Lawyerly

GR No. 190016

2013-10-02

FREDERICK VENTURA v. HEIRS OF SPS. EUSTACIO T. ENDAYA AND TRINIDAD L. ENDAYA

PERLAS-BERNABE, J.

To note, while the quality of contingency inheres in a contract to sell, the same should not be confused with a conditional contract of sale. In a contract to sell, the fulfillment of the suspensive condition will not automatically transfer ownership to the buyer although the property may have been previously delivered to him. The prospective seller still has to convey title to the prospective buyer by entering into a contract of absolute sale.[54] On the other hand, in a conditional contract of sale, the fulfillment of the suspensive condition renders the sale absolute and the previous delivery of the property has the effect of automatically transferring the seller's ownership or title to the property to the buyer.[55]

GR No.171692

2013-06-03

SPS. DELFIN O. TUMIBAY AND AURORA T. TUMIBAY-DECEASED v. SPS. MELVIN A. LOPEZ AND ROWENA GAY T. VISITACION LOPEZ

DEL CASTILLO, J.

We are, thus, inclined to rule that there was, indeed, a contractual agreement between the parties for the purchase of the subject land and that this agreement partook of an oral contract to sell for the sum of P800,000.00. A contract to sell has been defined as "a bilateral contract whereby the prospective seller, while expressly reserving the ownership of the subject property despite delivery thereof to the prospective buyer, binds himself to sell the said property exclusively to the prospective buyer upon fulfillment of the condition agreed upon, that is, full payment of the purchase price."[25] In a contract to sell, "ownership is retained by the seller and is not to pass until the full payment of the price x x x."[26] It is "commonly entered into so as to protect the seller against a buyer who intends to buy the property in installment[s] by withholding ownership over the property until the buyer effects full payment therefor."[27]

GR No. 191696

2013-04-10

ROGELIO DANTIS v. JULIO MAGHINANG

MENDOZA, J.

By the contract of sale, one of the contracting parties obligates himself to transfer the ownership of, and to deliver, a determinate thing, and the other to pay therefor a price certain in money or its equivalent.[32] A contract of sale is a consensual contract and, thus, is perfected by mere consent which is manifested by the meeting of the offer and the acceptance upon the thing and the cause which are to constitute the contract.[33] Until the contract of sale is perfected, it cannot, as an independent source of obligation, serve as a binding juridical relation between the parties.[34] The essential elements of a contract of sale are: a) consent or meeting of the minds, that is, consent to transfer ownership in exchange for the price; b) determinate subject matter; and c) price certain in money or its equivalent.[35] The absence of any of the essential elements shall negate the existence of a perfected contract of sale.[36]

GR No. 158920

2012-11-28

REPUBLIC v. MARAWI-MARANTAO GENERAL HOSPITAL

LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.

A contract to sell is defined as a bilateral contract whereby the prospective seller, while expressly reserving the ownership of the property despite delivery thereof to the prospective buyer, binds himself to sell the property exclusively to the prospective buyer upon fulfillment of the condition agreed, i.e., full payment of the purchase price.[43] In a contract to sell, the prospective seller explicitly reserves the transfer of title to the prospective buyer, meaning, the prospective seller does not as yet agree or consent to transfer ownership of the property subject of the contract to sell until the happening of an event, which for present purposes we shall take as the full payment of the purchase price. What the seller agrees or obliges himself to do is to fulfill his promise to sell the subject property when the entire amount of the purchase price is delivered to him.[44]

GR No. 168646

2011-01-21

LUZON DEVELOPMENT BANK v. ANGELES CATHERINE ENRIQUEZ

DEL CASTILLO, J.

Both parties are correct in arguing that the Contract to Sell executed by DELTA in favor of Enriquez did not transfer ownership over Lot 4 to Enriquez. A contract to sell is one where the prospective seller reserves the transfer of title to the prospective buyer until the happening of an event, such as full payment of the purchase price. What the seller obliges himself to do is to sell the subject property only when the entire amount of the purchase price has already been delivered to him. "In other words, the full payment of the purchase price partakes of a suspensive condition, the non-fulfillment of which prevents the obligation to sell from arising and thus, ownership is retained by the prospective seller without further remedies by the prospective buyer."[63] It does not, by itself, transfer ownership to the buyer.[64]

GR No. 165168

2010-07-09

SPS. NONILON AND IRENE MONTECALVO v. HEIRS OF EUGENIA T. PRIMERO

DEL CASTILLO, J.

