Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1K views

    RINGOR v. RINGOR

    Uploaded by

    King
    1) Jacobo Ringor owned land in San Fabian, Pangasinan and had children from three marriages. 2) Witnesses testified that even after Jacobo registered the land and sold portions to his grandson Jose, he remained in possession and control of the land. 3) The lower courts found that Jacobo created an express trust over the entire property for the benefit of his grandchildren. The Supreme Court affirmed, finding the oral testimony supported the existence of an express trust, and that Jose could not repudiate the trust by relying on the Torrens title.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    RINGOR v. RINGOR

    Uploaded by

    King
    1K views1 page
    1) Jacobo Ringor owned land in San Fabian, Pangasinan and had children from three marriages. 2) Witnesses testified that even after Jacobo registered the land and sold portions to his grandson Jose, he remained in possession and control of the land. 3) The lower courts found that Jacobo created an express trust over the entire property for the benefit of his grandchildren. The Supreme Court affirmed, finding the oral testimony supported the existence of an express trust, and that Jose could not repudiate the trust by relying on the Torrens title.

    Original Title

    RINGOR v. RINGOR.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) Jacobo Ringor owned land in San Fabian, Pangasinan and had children from three marriages. 2) Witnesses testified that even after Jacobo registered the land and sold portions to his grandson Jose, he remained in possession and control of the land. 3) The lower courts found that Jacobo created an express trust over the entire property for the benefit of his grandchildren. The Supreme Court affirmed, finding the oral testimony supported the existence of an express trust, and that Jose could not repudiate the trust by relying on the Torrens title.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    1K views1 page

    RINGOR v. RINGOR

    Uploaded by

    King
    1) Jacobo Ringor owned land in San Fabian, Pangasinan and had children from three marriages. 2) Witnesses testified that even after Jacobo registered the land and sold portions to his grandson Jose, he remained in possession and control of the land. 3) The lower courts found that Jacobo created an express trust over the entire property for the benefit of his grandchildren. The Supreme Court affirmed, finding the oral testimony supported the existence of an express trust, and that Jose could not repudiate the trust by relying on the Torrens title.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    RINGOR v.

    RINGOR
    MEANING OF TRUST; NATURE OF LEGAL RELATIONSHIP

    G.R. No. 147863. August 13, 2004

    FACTS: The controversy involves lands in San Fabian, Pangasinan, owned by the late Jacobo Ringor. By his first
    wife, Gavina Laranang, he had two children, Juan and Catalina. He did not have offsprings by his second and
    third wives. Catalina predeceased her father Jacobo who died sometime in 1935, leaving Juan his lone heir of 3
    lots owned by Jacobo. Juan married Gavina and had 7 children with her. One of the children was Jose (the father
    and predecessors-in-interest of herein petitioners). Jacobo applied for the registration of his lands under the
    Torrens system. He filed three land registration cases alone, with his son Juan, or his grandson Jose, applying
    jointly with him. Subsequently, in a Compraventa dated November 3, 1928, Jacobo allegedly sold and
    transferred to Jose his one-half undivided interest in Parcel 1 covered by OCT No. 25885. Jacobo's thumbmark
    appeared on the Compraventa. During trial, witnesses attested that even after the decisions in the three land
    registration cases and the Compraventas, Jacobo remained in possession of the lands and continued
    administering them as he did prior to their registration. According to witness Julio Monsis, Jacobo did not
    partition the lands since the latter said that he still needed them. When Jacobo died on June 7, 1935, the lands
    under the three land registration applications, including those which petitioners sought to partition in their
    counterclaim before the trial court, remained undivided. Jose continued to function as administrator over said
    land and promised to divide it equally/ When he died sometime on 1971, Respondents demanded from Jose's
    children, herein petitioners, the partition and delivery of their share in the estate left by Jacobo and under Jose's
    administration. The petitioners refused and attempts at amicable settlement failed. On March 27, 1973,
    respondents filed a Complaint for partition and reconveyance.

    RTC decided in favor of respondents, concluding that Jacobo created an express trust over his entire property
    in favor of his grandchildren. CA affirmed the lower court’s decision.

    ISSUE: Whether or not Jacobo only created an express trust.

    RULING: Express trusts, sometimes referred to as direct trusts, are intentionally created by the direct and
    positive acts of the settlor or the trustor by some writing, deed, or will, or oral declaration. Contrary to the claim
    of petitioners, oral testimony is allowed to prove that a trust exists. It is not error for the court to rely on parol
    evidence, - - i.e., the oral testimonies of witnesses Emeteria Ringor, Julio Monsis and Teofilo Abalos - - which
    the appellate court also relied on to arrive at the conclusion that an express trust exists.

    Contrary to the claim of petitioners, oral testimony is allowed to prove that a trust exists. It is not error for the
    court to rely on parol evidence, - - i.e., the oral testimonies of witnesses Emeteria Ringor, Julio Monsis and
    Teofilo Abalos - - which the appellate court also relied on to arrive at the conclusion that an express trust exists.
    A trustee who obtains a Torrens title over a property held in trust for him by another cannot repudiate the trust
    by relying on the registration. A Torrens Certificate of Title in Jose's name did not vest ownership of the land
    upon him. The Torrens system does not create or vest title. It only confirms and records title already existing
    and vested. The SC upheld the decision of the lower courts in favoring the respondents’ claims.

    You might also like