VOL.

647, APRIL 4, 2011 201

Carabeo vs. Dingco

tioner’s legal representatives or successors-in-interest, insofar as

his interest in the property subject of the action is concerned.
G.R. No. 190823. April 4, 2011.*
Same; Same; Same; The death of a client immediately divests
DOMINGO CARABEO, petitioner, vs. SPOUSES the counsel of authority.—In another vein, the death of a client
NORBERTO and SUSAN DINGCO, respondents. immediately divests the counsel of authority. Thus, in filing a
Notice of Appeal, petitioner’s counsel of record had no personality
Civil Law; Property; Sales; The requirement that a sale must to act on behalf of the already deceased client who, it bears
have for its object a determinate thing is satisfied as long as, at the reiteration, had not been substituted as a party after his death.
time the contract is entered into, the object of the sale is capable of The trial court’s decision had thereby become final and executory,
being made determinate without the necessity of a new or further no appeal having been perfected.
agreement between the parties.—That the kasunduan did not
specify the technical boundaries of the property did not render the PETITION for review on certiorari of a decision of the
sale a nullity. The requirement that a sale must have for its object Court of Appeals.
a determinate thing is satisfied as long as, at the time the    The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
contract is entered into, the object of the sale is capable of being   Bernaldo, Mirador Law Offices for petitioner.
made determinate without the necessity of a new or further   Ortiguera, Zuniga, Pomer, Salaria, Sison-Panganiban
agreement between the parties. As the above-quoted portion of for respondents.
the kasunduan shows, there is no doubt that the object of the sale
is determinate. CARPIO-MORALES, J.:
On July 10, 1990, Domingo Carabeo (petitioner) entered
Remedial Law; Actions; Death of a Party; The question as to
into a contract denominated as “Kasunduan sa Bilihan ng
whether an action survives or not depends on the nature of the
Karapatan sa Lupa”1 (kasunduan) with Spouses Norberto
action and the damage sued for.—Respecting the argument that
and Susan Dingco (respondents) whereby petitioner agreed
petitioner’s death rendered respondents’ complaint against him
to sell his rights over a 648 square meter parcel of
dismissible, Bonilla v. Barcena, 71 SCRA 491 (1976), enlightens:
unregistered land situated in Purok III, Tugatog, Orani,
The question as to whether an action survives or not depends on
Bataan to respondents for P38,000.
the nature of the action and the damage sued for. In the causes
Respondents tendered their initial payment of P10,000
of action which survive, the wrong complained [of] affects
upon signing of the contract, the remaining balance to be
primarily and principally property and property rights, the
paid on September 1990.
injuries to the person being merely incidental, while in the
Respondents were later to claim that when they were
causes of action which do not survive, the injury complained
about to hand in the balance of the purchase price,
of is to the person, the property and rights of property affected
petitioner re-
being incidental.
Same; Same; Same; Since the trial court was not informed of _______________
petitioner’s death, it may not be faulted for proceeding to render
judgment without ordering his substitution.—It bears noting that 1 Records, p. 6.
trial on the merits was already concluded before petitioner died.
202
Since the trial court was not informed of petitioner’s death, it may
not be faulted for proceeding to render judgment without ordering
his substitution. Its judgment is thus valid and binding upon peti- 202 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
Carabeo vs. Dingco
_______________

