Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (20082015)

Law

EFFECT AND APPLICATION OF LAWS

There is no irreconcilable conflict or repugnancy between Section 28 of R.A. No.
7279 and P.D. No. 1315 and No. 1472, rather, they can be read together and
harmonized to give effect to their provision. It should be stressed that Section 28 of
R.A. No. 7279 does not totally and absolutely prohibit eviction and demolition
without a judicial order as in fact it provides for exceptions. Pursuant to established
doctrine, the three (3) statutes should be construed in the light of the objective to
be achieved and the evil or mischief to be suppressed by the said laws, and they
should be given such construction as will advance the object, suppress the mischief
and secure the benefits intended. It is worthy to note that the three laws (P.D. No.
1315, P.D. No. 1472 and R.A. No. 7279) have a common objective to address the
housing problems of the country by establishing a comprehensive urban
development and housing program for the homeless. For this reason, the need to
harmonize these laws all the more becomes imperative. - Caridad Magkalas vs.
National Housing Authority, G.R. No. 138823, September 17, 2008
CONFLICT OF LAWS
In an action for enforcement of foreign judgment, the Court has limited review over
the decision rendered by the foreign tribunal. The Philippine courts cannot pass
upon the merits of the case pursuant to the incorporation clause of the Constitution,
unless there is proof of want of jurisdiction, want of notice to the party, collusion,
fraud, or clear mistake of law or fact. - Bank of the Philippine Islands Securities
Corporation vs. Edgardo V. Guevara, G.R. No. 167052, March 11, 2015
HUMAN RELATIONS
UNJUST ENRICHMENT
Expounding on this provision in a recent case, we have held that the principle of
unjust enrichment essentially contemplates payment when there is no duty to pay,
and the person who receives the payment has no right to receive it.
In light of the overpayment, it seems specious for petitioner to claim that it has
suffered damages from respondents refusal to pay its Progress Billing, which had
been proven to be excessive and inaccurate. Bearing in mind the law and
jurisprudence on unjust enrichment, we hold that petitioner is indeed liable to return
what it had received beyond the actual value of the work it had done for
respondent. - R.V. Santos Company, Inc. vs. Belle Corporation, G.R. Nos.
159561-62, October 3, 2012
PERSONS
PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY

Page 1 of 19

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (20082015)

Law

There is no requirement that the defendant/respondent spouse should be personally

examined by a physician or psychologist as a condition sine qua non for the
declaration of nullity of marriage based on psychological incapacity. - Marietta C.
Azcueta vs. Republic of the Philippines and the Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
180668, May 26, 2009
Article 36 of the Family Code is not to be confused with a divorce law that cuts the
marital bond at the time the causes therefore manifest themselves. It refers to a
serious psychological illness afflicting a party even before the celebration of the
marriage. It is a malady so grave and so permanent as to deprive one of awareness
of the duties and responsibilities of the matrimonial bond one is about to assume.
Judicial precedents regarding the evidentiary requirements in psychological
incapacity cases that must be applied. Jose Reynaldo B. Ochosa vs. Bona J.
Alano and Republic of the Philippines, G.R. No. 167459, January 26, 2011
PROPERTY RELATIONS OF THE SPOUSES (FAMILY CODE)
When the sale is made before the effectivity of the Family Code, the applicable law
is the Civil Code. Article 173 of the Civil Code provides that the disposition of
conjugal property without the wife's consent is not void but merely voidable. - Heirs
Of Domingo Hernandez, Sr., namely: Sergia V. Hernandez (Surviving
Spouse), Domingo V. Hernandez, Jr., and Maria Leonora Wilma Hernandez
vs. Plaridel Mingoa, Sr., Dolores Camisura, Melanie Mingoa, and Quezon
City Register of Deeds, G.R. No. 146548, December 18 2009
PROPERTY
OWNERSHIP
A Torrens title cannot be attacked collaterally, and the issue on its validity can be
raised only in an action expressly instituted for that purpose. A collateral attack is
made when, in another action to obtain a different relief, the certificate of title is
assailed as an incident in said action. Spouses Decaleng only sought the dismissal
of the complaint of PEC-EDNP plus the grant of their counterclaim for the payment
of moral damages, exemplary damages, litigation expenses, and attorneys fees.
They conspicuously did not pray for the annulment or cancellation of Certificate of
Title No. 1. Evidently, the Spouses Decalengs attack on the validity, as well as the
existence of Certificate of Title No. 1 is only incidental to their defense against the
accion publiciana and accion reinvindicatoria instituted by PEC-EDNP, hence, merely
collateral. - Sps. Ambrosio Decaleng (substituted by his heirs) and Julia
"Wanay" Decaleng vs. Bishop of the Missionary District of the Philippine
Islands of Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America,

Page 2 of 19

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (20082015)

Law

otherwise known as the Philippine Episcopal Church, G.R. No. 171209, June
27, 2012

ACCESSION
The accessory follows the principal. The right of accession is recognized under
Article 440 of the Civil Code which states that the ownership of property gives the
right by accession to everything which is produced thereby, or which is incorporated
or attached thereto, either naturally or artificially. - Maria Torbela, represented
by her heirs, Eulogio Tosino, et al. vs. Spouses Andres T. Rosario, et al.,
G.R. No. 140528, December 7, 2011
QUIETING OF TITLE

Vidal filed an action for quieting of title with regard to the land she inherited
from Francisco Cacho. However, Teofilo opposed contended that there is no
title to be disturbed in the first place. The court ruled that this action
indisputably an action for quieting of title, a special proceeding wherein the
court is precisely tasked to determine the rights of the parties as to a
particular parcel of land, so that the complainant and those claiming under
him/her may be forever free from any danger of hostile claim. - Republic of
the Philippines vs. Hon. Mamindiara P. Mangotara, et al., G.R. No. 170375,
July 7, 2010

