CUI V.

CUI (Bautista Angelo, 1957)

FACTS:
Don Mariano Cui and Dona Antonia Perales died intestate in Cebu, leaving vast amounts of propert,
appro!imatel ",#5$ s%m& Antonia died a'ead of Mariano, ('o be)ame t'e administrator of t'e )on*ugal
properties left be'ind&
+osario Cui filed in Court a petition for appointment of a guardian of Mariano and t'e properties on t'e
ground of in)ompeten), and (as granted& ,e (as eventuall de)lared in)ompetent b order of t'e Court
and (as assigned to -i)torino +enes as Mariano.s guardian&
Plaintiffs /esus Ma& Cui and /orge Ma& Cui allege t'at t'e defendants Antonio Ma& Cui and Mer)edes Cui de
+amos 'ave se)ured t'e transfer of t'e lots to t'emselves (it'out an pe)uniar )onsideration, 0under t'e
influen)e of t'e latter, b means of de)eit1& +osario appeared as one of t'e vendees, but ('en s'e found
t'is out, s'e returned t'e land to Mariano t'roug' a resale of t'e land in favor of Mariano& 2t (as also furt'er
alleged t'at defendants 'ad se)ured a loan from +e'abilitation Properties amounting to P134,444&
44
, ('i)'
(as used for )onstru)tion of an apartment building, ('i)' (as rented to C'inese )ommer)ial firms and
earning rentals amounting to P7,#44&
44
5mont', to t'e ire and pre*udi)e of t'e plaintiffs&
Defendants set up t'e defense t'at t'e sale (as valid in t'at it (as e!e)uted ('en Mariano (as still in
possession of 'is mental fa)ulties, and t'at 'e suffered deterioration of 'is mental )apa)it several ears
later, ('en 'e (as de)lared in)ompetent& 6'e also argued t'at t'e are t'e o(ners of t'e na7ed
o(ners'ip of "53 of t'e t'ree lots in %uestion, ('i)' did not produ)e rent until t'e t'emselves too7 )apital
and built t'e apartment, ('i)' t'e argue is t'eir e!)lusive propert& 8urt'ermore, ('ile it (as first e!e)uted
in favor of t'e defendants and +osario, eventuall +osario resold 'er s'are to Mariano&
2n support of t'eir )ontention t'at Don Mariano Cui did not and )ould not 'ave validl )onsented to t'e deed
of sale in %uestion, appellants submitted t'e follo(ing proposition9 (a) Don Mariano (as in)apa)itated to
give 'is )onsent b reason of 'is age and ailment: (b) Don Mariano a)ted under a mista7e, and 'is signature
(as se)ured b means of de)eit: and ()) t'e sale ;!'ibit A is vatiated b undue influen)e&
An additional argument of t'e appealing parties is t'at, at t'e ver least, t'e sale to Antonio Cui s'ould be
invalidated on t'e basis of 'im a)ting as agent5administrator of t'e properties of Mariano& 6'e emp'asi<e
t'e Po(er of Attorne given to 'im b Mariano, allo(ing 'im9
0. . to administer, sell, mortgage, lease, demand, claim, represent me and the intestate heirs, in all meetings
of corporations, associations, of which my or their presence is required, sue for, collect, cash, indorse
checks drawn in my favor or of the intestate heirs against any person or entity or bank, and sign all
documents, that I and or the intestate heirs to which I am the administrator are entitled to; giving and
granting said attorney full power to perform and to make everything necessary to be done or which he
believes to be necessary or beneficial for me and the said heirs as fully and to all intents and purposes as I
might or could do if personally present, with full power of substitution, and revocation, hereby granting
ratifying all that he or his substitutes shall lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue of these presents1
ISSUE(S):=>? t'e sale bet(een Mariano and 'is )'ildren (as a transa)tion bet(een prin)ipal and agent, ('i)'
(as pro'ibited b Arti)le 1@59 of t'e >ld Civil Code& ?>
RATIO: NCC Article !". #he following persons cannot acquire by purchase, even at a public or $udicial auction,
either in person or through the mediation of another%
&' #he guardian, the property of the person or persons who may be under his guardianship;
&(' Agents, the property whose administration or sale may have been intrusted to them, unless the consent of the
principal has been given;
6'e pro'ibition of t'e la( is )ontained in arti)le 1@59 of t'e old Civil Code, but t'is pro'ibition 'as alread been
removed&
Ander t'e provisions of arti)le 1@91, se)tion ", of t'e ne( Civil Code, an agent ma no( bu propert pla)ed in 'is
'ands for sale or administration, provided that the principal gives his consent thereto& ='ile t'e ne( Code )ame
into effe)t onl on August 34, 1954, 'o(ever, sin)e t'is is a rig't t'at is de)lared for t'e first time, t'e same ma be
given retroa)tive effe)t if no vested or a)%uired rig't is impaired (Arti)le ""53, ne( Civil Code)& During t'e lifetime
Don Mariano, and parti)ularl on Mar)' $, 19@#, t'e 'erein appellants )ould not )laim an vested or a)%uired rig't in
t'ese properties, for, as 'eirs, t'e most t'e 'ad (as a mere e!pentan)&
0=e ma, t'erefore, invo7e no( t'is pra)ti)al and liberal provision of our ne( Civil Code even if t'e sale 'ad ta7en
pla)e before its effe)tivit&1
2n t'e first pla)e, t'e )ontention t'at t'ere (as a prin)ipalBagent relations'ip e!isting (as onl raised in t'e appeal for
t'e first time, and (as not raised in t'e trial )ourt&
IS!OSITIVE: C82 de)ision affirmed b CC, petition denied&
/M -ida