Professional Documents
Culture Documents
SUMMARY
Rivera buys from a yard sale but doesn’t take it home with him. Ong then buys the same things,
but this time takes it home. There was obviously a double sale. Supreme Court sides with Ong
since he was a buyer in good faith.
ISSUE
W/N Marciano Rivera is the owner of the articles that were subsequently bought by Ong Che. –
NO
RATIO
- Defendant was a purchaser in good faith, and he acquired possession by virtue of his
purchase
- Ong Che has better title than the first purchase, who has never had possession at all
- Conflict in testimony as to who the original owner is (not important)
o Crisanto Lichauco, who sold to Rivera, was not a member of the house of
Lichauco
o Crisanto testified that the property he sold was property of Galo Lichauco, one of
the members of the establishment
o But the Court doubts the correctness of this statement because evidence by
defendant tends to how that things acquitted by him were bought from Faustino
Lichauco
- Nonetheless, even if the property did belong to Galo Lichauco, the house of Lichauco
still had authority to sell it
o Where two different agents of the same owner negotiated sales to two different
purchasers, the second purchaser having acquired possession first must be
declared the true owner
o It was merely a mistake of selling something that had already been sold
- It was also incumbent upon plaintiff to prove title in himself, against the defendant, by a
preponderance of evidence
o He can’t just recover merely on the weakness of defendant’s title
o Rivera failed to prove title in himself
- Defendant had, in his favor, the fact that he was a purchaser in good faith and had
acquired lawful possession
- There is a presumption arising from such possession that he was the owner.