This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2015-02-11 |
PERLAS-BERNABE, J. |
||||
| As a final point of concern, the Court deems it apt to correct the MCTC-Nabunturan-Mawab's characterization of the simulated character of the undated lease contract, which, to note, stands as a mere error in terminology that would not negate the granting of the present petition on the ground of res judicata. Properly speaking, the contract, as gathered from the MCTC-Nabunturan-Mawab's ratiocination, should be considered as an absolutely and not a relatively simulated contract. The distinction between the two was discussed in Heirs of Intac v. CA,[48] viz.: Articles 1345 and 1346 of the Civil Code provide: | |||||