[Canuto vs Mariano] (1995) entered into subsequent to the time when the written

instrument was executed, notwithstanding such

[J. Regalado]
TOPIC Rules of Admissibility - Documentary
Evidence - Parol Evidence Rule
SUMMARY (optional for relatively long cases)
DOCTRINE The rule forbidding the admission of parol
or extrinsic evidence to alter, vary
contradict a written instrument does not
apply so as to prohibit the
establishment by parol of an
agreement between the parties to a
writing, entered into subsequent to the
time when the written instrument was
executed, notwithstanding such
agreement may have the effect of adding
to , changing, modifying, or even
altogether abrogating the contract of the
parties as evidenced by the writing.
EVIDENCE Deed of Sale with Right of Repurchase
Canuto’s Testimony
agreement may have the effect of adding to , changing,
modifying, or even altogether abrogating the contract of
the parties as evidenced by the writing; for the parol
evidence does not in any way deny that the original
agreement of the parties was but merely goes to show
that the parties have exercised their right to change or
abrogate the same, or to make a new and independent
contract.
"It makes no difference how soon after the execution of
the written contract the parol one was made. If it was in
fact subsequent and is otherwise unobjectionable it may
be proved and enforced."
IV. DISPOSITIVE
We conclude that the judgment entered in the court
below should be affirmed with costs of this instance
against the appellant. So ordered.

I. FACTS
Petitioner Canuto executed a deed of sale for a parcel of
land with right of repurchase to respondent Mariano. The
term of the repurchase is within one year but since
Canuto failed to repurchase within said time, Mariano
claimed absolute ownership of said lot.
Canuto insists however that they had an oral agreement
for extension of the term of repurchase. Canuto testifies
that Mariano did not appear on the day agreed upon for
the repurchase.
The lower court accepted petitioner’s testimony and that
of a corroborating witness in ruling in her favour.
II. ISSUE
WON Canuto is permitted to contradict a written
instrument by introduction of oral evidence? YES
III. RATIONALE
"The rule forbidding the admission of parol or extrinsic
evidence to alter, vary contradict a written instrument
does not apply so as to prohibit the establishment by
parol of an agreement between the parties to a writing,