The Syjucos' title, shows that it originated from OCT No. 994 registered on May 3,
1917 while Bonficacio's title shows that that it likewise originated from OCT No. 994,
but registered on April 19, 1917. This case affirmed the earlier finding that there is
only one OCT No. 994, the registration date of which had already been decisively
settled as 3 May 1917 and not 19 April 1917 and categorically concluded that OCT
No. 994 which reflects the date of 19 April 1917 as its registration date is null and
void. - Imelda Syjuco, et al., vs. Felisa D. Bonifacio and VSD Realty &
Corporation, G.R. No. 148748, January 14, 2015
For an action to quiet title to prosper, two indispensable requisites must concur: (1)
the plaintiff or complainant has a legal or equitable title or interest in the real
property subject of the action; and (2) the deed, claim, encumbrance, or proceeding
claimed to be casting a cloud on his title must be shown to be in fact invalid or
inoperative despite its prima facie appearance of validity or legal efficacy. Herminio M. De Guzman, for himself and as Attorney-In-Fact of Nilo M. De
Guzman, Angelino De Guzman, Josefino M. De Guzman, Estrella M. De
Guzman, Teresita De Guzman, Elsa Margarita M. De Guzman, Evelyn M. De
Page 3 of 19

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (20082015)

Law

Guzman, Ma. Nimia M. De Guzman, Antolin M. De Guzman, and Ferdinand

M. De Guzman vs. Tabangao Realty Incorporated, G.R. No. 154262,
February 11, 2015
POSESSION
It is a time-honored legal precept that after the consolidation of titles in the buyers
name, for failure of the mortgagor to redeem, entitlement to a writ of possession
becomes a matter of right. - Viola Cahilig et al., vs. Hon. Eustaquio G.
Terencio et al., G.R. No. 164470, November 28, 2011

OBLIGATIONS
EXTINGUISHMENT OF OBLIGATIONS
Article 1391 of the Civil Code, which pertinently reads: The action for annulment
shall be brought within four years. In case of mistake or fraud, this period shall
begin from the time of the discovery of the same. - Spouses Renato and Florinda
Dela Cruz vs. Spouses Gil and Leonila Segovia, G.R. No. 149801, June 26,
2008
In general, a payment in order to be effective to discharge an obligation, must be
made to the proper person. Thus, payment must be made to the obligee himself or
to an agent having authority, express or implied, to receive the particular payment.
Hence, absent any showing that the respondent agreed to the payment of the
contract price to another person, or that she authorized Cruz to claim the check on
her behalf, the payment, to be effective must be made to her. - Republic of the
Philippines, represented by the Chief of the Philippine National Police vs.
Thi Thu Thuy T. De Guzman, G.R. No. 175021, June 15, 2011
It is important to note at this point that in the determination of the nullity of a
contract based on the lack of consideration, the debtor has the burden to prove the
same. Article 1354 of the Civil Code provides that "although the cause is not stated
in the contract, it is presumed that it exists and is lawful, unless the debtor proves
the contrary." - Union Bank of the Philippines vs. Spouses Rodolfo T. Tiu
and Victoria N. Tiu, G.R. Nos. 173090-91, September 7, 2011
CONTRACTS
ESSENTIAL REQUISISTES
When there is as of yet no meeting of the minds as to the subject matter or the
cause or consideration of the contract being negotiated, the same cannot be
considered to have been perfected. - MCA-MBF Countdown Cards Philippines
Inc., Amable R. Aguiluz V, Amable C. Aguiluz IX, Cielo C. Aguiluz, Alberto
L. Buenviaje, Vicente Acsay and MCA Holdings and Management
Page 4 of 19

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (20082015)

Law

Corporation vs. MBf Card International Limited and MBf Discount Card
Limited, G.R. No. 173586, March 14, 2012
KINDS OF CONTRACTS
SALVADOR A. FERNANDEZ vs. CRISTINA D. AMAGNA
G.R. No. 152614, September 30, 2009, J. Leonardo-De Castro
When the contract of lease does not provide for a definite period for its
duration, the lease shall be considered month to month if the rentals are paid on a
monthly basis and when the lessee fails to pay the monthly rental, the contract of
lease shall be considered terminated.
ROLANDO T. CATUNGAL, JOSE T. CATUNGAL, JR., CAROLYN T. CATUNGAL and
ERLINDA CATUNGAL-WESSEL vs. ANGEL S. RODRIGUEZ
G.R. No. 146839, March 23, 2011, J. LEONARDO-DE CASTRO
This Court has distinguished between a condition imposed on the perfection
of a contract and a condition imposed merely on the performance of an obligation.
While failure to comply with the first condition results in the failure of a contract,
failure to comply with the second merely gives the other party the option to either
refuse to proceed with the sale or to waive the condition.
INTERPRETATION OF CONTRACTS
As mandated by Article 1370 of the Civil Code, if the terms of the contract are clear
and leave no doubt upon the intention of the contracting parties, the literal meaning
of its stipulations shall control. The agreement is clear, plain and simple that it
leaves no room for interpretation. It explicitly provides that for the services of
Zamora, as agent under the agreement, Multiwood agreed to pay her in the amount
equivalent to 10% of the face value of the invoice price, covering the letter of credit
or such other instrument representing the actual purchase price for the products
sold or shipped by Multiwood. - Heirs of Deceased Carmen Cruz-Zamora vs.
Multiwood International Inc., G.R. No. 146428, January 19, 2009
DEFECTIVE CONTRACTS
The proper basis for the nullity of the forged pacto de retro sale is Article 1318 of
the Civil Code, which enumerates the essential requisites of a valid contract, and
not Article 1409 which enumerates examples of void contracts in relation to Article
1505 which refers to an unenforceable contract and is applicable only to goods. Vicente Manzano, Jr. vs. Marcelino Garcia, G.R. No. 179323, November 28,
2011
Article 1305 of the Civil Code allows contracting parties to establish such
stipulation, clauses, terms, and conditions as they may deem convenient, provided,
however, that they are not contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order, or
public policy.
Page 5 of 19

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (20082015)

