Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 713 views

    Racpan V Baroga-Haigh

    Uploaded by

    Isay Yason
    The Supreme Court ruled that the venue was properly laid in Davao City for a complaint seeking to nullify a deed of sale for real property. The complaint was a personal action, not a real action, as it did not seek recovery or possession of the real property itself. In a personal action, venue is proper where the plaintiff or defendant resides. Here, both parties resided in Davao City. The appellate court had erred in treating the complaint as a real action subject to venue rules for cases affecting title or possession of real property. As a personal action concerning the validity of a contract, Davao City was the correct venue.

    Copyright:

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

    Racpan V Baroga-Haigh

    Uploaded by

    Isay Yason
    713 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court ruled that the venue was properly laid in Davao City for a complaint seeking to nullify a deed of sale for real property. The complaint was a personal action, not a real action, as it did not seek recovery or possession of the real property itself. In a personal action, venue is proper where the plaintiff or defendant resides. Here, both parties resided in Davao City. The appellate court had erred in treating the complaint as a real action subject to venue rules for cases affecting title or possession of real property. As a personal action concerning the validity of a contract, Davao City was the correct venue.

    Original Description:

    REM

    Original Title

    Racpan v Baroga-Haigh

    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 Supreme Court ruled that the venue was properly laid in Davao City for a complaint seeking to nullify a deed of sale for real property. The complaint was a personal action, not a real action, as it did not seek recovery or possession of the real property itself. In a personal action, venue is proper where the plaintiff or defendant resides. Here, both parties resided in Davao City. The appellate court had erred in treating the complaint as a real action subject to venue rules for cases affecting title or possession of real property. As a personal action concerning the validity of a contract, Davao City was the correct venue.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    713 views2 pages

    Racpan V Baroga-Haigh

    Uploaded by

    Isay Yason
    The Supreme Court ruled that the venue was properly laid in Davao City for a complaint seeking to nullify a deed of sale for real property. The complaint was a personal action, not a real action, as it did not seek recovery or possession of the real property itself. In a personal action, venue is proper where the plaintiff or defendant resides. Here, both parties resided in Davao City. The appellate court had erred in treating the complaint as a real action subject to venue rules for cases affecting title or possession of real property. As a personal action concerning the validity of a contract, Davao City was the correct venue.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    CIVIL PROCEDURE

    ISSUE: Whether the venue was improperly laid?


    RUDY L. RACPAN v. SHARON BARROGA-HAIGH
    HELD: NO, the venue was properly laid as the complaint was a
    G.R. No. G.R. No. 234499| June 06, 2018
    personal action.
    Subtopic: F. Jurisdiction vs. venue
    RATIO
    DOCTRINE: Well-settled is the rule that an action to annul a
    contract of loan and its accessory real estate mortgage is a personal VENUE OF ACTION
    action. In a personal action, the plaintiff seeks the recovery of
    personal property, the enforcement of a contract or the recovery Section 1. Venue of real actions. - Actions affecting title to or
    of damages. In contrast, in a real action, the plaintiff seeks the possession of real property, or interest therein, shall be
    recovery of real property, or, as indicated in Section 2 (a), Rule 4 of commenced and tried in the proper court which has jurisdiction
    the then Rules of Court, a real action is an action affecting title to over the area wherein the real property involved, or a portion
    real property or for the recovery of possession, or for partition or thereof, is situated.
    condemnation of or foreclosure of mortgage on, real property.
    Forcible entry and detainer actions shall be commenced and tried
    FACTS: in the municipal trial court of the municipality or city wherein the
    real property involved, or a portion thereof, is situated.
     Petitioner Rudy Racpan filed a Complaint "For
    Declaration For Nullity of Deed of Sale with Right to Section 2. Venue of personal actions. - All other actions may be
    Repurchase & Attorney's Fees" before the Regional Trial commenced and tried where the plaintiff or any of the principal
    Court of Davao City, Branch 11 (RTC-Davao). In his plaintiffs resides, or where the defendant or any of the principal
    Complaint, which was docketed as Civil Case No. 34, defendants resides, or in the case of a non-resident defendant
    742-2012, petitioner alleged that after his wife's death where he may be found, at the election of the plaintiff.
    on November 12, 2011, he instructed their daughter to
    arrange his wife's important documents.
     In so doing, their daughter discovered a Deed of Sale The basic distinction between a real and a personal action and their
    with Right to Purchase dated March 29, 2011. The Deed respective venues in Bank of the Philippine Islands v. Hontanosas,
    of Sale was purportedly signed by him and his late wife Jr.
    and appeared to convey to respondent Sharon Barroga-
    Haigh a real property registered in his name under TCT [ real action ] A real action is one that affects title to or possession
    No. T-142-2011009374 and located in Bo. Tuganay, of real property, or an interest therein. Such action is to be
    Municipality of Carmen, Province of Davao del commenced and tried in the proper court having jurisdiction over
    Norte.4Petitioner maintained that the Deed of Sale was the area wherein the real property involved, or a portion thereof,
    falsified and fictitious as he never signed any contract, is situated, which explains why the action is also referred to as a
    not even any special power of attorney, for the sale or local action
    conveyance of the property which is still in his [personal action] In contrast, the Rules of Court declares all other
    possession. Thus, he prayed for the declaration of the actions as personal actions. Such actions may include those
    Deed of Sale's nullity. brought for the recovery of personal property, or for the
     RTC dismissed the case for failure to comply with a enforcement of some contract or recovery of damages for its
    condition precedent prior to its filing. breach, or for the recovery of damages for the commission of an
     CA affirmed the RTC ruling. injury to the person or property. The venue of a personal action is
     The CA explained that petitioner's Complaint is a real the place where the plaintiff or any of the principal plaintiffs
    action as it wants the court to abrogate and nullify - resides, or where the defendant or any of the principal defendants
    whatever right or claim the respondent might have on resides, or in the case of a non-resident defendant where he may
    the property subject of the Deed of Sale. Hence, for the be found, at the election of the plaintiff, for which reason the
    appellate court, Section 1, Rule 4 of the Rules of Court action is considered a transitory one.
    is applicable. Under this Rule, real actions shall be [ AS APPLIED IN THIS CASE ] In the Complaint filed with the court a
    commenced and tried in the proper court which has quo, petitioner sought the nullification of the Deed of Sale with
    jurisdiction over the area wherein the real property Right to Repurchase on the strength of this claim: he did not sign
    involved is situated. As the property involved is located the same nor did he execute any special power of attorney in favor
    in Bo.Tuganay, Municipality of Carmen, Province of of his late wife to do so in his behalf. 18 But, as there was no
    Davao del Norte, the appellate court held that the allegation that the possession and title to the property have been
    Complaint should have been lodged with the RTC of transferred to respondent, nowhere in the Complaint did
    Davao del Norte and not the RTC-Davao. petitioner allege or pray for the recovery or reconveyance of the
    real property

    1
    Evidently, as the Complaint was not concerned with the title to or
    recovery of the real property, it was a personal action. Thus, Davao
    City, where both the petitioner and the respondent reside is the
    proper venue for the complaint. The appellate court therefore
    committed a reversible error in affirming the trial court's dismissal
    of the case for improper venue

    You might also like