This case has been cited 7 times or more.
|
2015-12-09 |
BERSAMIN, J. |
||||
| Section 39 of Act No. 496 (The Land Registration Act) requires that every person receiving a certificate of title in pursuance of a decree of registration, and every subsequent purchaser of registered land who takes a certificate of title for value in good faith shall hold the same free of all encumbrances except those noted on said certificate. An encumbrance in the context of the provision is "anything that impairs the use or transfer of property; anything which constitutes a burden on the title; a burden or charge upon property; a claim or lien upon property."[44] It denotes "any right to, or interest in, land which may subsist in another to the diminution of its value, but consistent with the passing of the fee by conveyance."[45] An annotation, on the other hand, is "a remark, note, case summary, or commentary on some passage of a book, statutory provision, court decision, of the like, intended to illustrate or explain its meaning."[46] The purpose of the annotation is to charge the purchaser or title holder with notice of such burden and claims.[47] Being aware of the annotation, the purchaser must face the possibility that the title or the real property could be subject to the rights of third parties.[48] | |||||
|
2013-12-11 |
PERLAS-BERNABE, J. |
||||
| A contract is what the law defines it to be, taking into consideration its essential elements, and not what the contracting parties call it.[33] The real nature of a contract may be determined from the express terms of the written agreement and from the contemporaneous and subsequent acts of the contracting parties. However, in the construction or interpretation of an instrument, the intention of the parties is primordial and is to be pursued. The denomination or title given by the parties in their contract is not conclusive of the nature of its contents.[34] | |||||
|
2013-02-20 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| In Tan v. Benolirao,[17] this Court, speaking through Justice Brion, ruled that the parties entered into a contract to sell as revealed by the following stipulation: d) That in case, BUYER has complied with the terms and conditions of this contract, then the SELLERS shall execute and deliver to the BUYER the appropriate Deed of Absolute Sale;[18] | |||||
|
2012-11-28 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| The above provisions provide that title to the property remains with the seller and will only be transferred to the buyer-redemptioner upon the execution of a final deed of sale and that upon full payment of the purchase price by the buyer-redemptioner, the SSS as seller has the obligation to execute a deed of absolute sale in favor of the former. The above provisions further reveal that the true nature of the deed of conditional sale between the parties is a contract to sell. It is established case law that where the seller promises to execute a deed of absolute sale upon the completion by the buyer of the payment of the price, the contract is only a contract to sell. Thus, while the contract is denominated as a Deed of Conditional Sale, the presence of the above-quoted provisions identifies the contract as being a mere contract to sell.[42] | |||||
|
2012-09-05 |
REYES, J. |
||||
| Where the action is in personam[18] and the defendant is in the Philippines, service of summons may be made through personal service, that is, summons shall be served by handing to the defendant in person a copy thereof, or if he refuses to receive and sign for it, by tendering it to him.[19] If the defendant cannot be personally served with summons within a reasonable time, it is then that substituted service may be made.[20] Personal service of summons should and always be the first option, and it is only when the said summons cannot be served within a reasonable time can the process server resort to substituted service.[21] | |||||
|
2012-08-15 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| Section 11 of the contract between Union Bank and Maunlad Homes provides that "[u]pon payment in full of the Purchase Price of the Property x x x, the SELLER shall execute and deliver a Deed of Absolute Sale conveying the Property to the BUYER."[26] "Jurisprudence has established that where the seller promises to execute a deed of absolute sale upon the completion by the buyer of the payment of the price, the contract is only a contract to sell."[27] The presence of this provision generally identifies the contract as being a mere contract to sell.[28] After reviewing the terms of the contract between Union Bank and Maunlad Homes, we find no reasonable ground to exempt the present case from the general rule; the contract between Union Bank and Maunlad Homes is a contract to sell. | |||||
|
2010-08-23 |
ABAD, J. |
||||
| In Tan v. Benolirao,[19] the buyer of land in a contract to sell refused to pay the balance of the purchase price because of the sudden appearance of an annotation on the sellers' title, judicially placed by excluded co-heirs, thus creating a legal lien on the property in favor of such co-heirs. The Court held that, because of the annotation, the sellers could no longer compel the buyer to pay the balance of the purchase price since they could not fulfill their obligation to transfer a clean title to the latter. The Court held that the buyer's refusal to pay the balance cannot justify the sellers' forfeiture of his downpayment. Thus: We, therefore, hold that the contract to sell was terminated when the vendors could no longer legally compel Tan to pay the balance of the purchase price as a result of the legal encumbrance which attached to the title of the property. Since Tan's refusal to pay was due to the supervening event of a legal encumbrance on the property and not through his own fault or negligence, we find and so hold that the forfeiture of Tan's down payment was clearly unwarranted.[20] | |||||