1.

Significant Application of Extinctive Prescription SCRA 32

A. Concept

The concept of extinctive prescription was devised to correct a defect in legal practice.
Before, a party who had any legal ground of complaint against another might call the
latter to answer in court at such time as suited his convenience. It was soon found out that
the practice produces great inconvenience. Parties often wait till witnesses were dead or
papers destroyed so a successful defense might have been made.

For this reason, in 1623, a statute was passed in England, entitled An Act for Limitation of
Actions and for Avoiding of Suits in Law or otherwise known as Statute of Limitation.

In the New Civil Code, rights and actions are lost by prescription. By negligence,
carelessness or abandonment, owners may be deprived of their properties by usurpers
who, by the lapse of time, acquire the same by prescription. Essentially, prescription
protects not the person who sleeps on his rights but the person who is diligent and
vigilant.

B. How to Set Up the Defense of Prescription SCRA 27

Defense of prescription must be pleaded, otherwise, it is deemed waived.

It need NOT be pleaded when:

a. The party entitled to the defense of prescription had no means of knowing, before the trial
began, that the claim advanced by the opposing party is barred by the statute of
limitations.
b. The whereabouts of the defendants was unknown, so that upon motion by the plaintiff the
lower court ordered that the defendant be summoned by publication and the defendant
was declared default for failure to file an answer, the defense of prescription cannot be
considered waived by the failure of the absent defendant to answer the complaint
c. The defense of prescription may also be proved by a party despite failure to plead it if no
proper and timely objection is interposed.
d. Plaintiffs own allegation in the complaint or the evidence he presented shows clearly that
the action had prescribed.
e. The title to the real estate is by adverse possession

Prescription as Ground of Motion to Dismiss when prescription is interposed as a ground of a

motion to dismiss under Section 1 (f) of Rule 16, the court must proceed to hear the motion and
receive evidence on the issue of prescription where it is not clear from the allegations of the
complaint just when the plaintiffs cause accrued. There is no need to receive evidence on the
defense of prescription if the pleadings filed by the parties contain averments sufficient to decide
the issue of prescription.

Amendment of the pleading is discretionary with the court and may be denied where its effect
would be to change substantially the nature of the issues between the parties.
2. Viewpoints of Possession SCRA 99

A. Concept

Possession is the holding of a thing or the enjoyment of a right. In prescription, to

constitute the foundation of a prescriptive right, possession must be possession under
claim of title or to use the common law equivalent of the term, it must be adverse.
Actual Possession of land consists in the manifestation of acts of dominion over it of such a
nature as a party would naturally exercise his own property. Adverse Possession transfers
ownership and confers title except as against a registered title.
Kinds of Possession

a. Possession in Good Faith

A possessor in good faith is not aware that there is in his title, or in the manner of acquiring it,
any flaw invalidating the same.
Good faith must rest on a colourable right in the builder, beyond a mere stubborn belief in ones
title despite judicial adjudication.
b. Possession in Bad Faith
A possessor in bad faith is one who is not ignorant of the fact that there exists a defect in his
title, or mode of acquiring possession.
The partys mere refusal to believe that a defect or his willful closing of his eyes to the possibility
of the existence of a defect in his vendors title will not make him an innocent purchaser for
value, if it afterwards develops that the title was in fact defective.
c. Acquisitive Possession
For claim of acquisitive prescription to prosper, possession must be in the concept of owner.
d. Adverse Possession
A person in the open, continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and occupation of certain
lands for more than thirty years, in the concept of owner, is entitled to a confirmation of his title
to said land.
1. Effects of Possession
Owner who had been unlawfully deprived of his personal property has a better right as against
an innocent third party over the possession of personal property.
2. Rights of Possessor

The possessors claim for the value of the improvements, which they had placed on the land was
not allowed since it was deemed offset by their obligation to pay rental from the time they were
required by the owner to vacate the same.
3. Prescription of Felonies SCRA 122

Prescription of the crime is the forfeiture or loss of the right of the State to prosecute the
offender after the lapse of a certain time.

