Case Summary (G.R. No. 127400)
Key Dates
June 6, 1931 — contested sale executed by Francisca Delupio in favor of Fabian Franco.
October 15, 1934 — agreement between Simplicio Birondo and attorney Rotea for professional services and compensation (one-third of the land plus incidental expenses).
April 25, 1936 — Court of First Instance ordered notation of Rotea’s right of retention on the original certificate of title (No. 27823).
May 9, 1936 — Motion for reconsideration filed by Francisca Delupio.
May 29, 1936 — Trial court granted motion and set aside the notation order.
July 7, 1936 — Trial court issued a new order directing notation of Rotea’s right of retention (without specifying its value).
Appeal taken by Delupio; Supreme Court decision rendered affirming the trial court order.
Facts and Retainer Agreement
Simplicio Birondo, father of the minors Josefina and Sofia, contracted attorney Marcos J. Rotea to secure annulment of a 1931 sale and obtain a Torrens certificate in the names of the minors. The agreed compensation was one-third of the land (to be taken from an uncultivated portion), and incidental expenses were to be borne by the attorney. Rotea successfully procured disapproval of the sale by the Bureau of Lands, obtained certificate of title No. 27823 in the minors’ names, and prepared and prosecuted civil actions in the Court of First Instance of Rizal to protect the minors’ interests.
Procedural History in the Trial Court
Following Rotea’s petition, the trial court initially ordered notation of his right of retention over one-third of the land on April 25, 1936. The guardian (Delupio) moved for reconsideration on the ground that Simplicio, as father but not guardian of the minors’ property, lacked authority to bind their property. The trial court granted the motion on May 29, 1936, setting aside the notation. On July 7, 1936, however, the trial court again ordered notation of Rotea’s right of retention (without fixing its value). Delupio appealed this latter order.
Legal Issue Presented
Whether attorney Marcos J. Rotea is entitled to compensation and to have his right of retention noted on the minors’ title for services rendered pursuant to a contract entered into with the minors’ father, who was not their legal guardian.
Legal Analysis: Parental Authority vs. Negotiorum Gestor
The Court recognized two distinct legal points. First, as a general rule, the father, by virtue of paternity alone, lacks authority to bind the property of his minor children by contract. Thus, an agreement by Simplicio to convey one-third of the minors’ land would not, by itself, validly bind the minors’ patrimony. That legal limitation, however, does not leave an attorney who has acted to protect the minors with no remedy.
Second, the Court invoked the doctrine of negotiorum gestio (management of another’s affairs without mandate). Under article 1893 of the Civil Code, a person who voluntarily intervenes to manage the affairs of another for that other’s benefit is entitled to be indemnified for necessary and useful expenses and to recover damages sustained in the performance of such duties, even if the principal or guardian fails to ratify the manager’s acts. Applying that doctrine, the Court held that Rotea’s successful efforts to annul a fraudulent sale and secure issuance of a Torrens certificate in the minors’ names constituted management of the minors’ affairs for their benefit. Consequently, Rotea was entitled to indemnity for necessary and useful expenditures and damages incurred, and to have his lien or right of retention noted on the title.
Court’s Holding and Disposition
The Supreme Court held that an attorney who, at the request of a father (who is not the legal guardian), undertakes and successfully accomplishes the annulment of a fraudulent sale of real property belonging to minors and
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 127400)
Citation and Court
- Reported at 67 Phil. 330, G.R. No. 45310.
- Decision rendered April 14, 1939.
- Opinion authored by Justice Villa-Real.
- Justices Avancena, C. J., Imperial, Diaz, Laurel, Concepcion, and Moran concurred.
Parties
- Petitioner and appellee: Marcos J. Rotea, an attorney.
- Oppositor and appellant: Francisca Delupio, guardian of the persons and properties of the minors Josefina and Sofia Birondo.
- Other persons involved: Simplicio Birondo (father of the minors), the minors Josefina and Sofia Birondo, deceased mother Beatriz Bartolome, and Fabian Franco (purchaser in the contested sale).
Property and Original Transaction
- Subject property: a piece of land known as Lot No. 1023 of the Hacienda Piedad, Baesa, Caloocan, Rizal.
- Original contested sale: sale executed on June 6, 1931, by Francisca Delupio (the minors’ grandmother) in favor of Fabian Franco.
- The minors’ claim to the right to buy the land derived from inheritance from their deceased mother, Beatriz Bartolome, and their subsequent acquisition of ownership from the Government by purchase.
Retainer Agreement Between Simplicio Birondo and Attorney Marcos J. Rotea
- Date and purpose: On October 15, 1934, Simplicio Birondo entrusted attorney Marcos J. Rotea with securing the annulment of the June 6, 1931 sale and procuring issuance of a Torrens certificate in the names of the minors Josefina and Sofia.
- Consideration agreed: For professional services, Simplicio Birondo bound himself to convey to attorney Marcos J. Rotea one third of the land in question.
- Specifics of the one-third conveyance: The one third to be conveyed would be taken from the uncultivated portion near the Novaliches-Manila provincial road.
- Incidentals and expenses: The agreement, as recited, provided that all incidental expenses, including those for issuance of the certificate of title in the names of the two minors, were to be for the account of the attorney.
Attorney’s Actions and Results Achieved
- Administrative action: Attorney Marcos J. Rotea took steps with the Bureau of Lands which resulted in disapproval of the sale executed by Francisca Delupio in favor of Fabian Franco.
- Title issuance: As a result of these efforts, original certificate of title No. 27823 of the office of the register of deeds of Rizal was issued in the names of the minors Josefina and Sofia Birondo.
- Judicial actions: Attorney Rotea prepared the complaint and appeared:
- In civil case No. 6177 of the Court of First Instance of Rizal in the name and representation of Simplicio Birondo and his minor daughters.
- In civil case No. 6191 of the same court in the name of Simplicio Birondo alone.
Proceedings in the Court of First Instance of Rizal
- Petition to note retention: On April 17, 1936, attorney Rotea petitioned for notation of his right of retention over one third of the lot; the court issued an order on April 25, 1936 directing the register of deeds of Rizal to note said right of retention over one third of the land as shown on original certificate of title No. 27823.
- Motion for reconsideration by guardian: On May 9, 1936, Francisca Delupio, acting as guardian of the minors, filed a motion asking reconsideration of the April 25 order that directed notation of Rotea’s right of retention.
- Grounds of the guardian’s motion: The motion contended that Simplicio Birondo, the father, was not authorized to enter into any agreement with attorney Rotea regarding the properties of the minors.
- First disposition after motion: After hearing the motion and opposition, the Court of First Instance of Rizal granted the guardian’s motion by order of May 29, 1936, and set aside the earlier order for notation.
- Subsequent order for notation: On July 7, 1936, the Court of First Instance of Rizal issued another order again directing the notation of attorney Rotea’s right of retention, but that later order did not specify the monetary value of the right of retention.
- Appeal: The administratrix (guardian) Francisca Delupio excepted to the July 7 order and interposed the present appeal to the Supreme Court.
Single Question Presented to the Supreme Court
- The sole question presented by the appeal: Whether attorney Marcos J. Rotea is entitled to be compensated for the services he rendered in securing the annulment of the sale and procuring the issuance of an original certificate of title in the names of the minors Josefina and Sofia Birondo, by virtue of the contract entered into between attorn