SPOUSES GODOFREDO ALFREDO and CARMEN LIMON ALFREDO v SPOUSES ARMANDO BORRAS and

ADELIA LOBATON BORRAS

FACTS:The Alfredo spouses mortgaged their land to DBP. To pay their debt, theysold the land to
spouses Borras for P15,000. The latter also assumed to paythe loan. Borras subsequently paid
the balance of the purchase price of theland for which Alfredo issued a receipt dated 11 March 1970 as
well as the
corresponding owner’s duplicate copy of the land’s OCT.
Borras thereaftertook possession of the said land. Later, they found out that Alfredo sold
theland again to other buyers by securing duplicate copies of the OCTs uponpetition with the court.
Thus, they filed for specific performance. Alfredospouses claimed that the sale, not
being in writing, is unenforceable underthe Statute of Frauds.
ISSUE: W/N the contract of sale is unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds.
HELD: NO.The Statute of Frauds provides that a contract for the sale of real propertyshall be
unenforceable unless the contract or some note or memorandum ofthe sale is in writing and
subscribed by the party charged or his agent. Theexistence of the receipt dated 11 March 1970, which is a
memorandum ofthe sale, removes the transaction from the provisions of the Statute
ofFrauds.The Statute of Frauds applies only to executory contracts and not tocontracts either partially or
totally performed. Thus, where one party has
performed one’s obligation, oral evidence will be admitted to prove the
agreement. In the instant case, the parties have consummated the sale of theSubject Land, with both
sellers and buyers performing their respectiveobligations under the contract of sale. In addition,
a contract that violatesthe Statute of Frauds is ratified by the acceptance of benefits under
thecontract. Alfredo spouses benefited from the contract because they paidtheir DBP loan and secured
the cancellation of their mortgage using themoney given by Borras. Alfredo also accepted payment of the
balance of thepurchase price.Alfredo spouses cannot invoke the Statute of Frauds to deny the
existence ofthe verbal contract of sale because they have performed their
obligations,and have accepted benefits, under the verbal contract. Borras spouses havealso performed
their obligations under the verbal contract. Clearly, both thesellers and the buyers have consummated the
verbal contract of sale of theSubject Land. The Statute of Frauds was enacted to prevent
fraud. This lawcannot be used to advance the very evil the law seeks to prevent.