PHILIPPINE JURISPRUDENCE - FULL TEXT The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Fo n!

ation "#R# No# L-$$%% Dece&'er $() *(+, -.NIC. C.NCEPCI.N /0# PACIENCIA STA# ANA Rep 'lic o1 the Philippine0 SUPRE-E C.URT -anila EN 2ANC "#R# No# L-$$%% Dece&'er $() *(+, -.NIC. C.NCEPCI.N) plainti11-appellant) /0# PACIENCIA STA# ANA) !e1en!ant-appellee# Yap and Garcia for appellant. Tomas Yumol for appellee.

FERIA) J.: An action wa0 in0tit te! '3 Monico Concepcion vs. Paciencia Sta. Ana to ann l the 0ale &a!e '3 the late Perpet a Concepcion) 0i0ter o1 the plainti11) o1 three parcel0 o1 lan! with the i&pro/e&ent0 thereon to the !e1en!ant# The co&plaint alle4e0) a&on4 other0) that the plainti11 i0 the onl3 0 r/i/in4 le4iti&ate 'rother o1 Perpet a Concepcion) who !ie! on or a'o t Jan ar3 $5) *(65) witho t i00 e an! witho t lea/in4 an3 will7 that in her li1e ti&e or on a'o t J ne $() *(6+) 0ai! Perpet a Concepcion) in conni/ance with the !e1en!ant an! with intent to !e1ra ! the plainti11) 0ol! an! con/e3e! three parcel0 o1 lan! 1or a 1al0e an! 1ictitio 0 con0i!eration to the !e1en!ant) who 0ec re! tran01er certi1icate0 o1 title o1 0ai! lan!0 i00 e! n!er her na&e7 an! that the !e1en!ant ha0 'een in po00e00ion o1 the propertie0 0ol! 0ince the !eath o1 Perpet a Concepcion) there'3 ca 0in4 !a&a4e0 to the plainti11 in the a&o nt o1 not le00 than two h n!re! 8P$,,9 pe0o0# De1en!ant 1ile! a &otion to !i0&i00 the co&plaint on the 4ro n! that it !oe0 not 0tate a ca 0e o1 action) 'eca 0e the !ecea0e! 'ein4 the owner o1 the propertie0 0ol! ha! the ri4ht to enjo3 an! !i0po0e o1 the& witho t 1 rther li&itation than tho0e e0ta'li0he! '3 law# The Co rt o1 Fir0t In0tance o1 -anila 4rante! the &otion to !i0&i00 an! !i0&i00e! the co&plaint on the 4ro n! that :the plainti11 i0 not a part3 to the !ee! o1 0ale e;ec te! '3 Perpet a Concepcion in 1a/or o1 the !e1en!ant# E/en in the a00 &ption that the con0i!eration o1 the contract i0 1ictitio 0) the plainti11 ha0 no ri4ht o1 action a4ain0t the !e1en!ant# Un!er article *<,$ o1 the Ci/il Co!e) :the action to ann l a contract &a3 'e 'ro 4ht '3 an3 per0on principall3 or 0 '0i!iaril3 'o n! there'3#: The plainti11 i0 not 'o n! '3 the !ee! o1 0ale e;ec te! '3 the !ecea0e! in 1a/or o1 the !e1en!ant# He ha0 no o'li4ation n!er the !ee!#: Plainti11 appeale! 1ro& the or!er o1 the co rt !i0&i00in4 hi0 co&plaint) an! now a00i4n0 a0 erroneo 0 the or!er appeale! 1ro& on the 1ollowin4 4ro n!0= 8*9 that a 0i& late! or 1ictitio 0 0ale 1or a 1ictitio 0 or 1al0e con0i!eration i0 n ll an! /oi! per se or non-e;i0tence) hence it cannot tran01er owner0hip7 an! 8$9 that accor!in4 to article *<,$ o1 the 0a&e co!e) :the action to ann l a contract &a3 'e 'ro 4ht '3 a per0on principall3 or 0 '0i!iaril3

