Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 129 views

    Sagrada Orden vs. 91 Phil. 503 (1952)

    Uploaded by

    Lu Cas
    1) The land originally belonged to the plaintiff but was acquired by a Japanese corporation during the Japanese occupation. 2) After the war, the US Alien Property Custodian took possession of the property. It was then occupied by defendant National Coconut Corporation. 3) The plaintiff sued and the court cancelled the Japanese corporation's title and reissued it to the plaintiff, cancelling the claims of the Alien Property Custodian. 4) However, the court found that the defendant was not liable to pay rentals to the plaintiff for occupying the property prior to the judgment, as it did so in good faith with the permission of the Alien Property Custodian, which had legal control at

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Sagrada Orden vs. 91 Phil. 503 (1952)

    Uploaded by

    Lu Cas
    129 views1 page
    1) The land originally belonged to the plaintiff but was acquired by a Japanese corporation during the Japanese occupation. 2) After the war, the US Alien Property Custodian took possession of the property. It was then occupied by defendant National Coconut Corporation. 3) The plaintiff sued and the court cancelled the Japanese corporation's title and reissued it to the plaintiff, cancelling the claims of the Alien Property Custodian. 4) However, the court found that the defendant was not liable to pay rentals to the plaintiff for occupying the property prior to the judgment, as it did so in good faith with the permission of the Alien Property Custodian, which had legal control at

    Original Description:

    ObliConDigest

    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
    1) The land originally belonged to the plaintiff but was acquired by a Japanese corporation during the Japanese occupation. 2) After the war, the US Alien Property Custodian took possession of the property. It was then occupied by defendant National Coconut Corporation. 3) The plaintiff sued and the court cancelled the Japanese corporation's title and reissued it to the plaintiff, cancelling the claims of the Alien Property Custodian. 4) However, the court found that the defendant was not liable to pay rentals to the plaintiff for occupying the property prior to the judgment, as it did so in good faith with the permission of the Alien Property Custodian, which had legal control at

    Copyright:

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

    Sagrada Orden vs. 91 Phil. 503 (1952)

    Uploaded by

    Lu Cas
    1) The land originally belonged to the plaintiff but was acquired by a Japanese corporation during the Japanese occupation. 2) After the war, the US Alien Property Custodian took possession of the property. It was then occupied by defendant National Coconut Corporation. 3) The plaintiff sued and the court cancelled the Japanese corporation's title and reissued it to the plaintiff, cancelling the claims of the Alien Property Custodian. 4) However, the court found that the defendant was not liable to pay rentals to the plaintiff for occupying the property prior to the judgment, as it did so in good faith with the permission of the Alien Property Custodian, which had legal control at

    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

    ObliConDigest - Sagrada Orden Vs. 91 Phil.

    503 (1952)

    Facts:
    The land in question belongs to plaintiff Sagrada Orden in whose name the title was registered before
    the war. On January 4, 1943, during the Japanese military occupation, the land was acquired by a
    Japanese corporation by the name of Taiwan Tekkosho. After liberation on April 4, 1946, the Alien
    Property Custodian of the United States of America took possession, control, and custody of the
    property pursuant to the Trading with the Enemy Act

    The property was occupied by the Copra Export Management Company under a custodian agreement
    with US Alien Property Custodian. When it vacated the property, it was occupied by defendant National
    Coconut Corporation

    The plaintiff made claim to the said property before the Alien Property Custodian. Alien Property
    Custodian denied such claim. It brought an action in court which resulted to the cancellation of the title
    issued in the name of Taiwan Tekkosho which was executed under threats, duress, and intimidation;
    reissuance of the title in favor of the plaintiff; cancellation of the claims, rights, title, interest of the Alien
    property Custodian; and occupant National Coconut Corporation ejection from the property. A right was
    also vested to the plaintiff to recover from the defendants rentals for its occupation of the land from the
    date it vacated.

    Defendant contests the rental claims on the defense that it occupied the property in good faith and
    under no obligation to pay rentals.

    Issue:
    Whether or not the defendant is obliged to pay rentals to the plaintiff

    Held:
    No. Nacoco is not liable to pay rentals prior the judgment. If defendant-appellant is liable at all, its
    obligations, must arise from any of the four sources of obligations, namely, law, contract or quasi-
    contract, crime, or negligence. (Article 1089, Spanish Civil Code.) Defendant-appellant is not guilty of any
    offense at all, because it entered the premises and occupied it with the permission of the entity which
    had the legal control and administration thereof, the Alien Property Administration. Neither was there
    any negligence on its part.

    You might also like