Heirs of Tanak v.

Martinez
FACTS:
- Moro Pangarawan during his lifetime, he had 3 wives, one after the other
- On the first wife, he begot 2 child
- He continue to cultivate the 16 hc of land when the 1st wife died and acted as the sole owner
of the land
- Then he married his 2nd wife, which is the petitioner’s mother
- She died and there were no liquiditaion like t efirst wife
- He married the 3rd wife, which in this case the mother of the private respondent
- Respondent acted as the administrator of the properties and allegedly register it to his name
alone, where in fact there are other heirs who also have rights to a share of the land

Issue: W?N the action of the co heirs had already prescribed having been brought one year
from the date of the issuance of the OCT

Held:
Article 1456 of our new Civil Code which provides: 'If property is acquired through mistake or fraud,
the person obtaining it is, by force of law, considered a trustee of an implied trust for the benefit of
the person from whom the property comes.' Since it appears that the land in question was obtained
by defendants thru fraudulent representations by means of which a patent and a title were issued in
their name, they are deemed to hold it in trust for the benefit of the person prejudiced by it. Here this
person is the plaintiff. There being an implied trust in this transaction, the action to recover the
property prescribes after the lapse of ten years. Here this period has not yet elapsed.

-No, Petitioner’s action had not yet prescribved

- Since respondednt was able to secure the disputed title thru fraud, an implied trust was
created in favor of the co-heirs. Respondent is deemed to merely hold the property for them in
his benefit
-There being an implied trust, the action to recover prescribes after 10 years.
- Consequently, the present action is not yet barred by prescription

HEIRS OF EMILIO CANDELARIA V. ROMERO

Facts:
- Emilio Candelaria, continued the installment basis payment his brother Lucas, who cannot
continue anymore his payment due to his sickness.
- Lucas has only paid 2 installment, where Emilio paid returned and continued the payment
- The payment is issued in Lucas’ name
- Lucas held the title merely in trust for Emilio and this was acknowledged by Lucas and his heirs
( in this case defendants)

ISSUE:
1. W/N the trust have been created is express
- the court in opinion said that it is implied trust
Civil Code in Art. 1453 thereof, is founded upon equity.
- from the allegation that Emilio paid the purchase price, with the understanding that necessary
documents will be transferred later on being brother by brother
- It is apparent that Emilio who furnished the consideration intended to obtain a beneficial
interest in the property.
- And therefore Lucas is presumed to hold it for Emilio and convey the property later on

CUAYCONG V CUAYCONG
- If the intention to establish a trust is clear, the trust is express; if the intent to establish a trust
is to be taken from circumstances or other matters indicative of such intent, then the trust is
implied.
- Eduardo, survived by his three brothers (Justo, Lino, meliton) ans sister (Basilisa)
- Upon Eduardo’s death his properties were distributed to his heirs as he willed except for 2
haciendas (comprising 8 lots) under the name of Luis, son of one of his brother Justo
- oN several occasion, Eduardo made known to his brothers and sister that he and his wife had
an understanding and made arranfement with Luis and Justo, that it was desire to divide the
Haciendas among the brothers and sister and his wife (half for the wife and half for the siblisng)
- They failed to pay the half to the wife and Luis caused the issuance of the titles under his
name so Lino’s heir demandedfor their share
Issue: W/N trust is express or implied
- It was hold to be an express trust
-Express trusts are those created by the direct and positive acts of the parties, by some writing or
deed or will or by words evidencing an intention to create a trust. 
-On the other hand, implied trusts are those which, without being expressed, are deducible from the
nature of the transaction by operation of law as matters of equity, in dependently of the particular
intention of the parties.
-From these and from the provisions of paragraph 8 of the complaint itself, We find it clear that
the plaintiffs alleged an express trust over an immovable, especially since it is alleged that
the trustor expressly told the defendants of his intention to establish the trust. Such a situation
definitely falls under Article 1443 of the Civil Code.

ADAZA V CA
- Victor Adaza, father of the petitioner and respondent, excuted a deed of donation of a 13
hectare in favor of his daigther and son Horacio
- Part of the will was crossed out for the patent to be registered under the name of daughter
Violeta alone.
- On a family gathering, petitioner Horacio asked respondendt, Violeta to sign a deed of waiver
which states that the land was owned in common for both of them, which Violeta signed.
- Later on, violeta seeks to annul the waiver and alleged that her signature was fraudulently and
with undue influence obtained

Issue: W/N an implied trust was created by Horacio

- Yes, there is an implied trust
- in the circumstances that 1) deed of donation made to appear that donor intended 2 co
owners and 2) deed of waiver signed by Violeta
- Art 1449. There is also an implied trust when a donation is made to a person but it appears
that although the legal estate is transmitted to the donee, he nevertheless is either to have
beneficial interest or only part thereof.

the donee, he nevertheless is

either to have no beneficial
interest or
only a part thereof
DIAZ V. GORRICHO AND AGUADO
- In constructive trust, laches constitutes a bar to actions to enforce the trust, and repudiation is
not required, unless there is a concealment of the facts giving rise to the trust.. although the
concealment must be adequately pleaded by the plaintiff in a suit to declare a trust, where the
delay is apparent on the face of his pleading

Facts:
- Francisco Diaz died survived by his wife Servilla and three children – Manuel, Constancia and
Lolita
- In 1935, respondent, Gorricho filed an action against Sevilla, wherein a writ of attachment was
issued upon the shares of Sevilla ni said lots, which was later on sold at public auction to
Gorricho also.
- The sheriff wrongfully conveyed the whole lots to Garricho instead of Sevilla’s ½ interest.
- The petitioners, filed a case against Gorricho for the reconveyance of the half interest of the
subject lots

Issue:
1. W/N a conrtructive trust was created in favor of siblings Diaz
- Yes Art 1456 provides that “if property is acquired through mistake or fraud, the person
obtaining is is, by force of law, considered a trusteeof an implied trust for the benefit of the
person from whom the property come”
- Since Gorricho acquired the whole lot through error of the sheriff, where he shall only be
entitled to half, then a constructive trust was created in favor of the siblings
2. W/N the action for reconveyance was barred by laches?
- YES, in constructive trust, there is neither promise nor fiduciary relation; the trustee does not
recognizea ny trust and has ni intent to hold for the beneficiary; therefore, the beneficiary is
not justified in delaying action to recover his property. It is his fault if he delays; hence, he may
be estopped by his own laches.
3. W/N the action for reconveyance was barred by prescription
- YES, the longest extinctive period was only 10 years.
- Here 15 years lapsed before they sought remedy, so it was barred by prescripton