Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 15 views

    Property Cases Digests

    Uploaded by

    Myla Rodrigo
    This case involves a dispute over property inherited by six siblings from their parents. The property had not been properly partitioned according to legal procedures. One sibling, Mauricia, acquired 97.43 square meters by allegedly purchasing shares from some of the other siblings. However, a third party, Licerio Nique, also purchased 121.67 square meters from one of the siblings, Laurencia. The court ruled that while Laurencia was entitled to sell her inherited share, because the property had not been partitioned, no specific portion of the property could be identified as belonging to Laurencia alone. Therefore, Laurencia's sale to the third party was not valid under the Civil Code.

    Copyright:

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

    Property Cases Digests

    Uploaded by

    Myla Rodrigo
    15 views1 page
    This case involves a dispute over property inherited by six siblings from their parents. The property had not been properly partitioned according to legal procedures. One sibling, Mauricia, acquired 97.43 square meters by allegedly purchasing shares from some of the other siblings. However, a third party, Licerio Nique, also purchased 121.67 square meters from one of the siblings, Laurencia. The court ruled that while Laurencia was entitled to sell her inherited share, because the property had not been partitioned, no specific portion of the property could be identified as belonging to Laurencia alone. Therefore, Laurencia's sale to the third party was not valid under the Civil Code.

    Original Description:

    Property Cases Digests 2016

    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 a dispute over property inherited by six siblings from their parents. The property had not been properly partitioned according to legal procedures. One sibling, Mauricia, acquired 97.43 square meters by allegedly purchasing shares from some of the other siblings. However, a third party, Licerio Nique, also purchased 121.67 square meters from one of the siblings, Laurencia. The court ruled that while Laurencia was entitled to sell her inherited share, because the property had not been partitioned, no specific portion of the property could be identified as belonging to Laurencia alone. Therefore, Laurencia's sale to the third party was not valid under the Civil Code.

    Copyright:

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

    Property Cases Digests

    Uploaded by

    Myla Rodrigo
    This case involves a dispute over property inherited by six siblings from their parents. The property had not been properly partitioned according to legal procedures. One sibling, Mauricia, acquired 97.43 square meters by allegedly purchasing shares from some of the other siblings. However, a third party, Licerio Nique, also purchased 121.67 square meters from one of the siblings, Laurencia. The court ruled that while Laurencia was entitled to sell her inherited share, because the property had not been partitioned, no specific portion of the property could be identified as belonging to Laurencia alone. Therefore, Laurencia's sale to the third party was not valid under the Civil Code.

    Copyright:

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

    62 ALEJANDRINO v CA

    G.R. No. 114151. September 17, 1998


    Facts:
    Late spouses Alejandrino left their six children named Marcelino, Gregorio, Ciriaco, Mauricia,
    Laurencia and Abundio a 219-square-meter Lot 2798 in Mambaling, Cebu City. Upon the demise
    of the Alejandrino spouses, the property should have been divided among their children with each
    child having a share of 36.50 square meters. However, the estate of the Alejandrino spouses was
    not settled in accordance with the procedure outlined in the Rules of Court.
    Petitioner Mauricia (one of the children) acquired a total of 97.43 square meters after allegedly
    purchasing some of her siblings share. It turned out, however, that a third party named Licerio
    Nique, the private respondent, also purchased portions of the siblings property, totaling to 121.67
    square meters from Mauricias sister, Laurencia.

    Issue:
    Whether as an heir of the Alejandrino property, Laurencia may validly sell specific portions thereof
    to a third party

    Ruling:
    No. In the instant case, Laurencia was within her hereditary rights in selling her pro
    indiviso share in Lot No. 2798. However, because the property had not yet been partitioned in
    accordance with the Rules of Court, no particular portion of the property could be identified as yet
    and delineated as the object of the sale. Thus, interpreting Article 493 of the Civil Code providing
    that an alienation of a co-owned property shall be limited to the portion which may be allotted to
    (the seller) in the division upon the termination of the co-ownership, the Court said:
    x x x (p)ursuant to this law, a co-owner has the right to alienate his pro-indiviso share in
    the co-owned property even without the consent of the other co-owners. Nevertheless,
    as a mere part owner, he cannot alienate the shares of the other co-owners. The
    prohibition is premised on the elementary rule that `no one can give what he does not
    have (Nemo dat quod non habet)

    You might also like