Sagrada Orden vs.

National Coconut Corporation

91 SCRA 503
FACTS
Petitioner Sagrada Orden o!ned a land !"ic" !as ac#uired $% a &apanese corporation during t"e &apanese 'ilitar%
occupation. A(ter t"e li$eration t"e Alien Propert% Custodian too) possession control and custod% o( t"e land. T"e Copra
*+port ,anage'ent Co'pan% occupied t"e propert% and !"en it vacated t"e
respondent National Coconut Corporation occupied it t"roug" t"e representation 'ade $% t"e P"ilippine -overn'ent to
t"e Alien Propert% Custodian. T"e propert% !as returned to Sagrada Orden upon .udg'ent t"at t"e contract o( sale o( t"e
propert% in (avour o( t"e &apanese corporation !as null and void and upon pa%'ent o( t"e consideration it received (or t"e
propert% to t"e P"ilippine Alien Propert% Ad'inistration. Sagrada Orden !as also given t"e rig"t to recover (ro' National
Coconut Corporation reasona$le rentals (or t"e use and occupation o( t"e pre'ises. Sagrada Orden (iled an action to
recover rentals (ro' National Coconut Corporation (ro' t"e ti'e it used and occupied t"e pre'ises. National Coconut
Corporation clai'ed t"at it !as !illing to pa% onl% (ro' t"e ti'e t"e propert% !as returned to Sagrada Orden and not
$e(ore (or it occupied t"e propert% in good (ait" under no o$ligation to pa% t"e rentals.
/SS0*
1as National Coconut Corporation lia$le (or rentals prior to t"e date t"e propert% !as returned to Sagrada Orden2
R03/N-
No. National Coconut Corporation !as not lia$le (or t"e rentals prior to t"e date t"e propert% !as returned to Sagrada
Orden. For National Coconut Corporation to $e lia$le its o$ligation 'ust arise (ro' t"e la! contract or #uasi4 contract
cri'e or negligence as provided $% Article 1155 o( t"e Civil Code !"ic" !as ta)en (ro' Article 1069 o( t"e old Civil Code.
As none o( t"ese sources !ere present National Coconut Corporation cannot $e "eld lia$le. T"ere !as also no e+press
agree'ent $et!een t"e entit% !"ic" "ad legal control and ad'inistration o( t"e propert% and t"e National Coconut
Corporation (or t"e latter to pa% rentals on t"e propert% so t"ere !as no o$ligation.
Sagrada Orden vs. Nacoco 91 P"il. 503 719589
Nature: appeal (ro' .udg'ent o( CF/ o( ,anila
Facts and ;ac)ground o( t"e Case
4 On &an < 19<8 during t"e &apanese occupation Tai!an Te))os"o 7&apanese corporation9 ac#uired t"e plainti((=s
propert% 7land !it" !are"ouse in Pandacan ,anila9 (or P"p1<0>
4 On April < 19<? a(ter t"e li$eration t"e 0S too) control and custod% o( t"e a(ore'entioned ene'%=s land under Sect 18
o( t"e Trading !it" t"e *ne'% Act
4 /n t"e sa'e %ear t"e Copra *+port ,anage'ent Co'pan% occupied t"e propert% under custodians"ip agree'ent !it"
t"e 0nited States Alien Propert% Custodian
4 /n August 19<? !"en t"e Copra *+port ,anage'ent Co. vacated t"e propert% t"e National Coconut Corporation
7NACOCO9 t"e de(endant occupied it ne+t
4 Sagrada Orden 7plainti((9 (iles clai's on t"e propert% !it" t"e Court o( First /nstance o( ,anila and against t"e P"ilippine
Alien Propert% Ad'inistrator
4 Plainti(( petitions t"at t"e sale o( t"e propert% to Tai!an Te))os"o s"ould $e declared null and void as it !as e+ecuted
under duress t"at t"e interest o( t"e Alien Propert% Custodian $e cancelled and t"at NACOCO $e given until Fe$ruar%
86 19<9 to recover its e#uip'ent (or' t"e propert% and vacate t"e pre'ise
4 T"e Repu$lic o( t"e P"ilippines is allo!ed to intervene
4 CF/: t"e de(endant 7P"ilippine Alien Propert% Ad'inistrator9 and t"e intervenor 7RP9 are released (ro' an% lia$ilit% $ut
t"e plainti(( 'a% reserve t"e rig"t to recover (ro' NACOCO reasona$le rentals (or t"e use and occupation o( t"e pre'ises
4 T"e sale o( t"e propert% to t"e Tai!an Ta))es"o !as declared void and t"e plainti(( !as given t"e rig"t to recover
P"p3000@'ont" as reasona$le rental (ro' August 19<? 7date !"en NACOCO occupied propert%9 to t"e date NACOCO
vacates t"e pre'ises
4 t"e .udg'ent is appealed to t"e SC
3egal /ssues
1. 1ON t"e de(endant is lia$le to pa% rent (or occup%ing t"e propert% in #uestion
&udg'ent
1. T"e CF/=s decision t"at t"e de(endant s"ould pa% rent (ro' August 19<? to Fe$ruar% 86 19<9 !as reversed costs
against t"e plainti((
Ratio
O$ligations can onl% arise (ro' (our sources: la! contracts or #uasi4contracts cri'e or negligence 7Art 1069 Spanis"
Civil Code9.
T"ere !ere no la!s or an e+press agree'ent $et!een t"e de(endant or t"e Alien Propert% Custodian !it" t"e plainti((
regarding pa%'ent o( rent. T"e propert% !as ac#uired $% t"e Alien Propert% Ad'inistrator t"roug" la! 7Trading !it" t"e
*ne'% Act9 on t"e seiAure o( alien propert% and not as a successor to t"e interests o( t"e latter. T"ere !as no contract o(
rental $@! t"e' and Tai!an Ta))es"o. NACOCO entered possession o( t"e propert% (ro' t"e Alien Propert% Custodian
!it"out an% e+pectation o( lia$ilit% (or its use. NACOCO did not co''it an% negligence or o((ense and t"ere !as no
contract i'plied or ot"er!ise entered into t"at can $e used as $asis (or clai'ing rent on t"e propert% $e(ore t"e plainti((
o$tained t"e .udg'ent annulling t"e sale to Tai!an Ta))es"o. T"e plainti(( "as no rig"t to clai' rent (ro' NACOCO.
/'portant Notes
Article 1155 o( t"e Ne! Civil Code states t"at t"ere are 5 sources o( o$ligations: la!s contracts #uasi4contracts (elonies
7acts or o'issions punis"ed $% la!9 and #uasi4delicts.
Sagrada Orden Bs Nacoco C>inu"a ng Dapon
ang lupa.
Action to recover parcel o( land o!ned $% P and
t"en $ecause o( &apanese !ar !as ac#uired $%
ot"er parties t"en possessed $% t"e 0S govt t"ru
its custodian t"en possessed $% t"e de(endant
!it"out agree'ent !it" t"e 0S or !it" t"e
plainti(( and de( t"en leased a part o( t"e land.
/ssue: 1ON de(endant is lia$le to Sagrada and
'ust pa% t"e rentals.
Deld: No. /( lia$le at all 'ust arise (ro' an% o(
t"e (our sources o( o$ligations. APA !as a trustee
o( t"e 0S and i( de( lia$le not to plainti(( $ut to
0S govt. ;ut de(endant not lia$le (or rentals $ec
no e+press agree'ent $et t"e APA and Nacoco.
*+istence o( i'plied agree'ent is contrar% to
t"e circu'stances.
Source: Contract. ;ut t"ere !as none.
3eung ;en vs. O=;rien C -a'$ling
O= ;rien (iled an action in t"e court o( CF-/ o( ,anila to recover (ro' 3eung ;en t"e su' o( P15000 alleged to "ave
$een lost $% O=;rien to 3eung ;en in a series o( ga'$ling $an)ing and percentage ga'es:
/ssue: 1ON O=;rien can recover t"e 'one% (ro' 3eung ;en.
Deld: Ees. 0pon general principles recogniAed $ot" in t"e civil and co''on la! 'one% lost in ga'$ling and voluntar%
paid $% t"e loser to t"e !inner cannot in t"e a$sence o( statute $e recovered in a civil action. ;ut Act. No. 1555 o( t"e
P"il. Co'' !"ic" de(ines and penaliAed di((erent (or's o( ga'$ling contains nu'erous provisions recogniAing t"e rig"t
to recover 'one% lost in ga'$ling. /t 'ust t"ere(ore $e assu'ed t"at t"e action o( plainti(( !as $ased upon t"e rig"t to
recover% given $% section 5 o( said Act !"ic" declares t"at an action 'a% $e $roug"t against t"e $an)er $% an% person
losing 'one% at a $an)ing or percentage ga'e.