'o n! there'3): an! a0 n!er article *$+% o1 the Ci/il Co!e :contract0 0hall 'e 'in!in4 onl3 pon the partie0 who &a>e the& an! their heir0): the plainti11 a0 heir o1 the !ecea0e! contractin4 part3 can 'rin4 action to ann l the contract o1 0ale n!er con0i!eration# 8*9 The plainti11?0 contention that a 0i& late! or 1ictitio 0 contract o1 0ale with a 1al0e con0i!eration i0 n ll an! /oi! per se) or i0 a contrato inexistente) not &erel3 a contrato nulo) i0 not correct# Article *$%@ o1 the Ci/il Co!e * e;pre00l3 pro/i!e0 that :the 0tate&ent o1 a 1al0e con0i!eration in contract 0hall 'e 4ro n! 1or ann l&ent): an! article *<,* o1 the 0a&e co!e pro/i!e! 1or the li&itation o1 action0 1or ann l&ent o1 a contract# In 0 pport o1 hi0 contention that the contract o1 0ale n!er con0i!eration 'ein4 a 1ictitio 0 contract or contract with a 1al0e con0i!eration i0 n ll per se or non-e;i0tent) plainti11 A ote0 -anre0a?0 co&&ent on article *$%6 to *$%%) Bol# 5) p# @$<) which 0a30= :Reco4niCin4 thi0 analo43) it wa0 hel! '3 the S pre&e Co rt o1 Spain that a 1ictitio 0 contract) or contract entere! into with 1al0e con0i!eration !oe0 not con1er an3 ri4ht or pro! ce an3 le4al e11ect) citin4 the j !4&ent0 o1 the S pre&e Co rt o1 Spain o1 .cto'er <*) *5@+) o1 -arch $*) *556) an! o1 No/e&'er $<) *5%%#: Appellant?0 concl 0ion i0 not correct# 23 0tatin4 that contract0 with 1al0e con0i!eration con1er no ri4ht an! pro! ce no le4al e11ect) -anre0a !oe0 not &ean to 0a3 that the3 are n ll an! /oi! per se or non-e;i0tent a0 contra!i0tin4 i0he! 1ro& ann lla'le) 1or the e11ect0 o1 'oth non-e;i0tent an! ann lla'le contract0 that ha/e 'een ann lle! are the 0a&e= the3 con1er no ri4ht an! pro! ce no le4al e11ect# Dhat -anre0a 0a30 on pa4e %,, o1 the 0a&e /ol &e) co&&entin4 on article *<,*) i0 the 1ollowin4= :The e;pre00ion o1 a 1al0e ca 0e or con0i!eration in the contract !oe0 not &a>e it non-e;i0tent) an! it 0hall onl3 'e a 4ro n! 1or an action 1or n llit3 a0 pro/i!e! '3 article *$%@ an! con1ir&e! '3 article *<,* o1 the Ci/il Co!e# There are 0o&e who con0i!er thi0 0o&ewhat con1 0e! n!er the Co!e7 1or 0 it i0 /er3 clear) 1or the co!e repeate!l3 pro/i!e0 that the e11ect o1 a 1al0e con0i!eration i0 li&ite! to &a>in4 the contract /oi!a'le) an! we ha/e alrea!3 pointe! o t that in thi0 partic lar) o r Ci/il Co!e ha0 !e/iate! !eli'eratel3 1ro& the French Co!e) which incl !e0 in!i0tinctl3 in one an! the 0a&e pro/i0ion contract0 witho t con0i!eration an! contract0 in which the con0i!eration i0 illicit or 1al0e#: In the ca0e o1 De Belen vs. Collector of Customs and S eriff of Manila 86@ Phil# $6*9) thi0 co rt) thro 4h -r# J 0tice Street) 0ai! that :The !i0tinction 'etween entire a'0ence o1 contract 8inexistencia9 an! the 0it ation reA irin4 an action o1 re0ci00ion or n llit3 i0 1 ll3 e;po n!e! '3 -anre0a in hi0 co&&ent on article *<,, o1 the Ci/il Co!e 8!.v.9#: 8$9 A0 to the appellant?0 0econ! an! la0t contention) n!er the law action to ann l a contract entere! into with all the reA i0ite0 &entione! in article *$@* whene/er the3 are tainte! with the /ice which in/ali!ate the& in accor!ance with law) &a3 'e 'ro 4ht) not onl3 '3 an3 per0on principall3 'o n! or who &a!e the&) ' t al0o '3 hi0 heir to who& the ri4ht an! o'li4ation ari0in4 1ro& the contract are tran0&itte!