Title
Tan vs. Andrade
Case
G.R. No. 171904
Decision Date
Aug 7, 2013
Rosario sold properties to Bobby Tan after mortgage foreclosure; her children claimed equitable mortgage and conjugal ownership. Court ruled sale valid, properties Rosario’s, and claim barred by laches.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 171904)

Facts

Rosario Vda. De Andrade owned four parcels of land in Cebu City, which she mortgaged to Simon Diu, leading to a foreclosure. Bobby Tan assisted Rosario in redeeming these properties. Subsequently, Rosario sold these properties to Bobby and her son Proceso Andrade, Jr. for PHP 100,000, documented through a Deed of Absolute Sale. Proceso, Jr. assigned his interest to Bobby via a Deed of Assignment in exchange for PHP 50,000. Bobby also granted Proceso, Jr. an Option to Buy the properties for PHP 310,000, which he did not exercise. This lack of action allowed Bobby to consolidate ownership, receiving Titles in his name.

Initial Judgement

In October 1997, the Andrades filed a complaint for reconveyance and annulment of deeds against Bobby in the Regional Trial Court (RTC). They argued that the transaction was actually an equitable mortgage intended to secure Rosario's debt, claiming co-ownership of the estates. Bobby defended his position, asserting legitimate ownership following Proceso, Jr.'s failure to buy back the properties. On April 6, 2001, the RTC ruled in favor of Bobby, characterizing the sale as valid and reaffirming Bobby's ownership, citing the Andrades' delay in asserting their claim.

Court of Appeals Ruling

The Andrades appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA), which issued a ruling on July 26, 2005. The CA partially affirmed the RTC’s findings, confirming that the transaction was a bona fide sale and dismissing the equitable mortgage claim due to lack of evidence. However, the CA recognized the subject properties as part of the conjugal partnership of Rosario and her late husband, Proceso, Sr. Consequently, it held that Rosario could only sell her pro-indiviso share without affecting the Andrades' interests, thereby establishing a resulting trust and allowing the Andrades to claim their rightful share.

Re-examination of Evidence

Both parties filed motions for reconsideration, which the CA denied. The petition now before the Supreme Court focuses on the characterization of the transactions and whether the properties are exclusive to Rosario or conjugal. The Court emphasized that factual findings of the trial court upheld by the CA are typically conclusive, so the designation of the sale was maintained. In contrast, the question of whether the properties belonged solely to Rosario or were conjugal required further examination.

Legal Standards Applied

The Court referenced Article 160 of the Civil Code, positing that all property acquired during a marriage is presumed conjugal unless proven otherwise. For this presumption to apply, it mus

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.