;*N BS. O=;R/*N Case Figest
3*0N- ;*N BS. P. &. O=;R/*N &A,*S A. OSTRANF and -*O. R. DARB*E &udges o( First /nstance o( t"e Cit% o(
,anila
April ? 1916
FACTS: On Fece'$er 18 1915 an action !as instituted in t"e Court o( First /nstance o( ,anila $% P.&. O=;rien to
recover o( 3eung ;en t"e su' o( P15000 all alleged to "ave $een lost $% t"e plainti(( to t"e de(endant in a series o(
ga'$ling $an)ing and percentage ga'es conducted during t"e t!o or t"ree 'ont"s prior to t"e institution o( t"e suit.
T"e plainti(( as)ed (or an attac"'ent against t"e propert% o( t"e de(endant on t"e ground t"at t"e latter !as a$out to
depart (ro' t"e P"ilippines !it" intent to de(raud "is creditors. T"is attac"'ent !as issued. T"e provision o( la! under
!"ic" t"is attac"'ent !as issued re#uires t"at t"ere s"ould $e a cause o( action arising upon contract e+press or
i'plied. T"e contention o( t"e petitioner is t"at t"e statutor% action to recover 'one% lost at ga'ing is not suc" an action
as is conte'plated in t"is provision and "e insists t"at t"e original co'plaint s"o!s on its (ace t"at t"e re'ed% o(
attac"'ent is not availa$le in aid t"ereo(G t"at t"e Court o( First /nstance acted in e+cess o( its .urisdiction in granting t"e
!rit o( attac"'entG t"at t"e petitioner "as no plain speed% and ade#uate re'ed% $% appeal or ot"er!iseG and t"at
conse#uentl% t"e !rit o( certiorari supplies t"e appropriate re'ed% (or t"is relie(.
/SS0*: 1"et"er or not t"e statutor% o$ligation to restore 'one% !on at ga'ing is an o$ligation arising (ro' contract
e+press or i'plied.
R03/N-: Ees. /n per'itting t"e recover% 'one% lost at pla% Act No. 1555 "as introduced 'odi(ications in t"e application
o( Articles 1596 1601 and 1305 o( t"e Civil Code.
T"e (irst t!o o( t"ese articles relate to ga'$ling contracts !"ile article 1305 treats o( t"e nullit% o( contracts proceeding
(ro' a vicious or illicit consideration. Ta)ing all t"ese provisions toget"er it 'ust $e apparent t"at t"e o$ligation to return
'one% lost at pla% "as a decided a((init% to contractual o$ligationG and t"e Court $elieves t"at it could !it"out violence to
t"e doctrines o( t"e civil la! $e "eld t"at suc" o$ligations is an inno'inate #uasi4contract.
/t is "o!ever unnecessar% to place t"e decision on t"is ground. /n t"e opinion o( t"e Court t"e cause o( action stated in
t"e co'plaint in t"e court $elo! is $ased on a contract e+press or i'plied and is t"ere(ore o( suc" nature t"at t"e court
"ad aut"orit% to issue t"e !rit o( attac"'ent. T"e application (or t"e !rit o( certiorari 'ust t"ere(ore $e denied and t"e
proceedings dis'issed.
-O3AN-CO B. PC/;
Facts: /n 1969 1illia' -olangco Construction Corporation 71-CC9 and t"e P"ilippine Co''ercial /nternational ;an)
7PC/;9 entered into a contract (or t"e construction o( t"e e+tension o( PC/; To!er //. T"e pro.ect included a'ong ot"ers
t"e application o( a granitite !as"4out (inis" on t"e e+terior !alls o( t"e $uilding.
/n a letter PC/; !it" t"e concurrence o( its consultant TC-/ *ngineers 7TC-/9 accepted t"e turnover o( t"e co'pleted
!or) $% 1-CC. To ans!er (or an% de(ect arising !it"in a period o( one %ear 1-CC su$'itted a guarantee $ond dated
&ul% 1 1998 in co'pliance !it" t"e construction contract (Defects liability period).
T"e controvers% $et!een t"e parties arose !"en portions o( t"e granitite !as"4out (inis" o( t"e e+terior o( t"e $uilding
$egan peeling o(( and (alling (ro' t"e !alls in 1993. 1-CC 'ade 'inor repairs a(ter PC/; re#uested it to recti(% t"e
construction de(ects.
/n 199< PC/; entered into anot"er contract !it" ;rains and ;ra!n Construction and Fevelop'ent Corporation to re4do
t"e entire granitite !as"4out (inis" a(ter 1-CC 'ani(ested t"at it !as Hnot in a position to do t"e ne! (inis"ing !or)H
t"oug" it !as !illing to s"are part o( t"e cost. PC/; incurred e+penses a'ounting to P11 ??5000 (or t"e repair !or).
PC/; (iled a re#uest (or ar$itration !it" t"e Construction /ndustr% Ar$itration Co''ission 7C/AC9 (or t"e rei'$urse'ent o(
its e+penses (or t"e repairs 'ade $% anot"er contractor. /t co'plained o( 1-CC=s alleged non4co'pliance !it" t"eir
contractual ter's on 'aterials and !or)'ans"ip.
T"e C/AC declared 1-CC lia$le (or t"e construction de(ects in t"e pro.ect.
On appeal t"e CA a((ir'ed t"e C/AC decision.
Dence t"is present petition.
/ssue: 1"et"er or not petitioner 1-CC is lia$le (or de(ects in t"e granitite !as"4out (inis" t"at occurred a(ter t"e lapse o(
t"e one4%ear de(ects lia$ilit% period provided in Art. I/ o( t"e construction contract.
Deld: No.
T"e controvers% pivots on a provision in t"e construction contract re(erred to as t"e de(ects lia$ilit% period. Article I/ o( t"e
construction contract provides:
+++
the CONTRACTOR hereby guarantees the work stipulated in this Contract and shall !ake good any defect in
!aterials and work!anship which beco!es e"ident within one (#) year after the final acceptance of the work$
Article 130? o( t"e Civil Code enunciates t"e autono'ous nature o( contracts.
Article #%&'$ The contracting parties !ay establish such stipulations clauses ter!s and conditions as they !ay dee!
con"enient pro"ided they are not contrary to law !orals good custo!s public order or public policy$
O$ligations arising (ro' contracts "ave t"e (orce o( la! $et!een t"e parties and s"ould $e co'plied !it" in good (ait". /n
c"aracteriAing t"e contract as "aving t"e (orce o( la! $et!een t"e parties t"e la! stresses t"e o$ligator% nature o( a
$inding and valid agree'ent.
/n t"e present case t"e provision in t"e construction contract providing (or a de(ects lia$ilit% period !as not s"o!n as
contrar% to la! 'orals good custo's pu$ic order or pu$lic polic%. ;% t"e nature o( t"e o$ligation in suc" contract t"e
provision li'iting lia$ilit% (or de(ects and (i+ing speci(ic guarant% periods !as not onl% (air and e#uita$leG it !as also
necessar%. 1it"out suc" li'itation t"e contractor !ould $e e+pected to 'a)e a perpetual guarantee on all 'aterials and
!or)'ans"ip.
T"e contract (urt"er did not speci(% a di((erent period (or de(ects in t"e granitite !as"4out (inis"G "ence an% de(ect t"erein
s"ould "ave $een $roug"t to 1-CC=s attention !it"in t"e one4%ear de(ects lia$ilit% period in t"e contract.
1e cannot countenance an interpretation t"at under'ines a contractual stipulation (reel% and validl% agreed upon. T"e
courts !ill not relieve a part% (ro' t"e e((ects o( an un!ise or un(avora$le contract (reel% entered into.
Furt"er it 'ust $e noted t"at t"is )ind o( stipulation is o( particular i'portance to t"e contractor (or as a general rule a(ter
t"e lapse o( t"e period agreed upon t"erein "e 'a% no longer $e "eld accounta$le (or !"atever de(ects de(iciencies or
i'per(ections t"at 'a% $e discovered in t"e !or) e+ecuted $% "i'.
