VILLARROEL V ESTRADA EN BANC; December 19, 1940 NATURE: Petition to review the decision of the CFI FACTS ! "n #$% 9, 191&, A'e($nder F C$''$o, mother of )*$n F +i''$rroe', obt$ined from the so*ses #$ri$no Estr$d$ $nd -everin$ debt of P1,000, $%$b'e $fter seven %e$rs! A'e.$ndr$, $ssed $w$%, 'e$vin/ +i''$roe' $s so'e heir he so*ses #$ri$no Estr$d$ $nd -everin$ $'so $ssed $w$%, 'e$vin/ Bern$rdino Estr$d$ $s so'e heir ! "n A*/*st 9, 190, +i''$roe' /$ve $ doc*ment to Estr$d$, in which he dec'$red in owin/ the $mo*nt of P1,000, with $n interest of 1& ercent er %e$r his $ction t*rns on the co''ection of this $mo*nt! he Co*rt of First Inst$nce of 2$/oon, in $s interosed this $ction, $nd decided for +i''$roe' to $% the $mo*nt dem$nded of P1,000 with its 'e/$' interests of 1& ercent from A*/*st 9, 190 to its com'ete $%ment +i''$roe' $e$'ed ISSUE 3"N +i''$roe' sho*'d $% the $mo*nt desite the rescrition of the ori/in$' debt HELD ! he resent $ction is not b$sed on the ori/in$' ob'i/$tion contr$cted b% the mother +i''$roe', which h$s rescribed, b*t on th$t which he contr$cted on A*/*st 9, 190 when $ss*min/ the f*'fi''ment of th$t ob'i/$tion Bein/ the so'e heir of the indebted one, with ri/ht her inherit$nce, th$t debt which w$s contr$cted b% his mother 'e/$''%, $'tho*/h no 'on/er effective b% rescrition, now is, neverthe'ess, $ mor$' ob'i/$tion h$t consider$tion is s*fficient to cre$te $nd to m$e his ob'i/$tion vo'*nt$ri'% contr$cted, effective A*/*st of 190! he r*'e in which $ new romise to $% $ rescribed debt m*st be done on'% b% the s$me erson or $nother who is 'e/$''% $*thori5ed b% her, is not $'ic$b'e $'ic$b'e to the resent resent c$se, bec$*se bec$*se +i''$roe' +i''$roe' vo'*nt$ri'% w$nted w$nted to $ss*me this ob'i/$tion ob'i/$tion Dispositi Disposition on he $e$'ed sentence is confirmed, with costs to the $e''$nt
FISHER V ROBB +I22A6EA2; November &, 199 NA76E8 Ae$' from $ .*d/ment of the CFI of #$ni'$, which ordered defend$nt 6obb to $% '$intiff Fisher the s*m of P &,000 with interest FACTS ! "n -et 19, defend$nt!$e''$nt )ohn 6obb w$s $sed b% the bo$rd of directors of the Phi'iine :re%ho*nd C'*b Inc P:CI< to st*d% the oer$tion of $ do/ r$cin/ co*rse in -h$n/h$i! In -h$n/h$i, he met '$intiff!$e''ee, A" Fisher who h$ened to be the m$n$/er of the do/ r$cin/ co*rse D*rin/ their time to/ether, P'$intiff bec$me interested in the P:CI $nd $sed to become $ stocho'der =e '$ter on st s*bscribed to P:CI $nd sent $ $%ment of P ,000 for the 1 inst$''ment of his s*bscrition 6obb ret*rned to #$ni'$ from -h$n/h$i short'% there$fter nd ! After $ few months, the P:CI Bo$rd iss*ed $ c$'' for the & inst$''ment of Fisher>s s*bscrition, hence, defend$nt!$e''$nt 6obb sent $ nd r$dio/r$m re?*estin/ $%ment of the & inst$''ment Fisher d*'% com'ied $nd sent P &,000 direct'% to P:CI ! he P:CI however, d*e to the m$ni*'$tions of some of its members, cr*mb'ed not too 'on/ $fter! Defend$nt!$e''$nt 6obb, who w$s or/$ni5in/ $ new com$n% c$''ed the Phi'iine 6$cin/ C'*b, immedi$te'% ende$vored to s$ve the investment of those who h$d s*bscribed to the P:CI, b% h$vin/ the Phi'iine 6$cin/ C'*b $c?*ire the rem$inin/ $ssets of the P:CI ! 6obb wrote $ 'etter to Fisher e('$inin/ in det$i' the critic$' condition of the P:CI, $nd o*t'inin/ his '$ns to s$ve the roerties $nd $ssets of the '$intiff!$e''ee $nd th$t he fe't mor$''% resonsib'e to the stocho'ders who h$d $id their second inst$''ment ! In $nswer to s$id 'etter, the '$intiff!$e''ee wrote the defend$nt!$e''$nt re?*irin/ him to ret*rn the entire $mo*nt $id b% him to the P:CI 7on receivin/ this 'etter, the defend$nt!$e''$nt $nswered the '$intiff!$e''ee on #$rch 1@, 19@, to the effect th$t it w$s not his d*t% *nder the '$w to reimb*rse the '$intiff! $e''ee for $n% 'oss which he mi/ht h$ve s*ffered in connection with the P:CI in the s$me w$% th$t he co*'d not e(ect $n%one to reimb*rse him for his own 'osses which were m*ch more th$n those of the '$intiff!$e''ee nd ! In his 'etter d$ted #$rch 1@, 19@, defend$nt!$ defend$nt!$e''$nt e''$nt st$ted th$t he fe't $ mor$' resonsibi'it% resonsibi'it% for the & $%ments which were m$de to c$rr% o*t his '$n $nd th$t he, $'on/ with $ cert$in #r =i'scher, wo*'d see to it th$t the stocho'ders who m$de &nd $%ments wi'' be $id b$c $s soon $s ossib'e o*t of their ver% own erson$' f*nds =e stressed th$t the% were doin/ so not bec$*se of $n% ob'i/$tion nd b*t sim'% bec$*se the% h$d t$en it *on themse'ves to do it; the% fe't the% h$d $ erson$' resonsibi'it% to those who m$de their & $%ments! Fin$''%, in the s$me 'etter, 6obb st$ted th$t he w$s to receive cert$in sh$res for his services $s romoter of the new Phi'iine nd 6$cin/ C'*b $s soon $s he receives it, he wi'' be in $ osition to comens$te the few others who m$de the & $%ment =e rest$ted th$t the $%ments wi'' come from his erson$' f*nds in $n effort to m$e thin/s e$sier for those who were sort eno*/h to tr% to s$ve the nd :re%ho*nd or/ b% m$in/ & $%ments ISSUE 3"N the romise m$de b% defend$nt!$e''$nt is the s*fficient consider$tion contem'$ted *nder Art 1&@1 $s $n essenti$' e'ement for the 'e/$' e(istence of $n onero*s contr$ct which wo*'d bind the romisor to com'% with his romise< HELD N" Ratio A mere mor$' ob'i/$tion or conscientio*s d*t% $risin/ who''% from ethic$' motives or $ mere conscientio*s d*t% *nconnected with $n% $n %
'e/$' ob'i/$tion, wi'' not f*rnish $ consider$tion for e(ec*tor% romise Reasoning he romise m$de b% $n or/$ni5er of $ do/ r$cin/ co*rse to $ stocho'der to ret*rn to him cert$in $mo*nts $id b% the '$tter in
s$tisf$ction of his s*bscrition *on the be'ief of s$id or/$ni5er th$t he w$s mor$''% resonsib'e bec$*se of the f$i'*re of the enterrise, is not the consider$tion re?*ired b% $rtic'e 1&@1 of the Civi' Code $s $n essenti$' e'ement for the 'e/$' e(istence of $n onero*s contr$ct which wo*'d bind the romisor to com'% with his romise!he romise which defend$nt!$e''$nt m$de to the '$intiff!$e''ee w$s romted b% $ fee'in/ of it%, res*'tin/ from the 'oss which the '$tter h$d s*ffered bec$*se of the f$i'*re of the enterrise he ob'i/$tion which s$id defend$nt! $e''$nt h$d contr$cted with the '$intiff!$e''ee is, therefore, *re'% mor$' $nd, $s s*ch, not dem$nd$b'e in '$w b*t on'% in conscience, over
which h*m$n .*d/es h$ve no .*risdictionDisposition he $e$'ed .*d/ment is reversed $nd the defend$nt is $bso'ved from the com'$int with costs to the '$intiff
KALALO V LUZ A2DI+A6; )72 1, 190 Ae$' from the decision, d$ted Febr*$r% 10, 19@, of the Co*rt of First Inst$nce of 6i5$' Br$nch + *e5on Cit%< in its Civi' C$se No !@@1 FACTS ! "n November 1, 199, $e''ee $'$'o, $ 'icensed civi' en/ineer doin/ b*siness *nder the firm n$me of " A $'$'o $nd Associ$tes, entered into $n $/reement with $e''$nt 2*5, $ 'icensed $rchitect, doin/ b*siness *nder the firm n$me of A) 2*5 $nd Associ$tes, whereb% the former w$s to render en/ineerin/ desi/n services to the '$tter for fees, $s sti*'$ted in the $/reement he services inc'*ded desi/n com*t$tion $nd setches, contr$ct dr$win/ $nd technic$' secific$tions of $'' en/ineerin/ h$ses of the ro.ect desi/ned b% "A $'$'o $nd Associ$tes, bi'' of ?*$ntities $nd cost estim$te, $nd cons*'t$tion $nd $dvice d*rin/ constr*ction re'$tive to the wor P*rs*$nt to s$id $/reement, $e''ee rendered en/ineerin/ services to $e''$nt in the fo''owin/ ro.ects8
$
P$%ment in do''$rs is rohibited b% 6e*b'ic Act 6A< No &9 which rovides th$t if the ob'i/$tion w$s inc*rred prior to the enactment of the Act $nd re?*ire $%ment in $ $rtic*'$r ind of coin or c*rrenc% other th$n the Phi'iine c*rrenc% the s$me sh$'' be disch$r/ed in Phi'iine c*rrenc% me$s*red $t the rev$i'in/ rate of exchange at the time the obligation was incurred 6A No &9 w$s en$cted on )*ne 1@, 190 In the c$se now before 7s the ob'i/$tion of $e''$nt to $% $e''ee the &0L of J140,00000, or the s*m of J&,00000, $ccr*ed on A*/*st &, 19@1, or $fter the en$ctment of 6A No &9 It fo''ows th$t the rovision of 6A No &9 which re?*ires $%ment $t the rev$i'in/ r$te of e(ch$n/e when the ob'i/$tion w$s inc*rred c$nnot be $'ied 6A No &9 does not rovide for the r$te of e(ch$n/e for the $%ment of ob'i/$tion inc*rred $fter the en$ctment of s$id Act he 'o/ic$' conc'*sion, therefore, is th$t the r$te of e(ch$n/e sho*'d be th$t rev$i'in/ $t the time of $%ment his view finds s*ort in the r*'in/ of this Co*rt in the c$se of Engel vs. Velasco & Co. where this Co*rt he'd th$t even if the ob'i/$tion $ss*med b% the defend$nt w$s to $% the '$intiff $ s*m of mone% e(ressed in Americ$n c*rrenc%, the indemnit% to be $''owed sho*'d be e(ressed in Phi'iine c*rrenc% $t the r$te of e(ch$n/e $t the time of .*d/ment r$ther th$n $t the r$te of e(ch$n/e rev$i'in/ on the d$te of defend$ntHs bre$ch
Disposition herefore, $e''$nt sho*'d $% the $e''ee the e?*iv$'ent in esos of the J&,00000 $t the free m$ret r$te of e(ch$n/e $t the
time of $%ment he tri$' co*rt did not err when it he'd th$t herein $e''$nt sho*'d $% $e''ee J&,00000 to be converted into the Phi'iine c*rrenc% on the b$sis of the c*rrent r$te of e(ch$n/e $t the time of $%ment
