Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

EXPECTACION DECLARO v. CA THIRD DIVISION

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 140528 2011-12-07	TOSINO v. SPS. ANDRES T. ROSARIO AND LENA DUQUE-ROSARIO AND BANCO FILIPINO SAVINGS AND MORTGAGE BANK LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
Even if the Court considers Dr. Rosario's testimony on his alleged verbal agreement with the Torbela siblings, the Court finds the same unsatisfactory. Dr. Rosario averred that the two Deeds were executed only because he was "planning to secure loan from the Development Bank of the Philippines and Philippine National Bank and the bank needed absolute quitclaim[.]" [58] While Dr. Rosario's explanation makes sense for the first Deed of Absolute Quitclaim dated December 12, 1964 executed by the Torbela siblings (which transferred Lot No. 356-A to Dr. Rosario for P9.00.00), the same could not be said for the second Deed of Absolute Quitclaim dated December 28, 1964 executed by Dr. Rosario. In fact, Dr. Rosario's Deed of Absolute Quitclaim (in which he admitted that he only borrowed Lot No. 356-A and was transferring the same to the Torbela siblings for P1.00.00) would actually work against the approval of Dr. Rosario's loan by the banks. Since Dr. Rosario's Deed of Absolute Quitclaim dated December 28, 1964 is a declaration against his self-interest, it must be taken as favoring the truthfulness of the contents of said Deed. [59]
	GR No. 174672 2008-04-16	MACTAN-CEBU INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY v. HEIRS OF MARCELINA L. SERO YNARES-SATIAGO, J.
An action for reconveyance is a legal remedy granted to a landowner whose property has been wrongfully or erroneously registered in another's name.[23] However, such action must be filed within 10 years from the issuance of the title since the issuance operates as a constructive notice.[24] Thus, the cause of action which respondents may have against the petitioner is definitely barred by prescription.
	GR NO. 145849 2005-08-22	SPS. JOSE BEJOC AND JOVITA CAPUTOL BEJOC v. PRIMA CALDERON CABREROS CORONA, J.
This period is reckoned from the date of the issuance of the original certificate of title or transfer certificate of title. Since such issuance operates as a constructive notice to the whole world,[24] the discovery of the fraud is deemed to have taken place at that time. Here, the title was issued on October 17, 1984. The action for reconveyance was, on the other hand, filed 6 years later, on February 1, 1990. Clearly, prescription had not yet attached. The suit was brought well within the 10-year prescriptive period for implied trusts.
	GR No. 145849 2005-07-22	SPS. JOSE BEJOC AND JOVITA CAPUTOL BEJOC v. PRIMA CALDERON CABREROS CORONA, J.
This period is reckoned from the date of the issuance of the original certificate of title or transfer certificate of title. Since such issuance operates as a constructive notice to the whole world,[24] the discovery of the fraud is deemed to have taken place at that time. Here, the title was issued on October 17, 1984. The action for reconveyance was, on the other hand, filed 6 years later, on February 1, 1990. Clearly, prescription had not yet attached. The suit was brought well within the 10-year prescriptive period for implied trusts.