STATEMENT OF FACTS

On (date of the sale), a Deed of Absolute Sale of a parcel of land was executed and entered
into by and between (vendor’s name) and (vendee’s name) at (place of execution). The
instrument bore the signature of both the vendor and his spouse, (name of spouse).

Sometime in (date), the LGU utilized the acquired parcel of land as Nursery which is
existing up to present.

In (date), the heirs of Mr. Vibal notified the LGU- of their intention to make use of the
above parcel of land. They alleged that the Deed of Sale was a patent nullity as the same was
executed and signed by their deceased father while intoxicated. The issue was not resolved.

It was On (date of meeting), a meeting regarding the claim of the heirs of Mr. Vibal was
held.

ISSUES

1. Whether or not the deed of sale is null and void as it was executed and signed while
the vendor was intoxicated.

2. Whether or not the ownership over the parcel of land is retained in the name of the
heirs.

ARGUMENTS

First Issue: ON THE NULLITY OF THE DEED OF SALE

 THE DEED OF SALE WAS EXECUTED AND SIGNED BY ONE OF THE SPOUSES WHILE
UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ALCOHOL (INTOXICATION)

The following contracts are void from the beginning as provided by Article 1409 of the
Civil Code, to wit:

“Art. 1409. The following contracts are inexistent and void from the beginning:

(1) Those whose cause, object or purpose is contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order or public policy;

(2) Those which are absolutely simulated or fictitious;

(3) Those whose cause or object is outside the commerce of men;

(4) Those which contemplate an impossible service;

(5) Those which contemplate an impossible service;

(6) Those where the intention of the parties relative to the principal object of the contract cannot be ascertained;

(7) Those expressly prohibited or declared void by law.

These contracts cannot be ratified. Neither can the right to set up the defense of illegality be waived.”

Contracts may likewise be declared null and void as provided under Article

In the instant case, there is no showing that the contract executed and signed while the
late Mr. Vibal was allegedly intoxicated, is void. In fact, this allegation is merely brought up by
the heirs years after the death of their father, Mr. Vibal. During the lifetime of Mr. Vibal, he never
the challenged the validity of the contract and sale.

Intoxication as a ground for nullity of contract is neither expressly nor impliedly stated in
the above provision, thus, the contract enjoys the presumption of validity.

Assuming arguendo that the late Mr. Vibal was indeed intoxicated at the time of the
execution and signing of the instrument, the contract is by law, deemed valid until annulled or
VOIDABLE, and NOT VOID to wit:
 “ART. 1328. Contracts entered into during a lucid interval are valid. Contracts agreed to in a state of
drunkenness or during hypnotic spell are voidable.”

The contract being voidable, it is subject to prescription of four (4) years and ratification,
expressly or impliedly.

Consequently, the contract can no longer be attacked as the vice was ratified by accepting
and retaining the benefits of the sale which is the purchase price.

Second Issue: ON OWNERSHIP OVER THE PARCEL OF LAND

THE DEED OF ABSOLUTE SALE BEING ALLEGEDLY VOID, OWNERSHIP IS RETAINED IN THE
NAME OF THE HEIRS.