HERMOSA VS LONGARA GR No. L-5267, October 27, 1953
FACTS: This is an appeal by way of certiorari against a decision of the Court of Appeals, fourth division, approving certain claims presented by Epifanio M !ongara against the testate estate of Fernando "ermosa, Sr The The claims are of three #inds, namely, $%,&'('( representing credit advances made to the intestate from ()&% to ()'', $(%,)%'(% made to his son Francisco "ermosa, and $&,**% made to his grandson, Fernando "ermosa, +r from ()' to ()'*, after the death of the intestate, which occurred in -ecember, ()'' The claimant presented evidence and the Court of Appeals found, in accordance therewith, therewith, that the intestate had as#ed for the said credit advances for himself and for the members of his family .on condition that their payment should be made by Fernando "ermosa, Sr as soon as he receive funds derived from the sale of his property in Spain. Claimant had testified without opposition that the credit advances were to be .payable as soon as Fernando "ermosa, Sr/s property in Spain was sold and he receive money derived from the sale. The Court of Appeals held that payment of the advances did not become due until the administratri0 received the sum of $%1,111 from the buyer of the property 2pon authori3ation of the probate court in 4ctober, ()'*, and the same was paid for subse5uently subse5uently The Claim Claim was filed on 4ctober %, ()'6 ()'6 7SS2E: -oes said condition a potestative condition and thusly void and unenforceable8 unenforcea ble8 92!7;: A careful consideration consideration of the condition upon which payment of the sums advanced was made to depend, .as soon as he ut in addition of the sale to him
Intest Intestate ate Fernand ernando o Hermos Hermosa, a, Sr. Sr. asked asked for three three (3) credit credit advanc advances es from from respon responden dentt Epifanio M. Longara. To (!) of said credit advances ere made d"ring his #ifetime and in his favor and in his son hi#e the #ast credit as made after his death and in favor of his grandson. Evidences sho that said credits ere asked $% the intestate &on condition that their pa%ment sho"#d $e made $% him, as soon as he receives f"nds derived from the sa#e of his propert% in Spain.' fter the intestates death and "pon a"thori*ation of the pro$ate co"rt, the administration of the intestates propert%, propert%, his ife, so#d the propert% and the same as paid for s"$se+"ent#%. s"$se+"ent#%. s a conse+"ence, respondent #ed an action for the pa%ment of the aforesaid credits hich as "phe#d $% the #oer co"rt and $% the -o"rt of ppea#s. Hoever, Hoever, the same as contested $% herein petitioners, heirs of the intestate, on the gro"nd that the o$#igation contracted $% the intestate as s"$ect to a condition e/c#"sive#% dependent "pon "pon the i# i### of the de$tor de$tor condicion potestiva and therefore n"## and void, in accordance ith artic#e 0001 of the 2#d -ivi# -ode. ISSUE:
hethe hetherr or not the conditio condition n made made in the o$#iga o$#igatio tion n is a p"re#% p"re#% s"spensi s"spensive ve condit condition ion dependent or potestative "pon the e/c#"sive i## of the de$tor. de$tor. RULING:
42, 42, the condition of the o$#igation as that the pa%ment as to $e made &as soon as he (o$#igor) receives f"nds f"nds from the sa#e of his propert% propert% in Spain.' The i## to se## on the part part of the de$tor (intestate) as present in fact or pres"med #ega##% to e/ist a#tho"gh the price and other condition thereof ere sti## sti## ithin his discretion discretion and na# approva#. 5"t in addition to this
accepta$i#it% of the sa#e to him (o$#igor), there ere sti## other conditions that had to conc"r to e6ect the sa#e, main#% that of the presence of a $"%er, read%, a$#e and i##ing to p"rchase the propert% "nder the condition demanded $% the vendor.
