Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

APOLONIO EGAO v. CA

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 172316 2010-12-08	SPS. JOSE CHUA AND MARGARITA CHUA v. PEDRO GUTIERREZ PERALTA, J.
The preference given to a duly registered levy on attachment or execution over a prior unregistered sale is well settled in our jurisdiction. This is because registration is the operative act that binds or affects the land insofar as third persons are concerned.[19] It is upon registration that there is notice to the whole world.[20]
	GR NO. 168220 2005-08-31	SPS. RUDY PARAGAS AND CORAZON B. PARAGAS v. BALACANO CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
Based on the foregoing, the court of Appeals concluded that Gregorio's consent to the sale of the lots was absent, making the contract null and void. Consequently, the spouses Paragas could not have made a subsequent transfer of the property to Catalino Balacano. Indeed, nemo dat quod non habet. Nobody can dispose of that which does not belong to him.[19]
	GR No. 138953 2002-06-06	CASTORIO ALVARICO v. AMELITA L. SOLA QUISUMBING, J.
Should there be no inscription, the ownership shall pertain to the person who in good faith was first in the possession; and, in the absence thereof, to the person who presents the oldest title, provided there is good faith. (Emphasis supplied.) Petitioner claims that respondent was in bad faith when she registered the land in her name and, based on the abovementioned rules, he has a better right over the property because he was first in material possession in good faith. However, this allegation of bad faith on the part of Amelita Sola in acquiring the title is devoid of evidentiary support. For one, the execution of public documents, as in the case of Affidavits of Adjudication, is entitled to the presumption of regularity, hence convincing evidence is required to assail and controvert them.[25] Second, it is undisputed that OCT No. 3439 was issued in 1989 in the name of Amelita. It requires more than petitioner's bare allegation to defeat the Original Certificate of Title which on its face enjoys the legal presumption of regularity of issuance.[26] A Torrens title, once registered, serves as notice to the whole world. All persons must take notice and no one can plead ignorance of its registration.[27]
	GR No. 127797 2000-01-31	ALEJANDRO MILLENA v. CA BELLOSILLO, J.
Questions of authenticity of documents being one of fact, this Court will not ordinarily disturb the conclusions of the Court of Appeals on this matter.[11] However for the sake of substantial justice we shall thoroughly discuss the points raised by petitioner.