;A0T/STA BS ;ORRO,*O
FACTS: On Sept 15 19?< (ord truc) o( petitioner Ro$erto tan ting driven $% A$elardo ;autista t"e ot"er petitioner and
t"e Bol)s!agen deliver% panel truc) o!ned $% respondent Federico O ;orro'eo /nc. !ere involved in a tra((ic accident
along *FSA. /n said accident Juintin Felgado a "elper in ;orro'eo=s deliver% panel truc) sustained in.uries !@c
resulted in "is instantaneous deat". ;orro'eo "ad to pad Felgado=s !ido! t"e su' o( P<<<< representing co'pensation
7deat" $ene(it9 and (uneral e+penses due Felgado under t"e 1or)'en=s Co'pensation Act. On &une 15 19?5 upon
aver'ent t"at t"e said accident !as caused $% petitioners= negligence ;orro'eo started to suit in t"e ,unicipal Court o(
,andalu%ong RiAal to recover (ro' petitioners t"e co'pensation and (uneral e+penses it paid to t"e !ido! o( Juintin
Felgado. Petitioners (iled a notice o( appeal and clai'ed e+cusa$le negligence (or t"e (ailure o( t"eir counsel to appear in
t"e (irst "earing and asserted t"at t"e% "ad a good and su$stantial de(ense. Respondents= ans!er contended t"at t"e
petition (or relie( !as (iled out o( ti'e.
/SS0*: 1ON t"ere is a need to esta$lis" an% contractual relations"ip $et!een Juintin Felgado and "erein petitioners2
D*3F: No. T"e o$ligation o( t"e e'plo%er to pa% deat" $ene(its and (uneral e+penses (or "is e'plo%ee=s deat" !"ile in
t"e course o( e'plo%'ent as sanctioned $% Section 8 and ? o( t"e 1or)'en=s Co'pensation Act is one t"at arises (ro'
la!. /t is evident t"at i( co'pensation is clai'ed and a!arded and t"e e'plo%er pa%s it t"e e'plo%er $eco'es
su$rogated to and ac#uires $% operation o( la! t"e !or)er=s rig"ts against t"e tort(easor. No need t"en t"ere is to
esta$lis" an% contractual relations"ip $et!een Felgado and t"e petitioners. T"e cause o( action i( respondent corp is one
!@c does not spring (ro' a credit0r4de$tor relations"ip. /T arises $% virtue o( its su$rogation to t"e rig"t o( Felgado to sue
t"e guilt% part%. Suc" su$rogation is sanctioned $% t"e 1or)'en=s Co'pensation 3a! a(oresaid.
,AR/T/,* CO. OF TD* PD/3. BS. R*PARAT/ONS CO,,/SS/ON
FACTS: Plainti(( ,ariti'e Co. o( t"e P"ils. !ould den% t"at it is controlling in its suit to "old de(endant Reparations Co''.
lia$le (or t"e (reig"t c"arges as t"e consignee o( reparations goods not!it"standing t"at under Section 11 o( t"e
Reparations Act ocean (reig"t and ot"er e+penses incident to i'portation s"all $e paid $% t"e end4user and not $% suc"
agenc%G t"at de(endant is e+e'pt (ro' suc" o$ligation. /n plainti((=s co'plaint it alleged t"at s"ip'ents o( reparation
goods !ere loaded in 3 o( its vessels consigned to t"e de(endant !@ (reig"t c"arges. T"en ca'e to allegation t"at said
vessels arrived in ,anila and disc"arged all suc" s"ip'ent o( reparations goods !@c !ere dul% received $% de(endant in
good order and condition $ut de(endant (ailed and re(used to pa% not !it"standing repeated de'ands.
/SS0*: 1ON t"e contention o( t"e plainti(( !ill prosper2
D*3F: No. it is a (unda'ental re#uire'ent t"at t"e contract entered into 'ust $e in accordance !it" and not repugnant
to an applica$le statute. /ts ter's are e'$odied "erein. T"e contracting parties need not repeat t"e' and t"e% do not
even "ave to $e re(erred to. *ver% contract t"us contains not onl% !"at "as $een e+plicitl% stipulated $ut t"e statutor%
provisions t"at "ave an% $earing on t"e 'atter. T"e principle is t"us !ell4settled t"at and e+isting la! enters into and
(or's part o( a valid contract !@o t"e need (or t"e parties e+pressl% 'a)ing re(erence to it. Onl% t"us could its validit%
inso(ar as so'e o( its provisions are concerned to $e assured

PereA vs Po'ar
1? Nove'$er 1903 K Ponente: Torres
Facts
4
Fon Bicente PereA (iled a co'plaint !it" t"e CF/ in 3aguna as)ing (or t"e rate o( co'pensation it is entitledto (or t"e
services "e rendered in t"e Ta$acalera Co'pan%. PereA also as)ed t"at *ugenio Po'ar $econde'ned to pa% da'ages.
4
/n t"is case Po'ar agent o( Co'pania -eneral de Ta$acos ver$all% re#uested PereA to act as aninterpreter $et!een
"i' and t"e 'ilitar% aut"orities. PereA !ould .oin "i' in con(erences at t"e localgarrison !it" 'ilitar% o((icials as regards
certain s"ip'ents and e+ports. PereA !as on call
C
"is services!ere read% !"enever needed. ;ecause "e !as on call "e a$andoned "is o!n $usiness 7a soap (actor%9$ut
Po'ar assured "i' t"at Ta$acalera Co'pan% al!a%s generousl% repaid services rendered it. Po'ar
even o((ered e'plo%'ent in t"at co'pan% $ut PereA re(used. ;ecause o( PereA=s services Po'ar earned
large pro(its.
4
To ans!er t"e co'plaint Po'ar denied ever%t"ing. /nstead "e said t"at PereA $orro!ed 'one% (ro' "i'(or "is
$usiness and t"at "e delivered 3? arro$as o( oil !ort" L10? and t"ree pac)ages o( resin (or use incoloring "is soap.
PereA .oined "i' in "is trips $ecause PereA !anted to e+tend "is 'ercantile relations andPo'ar allo!ed onl% $ecause o(
t"e (riends"ip "e (or'ed !it" PereA and $ecause o( t"e (ree transportationPereA provides. PereA acted as interpreter in
t"e con(erences $% "is o!n (ree !ill !it"out Po'ar re#uesting"i' so no legal relation $et!een "i' and t"e co'pan%
!as (or'ed. 1"en Po'ar accepted t"espontaneous voluntar% and o((icious services o( PereA it !as in "is private
capacit% and not as agent o( t"eco'pan%.
/ssue: S"ould PereA $e re'unerated2 E*S. T"ere !as an i'plicit contract. Also recover% is $ased on t"eprinciple o(
un.ust enric"'ent.Rationale:
4
Fro' t"e testi'onies at trial it appears t"at PereA indeed rendered services as interpreter o( *nglis". De gotpasses and
acco'panied Po'ar
in "is .ourne%s in 3aguna. ;ut it doesn=t appear on record !"et"er PereA
!as at t"e disposal o( Po'ar (or ? 'ont"s. No contract !as entered into no'inate or inno'inate
$ut t"ere!as tacit and 'utual consent as to t"e rendition o( services. So t"is !ould give rise to an o$ligationupon t"e
person !"o !as $ene(ited to 'a)e co'pensation.
;esides t"ere !as no proo( t"at t"eservice !as rendered gratuitousl%.
4

*ven i( Po'ar denied t"at "e solicited PereA=s services "e still consented to PereA=s services.
T"e service!as a licit o$.ect o( a contract so it 'a% $e i'plied t"at a contract e+isted $et!een t"e parties.
Po'araccepted t"e service and PereA rendered it e+pecting t"at t"e $ene(it !ould $e reciprocal. So ano$ligation arises
(ro' t"is scenario. Dere t"ere !as an inno'inate contract
C

(acio ut des
.

As suc"t"e principle o( la! t"at no one s"ould $e per'itted to enric" "i'sel( to t"e da'age o( anot"erapplies
.
4
No salar% !as (i+ed (or t"e services so t"e court 'ust deter'ine its value to $e deter'ined $% t"e custo'and (re#uent
use o( t"e place in !"ic" suc" services !ere rendered.
4
So t"e court ruled against Po'ar. Po'ar s"ould pa% 800 ,e+ican pesos less 50 pesos as to t"e costs o( t"e suit.