Law

Pactum commissorium is among the contractual stipulations that are deemed

contrary to law. It is defined as "a stipulation empowering the creditor to
appropriate the thing given as guaranty for the fulfillment of the obligation in the
event the obligor fails to live up to his undertakings, without further formality, such
as foreclosure proceedings, and a public sale." It is explicitly prohibited under Article
2088 of the Civil Code. - Philnico Industrial Corporation vs. Privatization and
Management Office, G.R. No. 199420, August 27, 2014
RESCISSION OF CONTRACTS
The general rule is that he who alleges fraud or mistake in a transaction must
substantiate his allegation as the presumption is that a person takes ordinary care
for his concerns and that private dealings have been entered into fairly and
regularly." One who alleges defect or lack of valid consent to a contract by reason of
fraud or undue influence must establish by full, clear and convincing evidence such
specific acts that vitiated a partys consent, otherwise, the latters presumed
consent to the contract prevails. - Fontana Resort and Country Club, Inc. and
RN Development Corp. vs. Spouses Roy S. Tan and Susan C. Tan, G.R. No.
154670, January 30, 2012
SALES
EXTINGUISHMENT OF SALE
The alleged nullity of the deed of conditional sale because the period of redemption
had expired is wrong. The right of legal redemption must be exercised within
specified time limits. However, the statutory period of redemption can be extended
by agreement of the parties. Allowing a redemption after the lapse of the statutory
period, when the buyer at the foreclosure does not object but even consents to the
redemption, will uphold the policy of the law recognized in such cases as Javellana
v. Mirasol and Nuez, and in the more recent case of Tibajia, et al. v. Honorable
Court of Appeals, et al., which is to aid rather than defeat the right of redemption. Republic of the Philippines vs. Marawi-Marantao General Hospital Inc, and
Atty. Macapanton K. Mangodadatu, G.R. No. 158920, November 28, 2012
PARTNERSHIP
There is a co-ownership when an undivided thing or right belongs to different
persons. It is a partnership when two or more persons bind themselves to contribute
money, property, or industry to a common fund, with the intention of dividing the
profits among themselves. A partner is entitled only to his share as agreed upon, or
in the absence of any such stipulations, then to his share in proportion to his
contribution to the partnership. - Federico Jarantilla, Jr. vs. Antonieta
Jarantilla, Buenaventura Remotigue, substituted by Cynthia Remotigue,
Doroteo Jarantilla and Tomas Jarantilla, G.R. No. 154486, December 1,
2010
Page 6 of 19

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (20082015)

Law

AGENCY
Our law mandates an agent to act within the scope of his authority. The scope of an
agents authority is what appears in the written terms of the power of attorney
granted upon him. Under Article 1878(11) of the Civil Code, a special power of
attorney is necessary to obligate the principal as a guarantor or surety. In the case
at bar, the principal could be held liable even if the agent exceeded the scope of his
authority only if the agents act of issuing the Surety Bond is deemed to have been
performed within the written terms of the power of attorney he was granted.
However, the Special Power of Attorney accorded to the agent in this case clearly
states the limits of his authority and particularly provides that in case of surety
bonds, it can only be issued in favor of the Department of Public Works and
Highways, the National Power Corporation, and other government agencies. Country Bankers Insurance Corporation vs. Keppel Cebu Shipyard,
Unimarine Shipping Lines, Inc., Paul Rodriguez, Peter Rodriguez, Albert
Hontanosas, and Bethoven Quinain, G.R. No. 166044, June 18, 2012
TRUST
A trust may have a constructive or implied nature in the beginning, but the
registered owners subsequent express acknowledgement in a public document of a
previous sale of the property to another party, had the effect of imparting to the
aforementioned trust the nature of an express trust. - Maria Torbela, represented
by her heirs, Eulogio Tosino et al vs. Spouses Andres T. Rosario et al, G.R.
No. 140528, December 7, 2011
A constructive trust is substantially an appropriate remedy against unjust
enrichment. It is raised by equity in respect of property, which has been acquired by
fraud, or where although acquired originally without fraud, it is against equity that it
should be retained by the person holding it. Thus, the payees, who acquired the
retirement benefits under the GSIS RFP, are considered as trustees of the disallowed
amounts, as although they committed no fraud in obtaining these benefits, it is
against equity and good conscience for them to continue holding on to them.
Government Service Insurance System (GSIS), et al. vs. Commission On
Audit (COA), Amorsonia B. Escarda, Ma. Cristina D. Dimagiba, and
Reynaldo P. Ventura, G.R. No. 162372, September 11, 2012
CREDIT TRANSACTIONS
LOAN

Page 7 of 19

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (20082015)

