Title
Fajardo, Jr. vs. Freedom to Build, Inc.
Case
G.R. No. 134692
Decision Date
Aug 1, 2000
Spouses violated restrictive covenant in property sale; developer enforced terms; Supreme Court upheld covenant validity, ordered demolition of unauthorized structures.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 134692)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Parties and Contract
    • Freedom To Build, Inc. (respondent), owner-developer and seller of low-cost housing, executed a Contract to Sell with petitioners Eliseo Fajardo, Jr. and Marissa Fajardo for Lot No. 33, Block 14, De la Costa Homes, Barangka, Marikina, Metro Manila.
    • The Contract contained a Restrictive Covenant imposing:
      • A two-meter front easement prohibiting any structure thereon.
      • Upward expansion limited to the back portion of the house, not extending beyond the original apex.
      • Front second-storey expansion limited to six meters back from the front property line and four meters back from the existing front wall.
  • Title Annotation and Unauthorized Construction
    • Transfer Certificate of Title No. N-115384 issued to petitioners likewise annotated the above restrictions.
    • Petitioners disregarded warnings and extended their roof to the property line and built a second storey over the original front wall.
  • Procedural History
    • Respondent filed an action in RTC, Pasig City (Branch 261) for demolition of the unauthorized extensions.
    • RTC rendered judgment ordering petitioners to demolish the excess structures, denying damages and attorney’s fees for lack of proof.
    • On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC decision.
    • Petitioners elevated the case to the Supreme Court via a petition for review on certiorari.

Issues:

  • Validity and Enforceability of Restrictive Covenant
    • Whether respondent-relaxed developer retains personality and interest to enforce the covenant after sale.
    • Whether enforcement authority has shifted to the Homeowners’ Association, absolving respondent.
  • Effect of Neighbors’ Consent and Petitioners’ Personal Circumstances
    • Whether the lack of objection by adjacent owners justifies petitioners’ breach.
    • Whether petitioners’ need to accommodate growing families constitutes valid reason for expansion.
  • Penalty of Demolition
    • Whether demolition is allowable absent a specific contractual stipulation prescribing that remedy.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.