TRUST CASES TRUST CASES
Trusts are vested with equitable considerations Trusts are vested with equitable considerations
GOVERNMENT v. AA!"##A$ ET. A#.$ MUN. O% TA&AAS$ ET. A#.$ MAR"A 'A#A!$ ET. A#. GOVERNMENT v. AA!"##A$ ET. A#.$ MUN. O% TA&AAS$ ET. A#.$ MAR"A 'A#A!$ ET. A#. %acts(
%acts(
Subjects lots (3464, 3469, and 3470) are claimed by the mun. of tayabas and the goernor of Subjects lots (3464, 3469, and 3470) are claimed by the mun. of tayabas and the goernor of thethe !roince on one side,
!roince on one side, and by "aria. #ufemio, #ugenio $eli%, et. al. on and by "aria. #ufemio, #ugenio $eli%, et. al. on the other. &ot 3470 is also claimedthe other. &ot 3470 is also claimed by 'orotea &o!e. ll three lots *ere registered, !er court order, in the name
by 'orotea &o!e. ll three lots *ere registered, !er court order, in the name of the goernor in of the goernor in trust for atrust for a secondary school to be
secondary school to be established in the munici!ality. +established in the munici!ality. +laimants alad and &o!e a!!ealed.laimants alad and &o!e a!!ealed. -he lands *ere originally o*ned by
-he lands *ere originally o*ned by &uis alad, a school teacher, *ho obtained the same &uis alad, a school teacher, *ho obtained the same by gratuitousby gratuitous title in /94. &uis e%ecuted a
title in /94. &uis e%ecuted a hologra!hic *ill. e died in 'ecember /96 hologra!hic *ill. e died in 'ecember /96 *ithout descendants, but*ithout descendants, but leaing a *ido*, 'orotea &o!e (married since
leaing a *ido*, 'orotea &o!e (married since 1ct 4 //2). 1ct 4 //2). +$ -a+$ -ayabas ordered the yabas ordered the !rotocoliation or!rotocoliation or !robation of the *ill oer the
!robation of the *ill oer the o!!osition of &eo!oldo and olicar!io alad (collateral heirs of &uo!!osition of &eo!oldo and olicar!io alad (collateral heirs of &u is) and ofis) and of *hom a!!ellant alads are descendants.
*hom a!!ellant alads are descendants. -he *ill reads
-he *ill reads
"That the cocoanut land in Colongcolong, which I have put
"That the cocoanut land in Colongcolong, which I have put under cultivation, be used by my wife after my under cultivation, be used by my wife after my death durin
death during g her life or her life or untiuntil she l she marrmarries, which properties, which property is y is referreferred to red to in the in the inveninventory under No. 5 tory under No. 5 but but from this cocoanut land shall be taken what is to be lent to the persons who are to plant cocoanut trees from this cocoanut land shall be taken what is to be lent to the persons who are to plant cocoanut trees and that which is to be paid to them as their share of the crop if any should remain and that she try to and that which is to be paid to them as their share of the crop if any should remain and that she try to earn with the product of the cocoanut trees of which those bearing fruit are annually increasing and if the earn with the product of the cocoanut trees of which those bearing fruit are annually increasing and if the times aforementioned should arrive, I prepare and donate it to a secondary college to be erected in the times aforementioned should arrive, I prepare and donate it to a secondary college to be erected in the capital of Tayabas so this will be delivered by my wife and the e!ecutors to the yuntamiento of this capital of Tayabas so this will be delivered by my wife and the e!ecutors to the yuntamiento of this town, should there by any, and if not, to the civil governor of this province in order to cause the manager town, should there by any, and if not, to the civil governor of this province in order to cause the manager thereof to comply with my wishes for the good of many and the welfare of the town.#
thereof to comply with my wishes for the good of many and the welfare of the town.# fter
fter &uis5 &uis5 death, death, 'orotea 'orotea remained remained in in !ossession !ossession of of the the land land and and remarried remarried one one +ali%to +ali%to 'olendo.'olendo. foresaid coll
foresaid collateral heirs of &uis brateral heirs of &uis brought an action for !arought an action for !artition of the lands agtition of the lands against 'orotea on the gainst 'orotea on the groundround that by reason of her remarriage she had lost the right to their e%clusie use and !ossession. "un. of that by reason of her remarriage she had lost the right to their e%clusie use and !ossession. "un. of
--aayabyabas as ininterterenened ed claclaimiming ing its right under its right under the *illthe *ill. . &ot&ots s 3463464 4 and and 3463469 9 *e*ere re turturned ned oeoer r to to thethe munici!ality 3470 remained *ith 'orotea, !er
munici!ality 3470 remained *ith 'orotea, !er agreement.agreement. +$ dismissed the action on the
+$ dismissed the action on the strength of said agreement.strength of said agreement. !!ellants alads argue that there *as no trust created since no
!!ellants alads argue that there *as no trust created since no trustee and cesti ue trust *ere namedtrustee and cesti ue trust *ere named in the *ill.
