Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 555 views

    Legal Research Position Paper and Legal Writing

    Uploaded by

    Christalyn Casil
    This case involves an annulment of contract filed by complainant Anna Geronimo against respondent Peter Pascual. In 2009, Pascual visited Geronimo's condo unit and expressed interest in purchasing it. Later that year, Geronimo's husband signed a deed of sale and received payment from Pascual for the property. However, upon returning from giving birth in the US, Geronimo claimed they were not selling the unit. Pascual argues the contract is valid as it contained consent from both parties and met the requirements of the Civil Code. He cites previous court cases establishing a contract is not invalid if signed by one co-owner and requests the court uphold the contract and deny the annul

    Copyright:

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

    Legal Research Position Paper and Legal Writing

    Uploaded by

    Christalyn Casil
    555 views4 pages
    This case involves an annulment of contract filed by complainant Anna Geronimo against respondent Peter Pascual. In 2009, Pascual visited Geronimo's condo unit and expressed interest in purchasing it. Later that year, Geronimo's husband signed a deed of sale and received payment from Pascual for the property. However, upon returning from giving birth in the US, Geronimo claimed they were not selling the unit. Pascual argues the contract is valid as it contained consent from both parties and met the requirements of the Civil Code. He cites previous court cases establishing a contract is not invalid if signed by one co-owner and requests the court uphold the contract and deny the annul

    Original Description:

    REACTION PAPER

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involves an annulment of contract filed by complainant Anna Geronimo against respondent Peter Pascual. In 2009, Pascual visited Geronimo's condo unit and expressed interest in purchasing it. Later that year, Geronimo's husband signed a deed of sale and received payment from Pascual for the property. However, upon returning from giving birth in the US, Geronimo claimed they were not selling the unit. Pascual argues the contract is valid as it contained consent from both parties and met the requirements of the Civil Code. He cites previous court cases establishing a contract is not invalid if signed by one co-owner and requests the court uphold the contract and deny the annul

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    555 views4 pages

    Legal Research Position Paper and Legal Writing

    Uploaded by

    Christalyn Casil
    This case involves an annulment of contract filed by complainant Anna Geronimo against respondent Peter Pascual. In 2009, Pascual visited Geronimo's condo unit and expressed interest in purchasing it. Later that year, Geronimo's husband signed a deed of sale and received payment from Pascual for the property. However, upon returning from giving birth in the US, Geronimo claimed they were not selling the unit. Pascual argues the contract is valid as it contained consent from both parties and met the requirements of the Civil Code. He cites previous court cases establishing a contract is not invalid if signed by one co-owner and requests the court uphold the contract and deny the annul

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 4

    Republic of the Philippines

    Anna Geronimo Complainant.



    versus.

    Mr. peter Pascual

    Respondent

    ____________________________


    Position Paper
    for the defendant

    defendant through counsel, respectfully submits this position paper with the attached supporting
    affidavit and documents to wit:


    PARTIES


    COMPLAINANT ms.geronimo(herein reffered as complainant)is a Filipino,of legal
    age,married.

    RESPODENT mr. pascual (herein referred as defendant) is a Filipino,of legal age.

    Statement of the nature of the case

    This is case for annulment of contract with damages filed by the complainant against
    defendant.

    Statement of facts


    In January 2009,the defendant visited the condo unit of the complainant and was told by the
    latter that she and her husband has a paln of buying a house anddefendant herein told the
    complainant that he would be willing to buy the condo unit where the complainant reside if the
    compalainant plans to sell it.

    On april 2009,complainant asks the defendant if he was still interested in buying the unit
    and informed the defendant that they(complainant) is selling the condo unit for 2million pesos.

    Sometime in june 2009,defendant met up with his lawyer friend and arranged the
    2million check and necessary deed of sale.defendant met up with the husband of complainant mr.
    Geronimo while the complainant was still in the US to give birth to pay the 2million check. Mr.
    Geronimo handed the signed deed of sale to the defendant. Due to this, defendant then was able
    to transfer the title of the condo unit into his name.

    September 2009, the complainant returns to the Philippines after giving birth in the US.
    Complainant called the defendant that they were not going to sell the unit.

    The complainant then filed against the defendant for annulment of contract with damages.


    ISSUE

    1. Whether or not the contract is void and the contract can still be revoke

    2. Whether or not the contract can still be annulled


    DISCUSSION/ARGUMENTS


    1. ISSUE OF VALIDITY OF CONTRACT
    The contract in the case at bar is considered to be valid/voidable in conformity with the
    following laws that govern such issues:

    Article 1318 of the Civil Code
    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 obligation which is established.
    Article 1319 of the Civil Code
    Consent is manifested by the meeting of the offer and the acceptance upon
    the thing and the cause which are to constitute the contract. The offer must be
    certain and the acceptance absolute. A qualified acceptance constitutes a
    counter-offer.
    Acceptance made by letter or telegram does not bind the offerer except
    from the time it came to his knowledge. The contract, in such a case, is
    presumed to have been entered into in the place where the offer was made.
    Article 1390 of the Civil Code
    The following contracts are voidable or annullable, even though there
    may have been no damage to the contracting parties:
    (1) Those where one of the parties is incapable of giving consent to a contract;
    (2) Those where the consent is vitiated by mistake, violence, intimidation,
    undue influence or fraud.
    These contracts are binding, unless they are annulled by a proper action in
    court. They are susceptible of ratification..

    In the case of HEIRS OF CAYETANO PANGAN and CONSUELO PANGAN vs SPOUSES
    ROGELIO PERRERAS and PRISCILLA PERRERAS the court ruled that:

    There was a perfected contract between the parties since all the essential requisites of a contract
    is present in accordance to article 1318 of the civil code and thus it does that a thing is sold
    without the consent of all the co-owners does not invalidate the sale or render it void.

    Also in the case of CONCEPCION R. AINZA, substituted by her legal heirs, DR. NATIVIDAD
    A. TULIAO, CORAZON A. JALECO and LILIA A. OLAYON, petitioners, vs. SPOUSES
    ANTONIO PADUA and EUGENIA PADUA, respondents.
    The consent of both Eugenia and Antonio is necessary for the sale of the conjugal property to be
    valid. Antonios consent cannot be presumed.[13] Except for the self-serving testimony of
    petitioner Natividad, there is no evidence that Antonio participated or consented to the sale of the
    conjugal property. Eugenia alone is incapable of giving consent to the contract. Therefore, in
    the absence of Antonios consent, the disposition made by Eugenia is voidable.[14]

    In the case at bar, there shows that the complainant did and have consented on the sale of the condo
    unit and thus makes the contract valid/voidable.Also in the above ruling,the complainant cannot invoke
    that the contract entered to by her husband is void.

    Applying the principles in the instant case the complainants claim of a void contract
    entered to by her husband and rescingding of the contract is incorrect.

    Prayer
    Wherefore,premices considered,defendant respectfully prays that the judgement be
    rendered by the honorable court to:
    1. Declare the contract of sell by the defendant to the husband of the complainant as
    valid.
    2. Declare the contract as final.

    Defendant prays for such other reliefs as may be just and equitable under premises.


    Atty. Jude Laurel
    Through counsel-Defendant

    You might also like