lhey now
flnd Lhemselves lnŦ lL would noL be falr Lo pass on Lhe bad consequences of Lhelr cholces Lo
respondenLsŦ ÞeLlLlonersƌ low regard for Lhe rules or nonchalance Loward procedural
requlremenLsţ whlch Lhey camouflage wlLh Lhe cloak of poverLyţ has ln facL conLrlbuLed much Lo
Lhe delayţ and hence frusLraLlon of [usLlceţ ln Lhe presenL caseŦ
1he sale Lo respondenLs was made afLer Lhe execuLlon of Lhe deed of exLra[udlclal seLLlemenL of
Lhe esLaLeŦ 1he exLra[udlclal seLLlemenL of esLaLeţ even Lhough noL publlshedţ belng deemed a
parLlLlon of Lhe lnherlLed properLyţ !ose could valldly Lransfer ownershlp over Lhe speclflc porLlon
of Lhe properLy LhaL was asslgned Lo hlmŦ 1he records show LhaL !ose dld ln facL sell Lo respondenLs
Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ 1he deed of sale execuLed by !ose ln favor of Lhe respondenLs belng a publlc
documenLţ ls enLlLled Lo full falLh and credlL ln Lhe absence of compeLenL evldence LhaL lLs
execuLlon was LalnLed wlLh defecLs and lrregularlLles LhaL would warranL a declaraLlon of nulllLyŦ As
found by Lhe 81Cţ peLlLloners falled Lo prove any defecL or lrregularlLles ln Lhe execuLlon of Lhe
deed of saleŦ 1hey falled Lo prove by sLrong evldenceţ Lhe alleged lack of consenL of !ose Lo Lhe sale
of Lhe sub[ecL real properLyŦ As found by Lhe 81Cţ alLhough !ose was sufferlng from parLlal
paralysls and could no longer slgn hls nameţ Lhere ls no showlng LhaL hls menLal faculLles were
affecLed ln such a way as Lo negaLe Lhe exlsLence of hls valld consenL Lo Lhe saleţ as manlfesLed by
hls Lhumbmark on Lhe deed of saleŦ 1he records sufflclenLly show LhaL he was capable of boardlng
a Lrlcycle Lo go on Lrlps by hlmselfŦ SufflclenL LesLlmonlal evldence ln facL shows LhaL !ose asked
respondenLs Lo buy Lhe sub[ecL properLy so LhaL lL could be Laken ouL from Lhe bank Lo whlch lL was
morLgagedŦ 1hls facL evlnces LhaL !ose's menLal faculLles funcLloned lnLelllgenLlyŦ

Acap vsŦ CAţ
Gk# 118114ţ DecŦ 7ţ 199S
2S1 SCkA 30


lacLsť Spouses SanLlago vasquez and Lorenza Cruma owns a loL ln Plnlgaranţ negros CccldenLalŦ
AfLer boLh spouses dledţ Lhelr only son lellxberLo lnherlLed Lhe loLŦ ln 1973ţ lellxberLo execuLed a

duly noLarlzed documenL enLlLled ƍueclaraLlon of Pelrshlp and ueed of AbsoluLe Saleƍ ln favor of
Cosme ÞldoŦ ÞeLlLloner 1eodoro Acap had been Lhe LenanL of a porLlon of Lhe sald landţ coverlng an
area of nlne Lhousand flve hundred (9ţ300) meLersŦ When ownershlp was Lransferred ln 1973 by
lellxberLo Lo Cosme Þldoţ Acap conLlnued Lo be Lhe reglsLered LenanL Lhereof and rellglously pald
hls leasehold renLals Lo Þldo and LhereafLerţ upon Þldoƌs deaLhţ Lo hls wldow LaurenclanaŦ 1he
conLroversy began when Þldo dled lnLesLaLe and on 27 november 1981ţ hls survlvlng helrs
execuLed a noLarlzed ueclaraLlon of Pelrshlp and Walver of 8lghLs of Lhe loLŦ WlLh a provlslonº do
hereby walveţ qulLclalm all our rlghLsţ lnLeresLs and parLlclpaLlon over Lhe sald parcel of land ln
favor of Ldy delos 8eyes Ŷ noL a leglLlmaLe helrŦ
upon obLalnlng Lhe ueclaraLlon of Pelrshlp wlLh Walver of 8lghLs ln hls favorţ prlvaLe respondenL
Ldy de los 8eyes flled Lhe same wlLh Lhe 8eglsLry of ueeds as parL of a noLlce of an adverse clalm
agalnsL Lhe orlglnal cerLlflcaLe of LlLleŦ 1hereafLerţ prlvaLe respondenL soughL for peLlLloner (Acap)
Lo personally lnform hlm LhaL he (Ldy) had become Lhe new owner of Lhe land and LhaL Lhe lease
renLals Lhereon should be pald Lo hlmŦ ÞrlvaLe respondenL furLher alleged LhaL he and peLlLloner
enLered lnLo an oral lease agreemenL whereln peLlLloner agreed Lo pay Len (10) cavans of palay per
annum as lease renLalŦ ln 1982ţ peLlLloner allegedly complled wlLh sald obllgaLlonŦ ln 1983ţ
howeverţ peLlLloner refused Lo pay any furLher lease renLals on Lhe landţ prompLlng prlvaLe
respondenL Lo seek Lhe asslsLance of Lhe Lhen MlnlsLry of Agrarlan 8eform (MA8) ln Plnlgaranţ
negros CccldenLalŦ uurlng Lhe meeLlngţ an offlcer of Lhe MlnlsLry lnformed Acapƌs wlfe abouL
prlvaLe respondenLƌs ownershlp of Lhe sald land buL she sLaLed LhaL she and her husband (1eodoro)
dld noL recognlze prlvaLe respondenLƌs clalm of ownershlp over Lhe landŦ Cn 28 Aprll 1988ţ afLer
Lhe lapse of four (4) yearsţ prlvaLe respondenL flled a complalnL for recovery of possesslon and
damages agalnsL peLlLlonerţ alleglng ln Lhe maln LhaL as hls leasehold LenanLţ peLlLloner refused
and falled Lo pay Lhe agreed annual renLal of Len (10) cavans of palay desplLe repeaLed demandsŦ
lssuesť WheLher or noL Lhe ÞeLlLloner ls correcL refuslng Lo recognlze Ldy 8eyes as Lhe owner of Lhe
landŦ
Peldť
We flnd Lhe peLlLlon lmpressed wlLh merlLŦ
ln Lhe flrsL placeţ an asserLed rlghL or clalm Lo ownershlp or a real rlghL over a Lhlng arlslng from a
[urldlcal acLţ however [usLlfledţ ls noL per se sufflclenL Lo glve rlse Lo ownershlp over Lhe resŦ 1haL
rlghL or LlLle musL be compleLed by fulfllllng cerLaln condlLlons lmposed by lawŦ Penceţ ownershlp
and real rlghLs are acqulred only pursuanL Lo a legal mode or processŦ Whlle LlLle ls Lhe [urldlcal
[usLlflcaLlonţ mode ls Lhe acLual process of acqulslLlon or Lransfer of ownershlp over a Lhlng ln
quesLlonŦ
1here ls a marked dlfference beLween a sale of heredlLary rlghLs and a walver of heredlLary rlghLsŦ
1he flrsL presumes Lhe exlsLence of a conLracL or deed of sale beLween Lhe parLlesŦ 1he second lsţ
Lechnlcally speaklngţ a mode of exLlncLlon of ownershlp where Lhere ls an abdlcaLlon or lnLenLlonal
rellnqulshmenL of a known rlghL wlLh knowledge of lLs exlsLence and lnLenLlon Lo rellnqulsh lLţ ln
favor of oLher persons who are coŴhelrs ln Lhe successlonŦ ÞrlvaLe respondenLţ belng Lhen a
sLranger Lo Lhe successlon of Cosme Þldoţ cannoL concluslvely clalm ownershlp over Lhe sub[ecL loL
on Lhe sole basls of Lhe walver documenL whlch nelLher reclLes Lhe elemenLs of elLher a saleţ or a
donaLlonţ or any oLher derlvaLlve mode of acqulrlng ownershlpŦ

Arr|o|a vŦ Arr|o|a
Gk# 177703ţ IanŦ 28ţ 2008
S42 SCkA 666

lacLsť

1hls ls a ÞeLlLlon for 8evlew on CerLlorarl under 8ule 43 of Lhe 8ules of CourLţ assalllng Lhe ueclslon
and 8esoluLlon of Lhe CourL of AppealsŦ

!ohn nabor CŦ Arrlola flled Speclal Clvll AcLlon wlLh Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal CourLţ 8ranch 234ţ Las Þlnas
ClLy (81C) agalnsL vllma CŦ Arrlola and AnLhony 8onald CŦ Arrlola for [udlclal parLlLlon of Lhe
properLles of decedenL lldel ArrlolaŦ 8espondenL ls Lhe son of decedenL lldel wlLh hls flrsL wlfe
vlcLorla CŦ Calablaţ whlle peLlLloner AnLhony ls Lhe son of decedenL lldel wlLh hls second wlfeţ
peLlLloner vllmaŦ

Cn lebruary 16ţ 2004ţ Lhe 81C rendered a ueclslonţ orderlng Lhe parLlLlon of Lhe parcel of land lefL
by Lhe decedenL lldel SŦ Arrlola by and among hls helrs !ohn nabor CŦ Arrlolaţ vllma CŦ Arrlola and
AnLhony 8onald CŦ Arrlola ln equal shares of oneŴLhlrd (1/3) each wlLhouL pre[udlce Lo Lhe rlghLs of
credlLors or morLgagees Lhereonţ lf anyŤ

As Lhe parLles falled Lo agree how Lo parLlLlon among Lhem Lhe landţ !ohn nabor soughL Lhe sale
Lhrough publlc aucLlon and peLlLloners acceded Lo lLŦ Sald aucLlon had Lo be reseL when peLlLloners
refused Lo lnclude Lhe house sLandlng on Lhe sub[ecL landŦ

lssueť

WheLher Lhe sub[ecL house ls covered ln Lhe [udgmenL of parLlLlon of Lhe loL and should be
lncluded ln Lhe sale Lhrough publlc aucLlonŦ

Peldť

1he sub[ecL house ls covered by Lhe [udgmenL of parLlLlonŦ

llrsLţ as correcLly held by Lhe CAţ under Lhe provlslons of Lhe Clvll Codeţ Lhe sub[ecL house ls
deemed parL of Lhe sub[ecL landŦ

ln generalţ Lhe rlghL Lo accesslon ls auLomaLlc (lpso [ure)ţ requlrlng no prlor acL on Lhe parL of Lhe
owner or Lhe prlnclpalŦ So LhaL even lf Lhe lmprovemenLs lncludlng Lhe house were noL alleged ln
Lhe complalnL for parLlLlonţ Lhey are deemed lncluded ln Lhe loL on whlch Lhey sLandţ followlng Lhe
prlnclple of accesslonŦ ConsequenLlyţ Lhe loL sub[ecL of [udlclal parLlLlon ln Lhls case lncludes Lhe
house whlch ls permanenLly aLLached LhereLoţ oLherwlseţ lL would be absurd Lo dlvlde Lhe prlnclpalţ
lŦeŦţ Lhe loLţ wlLhouL dlvldlng Lhe house whlch ls permanenLly aLLached LhereLoŦ

Secondţ respondenL has repeaLedly clalmed LhaL Lhe sub[ecL house was bullL by Lhe deceasedŦ
ÞeLlLloners never conLroverLed such clalmŦ 1here ls Lhen no dlspuLe LhaL Lhe sub[ecL house ls parL
of Lhe esLaLe of Lhe deceasedŤ as suchţ lL ls owned ln common by Lhe laLLerƌs helrsţ Lhe parLles
herelnţ any one of whomţ under ArLlcle 494 of Lhe Clvll Codeţ mayţ aL any Llmeţ demand Lhe
parLlLlon of Lhe sub[ecL houseŦ 1hereforeţ respondenLƌs recourse Lo Lhe parLlLlon of Lhe sub[ecL
house cannoL be hlnderedţ leasL of all by Lhe mere Lechnlcal omlsslon of sald common properLy
from Lhe complalnL for parLlLlonŦ

1haL sald noLwlLhsLandlngţ we musL emphaslze LhaLţ whlle we LreaL Lhe sub[ecL house as parL of Lhe
coŴownershlp of Lhe parLlesţ we sLop shorL of auLhorlzlng lLs acLual parLlLlon by publlc aucLlon aL
Lhls LlmeŦ lL bears emphasls LhaL an acLlon for parLlLlon lnvolves Lwo phasesť flrsLţ Lhe declaraLlon of
Lhe exlsLence of a sLaLe of coŴownershlpŤ and secondţ Lhe acLual LermlnaLlon of LhaL sLaLe of coŴ
ownershlp Lhrough Lhe segregaLlon of Lhe common properLyŦ WhaL ls seLLled Lhus far ls only Lhe
facL LhaL Lhe sub[ecL house ls under Lhe coŴownershlp of Lhe parLlesţ and Lherefore suscepLlble of
parLlLlon among LhemŦ

WheLher Lhe sub[ecL house should be sold aL publlc aucLlon as ordered by Lhe 81C ls an enLlrely
dlfferenL maLLerŦ
8espondenL clalms LhaL Lhe sub[ecL house was bullL by decedenL lldel on hls excluslve properLyŦ
ÞeLlLloners add LhaL sald house has been Lhelr resldence for 20 yearsŦ 1aken LogeLherţ Lhese
avermenLs on record esLabllsh LhaL Lhe sub[ecL house ls a famlly home wlLhln Lhe conLemplaLlon of
Lhe provlslons of 1he lamlly Codeţ parLlcularlyť

ArLlcle 132Ŧ 1he famlly homeţ consLlLuLed [olnLly by Lhe husband and Lhe wlfe or by an unmarrled
head of a famllyţ ls Lhe dwelllng house where Lhey and Lhelr famlly resldeţ and Lhe land on whlch lL
ls slLuaLedŦ

ArLlcle 133Ŧ 1he famlly home ls deemed consLlLuLed on a house and loL from Lhe Llme lL ls occupled
as a famlly resldenceŦ lrom Lhe Llme of lLs consLlLuLlon and so long as any of lLs beneflclarles
acLually resldes Lherelnţ Lhe famlly home conLlnues Lo be such and ls exempL from execuLlonţ
forced sale or aLLachmenL excepL as herelnafLer provlded and Lo Lhe exLenL of Lhe value allowed by
lawŦ

Cne slgnlflcanL lnnovaLlon lnLroduced by 1he lamlly Code ls Lhe auLomaLlc consLlLuLlon of Lhe
famlly home from Lhe Llme of lLs occupaLlon as a famlly resldenceţ wlLhouL need anymore for Lhe
[udlclal or exLra[udlclal processes provlded under Lhe defuncL ArLlcles 224 Lo 231 of Lhe Clvll Code
and 8ule 106 of Lhe 8ules of CourLŦ lurLhermoreţ ArLlcles 132 and 133 speclflcally exLend Lhe scope
of Lhe famlly home noL [usL Lo Lhe dwelllng sLrucLure ln whlch Lhe famlly resldes buL also Lo Lhe loL
on whlch lL sLandsŦ 1husţ applylng Lhese concepLsţ Lhe sub[ecL house as well as Lhe speclflc porLlon
of Lhe sub[ecL land on whlch lL sLands are deemed consLlLuLed as a famlly home by Lhe deceased
and peLlLloner vllma from Lhe momenL Lhey began occupylng Lhe same as a famlly resldence 20
years backŦ

lL belng seLLled LhaL Lhe sub[ecL house (and Lhe sub[ecL loL on whlch lL sLands) ls Lhe famlly home of
Lhe deceased and hls helrsţ Lhe same ls shlelded from lmmedlaLe parLlLlon under ArLlcle 139 of 1he
lamlly Codeţ vlzť
ArLlcle 139Ŧ 1he famlly home shall conLlnue desplLe Lhe deaLh of one or boLh spouses or of Lhe
unmarrled head of Lhe famlly for a perlod of Len years or for as long as Lhere ls a mlnor beneflclaryţ
and Lhe helrs cannoL parLlLlon Lhe same unless Lhe courL flnds compelllng reasons LhereforŦ 1hls
rule shall apply regardless of whoever owns Lhe properLy or consLlLuLed Lhe famlly homeŦ

1he purpose of ArLlcle 139 ls Lo averL Lhe dlslnLegraLlon of Lhe famlly unlL followlng Lhe deaLh of lLs
headŦ 1o Lhls endţ lL preserves Lhe famlly home as Lhe physlcal symbol of famlly loveţ securlLy and
unlLy by lmposlng Lhe followlng resLrlcLlons on lLs parLlLlonť flrsLţ LhaL Lhe helrs cannoL exLraŴ
[udlclally parLlLlon lL for a perlod of 10 years from Lhe deaLh of one or boLh spouses or of Lhe
unmarrled head of Lhe famllyţ or for a longer perlodţ lf Lhere ls sLlll a mlnor beneflclary resldlng
LherelnŤ and secondţ LhaL Lhe helrs cannoL [udlclally parLlLlon lL durlng Lhe aforesald perlods unless
Lhe courL flnds compelllng reasons LhereforŦ no compelllng reason has been alleged by Lhe parLlesŤ
nor has Lhe 81C found any compelllng reason Lo order Lhe parLlLlon of Lhe famlly homeţ elLher by
physlcal segregaLlon or asslgnmenL Lo any of Lhe helrs or Lhrough aucLlon sale as suggesLed by Lhe
parLlesŦ

More lmporLanLlyţ ArLlcle 139 lmposes Lhe proscrlpLlon agalnsL Lhe lmmedlaLe parLlLlon of Lhe
famlly home regardless of lLs ownershlpŦ 1hls slgnlfles LhaL even lf Lhe famlly home has passed by
successlon Lo Lhe coŴownershlp of Lhe helrsţ or has been wllled Lo any one of Lhemţ Lhls facL alone
cannoL Lransform Lhe famlly home lnLo an ordlnary properLyţ much less dlspel Lhe proLecLlon casL
upon lL by Lhe lawŦ 1he rlghLs of Lhe lndlvldual coŴowner or owner of Lhe famlly home cannoL
sub[ugaLe Lhe rlghLs granLed under ArLlcle 139 Lo Lhe beneflclarles of Lhe famlly homeŦ

SeL agalnsL Lhe foregolng rulesţ Lhe famlly home ŴŴ conslsLlng of Lhe sub[ecL house and loL on whlch
lL sLands ŴŴ cannoL be parLlLloned aL Lhls Llmeţ even lf lL has passed Lo Lhe coŴownershlp of hls helrsţ
Lhe parLles herelnŦ uecedenL lldel dled on March 10ţ 2003Ŧ 1husţ for 10 years from sald daLe or
unLll March 10ţ 2013ţ or for a longer perlodţ lf Lhere ls sLlll a mlnor beneflclary resldlng Lherelnţ Lhe
famlly home he consLlLuLed cannoL be parLlLlonedţ much less when no compelllng reason exlsLs for
Lhe courL Lo oLherwlse seL aslde Lhe resLrlcLlon and order Lhe parLlLlon of Lhe properLyŦ

1he CourL ruled ln Ponrado vŦ CourL of Appeals LhaL a clalm for excepLlon from execuLlon or forced
sale under ArLlcle 133 should be seL up and proved Lo Lhe Sherlff before Lhe sale of Lhe properLy aL
publlc aucLlonŦ Pereln peLlLloners Llmely ob[ecLed Lo Lhe lncluslon of Lhe sub[ecL house alLhough for
a dlfferenL reasonŦ

1o recaplLulaLeţ Lhe evldence of record susLaln Lhe CA rullng LhaL Lhe sub[ecL house ls parL of Lhe
[udgmenL of coŴownershlp and parLlLlonŦ 1he same evldence also esLabllshes LhaL Lhe sub[ecL house
and Lhe porLlon of Lhe sub[ecL land on whlch lL ls sLandlng have been consLlLuLed as Lhe famlly
home of decedenL lldel and hls helrsŦ ConsequenLlyţ lLs acLual and lmmedlaLe parLlLlon cannoL be
sancLloned unLll Lhe lapse of a perlod of 10 years from Lhe deaLh of lldel Arrlolaţ or unLll March 10ţ
2013Ŧ

lL bears emphaslsţ howeverţ LhaL ln Lhe meanLlmeţ Lhere ls no obsLacle Lo Lhe lmmedlaLe publlc
aucLlon of Lhe porLlon of Lhe sub[ecL land covered by 1C1 noŦ 383714ţ whlch falls ouLslde Lhe
speclflc area of Lhe famlly homeŦ

WPL8LlC8Lţ Lhe peLlLlon ls ÞA81L? C8An1Lu and Lhe november 30ţ 2006 ueclslon and Aprll 30ţ
2007 8esoluLlon of Lhe CourL of Appeals are MCulllLu ln LhaL Lhe house sLandlng on Lhe land
covered by 1ransfer CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle noŦ 383714 ls uLCLA8Lu parL of Lhe coŴownershlp of Lhe
parLles !ohn nabor CŦ Arrlolaţ vllma CŦ Arrlola and AnLhony 8onald CŦ Arrlola buL LxLMÞ1Lu from
parLlLlon by publlc aucLlon wlLhln Lhe perlod provlded for ln ArLlcle 139 of Lhe lamlly CodeŦ

keyes vŦ k@C Makat|
Gk# 16S744ţ AugŦ 11ţ 2008
S61 SCkA S93

lacLsť Cscar and prlvaLe respondenL 8odrlgo CŦ 8eyes (8odrlgo) are Lwo of Lhe four chlldren of Lhe
spouses Þedro and AnasLacla 8eyesŦ Þedroţ AnasLaclaţ Cscarţ and 8odrlgo each owned shares of
sLock of ZenlLh lnsurance CorporaLlon (ZenlLh)ţ a domesLlc corporaLlon esLabllshed by Lhelr famllyŦ
Þedro dled ln 1964ţ whlle AnasLacla dled ln 1993Ŧ AlLhough Þedroƌs esLaLe was [udlclally parLlLloned
among hls helrs someLlme ln Lhe 1970sţ no slmllar seLLlemenL and parLlLlon appear Lo have been
made wlLh AnasLaclaƌs esLaLeţ whlch lncluded her shareholdlngs ln ZenlLhŦ As of !une 30ţ 1990ţ
AnasLacla owned 136ţ398 shares of ZenlLhŤ Cscar and 8odrlgo owned 8ţ713ţ637 and 4ţ230 sharesţ
respecLlvelyŦ ZenlLh and 8odrlgo flled a complalnL wlLh SLCţ Lo obLaln an accounLlng of Lhe funds
and asseLs of ZLnl1P and Lo eLermlne Lhe shares of sLock of deceased spouses Þedro and AnasLacla
8eyes LhaL were arblLrarlly and fraudulenLly approprlaLed żby CscarŽ for hlmselfŦ
lssueť WheLher or noL 8odrlgo shall auLomaLlcally become Lhe owner of Lhe shares ln proporLlon Lo
hls successlon shareŦ
Peldť noŦ We polnL ouL aL Lhe ouLseL LhaL whlle 8odrlgo holds shares of sLock ln ZenlLhţ he holds
Lhem ln Lwo capaclLlesť ln hls own rlghL wlLh respecL Lo Lhe 4ţ230 shares reglsLered ln hls nameţ and
as one of Lhe helrs of AnasLacla 8eyes wlLh respecL Lo Lhe 136ţ398 shares reglsLered ln her nameŦ
WhaL ls maLerlal ln resolvlng Lhe lssues of Lhls case under Lhe allegaLlons of Lhe complalnL ls
8odrlgoƌs lnLeresL as an helr slnce Lhe sub[ecL maLLer of Lhe presenL conLroversy cenLers on Lhe
shares of sLocks belonglng Lo AnasLaclaţ noL on 8odrlgoƌs personallyŴowned shares nor on hls
personallLy as shareholder ownlng Lhese sharesŦ ln Lhls llghLţ all reference Lo shares of sLocks ln Lhls
case shall perLaln Lo Lhe shareholdlngs of Lhe deceased AnasLacla and Lhe parLlesƌ lnLeresL Lhereln
as her helrsŦ

ArLlcle 777 of Lhe Clvll Code declares LhaL Lhe successlonal rlghLs are LransmlLLed from Lhe momenL
of deaLh of Lhe decedenLŦ Accordlnglyţ upon AnasLaclaƌs deaLhţ her chlldren acqulred legal LlLle Lo
her esLaLe (whlch LlLle lncludes her shareholdlngs ln ZenlLh)ţ and Lhey areţ prlor Lo Lhe esLaLeƌs
parLlLlonţ deemed coŴowners LhereofŦż23Ž1hls sLaLus as coŴownersţ howeverţ does noL lmmedlaLely
and necessarlly make Lhem sLockholders of Lhe corporaLlonŦ unless and unLll Lhere ls compllance
wlLh SecLlon 63 of Lhe CorporaLlon Code on Lhe manner of Lransferrlng sharesţ Lhe helrs do noL
become reglsLered sLockholders of Lhe corporaLlonŦ
8odrlgo musLţ Lhereforeţ hurdle Lwo obsLacles before he can be consldered a sLockholder of ZenlLh
wlLh respecL Lo Lhe shareholdlngs orlglnally belonglng Lo AnasLaclaŦ llrsLţ he musL prove LhaL Lhere
are shareholdlngs LhaL wlll be lefL Lo hlm and hls coŴhelrsţ and Lhls can be deLermlned only ln a
seLLlemenL of Lhe decedenLƌs esLaLeŦ no such proceedlng has been commenced Lo daLeŦ Secondţ he
musL reglsLer Lhe Lransfer of Lhe shares alloLLed Lo hlm Lo make lL blndlng agalnsL Lhe corporaLlonŦ
Pe cannoL demand LhaL Lhls be done unless and unLll he has esLabllshed hls speclflc alloLmenL (and
prlma facle ownershlp) of Lhe sharesŦ WlLhouL Lhe seLLlemenL of AnasLaclaƌs esLaLeţ Lhere can be no
deflnlLe parLlLlon and dlsLrlbuLlon of Lhe esLaLe Lo Lhe helrsŦ WlLhouL Lhe parLlLlon and dlsLrlbuLlonţ
Lhere can be no reglsLraLlon of Lhe LransferŦ And wlLhouL Lhe reglsLraLlonţ we cannoL conslder Lhe
LransfereeŴhelr a sLockholder who may lnvoke Lhe exlsLence of an lnLraŴcorporaLe relaLlonshlp as
premlse for an lnLraŴcorporaLe conLroversy wlLhln Lhe [urlsdlcLlon of a speclal commerclal courLŦ

Þuno vŦ Þuno Lnterpr|ses
Gk# 177066ţ SeptŦ 11ţ 2009
S99 SCkA S8S

lacLsť Carlos LŦ Þunoţ who dled on !une 23ţ 1963ţ was an lncorporaLor of respondenL Þuno
LnLerprlsesţ lncŦ Cn March 14ţ 2003ţ peLlLloner !osellLo Musnl Þunoţ clalmlng Lo be an helr of Carlos
LŦ Þunoţ lnlLlaLed a complalnL for speclflc performance agalnsL respondenLŦ ÞeLlLloner averred LhaL
he ls Lhe son of Lhe deceased wlLh Lhe laLLer's commonŴlaw wlfeţ Amella ÞunoŦ As survlvlng helrţ he
clalmed enLlLlemenL Lo Lhe rlghLs and prlvlleges of hls laLe faLher as sLockholder of respondenLŦ
8espondenL flled a moLlon Lo dlsmlss on Lhe ground LhaL peLlLloner dld noL have Lhe legal
personallLy Lo sue because hls blrLh cerLlflcaLe names hlm as º!osellLo Musnl MunoŦ" Aproposţ
Lhere was yeL a need for a [udlclal declaraLlon LhaL º!osellLo Musnl Þuno" and º!osellLo Musnl
Muno" were one and Lhe sameŦ
lssueť WCn ÞeLlLloner has Lhe rlghL on Lhe sLockholder of Lhe decedenLŦ
Peldť ÞeLlLloner falled Lo esLabllsh Lhe rlghL Lo lnspecL respondenL corporaLlon's books and recelve
dlvldends on Lhe sLocks owned by Carlos LŦ ÞunoŦ ÞeLlLloner anchors hls clalm on hls belng an helr
of Lhe deceased sLockholderŦ Poweverţ we agree wlLh Lhe appellaLe courL LhaL peLlLloner was noL
able Lo prove saLlsfacLorlly hls flllaLlon Lo Lhe deceased sLockholderŤ Lhusţ Lhe former cannoL clalm
Lo be an helr of Lhe laLLerŦ A cerLlflcaLe of llve blrLh purporLedly ldenLlfylng Lhe puLaLlve faLher ls
noL compeLenL evldence of paLernlLy when Lhere ls no showlng LhaL Lhe puLaLlve faLher had a hand
ln Lhe preparaLlon of Lhe cerLlflcaLeŦ 1he local clvll reglsLrar has no auLhorlLy Lo record Lhe paLernlLy
of an llleglLlmaLe chlld on Lhe lnformaLlon of a Lhlrd personŦż10Ž As correcLly observed by Lhe CAţ
only peLlLloner's moLher supplled Lhe daLa ln Lhe blrLh cerLlflcaLe and slgned Lhe sameŦ 1here was
no evldence LhaL Carlos LŦ Þuno acknowledged peLlLloner as hls sonŦ
upon Lhe deaLh of a shareholderţ Lhe helrs do noL auLomaLlcally become sLockholders of Lhe
corporaLlon and acqulre Lhe rlghLs and prlvlleges of Lhe deceased as shareholder of Lhe
corporaLlonŦ 1he sLocks musL be dlsLrlbuLed flrsL Lo Lhe helrs ln esLaLe proceedlngsţ and Lhe Lransfer
of Lhe sLocks musL be recorded ln Lhe books of Lhe corporaLlonŦ SecLlon 63 of Lhe CorporaLlon
Code provldes LhaL no Lransfer shall be valldţ excepL as beLween Lhe parLlesţ unLll Lhe Lransfer ls
recorded ln Lhe books of Lhe corporaLlonŦż16Ž uurlng such lnLerlm perlodţ Lhe helrs sLand as Lhe
equlLable owners of Lhe sLocksţ Lhe execuLor or admlnlsLraLor duly appolnLed by Lhe courL belng
vesLed wlLh Lhe legal LlLle Lo Lhe sLockŦż17Ž unLll a seLLlemenL and dlvlslon of Lhe esLaLe ls effecLedţ
Lhe sLocks of Lhe decedenL are held by Lhe admlnlsLraLor or execuLorŦż18Ž ConsequenLlyţ durlng
such Llmeţ lL ls Lhe admlnlsLraLor or execuLor who ls enLlLled Lo exerclse Lhe rlghLs of Lhe deceased
as sLockholderŦ

1husţ even lf peLlLloner presenLs sufflclenL evldence ln Lhls case Lo esLabllsh LhaL he ls Lhe son of
Carlos LŦ Þunoţ he would sLlll noL be allowed Lo lnspecL respondenL's books and be enLlLled Lo
recelve dlvldends from respondenLţ absenL any showlng ln lLs Lransfer book LhaL some of Lhe shares
owned by Carlos LŦ Þuno were Lransferred Lo hlmŦ 1hls would only be posslble lf peLlLloner has been
recognlzed as an helr and has parLlclpaLed ln Lhe seLLlemenL of Lhe esLaLe of Lhe deceasedŦ