quested them to keep it first as he was yet to settle an on-

* THIRD DIVISION.
going “squabble” over the land.
Nevertheless, respondents gave petitioner small sums of
201 money from time to time which totaled P9,100, on
petitioner’s request according to them; due to respondents’ “WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered
inability to pay the amount of the remaining balance in ordering:
full, according to petitioner. 1. The defendant to sell his right over 648 square meters of land
By respondents’ claim, despite the alleged problem over pursuant to the contract dated July 10, 1990 by executing a Deed
the land, they insisted on petitioner’s acceptance of the of Sale thereof after the payment of P18,900 by the plaintiffs;
remaining balance of P18,900 but petitioner remained firm 2. The defendant to pay the costs of the suit.”
in his refusal, proffering as reason therefor that he would
register the land first. _______________
Sometime in 1994, respondents learned that the alleged
problem over the land had been settled and that petitioner 3 Section 16. Death of party; duty of counsel.—Whenever a party to a
had caused its registration in his name on December 21, pending action dies, and the claim is not thereby extinguished, it shall be
1993 under Transfer Certificate of Title No. 161806. They the duty of his counsel to inform the court within thirty (30) days after
thereupon offered to pay the balance but petitioner such death of the fact thereof, and to give the name and address of his
declined, drawing them to file a complaint before the legal representative or representatives. Failure of counsel to comply with
Katarungan Pambarangay. No settlement was reached, his duty shall be a ground for disciplinary action.
however, hence, respondent filed a complaint for specific The heirs of the deceased may be allowed to be substituted for the
performance before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of deceased, without requiring the appointment of an executor or
Balanga, Bataan. administrator and the court may appoint a guardian ad litem for the
Petitioner countered in his Answer to the Complaint minor heirs.
that the sale was void for lack of object certain, the The court shall forthwith order said legal representative or
kasunduan not having specified the metes and bounds of representatives to appear and be substituted within a period of thirty (30)
the land. In any event, petitioner alleged that if the validity days from notice.
of the kasunduan is upheld, respondents’ failure to comply If no legal representative is named by the counsel for the deceased
with their reciprocal obligation to pay the balance of the party, or if the one so named shall fail to appear within the specified
purchase price would render the action premature. For, period, the court may order the opposing party, within a specified time to
contrary to respondents’ claim, petitioner maintained that procure the appointment of an executor or administrator for the estate of
they failed to pay the balance of P28,000 on September the deceased and the latter shall immediately appear for and on behalf of
1990 to thus constrain him to accept installment payments the deceased. The court charges in procuring such appointment, if
totaling P9,100. defrayed by the opposing party, may be recovered as costs. (16a, 17a)
After the case was submitted for decision or on January 4 Rollo, pp. 71-79.
31, 2001,2 petitioner passed away. The records do not show
204
that

