Lex Rex Ph

Bambalan vs. Maramba Digest

Facts

Bambalan signed a document executing a transfer of land of ownership to Maramba. After some time, Bambalan then asserted that the transfer was invalid for the following reasons: (1) Bambalan was a minor; (2) Record shows that it was not his intention to sell the land. Maramba argues that the doctrine in Mercado vs. Espiritu should apply. In that case, the plaintiff pretended to be of age and the contract was validated.

Issue

Will the minor Bambalan’s act validate the sale of land?

Ruling

No, the transfer of ownership is invalid because of the minority of Bambalan. First, the ruling in Mercado vs. Espiritu is premised on the fact that the (a) minor pretended to be an adult; and (b) the contracting party did not know that they are dealing with a minor. Here, Maramba knew that Bambalan was a minor, and Bambalan did not pretend. Moreover, even if the contract was valid, the transaction is still invalid because it did not adhere to the provisions of section 50 of the Act. No. 496, wherein the register of deeds must give validity to the contracts.

Other Content You May Be Interested In:

Brown-Araneta vs. Araneta

Facts Juan and Michelle were married and had 2 minor children. They separated and the children remained in Michelle’s custody. Juan filed for a Petition

Read More »

Silverio v. Republic Digest

MY TITLE Petitioner Silverio underwent sex change CASE TAGS Male and Female in MarriageHomosexuality CITATION  Silverio vs Republic G.R. 174689 | October 22, 2007 ROMMEL JACINTO DANTES SILVERIO,

Read More »

People vs. Mendoza Digest

Full text Lesson: A bigamous marriage need no judicial decree of nullity. Facts Arturo Mendoza was sentenced by the CFI guilty of bigamy and sentencing him

Read More »

Complex crime

When a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies, or when an offense is a necessary means to committing the other,

Read More »
en_USEnglish