F/SS*NT/N- ,cFonoug".
4

T"ere=s no evidence t"at t"e
recover% s"ould $e 800 ,e+ican Pesos.
P*FRO *3CANO and PATR/C/A *3CANO in t"eir capacit% as Ascendants o( Agapito *lcano deceased
plainti((s4appellantsvs.
R*-/NA3F D/33 'inor and ,ARB/N D/33 as (at"er and Natural -uardian o( said 'inor
de(endants4appellees.
FACTS
/t appears t"at (or t"e )illing o( t"e son Agapito o( plainti((s4appellants de(endant4 appellee Reginald Dill !as
prosecutedcri'inall% in Cri'inal Case No. 5108 o( t"e Court o( First /nstance o( JueAon Cit%. A(ter due trial "e !as ac#uitted on t"e groundt"at
"is act !as not cri'inal $ecause o( Hlac) o( intent to )ill coupled !it" 'ista)e.H Parent"eticall% none o( t"e parties "as(avored 0s !it" a cop% o( t"e
decision o( ac#uittal presu'a$l% $ecause appellants do not dispute t"at suc" indeed !as t"e $asisstated in t"e courtMs decision. And so
!"en appellants (iled t"eir co'plaint against appellees Reginald and "is (at"er Att%.,arvin Dill on account o( t"e deat" o( t"eir
son t"e appellees (iled t"e 'otion to dis'iss a$ove4re(erred to.T"e lo!er court granted 'otion to dis'issG "ence t"e present action.
/SS0*S
1. /s t"e present civil action (or da'ages $arred $% t"e ac#uittal o( Reginald in t"e cri'inal case !"erein t"e action (or civil lia$ilit% !as not
reversed28. ,a% Article 8160 78nd and last paragrap"s9 o( t"e Civil Code "e applied against Att%. Dill not!it"standing t"e undisputed (actt"at at
t"e ti'e o( t"e occurrence co'plained o( Reginald t"oug" a 'inor living !it" and getting su$sistence (ro' "is (at"er!as alread% legall%
'arried2
D*3F
/n
;arredo vs. -arcia it !as "eld t"at t"e sa'e given act can result in civil lia$ilit% not onl% under t"e Penal Code $ut also under t"e Civil Code.
T"us t"e opinion "olds:+++ in t"is .urisdiction t"e separate individualit% o( a cuasi4delito or culpa a#uiliana under t"e Civil Code "as $een
(ull%and clearl% recogniAed even !it" regard to a negligent act (or !"ic" t"e !rongdoer could "ave $een prosecuted andconvicted in a cri'inal
case and (or !"ic" a(ter suc" a conviction "e could "ave $een sued (or t"is civil lia$ilit% arising (ro' "is cri'e.Firstl% t"e Revised Penal Code
in articles 3?5 punis"es not onl% rec)less $ut also si'ple negligence. /( !e !ere to "oldt"at articles 1908 to 1910 o( t"e Civil Code re(er onl% to (ault
or negligence not punis"ed $% la! accordingl% to t"eliteral i'port o( article 1093 o( t"e Civil Code t"e legal institution o( culpa
a#uiliana !ould "ave ver% little scope andapplication in actual li(e. Feat" or in.ur% to persons and da'age to propert%4 t"roug" an% degree o(
negligence C even t"e slig"test 4 !ould "ave to $e ide'ni(ied onl% t"roug" t"e principle o( civil lia$ilit% arising (ro' a cri'e. /n suc" astate o( a((airs
!"at sp"ere !ould re'ain (or cuasi4delito or culpa a#uiliana 2Secondar% to (ind t"e accused guilt% in a cri'inal case proo( o( guilt $e%ond
reasona$le dou$t is re#uired !"ile in acivil case preponderance o( evidence is su((icient to 'a)e t"e de(endant pa% in da'ages. T"ere are
nu'erous cases o(
cri'inal negligence !"ic" cannot $e s"o!n $e%ond reasona$le dou$t $ut can $e proved $% a preponderance o( evidence. /n suc" cases t"e
de(endant can and s"ould $e 'ade responsi$le in a civil action under articles 1908 to 1910o( t"e Civil Code. Ot"er!ise t"ere !ould $e 'an%
instances o( unvindicated civil !rongs. H
0$i .us /de'ni(ied re'ediu'.H;ecause o( t"e $road s!eep o( t"e provisions o( $ot" t"e Penal Code and t"e Civil Code on t"is su$.ect !"ic" "as
givenrise to t"e overlapping or concurrence o( sp"eres alread% discussed and (or lac) o( understanding o( t"e c"aracter
ande((icac% o( t"e action (or culpa a#uiliana t"ere "as gro!n up a co''on practice to see) da'ages onl% $% virtue o( t"ecivil responsi$ilit%
arising (ro' a cri'e (orgetting t"at t"ere is anot"er re'ed% !"ic" is $% invo)ing articles 190841910 o( t"e Civil Code.1e $elieve it is "ig" ti'e !e
pointed out to t"e "ar's done $% suc" practice and to restore t"e principle o( responsi$ilit% (or (ault or negligence under articles 1908
et se#. o( t"e Civil Code to its (ull rigor. /t is "ig" ti'e !ecaused t"e strea' o( #uasi4delict or culpa a#uiliana to (lo! on its o!n natural
c"annel so t"at its !aters 'a% no longer$e diverted into t"at o( a cri'e under t"e Penal Code.
ART. 8155. Responsi$ilit% (or (ault or negligence under t"e preceding article is entirel% separate and distinct (ro' t"e civil
lia$ilit% arising (ro' negligence under t"e Penal Code. ;ut t"e plainti(( cannot recover da'ages t!ice (or t"e sa'e act or o'ission o( t"e
de(endant. According to t"e Code Co''ission: HT"e (oregoing provision 7Article 81559 t"roug" at (irst sig"t startling is not
so novel ore+traordinar% !"en !e consider t"e e+act nature o( cri'inal and civil negligence. T"e (or'er is a violation o( t"e cri'inal la! !"ile
t"e latter is a Hculpa a#uilianaH or #uasi4delict o( ancient origin "aving al!a%s "ad its o!n (oundation and individualit%separate (ro'
cri'inal negligence.T"ere(ore under t"e proposed Article 8155 ac#uittal (ro' an accusation o( cri'inal negligence
!"et"er on reasona$le dou$t ornot s"all not $e a $ar to a su$se#uent civil action not (or civil lia$ilit% arising (ro' cri'inal
negligence $ut (or da'ages due toa #uasi4delict or Mculpa a#uilianaM. ;ut said article (orestalls a dou$le recover%.HT"e
e+tinction o( civil lia$ilit% re(erred to in Par. 7e9 o( Section 3 Rule 111 re(ers e+clusivel% to civil lia$ilit% (ounded on Article100 o( t"e Revised Penal Code
!"ereas t"e civil lia$ilit% (or t"e sa'e act considered as a #uasi4delict onl% and not as a cri'e isnot e+tinguis"ed even $% a declaration in t"e
cri'inal case t"at t"e cri'inal act c"arged "as not "appened or "as not $eenco''itted $% t"e accused. ;rie(l% stated 1e "ere "old in reiteration o(
-arcia t"at culpa a#uiliana includes voluntar% andnegligent acts !"ic" 'a% $e punis"a$le $% la!.
