Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

JULIE NABUS v. JOAQUIN PACSON

This case has been cited 8 times or more.

	GR No. 196251 2014-07-09	OLIVAREZ REALTY CORPORATION v. BENJAMIN CASTILLO LEONEN, J.
In both contracts to sell and contracts of conditional sale, title to the property remains with the seller until the buyer fully pays the purchase price.[110] Both contracts are subject to the positive suspensive condition of the buyer's full payment of the purchase price.[111]
	GR No. 196251 2014-07-09	OLIVAREZ REALTY CORPORATION v. BENJAMIN CASTILLO LEONEN, J.
In both contracts to sell and contracts of conditional sale, title to the property remains with the seller until the buyer fully pays the purchase price.[110] Both contracts are subject to the positive suspensive condition of the buyer's full payment of the purchase price.[111]
	GR No. 196251 2014-07-09	OLIVAREZ REALTY CORPORATION v. BENJAMIN CASTILLO LEONEN, J.
In a contract of conditional sale, the buyer automatically acquires title to the property upon full payment of the purchase price.[112] This transfer of title is "by operation of law without any further act having to be performed by the seller."[113] In a contract to sell, transfer of title to the prospective buyer is not automatic.[114] "The prospective seller [must] convey title to the property [through] a deed of conditional sale."[115]
	GR No. 196251 2014-07-09	OLIVAREZ REALTY CORPORATION v. BENJAMIN CASTILLO LEONEN, J.
Specifically, Article 1191 of the Civil Code on the right to rescind reciprocal obligations does not apply to contracts to sell.[117] As this court explained in Ong v. Court of Appeals,[118] failure to fully pay the purchase price in contracts to sell is not the breach of contract under Article 1191.[119] Failure to fully pay the purchase price is "merely an event which prevents the [seller's] obligation to convey title from acquiring binding force."[120] This is because "there can be no rescission of an obligation that is still non-existent, the suspensive condition not having [happened]."[121]
	GR No. 190016 2013-10-02	FREDERICK VENTURA v. HEIRS OF SPS. EUSTACIO T. ENDAYA AND TRINIDAD L. ENDAYA PERLAS-BERNABE, J.
A contract to sell is defined as a bilateral contract whereby the prospective seller, while expressly reserving the ownership of the subject property despite delivery thereof to the prospective buyer, binds himself to sell the said property exclusively to the latter upon his fulfillment of the conditions agreed upon, i.e., the full payment of the purchase price[50] and/or compliance with the other obligations stated in the contract to sell. Given its contingent nature, the failure of the prospective buyer to make full payment[51] and/or abide by his commitments stated in the contract to sell prevents the obligation of the prospective seller to execute the corresponding deed of sale to effect the transfer of ownership to the buyer from arising. As discussed in Sps. Serrano and Herrera v. Caguiat:[52]
	GR No. 178584 2012-10-08	ASSOCIATED MARINE OFFICERS v. NORIEL DECENA PERLAS-BERNABE, J.
It is basic that a contract is what the law defines it to be, and not what it is called by the contracting parties. A contract to sell is defined as a bilateral contract whereby the prospective seller, while expressly reserving the ownership of the subject property despite delivery thereof to the prospective buyer, binds itself to sell the said property exclusively to the prospective buyer upon fulfillment of the condition agreed upon, that is, full payment of the purchase price.[22]
	GR No. 171359 2012-07-18	BENJAMIN A. UMIPIG v. PEOPLE VILLARAMA, JR., J.
Palomo requested for the release of down payment in the amount of P6,910,260.00 notwithstanding that no contract of sale had yet been consummated, as only a contract to sell was executed by the supposed attorney-in-fact of the vendors, Solis. As earlier mentioned, the Contract to Sell over Lots 1731 and 1732 stipulated that the balance of the total consideration is to be paid 15 days after receipt of the approved "[e]xtrajudicial partition of Estate, location plan, reconstitution of owner's copy and signing of [the] Deed of Sale." This clearly indicates that the parties agreed to execute the contract of sale only after the full payment of the purchase price by the buyer and the corresponding submission by the seller of the documents necessary for the transfer of registration of the lots sold. We have held that where the vendor promises to execute a deed of absolute sale upon the completion by the vendee of the payment of the price, the contract is only a contract to sell. Such stipulation shows that the vendor reserved title to the subject property until full payment of the purchase price.[64]
	GR No. 188064 2011-06-01	MILA A. REYES v. VICTORIA T. TUPARAN MENDOZA, J.
Accordingly, the petitioner's obligation to sell the subject properties becomes demandable only upon the happening of the positive suspensive condition, which is the respondent's full payment of the purchase price. Without respondent's full payment, there can be no breach of contract to speak of because petitioner has no obligation yet to turn over the title. Respondent's failure to pay in full the purchase price is not the breach of contract contemplated under Article 1191 of the New Civil Code but rather just an event that prevents the petitioner from being bound to convey title to the respondent. The 2009 case of Nabus v. Joaquin & Julia Pacson[8] is enlightening: The Court holds that the contract entered into by the Spouses Nabus and respondents was a contract to sell, not a contract of sale.