Scribd
Upload
283 views5 pages

Comment To Petition For Review - 20feb21

1. Eva Carino Brutal has leased a residential property from Juan Dela Cruz since 2009, however the lease was not renewed after it expired in November 2018. 2. In December 2018, Juan Dela Cruz sold the property to Andrew F. Medina. Medina then demanded that Brutal vacate the property. 3. Brutal argues she has the right of first refusal on the property as stipulated in her expired lease contract. However, Medina and his legal counsel oppose this argument.

Uploaded by

Carol Evangelista
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
283 views5 pages

Comment To Petition For Review - 20feb21

1. Eva Carino Brutal has leased a residential property from Juan Dela Cruz since 2009, however the lease was not renewed after it expired in November 2018. 2. In December 2018, Juan Dela Cruz sold the property to Andrew F. Medina. Medina then demanded that Brutal vacate the property. 3. Brutal argues she has the right of first refusal on the property as stipulated in her expired lease contract. However, Medina and his legal counsel oppose this argument.

Uploaded by

Carol Evangelista
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 5

Republic of the Philippines

Court of Appeals
Las Pinas City

Andrew F. Medina
Plaintiff,
CA-G.R. S.P. NO. 1 - 2021
-versus-

Eva Carino Brutal


Defendant.

x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -/

COMMENTS AND OPPOSITION TO


THE PETITION FOR REVIEW

COMES NOW the Respondent EVA CARINO BRUTAL by the


undersigned counsel and to this Honorable Court, respectfully interposes her
opposition to the Petition for Review filed by the Petitioner on the ground that a)
the trial court erred in reversing the decision of the lower court and that b) the trial
court erred in acknowledging the defendant's rights to first refusal.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

Classification: Restricted
1. Juan Dela Cruz, is the owner of a residential house and lot covered by TCT
No. 123456-R located in #69 Hobart St., ABC Homes, Las Pinas City. He
named the title thru his son, Bobby Dela Cruz.

2. The aforementioned property was leased to Eva Carino Brutal since 2009 by
a lease contract from Dec. 1st, 2017 to November 30th, 2018. Unfortunately,
the contract was not renewed since it expired but the same was
continuously being rented by Ms. Brutal. (Contract of Lease attached as
Annex “A”)

3. On Dec. 1st, 2018, Mr. Dela Cruz decided to sell the property to Andrew F.
Medina and they executed a Deed of Sale. The sale was made through Ma.
Nita Sabel, who also manages some of their properties in the Philippines.
(Dead of Sale attached as Annex “B”)

4. Since Mr. Medina became the new owner, he demanded Ms. Brutal to vacate
the property. Ms. Sabel continued to demand payment on behalf of the
owner and to inform the tenant to leave the premises. (Special Power of
Attorney attached as Annex “C”)

5. The contract of lease was not renewed after it expired on November 30 th,
2018. The fact that the tenant continued to use the premises after the
expiration of the contract of lease, it is considered that the contract of lease
was renewed according to the provision of Article 1670 of the Civil Code and

Classification: Restricted
that the tenant was obliged to comply according to the provision of Article
1657 of the Civil Code.

6. The MTCC Branch 12, released a judgement ruling (Annex “G”) in favor of
the petitioner. The defendant filed a motion for reconsideration (Annex “H”)
which has been denied by the MTCC.

7. The respondent filed an appeal (Annex “J”) under Rule 40 of the 2019
Revised Rules of Civil Procedure to the RTC Branch 13, Las Pinas City and
was docketed as Civil Case No. 456. On January 25, 2021, the RTC Br. 13,
Las Pinas City released an order (Annex “K”) reversing the decision of the
lower court.

8. The petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration (Annex “L”) for the order
released and was denied by the RTC. On February 15 th, 2021, the petitioner
filed a petition for review under Rule 45 of the 2019 Rules of Civil
Procedure.

COMMENT

In her Petition, Petitioner stated that her right of first refusal was provided in the
contract of lease dated _____________.

We beg to disagree. In the case of Tanay Recreation Center vs. Catalina Matienzo
Fausto (GR No. 140182, April 12, 2005), Petitioner's right of first refusal in this

Classification: Restricted
case is expressly provided for in the notarized contract of lease. Hence the
petitioner has the right to rescind the contract of sale within the period prescribed
by law.

“The rule is that a sale made in violation of a right of first refusal is valid.
However, it may be rescinded, or, as in this case, may be the subject of an action
for specific performance.” (Underscoring supplied)

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premise considered, it is most respectfully prayed of this


Honorable Court that after due notice and hearing, judgement be rendered in favor
of Respondent:

1. Deny the petition for review.


2. To pay the costs for this suit.

Other reliefs just and equitable under the premises are likewise prayed for.

Las Pinas City, Philippines February 20, 2021.

PADILLA LAW OFFICE


1ST Flr, Diaz Building,
Adarna St., Quezon City

By:

LEIF P. VILLAMAYOR
Roll No.: 00009

Classification: Restricted
PTR No: 00001
IBP No.: 00006
MCLE Compliance No.: 00003

Copy Furnished:
HIPOLITO LAW OFFICE
2nd floor ACDC building,
Masaya st. Las Pinas City

RUSSELL JOHN HIPOLITO


Roll No.: 00001
PTR No: 00002
IBP No.: 00003
MCLE Compliance No.: 00004

EVA CARINO BRUTAL


Defendant
#69 Hobart St., ABC Homes, Las Pinas City

ANDREW F. MEDINA
Plaintiff
#69 Hobart St., ABC Homes, Las Pinas City

Classification: Restricted

You might also like