DkC no|d|ngs CorpŦ vsŦ CA
Gk# 118248ţ Apr||Ŧ Sţ 2000
329 SCkA 666

lacLsť 1he sub[ecL of Lhe conLroversy ls a 14ţ021 square meLer parcel of land locaLed ln MallnLaţ
valenzuelaţ MeLro Manlla whlch was orlglnally owned by prlvaLe respondenL vlcLor uŦ 8arLolomeƌs
deceased moLherţ Lncarnaclon 8arLolomeŦ 1hls loL was ln fronL of one of Lhe LexLlle planLs of
peLlLloner andţ as suchţ was seen by Lhe laLLer as a poLenLlal warehouse slLeŦ ÞeLlLloner enLered

lnLo a ConLracL of Lease wlLh CpLlon Lo 8uy wlLh Lncarnaclon 8arLolomeţ whereby peLlLloner was
glven Lhe opLlon Lo lease or lease wlLh purchase Lhe sub[ecL landţ whlch opLlon musL be exerclsed
wlLhln a perlod of Lwo years counLed from Lhe slgnlng of Lhe ConLracLŦ ln Lurnţ peLlLloner underLook
Lo pay Þ3ţ000Ŧ00 a monLh as conslderaLlon for Lhe reservaLlon of lLs opLlonŦ WlLhln Lhe LwoŴyear
perlodţ peLlLloner shall serve formal wrlLLen noLlce upon Lhe lessor Lncarnaclon 8arLolome of lLs
deslre Lo exerclse lLs opLlonŦ ÞeLlLloner regularly pald Lhe monLhly Þ3ţ000Ŧ00 provlded for by Lhe
ConLracL Lo Lncarnaclon unLll her deaLh ln !anuary 1990Ŧ 1hereafLerţ peLlLloner coursed lLs paymenL
Lo prlvaLe respondenL vlcLor 8arLolomeţ belng Lhe sole helr of LncarnaclonŦ vlcLorţ howeverţ
refused Lo accepL Lhese paymenLsŦ
ÞeLlLloner flled a complalnL for speclflc performance and damages agalnsL vlcLor and Lhe 8eglsLer
of ueedsţ3 dockeLed as Clvll Case noŦ 3337ŴvŴ90 whlch was raffled off Lo 8ranch 171 of Lhe
8eglonal 1rlal CourL of valenzuelaŦ ÞeLlLloner prayed for Lhe surrender and dellvery of possesslon of
Lhe sub[ecL land ln accordance wlLh Lhe ConLracL LermsŤ Lhe surrender of LlLle for reglsLraLlon and
annoLaLlon Lhereon of Lhe ConLracLŤ and Lhe paymenL of Þ300ţ000Ŧ00 as acLual damagesţ
Þ300ţ000Ŧ00 as moral damagesţ Þ300ţ000Ŧ00 as exemplary damages and Þ300ţ000Ŧ00 as aLLorneyƌs
feesŦ

lssueť WCn ukC holdlngs can compel vlcLor Lo accepL Lhe conLracL enLered lnLo beLween hls
moLher and ukC PoldlngsŦ
Peldť 1he general ruleţ ls LhaL helrs are bound by conLracLs enLered lnLo by Lhelr predecessorsŴlnŴ
lnLeresL excepL when Lhe rlghLs and obllgaLlons arlslng Lherefrom are noL Lransmlsslble by (1) Lhelr
naLureţ (2) sLlpulaLlon or (3) provlslon of lawŦ
ln Lhe case aL barţ Lhere ls nelLher conLracLual sLlpulaLlon nor legal provlslon maklng Lhe rlghLs and
obllgaLlons under Lhe conLracL lnLransmlsslbleŦ More lmporLanLlyţ Lhe naLure of Lhe rlghLs and
obllgaLlons Lhereln areţ by Lhelr naLureţ LransmlsslbleŦ
1he naLure of lnLransmlsslble rlghLs as explalned by ArLuro 1olenLlnoţ an emlnenL clvlllsLţ ls as
followsť
Among conLracLs whlch are lnLransmlsslble are Lhose whlch are purely personalţ elLher by provlslon
of lawţ such as ln cases of parLnershlps and agencyţ or by Lhe very naLure of Lhe obllgaLlons arlslng
Lherefromţ such as Lhose requlrlng speclal personal quallflcaLlons of Lhe obllgorŦ lL may also be
sLaLed LhaL conLracLs for Lhe paymenL of money debLs are noL LransmlLLed Lo Lhe helrs of a parLyţ
buL consLlLuLe a charge agalnsL hls esLaLeŦ 1husţ where Lhe cllenL ln a conLracL for professlonal
servlces of a lawyer dledţ leavlng mlnor helrsţ and Lhe lawyerţ lnsLead of presenLlng hls clalm for
professlonal servlces under Lhe conLracL Lo Lhe probaLe courLţ subsLlLuLed Lhe mlnors as parLles for
hls cllenLţ lL was held LhaL Lhe conLracL could noL be enforced agalnsL Lhe mlnorsŤ Lhe lawyer was
llmlLed Lo a recovery on Lhe basls of quanLum merulLŦ9
ln Amerlcan [urlsprudenceţ ƍ(W)here acLs sLlpulaLed ln a conLracL requlre Lhe exerclse of speclal
knowledgeţ genlusţ sklllţ LasLeţ ablllLyţ experlenceţ [udgmenLţ dlscreLlonţ lnLegrlLyţ or oLher personal
quallflcaLlon of one or boLh parLlesţ Lhe agreemenL ls of a personal naLureţ and LermlnaLes on Lhe
deaLh of Lhe parLy who ls requlred Lo render such servlceŦƍ 10
lL has also been held LhaL a good measure for deLermlnlng wheLher a conLracL LermlnaLes upon Lhe
deaLh of one of Lhe parLles ls wheLher lL ls of such a characLer LhaL lL may be performed by Lhe
promlssorƌs personal represenLaLlveŦ ConLracLs Lo perform personal acLs whlch cannoL be as well
performed by oLhers are dlscharged by Lhe deaLh of Lhe promlssorŦ Converselyţ where Lhe servlce
or acL ls of such a characLer LhaL lL may as well be performed by anoLherţ or where Lhe conLracLţ by
lLs Lermsţ shows LhaL performance by oLhers was conLemplaLedţ deaLh does noL LermlnaLe Lhe
conLracL or excuse nonperformanceŦ 11
ln Lhe case aL barţ Lhere ls no personal acL requlred from Lhe laLe Lncarnaclon 8arLolomeŦ 8aLherţ
Lhe obllgaLlon of Lncarnaclon ln Lhe conLracL Lo dellver possesslon of Lhe sub[ecL properLy Lo
peLlLloner upon Lhe exerclse by Lhe laLLer of lLs opLlon Lo lease Lhe same may very well be
performed by her helr vlcLorŦ
As early as 1903ţ lL was held LhaL ƍ(P)e who conLracLs does so for hlmself and hls helrsŦƍ 12 ln 1932ţ
lL was ruled LhaL lf Lhe predecessor was duLyŴbound Lo reconvey land Lo anoLherţ and aL hls deaLh
Lhe reconveyance had noL been madeţ Lhe helrs can be compelled Lo execuLe Lhe proper deed for
reconveyanceŦ 1hls was grounded upon Lhe prlnclple LhaL helrs cannoL escape Lhe legal
consequence of a LransacLlon enLered lnLo by Lhelr predecessorŴlnŴlnLeresL because Lhey have
lnherlLed Lhe properLy sub[ecL Lo Lhe llablllLy affecLlng Lhelr common ancesLorŦ 13
lL ls fuLlle for vlcLor Lo lnslsL LhaL he ls noL a parLy Lo Lhe conLracL because of Lhe clear provlslon of
ArLlcle 1311 of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ lndeedţ belng an helr of Lncarnaclonţ Lhere ls prlvlLy of lnLeresL
beLween hlm and hls deceased moLherŦ Pe only succeeds Lo whaL rlghLs hls moLher had and whaL ls
valld and blndlng agalnsL her ls also valld and blndlng as agalnsL hlmŦ 14 1hls ls clear from
Þaranaque klngs LnLerprlses vsŦ CourL of Appealsţ 13 where Lhls CourL re[ecLed a slmllar defense Ÿ
WlLh respecL Lo Lhe conLenLlon of respondenL 8aymundo LhaL he ls noL prlvy Lo Lhe lease conLracLţ
noL belng Lhe lessor nor Lhe lessee referred Lo Lherelnţ he could Lhus noL have vlolaLed lLs
provlslonsţ buL he ls neverLheless a proper parLyŦ Clearlyţ he sLepped lnLo Lhe shoes of Lhe ownerŴ
lessor of Lhe land asţ by vlrLue of hls purchaseţ he assumed all Lhe obllgaLlons of Lhe lessor under
Lhe lease conLracLŦ Moreoverţ he recelved beneflLs ln Lhe form of renLal paymenLsŦ lurLhermoreţ
Lhe complalnLţ as well as Lhe peLlLlonţ prayed for Lhe annulmenL of Lhe sale of Lhe properLles Lo
hlmŦ 8oLh pleadlngs also alleged colluslon beLween hlm and respondenL SanLos whlch defeaLed Lhe
exerclse by peLlLloner of lLs rlghL of flrsL refusalŦ
ln order Lhen Lo accord compleLe rellef Lo peLlLlonerţ respondenL 8aymundo was a necessaryţ lf noL
lndlspensableţ parLy Lo Lhe caseŦ A favorable [udgmenL for Lhe peLlLloner wlll necessarlly affecL Lhe
rlghLs of respondenL 8aymundo as Lhe buyer of Lhe properLy over whlch peLlLloner would llke Lo
asserL lLs rlghL of flrsL opLlon Lo buyŦ
ln Lhe case aL barţ Lhe sub[ecL maLLer of Lhe conLracL ls llkewlse a leaseţ whlch ls a properLy rlghLŦ
1he deaLh of a parLy does noL excuse nonperformance of a conLracL whlch lnvolves a properLy
rlghLţ and Lhe rlghLs and obllgaLlons Lhereunder pass Lo Lhe personal represenLaLlves of Lhe
deceasedŦ Slmllarlyţ nonperformance ls noL excused by Lhe deaLh of Lhe parLy when Lhe oLher parLy
has a properLy lnLeresL ln Lhe sub[ecL maLLer of Lhe conLracLŦ 16
under boLh ArLlcle 1311 of Lhe Clvll Code and [urlsprudenceţ Lhereforeţ vlcLor ls bound by Lhe
sub[ecL ConLracL of Lease wlLh CpLlon Lo 8uyŦ

keyes vŦ Lnr|quez
Gk# 1629S6ţ Apr|| 10ţ 2008
SS1 SCkA 86

lAC1Sť
AnacleLo Cabrera and ulonlsla 8eyes coŴowned a parcel of land evldenced by (1C1) noŦ 81Ŵ3331 (1Ŵ
8070)Ŧ AnacleLo was survlved by hls Lwo daughLersţ LLLa (ÞeLerŴrespondenLs wlfe) and Craclanaţ
who dled slngle wlLhouL any lssue and who durlng her llfeLlme had sold her lnLeresL over Lhe land
Lo LLLaŦ ulonlsla 8eyes on Lhe oLher handţ was survlved by hereln peLlLlonersŦ
Þrlor Lo Lhe presenL conLroversyţ peLlLloners execuLed an LxLra[udlclal SeLLlemenL wlLh Sale of Lhe
LsLaLe of ulonlsla 8eyes (Lhe LxLra !udlclal SeLLlemenL) lnvolvlng a porLlon of Lhe sub[ecL parcel of
landŦ Alsoţ LogeLher wlLh helrs of AnacleLoţ peLlLloners execuLed a SegregaLlon of 8eal LsLaLe and

ConflrmaLlon of Sale (Lhe SegregaLlon and ConflrmaLlon) over Lhe same properLyŦ 8y vlrLue of Lhe
aforesLaLed documenLsţ 1C1 noŦ 81Ŵ33331 (1Ŵ8070) was cancelled and new 1C1s were lssued ln Lhe
names of AnacleLo Cabreraţ peLlLloner LuLlqulo ulcoţ !rŦţ peLlLloner lausLlno 8eyesţ peLlLloner
Lsperldlon 8eyesţ peLlLloner !ulleLa CŦ 8lveraţ lellpe ulcoţ and Archlmedes CŦ vlllaluzŦ
Meanwhlleţ LLLa dled leavlng ÞeLer and Lhelr daughLer ueborah as her helrsŦ ÞeLer and ueborahţ
bellevlng LhaL Lhey own Z of Lhe coŴowned land of AnacleLoţ sold a porLlon of sald land Lo Spouses
lernandezŦ When Spouses lernandez was abouL Lo reglsLer Lhelr share ln Lhe sub[ecL landţ Lhey
dlscovered LhaL cerLaln documenLs prevenL Lhem from dolng soť (1) AffldavlL by AnacleLo Cabrera
daLed March 16ţ 1937 sLaLlng LhaL hls share ln LoL noŦ 1831ţ Lhe sub[ecL properLyţ ls approxlmaLely
369 sqŦ mŦŤ (2) AffldavlL by ulonlsla 8eyes daLed !uly 13ţ 1929 sLaLlng LhaL AnacleLo only owned x of
LoL noŦ 1831ţ whlle 302Ŧ33 sqŦ mŦ belongs Lo ulonlsla and Lhe resL of Lhe properLy ls coŴowned by
nlcolasa 8acalsoţ !uan 8eyesţ llorenLlno 8eyes and Maxlmlano ulcoŤ (3) LxLraŴ!udlclal SeLLlemenL
wlLh Sale of Lhe LsLaLe of ulonlsla 8eyes daLed Aprll 17ţ 1996Ť (4) cerLlflcaLes of LlLle ln Lhe name of
Lhe hereln peLlLlonersŤ and (3) ueed of SegregaLlon of 8eal LsLaLe and ConflrmaLlon of Sale daLed
March 21ţ 1997 execuLed by Lhe alleged helrs of ulonlsla 8eyes and AnacleLo CabreraŦ Alleglng LhaL
Lhe foregolng documenLs are fraudulenL and flcLlLlousţ Lhe respondenLs flled a complalnL before
Lhe 81C for annulmenL or nulllflcaLlon of Lhe aforemenLloned documenLs and for damagesŦ 1hey
llkewlse prayed for Lhe ƍreparLlLlon and resubdlvlslonƍ of Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ
1he 81C denled dlsmlssed Lhelr complalnL alleglng LhaL slnce Lhey are noL Lhe helrs of AnacleLoţ
Lhey cannoL demand for Lhe parLlLlon of Lhe properLy wlLhouL flrsL belng declared as helrs of
AnacleLo ln a speclal proceedlngsŦ
Cn appealţ Lhe CA reversed Lhe 81C's declslonŦ Pence Lhls peLlLlonŦ
lSSuLť
WheLher or noL Lhe respondenLs have Lo lnsLlLuLe a speclal proceedlng Lo deLermlne
Lhelr sLaLus as helrs of AnacleLo Cabrera before Lhey can flle an ordlnary clvll acLlon Lo nulllfy Lhe
affldavlLs of AnacleLo Cabrera and ulonlsla 8eyesţ Lhe LxLraŴ!udlclal SeLLlemenL wlLh Lhe Sale of
LsLaLe of ulonlsla 8eyesţ and Lhe ueed of SegregaLlon of 8eal LsLaLe and ConflrmaLlon of Sale
execuLed by Lhe helrs of ulonlsla 8eyes and Lhe helrs of AnacleLo Cabreraţ as well as Lo cancel Lhe
new Lransfer cerLlflcaLes of LlLle lssued by vlrLue of Lhe aboveŴquesLloned documenLsŦ
PLLuť
?LSŦ
ln cases whereln alleged helrs of a decedenL ln whose name a properLy was reglsLered sue Lo
recover Lhe sald properLy Lhrough Lhe lnsLlLuLlon of an ordlnary clvll acLlonţ such as a complalnL for
reconveyance and parLlLlonţ18 or nulllflcaLlon of Lransfer cerLlflcaLe of LlLles and oLher deeds or
documenLs relaLed LhereLoţ19 Lhls CourL has conslsLenLly ruled LhaL a declaraLlon of helrshlp ls
lmproper ln an ordlnary clvll acLlon slnce Lhe maLLer ls ƍwlLhln Lhe excluslve compeLence of Lhe
courL ln a speclal proceedlngŦƍ 20 ln Lhe recenL case of ÞorLugal vŦ ÞorLugalŴ8elLranţ21 Lhe CourL
had Lhe occaslon Lo clarlfy lLs rullng on Lhe lssue aL handţ Lo wlLť

1he common docLrlne ln LlLamţ Sollvlo and Cullas ln whlch Lhe adverse parLles are puLaLlve helrs Lo
Lhe esLaLe of a decedenL or parLles Lo Lhe speclal proceedlngs for lLs seLLlemenL ls LhaL lf Lhe speclal
proceedlngs are pendlngţ or lf Lhere are no speclal proceedlngs flled buL Lhere lsţ under Lhe
clrcumsLances of Lhe caseţ a need Lo flle oneţ Lhen Lhe deLermlnaLlon ofţ among oLher lssuesţ
helrshlp should be ralsed and seLLled ln sald speclal proceedlngsŦ Where speclal proceedlngs had
been lnsLlLuLed buL had been flnally closed and LermlnaLedţ howeverţ or lf a puLaLlve helr has losL
Lhe rlghL Lo have hlmself declared ln Lhe speclal proceedlngs as coŴhelr and he can no longer ask for
lLs reŴopenlngţ Lhen an ordlnary clvll acLlon can be flled for hls declaraLlon as helr ln order Lo brlng
abouL Lhe annulmenL of Lhe parLlLlon or dlsLrlbuLlon or ad[udlcaLlon of a properLy or properLles
belonglng Lo Lhe esLaLe of Lhe deceasedŦ22

ln Lhe lnsLanL caseţ whlle Lhe complalnL was denomlnaLed as an acLlon for Lhe ƍueclaraLlon of nonŴ
LxlsLencyżslcŽţ nulllLy of ueedsţ and CancellaLlon of CerLlflcaLes of 1lLleţ eLcŦţƍ a revlew of Lhe
allegaLlons Lhereln reveals LhaL Lhe rlghL belng asserLed by Lhe respondenLs are Lhelr rlghL as helrs
of AnacleLo Cabrera who Lhey clalm coŴowned oneŴhalf of Lhe sub[ecL properLy and noL merely oneŴ
fourLh as sLaLed ln Lhe documenLs Lhe respondenLs soughL Lo annulŦ
ln Lhe same mannerţ Lhe respondenLs herelnţ excepL for Lhelr allegaLlonsţ have yeL Lo subsLanLlaLe
Lhelr clalm as Lhe legal helrs of AnacleLo Cabrera who areţ Lhusţ enLlLled Lo Lhe sub[ecL properLyŦ
nelLher ls Lhere anyLhlng ln Lhe records of Lhls case whlch would show LhaL a speclal proceedlng Lo
have Lhemselves declared as helrs of AnacleLo Cabrera had been lnsLlLuLedŦ As suchţ Lhe Lrlal courL
correcLly dlsmlssed Lhe case for Lhere ls a lack of cause of acLlon when a case ls lnsLlLuLed by parLles
who are noL real parLles ln lnLeresLŦ Whlle a declaraLlon of helrshlp was noL prayed for ln Lhe
complalnLţ lL ls clear from Lhe allegaLlons Lhereln LhaL Lhe rlghL Lhe respondenLs soughL Lo proLecL
or enforce ls LhaL of an helr of one of Lhe reglsLered coŴowners of Lhe properLy prlor Lo Lhe lssuance
of Lhe new Lransfer cerLlflcaLes of LlLle LhaL Lhey seek Lo cancelŦ 1husţ Lhere ls a need Lo esLabllsh
Lhelr sLaLus as such helrs ln Lhe proper forumŦ


@estamentary Success|on żArtsŦ 783Ŵ9S9ŽŤ
W|||s In Genera|Ť


V|tug vsŦ Court of Appea|sţ
Gk# 82027ţ MarŦ 29ţ 1990
183 SCkA 7SS

lAC1Sť
uolores Luchangco vlLugţ dled ln ln new ?orkţ uŦ SŦAŦţ and was survlved by wldowerţ peLlLloner
8omarlco CŦ vlLugŦ She lefL a wlll and deslgnaLed 8owena lausLlnoŴCorona as execuLrlx as well as
nenlLa AlonLe as coŴspeclal admlnlsLraLorŦ uurlng Lhe pendency of Lhe probaLe of her Lwo wlllsţ
8omarlco CŦ vlLug flled a moLlon asklng for auLhorlLy from Lhe probaLe courL Lo sell cerLaln shares
of sLock and real properLles belonglng Lo Lhe esLaLe Lo cover allegedly hls advances Lo Lhe esLaLe ln
Lhe sum of Þ667ţ731Ŧ66ţ plus lnLeresLsţ whlch he clalmed were personal fundsŦ As found by Lhe
CourL of Appealsţ Lhe alleged advances conslsLed of Þ38ţ147Ŧ40 spenL for Lhe paymenL of esLaLe
Laxţ Þ318ţ834Ŧ27 as deflclency esLaLe Laxţ and Þ90ţ749Ŧ99 as ƍlncremenL LhereLoŦƍ Accordlng Lo MrŦ
vlLugţ he wlLhdrew Lhe sums of Þ318ţ834Ŧ27 and Þ90ţ749Ŧ99 from savlngs accounL noŦ 33342Ŵ038
of Lhe 8ank of Amerlcaţ MakaLlţ MeLro ManllaŦ
8owena opposed Lhe moLlon Lo sell on Lhe ground LhaL Lhe same funds wlLhdrawn from savlngs
accounL noŦ 33342Ŵ038 were con[ugal parLnershlp properLles and parL of Lhe esLaLeţ and henceţ
Lhere was allegedly no ground for relmbursemenLŦ 8omarlco [usLlfled hls acL by lnslsLlng LhaL Lhe
sald funds are hls excluslve properLy havlng acqulred Lhe same Lhrough a survlvorshlp agreemenL
execuLed wlLh hls laLe wlfe and Lhe bank on !une 19ţ 1970Ŧ 1he agreemenL provldesť
We hereby agree wlLh each oLher and wlLh Lhe 8Ank Cl AML8lCAn nA1lCnAL 18uS1 Anu
SAvlnCS ASSCClA1lCn (herelnafLer referred Lo as Lhe 8Ank)ţ LhaL all money now or hereafLer
deposlLed by us or any or elLher of us wlLh Lhe 8Ank ln our [olnL savlngs currenL accounL shall be

Lhe properLy of all or boLh of us and shall be payable Lo and collecLlble or wlLhdrawable by elLher or
any of us durlng our llfeLlmeţ and afLer Lhe deaLh of elLher or any of us shall belong Lo and be Lhe
sole properLy of Lhe survlvor or survlvorsţ and shall be payable Lo and collecLlble or wlLhdrawable
by such survlvor or survlvorsŦ
We furLher agree wlLh each oLher and Lhe 8Ank LhaL Lhe recelpL or check of elLherţ any or all of us
durlng our llfeLlmeţ or Lhe recelpL or check of Lhe survlvor or survlvorsţ for any paymenL or
wlLhdrawal made for our aboveŴmenLloned accounL shall be valld and sufflclenL release and
dlscharge of Lhe 8Ank for such paymenL or wlLhdrawalŦ
1he Lrlal courL upheld Lhe valldlLy of Lhe agreemenL buL Lhe CourL of Appealsţ ln Lhe peLlLlon for
cerLlorarl flled by Lhe hereln prlvaLe respondenLţ held LhaL Lhe aboveŴquoLed survlvorshlp
agreemenL consLlLuLes a conveyance morLls causa whlch ƍdld noL comply wlLh Lhe formallLles of a
valld wlll as prescrlbed by ArLlcle 803 of Lhe Clvll Codeţ" and secondlyţ assumlng LhaL lL ls a mere
donaLlon lnLer vlvosţ lL ls a prohlblLed donaLlon under Lhe provlslons of ArLlcle 133 of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ

lSSuLť WCn Lhe survlvorshlp agreemenL consLlLuLes a conveyance morLls causa whlch needs Lo
comply wlLh Lhe formallLles of a valld wlllŦ
PLLuť nCŦ
under ArLlcle 2010 of Lhe Codeť

A81Ŧ 2010Ŧ 8y an aleaLory conLracLţ one of Lhe parLles or boLh reclprocally blnd Lhemselves Lo glve
or Lo do someLhlng ln conslderaLlon of whaL Lhe oLher shall glve or do upon Lhe happenlng of an
evenL whlch ls uncerLalnţ or whlch ls Lo occur aL an lndeLermlnaLe LlmeŦ

under Lhe aforequoLed provlslonţ Lhe fulflllmenL of an aleaLory conLracL depends on elLher Lhe
happenlng of an evenL whlch ls (1) ƍuncerLalnţƍ (2) ƍwhlch ls Lo occur aL an lndeLermlnaLe LlmeŦƍ A
survlvorshlp agreemenLţ Lhe sale of a sweepsLake LlckeLţ a LransacLlon sLlpulaLlng on Lhe value of
currencyţ and lnsurance have been held Lo fall under Lhe flrsL caLegoryţ whlle a conLracL for llfe
annulLy or penslon under ArLlcle 2021ţ eL sequenLlaţ has been caLegorlzed under Lhe secondŦ 23 ln
elLher caseţ Lhe elemenL of rlsk ls presenLŦ ln Lhe case aL barţ Lhe rlsk was Lhe deaLh of one parLy
and survlvorshlp of Lhe oLherŦ
Poweverţ as we have warnedť
xxx xxx xxx
8uL alLhough Lhe survlvorshlp agreemenL ls per se noL conLrary Lo law lLs operaLlon or effecL may
be vlolaLlve of Lhe lawŦ lor lnsLanceţ lf lL be shown ln a glven case LhaL such agreemenL ls a mere
cloak Lo hlde an lnofflclous donaLlonţ Lo Lransfer properLy ln fraud of credlLorsţ or Lo defeaL Lhe
leglLlme of a forced helrţ lL may be assalled and annulled upon such groundsŦ no such vlce has been
lmpuLed and esLabllshed agalnsL Lhe agreemenL lnvolved ln Lhls caseŦ 26
xxx xxx xxx
1here ls no demonsLraLlon here LhaL Lhe survlvorshlp agreemenL had been execuLed for such
unlawful purposesţ orţ as held by Lhe respondenL courLţ ln order Lo frusLraLe our laws on wlllsţ
donaLlonsţ and con[ugal parLnershlpŦ
1he concluslon ls accordlngly unavoldable LhaL MrsŦ vlLug havlng predeceased her husbandţ Lhe
laLLer has acqulred upon her deaLh a vesLed rlghL over Lhe amounLs under savlngs accounL noŦ
33342Ŵ038 of Lhe 8ank of AmerlcaŦ lnsofar as Lhe respondenL courL ordered Lhelr lncluslon ln Lhe
lnvenLory of asseLs lefL by MrsŦ vlLugţ we hold LhaL Lhe courL was ln errorŦ 8elng Lhe separaLe
properLy of peLlLlonerţ lL forms no more parL of Lhe esLaLe of Lhe deceasedŦ

S|cad vsŦ CAţ
Gk# 12S888ţ AugŦ 13ţ 1998
294 SCkA 183

lAC1Sť
A documenL denomlnaLed as ƍuLLu Cl uCnA1lCn ln1L8 vlvCSţƍ was execuLed by MonLlnola
namlng as donees her grandchlldrenţ namelyť CaLallno valderramaţ !udy CrlsLlna valderrama and
!esus AnLonlo valderramať and LreaLed of a parcel of land locaLed aL Caplzţ covered by 1ransfer
CerLlflcaLe of 1lLle noŦ 1Ŵ16103 ln Lhe name of MonLlnolaŦ 1he deed also conLalned Lhe slgnaLures
of Lhe donees ln acknowledgmenL of Lhelr accepLance of Lhe donaLlonŦ Sald deed was reglsLeredŦ
MonLlnola however reLalned Lhe ownerƌs dupllcaLe copy of Lhe new LlLle (noŦ 1Ŵ16622)ţ as well as
Lhe properLy lLselfţ unLll she Lransferred Lhe same Len (10) years laLerţ on !uly 10ţ 1990ţ Lo Lhe
spousesţ LrnesLo and Lvelyn SlcadŦ

1henţ on AugusL 24ţ 1990ţ she flled a peLlLlon wlLh Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal CourL ln 8oxas ClLy for Lhe
cancellaLlon of sald 1C1 noŦ 1Ŵ16622 and Lhe relnsLaLemenL of 1C1 noŦ 1Ŵ 16103 (ln her name)ţ Lhe
case belng dockeLed as Speclal ÞroceedlngŦ Per peLlLlon was founded on Lhe Lheory LhaL Lhe
donaLlon Lo her Lhree (3) grandchlldren was one morLls causa whlch Lhus had Lo comply wlLh Lhe
formallLles of a wlllŤ and slnce lL had noLţ Lhe donaLlon was vold and could noL effecLlvely serve as
basls for Lhe cancellaLlon of 1C1 noŦ 1Ŵ16103 and Lhe lssuance ln lLs place of 1C1 noŦ 1Ŵ16622Ŧ

Per peLlLlon was opposed by her grandchlldren (donees) alleglng LhaL lL was an lnLer vlvos
donaLlonţ havlng fully complled wlLh Lhe requlremenLs Lherefor seL ouL ln ArLlcle 729 of Lhe Clvll
CodeŦ 1he case was subsequenLly changed lnLo an ordlnary clvll acLlonŦ 1he courL held LhaL Lhe
donaLlon was lndeed one lnLer vlvosţ and dlsmlsslng Aurora MonLlnolaƌs peLlLlon for lack of merlLŦ

ln Lhe meanLlmeţ MonLlnola dledŦ An appeal was made by hereln peLlLlonerŴspouses Slcad who
subsLlLuLed MonLlnola afLer her legal helrs had expressed Lhelr dlslnLeresL over Lhe caseŦ 1he CA
however afflrmed Lhe Lrlal courL's declslon hence Lhe presenL peLlLlonŦ

lSSuLť WCn Lhe deed of donaLlon ls ln Lhe characLer of lnLer vlvosŦ


PLLuť

nCţ lL ls ln Lhe characLer of a morLls causa dlsposlLlonŦ

1he evldence esLabllshes LhaL on uecember 11ţ 1979ţ when Lhe deed of donaLlon prepared by
MonLlnolaƌs lawyer (ALLyŦ 1renas) was read and explalned by Lhe laLLer Lo Lhe parLlesţ MonLlnola
expressed her wlsh LhaL Lhe donaLlon Lake effecL only afLer Len (10) years from her deaLhţ and LhaL
Lhe deed lnclude a prohlblLlon on Lhe sale of Lhe properLy for such perlodŦ Accordlnglyţ a new
provlso was lnserLed ln Lhe deed readlngť ƍhoweverţ Lhe donees shall noL sell or encumber Lhe
properLles hereln donaLed wlLhln 10 years afLer Lhe deaLh of Lhe donorŦƍ 1he acLuallLy of Lhe
subsequenL lnserLlon of Lhls new provlso ls apparenL on Lhe face of Lhe lnsLrumenLť Lhe
lnLercalaLlon ls easlly percelved and ldenLlfled Ÿ lL was clearly Lyped on a dlfferenL machlneţ and ls
crammed lnLo Lhe space beLween Lhe penulLlmaLe paragraph of Lhe deed and LhaL lmmedlaLely
precedlng lLŦ

A donaLlon whlch purporLs Lo be one lnLer vlvos buL wlLhholds from Lhe donee Lhe rlghL Lo dlspose
of Lhe donaLed properLy durlng Lhe donorƌs llfeLlme ls ln LruLh one morLls causaŦ ln a donaLlon
morLls causa ƍLhe rlghL of dlsposlLlon ls noL Lransferred Lo Lhe donee whlle Lhe donor ls sLlll allveŦƍ

ln Lhe lnsLanL caseţ noLhlng of any consequence was Lransferred by Lhe deed of donaLlon ln
quesLlon Lo MonLlnolaƌs grandchlldrenţ Lhe osLenslble doneesŦ 1hey dld noL geL possesslon of Lhe
properLy donaLedŦ 1hey dld noL acqulre Lhe rlghL Lo Lhe frulLs Lhereofţ or any oLher rlghL of
domlnlon over Lhe properLyŦ More lmporLanLlyţ Lhey dld noL acqulre Lhe rlghL Lo dlspose of Lhe
properLy Ÿ Lhls would accrue Lo Lhem only afLer Len (10) years from MonLlnolaƌs deaLhŦ lndeedţ
Lhey never even lald hands on Lhe cerLlflcaLe of LlLle Lo Lhe sameŦ 1hey were Lherefore slmply
ƍpaper ownersƍ of Lhe donaLed properLyŦ All Lhese clrcumsLancesţ lncludlngţ Lo repeaLţ Lhe expllclL
provlslons of Lhe deed of donaLlon Ÿ reservlng Lhe exerclse of rlghLs of ownershlp Lo Lhe donee
and prohlblLlng Lhe sale or encumbrance of Lhe properLy unLll Len (10) years afLer her deaLh Ÿ
lnelucLably lead Lo Lhe concluslon LhaL Lhe donaLlon ln quesLlon was a donaLlon morLls causaţ
conLemplaLlng a Lransfer of ownershlp Lo Lhe donees only afLer Lhe donorƌs demlseŦ

1he valderramasƌ argumenL LhaL Lhe donaLlon ls lnLer vlvos ln characLer and LhaL Lhe prohlblLlon
agalnsL Lhelr dlsposlLlon of Lhe donaLed properLy ls merely a condlLlon whlchţ lf vlolaLedţ would
glve cause for lLs revocaLlonţ begs Lhe quesLlonŦ lL assumes LhaL Lhey have Lhe rlghL Lo make a
dlsposlLlon of Lhe properLyţ whlch Lhey do noLŦ 1he argumenL also makes no senseţ because lf Lhey
had Lhe rlghL Lo dlspose of Lhe properLy and dld ln facL dlspose of lL Lo a Lhlrd personţ Lhe
revocaLlon of Lhe donaLlon Lhey speak of would be of no uLlllLy or beneflL Lo Lhe donorţ slnce such a
revocaLlon would noL necessarlly resulL ln Lhe resLoraLlon of Lhe donorƌs ownershlp and en[oymenL
of Lhe properLyŦ

lL ls also error Lo suppose LhaL Lhe donaLlon under revlew should be deemed one lnLer vlvos slmply
because founded on conslderaLlons of love and affecLlonŦ ln Ale[andro vŦ Ceraldezţ supra Lhls CourL
also observed LhaL ƍLhe facL LhaL Lhe donaLlon ls glven ln conslderaLlon of love and affecLlon ** ls
noL a characLerlsLlc of donaLlons lnLer vlvos (solely) because Lransfers morLls causa may also be
made for Lhe same reasonŦƍ Slmllarlyţ ln 8onsaLo vŦ CourL of Appealsţ supraţ Lhls CourL oplned LhaL
Lhe facL ƍLhaL Lhe conveyance was due Lo Lhe affecLlon of Lhe donor for Lhe donees and Lhe servlces
rendered by Lhe laLLerţ ls of no parLlcular slgnlflcance ln deLermlnlng wheLher Lhe deedsţ LxhsŦ ƍ1ƍ
and ƍ2ţƍ consLlLuLe Lransfers lnLer vlvos or noLţ because a legacy may have ldenLlcal moLlvaLlonŦƍ

llnallyţ lL ls germane Lo adverL Lo Lhe legal prlnclple ln ArLlcle 1378 of Lhe Clvll Code Lo Lhe effecL
LhaL ln case of doubL relaLlve Lo a graLulLous conLracLţ Lhe consLrucLlon musL be LhaL enLalllng ƍLhe
leasL Lransmlsslon of rlghLs and
lnLeresLsƍŦ

1he donaLlon ln quesLlonţ Lhough denomlnaLed lnLer vlvosţ ls ln LruLh one morLls causaŤ lL ls vold
because Lhe essenLlal requlslLes for lLs valldlLy have noL been complled wlLhŦ


A|uad vŦ A|uad
Gk# 176943ţ CctŦ 17ţ 2008
S69 SCkA 697

lAC1Sť
Spouses MaLllde and Crlspln Aluad were chlldless buL durlng Lhelr llfeLlmeţ ralsed peLlLloners'
moLher Marla (Aluad) and respondenL Zenaldo (Aluad)Ŧ When Crlspln dledţ MaLllde lnherlLed from
hlm 6 parcels of landţ all of whlchţ she donaLed Lo MarlaŦ 1he ueed provldedť
1haLţ for and ln conslderaLlon of Lhe love and affecLlon of Lhe uCnC8 żMaLlldeŽ for Lhe uCnLL
żMarlaŽţ Lhe laLLer belng adopLed and havżlngŽ been broughL up by Lhe former Lhe uCnC8ţ by Lhese
presenLsţ Lransfer and conveyţ 8? WA? Cl uCnA1lCnţ unLo Lhe uCnLL Lhe properLy aboveŴ
descrlbedţ Lo become effecLlve upon Lhe deaLh of Lhe uCnC8ţ buL ln Lhe evenL LhaL Lhe uCnLL
should dle before Lhe uCnC8ţ Lhe presenL donaLlon shall be deemed resclnded and żofŽ no furLher
force and effecLŤ Þrovldedţ howeverţ LhaL anyLlme durlng Lhe llfeLlme of Lhe uCnC8 or anyone of
Lhem who should survlveţ Lhey could useżţŽ encumber or even dlspose of any or even all of Lhe
parcels of land hereln donaLedŦ
8ecause of Lhe agreemenL ln Lhe deed of donaLlon MaLllde was sLlll able Lo Lransfer ln her name Lhe
LlLles over 2 parcels of land (LoL 674 and LoL 676) ouL of Lhe 6 donaLed Lo MarlaŦ 1 (LoL 676) of
Lhose Lwo was laLer on sold by her Lo respondenLŦ
A year afLer LhaLţ MaLllde execuLed a lasL wlll and LesLamenL devlslng Lhe remalnlng four parcels of
land Lo Marla whlle her remalnlng properLlesţ lncludlng Lhe land Lhe LlLle of whlch was ln her name
(LoL 674)ţ Lo respondenLŦ
MaLllde dledŦ Marla followed her durlng Lhe same yearŦ Marla's helrsţ hereln peLlLlonersţ LhereafLer
lnsLlLuLed a case before Lhe 81C for Lhe recovery of Lhe Lwo loLs ln respondenL's possesslonŦ lor hls
defenseţ respondenL alleged LhaL Lhe flrsL loL was obLalned by hlm Lhrough sale whlle Lhe second
loL Lhrough lnherlLance based on Lhe wlll execuLed by MaLlldeŦ
1he Lrlal courL ruled ln favor of Lhe peLlLloners explalnlng LhaL lL was lmposslble for respondenL Lo
have a valld clalm over Lhe Lwo loLs as Lhose were prevlously donaLed ln favor of Lhe moLher of
peLlLlonersŦ
1he CA on appeal reversed Lhe Lrlal courL's declslon rullng LhaL Lhe donaLlon made Lo Lhe moLher of
peLlLloners was noL lnLer vlvos buL a morLls causa hence lnvalld for falllng Lo comply wlLh Lhe
requlslLes for lLs valldlLy as provlded under ArLŦ 803 of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ
Pence Lhe presenL appealŦ

lSSuLť WCn Lhe donaLlon made Lo peLlLloners was lnLer vlvosŦ

PLLuť
nCŦ

As dld Lhe appellaLe courLţ Lhe CourL flnds Lhe donaLlon Lo peLlLloners' moLher one of morLls causaţ
lL havlng Lhe followlng characLerlsLlcsť

