This case has been cited 6 times or more.
|
2012-04-25 |
SERENO, J. |
||||
| Also, we do not lose sight of the fact that the 2000 Tax Declaration was made only after the subject EP/OCT had already been issued. A mere tax declaration cannot defeat a certificate of title.[34] | |||||
|
2010-10-18 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| One is considered a purchaser in good faith if he buys the property without notice that some other person has a right to or interest in such property and pays its fair price before he has notice of the adverse claims and interest of another person in the same property.[32] Well-settled is the rule that every person dealing with registered land may safely rely on the correctness of the certificate of title issued therefor and the law will in no way oblige him to go beyond the certificate to determine the condition of the property.[33] "However, this rule shall not apply when the party has actual knowledge of facts and circumstances that would impel a reasonably cautious man to make such inquiry or when the purchaser has knowledge of a defect or the lack of title in his vendor or of sufficient facts to induce a reasonably prudent man to inquire into the status of the title of the property in litigation."[34] "His mere refusal to believe that such defect exists, or his willful closing of his eyes to the possibility of the existence of a defect in his vendor's title will not make him an innocent purchaser for value if it later develops that the title was in fact defective, and it appears that he had such notice of the defect had he acted with that measure of precaution which may reasonably be required of a prudent man in a like situation."[35] | |||||
|
2005-01-31 |
CORONA, J. |
||||
| An innocent mortgagee for value is akin to an innocent purchaser for value. The phrase "innocent purchaser for value" is deemed to include an innocent lessee, mortgagee or other (beneficiary of an) encumbrance for value.[10] An innocent purchaser for value is one who buys the property of another without notice that some other person has a right to or interest in such property and pays a full and fair price for the same at the time of such purchase or before he has notice of the claim of another person.[11] As a general rule, where the certificate of title is in the name of the vendor when the land is sold, the vendee for value has the right to rely on what appears on the face of the title and is not obligated to look beyond what appears on the face of the certificate of title of the vendor. As an exception, the vendee is required to make the necessary inquiries if there is anything in the certificate of title which raises any cloud or vice in the ownership of the property.[12] Otherwise, his mere refusal to believe that such defect exists, or his willful disregard of the possibility of the existence of a defect in his vendor's title will not make him an innocent purchaser for value if it afterwards develops that the title is in fact defective, and it appears that he had such notice of the defect as would have led to its discovery had he acted with that measure of precaution which may reasonably be required of a prudent man in a like situation.[13] | |||||
|
2005-01-31 |
CORONA, J. |
||||
| Where innocent third persons rely on the lack of defect of a certificate of title and acquire rights over the property, the Court cannot disregard such rights. Otherwise, public confidence in the certificate of title and ultimately, in the entire Torrens system will be impaired, for every one dealing with registered property will have to inquire at every instance whether the title has been regularly or irregularly issued.[14] | |||||
|
2003-07-31 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| Petitioners' argument that they have declared the disputed lot in their name and have paid the realty taxes thereof is unavailing, because tax declarations are not conclusive proof of title.[16] At best they are merely indicia of a claim of ownership.[17] Thus, it has been held in one case[18] that a party's declaration of real property, his payment of realty taxes and his designation as owner of the subject property in the cadastral survey and in the records of the Ministry of Agrarian Reform Office cannot defeat a certificate of title, which is an absolute and indefeasible evidence of ownership of the property in favor of the person whose name appears therein.[19] | |||||
|
2001-11-22 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| A court acquires jurisdiction over a person through either a valid service of summons or the person's voluntary appearance in court.[11] A court must necessarily have jurisdiction over a party for the latter to be bound by a court decision. | |||||