Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 34 views

    Defendant-Appellant.: JOSE B. ESCUETA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. AQUILINO PANDO, (Adm. Case No. 174. March 12, 1946.)

    Uploaded by

    Kat Jolejole
    Plaintiff purchased three lots from defendant payable in installments over 10 years. Plaintiff claims he is entitled to a credit of P787.89 paid by his wife toward the purchase price of another lot from defendant. The issue is whether defendant alone could resolve or annul their agreement without judicial intervention. The court held no, that while a right to resolve obligations exists if one party fails to comply, this right must be invoked through the courts, which will decree resolution unless grounds exist to allow a term for performance of the obligation.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Defendant-Appellant.: JOSE B. ESCUETA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. AQUILINO PANDO, (Adm. Case No. 174. March 12, 1946.)

    Uploaded by

    Kat Jolejole
    34 views1 page
    Plaintiff purchased three lots from defendant payable in installments over 10 years. Plaintiff claims he is entitled to a credit of P787.89 paid by his wife toward the purchase price of another lot from defendant. The issue is whether defendant alone could resolve or annul their agreement without judicial intervention. The court held no, that while a right to resolve obligations exists if one party fails to comply, this right must be invoked through the courts, which will decree resolution unless grounds exist to allow a term for performance of the obligation.

    Original Description:

    escueta v pando digest

    Original Title

    75 digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Plaintiff purchased three lots from defendant payable in installments over 10 years. Plaintiff claims he is entitled to a credit of P787.89 paid by his wife toward the purchase price of another lot from defendant. The issue is whether defendant alone could resolve or annul their agreement without judicial intervention. The court held no, that while a right to resolve obligations exists if one party fails to comply, this right must be invoked through the courts, which will decree resolution unless grounds exist to allow a term for performance of the obligation.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    34 views1 page

    Defendant-Appellant.: JOSE B. ESCUETA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. AQUILINO PANDO, (Adm. Case No. 174. March 12, 1946.)

    Uploaded by

    Kat Jolejole
    Plaintiff purchased three lots from defendant payable in installments over 10 years. Plaintiff claims he is entitled to a credit of P787.89 paid by his wife toward the purchase price of another lot from defendant. The issue is whether defendant alone could resolve or annul their agreement without judicial intervention. The court held no, that while a right to resolve obligations exists if one party fails to comply, this right must be invoked through the courts, which will decree resolution unless grounds exist to allow a term for performance of the obligation.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    JOSE B. ESCUETA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v.

    AQUILINO PANDO,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    [Adm. Case No. 174. March 12, 1946.]
    Facts:
    Plaintiff purchased from the defendant three lots of subdivision payable in
    installment for 10 years. The plaintiff claims that he is entitled to recover
    from the defendant the sum of P787.89 which his wife had paid on account of
    the purchase price of certain lots and which defendant subsequently agreed
    to credit to the plaintiff as part of the purchase price another lot to be chosen
    and bought by the plaintiff from the defendant.
    Issue:
    Could defendant, by himself alone and without judicial intervention, resolve
    or annul the agreement?
    Held:
    No. Under the article 1124 of the Civil Code the right to resolve reciprocal
    obligations, in case one of the obligors shall fail to comply with that is
    incumbent upon him, is deemed to be implied. But that right must be
    invoked judicially; for the same article also provides: "The court shall decree
    the resolution demanded, unless there should be grounds which justify the
    allowance of a term for the performance of the obligation."

    You might also like