Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 463 views

    (Case No. 87) : Modina v. CA

    Uploaded by

    Abigail Tolabing
    This case involves a dispute over the sale of land between spouses. Ramon Chiang sold a lot to Modina, but his wife Merlinda later contested the sale, arguing the land titles were never legally transferred to her husband. The lower courts sided with Merlinda. On appeal, the Supreme Court ruled that based on Article 1490 of the Civil Code, a sale of property between spouses is invalid unless a separation of property was agreed upon. As Chiang and his wife did not have such an agreement, the sale to Modina was void. The petitioner Modina therefore did not acquire a valid title to the property.

    Copyright:

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

    (Case No. 87) : Modina v. CA

    Uploaded by

    Abigail Tolabing
    463 views1 page
    This case involves a dispute over the sale of land between spouses. Ramon Chiang sold a lot to Modina, but his wife Merlinda later contested the sale, arguing the land titles were never legally transferred to her husband. The lower courts sided with Merlinda. On appeal, the Supreme Court ruled that based on Article 1490 of the Civil Code, a sale of property between spouses is invalid unless a separation of property was agreed upon. As Chiang and his wife did not have such an agreement, the sale to Modina was void. The petitioner Modina therefore did not acquire a valid title to the property.

    Original Title

    [87] Modina v. CA

    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 the sale of land between spouses. Ramon Chiang sold a lot to Modina, but his wife Merlinda later contested the sale, arguing the land titles were never legally transferred to her husband. The lower courts sided with Merlinda. On appeal, the Supreme Court ruled that based on Article 1490 of the Civil Code, a sale of property between spouses is invalid unless a separation of property was agreed upon. As Chiang and his wife did not have such an agreement, the sale to Modina was void. The petitioner Modina therefore did not acquire a valid title to the property.

    Copyright:

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

    (Case No. 87) : Modina v. CA

    Uploaded by

    Abigail Tolabing
    This case involves a dispute over the sale of land between spouses. Ramon Chiang sold a lot to Modina, but his wife Merlinda later contested the sale, arguing the land titles were never legally transferred to her husband. The lower courts sided with Merlinda. On appeal, the Supreme Court ruled that based on Article 1490 of the Civil Code, a sale of property between spouses is invalid unless a separation of property was agreed upon. As Chiang and his wife did not have such an agreement, the sale to Modina was void. The petitioner Modina therefore did not acquire a valid title to the property.

    Copyright:

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

    [Case No. 87] : Modina v.

    CA
    (Sale between Spouses; Art. 133; Art. 1490; Art. 1492)
    G.R No. 109355 October 29, 1999 Purisima, J.

    FACTS:

    Ramon Chiang sold a lot to Modina as evidenced by the Deeds of Sale. Merlinda, the wife of
    Chiang, seek the declaration of the nullity of the Deeds of Sale between her husband and Modina
    on the ground that the titles of the parcels of land in dispute were never legally transferred to her
    husband. Modina then brought up a Complaint for Recovery of Possession with Damages against
    the spouses and private respondents who are lessees on the said lot. The RTC and CA ruled in
    favor of Merlinda. Dissatisfied therewith, petitioner present Petition for Review alleging that the
    sale between the spouses is void, thus the principle of in pari delicto is applicable in this case.
    Petitioner avers that these leaves the guilty spouses as to where they are without prejudice on his
    part as the third party and therefore shall not be deprived of the right available for him.

    ISSUES:

    1. WON the sale of the land to Modina is valid.

    RULING:

    NO. Since one of the characteristic of a void or inexistent contract is that it does not produce any
    effect, Merlinda can recover the property from petitioner who never acquired title thereover.
    Under Art. 1490: The husband and the wife cannot sell property to each other, except:
    (1) When a separation of property was agreed upon in the marriage settlements; or
    (2) When there has been a judicial separation of property under Art. 191
    Thus, the sale by Chiang in favor of the petitioner is invalid for being prohibited by law. Not
    being the owner of subject properties, Ramon Chiang could not have validly sold the same to
    petitioner. The sale by Ramon Chiang in favor of the petitioner is, likewise, void and existent.

    You might also like