(1) lL conveys no LlLle or ownershlp Lo Lhe Lransferee before Lhe deaLh of Lhe LransferorŤ or whaL
amounLs Lo Lhe same Lhlngţ LhaL Lhe Lransferor should reLaln Lhe ownershlp (full or naked) and
conLrol of Lhe properLy whlle allveŤ

(2) 1haL before Lhe deaLh of Lhe Lransferorţ Lhe Lransfer should be revocable by Lhe Lransferor aL
wlllţ ad nuLumŤ buL revocablllLy may be provlded for lndlrecLly by means of a reserved power ln Lhe
donor Lo dlspose of Lhe properLles conveyedŤ and

(3) 1haL Lhe Lransfer should be vold lf Lhe Lransferor should survlve Lhe LransfereeŦ
1he phrase ln Lhe earllerŴquoLed ueed of uonaLlon ƍLo become effecLlve upon Lhe deaLh of Lhe
uCnC8ƍ admlLs of no oLher lnLerpreLaLlon Lhan Lo mean LhaL MaLllde dld noL lnLend Lo Lransfer Lhe
ownershlp of Lhe slx loLs Lo peLlLloners' moLher durlng her (MaLllde's) llfeLlmeŦ

1he sLaLemenL ln Lhe ueed of uonaLlon readlng ƍanyLlme durlng Lhe llfeLlme of Lhe uCnC8 or
anyone of Lhem who should survlveţ Lhey could useţ encumber or even dlspose of any or even all
Lhe parcels of land hereln donaLedƍ means LhaL MaLllde reLalned ownershlp of Lhe loLs and
reserved ln her Lhe rlghL Lo dlspose LhemŦ lor Lhe rlghL Lo dlspose of a Lhlng wlLhouL oLher
llmlLaLlons Lhan Lhose esLabllshed by law ls an aLLrlbuLe of ownershlpŦ1he phrase ln Lhe ueed of
uonaLlon ƍor anyone of Lhem who should survlveƍ ls of course ouL of syncŦ lor Lhe ueed of
uonaLlon clearly sLaLed LhaL lL would Lake effecL upon Lhe deaLh of Lhe donorţ henceţ sald phrase
could only have referred Lo Lhe donor MaLlldeŦ ÞeLlLloners Lhemselves concede LhaL such phrase
does noL refer Lo Lhe doneeţ Lhusť

x x x żlŽL ls well Lo polnL ouL LhaL Lhe lasL provlslon (senLence) ln Lhe dlspuLed paragraph should only
refer Lo MaLllde Aluadţ Lhe donorţ because she was Lhe only survlvlng spouse aL Lhe Llme Lhe
donaLlon was execuLed on 14 november 1981ţ as her husband Ŷ Crlspln Aluad żŶŽ had long been
dead as early as 1973Ŧ

1he Lrlal courLţ ln holdlng LhaL Lhe donaLlon was lnLer vlvosţ reasonedť

x x x 1he donaLlon ln quesLlon ls sub[ecL Lo a resoluLory Lerm or perlod when Lhe donor provldes ln
Lhe aforequoLed provlslonsţ ƍbuL ln Lhe evenL LhaL Lhe uCnLL should dle before Lhe uCnC8ţ Lhe
presenL donaLlon shall be deemed resclnded and żofŽ no furLher force and effecLƍŦ When Lhe donor
provldes LhaL should Lhe ƍuCnLLƍ xxx dle before Lhe uCnC8ţ Lhe presenL donaLlon shall be
deemed resclnded and żofŽ no furLher force and effecLƍ Lhe loglcal consLrucLlon Lhereof ls LhaL afLer
Lhe execuLlon of Lhe sub[ecL donaLlonţ Lhe same became effecLlve lmmedlaLely and shall be
ƍdeemed resclnded and żofŽ no furLher force and effecLƍ upon Lhe arrlval of a resoluLory Lerm or
perlodţ lŦeŦţ Lhe deaLh of Lhe donee whlch shall occur before LhaL of Lhe donorŦ undersLandablyţ Lhe
arrlval of Lhls resoluLory Lerm or perlod cannoL resclnd and render of no furLher force and effecL a
donaLlon whlch has never become effecLlveţ becauseţ cerLalnly whaL donaLlon ls Lhere Lo be
resclnded and rendered of no furLher force and effecL upon Lhe arrlval of sald resoluLory Lerm or
perlod lf Lhere was no donaLlon whlch was already effecLlve aL Lhe Llme when Lhe donee dled?

1he ueed of uonaLlon whlch lsţ as already dlscussedţ one of morLls causaţ noL havlng followed Lhe
formallLles of a wlllţ lL ls vold and LransmlLLed no rlghL Lo peLlLloners' moLherŦ 8uL even assumlng
arguendo LhaL Lhe formallLles were observedţ slnce lL was noL probaLedţ no rlghL Lo LoL nosŦ 674
and 676 was LransmlLLed Lo MarlaŦ MaLllde Lhus valldly dlsposed of LoL noŦ 674 Lo respondenL by
her lasL wlll and LesLamenLţ sub[ecL of course Lo Lhe quallflcaLlon LhaL her (MaLllde's) wlll musL be
probaLedŦ WlLh respecL Lo LoL noŦ 676ţ Lhe same hadţ as menLloned earllerţ been sold by MaLllde Lo
respondenL on AugusL 26ţ 1991Ŧ

ÞeLlLloners neverLheless argue LhaL assumlng LhaL Lhe donaLlon of LoL noŦ 674 ln favor of Lhelr
moLher ls lndeed morLls causaţ henceţ MaLllde could devlse lL Lo respondenLţ Lhe loL should
neverLheless have been awarded Lo Lhem because Lhey had acqulred lL by acqulslLlve prescrlpLlonţ
Lhey havlng been ln conLlnuousţ unlnLerrupLedţ adverseţ openţ and publlc possesslon of lL ln good
falLh and ln Lhe concepL of an owner slnce 1978Ŧ

ÞeLlLloners falled Lo ralse Lhe lssue of acqulslLlve prescrlpLlon before Lhe lower courLsţ howeverţ
Lhey havlng lald Lhelr clalm on Lhe basls of lnherlLance from Lhelr moLherŦ As a general ruleţ polnLs
of lawţ Lheorlesţ and lssues noL broughL Lo Lhe aLLenLlon of Lhe Lrlal courL cannoL be ralsed for Lhe
flrsL Llme on appealŦ lor a conLrary rule would be unfalr Lo Lhe adverse parLy who would have no
opporLunlLy Lo presenL furLher evldence maLerlal Lo Lhe new Lheoryţ whlch lL could have done had
lL been aware of lL aL Lhe Llme of Lhe hearlng before Lhe Lrlal courLŦ



Iorms of W|||


Suroza vsŦ nonradoţ
AM NoŦ 2026ŴCIIţ DecŦ 19ţ 1981
110 SCkA 388

lAC1Sť

Mauro Suroza was marrled Lo Marcellna SalvadorŦ 1hey dld noL have a chlld buL Lhey reared oneţ ln
Lhe name of AgaplLoţ also surnamed as SurozaŦ AgaplLo marrled nenlLa and Lhey had a chlld ln Lhe
name of LlllaŦ Mauro Suroza dledŦ AgaplLoţ who was a soldlerţ became dlsabled and was declared
lncompeLenL ln a speclal proceedlng where hls wlfe was appolnLed as hls guardlanŦ
Meanwhlleţ Arsenlaţ Lhe alleged glrlfrlend of AgaplLo had reared a chlld named Marllynţ who was
laLer dellvered Lo Marcellna who broughL her up as a supposed daughLer of AgaplLo and as her
granddaughLer Marllyn used Lhe surname SurozaŦ She sLayed wlLh Marcellna buL was noL legally
adopLed by AgaplLoŦ
lL appeared LhaL durlng Lhe llfeLlme of Marcellnaţ she allegedly execuLed a noLarlal wlll when she
was 73 years oldŦ 1haL wlll whlch ls ln Lngllsh was Lhumbmarked by herŦ She was llllLeraLeŦ Per
leLLers ln Lngllsh Lo Lhe veLerans AdmlnlsLraLlon were also Lhumbmarked by herŦ ln LhaL wlgţ
Marcellna bequeaLhed all her esLaLe Lo her supposed granddaughLer MarllynŦ

SubsequenLlyţ howeverţ Marcellna dledŦ 1hereafLerţ Marlna Þa[eţ alleged Lo be a laundrywoman of
Marcellna and Lhe execuLrlx ln her wlll (Lhe alLernaLe execuLrlx was !uanlLa Macaraegţ moLher of
Cscarţ Marllynƌs husband)ţ flled wlLh Lhe CourL of llrsL lnsLanceţ a peLlLlon for Lhe probaLe of
Marcellnaƌs alleged wlllŦ 1he case was asslgned Lo !udge 8eynaldo ÞŦ PonradoŦ

As Lhere was no opposlLlonţ and afLer hearlng !udge Ponrado lssued several orders among whlch
lnsLrucLed a depuLy sherlff Lo e[ecL Lhe occupanLs of Lhe LesLaLrlxƌs houseţ among whom was nenlLa
vŦ Surozaţ and Lo place Marlna ln possesslon LhereofŦ

1haL order alerLed nenlLa Lo Lhe exlsLence of Lhe LesLamenLary proceedlng for Lhe seLLlemenL of
Marcellnaƌs esLaLeŦ She opposed sald proceedlng by fllln ln Lhe LesLaLe case an omnlbus peLlLlon ƍLo
seL aslde proceedlngsţ admlL opposlLlon wlLh counLerŴpeLlLlon for admlnlsLraLlon and prellmlnary
ln[uncLlonƍŦ nenlLa ln LhaL moLlon relLeraLed her allegaLlon LhaL Marllyn was a sLranger Lo

Marcellnaţ LhaL Lhe wlll was noL duly execuLed and aLLesLedţ LhaL lL was procured by means of
undue lnfluence employed by Marlna and Marllyn and LhaL Lhe Lhumbmarks of Lhe LesLaLrlx were
procured by fraud or LrlckŦ
uesplLe her opposlLlonţ respondenL [udge allowed Lhe probaLe of Lhe wlllŦ !udge Ponrado ln hls
order daLed uecember 22ţ 1977ţ afLer noLlng LhaL Lhe execuLrlx had dellvered Lhe esLaLe Lo
Marllynţ and LhaL Lhe esLaLe Lax had been paldţ closed Lhe LesLamenLary proceedlngŦ

AbouL Len monLhs laLerţ ln a verlfled complalnL daLed CcLober 12ţ 1978ţ flled ln Lhls CourLţ nenlLa
charged !udge Ponrado wlLh havlng probaLed Lhe fraudulenL wlll of MarcellnaŦ

lSSuLť WCn Lhe wlll was vold for Lhe reasons LhaL lL was wrlLLen ln Lngllshţ a language noL know Lo
Lhe llllLeraLe LesLaLrlx and LhaL Lhe aLLesLlng wlLnesses dld noL appear before Lhe noLary as
admlLLed by Lhe noLary hlmselfŦ

PLLuť
?LSŦ ln Lhls caseţ respondenL [udgeţ on peruslng Lhe wlll and noLlng LhaL lL was wrlLLen ln Lngllsh
and was Lhumbmarked by an obvlously llllLeraLe LesLaLrlxţ could have readlly percelved LhaL Lhe wlll
ls voldŦ

ln Lhe openlng paragraph of Lhe wlllţ lL was sLaLed LhaL Lngllsh was a language ƍundersLood and
knownƍ Lo Lhe LesLaLrlxŦ 8uL ln lLs concludlng paragraphţ lL was sLaLed LhaL Lhe wlll was read Lo Lhe
LesLaLrlx ƍand LranslaLed lnLo llllplno languageƍŦ (pŦ 16ţ 8ecord of LesLaLe case)Ŧ 1haL could only
mean LhaL Lhe wlll was wrlLLen ln a language noL known Lo Lhe llllLeraLe LesLaLrlx andţ Lhereforeţ lL
ls vold because of Lhe mandaLory provlslon of arLlcle 804 of Lhe Clvll Code LhaL every wlll musL be
execuLed ln a language or dlalecL known Lo Lhe LesLaLorŦ 1husţ a wlll wrlLLen ln Lngllshţ whlch was
noL known Lo Lhe lgoroL LesLaLorţ ls vold and was dlsallowed (Acop vsŦ Þlrasoţ 32 ÞhllŦ 660)Ŧ

1he hasLy preparaLlon of Lhe wlll ls shown ln Lhe aLLesLaLlon clause and noLarlal acknowledgmenL
where Marcellna Salvador Suroza ls repeaLedly referred Lo as Lhe ƍLesLaLorƍ lnsLead of ƍLesLaLrlxƍŦ

Pad respondenL [udge been careful and observanLţ he could have noLed noL only Lhe anomaly as Lo
Lhe language of Lhe wlll buL also LhaL Lhere was someLhlng wrong ln lnsLlLuLlng Lhe supposed
granddaughLer as sole helress and glvlng noLhlng aL all Lo her supposed faLher who was sLlll allveŦ

lurLhermoreţ afLer Lhe hearlng conducLed by respondenL depuLy clerk of courLţ respondenL [udge
could have noLlced LhaL Lhe noLary was noL presenLed as a wlLnessŦ

ln splLe of Lhe absence of an opposlLlonţ respondenL [udge should have personally conducLed Lhe
hearlng on Lhe probaLe of Lhe wlll so LhaL he could have ascerLalned wheLher Lhe wlll was valldly
execuLedŦ

under Lhe clrcumsLancesţ we flnd hls negllgence and derellcLlon of duLy Lo be lnexcusableŦ


Lee vŦ @ambago
AŦCŦ NoŦ S281ţ IebŦ 12ţ 2008
S44 SCkA 393


lacLsť ComplalnanLţ Manuel LŦ Leeţ charged respondenLţ ALLyŦ 8eglno 8Ŧ 1ambagoţ wlLh vlolaLlon of
noLarlal Law and Lhe LLhlcs of Lhe legal professlon for noLarlzlng a wlll LhaL ls alleged Lo be spurlous
ln naLure ln conLalnlng forged slgnaLures of hls faLherţ Lhe decedenLţ vlcenLe Lee SrŦ and Lwo oLher
wlLnessesţ whlch were also quesLloned for Lhe unnoLaLed 8esldence CerLlflcaLes LhaL are known Lo
be a copy of Lhelr respecLlve voLerƌs affldavlLŦ ln addlLlon Lo suchţ Lhe conLesLed wlll was execuLed
and acknowledged before respondenL on !une 30ţ 1963 buL bears a 8esldence CerLlflcaLe by Lhe
1esLaLor daLed !anuary 3ţ 1962ţ whlch was never submlLLed for flllng Lo Lhe Archlves ulvlslon of Lhe
8ecords ManagemenL and Archlves Cfflce of Lhe naLlonal Commlsslon for CulLure and ArLs (nCAA)Ŧ
8espondenLţ on Lhe oLher handţ clalmed LhaL all allegaLlons are falsely glven because he allegedly
exerclsed hls duLles as noLary Þubllc wlLh due care and wlLh due regards Lo Lhe provlslon of exlsLlng
law and had complled wlLh elemenLary formallLles ln Lhe performance of hls duLles and LhaL Lhe
complalnL was flled slmply Lo harass hlm based on Lhe resulL of a crlmlnal case agalnsL hlm ln Lhe
Cmbudsman LhaL dld noL prosperŦ Poweverţ he dld noL deny Lhe conLenLlon of nonŴflllng a copy Lo
Lhe Archlves ulvlslon of nCAAŦ ln resoluLlonţ Lhe courL referred Lhe case Lo Lhe l8Þ and Lhe declslon
of whlch was afflrmed wlLh modlflcaLlon agalnsL Lhe respondenL and ln favor of Lhe complalnanL
lssueť uld ALLyŦ 8eglno 8Ŧ 1ambago commlLLed a vlolaLlon ln noLarlal Law and Lhe LLhlcs of Legal
Þrofesslon for noLarlzlng a spurlous lasL wlll and LesLamenL
Peldť ?esŦ As per Supreme CourLţ ALLyŦ 8eglno 8Ŧ 1ambago ls gullLy of professlonal mlsconducL as he
vlolaLed Lhe Lawyerƌs CaLhţ 8ule 138 of Lhe 8ules of CourLţ Canon 1 and 8ule 1Ŧ01nof Lhe Code of
Þrofesslonal 8esponslblllLyţ ArLlcle 806 of Lhe Clvll Code and provlslon of Lhe noLarlal LawŦ 1husţ
ALLyŦ 1ambago ls suspended from Lhe pracLlce of law for one year and hls noLarlal commlsslon
revokedŦ ln addlLlonţ because he has noL llved up Lo Lhe LrusLworLhlness expecLed of hlm as a
noLary publlc and as an offlcer of Lhe courLţ he ls perpeLually dlsquallfled from reappolnLmenLs as a
noLary ÞubllcŦ


Guerrero vŦ 8|h|s
Gk#174144ţ Apr||Ŧ 17ţ 2007
S21 SCkA 394

1he wlll was acknowledged by Lhe LesLaLrlx and Lhe wlLnesses aL Lhe LesLaLrlx's wlLnesses ln CC
before a noLary publlc who was commlssloned for and ln Caloocan ClLyŦ

Peldť lnvalldŦ noLary publlc was acLlng ouLslde Lhe place of hls commlsslonţ and Lhls dld noL saLlsfy
ArL 806Ŧ no noLary shall possess auLhorlLy Lo do any noLarlal acL beyond Lhe llmlLs of hls
[urlsdlcLlonŦ
Caneda vsŦ CAţ
Gk# 103SS4ţ MayŦ 28ţ 1993
222 SCkA 781

lacLsť Cn uecember 3ţ 1978ţ MaLeo Caballeroţ a wldower wlLhouL any chlldren and already ln
Lhe LwlllghL years of hls llfeţ execuLed a lasL wlll and LesLamenL aL hls resldence ln 1allsayţ Cebu
before Lhree aLLesLlng wlLnessesţ namelyţ Clprlano Labucaţ Cregorlo Cabando and llavlano
1oregosaŦ 1he sald LesLaLor was duly asslsLed by hls lawyerţ ALLyŦ Lmlllo LumonLadţ and a noLary
publlcţ ALLyŦ llloLeo Manlgosţ ln Lhe preparaLlon of LhaL lasL wlllŦ lL was declared Lherelnţ among

oLher Lhlngsţ LhaL Lhe LesLaLor was leavlng by way of legacles and devlses hls real and personal
properLles Lo ÞresenLaclon Cavlolaţ Angel AbaLayoţ 8ogello AbaLayoţ lsabellLo AbaLayoţ 8enonl CŦ
Cabrera and Marcosa AlcanLaraţ all of whom do noL appear Lo be relaLed Lo Lhe LesLaLorŦ
lour monLhs laLerţ or on Aprll 4ţ 1979ţ MaLeo Caballero hlmself flled a peLlLlon dockeLed as Speclal
Þroceedlng noŦ 3899Ŵ8 before 8ranch ll of Lhe Lhen CourL of llrsL lnsLance of Cebu seeklng Lhe
probaLe of hls lasL wlll and LesLamenLŦ 1he probaLe courL seL Lhe peLlLlon for hearlng on AugusL 20ţ
1979 buL Lhe same and subsequenL scheduled hearlngs were posLponed for one reason Lo anoLherŦ
Cn May 29ţ 1980ţ Lhe LesLaLor passed away before hls peLlLlon could flnally be heard by Lhe
probaLe courLŦ Cn lebruary 23ţ 1981ţ 8enonl Cabreraţ one of Lhe legaLees named ln Lhe wlllţ sough
hls appolnLmenL as speclal admlnlsLraLor of Lhe LesLaLorƌs esLaLeţ Lhe esLlmaLed value of whlch was
Þ24ţ000Ŧ00ţ and he was so appolnLed by Lhe probaLe courL ln lLs order of March 6ţ 1981Ŧ
1hereafLerţ hereln peLlLlonersţ clalmlng Lo be nephews and nleces of Lhe LesLaLorţ lnsLlLuLed a
second peLlLlonţ enLlLled ƍln Lhe MaLLer of Lhe lnLesLaLe LsLaLe of MaLeo Caballeroƍ and dockeLed
as Speclal Þroceedlng noŦ 3963Ŵ8ţ before 8ranch lx of Lhe aforesald CourL of llrsL lnsLance of CebuŦ
Cn CcLober 18ţ 1982ţ hereln peLlLloners had Lhelr sald peLlLlon lnLesLaLe proceedlng consolldaLed
wlLh Speclal Þroceedlng noŦ 3899Ŵ8 ln 8ranch ll of Lhe CourL of llrsL lnsLance of Cebu and opposed
LhereaL Lhe probaLe of Lhe 1esLaLorƌs wlll and Lhe appolnLmenL of a speclal admlnlsLraLor for hls
esLaLeŦ
8enonl Cabrera dled on lebruary 8ţ 1982 hence Lhe probaLe courLţ now known as 8ranch xv of Lhe
8eglonal 1rlal CourL of Cebuţ appolnLed Wllllam Cabrera as speclal admlnlsLraLor on !une 21ţ 1983Ŧ
1hereafLerţ on !uly 20ţ 1983ţ lL lssued an order for Lhe reLurn of Lhe records of Speclal Þroceedlng
noŦ 3963Ŵ8 Lo Lhe archlves slnce Lhe LesLaLe proceedlng for Lhe probaLe of Lhe wlll had Lo be heard
and resolved flrsLŦ Cn March 26ţ 1984 Lhe case was reraffled and evenLually asslgned Lo 8ranch xll
of Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal CourL of Cebu where lL remalned unLll Lhe concluslon of Lhe probaLe
proceedlngsŦ
ln Lhe course of Lhe hearlng ln Speclal Þroceedlng noŦ 3899Ŵ8ţ hereln peLlLloners appeared as
opposlLors and ob[ecLed Lo Lhe allowance of Lhe LesLaLorƌs wlll on Lhe ground LhaL on Lhe alleged
daLe of lLs execuLlonţ Lhe LesLaLor was already ln Lhe poor sLaLe of healLh such LhaL he could noL
have posslbly execuLed Lhe sameŦ ÞeLlLloners llkewlse relLeraLed Lhe lssue as Lo Lhe genulneness of
Lhe slgnaLure of Lhe LesLaLor LherelnŦ
Cn Lhe oLher handţ one of Lhe aLLesLlng wlLnessesţ Clprlano Labucaţ and Lhe noLary publlc ALLyŦ
llloLeo Manlgosţ LesLlfled LhaL Lhe LesLaLor execuLed Lhe wlll ln quesLlon ln Lhelr presence whlle he
was of sound and dlsposlng mlnd and LhaLţ conLrary Lo Lhe asserLlons of Lhe opposlLorsţ MaLeo
Caballero was ln good healLh and was noL unduly lnfluenced ln any way ln Lhe execuLlon of hls wlllŦ
Labuca also LesLlfled LhaL he and Lhe oLher wlLnesses aLLesLed and slgned Lhe wlll ln Lhe presence of
Lhe LesLaLor and of each oLherŦ 1he oLher Lwo aLLesLlng wlLnesses were noL presenLed ln Lhe
probaLe hearlng as Lhe had dled by LhenŦ
Cn Aprll 3ţ 1988ţ Lhe probaLe courL rendered a declslon declarlng Lhe wlll ln quesLlon as Lhe lasL wlll
and LesLamenL of Lhe laLe MaLeo CaballeroŦ 1husţ peLlLloners elevaLed Lhe case ln Lhe CourL of
Appeals buL Lhe laLLer afflrmed LhaL of Lhe Lrlal courL's rullng on Lhe ground LhaL Lhe aLLesLaLlon
clause ln Lhe lasL wlll of MaLeo Caballero subsLanLlally complles wlLh ArLlcle 803 of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ
lssueť WCn Lhe aLLesLaLlon clause may be consldered as havlng subsLanLlally complled wlLh Lhe
requlremenLs of ArLŦ 803 of Lhe Clvll Code
Peldť no
WhaL appears ln Lhe aLLesLaLlon clause whlch Lhe opposlLors clalm Lo be defecLlve lsť ƍ Weţ Lhe
underslgned aLLesLlng WlLnessesţ whose 8esldences and posLal addresses appear on Lhe CpposlLe
of our respecLlve namesţ we do cerLlfy LhaL Lhe LesLamenL was read by hlm and Lhe aLLesLaLorţ
MaLeo Caballeroţ has publlshed unLo us Lhe foregolng wlll conslsLlng of 1P8LL ÞACLSţ lncludlng Lhe
acknowledgmenLţ each page numbered correlaLlvely ln leLLers of Lhe upper parL of each pageţ as
hls LasL Wlll and 1esLamenLţ and he has slgned Lhe same and every page Lhereofţ on Lhe spaces
provlded for hls slgnaLure and on Lhe lefL hand margln ln Lhe presence of Lhe sald LesLaLor and ln
Lhe presence of each and all of usŦ"
SC argued LhaL Lhe presenL peLlLlon ls merlLorlousŦ
An aLLesLaLlon clause refers Lo LhaL parL of an ordlnary wlll whereby Lhe aLLesLlng wlLnesses cerLlfy
LhaL Lhe lnsLrumenL has been execuLed before Lhem and Lo Lhe manner of Lhe execuLlon Lhe sameŦ
lL ls a separaLe memorandum or record of Lhe facLs surroundlng Lhe conducL of execuLlon and once
slgned by Lhe wlLnessesţ lL glves afflrmaLlon Lo Lhe facL LhaL compllance wlLh Lhe essenLlal
formallLles requlred by law has been observedŦ lL ls made for Lhe purpose of preservlng ln a
permanenL form a record of Lhe facLs LhaL aLLended Lhe execuLlon of a parLlcular wlllţ so LhaL ln
case of fallure of Lhe memory of Lhe aLLesLlng wlLnessesţ or oLher casualLyţ such facLs may sLlll be
provedŦ
under Lhe Lhlrd paragraph of ArLlcle 803ţ such a clauseţ Lhe compleLe lack of whlch would resulL ln
Lhe lnvalldlLy of Lhe wlllţ should sLaLe (1) Lhe number of Lhe pages used upon whlch Lhe wlll ls
wrlLLenŤ (2) LhaL Lhe LesLaLor slgnedţ or expressly caused anoLher Lo slgnţ Lhe wlll and every page
Lhereof ln Lhe presence of Lhe aLLesLlng wlLnessesŤ and (3) LhaL Lhe aLLesLlng wlLnesses wlLnessed
Lhe slgnlng by Lhe LesLaLor of Lhe wlll and all lLs pagesţ and LhaL sald wlLnesses also slgned Lhe wlll
and every page Lhereof ln Lhe presence of Lhe LesLaLor and of one anoLherŦ
1he purpose of Lhe law ln requlrlng Lhe clause Lo sLaLe Lhe number of pages on whlch Lhe wlll ls
wrlLLen ls Lo safeguard agalnsL posslble lnLerpolaLlon or omlsslon of one or some of lLs pages and Lo
prevenL any lncrease or decrease ln Lhe pagesŤ whereas Lhe subscrlpLlon of Lhe slgnaLure of Lhe
LesLaLor and Lhe aLLesLlng wlLnesses ls made for Lhe purpose of auLhenLlcaLlon and ldenLlflcaLlonţ
and Lhus lndlcaLes LhaL Lhe wlll ls Lhe very same lnsLrumenL execuLed by Lhe LesLaLor and aLLesLed
Lo by Lhe wlLnessesŦ
lurLherţ by aLLesLlng and subscrlblng Lo Lhe wlllţ Lhe wlLnesses Lhereby declare Lhe due execuLlon of
Lhe wlll as embodled ln Lhe aLLesLaLlon clauseŦ 1he aLLesLaLlon clauseţ Lhereforeţ provlde sLrong
legal guaranLles for Lhe due execuLlon of a wlll and Lo lnsure Lhe auLhenLlclLy LhereofŦ As lL
apperLalns only Lo Lhe wlLnesses and noL Lo Lhe LesLaLorţ lL need be slgned only by LhemŦ Where lL
ls lefL unslgnedţ lL would resulL ln Lhe lnvalldaLlon of Lhe wlll as lL would be posslble and easy Lo add
Lhe clause on a subsequenL occaslon ln Lhe absence of Lhe LesLaLor and lLs wlLnessesŦ
ln Lhls caseţ an examlnaLlon of Lhe lasL wlll and LesLamenL of MaLeo Caballero shows LhaL lL ls
comprlsed of Lhree sheeLs all of whlch have been numbered correlaLlvelyţ wlLh Lhe lefL margln of
each page Lhereof bearlng Lhe respecLlve slgnaLures of Lhe LesLaLor and Lhe Lhree aLLesLlng
wlLnessesŦ 1he parL of Lhe wlll conLalnlng Lhe LesLamenLary dlsposlLlons ls expressed ln Lhe
CebuanoŴvlsayan dlalecL and ls slgned aL Lhe fooL Lhereof by Lhe LesLaLorŦ 1he aLLesLaLlon clause ln
quesLlonţ on Lhe oLher handţ ls reclLed ln Lhe Lngllsh language and ls llkewlse slgned aL Lhe end
Lhereof by Lhe Lhree aLLesLlng wlLnesses hereLo
lL wlll be noLed LhaL ArLlcle 803 requlres LhaL Lhe wlLness should boLh aLLesL and subscrlbe Lo Lhe
wlll ln Lhe presence of Lhe LesLaLor and of one anoLherŦ ƍALLesLaLlonƍ and ƍsubscrlpLlonƍ dlffer ln
meanlngŦ ALLesLaLlon ls Lhe acL of sensesţ whlle subscrlpLlon ls Lhe acL of Lhe handŦ 1he former ls
menLalţ Lhe laLLer mechanlcalţ and Lo aLLesL a wlll ls Lo know LhaL lL was publlshed as suchţ and Lo
cerLlfy Lhe facLs requlred Lo consLlLuLe an acLual and legal publlcaLlonŤ buL Lo subscrlbe a paper
publlshed as a wlll ls only Lo wrlLe on Lhe same paper Lhe names of Lhe wlLnessesţ for Lhe sole
purpose of ldenLlflcaLlonŦ

Whlle lL may be Lrue LhaL Lhe aLLesLaLlon clause ls lndeed subscrlbed aL Lhe end Lhereof and aL Lhe
lefL margln of each page by Lhe Lhree aLLesLlng wlLnessesţ lL cerLalnly cannoL be concluslvely
lnferred Lherefrom LhaL Lhe sald wlLness afflxed Lhelr respecLlve slgnaLures ln Lhe presence of Lhe
LesLaLor and of each oLher slnceţ as peLlLloners correcLly observedţ Lhe presence of sald slgnaLures
only esLabllshes Lhe facL LhaL lL was lndeed slgnedţ buL lL does noL prove LhaL Lhe aLLesLlng
wlLnesses dld subscrlbe Lo Lhe wlll ln Lhe presence of Lhe LesLaLor and of each oLherŦ 1he execuLlon
of a wlll ls supposed Lo be one acL so LhaL where Lhe LesLaLor and Lhe wlLnesses slgn on varlous
days or occaslons and ln varlous comblnaLlonsţ Lhe wlll cannoL be sLamped wlLh Lhe lmprlmaLur of
effecLlvlLyŦ
ln Lhe case aL barţ conLrarllyţ proof of Lhe acLs requlred Lo have been performed by Lhe aLLesLlng
wlLnesses can be supplled by only exLrlnslc evldence Lhereofţ slnce an overall appreclaLlon of Lhe
conLenLs of Lhe wlll ylelds no basls whaLsoever from wlLh such facLs may be plauslbly deducedŦ
WhaL prlvaLe respondenL lnslsLs on are Lhe LesLlmonles of hls wlLnesses alleglng LhaL Lhey saw Lhe
compllance wlLh such requlremenLs by Lhe lnsLrumenLal wlLnessesţ obllvlous of Lhe facL LhaL he ls
Lhereby resorLlng Lo exLrlnslc evldence Lo prove Lhe same and would accordlngly be dolng by Lhe
lndlrecLlon whaL ln law he cannoL do dlrecLlyŦ