Art. 90 of the Revised Penal Code. Prescription of crime.

Crimes punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or reclusion temporal shall prescribe in twenty
years.

Crimes punishable by other afflictive penalties shall prescribe in fifteen years.

Those punishable by a correctional penalty shall prescribe in ten years; with the exception of
those punishable by arresto mayor, which shall prescribe in five years.

The crime of libel or other similar offenses shall prescribe in one year.

The crime of oral defamation and slander by deed shall prescribe in six months.

Light offenses prescribe in two months.

When the penalty fixed by law is a compound one, the highest penalty shall be made the basis of
the application of the rules contained in the first, second and third paragraphs of this article. (As
amended by RA 4661, approved June 19, 1966)
 4. Specific Applications of the Prescriptive Remedy SCRA 98

1. Acquisitive Prescription is that by which one acquires ownership and other real rights
through the lapse of time in the manner and under the conditions laid down by law.

2. Extinctive Prescription is that by which one loses rights and actions through the lapse of
time in the manner and under the conditions laid down by law.

a. Civil cases ex. an action for the reconveyance of land based on implied or
constructive trust prescribes in ten years. And it is from the date of issuance of such
title that the effective assertion of adverse title for purposes of the statute of limitation
is counted.

3. Commencement of prescriptive period

a. Civil cases ex. time for prescription of actions for partition and reconveyance runs
from the date of issuance of original certificate of title.

4. Interruption of prescriptive period

a. Civil cases The prescription of actions is interrupted pursuant to Article 1155 of the
Civil Code either: (1) when they are filed before the court or (2) where there is written
extrajudicial demand by the creditors, or (3) when there is any written
acknowledgement of the debt by the debtor.

5. Imprescriptible rights and actions ex. Article 494 of the New Civil Code provides that each
co-owner may demand at any time the partition of the common property, a provision which
implies that the action to demand partition is imprescriptible or cannot be barred by laches;
a person is not barred by prescription from filing an action for reconveyance of property
erroneously included in the title of another.

6. Defense of Prescription ex. The issue raised by appellants does not need any lengthy
much less scholarly dissertation. The decree of registration was issued October 1941. The
certificates of title, were issued either forthwith or not much later. In any event,
conventional wisdom would dictate that titles were not issued more than ten years after the
decree of registration. Appellants action was filed almost twenty-four years after the
issuance of said decree. Under these facts, it is safe to hold as we do hold that the trial
courts ruling to the effect that the appellants action had already prescribed is correctly and
should be affirmed.

7. Waiver of Prescriptive Defense ex. It is settled law in this jurisdiction that the defense of
prescription is waivable and that if it is not raised as a defense in the trial court, it cannot be
considered on appeal, the general rule being that the appellate court is not authorized to
consider and resolve any question not properly raised in the lower court.
5. Statute of Frauds SCRA 21

I Requirements and Purpose

Agreement in the following cases shall be unenforceable by action, unless the same, or some
note or memorandum be:
1. In writing
2. Subscribed by the party charged or by his agent

Cases in General Rule:

1. An agreement that by its terms is not to be performed within a year from the making
thereof;
2. A special promise to answer for debt, default, or miscarriage of another;
3. An agreement made in consideration of marriage, other than a mutual promise to marry;
4. An agreement for the sale of goods, chattels or things in action, at a price not less than
P500.00;

Exception: Unless the buyer accept and receive part of such goods and chattels, or evidences, or
some of them, of such things in action, or pay at the time some part of the purchase money;

5. An agreement for the leasing for a longer period than one year, or for the sale of a real
property or of an interest therein; and
6. A representation as to the credit of a third person

Note: Evidence of the agreement cannot be received without the writing or a secondary evidence
in its contents. (Art. 1403, par. 2, Civil Code)

Purposes:
1. To prevent fraud and perjury in the enforcement of obligations depending for their
evidence upon unassisted memory of witnesses.
2. Provides for the form or method by which contracts coming within its terms may be
proved.
Note (re: sufficiency of requirements)
If the parties permit a contract to be proved, without objection as to the form of the proof,
it is then just as binding as if the statute had been complied with.
Failure to object, like acceptance of the benefits under the contract, constitutes
ratification.
Any document or writing, formal or informal, written either for the purpose which satisfies
all the statutes requirements as to contents and signature would be sufficient.
Note or memorandum of a contract, in order to satisfy the Statute of Frauds, need not
state the consideration, since this element is presumed until the contrary is proved.

