[go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd
Upload
392 views1 page

1 - Case Digest Palero-Tan V Urdaneta

Urdaneta found jewelry in the RTC office that belonged to Tan. Instead of returning the jewelry, Urdaneta threw it away when his wife suspected he bought it for a mistress. It was later found out that Urdaneta knew the jewelry belonged to Tan but did not inform her. The court held that Urdaneta could be faulted for throwing away found property and that finders have an obligation under the Civil Code to report found items to the proper authorities or return them to the owner.

Uploaded by

deuce scri
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
392 views1 page

1 - Case Digest Palero-Tan V Urdaneta

Urdaneta found jewelry in the RTC office that belonged to Tan. Instead of returning the jewelry, Urdaneta threw it away when his wife suspected he bought it for a mistress. It was later found out that Urdaneta knew the jewelry belonged to Tan but did not inform her. The court held that Urdaneta could be faulted for throwing away found property and that finders have an obligation under the Civil Code to report found items to the proper authorities or return them to the owner.

Uploaded by

deuce scri
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

TAN vs.

URDANETA

Facts:
Urdaneta found jewelry inside the RTC office. Tan is the owner of the jewelry. Urdaneta did not return the
jewelry instead he threw it away when his wife suspected that we bought the jewelry for a mistress.
However, it was found out that he knew that Tan had lost the jewelry and that he did not bother to inform
her.

Issues:
Whether or not Urdaneta can be faulted for throwing away the jewelry he found.

Held:
Yes, he can be faulted.

When a person who finds a thing that has been lost or mislaid by the owner takes the thing into his hands,
he acquires physical custody only and does not become vested with legal possession. In assuming such
custody, the finder is charged with the obligation of restoring the thing to its owner. It is thus
respondents duty to report to his superior or his officemates that he found something. The Civil Code, in
Article 719, explicitly requires the finder of a lost property to report it to the proper authorities, thus:

Article 719. Whoever finds a movable, which is not treasure, must return it to its previous possessor. If the
latter is unknown, the finder shall immediately deposit it with the mayor of the city or municipality where
the finding has taken place.

The finding shall be publicly announced by the mayor for two consecutive weeks in the way he deems best.

If the movables cannot be kept without deterioration, or without the expenses which considerably
diminish its value, it shall be sold at public auction eight days after the publication.

Six months from the publication having elapsed without the owner having appeared, the thing found, or
its value, shall be awarded to the finder. The finder and the owner shall be obliged, as the case may be, to
reimburse the expenses.

You might also like