MANILA MANI LA LODGE LO DGE NO @1 BENEVELONT PROTECTIVE ORDER OF THE ELKS V CA CA-6"; -etember 0, 19@ NATURE Petitions for review on certior$ri of the decision of the Co*rt of Ae$'s FACTS ! "n )*ne &@, 190 the Phi'iine Commission en$cted Act No 1@0 which $*thori5ed the Cit% of #$ni'$ to rec'$im $ ortion of #$ni'$ B$% he rec'$imed $re$ w$s to form $rt of the 2*net$ e(tension he Act rovided th$t the rec'$imed $re$ Msh$'' be the roert% of the Cit% of #$ni'$M $nd th$t the Cit% of #$ni'$ is $*thori5ed to set $side $ tr$ct of the rec'$imed '$nd formed b% the 2*net$ e(tension $t the north end for $ hote' site, $nd to 'e$se the s$me, with the $rov$' of the :overnor :ener$', to $ resonsib'e erson or coror$tion for $ term not to e(ceed 99 %e$rs -*bse?*ent'%, the Phi'iine Commission $ssed on #$% 1, 190 Act No 1@, $mendin/ Act No 1@0, so $s to $*thori5e the Cit% of #$ni'$ either to 'e$se or to se'' the ortion set $side $s $ hote' site
! he tot$' $re$ rec'$imed w$s $ 'itt'e over & hect$res he Cit% of #$ni'$ $'ied for the re/istr$tion of the rec'$imed $re$, $nd on )$n*$r% &0, 1911, ori/in$' certific$te of tit'e w$s iss*ed in the n$me of the Cit% of #$ni'$ he tit'e described the re/istered '$nd $s M*n terreno conocido con e' nombre de 2*net$ E(tension, sit*$do en e' distrito de '$ Ermit$M r$ns'$tion8 A '$nd nown *nder the n$me of 2*net$ E(tension, sit*$ted in the district of Ermit$O ! he re/istr$tion w$s s*b.ect, however, to the enc*mbr$nces mentioned in Artic'e 9 of the 2$nd 6e/istr$tion Act $s m$% be s*bsistin/ $nd Ms*.eto $ '$s disosiciones % condiciones ini*est$s en '$ 2e% No 1@0; % s*.eto t$mbien $ 'os contr$tos de vent$, ce'ebr$t'os % obor/$dos or t$ Ci*d$d de #$ni'$ $ f$vor de' Arm% $nd N$v% C'*b % '$ #$ni'$ 2od/e No @1 Benevo'ent $nd Protective "rder of E's, fech$dos en &9 de Diciembre de 190 % 1@ de Enero de 1909M r$ns'$tion8 -*b.ect to the disositions $nd conditions rovided b% Act No 1@0; $nd s*b.ect $'so to contr$cts of s$'e ce'ebr$ted $nd entered into b% the Cit% of #$ni'$ in f$vor of the Arm% $nd N$v% C'*b $nd #$ni'$ 2od/e No @1 Benevo'ent $nd Protective "rder of E's BP"E for short<, d$ted &9th of December 190 $nd 1@th of )$n*$r% 1909O ! "n )*'% 1, 1911, the Cit% of #$ni'$ conve%ed ,40 s?*$re meters of the rec'$imed $re$ to the #$ni'$ 2od/e No @1, BP"E on the b$sis of which $ tr$nsfer certific$te of tit'e w$s iss*ed to the '$tter over the M$rce'$ de terreno ?*e es $rte de '$ 2*net$ E(tension, -it*$d$ en e' Distrito de '$ Ermit$M r$ns'$tion8 P$rce' of '$nd which is $rt of the 2*net$ E(tension, sit*$ted in the District of Ermit$O ! At the b$c of this tit'e w$s $n $nnot$ted doc*ment which in $rt re$ds $s fo''ows8 M?*e '$ cit$d$ ci*d$d de #$ni'$ tendr$ derecho $ s* ocion de recomr$% '$ e(res$d$ roied$d $r$ fines *'dicos so'$mente, en c*$'?*ier tiemo des*es de cinc*ent$ $nos desde e' 1 de )*'io de 1911, revio $/o $ '$ entid$d comr$dor$, o $ s*s s*cesores de' recio de '$ vent$ de '$ mism$ roied$d, m$s e' v$'or ?*e entoces ten/$n '$s me.oresM Attemted r$ns'$tion8 h$t the s$id cit% of #$ni'$ h$s the 'e/$' otion to re*rch$se the s$id roert% so'e'% for th *b'ic *roses, $t $n% time $fter fift% %e$rs from the 1 of )*'% 1911, $t the rice revio*s'% $id to the b*%in/ entit% or the f*t*re m$ret rice of the roert %, whichever v$'*e is hi/herO ! In )$n*$r% 19@ the BP"E etitioned the CFI of #$ni'$, Br$nch I+, for the c$nce''$tion of the ri/ht of the Cit% #$ni'$ to re*rch$se the roert% his etition w$s /r$nted on Febr*$r% 1, 19@ ! "n November 19, 19@ the BP"E so'd for the s*m of P4,00,000 the '$nd to/ether with $'' the imrovements thereon to the $r'$c Deve'oment Coror$tion DC, for short< which $id P1,00,000 $s down $%ment $nd mort/$/ed to the vendor the s$me re$'t% to sec*re the $%ment of the b$'$nce to be $id in ?*$rter'% inst$''ments At the time of the s$'e, there w$s no $nnot$tion of $n% s*bsistin/ 'ien on the tit'e to the roert% "n December 1&, 19@ C No 444 w$s iss*ed to DC over the s*b.ect '$nd sti'' described $s M7n$ $rce'$ de terreno, ?*e es $rte de '$ 2*net$ E(tension, sit*$d$ en e' Distrito de Ermit$M ! In )*ne 19@4 the Cit% of #$ni'$ fi'ed with the CFI of #$ni'$ $ etition for the re$nnot$tion of its ri/ht to re*rch$se he co*rt, $fter he$rin/, iss*ed $n order, d$ted November 19, 19@4, directin/ the 6e/rister of Deeds of the Cit% of #$ni'$ to re$nnot$te in toto the entr% re/$rdin/ the ri/ht of the Cit% of #$ni'$ to re*rch$se the roert% $fter fift% %e$rs From this order DC $nd BP"E $e$'ed to this Co*rt which on )*'% 1, 19@ $ffirmed the tri$' co*rtHs order of re$nnot$tion, b*t reserved to DC the ri/ht to brin/ $nother $ction for the c'$rific$tion of its ri/hts ! After tri$' the co*rt $ ?*o rendered on )*'% 14, 19& its decision findin/ the s*b.ect '$nd to be $rt of the M*b'ic $r or '$5$M $nd, therefore, $rt of the *b'ic dom$in he co*rt conse?*ent'% dec'$red th$t the s$'e of the s*b.ect '$nd b% the Cit% of #$ni'$ to #$ni'$ 2od/e No @1, BP"E, w$s n*'' $nd void; th$t '$intiff DC w$s $ *rch$ser thereof in /ood f$ith $nd for v$'*e from BP"E $nd c$n enforce its ri/hts $/$inst the '$tter; $nd th$t BP"E is entit'ed to recover from the Cit% of #$ni'$ wh$tever consider$tion it h$d $id the '$tter ! In its decision rom*'/$ted on )*ne 0, 19, the CA conc*rred in the findin/s $nd conc'*sions of the 'ower co*rt ISSUES 1 3"N the roert% s*b.ect of the $ction w$s $trimoni$' roert% of the Cit% of #$ni'$ $nd not $ $r or '$5$ & 3"N the Cit% of #$ni'$ is estoed from ?*estionin/ the v$'idit% of the s$'e it e(ec*ted on )*'% 1, 1911 conve%in/ the s*b.ect roert% to the #$ni'$ 2od/e No @1, BP"E 3"N the CA h$s de$rted from the $cceted $nd *s*$' co*rse of .*dici$' roceedin/s in th$t it did not m$e its own findin/s b*t sim'% recited those of the 'ower co*rt HELD 1 N"3e ho'd th$t it is of *b'ic dominion, intended for *b'ic *se Reasoning First'%, if the rec'$imed $re$ w$s /r$nted to the Cit% of #$ni'$ $s its $trimoni$' roert%, the Cit% co*'d, b% virt*e of its ownershi,
disose of the who'e rec'$imed $re$ witho*t need of $*thori5$tion to do so from the '$wm$in/ bod% h*s Artic'e 4 of the Civi' Code of -$in rovides th$t Mownershi is the ri/ht to en.o% $nd disose of $ thin/ witho*t f*rther 'imit$tions th$n those est$b'ished b% '$wM he ri/ht to disose .*s disonendi< of oneHs roert% is $n $ttrib*te of ownershi Act No 1@0, $s $mended, however, rovides b% necess$r% im'ic$tion,
th$t the Cit% of #$ni'$ co*'d not disose of the rec'$imed $re$ witho*t bein/ $*thori5ed b% the '$wm$in/, bod% h*s the st$t*te rovides th$t Mthe Cit% of #$ni'$ is hereb% $*thori5ed to set $side $ tr$ct $t the north end, for $ hote' site, $nd to 'e$se the s$me ( ( ( sho*'d the m*nici$' bo$rd ( ( ( deem it $dvis$b'e, it is hereb% $*thori5ed ( ( ( to se'' s$id tr$ct of '$nd ( ( (M If the rec'$imed $re$ were $trimoni$' roert% of the Cit%, the '$tter co*'d disose of it witho*t need of the $*thori5$tion rovided b% the st$t*te, $nd the $*thori5$tion to set $side, 'e$se, or se'' /iven b% the st$t*te wo*'d indeed be s*erf'*o*s o so constr*e the st$t*te $s to render the term M$*thori5e,M which is ree$ted'% *sed b% the st$t*te, s*erf'*o*s wo*'d vio'$te the e'ement$r% r*'e of 'e/$' hermene*tics th$t effect m*st be /iven to ever% word, c'$*se, $nd sentence of the st$t*te $nd th$t $ st$t*te sho*'d be so interreted th$t no $rt thereof becomes inoer$tive or s*erf'o*s o $*thori5e me$ns to emower, to /ive $ ri/ht to $ct Act No 1@0 f*rthermore ?*$'ifies the verb M$*thori5eM with the $dverb Mhereb%,M which me$ns Mb% me$ns of this st$t*e or sectionM =ence witho*t the $*thori5$tion e(ress'% /iven b% Act No 1@0, the Cit% of #$ni'$ co*'d not 'e$se or se'' even the northern ortion; m*ch 'ess co*'d it disose of the who'e rec'$imed $re$ Conse?*ent'%, the rec'$imed $re$ w$s /r$nted to the Cit% of #$ni'$, not $s its $trimoni$' roert% At most, on'% the northern ortion reserved $s $ hote' site co*'d be s$id to be $trimoni$' roert%, for, b% e(ress st$t*tor% rovision it co*'d be disosed of, $nd the tit'e thereto wo*'d revert to the Cit% sho*'d the /r$ntee f$i' to com'% with the terms rovided b% the st$t*te ! -econd'% the rec'$imed $re$ is $n Me(tension to the 2*net$ in the Cit% of #$ni'$M If the rec'$imed $re$ is $n e(tension of the 2*net$, then it is of the s$me n$t*re or ch$r$cter $s the o'd 2*net$ Anent this m$tter, it h$s been s$id th$t $ ower to e(tend or contin*e $n $ct or b*siness c$nnot $*thori5e $*thori5e $ tr$ns$ction th$t is tot$''% distinct distinct It is not dis*ted th$t the o'd 2*net$ is $ *b'ic $r or '$5$ $nd it is so considered considered b% -ection 9 of the 6evised "rdin$nces of the Cit% of #$ni'$ =ence the Me(tension to the 2*net$M m*st be $'so $ *b'ic $r or '$5$ $nd for *b'ic *se DC, however, contends th$t the s*b.ect roert% c$nnot be considered $n e(tension of the o'd 2*net$ bec$*se it is o*tside of the 'imits of the o'd 2*net$ when e(tended to the se$ his is $ str$ined interret$tion of the term Me(tension,M for $n Me(tensionM it h$s been he'd, Msi/nifies en'$r/ement in $n% direction!in 'en/th, bre$dth, or circ*mst$nces ! hird'%, the rec'$imed $re$ w$s former'% $ $rt of the #$ni'$ B$% A b$% is nothin/ more th$n $n in'et of the se$ P*rs*$nt to Artic'e 1 of the 2$w of 3$ters of 1@@, b$%s, ro$dste$ds, co$st se$, in'ets $nd shores $re $rts of the n$tion$' dom$in oen to *b'ic *se hese $re $'so roert% of *b'ic ownershi devoted to *b'ic *se, $ccordin/ to Artic'e 9 of the Civi' Code of -$in 3hen the shore or $rt of the b$% is rec'$imed, it does not 'ose its ch$r$cter of bein/ roert% for *b'ic *se ! Fo*rth'%, Act 1@0, $s $mended, $*thori5ed the 'e$se or s$'e of the northern ortion of the rec'$imed $re$ $s $ hote' site he s*b.ect roert% is not th$t northern ortion $*thori5ed to be 'e$sed or so'd; the s*b.ect roert% is the so*thern ortion =ence, $'%in/ the r*'e of e(resio *ni*s est e('*sio $'teri*s, the Cit% of #$ni'$ w$s not $*thori5ed to se'' the s*b.ect roert% he $'ic$tion of this rinci'e of st$t*tor% constr*ction becomes the more imer$tive in the c$se $t b$r in$sm*ch $s not on'% m*st the *b'ic /r$nt of the rec'$imed $re$ to the Cit% of #$ni'$ be, $s $bove st$ted, strict'% constr*ed $/$inst the Cit% of #$ni'$, b*t $'so bec$*se $ /r$nt of ower to $ m*nici$' coror$tion, $s h$ens in this c$se where the cit% is $*thori5ed to 'e$se or se'' the northern ortion of the 2*net$ e(tension, is strict'% 'imited to s*ch $s $re e(ress'% or im'ied'% $*thori5ed or necess$ri'% incident$' to the ob.ectives of the coror$tion ! Fifth'%, Artic'e 44 of the Civi' Code of -$in rovides th$t roert% of *b'ic *se, in rovinces $nd in towns, comrises the rovinci$' $nd town ro$ds, the s?