ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF A CONTRACT OF SALE

REMAN RECIO vs HEIRS OF OF SPOUSES AGUEDO AND MARIA ALTAMARINO

(July 24, 2013)

FACTS:

In 1950, Nena Recio, mother of Renan Necio leased from the respondents Altamarinos a parcel of
land in Lipa City, Batangas.
The Altamarinos inherited the subj pect land from their deceased parents.
On 1988, petitioners claimed that the respondent offered to sell the subject property to Nena Recio
in which the latter accepted. However,it did not materialize. Nonetheless, petitioners continued to
occupy the property with the consent of the respondent.
On 1994, petitioner (Reman Recio) renewed Nenas option to buy and conducted series of
negotiations with respondent Alejandro Altamarino (one of the heirs). Thereafter, they entered into
an oral contract of sale. In view of the sale, petitoners made partial payments to the Altamarino and
were received and as well as acknowledged by Alejandro Altamarino until the petitioner offered in
many instances to pay the remaining balance of the agreed purchase price but Alejandro kept
avoiding the petitioner.
Because of that, petitioner demanded for the Altamarinos, the execution of a Deed of Absolute Sale
in exchange for the full payment of the agreed price. It was then dicpscovered that the subject land
has been subsequently sold to Sps Lajarca.
RTC ruled in favor of the plaintiff.
CA affirmed the lower courts decision but modified such and found out that Alejandro did not have
the authority to represent his co-heirs.

ISSUE:
Whether or not the sale between the petitioner and Alejandro was valid.

RULING:
Yes, there was a valid contract of sale.
A valid contract of sale requires:
(a) a meeting of minds of the parties to transfer ownership of the thing sold in exchange for a
price;
(b) the subject matter, which must be a possible thing; and
(c) the price certain in money or its equivalent.

In the instant case, all these elements are present. The records disclose that the Altamiranos
were the ones who offered to sell the property to Nena but the transaction did not push
through due to the fault of the respondents. Thereafter, the petitioner renewed Nenas option
to purchase the property to which Alejandro, as the representative of the Altamiranos verbally
agreed. The determinate subject matter is Lot No. 3, which is covered under TCT No. T-
102563 and located at No. 39 10 de Julio Street (now Esteban Mayo Street), Lipa City,
Batangas.23 The price agreed for the sale of the property was Five Hundred Thousand Pesos
(P 500,000.00).24 It cannot be denied that the oral contract of sale entered into between the
petitioner and Alejandro was valid.

IPIL, Careyssa Mae I. College of Law

SALES University of San Jose Recoletos