# Hence i1 no 0 ch ri4ht0) action0 or o'li4ation0 ha/e 'een tran0&itte! to the heir) the latter can not 'rin4 an action to ann l the contract in repre0entation o1 the contractin4 part3 who &a!e it# In "olfson vs. #state of Martine$) $, Phil#) <6,) thi0 S pre&e Co rt A ote! with appro/al the j !4&ent o1 the S pre&e Co rt o1 Spain o1 April *5) *(,*) in which it wa0 hel! that :he who i0 not a part3 to a contract) or an a00i4nee there n!er) or !oe0 not repre0ent tho0e who too> part therein) ha0 n!er article0 *$+% an! *<,$ o1 the Ci/il Co!e no le4al capacit3 to challen4e the /ali!it3 o1 0 ch contract#: An! in %rlanda vs. Pitar&ue 8$$ Phil# <5<9 we hel! that :the te0ta&entar3 or le4al heir contin e0 in law a0 the j ri!ical per0onalit3 o1 hi0 pre!ece00or in intere0t) who tran0&it to hi& 1ro& the &o&ent o1 hi0 !eath 0 ch o1 hi0 ri4ht0) action0 an! o'li4ation0 a0 are not e;tin4 i0he! there'3#:la'p il.net The A e0tion to 'e re0ol/e! i0) there1ore) whether the !ecea0e! Perpet a Concepcion

ha0 tran0&itte! to the plainti11 an3 ri4ht ari0in4 1ro& the contract n!er con0i!eration in or!er that he can 'rin4 an action to ann l the 0ale /ol ntaril3 &a!e '3 her to the !e1en!ant with a 1al0e con0i!eration# De are o1 the opinion an! 0o hol!) that the late Perpet a Concepcion ha0 not tran0&itte! to the plainti11 an3 ri4ht ari0in4 1ro& the contract o1 con/e3ance or 0ale o1 her lan!0 to the !e1en!ant) an! there1ore the plainti11 cannot 1ile an action to ann l 0 ch contract a0 repre0entati/e o1 the !ecea0e!# Accor!in4 to the co&plaint) the !ecea0e!) in conni/ance with the !e1en!ant an! with intent to !e1ra ! the plainti11) 8that i0) in or!er not to lea/e the propertie0 a'o/e &entione! pon her !eath to the plainti119 0ol! an! con/e3e! the& to the latter) 1or a 1al0e an! 1ictitio 0 con0i!eration# It i0) there1ore o'/io 0) that the con/e3ance or 0ale o1 0ai! propertie0 to the !e1en!ant wa0 /ol ntaril3 &a!e '3 the !ecea0e! to 0ai! !e1en!ant# A0 the !ecea0e! ha! no 1orce! heir) 0he wa0 1ree to !i0po0e o1 all her propertie0 a0 a'0ol te owner thereo1) witho t 1 rther li&itation than tho0e e0ta'li0he! '3 law) an! the ri4ht to !i0po0e o1 a thin4 in/ol/e0 the ri4ht to 4i/e or to con/e3 it to another witho t an3 con0i!eration# The onl3 li&itation e0ta'li0he! '3 law on her ri4ht to con/e3 0ai! propertie0 to the !e1en!ant witho t an3 con0i!eration i0) that 0he co l! not !i0po0e o1 or tran01er her propert3 to another in 1ra ! o1 her cre!itor0# An! thi0 co rt) in Solis vs. C ua Pua (ermanos 8+, Phil# @<@9) thro 4h -r# J 0tice Street) hel! that :a /ol ntar3 con/e3ance) witho t an3 con0i!eration whate/er) i0 prima facie 4oo! a0 'etween the partie0) an! 0 ch an in0tr &ent can not 'e !eclare! 1ra ! lent a0 a4ain0t cre!itor0 in the a'0ence o1 proo1) that there wa0 at the ti&e o1 the e;ec tion o1 the con/e3ance a cre!itor who co l! 