Case Digest (G.R. No. L-5536) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
The case involves Laureana Torio, the plaintiff and appellant, against Nicanor Rosario, the defendant and appellee. The events leading to this case occurred in Binmaley, Pangasinan, with the dispute centering around a parcel of land comprising 21 ares and 84 centares. The ownership of this property became a matter of contention after Julian Raymundo, Laureana's husband, donated a one-half undivided interest in the land to her by a donation propter nuptias executed on April 14, 1937. Subsequently, on May 4, 1944, Julian Raymundo sold his undivided interest to Nicanor Rosario, with the transaction duly registered in the office of the register of deeds on the same date. Following this sale, Nicanor Rosario assumed possession of the property. On May 12, 1944, Laureana commenced legal proceedings seeking to exercise her right of legal redemption, claiming her right under Article 1523 of the old Civil Code. On August 17, 1949, Laureana deposited the amount of P40 as the redemption pri Case Digest (G.R. No. L-5536) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Property and Ownership Background
- Laureana Torio (plaintiff) and Julian Raymundo (her husband) were the co-owners pro indiviso of a parcel of land located in barrio Lomboy, Binmaley, Pangasinan, with an area of 21 ares and 84 centares.
- The co-ownership arose from a donation propter nuptias executed on April 14, 1937, whereby Julian Raymundo transferred one-half of the property to his prospective wife, Laureana Torio.
- Transaction Involving Transfer of Interest
- On May 4, 1944, Julian Raymundo sold his undivided one-half interest in the land to Nicanor Rosario.
- The deed of sale was duly registered in the office of the register of deeds on the same day.
- Nicanor Rosario took possession of the portion purchased from the date of the transfer and maintained it thereafter.
- Exercise of the Right to Legal Redemption
- On May 12, 1944, almost immediately following the sale, Laureana Torio filed an action to exercise her right of legal redemption over her co-owned property, as provided under Article 1523 of the old Civil Code.
- On August 17, 1949, she deposited P40 as the redemption price, thereby attempting to redeem the one-half interest in the property.
- Procedural Background and Lower Court Ruling
- The lower court held that Laureana Torio had lost her right to redeem due to her failure to offer to repurchase the property (i.e., a “tender” of the redemption money) before instituting the legal redemption action, which it considered a sine qua non requirement.
- Consequently, the lower court dismissed her complaint with the awarding of costs against her.
- Appeal and Certification of the Case
- Following the adverse ruling, the plaintiff appealed the decision to the Court of Appeals.
- The case was then certified to the Supreme Court on the ground that it presented purely questions of law arising from a stipulation of facts.
Issues:
- Whether the plaintiff, Laureana Torio, can still exercise her right to legal redemption despite her failure to make a prior offer (or tender) to repurchase the property within the period prescribed by law.
- Does the absence of a previous tender of the redemption price bar the exercise of the legal redemption right?
- Is the registration of the deed of sale, which functions as an offer or tender under the law, sufficient to fulfill the statutory requirement?
- Whether the statutory provisions (specifically Article 1523 and related sections of the old Civil Code) necessitate a preliminary tender of the redemption money before initiating legal action for redemption.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)