Abangan vsŦ Abanganţ
Gr # 13431ţ NovŦ 12ţ 1919
40 Þh|| 476

Cn SepLember 19ţ 1917ţ Lhe CourL of llrsL lnsLance of Cebu admlLLed Lo probaLe Ana Abanganƌs wlll
execuLed !ulyţ 1916Ŧ lrom Lhls declslon Lhe opponenLƌs appealedŦ
Sald documenLţ duly probaLed as Ana Abanganƌs wlllţ conslsLs of Lwo sheeLsţ Lhe flrsL of whlch
conLalns all of Lhe dlsposlLlon of Lhe LesLaLrlxţ duly slgned aL Lhe boLLom by MarLln MonLalban (ln
Lhe name and under Lhe dlrecLlon of Lhe LesLaLrlx) and by Lhree wlLnessesŦ 1he followlng sheeL
conLalns only Lhe aLLesLaLlon clause duly slgned aL Lhe boLLom by Lhe Lhree lnsLrumenLal wlLnessesŦ
nelLher of Lhese sheeLs ls slgned on Lhe lefL margln by Lhe LesLaLrlx and Lhe Lhree wlLnessesţ nor
numbered by leLLersŤ and Lhese omlsslonsţ accordlng Lo appellanLsƌ conLenLlonţ are defecLs
whereby Lhe probaLe of Lhe wlll should have been denledŦ We are of Lhe oplnlon LhaL Lhe wlll was
duly admlLLed Lo probaLeŦ
ln requlrlng LhaL each and every sheeL of Lhe wlll should also be slgned on Lhe lefL margln by Lhe
LesLaLor and Lhree wlLnesses ln Lhe presence of each oLherţ AcL noŦ 2643 (whlch ls Lhe one
appllcable ln Lhe case) evldenLly has for lLs ob[ecL (referrlng Lo Lhe body of Lhe wlll lLself) Lo avold
Lhe subsLlLuLlon of any of sald sheeLsţ Lhereby changlng Lhe LesLaLorƌs dlsposlLlonsŦ 8uL when Lhese
dlsposlLlons are wholly wrlLLen on only one sheeL slgned aL Lhe boLLom by Lhe LesLaLor and Lhree
wlLnesses (as Lhe lnsLanL case)ţ Lhelr slgnaLures on Lhe lefL margln of sald sheeL would be
compleLely purposelessŦ ln requlrlng Lhls slgnaLure on Lhe marglnţ Lhe sLaLuLe Look lnLo
conslderaLlonţ undoubLedlyţ Lhe case of a wlll wrlLLen on several sheeLs and musL have referred Lo
Lhe sheeLs whlch Lhe LesLaLor and Lhe wlLnesses do noL have Lo slgn aL Lhe boLLomŦ A dlfferenL
lnLerpreLaLlon would assume LhaL Lhe sLaLuLe requlres LhaL Lhls sheeLţ already slgned aL Lhe
boLLomţ be slgned LwlceŦ We cannoL aLLrlbuLe Lo Lhe sLaLuLe such an lnLenLlonŦ As Lhese slgnaLures
musL be wrlLLen by Lhe LesLaLor and Lhe wlLnesses ln Lhe presence of each oLherţ lL appears LhaLţ lf
Lhe slgnaLures aL Lhe boLLom of Lhe sheeL guaranLles lLs auLhenLlclLyţ anoLher slgnaLure on lLs lefL
margln would be unneccessaryŤ and lf Lhey do noL guaranLyţ same slgnaLuresţ afflxed on anoLher
parL of same sheeLţ would add noLhlngŦ We cannoL assume LhaL Lhe sLaLuLe regards of such
lmporLance Lhe place where Lhe LesLaLor and Lhe wlLnesses musL slgn on Lhe sheeL LhaL lL would
conslder LhaL Lhelr slgnaLures wrlLLen on Lhe boLLom do noL guaranLy Lhe auLhenLlclLy of Lhe sheeL
buLţ lf repeaLed on Lhe marglnţ glve sufflclenL securlLyŦ
ln requlrlng LhaL each and every page of a wlll musL be numbered correlaLlvely ln leLLers placed on
Lhe upper parL of Lhe sheeLţ lL ls llkewlse clear LhaL Lhe ob[ecL of AcL noŦ 2643 ls Lo know wheLher
any sheeL of Lhe wlll has been removedŦ 8uLţ when all Lhe dlsposlLlve parLs of a wlll are wrlLLen on
one sheeL onlyţ Lhe ob[ecL of Lhe sLaLuLe dlsappears because Lhe removal of Lhls slngle sheeLţ
alLhough unnumberedţ cannoL be hlddenŦ
WhaL has been sald ls also appllcable Lo Lhe aLLesLaLlon clauseŦ Whereforeţ wlLhouL conslderlng
wheLher or noL Lhls clause ls an essenLlal parL of Lhe wlllţ we hold LhaL ln Lhe one accompanylng Lhe
wlll ln quesLlonţ Lhe slgnaLures of Lhe LesLaLrlx and of Lhe Lhree wlLnesses on Lhe margln and Lhe
numberlng of Lhe pages of Lhe sheeL are formallLles noL requlred by Lhe sLaLuLeŦ Moreoverţ
referrlng speclally Lo Lhe slgnaLure of Lhe LesLaLrlxţ we can add LhaL same ls noL necessary ln Lhe
aLLesLaLlon clause because Lhlsţ as lLs name lmpllesţ apperLalns only Lo Lhe wlLnesses and noL Lo Lhe
LesLaLor slnce Lhe laLLer does noL aLLesLţ buL execuLesţ Lhe wlllŦ
SynLheslzlng our oplnlonţ we hold LhaL ln a wlll conslsLlng of Lwo sheeLs Lhe flrsL of whlch conLalns
all Lhe LesLamenLary dlsposlLlons and ls slgned aL Lhe boLLom by Lhe LesLaLor and Lhree wlLnesses
and Lhe second conLalns only Lhe aLLesLaLlon clause and ls slgned also aL Lhe boLLom by Lhe Lhree
wlLnessesţ lL ls noL necessary LhaL boLh sheeLs be furLher slgned on Lhelr marglns by Lhe LesLaLor
and Lhe wlLnessesţ or be pagedŦ
1he ob[ecL of Lhe solemnlLles surroundlng Lhe execuLlon of wllls ls Lo close Lhe door agalnsL bad
falLh and fraudţ Lo avold subsLlLuLlon of wllls and LesLamenLs and Lo guaranLy Lhelr LruLh and
auLhenLlclLyŦ 1herefore Lhe laws on Lhls sub[ecL should be lnLerpreLed ln such a way as Lo aLLaln
Lhese prlmordal endsŦ 8uLţ on Lhe oLher handţ also one musL noL lose slghL of Lhe facL LhaL lL ls noL
Lhe ob[ecL of Lhe law Lo resLraln and curLall Lhe exerclse of Lhe rlghL Lo make a wlllŦ So when an
lnLerpreLaLlon already glven assures such endsţ any oLher lnLerpreLaLlon whaLsoeverţ LhaL adds
noLhlng buL demands more requlslLes enLlrely unnecessaryţ useless and frusLaLlve of Lhe LesLaLorƌs
lasL wlllţ musL be dlsregardedŦ
As anoLher ground for Lhls appealţ lL ls alleged Lhe records do noL show LhaL Lhe LesLarlx knew Lhe
dlalecL ln whlch Lhe wlll ls wrlLLenŦ 8uL Lhe clrcumsLance appearlng ln Lhe wlll lLself LhaL same was
execuLed ln Lhe clLy of Cebu and ln Lhe dlalecL of Lhls locallLy where Lhe LesLaLrlx was a nelghbor ls
enoughţ ln Lhe absence of any proof Lo Lhe conLraryţ Lo presume LhaL she knew Lhls dlalecL ln whlch
Lhls wlll ls wrlLLenŦ
lor Lhe foregolng conslderaLlonsţ Lhe [udgmenL appealed from ls hereby afflrmed wlLh cosLs agalnsL
Lhe appellanLsŦ
Ce|ada vŦ Abena
Gk# 14SS4Sţ IuneŦ 30ţ 2008
SS6 SCkA S69

lacLsť ÞeLlLloner Þaz SamanlegoŴCelada was Lhe flrsL cousln of decedenL MargarlLa SŦ Mayores
(MargarlLa) whlle respondenL was Lhe decedenL's llfelong companlon slnce 1929Ŧ
Cn Aprll 27ţ 1987ţ MargarlLa dled slngle and wlLhouL any ascendlng nor descendlng helrs as her
parenLsţ grandparenLs and slbllngs predeceased herŦ She was survlved by her flrsL couslns CaLallna
SamanlegoŴ8ombayţ ManuellLa Samanlego Sa[onlaţ lellza Samanlegoţ and peLlLlonerŦ
8efore her deaLhţ MargarlLa execuLed a LasL Wlll and 1esLamenL on lebruary 2ţ 1987 where she
bequeaLhed oneŴhalf of her undlvlded share of a real properLy Lo respondenLţ norma AŦ Þahlngaloţ
and llorenLlno MŦ Abena ln equal shares or oneŴLhlrd porLlon eachŦ She llkewlse bequeaLhed oneŴ
half of her undlvlded share of a real Lo respondenLţ lsabelo MŦ Abenaţ and Amanda MŦ Abena ln

equal shares or oneŴLhlrd porLlon eachŦ MargarlLa also lefL all her personal properLles Lo
respondenL whom she llkewlse deslgnaLed as sole execuLor of her wlllŦ
Cn AugusL 11ţ 1987ţ peLlLloner flled a peLlLlon for leLLers of admlnlsLraLlon of Lhe esLaLe of
MargarlLa before Lhe 81C of MakaLlŦ 1he case was dockeLed as SÞ ÞrocŦ noŦ MŴ1331Ŧ
Cn CcLober 27ţ 1987ţ respondenL flled a peLlLlon for probaLe of Lhe wlll of MargarlLa before Lhe
81C of MakaLl and Lhe laLLer consequenLly rendered a declslon declarlng Lhe lasL wlll and LesLamenL
of MargarlLa probaLed and respondenL as Lhe execuLor of Lhe wlllŦ ÞeLlLloner appealed Lo CA buL
Lhe laLLer only afflrmed ln LoLo Lhe 81C rullngŦ Penceţ Lhe lnsLanL peLlLlonŦ
lssuesť
(1) WCn CA erred ln noL declarlng Lhe wlll lnvalld for fallure Lo comply wlLh Lhe formallLles
requlred by law
(2) WCn CA erred ln noL declarlng Lhe wlll lnvalld because lL was procured Lhrough undue
lnfluence and pressureţ and
(3) WCn CA erred ln noL declarlng peLlLloner and her slbllngs as Lhe legal helrs of MargarlLaţ and ln
noL lssulng leLLers of admlnlsLraLlon Lo peLlLloner
Peldť SC ruled ln favor of respondenLŦ Slnce SC ls noL a Lrler of facLsţ Lhey found no reason Lo
dlsLurb Lhe flndlngs of 81Cţ Lo wlLť
(1)WlLh żregardŽ Lo Lhe conLenLlon of Lhe opposlLors żÞaz SamanlegoŴCeladaţ eL alŦŽ LhaL Lhe
LesLaLor żMargarlLa MayoresŽ was noL menLally capable of maklng a wlll aL Lhe Llme of Lhe
execuLlon Lhereofţ Lhe same ls wlLhouL merlLŦ 1he opposlLors falled Lo esLabllshţ by preponderance
of evldenceţ sald allegaLlon and conLradlcL Lhe presumpLlon LhaL Lhe LesLaLor was of sound mlnd
(See ArLlcle 800 of Lhe Clvll Code)Ŧ ln facLţ wlLness for Lhe opposlLorsţ urŦ 8amon LamberLeţ whoţ ln
some occaslonsţ aLLended Lo Lhe LesLaLor monLhs before her deaLhţ LesLlfled LhaL MargarlLa
Mayores could engage ln a normal conversaLlon and he even sLaLed LhaL Lhe lllness of Lhe LesLaLor
does noL warranL hosplLallzaLlonŧŦ noL one of Lhe opposlLor's wlLnesses has menLloned any
lnsLance LhaL Lhey observed acL/s of Lhe LesLaLor durlng her llfeLlme LhaL could be consLrued as a
manlfesLaLlon of menLal lncapaclLyŦ 1he LesLaLor may be admlLLed Lo be physlcally weak buL lL does
noL necessarlly follow LhaL she was noL of sound mlndŦ ż1heŽ LesLlmonles of conLesLanL wlLnesses
are pure aforeLhoughLŦ
(2) AnenL Lhe conLesLanLs' submlsslon LhaL Lhe wlll ls faLally defecLlve for Lhe reason LhaL lLs
aLLesLaLlon clause sLaLes LhaL Lhe wlll ls composed of Lhree pages whlle ln LruLh and ln facLţ Lhe wlll
conslsLs of Lwo pages only because Lhe aLLesLaLlon ls noL a parL of Lhe noLarlal wlllţ Lhe same ls noL
accuraLeŦ Whlle lL ls Lrue LhaL Lhe aLLesLaLlon clause ls noL a parL of Lhe wlllţ Lhe courLţ afLer
examlnlng Lhe LoLallLy of Lhe wlllţ ls of Lhe consldered oplnlon LhaL error ln Lhe number of pages of
Lhe wlll as sLaLed ln Lhe aLLesLaLlon clause ls noL maLerlal Lo lnvalldaLe Lhe sub[ecL wlllŦ lL musL be
noLed LhaL Lhe sub[ecL lnsLrumenL ls consecuLlvely leLLered wlLh pages Aţ 8ţ and C whlch ls a
sufflclenL safeguard from Lhe posslblllLy of an omlsslon of some of Lhe pagesŦ 1he error musL have
been broughL abouL by Lhe honesL bellef LhaL Lhe wlll ls Lhe whole lnsLrumenL conslsLlng of Lhree
pages lncluslve of Lhe aLLesLaLlon clause and Lhe acknowledgemenLŦ 1he poslLlon of Lhe courL ls ln
consonance wlLh Lhe ƍdocLrlne of llberal lnLerpreLaLlonƍ enunclaLed ln ArLlcle 809 of Lhe Clvll Code
whlch readsť ƍln Lhe absence of bad falLhţ forgery or fraudţ or undue żandŽ lmproper pressure and
lnfluenceţ defecLs and lmperfecLlons ln Lhe form of aLLesLaLlon or ln Lhe language used Lhereln shall
noL render Lhe wlll lnvalld lf lL ls proved LhaL Lhe wlll was ln facL execuLed and aLLesLed ln
subsLanLlal compllance wlLh all Lhe requlremenLs of ArLlcle 803Ŧƍ
(3) 1he courL also re[ecLs Lhe conLenLlon of Lhe opposlLors LhaL Lhe slgnaLures of Lhe LesLaLor were
afflxed on dlfferenL occaslons based on Lhelr observaLlon LhaL Lhe slgnaLure on Lhe flrsL page ls
allegedly dlfferenL ln slzeţ LexLure and appearance as compared wlLh Lhe slgnaLures ln Lhe
succeedlng pagesŦ AfLer examlnaLlon of Lhe slgnaLuresţ Lhe courL does noL share Lhe same
observaLlon as Lhe opposlLorsŦ 1he plcLure shows LhaL Lhe LesLaLor was afflxlng her slgnaLure ln Lhe
presence of Lhe lnsLrumenLal wlLnesses and Lhe noLaryŦ 1here ls no evldence Lo show LhaL Lhe flrsL
slgnaLure was procured earller Lhan lebruary 2ţ 1987Ŧ
(4) llnallyţ Lhe courL flnds LhaL nelLher pressure nor undue lnfluence was exerLed on Lhe LesLaLor Lo
execuLe Lhe sub[ecL wlllŦ ln facLţ Lhe plcLure reveals LhaL Lhe LesLaLor was ln a good mood and
smlllng wlLh Lhe oLher wlLnesses whlle execuLlng Lhe sub[ecL wlllŦ ln flneţ Lhe courL flnds LhaL Lhe
LesLaLor was menLally capable of maklng Lhe wlll aL Lhe Llme of lLs execuLlonţ LhaL Lhe noLarlal wlll
presenLed Lo Lhe courL ls Lhe same noLarlal wlll LhaL was execuLed and LhaL all Lhe formal
requlremenLs (See ArLlcle 803 of Lhe Clvll Code) ln Lhe execuLlon of a wlll have been subsLanLlally
complled wlLh ln Lhe sub[ecL noLarlal wlllŦ

Iave||ana vsŦ Ledesma
Gk#Ŧ LŴ7179ţ IuneŦ 30ţ 19SS
97 Þh|| 2S8

lacLsť
1he CourL of llrsL lnsLance of llollo admlLLed Lo probaLe Lhe documenLs ln Lhe vlsayan
dlalecL as Lhe LesLamenL and codlcll duly execuLed by Lhe deceased MaŦ Apollnarla Ledesma vdaŦ de
!avellanaţ on March 30ţ 1930ţ and May 29ţ 1932ţ respecLlvelyţ wlLh 8amon 1ablanaţ Clorla
MonLlnola de 1ablana and vlcenLe ?ap as wlLnessesŦ
1he conLesLanLţ MaLea Ledesmaţ slsLer and nearesL survlvlng relaLlve of sald deceasedţ
appealed from Lhe declslonţ lnslsLlng LhaL Lhe sald exhlblLs were noL execuLed ln conformlLy wlLh
lawŦ Ledesma ls quesLlonlng Lhe valldlLy of Lhe codlcll conLendlng LhaL Lhe facL LhaL Lhe noLary dld
noL slgn Lhe lnsLrumenL ln Lhe presence of Lhe LesLaLor and Lhe wlLness made Lhe codlcll was noL
execuLed ln conformlLy wlLh Lhe law

lSSuLť
W/n Lhe codlcll was valldly execuLedŦ

PLLuť
1he lnsLrumenLal wlLnesses (who happen Lo be Lhe same ones who aLLesLed Lhe wlll of
1930) asserLed LhaL afLer Lhe codlcll had been slgned by Lhe LesLaLrlx and Lhe wlLnesses aL Lhe San
Þablo PosplLalţ Lhe same was slgned and sealed by noLary publlc ClmoLea on Lhe same occaslonŦ
Cn Lhe oLher handţ ClmoLea
afflrmed LhaL he dld noL do soţ buL broughL Lhe codlcll Lo hls offlceţ and slgned and sealed lL LhereŦ
1he varlance does noL necessarlly lmply consclous perverslon of LruLh on Lhe parL of Lhe wlLnessesţ
buL appears raLher due Lo a wellŴesLabllshed phenomenonţ Lhe Lendency of Lhe mlndţ ln recalllng
pasL evenLsţ Lo subsLlLuLe Lhe usual and hablLual for whaL dlffers sllghLly from lLŦ
WheLher or noL Lhe noLary slgned Lhe cerLlflcaLlon of acknowledgmenL ln Lhe presence
of Lhe LesLaLrlx and Lhe wlLnessesţ does noL affecL Lhe valldlLy of Lhe codlcllŦ
1he new Clvll Code does noL requlre LhaL Lhe slgnlng of Lhe LesLaLorţ wlLnesses and
noLary should be accompllshed ln one slngle acLŦ A comparlson of ArLlcles 803 and 806 of Lhe new
Clvll Code reveals LhaL whlle LesLaLor and wlLnesses slgn ln Lhe presence of each oLherţ all LhaL ls
LhereafLer requlred ls LhaL ƍevery wlll musL be acknowledged before a noLary publlc by Lhe LesLaLor
and Lhe wlLnessesƍ (ArLŦ 806)Ť lŦeŦţ LhaL Lhe laLLer should avow Lo Lhe cerLlfylng offlcer Lhe

auLhenLlclLy of Lhelr slgnaLures and Lhe volunLarlness of Lhelr acLlons ln execuLlng Lhe LesLamenLary
dlsposlLlonŦ 1hls was done ln Lhls caseŦ
1he subsequenL slgnlng and seallng by Lhe noLary of hls cerLlflcaLlon LhaL Lhe LesLamenL
was duly acknowledged by Lhe parLlclpanLs Lhereln ls no parL of Lhe acknowledgmenL lLself nor of
Lhe LesLamenLary acLŦ Pence Lhelr separaLe execuLlon ouL of Lhe presence of Lhe LesLaLrlx and her
wlLnesses cannoL be sald Lo
vlolaLe Lhe rule LhaL LesLamenLs should be compleLed wlLhouL lnLerrupLlonŦ lL ls noLeworLhy LhaL
ArLlcle 806 of Lhe new Clvll Code does noL conLaln words requlrlng LhaL Lhe LesLaLor and Lhe
wlLnesses should acknowledge Lhe LesLamenL on Lhe same day or occaslon LhaL lL was execuLedŦ

Cruz vsŦ V|||asorţ
Gk# LŴ32213ţ NovŦ 26ţ 1973
S4 SCkA 31

lacLsť
1he Cll of Cebu allowed Lhe probaLe of valenLe ZŦ Cruz's lasL wlll and LesLamenLŦ Pls survlvlng
spouseţ AgaplLa Cruzţ opposed Lhe allowance of Lhe wlll alleglng lL was execuLed Lhrough fraudţ
decelLţ mlsrepresenLaLlon and undue lnfluenceŤ LhaL Lhe sald lnsLrumenL was execuLe wlLhouL Lhe
LesLaLor havlng been fully lnformed of Lhe conLenL Lhereofţ parLlcularly as Lo whaL properLles he
was dlsposlng and LhaL Lhe supposed lasL wlll and LesLamenL was noL execuLed ln accordance wlLh
lawŦ AgaplLa appealed Lhe allowance of Lhe wlll by cerLlorarlŦ

lssueť
W/n Lhe wlll was execuLed ln accordance wlLh law (parLlcularly ArLlcles 803 and 806 of
Lhe nCCţ Lhe flrsL requlrlng aL leasL Lhree credlble wlLnesses Lo aLLesL and subscrlbe Lo Lhe wlllţ and
Lhe second requlrlng Lhe LesLaLor and Lhe wlLnesses Lo acknowledge Lhe wlll before a noLary
publlcŦ)Ŧ

Peldť
nCŦ Cf Lhe Lhree lnsLrumenLal wlLnesses Lo Lhe wlllţ one of Lhem (ALLyŦ 1eves) ls aL Lhe
same Llme Lhe noLary Þubllc before whom Lhe wlll was supposed Lo have been acknowledgedŦ 1he
noLary publlc before whom Lhe wlll was acknowledged cannoL be consldered as Lhe Lhlrd
lnsLrumenLal wlLness slnce he cannoL acknowledge before hlmself hls havlng slgned Lhe wlllŦ
1o acknowledge before means Lo avow (!avellana vŦ LedesmaŤ CasLro vŦ CasLro)Ť Lo own as genulneţ
Lo assenLţ Lo admlLŤ and ƍbeforeƍ means ln fronL or precedlng ln space or ahead ofŦ ConsequenLlyţ lf
Lhe Lhlrd wlLness were Lhe noLary publlc hlmselfţ he would have Lo avow assenLţ or admlL hls havlng
slgned Lhe wlll ln fronL of hlmselfŦ 1hls cannoL be done because he cannoL spllL hls personallLy lnLo
Lwo so LhaL one wlll appear before Lhe oLher Lo acknowledge hls parLlclpaLlon ln Lhe maklng of Lhe
wlllŦ 1o permlL such a slLuaLlon Lo obLaln would be sancLlonlng a sheer absurdlLyŦ lurLhermoreţ Lhe
funcLlon of a noLary publlc lsţ among oLhersţ Lo guard agalnsL any lllegal or lmmoral arrangemenL
(8allnon vŦ ue Leon)Ŧ 1haL funcLlon would defeaLed lf Lhe noLary publlc were one of Lhe aLLesLlng
lnsLrumenLal wlLnessesŦ lL would place hlm ln lnconslsLenL poslLlon and Lhe very purpose of
acknowledgmenLţ whlch ls Lo mlnlmlze fraudţ would be LhwarLedŦ
AdmlLLedlyţ Lhere are Amerlcan precedenLs holdlng LhaL noLary publlc mayţ ln addlLlonţ
acL as a wlLness Lo Lhe execuLlve of Lhe documenL he has noLarlzedŦ 1here are oLhers holdlng LhaL
hls slgnlng merely as noLary ln a wlll noneLheless makes hlm a wlLness LhereonŦ 8uL Lhese
auLhorlLles do noL serve Lhe purpose of Lhe law ln Lhls [urlsdlcLlon or are noL declslve of Lhe lssue
hereln because Lhe noLarles publlc and wlLnesses referred Lo ln Lhese cases merely acLed as
lnsLrumenLalţ subscrlblng aLLesLlng wlLnessesţ and noL as acknowledglng wlLnessesŦ Pereţ Lhe
noLary publlc acLed noL only as aLLesLlng wlLness buL also acknowledglng wlLnessţ a slLuaLlon noL
envlsaged by ArLlcle 803Ŵ06Ŧ ÞrobaLe of wlll seL asldeŦ

Azue|a vŦ CA
Gk# 122880ţ Apr||Ŧ 12ţ 2006
487 SCkA 119

lacLsť
lellx Azuela flled a peLlLlon wlLh Lhe Lrlal courL for Lhe probaLe of a noLarlal wlll purporLedly
execuLed by Lugenla LŦ lgsolo on !une 10ţ 1981 and noLarlzed on Lhe same dayŦ 1he wlll conslsLed
of Lwo (2) pages and was wrlLLen ln llllplnoŦ 1he aLLesLaLlon clause dld noL sLaLe Lhe number of
pages and lL was noL slgned by Lhe aLLesLlng wlLnesses aL Lhe boLLom LhereofŦ 1he sald wlLnesses
afflxed Lhelr slgnaLures on Lhe lefLŴhand margln of boLh pages of Lhe wlll LhoughŦ
Ceralda CasLlllo opposed Lhe peLlLlonţ clalmlng LhaL Lhe wlll was a forgeryŦ She also argued LhaL Lhe
wlll was noL execuLed and aLLesLed Lo ln accordance wlLh lawŦ She polnLed ouL LhaL Lhe decedenLƌs
slgnaLure dld noL appear on Lhe second page of Lhe wlllţ and Lhe wlll was noL properly
acknowledgedŦ
1he Lrlal courL held Lhe wlll Lo be auLhenLlc and Lo have been execuLed ln accordance wlLh law andţ
Lhusţ admlLLed lL Lo probaLeŦ Accordlng Lo Lhe Lrlal courLţ Lhe declaraLlon aL Lhe end of Lhe wlll
under Lhe subŴLlLleţ ƍÞaLunay ng Mga Sakslţƍ comprlsed Lhe aLLesLaLlon clause and Lhe
acknowledgemenLţ and was a subsLanLlal compllance wlLh Lhe requlremenLs of Lhe lawŦ lL also held
LhaL Lhe slgnlng by Lhe subscrlblng wlLnesses on Lhe lefL margln of Lhe second page of Lhe wlll
conLalnlng Lhe aLLesLaLlon clause and acknowledgmenLţ lnsLead of aL Lhe boLLom Lhereofţ
subsLanLlally saLlsfled Lhe purpose of ldenLlflcaLlon and aLLesLaLlon of Lhe wlllŦ
1he CourL of Appealsţ howeverţ reversed Lhe Lrlal courLƌs declslon and ordered Lhe dlsmlssal of Lhe
peLlLlon for probaLeŦ lL noLed LhaL Lhe aLLesLaLlon clause falled Lo sLaLe Lhe number of pages used ln
Lhe wlllţ Lhus renderlng Lhe wlll vold and undeservlng of probaLeŦ
Azuela argues LhaL Lhe requlremenL under ArLlcle 803 of Lhe Clvll Code LhaL ƍLhe number of pages
used ln a noLarlal wlll be sLaLed ln Lhe aLLesLaLlon clauseƍ ls merely dlrecLoryţ raLher Lhan
mandaLoryţ and Lhus suscepLlble Lo whaL he Lermed as ƍLhe subsLanLlal compllance ruleŦƍ

lssueť
WheLher or noL Lhe sub[ecL wlll complled wlLh Lhe requlremenLs of Lhe law andţ henceţ should be
admlLLed Lo probaLe

Peldť
noŦ A wlll whose aLLesLaLlon clause does noL conLaln Lhe number of pages on whlch Lhe wlll ls
wrlLLen ls faLally defecLlveŦ A wlll whose aLLesLaLlon clause ls noL slgned by Lhe lnsLrumenLal
wlLnesses ls faLally defecLlveŦ And perhaps mosL lmporLanLlyţ a wlll whlch does noL conLaln an
acknowledgmenLţ buL a mere [uraLţ ls faLally defecLlveŦ Any one of Lhese defecLs ls sufflclenL Lo
deny probaLeŦ A noLarlal wlll wlLh all Lhree defecLs ls [usL achlng for [udlclal re[ecLlonŦ
Þrlor Lo Lhe new Clvll Codeţ Lhe sLaLuLory provlslon governlng Lhe formal requlremenLs of wllls was
SecLlon 618 of Lhe Code of Clvll ÞrocedureŦ LxLanL Lherefrom ls Lhe requlremenL LhaL Lhe
aLLesLaLlon sLaLe Lhe number of pages of Lhe wlllŦ 1he enacLmenL of Lhe new Clvll Code puL ln force
a rule of lnLerpreLaLlon of Lhe requlremenLs of wlllsţ aL leasL lnsofar as Lhe aLLesLaLlon clause ls

concernedţ LhaL may vary from Lhe phllosophy LhaL governed Lhe sald SecLlon 618Ŧ ArLlcle 809 of
Lhe Clvll Codeţ Lhe Code Commlsslon opLed Lo recommend a more llberal consLrucLlon Lhrough Lhe
ƍsubsLanLlal compllance ruleŦƍ
Poweverţ !usLlce !Ŧ8ŦLŦ 8eyes cauLloned LhaL Lhe rule ƍmusL be llmlLed Lo dlsregardlng Lhose defecLs
LhaL can be supplled by an examlnaLlon of Lhe wlll lLselfť wheLher all Lhe pages are consecuLlvely
numberedŤ wheLher Lhe slgnaLures appear ln each and every pageŤ wheLher Lhe subscrlblng
wlLnesses are Lhree or Lhe wlll was noLarlzedŦŦŦ8uL Lhe LoLal number of pagesţ and wheLher all
persons requlred Lo slgn dld so ln Lhe presence of each oLher musL subsLanLlally appear ln Lhe
aLLesLaLlon clauseţ belng Lhe only check agalnsL per[ury ln Lhe probaLe proceedlngsŦƍ
1he CourL suggesLed ln Caneda vŦ CourL of Appeals (CŦ8Ŧ noŦ 103334ţ May 28ţ 1993ţ 222 SC8A 781)
LhaL Lhere ls subsLanLlal compllance wlLh Lhls requlremenL lf Lhe wlll sLaLes elsewhere ln lL how
many pages lL ls comprlsed ofţ as was Lhe slLuaLlon ln Slngson and 1aboadaŦ ln Lhls caseţ howeverţ
Lhere could have been no subsLanLlal compllance wlLh Lhe requlremenLs under ArLŦ 803 of Lhe Clvll
Code slnce Lhere ls no sLaLemenL ln Lhe aLLesLaLlon clause or anywhere ln Lhe wlll lLself as Lo Lhe
number of pages whlch comprlse Lhe wlllŦ 1here was an lncompleLe aLLempL Lo comply wlLh Lhls
requlslLeţ a space havlng been alloLLed for Lhe lnserLlon of Lhe number of pages ln Lhe aLLesLaLlon
clauseŦ ?eL Lhe blank was never fllled lnŦ
1he sub[ecL wlll cannoL be consldered Lo have been valldly aLLesLed Lo by Lhe lnsLrumenLal
wlLnessesŦ Whlle Lhe slgnaLures of Lhe lnsLrumenLal wlLnesses appear on Lhe lefLŴhand margln of
Lhe wlllţ Lhey do noL appear aL Lhe boLLom of Lhe aLLesLaLlon clauseŦ ArLŦ 803 parLlcularly segregaLes
Lhe requlremenL LhaL Lhe lnsLrumenLal wlLnesses slgn each page of Lhe wlllţ from Lhe requlslLe LhaL
Lhe wlll be aLLesLed and subscrlbed by LhemŦ 1he slgnaLures on Lhe lefLŴhand corner of every page
slgnlfyţ among oLhersţ LhaL Lhe wlLnesses are aware LhaL Lhe page Lhey are slgnlng forms parL of Lhe
wlllŦ Cn Lhe oLher handţ Lhe slgnaLures Lo Lhe aLLesLaLlon clause esLabllsh LhaL Lhe wlLnesses are
referrlng Lo Lhe sLaLemenLs conLalned ln Lhe aLLesLaLlon clause lLselfŦ An unslgned aLLesLaLlon
clause resulLs ln an unaLLesLed wlllŦ Lven lf Lhe lnsLrumenLal wlLnesses slgned Lhe lefLŴhand margln
of Lhe page conLalnlng Lhe unslgned aLLesLaLlon clauseţ such slgnaLures cannoL demonsLraLe Lhese
wlLnessesƌ underLaklngs ln Lhe clauseţ slnce Lhe slgnaLures LhaL do appear on Lhe page were
dlrecLed Lowards a wholly dlfferenL avowalŦ
1he noLary publlc who noLarlzed Lhe sub[ecL wlll wroLeţ ƍnllagdaan ko aL nlnoLarlo ko ngayong 10
ng Punyo 10 (slc)ţ 1981 dlLo sa Lungsod ng MaynllaŦ ƍ 8y no manner of conLemplaLlon can Lhese
words be consLrued as an acknowledgmenLŦ An acknowledgmenL ls Lhe acL of one who has
execuLed a deed ln golng before some compeLenL offlcer or courL and declarlng lL Lo be hls acL or
deedŦ lL mlghL be posslble Lo consLrue Lhe avermenL as a [uraLţ even Lhough lL does noL follow Lo
Lhe usual language LhereofŦ A [uraL ls LhaL parL of an affldavlL where Lhe noLary cerLlfles LhaL before
hlm/herţ Lhe documenL was subscrlbed and sworn Lo by Lhe execuLorŦ lL may noL have been sald
beforeţ buL a noLarlal wlll LhaL ls noL acknowledged before a noLary publlc by Lhe LesLaLor and Lhe
wlLnesses ls faLally defecLlveţ even lf lL ls subscrlbed and sworn Lo before a noLary publlcŦ
1he lmporLance of Lhe requlremenL of acknowledgmenL ls hlghllghLed by Lhe facL LhaL lL had been
segregaLed from Lhe oLher requlremenLs under ArLŦ 803 and enLrusLed lnLo a separaLe provlslonţ
ArLŦ 806Ŧ 1he express requlremenL of ArLŦ 806 ls LhaL Lhe wlll be ƍacknowledgedƍţ and noL merely
subscrlbed and sworn LoŦ 1he acknowledgmenL coerces Lhe LesLaLor and Lhe lnsLrumenLal
wlLnesses Lo declare before an offlcer of Lhe law LhaL Lhey had execuLed and subscrlbed Lo Lhe wlll
as Lhelr own free acL or deedŦ Such declaraLlon ls under oaLh and under paln of per[uryţ Lhus
allowlng for Lhe crlmlnal prosecuLlon of persons who parLlclpaLe ln Lhe execuLlon of spurlous wlllsţ
or Lhose execuLed wlLhouL Lhe free consenL of Lhe LesLaLorŦ lL also provldes a furLher degree of
assurance LhaL Lhe LesLaLor ls of cerLaln mlndseL ln maklng Lhe LesLamenLary dlsposlLlons Lo Lhose
persons he/she had deslgnaLed ln Lhe wlllŦ


Garc|a vsŦ Vasquezţ
Gk# LŴ2661Sţ Apr||Ŧ 30ţ 1970
32 SCkA 489

lacLsť
1hls ls a peLlLlon for appeal from Lhe Cll of Manlla admlLLlng Lo probaLe Lhe wlll of
Cllcerla Avellno del 8osarlo (ºCllcerla") execuLed ln 1960Ŧ Llkewlseţ Lhls ls also an appeal Lo remove
Lhe
currenL admlnlsLraLorţ Consuelo ConzalesŴÞrecllla( ºConsuelo") as speclal admlnlsLraLrlx of Lhe
esLaLe on Lhe ground of Consuelo possesses lnLeresL adverse Lo Lhe esLaLe and Lo order Lhe 8u of
Manlla Lo annoLaLe on Lhe reglsLered lands a noLlce of Lls ÞendensŦ
When Cllcerla dled she had no descendanLsţ ascendanLsţ bros or slsses and 90 yrs oldŦ
AfLer whlchţ her nleceţ Consuelo peLlLloned Lhe courL Lo be Lhe admlnlsLraLrlx of Lhe properLlesŦ
1he courL approved Lhls because Consuelo has been was already managlng Lhe properLles of Lhe
deceased durlng her llfeLlmeŦ WhaL Lhe respondenLs allege ls LhaL ln Lhe lasL years of Lhe deceasedţ
Consuelo soughL Lhe Lransfer of cerLaln parcels of land valued aL 300k for a sale prlce of 30k Lo her
husband Alfonso Lhrough fraud and lnLlmldaLlonŦ ln addlLlonţ Lhe opposlLors presenLed evldence
LhaL Consuelo asked Lhe courL Lo lssue new CerLlflcaLes of 1lLles Lo cerLaln parcels of land for Lhe
purpose of preparlng Lhe lnvenLory Lo be used ln Lhe probaLeŦ Also shown was LhaL nLW 1C1s were
lssued by Lhe 8u for cerLaln lands of Lhe deceased afLer Consuelo asked for Lhe old 1C1sŦ
AL Lhe end of Lhe probaLe proceedlngsţ Lhe courL ruled LhaL Counsuelo should be made
Lhe admlnlsLraLorţ and LhaL Lhe wlll was duly execuLed because of Lhese reasonsť nC LvluLnCL PAS
8LLn Þ8LSLn1Lu Lo esLabllsh LhaL Lhe deceased was noL of sound mlndţ
LhaL evenLough Lhe allegaLlons sLaLe LhaL Lhe deceased prepared anoLher wlll ln 1936 (12pages)ţ
Lhe laLLer ls noL prevenLed from execuLlng anoLher wlll ln 1960 (1page)ţ and LhaL lnconslsLencles ln
Lhe LesLlmonles of Lhe wlLnesses prove Lhelr LruLhfulnessŦ

lssueť
Was Lhe wlll ln 1960 (1 page) duly/properly execuLed?