A. Contracts not to be performed within a year

General Rule: Agreements not to be performed or which cannot be carried out on either side
within a year from making thereof.

Exception: Agreements, which, by their terms, are to be fully performed or completed on one
side within such time.

Example: Contract continued from year to year for several years.

B. Special Promise to answer for the debt, etc. of another

Test: Whether the promise is an original or a collateral one.

1. Original or independent
- If the promisor becomes primarily liable for the payment of the debt

Effect: Not covered by the Statute of Frauds

2. Collateral
- Promisor becomes merely a surety

Effect: Covered by the Statute of Frauds

 Whether original or collateral is a question of law and fact, which is determined from the
evidence as to the language used in making the promise, and the circumstances, which the
promise was made.

C. Agreement in Consideration of Marriage

Exception: Mutual promise to marry.

- Aggrieved party may resort to sue the offending party for actual damages, but not moral
damages incurred.

II Doctrine of Partial Performance (Effect)

General Rule: Applies only to executory, and not to completed or executed contracts.

Reason:
- It would be in fraud if one party were permitted to oppose performance on his part after he
has allowed or induced the other to perform in reliance upon the agreement, for it would enable
the former to keep the benefits already derived by him from the transaction in litigation and at
the same time evade the obligations, responsibilities or liabilities assumed or contracted by him.

Exceptions:
1. Sale of real property which has been consummated by the delivery of the property to the
vendee.
2. Partially executed by payment of a part of the price to the vendors and the delivery of the
land to the vendees
3. Where the buyer receives a part of the goods and chattels subject of an oral contract sale.
4. Where pursuant to verbal modification of a written contract of lease, where modification is
totally opposite of what is written in the contract.

Requirements:

1. Must appear clearly that full or complete performance has been made by one party;
2. Must be certain, definite, clear, unambiguous, and unequivocal in its terms and as to
subject matter, aside from being fair, reasonable, and just in its provisions.
Procedure when partial performance is alleged:
- When a party concerned has pleaded partial performance, such party is entitled to a
reasonable chance to establish by parol evidence, the truth of his allegation, as well as the
contract itself.
III Transactions outside the purview of the Statute of Frauds
1. Wills
2. Renunciation of Inheritance
3. Partition of inheritance
4. Innominate contracts
6. Acquisition of Ownership by Prescription SCRA 35

I Ownership, defined

1. It is an independent right of exclusive enjoyment and control of a thing for the purpose of
deriving therefrom all the advantages required by the reasonable needs of the owner and the
promotion of the general welfare but subject to the restrictions imposed by law and the rights of
others.
2. It is the right by which a thing belongs to someone in particular, to the exclusion of all
others.
3. The entity of powers of use and dispersal allowed by law. It implies that there is some
power of disposal; but the owner of the thing is not necessarily the person who at a given time
has the whole power of use and disposal.

II Classes of Prescription
1. Acquisitive Prescription
a. Ordinary Acquisitive Prescription
- The acquisition of ownership and other real rights through possession of things in good
faith and with just title for the time fixed by law. (Article 1117, New Civil Code)

b. Extraordinary Acquisitive Prescription

- Acquisition of ownership and other real rights through uninterrupted adverse possession
for the period fixed by law without need of title or good faith.

