Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

FELICIDAD L. ORONCE v. CA

This case has been cited 6 times or more.

	GR No. 155716 2009-10-02	ROCKVILLE EXCEL INTERNATIONAL EXIM CORPORATION v. SPS. OLIGARIO CULLA AND BERNARDITA MIRANDA BRION, J.
For the presumption of an equitable mortgage to arise under Article 1602, two (2) requisites must concur: (a) that the parties entered into a contract denominated as a contract of sale; and, (b) that their intention was to secure an existing debt by way of a mortgage. Any of the circumstances laid out in Article 1602, not the concurrence nor an overwhelming number of the enumerated circumstances, is sufficient to support the conclusion that a contract of sale is in fact an equitable mortgage.[11] In several cases, we have not hesitated to declare a purported contract of sale to be an equitable mortgage based solely on one of the enumerated circumstances under Article 1602.[12] This approach follows the rule that when doubt exists on the nature of the parties' transaction, the law favors the least transmission of property rights.[13]
	GR NO. 167961 2007-04-03	SPS. MANUEL LEY AND JANET LEY v. UNION BANK OF PHILIPPINES TINGA, J.
While it is true that a certificate of sale on the Tagaytay property was already issued in favor of UBP, the one year period of redemption had not yet expired when the complaint for recovery of title was filed by the spouses Ley. It is only upon the expiration of the redemption period, without the judgment debtor having made use of his right of redemption, does ownership of the land sold become consolidated in the purchaser.[40]
	GR NO. 158166 2005-01-21	MINERVA UMPOC v. MILDRED MERCADO AS ADMINISTRATRIX OF ESTATE OF LATE DR. JESUSA BARRIOS CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The issuance of a new TCT in the name of the alleged buyers in the litigated Deed of Sale from whom petitioners derived their right to possess the apartment units does not import conclusive evidence of ownership.[39] At the time the MeTC rendered its ruling on the unlawful detainer case, the disputed property was in the name of the decedent, Dr. Jesusa Barrios. It was only when they were being ejected from the premises did petitioners bring up the 1987 Deed of Sale. Adding to the dubiety of their claim of ownership over the subject property is the fact that petitioners herein waited thirteen (13) years before causing the transfer of the property in the names of the alleged vendees on the basis of the 1987 Deed of Sale, the validity of which is the very subject of a separate case for annulment of title filed by the respondent. Too, as found by the Court of Appeals and the lower courts, petitioners are occupying units of the apartments which are different from those conveyed to their assignors in the impugned Deed of Sale. Thus, in our mind, no error could be laid at the door of the MeTC, the RTC, and the Court of Appeals, for giving more probative weight to the TCT in the name of the decedent vis-à-vis the contested unregistered Deed of Sale the sole evidence upon which they anchor their claim of ownership.
	GR No. 156522 2004-05-28	ERLINDA SAN PEDRO v. RUBEN LEE YNARES-SATIAGO, J.
It is well-settled that the presence of even one of the foregoing circumstances is sufficient to declare a contract as an equitable mortgage,[65] in consonance with the rule that the law favors the least transmission of property rights.[66] For the presumption of an equitable mortgage to arise under Article 1602, two requisites must concur: (1) that the parties entered into a contract denominated as a sale; and (2) that their intention was to secure an existing debt by way of a mortgage.[67]
	GR No. 131520 2000-01-28	ESTELITA AGUIRRE v. CA YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
As already stated above, Article 1604 of the Civil Code provides that the provisions of Article 1602 shall also apply to a contract purporting to be an absolute sale. The presence of even one of the circumstances in Article 1602 is sufficient basis to declare a contract as one of equitable mortgage. The explicit provision of Article 1602 that any of those circumstances would suffice to construe a contract of sale to be one of equitable mortgage is in consonance with the rule that the law favors the least transmission of property rights.[9] To stress, the existence of any one of the conditions under Article 1602, not a concurrence, or an overwhelming number of such circumstances, suffices to give rise to the presumption that the contract is an equitable mortgage.[10]