<
/t results t"ere(ore t"at t"e ac#uittal o( Reginal Dill in t"e cri'inal case "as not e+tinguis"ed "is lia$ilit% (or #uasi4delict "encet"at ac#uittal is not
a $ar to t"e instant action against "i'.Co'ing no! to t"e second issue a$out t"e e((ect o( ReginaldMs e'ancipation $% 'arriage on t"e
possi$le civil lia$ilit% o( Att%.Dill "is (at"er it is also Our considered opinion t"at t"e conclusion o( appellees t"at Att%. Dill is
alread% (ree (ro' responsi$ilit%cannot $e up"eld.1"ile it is true t"at parental aut"orit% is ter'inated upon e'ancipation o( t"e c"ild 7Article
385 Civil Code9 and under Article395 e'ancipation ta)es place H$% t"e 'arriage o( t"e 'inor 7c"ild9H it is "o!ever also clear
t"at pursuant to Article 399e'ancipation $% 'arriage o( t"e 'inor is not reall% (ull or a$solute. T"us H7*9'ancipation $% 'arriage or $%
voluntar%concession s"all ter'inate parental aut"orit% over t"e c"ildMs person. /t s"all ena$le t"e 'inor to ad'inister "is propert% ast"oug" "e !ere o(
age $ut "e cannot $orro! 'one% or alienate or encu'$er real propert% !it"out t"e consent o( "is (at"er or'ot"er or guardian. De can sue and $e
sued in court onl% !it" t"e assistance o( "is (at"er 'ot"er or guardian.HNo! under Article 8160 H7T9"e o$ligation i'posed $%
article 815? is de'anda$le not onl% (or oneMs o!n acts or o'issions $utalso (or t"ose o( persons (or !"o' one is responsi$le. T"e
(at"er and in case o( "is deat" or incapacit% t"e 'ot"er areresponsi$le. T"e (at"er and in case o( "is deat" or incapacit% t"e 'ot"er are responsi$le
(or t"e da'ages caused $% t"e 'inorc"ildren !"o live in t"eir co'pan%.H /n t"e instant case it is not controverted t"at Reginald alt"oug" 'arried !as
living !it""is (at"er and getting su$sistence (ro' "i' at t"e ti'e o( t"e occurrence in #uestion. Factuall% t"ere(ore Reginald !as stillsu$servient to and
dependent on "is (at"er a situation !"ic" is not unusual./t 'ust $e $orne in 'ind t"at according to ,anresa t"e reason $e"ind t"e .oint and solidar%
lia$ilit% o( presuncion !it" t"eiro((ending c"ild under Article 8160 is t"at is t"e o$ligation o( t"e parent to supervise t"eir 'inor c"ildren in order to
preventt"e' (ro' causing da'age to t"ird persons.
5
On t"e ot"er "and t"e clear i'plication o( Article 399 in providing t"at a 'inor

e'ancipated $% 'arriage 'a% not nevert"eless sue or $e sued !it"out t"e assistance o( t"e parents is t"at suc" e'ancipationdoes not carr%
!it" it (reedo' to enter into transactions or do an% act t"at can give rise to .udicial litigation. 7See ,anresa /d.Bol. //
pp. 5??45?5 55?.9 And surel% )illing so'eone else invites .udicial action.Accordingl% in Our considered vie! Article
8160 applies to Att%. Dill not!it"standing t"e e'ancipation $% 'arriage o( Reginald.Do!ever inas'uc" as it is evident t"at
Reginald is no! o( age as a 'atter o( e#uit% t"e lia$ilit% o( Att%. Dill "as $eco'e

'illing su$sidiar% to t"at o( "is son.1D*R*FOR* t"e order appealed (ro' is reversed and t"e trial court is ordered to proceed in
accordance !it" t"e (oregoingopinion. Costs against appellees.
;arredo vs -arcia
Facts: On ,a% 3 193? t"ere !as a "ead4on collision $et!een a ta+i o( t"e ,alate ta+ica$ driven $% Fontanilla and a
carretela guided $% Fi'apilis. T"e carretela !as over4turned and a passenger a 1?4%ear old $o% -arcia su((ered
in.uries (ro' !"ic" "e died. A cri'inal action !as (iled against Fontanilla and "e !as convicted. T"e court in t"e cri'inal
case granted t"e petition to reserve t"e civil action.-arcia and Al'ario parents o( t"e deceased on ,arc" 5 1939 (iled
a civil action against ;arredo t"e proprietor o( t"e ,alate Ta+ica$ and e'plo%er o( Fontanilla 'a)ing "i' pri'aril% and
directl% responsi$le under culpa ac#uiliana o( Article 8160 o( t"e Civil Code o( t"e P"ilippines. /t is undisputed t"at
Fontanilla=s negligence!as t"e cause o( t"e accident as "e !as driving on t"e !rong side o( t"e road at "ig" speed and
t"ere !as no s"o!ing t"at ;arredo e+ercised t"e diligence o( a good (at"er o( a (a'il% a de(ense to Article 8160 o( t"e
said Code. ;arredo=s t"eor% o( de(ense is t"at Fontanilla=s negligence $eing punis"ed $% t"e Revised Penal Code
"is lia$ilit% as e'plo%er is onl% su$sidiar% $ut Fontanilla !as not sued (or civil lia$ilit%. Dence ;arredo clai's t"at "e
cannot $e "eld lia$le.
Issue: 1"et"er or not ;arredo as e'plo%er is civill% lia$le (or t"e acts o( Fontanilla "is e'plo%ee.
Held: Juasi4delict or culpa ac#uiliana is a separate legal institution under t"e Civil Code o( t"e P"ilippines is entirel%
distinct and independent (ro' a delict or cri'e under t"e Revised Penal Code. /n t"is .urisdiction t"e sa'e negligent
act causing da'age 'a% produce civil lia$ilit% 7su$sidiar%9 arising (ro' a cri'e under Article 103 o( t"e Revised Penal
Code o( t"e P"ilippinesG or create an action (or #uasi4delicto or culpa a#uiliana under Articles 8159 and 8160 o( t"e Civil
Code and t"e parties are (ree to c"oose !"ic" course to ta)e. And in t"e instant case t"e negligent act o( Fontanilla
produces t!o 789 lia$ilities o( ;arredo: First a su$sidiar% one $ecause o( t"e civil lia$ilit% o( Fontanilla arising (ro' t"e
latter=s cri'inal negligence under Article 103 o( t"e Revised Penal Code and second ;arredo=s pri'ar% and direct
responsi$ilit% arising (ro' "is presu'ed negligence as an e'plo%er under Article 8160 o( t"e Civil Code. Since t"e
plainti((s are (ree to c"oose !"at re'ed% to ta)e t"e% pre(erred t"e second !"ic" is !it"in t"eir rig"ts. T"is is t"e 'ore
e+pedious and e((ective 'et"od o( relie( $ecause Fontanilla !as eit"er in prison or .ust $een released or "ad no propert%.
;arredo !as "eld lia$le (or da'ages.
,endoAa vs Arrieta
Facts: On Octo$er 88 19?9 at around <p' a 34!a% ve"icular accident occurred along ,ac4Art"ur Dig"!a% ;ulacan
involving a ,ercedeA ;enA o!ned and driven $% petitioner a private .eep o!ned and driven $% respondent SalaAar and a
gravel and sand truc) o!ned $% respondent Ti'$ol and driven $% ,onto%a. As aconse#uence separate in(or'ations
!ere (iled against SalaAar and ,onto%a.
At t"e trial petitioner testi(ied t"at SalaAar overtoo) t"e truc) s!erved to t"e le(t and "it "is car. De (urt"er testi(ied t"at
$e(ore i'pact SalaAar .u'ped (ro' t"e .eep not )no!ing t"at SalaAar !as "it $% t"e truc) o( ,onto%a. ,onto%a a((ir'ed
t"is. On t"e ot"er "and SalaAar tried to s"o! t"at a(ter overta)ing t"e truc) "e (las"ed a signal s"o!ing "is intention to
turn le(t $ut !as stopped at $% a police'an directing tra((ic at t"e intersection !"ic" "e contends to $e t"e ti'e "e !as "it
$% t"e truc) causing "is .eep to "it petitioner=s car.
/ssues:
719 1"et"er or not t"e da'ages ensued to t"e ve"icle o( petitioner s"all $e t"e lia$ilit% o( t"e driver o( t"e .eep or o( t"e
truc).
789 1"et"er or not t"e truc)=s o!ner 'a% $e "eld lia$le (or da'ages caused $% "i' e'plo%ee.
Deld: T"us t"e trial Court a$solved .eep4o!ner4driver SalaAar o( an% lia$ilit% civil and cri'inal in vie! o( its (indings t"at
t"e collision $et!een SalaAarMs .eep and petitionerMs car !as t"e result o( t"e (or'er "aving $een $u'ped (ro' $e"ind
$% t"e truc) driven $% ,onto%a. Neit"er !as petitioner a!arded da'ages as "e !as not a co'plainant against truc)4
driver ,onto%a $ut onl% against .eep4o!ner4driver SalaAar.