*$res, streets, fo*nt$ins, $nd *b'ic w$ters, the romen$des, $nd *b'ic wors of /ener$' service $id for b% s*ch towns or rovincesM A $r or '$5$, s*ch $s the e(tension to the 2*net$, is *ndo*bted'% comrised in s$id $rtic'e ! 3e h$ve demonstr$ted th$t the 2*net$ e(tension w$s intended to be roert% of the Cit% of #$ni'$ for *b'ic *se B*t, co*'d not s$id roert% '$ter on be converted, $s the etitioners contend, to $trimoni$' roert%Q It co*'d be B*t this Co*rt h$s $'re$d% s$id, in I/n$cio v he Director of 2$nds th$t it is on'% the e(ec*tive $nd ossib'% the 'e/is'$tive de$rtment th$t h$s the $*thorit% $nd the ower to m$e the dec'$r$tion th$t s$id Proert% is no 'on/er re?*ired for *b'ic *se, $nd *nti' s*ch dec'$r$tion is m$de the roert% m*st contin*e to form $rt of the *b'ic dom$in In the c$se $t b$r, there h$s been no s*ch e('icit or *ne?*ivoc$' dec'$r$tion It sho*'d be noted th$t co*rts $re *ndo*bted'% not rim$ri'% c$''ed *on, $nd $re not in $ osition, to determine whether $n% *b'ic '$nd is sti'' needed for the *roses secified in Artic'e 4 of the 2$w of 3$ters & N"Ratio he :overnment is never estoed b% mist$es or errors on the $rt of its $/ents $nd estoe' does not $'% to $ m*nici$' coror$tion to v$'id$te $ contr$ct th$t is rohibited b% '$w or its $/$inst *b'ic o'ic% Reasoning he s$'e of )*'% 1, 1911 e(ec*ted b% the Cit% of #$ni'$ to #$ni'$ 2od/e w$s cert$in'% $ contr$ct rohibited b% '$w Estoe'
c$nnot be *r/ed even if the Cit% of #$ni'$ $cceted the benefits of s*ch contr$ct of s$'e $nd the #$ni'$ 2od/e No @1 h$d erformed its $rt of the $/reement, for to $'% the doctrine of estoe' $/$inst the Cit% of #$ni'$ in this c$se wo*'d be t$nt$mo*nt to en$b'in/ it to do indirect'% wh$t it co*'d not do direct'% he s$'e of the s*b.ect roert% e(ec*ted b% the Cit% of #$ni'$ to the #$ni'$ 2od/e No @1, BP"E, w$s void $nd ine(istent for '$c of s*b.ect m$tter $ $r is o*tside the commerce of m$nO It s*ffered from $n inc*r$b'e defect th$t co*'d not be r$tified either b% '$se of time or b% e(ress r$tific$tion he #$ni'$ 2od/e No @1 therefore $c?*ired no ri/ht b% virt*e of the s$id s$'e =ence to consider now the contr$ct ine(istent $s it $'w$%s h$s been, c$nnot be $n im$irment of the ob'i/$tions of contr$cts, for there w$s in contem'$tion of '$w, no contr$ct $t $'' he ine(istence of s$id s$'e c$n be set * $/$inst $n%one who $sserts $ ri/ht $risin/ from it, not on'% $/$inst the first vendee, the #$ni'$ 2od/e No @1, BP"E, b*t $'so $/$inst $'' its -*ccessors, inc'*din/ the DC, which $re not rotected b% '$w he doctrine of bone fide *rch$ser witho*t notice, bein/ c'$imed b% the DC, does not $'% where there is $ tot$' $bsence of tit'e in the vendor, $nd the /ood f$ith of the *rch$ser DC c$nnot cre$te tit'e where none e(ists he restor$tion or restit*tion of wh$t h$s been /iven is in order N" 3e h$ve shown in o*r disc*ssion of the first iss*e th$t the decision of the tri$' co*rt is f*''% in $ccord$nce with '$w It fo''ows th$t when s*ch decision w$s $ffirmed b% the CA, the $ffirm$nce w$s 'iewise in $ccord$nce with '$w =ence, no *sef*' *rose wi'' be served in f*rther disc*ssin/ this iss*e Disposition he etitions $re denied for '$c of merit $nd the decision of the CA is $ffirmed, $t etitionersH cost
MIGUEL V CATA CATALINO 6EE-; November &9, 19@ NATURE An Ae$' from the .*d/ment of the CFI of B$/*io dismissin/ the '$intiff>s com'$int for recover% of ossession of $ $rce' of '$nd $nd dec'$rin/ the defend$nt the tr*e owner thereof FACTS
! he '$nd in dis*te is 'oc$ted in Ben/*et, #o*nt$in Province $nd is covered b% "ri/in$' Certific$te of it'e No 1 iss*ed on Dec &, 19& in the n$me of B$c$?*io B$eew<, $ widower, with no $nnot$ted enc*mbr$nces or s$'es! P'$intiff :r$ce +ent*r$ is the on'% chi'd of B$c$?*io
rd b% his first wife, Debs$%, $nd the other $e''$nts -imeon, Emi'i$ $nd #$rce'in$ #i/*e' $re his chi'dren b% his wife, Cos$m$n/ he s*ccessive wives h$ve $'' died nd ! B$c$?*io, who died in 194, $c?*ired the '$nd from his & wife $nd so'd it to C$t$'ino A/%$$o, f$ther of the defend$nt, F'orendo C$t$'ino, for P00 in 19& No form$' deed of s$'e w$s e(ec*ted b*t for more th$n 0 %e$rs since 19&, F'orendo $nd his f$ther h$d been in ossession of the '$nd in the concet of owner, $%in/ t$(es $nd $ddin/ imrovements In 1949, :r$ce +ent*r$, $'one, Rso'd> the '$nd $new for P00 to A/%$$o who in t*rn so'd it to his son, the defend$nt ! "n )$n &&, 19@&, $e''$nts bro*/ht s*it to the C $/$inst C$t$'ino for recover% of s$id '$nd, c'$imin/ to be the chi'dren $nd heirs of the ori/in$' re/istered owner, $verrin/ th$t defend$nt too the '$nd $nd /$thered its rod*ce *n'$wf*''% wKo their consent he defend$nt 'e$ded ownershi $nd $dverse ossession for 0 %e$rs, $nd co*nterc'$imed for $ttorne%>s fees he co*rt dismissed the com'$int, orderin/ the 6e/ister of Deeds to iss*e $ tr$nsfer certific$te =ence this $e$' $ss$i'in/ the C>s findin/s of f$ct $nd '$w =owever, since this is $ direct $e$' from the C, where the roert%>s v$'*e does not e(ceed P&00,000, on'% iss*es of '$w $re review$b'e b% the -C ISSUE 3"N the C erred in $w$rdin/ the '$nd in dis*te to C$t$'ino HELD N"! he $e''$nts $ss$i' the $dmission of evidence of $n e(hibit with $ decision in f$vor of the defend$nt b% the co*nci' of B$rrio of -$n P$sc*$' he Co*rt conc*rs th$t the decision is *'tr$ vires since b$rrio co*nci's h$ve no .*dici$' owers A+III -1, Constit*tion; -1& B$rrio Ch$rter< he s$'e b% B$c$?*io to C$t$'ino A/%$$o is n*'' $nd void for '$c of e(ec*tive $rov$', hence, in '$w, B$c$?*io rem$ined the owner *nti' it w$s $ssed on to his heirs b% s*ccession *on his de$th! Notwithst$ndin/ these errors, the Co*rt be'ieves th$t the .*d/ment in f$vor of A/%$$o sho*'d be s*st$ined Desite the inv$'idit% of the s$'e, B$c$?*io s*ffered A/%$$o to enter, osses $nd en.o% the '$nd witho*t rotest from 19&!194, $nd the $e''$nts in t*rn too no stes to reivindic$te the 'ot from 1944!19@& As he'd in #e.i$ de 2*c$s v :$moni$, even /r$ntin/ th$t the tit'e does not rescribe, their in$ction of 4 %e$rs .*stifies the defend$nt>s e?*it$b'e defense of '$ches, wherein the ori/in$' owner>s ri/ht to recover the roert% h$s been converted into $ st$'e dem$nd
! As in the :$moni$ c$se, the fo*r e'ements of '$ches $re resent in the c$se $t b$r, n$me'%8 $< cond*ct on the $rt of the defend$nt, or of one *nder whom he c'$ims, /ivin/ rise to the sit*$tion of which com'$int is m$de $nd for which the com'$int sees $ remed%; b< de'$% in $ssertin/ the com'$in$ntHs ri/hts, the com'$in$nt h$vin/ h$d now'ed/e or notice, of the defend$ntHs cond*ct $nd h$vin/ been $fforded $n oort*nit% to instit*te $ s*it; c< '$c of now'ed/e or notice on the $rt of the defend$nt th$t the com'$in$nt wo*'d $ssert the ri/ht on which he b$ses his s*it; $nd d< in.*r% or re.*dice to the defend$nt in the event re'ief is $ccorded to the com'$in$nt, or the s*it is not he'd to be b$rred ! In the resent c$se, the $e''$nts $e''$nts new the 19& s$'e w$s inv$'id $nd did not h$ve to w$it f or 4 %e$rs to instit*te instit*te $ s*it, c'e$r'% brin/in/ brin/in/ re.*dice to the defend$nt who w$s m$de to fee' sec*re of his ownershi over the 'ot ! As he'd in Nie'son Co v 2e$nto Conso'id$ted #inin/ Co, rescrition is concerned with the f$ct of de'$% m$tter of time<, whi'e '$ches with the effect of de'$% $ ?*estion of ine?*it%<, $nd th*s both $'% indeendent'% of e$ch other ! -ince the $e''$nts $re b$rred from recover%, the Co*rt w$s .*stified in orderin/ th$t B$c$?*io>s certific$te be c$nce''ed $nd the new tr$nsfer certific$te in defend$nt>s n$me be iss*ed b% the 6e/ister of DeedsDisposition F"6 =E F"6E:"IN: 6EA-"N-, the $e$'ed decision is hereb% $ffirmed, with costs $/$inst the '$intiffs!$e''$nts ANNOTATION & SCRA 4&
