#oblicon

153: I loved you

Hello~~ my name is Ris and welcome to my studyblr ^^

Since this is my first post, I wanna tell you guys my stuff? To be honest I love love love pens and notebooks but I wanna be a studyblr that doesn’t or would rarely use “known” products because I wanna show everyone that you can make your notes look exciting no matter what product you use 😉😉

Everything on the photo, i’ve bought way back - yup, I’m still using them up to this day ~~

—————————————-

The action or defense for the declaration of the inexistence of a contract does not prescribe.

The action for the declaration of inexistence or the defense on such is imprescriptible. The mere lapse of time does not validate a void contract, unlike in voidable contracts, which, if not assailed within the specific period provided by law, shall remain valid.

It is not necessary to go to the court to declare the nullity of a void contract if both parties agree that it is void and henceforth, on their own volition, change it. However, to avoid instances where one party refuses to restore what he has received out of a void contract, it is better to go to the court first to avoid inconvenience or to avoid taking the law into his own hands. Taking the law into one’s hands may lead to coercion which is a criminal offense.

The right to have a contract declared void ab initio may be barred by laches although not barred by prescription. It is an application of equity, based upon the grounds of public policy which require for the peace of society, discouraging stale claims. It is however exercised on the discretion of the court, its application controlled by equitable consideration.

Related/Cited Case

Heirs of Ureta v Heirs of Ureta

FACTS: Alfonso Ureta had 14 children, including, Policronio. The children of Policronio (Heirs of Policronio), are opposed to the validity of the Extrajudicial Partition. On October 1969, in order to reduce the inheritance taxes, Alfonso executed four (4) Deeds of Sale in favor of his children including Policronio. Since the sales were only made for taxation purposes and no monetary consideration was given, Alfonso continued to own, possess and enjoy the lands and their produce. On October 11, 1972, Alfonso died and his children acted as the administrator of his father’s estate. on November 22, 1974, Policronio died. The subject land under the deed of sale was never taken possession of by Policronio nor his heirs. On April 19, 1989, Alfonso’s heirs executed a Deed of Extra-Judicial Partition, which included all the lands that were covered by the four (4) deeds of sale that were previously executed by Alfonso for taxation purposes. Conrado, Policronio’s eldest son, representing the Heirs of Policronio, signed the Deed of Extra-Judicial Partition in behalf of his co-heirs.

On July 30, 1995, the Heirs of Policronio allegedly learned about the Deed of Extra-Judicial Partition involving Alfonso’s estate when it was published in the July 19, 1995issue of the Aklan Reporter. Believing that the six parcels of land belonged to their late father, and excluded from the Deed of Extra-Judicial Partition, the Heirs of Policronio sought to amicably settle but despite earnest efforts, the Heirs of Policronio filed a Complaint for Declaration of Ownership, Recovery of Possession over the subject land.

ISSUES:  Whether or not the Deed of Extra-Judicial Partition was valid.

Payments made in a state of insolvency for obligations to whose fulfillment the debtor could not be compelled at the time they were effected, are also rescissible. (1292)

Rescission under Article 1191 is a result of what people usually call as breach of contract. In reciprocal contracts, parties have mutual obligations and the obligation by either party to do, not to do or to give something is actually the cause for the other party to agree to also do, not do or give something in return. So when one does not perform his obligations under his contract, the other party has remedies under the law. Under the said Article 1191, the injured party can choose between fulfillment and rescission, with payment of damages in either case. This means that the injured party can either compel the guilty party to perform his part of the contract and claim for damages as a result of the breach, or it can rescind the contract and also claim for damages.

Illustration:

Question: Juan, an insolvent, owes Pedro P 1,000, but which debt has already been prescribed, Juan nevertheless still paid Pedro the P 1,000. May Pablo, another creditor of Juan rescind the payment made by Juan to Pedro?