Peldť
nCŦ Þrovlslon of ArLlcle 808 mandaLoryŦ 1hereforeţ lor all lnLenLs and purposes of Lhe
rules on probaLeţ Lhe LesLaLrlx was llke a bllnd LesLaLorţ and Lhe due execuLlon of her wlll would
have
requlred observance of ArLlcle 808Ŧ 1he raLlonale behlnd Lhe requlremenL of readlng Lhe wlll Lo Lhe
LesLaLor lf he ls bllnd or lncapable of readlng Lhe wlll hlmself (as when he ls llllLeraLe)ţ ls Lo make
Lhe provlslons Lhereof known Lo hlmţ so LhaL he may be able Lo ob[ecL lf Lhey are noL ln accordance
wlLh hls wlshesŦ Llkewlseţ Lhe 1970 wlll was done ln 1agalog whlch Lhe deceased ls noL well versed
buL ln SpanlshŦ 1hls creaLes doubL as Lo Lhe due execuLlon of Lhe wlll and as well as Lhe
Lypographlcal errors conLaln Lhereln whlch show Lhe hasLe ln preparlng Lhe 1 page wlll as
compared Lo Lhe 12 page wlll creaLed ln 1936 wrlLLen ln SpanlshŦ ALSCţ as Lo Lhe bllndnessţ Lhere
was proof glven by Lhe LesLlmony of Lhe docLor LhaL Lhe deceased could noL read aL near dlsLances
because of caLaracLsŦ (1esLaLrlx's vlslon was malnly for vlewlng dlsLanL ob[ecLs and noL for readlng

prlnLŦ) Slnce Lhere ls no proof LhaL lL was read Lo Lhe deceased Lwlceţ Lhe wlll was nC1 duly
execuLedŦ
ALSCţ Consuelo should be removed as admlnlsLraLor because she ls noL expecLed Lo sue
her own husband Lo reconvey Lhe lands Lo Lhe esLaLe alleged Lo have been Lransferred by Lhe
deceased Lo her own husbandŦ
1he noLlce of lls pendens ls also noL proper where Lhe lssue ls noL an acLlon ln remţ
affecLlng real properLy or Lhe LlLle LhereLoŦ

A|varado vsŦ Gav|o|aţ IrŦţ
Gk # 7469Sţ SeptŦ 14ţ 1993
226 SCkA 348

lacLsť
Cn 3 november 1977ţ 79Ŵyear old 8rlgldo Alvarado execuLed a noLarlal wlll enLlLled
ºPullng Pabllln" whereln he dlslnherlLed an llleglLlmaLe sonţ peLlLloner Cesar Alvaradoţ and
expressly revoked a prevlously execuLed holographlc wlll aL Lhe Llme awalLlng probaLe before Lhe
81C of LagunaŦ Accordlng Lo 8ayanl MaŦ 8lnoţ prlvaLe respondenLţ he was presenL when Lhe sald
noLarlal wlll was execuLedţ LogeLher wlLh Lhree lnsLrumenLal wlLnesses and Lhe noLary publlcţ
where Lhe LesLaLor dld noL read Lhe wlll hlmselfţ sufferlng as he dld from glaucomaŦ
8lnoţ a lawyerţ drafLed Lhe elghLŴpage documenL and read Lhe same aloud before Lhe
LesLaLorţ Lhe Lhree lnsLrumenLal wlLnesses and Lhe noLary publlcţ Lhe laLLer four followlng Lhe
readlng wlLh Lhelr own respecLlve coples prevlously furnlshed LhemŦ
1hereafLerţ a codlcll enLlLled ºkasulaLan ng Þagbabago ng llang Þagpapaslya na
nasasaad sa Pullng Pabllln na May ÞeLsa noblembre 3ţ 1977 nl 8rlgldo Alvarado" was execuLed
changlng
some dlsposlLlons ln Lhe noLarlal wlll Lo generaLe cash for Lhe LesLaLor's eye operaLlonŦ Sald codlcll
was llkewlse noL read by 8rlgldo Alvarado and was read ln Lhe same manner as wlLh Lhe prevlously
execuLed wlllŦ
When Lhe noLarlal wlll was submlLLed Lo Lhe courL for probaLeţ Cesar Alvarado flled hls
opposlLlon as he sald LhaL Lhe wlll was noL execuLed and aLLesLed as requlred by lawŤ LhaL Lhe
LesLaLor was lnsane or menLally lncapaclLaLed due Lo senlllLy and old ageŤ LhaL Lhe wlll was
execuLed under duressţ or lnfluence of fear or LhreaLsŤ LhaL lL was procured by undue pressure and
lnfluence on Lhe parL of Lhe beneflclaryŤ and LhaL Lhe slgnaLure of Lhe LesLaLor was procured by
fraud or LrlckŦ

lssueť
W/n noLarlal wlll of 8rlgldo Alvarado should be admlLLed Lo probaLe desplLe allegaLlons
of defecLs ln Lhe execuLlon and aLLesLaLlon Lhereof as LesLaLor was allegedly bllnd aL Lhe Llme of
execuLlon and Lhe doubleŴreadlng requlremenL under ArLŦ 808 of Lhe nCC was noL complled wlLhŦ

Peldť
?LSŦ 1he splrlL behlnd Lhe law was served Lhough Lhe leLLer was noLŦ AlLhough Lhere
should be sLrlcL compllance wlLh Lhe subsLanLlal requlremenLs of law ln order Lo lnsure Lhe
auLhenLlclLy of Lhe wlllţ Lhe formal lmperfecLlons should be brushed aslde when Lhey do noL affecL
lLs purpose and whlchţ when Laken lnLo accounLţ may only defeaL Lhe LesLaLor's wlllŦ
Cesar Alvardo was correcL ln asserLlng LhaL hls faLher was noL LoLally bllnd (of counLlng
flngers aL 3 feeL) when Lhe wlll and codlcll were execuLedţ buL he can be so consldered for purposes
of ArLŦ 808Ŧ
1haL ArLŦ 808 was noL followed sLrlcLly ls beyond cavllŦ Poweverţ ln Lhe case aL barţ
Lhere was subsLanLlal compllance where Lhe purpose of Lhe law has been saLlsfledť LhaL of maklng
Lhe provlslons known Lo Lhe LesLaLor who ls bllnd or lncapable of readlng Lhe wlll hlmself (as when
he ls llllLeraLe) and enabllng hlm Lo ob[ecL lf Lhey do noL accord wlLh hls wlshesŦ
8lno read Lhe LesLaLor's wlll and codlcll aloud ln Lhe presence of Lhe LesLaLorţ hls Lhree
lnsLrumenLal wlLnessesţ and Lhe noLary publlcŦ Þrlor and subsequenL LhereLoţ Lhe LesLaLor afflrmedţ
upon belng askedţ LhaL Lhe conLenLs read corresponded wlLh hls lnsLrucLlonsŦ Cnly Lhen dld Lhe
slgnlng and acknowledgmenL Lake placeŦ
1here ls no evldence LhaL Lhe conLenLs of Lhe wlll and Lhe codlcll were noL sufflclenLly
made known and communlcaLed Lo Lhe LesLaLorŦ WlLh four personsţ mosLly known Lo Lhe LesLaLorţ
followlng Lhe readlng word for word wlLh Lhelr own coplesţ lL can be safely concluded LhaL Lhe
LesLaLor was reasonably assured LhaL whaL was read Lo hlm were Lhe Lerms acLually appearlng on
Lhe LypewrlLLen documenLsŦ
1he raLlonale behlnd Lhe requlremenL of readlng Lhe wlll Lo Lhe LesLaLor lf he ls bllnd or
lncapable of readlng Lhe wlll Lo hlmself (as when he ls llllLeraLe)ţ ls Lo make Lhe provlslons Lhereof
known Lo hlmţ so LhaL he may be able Lo ob[ecL lf Lhey are noL ln accordance wlLh hls wlshesŦ
AlLhough Lhere should be sLrlcL compllance wlLh Lhe subsLanLlal requlremenLs of law ln
order Lo lnsure Lhe auLhenLlclLy of Lhe wlllţ Lhe formal lmperfecLlons should be brushed aslde when
Lhey do noL affecL lLs purpose and whlchţ when Laken lnLo accounLţ may only defeaL Lhe LesLaLor's
wlllŦ

koxas vsŦ De Iesusţ
Gk #Ŧ LŴ38338ţ IanŦ 28ţ 198S
134 SCkA 24S

lacLsť A speclalproceedlng for Lhe seLLlemenL of Lhe esLaLe of Andres de !esus and 8lblana 8oxas de
!esus was flleds by Slmon 8oxasŦ uurlng such proceedlng he dellvered Lo Lhe courL a noLebook
purporLlng Lo be Lhe holographlc wlll of deceased 8lblanaŦ Sald wlll was daLed lebŦ 61 Lo whlch Lhe
courL admlLLed Lo probaLeŦ Luz 8oxas Lhen quesLloned Lhlsa acL of Lhe courL conLendlng LhaL sald
wlll should noL be probaLed because lL ls noL properly daLed as requlred by lawŦ

lssueť WheLher Lhe sald wlll lndlcaLlng only Lhe monLh and year (lebŦ 61) ls properly daLed and
hence musL be probaLedŦ

Peldť?esţ Lhe sald wlll musL be probaLed as Lhere ls subsLanLlal compllance wlLh Lhe requlremenL of
Lhe lawŦ As a general ruleţ Lhe ºdaLe' ln a holographlc wlll should lnclude Lhe dayţ monLhţ and year
of lLs execuLlonŦ Poweverţ when ln Lhe case aL barţ Lhere ls no appearance of fraudţ bad falLhţ
undue lnfluence and pressure and Lhe auLhenLlclLy of Lhe wlll ls esLabllshedţ and Lhe only lssue ls
Lhe daLe ºlL8/61" appearlng ln Lhe sald holographlc wlllţ probaLe of sald wlll should Lherefore be
allowed under Lhe prlnclple of subsLanLlal compllanceŦ

Labrador vsŦ CAţ
C8# 83843Ŵ44ţ AprllŦ 3ţ 1990
184 SC8A 170

lAC1Sť Cn !une 10ţ 1972ţ Meleclo Labrador dled leavlng behlnd a parcel of land and Lhe followlng
helrsţ namelyť Sagradoţ Lnrlcaţ CrlsLobalţ !esusţ Caudencloţ !oseflnaţ !ullanaţ Pllarla and !ovlLaţ all
surnamed Labradorţ and a holographlc wlllŦ

Cn !uly 28ţ 1973ţ Sagrado Labrador (now deceased buL subsLlLuLed by hls helrs)ţ Lnrlca Labrador
and CrlsLobal Labradorţ flled a peLlLlon for Lhe probaLe Lhe alleged holographlc wlll of Lhe laLe
Meleclo LabradorŦ

SubsequenLlyţ on SepLember 30ţ 1973ţ !esus Labrador (now deceased buL subsLlLuLed by hls helrs)ţ
and Caudenclo Labrador flled an opposlLlon Lo Lhe peLlLlon on Lhe ground LhaL Lhe wlll has been
exLlngulshed or revoked by lmpllcaLlon of lawţ alleglng Lhereln LhaL on SepLember 30ţ 1971ţ before
Melecloƌs deaLhţ LesLaLor Meleclo execuLed a ueed of AbsoluLe Saleţ selllng ln favor of opposlLors
!esus and Caudenclo Lhe parcel of landŦ Larller howeverţ ln 1973ţ !esus Labrador sold sald parcel of
land Lo navaL for only llve 1housand (Þ3ţ000) ÞesosŦ

Sagrado flledţ on november 28ţ 1973ţ agalnsL hls broLhersţ Caudenclo and !esusţ for Lhe annulmenL
of sald purporLed ueed of AbsoluLe Sale over a parcel of land whlch Sagrado allegedly had already
acqulred by devlse from Lhelr faLher Meleclo Labrador under a holographlc wlll execuLed on March
17ţ 1968Ŧ

1he Lrlal courL allowed Lhe probaLe of Lhe holographlc wlll and declared null and vold Lhe ueed of
AbsoluLe saleŦ Cn appeal Lhe CAmodlfled sald declslon of Lhe courL a quo by denylng Lhe allowance
of Lhe probaLe of Lhe wlll for belng undaLedŦ

lSSuLť WheLher or noL Lhe alleged holographlc wlll of one Meleclo Labrador ls daLedţ as provlded
for ln ArLlcle 810 of Lhe new Clvll CodeŦ

PLLuť 1he alleged undaLed holographlc wlll wrlLLen ln llocano LranslaLed lnLo Lngllshţ
l Ÿ llrsL Þage
ŧŧŧŦxxxxx
ll Ÿ Second Þage
And Lhls ls Lhe day ln whlch we agreed LhaL we are maklng Lhe parLlLlonlng and asslgnlng Lhe
respecLlve asslgnmenL of Lhe sald flshpondţ and Lhls belng ln Lhe monLh of Marchţ 17Lh dayţ ln Lhe
year 1968ţ and Lhls declslon and or lnsLrucLlon of mlne ls Lhe maLLer Lo be followedŦ And Lhe one
who made Lhls wrlLlng ls no oLher Lhan MLLLClC LA88AuC8ţ Lhelr faLherŦ
ŧŦŦxxxxx
lll Ÿ 1Pl8u ÞACL
ŧŧŦxxxx

1he peLlLlonţ whlch prlnclpally alleges LhaL Lhe holographlc wlll ls really daLedţ alLhough Lhe daLe ls
noL ln lLs usual placeţ ls lmpressed wlLh merlLŦ

1he wlll has been daLed ln Lhe hand of Lhe LesLaLor hlmself ln perfecL compllance wlLh ArLlcle 810Ŧ
lL ls worLhy of noLe Lo quoLe Lhe flrsL paragraph of Lhe second page of Lhe holographlc wlllţ vlzť
And Lhls ls Lhe day ln whlch we agreed LhaL we are maklng Lhe parLlLlonlng and asslgnlng Lhe
respecLlve asslgnmenL of Lhe sald flshpondţ and Lhls belng ln Lhe monLh of Marchţ 17Lh dayţ ln Lhe
year 1968ţ and Lhls declslon and or lnsLrucLlon of mlne ls Lhe maLLer Lo be followedŦ And Lhe one
who made Lhls wrlLlng ls no oLher Lhan MLLLClC LA88AuC8ţ Lhelr faLherŦ (emphasls supplled)

1he law does noL speclfy a parLlcular locaLlon where Lhe daLe should be placed ln Lhe wlllŦ 1he only
requlremenLs are LhaL Lhe daLe be ln Lhe wlll lLself and execuLed ln Lhe hand of Lhe LesLaLorŦ 1hese
requlremenLs are presenL ln Lhe sub[ecL wlllŦ

8espondenLs clalm LhaL Lhe daLe 17 March 1968 ln Lhe wlll was when Lhe LesLaLor and hls
beneflclarles enLered lnLo an agreemenL among Lhemselves abouL ƍLhe parLlLlonlng and asslgnlng
Lhe respecLlve asslgnmenLs of Lhe sald flshpondţƍ and was noL Lhe daLe of execuLlon of Lhe
holographlc wlllŤ henceţ Lhe wlll ls more of an ƍagreemenLƍ beLween Lhe LesLaLor and Lhe
beneflclarles Lhereof Lo Lhe pre[udlce of oLher compulsory helrs llke Lhe respondenLsŦ 1hls was Lhus
a fallure Lo comply wlLh ArLlcle 783 whlch deflnes a wlll as ƍan acL whereby a person ls permlLLedţ
wlLh Lhe formallLles prescrlbed by lawţ Lo conLrol Lo a cerLaln degree Lhe dlsposlLlon of hls esLaLeţ
Lo Lake effecL afLer hls deaLhŦƍ

8espondenLs are ln errorŦ 1he lnLenLlon Lo show 17 March 1968 as Lhe daLe of Lhe execuLlon of Lhe
wlll ls plaln from Lhe Lenor of Lhe succeedlng words of Lhe paragraphŦ As apLly puL by peLlLlonerţ Lhe
wlll was noL an agreemenL buL a unllaLeral acL of Meleclo Labrador who plalnly knew LhaL whaL he
was execuLlng was a wlllŦ 1he acL of parLlLlonlng and Lhe declaraLlon LhaL such parLlLlonlng as Lhe
LesLaLorƌs lnsLrucLlon or declslon Lo be followed reveal LhaL Meleclo Labrador was fully aware of Lhe
naLure of Lhe esLaLe properLy Lo be dlsposed of and of Lhe characLer of Lhe LesLamenLary acL as a
means Lo conLrol Lhe dlsposlLlon of hls esLaLeŦ

ka|aw vsŦ ke|ovaţ
Gk #Ŧ LŴ40207ţ SeptŦ 28ţ 1984
132 SCkA 237

lacLsť naLlvldad kŦ kalaw dled wlLh a holographlc Wlll whlchţ as flrsL wrlLLenţ named her slsLer 8osa
kŦ kalaw as her sole helrŦ Poweverţ Lhere ls an alLeraLlon (crosslng ouL ƍslsLer 8osa kŦ kalawƍ and
lnserLlng ƍbroLher Cregorlo kalawƍ as sole helr) wlLhouL Lhe proper auLhenLlcaLlon by Lhe full
slgnaLure of Lhe LesLaLrlx as requlred by ArLlcle 814 of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ Cregorlo flled for Lhe probaLe
of Lhe Wlllţ buL lL was opposed by 8osaŦ 1he Lrlal courL denled Lhe probaLe of Lhe WlllŦ 8osaţ on
Lhe oLher handţ flled a peLlLlon for revlew clalmlng LhaL Lhe Wlll ln lLs orlglnal form musL be
probaLed and LhaL she be declared as Lhe sole helrŦ

lssue/sť WheLher Lhe Wlll be admlLLed Lo probaLe alLhough Lhe alLeraLlons and/or lnserLlons or
addlLlons were noL auLhenLlcaLed by Lhe full slgnaLure of Lhe LesLaLrlx pursuanL Lo ArLŦ 814 of Lhe
Clvll CodeŤ or wheLher Lhe Wlll ln lLs orlglnal unalLered form declarlng 8osa kalaw as sole helr be
probaLedŦ

Peldť Crdlnarllyţ when a number of erasuresţ correcLlonsţ and lnLerllneaLlons made by Lhe LesLaLor
ln a holographlc Wlll have noL been noLed under hls slgnaLureţ Ŧ Ŧ Ŧ Lhe Wlll ls noL Lhereby
lnvalldaLed as a wholeţ buL aL mosL only as respecLs Lhe parLlcular words erasedţ correcLed or
lnLerllnedŦ Poweverţ when as ln Lhls caseţ Lhe holographlc Wlll ln dlspuLe had only one subsLanLlal
provlslonţ whlch was alLered by subsLlLuLlng Lhe orlglnal helr wlLh anoLherţ buL whlch alLeraLlon dld
noL carry Lhe requlslLe of full auLhenLlcaLlon by Lhe full slgnaLure of Lhe LesLaLorţ Lhe effecL musL be

LhaL Lhe enLlre Wlll ls volded or revoked for Lhe slmple reason LhaL noLhlng remalns ln Lhe Wlll afLer
LhaL whlch could remaln valldŦ 1o sLaLe LhaL Lhe Wlll as flrsL wrlLLen should be glven efflcacy ls Lo
dlsregard Lhe seemlng change of mlnd of Lhe LesLaLrlxŦ 8uL LhaL change of mlnd can nelLher be
glven effecL because she falled Lo auLhenLlcaLe lL ln Lhe manner requlred by law by afflxlng her full
slgnaLureŦ

1LLPAnkLLţ !Ŧţ concurrlngť
ÞrobaLe of Lhe radlcally alLered wlll replaclng Cregorlo for 8osa as sole helr ls properly denledţ slnce
Lhe same was noL duly auLhenLlcaLed by Lhe full slgnaLure of Lhe execuLrlx as mandaLory requlred
by ArLlcle 814 of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ 1he orlglnal unalLered wlll namlng 8osa as sole helr cannoLţ
howeverţ be glven effecL ln vlew of Lhe Lrlal courLƌs facLual flndlng LhaL Lhe LesLaLrlx had by her own
handwrlLlng subsLlLuLed Cregorlo for 8osaţ so LhaL Lhere ls no longer any wlll namlng 8osa as sole
helrŦ 1he neL resulL ls LhaL Lhe LesLaLrlx lefL no valld wlll and boLh 8osa and Cregorlo as her nexL of
kln succeed Lo her lnLesLaLe esLaLeŦ


Lchavez vsŦ Dozen consŦ
Gk# 192916] CctŦ 11ţ 2010
632 SCkA S94

lacLsť vlcenLe Lchavez (vlcenLe) was Lhe absoluLe owner of sub[ecL loLs ln Cebu ClLyŦ Cn SepLember
7ţ 1983ţ he donaLed Lhe sub[ecL loLs Lo peLlLloner Manuel Lchavez (Manuel) Lhrough a ueed of
uonaLlon MorLls CausaŦ Manuel accepLed Lhe donaLlonŦ
ln March 1986ţ vlcenLe execuLed a ConLracL Lo Sell over Lhe same loLs ln favor of uozen
ConsLrucLlon and uevelopmenL CorporaLlon (uozen CorporaLlon)Ŧ A ueeds of AbsoluLe Sale was
execuLed over Lhe same properLles covered by Lhe prevlous ConLracL Lo SellŦ
Cn november 6ţ 1986ţ vlcenLe dledŦ Lmlllano Cabanlgţ vlcenLe's nephewţ flled a peLlLlon for Lhe
seLLlemenL of vlcenLe's lnLesLaLe esLaLeŦ Cn Lhe oLher handţ Manuel flled a peLlLlon Lo approve
vlcenLe's donaLlon morLls causa ln hls favor and an acLlon Lo annul Lhe conLracLs of sale vlcenLe
execuLed ln favor of uozen CorporaLlonŦ
1he 81C dlsmlssed Manuel's peLlLlon Lo approve Lhe donaLlon and hls acLlon for annulmenL of Lhe
conLracLs of saleŦ 1he 81C found LhaL Lhe execuLlon of a ConLracL Lo Sell ln favor of uozen
CorporaLlonţ afLer vlcenLe had donaLed Lhe loLs Lo Manuelţ was an equlvocal acL LhaL revoked Lhe
donaLlonŦ 1he CA afflrmed Lhe 81C's declslonŦ 1he CA held LhaL slnce Lhe donaLlon ln favor of
Manuel was a donaLlon morLls causaţ compllance wlLh Lhe formallLles for Lhe valldlLy of wllls should
have been observedŦ 1he CA found LhaL Lhe deed of donaLlon dld noL conLaln an aLLesLaLlon clause
and was Lherefore voldŦ
Cn Appeal Lo SCţ he argues LhaL CA erred lgnorlng Lhe AcknowledgmenL porLlon of Lhe
deed of donaLlonţ whlch conLalns Lhe ºlmporL and purpose" of Lhe aLLesLaLlon clause requlred ln
Lhe execuLlon of wlllsŦ 1he AcknowledgmenL readsť
8LlC8L MLţ noLary Þubllcţ Lhls 7Lh day of SepLember 1983 aL 1allsayţ Cebuţ personally
appeared vlCLn1L SŦ Lchavez wlLh 8esŦ CerLŦ noŦ 16866094 lssued on Aprll 10ţ 1983 aL żslcŽ 1allsayţ
Cebu known Lo me Lo be Lhe same person who execuLed Lhe foregolng lnsLrumenL of ueed of
uonaLlon MorLls Causa before Lhe noLary Þubllc and ln Lhe presence of Lhe foregolng Lhree (3)
wlLnesses who slgned Lhls lnsLrumenL before and ln Lhe presence of each oLher and of Lhe noLary
Þubllc and all of Lhem acknowledge Lo me LhaL Lhe same ls Lhelr volunLary acL and deedŦ

lssueť WCn Lhe AcknowledgemenL ln Lhe ueed of donaLlon be consldered as an ALLesLaLlon clause
ln a wlll?

Peldť noŦ 1he purporLed aLLesLaLlon clause embodled ln Lhe AcknowledgmenL porLlon does noL
conLaln Lhe number of pages on whlch Lhe deed was wrlLLenŦ 1he excepLlon Lo Lhls rule ln Slngson
vŦ llorenLlno and 1aboada vŦ PonŦ 8osal cannoL be applled Lo Lhe presenL caseţ as Lhe facLs of Lhls
case are noL slmllar wlLh Lhose of Slngson and 1aboadaŦ ln Lhose casesţ Lhe CourL found LhaL
alLhough Lhe aLLesLaLlon clause falled Lo sLaLe Lhe number of pages upon whlch Lhe wlll was
wrlLLenţ Lhe number of pages was sLaLed ln one porLlon of Lhe wlllŦ 1hls ls noL Lhe facLual slLuaLlon
ln Lhe presenL caseŦ
1he SC ruledţ LhaL even granLlng LhaL Lhe AcknowledgmenL embodles whaL Lhe aLLesLaLlon clause
requlresţ we are noL prepared Lo hold LhaL an aLLesLaLlon clause and an acknowledgmenL can be
merged ln one sLaLemenLŦ
1haL Lhe requlremenLs of aLLesLaLlon and acknowledgmenL are embodled ln Lwo separaLe
provlslons of Lhe Clvll Code (ArLlcles 803 and 806ţ respecLlvely) lndlcaLes LhaL Lhe law conLemplaLes
Lwo dlsLlncL acLs LhaL serve dlfferenL purposesŦ An acknowledgmenL ls made by one execuLlng a
deedţ declarlng before a compeLenL offlcer or courL LhaL Lhe deed or acL ls hls ownŦ Cn Lhe oLher
handţ Lhe aLLesLaLlon of a wlll refers Lo Lhe acL of Lhe lnsLrumenLal wlLnesses Lhemselves who
cerLlfy Lo Lhe execuLlon of Lhe lnsLrumenL before Lhem and Lo Lhe manner of lLs execuLlonŦ
An aLLesLaLlon musL sLaLe all Lhe deLalls Lhe Lhlrd paragraph of ArLlcle 803 requlresŦ ln Lhe absence
of Lhe requlred avowal by Lhe wlLnesses Lhemselvesţ no aLLesLaLlon clause can be deemed
embodled ln Lhe AcknowledgemenL of Lhe ueed of uonaLlon MorLls CausaŦ

A[ero vsŦ CAţ
Gk# 106720ţ SeptŦ 1Sţ 1994
236 SCkA 488

lAC1Sť 1he laLe Annle Sandţ who dled on november 23ţ 1982ţ execuLed a holographlc wlll
before her deaLhŦ ln Lhe wlllţ decedenL named as devlsees among oLhersţ Lhe peLlLloners 8oberLo
and 1helma A[ero and prlvaLe respondenL ClemenLe SandŦ Cn !anuary 20ţ 1983ţ peLlLloners
lnsLlLuLed SpŦ ÞrocŦ noŦ CŴ37171 ln Lhe CC 81Cţ for allowance of decedenLƌs holographlc wlllŦ
ÞrlvaLe respondenL opposed Lhe peLlLlon on Lhe grounds LhaLť nelLher Lhe LesLamenLƌs body nor Lhe
slgnaLure Lhereln was ln decedenLƌs handwrlLlngŤ lL conLalned alLeraLlons and correcLlons whlch
were noL duly slgned by decedenLŤ andţ Lhe wlll was procured by peLlLloners Lhrough lmproper
pressure and undue lnfluenceŦ noLwlLhsLandlng Lhe opposlLlonsţ Lhe Lrlal courL admlLLed Lhe
decedenLƌs holographlc wlll Lo probaLeŦ Cn appealţ sald ueclslon was reversedţ and Lhe peLlLlon for
probaLe of decedenLƌs wlll was dlsmlssedŦ 1he CourL of Appeals found LhaLţ ƍLhe holographlc wlll
falls Lo meeL Lhe requlremenLs for lLs valldlLyŦƍ 4 lL held LhaL Lhe decedenL dld noL comply wlLh
ArLlcles 813 and 814 of Lhe new Clvll CodeŦ lL alluded Lo cerLaln dlsposlLlons ln Lhe wlll whlch were
elLher unslgned and undaLedţ or slgned buL noL daLedŦ lL also found LhaL Lhe erasuresţ alLeraLlons
and cancellaLlons made Lhereon had noL been auLhenLlcaLed by decedenLŦ
lSSuLť WCn Lhe holographlc wlll ls valldŦ
8uLlnCť 1husţ Lhls appeal whlch ls lmpressed wlLh merlLŦ
ArLlcle 839 of Lhe new Clvll Code readsť
ArLŦ 839ť 1he wlll shall be dlsallowed ln any of Lhe followlng casesŤ
(1) lf Lhe formallLles requlred by law have noL been complled wlLhŤ

(2) lf Lhe LesLaLor was lnsaneţ or oLherwlse menLally lncapable of maklng a wlllţ aL Lhe Llme of lLs
execuLlonŤ
(3) lf lL was execuLed Lhrough force or under duressţ or Lhe lnfluence of fearţ or LhreaLsŤ
(4) lf lL was procured by undue and lmproper pressure and lnfluenceţ on Lhe parL of Lhe beneflclary
or of some oLher personŤ
(3) lf Lhe slgnaLure of Lhe LesLaLor was procured by fraudŤ
(6) lf Lhe LesLaLor acLed by mlsLake or dld noL lnLend LhaL Lhe lnsLrumenL he slgned should be hls
wlll aL Lhe Llme of afflxlng hls slgnaLure LhereLoŦ
1hese llsLs are excluslveŤ no oLher grounds can serve Lo dlsallow a wlllŦ 3 1husţ ln a peLlLlon Lo admlL
a holographlc wlll Lo probaLeţ Lhe only lssues Lo be resolved areť (1) wheLher Lhe lnsLrumenL
submlLLed lsţ lndeedţ Lhe decedenLƌs lasL wlll and LesLamenLŤ (2) wheLher sald wlll was execuLed ln
accordance wlLh Lhe formallLles prescrlbed by lawŤ (3) wheLher Lhe decedenL had Lhe necessary
LesLamenLary capaclLy aL Lhe Llme Lhe wlll was execuLedŤ andţ (4) wheLher Lhe execuLlon of Lhe wlll
and lLs slgnlng were Lhe volunLary acLs of Lhe decedenLŦ 6
lor purposes of probaLlng nonŴholographlc wlllsţ Lhese formal solemnlLles lnclude Lhe subscrlpLlonţ
aLLesLaLlonţ and acknowledgmenL requlremenLs under ArLlcles 803 and 806 of Lhe new Clvll CodeŦ
ln Lhe case of holographlc wlllsţ on Lhe oLher handţ whaL assures auLhenLlclLy ls Lhe requlremenL
LhaL Lhey be LoLally auLographlc or handwrlLLen by Lhe LesLaLor hlmselfţ 7 as provlded under ArLlcle
810 of Lhe new Clvll Codeţ Lhusť
A person may execuLe a holographlc wlll whlch musL be enLlrely wrlLLenţ daLedţ and slgned by Lhe
hand of Lhe LesLaLor hlmselfŦ lL ls sub[ecL Lo no oLher formţ and may be made ln or ouL of Lhe
Þhlllpplnesţ and need noL be wlLnessedŦ (Lmphasls supplledŦ)
lallure Lo sLrlcLly observe oLher formallLles wlll noL resulL ln Lhe dlsallowance of a holographlc wlll
LhaL ls unquesLlonably handwrlLLen by Lhe LesLaLorŦ A readlng of ArLlcle 813 of Lhe new Clvll Code
shows LhaL lLs requlremenL affecLs Lhe valldlLy of Lhe dlsposlLlons conLalned ln Lhe holographlc wlllţ
buL noL lLs probaLeŦ lf Lhe LesLaLor falls Lo slgn and daLe some of Lhe dlsposlLlonsţ Lhe resulL ls LhaL
Lhese dlsposlLlons cannoL be effecLuaLedŦ Such fallureţ howeverţ does noL render Lhe whole
LesLamenL voldŦ Llkewlseţ a holographlc wlll can sLlll be admlLLed Lo probaLeţ noLwlLhsLandlng nonŴ
compllance wlLh Lhe provlslons of ArLlcle 814Ŧ 1husţ unless Lhe unauLhenLlcaLed alLeraLlonsţ
cancellaLlons or lnserLlons were made on Lhe daLe of Lhe holographlc wlll or on LesLaLorƌs slgnaLureţ
9 Lhelr presence does noL lnvalldaLe Lhe wlll lLselfŦ 10 1he lack of auLhenLlcaLlon wlll only resulL ln
dlsallowance of such changesŦ
As a general ruleţ courLs ln probaLe proceedlngs are llmlLed Lo pass only upon Lhe exLrlnslc valldlLy
of Lhe wlll soughL Lo be probaLedŦ Poweverţ ln excepLlonal lnsLancesţ courLs are noL powerless Lo
do whaL Lhe slLuaLlon consLralns Lhem Lo doţ and pass upon cerLaln provlslons of Lhe wlllŦ 11 ln Lhe
case aL benchţ decedenL herself lndublLably sLaLed ln her holographlc wlll LhaL Lhe Cabadbaran
properLy ls ln Lhe name of her laLe faLherţ !ohn PŦ Sand (whlch led opposlLor urŦ !ose A[ero Lo
quesLlon her conveyance of Lhe same ln lLs enLlreLy)Ŧ 1husţ as correcLly held by respondenL courLţ
she cannoL valldly dlspose of Lhe whole properLyţ whlch she shares wlLh her faLherƌs oLher helrsŦ