! he Annot$tion is $bo*t the M-i/nific$nt A'ic$tions of E(tinctive PrescritionM It st$rts $t & -C6A &@ For o*r *oses, wh$t is si/nific$nt is the $rt th$t is disc*ssed from & -C6A 4&! 2imit$tion of Actions in Im'ied or Constr*ctive r*st ! In $ 'on/ 'ine of c$ses, the -*reme Co*rt *sed to $dot the view th$t the ri/ht of $ction of $ cest*i ?*e tr*st $/$inst the tr*stee in $n im'ied or constr*ctive tr*st does not rescribe B*t $s e$r'% $s 19@ $ minorit% in the -C viewed with do*bt the contin*ed v$'idit% of the rinci'e of imrescritibi'it% of $ctions b$sed on constr*ctive or im'ied tr*sts ! In $ 19 c$se, -C thro*/h )B2 6e%es, e(ressed the view th$t in $ constr*ctive tr*st, imosed $s it is b% '$w, where no romise or fid*ci$r% re'$tion e(ists, the so! c$''ed tr*stee does not reco/ni5e $n% tr*st $nd h$s no interest to ho'd for the benefici$r%; th*s, the benefici$r% c$n be b$rred to enforce the tr*st, *n'ess thereHs conce$'ment of the f$cts /ivin/ rise to the tr*st ! Desite -C view in Di$5 v :orricho $nd reiter$ted in s*bse?*ent c$ses, to the effect th$t $n $ction *on $ constr*ctive tr*st is s*b.ect to rescrition, $ contr$r% view $e$red to h$ve been $doted in $t 'e$st c$ses decided s*bse?*ent to the Di$5 doctrine ! In )*$n et $' v *Gi/$8 3hen $n heir thro*/h fr$*d*'ent reresent$tion, or b% retendin/ to be the so'e heir of the dece$sed, s*cceeded in h$vin/ the tit'e over $ re$' roert% re/istered in his n$me to the e(c'*sion of the other heirs, $ constr*ctive tr*st is cre$ted in f$vor of the defr$*ded heir $nd /r$nts to the '$tter the ri/ht to vindic$te the roert% re/$rd'ess of the '$se of time In C$'$di$o v +d$ de B'$s8 -C dec'$red th$t $n $ction to come' reconve%$nce of roert% with orrens it'e does not rescribe if the re/istered owner h$d obt$ined re/istr$tion in b$d f$ith $nd the roert% is sti'' in the '$tterHs n$me, bec the re/istr$tion is in the n$t*re of $ contin*in/ $nd s*bsistin/ tr*st
! he consens*s of oinion8 he rescrition of $ction for recvonve%$nce b$sed on im'ied or constr*ctive tr*st is now $ sett'ed ?*estion in o*r .*risdiction Corresondin/' %, where im'ied tr*st is resent, the $ction to recover the roert %rescribes $fter the '$se of 10 %e$rs *n'ess $ fid*ci$r% re'$tion e(ists $nd the tr*stee reco/ni5es the tr*st SALAO V SALAO A7IN"; #$rtch 1@, &00
Ae$' from the decision of the tri$' co*rt FACTS ! #$n*e' -$'$o $nd +$'entin$ I/n$cio be/ot 4 chi'dren, P$tricio, A'e.$ndr$, )*$n B$n'i< $nd Ambrosi$ #$n*e' died in 1 P$tricio died in 1@ $nd w$s s*rvived b% his son +$'entin! 3hen +$'entin$ died, her est$te w$s $dministered b% Ambrosi$ It w$s $rtitioned e(tr$!.*dici$''%
to A'e.$ndr$, )*$n, Ambrosi$ $nd +$'entin +$'entin w$s /iven '$d which h$s $n $r$ised v$'*e of 1,01 which e(ceeded +$'entinHs distrib*tive sh$re -o in the deed of $rtition he w$s directed to $% to his co!heirs the s*m of P,@ ! In 1911, rior to +$'entin$>s de$th, )*$n $nd Ambrosi$ sec*red $ orrens tit'e for $ fort%!seven!hect$re fishond 'oc$ted $t -itio C$'*n*r$n, 2*b$o, P$m$n/$ he C$'*n*r$n fishond is the bone of contention in this c$se! P'$intiffs $ver th$t +$'entin -$'$o $nd A'e.$ndr$ -$'$o $'so $rtici$ted in the $c?*isition of the s$id fishond Defend$nts contend th$t the C$'*n*r$n fishond consisted of '$nds *rch$sed b% )*$n -$'$o, -r $nd Ambrosi$ -$'$o ! =owever, there c$n be no cont rovers% $s to the f$ct th$t $fter ) *$n -$'$o, -r $nd Ambrosi$ -$'$o sec*red $ orrens orrens tit'e for the C$'*n*r$n fishond in 1911 the% e(ercised dominic$' ri/hts over it to the e(c'*sion of their nehew, +$'entin -$'$o! "n #$% &, 1911 Ambrosi$ -$'$o bo*/ht for fo*r tho*s$nd esos from the heirs of En/r$cio -$nti$/o $ $rce' of sw$m'$nd Ambrosi$ -$'$o $nd )*$n -$'$o fi'ed $n $'ic$tion for the re/istr$tion of th$t '$nd in their n$mes $nd it w$s /r$nted b% the CFI h$t Pin$n/$n$c$n or 2ew$ fishond $d.oins the C$'*n*r$n fishond ! )*$n -$'$o, -r died on November , 191 +$'entin -$'$o died on Febr*$r% 9, 19 =is est$te, which consists of & fishonds he h$d inherited in 191 from his /r$ndmother, +$'entin$ I/n$cio, w$s $rtitioned to her two d$*/hters, Benit$ -$'$o! #$rce'o $nd +ictorin$ -$'$o! A'c*ri5$ No mention of the $''e/ed 1K interest in the C$'*n*r$n $nd 2ew$ fishonds w$s m entioned ! "n Ari' , 1940 Ambrosi$ -$'$o don$ted to her /r$ndniece, '$intiff Benit$ -$'$o "n th$t occ$sion she co*'d h$ve $sed Ambrosi$ -$'$o to de'iver to her $nd to the chi'dren of her sister, +ictorin$, the C$'*n*r$n fishond if it were tr*e th$t it w$s he'd in tr*st b% Ambrosi$ $s the sh$re of Benit$Hs f$ther in the $''e/ed .oint vent*re B*t she did not m$e $n% s*ch dem$nd It w$s on'% $fter Ambrosi$ -$'$oHs de$th th$t she tho*/ht of fi'in/ $n $ction for the reconve%$nce ! Abo*t $ %e$r before Ambrosi$ -$'$oHs de$th on -etember 14, 194 she don$ted her one!h$'f proindiviso sh$re in the two fishonds in ?*estion to her nehew, )*$n - -$'$o, )r )*$ni< =e w$s $'re$d% the owner of the the other h$'f of the s$id fishonds, h$vin/ inherited it from his f$ther, )*$n -$'$o, -r ! he '$w%er of Benit$ -$'$o $nd the Chi'dren of +ictorin$ -$'$o in $ 'etter d$ted )$n*$r% &@, 191 informed )*$n - -$'$o, )r th$t his c'ients h$d $ one!third sh$re in the two fishonds )*$ni did not ref*sed to /ive their $''e/ed sh$re ! Benit$ -$'$o $nd her nehews $nd niece fi'ed $ com'$int $/$inst )*$ni he% $sed for the $nn*'ment of the don$tion to )*$n - -$'$o, )r $nd for the reconve%$nce to them of the C$'*n*r$n fishond -$'$o, )r in his $nswer 'e$ded $s $ defense the indefe$sibi'it% of the orrens tit'e sec*red b% his f$ther $nd $*nt =e $'so invoed the -t$t*te of Fr$*ds, rescrition $nd '$ches ! )*$n - -$'$o, )r died in 19 $t the $/e of sevent%!one =e w$s s*bstit*ted b% his widow, #ercedes P$sc*$' $nd his si( chi'dren $nd b% the $dministr$tor of his est$te In the intest$te roceedin/s for the sett'ement of his est$te the two fishonds in ?*estion were $d.*dic$ted to his seven 'e/$' heirs in e?*$' sh$res with the condition th$t the roerties wo*'d rem$in *nder $dministr$tion d*rin/ the endenc% of this c$se ! he tri$' co*rt fo*nd th$t there w$s no comm*nit% of roert% $mon/ )*$n -$'$o, -r, Ambrosi$ -$'$o $nd +$'entin -$'$o when the C$'*n*r$n $nd Pin$n/$n$c$n 2ew$< '$nds were $c?*ired here w$s however, co!ownershi between 1914, the time of +$'entin$>s de$th, thr* 191, the time the est$te w$s $rtitioned he tri$' co*rt s*rmised th$t the co!ownershi which e(isted from 1914 to 191 mis'ed the '$intiffs $nd their witnesses $nd c$*sed them to be'ieve erroneo*s'% th$t there w$s $ co!ownershi in 190 or there$bo*ts he% $'so r$tion$'i5ed th$t +$'entinHs omission d*rin/ his 'ifetime to $ss$i' the orrens tit'es of )*$n $nd Ambrosi$ si/nified th$t Mhe w$s not $ co!ownerM of the fishonds It $'so he'd th$t the don$tion to )*$ni w$s v$'id'% e(ec*ted ! Both $rties $e$'ed he '$intiffs $e$'ed bec$*se their $ction for reconve%$nce w$s dismissed he defend$nts $e$'ed bec$*se their co*nterc'$im for d$m$/es w$s dismissed ISSUES 1 3"N the C$'*n*r$n fishond w$s he'd in tr*st for +$'entin -$'$o b% )*$n -$'$o, -r $nd Ambrosi$ -$'$o & 3"N '$intiffsH $ction for reconve%$nce h$d $'re$d% rescribed 3"N the defend$nt>s $re entit'ed to d$m$/es HELD 1 N"
! Not $ scinti''$ of doc*ment$r% evidence w$s resented b% the '$intiffs to rove th$t there w$s $n e(ress tr*st over the C$'*n*r$n fishond in f$vor of +$'entin -$'$o P*re'% $ro' evidence w$s offered b% them to rove the $''e/ed tr*st heir c'$im th$t in the or$' $rtition in 1919 of the two fishonds t he C$'*n*r$n fishond w$s $ssi/ned to +$'entin -$'$o is 'e/$''% *nten$b'e ! P$ro' evidence c$nnot be *sed to rove $n e(ress tr*st concernin/ re$'t% ! P'$intiffsH 'e$din/s $nd evidence c$nnot be re'ied *on to rove $n im'ied tr*st he tri$' co*rtHs firm conc'*sion th$t there w$s no comm*nit% of roert% d*rin/ the 'ifetime of +$'entin$; I/n$cio or before 1914 is s*bst$nti$ted b% defend$ntsH doc*ment$r% evidence ! he e(istence of the $''e/ed co!ownershi over the '$nds s*osed'% inherited from #$n*e' -$'$o in 1 is the b$sis of '$intiffsH contention th$t the C$'*n*r$n fishond w$s he'd in tr*st for +$'entin -$'$o! B*t th$t co!ownershi w$s not roven b% $n% cometent evidence It is ?*ite imrob$b'e imrob$b'e bec$*se the $''e/ed $''e/ed est$te of #$n*e' -$'$o w$s 'iewise 'iewise not s$tisf$ctori' s$tisf$ctori'% % roven roven here here were inconsistencies inconsistencies in the '$intiff>s ori/in ori/in$' $' com'$ com'$int int,, $mende $mended d com'$ com'$int int $nd brief brief over over the n*mber n*mber of hect$r hect$res es which which were were *nder *nder co! owners ownershi hi &, $nd 11 hect$res hect$res resective'%< he% theori5ed th$t the e'even hect$res Mwere, $nd necess$ri'%, the n*c'e*s, n$% the ver% root, of the roert% now in 'iti/$tion B*t the e'even hect$res were not roven b% $n% tr*stworth% evidence ! he 1919 $rtition of +$'entin$ I/n$cioHs est$te covered $bo*t 1 hect$res of fishonds $nd rice'$nds If $t the time th$t $rtition w$s m$de there were 11 hect$res of '$nd be'on/in/ to #$n*e' -$'$o those e'even hect$res wo*'d h$ve been $rtitioned in writin/ 'ie +$'entin$>s +$'entin$>s est$te It is incredib'e th$t the 4 hect$re fishond wo*'d be $d.*dic$ted to +$'entin b% mere word of mo*th, when the $rtition for the 1 hect$re est$te of +$'entin$ w$s *t into writin/! he imrob$bi'it% of the $''e/ed or$' $rtition becomes more evident when it is borne in mind th$t the two fishonds were re/istered '$nd h$t me$ns th$t $n% tr$ns$ction $ffectin/ the re/istered '$nd sho*'d be evidenced b% $ re/ister$b'e deed he f$ct th$t +$'entin -$'$o $nd his s*ccessors!in!interest never bothered in 40 %e$rs to roc*re $n% doc*ment$r% evidence to est$b'ish their $''e/ed interest is ver% s*//estive of the $bsence of s*ch interest