2. Extinctive Prescription

III Requisites of Acquisitive Prescription

1. Capacity of Parties
- Parties who are capable of acquiring property of rights by other legal modes
- Minors and other incapacitated persons personally or through their parents, guardians or
legal representatives

2. Thing must be within the commerce of men

- All things which are within the commerce of men are susceptible of prescription

Exceptions:
a. Unless otherwise provided
b. Property of the State or any of its divisions not patrimonial in character

3. Possession which must be:

a. In the concept of an owner

b. Public
c. Peaceful
d. Uninterrupted
- A possessory information may ripen into title of ownership; when no evidence that said
possession had in the meantime been legally interrupted.
- Possession is interrupted for the purpose of prescription, naturally or civilly
1. Natural interruption when through any cause it should cease for more than 1 year. (Art.
1120, New Civil Code)

2. Civil interruption produced by judicial summons to the possessor. (Art. 1123, New Civil
Code)

4. Just title must be proved

- It is never presumed, for the purpose of acquisitive prescription
- An essential requisite for acquisitive prescription to be availed of as occupation and use

5. Evidence of acquisitive prescription must be strong and clear

- Must be clear, complete, and conclusive

IV Against whom prescription may run (both acquisitive and extinctive prescription)

1. Minors and other incapacitated persons who have parents, guardians, or other legal
representatives.
2. Absentees who have administrators, either appointed by them before their
disappearance, or appointed by the court
3. Persons living abroad who have managers or administrators
4. Judicial Persons except the State and its subdivisions

V Against whom prescription does not run

1. Between husband and wife
2. Between parents and children
3. Between guardian and ward (during continuance of guardianship)
4. State (for reconveyance of lands)
5. Against continuing and subsisting trust
Exception:
- When there is fraud that was employed by the trustee prior to or simultaneous with the
procurement of the property in his name
7. The Concept and Advocacy of Quasi Delict SCRA 63

The concept of quasi-delict is founded on the principle of equity. The consequences of fault or
negligence of the later shall not be borne by the victim who is without fault. If you are the one
who is negligent, then you should be liable for the damages of your act even if it was not
deliberate.

The elements of quasi-delict are the following:

1. Fault or negligence
2. Damage of injury suffered by the other person
3. Direct causal relation between the fault or negligence and the resulting damage or injury

An action in quasi-delict is [predicated on the existence of negligence.

Negligence is the failure to observe for the protection of the interest of another person , that
degree of care, precaution and vigilance which the circumstances justly demand, whereby such
other person suffers injury.

It depends on the situation and the nature of the obligation. There are obligations which merely
require light diligence. There are obligations which require ordinary diligence. There are
obligations which require extraordinary diligence. If you are in a situation where a law imposes
an obligation to observe extraordinary diligence, but you only exercise light diligence, then you
will be considered as negligent or at fault because you did not exercise the degree of diligence
that is required of you under the circumstances. If you are driving at 100 kph in Claveria, would
that be negligence? Yes, because of the circumstances of the place and of the time would require
to drive slower. But what if you are in a highway (at 4 am, can that be considered negligence?
No.

For the 2nd element, there must be damage or injury that is compensable.

For the 3rd element, the negligence or fault is the proximate cause of the damage. You can
actually make a causal relation or a logical connection between the fault or negligence and with
the damage that was caused as a consequence.

In the case of Urbano vs. IAC, proximate cause was defined as "that cause, which, in natural and
continuous sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening cause, produces the injury, and
without which the result would not have occurred. So, there should be a logical connection
between the act committed and the subsequent injury or damage. In this case, it was not proved
that his act was the proximate cause of the death.
8. Computation of Prescription of Crimes SCRA 75

Art. 91. Computation of prescription of offenses. The period of prescription shall commence to
run from the day on which the crime is discovered by the offended party, the authorities, or their
agents, and shall be interrupted by the filing of the complaint or information, and shall
commence to run again when such proceedings terminate without the accused being convicted
or acquitted, or are unjustifiably stopped for any reason not imputable to him.

