CASE DIGEST: PRICE AND OTHER CONSIDERATION
SPOUSES VIOVICENTE C. SPOUSES
VIOVICENTE
FACTS:
Teodorico Viovicente and Dominga Viovicente
are married and Danilo Viovicente is their eldest
son. Teodorico owned a house in Laguna in
which he acquired through a GSIS loan.
Sometime in June 1993, Danilo went to their
house in Tacloban and forced him and Dominga
to sign a Deed of Absolute Sale regarding the
house in Laguna in which the Spouses Teodorico
refused.
Because of this, Danilo got angry and threw a
briefcase at him but missed. Because of fear, he
and Dominga signed the deed even without
receiving any payment as consideration.
Upon receiving the copy of the Deed, Teodorico
noted that the acknowledgment portion falsely
impossible that he appeared in a notary public in
Makati City since he reported to work in Tacloban
that day.
He also learned that Danilo and his wife acquired
a TCT through a fictitious deed of absolute sale
thus he filed a complaint against Danilo for the
reconveyance of property, nullity of the supposed
sale of real property and cancellation of TCT
issued in the name of Danilo and his wife.
According to Danilo, he and Teodorico had an
agreement that it would be convenient to have a
house in Manila where his siblings could stay.
Teodorico apply for loan to cover the
downpayment while Danilo would be in charge of
paying the amortization and upon the full
payment of the said property, it will be convey to
him.
ISSUE: W/N the Deed of Sale between
Teodorico and Danilo is valid.
RULING:
There was no consideration for the alleged
sale of the Property from plaintiffs to Danilo.
There was never any agreement for the price
of an alleged sale.
The judgment should be rendered declaring the
alleged sale of the property to Danilo void for
absence of consideration.
DOLES V. ANGELES
FACTS:
Respondent filed a complaint for Specific
performance with damages against the petitioner
Jocelyn. The respondent Angeles, alleged that
the petitioner was indebted a personal loan of
P405,430 with interest. By the virtue of a Deed of
Absolute Sale by the petitioner as the seller, sell
to the respondent a parcel of land together with
its improvements thereon in a Subdivision to
satisfy her personal loan. The said property was
mortgage to NHMFC and the respondent will
assume the undue balance of the mortgage. The
said property during that time, was occupied by a
tenant.
Upon the verification of the respondent to
NHMFC, she learned that the respondent has
incurred a debt of P26,000 together with
penalties and interest. Despite the repeated
demand to the petitioner, she refused to
cooperate for the proper transfer of the title to the
respondent’s name. Aside from that, the
petitioner collect the rent for the property and
refuse to remit it to the respondent.
The petitioner alleged that she did not owe any
money to the respondent instead, she referred
her friends are the ones who borrowed money
from the respondent and help the petitioner
collect the owned money from the borrowers to
whom she could not locate anymore. She was
threatened with a criminal case because of the
bounced checks issued to the petitioner. Because
of this, she execute an Absolute Deed of Sale
over her property to avoid criminal prosecution.
She alleged that there is no valid consideration in
the said sale.
ISSUE/S:
W/N the Deed of Absolute Sale is
supported by a valid consideration
RULING:
This Court has consistently held that a contract of
sale is null and void and produces no effect
whatsoever where the same is without cause or
consideration.
This Court in the recent past has declared
that an assumption of a mortgage debt may
constitute a valid consideration for a sale.
In view of these anomalies, the Court cannot
entertain the possibility that respondent agreed to
assume the balance of the mortgage loan which
petitioner allegedly owed to the NHMFC
especially since the record is bereft of any factual
finding that petitioner was, in the first place,
endowed with any ownership rights to validly
mortgage and convey the property.
It is stated that the property is registered in the
name of Household Development Corporation. It
cannot be inferred from this bare notation nor
from any other evidence on the record, that the
petitioner or her father held any direct interest in
the property in question so as to validly constitute
a mortgage there on and with more reason to
effect the delivery of the object of the sale at the
consummation state. There is a notion that the
TCT itself has been cancelled.
Even assuming the mortgage validly exists, the
Court notes respondents allegation that the
mortgage with the NHMFC was for 25 years.
The Court declared that the sale is void for
lack of cause.
SAN MIGUEL PROPERTIES V. SPOUSES
HUANG
FACTS:
San Miguel Properties Philippines is a domestic
corporation engaged in the purchase and sale of
real properties.
One of their properties located in Pasig City was
offered for sale in cash and an offer was made to
Atty. Dauz who are acting for respondent
spouses as undisclosed principals.
Atty. Dauz made terms regarding the purchase of
the said property to wit: the sum of P500,000 will
be given as earnest money and the balance
would be paid in eight equal monthly installments.
