Memorandum for Defendant

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s) : 577
  • Published : October 20, 2012
Open Document
Text Preview
Republic of the Philippines
COURT OF APPEALS
Manila

SECOND DIVISION

RAUL GERONIMO and
ANNA GERONIMO
Plaintiff-Appellee,

CIVIL CASE NO. 190211
-versus -
PETER PASCUAL
Defendant-Appellant,

x-----------------------------------x

MEMORANDUM

Defendant-appellant, Peter Pascual, through counsel, in compliance with the Honorable Court’s order,respectfully submits this Memorandum
Prefatory Statement

Plaintiff-appellee RAUL GERONIMO and ANNA GERONIMO in the instant case claims, with the lower Court’s sanction, that there should be an annulment of the Deed of Sale, saying that the Contract of Sale of the Condominium Unit has not been consummated.

Defendant-appellant PETER PASCUAL, however, categorically denies the allegations and that the sale of the condominium unit is valid because he was able to talk to Raul Geronimo and he handed to him the manager’s check worth 2 Million Pesos.

STATEMENT OF FACTS/CASE
1.Defendant, Peter Pascual, single and a sales manager, has been friends with Raul Geronimo, the husband of plaintiff Anna Geronimo since college. 2.Sometime in January 2009, when defendant visited the condominium unit of the plaintiff, the latter told the former of their plan to sell said property. Immediately after, defendant told the spouses Geronimo that he will buy the said condo unit should they finally decide to sell the same. 3.In April 2009, plaintiff called defendant informing him that they have finally found a house and asked him if he was still interested to buy the condo unit for Two million Pesos (P2, 000, 000.00). Defendant immediately replied “yes” to plaintiff and shall back when the Deed of Sale and Manager’s check were ready. 4.In May 2009, plaintiff went to the United States to give birth. 5.In June 2009, defendant met up with Raul Geronimo. The latter signed the Deed of Sale after the former handed to him the manager’s check for Two Million Pesos. 6.Defendant was able to get the Certificate of Title which was under the name of Raul Geronimo only. Subsequently, defendant transferred said Certificate of Title to his name. 7.In September 2009, plaintiff returned to the Philippines and called defendant to tell him that they were not interested in selling the condo unit anymore and that they will return the money in cash. However, defendant refused to accept the money because the sale has been consummated. 8.Plaintiff filed a suit for annulment of Contract of Sale against defendant.

STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

Whether or not the contract of sale is voidable?

ARGUMENTS

The contract of sale is not voidable for the following reasons:

I.There is a valid, perfected and binding contract of sale, thus; Art.1318 There is no contract unless the following requisites concur: (1)Consent of the contracting parties;
(2)Object certain which is the subject matter of the contract; (3)Cause of the obligations which is established.
In the instant case, the above mentioned requisites were complied. First, the spouses Geronimo and defendant consented to the sale of the condo unit. Secondly, the object of the contract is the condo unit. Third, the cause of the contract is the Two Million Pesos paid by defendant in June 2009 to Raul Geronimo.

Thus, the contract is valid. Being essentially consensual, a contract of sale is perfected at the moment that there is a meeting of minds upon the thing which is the object of the contract and upon the price. However, ownership of the thing sold shall not be transferred to the vendee until actual or constructive delivery of the property (Abalos vs. Macatangay, 439 Scra 649). The husband may dispose of conjugal property without the wife’s consent if such sale is necessary to answer for conjugal liabilities mentioned in Article 161 and 162 of the Civil Code. In Tinitigan vs. Tinitigan, the Court ruled that the husband may sell...
tracking img