The term of prescription shall not run when the offender is absent from the Philippine
Archipelago. The prescription shall be interrupted when the proceedings are instituted against
the guilty person, and shall begin to run again if the proceedings are dismissed for reasons not
constituting jeopardy. (Sec. 2, Act No. 3326)

Outline of the provisions:

1. Period of prescription shall run from the day the crime is discovered by the offended party, the
authorities or their agents.
2. It is interrupted by filing o the complaint or information.
3. It commences again when such proceedings terminate without the accused being convicted or
acquitted or are unjustifiably stopped for any reason not imputable to him.
4. The term of prescription shall not run when the offender is absent from the Philippines.
9. The Fundamentals in Good Faith in Possession SCRA 89

A. Ascertainment of Good Faith

In ascertaining the intention by which one is actuated on a given occasion, we are necessarily
controlled by the evidence as to the conduct and outward acts by which alone the inward motive
may, with safety, be determined. So that it is that the honesty of intention, the honest lawful
intent, which constitutes good faith implies a freedom from knowledge and circumstances
which ought to put a person on injury, and so it is that proof of such knowledge overcome the
presumption of good faith in which the court always indulge in the absence of proof to the
contrary.

B. Characteristics of Good Faith

Good faith is always presumed. It is presumed that the right of the possessor is well-founded.
However, from the service of judicial summons there exists an act that the possessor knows that
his right is not secure, that someone disputes it and that he may yet lose it. On the date of the
service of summons upon possessor, his possession in good faith is interrupted.

Effects of Good Faith on the Rights of Possessor

A. Necessary and useful expenses incurred

Necessary expenses are incurred not for the improvement but for preservation. It is not intended
to increase the value of the estate but to prevent its becoming useless such as expenses
incurred in the repair of the house.
Useful expenses are incurred to give greater utility or productivity to the property such as
expenses for the construction of a wall surrounding the estate, construction of irrigation system.

B. Fruits received before interruption of possession

All fruits received from the land before said legal interruption belongs to the possessor, but all
fruits that he may receive after the legal interruption shall be delivered or paid by him to the
owner. If there are no natural fruits, the reasonable rent from the time of the legal interruption
shall be paid by the possessor to the owner. If it was proven that good faith of the possessor
ceased even before the filing of the case, he must restore to the owner the fruits received from
the time such good faith ceased,

C. Deterioration of the thing possessed

A possessor in good faith shall not be liable for the deterioration or loss of the thing possessed,
except in cases in which it is proved that he has acted with fraudulent intent or negligence, after
the judicial summons.
10. Significant Problem Involving Changes in Possession SCRA 89

Modes of Acquiring Possession

a. Material Occupation
Material occupation is recognized as the first mode for acquiring possession. In fact, it is also a
mode of acquiring ownership over things appropriable by nature which are without an owner with
the exception of a piece of land. It is only the possession and not the ownership over the piece of
land can be acquired, though possession may ripen into acquisitive prescription over the land
possessed upon fulfilment of specific conditions.
Possession in the eyes of law does not mean that a man has to have his feet on every square
meter of ground before it can be said that he is in possession. It is enough that he maintains
possession and cultivation of a portion of the land provided that the remainder is not in adverse
possession of another.
b. Subjecting to the Action of the Will or Proper Acts and Legal Formalities for its Acquisition
Possession is also acquired by the fact that it is subject to the action of our will or by the proper
acts and legal formalities established for acquiring such right.
Rights Arising Out of Possession
a. Rights of Every Possessor
1. Right to be respected in his possession and should he be disturbed therein, he shall be
protected in or restored to said possession by the means established by law and the Rules of
Court.
2. Right to be reimbursed of necessary expenses. Necessary expenses as distinguished from
useful and expenses for pure luxury, are those made for preservation of the property without
which the property would deteriorate or be lost.
3. Right to recover lost movables. While the possession of movable property acquired in good
faith is equivalent to a title, nevertheless, one who has lost any movable or has been unlawfully
deprived thereof may recover it from the person in possession thereof but if the possessor has
acquired in good faith at a public sale, the owner cannot obtain its return without reimbursement
of the price paid thereof.
b. Effect of good faith on the rights of the possessor
1. Right to the fruits. A possessor in good faith is entitled to the fruits received before the
possession is legally interrupted. The fruits shall include natural fruits which are the spontaneous
products of the soil and the young and other products of animals, industrial fruits which are
produced through cultivation or labor and civil fruits which include rents of building, price of
leases of lands and other property and the cost of perpetual and life annuities and other similar
income.
2. Right to indemnity. While the owner of the land on which anything has been built, has the
right to appropriate as his own the works, the possessor in good faith on one hand has the right
to indemnity for expenses incurred. Unless, the builder or planter is obliged to buy the land or
the owner chooses not to appropriate what has been built, planted or sown, the possessor in
good faith shall be entitled by way of indemnity to a reimbursement of necessary and useful
expenses. For expenses of pure luxury, the possessor may be entitled for indemnity if the owner
chooses, otherwise he shall be entitled to remove the ornaments.
11. Acquisitive Prescription Against the State SCRA 96

