Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 59 views

    Amerol v. Bagumbaran

    Uploaded by

    Val Cea
    Bagumbaran applied for and was granted a patent for Amerol's land without Amerol's knowledge. Nine years later, when Amerol learned of this, he filed for reconveyance of the land, which the trial court denied, stating the four year period to file for reconveyance had passed. The Supreme Court ruled that the period was actually ten years for cases involving implied or constructive trusts, so Amerol's claim was still valid. The Supreme Court found in favor of Amerol and reversed the trial court's decision.

    Copyright:

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

    Amerol v. Bagumbaran

    Uploaded by

    Val Cea
    59 views1 page
    Bagumbaran applied for and was granted a patent for Amerol's land without Amerol's knowledge. Nine years later, when Amerol learned of this, he filed for reconveyance of the land, which the trial court denied, stating the four year period to file for reconveyance had passed. The Supreme Court ruled that the period was actually ten years for cases involving implied or constructive trusts, so Amerol's claim was still valid. The Supreme Court found in favor of Amerol and reversed the trial court's decision.

    Original Title

    Amerol v. Bagumbaran.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Bagumbaran applied for and was granted a patent for Amerol's land without Amerol's knowledge. Nine years later, when Amerol learned of this, he filed for reconveyance of the land, which the trial court denied, stating the four year period to file for reconveyance had passed. The Supreme Court ruled that the period was actually ten years for cases involving implied or constructive trusts, so Amerol's claim was still valid. The Supreme Court found in favor of Amerol and reversed the trial court's decision.

    Copyright:

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

    Amerol v. Bagumbaran

    Uploaded by

    Val Cea
    Bagumbaran applied for and was granted a patent for Amerol's land without Amerol's knowledge. Nine years later, when Amerol learned of this, he filed for reconveyance of the land, which the trial court denied, stating the four year period to file for reconveyance had passed. The Supreme Court ruled that the period was actually ten years for cases involving implied or constructive trusts, so Amerol's claim was still valid. The Supreme Court found in favor of Amerol and reversed the trial court's decision.

    Copyright:

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

    Amerol v.

    Bagumbaran

    G.r. no. l-33261 September 30, 1987

    Facts:

    Unbeknownst Amerol, Bagumbaran applied for patent application over the formers land. Amerol took
    action to cancel the patent only after 9 years from its registration. He prayed for reconveyance which
    the trial court denied stating that the former unfortunately lost his right to reconveyance within the
    period of 4 years from the date of registration of said patent.

    Issue:

    Has the action for reconveyance prescribed?

    Held:

    No. An action for reconveyance based on an implied or constructive trust must perforce prescribed in 10
    years and not otherwise. It is well settled that an action for reconveyance based on an implied or
    constructive trust prescribes in 10 years from the issuance of the torrens title over the property.

    You might also like