Case Digest (G.R. No. L-3107)
Facts:
The case G.R. No. L-3107 involves Augusto J. D. Cortes as the plaintiff and Dee Chian Hong & Sons, Inc. as the defendant. The events leading to the case began on September 10, 1936, when Cortes sold a parcel of land located at the corner of Rosario and Ongpin Streets in Manila, along with a four-story reinforced concrete building, to Dee Chian Hong & Sons, Inc., a company composed entirely of Chinese nationals, for the sum of P143,000. A Transfer Certificate of Title No. 49918 was issued in favor of the buyer. Subsequently, Cortes sought to extrajudicially rescind the contract due to the constitutional prohibition against land ownership by foreigners. However, the defendant refused to comply with this request, prompting Cortes to file a lawsuit. The lower court dismissed the case, leading to an appeal by Cortes. In the appeal, Cortes argued that the lower court erred in ruling that only the Republic of the Philippines had the right to seek rescission of the sale, asse...
Case Digest (G.R. No. L-3107)
Facts:
Parties Involved:
- Plaintiff/Appellant: Augusto J. D. Cortes
- Defendant/Appellee: Dee Chian Hong & Sons, Inc.
Transaction Details:
- On September 10, 1936, the plaintiff, Augusto J. D. Cortes, sold a parcel of land located at the corner of Rosario and Ongpin Streets in Manila, along with a four-story reinforced concrete building, to Dee Chian Hong & Sons, Inc., for the sum of P143,000.
- The defendant, Dee Chian Hong & Sons, Inc., is a corporation whose shareholders are all Chinese citizens.
- Transfer Certificate of Title No. 49918 was issued in favor of the defendant.
Legal Action:
- The plaintiff sought the extrajudicial rescission of the contract, but the defendant refused.
- Consequently, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit to rescind the sale and recover the property.
Lower Court Decision:
- The trial court dismissed the plaintiff's complaint.
Issue:
- Whether the plaintiff, Augusto J. D. Cortes, has the right to seek the rescission of the sale contract, which was allegedly made in violation of the constitutional prohibition against the sale of land to aliens.
- Whether the sale to the defendant, whose shareholders are all Chinese citizens, is null and void under the Constitution.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)