A. Classification of State Properties

1. Property of Public Dominion. Art. 420. The following things are property of public dominion:

(1) Those intended for public use, such as roads, canals, rivers, torrents, ports and bridges
constructed by the State, banks, shores, roadsteads, and others of similar character;
(2)Those which belong to the State, without being for public use, and are intended for
some public service or for the development of the national wealth.

A property of the public dominion is outside the commerce of man and as such is not susceptible
of purchase, acquisition or appropriation.

2. Patrimonial Property. Art. 421. All other property of the State, which is not of the character
stated in the preceding article, is patrimonial property. (340a)

B. Adverse Possession of State Properties

1. Property of Public Dominion. If a property of public dominion is mistakenly conveyed in favor of

a private individual, the State can still seek cancellation of title as the title has not become
indefeasible for prescription cannot be invoked against the State.

2. Patrimonial Property. Even if a property were possessed for a period of time which under
the New Civil Code ripens into acquisitive prescription, if the property belongs to the State, there
would still be a need of a grant from the State to confirm or legalize the imperfect tite of the
possessor over a disposable public land. The application of prescription is not automatic as it still
needs confirmation from the State itself.
12. Acquisitive Prescription SCRA 721

Prescription Defined:

Article 1106 defines prescription as By prescription, one acquires ownership and other
real rights through lapse of time in the manner and under the conditions laid down by law.
Rights and Actions are also lost by prescription.

Basis of Prescription:

Acquisitive Prescription is based on the assertion by a usurper of an adverse right for such
a long time, uncontested by the true owner of the right as to give rise to presumption that the
latter has given up such right in favor of the former.

Extinctive Prescription is based on the probability, born of experience, that the alleged
right which accrued in the distant past never existed or has already been extinguished; or, if it
exists, the inconvenience caused by the lapse of time should be borne by the party negligent in
the assertion of his right.

Retroactivity of Prescription - The acquisition of ownership or other real rights through

prescription is retroactive; once the period is completed, the new owner is considered as having
acquired the thing or right from the moment the period begins to run.

Kinds of Prescription

1) ACQUISITIVE prescription or adverse possession and usurpation (Art. 1117) 2)

2) The loss of a right of action by the lapse of time, known as EXTINCTIVE prescription or
limitation of actions.

Requisites of Acquisitive Prescription:

General Requisites are:

1) Capacity to acquire prescription 2) A thing capable of acquisition by prescription 3)

Possession of the thing under certain conditions 4) Lapse of time provided by law

Note: that the first two requisites are the same whether the prescription be ordinary or
extraordinary, the last two vary for each kind.
13. Doctrine of Laches SCRA 5

LACHES is the failure or neglect, for an unreasonable and unexplained length of time, to do that
which by exercising due diligence could or should have been done earlier; it is negligence or
omission to assert a right within a reasonable time, warranting a presumption that the party
entitled to assert it either has abandoned it or declined to assert it.

It has also been defined as such neglect or omission to assert a right taken in conjunction with
the lapse of time and other circumstances causing prejudice to an adverse party, as will operate
as a bar in equity.