Law

There is no express trust made if there is no clear and manifest intention to create
such. If after careful scrutiny of the document, it is clear that what was intended
was the establishment of a lien over the subject properties as a form of collateral,
then the underlying agreement is a loan, not a trust. - Philippine National Bank
vs. Merelo B. Aznar, et al., G.R. No. 171805, May 30, 2011
REAL MORTGAGE
It has been settled that there is effective registration once the registrant has fulfilled
all that is needed of him for purposes of entry and annotation, so that what is left to
be accomplished lies solely on the register of deeds. As such, an entry of the
certificate of sale was validly registered even if the same was only annotated in the
owners transfer certificates of titles. Particularly, the purchaser in the auction sale
cannot be faulted for the impossibility of annotation on the transfer certificates of
title which were supposed to be in the custody of the Registrar of Deeds, like in
instances when the same were previously razed in fire. Neither could such
purchaser be blamed for the fact that there were no reconstituted titles available
during the time of inscription as it had taken the necessary steps in having the
same reconstituted but to no avail. Hence, the one-year period of redemption
commences to run from the said annotation and the failure of the mortgagors to
redeem during the said period entitles the purchaser to the writ of possession as a
matter of right. - National Housing Authority vs. Augusto Basa, Jr., Luz Basa
and Eduardo S. Basa, G.R. No. 149121, April 20, 2010
Foreclosure proceedings enjoy the presumption of regularity and that the mortgagor
who alleges absence of a requisite has the burden of proving such fact.
The publication of the notice of sale in the newspaper of general circulation alone is
more than sufficient compliance with the notice posting requirement of the law. By
such publication, a reasonably wide publicity had been effected such that those
interested might attend the public sale, and the purpose of the law had been
thereby subserved. - Century Savings Bank vs. Spouses Danilo T. Samonte
and Rosalinda M. Samonte, G.R. No. 176212, October 20, 2010
If the proceeds of the sale are insufficient to cover the debt in an extrajudicial
foreclosure of mortgage, the mortgagee is entitled to claim the deficiency from the
debtor. While Act No. 3135, as amended, does not discuss the mortgagees right to
recover the deficiency, neither does it contain any provision expressly or impliedly
prohibiting recovery. - BPI Family Savings Bank, Inc. vs. Ma. Arlyn T. Avenido
& Pacifico A. Avenido , G.R. No. 175816, December 7, 2011
Gross inadequacy of price does not nullify an execution sale. In an ordinary sale, for
reason of equity, a transaction may be invalidated on the ground of inadequacy of
price, or when such inadequacy shocks ones conscience as to justify the courts to
interfere; such does not follow when the law gives the owner the right to redeem as
when a sale is made at public auction, upon the theory that the lesser the price, the
easier it is for the owner to effect redemption. When there is a right to redeem,
Page 8 of 19

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (20082015)

Law

inadequacy of price should not be material because the judgment debtor may reacquire the property or else sell his right to redeem and thus recover any loss he
claims to have suffered by reason of the price obtained at the execution sale. Thus,
respondent stood to gain rather than be harmed by the low sale value of the
auctioned properties because it possesses the right of redemption. - Bank Of The
Philippine Islands, as Successor-In-Interest of Far East Bank & Trust
Company vs. Cynthia L. Reyes, G.R. No. 182769, February 1, 2012
While it is true that the annotation of the first mortgage to Villar on Galass TCT
contained a restriction on further encumbrances without the mortgagees prior
consent, this restriction was nowhere to be found in the Deed of Real Estate
Mortgage. As this Deed became the basis for the annotation on Galass title, its
terms and conditions take precedence over the standard, stamped annotation
placed on her title. If it were the intention of the parties to impose such restriction,
they would have and should have stipulated such in the Deed of Real Estate
Mortgage itself. Moreover, Villars purchase of the mortgaged property did not
violate the prohibition on pactum commissorium. The power of attorney provision in
favor of Villar did not provide that the ownership over the subject property would
automatically pass to Villar upon Galass failure to pay the loan on time. What it
granted was the mere appointment of Villar as attorney-in-fact, with authority to sell
or otherwise dispose of the subject property, and to apply the proceeds to the
payment of the loan. Finally, Villar did not obligate herself to replace the debtor in
the principal obligation upon his buying of the mortgaged property, and could not
do so in law without the creditors consent. Therefore, the obligation to pay the
mortgage indebtedness remains with the original debtors Galas and Pingol. - Pablo
P. Garcia vs. Yolanda Valdez Villar, G.R. No. 158891, June 27, 2012

DRAGNET CLAUSE
As a general rule, a mortgage liability is usually limited to the amount mentioned in
the contract. However, the amounts named as consideration in a contract of
mortgage do not limit the amount for which the mortgage may stand as security if,
from the four corners of the instrument, the intent to secure future and other
indebtedness can be gathered. This stipulation is valid and binding between the
parties and is known as the "blanket mortgage clause" also known as the "dragnet
clause. - Ramona Ramos and the Estate of Luis T. Ramos vs. Philippine
National Bank, Opal Portfolio Investments (SPV-AMC), Inc. and Golden
Dragon Star Equities, Inc., G.R. No. 178218, December 14, 2011
JUST COMPENSATION
When the acquisition process under PD 27 remains incomplete and is overtaken by
RA 6657, the process should be completed under RA 6657, with PD 27 and EO 228

Page 9 of 19

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (20082015)

Law

having suppletory effect only. This means that PD 27 applies only insofar as there
are gaps in RA 6657; where RA 6657 is sufficient, PD 27 is superseded.
Moreover, the Court has allowed the grant of interest in expropriation cases where
there is delay in the payment of just compensation. In fact, the interest imposed in
case of delay in payments in agrarian cases is 12% per annum and not 6% as "the
imposition x x x is in the nature of damages for delay in payment which in effect
makes the obligation on the part of the government one of forbearance."
Finally, the constitutional limitation of "just compensation" is considered to be the
sum equivalent to the market value of the property, broadly described to be the
price fixed by the seller in open market in the usual and ordinary course of legal
action and competition or the fair value of the property as between one who
receives, and one who desires to sell, if fixed at the time of the actual taking by the
government. Thus, if property is taken for public use before compensation is
deposited with the court having jurisdiction over the case , the final compensation
must include interest on its just value to be computed from the time the property is
taken to the time when compensation is actually paid or deposited with the court. In
fine, between the taking of the property and the actual payment, legal interests
accrue in order to place the owner in a position as good as (but not better than) the
position he was in before the taking occurred. - Land Bank of the Philippines vs.
Emiliano R. Santiago, Jr., G.R. No. 182209, October 3, 2012
LEASE
LEASE OF RURAL AND URBAN LANDS
The well-entrenched principle is that a lease from month-to-month is with a definite
period and expires at the end of each month upon the demand to vacate by the
lessor.
The subsequent acceptance by the lessor of rental payments does not, absent any
circumstance that may dictate a contrary conclusion, legitimize the unlawful
character of their possession. - Cebu Bionic Builders Supply, Inc. and Lydia Sia
vs. Development Bank of the Philippines, Jose To Chip, Patricio Yap and
Roger Balila, G.R. No. 154366, November 17, 2010
In case the lessee chooses to renew the lease but there are no specified terms and
conditions for the new contract of lease, the same terms and conditions as the
original contract of lease shall continue to govern. - Manila International Airport
Authority vs. Ding Velayo Sports Center, Inc , G.R. No. 161718, December
14, 2011
LAND TITLES AND DEEDS
JURISDICTION
Page 10 of 19

