Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 700 views

    Macapagal vs. Remorin Et. Al. G.R. No. 158380. May 16, 2005 DIGESTED

    Uploaded by

    Jacquelyn Alegria
    1) Corazon owned a property that was illegally sold by her step-mother Purificacion to Catalina Remorin. Corazon filed suits to recover the property. 2) An agreement was made between Corazon, Catalina, and Laurelia where Corazon would sell the property to Laurelia and Catalina would use the proceeds to pay off her mortgage. 3) Catalina did not have authorization to later sell the property to Mariquita Macapagal. The sale to Laurelia was valid even though the contract did not state the accurate price, and Laurelia's ownership and title were upheld since she recorded the purchase first.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Macapagal vs. Remorin Et. Al. G.R. No. 158380. May 16, 2005 DIGESTED

    Uploaded by

    Jacquelyn Alegria
    700 views1 page
    1) Corazon owned a property that was illegally sold by her step-mother Purificacion to Catalina Remorin. Corazon filed suits to recover the property. 2) An agreement was made between Corazon, Catalina, and Laurelia where Corazon would sell the property to Laurelia and Catalina would use the proceeds to pay off her mortgage. 3) Catalina did not have authorization to later sell the property to Mariquita Macapagal. The sale to Laurelia was valid even though the contract did not state the accurate price, and Laurelia's ownership and title were upheld since she recorded the purchase first.

    Original Description:

    Agency Cases

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) Corazon owned a property that was illegally sold by her step-mother Purificacion to Catalina Remorin. Corazon filed suits to recover the property. 2) An agreement was made between Corazon, Catalina, and Laurelia where Corazon would sell the property to Laurelia and Catalina would use the proceeds to pay off her mortgage. 3) Catalina did not have authorization to later sell the property to Mariquita Macapagal. The sale to Laurelia was valid even though the contract did not state the accurate price, and Laurelia's ownership and title were upheld since she recorded the purchase first.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    700 views1 page

    Macapagal vs. Remorin Et. Al. G.R. No. 158380. May 16, 2005 DIGESTED

    Uploaded by

    Jacquelyn Alegria
    1) Corazon owned a property that was illegally sold by her step-mother Purificacion to Catalina Remorin. Corazon filed suits to recover the property. 2) An agreement was made between Corazon, Catalina, and Laurelia where Corazon would sell the property to Laurelia and Catalina would use the proceeds to pay off her mortgage. 3) Catalina did not have authorization to later sell the property to Mariquita Macapagal. The sale to Laurelia was valid even though the contract did not state the accurate price, and Laurelia's ownership and title were upheld since she recorded the purchase first.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    G.R. No.

    158380 May 16, 2005


    MARIQUITA MACAPAGAL v. CATALINA O. REMORIN,
    CORAZON CALUZA-BAMRUNGCHEEP, and LAURELIA
    CALUZA-VALENCIANO

    Facts: Corazon sold her property to mortgagor Laurelia. Although the
    contract did not accurately reflect the actual purchase price of the property,
    it remains valid because it is only a relative simulation which does not
    affect the validity of the contract but does require its reformation.

    > Sale (July 1986) of the Property of Corazon Caluza-Bamrungcheep
    (which was inherited from her father) by her step-mother Purificacion
    Arce-Caluza to Catalina Remorin ~ Corazon left for Thailand (after
    marriage to a Thai), Purificacion was entrusted with the administration of
    the property, Purificacion obtained Titles in her name by claiming to be
    the sole heir of her deceased husband and to have lost her TCTs > Catalina
    mortgaged the property to L & R Lending Corporation for P200k and then
    to Laurelia Caluza-Valenciano for P295k to pay off the former mortgage >
    Civil Suit (December 29, 1986) by Corazon for reconveyance and
    damages against Purificacion and Catalina upon discovery of the sale of
    her property and Criminal Suit by Corazon against Purificacion and
    Catalina for falsification and perjury > Deed of Transfer (May 4, 1987)
    executed by Catalina, signed by Purificacion as witness, admitting the
    wrong they did in illegally transferring the lots in their names and
    acknowledging Corazon to be the rightful owner ~ presented to the
    Register of Deeds which caused the cancellation of TCT in favor of
    Catalina and issuance of TCT in favor of Corazon but with annotation of
    Laurelias mortgage > MOA (September 9, 1988) among Corazon,
    Catalina and Laurelia where Corazon would sell her property and from its
    proceeds, Catalina would pay her mortgage obligation to Laurelia ~
    Approved (September 16, 1988) ~ (revision of the March 21, 1988 MOA
    that ceded ownership to Purificacion upon satisfaction of mortgage to
    Laurelia due to Purificacions death on July 28, 1988) > Sale (May 24,
    1989) of Property by Corazon to Laurelia ~ Issuance of TCT in Laurelias
    name (July 21, 1989) > Sale (August 24, 1989) of Property by Catalina to
    Mariquita Macapagal > SUIT (November 28, 1989) by Laurelia against
    Macapagal for ejectment > SUIT by Macapagal for nullification of the
    Sale to Laurelia > CONTENTION of Macapagal: that the contract of sale
    between Corazon and Laurelia was invalid because it did not reflect the
    true purchase price; that Catalina was authorized to sell the property as
    provided in the MOA that Catalina shall pay off her mortgage obligation
    and incidental expenses from the proceeds of the sale

    > Sale of Property by Corazon to Laurelia is VALID even if it did not
    accurately reflect the true consideration, the actual purchase price of the
    property > Not cause for declaration of its nullity ~ only a relative
    simulation of the contract which remains valid and enforceable ~ valid but
    subject to reformation

    > Catalina NOT AUTHORIZED to sell the property > Not Authorized
    under the MOA ~ MOA not a Waiver by Corazon, as owner of the
    property, of right to enjoy and dispose her property ~ Parties did not intend
    the MOA to be the document itself considering that they agreed to execute
    such other documents or papers as are necessary to implement the
    agreement ~ Necessity of a special power of attorney for an agent to enter
    into any contract by which the ownership of an immovable property is
    transmitted

    > Macapagal cannot enforce the MOA > stranger/third party > not
    identified outright as the buyer for whom he has been conferred a favor

    > Macapagal not a buyer in good faith ~ did not buy the disputed lot from
    its registered owner

    > Laurelia as the rightful owner > Double sales of real property, ownership
    passes to the vendee who, in good faith, first recorded it in the Registry of
    Property > Laurelia registered the sale and was issued a TCT in her name
    on July 21, 1989, even before the sale to Macapagal

    You might also like