The principle of laches is a creation of equity which, as such, is applied not really to penalize
neglect or sleeping upon one's right, but rather to avoid recognizing a right when to do so would
result in a clearly inequitable situation.

As an equitable defense, laches does not concern itself with the character of the defendant's
title, but only with whether or not by reason of the plaintiff's long in action or inexcusable
neglect, he should be barred from asserting this claim at all, because to allow him to do so would
be inequitable and unjust to the defendant.

The doctrine of laches or of stale demands is based upon grounds of public policy which requires,
for the peace of society, the discouragement of stale claims and . . . is principally a question of
the inequity or unfairness of permitting a right or claim to be enforced or asserted.

The time-honored rule anchored on public policy is that relief will be denied to a litigant whose
claim or demand has become "stale", or who has acquiesced for an unreasonable length of time,
or who has not been vigilant or who has slept on his rights either by negligence, folly or
inattention. 30 In other words, public policy requires, for the peace of society, the
discouragement of claims grown stale for non-assertion; thus laches is an impediment to the
assertion or enforcement of a right which has become, under the circumstances, inequitable or
unfair to permit.
The following are the essential elements of laches:
(1) Conduct on the part of the defendant, or of one under whom he claims, giving rise to the
situation complained of;
(2) Delay in asserting complainant's right after he had knowledge of the defendant's conduct and
after he has an opportunity to sue;
(3) Lack of knowledge or notice on the part of the defendant that the complainant would assert
the right on which he bases his suit; and
(4) Injury or prejudice to the defendant in the event relief is accorded to the complainant.
G.R. No. 112519 November 14, 1996
CATHOLIC BISHOP OF BALANGA, respresented by CRISPULO TORRICO, petitioner, vs.
THE HON. COURT OF APPEALS and AMANDO DE LEON, respondent
14. The Doctrine of Estoppel by Laches SCRA 119

Estoppel by laches or stale demands ordains that the failure or neglect, for an unreasonable
and unexplained length of time, to do that which by exercising due diligence could or should
have been done earlier, or the negligence or omission to assert a right within a reasonable time,
warrants a presumption that the party entitled to assert it either has abandoned it or declined to
assert it.

There is no absolute rule as to what constitutes laches; it is addressed to the sound discretion
of the court. Being an equitable doctrine, its application is controlled by equitable
considerations.

Estoppel by laches may be invoked to bar the issue of lack of jurisdiction only in cases in which
the factual milieu is analogous to that in the cited case. In such controversies, laches should
have been clearly present; that is, lack of jurisdiction must have been raised so belatedly as to
warrant the presumption that the party entitled to assert it had abandoned or declined to assert
it.

[A party may be estopped or barred from raising a question in different ways and for different
reasons. Thus we speak of estoppel in pais, of estoppel by deed or by record, and of estoppel by
laches.

Laches, in a general sense, is failure or neglect, for an unreasonable and unexplained length of
time, to do that which, by exercising due diligence, could or should have been done earlier; it is
negligence or omission to assert a right within a reasonable time, warranting a presumption that
the party entitled to assert it either has abandoned it or declined to assert it.

The doctrine of laches or of stale demands is based upon grounds of public policy which
requires, for the peace of society, the discouragement of stale claims and, unlike the statute of
limitations, is not a mere question of time but is principally a question of the inequity or
unfairness of permitting a right or claim to be enforced or asserted.] Tijam vs Sibongan

It has been held that a party cannot invoke the jurisdiction of a court to secure affirmative relief
against his opponent and, after obtaining or failing to obtain such relief, repudiate or question
that same jurisdiction. (Dean vs. Dean, 136 Or. 694, 86 A.L.R. 79). In the case just cited, by way
of explaining the rule, it was further said that the question whether the court had jurisdiction
either of the subject matter of the action or of the parties was not important in such cases
because the party is barred from such conduct not because the judgment or order of the court is
valid and conclusive as an adjudication, but for the reason that such a practice cannot be
tolerated obviously for reasons of public policy.
15. Significant Application of the Doctrine of Estoppel SCRA 43

Estoppel is a bar which precludes a person from denying or asserting anything to the contrary of
that which has, in contemplation of law, been established as the truth, either by the acts of
judicial or legislative officers or by his own deed or representation, either expressed or implied.

