Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
[1999]|ItPaystoKnow
G.R.NO.135362(December13,1999)
DELEON,JR.,J.:
FACTS:
Augusto Salas, Jr. was the registered owner of a vast
tract of land in Lipa City, Batangas. He entered into
an OwnerContractor Agreement with Respondent Laperal Realty
Corporationtorenderandprovidecomplete(horizontal)
construction services on his land. Said agreement
containsanarbitrationclause,towit:
ARTICLEVI.ARBITRATION.
All cases of dispute between CONTRACTOR and
OWNERS representative shall be referred to the
committeerepresentedby:
1.OnerepresentativeoftheOWNER
2.OnerepresentativeoftheCONTRACTOR
3. One representative acceptable to both OWNER
andCONTRACTOR.
Salas, Jr. then executed a Special Power of Attorneyin favor of
Respondent Laperal Realty to exercise general control,
supervisionandmanagementofthesaleofhisland,for
cash or on installment basis. By virtue thereof,
Respondent Laperal Realty subdivided said land and
https://juanknows.wordpress.com/2013/12/11/jurisprudenceheirsofaugustolsalasjrvslaperalrealtycorporationetal1999/ 1/7
3/4/2017 Jurisprudence:HeirsofAugustoL.Salas,Jr.vs.LaperalRealtyCorporation,etal.[1999]|ItPaystoKnow
https://juanknows.wordpress.com/2013/12/11/jurisprudenceheirsofaugustolsalasjrvslaperalrealtycorporationetal1999/ 2/7
3/4/2017 Jurisprudence:HeirsofAugustoL.Salas,Jr.vs.LaperalRealtyCorporation,etal.[1999]|ItPaystoKnow
https://juanknows.wordpress.com/2013/12/11/jurisprudenceheirsofaugustolsalasjrvslaperalrealtycorporationetal1999/ 4/7
3/4/2017 Jurisprudence:HeirsofAugustoL.Salas,Jr.vs.LaperalRealtyCorporation,etal.[1999]|ItPaystoKnow
assigneditsrightsundertheAgreementtoathirdparty,
making the former, the assignor, and the latter, the
assignee, such assignee would also be bound by the
arbitration provision since assignment involves such
transferofrightsastovestintheassigneethepowerto
enforce them to the same extent as the assignor could
have enforced them against the debtor or, in this case,
againsttheheirsoftheoriginalpartytotheAgreement.
However,RespondentLotBuyersareNOTassigneesof
the rights of Respondent Laperal Realty under the
Agreement to develop Salas, Jr.s land and sell the
same. They are, rather, buyers of the land that
Respondent Laperal Realty was given the authority to
develop and sell under the Agreement. As such, they
are NOT assigns contemplated in Art. 1311 of the
New Civil Code which provides that contracts take
effectonlybetweentheparties,theirassignsandheirs.
Inthesamevein,Petitionerscontentionthatrescission,
being their cause of action, falls under the exception
clauseinSec.2of Republic Act No. 876iswithoutmerit.For
while rescission, as a general rule, is an arbitrable
issue, they impleaded in the suit for rescission the
Respondent Lot Buyers who are neither parties to the
Agreement nor the latters assigns or heirs.
Consequently, the right to arbitrate as provided in
https://juanknows.wordpress.com/2013/12/11/jurisprudenceheirsofaugustolsalasjrvslaperalrealtycorporationetal1999/ 6/7
3/4/2017 Jurisprudence:HeirsofAugustoL.Salas,Jr.vs.LaperalRealtyCorporation,etal.[1999]|ItPaystoKnow
https://juanknows.wordpress.com/2013/12/11/jurisprudenceheirsofaugustolsalasjrvslaperalrealtycorporationetal1999/ 7/7