0 evaluări0% au considerat acest document util (0 voturi)
86 vizualizări1 pagină
Alejandra Mina opposed Ruperto Pascual's sale of a share of a warehouse and lot, claiming ownership of the lot. Mina's predecessor, Francisco Fontanilla, had allowed his brother Andres to erect a warehouse on the lot owned by Francisco. When Francisco and Andres died, their children inherited their shares. The Supreme Court ruled that the agreement between Francisco and Andres for use of the lot was not a commodatum contract, as commodatum requires a definite period for use of the property, which was not established in this case. Therefore, Mina did not inherit ownership of the entire property.
Alejandra Mina opposed Ruperto Pascual's sale of a share of a warehouse and lot, claiming ownership of the lot. Mina's predecessor, Francisco Fontanilla, had allowed his brother Andres to erect a warehouse on the lot owned by Francisco. When Francisco and Andres died, their children inherited their shares. The Supreme Court ruled that the agreement between Francisco and Andres for use of the lot was not a commodatum contract, as commodatum requires a definite period for use of the property, which was not established in this case. Therefore, Mina did not inherit ownership of the entire property.
Alejandra Mina opposed Ruperto Pascual's sale of a share of a warehouse and lot, claiming ownership of the lot. Mina's predecessor, Francisco Fontanilla, had allowed his brother Andres to erect a warehouse on the lot owned by Francisco. When Francisco and Andres died, their children inherited their shares. The Supreme Court ruled that the agreement between Francisco and Andres for use of the lot was not a commodatum contract, as commodatum requires a definite period for use of the property, which was not established in this case. Therefore, Mina did not inherit ownership of the entire property.
Francisco Fontanilla is the owner of land and he allowed his brother,
Andres, to erect a warehouse in that lot. Both Francisco and Andres died and their children became their respective heirs: Mina for Francisco and Pascual for Andres. Pascual sold his share of the warehouse and lot. Mina opposed because the lot is hers because her predecessor (Francisco) never parted with its ownership when he let Andres construct a warehouse, hence, it was a contract of commodatum.
ISSUE: Whether of not the nature of the contract between Francisco and Andres was a commodatum?
HELD:
The Supreme Court held that it was not a commodatum. It is an essential
feature of commodatum that the use of the thing belonging to another shall be for a certain period. The parties never fixed a definite period during which Andres could use the lot and afterwards return it.