Title
Standard Oil Co. of New York vs. Jaramillo
Case
G.R. No. 20329
Decision Date
Mar 16, 1923
A petitioner sought mandamus to compel the Register of Deeds to register a chattel mortgage involving leasehold rights and a building. The Court ruled the Register’s duty is ministerial, lacking authority to determine property classification, and ordered registration.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 188933)

Key Dates

• November 27, 1922 – Execution and delivery of the chattel mortgage document
• March 16, 1923 – Decision date

Applicable Law

• Chattel Mortgage Law (Act No. 1508), as amended by Act No. 2496, now embodied in section 198 of the Administrative Code
• Articles 334 and 335 of the Civil Code (classification of real and personal property)
• Principles governing mandamus

Facts

On November 27, 1922, Gervasia de la Rosa, as lessee of a parcel of land in Manila and owner of a substantial house thereon, executed a document styled as a chattel mortgage. The instrument purported to convey by way of mortgage her leasehold interest in the lot and the building erected thereon. After acknowledgment and delivery, the petitioner tendered the document for registration as a chattel mortgage. Register Jaramillo refused to record it, reasoning that the interests mortgaged were not “personal property” under the Chattel Mortgage Law.

Issue

Whether the Register of Deeds has authority to determine the nature (real or personal) of property described in an instrument presented for registration as a chattel mortgage and to refuse registration on that basis.

Court’s Analysis

  1. Ministerial Duty of the Register
    The role of the register in recording chattel mortgages is purely ministerial. No statute grants him judicial or quasi-judicial power to qualify instruments or to pass upon the character of the property they cover. His sole duty is to accept a properly executed instrument, collect the fee, and enter it in the chattel mortgage register.

  2. Legal Effect of Registration
    Registration of a chattel mortgage operates only as constructive notice of the underlying contract. It neither alters the rights of the parties nor adds to the title; it merely gives notice to third parties.

  3. Classification under Civil Code Articles 334 and 335
    While those articles offer general rules for distinguishing real from personal property, they do not provide an absolute test for every transaction. Parties may, by agreement, treat property ordinarily deemed real as personal for purposes of a mortgage. Moreover, classification may vary depending on context, taxation, or contractual arrangement.

  4. Precedent and Administrative Ruling
    A 1914 ruling by Judge Ostrand, later affirmed by the Attorney-General’s 1909 opinion, held that a register cannot refuse registration on the ground that the property is real rather than personal; any cha

...continue reading

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