BENJAMIN BAUTISTA, petitioner, vs. SHIRLEY G.

UNANGST and in the alleged vendee, a lack of interest in the property that belies
OTHER UNKNOWN PERSONS, respondents. Bautista vs. Unangst the truthfulness of the sale a retro.

Civil Law; Sales; Equitable Mortgage; Respondent is correct in

alleging that the deed of sale with right to repurchase qualifies as an
equitable mortgage under Article 1602.—Respondent is correct in
alleging that the deed of sale with right to repurchase qualifies as an
equitable mortgage under Article 1602. She merely secured the
payment of the unpaid car rentals and the amount advanced by
petitioner to Jojo Lee.

Same; Same; Same; When the vendor is in urgent need of money

when he executes the sale, the alleged sale with pacto de retro will
be construed as an equitable mortgage.—It is established that
respondent signed the deed only because of the urgent necessity of
obtaining funds. When the vendor is in urgent need of money when
he executes the sale, the alleged sale with pacto de retro will be
construed as an equitable mortgage. “Necessitous men are not,
truly speaking, free men; but to answer a present emergency will
submit to any terms that the crafty may impose upon them.”

Same; Same; Same; Where in a contract of sale with pacto de retro,

the vendor remains in possession, as a lessee or otherwise, the
contract shall be presumed to be an equitable mortgage.—Where in
a contract of sale with pacto de retro, the vendor remains in
possession, as a lessee or otherwise, the contract shall be presumed
to be an equitable mortgage. The reason for the presumption lies in
the fact that in a contract of sale with pacto de retro, the legal title
to the property is immediately transferred to the vendee, subject to
the vendor’s right to redeem. Retention, therefore, by the vendor of
the possession of the property is inconsistent with the vendee’s
acquisition of the right of ownership under a true sale. It discloses,