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (20082015)

Law

It is well-settled that the DAR, through its adjudication arm, i.e., the DARAB and its
regional and provincial adjudication boards, exercises quasi-judicial functions and
jurisdiction on all matters pertaining to an agrarian dispute or controversy and the
implementation of agrarian reform laws. Pertinently, it is provided in the DARAB
Revised Rules of Procedure that the DARAB has primary and exclusive jurisdiction,
both original and appellate, to determine and adjudicate all agrarian disputes
involving the implementation of the CARP and related agrarian reform laws. Such
jurisdiction shall extend to cases involving the issuance, correction and cancellation
of Certificates of Land Ownership Award (CLOAs) and Emancipation Patents which
are registered with the Land Registration Authority. - Pedro Gabriel et. al. vs.
Murmuray Jamias et. al., G.R. No. 156482, September 17, 2008
It is a basic rule that jurisdiction is determined by the allegations in the complaint.
The peitioners complaints did not contain any allegation that would, even in the
slightest, imply that the issue to be resolved in this case involved an agrarian
dispute which would transfer the jurisdiction to Department of Agrarian Reform
Adjudication Board (DARAB). In the action filed by the petitioner, the issue to be
resolved was who between the petitioner and the private respondents and their
purported predecessors-in-interest, have a valid title over the subject properties in
light of the relevant facts and applicable laws. The case thus involves a controversy
relating to the ownership of the subject properties, which is beyond the scope of the
phrase "agrarian dispute." The jurisdiction must then belong to the Regional Trial
Court. - Bases Conversion Development Authority vs. Provincial Agrarian
Reform Officer of Pampanga, Register of Deeds of Angeles City, Benjamin
Poy Lorenzo, Lavernie Poy Lorenzo, Diosdado De Guzman, Rosemary Eng
Tay Tan, Leandro De Guzman, Benjamin G. Lorenzo, Antonio Manalo, and
Socorro De Guzman, G.R. Nos. 155322-29, June 27, 2012
TORRENS SYSTEM
Banks, their business being impressed with public interest, are expected to exercise
more care and prudence than private individuals in their dealings, even those
involving registered lands. The rule that persons dealing with registered lands can
rely solely on the certificate of title does not apply to banks. - Philippine Trust
Company (also known as Philtrust Bank) vs. Hon. Court of Appeals and
Forfom Development Corporation, G.R. No. 150318, November 22, 2010
Banco Filipino is not an ordinary mortgagee, but is a mortgagee-bank, whose
business is impressed with public interest. A banking institution is expected to
exercise due diligence before entering into a mortgage contract. The ascertainment
of the status or condition of a property offered to it as security for a loan must be a
standard and indispensable part of its operations. - Maria Torbela, represented
by her heirs, Eulogio Tosino et al vs. Spouses Andres T. Rosario et al, G.R.
No. 140528, December 7, 2011
Under the Regalian doctrine embodied in our Constitution, land that has not been
acquired from the government, either by purchase, grant, or any other mode
Page 11 of 19

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (20082015)

Law

recognized by law, belongs to the State as part of the public domain. Thus, it is
indispensable for a person claiming title to a public land to show that his title was
acquired through such means
It is not enough for the PENRO or CENRO to certify that a land is alienable and
disposable. The applicant for land registration must prove that the DENR Secretary
had approved the land classification and released the land of the public domain as
alienable and disposable, and that the land subject of the application for registration
falls within the approved area per verification through survey by the PENRO or
CENRO. In addition, the applicant for land registration must present a copy of the
original classification approved by the DENR Secretary and certified as a true copy
by the legal custodian of the official records. These facts must be established to
prove that the land is alienable and disposable. - Republic of the Philippines vs.
Gloria Jaralve substituted Alan Jess Jaralve Documento, Jr., Edgardo
Jaralve, Serafin Uy, Jr., Shella Uy, Lagnada, Say A-Ang, International Nimfa
Pantaleon Starg Lad and Development Corporation, Annie Tan, Teotimo
Cabarrubias, Jessica Daclan, Ma. Emma Ramas, Danilo Deen, and Eric
Anthony Deen, G.R. No. 175177, October 24, 2012
The real purpose of the Torrens system is to quiet title to land and to stop forever
any question as to its legality A Torrens title is generally a conclusive evidence of
the ownership of the land referred to therein.
Section 48 of Presidential Decree No. 1529, otherwise known as the Property
Registration Decree, explicitly provides that [a] certificate of title shall not be
subject to collateral attack. It cannot be altered, modified, or cancelled except in a
direct proceeding in accordance with law. - Deogenes O. Rodriguez vs. Hon.
Court of Appeals and Philippine Chinese Charitable Association, Inc., G.R.
No. 184589, June 13, 2013
REGISTRATION
Current doctrine thus seems to be that entry alone produces the effect of
registration, whether the transaction entered is a voluntary or an involuntary one,
so long as the registrant has complied with all that is required of him for purposes of
entry and annotation, and nothing more remains to be done but a duty incumbent
solely on the register of deeds. - Durawood Construction and Lumber Supply,
Inc. vs. Candice S. Bona, G.R. No. 179884, January 25, 2012
The Supreme Court had allowed substantial compliance with the requirement that
an applicant for land registration must prove that the DENR Secretary had approved
the land classification and released the land as alienable and disposable and was
lenient with the application of the rule that a CENRO Certification, by itself does not
prove that the land is alienable and disposable. However, such substantial
compliance and leniency will not be allowed where the Land Registration Authority
(LRA) or the DENR oppose the application on the ground that the land subject
thereof is inalienable. - Republic of the Philippines vs. Lydia Capco De

Page 12 of 19

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (20082015)