! he m$tter c$n $'so be viewed in $nother w$% In the $rtition of +$'entin$ I/n$cioHs est$te, +$'entin w$s ob'i/$ted to $% P,& to Ambrosi$ -$'$o If +$'entin re$''% h$d $ sh$re in the fishonds, Ambrosi$ co*'d h$ve .*st ded*cted from his sh$re of e$rnin/s of the fishonds =owever, there w$s no s*ch sti*'$tion ! A orrens tit'e is /ener$''% $ conc'*sive of the ownershi of the '$nd referred to therein -ec 4, Act 49@< A stron/ res*mtion e(ists th$t orrens tit'es were re/*'$r'% iss*ed $nd th$t the% $re v$'id ! here w$s no res*'tin/ tr*st in this c$se bec$*se there never w$s $n% intention on the $rt of )*$n -$'$o, -r, Ambrosi$ -$'$o $nd +$'entin -$'$o to cre$te $n% tr*st here w$s no constr*ctive tr*st bec$*se the re/istr$tion of the two fishonds in the n$mes of )*$n $nd Ambrosi$ w$s not viti$ted b% fr$*d or mist$e & E! P'$intiffsH $ction is c'e$r'% b$rred b% rescrition or '$ches 7nder Act No 190, whose st$t*te of 'imit$tion wo*'d $'% if there were $n im'ied tr*st in this c$se, the 'on/est eriod of e(tinctive rescrition w$s on'% ten %e$rs ! he C$'*n*r$n fishond w$s re/istered in 1911 he written e(tr$.*dici$' dem$nd for its reconve%$nce w$s m$de b% the '$intiffs in 191 heir $ction w$s fi'ed in 19& or $fter the '$se of more th$n fort% %e$rs from the d$te of re/istr$tion N" ! A'tho*/h the defend$nt>s c$*ses of $ction t*rned o*t to be *nfo*nded, the ertin$cit% $nd vi/or with which the% ressed their c'$im indic$te their sincerit% $nd /ood f$ith inc*rred e(enses, resented 1 witnesses< ! here is the f*rther consider$tion th$t the $rties were descend$nts of common $ncestors, the so*ses #$n*e' -$'$o $nd +$'entin$ I/n$cio, $nd th$t '$intiffsH $ction w$s b$sed on their honest s*osition th$t the f*nds *sed in the $c?*isition of the '$nds in 'iti/$tion were e$rnin/s of the roerties $''e/ed'% inherited from #$n*e' -$'$o ! Considerin/ those circ*mst$nces, it c$nnot be conc'*ded with certit*de th$t '$intiffsH $ction w$s m$nifest'% frivo'o*s or w$s rim$ri'% intended to h$r$ss the defend$nts An $w$rd for d$m$/es to the defend$nts does not $e$r to be .*st $nd roer
FABIAN ! FABIAN Ae$' t$en from the decision of the CFI dismissin/ '$intiff>s com'$int for reconve%$nce FACTS ! "n )$n*$r% 1, 1909, P$b'o F$bi$n bo*/ht from the Phi'iine :overnment 'ot 1@4 of the Fri$r 2$nds Est$te in #*ntin'*$, 6i5$' =e died on A*/*st &, 19&, s*rvived b% fo*r chi'dren, n$me'%, Eser$n5$, Benit$ I, Benit$ II, $nd -i'bin$
! "n "ctober , 19& -i'bin$ F$bi$n $nd eodor$ F$bi$n, niece of the dece$sed, e(ec*ted $n $ffid$vit $nd on November 14, 19& the $ctin/ Director of 2$nds, on beh$'f of the :overnment, so'd 'ot 1@4, *nder deed 1&&, to -i'bin$ $nd eodor$ F$bi$n ! In 19&9, the vendees too h%sic$' ossession thereof, c*'tiv$ted it, $nd $rori$ted the rod*ce therefrom $nd conceded'% h$ve * to the resent been $rori$tin/ the fr*its from the '$nd e(c'*sive'% for themse'ves< In th$t s$me %e$r, the% dec'$red the 'ot in their n$mes for t$($tion *roses *nder t$( dec'$r$tion 4 -ince 19&9 * to the resent, the% h$ve been $%in/ the re$' est$te t$(es thereon ! "n )*'% 1, 19@0 the '$intiffs fi'ed the resent $ction for reconve%$nce $/$inst the defend$nts so*ses, $verrin/ th$t -i'bin$ $nd eodor$, thro*/h fr$*d eretr$ted in their $ffid$vit, m$de it $e$r th$t Me' fin$do P$b'o F$bi$n no de.o nin/*n otro heredero sino 'os dec'$r$ntes con derecho $ hered$r e' 'ote No 1@4 de '$ h$ciend$ de #*ntin'*$M, which is $ f$'se n$rr$tion of f$cts bec$*se -i'bin$ new th$t she is not the on'% d$*/hter $nd heir of the dece$sed P$b'o F$bi$n, $nd eodor$ 'iewise new $'' $'on/ th$t, $s $ mere niece of the dece$sed, she w$s rec'*ded from inheritin/ from him in the resence of his fo*r s*rvivin/ d$*/hters ! he defend$nts c'$im th$t P$b'o F$bi$n w$s not the owner of 'ot 1@4 $t the time of his de$th on A*/*st &, 19& bec$*se he h$d not $id in f*'' the $morti5$tions on the 'ot; th$t the% $re the $bso'*te owners thereof, h$vin/ *rch$sed it from the :overnment for the s*m of P1&0, $nd from th$t %e$r h$vin/ e(ercised $'' the $ttrib*tes of ownershi thereof * to the resent; $nd th$t the resent $ction for reconve%$nce h$s $'re$d% rescribed ! he 'ower co*rt rendered .*d/ment on )*ne &, 19@&, dec'$rin/ th$t the defend$nts so*ses h$d $c?*ired $ v$'id $nd com'ete tit'e to the roert% b% $c?*isitive rescrition, $nd $ccordin/'% dismissed the com'$int, with costs $/$inst the '$intiffs ISSUES 1 3"N P$b'o F$bi$n w$s the owner of 'ot 1@4 $t the time of his de$th, in the f$ce of the f$ct, $dmitted b% the defend$nts!$e''ees, th$t he h$d not then $id the entire *rch$se rice thereof & 3"N '$ches m$% b$r $n $ction to enforce $ constr*ctive tr*st 3"N tit'e to the '$nd h$s vested in the $e''ees thro*/h the mode of $c?*isitive rescrition HELD 1 ERatio 2ot 1@4 w$s $ $rt of the Fri$r 2$nds Est$te of #*ntin'*$, 6i5$'; its s$'e to P$b'o F$bi$n w$s therefore /overned b% Fri$r 2$nds Act
3hi'e *nder section 1 of the s$id Act, tit'e to the '$nd so'd is reserved reserved to the :overnment :overnment *nti' the *rch$ser *rch$ser m$es f*'' $%ment of $'' the re?*ired inst$''ments $nd the interest thereon, this 'e/$' reserv$tion refers to the b$re, n$ed tit'e he e?*it$b'e $nd benefici$' tit'e re$''% went to the *rch$ser the moment he $id the first inst$''ment $nd w$s /iven $ certific$te of s$'e he $ssi/nment $nd s$'e of the 'ot to the defend$nts -i'bin$ $nd eodor$ were therefore n*'' $nd void $s to th$t ortion so'd to eodor$, $nd $s we'' $s to th$t ortion which '$wf*''% devo'ved in f$vor of the $e''$nts o the e(tent of the $rtici$tion of the $e''$nts, $'ic$tion m*st be m$de of the rinci'e th$t if roert% is $c?*ired $c?*ired thro*/h fraud , the erson obt$inin/ obt$inin/ it is considered $ trustee trustee of an implied trust for the benefit of the erson from whom the roert% comes Reasoning he reserv$tion of the tit'e in f$vor of the :overnment is m$de mere'% to rotect the interest of the :overnment so $s to rec'*de
the *rch$ser from enc*mberin/ or disosin/ of the 'ot *rch$sed before the $%ment in f*'' of the *rch$se rice "*tside of this rotection the :overnment ret$ins no ri/ht $s $n owner And when s$id *rch$ser fin$''% $%s the fin$' inst$''ment on the *rch$se rice $nd is /iven $
deed of conve%$nce $nd $ certific$te of tit'e, the tit'e $t 'e$st in e?*it%, retro$cts to the time he first occ*ied the '$nd, $id the first inst$''ment $nd w$s iss*ed the corresondin/ certific$te of s$'e & ERatio In constr*ctive tr*sts, the r*'e is th$t '$ches constit*tes $ b$r to $ctions to enforce the tr*st, $nd re*di$tion is not re?*ired, *n'ess there
is $ conce$'ment of the f$cts /ivin/ rise to the tr*st Reasoning Assi/nment of s$'e certific$te 4 w$s effected on "ctober , 19&; $nd the $ct*$' tr$nsfer of 'ot 1@4 w$s m$de on the fo''owin/
November 14 It w$s on'% on )*'% , 19@0, & bi/ %e$rs '$ter, th$t the $e''$nts for the first time c$me forw$rd with their c'$im to the '$nd It is not serio*s'% $sserted th$t the $e''ees conce$'ed the f$cts /ivin/ rise to the tr*st "n the contr$r%, the sti*'$tion of f$cts of the $rties st$tes with striin/ c'$rit% Mth$t defend$nts herein h$ve been in ossession of the '$nd in ?*estion since 192 up to the present publicl! and continuousl! under claim of ownership" the! have cultivated it# harvested and appropriated the fruits for themselves M ERatio An $ction for reconve%$nce of re$' roert% b$sed *on $ constr*ctive or im'ied tr*st, res*'tin/ from fr$*d, m$% be b$rred b% the st$t*te
of 'imit$tions, $nd the $ction therefor m$% be fi'ed within fo*r %e$rs from the discover% of the fr$*d, the discover% in th$t c$se bein/ deemed to h$ve t$en '$ce when new certific$tes of tit'e were iss*ed e(c'*sive'% in the n$mes of the resondents therein Reason Reasoning ing 7on the *ndis*ted f$cts in the c$se $t b$r, not on'% h$d '$ches set in when the $e''$nts instit*ted their $ction for, reconve%$nce in 19@0, b*t $s we'' their ri/ht to enforce the constr*ctive tr*st h$d $'re$d% rescribed $en $en !ears actual adverse ossession b% $n% erson c'$imin/ to be the owner for th$t time of $n% '$nd or interest in '$nd, *ninterr*ted'% contin*ed for ten !ears b% occ*$nc%, descent, /r$nts, or otherwise, in whatever wa! such occupanc! ma! have commenced or continued , sh$'' vest in ever% $ct*$' occ*$nt or ossessor of
s*ch '$nd $ f*'' $nd com'ete tit'e .*d/ment a %uo, dismissin/ the com'$int, is $ffirmed No rono*ncement $s to costsVoting Concecion, C), 6e%es, 6e%es, Dispositio Disposition n he .*d/ment Voting Concecion, )B2, Di5on, B en/5on, )P, )P, $'div$r, -$nche5, An/e'es $nd Fern$ndo, )), conc*r #$$'int$', ), conc*rs in the res*'t
BUENO V RE"ES #AA2INA2; Ari' &, 19@9 An $e$' from the decision of the CFI dismissin/ the '$intiff>s com'$int FACTS ! In )$n*$r% 19@, F6ANCI-" 6EE- fi'ed $n $nswer in $ c$d$str$' c$se c'$imin/ 2" N" & to be his $nd his & brothers )*$n $nd #$teo
S S S S S S S S S S