T"at petitionerMs cause o( action against Ti'$ol in t"e civil case is $ased on #uasi4delict is evident (ro' t"e recitals in t"e
co'plaint to !it: t"at !"ile petitioner !as driving "is car along ,acArt"ur Dig"!a% at ,arilao ;ulacan a .eep o!ned and
driven $% SalaAar suddenl% s!erved to "is 7petitionerMs9 lane and collided !it" "is car T"at t"e sudden s!erving o(
SalaAarMs .eep !as caused eit"er $% t"enegligence and lac) o( s)ill o( Freddie ,onto%a Ti'$olMs e'plo%ee !"o !as t"en
driving a gravel and sand truc) iii t"e sa'e direction as SalaAarMs .eepG and t"at as a conse#uence o( t"e collision
petitionerMs car su((ered e+tensive da'ages. Clearl% t"ere(ore t"e t!o (actors t"at a cause o( action 'ust consist o(
na'el%: 719 plainti((Ms pri'ar% rig"t i.e. t"at "e is t"e o!ner o( a ,ercedes ;enA and 789 de(endantMs delict or !rong(ul act
or o'ission !"ic" violated plainti((Ms pri'ar% rig"t i.e. t"e negligence or lac) o( s)ill eit"er o( .eep4o!ner SalaAar or o(
Ti'$olMs e'plo%ee ,onto%a in driving t"e truc) causing SalaAarMs .eep to s!erve and collide !it" petitionerMs car !ere
alleged in t"e Co'plaint.
Conse#uentl% petitionerMs cause o( action $eing $ased on #uasi4delict respondent &udge co''itted reversi$le error
!"en "e dis'issed t"e civil suit against t"e truc)4o!ner as said case 'a% proceed independentl% o( t"e cri'inal
proceedings and regardless o( t"e result o( t"e latter.
/n vie! o( !"at "as $een proven and esta$lis"ed during t"e trial accused Freddie ,onto%a !ould $e "eld a$le (or "aving
$u'ped and "it t"e rear portion o( t"e .eep driven $% t"e accused Rodol(o SalaAar. Considering t"at t"e collision
$et!een t"e .eep driven $% Rodol(o SalaAar and t"e car o!ned and driven $% *dgardo ,endoAa !as t"e result o( t"e
"itting on t"e rear o( t"e .eep $% t"e truc) driven $% Freddie ,onto%a t"is Court $e"aves t"at accused Rodol(o SalaAar
cannot $e "eld a$le (or t"e da'ages sustained $% *dgardo ,endoAaMs car.
,endoAa v. Arrieta
Facts:
A t"ree4 !a% ve"icular accident occurred involving a car o!ned and driven $% petitioner *dgardo ,endoAa a
private .eep o!ned and driven $% respondent Rodol(o SalaAar and a gravel and sand truc) o!ned $% respondent Felipino
Ti'$ol and driven $% Freddie ,onto%a. As a conse#uence o( said 'is"ap t!o separate /n(or'ations (or Rec)less
/'prudence Causing Fa'age to Propert% !ere (iled against Rodol(o SalaAar and Freddie ,onto%a !it" t"e CF/ o(
;ulacan. T"e trial Court a$solved .eep4o!ner4driver SalaAar o( an% lia$ilit% civil and cri'inal in vie! o( its (indings t"at
t"e collision $et!een SalaAar=s .eep and petitioner=s car !as t"e result o( t"e (or'er "aving $een $u'ped (ro' $e"ind $%
t"e truc) driven $% ,onto%a. Neit"er !as petitioner a!arded da'ages as "e !as not a co'plainant against truc)4driver
,onto%a $ut onl% against .eep4o!ner4driver SalaAar. A(ter t"e ter'ination o( t"e cri'inal cases petitioner (iled a civil case
against respondents SalaAar and Ti'$ol (or t"e da'ages sustained $% "is car as a result o( t"e collision involving t"eir
ve"icles.
/ssue:
!"et"er or not t"e lo!er court in dis'issing petitioner=s co'plaint (or da'ages $ased on #uasi4delict against
private respondents
Deld:
/nso(ar as Ti'$ol is concerned t"e ans!er is %es. T"e respondent &udge !rong(ull% sustained Ti'$ol=s
allegations t"at t"e civil suit is $arred $% t"e prior .oint .udg'ent in a cri'inal case (iled against "i' !"erein no
reservation to (ile a separate civil case !as 'ade $% petitioner and !"ere t"e latter activel% participated in t"e trial and
tried to prove da'ages against SalaAar onl%. For petitionerMs cause o( action against Ti'$ol in t"e civil case is $ased on
#uasi4delict. Respondent &udge co''itted reversi$le error !"en "e dis'issed t"e civil suit against t"e truc)4o!ner as
said case 'a% proceed independentl% o( t"e cri'inal proceedings and regardless o( t"e result o( t"e latter. Article 31 o(
t"e Civil Code provides t"at N1"en t"e civil action is $ased on an o$ligation not arising (ro' t"e act or o'ission
co'plained o( as a (elon% suc" civil action 'a% proceed independentl% o( t"e cri'inal proceedings and regardless o( t"e
result o( t"e latter.O Ti'$ol=s su$'ission t"at petitionerMs (ailure to 'a)e a reservation in t"e cri'inal action o( "is rig"t to
(ile an independent civil action as re#uired under section 8 Rule 111 Rules o( Court $ars t"e institution o( suc" separate
civil action is untena$le. For inas'uc" as Article 31 7in relation to Articles 815? and 81559 o( t"e Civil Code creates a civil
lia$ilit% distinct and di((erent (ro' t"e civil action arising (ro' t"e o((ense o( negligence under t"e Revised Penal Code no
reservation is re#uired to $e 'ade in t"e cri'inal case. And so to reiterate t"e civil case (iled against Ti'$ol is not
$arred $% t"e (act t"at petitioner (ailed to reserve in t"e cri'inal action "is rig"t to (ile an independent civil action $ased
on #uasi4delict.
;ut inso(ar as SalaAar is concerned t"e ans!er is no. /nas'uc" as civil lia$ilit% co4e+ists !it" cri'inal responsi$ilit% in
negligence cases t"e o((ended part% "as t"e option $et!een an action (or en(orce'ent o( civil lia$ilit% $ased on culpa
cri'inal under Article 100 o( t"e Revised Penal Code and an action (or recover% o( da'ages $ased on culpa a#uiliana
under Article 8155 o( t"e Civil Code. T"e action (or en(orce'ent o( civil lia$ilit% $ased on culpa cri'inal under section 1 o(
Rule 111 o( t"e Rules o( Court is dee'ed si'ultaneousl% instituted !it" t"e cri'inal action unless e+pressl% !aived or
reserved (or separate application $% t"e o((ended part%. T"e circu'stances attendant to t"e cri'inal case %ields t"e
conclusion t"at petitioner "ad opted to $ase "is cause o( action against SalaAar on culpa cri'inal and not on culpa
a#uiliana as evidenced $% "is active participation and intervention in t"e prosecution o( t"e cri'inal suit against said
SalaAar. T"e latterMs civil lia$ilit% continued to $e involved in t"e cri'inal action until its ter'ination. Suc" $eing t"e case
t"ere !as no need (or petitioner to "ave reserved "is rig"t to (ile a separate civil action as "is action (or civil lia$ilit% !as
dee'ed i'pliedl% instituted in t"e cri'inal case.
SalaAar cannot $e "eld civill% lia$le (or da'ages sustained $% petitioner=s car (or considering t"at t"e collision
$et!een t"e .eep driven $% "i' and t"e car o!ned and driven $% ,endoAa !as t"e result o( t"e "itting on t"e rear o( t"e
.eep $% t"e truc) driven $% ,onto%a it cannot $e said t"at SalaAar !as at (ault. Dence t"e rig"t o( petitioner to clai'
da'ages (ro' SalaAar did not arise. Accordingl% inas'uc" as petitionerMs cause o( action as against .eep4o!ner4driver
SalaAar is e+4 delictu (ounded on Article 100 o( t"e Revised Penal Code t"e civil action 'ust $e "eld to "ave $een
e+tinguis"ed in consonance !it" Section 37c9 !"ic" provides t"at N*+tinction o( t"e penal action does not carr% !it" it
e+tinction o( t"e civil unless t"e e+tinction proceeds (ro' a declaration in a (inal .udg'ent t"at t"e (act (ro' !"ic" t"e ci"il
right arise did not e(istPO
CruAado v. ;ustosCase:
Q
An appeal (ro' t"e .udg'ent o( CF/ Pa'panga allo!ing declaring de(endant ;ustos as t"erig"t(ul o!ner o( t"e propert% in #uestion.