Law

Tensuan, represented by Claudia C. Aruelo, G.R. No. 171136, October 23,

2013
A party claiming ownership over a parcel of land cannot bank on the weakness and
defects of the title of the adverse party but rely on the strength of his claim. - CLT
Realty Development Corporation vs. Phil-Ville Development and Housing
Corporation, Republic Of The Philippines (through the OFFICE OF THE
SOLICITOR GENERAL), and the Register of Deeds of Metro Manila District
III, Caloocan, G .R. No. 160728, March 11, 2015
1. The buyer of the property does not automatically becomes a party to the land
registration case after complying with the requirements of Sec. 22 of P.D
1529.
2. Section 108 of Presidential Decree No. 1529 authorizes a person having
interest in a registered property to ask for the amendment and alteration of a
certificate of title or the entry of a new certificate if "new interests not
appearing upon the certificate have arisen or been created," "an omission or
error was made in entering a certificate or any memorandum thereon," or
"upon any other reasonable ground." - The Heirs of Eugenio Lopez, Sr.
namely, Oscar M. Lopez, Manuel M. Lopez and Presentacion L.
Psinakis vs. The Honorable Francisco Querubin, In His Capacity As
Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court of Antipolo, Branch 74,
The Heirs of Alfonso Sandoval and his wife Rosa Ruiz, represented
by
their
Attorney-In-Fact,
Mrs.
Imelda
Rivera
G.R. No. 155405, March 18, 2015
The ministerial duty of the land registration court to issue a writ of possession
ceases with respect to actual possessors of the property under a claim of
ownership. Heirs of Eugenio Lopez vs. Alfonso Sandoval and Roman Ozaeta,
Jr., G.R. No. 164092, March 18, 2015
Although the NCIP has the authority to issue temporary restraining orders and writs
of injunction, it was not convinced that private respondents were entitled to the
relief granted by the Commission. Proclamation No. 15 does not appear to be a
definitive recognition of private respondents ancestral land claim, as it merely
identifies the Molintas and Gumangan families as claimants of a portion of the Busol
Forest Reservation, but does not acknowledge vested rights over the same. Since it
is required before the issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction that claimants
show the existence of a right to be protected, this Court, previously, ultimately
granted the petition of the City Government of Baguio and set aside the writ of
preliminary injunction issued therein applying stare decisis. - The Baguio
Regreening Movement, Inc. vs. Atty. Brain Masweng G.R. No. 180882,
February 27, 2013

Page 13 of 19

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (20082015)

Law

INNOCENT PURCHASER FOR VALUE

The law does not require a person dealing with the owner of registered land to go
beyond the certificate of title as he may rely on the notices of the encumbrances on
the property annotated on the certificate of title or absence of any annotation. Here,
petitioners adverse claim is annotated at the back of the title coupled with the fact
that they are in possession of the disputed property. To [the Court], these
circumstances should have put respondents on guard and required them to
ascertain the property being offered to them has already been sold to another to
prevent injury to prior innocent buyers. A person who deliberately ignores a
significant fact which would create suspicion in an otherwise reasonable man is not
an innocent purchaser for value. It is a well-settled rule that a purchaser cannot
close his eyes to facts which should put a reasonable man upon his guard, and then
claim that he acted in good faith under the belief that there was no defect in the
title of the vendor. - Spouses Jesus Ching and Lee Poe Tin vs. Spouses Adolfo
and Arsenia Enrile, G.R. No. 156076, September 17, 2008
One can sell only what one owns or is authorized to sell, and the buyer can acquire
no more right than what the seller can transfer legally.
A person dealing with registered land has a right to rely on the Torrens certificate of
title and to dispense with the need of inquiring further except when the party has
actual knowledge of facts and circumstances that would impel a reasonably
cautious man to make such inquiry or when the purchaser has knowledge of a
defect or the lack of title in his vendor or of sufficient facts to induce a reasonably
prudent man to inquire into the status of the title of the property in litigation. Adoracion Rosales Rufloe, Alfredo Rufloe and Rodrigo Rufloe vs. Leonarda
Burgos, Anita Burgos, Angelito Burgos, Amy Burgos, Elvira Delos Reyes
and Julian C. Tubig, G.R. No. 143573, January 30, 2009
It is a well-settled doctrine that one who deals with property registered under the
Torrens system need not go beyond the same, but only has to rely on the
certificates of title, he is charged with notice only of such burdens and claims as are
annotated on the certificates. But, a buyer of real property in possession of persons
other than the seller must be wary and should investigate the rights of those in
possession, for without such inquiry the buyer can hardly be regarded as a buyer in
good faith and cannot have any right over the property.
A purchaser in good faith is one who buys property without notice that some other
person has a right to or interest in such property and pays its fair price before he
has notice of the adverse claims and interest of another person in the same
property.
Laches is defined as the failure to assert a right for an unreasonable and
unexplained length of time, warranting a presumption that the party entitled to
assert it has either abandoned or declined to assert it. - The Heirs of Romana

Page 14 of 19

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (20082015)