204 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

_______________
Carabeo vs. Dingco
2  Petitioner’s Death Certificate is appended as Annex “M” to the
petition for review, Rollo, p. 105.
SO ORDERED.”5
203
Petitioner’s counsel filed a Notice of Appeal on March
20, 2001.
VOL. 647, APRIL 4, 2011 203 By the herein challenged Decision dated July 20, 2009,6
Carabeo vs. Dingco the Court of Appeals affirmed that of the trial
court.Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration having been
denied by Resolution of January 8, 2010, the present
petitioner’s counsel informed Branch 1 of the Bataan RTC,
petition for review was filed by Antonio Carabeo,
where the complaint was lodged, of his death and that
petitioner’s son,7 faulting the appellate court:
proper substitution was effected in accordance with Section
16, Rule 3, Rules of Court.3 (A)
By Decision of February 25, 2001,4 the trial court ruled … in holding that the element of a contract, i.e., an object
in favor of respondents, disposing as follows: certain is present in this case.
(B)
 … in considering it unfair to expect respondents who are not Clutching at straws, petitioner proffers lack of spousal
lawyers to make judicial consignation after herein petitioner consent. This was raised only on appeal, hence, will not be
allegedly refused to accept payment of the balance of the purchase considered, in the present case, in the interest of fair play,
price. justice and due process.10
(C) Respecting the argument that petitioner’s death
… in upholding the validity of the contract, “Kasunduan sa rendered respondents’ complaint against him dismissible,
Bilihan ng Karapatan sa Lupa,” despite the lack of spousal Bonilla v. Barcena11 enlightens:
consent, (underscoring supplied)
_______________
and proffering that
8  Heirs of Romana Ingjug-Tiro, et al. v. Spouses Casals, et al., G.R. No.
(D)
134718, August 20, 2001, 363 SCRA 435.
[t]he death of herein petitioner causes the dismissal of the action
9  Civil Code, Article 1460.
filed by respondents; respondents’ cause of action being an action
10 Philippine Commercial and International Bank v. Custodio, G.R. No.
in personam. (underscoring supplied)
173207, February 14, 2008, 545 SCRA 367.
11 G.R. No. L-41715, June 18, 1976, 71 SCRA 491.
_______________
206
5 Id., at pp. 78-79.
6  Penned by Associate Justice Jose C. Reyes, with the concurrence of
Associate Justices Martin S.   Villarama, Jr. (now Supreme Court 206 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
Associate Justice) and Normandie B. Pizzaro, id., at pp. 28-36. Carabeo vs. Dingco
7  Rosita’s Death Certificate appended to the petition for review as
Annex “M-1”, id., at p. 106. “The question as to whether an action survives or not depends
205
on the nature of the action and the damage sued for. In the
causes of action which survive, the wrong complained [of]
affects primarily and principally property and property rights, the
VOL. 647, APRIL 4, 2011 205 injuries to the person being merely incidental, while in the
Carabeo vs. Dingco causes of action which do not survive, the injury complained
of is to the person, the property and rights of property affected
being incidental.” (emphasis and underscoring supplied)
     The petition fails.
The pertinent portion of the kasunduan reads:8 In the present case, respondents are pursuing a property
“x x x x
right arising from the kasunduan, whereas petitioner is
Na ako ay may isang partial na lupa na matatagpuan sa Purok
invoking nullity of the kasunduan to protect his
111, Tugatog, Orani Bataan, na may sukat na 27 x 24 metro
proprietary interest. Assuming arguendo, however, that
kuwadrado, ang nasabing lupa ay may sakop na dalawang
the kasunduan is deemed void, there is a corollary
punong santol at isang punong mangga, kaya’t ako ay
obligation of petitioner to return the money paid by
nakipagkasundo sa mag-asawang Norby Dingco at Susan Dingco
respondents, and since the action involves property
na ipagbili sa kanila ang karapatan ng nasabing lupa sa halagang
rights,12 it survives.
P38,000.00.
It bears noting that trial on the merits was already
x x x x” (underscoring supplied)
concluded before petitioner died. Since the trial court was
not informed of petitioner’s death, it may not be faulted for
That the kasunduan did not specify the technical proceeding to render judgment without ordering his
boundaries of the property did not render the sale a nullity. substitution. Its judgment is thus valid and binding upon
The requirement that a sale must have for its object a petitioner’s legal representatives or successors-in-interest,
determinate thing is satisfied as long as, at the time the insofar as his interest in the property subject of the action
contract is entered into, the object of the sale is capable of is concerned.13
being made determinate without the necessity of a new or In another vein, the death of a client immediately
further agreement between the parties.9 As the above- divests the counsel of authority.14 Thus, in filing a Notice of
quoted portion of the kasunduan shows, there is no doubt Appeal, petitioner’s counsel of record had no personality to
that the object of the sale is determinate. act on behalf of the already deceased client who, it bears
reiteration, had not been substituted as a party after his
 death. The trial court’s decision had thereby become final
and executory, no appeal having been perfected.

_______________

12 Sumaljag v. Spouses Literato, et al., G.R. No. 149787, June 18, 2008,
555 SCRA 53.
13  Saligumba et al. v. Palanog, G.R. No. 143365, December 4, 2008,
573 SCRA 8.
14 Active Realty and Development Corporation v. Fernandez, G.R. No.
157186, October 19, 2007, 537 SCRA 116.

207

VOL. 647, APRIL 4, 2011 207

Carabeo vs. Dingco

WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED.

SO ORDERED.

Carpio,** Brion, Bersamin and Sereno, JJ., concur.

Petition denied.

Note.—Failure of the counsel to comply with his duty to

inform the court of the death of his client, such that no
substitution is effected, will not invalidate the proceedings
and the judgment rendered thereon if the action survives
the death of such party. (Napere vs. Barbarona, 543 SCRA
376 [2008])

——o0o—— 

© Copyright 2020 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.