Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 25 views

    Unlawful Detainer: G.R. No. 183822. January 18, 2012

    Uploaded by

    Oji Dayag
    The Court held that a complaint for unlawful detainer sufficiently alleges a cause of action if it recites that: (1) the defendant's possession of the property was initially through contract or tolerance of the plaintiff; (2) the defendant's possession became illegal after the plaintiff terminated the defendant's right of possession; (3) after termination, the defendant remained in possession and deprived the plaintiff of enjoyment of the property; and (4) the plaintiff instituted the complaint within one year of last demanding the defendant vacate the property.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Unlawful Detainer: G.R. No. 183822. January 18, 2012

    Uploaded by

    Oji Dayag
    25 views1 page
    The Court held that a complaint for unlawful detainer sufficiently alleges a cause of action if it recites that: (1) the defendant's possession of the property was initially through contract or tolerance of the plaintiff; (2) the defendant's possession became illegal after the plaintiff terminated the defendant's right of possession; (3) after termination, the defendant remained in possession and deprived the plaintiff of enjoyment of the property; and (4) the plaintiff instituted the complaint within one year of last demanding the defendant vacate the property.

    Original Description:

    file

    Original Title

    Unlawful Detainer

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Court held that a complaint for unlawful detainer sufficiently alleges a cause of action if it recites that: (1) the defendant's possession of the property was initially through contract or tolerance of the plaintiff; (2) the defendant's possession became illegal after the plaintiff terminated the defendant's right of possession; (3) after termination, the defendant remained in possession and deprived the plaintiff of enjoyment of the property; and (4) the plaintiff instituted the complaint within one year of last demanding the defendant vacate the property.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    25 views1 page

    Unlawful Detainer: G.R. No. 183822. January 18, 2012

    Uploaded by

    Oji Dayag
    The Court held that a complaint for unlawful detainer sufficiently alleges a cause of action if it recites that: (1) the defendant's possession of the property was initially through contract or tolerance of the plaintiff; (2) the defendant's possession became illegal after the plaintiff terminated the defendant's right of possession; (3) after termination, the defendant remained in possession and deprived the plaintiff of enjoyment of the property; and (4) the plaintiff instituted the complaint within one year of last demanding the defendant vacate the property.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Unlawful Detainer

    In Cabrera

    v.

    Getaruela,

    the

    Court

    held

    that a

    complaint

    sufficiently alleges a cause of action for unlawful detainer if it


    recites the following:
    (1) initially, possession of property by the defendant was by
    contract with or by tolerance of the plaintiff;
    (2) eventually, such possession became illegal upon notice by
    plaintiff to defendant of the termination of the latters
    right of possession;
    (3) thereafter, the defendant remained in possession of the
    property and deprived the plaintiff of the enjoyment
    thereof; and
    (4) within one year from the last demand on defendant to
    vacate the property, the plaintiff instituted the complaint
    for ejectment (Ruben C. Copuz, rep. by Atty.-in-fact
    Wenifreda C. AgullanaVs. Sps. Hilarion Agustin and
    Justa Agustin, G.R. No. 183822. January 18, 2012).

    You might also like