Sps. Feliza Duyan Gomez and Eugenio Gomez v. Purisima Duyan et al.

[G.R. No. 144148. March 18, 2005]

TOPIC: Trusts, express trusts, implied trusts
PONENTE: Austria-Martinez
=
FACTS:
Eulogio Duyan (respondent) and Feliza Duyan are siblings. Eulogio allowed Feliza to construct a house on his
property in 1968.
An instrument entitled Pagpapahayag was executed by the siblings in recognition of the fact that the property was
owned by Eulogio and that Feliza etc was only staying there due to his generosity. Instrument also provided that, in
the event that the property be registered in her name, Feliza would acknowledge that Eulogio was the owner of the
property and never assert ownership over the same, except in accordance with her brothers wishes.
Later on, a deed of sale covering the house was executed by Eulogio and common-law wife Regina in favor of Feliza.
Feliza then, allegedly, asserted ownership over the house and lot.
Purisima, legal wife of Eugolio, then filed for recovery of possession and damages. Case was dismissed because the
parties entered into an amicable settlement.
1978 After Eulogio and Purisima executed a deed of sale in favor of Feliza, another Pagpapahayag was
executed between the siblings. Here, Feliza acknowleged that the lot subject of the deed of sale will eventually be
transferred to the children of Eulogio.
Feliza, despite this pagpapahayag, registered the deed of sale with the register of deeds (title was issued to her).
Purisima filed a case for reconveyance of real property and cancellation of the TCT. RTC dismissed the complaint.
CA reversed the decision and held that an implied trust arose in favor of the children of Eulogio by virtue of the
Pagpapahayag.
ISSUE(S): WON there was a trust was created when the second Pagpapahayag was executed.
HELD: Yes, an EXPRESS trust was created. Feliza and Eugenio Gomez betrayed the express trust when they registered
the property in their name and resisted the action for reconveyance. CA decision ordering the reconveyance of property to
Duyan and cancellation of the TCT is affirmed.
RATIO:
In express terms, Feliza undertook in the 1978 Pagpapahayag to convey the property subject of the fictitious deed
of sale to her own nephews and nieces who are the children of her brother Eulogio.
The intent of the siblings to create a trust was clear. Eulogio as the trustor, Feliza as the trustee and Eulogios
children as the beneficiaries of the res.
Express trusts are those which the direct and positive acts of the parties create, by some writing, deed or will, or
words evincing an intention to create a trust.
Even if the word trust was not expressly used by the signatories, it is sufficient that a trust is clearly intended.
Felizas act of registering the property in their own names and resisting the action for reconveyance is a betrayal of
the express trust.
Reconveyance is the proper action for Duyans to take since they are the rightful owners of the property.
A trustee who obtains a Torrens title over the property held in trust by him for another cannot repudiate the trust by
relying on the registration.
CASE LAW/ DOCTRINE: For there to be an express trust, it is sufficient that a trust is clearly intended by the parties.
A trustee who obtains a Torrens title over the property held in trust by him for another cannot repudiate the trust by relying
on the registration.