! & %rs '$ter '$ter the '$intif '$intiffs fs in this c$se c$se fi'rd $n $n $ction $ction of reconve%$nce reconve%$nce of of 2ot & he% he% s$id th$t th$t the '$nd '$nd did not not be'on/ to 6e%es 6e%es $nd his his brothers ! the '$nd '$nd w$s ori/in$''% ori/in$''% owned b% )or/e B*eno B*eno 3hen he he died, his his chi'dren chi'dren inherited inherited it8 it8 Bri/id$, Bri/id$, E*/eni$ E*/eni$ $nd 6*fino 6*fino B6i/id$ B6i/id$ $nd E*/eni E*/eni$ $ then died 'e$vin/the '$nd to their resective chi'dren $nd 6*fino who $re now the '$intiffs in this c$se Fr$ncisco w$s E*/eni$>s h*sb$nd h*s, it is c'$imed th$t the '$nd sho*'d be'on/ to his chi'dren $nd his wife>s sib'in/s, Bri/id$ nd 6*fino ! he defend$nt defend$nts s )*$n $nd #$teo #$teo 6e%es 6e%es fi'ed their their $nswer $nswer Fr$ncisco Fr$ncisco died died $'re$d%< $'re$d%< , in which which the% r$ised $ n*mber of of defenses, defenses, inc'*din/ inc'*din/ '$ches, imrescritibi'it% of tit'e, $nd rescrition of $ction he '$st defense w$s *he'd b% the co*rt $nd now s*b.ect of this $e$' ! 7on $e$', $e$', the $e'' $e''$ntsK' $ntsK'$intif $intiffs fs $ssi/ned $ssi/ned the ff ff errors8 1< 1< in the dismiss$' dismiss$' of the com'$int com'$int on the the /ro*nd of of rescrition; rescrition; $nd $nd &< in the the dismiss$' of the com'$int Meven in re'$tion to $e''$nts s*rn$med 6e%es, the chi'dren of Fr$ncisco 6e%es ! Both the $e''e $e''ees es $nd the the co*rt be'ow be'ow roceeded roceeded on on the theor% th$t the $ction $ction for reconve% reconve%$nce $nce w$s redic$ redic$ted ted on the e(isten e(istence ce of $n im'ied tr*st, $nd th$t s*ch $n $ction rescribes in 10 %e$rs he $e''$nts co*nter, in this $e$', th$t the tr*st w$s not im'ied b*t e(ress, $nd th$t in $n% c$se even $n im'ied tr*st, $ccordin/ to some decisions of this Co*rt, is imrescritib'e "n the other h$nd, the $e''$nts co*nter b% s$%in/ th$t the tr*st w$s not im'ied b*t e(ress, $nd is in $n% c$se imrescritib'e ISSUES 3"N the $ction for reconve%$nce rescribes in 10 %e$rs HELD es Reasoning
! he $e''$nts co*nter $r/*ment is *nten$b'e ! 3h$t w$s $$rent'% desi/ned to be $n e(ress tr*st w$s for the '$te Fr$ncisco = 6e%es to fi'e $n $nswer in the c$d$str$' roceedin/ $nd to obt$in tit'e to the '$nd for $nd in beh$'f of $'' the heirs of )or/e B*eno B*t s*ch e(ress tr*st f$i'ed to m$teri$'i5e ! If $n% tr*st c$n be ded*ced $t $'' from the fore/oin/ f$cts it w$s $n im'ied one! 3hi'e there $re some decisions which ho'd th$t $n $ction *on $ tr*st is imrescritib'e, witho*t distin/*ishin/ between e(ress $nd im'ied tr*sts, the better r*'e, $s '$id down b% this Co*rt in other decisions, is th$t rescrition does s*ervene where the tr*st is mere'% $n im'ied one! 7on the /ener$' roosition th$t $n $ction for reconve%$nce s*ch $s the resent is s*b.ect to rescrition in ten %e$rs the $e''ees $nd the co*rt $ ?*o $re correct he ?*estion here, however is8 from wh$t time sho*'d the rescritive eriod be co*nted, in the 'i/ht of the $''e/$tions in the com'$intQ ! the c$*se of $ction *on s*ch tr*st m*st be deemed to h$ve $ccr*ed on'% *on the discover% of s*ch b$d f$ith or mist$e, or to *t it more secific$''%, *on the discover% b% the $e''$nts th$t Fr$ncisco = 6e%es, in vio'$tion of their $/reement with him, h$d obt$ined re/istr$tion of the dis*ted roert% in his own n$me $nd in the n$mes of his brothers
! It wo*'d not do to s$% th$t the c$d$str$' roceedin/ itse'f, b% virt*e of its n$t*re $s $ roceedin/ in rem, w$s constr*ctive notice to the $e''$nts, for $s f$r $s the% were concerned the c$d$str$' $nswer the% h$d $*thori5ed Fr$ncisco = 6e%es to fi'e w$s not $dverse to them; $nd neither he nor the $e''ee m$% invoe the constr*ctive!notice r*'e on the b$sis of their own bre$ch of the $*thorit% th*s /iven "n to of $'' this, it w$s the $e''$nts $nd not the $e''ees who were in ossession of the roert% $s owners, contin*o*s'% * to 19@&, when for the first time the '$tter $e$red *on the scene $nd tried to /et s*ch ossession, thereb% reve$'in/ to them the f$ct of the mist$en or fr$*d*'ent re/istr$tion ! B*t the fore/oin/ $re not f$cts $'re$d% est$b'ished b% evidence he% $re mere'% $''e/ed in the com'$int hese $re m$tters of defense th$t m*st be s*bst$nti$ted $t the tri$' ! 3ith this view we t$e of the c$se, it is *nnecess$r% to t$e 2i the second error $ssi/ned Ratio
! If $n% tr*st c$n be ded*ced $t $'' from the fore/oin/ f$cts it w$s $n im'ied one, $risin/ b% oer$tion of '$w not from $n% res*med intention of the $rties b*t to s$tisf% the dem$nds of .*stice $nd e?*it% $nd $s A rotection $/$inst *nf$ir de$'in/ or downri/ht fr$*d Indeed, in this ind of im'ied tr*st, common'% denomin$ted constr*ctive, $s distin/*ished from res*'tin/, tr*st, there e(ists $ cert$in $nt$/onism between the cest*i ?*e tr*st $nd the tr*stee ! h*s, for inst$nce, *nder Artic'e 14@ of the Civi' Code, Mif roert% is $c?*ired thro*/h mist$e or fr$*d, the erson obt$inin/ it is, b% force of '$w, considered $ tr*stee of $M im'ied tr*st for the benefit of the erson from whom the roert% comesM In $ n*mber of c$ses this Co*rt h$s he'd th$t re/istr$tion of roert% b% one erson in his n$me, whether b% mist$e or fr$*d, the re$' owner bein/ $nother erson, imresses *on the tit'e so $c?*ired the ch$r$cter of $ constr*ctive tr*st for the re$' owner, which wo*'d .*stif% $n $ction for reconve%$nce ! )B2 6e%es in )# *$son $nd Co, Inc v #$/d$n/$'8 M7nder -ection 40 of the o'd Code of the Civi' Proced*re, $'' $ctions for recover% of re$' roert% rescribes in 10 %e$rs, e(cetin/ $ctions b$sed on contin*in/ or s*bsistin/ tr*sts th$t were considered b% -ection $s imrescritib'e As he'd in the c$se of Di$5 v :orricho, however, the contin*in/ or s*bsistin/ tr*sts contem'$ted in -ection of the Code of Civi' Proced*re referred on'% to e(ress *nre*di$ted tr*sts, $nd did not inc'*de constr*ctive tr*sts where no fid*ci$r% re'$tion e(ists $nd the tr*stee does not reco/ni5e the tr*st of $''M Disposition the order $e$'ed from is set $side $nd the c$se is rem$nded for f*rther roceedin/s
TAMA"O V CALLE#O C"NCEPCI"N; )*'% &, 19& FACTS ! his $ction w$s bro*/ht b% A*re'io C$''e.o, ori/in$''% $/$inst #$ri$no $m$%o on'%, $nd, '$ter, $/$inst his brother #$rcos $m$%o, $'so, for the reconve%$nce of the northern ortion of $ $rce' of '$nd in the n$mes of s$id brothers CFI dismissed the com'$int Co*rt of Ae$'s reversed $nd the '$nd w$s dec'$red reconve%ed *nto him
! It $e$rs th$t the so*ses +icente $m$%o $m$%o $nd Ciri'$ +e'$sco $m$%o $m$%o owned $ $rce' of '$nd in the b$rrio of "$'sic or :*$'sic Prior to Feb 1, 191&, s$id so*ses so'd $rt of the northern ortion of s$id '$nd to Fern$ndo Dom$nt$%, who too ossession thereof ! -ometime $fter this s$'e, b*t before s$id d$te, +icente $m$%o died =is widow h$vin/ w$ived her ri/hts to the rem$inin/ ortion of their ori/in$' roert% in f$vor of her chi'dren #$ri$no $m$%o $nd #$rcos $m$%o, these brothers were, on Febr*$r% 1, 191&, dec'$red so'e heirs of the dece$sed he brothers $'ied for the re/istr$tion in their n$mes, of $ tr$ct of '$nd of $bo*t ,09 s?*$re meters, $''e/in/ th$t the% h$d th*s inherited the s$me from their dece$sed f$ther ! .*d/ment w$s rendered, directin/ the re/istr$tion, in the n$me of #$ri$no $m$%o $nd #$rcos $m$%o, of &0,4&1 s?m on'% of the '$nd $'ied for, s$id $'ic$nts h$vin/ $cnow'ed/ed th$t the rem$inin/ ortion thereot be'on/ed to the est$te of :re/orio F'or #$t$, dece$sed ! Not 'on/ $fter Fern$ndo Dom$nt$% so'd his $bove!mentioned '$nd of &&,1&!1K s?*$re meters to A*re'io C$''e.o, who too ossession thereof since then! -*bse?*ent'%, #$rcos $m$%o so'd his *ndivided sh$re in the roert% the &00 s?m '$nd< to his brother #$ri$no $m$%o hen, #$ri$no so'd 0,000 s?m to Proceso Est$cio, *on whose re?*est s*rve%or Fide' Di$5 went to the '$nd for the *rose of re$rin/ $ s*bdivision '$n $nd se/re/$tin/ the hect$res th*s conve%ed b% #$ri$no $m$%o, b*t Di$5 did not $ccom'ish his *rose, for he w$s not $''owed b% C$''e.o to enter the ortion he'd b% the '$tter ! C$''e.o $sed #$ri$no $m$%o to c$*se to be e(c'*ded the '$nd he'd b% the former, b*t the '$tter ref*sed to do so! hen C$''e.o fi'ed his resent com'$int for reconve%$nce $nd d$m$/es! =$vin/ f$i'ed to $nswer the $mended com'$int, defend$nt #$rcos $m$%o w$s dec'$red in def$*'t, where$s defend$nt #$ri$no $m$%o fi'ed his $nswer with co*nterc'$im =is m$in defense w$s th$t the '$nd c'$imed b% C$''e.o is o*tside the erimeter of the $re$ covered b% the $forementioned certific$tes of tit'e ! #$ri$no $m$%o $m$%o 'e$ded $'so the st$t*te of 'imit$tions ! CFI rendered $ decision dismissin/ the com'$int, *on the /ro*nd th$t the '$nd P*rch$sed b% Fern$ndo Dom$nt$% from the $rents of #$ri$no $nd #$rcos $m$%o is not inc'*ded in s$id tit'es ! this decision w$s reversed b% CA which fo*nd th$t the '$nd c'$imed b% C$''e.o is $rt of the '$nd covered b% the $forementioned certific$tes of tit'e he'd b% $m$%o, $nd overr*'ed the 'e$ of rescrition set * b% #$ri$no $m$%o, *on the theor% th$t the tit'e to s$id ortion of '$nd now c'$imed b% C$''e.o, $nd, before, b% Fern$ndo Dom$nt$%, is he'd in tr*st b% the $m$%os $nd th$t the $ction to enforce s$id tr*st does not rescribe ! $m$%o m$int$ins th$t the Co*rt of Ae$'s h$s erred8 1< Min not ho'din/ th$t the resondent A*re'io C$''e.oHs c$*se of $ction, if $n%, h$d $'re$d% rescribedM; &< Min ho'din/ th$t the etitionerHs f$i'*re to $e$' from the decision th$t did not /r$nt him $ffirm$tive re'ief on the m$tter of ossession, constit*ted res $d.*dic$t$ thereonM; < Min disre/$rdin/ the .*dici$' $dmission m$de b% the resondent C$''e.o $nd his co*nse'M; 4< Min m$in/ conc'*sions not s*orted b% the f$cts on recordM, < Min not $ffirmin/ the decision rendered b% the tri$' co*rtM