It concludes the truth in order to prevent fraud and falsehood, and imposes silence on a party
only when in conscience and honesty he should not be allowed to speak.

[Despite his passionate arguments, we are constrained to rule against petitioner on grounds of
fairness and equity particularly on the principle of estoppel. In PNB v. CA,[17] we held:

"The doctrine of estoppel is based upon the grounds of public policy, fair dealing, good faith and
justice, and its purpose is to forbid one to speak against his own act, representations, or
commitments to the injury of one to whom they were directed and who reasonably relied
thereon. The doctrine of estoppel springs from equitable principles and the equities in the case.
It is designed to aid the law in the administration of justice where without its aid injustice might
result. It has been applied by this Court wherever and whenever special circumstances of a
case so demand."]

Kinds of Estoppel

1. Technical Estoppels

Estoppel by record the preclusion to deny the truth of matters set forth in a record, whether
judicial or legislative, and also to deny the facts adjudicated by a court of competent jurisdiction
Example: the conclusiveness of a judgment on the parties to a case

Estoppel by deed a bar which precludes one party to a deed and his privies from asserting as
against the other party and his privies any right or title in derogation of the deed, or from
denying the truth of any material facts asserted in it; a written instrument is necessary for there
to be estoppel by deed

Some doctrines:

1. If the deed or instrument is null and void because of the contract, there is no estoppel.
2. Ordinarily, the person estopped must be capacitated; but a minor is clever enough to
deceive others, estoppel may result.
3. If a person, who is not a party to the instrument, notarizes the same, he is not in estoppel.

2. Equitable Estoppel or Estoppel in Pais

It arises when one by his acts, representations or admissions, or by his silence when he ought to
speak out, intentionally or through culpable negligence, induces another to believe certain facts
to exist, and such other rightfully relies and acts on such belief, so that he will be prejudiced if
the former is permitted to deny the existence of such facts. It takes place in a situation where
because if a partys action or omission, he is denied the right to plead or prove an otherwise
important fact.
16. Attack on Jurisdiction When Barred By Estoppel By Laches SCRA 46

A party may be estopped or barred from raising a question in different ways and for different
reasons. Thus we speak of estoppel in pais, of estoppel by deed or by record, and of estoppel by
laches.

Laches, in a general sense, is failure or neglect, for an unreasonable and unexplained length of
time, to do that which, by exercising due diligence, could or should have been done earlier; it is
negligence or omission to assert a right within a reasonable time, warranting a presumption that
the party entitled to assert it either has abandoned it or declined to assert it.

The doctrine of laches or of stale demands is based upon grounds of public policy which
requires, for the peace of society, the discouragement of stale claims and, unlike the statute of
limitations, is not a mere question of time but is principally a question of the inequity or
unfairness of permitting a right or claim to be enforced or asserted.

It has been held that a party cannot invoke the jurisdiction of a court to secure affirmative relief
against his opponent and, after obtaining or failing to obtain such relief, repudiate or question
that same jurisdiction. (Dean vs. Dean, 136 Or. 694, 86 A.L.R. 79). In the case just cited, by way
of explaining the rule, it was further said that the question whether the court had jurisdiction
either of the subject matter of the action or of the parties was not important in such cases
because the party is barred from such conduct not because the judgment or order of the court is
valid and conclusive as an adjudication, but for the reason that such a practice cannot be
tolerated obviously for reasons of public policy.

There are three cases decided by the Honorable Supreme Court which may be worthy of
consideration wherein the Honorable Supreme Court frowned upon the undesirable practice of
appellants submitting their case for decision and then accepting the judgment, if favorable, but
attacking it for lack of jurisdiction when adverse.

Considering, however, that the Supreme Court has the exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all
cases in which the jurisdiction of any inferior court is in issue (Sec. 1, Par. 3[3], Judiciary Act of
1948, as amended).