Codoy vsŦ Ca|ugayţ
Gk# 123486ţ AugŦ 12ţ 1999
312 SCkA 333

lacLsť

Cn Aprll 6ţ 1990ţ Lvangellne Calugayţ !osephlne Salcedo and Lufemla ÞaLlgasţ devlsees and legaLees
of Lhe holographlc wlll of Lhe deceased MaLllde Seno vdaŦ de 8amonalţ flled wlLh Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal
CourLţ Mlsamls CrlenLalţ 8ranch 18ţ a peLlLlon 3 for probaLe of Lhe holographlc wlll of Lhe deceasedţ
who dled on !anuary 16ţ 1990Ŧ

ln Lhe peLlLlonţ respondenLs clalmed LhaL Lhe deceased MaLllde Seno vdaŦ de 8amonalţ was of
sound and dlsposlng mlnd when she execuLed Lhe wlll on AugusL 30ţ 1978ţ LhaL Lhere was no fraudţ
undue lnfluenceţ and duress employed ln Lhe person of Lhe LesLaLorţ and Lhe wlll was wrlLLen
volunLarllyŦ 1he assessed value of Lhe decedenL's properLyţ lncludlng all real and personal properLy
was abouL Þ400ţ000Ŧ00ţ aL Lhe Llme of her deaLhŦ

Cn !une 28ţ 1990ţ Lugenla 8amonal Codoy and Manuel 8amonal flled an opposlLlon 3 Lo Lhe
peLlLlon for probaLeţ alleglng LhaL Lhe holographlc wlll was a forgery and LhaL Lhe same ls even
llleglbleŦ 1hls glves an lmpresslon LhaL a ƍLhlrd handƍ of an lnLeresLed parLy oLher Lhan Lhe ƍLrue
handƍ of MaLllde Seno vdaŦ de 8amonal execuLed Lhe holographlc wlllŦ

ÞeLlLloners argued LhaL Lhe repeaLed daLes lncorporaLed or appearlng on Lhe wlll afLer every
dlsposlLlon ls ouL of Lhe ordlnaryŦ lf Lhe deceased was Lhe one who execuLed Lhe wlllţ and was noL
forcedţ Lhe daLes and Lhe slgnaLure should appear aL Lhe boLLom afLer Lhe dlsposlLlonsţ as regularly
done and noL afLer every dlsposlLlonŦ And assumlng LhaL Lhe holographlc wlll ls ln Lhe handwrlLlng
of Lhe deceasedţ lL was procured by undue and lmproper pressure and lnfluence on Lhe parL of Lhe
beneflclarlesţ or Lhrough fraud and LrlckeryŦ

Cn uecember 12ţ 1990ţ respondenLs flled a noLlce of appealţ 8 and ln supporL of Lhelr appealţ Lhe
respondenLs once agaln relLeraLed Lhe LesLlmony of Lhe followlng wlLnessesţ namelyť (1) AugusLo
nerlŤ (2) Cenerosa SenonŤ (3) MaLllde 8amonal 8lnanayŤ (4) 1ereslLa vedadŤ (3) llscal 8odolfo
WagaŤ and (6) Lvangellne CalugayŦ

Accordlng Lo Lhe CourL of Appealsţ Lvangellne Calugayţ MaLllde 8amonal 8lnanay and oLher
wlLnesses deflnlLely and ln no uncerLaln Lerms LesLlfled LhaL Lhe handwrlLlng and slgnaLure ln Lhe
holographlc wlll were Lhose of Lhe LesLaLor herselfŦ1husţ upon Lhe unrebuLLed LesLlmony of
appellanL Lvangellne Calugay and wlLness MaLllde 8amonal 8lnanayţ Lhe CourL of Appeals
susLalned Lhe auLhenLlclLy of Lhe holographlc wlll and Lhe handwrlLlng and slgnaLure Lherelnţ and
allowed Lhe wlll Lo probaLeŦ ln Lhls peLlLlonţ Lhe peLlLloners ask wheLher Lhe provlslons of ArLlcle
811 of Lhe Clvll Code are permlsslve or mandaLoryŦ 1he arLlcle provldesţ as a requlremenL for Lhe
probaLe of a conLesLed holographlc wlllţ LhaL aL leasL Lhree wlLnesses expllclLly declare LhaL Lhe
slgnaLure ln Lhe wlll ls Lhe genulne slgnaLure of Lhe LesLaLorŦ

lssueť

WheLher or noL Lhe provlslon of ArLlcle 811 ls permlsslve or mandaLoryŦ

Peldť

We are convlncedţ based on Lhe language usedţ LhaL ArLlcle 811 of Lhe Clvll Code ls mandaLoryŦ 1he
word ƍshallƍ connoLes a mandaLory orderŦ We have ruled LhaL ƍshallƍ ln a sLaLuLe commonly

denoLes an lmperaLlve obllgaLlon and ls lnconslsLenL wlLh Lhe ldea of dlscreLlon and LhaL Lhe
presumpLlon ls LhaL Lhe word ƍshallţƍ when used ln a sLaLuLe ls mandaLoryŦƍ

Laws are enacLed Lo achleve a goal lnLended and Lo gulde agalnsL an evll or mlschlef LhaL alms Lo
prevenLŦ ln Lhe case aL barţ Lhe goal Lo achleve ls Lo glve effecL Lo Lhe wlshes of Lhe deceased and
Lhe evll Lo be prevenLed ls Lhe posslblllLy LhaL unscrupulous lndlvlduals who for Lhelr beneflL wlll
employ means Lo defeaL Lhe wlshes of Lhe LesLaLorŦ
WhaL MsŦ 8lnanay saw were preŴprepared recelpLs and leLLers of Lhe deceasedţ whlch she elLher
malled or gave Lo her LenanLsŦ She dld noL declare LhaL she saw Lhe deceased slgn a documenL or
wrlLe a noLeŦ ln her LesLlmony lL was also evldenL LhaL MsŦ 8lnanay kepL Lhe facL abouL Lhe wlll
from peLlLlonersţ Lhe legally adopLed chlldren of Lhe deceasedŦ Such acLlons puL ln lssue her moLlve
of keeplng Lhe wlll a secreL Lo peLlLloners and reveallng lL only afLer Lhe deaLh of MaLllde Seno vdaŦ
de 8amonalŦ Soţ Lhe only reason LhaL Lvangellne can glve as Lo why she was famlllar wlLh Lhe
handwrlLlng of Lhe deceased was because she llved wlLh her slnce blrLhŦ She never declared LhaL
she saw Lhe deceased wrlLe a noLe or slgn a documenLŦ

lrom Lhe LesLlmonles of Lhese wlLnessesţ Lhe CourL of Appeals allowed Lhe wlll Lo be probaLed and
dlsregard Lhe requlremenL of Lhree wlLnesses ln case of conLesLed holographlc wlllţ clLlng Lhe
declslon ln Azaola vsŦ Slngsonţ rullng LhaL Lhe requlremenL ls merely dlrecLory and noL mandaLoryŦ

ln Lhe case of A[ero vsŦ CourL of Appealsţ we sald LhaL ƍLhe ob[ecL of Lhe solemnlLles surroundlng
Lhe execuLlon of wllls ls Lo close Lhe door agalnsL bad falLh and fraudţ Lo avold subsLlLuLlon of wllls
and LesLamenLs and Lo guaranLy Lhelr LruLh and auLhenLlclLyŦ 1hereforeţ Lhe laws on Lhls sub[ecL
should be lnLerpreLed ln such a way as Lo aLLaln Lhese prlmordlal endsŦ 8uLţ on Lhe oLher handţ also
one musL noL lose slghL of Lhe facL LhaL lL ls noL Lhe ob[ecL of Lhe law Lo resLraln and curLall Lhe
exerclse of Lhe rlghL Lo make a wlllŦƍ

Poweverţ we cannoL ellmlnaLe Lhe posslblllLy of a false documenL belng ad[udged as Lhe wlll of Lhe
LesLaLorţ whlch ls why lf Lhe holographlc wlll ls conLesLedţ LhaL law requlres Lhree wlLnesses Lo
declare LhaL Lhe wlll was ln Lhe handwrlLlng of Lhe deceasedŦ 1he wlll was found noL ln Lhe personal
belonglngs of Lhe deceased buL wlLh one of Lhe respondenLsţ who kepL lL even before Lhe deaLh of
Lhe deceasedŦ ln Lhe LesLlmony of MsŦ 8lnanayţ she revealed LhaL Lhe wlll was ln her possesslon as
early as 1983ţ or flve years before Lhe deaLh of Lhe deceasedŦ

1here was no opporLunlLy for an experL Lo compare Lhe slgnaLure and Lhe handwrlLlng of Lhe
deceased wlLh oLher documenLs slgned and execuLed by her durlng her llfeLlmeŦ 1he only chance aL
comparlson was durlng Lhe crossŴexamlnaLlon of MsŦ 8lnanay when Lhe lawyer of peLlLloners asked
MsŦ 8lnanay Lo compare Lhe documenLs whlch conLalned Lhe slgnaLure of Lhe deceased wlLh LhaL of
Lhe holographlc wlll and she ls noL a handwrlLlng experLŦ Lven Lhe former lawyer of Lhe deceased
expressed doubLs as Lo Lhe auLhenLlclLy of Lhe slgnaLure ln Lhe holographlc wlllŦ

A vlsual examlnaLlon of Lhe holographlc wlll convlnce us LhaL Lhe sLrokes are dlfferenL when
compared wlLh oLher documenLs wrlLLen by Lhe LesLaLorŦ 1he slgnaLure of Lhe LesLaLor ln some of
Lhe dlsposlLlon ls noL readableŦ 1here were uneven sLrokesţ reLraclng and erasures on Lhe wlllŦ

Comparlng Lhe slgnaLure ln Lhe holographlc wlll daLed AugusL 30ţ 1978ţ 33 and Lhe slgnaLures ln
several documenLs such as Lhe appllcaLlon leLLer for pasLure permlL daLed uecember 30ţ 1980ţ 34
and a leLLer daLed !une 16ţ 1978ţ 33 Lhe sLrokes are dlfferenLŦ ln Lhe leLLersţ Lhere are conLlnuous
flows of Lhe sLrokesţ evldenclng LhaL Lhere ls no heslLaLlon ln wrlLlng unllke LhaL of Lhe holographlc
wlllŦ Weţ Lhereforeţ cannoL be cerLaln LhaL Lhe holographlc wlll was ln Lhe handwrlLlng by Lhe
deceasedŦ


kode|as vsŦ Aranzaţ
NoŦ LŴS8S09ţ DecŦ 7ţ 1982
119 SCkA 16

Wlll may be allowedŦ 1he only quesLlon here ls wheLher a holographlc wlll whlch was
losL or cannoL be found can be proved by means of a phoLosLaLlc copyŦ ÞursuanL Lo ArLlcle 811 of
Lhe Clvll Codeţ probaLe of holographlc wllls ls Lhe allowance of Lhe wlll by Lhe courL afLer lLs due
execuLlon has been provedŦ 1he probaLe may be unconLesLed or noLŦ lf unconLesLedţ aL leasL one
ldenLlfylng wlLness ls requlred andţ lf no wlLness ls avallableţ experLs may be resorLed LoŦ lf
conLesLedţ aL leasL Lhree ldenLlfylng wlLnesses are requlredŦ noweverţ |f the ho|ograph|c w||| has
been |ost or destroyed and no other copy |s ava||ab|eţ the w||| can not be probated because the
best and on|y ev|dence |s the handwr|t|ng of the testator |n sa|d w|||Ŧ It |s necessary that there be
a compar|son between samp|e handwr|tten statements of the testator and the handwr|tten w|||Ŧ
8utţ a photostat|c copy or xerox copy of the ho|ograph|c w||| may be a||owed because
compar|son can be made w|th the standard wr|t|ngs of the testatorŦ ln Lhe case of Cam vsŦ ?apţ
104 ÞPlLŦ 309ţ Lhe CourL ruled LhaL ƍLhe execuLlon and Lhe conLenLs of a losL or desLroyed
holographlc wlll may noL be proved by Lhe bare LesLlmony of wlLnesses who have seen and/or read
such wlllŦ 1he wlll lLself musL be presenLedŤ oLherwlseţ lL shall produce no effecLŦ 1he law regards
Lhe documenL lLself as maLerlal proof of auLhenLlclLyŦƍ 8uLţ ln looLnoLe 8 of sald declslonţ lL says
LhaL ƍÞerhaps lL may be proved by a phoLographlc or phoLosLaLlc copyŦ Lven a m|meographed or
carbon copyŤ or by other s|m||ar meansţ |f anyţ whereby the authent|c|ty of the handwr|t|ng of
the deceased may be exh|b|ted and tested before the probate courtţƍ Lv|dent|yţ the photostat|c
or xerox copy of the |ost or destroyed ho|ograph|c w||| may be adm|tted because then the
authent|c|ty of the handwr|t|ng of the deceased can be determ|ned by the probate courtŦ

VdaŦ De Þerez vsŦ @o|eteţ
Gk# 76714ţ IuneŦ 2ţ 1994
232 SCkA 722

lAC1Sť

urŦ !ose Cunanan and hls wlfeţ urŦ Lvelyn ÞerezŴCunananţ who became Amerlcan clLlzens and
resldenLs of new ?orkţ each execuLed a wlll also ln new ?orkţ conLalnlng provlslons on presumpLlon
of survlvorshlp (ln Lhe evenL LhaL lL ls noL known whlch one of Lhe spouses dled flrsLţ Lhe husband
shall be presumed Lo have predeceased hls wlfe)Ŧ LaLerţ Lhe enLlre famlly perlshed ln a flre LhaL
guLLed Lhelr homeŦ 1husţ 8afaelţ who was named LrusLee ln !ose's wlllţ flled for separaLe probaLe
proceedlngs of Lhe wlllsŦ


LaLerţ Lvelyn's moLherţ Salud Þerezţ flled a peLlLlon for reprobaLe ln 8ulacanŦ 8afael opposedţ
argulng LhaL Salud was noL an helr accordlng Lo new ?ork lawŦ Pe conLended LhaL slnce Lhe wllls

were execuLed ln new ?orkţ new ?ork law should governŦ Pe furLher argued LhaLţ by new ?ork lawţ
he and hls broLhers and slsLers were !ose's helrs and as such enLlLled Lo noLlce of Lhe reprobaLe
proceedlngsţ whlch Salud falled Lo glveŦ

lor her parLţ Salud sald she was Lhe sole helr of her daughLerţ Lvelynţ and LhaL Lhe Lwo wllls were ln
accordance wlLh new ?ork lawŦ 8uL before she could presenL evldence Lo prove Lhe law of new
?orkţ Lhe reprobaLe courL already lssued an orderţ dlsallowlng Lhe wlllsŦ

lSSuLť WheLher or noL Lhe reprobaLe of Lhe wllls should be allowed



PLLuť

LxLrlnslc valldlLy of Wllls of nonŴ8esldenL Allens

1he respecLlve wllls of Lhe Cunanan spousesţ who were Amerlcan clLlzensţ wlll only be effecLlve ln
Lhls counLry upon compllance wlLh Lhe followlng provlslon of Lhe Clvll Code of Lhe Þhlllpplnesť

ArLŦ 816Ŧ 1he wlll of an allen who ls abroad produces effecL ln Lhe Þhlllpplnes lf made wlLh Lhe
formallLles prescrlbed by Lhe law of Lhe place ln whlch he resldesţ or accordlng Lo Lhe formallLles
observed ln hls counLryţ or ln conformlLy wlLh Lhose whlch Lhls Code prescrlbesŦ

1husţ proof LhaL boLh wllls conform wlLh Lhe formallLles prescrlbed by new ?ork laws or by
Þhlllpplne laws ls lmperaLlveŦ

Lvldence for 8eprobaLe of Wllls ÞrobaLed ouLslde Lhe Þhlllpplnes

1he evldence necessary for Lhe reprobaLe or allowance of wllls whlch have been probaLed ouLslde
of Lhe Þhlllpplnes are as followsť (1) Lhe due execuLlon of Lhe wlll ln accordance wlLh Lhe forelgn
lawsŤ (2) Lhe LesLaLor has hls domlclle ln Lhe forelgn counLry and noL ln Lhe ÞhlllpplnesŤ (3) Lhe wlll
has been admlLLed Lo probaLe ln such counLryŤ (4) Lhe facL LhaL Lhe forelgn Lrlbunal ls a probaLe
courLţ and (3) Lhe laws of a forelgn counLry on procedure and allowance of wllls (lll Moran
CommenLarles on Lhe 8ules of CourLţ 1970 edŦţ ppŦ 419Ŵ429Ť SunLay vŦ SunLayţ 93 ÞhllŦ 300 ż1934ŽŤ
lluemer vŦ Plxţ 34 ÞhllŦ 610 ż1930Ž)Ŧ LxcepL for Lhe flrsL and lasL requlremenLsţ Lhe peLlLloner
submlLLed all Lhe needed evldenceŦ

1he necesslLy of presenLlng evldence on Lhe forelgn laws upon whlch Lhe probaLe ln Lhe forelgn
counLry ls based ls lmpelled by Lhe facL LhaL our courLs cannoL Lake [udlclal noLlce of LhemŦ

Cn Lack of noLlce Lo !ose's Pelrs

1hls peLlLlon cannoL be compleLely resolved wlLhouL Louchlng on a very glarlng facL Ŵ peLlLloner has
always consldered herself Lhe sole helr of urŦ Lvelyn Þerez Cunanan and because she does noL
conslder herself an helr of urŦ !ose lŦ Cunananţ she noLlceably falled Lo noLlfy hls helrs of Lhe flllng
of Lhe proceedlngsŦ 1husţ even ln Lhe lnsLanL peLlLlonţ she only lmpleaded respondenL !udgeţ
forgeLLlng LhaL a [udge whose order ls belng assalled ls merely a nomlnal or formal parLy (Calderon
vŦ SollclLor Ceneralţ 213 SC8A 876 ż1992Ž)Ŧ

1he rule LhaL Lhe courL havlng [urlsdlcLlon over Lhe reprobaLe of a wlll shall ƍcause noLlce Lhereof Lo
be glven as ln case of an orlglnal wlll presenLed for allowanceƍ (8evlsed 8ules of CourLţ 8ule 27ţ
SecLlon 2) means LhaL wlLh regard Lo noLlcesţ Lhe wlll probaLed abroad should be LreaLed as lf lL
were an ƍorlglnal wlllƍ or a wlll LhaL ls presenLed for probaLe for Lhe flrsL LlmeŦ Accordlnglyţ
compllance wlLh SecLlons 3 and 4 of 8ule 76ţ whlch requlre publlcaLlon and noLlce by mall or
personally Lo Lhe ƍknown helrsţ legaLeesţ and devlsees of Lhe LesLaLor resldenL ln Lhe Þhlllpplnesƍ
and Lo Lhe execuLorţ lf he ls noL Lhe peLlLlonerţ are requlredŦ

1he broLhers and slsLers of urŦ !ose lŦ Cunananţ conLrary Lo peLlLlonerƌs clalmţ are enLlLled Lo
noLlces of Lhe Llme and place for provlng Lhe wlllsŦ under SecLlon 4 of 8ule 76 of Lhe 8evlsed 8ules
of CourLţ Lhe ƍcourL shall also cause coples of Lhe noLlce of Lhe Llme and place flxed for provlng Lhe
wlll Lo be addressed Lo Lhe deslgnaLed or oLher known helrsţ legaLeesţ and devlsees of Lhe LesLaLorţ
Ŧ Ŧ Ŧ ƍ

WPL8LlC8Lţ Lhe quesLloned Crder ls SL1 ASluLŦ 8espondenL !udge shall allow peLlLloner
reasonable Llme wlLhln whlch Lo submlL evldence needed for Lhe [olnL probaLe of Lhe wllls of Lhe
Cunanan spouses and see Lo lL LhaL Lhe broLhers and slsLers of urŦ !ose lŦ Cunanan are glven all
noLlces and coples of all pleadlngs perLlnenL Lo Lhe probaLe proceedlngsŦ

SC C8uL8LuŦ
W|tnesses to W|||s


Cod|c||s and Incorporat|on by keference
kevocat|on of W|||s and @estamentary D|spos|t|on



Adr|ana Ma|oto vsŦ CAţ
NoŦ LŴ76464ţ IebŦ 29ţ 1988
1S8 SCkA 4S1



Gago vsŦ Mamuyacţ
NoŦ LŴ26317ţ IanŦ 29ţ 1927
49 Þh||Ŧ 902

lacLsť

Cn Lhe 21sL day of lebruaryţ 1923ţ Lhe presenL acLlon was commencedŦ 1he purpose of Lhls acLlon
was Lo obLaln Lhe probaLlon of a lasL wlll and LesLamenL of Mlguel Mamuyacţ who dled on Lhe 2d
day of !anuaryţ 1922ţ ln Lhe munlclpallLy of Agoo of Lhe Þrovlnce of La unlonŦ lL appears from Lhe
record LhaL on or abouL Lhe 27Lh day of !ulyţ 1918ţ Lhe sald Mlguel Mamuyac execuLed a lasL wlll

and LesLamenL (LxhlblL A)Ŧ ln Lhe monLh of !anuaryţ 1922ţ Lhe sald lranclsco Cago presenLed a
peLlLlon ln Lhe CourL of llrsL lnsLance of Lhe Þrovlnce of La unlon for Lhe probaLlon of LhaL wlllŦ 1he
probaLlon of Lhe same was opposed by Cornello Mamuyacţ Ambroslo Larlosaţ lellclana 8auzonţ and
CaLallna Mamuyac (clvll cause noŦ 1144ţ Þrovlnce of La unlon)Ŧ AfLer hearlng all of Lhe parLles Lhe
peLlLlon for Lhe probaLlon of sald wlll was denled by Lhe Ponorable CŦ MŦ vlllareal on Lhe 2d day of
novemberţ 1923ţ upon Lhe ground LhaL Lhe deceased had on Lhe 16Lh day of Aprllţ 1919ţ execuLed
a new wlll and LesLamenLţ sLaLlngť

ƍ1haL LxhlblL A ls a mere carbon copy of lLs orlglnal whlch remalned ln Lhe possesslon of Lhe
deceased LesLaLor Mlguel Mamuyacţ who revoked lL before hls deaLh as per LesLlmony of wlLnesses
!ose lenoyţ who Lyped Lhe wlll of Lhe LesLaLor on Aprll 16ţ 1919ţ and Carlos 8e[arţ who saw on
uecember 30ţ 1920ţ Lhe orlglnal of LxhlblL A (wlll of 1919) acLually cancelled by Lhe LesLaLor Mlguel
Mamuyacţ who assured Carlos 8e[ar LhaL lnasmuch as he had sold hlm a house and Lhe land where
Lhe house was bullLţ he had Lo cancel lL Lhe wlll of 1919)ţ execuLlng Lhereby a new LesLamenLŦ
narclsa Cago ln a way corroboraLes Lhe LesLlmony of !ose lenoyţ admlLLlng LhaL Lhe wlll execuLed
by Lhe deceased (Mlguel Mamuyac) ln 1919 was found ln Lhe possesslon of faLher Mlguel
MamuyacŦ 1he opponenLs have successfully esLabllshed Lhe facL LhaL faLher Mlguel Mamuyac had
execuLed ln 1920 anoLher wlllŦ 1he same narclsa Cagoţ Lhe slsLer of Lhe deceasedţ who was llvlng ln
Lhe house wlLh hlmţ when crossŴexamlned by aLLorney for Lhe opponenLsţ LesLlfled LhaL Lhe orlglnal
of LxhlblL A could noL be foundŦ lor Lhe foregolng conslderaLlon and for Lhe reason LhaL Lhe orlglnal
of LxhlblL A has been cancelled by Lhe deceased faLher Mlguel Mamuyacţ Lhe courL dlsallows Lhe
probaLe of LxhlblL A for Lhe appllcanLŦƍ lrom LhaL order Lhe peLlLloner appealedŦ

lssueť

WheLher or noL Lhe probaLe of Lhe old wlll shall be allowedŦ

Peldť

WlLh reference Lo Lhe sald cancellaLlonţ lL may be sLaLed LhaL Lhere ls poslLlve proofţ noL denledţ
whlch was accepLed by Lhe lower courLţ LhaL Lhe wlll ln quesLlon had been cancelled ln 1920Ŧ 1he
law does noL requlre any evldence of Lhe revocaLlon or cancellaLlon of a wlll Lo be preservedŦ lL
Lherefore becomes dlfflculL aL Llmes Lo prove Lhe revocaLlon or cancellaLlon of wlllsŦ 1he facL LhaL
such cancellaLlon or revocaLlon has Laken place musL elLher remaln unproved or be lnferred from
evldence showlng LhaL afLer due search Lhe orlglnal wlll cannoL be foundŦ Where a wlll whlch
cannoL be found ls shown Lo have been ln Lhe possesslon of Lhe LesLaLorţ when lasL seenţ Lhe
presumpLlon lsţ ln Lhe absence of oLher compeLenL evldenceţ LhaL Lhe same was cancelled or
desLroyedŦ 1he same presumpLlon arlses where lL ls shown LhaL Lhe LesLaLor had ready access Lo
Lhe wlll and lL cannoL be found afLer hls deaLhŦ lL wlll noL be presumed LhaL such wlll has been
desLroyed by any oLher person wlLhouL Lhe knowledge or auLhorlLy of Lhe LesLaLorŦ 1he force of Lhe
presumpLlon of cancellaLlon or revocaLlon by Lhe LesLaLorţ whlle varylng greaLlyţ belng weak or
sLrong accordlng Lo Lhe clrcumsLancesţ ls never concluslveţ buL may be overcome by proof LhaL Lhe
wlll was noL desLroyed by Lhe LesLaLor wlLh lnLenL Lo revoke lLŦ

ln vlew of Lhe facL LhaL Lhe orlglnal wlll of 1919 could noL be found afLer Lhe deaLh of Lhe LesLaLor
Mlguel Mamuyac and ln vlew of Lhe poslLlve proof LhaL Lhe same had been cancelledţ we are forced
Lo Lhe concluslon LhaL Lhe concluslons of Lhe lower courL are ln accordance wlLh Lhe welghL of Lhe
evldenceŦ


Mo|o vsŦ Mo|oţ
NoŦ LŴ 2S38ţ SeptŦ 21ţ 19S1
90 Þh|| 37

lacLsť Marlano Molo dled on !anuary 24ţ 1941 wlLhouL any compulsory helr ln Lhe dlrecL llneŦ Pe
was survlved by hereln peLlLloner !uana Molo and by hls nleces and nephew who are Lhe
opposlLorsŦ Marlano lefL Lwo wlllsţ one execuLed on AugusL 17ţ 1918 and anoLher execuLed on !une
20ţ 1939Ŧ 1he second wlll conLalns a clause whlch expressly revokes Lhe flrsL wlllŦ !uana Molo flled
for Lhe probaLe of Lhe second wlll whlch was denled by Lhe courL on Lhe ground LhaL lL was noL
execuLed accordlng Lo Lhe requlremenLs prescrlbed by lawŦ She Lhen also flled for Lhe probaLe of
Lhe flrsL wlll whlch was granLed by Lhe courLţ hence Lhls appeal by Lhe opposlLors on Lhe ground
LhaL Lhe second wlll had expressly revoked Lhe flrsL wlllŤ Lhereforeţ Lhe flrsL wlll should have noL
been probaLedŦ

lssueť WheLher Lhe second wlll conLalnlng an express revocaLlon of Lhe flrsL wlll can be glven effecL

Peldť noţ Lhe second wlll cannoL be glven effecL and Lhe flrsL wlll can be admlLLed Lo probaLeŦ A
subsequenL wlll conLalnlng a clause revoklng a prevlous wlllţ havlng been dlsallowed for Lhe reason
LhaL lL was noL execuLed ln conformlLy wlLh Lhe provlslons of Lhe law as Lo Lhe maklng of wllls ţ
cannoL produce Lhe effecL of annulllng Lhe prevlous wlllţ ln as much as Lhe revocaLory clause ls voldŦ
1he earller wlll can sLlll be admlLLed Lo probaLe under Lhe prlnclple of ºdependenL relaLlve
revocaLlon"ţ predlcaLed on Lhe LesLaLorƌ lnLenLlon noL Lo dle lnLesLaLeŦ 1haL ls why he execuLed Lwo
wllls on Lwo dlfferenL occaslons and lnsLlLuLed hls wlfe as hls unlversal helrŦ

nC1Lť uLÞLnuLn1 8LLA1lvL 8LvCCA1lCn Ŵ 1he docLrlne LhaL regards as muLually lnLerrelaLed Lhe
acLs of a LesLaLor desLroylng a wlll and execuLlng a second wlllŦ ln such casesţ lf Lhe second wlll ls
elLher never made or lmproperly execuLedţ Lhere ls a rebuLLable presumpLlon LhaL Lhe LesLaLor
would have preferred Lhe former wlll Lo no wlll aL allţ whlch allows Lhe posslblllLy of probaLe of Lhe
desLroyed wlllŦ
Some [urlsdlcLlons decllne Lo apply Lhe docLrlne of dependenL relaLlve revocaLlon Lo cases Lo
ellmlnaLe a wrlLLen revocaLlon of a wlllţ buL apply lL Lo declare Lhe lneffecLlveness of a physlcal acL
of revocaLlonŦ 1he [usLlflcaLlon for Lhe dlsLlncLlon ls LhaL Lhe physlcal acL ls lnherenLly equlvocalŦ
1he courL has Lhe power Lo lnLerpreL Lhe amblguous acL Lo ascerLaln whaL Lhe LesLaLor dld buL noL
Lo dlsregard an express sLaLemenL of Lhe LesLaLor and subsLlLuLe lLs own concepLlon of whaL Lhe
LesLaLor should have doneŦ
1he docLrlne of dependenL relaLlve revocaLlon conLravenes Lhe sLrlcL lnLerpreLaLlon of and demand
for rlgld adherence Lo Lhe speclflc language of Lhe sLaLuLes concernlng Lhe execuLlon and
revocaLlon of wllls and Lhe Lheory of Lhe parol evldence


D|az vsŦ De Leonţ
NoŦ LŴ 17714Ŧ MayŦ 31ţ 1922
43 Þh|| 413

lAC1Sť 1he peLlLloner denles Lhere was revocaLlon of Lhe wlllţ whlle Lhe conLesLanL afflrms Lhe
same by alleglng LhaL Lhe LesLaLor revoked hls wlll by desLroylng lLţ and by execuLlng anoLher wlll
expressly revoklng Lhe formerŦ

lSSuLť WheLher or noL Lhe wlll execuLed by !esus de Leon was revoked by hlm?

