[go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd
Upload
123 views6 pages

Litonjua v. Fernandez

The document summarizes a legal case regarding a disputed land sale agreement. It provides background facts, including that the petitioners agreed to buy land from the respondent Fernandez, who claimed to be acting as an agent for the owners. However, Fernandez later said the sale would not proceed as her cousin did not want to sell his share. The issue is whether a valid contract existed without a special power of attorney authorizing Fernandez to sell the land. The ruling was that no contract was perfected, as Fernandez denied authorization and no written power of attorney was provided, making any purported sale by her null and void.

Uploaded by

Cee Laurino
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
123 views6 pages

Litonjua v. Fernandez

The document summarizes a legal case regarding a disputed land sale agreement. It provides background facts, including that the petitioners agreed to buy land from the respondent Fernandez, who claimed to be acting as an agent for the owners. However, Fernandez later said the sale would not proceed as her cousin did not want to sell his share. The issue is whether a valid contract existed without a special power of attorney authorizing Fernandez to sell the land. The ruling was that no contract was perfected, as Fernandez denied authorization and no written power of attorney was provided, making any purported sale by her null and void.

Uploaded by

Cee Laurino
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 6

Facts:

• In 1965, Alimario who worked as brokers, offered to sell to the


petitioners, Sps. Litonjua, parcels of land. The petitioners and
respondent Fernandez, who is allegedly acting as agents of the
respondent-owners, agreed that the petitioners would buy the
property. Also, it was agreed that respondent Fernandez would
present a special power of attorney executed by the owners of the
property, authorizing her to sell the property for and in their behalf. 
Facts:
• However, respondent was told by her cousin that he was not
selling his share since there were already tenants on the said
lands. Hence, respondent Fernandez wrote the
petitioners informing them that they thereby changed their mind
and that the sale will no longer push through.
Facts:
• When the petitioners received no response from respondent Fernandez,
the petitioners sent her another Letter dated February 1, 1996, asking that
the Deed of Absolute Sale covering the property be executed in
accordance with their verbal agreement dated November 27, 1995. The
petitioners also demanded the turnover of the subject properties to them
within fifteen days from receipt of the said letter; otherwise, they would
have no option but to protect their interest through legal means.
Issue:
• Whether or not there was a perfected contract of sale between
the parties in the absence of Special Power of Attorney?
Ruling
• No. There was no contract of sale being perfected between the parties
without executing a special power of attorney.
• ART. 1878. Special powers of attorney are necessary in the following
cases:
    … (5) To enter into any contract by which the ownership of an immovable
is transmitted or acquired either gratuitously or for a valuable consideration;
…(12) To create or convey real rights over immovable property, or for
any other act of strict dominion.
Ruling:
• In this case, respondent Fernandez specifically denied that she was authorized by the respondents-
owners to sell the properties, both in her answer to the complaint and when she testified and, no
evidence on record that the respondents-owners ratified all the actuations of respondent Fernandez
in connection with her dealings with the petitioners. 
• The only evidence adduced by the petitioners to prove that respondent Fernandez was
authorized by the respondents owners is the testimony of petitioner Antonio Litonjua that
respondent Fernandez openly represented herself to be the representative of the respondents
owners, and that she promised to present to the petitioners on December 8, 1996 a written authority
to sell the properties.
• Hence, Any sale of real property by one purporting to be the agent of the registered owner without
any authority therefor in writing from the said owner is null and void.

You might also like