The petitioner refused the counter offer.
Another counter-offer was sent by Atty. Dauz in
which it enclosed that a sum of P1M will be an
earnest deposit money with some terms in which
the petitioner’s vice-president and operations
manager accepted the earnest-deposit.
However, on their next meeting, Sobrecarey (VP
of San Miguel) informed Atty. Dauz that the
petitioner has not yet acted on the said counter-
offer which prompted Atty. Dauz to propose a
four-month period of amortization and even ask
for an extension of 45 days in which it was
granted.
The President of San Miguel informed atty. Dauz
that the parties failed to agree on the terms and
conditions thus granted the petitioner to return
the earnest deposit.
Respondents attempted to return the “earnest-
deposit” but the petitioner refused on the ground
that respondent’ option to purchase had already
expired.
Respondent spouses filed a complaint for specific
performance against the petitioner.
RTC granted the petitioner’s motion and
dismissed the action. CA reversed the decision of
the RTC.
ISSUE: W/N there is a valid sale.
RULING:
The alleged payment and acceptance of earnest
money, the Court holds that respondents did not
give the P1M as earnest money. They presented
the amount merely as a deposit of what would
eventually become the earnest money or
downpayment should a contract of sale be made
by them. The amount was thus given not as
part of the purchase price and as proof of the
perfection of the contract of sale but only as a
guarantee that respondents would not back
out of the sale.
Under the second paragraph of Art. 1479, an
accepted unilateral promise to buy or sell a
determinate thing for a price certain is
binding upon the promisor only if the promise
is supported by a distinct consideration.
Consideration in an option contract may be
anything of value, unlike in sale where it must be
the price certain in money or its equivalent. .
There is no showing here of any consideration for
the option.
In the present case, the parties never go past the
negotiation stage. The alleged “indubitable
evidence” of a perfected sale cited by the
appellate court was nothing more than offers and
counter-offers which did not amount to any final
arrangement containing the essential elements of
a contract of sale.
The manner of payment of the purchase price
is an essential element before a valid and
binding contract of sale can exist. (Navarro v.
Sugar Producers Coop. Marketing Assoc. Inc)
It can not therefore, be said that a definite and
firm sales agreement between the parties had
been perfected over the lot in question.
It is not the giving of earnest money, but the
proof of the concurrence of all the essential
elements of the contract of sale which
establishes the existence of a perfected sale.
BACALA V. HEIRS OF POLIÑO
FACTS:
Aproniana, Juan and Anecito Poliño were
siblings. Poliño was married to Clara and the
father of Aquilino and Ducepino in which both of
his sons are mentally incapacitated.
Anecito and Clara were the registered owner of a
parcel of land planted with coconuts in Davao
Oriental. The couple died intestate and was
survived by their sons and sole heirs.
Before his death, Anecito executed a Deed of
Sale with his brother Juan. In the said Deed of
Sale, Anecito allegedly ceded unto Juan the
subject property for a consideration of P15,000
and stipulated that during Anecito’s lifetime, Juan
shall allow Anecito to enjoy the said subject
property and upon his death, Juan shall continue
to support and provide financial assistance to
Aquilino and Ducepino.
Aproniana become the judicial guardian of
Anecito’s sons and while the Guardianship
proceedings were pending, Juan executed a
Deed of Voluntary Transfer conveying the subject
property to his children.
 element, was also stated as the consideration
Aproniana then instituted the instant Complaint in the Deed of Sale.
against the spouses Juan and Corazon on behalf
of her nephews and assailed the validity of the
A resolutory condition extinguishes a
documents for being fictitious and without
transaction, that for a time existed and
consideration.
discharges the obligations created
thereunder.
ISSUE/S:
 W/N gross inadequacy of the price nullify As a general rule, the power to rescind an
the contract between Anecito and Juan obligation must invoked judicially and cannot
 W/N the contract between Anecito and be exercised solely on a party’s own
Juan Valid. judgment that the other has committed a
breach of the obligation.
RULING:
As an exception, an injured party need not
Anecito had expressly acknowledged in the Deed resort to court action in order to rescind a
of Sale his receipt of the said amount as contract when the contract itself provides that
consideration of the contract. it may revoked or cancelled upon violation of
its terms and conditions.
Gross inadequacy or simulation of price
neither affects nor invalidates a sale, but it
can be shown that the parties may have really
intended a donation or some other act or
contract.

The Deed of Sale contains all of the three basic

requisites of a contract of sale. All three elements
were established, since no issue was raised as to
any vice tainting Anecito’s and Juan’s consent to
the transaction conveying ownership over the
subject property. The price therefore, the third