This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2009-10-05 |
VELASCO JR., J. |
||||
| The trial court ruled that prescription has set in, since respondents alleged in the complaint fraud and misrepresentation in procuring the transfer of subject lots, and such transfer was made on April 21, 1970, while the instant complaint was filed only on August 10, 1994, or a little over 24 years. Relying on Buenaventura v. Court of Appeals,[25] where the Court held that an action for reconveyance of title due to fraud is susceptible to prescription either within four or 10 years, the trial court held that the instant action is definitely barred. It also ruled that even if a constructive trust was created as averred by respondents, still, the instant action has prescribed for a constructive trust prescribes in 10 years, relying on Tenio-Obsequio v. Court of Appeals.[26] | |||||
|
2003-08-19 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| Though laches applies even to imprescriptible actions,[29] its elements must be proved positively.[30] Laches is evidentiary in nature which could not be established by mere allegations in the pleadings and can not be resolved in a motion to dismiss.[31] At this stage therefore, the dismissal of the complaint on the ground of laches is premature. | |||||