Sacobia Hills vs. Ty

7. Sacobia Hills vs.
Dy
petitioner Sacobia Hills Development Corporation (Sacobia) is the developer of True

North Golf and Country Club (True North) located inside the Clark Special Economic
Zone in Pampanga which boasts of amenities that include a golf course, clubhouse,
sports complex and several vacation villas.
On February 12, 1997, respondent Allan U. Ty wrote to Sacobia a letter expressing
his intention to acquire one (1) Class A share of True North and accordingly paid
the reservation fee of P180,000.00 as evidenced by PCI Bank Check No. 0038053.5
Through letters dated May 28, 1997 and July 4, 1997, Sacobia assured its
shareholders that the development of True North was proceeding on schedule; that
the golf course would be playable by October 1999; that the Environmental Clearance
Certificate (ECC) by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) as
well as the Permit to Sell from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) should
have been released by October 1997; and that their registration deposits remained
intact in an escrow account.6
On September 1, 1997, Sacobia approved the purchase application and membership of

respondent for P600,000.00, subject to certain terms and conditions.
However, on January 12, 1998, respondent notified Sacobia that he is rescinding the
contract and sought refund of the payments already made due to the latter�s failure
to complete the project on time as represented.
Notwithstanding the notices given by Sacobia, respondent notified on April 17, 1998
that he had stopped payment on the five (5) post dated checks and reiterated his
demand for the refund of his payments which amounted to P409,090.92.
On June 16, 1999, respondent sent Sacobia a letter formally rescinding the contract
and demanding for the refund of the P409,090.92 thus far paid by him. By way of
reply, Sacobia informed respondent that it had a no-refund policy, and that it had
endorsed respondent to Century Properties, Inc. for assistance on the resale of his
share to third persons.
Thus, on July 21, 1999, respondent filed a complaint for rescission and damages. On
November 29, 2002, the trial court rendered judgment in favor of petitioners. The
trial court found that the contract between the parties did not warrant that the
golf course and clubhouse would be completed within a certain period of time to
entitle respondent to rescind.
On appeal, the CA rendered its decision reversing the decision of the trial court
and confirmed the rescission of the contract.
Issue:
whether the contract entered into by the parties may be validly rescinded under
Article 1191 of the Civil Code.
Won CA erred in its decision in rescinding the contract between Ty and Sacobia
Hills
Ruling:
In a Contract to Sell, the payment of the purchase price is a positive suspensive

condition, the failure of which is not a breach, casual or serious, but a situation
that prevents the obligation of the vendor to convey title from acquiring an
obligatory force. It is one where the happening of the event gives rise to an
obligation. Thus, for its non-fulfillment there will be no contract to speak of,
the obligor having failed to perform the suspensive condition which enforces a
juridical relation.
Indeed, there can be no rescission under Article 1191 of the Civil Code because
until the happening of the condition, i.e. full payment of the contract price,
Sacobia�s obligation to deliver the title and object of the sale is not yet extant.
A non-existent obligation cannot be subject of rescission. Article 1191 speaks of
obligations already existing, which may be rescinded in case one of the obligors
fails to comply with what is incumbent upon him.
WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The decision dated August 19, 2004 of the Court
of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 76987 and its resolution dated October 28, 2004, are
REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Respondent�s complaint for rescission of contract and
damages in Civil Case No. 01-99696 is DISMISSED. He is ORDERED to PAY to Sacobia
Hills Development Corporation the amount of Pesos: One Hundred Ninety Thousand Nine
Hundred Nine and Eight Centavos (P190,909.08) without interest within thirty (30)
days from finality of this decision; otherwise, fifty percent (50%) of his total
payments shall be forfeited.

Sacobia Hills vs. Ty

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sacobia Hills vs. Ty

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sacobia Hills vs. Ty

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

7. Sacobia Hills vs.

petitioner Sacobia Hills Development Corporation (Sacobia) is the developer of True

On September 1, 1997, Sacobia approved the purchase application and membership of

In a Contract to Sell, the payment of the purchase price is a positive suspensive

You might also like