In a contract to sell, the prospective seller explicitly reserves the transfer of title to the prospective buyer, meaning, the prospective seller does not as yet agree or consent to transfer ownership of the property subject of the contract to sell until the happening of an event, which for present purposes we shall take as the full payment of the purchase price,[30] What the seller agrees or obliges himself to do is to fulfill his promise to sell the subject property when the entire amount of the purchase price is delivered to him.[31] In other words, the full payment of the purchase price partakes of a suspensive condition, the non-fulfillment of which prevents the obligation to sell from arising and thus, ownership is retained by the prospective seller without further remedies by the prospective buyer.[32] A contract to sell is commonly entered into in order to protect the seller against a buyer who intends to buy the property in installment by withholding ownership over the property until the buyer effects Ml payment therefor.[33]

GR No. 153142

2010-03-29

CATALINA BALAIS-MABANAG v. REGISTER OF DEEDS OF QUEZON CITY

BERSAMIN, J.

The CA found that it was the petitioner who did not comply with the notice of the sheriff of the implementation of the judgment through the writ of execution;[24] and that her non-compliance then justified the RTC's order to the Branch Clerk of Court to execute the deed of absolute sale to implement the final judgment rendered in G. R. No. 103577.

GR No. 179653

2009-07-31

UNITED MUSLIM v. VS.BRYC-V DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

NACHURA, J.

The case of Coronel v. Court of Appeals[8] is illuminating and explains the distinction between a conditional contract of sale under Article 1458 of the Civil Code and a bilateral contract to sell under Article 1479 of the same code: A contract to sell may thus be defined as a bilateral contract whereby the prospective seller, while expressly reserving the ownership of the subject property despite delivery thereof to the prospective buyer, binds himself to sell the said property exclusively to the prospective buyer upon fulfillment of the condition agreed upon, that is, full payment of the purchase price.

GR No. 165568

2009-07-13

GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM v. ABRAHAM LOPEZ

CARPIO, J.

In the present case, the parties never got past the negotiation stage. Nothing shows that the parties had agreed on any final arrangement containing the essential elements of a contract of sale, namely, (1) consent or the meeting of the minds of the parties; (2) object or subject matter of the contract ; and (3) price or consideration of the sale.[24]

GR No. 171008

2007-09-13

CARMELITA FUDOT v. CATTLEYA LAND

TINGA, J.

In interpreting this provision, the Court declared that the governing principle is primus tempore, potior jure (first in time, stronger in right). Knowledge gained by the first buyer of the second sale cannot defeat the first buyer's rights, except where the second buyer registers in good faith the second sale ahead of the first as provided by the aforequoted provision of the Civil Code. Such knowledge of the first buyer does not bar him from availing of his rights under the law, among them to register first his purchase as against the second buyer. However, knowledge gained by the second buyer of the first sale defeats his rights even if he is first to register the second sale, since such knowledge taints his prior registration with bad faith.[34] It is thus essential, to merit the protection of Art. 1544, second paragraph, that the second realty buyer must act in good faith in registering his deed of sale.[35]

GR NO. 137162

2007-01-24

CORAZON L. ESCUETA v. RUFINA LIM

AZCUNA, J.

Applying Article 1544 of the Civil Code, a second buyer of the property who may have had actual or constructive knowledge of such defect in the seller's title, or at least was charged with the obligation to discover such defect, cannot be a registrant in good faith. Such second buyer cannot defeat the first buyer's title. In case a title is issued to the second buyer, the first buyer may seek reconveyance of the property subject of the sale.[23] Even the argument that a purchaser need not inquire beyond what appears in a Torrens title does not hold water. A perusal of the certificates of title alone will reveal that the subject properties are registered in common, not in the individual names of the heirs.