ISSUES 1 3"N C$''e.o>s c$*se of $ction h$d $'re$d% rescribed & 3"N etitioner>s f$i'*re to $e$' from the decision th$t did not /r$nt him $ffirm$tive re'ief constit*ted res .*dic$t$ 3"N the .*dici$' $dmission m$de b% C$''e.o $nd his co*nse' sho*'d h$ve been disre/$rded 4 3"N the co*rt m$de conc'*sions not s*orted b% f$cts 3"N the C$''e.o h$s the ri/ht to dem$nd $ reconve%$nce HELD 1 N" Ratio 3here $n im'ied tr*st w$s cre$ted in f$vor of Dom$nt$% b% the erroneo*s inc'*sion in the $m$%o brothersH certific$te of tit'e of the
$rce' of '$nd former'% so'd b% their $rents to Dom$nt$% who in t*rn so'd it to A*re'io C$''e.o< $nd on )*ne &, 191, #$ri$no $m$%o, on his beh$'f $nd th$t of his brother #$rcos, e(ress'% reco/ni5ed the s$id revio*s s$'e b% their $rents to Dom$nt$%, s*ch e(ress reco/nition h$d the effect of im$rtin/ to the $forementioned tr*st the n$t*re of $n e(ress tr*st which is not s*b.ect to the st$t*te of 'imit$tions, $t 'e$st, *nti' re*di$ted, in which event the eriod of rescrition be/ins to r*n on'% from the time of the re*di$tion In the inst$nt c$se, re*di$tion too '$ce on'% in e$r'% )*ne, 19&, when #$ri$no $m$%o re.ected C$''e.oHs dem$nd th$t the dis*ted ortion be e(c'*ded from C No 4@ in the formerHs n$me 3hen the inst$nt c$se for reconve%$nce w$s fi'ed on )*ne &, 19&, the eriod of rescrition h$d b$re'% be/*n to r*n Reasoning It sho*'d be noted th$t $'tho*/h the tr*st cre$ted b% the $'ic$tion for re/istr$tion fi'ed b% #$ri$no $nd #$rcos $m$%o, on or
$bo*t -etember &9, 191, $nd the inc'*sion in "C No &@1&, iss*ed in their n$mes, on November 1, 191, of the tr$ct of '$nd revio*s'% so'd b% their $rents to Fern$ndo Dom$nt$% ! $nd '$ter conve%ed b% him to A*re'io C$''e.o ! m$% h$ve h$d $ constr*ctive or im'ied n$t*re, its st$t*s w$s s*bst$nti$''% $ffected on )*ne &, 191, b% the fo''owin/ f$cts, n$me'%8 "n the d$te '$st mentioned, mentioned, Fern$ndo Fern$ndo Dom$nt$% $nd etitioner etitioner #$ri$no $m$%o $m$%o e(ec*ted the *b'ic *b'ic instr*ment whereb% #$ri$no e('icit'% $cnow'ed/ed th$t his dece$sed $rents h$d so'd to Dom$nt$% the $rce' of '$nd of $bo*t &&,1&K1 s?*$re meters then he'd b% the '$tter, $nd sti*'$tin/ sti*'$tin/ th$t Dom$nt$% is the $bso'*te owner of s$id '$nd, free from $n% 'ien or enc*mbr$nce thereon his e(ress reco/nition b% #$ri$no $m$%o of the revio*s s$'e, m$de b% their $rents, to Fern$ndo Dom$nt$% h$d the effect of im$rtin/ to the $forementioned tr*st the n$t*re of $n e(ress tr*st ! it h$vin/ been cre$ted b% the wi'' of the $rties, Mno $rtic*'$r wordsM bein/ Mre?*ired for the cre$tion of $n e(ress tr*st, it bein/ s*fficient th$t $ tr*st is c'e$r'% intendedM ! which e(ress tr*st is $ MContin*in/ $nd s*bsistin/M tr*st, not s*b.ect to the st$t*te of 'imit$tions, $t 'e$st, *nti' re*di$ted, in which event the eriod of rescrition be/ins to r*n on'% from the time of the re*di$tion he '$tter did not t$e '$ce *nti' e$r'% in )*ne, 19&, when #$ri$no $m$%o re.ected A*re'io C$''e.oHs dem$nd B*t, then, the c$se $t b$r w$s fi'ed wees '$ter when the eriod of rescrition h$d b$re'% be/*n to r*n & Ratio PetitionerHs retense is m$nifest'% devoid of merit, for the Co*rt of Ae$'s h$d e('icit'% $cnow'ed/ed C$''e.oHs tit'e over the dis*ted
'$nd $nd dec'$red the s$me reconve%ed to him his necess$ri'% im'ied th$t C$''e.o is entit'ed to rem$in in ossession of s$id '$nd Ratio he findin/ of the Co*rt of Ae$'s to the effect th$t the '$nd so'd b% etitionerHs $rents to Dom$nt$% is within the erimeter of the
roert% covered b% C No 4@ is essenti$''% $ ?*estion of f$ct, $nd, conse?*ent'%, the findin/ to this effect is fin$' $nd not s*b.ect to review in the resent $e$' on certior$ri 'ote( see the original for the factual finding of the CA. )ottomline# the land in %uestion is shown to be Calle*o+s and not $ama!o+s., 4 Ratio PetitionerH PetitionerHs s $r/*ment $r/*ment th$t the conc'*sion conc'*sion of the Co*rt of Ae$'s Ae$'s to the effect th$t 2ot No, 1&40 w$s $c?*ired b% resondent resondent C$''on
from #$(imo 6ico Mis not s*orted b% $n% direct testimoni$' evidenceM, is in the n$t*re of $ ne/$tive re/n$nt It does not den% the e(istence of indirect testimoni$' evidence, s*ch $s the circ*mst$nces considered b% the Co*rt of Ae$'s Neither does it $ss$i' the e(istence of direct doc*ment$r% evidence In short, it does not den% the e(istence of s*bst$nti$' evidence in s*ort of the contested conc'*sion of f$ct of the Co*rt of Ae$'s Ratio Petitioner ?*estions the ri/ht of C$''e.o to dem$nd $ reconve%$nce, insof$r $s it m$% $ffect the ortion of 0,000 s?*$re meters so'd b%
him to Proceso Est$cio, *on the /ro*nd th$t the '$tter is $ *rch$ser in /ood f$ith for v$'*e his is, however, $ defense not $v$i'$b'e to etitioner herein, $side from the f$ct th$t he h$s not even 'e$ded it in the tri$' co*rt or otherwise r$ised it either in th$t co*rt or in the Co*rt of Ae$'s ! 3e note th$t the Disosition $rt of the decision of the Co*rt of Ae$'s dec'$res th$t the '$nd in ?*estion is Mdec'$red reconve%edM to s$id resondent -*ch reconve%$nce c$nnot, however, be deemed m$de witho*t $ s*rve% definin/ with recision the metes $nd bo*nds of the $re$ to be se/re/$ted f or herein resondent, A*re'io C$''e.o Disposition Accordin/'%, this c$se sho*'d be rem$nded to the co*rt of ori/in for the re$r$tion of $ s*bdivision '$n of the ortion th*s to be
se/re/$ted $nd the .*dici$' $rov$' of s*ch '$n, $nd on'% $fter s*ch $rov$' h$s become fin$' $nd e(ec*tor% m$% the reconve%$nce be either m$de or deemed effected -o modified, the $e$'ed decision of the Co*rt of Ae$'s is hereb% $ffirmed in $'' other resects, with the costs of this inst$nce $/$inst etitioner #$ri$no $m$%o 6et5e'%n #$e : *int$n$
Hei$s o% M&'i(o S&n)o$)o !* Hei$s o% M&nue+ ,ui)&no 449 -C6A 1< F&-ts:
"n A*/*st &9, 19, Free P$tent No +II!4!&94 +II!4!&94 w$s iss*ed to A'$n P *i.$no *i.$no over $ $rce' $rce' of '$nd identified identified $s 2ot 4, C$d$stre 4!D wherein "ri/in$' Certific$te of it'e "C< No "P!&&1 w$s iss*ed in his n$me #e$nwhi'e, on November 11, 19, Free P$tent No +II!4! 0 w$s iss*ed in f$vor of :wendo'%n Enri?*e5 for 2ot 9, C$d$stre 4!D in which "C No "P!94 w$s $'so iss*ed in her n$me A'$n *i.$no $nd :wendo'%n Enri?*e5 $re $mon/ the heirs of #$n*e' *i.n$o who $re the riv$te resondents in this c$se E nri?*e5 fi'ed $n $'ic$tion for $ free $tent over 2ot @ of C$d$stre 4!D with the De$rtment of Environment $nd N$t*r$' 6eso*rces DEN6< -he $'so fi'ed $n $'ic$tion for $ free $tent over 2ot =owever, the heirs of :*i''ermo -$n.or.o, fi'ed $ rotestKcom'$int with the DEN6 r$%in/ for the c$nce''$tion of Free P$tent Nos +II!4!&94 $nd +II!4!0, $nd for the dismiss$' of the free $tent $'ic$tions over 2ots @ $nd he rotest$ntsKc'$im$nts $''e/ed th$t the s$id $rce's of '$nd were ori/in$''% owned b% An$ni$s 7rs$' b*t were e(ch$n/ed for $ $rce' of '$nd, owned b% their redecessor, :*i''ermo -$n.or.o, $nd from whom the% inherited the roert% =owever, the rotest$ntsKc'$im$nts withdrew their rotestKcom'$int h*s, on Ari' 14, 199&, the 6e/ion$' E(ec*tive Director rendered $ decision /ivin/ d*e co*rse to the $'ic$tions =owever, he r*'ed th$t the free $tents over 2ots 4 $nd 9 co*'d no 'on/er be dist*rbed since the com'$int for the c$nce''$tion w$s fi'ed more th$n one %e$r from their iss*$nce "n -etember 1, 199, etitioners +icente -$n.or.o, the heirs of #$(imo -$n.or.o, $nd -o*ses Inot, fi'ed $ com'$int for c$nce''$tion of tit'es *nder t$( dec'$r$tions $nd reconve%$nce of ossession of re$' roert% coverin/ the 2ots 4, @, $nd 9, $/$inst the riv$te resondents, the heirs of #$n*e' *i.$no $nd +icente :*'be Petitioners $''e/e th$t the% $re the owners of sever$' $rce's of '$nd coverin/ 2ots 4, @, $nd 9 which the% inherited from their /r$ndf$ther the '$te #$(imo -$n.or.o Accordin/ to the etitioners, sometime in 19, the $rce's of '$nd in ?*estion were 'e$sed to #$n*e' *i.$no for $ two &< %e$r eriod =owever, the 'e$se w$s never $id for nor w$s ossession of the s$id roerties ever ret*rned to the etitioners, desite ree$ted dem$nds on *i.$no to ret*rn the s$me 3hen #$n*e' *i.$no died, his heirs divided $mon/ themse'ves the '$nd be'on/in/ to the etitioners P'$intiffs $verred th$t the% nor their $scend$nts h$ve never so'd, don$ted, or mort/$/ed $n% of these 'ots in ?*estion to the defend$nts or their $scend$nts "n the other h$nd, riv$te resondents fi'ed $ motion to dismiss the com'$int on the /ro*nd of res *udicata b$sed on the decision of the 6e/ion$' E(ec*tive Director on Ari' 14, 199& he% m$int$ined th$t the decision of the 6e/ion$' E(ec*tive Director h$d become fin$' $nd e(ec*tor% $nd, $s s*ch, b$rred the etitioners> $ction he% $'so invoed th$t the etitioners> $ction w$s b$rred b% the iss*$nce of "C No "P!&&1 coverin/ 2ot 4, $nd "C No "P!94 coverin/ 2ot 9 he 6e/ion$' ri$' Co*rt dismissed the com'$int on the /ro*nd of res .*dic$t$ "n $e$', etitioners 'imited the iss*e to 2ots 4 $nd 9 on'% he $e''$te co*rt $ffirmed the order of the tri$' co*rt $'tho*/h for $ different re$son, ie, rescrition etitioner> ner>s s $ction $ction for the reconve% reconve%$nc $nce e of 2ots 4 $nd 9, covered covered b% "C No "P!&&1 "P!&&1 $nd "C No "P!94 "P!94 Issue: 3"N etitio resective'% is b$rred b% rescrition He+.:
No, the $ction for reconve%$nce of the 'ots in ?*estion h$s not %et rescribed A orrens orrens tit'e iss*ed on the b$sis of the free $tents bec$me $s indefe$sib'e $s one which w$s .*dici$''% sec*red *on the e(ir$tion of one %e$r from d$te of iss*$nce of the $tent =owever, $n $//rieved $rt% m$% sti'' fi'e $n $ction for reconve%$nce b$sed on im'ied or constr*ctive tr*st, which rescribes in ten %e$rs from the d$te of the iss*$nce of the Certific$te of it'e over the roert% rovided th$t the roert% h$s not been $c?*ired b% $n innocent *rch$ser for v$'*e he resence of fr$*d or mist$e cre$tes $n im'ied tr*st for the benefit of the ri/htf*' $nd 'e/$' owner /ivin/ him the ri/ht to see reconve%$nce of the roert% A'' th$t m*st be $''e/ed in the com'$int $re two $cts8 1< th$t the '$intiff w$s the owner of the '$nd $nd, &< th$t the defend$nt h$d i''e/$''% disossessed him of the s$me In their com'$int, the etitioners c'e$r'% $sserted th$t their redecessors!in!interest h$ve 'on/ been the $bso'*te $nd e(c'*sive owners of the 'ots in ?*estion $nd th$t the% were fr$*d*'ent'% derived of ownershi thereof when the riv$te resondents obt$ined free $tents $nd certific$tes of tit'e in their n$mes Artic'e 14@ of the New Civi' Code rovides th$t $ erson $c?*irin/ roert% thro*/h fr$*d becom es b% oer$tion of '$w $ tr*stee of $n im'ied tr*st for the benefit of the re$' owner of the roert% he resence of fr$*d in this c$se cre$ted $n im'ied tr*st in f$vor of the etitioners, /ivin/ them the ri/ht to see reconve%$nce of the roert% from the riv$te resondents =owever, bec$*se of the tri$' co*rt>s dismiss$' order, the etitioners h$ve been *n$b'e to rove their ch$r/es of fr$*d $nd misreresent$tion he etitioners> $ction for reconve%$nce m$% not be s$id to h$ve rescribed, for, b$sin/ the resent $ction on im'ied tr*st, the rescritive eriod is ten %e$rs he ?*estioned tit'es were obt$ined on A*/*st &9, 19 $nd November 11, 19, in "C Nos "P!&&1 $nd "P!94, resective'% he etitioners commenced their $ction for reconve%$nce on -etember 1, 199 -ince the etitioners> c$*se of $ction is b$sed on fr$*d, deemed to h$ve t$en '$ce when the certific$tes of tit'e were iss*ed, the com'$int fi'ed on -etember 1, 199 is, therefore, we'' within the rescritive eriod
AZNAR BROTHERS REALT" COMPAN" vs A"ING :6 No 144
#$% 1@, &00
FACTS:
Cris$nt$ #$'o'o%!on etitioned for the iss*$nce of $ -&.&st$&+ .e-$ee in her f$vor over 2ot No 499 'oc$ted in 2$*!2$* Cit%
Cris$nt$ #$'o'o%!on died, so the C$d$str$' co*rt iss*ed $ decision directin/ the iss*$nce of $ decree of tit'e in the n$me of her chi'dren, n$me'%8 )*$n, Ce'edonio, Emi'i$no, Fr$ncisco, -imeon, Bern$be, 6obert$ $nd F$*st$, $'' s*rn$med A%in/ Ho/e!e$0 t1e -e$ti%i-&te /&s +ost .u$in2 t1e /&$*
A'' the heirs of the A%in/ sib'in/s e(ec*ted $n E(tr$!)*dici$' P$rtition of 6e$' Est$te with Deed of Abso'*te -$'e conve%in/ the 'ot in iss*e to the A5n$r Brothers 6e$'t% Com$n% he deed w$s re/istered with the 6"D of 2$*!2$* Cit% on #$rch @, 1994 *nder A-t* No* 3344 the '$w /overnin/ re/istr$tion of *nre/istered '$nd, $nd since then, the re$'t% com$n% re'i/io*s'% $id the re$' roert% t$(es on the roert% 2$ter, A5n$r Brothers 6e$'t% Com$n% fi'ed $ Petiti 2$ter, Petition on for Re-onstitution o% t1e O$i2in&+ Tit+e sin-e t1e o$i2in&+ tit+e o% t1e +ot /&s +ost .u$in2 t1e /&$* his w$s /r$nted b% the co*rt $nd the 6"D of 2$*!2$* w$s directed to iss*e $ reconstit*ted tit'e in the n$me of the A%in/ -ib'in/s h*s, "C No 6"!&@ w$s iss*ed
he A5n$r Brothers 6e$'t% Com$n% then sent o*t notices, to v$c$te the 'ot, to the ersons occ*%in/ the roert%, re$sonin/ th$t the% were the ri/htf*' owner he occ*$nts ref*sed to v$c$te, hence $n e.ectment c$se w$s fi'ed $/$inst them before the #C he #C ordered the occ*$nts to v$c$te Event*$''%, this c$se re$ched the -*reme Co*rt $nd $ decision w$s rendered in f$vor of the re$'t% com$n% dec'$rin/ them $s the ri/htf*' ossessor of the '$nd
#e$nwhi'e, ersons c'$imin/ to be the descend$nts of the ei/ht A%in/ sib'in/s, n*mberin/ $ro*nd &&0 ersons s*bmitted $n $mended com'$int before the 6C $nd $''e/ed th$t the% $re co!owners of the '$nd bein/ the descend$nts of the re/istered owners *nder "C No 6"! &@; th$t the% h$d been in $ct*$', e$cef*', h%sic$', oen, $dverse, contin*o*s $nd *ninterr*ted ossession in concet of owner of s*b.ect $rce' of '$nd since time immemori$'; $nd th$t t1e .ee. o% &5so+ute s&+e e'e-ute. in %&!o$ o% t1e $e&+t6 -o(p&n6 56 t1e &++e2e. 1ei$s o% C$is&nt& M&+o+o6on is & %$&u. &n. is nu++ &n. !oi. ab initio 5e-&use not &++ t1e -oo/ne$s o% su5)e-t p$ope$t6 &%%i'e. t1ei$ si2n&tu$e on s&i. .o-u(ent &n. so(e o% t1e -oo/ne$s /1o suppose.+6 si2ne. s&i. .o-u(ent 1&. 5een .e&. &t t1e ti(e o% t1e e'e-ution t1e$eo% ; th$t A5n$r Brothers 6e$'t% Com$n% he'd the '$nd in b$d f$ith, nowin/ f*''% we'' th$t it did not h$ve $n% ri/ht to the '$nd $nd *sed force, thre$t $nd intimid$tion $/$inst them th*s s*fferin/ mor$' d$m$/es
A5n$r Brothers 6e$'t% Com$n% denied th$t the A%in/s $re the '$wf*' owners of the '$nd $nd $''e/ed it h$d been in $ct*$' ossession of s*b.ect '$nd $s owner thereof b% virt*e of the e(tr$!.*dici$' $rtition of re$' roert% $nd deed of $bso'*te s$'e e(ec*ted in its f$vor; th$t in f$ct, it h$d been $%in/ t$(es thereon re'i/io*s'% re'i/io*s'% he re$'t% com$n% f*rther $''e/ed th$t the% $re 5&$$e. 56 p$es-$iption to %i+e &n &-tion %o$ $e-o!e$6 o% p$ope$t6 /1i-1 s1ou+. 5e institute. /it1in 46e&$s %$o( .is-o!e$6 o% t1e %$&u.* It too the A%in/ heirs &%e$rs to fi'e their $ction $/$inst the re$'t% com$n%
ISSUE: Is the re/istr$tion of the E(tr$!)*dici$' P$rtition of 6e$' Est$te with Deed of Abso'*te -$'e conve%in/ the 'ot in iss*e to the A5n$r Brothers 6e$'t% Com$n% with the 6"D bindin/ $nd conse?*ent'%, res*'ts in the r*nnin/ of the rescritive eriod for reconve%$nceQ
He+.: No*
he s$'e of re/istered roert%, recorded in the 6"D, c$nnot be considered $s re/istered R&tion&+e:
)*risr*dence dict$tes th$t th$t re/istr$tion of instr*ments m*st be done in the roer re/istr%, in order to $ffect $nd bind the '$nd $nd, th*s, oer$te $s constr*ctive notice to the wor'd
In this c$se, the E(tr$.*dici$' P$rtition of 6e$' Est$te with Deed of Abso'*te -$'e w$s re/istered *nder Act No 44 $nd not *nder Act No 49@, therefore the doc*ment c$nnot be deemed re/istered As conse?*ence of non!re/istr$tion, the 10%e$r rescritive eriod c$nnot be reconed from the d$te of re/istr$tion of the doc*ment *nder Act No 444 since no constr*ctive notice to the wor'd w$s erfected b% s*ch re/istr$tion re/istr $tion he rescritive rescritive eriod on'% be/$n to r*n from the time the A%i A%in/ n/ heirs h$d $ct*$' notice of the E(tr$!) E(tr$!)*dici$ *dici$'' P$rtition of 6e$' Est$te with Deed of Abso'*te -$'e which w$s not roven b% c'e$r $nd convincin/ evidence in this c$se
e(tr$!.*dici *dici$' $' $rtition with deed of $bso'* $bso'*te te s$'e n*'' $nd void, $s c'$ime c'$imed d b% the A%in/ A%in/ Descen Descend$nts, d$nts, bec$*se not $'' the co! Issue: Is the e(tr$!. owners of s*b.ect roert% $ffi(ed their si/n$t*re on s$id doc*ment $nd some of the co!owners who s*osed'% si/ned s$id doc*ment h$d been de$d $t the time of the e(ec*tion thereofQ
He+.: No he e(tr$!.*dici$' $rtition with deed of $bso'*te s$'e is +A2ID b*t on'% between the heirs who $rtici$ted in the e(ec*tion thereof herefore, the heirs who *ndis*ted'% did not $rtici$te therein, c$nnot be bo*nd b% s$id doc*ment
Issue: Does the re$'t% com$n%>s defense, th$t the% $c?*ired the entire $rce' of '$nd with the mist$en be'ief th$t $'' the heirs h$ve e(ec*ted the doc*ment, entit'e them to ownershi over the '$nd b% rescritionQ
He+.: No0 A5n$r Brothers 6e$'t% Com$n% c$nnot be entit'ed ownershi over the '$nd b$sed on mist $en be'ief
R&tion&+e: he '$w rovides th$t if roert% is &-7ui$e. t1$ou21 (ist&8e o$ %$&u. , t1e pe$son o5t&inin2 it is -onsi.e$e. & t$ustee o% &n c$nnot $c?*ire b% rescr rescrition ition i(p+ie. t$ust %o$ t1e 5ene%it o% t1e pe$son %$o( /1o( t1e p$ope$t6 -o(es* B$sed on this r*'e, $ tr*stee c$nnot ownershi owners hi over roe roert% rt% entr*sted to him *nti' $nd *n'ess he re*di$tes the tr*st =owev =owever, er, in constr*ctive constr*ctive im'ie im'ied d tr*sts, rescri rescrition tion m$% s*ervene even if the tr*stee does not re*di$te the re'$tionshi Necess$ri'%, re*di$tion of s$id tr*st is not $ condition recedent to the r*nnin/ of the rescritive eriod
Notes: 9* 1o 1&s t1e 5u$.en o% p$o!in2 t1&t p$es-$iption 1&s 5e2un to $un;
!A5n$r Brothers 6e$'t% Com$n% h$s the b*rden of rovin/ the r*nnin/ of rescrition bec$*se it w$s the re$'t% com$n% th$t set * the defense th$t of rescrition which w$s denied b% the A%in/ heirs <* Does +&-1es &pp+6 1e$e;
!No '$ches wi'' not $'% here bec$*se the three heirs too $ction to rotect their interest we'' within the eriod rescribed b% '$w