in the *ill. "ssue( "ssue(
8hether or not a trust *as created by irtue of the *ill e%ecuted by &uis alad. 8hether or not a trust *as created by irtue of the *ill e%ecuted by &uis alad. Rulin)(
Rulin)( es. es.
n order that a trust may become effectie there must, of course, be a trustee and a cestui ue trust, and n order that a trust may become effectie there must, of course, be a trustee and a cestui ue trust, and counsel for the a!!ellants alad argues that *e here hae neither that there is no ayuntamiento, no counsel for the a!!ellants alad argues that *e here hae neither that there is no ayuntamiento, no :obernador +iil of the !roince, and no
:obernador +iil of the !roince, and no secondary school in the secondary school in the to*n of -ato*n of -ayabas.yabas.
n ayuntamiento corres!onds and it may be conceded that the ordinary munici!al cor!oration and it may n ayuntamiento corres!onds and it may be conceded that the ordinary munici!al cor!oration and it may
be
be conconcedceded ed thathat t the the ordordinainary ry munmuniciici!al !al gogoernernmenment t in in thethese se slslandands s falfalls ls shoshort rt of of beibeing ng sucsuch h aa cor!oration. ;ut *e hae !roincial goernors *ho li<e their !redecessors, the ciil goernors, are the cor!oration. ;ut *e hae !roincial goernors *ho li<e their !redecessors, the ciil goernors, are the chief e%ecuties of their res!ectie !roinces. t is true that in a fe* details the functions and !o*ers of chief e%ecuties of their res!ectie !roinces. t is true that in a fe* details the functions and !o*ers of
the t*o offices may ary some*hat, but it cannot be successfully dis!uted that one office is the legal successor of the other. t might as *ell be contended that *hen under the !resent regime the title of the chief e%ecutie of the hili!!ines *as changed from +iil :oernor to that of :oernor=:eneral, the latter *as not the legal successor of the former. -here can therefore be but ery little doubt that the goernor of the roince of -ayabas, as the successor of the ciil goernor of the !roince under the S!anish regime, may act as trustee in the !resent case.
n the regard to !riate trusts it is not al*ays necessary that the cestui ue trust should be named, or een be in esse at the time the trust is created in h is faor. ($lint on -rusts and -rustees, section >2 citing $raier s. $raier, > ill +h., 302 shurst s. :ien, 2 8atts ? S., 3>9 +arson s. +arson, 8ins. @A.+.B, >4.) -hus a deise to a father in trust for accumulation for his children la*fully begotten at the time of his death has been held to be good although the father had no children at the time of the esting of the funds in him as trustee. n charitable trusts such as the one here under discussion, the rule is still further rela%ed.
Cny dis!osition *hich im!oses u!on an heirs the obligation of !eriodically inesting s!ecified sums in charitable *or<s, such as do*ries for !oor maidens or scholarshi!s for students, or in faor of the !oor, or any charitable or !ublic educational institution, shall be alid under the follo*ing conditions
Cf the charge is im!osed on real !ro!erty and is tem!orary, the heir or heirs may dis!ose of the encumbered estate, but the lien shall continue until the record thereof is can celed.
Cf the charge is !er!etual, the heir may ca!italie it and inest the ca!ital at interest, fully secured by first mortgage.
C-he ca!italiation and inestment of the !rinci!al shall be made *ith the interention of the ciil goernor of the !roince after hearing the o!inion of the !rosecuting officer.
Cn any case, if the testator should not hae laid do*n any rules for the management and a!!lication of the charitable legacy, it shall be done by the e%ecutie authorities u!on *hom this duty deoles by la*.C t is true that minor distinctions may !ossibly be dra*n bet*een the case before us and that !resu!!osed in the articles uoted, but the general !rinci!le in the same in both cases. ere the trustee, *ho holds the legal title, as distinguished from the beneficial title resting in the cestui ue trust, must be considered the heir. -he deise under consideration does not in terms reuire !eriodical inestments of s!ecified sums, but it is difficult to see ho* this can affect the general !rinci!le inoled, and unless the deise contraenes some other !roision of the +ode it must be u!held.