GR NO. 142411

2005-10-14

WINIFREDA URSAL v. CA

AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.

A contract to sell is a bilateral contract whereby the prospective seller, while expressly reserving the ownership of the subject property despite delivery thereof to the prospective buyer, binds himself to sell the said property exclusively to the prospective buyer upon fulfillment of the condition agreed upon, that is, full payment of the purchase price.[36]

GR NO. 142411

2005-10-14

WINIFREDA URSAL v. CA

AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.

As explained in Coronel vs. Court of Appeals:[52]

GR NO. 152228

2005-09-23

RIMBUNAN HIJAU GROUP OF COMPANIES v. ORIENTAL WOOD PROCESSING CORPORATION

We have stressed time and again that allegations must be proven by sufficient evidence because mere allegation is definitely not evidence.[46] It cannot be used as basis for a court's decision. Absent evidence to prove respondent's allegations in the case at bar, this Court fails to see how the Court of Appeals could have concluded that petitioners were doing business in the Philippines.

GR NO. 165889

2005-09-20

SACOBIA HILLS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION v. ALLAN U. TY

YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.

In a contract to sell, the prospective seller does not consent to transfer ownership of the property to the buyer until the happening of an event, which for present purposes, is the full payment of the purchase price. What the seller agrees or obliges himself to do is to fulfill his promise to sell the subject property when the entire amount of the purchase price is delivered to him. Upon the fulfillment of the suspensive condition, ownership will not automatically transfer to the buyer although the property may have been previously delivered to him. The prospective seller still has to convey title to the prospective buyer by entering into a contract of absolute sale.[14]

GR NO. 154413

2005-08-31

SPS. ALFREDO R. EDRADA AND ROSELLA L. EDRADA v. SPS. EDUARDO RAMOS AND CARMENCITA RAMOS

TINGA, J.

Returning to the true nature of the document, we neither could conclude that a "contract to sell" had been established. A contract to sell is defined as a bilateral contract whereby the prospective seller, while expressly reserving the ownership of the subject property despite delivery thereof to the prospective buyer, binds himself to sell the said property exclusively to the prospective buyer upon fulfillment of the condition agreed upon, that is, full payment of the purchase price.[23]

AC. No. 5469

2004-08-10

RICARDO A. FORONDA v. ATTY. ARNOLD V. GUERRERO

CALLEJO, SR., J.

Thereafter, according to the complainant, the respondent, acting for and in behalf of his clients, the Mabanag Spouses, filed several cases[7] questioning the ruling of the Court in G.R. No. 103577. The complainant contended that the multiple pleadings and actions pursued by the respondent indicate that he violated his oath as an officer of the court and breached the Code of Professional Responsibility for Lawyers. The complainant thereafter prayed that the instant complaint be referred to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines for proper investigation and action.[8]

GR No. 144225

2003-06-17

SPS. GODOFREDO ALFREDO AND CARMEN LIMON ALFREDO v. SPS. ARMANDO BORRAS AND ADELIA LOBATON BORRAS

CARPIO, J.

Neither is the action barred by laches. We have defined laches as the failure or neglect, for an unreasonable time, to do that which, by the exercise of due diligence, could or should have been done earlier.[52] It is negligence or omission to assert a right within a reasonable time, warranting a presumption that the party entitled to assert it either has abandoned it or declined to assert it.[53] Armando and Adelia discovered in January 1994 the subsequent sale of the Subject Land and they filed this case on 7 March 1994. Plainly, Armando and Adelia did not sleep on their rights.

GR No. 149750

2003-06-16

AURORA ALCANTARA-DAUS v. SPS. HERMOSO AND SOCORRO DE LEON

PANGANIBAN, J.

A contract of sale is consensual. It is perfected by mere consent,[10] upon a meeting of the minds[11] on the offer and the acceptance thereof based on subject matter, price and terms of payment.[12] At this stage, the seller's ownership of the thing sold is not an element in the perfection of the contract of sale.

