Kasilag versus Rodriguez Case Digest/ Brief 69 Phil 217

FACTS: This is an appeal taken by the defendant-petitioner from the decision

of the Court of Appeals which modified that rendered by the court of First
Instance of Bataan. The said court held: that the contract is entirely null and
void and without effect; that the plaintiffs-respondents, then appellants, are
the owners of the disputed land, with its improvements, in common
ownership with their brother Gavino Rodriguez, hence, they are entitled to
the possession thereof; that the defendant-petitioner should yield possession
of the land in their favor, with all the improvements thereon and free from
any lien

SUBSTANTIVE FACTS: The parties entered into a contract of loan to which has
an accompanying accessory contract of mortgage. The executed accessory
contract involved the improvements on a piece land, the land having been
acquired by means of homestead. P for his part accepted the contract of
mortgage.

Believing that there are no violations to the prohibitions in the alienation of

lands P, acting in good faith took possession of the land. To wit, the P has no
knowledge that the enjoyment of the fruits of the land is an element of the
credit transaction of Antichresis.

ISSUE: Whether or not P is deemed to be a possessor in good faith of the

land, based upon Article 3 of the New Civil Code as states Ignorance of the
law excuses no one from compliance therewith, the Ps lack of knowledge of
the contract of antichresis.

HELD: The accessory contract of mortgage of the improvements of on the

land is valid. The verbal contract of antichresis agreed upon is deemed null
and void.

REASONING: Sec 433 of the Civil Code of the Philippines provides Every
person who is unaware of any flaw in his title or in the manner of its
acquisition by which it is invalidated shall be deemed a possessor of good
faith. And in this case, the petitioner acted in good faith. Good faith maybe
a basis of excusable ignorance of the law, the petitioner acted in good faith
in his enjoyment of the fruits of the land to which was done through his
apparent acquisition thereof.