Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 196 views

    Aguirre v. Pheng

    Uploaded by

    John Paumig
    This case involves a dispute over ownership of a steel tank that was sold multiple times. Jesus Aguirre claims ownership based on originally purchasing the tank, but others made improvements to it. The Court ruled that while Aguirre owns the tank, paying him the full current value would unjustly enrich him at the expense of those who improved it in good faith. The Court denied Aguirre's petition, finding he was only entitled to the original purchase price and that others were due payment for their improvements.

    Copyright:

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

    Aguirre v. Pheng

    Uploaded by

    John Paumig
    196 views5 pages
    This case involves a dispute over ownership of a steel tank that was sold multiple times. Jesus Aguirre claims ownership based on originally purchasing the tank, but others made improvements to it. The Court ruled that while Aguirre owns the tank, paying him the full current value would unjustly enrich him at the expense of those who improved it in good faith. The Court denied Aguirre's petition, finding he was only entitled to the original purchase price and that others were due payment for their improvements.

    Original Description:

    Property Report

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involves a dispute over ownership of a steel tank that was sold multiple times. Jesus Aguirre claims ownership based on originally purchasing the tank, but others made improvements to it. The Court ruled that while Aguirre owns the tank, paying him the full current value would unjustly enrich him at the expense of those who improved it in good faith. The Court denied Aguirre's petition, finding he was only entitled to the original purchase price and that others were due payment for their improvements.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    196 views5 pages

    Aguirre v. Pheng

    Uploaded by

    John Paumig
    This case involves a dispute over ownership of a steel tank that was sold multiple times. Jesus Aguirre claims ownership based on originally purchasing the tank, but others made improvements to it. The Court ruled that while Aguirre owns the tank, paying him the full current value would unjustly enrich him at the expense of those who improved it in good faith. The Court denied Aguirre's petition, finding he was only entitled to the original purchase price and that others were due payment for their improvements.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    of 5

    AGUIRRE V.

    PHENG
    G.R. L-20851
    SEPTEMBER 3, 1966
    John Patrick L. Paumig
    11582456
    Facts
    June 23, 1954, Vicente Aldaba and Teresa Aldaba sold to Jesus Aguirre a circular
    bolted steel tank for nine-hundred Pesos (P 900)
    However, it appeared that Vicente and Teresa sold the same tank to Zosimo Gabriel
    on December 2, 1954 for nine-hundred Pesos (P 900).
    Gabriel then sold it to Leonora & Company on December 5, 1954 for two thousand
    five hundred Pesos (P 2,500)
    Leonora & Company improved the tank with some alterations on it. It was then sold
    to National Shipyard & Steel Corporation (Nassco) for fourteen thousand five
    hundred Pesos (P 14,500)
    Lower courts rendered in favor of Aguirre. However, Nassco is only required to pay
    Aguirre the sum of P 900, which is the amount he spent on the tank, and Leonora &
    Co. the sum of P 11,299 which represents the improvements made by them.
    Aguirre contested the decision stating that he is entitled for the full P14,500.
    Issue

    Whether or not Jesus Aguirre is entitled for the


    full price of P14,500 being declared the
    absolute owner of the steel tank in question.
    Arguments
    Leonora and Co., and
    Jesus Aguirre NASSCO
    Contends that under Art. 440 of the To pay Aguirre nine-hundred Pesos
    Civil Code, his ownership of the
    property entitles him to everything (P 900) is sufficient because this
    produced thereby, or is incorporated was all the amount that he (Aguirre)
    or attached thereto, either naturally or parted with when he purchased the
    artificially. tank.
    Article 440. The ownership of property gives the
    right by accession to everything which is In the event that the improved tank
    produced thereby, or which is incorporated or
    attached thereto, either naturally or artificially. is delivered to Aguirre, he would be
    tasked to reimburse Leonora and
    In other words, since he has full
    ownership of the tank, the
    Co. the sum of P11,299. Therefore,
    improvements made by Leonora and paying him the full sum of P14,500
    Co shall be deemed to have been is counter-intuitive.
    owned by him therefore entitling him
    for the full price of the tank.
    Ruling

    Court held that as a general rule the absolute owner is entitled to all accession thereto.
    However, the case is different where there is absence of bad faith or there is good faith
    on the one who made the improvements or the accessions on the property.
    Article 466. Whenever two movable things belonging to different owners are, without bad faith, united
    in such a way that they form a single object, the owner of the principal thing acquires the accessory,
    indemnifying the former owner thereof for its value.
    To uphold Aguirres contention would unjustly enrich himself at the expense of another
    which is contrary to law.
    Therefore NASSCO cannot be compelled to pay more than P14,500 for the tank as well
    as pay Aguirre to pay the full price.
    Petition DENIED

    You might also like