Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 32 views

    Hermosa Vs Longara 49 OG 4287

    Uploaded by

    Dominic Benjamin
    Fernando Hermosa, Sr. received credit advances from Epifanio Longara that were payable once Hermosa Sr.'s property in Spain was sold and money from the sale was received. This suspensive condition occurred 10 years later, after Hermosa Sr.'s death. The court ruled that (1) the obligation was not a purely potestative condition dependent solely on Hermosa Sr.'s will, but was a mixed condition that also depended on an outside buyer purchasing the property; and (2) the action to claim the advances did not prescribe, as the obligation to pay only became due and demandable upon the happening of the suspensive condition of the property sale.

    Copyright:

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

    Hermosa Vs Longara 49 OG 4287

    Uploaded by

    Dominic Benjamin
    32 views1 page
    Fernando Hermosa, Sr. received credit advances from Epifanio Longara that were payable once Hermosa Sr.'s property in Spain was sold and money from the sale was received. This suspensive condition occurred 10 years later, after Hermosa Sr.'s death. The court ruled that (1) the obligation was not a purely potestative condition dependent solely on Hermosa Sr.'s will, but was a mixed condition that also depended on an outside buyer purchasing the property; and (2) the action to claim the advances did not prescribe, as the obligation to pay only became due and demandable upon the happening of the suspensive condition of the property sale.

    Original Description:

    obligations and contracts

    Original Title

    Hermosa vs Longara 49 OG 4287

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Fernando Hermosa, Sr. received credit advances from Epifanio Longara that were payable once Hermosa Sr.'s property in Spain was sold and money from the sale was received. This suspensive condition occurred 10 years later, after Hermosa Sr.'s death. The court ruled that (1) the obligation was not a purely potestative condition dependent solely on Hermosa Sr.'s will, but was a mixed condition that also depended on an outside buyer purchasing the property; and (2) the action to claim the advances did not prescribe, as the obligation to pay only became due and demandable upon the happening of the suspensive condition of the property sale.

    Copyright:

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

    Hermosa Vs Longara 49 OG 4287

    Uploaded by

    Dominic Benjamin
    Fernando Hermosa, Sr. received credit advances from Epifanio Longara that were payable once Hermosa Sr.'s property in Spain was sold and money from the sale was received. This suspensive condition occurred 10 years later, after Hermosa Sr.'s death. The court ruled that (1) the obligation was not a purely potestative condition dependent solely on Hermosa Sr.'s will, but was a mixed condition that also depended on an outside buyer purchasing the property; and (2) the action to claim the advances did not prescribe, as the obligation to pay only became due and demandable upon the happening of the suspensive condition of the property sale.

    Copyright:

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

    Hermosa vs Longara 49 OG 4287

    Case # 38

    Topic: Mixed Condition

    Submitted by: Patrick Amparo

    Facts: Fernando Hermosa, Sr. made credit advances for himself and his family members from Epifanio
    M. Longara “payable as soon as Fernando Hermosa, Sr. ‘ property in Spain was sold and he receive
    money derived from the sale”. The suspensive condition happened ten years after the advances were
    made and after the death of Hermosa Sr. CA approved Longara’s action to claim such advances against
    the testate estate of Hermosa Sr. On appeal, it was contended that the obligation was null and void
    since the obligation was subject to a condition solely dependent upon the will of the debtor (art 1115 of
    the old Civil Code).

    Issue 1: Was the obligation subject to a potestative condition?

    Ruling: No. Besides the will of Hermosa, Sr. to sell, there were other conditions that had to concur in
    order to effect the sale such as the presence of a buyer willing to purchase the property under the
    conditions demanded by the seller. Without such a buyer, the proceeds from the sale would not have
    been sent to the islands. Therefore, the obligation was valid since it was not a purely potestative one but
    a mixed one dependent partly upon the will of the debtor and partly upon chance.

    Issue 2: Did the action to claim advances prescribe considering that the suspensive condition happened
    ten years after advances were made?

    Ruling: No. As the obligation retroacts to the date when the contract was entered into, all amounts
    advanced from the time of the agreement became due, upon the happening of the suspensive
    condition. As the obligation to pay became due and demandable only when the house was sold and the
    proceeds received in the islands, the action to recover the same only accrued, within the meaning of the
    statute of limitations, on date the money became available here hence the action to recover the
    advances has not yet prescribed.

    You might also like