'e !e1ra !e! '3 the con/e3ance) $% C# J#) 6%,#: E/en a 1orce! heir o1 the !ecea0e! Perpet a Concepcion wo l! ha/e no ri4ht to in0tit te a0 repre0entati/e o1 the !ece!ent) an action o1 n llit3 o1 a contract &a!e '3 the !ece!ent to !e1ra ! hi0 cre!itor0) 'eca 0e 0 ch a contract 'ein4 con0i!ere! illicit n!er article *<,@ o1 the Ci/il Co!e) Perpet a Concepcion her0el1 ha! no ri4ht o1 action to ann l it an! reco/er the propertie0 0he ha! con/e3e! to the !e1en!ant# 2 t the 1orce! heir co l! in 0 ch ca0e 'rin4 an action to re0cin! the contract n!er article *$(* 8<9 o1 the Ci/il Co!e# -anre0a in hi0 co&&ent0 on article0 *<,+ an! *<,@ o1 the Ci/il Co!e 86th e!ition) /ol &e 5) pp# %*%) %*59) 0a30= :A0 to heir0) it i0 intere0tin4 that the j !4&ent o1 -a3 @) *(,$) o1 the S pre&e Co rt o1 Spain which !enie! a 1orce! heir the ri4ht to in0tit te an action to ann l contract0 con0i!ere! a illicit) 1or ha/in4 'een entere! into '3 hi0 pre!ece00or in intere0t 1or the p rpo0e o1 !epri/in4 the 1orce! heir o1 hi0 le4iti&e# The j !4&ent p rporte! to hol! that the proper action wo l! ha/e 'een an action to re0cin! con1or&it3 with what we in!icate! in co&&entin4 on article *$(*) an! !eclare! that ?e/en 1orce! heir0 who accept an inheritance n!er the 'ene1it o1 in/entor3 are within the r le $ o1 article *5,@) that !enie0 to the 4 ilt3 part3 the ri4ht to reco/er an3thin4 he &a3 ha/e 4i/en) or to en1orce the per1or&ance o1 an3 n!erta>in4 in hi0 1a/or) when the other part3 ha0 nothin4 to !o with the illicit con0i!eration7 a !octrine lai! !own in the j !4&ent o1 J l3 6) *5(@#?: The rea0on wh3 a 1orce! heir ha0 the ri4ht to in0tit te an action o1 re0ci00ion i0 that the ri4ht to the le4iti&e i0 0i&ilar to a cre!it o1 a cre!itor# A0 the 0a&e Spani0h a thor correctl3 0tate0 in co&&entin4 on article *$(* o1 the Ci/il Co!e= :The ri4ht0 o1 a 1orce! heir to the le4iti&e are n!o 'te!l3 0i&ilar to a cre!it o1 a cre!itor in 0o 1ar a0 the ri4ht0 to the le4iti&e &a3 'e !e1eate! '3 1ra ! lent contract0) an! are 0 perior to the will o1 tho0e 'o n! to re0pect the&# In it0 j !4&ent o1 .cto'er $5) *5(%) the S pre&e Co rt o1 Spain hel! that the 1orce! heir0 in0tit te! a0 0 ch '3 their 1ather to the latter?0 te0ta&ent ha/e the n!enia'le ri4ht to in0tit te an action to ann l contract0 entere! into '3 the 1ather to their prej !ice# A0 it i0 0een the action i0 calle! action o1 n llit3) ' t it i0 rather an action o1

re0ci00ion ta>in4 into acco nt the p rpo0e 1or which it i0 in0tit te! an! the con1 0ion o1 i!ea0 that ha0 pre/aile! in thi0 &atter# The !octrine we 0hall e;po n! in co&&entin4 on article0 *<,$ an! *<,@ will con1ir& what we ha/e j 0t 0tate!#: 8-anre0a Codi&o Civil) 6th e!ition) Bol# 5) pp# @@% an! @@5#9 There1ore) a0 the plainti11 in the pre0ent ca0e) not 'ein4 a 1orce! heir o1 the late Perpet a Concepcion) can not in0tit te an action to ann l n!er article *<,, or to re0cin! n!er article *$(* 8<9 o1 the Ci/il Co!e the contract n!er con0i!eration entere! into '3 the !ecea0e! with the !e1en!ant# In /iew o1 the 1ore4oin4) the j !4&ent o1 the lower co rt i0 a11ir&e! with co0t0 a4ain0t the appellant# So or!ere!# Moran) C.J.) Ben&$on) Padilla) Tuason) *e+es) and Bautista An&elo) JJ.) concur. Montema+or) and Ju&o) JJ.) concur in t e result. PA2L.) M.: Conc rro con la parte !i0po0iti/a#

Footnote0 * De are re1errin4 in thi0 !eci0ion to the ol! Ci/il Co!e applica'le in the pre0ent ca0e# The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Fo n!ation