	GR No. 190016 2013-10-02	FREDERICK VENTURA v. HEIRS OF SPS. EUSTACIO T. ENDAYA AND TRINIDAD L. ENDAYA PERLAS-BERNABE, J.
To note, while the quality of contingency inheres in a contract to sell, the same should not be confused with a conditional contract of sale. In a contract to sell, the fulfillment of the suspensive condition will not automatically transfer ownership to the buyer although the property may have been previously delivered to him. The prospective seller still has to convey title to the prospective buyer by entering into a contract of absolute sale.[54] On the other hand, in a conditional contract of sale, the fulfillment of the suspensive condition renders the sale absolute and the previous delivery of the property has the effect of automatically transferring the seller's ownership or title to the property to the buyer.[55]
	GR No.171692 2013-06-03	SPS. DELFIN O. TUMIBAY AND AURORA T. TUMIBAY-DECEASED v. SPS. MELVIN A. LOPEZ AND ROWENA GAY T. VISITACION LOPEZ DEL CASTILLO, J.
We are, thus, inclined to rule that there was, indeed, a contractual agreement between the parties for the purchase of the subject land and that this agreement partook of an oral contract to sell for the sum of P800,000.00. A contract to sell has been defined as "a bilateral contract whereby the prospective seller, while expressly reserving the ownership of the subject property despite delivery thereof to the prospective buyer, binds himself to sell the said property exclusively to the prospective buyer upon fulfillment of the condition agreed upon, that is, full payment of the purchase price."[25] In a contract to sell, "ownership is retained by the seller and is not to pass until the full payment of the price x x x."[26] It is "commonly entered into so as to protect the seller against a buyer who intends to buy the property in installment[s] by withholding ownership over the property until the buyer effects full payment therefor."[27]
	GR No. 191696 2013-04-10	ROGELIO DANTIS v. JULIO MAGHINANG MENDOZA, J.
By the contract of sale, one of the contracting parties obligates himself to transfer the ownership of, and to deliver, a determinate thing, and the other to pay therefor a price certain in money or its equivalent.[32] A contract of sale is a consensual contract and, thus, is perfected by mere consent which is manifested by the meeting of the offer and the acceptance upon the thing and the cause which are to constitute the contract.[33] Until the contract of sale is perfected, it cannot, as an independent source of obligation, serve as a binding juridical relation between the parties.[34] The essential elements of a contract of sale are: a) consent or meeting of the minds, that is, consent to transfer ownership in exchange for the price; b) determinate subject matter; and c) price certain in money or its equivalent.[35] The absence of any of the essential elements shall negate the existence of a perfected contract of sale.[36]
	GR No. 158920 2012-11-28	REPUBLIC v. MARAWI-MARANTAO GENERAL HOSPITAL LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
A contract to sell is defined as a bilateral contract whereby the prospective seller, while expressly reserving the ownership of the property despite delivery thereof to the prospective buyer, binds himself to sell the property exclusively to the prospective buyer upon fulfillment of the condition agreed, i.e., full payment of the purchase price.[43] In a contract to sell, the prospective seller explicitly reserves the transfer of title to the prospective buyer, meaning, the prospective seller does not as yet agree or consent to transfer ownership of the property subject of the contract to sell until the happening of an event, which for present purposes we shall take as the full payment of the purchase price. What the seller agrees or obliges himself to do is to fulfill his promise to sell the subject property when the entire amount of the purchase price is delivered to him.[44]
	GR No. 168646 2011-01-21	LUZON DEVELOPMENT BANK v. ANGELES CATHERINE ENRIQUEZ DEL CASTILLO, J.
Both parties are correct in arguing that the Contract to Sell executed by DELTA in favor of Enriquez did not transfer ownership over Lot 4 to Enriquez. A contract to sell is one where the prospective seller reserves the transfer of title to the prospective buyer until the happening of an event, such as full payment of the purchase price. What the seller obliges himself to do is to sell the subject property only when the entire amount of the purchase price has already been delivered to him. "In other words, the full payment of the purchase price partakes of a suspensive condition, the non-fulfillment of which prevents the obligation to sell from arising and thus, ownership is retained by the prospective seller without further remedies by the prospective buyer."[63] It does not, by itself, transfer ownership to the buyer.[64]