Law

Saves, et al. vs. The Heirs of Escolastico Saves, et al., G.R. No. 152866,
October 6, 2010
REMEDIES
Since the indefeasibility of a title does not attach to titles secured by fraud and
misrepresentation, it was as if no title at all was ever issued in this case to the
petitioner and therefore this is hardly the occasion to talk of collateral attack
against a title. - Gregorio Araneta University Foundation vs. The Regional
Trial Court of Kalookan City, G.R. No. 139672, March 4, 2009
The general rule is that in the case of two certificates of title, purporting to include
the same land, the earlier in date prevails. Applying the principle Primus Tempore,
Portior Jure (First in Time, Stronger in Right), it was found that ALIs title was the
valid one having been derived from the earlier OCT. - Spouses Morris Carpo and
Socorro Carpo vs. Ayala Land, Incorporated, G.R. No. 166577, February 3,
2010
An action for declaration of nullity of title and recovery of ownership of real
property, or re-conveyance, is a real action but it is an action in personam, for it
binds a particular individual only although it concerns the right to a tangible thing.
Any judgment therein is binding only upon the parties properly impleaded. The
effect of the said judgment cannot be extended to BPI Family and the spouses Chan
by simply issuing an alias writ of execution against them. No man shall be affected
by any proceeding to which he is a stranger, and strangers to a case are not bound
by any judgment rendered by the court. In the same manner, a writ of execution
can be issued only against a party and not against one who did not have his day in
court. - Emerita Muoz vs. Atty. Victoriano R. Yabut, Jr. and Samuel Go
Chan, G.R. No. 142676, June 6, 2011
The rights and claims vested by virtue of a decision of the Cadastral Court,
adjudicating said lot to different persons which was never implemented nor
executed despite the lapse of more than thirty years cannot prescribed for failure to
fully execute the same. And an action for reconveyance of registered land based on
implied trust prescribes in ten years, the point of reference being the date of
registration of the deed or the date of the issuance of the certificate of title over the
property, however, the ten-year prescriptive period applies only when the person
enforcing the trust is not in possession of the property. - Jose Fernando, Jr., Zoilo
Fernando, Norma Fernando Banares, Rosario Fernando Tangkencgo, Heirs
of Tomas Fernando, represented by Alfredo V. Fernando, Heirs of Guillermo
Fernando, represented by Ronnie H. Fernando, Heirs of Iluminada
Fernando, represented by Benjamin Estrella and Heirs of Germogena
Fernando vs. Leon Acuna, Hermogenes Fernando, Heirs Of Spouses
Antonio Fernando and Felisa Camacho, represented by Hermogenes
Fernando, G.R. No. 161030, September 14, 2011
As correctly pointed out by petitioner, we had emphasized in Republic v. Holazo
that the term any other document in paragraph (f) refers to reliable documents of
the kind described in the preceding enumerations and that the documents referred
Page 15 of 19

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (20082015)

Law

to in Section 2(f) may be resorted to only in the absence of the preceding

documents in the list. Therefore, the party praying for the reconstitution of a title
must show that he had, in fact, sought to secure such documents and failed to find
them before presentation of other documents as evidence in substitution is
allowed. Thus, we stated in Holazo that When Rep. Act No. 26, Section 2(f), or 3(f)
for that matter, speaks of any other document, it must refer to similar documents
previously enumerated therein or documents ejusdem generis as the documents
earlier referred to. The documents alluded to in Section 3(f) must be resorted to in
the absence of those preceding in order the petitioner for reconstitution fails to
show that he had, in fact, sought to secure such prior documents (except with
respect to the owners duplicate copy of the title which it claims had been, likewise,
destroyed) and failed to find them, the presentation of the succeeding documents
as substitutionary evidence is proscribed. Republic of the Philippines vs.
Conception Lorenzo, et al., G.R. No. 172338, November 10, 2012
NOTE: Registration of patents is Excluded from the 2015 Bar Examinations
A certificate of title issued pursuant to a homestead patent becomes indefeasible
after one year, is subject to the proviso that the land covered by said certificate is
a disposable public land within the contemplation of the Public Land Law. In this
case, the subject property is part of the Matchwood Forest Reserve and is
inalienable and not subject to disposition. Being contrary to the Public Land Law, the
Homestead Patent and OCT issued in respondents name are void; and the right of
petitioner Republic to seek cancellation of such void patent/title and reversion of the
subject property to the State is imprescriptible. - Republic of the Philippines
Bureau Of Forest Development vs. Vicente Roxas and the Register of
Deeds of Oriental Mindoro, G.R. No. 157988, December 11, 2013
PRESCRIPTION
When the plaintiff in such action is not in possession of the subject property, the
action prescribes in ten years from the date of registration of the deed or the date
of the issuance of the certificate of title over the property. When the plaintiff is in
possession of the subject property, the action, being in effect that of quieting of title
to the property, does not prescribe. - Heirs Of Domingo Valientes vs. Hon.
Reinerio (Abraham) B. Ramas, Acting Presiding Judge, RTC, Branch 29,
9th Judicial Region, San Miguel, Zamboanga del Sur and Vilma V. Minor,
G.R. No. 157852, December 15, 2010
PUBLIC LAND ACT
The ultimate objective of the law is "to promote public policy, that is, to provide
home and decent living for destitutes, aimed at providing a class of independent
small landholders which is the bulwark of peace and order. - Barceliza P.
Capistrano vs. Darryl Limcuando and Fe S. Sumiran, G.R. No. 152413,
February 13, 2009

Page 16 of 19

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (20082015)

Law

Nowhere in Commonwealth Act No. 141 does it say that the right to repurchase
under Section 119 thereof could not be extended by mutual agreement of the
parties involved. Neither would extending the period in Section 119 be against
public policy as the evident purpose of the Public Land Act, especially the provisions
thereof in relation to homesteads, is to conserve ownership of lands acquired as
homesteads in the homesteader or his heirs. - Rodolfo Morla vs. Corazon
Nisperos Belmonte, et al., G.R. No. 171146, December 7, 2011
In the present case, it is settled that Homestead Patent was issued to Gerardo on
January 12, 1951 and the Absolute Deed of Sale between Gerardo and Juan was
executed on July 10, 1951, after a lapse of only six months. Irrefragably, the
alienation of the subject properties took place within the five-year prohibitory period
under Section 118 of the Public Land Act, as amended as such, the sale by Gerardo
to Juan is null and void right from the very start. As a void contract, the Absolute
Deed of Sale dated July 10, 1951 produces no legal effect whatsoever in accordance
with the principle quod nullum est nullum producit effectum, thus, it could not have
transferred title to the subject properties from Gerardo to Juan and there could be
no basis for the issuance of TCT in Juans name. A void contract is also not
susceptible of ratification, and the action for the declaration of the absolute nullity
of such a contract is imprescriptible. To reiterate, Section 118 of the Public Land Act,
as amended, reads that, except in favor of the Government or any of its branches,
units, or institutions, or legally constituted banking corporations, lands acquired
under free patent or homestead provisions shall not be subject to encumbrance or
alienation from the date of the approval of the application and for a term of five
years from and after the date of issuance of the patent or grant. The provisions of
law are clear and explicit. A contract which purports to alienate, transfer, convey, or
encumber an homestead within the prohibitory period of five years from the date of
the issuance of the patent is void from its execution. In a number of cases, this
Court has held that such provision is mandatory. Alejandro Binayug and Ana
Binayug vs. Eugenio Ugaddan, et al., G.R. No. 181623, December 5, 2012
TENANCY
While a tenant is not required to be physically present in the land at all hours of the
day and night, such doctrine cannot be stretched to apply to a case wherein the
supposed tenant has chosen to reside in another place so far from the land to be
cultivated that it would be physically impossible to be present therein with some
degree of constancy as to allow the tenant to cultivate the same. - Leonardo
Tarona, Eugenia Tarona, Nita Tarona, Luis Tarona, Rosalinda Tarona,
Apolonia Tarona, Carlos Tarona, Lourdes Tarona and Rogelio Tarona vs.
Court of Appeals (Ninth Division), Gay T. Leao, Lemuel T. Leao, Noel T.
Leao, Jedd Anthony Leao Cuison and Jason Anthony Leao Cuison, G.R.
No. 170182, June 18, 2009
TORTS AND DAMAGES

