Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 120 views

    Bible Baptist Church Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Myles Rubio
    The Bible Baptist Church entered into a 15-year lease agreement with Spouses Villanueva. As part of the agreement, BBC paid 84,000 pesos, which was used to redeem a mortgage on the property. The lease gave BBC the option to purchase the property. When BBC tried to exercise this option, the Villanuevas argued there was no consideration for the purchase option. Both the Regional Trial Court and the Court of Appeals found in favor of the Villanuevas, ruling that the payment was for rent and not consideration for the purchase option. The Supreme Court affirmed this decision, finding that for an option contract to be valid, there needs to be separate consideration beyond rent to support the purchase option, which

    Copyright:

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

    Bible Baptist Church Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Myles Rubio
    120 views1 page
    The Bible Baptist Church entered into a 15-year lease agreement with Spouses Villanueva. As part of the agreement, BBC paid 84,000 pesos, which was used to redeem a mortgage on the property. The lease gave BBC the option to purchase the property. When BBC tried to exercise this option, the Villanuevas argued there was no consideration for the purchase option. Both the Regional Trial Court and the Court of Appeals found in favor of the Villanuevas, ruling that the payment was for rent and not consideration for the purchase option. The Supreme Court affirmed this decision, finding that for an option contract to be valid, there needs to be separate consideration beyond rent to support the purchase option, which

    Original Description:

    Obligations and Contracts Case Digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Bible Baptist Church entered into a 15-year lease agreement with Spouses Villanueva. As part of the agreement, BBC paid 84,000 pesos, which was used to redeem a mortgage on the property. The lease gave BBC the option to purchase the property. When BBC tried to exercise this option, the Villanuevas argued there was no consideration for the purchase option. Both the Regional Trial Court and the Court of Appeals found in favor of the Villanuevas, ruling that the payment was for rent and not consideration for the purchase option. The Supreme Court affirmed this decision, finding that for an option contract to be valid, there needs to be separate consideration beyond rent to support the purchase option, which

    Copyright:

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

    Bible Baptist Church Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Myles Rubio
    The Bible Baptist Church entered into a 15-year lease agreement with Spouses Villanueva. As part of the agreement, BBC paid 84,000 pesos, which was used to redeem a mortgage on the property. The lease gave BBC the option to purchase the property. When BBC tried to exercise this option, the Villanuevas argued there was no consideration for the purchase option. Both the Regional Trial Court and the Court of Appeals found in favor of the Villanuevas, ruling that the payment was for rent and not consideration for the purchase option. The Supreme Court affirmed this decision, finding that for an option contract to be valid, there needs to be separate consideration beyond rent to support the purchase option, which

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    BIBLE BAPTIST CHURCH vs.

    Court of Appeals

    

    Topic: Consideration 

    

    FACTS

    

    Bible Baptist Church entered into a contract of lease with Spouses Villanueva for a period of 15
    years. Upon signing the lease agreement the lessee paid a sum of 84,000 for the purpose of
    redemption of said property which mortgaged by the lessor. The lessee has the option to buy the
    premises during the lease. When BBC wanted to purchase the property. Spouses Villanueva
    contended that there was no consideration that BBC gave then which is why BBC cannot compel
    them to sell the property. BBC filed a writ of injunction.
    

    RTC HELD:

    The Regional Trial Court found that "[a]ll payments made under the contract of lease were for
    rentals. No money [was] ever exchanged for and in consideration of the option." Hence, the
    Regional Trial Court found the action of the Baptist Church to be "premature and without basis to
    compel the defendant to sell the leased premises."

    

    CA HELD:

    1 BBC did not have a consideration and, therefore, did not bind the latter. 

    2 The option to buy did not have a fixed price agreed upon by the parties for the purchase of the
    property

    3 BBC is not awarded with damages and attorney’s fees. 

    


    ISSUES

    1) Whether or not the option to buy given to the Baptist Church is founded upon a consideration;
    2) Whether or not by the terms of the lease agreement, a price certain for the purchase of the land
    had been fixed; and
    3) Whether or not the Baptist Church is entitled to an award for attorney's fees.

    

    SC HELD: Court agrees with as the Court of Appeals, which affirmed the findings of the Regional
    Trial Court, that such claim is to be dismissed for lack of factual and legal basis.

    WHEREFORE, the Decision and Resolution of the Court of Appeals subject of the petition are
    hereby AFFIRMED.

    

    Ratio:

    

    For an option contract to be valid and enforceable against the promissor, there must be a separate
    and distinct consideration that supports it. petitioners cannot insist that the P84,000 they paid in
    order to release the Villanuevas' property from the mortgage should be deemed the separate
    consideration to support the contract of option. They were in fact apportioned monthly rentals for
    the year 1985. They posit that their act of advancing the money to "rescue" the property from
    mortgage and impending foreclosure, should be enough consideration to support the option. this
    Court cannot find that petitioner Baptist Church parted with anything of value, aside from the
    amount of P84,000 which was in fact eventually utilized as rental payments. Second, there is no
    document that contains an agreement between the parties that petitioner Baptist Church's
    supposed rescue of the mortgaged property was the consideration which the parties contemplated
    in support of the option clause in the contract.

    You might also like