Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • ROSENCOR V. INQUING (March 08, 2001) Facts

    Uploaded by

    Kyle Hernandez
    2 views1 page
    The tenants were verbally given the pre-emptive right to purchase the property if it was sold by both the original and new lessors. When the new lessors tried to sell it to a third party, the tenants claimed they were deceived and sued to enforce their right of first refusal. The court held that a verbal pre-emptive right can be enforced and proved by oral evidence. However, rescission of the third party sale contract was not possible because the third party purchaser was not aware of the tenants' right and acted in good faith. The tenants were entitled to damages instead.

    Original Description:

    ddsds

    Original Title

    Sales 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
    The tenants were verbally given the pre-emptive right to purchase the property if it was sold by both the original and new lessors. When the new lessors tried to sell it to a third party, the tenants claimed they were deceived and sued to enforce their right of first refusal. The court held that a verbal pre-emptive right can be enforced and proved by oral evidence. However, rescission of the third party sale contract was not possible because the third party purchaser was not aware of the tenants' right and acted in good faith. The tenants were entitled to damages instead.

    Copyright:

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

    ROSENCOR V. INQUING (March 08, 2001) Facts

    Uploaded by

    Kyle Hernandez
    The tenants were verbally given the pre-emptive right to purchase the property if it was sold by both the original and new lessors. When the new lessors tried to sell it to a third party, the tenants claimed they were deceived and sued to enforce their right of first refusal. The court held that a verbal pre-emptive right can be enforced and proved by oral evidence. However, rescission of the third party sale contract was not possible because the third party purchaser was not aware of the tenants' right and acted in good faith. The tenants were entitled to damages instead.

    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

    ROSENCOR V.

    INQUING (March 08, 2001)

    FACTS:
    Respondents are tenants of a two-storey residential apartment in Tomas Morato QC. The lease
    was not covered by any contract.
    Lessees were verbally given by the lessors the pre-emptive right to purchase the property in
    case of sale.

    The original lessors died and their heir also promised the lessees the same pre-emptive right
    to purchase. The new lessors represented by Eufrocina de Leon demanded the lessees to
    vacate the property because the building will allegedly be demolished but after the lessees
    declined, she sent them a letter offering to sell the property for 2M. Lessees made a counter
    offer of 1M but no reply was made by the lessors.

    De leon subsequently informed the lessees that the property was already sold to Rosencor.
    Lessees claimed that they were deceived because the property was already sold to Rosencor
    before it was offered to them. They offered to reimburse the payment to the lessors but the
    offer was declined as hence, this petition.

    ISSUE:
    WON the lessors should recognize the pre-emptive right of the lessees even if it was only given
    verbally.

    HELD:
    The right of first refusal is not covered by the Statute of Frauds. The application of such statute
    presupposes the existence of a perfected contact which is no applicable in this case. As such,
    a right of first refusal need not be written to be enforceable and can be proved by oral evidence.

    Lessees have proven that the lessors admit the right of first refusal given to them when the
    property was offered to them by 2M.

    The prevailing doctrine is that a contract of sale entered in violation of right of first refusal is
    rescissible. However, this doctrine cannot be applied here because the vendees (Rosencor) is
    in good faith. Under Art.1358, recission cannot take place when things which are the object of
    sale is legally in possession of third person who did not act in bad faith.

    Rosencor could not have acted in bad faith because they are not aware of the right of first
    refusal given verbally. Respondents should instead file for damages.

    You might also like