PLLuť ?esŦ 1he CourL held LhaL Lhe second wlll LxhlblL 1 execuLed by Lhe deceased ls noL cloLh wlLh
all Lhe necessary requlslLes Lo consLlLuLe a sufflclenL revocaLlonŦ

8uL accordlng Lo Lhe sLaLuLe governlng Lhe sub[ecL ln Lhls [urlsdlcLlonţ Lhe desLrucLlon of a wlll
anlmo revocandl consLlLuLesţ ln lLselfţ a sufflclenL revocaLlonŦ (SecŦ 623ţ Code of Clvll
ÞrocedureŦ)lavvphl1-ne+

lrom Lhe evldence submlLLed ln Lhls caseţ lL appears LhaL Lhe LesLaLorţ shorLly afLer Lhe execuLlon of
Lhe flrsL wlll ln quesLlonţ asked LhaL Lhe same be reLurned Lo hlmŦ 1he lnsLrumenL was reLurned Lo
Lhe LesLaLor who ordered hls servanL Lo Lear Lhe documenLŦ 1hls was done ln hls presence and
before a nurse who LesLlfled Lo Lhls effecLŦ AfLer some Llmeţ Lhe LesLaLorţ belng asked by urŦ
Cornello Mapa abouL Lhe wlllţ sald LhaL lL had been desLroyedŦ

1he lnLenLlon of revoklng Lhe wlll ls manlfesL from Lhe esLabllshed facL LhaL Lhe LesLaLor was
anxlous Lo wlLhdraw or change Lhe provlslons he had made ln hls flrsL wlllŦ 1hls facL ls dlsclosed by
Lhe LesLaLorƌs own sLaLemenLs Lo Lhe wlLnesses CanLo and Lhe MoLher Superlor of Lhe PosplLal
where he was conflnedŦ

1he orlglnal wlll hereln presenLed for probaLe havlng been desLroyed wlLh anlmo revocandlţ cannoL
now be probaLed as Lhe wlll and lasL LesLamenL of !esus de LeonŦ


kepub||cat|on and kev|va| of W|||s
D|sa||owance of W|||s

Dorotheo vsŦ CAţ
Gk# 108S81ţ DecŦ 8ţ 1999
320 SCkA 12


lacLsť SomeLlme ln 1977ţ afLer Ale[andro uoroLheo's deaLhţ peLlLlonerţ flled a speclal proceedlng
for Lhe probaLe of Lhe laLLer's lasL wlll and LesLamenLŦ ln 1981ţ Lhe courL lssued an order admlLLlng
Ale[andro's wlll Lo probaLeŦ ÞrlvaLe respondenLs dld noL appeal from sald orderŦ Poweverţ ln 1983ţ
Lhey flled a ºMoLlon 1o ueclare 1he Wlll lnLrlnslcally voldŦ"
1he Lrlal courL granLed Lhe moLlon and lssued an orderţ declarlng Lourdes noL Lhe wlfe of Lhe laLe
Ale[andro uoroLheoţ Lhe provlslons of Lhe lasL wlll and LesLamenL of Ale[andro uoroLheo as
lnLrlnslcally voldţ and declarlng Lhe opposlLors (hereln prlvaLe respondenLs) as Lhe only helrs of Lhe
Ale[andro uoroLheo Ŧ
ÞeLlLloner moved for reconslderaLlon argulng LhaL she ls enLlLled Lo some compensaLlon slnce she
Look care of Ale[andro prlor Lo hls deaLh alLhough she admlLLed LhaL Lhey were noL marrled Lo each
oLherŦ upon denlal of her moLlon for reconslderaLlonţ peLlLloner appealed Lo Lhe CourL of Appealsţ
buL Lhe same was dlsmlssedŦ 1hls dlsmlssal became flnal and execuLoryŦ A wrlL of execuLlon was
LhereafLer lssuedŦ
ConsequenLlyţ when peLlLloner refused Lo surrender Lhe 1C1'sţ (coverlng Lhe properLles of Lhe laLe
Ale[andro)ţ prlvaLe respondenLs flled a moLlon for cancellaLlon of sald LlLles and for lssuance of new
LlLles ln Lhelr namesŦ ÞeLlLloner opposed Lhe moLlonŦ 1he lower courL ruled for peLlLloner buL Lhe
same was reversed by Lhe CAŦ
Penceţ Lhe presenL peLlLlon where peLlLloner assalls Lhe Crder of Lhe CourL of Appeals whlch
declared Lhe lnLrlnslc lnvalldlLy of Ale[andro's wlll LhaL was earller admlLLed Lo probaLeŦ

lssueť WheLher a lasL wlll and LesLamenL admlLLed Lo probaLe buL declared lnLrlnslcally vold ln an
order LhaL has become flnal and execuLory sLlll be glven effecLŦ

Peldť A flnal and execuLory declslon or order can no longer be dlsLurbed or reopened no maLLer
how erroneous lL may beŦ lL has been conslsLenLly held LhaL lf no appeal ls Laken ln due Llme from a
[udgmenL or order of Lhe Lrlal courLţ Lhe same aLLalns flnallLy by mere lapse of LlmeŦ 1husţ Lhe
order allowlng Lhe wlll became flnal and Lhe quesLlon deLermlned by Lhe courL ln such order can no
longer be ralsed anewţ elLher ln Lhe same proceedlngs or ln a dlfferenL moLlonŦ 1he maLLers of due
execuLlon of Lhe wlll and Lhe capaclLy of Lhe LesLaLor acqulred Lhe characLer of res [udlcaLa and
cannoL agaln be broughL lnLo quesLlonţ all [urldlcal quesLlons ln connecLlon LherewlLh belng for
once and forever closedŦ
Poweverţ Lhe lnLrlnslc valldlLy ls anoLher maLLer and quesLlons regardlng Lhe same may sLlll be
ralsed even afLer Lhe wlll has been auLhenLlcaLedŦ 1husţ lL does noL necessarlly follow LhaL an
exLrlnslcally valld lasL wlll and LesLamenL ls always lnLrlnslcally valldŦ Lven lf Lhe wlll was valldly
execuLedţ lf Lhe LesLaLor provldes for dlsposlLlons LhaL deprlves or lmpalrs Lhe lawful helrs of Lhelr
leglLlme or rlghLful lnherlLance accordlng Lo Lhe laws on successlonţ Lhe unlawful
provlslons/dlsposlLlons Lhereof cannoL be glven effecLŦ
1hls ls speclally so when Lhe courLs had already deLermlned ln a flnal and execuLory declslon LhaL
Lhe wlll ls lnLrlnslcally voldŦ Such deLermlnaLlon havlng aLLalned LhaL characLer of flnallLy ls blndlng
on Lhls CourL whlch wlll no longer be dlsLurbedŦ noL LhaL Lhls CourL flnds Lhe wlll Lo be lnLrlnslcally
valldţ buL LhaL a flnal and execuLory declslon of whlch Lhe parLy had Lhe opporLunlLy Lo challenge
before Lhe hlgher Lrlbunals musL sLand and should no longer be reevaluaLedŦ
ln Lhls caseţ Lhe courL had ruled LhaL Lhe wlll of Ale[andro was exLrlnslcally valld buL Lhe lnLrlnslc
provlslons Lhereof were voldŦ 1husţ Lhe rules of lnLesLacy apply as correcLly held by Lhe Lrlal courLŦ


Santos vsŦ 8uenaventura
Gk NoŦ LŴ22797ţ SeptŦ 22ţ 1966
18 SCkA 47

lAC1Sť Pereln peLlLloner 8osallna SanLosţ one of Lhe nleces of Lhe deceased Maxlma SanLos vda
de 8lasţ flled on CcLober 22ţ 1936 wlLh Lhe Cll of 8lzal for Lhe probaLe of Lhe lasL wlll allegedly
execuLed on SepLember 22ţ 1936 by Lhe deceasedŦ Among Lhe devlsees menLloned ln Lhe wlll ls
llora 8las de 8uenavenLuraţ hereln respondenLţ ls noL relaLed by blood Lo Lhe deceasedŦ
Cn november 28ţ 1936ţ llora 8las de 8uenavenLura and !usLo Carcla flled an opposlLlon Lo Lhe
probaLe of sald wlllŦ Poweverţ afLer Lhe probaLe courL had recelved Lhe evldence for boLh
peLlLloner and opposlLorsţ buL before Lhe laLLer could close Lhe evldenceţ llora 8las wlLhdrew her

opposlLlon Lo Lhe probaLe of Lhe wlll and [olned Lhe proponenL of Lhe sald wlll for Lhe legallzaLlon of
Lhe sameŦ 1he proceedlngs conLlnued however as Lo Lhe opposlLlon of !usLo CarclaŦ
Cn uecember 24ţ 1937ţ Lhe probaLe of Lhe wlll was allowedŦ lloraţ LhereafLer flled a peLlLlon
praylng for Lhe dellvery Lo her of a flshpond as speclflc devlse ln her favor under lLem noŦ 3ţ Clause
noŦ 6ţ of Lhe wlllŦ 8osallna opposed Lhe sald peLlLlon on Lhe ground LhaL sald speclflc devlse ln favor
of llora was forfelLed ln favor of Lhe oLher reslduary helrsţ pursuanL Lo a provlslon of Lhe wlll LhaL
should any of Lhe helrsţ devlsees or legaLees conLesL or oppose lLs probaLeţ Lhe laLLer shall lose hls
or her rlghL Lo recelve any lnherlLance or beneflL under lLţ whlch shall be forfelLed ln favor of Lhe
oLher helrsţ devlsees and legaLeesŦ
1he courL susLalned LhaL Lhe ºnoŴconLesL and forfelLure" clause of Lhe wlll was valld and had Lhe
effecL of deprlvlng llora of her devlse ln vlew of her prevlous opposlLlon Lo lLs probaLeţ whlch lL
held noL [usLlfled under Lhe clrcumsLancesŦ
lSSuLť WCn llora's flllng of her opposlLlon was [usLlfled whlch precluded vlolaLlon of Lhe ºno
conLesL and forfelLure clause"Ŧ
PLLuť 1he facLor LhaL preponderaLes ln favor of llor ls LhaLţ afLer reallzlng her mlsLake ln
conLesLlng Lhe wlll Ÿ a mlsLake commlLLed ln good falLh because grounded on sLrong doubLs Ÿ she
wlLhdrew her opposlLlon and [olned Lhe SanLos ln Lhe laLLerƌs peLlLlon for Lhe probaLe of Lhe wlllŦ
She musL noL now be penallzed for recLlfylng her errorŦ AfLer allţ Lhe lnLenLlons of Lhe LesLaLrlx had
been fulfllledţ her wlll had been admlLLed and allowed probaLe wlLhln a reasonably shorL perlodţ
and Lhe dlsposlLlon of her properLy can now be effecLedŦ
lL should be polnLed ouL LhaLţ conLrary Lo Lhe LranslaLlon accorded Lo Þaragraph lourLeen of Lhe
wlllţ Lhe LesLaLrlx en[olns noL a mere conLesL or opposlLlon Lo lLs probaLeţ buL a conLesL or
opposlLlon Lo Lhe probaLe of Lhe wlll and Lhe carrylng ouL of lLs provlslonsŦ 1hls ls so because Lhe
quesLloned clause speaks of ƍpagpapaLlbay aL pagŴblblgayŴblsaƍ lnsLead of ƍpagpapaLlbay o pagŴ
blblgayŴblsaŦ"1hls furnlshes a slgnlflcanL lndex lnLo Lhe lnLenLlon of Lhe LesLaLrlxţ namelyţ LhaL she
was more concerned ln lnsurlng Lhe carrylng ouL of her LesLamenLary provlslons Lhan ln precludlng
any conLesL or opposlLlon Lo lLŦ 8y Lhe wlLhdrawal of Lhe conLesL whlch llor broughL ln good falLhţ
no pre[udlce has been done lnLo Lhe lnLenLlon of Lhe LesLaLrlxŦ 1he dlsposlLlons of her wlll can now
be safely carrled ouLŦ
1he mosL LhaL can be saldţ lf aL allţ ls LhaL llora 8lasƌ acLuaLlons were also lmpelled by some deslre
Lo galnŦ 8uL who among Lhe helrs can assume a posLure of lnnocence and casL Lhe flrsL sLone? none
of Lhem can safely clalm LhaL he ls noL Lhus slmllarly moLlvaLedŦ
lrom Lhe foregolng premlses lL cannoL be sald LhaL lloraƌs acLuaLlons lmpalred Lhe Lrue lnLenLlon
of Lhe LesLaLrlx ln regard Lo Lhe ƍnoŴconLesL and forfelLureƍ clause of Lhe wlllŦ lloraƌs acL of
wlLhdrawlng her opposlLlon before she had resLed her case conLrlbuLed Lo Lhe speedy probaLlon of
Lhe wlllŦ Slnce Lhe wlLhdrawal came before llora had resLed her caseţ lL precluded Lhe defeaL of Lhe
probaLe upon Lhe sLrengLh of lloraƌs evldenceŦ 1hrough sald wlLhdrawalţ llora conformed Lo Lhe
LesLaLrlxƌs wlsh LhaL her dlsposlLlons of her properLles under Lhe wlll be carrled ouLŦ lL follows LhaLţ
Laken as a wholeţ lloraƌs acLuaLlons subserved raLher Lhan vlolaLed Lhe LesLaLrlxƌs lnLenLlonŦ
lnsLlLuLlon of Pelrs


keyes vsŦ 8arettoŴDatuţ
Gk # LŴ17818ţ IanŦ 2Sţ 1967
19 SCkA 8S

lacLsť 8lblano 8arreLLo was marrled Lo Marla CerardoŦ uurlng Lhelr llfeLlme Lhey acqulred a vasL
esLaLeţ conslsLlng of real properLles ln Manllaţ Þampangaţ and 8ulacanŦ When 8lblano dled he lefL
hls share of Lhese properLles ln a wlll Lo Salud 8arreLLoţ moLher of 1lrso's wardsţ and Lucla Mllagros
(Mllagros) 8arreLLoŦ 1he usufrucL of a flshpondţ howeverţ was reserved for hls wldowţ MarlaŦ Marla
was appolnLed admlnlsLraLrlxŦ 8y vlrLue Lhereofţ she prepared a pro[ecL of parLlLlon whlch was
approved by Lhe Cll of ManllaŦ 1he dlsLrlbuLlon of Lhe esLaLe and Lhe dellvery of Lhe shares of Lhe
helrs followedŦ As a consequenceţ Salud Look lmmedlaLe possesslon of her share and secured Lhe
cancellaLlon of Lhe CC1s and Lhe lssuance of new LlLles ln her own nameŦ
LveryLhlng wenL well unLll Marla dledŦ upon her deaLhţ lL was dlscovered LhaL she had execuLed
Lwo wlllsţ ln Lhe flrsL of whlchţ she lnsLlLuLed Salud and Mllagros as her helrsŤ andţ ln Lhe secondţ
she revoked Lhe same and lefL all her properLles ln favor of Mllagros aloneŦ 1husţ Lhe laLer wlll was
allowed and Lhe flrsL re[ecLedŦ ln re[ecLlng Lhe flrsL wlll presenLed by 1lrso Lhe lower courL held LhaL
Salud was noL Lhe daughLer of Lhe decedenL Marla by her husband 8lblanoŦ Pavlng Lhus losL Lhls
flghL for a share ln Lhe esLaLe of Marlaţ 1lrso now falls back upon Lhe remnanL of Lhe esLaLe of Lhe
deceased 8lblanoţ whlch was glven ln usufrucL Lo hls wldow MarlaŦ Penceţ Lhe acLlon for Lhe
recovery of oneŴhalf porLlon LhereofŦ 1hls acLlon afforded Mllagros an opporLunlLy Lo seL up her
rlghL of ownershlpţ noL only of Lhe flshpond under llLlgaLlonţ buL of all Lhe oLher properLles wllled
and dellvered Lo Saludţ for belng a spurlous helrţ and noL enLlLled Lo any share ln Lhe esLaLe of
8lblanoţ Lhereby dlrecLly aLLacklng Lhe valldlLyţ noL only of Lhe pro[ecL of parLlLlonţ buL of Lhe
declslon of Lhe courL based Lhereon as wellŦ Mllagros conLends LhaL Lhe Þro[ecL of ÞarLlLlon from
whlch Salud acqulred Lhe flshpond ln quesLlon ls vold ab lnlLlo and Salud dld noL acqulre any valld
LlLle LhereLoŦ
llndlng for Lhe defendanL (now appellee)ţ Mllagrosţ Lhe lower courL declared Lhe pro[ecL of
parLlLlon submlLLed ln Lhe proceedlngs for Lhe seLLlemenL of Lhe esLaLe of 8lblano Lo be null and
vold ab lnlLlo because Lhe dlsLrlbuLeeţ Saludţ predecessor of plalnLlffs (now appellanLs)ţ was noL a
daughLer of Lhe spouses 8lblano and MarlaŦ 1he nulllLy of Lhe pro[ecL of parLlLlon was decreed on
Lhe basls of ArLlcle 1081 of Lhe Clvll Code of 1889 (Lhen ln force) provldlng as followsť A parLlLlon ln
whlch a person was belleved Lo be an helrţ wlLhouL belng soţ has been lncludedţ shall be null and
voldŦ
lssueť WheLher ArLŦ 1081 of Lhe Cld Clvll Code was correcLly applled by Lhe lower courLŦ
Peldť ÞlalnLlffsŴappellanLs correcLly polnL ouL LhaL ArLlcle 1081 of Lhe old Clvll Code has been
mlsapplled Lo Lhe presenL case by Lhe courL belowŦ 1he reason ls obvlousť Salud admlLLedly had
been lnsLlLuLed helr ln Lhe laLe 8lblanoƌs lasL wlll and LesLamenL LogeLher wlLh defendanL MllagrosŤ
henceţ Lhe parLlLlon had beLween Lhem could noL be one such had wlLh a parLy who was belleved
Lo be an helr wlLhouL really belng oneţ and was noL null and vold under sald arLlcleŦ 1he legal
precepL (ArLlcle 1081) does noL speak of chlldrenţ or descendanLsţ buL of helrs (wlLhouL dlsLlncLlon
beLween forcedţ volunLary or lnLesLaLe ones)ţ and Lhe facL LhaL Salud happened noL Lo be a
daughLer of Lhe LesLaLor does noL preclude her belng one of Lhe helrs expressly named ln hls
LesLamenLŤ for 8lblano was aL llberLy Lo asslgn Lhe free porLlon of hls esLaLe Lo whomsoever he
choseŦ Whlle Lhe share (Z) asslgned Lo Salud lmplnged on Lhe leglLlme of Mllagrosţ Salud dld noL for
LhaL reason cease Lo be a LesLamenLary helr of 8lblano 8arreLLoŦ nor does Lhe facL LhaL Mllagros
was alloLLed ln her faLherƌs wlll a share smaller Lhan her leglLlme lnvalldaLe Lhe lnsLlLuLlon of Salud
as helrţ slnce Lhere was here no preLerlLlonţ or LoLal ommlsslon of a forced helrŦ

Aznar vsŦ Duncanţ
Gk # LŴ 2436Sţ Iune 30ţ 1966
17 SCkA S90

Ldward LŦ ChrlsLensenţ who aL hls deaLh was a uS clLlzen buL domlclled ln Lhe Þhlllpplnesţ lefL a wlll
devlslng unLo Marla Pelen (ChrlsLensen Carcla) Lhe amounL of Þ3ţ 600Ŧ00ţ and leavlng Lhe resL of
hls esLaLe Lo hls daughLerţ Marla Lucy (ChrlsLensen uaney)Ŧ uurlng parLlLlonţ Pelen opposedţ saylng
LhaL she ls deprlved of her leglLlme as acknowledged naLural chlld of Lhe LesLaLorŦ She furLher
argued LhaL SecLlon 946 of Lhe Callfornla Clvll Code provldes LhaL Lhe laws of Lhe domlclle of Lhe
decedenL should be applledŦ

1he Lrlal courL ruled LhaL slnce Ldward LŦ ChrlsLensen was a uS clLlzen aL Lhe Llme of hls deaLhţ Lhe
successlonal rlghLs and lnLrlnslc valldlLy of Lhe provlslons of hls wlll are Lo be governed by Lhe law of
CallfornlaŦ

lSSuLť

WheLher or noL Lhe 8envol uocLrlne should be applled



PLLuť

1here ls no quesLlon LhaL Ldward LŦ ChrlsLensen was a clLlzen of Lhe unlLed SLaLes and of Lhe SLaLe
of Callfornla aL Lhe Llme of hls deaLhŦ 8uL Lhere ls also no quesLlon LhaL aL Lhe Llme of hls deaLh he
was domlclled ln Lhe ÞhlllpplnesŦ

Meanlng of ºuomlclle" and º8esldence"

Coodrlchť º1he Lerms 'resldence' and 'domlclle' mlghL well be Laken Lo mean Lhe same Lhlngţ a
place of permanenL abodeŦ 8uL domlclleţ as has been shownţ has acqulred a Lechnlcal meanlngŦ
1hus one may be domlclled ln a place where he has never beenŦ And he may reslde ln a place
where he has no domlclleŦ 1he man wlLh Lwo homesţ beLween whlch he dlvldes hls Llmeţ cerLalnly
resldes ln each oneţ whlle llvlng ln lLŦ 8uL lf he wenL on buslness whlch would requlre hls presence
for several weeks or monLhsţ he mlghL properly be sald Lo have sufflclenL connecLlon wlLh Lhe place
Lo be called a resldenLŦ lL ls clearţ howeverţ LhaLţ lf he LreaLed hls seLLlemenL as conLlnulng only for
Lhe parLlcular buslness ln handţ noL glvlng up hls former ºhomeţ" he could noL be a domlclled new
?orkerŦ AcqulslLlon of a domlclle of cholce requlres Lhe exerclse of lnLenLlon as well as physlcal
presenceŦ º8esldence slmply requlres bodlly presence of an lnhablLanL ln a glven placeţ whlle
domlclle requlres bodlly presence ln LhaL place and also an lnLenLlon Lo make lL one's domlclleŦ"
8esldenceţ howeverţ ls a Lerm used wlLh shades of meanlngţ from Lhe meresL Lemporary presence
Lo Lhe mosL permanenL abodeţ and lL ls noL safe Lo lnslsL LhaL any one use ls Lhe only proper oneŦ"

naLlonallLy Þrlnclple

1he law LhaL governs Lhe valldlLy of hls LesLamenLary dlsposlLlons ls deflned ln ArLlcle 16 of Lhe Clvll
Code of Lhe ÞhlllpplnesŦ

1he appllcaLlon of Lhls arLlcle ln Lhe case aL bar requlres Lhe deLermlnaLlon of Lhe meanlng of Lhe
Lerm ºnaLlonal law" as used LherelnŦ

1here ls no slngle Amerlcan law governlng Lhe valldlLy of LesLamenLary provlslons ln Lhe unlLed
SLaLesţ each sLaLe of Lhe unlon havlng lLs own prlvaLe law appllcable Lo lLs clLlzens only and ln force
only wlLhln Lhe sLaLeŦ 1he ºnaLlonal law" lndlcaLed ln ArLlcle 16 of Lhe Clvll CodeŧcannoLţ Lhereforeţ
posslbly mean or apply Lo any general Amerlcan lawŦ So lL can refer Lo no oLher Lhan Lhe prlvaLe
law of Lhe SLaLe of CallfornlaŦ

1he nexL quesLlon lsť WhaL ls Lhe law ln Callfornla governlng Lhe dlsposlLlon of personal properLy?

ŧappellanL lnvokes Lhe provlslons of ArLlcle 946 lf Lhe Clvll Code of Callfornlať ºlf Lhere ls no law Lo
Lhe conLraryţ ln Lhe place where personal properLy ls slLuaLedţ lL ls deemed Lo follow Lhe person of
lLs ownerţ and ls governed by Lhe law of hls domlclleŦ"

ŧŦlL ls argued on execuLor's behalf LhaL as Lhe deceased ChrlsLensen was a clLlzen of Lhe SLaLe of
Callfornlaţ Lhe lnLernal law Lhereof should govern Lhe deLermlnaLlon of Lhe valldlLy of Lhe
LesLamenLary provlslons of ChrlsLensen's wlllţ such law belng ln force ln Lhe SLaLe of Callfornla of
whlch ChrlsLensen was a clLlzenŦ AppellanLţ on Lhe oLher handţ lnslsLs LhaL ArLlcle 946 should be
appllcableţ and ln accordance LherewlLh and followlng Lhe docLrlne of renvolţ Lhe quesLlon of Lhe
valldlLy of Lhe LesLamenLary provlslon ln quesLlon should be referred back Lo Lhe law of Lhe
decedenL's domlclleţ whlch ls Lhe ÞhlllpplnesŦ

8envol uocLrlne

Cne Lype of renvolŦ A [ural maLLer ls presenLed whlch Lhe confllcLŴofŴlaws rule of Lhe forum refers
Lo a forelgn lawţ Lhe confllcLŴofŴlaws rule of whlchţ ln Lurnţ refers back Lhe maLLer back agaln Lo Lhe
law of Lhe forumŦ 1hls ls renvol ln Lhe narrower senseŦ 1he Cerman Lerm for Lhls [udlclal process ls
'8uckverwelsungŦ' (º8envoyer" Lo send backŤ or ºWelLerverwelsung")

AnoLher Lheoryţ known as Lhe ºdocLrlne of renvolţ" has been advancedŦ 1he Lheory of Lhe docLrlne
of renvol ls LhaL Lhe courL of Lhe forumţ ln deLermlnlng Lhe quesLlon before lLţ musL Lake lnLo
accounL Lhe whole law of Lhe oLher [urlsdlcLlonţ buL also lLs rules as Lo confllcL of lawsţ and Lhen
apply Lhe law Lo Lhe acLual quesLlon whlch Lhe rules of Lhe oLher [urlsdlcLlon prescrlbeŦ 1hls may be
Lhe law of Lhe forumŦ 1he docLrlne of Lhe renvol has generally been repudlaLed by Lhe Amerlcan
auLhorlLlesŦ

8envol uocLrlne as Applled by Lhe CourL ln Lhls case

We noLe LhaL ArLlcle 946 of Lhe Callfornla Clvll Code ls lLs confllcL of laws ruleţ whlle Lhe rule applled
ln ln 8e kaufmanţ supraţ lLs lnLernal lawŦ lf Lhe law on successlon and Lhe confllcL of laws rules of
Callfornla are Lo be enforced [olnLlyţ each ln lLs own lnLended and approprlaLe sphereţ Lhe prlnclple
clLed ln 8e kaufman should apply Lo clLlzens llvlng ln Lhe SLaLeţ buL ArLlcle 946 should apply Lo such
of lLs clLlzens as are noL domlclled ln Callfornla buL ln oLher [urlsdlcLlonsŦ 1he rule lald down of
resorLlng Lo Lhe law of Lhe domlclle ln Lhe deLermlnaLlon of maLLers wlLh forelgn elemenL lnvolved
ls ln accord wlLh Lhe general prlnclple of Amerlcan law LhaL Lhe domlclllary law should govern ln
mosL maLLers or rlghLs whlch follow Lhe person of Lhe ownerŦ

Appellees argue LhaL whaL ArLlcle 16 of Lhe Clvll Code of Lhe Þhlllpplnes polnLed ouL as Lhe naLlonal
law ls Lhe lnLernal law of CallfornlaŦ 8uL as above explalnedţ Lhe laws of Callfornla have prescrlbed

Lwo seLs of laws for lLs clLlzensţ one for resldenLs Lhereln and anoLher for Lhose domlclled ln oLher
[urlsdlcLlonsŦ 8eason demands LhaL We should enforce Lhe Callfornla lnLernal law prescrlbed for lLs
clLlzens resldlng Lherelnţ and enforce Lhe confllcL of laws rules for Lhe clLlzens domlclled abroadŦ lf
we musL enforce Lhe law of Callfornla as ln comlLy we are bound Lo doţ as so declared ln ArLlcle 16
of our Clvll Codeţ Lhen we musL enforce Lhe law of Callfornla ln accordance wlLh Lhe express
mandaLe Lhereof and as above explalnedţ lŦeŦţ apply Lhe lnLernal law for resldenLs Lherelnţ and lLs
confllcLŴofŴlaws rule for Lhose domlclled abroadŦ

lL ls argued on appelleesƌ behalf LhaL Lhe clause ƍlf Lhere ls no law Lo Lhe conLrary ln Lhe place
where Lhe properLy ls slLuaLedƍ ln SecŦ 946 of Lhe Callfornla Clvll Code refers Lo ArLlcle 16 of Lhe
Clvll Code of Lhe Þhlllpplnes and LhaL Lhe law Lo Lhe conLrary ln Lhe Þhlllpplnes ls Lhe provlslon ln
sald ArLlcle 16 LhaL Lhe naLlonal law of Lhe deceased should governŦ 1hls conLenLlon can noL be
susLalnedŦ As explalned ln Lhe varlous auLhorlLles clLed above Lhe naLlonal law menLloned ln ArLlcle
16 of our Clvll Code ls Lhe law on confllcL of laws ln Lhe Callfornla Clvll Codeţ lŦeŦţ ArLlcle 946ţ whlch
auLhorlzes Lhe reference or reLurn of Lhe quesLlon Lo Lhe law of Lhe LesLaLorƌs domlclleŦ 1he confllcL
of laws rule ln Callfornlaţ ArLlcle 946ţ Clvll Codeţ preclsely refers back Lhe caseţ when a decedenL ls
noL domlclled ln Callfornlaţ Lo Lhe law of hls domlclleţ Lhe Þhlllpplnes ln Lhe case aL barŦ 1he courL of
Lhe domlclle can noL and should noL refer Lhe case back Lo CallfornlaŤ such acLlon would leave Lhe
lssue lncapable of deLermlnaLlon because Lhe case wlll Lhen be llke a fooLballţ Lossed back and forLh
beLween Lhe Lwo sLaLesţ beLween Lhe counLry of whlch Lhe decedenL was a clLlzen and Lhe counLry
of hls domlclleŦ 1he Þhlllpplne courL musL apply lLs own law as dlrecLed ln Lhe confllcL of laws rule
of Lhe sLaLe of Lhe decedenLţ lf Lhe quesLlon has Lo be decldedţ especlally as Lhe appllcaLlon of Lhe
lnLernal law of Callfornla provldes no leglLlme for chlldren whlle Lhe Þhlllpplne lawţ ArLsŦ 887(4) and
894ţ Clvll Code of Lhe Þhlllpplnesţ makes naLural chlldren legally acknowledged forced helrs of Lhe
parenL recognlzlng LhemŦ



Aca|n vsŦ IAC
Gk #LŴ 72706ţ CctŦ 27ţ 1987
1SS SCkA 100

1hls ls a peLlLlon for revlew on cerLlorarl of Lhe declslon of Lhe CAŦ

8espondenL 8eglonal 1rlal CourL granLed Lhe peLlLlon and ordered lLs dlsmlssalŦ

Cn May 29ţ 1984 peLlLloner ConsLanLlno Acaln flled on Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal CourL of Cebu ClLyţ a
peLlLlon for Lhe probaLe of Lhe wlll of Lhe laLe nemeslo Acaln and for Lhe lssuance Lo Lhe same
peLlLloner of leLLers LesLamenLaryţ on Lhe premlse LhaL nemeslo Acaln dled leavlng a wlll ln whlch
peLlLloner and hls broLhers AnLonloţ llores and !ose and hls slsLers AnlLaţ Concepclonţ Culrlna and
Laura were lnsLlLuLed as helrsŦ

1he wlll allegedly execuLed by nemeslo Acaln on lebruary 17ţ 1960 was wrlLLen ln 8lsaya wlLh a
LranslaLlon ln Lngllsh submlƌLLed by peLlLloner wlLhouL ob[ecLlon ralsed by prlvaLe respondenLsŦ 1he
wlll conLalned provlslons on burlal rlLesţ paymenL of debLsţ and Lhe appolnLmenL of a cerLaln ALLyŦ
lgnaclo CŦ vlllagonzalo as Lhe execuLor of Lhe LesLamenLŦ Cn Lhe dlsposlLlon of Lhe LesLaLorƌs
properLyţ Lhe wlll provldedť

1Pl8uť All my shares LhaL l may recelve from our properLlesŦ houseţ lands and money whlch l
earned [olnLly wlLh my wlfe 8osa ulongson shall all be glven by me Lo my broLher SLCunuC ACAln
llllplnoţ wldowerţ of legal age and presenLly resldlng aL 337ŴC Sanclangko SLreeLţ Cebu ClLyŦ ln case
my broLher Segundo Acaln preŴdeceased meţ all Lhe money properLlesţ landsţ houses Lhere ln
8anLayan and here ln Cebu ClLy whlch consLlLuLe my share shall be glven Lo me Lo hls chlldrenţ
namelyť AnlLaţ ConsLanLlnoţ Concepclonţ Culrlnaţ lauraţ lloresţ AnLonlo and !oseţ all surnamed
AcalnŦ

Cbvlouslyţ Segundo preŴdeceased nemesloŦ 1hus lL ls Lhe chlldren of Segundo who are clalmlng Lo
be helrsţ wlLh ConsLanLlno as Lhe peLlLlonerŦ

AfLer Lhe peLlLlon was seL for hearlng ln Lhe lower courL on !une 23ţ 1984 Lhe opposlLors
(respondenLs hereln vlrglnla AŦ lernandezţ a legally adopLed daughLer of Lhe deceased and Lhe
laLLerƌs wldow 8osa ulongson vdaŦ de Acaln flled a moLlon Lo dlsmlss on Lhe followlng grounds for
Lhe peLlLloner has no legal capaclLy Lo lnsLlLuLe Lhese proceedlngsŤ (2) he ls merely a unlversal helr
and (3) Lhe wldow and Lhe adopLed daughLer have been preLlrlLedŦ Sald moLlon was denled by Lhe
Lrlal [udgeŦ

AfLer Lhe denlal of Lhelr subsequenL moLlon for reconslderaLlon ln Lhe lower courLţ respondenLs
flled wlLh Lhe Supreme CourL a peLlLlon for cerLlorarl and prohlblLlon wlLh prellmlnary ln[uncLlon
whlch was subsequenLly referred Lo Lhe lnLermedlaLe AppellaLe CourL by 8esoluLlon of Lhe CourL
daLed March 11ţ 1983Ŧ

lAC granLed prlvaLe respondenLsƌ peLlLlon and ordered Lhe Lrlal courL Lo dlsmlss Lhe peLlLlon for Lhe
probaLe of Lhe wlll of nemeslo AcalnŦ ÞeLlLloner flled Lhls presenL peLlLlon for Lhe revlew of
respondenL CourLƌs declslonŦ

1he plvoLal lssue ln Lhls case ls wheLher or noL prlvaLe respondenLs have been preLlrlLedŦ

ArLlcle 834 of Lhe Clvll Code provldesť 1he preLerlLlon or omlsslon of oneţ someţ or all of Lhe
compulsory helrs ln Lhe dlrecL llneţ wheLher llvlng aL Lhe Llme of Lhe execuLlon of Lhe wlll or born
afLer Lhe deaLh of Lhe LesLaLorţ shall annul Lhe lnsLlLuLlon of helrŤ buL Lhe devlsees and legacles shall
be valld lnsofar as Lhey are noL lnofflclousŦ
lf Lhe omlLLed compulsory helrs should dle before Lhe LesLaLorţ Lhe lnsLlLuLlon shall be effecLualţ
wlLhouL pre[udlce Lo Lhe rlghL of represenLaLlonŦ

ÞreLerlLlon conslsLs ln Lhe omlsslon ln Lhe LesLaLorƌs wlll of Lhe forced helrs or anyone of Lhem
elLher because Lhey are noL menLloned Lherelnţ orţ Lhough menLlonedţ Lhey are nelLher lnsLlLuLed
as helrs nor are expressly dlslnherlLedŦ lnsofar as Lhe wldow ls concernedţ ArLlcle 834 of Lhe Clvll
Code may noL apply as she does noL ascend or descend from Lhe LesLaLorţ alLhough she ls a
compulsory helrŦ SLaLed oLherwlseţ even lf Lhe survlvlng spouse ls a compulsory helrţ Lhere ls no
preLerlLlon even lf she ls omlLLed from Lhe lnherlLanceţ for she ls noL ln Lhe dlrecL llneŦ Poweverţ
Lhe same Lhlng cannoL be sald of Lhe oLher respondenL vlrglnla AŦ lernandezţ whose legal adopLlon
by Lhe LesLaLor has noL been quesLloned by peLlLlonerŦ under ArLlcle 39 of ÞŦuŦ noŦ 603ţ known as
Lhe Chlld and ?ouLh Welfare Codeţ adopLlon glves Lo Lhe adopLed person Lhe same rlghLs and
duLles as lf he were a leglLlmaLe chlld of Lhe adopLer and makes Lhe adopLed person a legal helr of

Lhe adopLerŦ lL cannoL be denled LhaL she was LoLally omlLLed and preLerlLed ln Lhe wlll of Lhe
LesLaLor and LhaL boLh adopLed chlld and Lhe wldow were deprlved of aL leasL Lhelr leglLlmeŦ
nelLher can lL be denled LhaL Lhey were noL expressly dlslnherlLedŦ Penceţ Lhls ls a clear case of
preLerlLlon of Lhe legally adopLed chlldŦ

ÞreLenLlon annuls Lhe lnsLlLuLlon of an helr and annulmenL Lhrows open Lo lnLesLaLe successlon Lhe
enLlre lnherlLance lncludlng ƍla porclon llbre (que) no hublese dlspuesLo en vlrLual de legado
me[ora o donaclonƍ)Ŧ 1he only provlslons whlch do noL resulL ln lnLesLacy are Lhe legacles and
devlses made ln Lhe wlll for Lhey should sLand valld and respecLedţ excepL lnsofar as Lhe leglLlmes
are concernedŦ

1he unlversal lnsLlLuLlon of peLlLloner LogeLher wlLh hls broLhers and slsLers Lo Lhe enLlre
lnherlLance of Lhe LesLaLor resulLs ln LoLally abrogaLlng Lhe wlll because Lhe nulllflcaLlon of such
lnsLlLuLlon of unlversal helrsŴwlLhouL any oLher LesLamenLary dlsposlLlon ln Lhe wlllŴamounLs Lo a
declaraLlon LhaL noLhlng aL all was wrlLLenŦ Carefully worded and ln clear Lermsţ ArLlcle 834 of Lhe
Clvll Code offers no leeway for lnferenLlal lnLerpreLaLlonŦ no legacles or devlses havlng been
provlded ln Lhe wlll Lhe whole properLy of Lhe deceased has been lefL by unlversal LlLle Lo peLlLloner
and hls broLhers and slsLersŦ 1he effecL of annulllng Lhe ƍlnsLlLuLlon of helrs wlll beţ necessarllyţ Lhe
openlng of a LoLal lnLesLacy excepL LhaL proper legacles and devlses musLţ as already sLaLed aboveţ
be respecLedŦ

