Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 19 views

    Property Case Presentation: Calonia, Ma. Laurever O

    Uploaded by

    mlio
    This case involves a dispute over ownership of a vehicle. Siy, the original owner, entrusted the vehicle to Ong to sell, but Ong failed to return the vehicle or payment. The vehicle was then transferred to Chua and then to Tomlin. Siy filed a complaint for replevin to recover the vehicle from Tomlin. The Supreme Court ruled the writ of replevin was improper because Siy was no longer the rightful owner or possessor of the vehicle, as Tomlin had legally obtained and registered the vehicle, making him the proper owner.

    Copyright:

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

    Property Case Presentation: Calonia, Ma. Laurever O

    Uploaded by

    mlio
    19 views7 pages
    This case involves a dispute over ownership of a vehicle. Siy, the original owner, entrusted the vehicle to Ong to sell, but Ong failed to return the vehicle or payment. The vehicle was then transferred to Chua and then to Tomlin. Siy filed a complaint for replevin to recover the vehicle from Tomlin. The Supreme Court ruled the writ of replevin was improper because Siy was no longer the rightful owner or possessor of the vehicle, as Tomlin had legally obtained and registered the vehicle, making him the proper owner.

    Original Title

    No149_SiyVsTomlin_Calonia.pptx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involves a dispute over ownership of a vehicle. Siy, the original owner, entrusted the vehicle to Ong to sell, but Ong failed to return the vehicle or payment. The vehicle was then transferred to Chua and then to Tomlin. Siy filed a complaint for replevin to recover the vehicle from Tomlin. The Supreme Court ruled the writ of replevin was improper because Siy was no longer the rightful owner or possessor of the vehicle, as Tomlin had legally obtained and registered the vehicle, making him the proper owner.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    19 views7 pages

    Property Case Presentation: Calonia, Ma. Laurever O

    Uploaded by

    mlio
    This case involves a dispute over ownership of a vehicle. Siy, the original owner, entrusted the vehicle to Ong to sell, but Ong failed to return the vehicle or payment. The vehicle was then transferred to Chua and then to Tomlin. Siy filed a complaint for replevin to recover the vehicle from Tomlin. The Supreme Court ruled the writ of replevin was improper because Siy was no longer the rightful owner or possessor of the vehicle, as Tomlin had legally obtained and registered the vehicle, making him the proper owner.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    of 7

    PROPERTY

    CASE PRESENTATION

    SIY VS. TOMLIN

    G.R. NO. 205998


    Calonia, Ma. Laurever O. APRIL 24, 2017
    ARTICLE 1869: AGENCY MAY BE EXPRESS, OR IMPLIED FROM THE ACTS OF
    THE PRINCIPAL, FROM HIS SILENCE OR LACK OF ACTION, OR HIS
    FAILURE TO REPUDIATE THE AGENCY, KNOWING THAT ANOTHER PERSON
    IS ACTING ON HIS BEHALF WITHOUT AUTHORITY.

    TOPIC: WRIT OF REPLEVIN. AN AGENCY RELATIONSHIP IS CREATED


    BETWEEN THE VEHICLE OWNERS, AS PRINCIPALS, AND THE CAR
    TRADERS, AS AGENTS.
    FACTS OF THE CASE:

    • William Anghian Siy filed before the Regional Trial


    Court of Quezon City (RTC) a Complaint for Recovery
    of Possession with Prayer for Replevin against Frankie
    Domanog Ong (Ong), Chris Centeno (Centeno), John
    Co Chua (Chua), and herein respondent Alvin Tomlin.
    Siy is the owner of a 2007 model Range Rover with
    Plate Number ZMG 272 which he purchased from
    Alberto Lopez on July 22, 2009.
    FACTS OF THE CASE:

    • In 2010, he entrusted the said vehicle to Ong, a


    businessman who owned a second-hand car sales
    showroom, after the latter claimed that he had a
    prospective buyer. Ong failed to remit the proceeds of
    the sale nor return the vehicle. The petitioner found out
    that the vehicle had been transferred to Chua, and later
    learned that the vehicle was being transferred to Tomlin.
    • On August 17, 2011, respondent filed an Omnibus
    Motion seeking to quash the Writ of Replevin, dismiss
    the Complaint, and turn over the vehicle to Siy.
    ISSUE:

    • W/N the issuance of the Writ


    of Replevin is proper
    HELD:

    • NO. The issuance of the Writ of Replevin was not proper. The
    Supreme Court has held that in a complaint of replevin, the claimant
    must convincingly show that he is the owner or clearly entitled to the
    possession of the object sought to be recovered, and that the
    defendant, who is in actual or legal possession thereof, wrongfully
    detains the same. Considering that he was no longer the owner or
    rightful possessor of the subject vehicle at the time he filed in July
    2011, petitioner may not seek a return of the same through replevin.
    It was Tomlin who obtained the vehicle from Chua and registered the
    transfer with the Land Transportation Office, who is the rightful
    owner thereof, and as such, he is entitled to its possession. Hence the
    issuance of the Writ of Replevin was not proper.

    You might also like