Case Digest (G.R. No. 51058)
Facts:
Asia Production Co., Inc., Wang Ta Peng and Winston Wang v. Hon. Ernani Cruz Pano, Lolita Lee Le Hua and Alberto Dy, G.R. No. 51058, January 27, 1992, Supreme Court Third Division, Davide, Jr., J., writing for the Court.In March 1976 private respondents Lolita Lee Le Hua and Alberto Dy offered to sell a building (erected on a leased lot) to petitioners Asia Production Co., Inc., Wang Ta Peng and Winston Wang for P170,000, and orally promised to assign the lease of the land to petitioners. The agreement and the promise to assign the lease were not reduced to writing. Petitioners paid a downpayment of P20,000 on 20 March 1976 and issued eight postdated checks for the installment balance; they proceeded to construct a weaving factory on the premises in May 1976 in reliance on respondents’ assurances.
Respondents failed, despite extensions, to execute the deed of sale and the deed of assignment, although they cashed two checks totaling P30,000. The owner of the lot refused consent to assignment unless onerous terms were accepted. Petitioners stopped payment on the remaining checks, removed their machinery and equipment, returned possession of the building to respondents on or about 29 December 1976, and demanded return of P50,000 (the downpayment plus two installments), which respondents refused.
Petitioners filed a complaint for recovery of the P50,000 (and damages and attorneys’ fees) in the Court of First Instance (now the Regional Trial Court) of Quezon City as Civil Case No. Q-23593 (raffled to Branch XVIII, respondent Judge presiding). Respondent Lolita Lee Le Hua defaulted for failure to answer. Respondent Alberto Dy moved to dismiss, arguing the claim was barred by the Statute of Frauds (Art. 1403, Civil Code) because the sale of real property and the lease assignment required a writing; the Court below granted the motion in an Order of 18 April 1979 and denied petitioners’ motion for reconsideration in an Order of 21 June 1979, citing authorities including Paterno v. Jao Yan and Babao v. Perez.
Petitioners filed a petition with this Co...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did the trial judge commit grave abuse of discretion in dismissing the complaint on the ground that it was barred by the Statute of Frauds?
- Is an action to recover partial payments made under an oral agreement for the sale of a building (with an oral promise to assign a lease) barred by the Statute of Frauds, or does partial performance remove the...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)