Q
;ustos and *scaler !"o "as said to $e detaining suc" land re(used to deliver t"e possessiont"ereo( to plainti(( and re(used to recogniAe
"is o!ners"ip o( t"e sa'e.Facts:
Q
Agapito CruAado !as a poor 'an living in Pa'panga "e "ad a .o$ in court $ut !as still notenoug" to support "is (a'il%. De aspired to
"old t"e o((ice o( procurador in t"e CF/ o( Pa'panga $ut "e !as una$le to give t"e re#uired $ond an indispensa$le condition (or
"isappoint'ent.
Q
Since CruAado !as (riends !it" ;ustos a ric" !o'an in t"eir place. De $egged t"e latter tosi'ulate a 'ortgage deed o( a certain
propert% and "ave it e+ecuted in court in "is (avor onl%to pose t"at "e "as real propert% to ena$le "i' to #uali(% to suc" position o(
procurador. /ntrut" t"e said 'ortagage !as a (ront and (raudulent $ut !as e((ected $% 'a)ing a pretendedcontract !"ic" $ore t"e appearance o(
trut".
Q
/t is un#uestiona$le t"at t"e contract o( sale !as per(ect and $inding upon $ot" contractingparties since t"eir na'es $ot" appear in t"at instru'ent
to "ave agreed upon t"e t"ing sold.;ut it is also undenia$le t"at t"e said contract !as not consu''ated. 1.9 CruAado did
not pa%t"e purc"ase price o( P8800 8.9 "e never too) possession o( t"e land apparentl% sold in t"esaid deed. All t"at t"e vendee did !as
to pledge t"e land as a securit% (or t"e (ait"(uldisc"arge o( t"e duties o( "is o((ice.
Q
Santiago CruAado t"e son $roug"t an action (or recover% o( possession (ounded on t"e rig"ttrans'itted to "i' $% "is (at"er at "is deat"
C a rig"t arising (ro' t"e said si'ulated deed o( sale o( t"e land in #uestion./ssue:
Q
1@N t"e said deed o( sale !as si'ulated not !it" t"e intent to de(raud 3
rd
persons $ut (or t"esole purpose o( 'a)ing it appear t"at Agapito CruAado "as real propert%2
Q
1@N rig"ts o( trans'ission ac#uired $% Santiago CruAado (ro' t"e deat" o( "is (at"erpertaining to t"e said land in contest is valid and
!it"out de(ect2Ruling:
Q
0nder t"e la! t"e contract o( purc"ase and sale as consensual is per(ected $% consent as tot"e price and t"e t"ing and is
consu''ated $% t"e reciprocal deliver% o( t"e one and t"eot"er. Full o!ners"ip o( t"e t"ing sold $eing conve%ed to t"e vendee (ro' !"ic"
'o'ent t"erig"t o( action derived (ro' t"is rig"t 'a% $e e+ercised. C t"e record discloses t"at t"ere !asno pa%'ent 'ade $% CruAado to ;ustos
t"us rendering t"e contract not to $e consu''ated.
Q
Art 11?< states t"at a creditor "as a rig"t to t"e (ruits o( t"e ti'e t"e o$ligation to deliver itarise. Do!ever "e s"all not ac#uire a
propert% rig"t t"ereto until it "as $een delivered to "i'
;esides t"e (ailure to pa% t"e purc"ase price neit"er t"e vendee nor "is "eirs "ad at an% ti'eta)en possession o( t"e land. Seven
!itnesses attest to t"e (act ;ustos and "er "us$and !"ilestill living continued to possess t"e said land supposedl% sold to Agapito
CruAado andcultivated it as s"e "ad done long $e(ore t"e sale o( Septe'$er 1655 to Septe'$er 1691 t"edate o( co'plaint $% Santiago CruAado.
Q
Conse#uentl% at t"e deat" o( Agapito "e could not "ave trans'itted to t"e Santiago as "issuccessor an% greater rig"t
t"an a personal rig"t to e+act (ul(ill'ent o( a contract as plainti(( !as not t"e o!ner o( t"e said land "e could not validl% register it. T"is
(ul(ill'ent o( a rig"t"as alread% prescri$ed since under t"e la! prescription to!ards real propert% s"all $e 30%ears. /n t"e case at $ar t"e action to
recover too) 3< %ears to $ring it to court t"us "asalread% prescri$ed.
Q
Petition is denied.
Francisco Guttierez Repide vs. Afzetius and Afzetius 39 Phil. 190
Facts: T"e su$.ect o( speci(ic per(or'ance !it" re(erence to its co''on la! and civil la!
status is to $e considered on t"is appeal. T"e particular action is (or t"e speci(ic per(or'ance
o( a contract (or t"e sale and purc"ase o( seal estate.
T"e plainti(( is t"e o!ner o( a certain parcel o( realt% t"e de(endants 'ade a proposition to t"e
plainti(( (or t"e purc"ase o( t"is propert%. T"e propert% !as to $e 'ortgaged to t"e plainti(( to
rescue t"e pa%'ent o( t"is $alance. T"e plainti(( proceeded to "ave surve% 'ade o( t"e land
and to prepare t"e deed and 'ortgage. *+penses !"ere incurred (or t"ese purposes. T"e deed
!as read% !"en t"e de(endants !ere noti(ied to appear and sign t"e sa'e $ut t"e% (ailed to
t"is and !rote a letter to plainti((.
Plainti(( !as and still is !illing to e+ecute t"e deed in accordance !it" t"e ter's agreed upon
!it" t"e de(endants. Accordingl% plainti(( in "is action in t"e court o( First /nstance o( t"e
Cit% o( ,anila as)ed .udg'ent against t"e de(endants conde'ning t"e' to sign t"e deed and
'ortgage to t"e land in #uestion and to pa% t"e purc"ase price stipulated !it" costs.
/ssue: 1"et"er or not t"e de(endants are a$le to per(or' t"e contract is a 'atter o( de(ense
and t"ere is no special de(ense on t"at su$.ect in t"e ans!er.
Ruling: T"e .udg'ent t"en !as in (avor o( t"e de(endants dis'issing t"e plainti((=s
co'plaint !it"out pre.udice to an% ot"er re'ed% !"ic" t"e plainti(( 'ig"t "ave and !it"out
an% (inding as to t"e costs.
T"e plainti(( and appellant $ases "is argu'ent or articles 185< 1856 1856 1<50 and 1859 o(
t"e Civil Code. T"e provisions o( t"e (ive articles (irst cited and ot"ers t"at could $e
'entioned 'erel% tend to corro$orate !"at is sel(4evident na'el% t"e e+istence o( a valid
contract $et!een t"e parties. /ndisputa$l% t"ere "as $een an o((er and an acceptance and all
t"at re'ained to e((ectuate t"e contract !as t"e e+ecution o( t"e deed and t"e 'ortgage.
Dere !e "ave presented a good and valid contract $ilateral in c"aracter and (ree (ro' all taint
o( (raud. T"e sta$ilit% or co''ercial transaction re#uires t"at t"e rig"ts o( t"e seller $e
Civil 3a! C O$ligations and Contracts Page 5protected .ust as e((ectivel% as t"e rig"t o( t"e $u%er. /( t"is plainti(( "ad
re(used to co'pl%
!it" t"e contract speci(ic per(or'ance o( t"e o$ligation could "ave $een as)ed $% t"e
de(endants. &ust as surel% s"ould t"e plainti(( !"o "as lived up to "is $argain and !"o "as
$een put to e+pense to do so $e per'itted to coerce t"e de(endant into going t"roug" !it" t"e
contract.
T"e e+cuse o( t"e de(endants is t"at t"e% do not no! "ave t"e 'one% to pa% t"e (irst
install'ent. /n ot"er !ords t"e% plead i'possi$ilit% o( per(or'ance. T"e rule o( e#uit%
.urisprudence in suc" a case is t"at 'ere pecuniar% ina$ilit% to (ul(ill an engage'ent does not
disc"arge t"e o$ligation o( t"e contract nor does it constitute an% de(ense to a decree (or
speci(ic per(or'ance.
&udg'ent reversed
H ! R " # A $ % A H " & I % ' I ( H " P " F ) A R "
vs.
