G.R. No. L-27014
securing securing the indetedne indetedness. ss. %arceli %arcelino no later on paid the sum in ull satisaction satisaction o the entire claim and received rom #a$a #a$as s a reco reconv nvey eyanc ance e o the the thre three e parcels. parcels. &he widow, widow, 'aulina 'aulina 2ristoal 2ristoal,, and the childr children en o Epian Epianio io Gomez Gomez instituted an action or the recovery o the three parcels o land rom %arcelino Gomez.
October 5, 1927
PAULINA CRISTOBAL, ET AL., plaintifsappellees, vs. ARCELINO GOE!, deendant-appellant. "#ct$: •
•
•
•
•
•
•
Epi Epian anio io Gome Gomez z ow owne ned d a prop proper erty ty which was sold in a pacto de retro sale to Luis Yangco redeemale in ! years, althou although gh the period period passed passed witho without ut redemption, the vendee conceded the vendor the privilege o repurchase. Gomez Gomez apply apply to a "insma "insman, n, #iia #iiano no #a$as, #a$as, or assist assistanc ance e on a condit condition ion that he will let him have the money i his rother %arcelino %arcelino Gomez and his sister sister &ele eleso sora ra Gomez Gomez would would ma"e ma"e themselves responsile responsile or the loan. &he silings agreed and #a$as advance advance the sum o '())) which was used to repurchase the property in the names o %arcelino and &elesora.. * +private partnership in participation was creat created ed etwee etween n %arce %arcelin lino o and &elesora &elesora and therein agreed that the capi capita tall o the the part partne ners rshi hip p shou should ld consis consistt o '())) '())) o which which %arcel %arcelino ino was to supply the amount o '!)) and &elesora &elesora the sume o o '!!)). t was urther agreed that the all the prop proper erty ty to e redee edeeme med d shal shalll e name named d to the the two, two, that that %ar %arceli celino no shou should ld e its its ma mana nage ger, r, that that all all the the income, rent, produce o the property shal shalll e appl applie ied d e/cl e/clus usiv ivel ely y to the the amortizat amortization ion o the capital capital employed employed y the two parties with its cor correspo espond ndin ing g inte interrest est and and othe otherr incidental e/penses and as soon as the capital employed, with its interest and other incidental incidental e/penses e/penses,, shall shall have een covered, said properties shall e retur returne ned d to Epi Epian anio io Gome Gomez z or his his legitimate children. * year ater Epianios death, &elesora want wa nte ed to re ree her hersel sel rom the the responsiility which she had assumed to #a$as #a$as and conve conveye yed d to %arcel %arcelino ino her her inte intere rest st and and shar share e in the the thre three e properti properties es previous previously ly redeemed redeemed rom rom Yangco Yangco and oth declared dissolved dissolved the partnership they created. 0ith 0ith %arc %arcel elin ino o as the the sole sole det detor or,, #a$a #a$as s re1ui e1uirred him him to e/ecut ecute e a contra contract ct o sale sale o the three three parce parcels ls with pacto de retro or the purpose o
%e&e'(#'t)$ #r*+e't: 3eendant answered with a general denial and claimed to e the owner in his own right o all the property which is the su4ect o the action. 5e urther claimed that the trust agreement was "ept secret rom Epianio Gomez, and that, having no "nowledge o it, he could not have accepted it eore the stipulation was revo"ed. *nd that he has the ene6t o prescription in his avor, having een in possession o more than ) years under the deed which he ac1uired the sole right rom his sister. RTC)$ r+'*: ruled in avor o plaintifs and ound that the property in 1uestion elongs to the plaintifs, as co-owners, and ordered the deendant to surrender the property to them and e/ecute an appropriate deed o transer as well as to pay the cost o the proceeding. I$$+e$:
. 078 the the disso dissolut lution ion o o partn partners ership hip etween %arcelino and &elesora destroyed the ene6cial right o Epianio Gomez in the property. 9. 078 the part partner nershi ship p agreem agreement ent o o %arcelino and &elesora was a donation in avor o Epianio or an e/press trust. . 078 %ar %arcel celino ino Gom Gomez ez ac1ui ac1uire red d the property through prescription. prescription. R+'*/ ;2 declared ownership in avor o plaintifs.
<= &he act act that one o the the two individua individuals ls who have constituted themselves trustees or the purpose aove indicated conveys his interest in the property to his cotrustee does not relieve the latter rom the oligation to comply with the trust. <9= * trust trust constitu constituted ted etween etween two two contracting parties or the ene6t o a third person is not su4ect to the rules governing donations o real property. &he ene6ciary o the trust trust may
demand perormance o the oligation without having ormally accepted the ene6t o the trust in a pulic document, upon mere ac1uiescence in the ormation o the trusts and acceptance under the second par. o article 9!( o the 22. %uch energy has een e/panded y the attorneys or the appellant in attempting to demonstrate that, i Epianio at any time had any right in the property y virtue o the partnership agreement etween %arcelino and &elesora such right could e derived as a donation and that, inasmuch as the donation
was never accepted y Epianio in a pulic document, his supposed interest therein is unenorceale. &he partnership should not e viewed in light o an intended donation, ut as an e/press trust.
<= *s against the ene6ciary, prescription is not efective in avor o a person who is acting as a trustee o a continuing and susisting trust. &hereore, %arcelino cannot ac1uire ownership over the property through prescription.
