Scribd
Upload
122 views1 page

Co Tao Digest

This case is an appeal of a decision by the Court of Appeals regarding a property dispute between Co Tao and Joaquin Chan Chico. The Court of Appeals found that while Chan Chico's house was built partially on Tao's land, Chan Chico acted in good faith. The Court of Appeals ruled that Tao could elect to purchase the portion of Chan Chico's house built on the land or sell the land to Chan Chico. The Supreme Court is considering whether Chan Chico acted in good faith given the boundaries stated in the certificate of title. The Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' decision, agreeing that even with a title certificate, precise property boundaries can be difficult to determine without a survey.

Uploaded by

Elan Dy
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
Download as doc, pdf, or txt
122 views1 page

Co Tao Digest

This case is an appeal of a decision by the Court of Appeals regarding a property dispute between Co Tao and Joaquin Chan Chico. The Court of Appeals found that while Chan Chico's house was built partially on Tao's land, Chan Chico acted in good faith. The Court of Appeals ruled that Tao could elect to purchase the portion of Chan Chico's house built on the land or sell the land to Chan Chico. The Supreme Court is considering whether Chan Chico acted in good faith given the boundaries stated in the certificate of title. The Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' decision, agreeing that even with a title certificate, precise property boundaries can be difficult to determine without a survey.

Uploaded by

Elan Dy
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
Download as doc, pdf, or txt
Download as doc, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 1

CO TAO, plaintiff-appellee,

vs.
JOAQUIN CHAN CHICO, defendant-appellant

This is an appeal by certiorari from the decision of the Court of Appeals. The ponente of this
case is Justice Moran.

Facts:

In 1927 respondent Joaquin Chan Chico built a house on his lot No. 7, when that house was
constructed, Prudencia Rodriguez was yet the owner of the adjoining lot No. 6 belonging now to
petitioner Co Tao. About a year after the petitioner bought lot No. 6, he built a house thereon and
he used lumber that butted in respondent's house. Respondent protested and his protest was
resented by petitioner. The Court of Appeals, after examining the evidence, found that
respondent's house took a portion of petitioner land, but that respondent acted in good faith. The
Court of Appeals declared "that the plaintiff (petitioner) has the right to elect to purchase that
portion of the defendant's (respondent's) house which protrudes into the plaintiff's property, or to
sell to the defendants the land upon which the said portion of the defendant's house is built." And
the case was remanded to the Court of First Instance. From this decision petitioner appealed by
certiorari to the Supreme Court.

Issues: , whether or not respondent have acted in good faith in building a portion of his house
beyond the limits of his land, because he ought to know the metes and bound of his property as
stated in his certificate of title?

Held: The Court held that respondent acted in good faith and affirmed the decision of the CA.
CA’s ruling- “it is but stating the obvious to say that outside of the individuals versed in the
science of surveying, and this is already going far, no one can determine the precise extend or
location of his property by merely examining his paper title. The fact is even surveyors cannot
with exactitude do so. The disagreement among the three surveyors in the case at hand who have
made a resurvey of the ground with the aid of scientific devices and of their experience and
knowledge of surveying, is a graphic and concrete illustration of this truth."

You might also like