LAW ON PROPERTY | DE GARCIA VS. CA

DE GARCIA VS. CA

 

TOPIC/DOCTRINE

If the possessor of a movable loss of which the owner has been unlawfully deprived, has acquired it in good faith at a public sale, the owner cannot obtain its return without reimbursing the price paid therefor.

 

FACTS 

Guevara seeks recovery of one (1) lady's diamond ring 18 cts. white gold mounting, with one (1) 2.05 cts. diamond-solitaire, and four (4) brills 0.10 cts. total weight' which she bought on October 27, 1947 from R. Rebullida, Inc. She recognized the ring on the finger of Mrs. Garcia and asked where she bought it. 3 days after, she had Mr. Rebullida, who sold the ring and had 30 years of experience, examine the ring with the aid of a high-power lens and confirm that it was the same ring bought from him.

Evidence shows it was purchased by Garcia from Mrs. Miranda who got it from Miss Angelita Hinahon who in turn got it from the owner, Aling Petring who cannot be located. The ring now had a diamond-solitaire 2.57 cts., or much heavier than the lost diamond weighing 2.05 cts.

ISSUE 

Whether Guevara can recover the ring from Garcia a purchaser in good faith and for value.

 

RULING 

Yes, but with reimbursement.

The court ruled that 559 of the Civil Code reads: "The possession of movable property acquired in good faith is equivalent to a title. Nevertheless, one who has lost any movable or has been unlawfully deprived thereof may recover it from the person in possession of the same. If the possessor of a movable loss of which the owner has been unlawfully deprived, has acquired it in good faith at a public sale, the owner cannot obtain its return without reimbursing the price paid therefor.”

Here, the court ruled that the ring may still be recovered by the original owner with reimbursement.







Popular posts from this blog

CRIMINAL LAW II CASE DIGEST/ BACLAYON V. MUTIA, 129 SCRA 148

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I CASE DIGEST | THE DIOCESE OF BACOLOD V. COMELEC G.R. No. 205728, January 21, 2015

CREDIT TRANSACTIONS CASE DIGEST/ BPI FAMILY BANK VS. FRANCO/ G. R. NO. 123498/ 23 NOVEMBER 2007

REMEDIAL LAW | Riviera Golf Club v. CCA G.R. No. 173783, June 17 2015

CREDIT TRANSACTION CASE DIGEST/ MINA VS. PASCUAL/ 25 PHIL. 540 (1923)

CREDIT TRANSACTION CASE DIGEST/ QUINTOS VS. BECK/ 69 PHIL. 108 (1939)

LAW ON PROPERTY | ACOSTA V. OCHOA, ET AL., G.R. NO. 211559; G.R. NO. 215634, OCTOBER 15, 2019

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION | HYGIENIC PACKAGING CORPORATION VS. NUTRI-ASIA, INC ., G.R. NO. 201302, JANUARY 23, 2019

LEGAL ETHICS | MAURICIO C. ULEP VS. THE LEGAL CLINIC, INC Bar Matter No. 553. June 17, 1993

CREDIT TRANSACTION CASE DIGEST/ DELOS SANTOS VS. JARRA/ G. R. NO. L-4150/ 10 FEBRUARY 1910/ 15 PHIL. 147