1999 Bar Question 12

1999 Bar Question 12In 1950, the Bureau of Lands issued a Homestead patent to A. Three years later, A sold the homestead to B. A died in 1990, and his heirs filed an action to recover the homestead from B on the ground that its sale by their father to the latter is void under Section 118 of the Public Land Law. B contends, however, that the heirs of A cannot recover the homestead from him anymore because their action has prescribed and that furthermore, A was in pari delicto. Decide.AnswerThe sale of the land by A to B, 3 years after the issuance of the homestead patent, being in violation of Section 118 of the Public Land Act, is void from its inception.

The action filed by the heirs of B to declare the nullity or inexistence of the contract and to recover the land should be given due course.

Bs defense of prescription is untenable because an action which seeks to declare the nullity of inexistence of a contract does not prescribe. (Article 1410 of the Civil Code.)

The Defense of Pari Delicto in not applicable, since the law itself allows the homesteader to reacquire the land even if it has been sold.1991 Bar Question No. 12bMaria Enriquez failed to pay the realty taxes on her unregistered agricultural land located in Magdugo, Toledo City. In 1989, to satisfy the taxes due, the City sold it at public auction to Juan Miranda, an employee at the Treasurers Office of said City, whose bid at P10,000.00 was the highest. In due time, a final bill of sale was executed in his favor.

Maria refused to turn-over the possession of the property to Juan alleging that (1) she had been, in the meantime, granted free patent and on the basis thereof an Original Certificate of Title was issued to her, and (2) the sale in favor of Juan is void from the beginning in view of the provision in the Administrative Code of 1987 which prohibits officers and employees of the government from purchasing directly or indirectly any property sold by the government for non payment of any tax, free or other public charge.

(b) If the sale is void, may Juan recover the P10,000.00? If not, why not?AnswerJuan may recover. Under Article 1416 of the civil code, when the agreement is not illegal per se but is merely prohibited, and the prohibition by the law is designated for the protection of the plaintiff, he may, if public policy is thereby enhanced, recover what he has paid or delivered.2004 Bar Question No. 2a3 Distinguish briefly but clearly between:1. x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x2. x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x3. Civil Obligation and natural obligation?AnswerCivil Obligation is a juridical necessity to give, to do and not to do. It gives the creditor the legal right to compel by an action in court the performance of such obligation.

A natural obligation is based on equity and natural law. There is no legal right to compel performance thereof but if the debtor voluntarily pays it, he cannot recover what was paid.2002 Bar Question No. 7aWay back in 1948, Windas husband sold in favor of Verde Sports Center Corp. a 10-hectare property belonging to their conjugal partnership. The sale was made without Windas knowledge, much less consent. In 1950, Winda learned of the sale, when she discovered the deed of sale among the documents in her husbands vault after his demise. Soon after, she noticed that the construction of the sports complex had started. Upon completion of the construction in 1952, she tried but failed to get free membership privileges in Verde.

Winda now files a suit against Verde for the annulment of the sale on the grounds that she did not consent to the sale. In answer, Verde contends that, in accordance with the Spanish Civil Code which was in force, the sale in 1948 of the property did not need her concurrence. Verde contends that in any case the action has prescribed or is barred by laches. Winda rejoins that her Torrens title covering the property is indefeasible and imprescriptible. (a) Define or explain the term laches(b) Decide the case, stating for your decision.

Answer(a) Laches means failure or neglect, for an unreasonable and unexplained length of time, to do what, by exercising due diligence, could or should have been done earlier. It is negligence or omission to assert a right within a reasonable time.

(b) Windas claim that her Torrens Title covering the property is indefeasible and Imprescriptible is not tenable. The rule of indefeasibility of a Torrens Title means that after one year from the date of issue of the decree of registration or if the land has fallen into the hands of an innocent purchaser for value, the title becomes inconstestable and incontrovertible.IMPRESCRIPTIBILITY, on the other hand, means that no title to the land in derogation of that of the registered owner may be acquired by adverse possession or acquisitive prescription or that registered owner does not lose by extinctive prescription his right to recover ownership and possession of the land.

The action in this case is for annulment of the sale executed by the husband over a conjugal partnership property covered by a Torrens Title. Actions on contracts are subject to prescription. Hence, the action to set aside the sale, nonetheless, is already barred by prescription.2000 Bar Question No. 16aIn an action brought to collect a sum of money based on a surety agreement, the defense of laches was raised as the claim was filed more than seven years from the maturity of the obligation. However, the action was brought within the ten-year prescriptive period provided by law wherein actions based on written contracts can be instituted.

(a) Will the defense prosper? Reason.AnswerNo. the defense will not prosper. The problem did not give facts from which laches may be inferred. Mere delay in filing an action, standing alone, does not constitute laches.2000 Bar Question No. 16bIn an action brought to collect a sum of money based on a surety agreement, the defense of laches was raised as the claim was filed more than seven years from the maturity of the obligation. However, the action was brought within the ten-year prescriptive period provided by law wherein actions based on written contracts can be instituted.

(b) What are the essential elements of laches?Answer(b) The four basic elements of laches are:Conduct on the part of the defendant or of one under whom he claims, giving rise to the situation of which complainant seeks a remedy;Delay in asserting the complainants rights, the complainant having had knowledge or notice of the defendants conduct and having been afforded an opportunity to institute suit;Lack of knowledge on the part of the defendant that the complainant would assert the right on which he bases his suit;Injury or Prejudice to the defendant in the event relief is accorded to the complainant, or the suit is not held to be barred.

2000 Bar Question No. 17In 1955, Ramon and his sister Rosario inherited a parcel of land in Albay from their parents. Since Rosario was gainfully employed in Manila, she left Ramon alone to possess and cultivate the land. However, Ramon never shared the harvest with Rosario and was even able to sell one-half of the land in 1985 by claiming to be the sole heir of his parents. Having reached retirement age in 1990 Rosario returned to the province and upon learning what had transpired, demanded that the remaining half of the land be given to her as her share. Ramon opposed, asserting that he has already acquired ownership of the land by prescription, and that Rosario is barred by laches from demanding partition and reconveyance. Decide the conflicting claims.