Scribd
Upload
63 views1 page

ORDUA V. FUENTEBELLA, G.R. No. 176841, June 29, 2010 A. 1403 - Statute of Frauds

Orduña purchased a residential lot from Gabriel Sr. in installments but without a deed of sale. Orduña paid installments to Gabriel Jr. after Gabriel Sr.'s death and improved the property while paying taxes since 1979. However, the property was subject to further alienations and was eventually ceded to Fuentebella. When Fuentebella demanded Orduña vacate, Orduña filed a case seeking to acquire ownership upon payment of the remaining balance. The courts dismissed the case, finding the verbal sale unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that the Statute of Frauds does not apply to partially executed contracts, and the verbal contract was partially executed through

Uploaded by

anon_71222979
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
63 views1 page

ORDUA V. FUENTEBELLA, G.R. No. 176841, June 29, 2010 A. 1403 - Statute of Frauds

Orduña purchased a residential lot from Gabriel Sr. in installments but without a deed of sale. Orduña paid installments to Gabriel Jr. after Gabriel Sr.'s death and improved the property while paying taxes since 1979. However, the property was subject to further alienations and was eventually ceded to Fuentebella. When Fuentebella demanded Orduña vacate, Orduña filed a case seeking to acquire ownership upon payment of the remaining balance. The courts dismissed the case, finding the verbal sale unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that the Statute of Frauds does not apply to partially executed contracts, and the verbal contract was partially executed through

Uploaded by

anon_71222979
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

ORDUA V. FUENTEBELLA, G.R. No.

176841, June 29, 2010


A. 1403 - Statute of Frauds

FACTS:
Orduña purchased a residential lot from Gabriel Sr. to be payed in installments
but no deed of sale was executed. The installments were paid to Gabriel Jr. after the
death of his father. Improvements were then introduced by petitioner while paying the
propertie’s real property tax since 1979. Unknown to Orduña, the property has been
subject to further alienations until the same was ceded to respondent, Fuentebella.
Orduña, after being demanded by Fuentebella to vacate the disputed land, then filed a
Complaint for Annulment of Sale, Title and Reconveyance with Damages with a prayer
to acquire ownership over the subject lot upon payment of their remaining balance. The
RTC dismissed the petition because the verbal sale between Gabriel Sr. and Orduña
was unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds. This was later affirmed by the Court of
Appeals.

ISSUE:
Is the sale of the subject lot by Gabriel Sr to Orduña unenforceable under the
Statute of Frauds?

HELD:
No. It is a well-settled rule that the Statute of Frauds as expressed in Article
1403, par. (2), of the Civil Code is applicable only to purely executory contracts and not
to contracts which have already been executed either totally or partially. Here, the
verbal contract of sale has been partially executed through the partial payments made
by Orduña duly received by both Gabriel Jr. and his father.
The purpose of the Statute of Frauds is prevention fraud and perjury in the
enforcement of obligations depending for their evidence on the unassisted memory of
witnesses, by requiring some contracts and transactions to be evidenced by a writing
signed by the party to be charged. Since there is already ratification of the verbal
contract through the acceptance of benefits through the partial payments, it is thus
withdrawn from the purview of the Statute of Frauds.

You might also like