	GR No. 165168 2010-07-09	SPS. NONILON AND IRENE MONTECALVO v. HEIRS OF EUGENIA T. PRIMERO DEL CASTILLO, J.
In a contract to sell, the prospective seller explicitly reserves the transfer of title to the prospective buyer, meaning, the prospective seller does not as yet agree or consent to transfer ownership of the property subject of the contract to sell until the happening of an event, which for present purposes we shall take as the full payment of the purchase price,[30] What the seller agrees or obliges himself to do is to fulfill his promise to sell the subject property when the entire amount of the purchase price is delivered to him.[31] In other words, the full payment of the purchase price partakes of a suspensive condition, the non-fulfillment of which prevents the obligation to sell from arising and thus, ownership is retained by the prospective seller without further remedies by the prospective buyer.[32] A contract to sell is commonly entered into in order to protect the seller against a buyer who intends to buy the property in installment by withholding ownership over the property until the buyer effects Ml payment therefor.[33]
	GR No. 153142 2010-03-29	CATALINA BALAIS-MABANAG v. REGISTER OF DEEDS OF QUEZON CITY BERSAMIN, J.
The CA found that it was the petitioner who did not comply with the notice of the sheriff of the implementation of the judgment through the writ of execution;[24] and that her non-compliance then justified the RTC's order to the Branch Clerk of Court to execute the deed of absolute sale to implement the final judgment rendered in G. R. No. 103577.
	GR No. 179653 2009-07-31	UNITED MUSLIM v. VS.BRYC-V DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION NACHURA, J.
The case of Coronel v. Court of Appeals[8] is illuminating and explains the distinction between a conditional contract of sale under Article 1458 of the Civil Code and a bilateral contract to sell under Article 1479 of the same code: A contract to sell may thus be defined as a bilateral contract whereby the prospective seller, while expressly reserving the ownership of the subject property despite delivery thereof to the prospective buyer, binds himself to sell the said property exclusively to the prospective buyer upon fulfillment of the condition agreed upon, that is, full payment of the purchase price.
	GR No. 165568 2009-07-13	GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM v. ABRAHAM LOPEZ CARPIO, J.
In the present case, the parties never got past the negotiation stage. Nothing shows that the parties had agreed on any final arrangement containing the essential elements of a contract of sale, namely, (1) consent or the meeting of the minds of the parties; (2) object or subject matter of the contract ; and (3) price or consideration of the sale.[24]
	GR No. 171008 2007-09-13	CARMELITA FUDOT v. CATTLEYA LAND TINGA, J.
In interpreting this provision, the Court declared that the governing principle is primus tempore, potior jure (first in time, stronger in right). Knowledge gained by the first buyer of the second sale cannot defeat the first buyer's rights, except where the second buyer registers in good faith the second sale ahead of the first as provided by the aforequoted provision of the Civil Code. Such knowledge of the first buyer does not bar him from availing of his rights under the law, among them to register first his purchase as against the second buyer. However, knowledge gained by the second buyer of the first sale defeats his rights even if he is first to register the second sale, since such knowledge taints his prior registration with bad faith.[34] It is thus essential, to merit the protection of Art. 1544, second paragraph, that the second realty buyer must act in good faith in registering his deed of sale.[35]
	GR NO. 137162 2007-01-24	CORAZON L. ESCUETA v. RUFINA LIM AZCUNA, J.
Applying Article 1544 of the Civil Code, a second buyer of the property who may have had actual or constructive knowledge of such defect in the seller's title, or at least was charged with the obligation to discover such defect, cannot be a registrant in good faith. Such second buyer cannot defeat the first buyer's title. In case a title is issued to the second buyer, the first buyer may seek reconveyance of the property subject of the sale.[23] Even the argument that a purchaser need not inquire beyond what appears in a Torrens title does not hold water. A perusal of the certificates of title alone will reveal that the subject properties are registered in common, not in the individual names of the heirs.
