Case Digest (G.R. No. L-10609)
Facts:
In Yu Bun Guan v. Elvira Ong, G.R. No. 144735, decided October 18, 2001 under the 1987 Constitution, petitioner Yu Bun Guan and respondent Elvira Ong were married by Chinese rites in 1961. In 1968, respondent alone purchased a parcel in J.P. Rizal with her personal funds, which was registered as TCT No. 217614. During their marriage, they also acquired a conjugal house and lot in 1983 under a separate title. In July 1992, at petitioner’s insistence and on his promise to construct a building for their children and to settle an Allied Bank loan, respondent executed a simulated sale of the J.P. Rizal property in petitioner’s name, reciting a P200,000 consideration that was never paid. Despite this, petitioner secured TCT No. 181033 in his name. When petitioner failed to fulfill his promises and sought a replacement owner’s duplicate of the title through a petition before the Makati RTC, respondent filed an Affidavit of Adverse Claim and sued to declare the deed void, cancel the titCase Digest (G.R. No. L-10609)
Facts:
- Parties and marriage
- Yu Bun Guan (petitioner) and Elvira Ong (respondent) were married by Chinese rites on April 30, 1961, and had three children.
- The couple separated on August 26, 1992, allegedly due to petitioner’s misconduct.
- Property acquisitions and transactions
- On March 20, 1968, respondent purchased the J.P. Rizal property with her personal funds; it was registered in her name as TCT No. 26795 on April 17, 1968.
- In 1983, they jointly acquired a house and lot with conjugal funds, registered as TCT No. 118884 in both their names.
- On July 24, 1992, respondent “reluctantly” executed a Deed of Absolute Sale of the J.P. Rizal property to petitioner for a stated consideration of ₱200,000, which was never paid; TCT No. 181033 was thereafter issued in petitioner’s name.
- Respondent withheld the owner’s copy of TCT No. 181033 and paid all taxes and assessments on the property.
- Petitioner filed in 1993 a petition for replacement of the owner’s copy of TCT No. 181033, alleging loss; an order was granted and a new owner’s copy issued.
- On November 29, 1993, respondent executed an Affidavit of Adverse Claim and filed suit to annul the 1992 Deed of Sale, cancel TCT No. 181033, and recover damages.
- Proceedings below
- The Regional Trial Court of Makati declared the 1992 Deed of Sale void, recognized respondent as owner under TCT No. 217614, ordered cancellation of TCT No. 181033, issuance of a new title in respondent’s name, awarded damages and attorney’s fees, and dismissed petitioner’s counterclaim.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC decision and denied petitioner’s motion for new evidence and reconsideration on April 25, 2000 (Decision) and August 31, 2000 (Resolution).
- Petitioner filed a Rule 45 petition before the Supreme Court seeking review.
Issues:
- Whether the J.P. Rizal property should be treated as co-owned under Article 144 of the Civil Code given respondent’s use of conjugal funds.
- Whether the 1992 Deed of Sale was valid or was fictitious, simulated, and inexistent.
- Whether the doctrine of in pari delicto bars respondent’s claim to annul the 1992 sale.
- Whether TCT No. 181033 could be cancelled in the absence of proof of actual fraud.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)