Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 116 views

    Oscar Angeles vs. Secretary of Justice

    Uploaded by

    Valora France Miral Aranas
    1) In 1992, Mercado convinced the Angeles spouses to enter into an antichresis contract over 8 parcels of land owned by Juana Suazo. However, after 3 years the spouses discovered that Mercado had put the land under a sanglaang-perde contract under his and his spouse's names. 2) The Angeles spouses argued there was no partnership because there was no public instrument or SEC registration. They filed an estafa complaint against Mercado which was dismissed because the DOJ found the existence of a partnership. 3) Mercado claimed there was an industrial partnership called a "sosyo industrial" since 1991, where the Angeles sp

    Copyright:

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

    Oscar Angeles vs. Secretary of Justice

    Uploaded by

    Valora France Miral Aranas
    116 views2 pages
    1) In 1992, Mercado convinced the Angeles spouses to enter into an antichresis contract over 8 parcels of land owned by Juana Suazo. However, after 3 years the spouses discovered that Mercado had put the land under a sanglaang-perde contract under his and his spouse's names. 2) The Angeles spouses argued there was no partnership because there was no public instrument or SEC registration. They filed an estafa complaint against Mercado which was dismissed because the DOJ found the existence of a partnership. 3) Mercado claimed there was an industrial partnership called a "sosyo industrial" since 1991, where the Angeles sp

    Original Title

    9. Oscar Angeles vs. Secretary of Justice

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) In 1992, Mercado convinced the Angeles spouses to enter into an antichresis contract over 8 parcels of land owned by Juana Suazo. However, after 3 years the spouses discovered that Mercado had put the land under a sanglaang-perde contract under his and his spouse's names. 2) The Angeles spouses argued there was no partnership because there was no public instrument or SEC registration. They filed an estafa complaint against Mercado which was dismissed because the DOJ found the existence of a partnership. 3) Mercado claimed there was an industrial partnership called a "sosyo industrial" since 1991, where the Angeles sp

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    116 views2 pages

    Oscar Angeles vs. Secretary of Justice

    Uploaded by

    Valora France Miral Aranas
    1) In 1992, Mercado convinced the Angeles spouses to enter into an antichresis contract over 8 parcels of land owned by Juana Suazo. However, after 3 years the spouses discovered that Mercado had put the land under a sanglaang-perde contract under his and his spouse's names. 2) The Angeles spouses argued there was no partnership because there was no public instrument or SEC registration. They filed an estafa complaint against Mercado which was dismissed because the DOJ found the existence of a partnership. 3) Mercado claimed there was an industrial partnership called a "sosyo industrial" since 1991, where the Angeles sp

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    9.

    Oscar Angeles And Emerita Angeles, Petitioners,


    Vs. The Hon. Secretary Of Justice And Felino Mercado, Respondents.
    July 29, 2005, GR No. 142612

    Facts:
    In November 1992, Mercado convinced the Angeles Spouses to enter into a 5-year contract of
    antichresis covering 8 parcels of land with lanzones trees in Laguna, and owned by Juana Suazo.

    After 3 years and only after demand for an accounting did the spouses discover that Mercado had
    put the contract of sanglaang-perde over the subject land under Mercado and his spouse’s names.

    Petitioner’s Argument:
    The Angeles spouses argue that there is no partnership because of the lack of a public
    instrument indicating the same and a lack of registration with the Securities and Exchange
    Commission.
    On 19 November 1996, the Angeles spouses filed a criminal complaint for estafa under
    Article 315 of the RPC against Mercado. The Secretary of Justice affirmed the resolution of the
    Provincial Prosecution Office that dismissed the complaint for estafa because of the existence of
    the partnership.

    Respondent’s Argument:
    Mercado denied the Angeles spouses’ allegations. He claimed that there exists an
    industrial partnership, colloquially known as sosyo industrial, between him and his spouse as
    industrial partners and the Angeles spouses as the financiers, and they do not want to be revealed
    as the financiers for fear of NPA or being questioned by BIR. This industrial partnership had
    existed since 1991, before the contract of antichresis over the subject land. In their barangay
    conciliation proceeding, they all agreed that capital would come from the Angeles spouses while
    the profit would be divided evenly between Mercado and the Angeles spouses

    Issue: Whether a Partnership Existed Between Mercado and the Angeles Spouses as basis by the
    DOJ to dismiss the complaint of estafa.

    Ruling:
    Yes. First, the Angeles spouses contributed money to the partnership and not immovable
    property. Second, mere failure to register the contract of partnership with the SEC does not
    invalidate a contract that has the essential requisites of a partnership. The purpose of registration
    of the contract of partnership is to give notice to third parties. Failure to register the contract of
    partnership does not affect the liability of the partnership and of the partners to third persons.
    Neither does such failure to register affect the partnership’s juridical personality. A partnership
    may exist even if the partners do not use the words “partner” or “partnership.”
    Indeed, the Angeles spouses admit to facts that prove the existence of a partnership: a contract
    showing a sosyo industrial or industrial partnership, contribution of money and industry to a
    common fund, and division of profits between the Angeles spouses and Mercado.

    On a separate matter, the accounting of the proceeds is not a proper subject for the present case.

    WHEREFORE, we AFFIRM the decision of the Secretary of Justice. The present petition for
    certiorari is DISMISSED

    You might also like