	GR NO. 142411 2005-10-14	WINIFREDA URSAL v. CA AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
A contract to sell is a bilateral contract whereby the prospective seller, while expressly reserving the ownership of the subject property despite delivery thereof to the prospective buyer, binds himself to sell the said property exclusively to the prospective buyer upon fulfillment of the condition agreed upon, that is, full payment of the purchase price.[36]
	GR NO. 142411 2005-10-14	WINIFREDA URSAL v. CA AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
As explained in Coronel vs. Court of Appeals:[52]
	GR NO. 152228 2005-09-23	RIMBUNAN HIJAU GROUP OF COMPANIES v. ORIENTAL WOOD PROCESSING CORPORATION
We have stressed time and again that allegations must be proven by sufficient evidence because mere allegation is definitely not evidence.[46] It cannot be used as basis for a court's decision. Absent evidence to prove respondent's allegations in the case at bar, this Court fails to see how the Court of Appeals could have concluded that petitioners were doing business in the Philippines.
	GR NO. 165889 2005-09-20	SACOBIA HILLS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION v. ALLAN U. TY YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
In a contract to sell, the prospective seller does not consent to transfer ownership of the property to the buyer until the happening of an event, which for present purposes, is the full payment of the purchase price. What the seller agrees or obliges himself to do is to fulfill his promise to sell the subject property when the entire amount of the purchase price is delivered to him. Upon the fulfillment of the suspensive condition, ownership will not automatically transfer to the buyer although the property may have been previously delivered to him. The prospective seller still has to convey title to the prospective buyer by entering into a contract of absolute sale.[14]
	GR NO. 154413 2005-08-31	SPS. ALFREDO R. EDRADA AND ROSELLA L. EDRADA v. SPS. EDUARDO RAMOS AND CARMENCITA RAMOS TINGA, J.
Returning to the true nature of the document, we neither could conclude that a "contract to sell" had been established. A contract to sell is defined as a bilateral contract whereby the prospective seller, while expressly reserving the ownership of the subject property despite delivery thereof to the prospective buyer, binds himself to sell the said property exclusively to the prospective buyer upon fulfillment of the condition agreed upon, that is, full payment of the purchase price.[23]
	AC. No. 5469 2004-08-10	RICARDO A. FORONDA v. ATTY. ARNOLD V. GUERRERO CALLEJO, SR., J.
Thereafter, according to the complainant, the respondent, acting for and in behalf of his clients, the Mabanag Spouses, filed several cases[7] questioning the ruling of the Court in G.R. No. 103577. The complainant contended that the multiple pleadings and actions pursued by the respondent indicate that he violated his oath as an officer of the court and breached the Code of Professional Responsibility for Lawyers. The complainant thereafter prayed that the instant complaint be referred to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines for proper investigation and action.[8]
	GR No. 144225 2003-06-17	SPS. GODOFREDO ALFREDO AND CARMEN LIMON ALFREDO v. SPS. ARMANDO BORRAS AND ADELIA LOBATON BORRAS CARPIO, J.
Neither is the action barred by laches. We have defined laches as the failure or neglect, for an unreasonable time, to do that which, by the exercise of due diligence, could or should have been done earlier.[52] It is negligence or omission to assert a right within a reasonable time, warranting a presumption that the party entitled to assert it either has abandoned it or declined to assert it.[53] Armando and Adelia discovered in January 1994 the subsequent sale of the Subject Land and they filed this case on 7 March 1994. Plainly, Armando and Adelia did not sleep on their rights.
	GR No. 149750 2003-06-16	AURORA ALCANTARA-DAUS v. SPS. HERMOSO AND SOCORRO DE LEON PANGANIBAN, J.
A contract of sale is consensual. It is perfected by mere consent,[10] upon a meeting of the minds[11] on the offer and the acceptance thereof based on subject matter, price and terms of payment.[12] At this stage, the seller's ownership of the thing sold is not an element in the perfection of the contract of sale.

ROMULO A. CORONEL v. CA