GR!G"RI" *! &A P!+A
F A C T S : T " e p l a i n t i ( ( i s t " e t r u s t e e o ( a c " a r i t a $ l e $e#uest 'ade (or t"e construction o( a
leper "ospital andt"at ( at"er Agusti n de l a PeRa !as t"e dul % aut"ori Aedrepresentati ve o( t"e pl ai nt i ( ( to
recei ve t"e l egac%. T"ede(endant is t"e ad'inistrator o( t"e estate o( Fat"er Fela
PeRa./ n t " e % e a r 1 6 9 6 t " e $ o o ) s F a t " e r F e l a P e R a a s trustee s"o!ed t"at "e "ad
on "and as suc" trustee t"es u ' o ( P ? ? < 1 c o l l e c t e d $ % " i ' ( o r t " e c " a r i t a $ l e purposes
a(oresaid. /n t"e sa'e %ear "e deposited in
"isp e r s o n a l a c c o u n t P 1 9 0 0 0 i n t " e D o n g ) o n g a n d S"ang"ai ;an) at /loilo. S"ortl%
t"erea(ter and during t"e!ar o( t"e revolution Fat"er Fe la PeRa !as arrested $%t"e 'i l i tar% aut"ori t i es as a
pol i ti cal pri soner and !"i l et"us detained 'ade an order on said $an) in (avor o( t"e0nited States Ar'% o((icer under
!"ose c"arge "e t"en!as ( or t"e su' t"us deposi ted i n sai d $an). T"e arrest o( Fat"er Fe la PeRa and t"e
con(iscation o( t"e (unds int " e $ a n ) ! e r e t " e r e s u l t o ( t " e c l a i ' o ( t " e ' i l i t a r % aut"ori ti es
t"at "e !as an i nsurgent and t"at t"e
( undst " u s d e p o s i t e d " a d $ e e n c o l l e c t e d $ % " i ' ( o r revol ut i onar%
purposes. T"e 'one% !as ta)en ( ro' t"e$an) $% t"e 'i l i tar% aut"ori ti es $% vi rt ue o( suc" order !as
con(iscated and turned over to t"e -overn'ent.1"i l e t"ere i s consi dera$l e di spute i n t"e case over
t"e#uestion !"et"er t"e P??<1 o( trust (unds !as includedi n t"e P19000 deposi t ed as a( oresai d
nevert "el ess ac a r e ( u l e + a ' i n a t i o n o ( t " e c a s e l e a d s u s t o t " e concl usi on
t"at sai d t rust ( unds !ere a part o( t"e ( undsdeposi ted and !"i c" !ere re'oved and con( i scated $%t"e
'ilitar% aut"orities o( t"e 0nited States./SS0* : 1"et"er or not Fat"er de l a PeRa i s l i a$l e ( or t"e loss o( t"e
'one% under "is trust2R03/N-S : T"e court t"ere(ore (inds and declares t"att"e 'one% !"ic" is t"e su$.ect 'atter o(
t"is action !asdepos i t ed $ % Fat "e r Fe l a PeRa i n t "e Don g) ong and S"ang"ai ;an)ing Corporation o(
/loiloG t"at said 'one%!as ( orci $l % ta)en ( ro' t"e $an) $% t"e ar'ed ( orces o( t"e 0nited States during t"e !ar
o( t"e insurrectionG andt"at sai d Fat"er Fe l a PeRa !as not responsi $l e ( or
i tsloss.F a t " e r F e l a P e R a M s l i a $ i l i t % i s d e t e r ' i n e d $ % t " o s e por t i on s o( t "e
Ci v i l Code !" i c " r el at e t o o$l i gat i on s . 7;oo) < Title 1.9Al t"oug" t"e Ci vi l Code states t"at Ha person
o$l i ged togi v e s o'et " i n g i s al s o $ound t o pr e s er ve i t !i t " t "edi l i ge nc e per t a i n i n g t o a
good ( at "er o( a ( a'i l % H
7 ar t . 109< 9 i t al s o pr o vi de s ( ol l o!i n g t "e p r i nc i pl e o( t "eRo'an l a !
'a . or c a s us es t c ui "u'ana i n( i r 'i t as resi stere non potest
t " a t H n o o n e s " a l l $ e l i a $ l e ( o r ev ent s !"i c " c oul d not
$e ( or es een or !"i c " "av i n g $een (oreseen !ere inevita$le !it" t"e e+ception o( t"ecases e+pressl %
'ent i oned i n t"e l a! or t"ose i n !"i c"t"e o$ligation so declares.H 7Art. 1105.9;% pl aci ng t"e 'one% i n t"e
$an) and 'i +i ng i t !i t " "i spersonal ( unds Fe l a PeRa di d not t"ere$% assu'e ano$ligation di((erent (ro'
t"at under !"ic" "e !ould "avel a i n i ( s u c " d e p o s i t " a d n o t $ e e n ' a d e n o r d i d " e t "e r e$ %
'a) e "i 's el ( l i a$l e t o r e pa% t "e 'one% at al l "aAards. /( t"e "ad $een (orci$l% ta)en (ro' "is poc)et
or ( r o ' " i s " o u s e $ % t " e ' i l i t a r % ( o r c e s o ( o n e o ( t " e co'$atants duri ng a state o( !ar
i t i s cl ear t"at under t "e pr o vi s i on s o( t "e Ci vi l Code "e !o ul d "av e $een e+e'pt ( ro'
responsi $i l i t%. T"e ( act t"at "e pl aced t"et rust ( und i n t"e $an) i n "i s personal account does notadd
to "i s responsi $i l i t %. Suc" deposi t di d not 'a)e "i 'a de$tor !"o 'ust respond at all "aAards.
Por,ellosa vs. &and enure Ad,inistration 1 (%RA 3-.
Facts: T"e lot in controvers% is a part o( t"e Santa Clara *state on !"ic" 'an% (a'ilies "ave
settled t"roug" t"e consent o( its o!ner eac" paid a rental. /n ,a% 19<1 t"e said *state !as
ac#uired $% t"e -overn'ent S !as entrusted to an o((ice )no!n as t"e Rural Progress
Ad'in. !"ic" !as later a$olis"ed S its (unctions !as trans(erred to t"e ;ureau o( 3ands.
Recentl% suc" duties !as given to t"e 3and Tenure Ad'inistration.
T"e plainti(( ac#uired $% purc"ase t"e rig"t o( occupation o( t"e lot in #uestion (ro' Bicente
San &ose predecessor4in4interest. A(ter t"e purc"ase o( t"e Santa Clara *state $% t"e
-overn'ent t"e plainti((s !ere allo!ed to 'a)e pa%'ents on account o( t"e purc"ase price
o( t"e lot as (enced included t!o "undred 78009 s#.'. T"erea(ter t"e plainti((s (ound out t"at
t"e lot "ad $een su$divided into t!o 789 s'aller lots No. << and 56. 3ot No. << "ad $een sold
to Der'ino -uA'an. T"e plainti((s t"en (iled a co'plaint to co'pel t"e Firector o( 3ands to
e+ecute a Feed o( Sale in t"eir (avor S declare null and void t"e Feed o( Sale o( 3ot No. <<
e+ecuted in (avor o( respondent De'ino. T"e trial court rendered .udg'ent in (avor o(
plainti(( $ut !as reversed $% t"e Court o( Appeals dis'issing t"e petitioner=s co'plaint.
Dence t"is petition.
/ssue: 1"et"er or not t"e plainti((s are entitled to purc"ase (ro' t"e -overn'ent t"e lot
allegedl% includes 800 s#.'.
Deld: T"e .udg'ent under revie! !as a((ir'ed.
T"e lot on !"ic" San &ose=s "ouse stood "ad not $een speci(ied nor "ad t"e $oundaries
t"ereo( $een 'entioned. Signi(icantl% t"e plainti(( cannot s"o! a contract !"ere$% t"e Rural
Progress Ad'in. "as sold or pro'ised to sell t"e' a lot o( 800 s#.'. A part% clai'ing a rig"t
Civil 3a! C O$ligations and Contracts Page 6granted or created $% la! 'ust prove "is clai' $% co'petent evidence. De
'ust rel% on t"e
strengt" o( "is evidence and not on t"e !ea)ness o( t"at o( "is opponent.
,oreover t"e Feed o( Sale allegedl% e+ecuted $% Bicente San &ose in (avor o( Pornellosa is a
'ere private docu'ent and does not conclusivel% esta$lis" t"eir rig"t to t"e parcel o( land.
Acts and contracts !"ic" "ave (or t"eir su$.ect t"e creation trans'ission 'odi(ication or
e+tinguis"'ent o( real rig"ts over i''ova$le propert% 'ust appear in a pu$lic docu'ent.