We now deal wlLh anoLher maLLerŦ ln order LhaL a person may be allowed Lo lnLervene ln a probaLe
proceedlng he musL have an lnLeresL ln Lhe esLaLeţ or ln Lhe wlllţ or ln Lhe properLy Lo be affecLed
by lL elLher as execuLor or as a clalmanL of Lhe esLaLe and an lnLeresLed parLy ls one who would be
beneflLed by Lhe esLaLe such as an helr or one who has a clalm agalnsL Lhe esLaLe llke a credlLorŦ
ÞeLlLloner ls noL Lhe appolnLed execuLorţ nelLher a devlsee nor a legaLee Lhere belng no menLlon ln
Lhe LesLamenLary dlsposlLlon of any glfL of an lndlvldual lLem of personal or real properLy he ls
called upon Lo recelve (ArLlcle 782ţ Clvll Code)Ŧ

AL Lhe ouLseLţ he appears Lo have an lnLeresL ln Lhe wlll as an helrţ deflned under ArLlcle 782 of Lhe
Clvll Code as a person called Lo Lhe successlon elLher by Lhe provlslon of a wlll or by operaLlon of
lawŦ Poweverţ lnLesLacy havlng resulLed from Lhe preLerlLlon of respondenL adopLed chlld and Lhe
unlversal lnsLlLuLlon of helrsţ peLlLloner ls ln effecL noL an helr of Lhe LesLaLorŦ Pe has no legal
sLandlng Lo peLlLlon for Lhe probaLe of Lhe wlll lefL by Lhe deceased and Speclal Þroceedlngs musL
be dlsmlssedŦ

As a general ruleţ cerLlorarl cannoL be a subsLlLuLe for appealţ excepL when Lhe quesLloned order ls
an oppresslve exerclse of [udlclal auLhorlLyŦ lL ls axlomaLlc LhaL Lhe remedles of cerLlorarl and
prohlblLlon are noL avallable where Lhe peLlLloner has Lhe remedy of appeal or some oLher plalnţ
speedy and adequaLe remedy ln Lhe course of lawŦ 1hey areţ howeverţ proper remedles Lo correcL
a grave abuse of dlscreLlon of Lhe Lrlal courL ln noL dlsmlsslng a case where Lhe dlsmlssal ls founded
on valld groundsŦ

Speclal Þroceedlngs ls for Lhe probaLe of a wlllŦ As sLaLed by respondenL CourLţ Lhe general rule ls
LhaL Lhe probaLe courLƌs auLhorlLy ls llmlLed only Lo Lhe exLrlnslc valldlLy of Lhe wlllţ Lhe due
execuLlon Lhereofţ Lhe LesLaLorƌs LesLamenLary capaclLy and Lhe compllance wlLh Lhe requlslLes or
solemnlLles prescrlbed by lawŦ

1he lnLrlnslc valldlLy of Lhe wlll normally comes only afLer Lhe CourL has declared LhaL Lhe wlll has
been duly auLhenLlcaLedŦ Sald courL aL Lhls sLage of Lhe proceedlngs ls noL called upon Lo rule on
Lhe lnLrlnslc valldlLy or efflcacy of Lhe provlslons of Lhe wlllŦ

1he ruleţ howeverţ ls noL lnflexlble and absoluLeŦ under excepLlonal clrcumsLancesţ Lhe probaLe
courL ls noL powerless Lo do whaL Lhe slLuaLlon consLralns lL Lo do and pass upon cerLaln provlslons
of Lhe wlllŦ

ln Lhe lnsLanL case prlvaLe respondenLs flled a moLlon Lo dlsmlss Lhe peLlLlon on Lhe followlng
groundsť (1) peLlLloner has no legal capaclLy Lo lnsLlLuLe Lhe proceedlngsŤ (2) he ls merely a
unlversal helrŤ and (3) Lhe wldow and Lhe adopLed daughLer have been preLerlLedŦ lL was denled by
Lhe Lrlal courL ln an order daLed !anuary 21ţ 1983 for Lhe reason LhaL ƍLhe grounds for Lhe moLlon
Lo dlsmlss are maLLers properly Lo be resolved afLer a hearlng on Lhe lssues ln Lhe course of Lhe Lrlal
on Lhe merlLs of Lhe caseŦ A subsequenL moLlon for reconslderaLlon was denled by Lhe Lrlal courL on
lebruary 13ţ 1983Ŧ

lor prlvaLe respondenLs Lo have LoleraLed Lhe probaLe of Lhe wlll and allowed Lhe case Lo progress
when on lLs face Lhe wlll appears Lo be lnLrlnslcally vold as peLlLloner and hls broLhers and slsLers
were lnsLlLuLed as unlversal helrs coupled wlLh Lhe obvlous facL LhaL one of Lhe prlvaLe respondenLs
had been preLerlLed would have been an exerclse ln fuLlllLyŦ lL would have meanL a wasLe of Llmeţ
efforLţ expenseţ plus added fuLlllLyŦ 1he Lrlal courL could have denled lLs probaLe ouLrlghL or could
have passed upon Lhe lnLrlnslc valldlLy of Lhe LesLamenLary provlslons before Lhe exLrlnslc valldlLy
of Lhe wlll was resolvedŦ 1he remedles of cerLlorarl and prohlblLlon were properly avalled of by
prlvaLe respondenLsŦ

1husţ Lhls CourL ruled LhaL where Lhe grounds for dlsmlssal are lndublLableţ Lhe defendanLs had Lhe
rlghL Lo resorL Lo Lhe more speedyţ and adequaLe remedles of cerLlorarl and prohlblLlon Lo correcL a
grave abuse of dlscreLlonţ amounLlng Lo lack of [urlsdlcLlonţ commlLLed by Lhe Lrlal courL ln noL
dlsmlsslng Lhe caseţ and even assumlng Lhe exlsLence of Lhe remedy of appealţ Lhe CourL harkens
Lo Lhe rule LhaL ln Lhe broader lnLeresLs of [usLlceţ a peLlLlon for cerLlorarl may be enLerLalnedţ
parLlcularly where appeal would noL afford speedy and adequaLe rellefŦ

ÞeLlLlon was uLnlLu for lack of merlL and Lhe quesLloned declslon of respondenL CourL of Appeals
and lLs 8esoluLlon are hereby Alll8MLuŦ
SeparaLe Cplnlons

MLLLnClCŴPL88L8Aţ !Ŧţ concurrlngť
l concur ln Lhe resulL on Lhe baslc proposlLlon LhaL preLerlLlon ln Lhls case was by mlsLake or
lnadverLenceŦ
1o my mlndţ an lmporLanL dlsLlncLlon has Lo be made as Lo wheLher Lhe omlsslon of a forced helr ln
Lhe wlll of a LesLaLor ls by mlsLake or lnadverLenceţ or volunLary or lnLenLlonalŦ lf by mlsLake or
lnadverLenceţ Lhere ls Lrue preLerlrLon and LoLal lnLesLacy resulLsŦ 1he reason for Lhls ls Lhe
ƍlnablllLy Lo deLermlne how Lhe LesLaLor would have dlsLrlbuLed hls esLaLe lf none of Lhe helrs had
been omlLLed or forgoLLenŦ

ÞreLenLlon ls presumed Lo be only an lnvolunLary omlsslonŤ LhaL lsţ LhaL lf Lhe LesLaLor had known
of Lhe exlsLence of Lhe compulsory helr aL Lhe Llme of Lhe execuLlon of Lhe wlllţ he would have
lnsLlLuLed such helrŦ Cn Lhe oLher handţ lf Lhe LesLaLor aLLempLs Lo dlslnherlL a compulsory helrţ Lhe
presumpLlon of Lhe law ls LhaL he wanLs such helr Lo recelve as llLLle as posslble from hls esLaLeŦ

ln Lhe case aL barţ Lhere seems Lo have been mlsLake or lnadverLence ln Lhe omlsslon of Lhe
adopLed daughLerţ henceţ my concurrence ln Lhe resulL LhaL LoLal lnLesLacy ensuedŦ


Nugu|d vsŦ Nugu|d
Gk # LŴ 2344Sţ Iune 23ţ 1966
17 SCkA 449

8osarlo nuguldţ a resldenL of Cuezon ClLyţ dled on uecember 30ţ 1962ţ slngleţ wlLhouL
descendanLsţ leglLlmaLe or llleglLlmaLeŦ Survlvlng her were her leglLlmaLe parenLsţ lellx nuguld and
Þaz Salonga nuguldţ and slx (6) broLhers and slsLersţ namelyť Alfredoţ lederlcoţ 8emedlosţ Conradoţ
Lourdes and AlberLoţ all surnamed nuguldŦ

Cn May 18ţ 1963ţ peLlLloner 8emedlos nuguld flled ln Lhe CourL of llrsL lnsLance of 8lzal a
holographlc wlll allegedly execuLed by 8osarlo nuguld on november 17ţ 1931ţ some 11 years
before her demlseŦ ÞeLlLloner prayed LhaL sald wlll be admlLLed Lo probaLe and LhaL leLLers of
admlnlsLraLlon wlLh Lhe wlll annexed be lssued Lo herŦ

Cn !une 23ţ 1963ţ lellx nuguld and Þaz Salonga nuguldţ concededly Lhe leglLlmaLe faLher and
moLher of Lhe deceased 8osarlo nuguldţ enLered Lhelr opposlLlon Lo Lhe probaLe of her wlllŦ
Cround Lhereforţ lnLer allaţ ls LhaL by Lhe lnsLlLuLlon of peLlLloner 8emedlos nuguld as unlversal helr
of Lhe deceasedţ opposlLors Ŵ who are compulsory helrs of Lhe deceased ln Lhe dlrecL ascendlng llne
Ŵ were lllegally preLerlLed and LhaL ln consequence Lhe lnsLlLuLlon ls voldŦ

8efore a hearlng was had on Lhe peLlLlon for probaLe and ob[ecLlon LhereLoţ opposlLors moved Lo
dlsmlss on Lhe ground of absoluLe preLerlLlonŦ

1he courL held LhaL ƍLhe wlll ln quesLlon ls a compleLe nulllLy and wlll perforce creaLe lnLesLacy of
Lhe esLaLe of Lhe deceased 8osarlo nuguldƍ and dlsmlssed Lhe peLlLlon wlLhouL cosLsŦ

A moLlon Lo reconslder havlng been LhwarLed belowţ peLlLloner came Lo Lhls CourL on appealŦ

1Ŧ 1he case ls for Lhe probaLe of a wlllŦ 1he courLƌs area of lnqulry ls llmlLed Ŵ Lo an examlnaLlon ofţ
and resoluLlon onţ Lhe exLrlnslc valldlLy of Lhe wlllŦ Sald courL aL Lhls sLage of Lhe proceedlngs Ŵ ls
noL called upon Lo rule on Lhe lnLrlnslc valldlLy or efflcacy of Lhe provlslons of Lhe wlllţ Lhe legallLy of
any devlse or legacy LherelnŦ

uue Lo pracLlcal conslderaLlons (wasLe of Llmeţ efforLţ expenseţ plus added anxleLy) LhaL lnduce us
Lo a bellef LhaL we mlghL as well meeL headŴon Lhe lssue of Lhe valldlLy of Lhe provlslons of Lhe wlll
ln quesLlonŦ AfLer allţ Lhere exlsLs a [usLlclable conLroversy crylng for soluLlonŦ

2Ŧ ÞeLlLlonerƌs sole asslgnmenL of error challenges Lhe correcLness of Lhe concluslon below LhaL Lhe
wlll ls a compleLe nulllLyŦ 1hls exacLs from us a sLudy of Lhe dlspuLed wlll and Lhe appllcable sLaLuLeŦ
8eproduced hereunder ls Lhe wlllť

novŦ 17ţ 1931
lţ 8CSA8lC nuCuluţ belng of sound and dlsposlng mlnd and memoryţ havlng amassed a cerLaln
amounL of properLyţ do hereby glveţ devlseţ and bequeaLh all of Lhe properLy whlch l may have
when l dle Lo my beloved slsLer 8emedlos nuguldţ age 34ţ resldlng wlLh me aL 38Ŵ8 lrlgaţ CŦCŦ ln
wlLness whereofţ l have slgned my name Lhls sevenLh day of novemberţ nlneLeen hundred and
flfLyŴoneŦ
(SgdŦ) llleglble
1/ 8CSA8lC nuCulu

1he sLaLuLe we are called upon Lo apply ln ArLlcle 834 of Lhe Clvll Code whlchţ ln parLţ provldesť
A81Ŧ 834Ŧ 1he preLerlLlon or omlsslon of oneţ someţ or all of Lhe compulsory helrs ln Lhe dlrecL llneţ
wheLher llvlng aL Lhe Llme of Lhe execuLlon of Lhe wlll or born afLer Lhe deaLh of Lhe LesLaLorţ shall
annul Lhe lnsLlLuLlon of helrŤ buL Lhe devlses and legacles shall be valld lnsofar as Lhey are noL
lnofflclousŦ

ArLlcle 814 of Lhe Clvll Code of Spaln of 1889ţ whlch ls slmllarly hereln copledţ Lhus Ŵ
ArLŦ 814Ŧ 1he preLerlLlon of one or all of Lhe forced helrs ln Lhe dlrecL llneţ wheLher llvlng aL Lhe
Llme of Lhe execuLlon of Lhe wlll or born afLer Lhe deaLh of Lhe LesLaLorţ shall vold Lhe lnsLlLuLlon of
helrŤ buL Lhe legacles and beLLermenLs shall be valldţ ln so far as Lhey are noL lnofflclousŦ

1he word ƍannulƍ as used ln sLaLuLe requlrlng courL Lo annul allmony provlslons of dlvorce decree
upon wlfeƌs remarrlage means Lo reduce Lo noLhlngŤ Lo annlhllaLeŤ obllLeraLeŤ bloL ouLŤ Lo make
vold or of no effecLŤ Lo nulllfyŤ Lo abollshŦ

1he deceased 8osarlo nuguld lefL no descendanLsţ leglLlmaLe or llleglLlmaLeŦ 8uL she lefL forced
helrs ln Lhe dlrecL ascendlng llneţ her parenLsţ now opposlLors lellx nuguld and Þaz Salonga
nuguldŦ Andţ Lhe wlll compleLely omlLs boLh of Lhemť 1hey Lhus recelved noLhlng by Lhe LesLamenLŤ
LaclLlyţ Lhey were deprlved of Lhelr leglLlmeŤ nelLher were Lhey expressly dlslnherlLedŦ 1hls ls a clear
case of preLerlLlonŦ
1he oneŴsenLence wlll lnsLlLuLes peLlLloner as Lhe soleţ unlversal helr Ŵ noLhlng moreŦ no speclflc
legacles or bequesLs are Lhereln provlded forŦ lL ls ln Lhls posLure LhaL we say LhaL Lhe nulllLy ls
compleLeŦ Þerforceţ 8osarlo nuguld dled lnLesLaLeŦ

8eallyţ as we analyze Lhe word annul employed ln Lhe sLaLuLeţ Lhere ls no escaplng Lhe concluslon
LhaL Lhe unlversal lnsLlLuLlon of peLlLloner Lo Lhe enLlre lnherlLance resulLs ln LoLally abrogaLlng Lhe
wlllŦ 8ecauseţ Lhe nulllflcaLlon of such lnsLlLuLlon of unlversal helr Ŵ wlLhouL any oLher LesLamenLary
dlsposlLlon ln Lhe wlll Ŵ amounLs Lo a declaraLlon LhaL noLhlng aL all was wrlLLenŦ Carefully worded
and ln clear Lermsţ ArLlcle 834 offers no leeway for lnferenLlal lnLerpreLaLlonŦ Clvlng lL an expanslve
meanlng wlll Lear up by Lhe rooLs Lhe fabrlc of Lhe sLaLuLeŦ

3Ŧ We should noL be led asLray by Lhe sLaLemenL ln ArLlcle 834 LhaLţ annullmenL noLwlLhsLandlngţ
ƍLhe devlses and legacles shall be valld lnsofar as Lhey are noL lnofflclousƍŦ Legacles and devlses
merlL conslderaLlon only when Lhey are so expressly glven as such ln a wlllŦ noLhlng ln ArLlcle 834

suggesLs LhaL Lhe mere lnsLlLuLlon of a unlversal helr ln a wlll Ŵ vold because of preLerlLlon Ŵ would
glve Lhe helr so lnsLlLuLed a share ln Lhe lnherlLanceŦ As Lo hlmţ Lhe wlll ls lnexlsLenLŦ 1here musL beţ
ln addlLlon Lo such lnsLlLuLlonţ a LesLamenLary dlsposlLlon granLlng hlm bequesLs or legacles aparL
and separaLe from Lhe nulllfled lnsLlLuLlon of helrŦ

As aforesaldţ Lhere ls no oLher provlslon ln Lhe wlll before us excepL Lhe lnsLlLuLlon of peLlLloner as
unlversal helrŦ 1haL lnsLlLuLlonţ by lLselfţ ls null and voldŦ Andţ lnLesLaLe successlon ensuesŦ

4Ŧ ÞeLlLlonerƌs malnsLay ls LhaL Lhe presenL ls ƍa case of lneffecLlve dlslnherlLance raLher Lhan one of
preLerlLlonƍŦ lrom Lhlsţ peLlLloner draws Lhe concluslon LhaL ArLlcle 834 ƍdoes noL apply Lo Lhe case
aL barƍŦ

1hls argumenL falls Lo appreclaLe Lhe dlsLlncLlon beLween preLenLlon and dlslnherlLanceŦ
ÞreLerlLlon ƍconslsLs ln Lhe omlsslon ln Lhe LesLaLorƌs wlll of Lhe forced helrs or anyone of Lhemţ
elLher because Lhey are noL menLloned Lherelnţ orţ Lhough menLlonedţ Lhey are nelLher lnsLlLuLed
as helrs nor are expressly dlslnherlLedŦƍ ulslnherlLanceţ ln Lurnţ ƍls a LesLamenLary dlsposlLlon
deprlvlng any compulsory helr of hls share ln Lhe leglLlme for a cause auLhorlzed by lawŦƍ

1he wlll here does noL expllclLly dlslnherlL Lhe LesLaLrlxƌs parenLsţ Lhe forced helrsŦ lL slmply omlLs
Lhelr names alLogeLherŦ Sald wlll raLher Lhan be labeled lneffecLlve dlslnherlLance ls clearly one ln
whlch Lhe sald forced helrs suffer from preLerlLlonŦ

1he effecLs flowlng from preLerlLlon are LoLally dlfferenL from Lhose of dlslnherlLanceŦ ÞreLerlLlon
under ArLlcle 834 of Lhe Clvll Codeţ we repeaLţ ƍshall annul Lhe lnsLlLuLlon of helrƍŦ 1hls annulmenL
ls ln LoLoţ unless ln Lhe wlll Lhere areţ ln addlLlonţ LesLamenLary dlsposlLlons ln Lhe form of devlses
or legaclesŦ ln lneffecLlve dlslnherlLance under ArLlcle 918 of Lhe same Codeţ such dlslnherlLance
shall also ƍannul Lhe lnsLlLuLlon of helrsƍţ puL only ƍlnsofar as lL may pre[udlce Lhe person
dlslnherlLedƍţ whlch lasL phrase was omlLLed ln Lhe case of preLerlLlonŦ 8eLLer sLaLed yeLţ ln
dlslnherlLance Lhe nulllLy ls llmlLed Lo LhaL porLlon of Lhe esLaLe of whlch Lhe dlslnherlLed helrs have
been lllegally deprlvedŦ

3Ŧ ÞeLlLloner lnslsLs LhaL Lhe compulsory helrs lneffecLlvely dlslnherlLed are enLlLled Lo recelve Lhelr
leglLlmesţ buL LhaL Lhe lnsLlLuLlon of helr ƍls noL lnvalldaLedţƍ alLhough Lhe lnherlLance of Lhe helr so
lnsLlLuLed ls reduced Lo Lhe exLenL of sald leglLlmesŦ

WlLh reference Lo arLlcle 814ţ whlch ls Lhe only provlslon maLerlal Lo Lhe dlsposlLlon of Lhls caseţ lL
musL be observed LhaL Lhe lnsLlLuLlon of helrs ls Lhereln dealL wlLh as a Lhlng separaLe and dlsLlncL
from legacles or beLLermenLsŦ And Lhey are separaLe and dlsLlncL noL only because Lhey are
dlsLlncLly and separaLely LreaLed ln sald arLlcle buL because Lhey are ln Lhemselves dlfferenLŦ
r lnsLlLuLlon of helrs ls a bequesL by unlversal LlLle of properLy LhaL ls undeLermlnedŦ
r Legacy refers Lo speclflc properLy bequeaLhed by a parLlcular or speclal LlLleŦ
8uL agaln an lnsLlLuLlon of helrs cannoL be Laken as a legacyŦ

1he dlspuLed orderţ we observeţ declares Lhe wlll ln quesLlon ƍa compleLe nulllLyƍŦ ArLlcle 834 of
Lhe Clvll Code ln Lurn merely nulllfles ƍLhe lnsLlLuLlon of helrƍŦ Conslderlngţ howeverţ LhaL Lhe wlll
before us solely provldes for Lhe lnsLlLuLlon of peLlLloner as unlversal helrţ and noLhlng moreţ Lhe
resulL ls Lhe sameŦ 1he enLlre wlll ls nullŦ

Seang|o vŦ keyes
Gk # 140371Ŵ72ţ NovŦ 27ţ 2006
S08 SCkA 172
1hls ls a peLlLlon for cerLlorarl wlLh appllcaLlon for Lhe lssuance of a wrlL of prellmlnary ln[uncLlon
and/or Lemporary resLralnlng order seeklng Lhe nulllflcaLlon of Lhe orders of Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal
CourL of Manllaţ dlsmlsslng Lhe peLlLlon for probaLe on Lhe ground of preLerlLlonţ ƌln Lhe MaLLer of
Lhe lnLesLaLe LsLaLe of Segundo CŦ Seanglo vŦ Alfredo uŦ Seangloţ eL alŦ and ƌln Lhe MaLLer of Lhe
ÞrobaLe of Lhe Wlll of Segundo CŦ Seanglo vŦ uy ?leng Seangloţ 8arbara uŦ Seanglo and vlrglnla
SeangloŦ

ÞrlvaLe respondenLs flled a peLlLlon for Lhe seLLlemenL of Lhe lnLesLaLe esLaLe of Lhe laLe Segundo
Seangloţ and praylng for Lhe appolnLmenL of prlvaLe respondenL Lllsa uŦ SeangloSanLos as speclal
admlnlsLraLor and guardlan ad llLem of peLlLloner uy ?leng SeangloŦ

ÞeLlLloners uy ?lengţ 8arbara and vlrglnlaţ all surnamed Seangloţ opposed Lhe peLlLlonŦ 1hey
conLended LhaLť 1) uy ?leng ls sLlll very healLhy and ln full command of her faculLlesŤ 2) Lhe
deceased Segundo execuLed a general power of aLLorney ln favor of vlrglnla glvlng her Lhe power
Lo manage and exerclse conLrol and supervlslon over hls buslness ln Lhe ÞhlllpplnesŤ 3) vlrglnla ls
Lhe mosL compeLenL and quallfled Lo serve as Lhe admlnlsLraLor of Lhe esLaLe of Segundo because
she ls a cerLlfled publlc accounLanLŤ andţ 4) Segundo lefL a holographlc wlllţ daLed SepLember 20ţ
1993ţ dlslnherlLlng one of Lhe prlvaLe respondenLsţ Alfredo Seangloţ for causeŦ ln vlew of Lhe
purporLed holographlc wlllţ peLlLloners averred LhaL ln Lhe evenL Lhe decedenL ls found Lo have lefL
a wlllţ Lhe lnLesLaLe proceedlngs are Lo be auLomaLlcally suspended and replaced by Lhe
proceedlngs for Lhe probaLe of Lhe wlllŦ

A peLlLlon for Lhe probaLe of Lhe holographlc wlll of Segundo was flled by peLlLloners before Lhe
81CŦ 1hey llkewlse relLeraLed LhaL Lhe probaLe proceedlngs should Lake precedence because
LesLaLe proceedlngs Lake precedence and en[oy prlorlLy over lnLesLaLe proceedlngsŦ

Cn !uly 1ţ 1999ţ prlvaLe respondenLs moved for Lhe dlsmlssal of Lhe probaLe proceedlngs prlmarlly
on Lhe ground LhaL Lhe documenL purporLlng Lo be Lhe holographlc wlll of Segundo does noL
conLaln any dlsposlLlon of Lhe esLaLe of Lhe deceased and Lhus does noL meeL Lhe deflnlLlon of a
wlll under ArLlcle 783 of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ Accordlng Lo prlvaLe respondenLsţ Lhe wlll only shows an
alleged acL of dlslnherlLance by Lhe decedenL of hls eldesL sonţ Alfredoţ and noLhlng elseŤ LhaL all
oLher compulsory helrs were noL named nor lnsLlLuLed as helrţ devlsee or legaLeeţ henceţ Lhere ls
preLerlLlon whlch would resulL Lo lnLesLacyŦ Such belng Lhe caseţ prlvaLe respondenLs malnLalned
LhaL whlle procedurally Lhe courL ls called upon Lo rule only on Lhe exLrlnslc valldlLy of Lhe wlllţ lL ls
noL barred from delvlng lnLo Lhe lnLrlnslc valldlLy of Lhe sameţ and orderlng Lhe dlsmlssal of Lhe
peLlLlon for probaLe when on Lhe face of Lhe wlll lL ls clear LhaL lL conLalns no LesLamenLary
dlsposlLlon of Lhe properLy of Lhe decedenLŦ




PLLuť

1he purporLed holographlc wlll of Segundo LhaL was presenLed by peLlLloners was daLedţ slgned
and wrlLLen by hlm ln hls own handwrlLlngŦ LxcepL on Lhe ground of preLerlLlonţ prlvaLe
respondenLs dld noL ralse any lssue as regards Lhe auLhenLlclLy of Lhe documenLŦ

1he documenLţ enLlLled kasulaLan ng ÞagŴAalls ng Manaţ unmlsLakably showed Segundoƌs lnLenLlon
of excludlng hls eldesL sonţ Alfredoţ as an helr Lo hls esLaLe for Lhe reasons LhaL he clLed LherelnŦ ln
effecLţ Alfredo was dlslnherlLed by SegundoŦ

lor dlslnherlLance Lo be valldţ ArLlcle 916 of Lhe Clvll Code requlres LhaL Lhe same musL be effecLed
Lhrough a wlll whereln Lhe legal cause Lherefor shall be speclfledŦ WlLh regard Lo Lhe reasons for
Lhe dlslnherlLance LhaL were sLaLed by Segundo ln hls documenLţ Lhe CourL belleves LhaL Lhe
lncldenLsţ Laken as a wholeţ can be consldered a form of malLreaLmenL of Segundo by hls sonţ
Alfredoţ and LhaL Lhe maLLer presenLs a sufflclenL cause for Lhe dlslnherlLance of a chlld or
descendanL under ArLlcle 919 of Lhe Clvll CodeŦ

nowţ Lhe crlLlcal lssue Lo be deLermlned ls wheLher Lhe documenL execuLed by Segundo can be
consldered as a holographlc wlllŦ

A holographlc wlllţ as provlded under ArLlcle 810 of Lhe Clvll Codeţ musL be enLlrely wrlLLenţ daLedţ
and slgned by Lhe hand of Lhe LesLaLor hlmselfŦ lL ls sub[ecL Lo no oLher formţ and may be made ln
or ouL of Lhe Þhlllpplnesţ and need noL be wlLnessedŦ

Segundoƌs documenLţ alLhough lL may lnlLlally come across as a mere dlslnherlLance lnsLrumenLţ
conforms Lo Lhe formallLles of a holographlc wlll prescrlbed by lawŦ lL ls wrlLLenţ daLed and slgned
by Lhe hand of Segundo hlmselfŦ lnLenL Lo dlspose morLls causa can be clearly deduced from Lhe
Lerms of Lhe lnsLrumenLţ and whlle lL does noL make an afflrmaLlve dlsposlLlon of Lhe laLLerƌs
properLyţ Lhe dlslnherlLance of Alfredoţ noneLhelessţ ls an acL of dlsposlLlon ln lLselfŦ ln oLher
wordsţ Lhe dlslnherlLance resulLs ln Lhe dlsposlLlon of Lhe properLy of Lhe LesLaLor Segundo ln favor
of Lhose who would succeed ln Lhe absence of AlfredoŦ

Moreoverţ lL ls a fundamenLal prlnclple LhaL Lhe lnLenL or Lhe wlll of Lhe LesLaLorţ expressed ln Lhe
form and wlLhln Lhe llmlLs prescrlbed by lawţ musL be recognlzed as Lhe supreme law ln successlonŦ
All rules of consLrucLlon are deslgned Lo ascerLaln and glve effecL Lo LhaL lnLenLlonŦ lL ls only when
Lhe lnLenLlon of Lhe LesLaLor ls conLrary Lo lawţ moralsţ or publlc pollcy LhaL lL cannoL be glven
effecLŦ

WlLh regard Lo Lhe lssue on preLerlLlonţ Lhe CourL belleves LhaL Lhe compulsory helrs ln Lhe dlrecL
llne were noL preLerlLed ln Lhe wlllŦ lL wasţ ln Lhe CourLƌs oplnlonţ Segundoƌs lasL expresslon Lo
bequeaLh hls esLaLe Lo all hls compulsory helrsţ wlLh Lhe sole excepLlon of AlfredoŦ Alsoţ Segundo
dld noL lnsLlLuLe an helr Lo Lhe excluslon of hls oLher compulsory helrsŦ 1he mere menLlon of Lhe
name of one of Lhe peLlLlonersţ vlrglnlaţ ln Lhe documenL dld noL operaLe Lo lnsLlLuLe her as Lhe
unlversal helrŦ Per name was lncluded plalnly as a wlLness Lo Lhe alLercaLlon beLween Segundo and
hls sonţ AlfredoŦ

Conslderlng LhaL Lhe quesLloned documenL ls Segundoƌs holographlc wlllţ and LhaL Lhe law favors
LesLacy over lnLesLacyţ Lhe probaLe of Lhe wlll cannoL be dlspensed wlLhŦ ArLlcle 838 of Lhe Clvll
Code provldes LhaL no wlll shall pass elLher real or personal properLy unless lL ls proved and allowed
ln accordance wlLh Lhe 8ules of CourLŦ 1husţ unless Lhe wlll ls probaLedţ Lhe rlghL of a person Lo
dlspose of hls properLy may be rendered nugaLoryŦ

ln vlew of Lhe foregolngţ Lhe Lrlal courLţ Lhereforeţ should have allowed Lhe holographlc wlll Lo be
probaLedŦ lL ls seLLled LhaL LesLaLe proceedlngs for Lhe seLLlemenL of Lhe esLaLe of Lhe decedenL
Lake precedence over lnLesLaLe proceedlngs for Lhe same purposeŦ

ÞeLlLlon ls C8An1LuŦ 1he Crders of Lhe 81C of Manlla are seL asldeŦ 8espondenL [udge ls dlrecLed
Lo relnsLaLe and hear Lhe Speclal Þroceedlng for Lhe allowance of Lhe holographlc wlll of Segundo
SeangloŦ 1he lnLesLaLe case ls hereby suspended unLll Lhe LermlnaLlon of Lhe aforesald LesLaLe
proceedlngsŦ
SC C8uL8LuŦ

Subst|tut|on of ne|rs


Þa|ac|os vsŦ kam|rez
Gk # LŴ 279S2ţ IebŦ 1Sţ 1982
111 SCkA 704

1he maln lssue ln Lhls appeal ls Lhe manner of parLlLlonlng Lhe LesLaLe esLaLe of !ose Lugenlo
8amlrez among Lhe prlnclpal beneflclarlesţ namelyť hls wldow Marcelle uemoron de 8amlrezŤ hls
Lwo grandnephews 8oberLo and !orge 8amlrezŤ and hls companlon Wanda de WroblesklŦ

1he Lask ls noL LroubleŴfree because Lhe wldow Marcelle ls a lrench who llves ln Þarlsţ whlle Lhe
companlon Wanda ls an AusLrlan who llves ln SpalnŦ Moreoverţ Lhe LesLaLor provlded for
subsLlLuLlonsŦ

!ose Lugenlo 8amlrezţ a llllplno naLlonalţ dled ln Spaln on uecember 11ţ 1964ţ wlLh only hls wldow
as compulsory helrŦ Pls wlll was admlLLed Lo probaLe by Lhe CourL of llrsL lnsLance of Manllaţ on
!uly 27ţ 1963Ŧ Marla Lulsa Þalaclos was appolnLed admlnlsLraLrlx of Lhe esLaLeŦ ln due Llme she
submlLLed an lnvenLory of Lhe esLaLeŦ

Cn !une 23ţ 1966ţ Lhe admlnlsLraLrlx submlLLed a pro[ecL of parLlLlon as followsť Lhe properLy of Lhe
deceased ls Lo be dlvlded lnLo Lwo parLsŦ Cne parL shall go Lo Lhe wldow ƌen pleno domlnloƍ ln
saLlsfacLlon of her leglLlmeŤ Lhe oLher parL or ƍfree porLlonƍ shall go Lo !orge and 8oberLo 8amlrez
ƍen nuda proprledadŦƍ lurLhermoreţ one Lhlrd (1/3) of Lhe free porLlon ls charged wlLh Lhe wldowƌs
usufrucL and Lhe remalnlng LwoŴLhlrds (2/3) wlLh a usufrucL ln favor of WandaŦ

!orge and 8oberLo opposed Lhe pro[ecL of parLlLlon on Lhe groundsť (a) LhaL Lhe provlslons for
vulgar subsLlLuLlon ln favor of Wanda de Wrobleskl wlLh respecL Lo Lhe wldowƌs usufrucL and ln
favor of !uan Þablo !ankowskl and Poraclo vŦ 8amlrezţ wlLh respecL Lo Wandaƌs usufrucL are lnvalld
because Lhe flrsL helrs Marcelle and Wanda survlved Lhe LesLaLorŤ (b) LhaL Lhe provlslons for
fldelcommlssary subsLlLuLlons are also lnvalld because Lhe flrsL helrs are noL relaLed Lo Lhe second
helrs or subsLlLuLes wlLhln Lhe flrsL degreeţ as provlded ln ArLlcle 863 of Lhe Clvll CodeŤ (c) LhaL Lhe
granL of a usufrucL over real properLy ln Lhe Þhlllpplnes ln favor of Wanda Wroblesklţ who ls an
allenţ vlolaLes SecLlon 3ţ ArLlcle lll of Lhe Þhlllpplne ConsLlLuLlonŤ and LhaL (d) Lhe proposed

parLlLlon of Lhe LesLaLorƌs lnLeresL ln Lhe SanLa Cruz (LscolLa) 8ulldlng beLween Lhe wldow Marcelle
and Lhe appellanLsţ vlolaLes Lhe LesLaLorƌs express wlll Lo glve Lhls properLy Lo LhemŦ noneLhelessţ
Lhe lowe