Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 1

Viacrucis v.

Court of Appeals
(1972) Facts: Private respondents Orais and spouse brought an action to establish their title to a land of about 4 hectares in Leyte. They alleged that it is part of a bigger lot sold to them by its registered owner, Pedro Sanchez, by virtue of a deed of sale. They sought to recover the land from Viacrucis. Viacrucis claims that the deed of sale was simulated. The lower court and the appellate court ruled in favor of Orais, considering, among others, the admission of one Mrs. Costelo. Mrs. Costelo stated that although the land in dispute was physically in the possession of her deceased husband, they still recognized Orias as the owner of the land. The court also considered the admission of Mr. Costelo which was in a public document. Viacrucis assails the courts use of the Costelo spouses admissions, claiming that he cannot be prejudiced by an act or declaration of another. Issue: Whether the admission of Mrs. Costelo was binding on Viacrucis | YES Ruling: The testimony and the public document constitute declarations of the Costelos adverse to their interest which is admissible in evidence, pursuant to the rule on declarations against interests. Viacrucis has no reason whatsoever to object to the consideration in favor of Orais of said admission, the same having been made in 1936, more than 5 years before Viacrucis predecessors in interest entered the picture. Such admission may be received in evidence, not only against the party who made it or his successors in interest, but also against third persons.

Вам также может понравиться