8/11/2019 Ang Yu Asuncion Case

1/3

Ang Yu Asuncion case:

7. Perfection of a contract of sale

In sales, the contract is perfected when a person, called the seller, obligates himself, for a price certain, to deliver and totransfer ownership of a thing or right to another, called the buyer, over which the latter agrees. Article 1!" of the #ivil#ode provides that $%y the contract of sale one of the contracting parties obligates himself to transfer the ownership ofand to deliver a determinate thing, and the other to pay therefor a price certain in money or its e&uivalent. A contract ofsale may be absolute or conditional.'

". #ontract to sell is conditional( )ffect of breach of condition

*hen the sale is not absolute but conditional, such as in a $#ontract to +ell' where invariably the ownership of the thingsold is retained until the fulfillment of a positive suspensive condition normally, the full payment of the purchase price-,the breach of the condition will prevent the obligation to convey title from ac&uiring an obligatory force.

. /nconditional mutual promise to buy and sell obligatory on the parties

An unconditional mutual promise to buy and sell, as long as the ob0ect is made determinate and the price is fied, can beobligatory on the parties, and compliance therewith may accordingly be eacted.

12. Perfected contract of option

An accepted unilateral promise which specifies the thing to be sold and the price to be paid, when coupled with avaluable consideration distinct and separate from the price, is what may properly be termed a perfected contract ofoption. 3his contract is legally binding, and in sales, it conforms with the second paragraph of Article 17 of the #ivil#ode, which provides that $An accepted unilateral promise to buy or to sell a determinate thing for a price certain isbinding upon the promissor if the promise is supported by a consideration distinct from the price.

#45+)5+/A6

ui0ada v. #A 89.. 5o. 1;

8/11/2019 Ang Yu Asuncion Case

2/3

. Inchoate interest may be sub0ect of contract including a contract of sale( Interest over property under conditional deedof donation, not the land itself

3he donor may have an inchoate interest in the donated property during the time that ownership of the land has notreverted to her. +uch inchoate interest may be the sub0ect of contracts including a contract of sale. In the present case,however, what the donor sold was the land itself which she no longer owns. It would have been different if the donorDseller sold her interests over the property under the deed of donation which is sub0ect to the possibility of reversion ofownership arising from the nonDfulfillment of the resolutory condition.

!. 6aches, elements

6aches presupposes failure or neglect for an unreasonable and uneplained length of time, to do that which, byeercising due diligence, could or should have been done earlier( $it is negligence or omission to assert a right within areasonable time, thus, giving rise to a presumption that the party entitled to assert it either has abandoned or declined toassert it.' Its essential elements of a- #onduct on the part of the defendant, or of one under whom he claims, giving riseto the situation complained of( b- =elay in asserting complainants right after he had Bnowledge of the defendantsconduct and after he has an

A#AP vs #A

1. Asserted right or claim to ownership not sufficient per se to give rise to ownership over the res

An asserted right or claim to ownership or a real right over a thing arising from a 0uridical act, however 0ustified, is not perse sufficient to give rise to ownership over the res. 3hat right or title must be completed by fulfilling certain conditionsimposed by law. ?ence, ownership and real rights are ac&uired only pursuant to a legal mode or process. *hile title isthe 0uridical 0ustification, mode is the actual process of ac&uisition transfer of ownership over a thing in &uestion.

;. #lasses of modes of ac&uiring ownership

/nder Article 71; of the #ivil #ode, the modes of ac&uiring ownership are generally classified into two ;- classes,namely, the original mode i.e, through occupation, ac&uisitive prescription, law or intellectual creation- and thederivative mode i.e., through succession mortis causa or tradition as a result of certain contracts, such as sale, barter,donation, assignment or mutuum-.

C. #ontract of +ale( $=eclaration of ?eirship and *aiver of ights' an etra0udicial settlement between heirs under ule7 of the ules of #ourt

In a #ontract of +ale, one of the contracting parties obligates himself to transfer the ownership of and to deliver adeterminate thing, and the other party to pay a price certain in money or its e&uivalent. 4n the other hand, a declarationof heirship and waiver of rights operates as a public instrument when filed with the egistry of =eeds whereby theintestate heirs ad0udicate and divide the estate left by the decedent among themselves as they see fit. It is in effect anetra0udicial settlement between the heirs under ule 7 of the ules of #ourt. In the present case, the trial court erredin e&uating the nature and effect of the =eclaration of ?eirship and *aiver of ights the same with a contract deed- ofsale.

. +ale of hereditary rights and waiver of hereditary rights distinguished

3here is a marBed difference between a sale of hereditary rights and a waiver of hereditary rights. 3he first presumes theeistence of a contract or deed of sale between the parties. 3he second is, technically speaBing, a mode of etinction ofownership where there is an abdication or intentional relin&uishment of a Bnown right with Bnowledge of its eistenceand intention to relin&uish it, in favor of other persons who are coDheirs in the succession. In the present case, de loseyes, being then a stranger to the succession of #osme Pido, cannot conclusively claim ownership over the sub0ect loton the sole basis of the waiver document which neither recites the elements of either a sale, or a donation, or any otherderivative mode of ac&uiring ownership.

!. +ummon of @inistry of Agrarian eform does not conclude actuality of sale nor notice of such sale

3he conclusion, made by the trial and appellate courts, that a $sale' transpired between #osme Pidos heirs and de loseyes and that Acap ac&uired actual Bnowledge of said sale when he was summoned by the @inistry of Agrarianeform to discuss de los eyes claim over the lot in &uestion, has no basis both in fact and in law.

8/11/2019 Ang Yu Asuncion Case

3/3

A notice of adverse claim, by its nature, does not however prove private respondents ownership over the tenanted lot.$A notice of adverse claim is nothing but a notice of a claim adverse to the registered owner, the validity of which is yet tobe established in court at some future date, and is no better than a notice of lis pendens which is a notice of a casealready pending in court.' In the present case, while the eistence of said adverse claim was duly proven thus beingfiled with the egistry of =eeds which contained the =eclaration of ?eirship with *aiver of rights an was annotated atthe bacB of the 4riginal #ertificate of 3itle to the land in &uestion-, there is no evidence whatsoever that a deed of salewas eecuted between #osme Pidos heirs and de los eyes transferring the rights of the heirs to the land in favor of delos eyes. =e los eyes right or interest therefore in the tenanted lot remains an adverse claim which cannot by itself

be sufficient to cancel the 4#3 to the land and title to be issued in de los eyes name.

7. 3ransaction between heirs and de los eyes binding between parties, but cannot affect right of Acap to tenanted landwithout corresponding proof thereof

*hile the transaction between Pidos heirs and de los eyes may be binding on both parties, the right of Acap as aregistered tenant to the land cannot be perfunctorily forfeited on a mere allegation of de los eyes ownership withoutthe corresponding proof thereof. Acap had been a registered tenant in the sub0ect land since 1