Home›Bar Review›2015›Legal Ethics›Question XVIII
Question XVIII
XVIII. Atty. Javier sold a piece of land in favor of Gregorio for P2,000,000.00. Atty. Javier drafted the Deed of Sale with Right to Repurchase which he and Gregorio signed on August 12, 2002. Under said Deed, Atty. Javier represented that he had "the perfect right to dispose as owner in fee simple" the land and that the land is "free from all liens and encumbrances." The Deed also stated that Atty. Javier had two years within which to repurchase the property. Atty. Javier turned over the owner's copy of his certificate of title, TCT No. 12121, to Gregorio. Gregorio then immediately took possession of the land. Atty. Javier failed to exercise his right to repurchase within two years. Gregorio sent Atty. Javier a letter dated April 8, 2005 demanding that the latter already repurchase the property. Despite receipt of Gregorio's letter, Atty. Javier still failed to repurchase the property. Gregorio remained in peaceful possession of the land until July 25, 2013, when he received notice from Trustworthy Bank informing him that the land was mortgaged to said bank, that the bank already foreclosed on the land, and that Gregorio should therefore vacate the land. Upon investigation, Gregorio discovered that Atty. Javier's TCT No. 12121 had already been cancelled when another bank foreclosed on a previous mortgage on the land, but after a series of transactions, Atty. Javier was able to reacquire the land and secure TCT No. 34343 for the same. With TCT No. 34343, Atty. Javier constituted another mortgage on the land in favor of Trustworthy Bank on February 22, 2002. Gregorio was subsequently dispossessed of the property. Gregorio filed an administrative complaint against Atty. Javier. In his defense, Atty. Javier argued that he could not be held administratively liable as there was no attorney-client relationship between him and Gregorio. Moreover, the transaction was not actually one of sale with right to repurchase, but one of equitable mortgage, wherein he still had the legal right to mortgage the land to other persons. a. If you are tasked to investigate and report on Gregorio's administrative complaint against Atty. Javier, what will be your recommendation and finding? (3%) b. In the same administrative case, may Atty. Javier be ordered to return the P2,000,000.00 purchase price to Gregorio? Explain. (3%)
Model answer · ALAC
Answer — Legal basis — Application — Conclusion.
AI-drafted in ALAC form and AI-verified against landmark authorities — refined with every round of verification.