You're currently signed in as:
User

ARAMIS B. AGUILAR v. CA

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

2008-03-14
NACHURA, J.
If it were true that they were allowed to use only one of the nine (9) rooms subject of the contract of lease, and considering that the rooms were intended for a business purpose, we cannot understand why they did not specifically assert their right. If we believe petitioners' contention that they had been prevented from using the rooms for more than a year before the complaint for ejectment was filed, they should have demanded specific performance from the lessor and commenced an action in court. With the execution of the contract, petitioners were already in a position to exercise their right to the use and enjoyment of the property according to the terms of the lease contract.[56] As borne out by the records, the fact is that respondent turned over to petitioners the keys to the leased premises and petitioners, in fact, renovated the rooms. Thus, they were placed in possession of the premises and they had the right to the use and enjoyment of the same. They, likewise, had the right to resist any act of intrusion into their peaceful possession of the property, even as against the lessor itself. Yet, they did not lift a finger to protect their right if, indeed, there was a violation of the contract by the lessor.
2005-07-15
CALLEJO, SR., J.
Under Article 1054(3) of the New Civil Code, RCAM, as lessor, was obliged to maintain the LPI, as lessee, in the peaceful and adequate enjoyment of the areas/spaces for the entire duration of the contract.  And since it failed to comply with its obligation, the LPI had the right to suspend the payments of rentals[32] until possession thereof had been delivered to it. It also had the right to ask for the rescission of the MOA and indemnification for damages, or only the latter, allowing the contract to remain in force.[33] It would be unjust enrichment on the part of RCAM to require LPI to pay rentals for the areas/spaces leased by RCAM to MCIC.[34] The MTC is mandated to ascertain, after hearing the parties, the reasonable rentals LPI is obliged to pay for the leased areas/spaces, (except those sublet to MCIC) and ascertain, based on its findings, the amount that RCAM is obliged to refund to LPI, if any.