Page 17 of 19

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (20082015)

Law

TORTFEASOR
When the proximate cause of the accident is the lack of the due care and prudence
of the deceased, the doctrine of vicarious liability will not apply. Absent any showing
that the employer failed to exercise due care and diligence in the selection and
supervision of its employees, liability will not attach to it. - Vallacar Transit vs.
Jocelyn Catubig, G.R. No. 175512, May 30, 2011
MORAL DAMAGES
Moral damages are awarded to rape victims without need of proof other than the
fact of rape under the assumption that the victim suffered moral injuries from the
experience she underwent. On the other hand, when a crime is committed with an
aggravating circumstance either as qualifying or generic, an award of exemplary
damages is justified under Article 2230 of the New Civil Code. - People of the
Philippines vs. Roger Tejero, G.R. No. 187744, June 20, 2012
EXEMPLARY OR CORRECTIVE DAMAGES
The award of exemplary damages is justified if an aggravating circumstance, either
qualifying or generic, accompanies the crime. In the case at bar, the qualifying
circumstance of evident premeditation was duly alleged in the Information and
proved during the trial. Therefore, the trial court's award of the amount of
P30,000.00 as exemplary damages to heirs of the victim, must be reinstated. People of the Philippines vs. Gary Alinao, G.R. No. 191256, September 18,
2013
ATTORNEYS FEES
The stipulation on attorneys fees contained in the said Promissory Note constitutes
what is known as a penal clause. A penalty clause, expressly recognized by law, is
an accessory undertaking to assume greater liability on the part of the obligor in
case of breach of an obligation. The obligor would then be bound to pay the
stipulated indemnity without the necessity of proof on the existence and on the
measure of damages caused by the breach. It is well-settled that so long as such
stipulation does not contravene law, morals, or public order, it is strictly binding
upon the obligor. The attorneys fees so provided are awarded in favor of the
litigant, not his counsel. It is improper for both the RTC and the CA to increase the
award of attorneys fees despite the express stipulation contained in the said
Promissory Note since it is not intended to be compensation for respondents
counsel but was rather in the nature of a penalty or liquidated damages. Soledad Leonor Pea Suatengco and Antonio Esteban Suatengco vs.
Carmencita O. Reyes, G.R. No. 162729, December 17, 2008
While the body of the Decision quoted the agreement of the parties stating the
compensation as 20% contingent fee computed on the value to be recovered by
favorable judgment on the cases. It is basic that when there is a conflict between
the dispositive portion or fallo of a Decision and the opinion of the court contained
Page 18 of 19

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (20082015)

Law

in the text or body of the judgment, the former prevails over the latter. This rule
rests on the theory that the fallo is the final order while the opinion in the body is
merely a statement ordering nothing. - The Law Firm of Raymundo A. Armovit
vs. Court of Appeals and Bengson Commercial Building, Inc., G.R.
No. 154559, October 5, 2011
Both the RTC and the Court of Appeals held DBP liable for attorneys fees and costs
of suit because said courts believed that DBP should have been more aggressive in
pursuing its claim against Central. In the absence of stipulation, attorneys fees may
be recovered as actual or compensatory damages under any of the circumstances
provided for in Article 2208 of the Civil Code. Even if it were true that DBP had a
hand in the transfer of Traverses insurance coverage to Central, such act is not
sufficient to hold it solidarily liable with Central for the payment of attorneys fees
and cost of litigation under the above provision of the Civil Code. - Development
Bank of the Philippines vs. Traverse Development Corporation and Central
Surety and Insurance Company, G.R. No. 169293, October 5, 2011
GRADUATION OF DAMAGES
The increase in the award of damages is predicated on the qualifying
circumstances present in the case and not on the penalty imposed. In case of
moral damages, it need not be alleged and proved as the emotional suffering of
the heirs from the vicious killing of the victim cannot be denied. As to the loss of
earning capacity, the same need not be proved, as an exception, when the victim
is self-employed and earning less than the minimum wage under current labor
laws or when employed as a daily wage worker earning less than the minimum
wage under current labor laws. - People of the Philippines vs. Arnold
Garchitorena Y Camba A.K.A. Junior; Joey Pamplona A.K.A. Nato and
Jessie Garcia Y Adorino, G. R. No. 175605, August 28, 2009
In criminal cases, the basis of the increase in the award of damages is the
heinousness of the offense and does not depend on the penalty that the convict
shall suffer, therefore, the existence of the mitigating circumstance of minority shall
not produce the effect of reduction of damages. - People of the Philippines vs.
Richard O. Sarcia, G.R. No. 169641, September 10, 2009

Page 19 of 19