Skip to main content

CASE DIGEST: Yuvienco vs. Dacuycuy | G.R. No. L-55048 | May 27, 1981

Yuvienco vs. Dacuycuy

G.R. No. L-55048 | May 27, 1981

 BARREDO, J





FACTS:


The petitioners in this case are Suga Sotto Yuvienco, Britania Sotto, and Marcelino Sotto, who are the owners of a parcel of land and a building. They expressed their willingness to sell the property to the respondents, who were tenants on the property. The respondents replied by telegram, stating that they agreed to buy the property and would proceed to Tacloban to negotiate the details. However, when the petitioners' representative arrived with a prepared contract to purchase and sell, the respondents found a variance between the terms of payment and what they had in mind. As a result, the bankdraft offered for payment was returned, and the document remained unsigned by the respondents. The respondents then filed an action for specific performance in the Court of First Instance of Leyte, while the petitioners filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on the grounds that it stated no cause of action and that the claim alleged was unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds.

ISSUE:

Whether or not there was a perfected contract of sale between the petitioners and the respondents.

RULING:

The court ruled that there was no perfected contract of sale. The telegram-reply of the respondents, which stated "we agree to buy property," did not show the existence of a perfected contract of sale. The court emphasized that the respondents insisted on further negotiation of details instead of absolutely accepting the offer. Therefore, the complaint did not state a cause of action.

The court also ruled that the claim for specific performance was unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds. The alleged agreement for payment in installments was not supported by any writing or memorandum, as required by the Statute of Frauds. The court held that in any sale of real property on installments, the idea of payment on installments must be in the requisite of a note or memorandum. Since there was no such note or memorandum in this case, the claim for specific performance was unenforceable.


Read the full case here



Labels:
Location: Philippines

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Case Digest: Republic vs. De Knecht | G.R. No. 87335 | Feb 12, 1990

Republic vs. De Knecht  G.R. No. 87335 | Feb 12, 1990 GANCAYCO, J FACTS:  The Republic of the Philippines initiated an expropriation proceeding against homeowners along Fernando Rein-Del Pan streets, including Cristina De Knecht, with the aim of extending Epifanio de los Santos Avenue (EDSA) to Roxas Boulevard. In response, De Knecht filed a motion to dismiss, citing various grounds such as lack of jurisdiction, the pendency of an appeal with the President of the Philippines, prematurity of the complaint, and arbitrary and erroneous valuation of the properties. Despite this, the lower court issued a writ of possession. However, the Supreme Court intervened and on October 30, 1980, nullified the writ. The Supreme Court determined that the selection of Fernando Rein-Del Pan streets as the route for the EDSA extension was arbitrary and should not be endorsed by the judiciary. As a result, the decision became final, and the lower court was instructed to dismiss the expropriation c...
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Digest: De Knecht vs. Bautista | G.R. No. L-51078 | Oct 30, 1980

De Knecht vs. Bautista  G.R. No. L-51078 | Oct 30, 1980 FERNANDEZ, J FACTS: Cristina de Knecht lodged a petition for certiorari and prohibition against Judge Pedro JL. Bautista and the Republic of the Philippines in response to a significant alteration in the government's infrastructure plans. Originally, the government intended to extend Epifanio de los Santos Avenue (EDSA) to Roxas Boulevard via Cuneta Avenue. However, this plan was revised to pass through Fernando Rein and Del Pan Streets, consequently impacting owners of residential houses, including the petitioner. In an effort to address this change, the petitioner submitted a petition to President Ferdinand E. Marcos urging a return to the original route. Despite this appeal, the Ministry of Public Highways persisted in enforcing the new pathway. Subsequently, the government initiated legal action by filing a complaint for expropriation against the owners of the affected properties, which encompassed the petitioner's hol...
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Digest: So Ping Bun vs. Court of Appeals | G.R. No. 120554 | Sep 21, 1999

So Ping Bun vs. Court of Appeals   G.R. No. 120554 | Sep 21, 1999 QUISUMBING, J FACTS: The case of So Ping Bun v. Court of Appeals involves a dispute over lease contracts between Tek Hua Enterprising Corp. (respondent) and Dee C. Chuan & Sons, Inc. (DCCSI). Tek Hua Enterprises was the lessee of DCCSI's premises in Binondo, Manila, but So Ping Bun (petitioner) was occupying the same premises for his Trendsetter Marketing. Manuel Tiong, a member of Tek Hua Enterprises, asked So Ping Bun to vacate the premises, but he refused and entered into formal lease contracts with DCCSI. Private respondents filed a suit for injunction, seeking the nullification of the lease contracts and damages. The trial court ruled in favor of the private respondents, and the Court of Appeals affirmed the decision. ISSUE:  Whether or not So Ping Bun is guilty of tortuous interference with a contract. RULING: The court ruled in favor of the respondent corporation, finding So Ping Bun guilty of to...
Post a Comment
Read more