You're currently signed in as:
User

FELIPE DAVID v. BANDIN)

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

2005-09-20
On the issue of whether respondent Florencia Realty Corporation is a purchaser in good faith or not, case law has it that he who alleges that he is a purchaser of registered land is burdened to prove such statement.  Such burden is not discharged by involving the ordinary presumption of good faith.[56] The defense of having purchased the property in good faith may be availed of only where registered land is involved and the buyer had relied in good faith on the clean title of the registered owner.[57] In this case, it appears that the respondent purchased the parcels of land on September 20, 1993.  At that time, the petitioners were still the registered owners of the property.  The respondent did not allege in its answer to the complaint that it was a purchaser in good faith of the property; neither did it adduce a morsel of evidence to prove that it purchased the property in good faith.
2003-02-20
BELLOSILLO, J.
We also find no reason to disturb our findings upon petitioners' assertion that they were purchasers of the three (3) parcels of land in good faith and for value. As we held in David v. Bandin, "the issue of good faith or bad faith of the buyer is relevant only where the subject of the sale is registered land and the purchaser is buying the same from the registered owner whose title to the land is clean x x x in such case the purchaser who relies on the clean title of the registered owner is protected if he is a purchaser in good faith for value."[29] Since the properties in question are unregistered lands, petitioners as subsequent buyers thereof did so at their peril. Their claim of having bought the land in good faith, i.e., without notice that some other person has a right to or interest in the property, would not protect them if it turns out, as it actually did in this case, that their seller did not own the property at the time of the sale.