8e hae been unable to find any such !roision. -here is no iolation of any rule against !er!etuities the deise does not !rohibit the alienation of the land deised. t does not iolate article 670 of the +ode the ma<ing of the *ill and the continuance or uantity of the estate of the heir are not left in the discretion of a third !arty. the deisee is not uncertain and the deise is therefore not re!ugnant to article 720 of the +iil +ode. the !roincial goernor can hardly be regarded as a !ublic establishment *ithin the meaning of article 74/ and may therefore receie the inheritance *ithout the !reious a!!roal of the :oernment. ;ut counsel argues that assuming all this to be true the collateral heirs of the deceased *ould neertheless be entitled to the income of the land until the cestui ue trust is actually in esse. 8e do not thin< so. f the trustee holds the legal title and the deise is alid, the natural heirs of the deceased hae no remaining interest in the land e%ce!t their right to the reersion in the eent *hich has not as yet ta<en !lace. $rom a reading of the testamentary clause under discussion it seems uite eident that the intention of the testator *as to hae the income of the !ro!erty accumulate for the benefit of the !ro!osed school until the same should be established.
ES'ERAN*A %A"AN$ EN"TA %A"AN and !AMASO 'A'A & %A"AN v. S"#"NA %A"AN$ %E#"C"ANO #AN!S"TE$ TEO!ORA %A"AN and %RANC"SCO !E# MONTE
%acts(
ablo $abian bought from the go5t the subject friar lands estate in "untinlu!a, Dial !ayable in installments. ;y irtue of this !rocess, he *as issued a sale certificate.
1n the strength of an affidait, the sale cert. *as assigned to Silbina $abian and -eodora $abian, niece of the deceased ablo.-he acting director of lands sold one lot to Silbina (married to $eliciano &andrito), and to -eodora (married to $rancisco 'el "onte), for the sum o>0. -hey too< !ossession thereof, cultiated it, and a!!ro!riated the !roduce therefrom they declared the lot in their names for ta% !ur!oses under ta% dec. this ta% dec *as later cancelled, and in lieu thereof t*o ta% decs *ere issued in faor of -eodora and Silbina. Since then they hae been !aying real estate ta%es thereon. &ater Degister of 'eeds of Dial issued -+- in their names. nd the same *as subdiided into t*o eual !arts E issued t*o se!arate -+-s.
laintiffs #s!erana, ;enita, and 'amaso filed acton for reconeyance against the res!ondent s!ouses, aerring that Silbina and -eodora, thru fraud !er!etrated in their affidait, made it a!!ear that ablo $abian gae them the subject lot, *hich is a false narration of facts because Silbina <ne* that she is not the only daughter and heir of the deceased ablo, and -eodora li<e*ise <ne* all along that, asa mere niece she *as !recluded from inheriting from him in the !resence of the four suriing daughters that they succeeded fraudulently in haing the lots registered in their names.
Silbina and -eodora E claim that ablo *as not the o*ner of the said lot at the time of his death because he had not !aid in full the amortiation on the lot that they *ere the absolute o*ners thereof, haing !urchased it from the got and haing e%ercised all the attributes of o*nershi! thereof u! to the !resent and that the action for reconeyance already !rescribed
+$ E s!ouses had acuired a alid and com!lete title to the !ro!erty by acuisitie !rescri!tion. "ssues(
. 8hether or not ablo *as the o*ner of the said lot at the time of his death.
>. 8hether or not laches may constitute a bar to an action not enforce a constructie trust Rulin)
. es. -he euitable and beneficial title really *ent to the !urchaser the moment he !aid the first installment and *as gien a certificate of sale. -he reseration of the title in faor of the :oernment is made merely to !rotect the interest of the :oernment so as to !reclude. or !reent the !urchaser from encumbering or dis!osing of the lot !urchased before the !ayment in full of the !urchase !rice. 1utside of this !rotection the :oernment retains no right as an o*ner. $or instance, after issuance of the sales certificate and !ending !ayment in full of the !urchase !rice, the :oernment may not sell the lot to another. t may not een encumber it. t may not occu!y the land to use or cultiate neither may it lease it or een !artici!ate or share in its fruits. n other *ords, the :oernment does not and cannot e%ercise the rights and !rerogaties of o*ner. nd *hen said !urchaser finally !ays the final installment on the !urchase !rice and is gien a deed of coneyance and a certificate of title, the title, at least in euity, retroacts to the time he first occu!ied the land, !aid the first installment and *as issued the corres!onding certificate of sale. n other *ords, !ending the com!letion of the !ayment of the !urchase !rice, the !urchaser is entitled to all the benefits and adantages *hich may accrue to the land as *ell as suffer the losses that may befall it.-hat ablo $abian had !aid fie annual installments to the :oernment, and in fact been issued sale certificate 247 in his name, are conceded. e *as therefore the o*ner of lot 64 at the time of his death. e left four daughters, namely, #s!erana, ;enita , ;enita and Silbina, to *hom all his rights and interest oer lot 64 !assed u!on his demise.Cn case a holder of a certificate dies before the giing of the deed and does not leae a *ido*, then the interest of the holder of the certificate shall descend and deed shall issue to the !erson *ho under the la*s of the hili!!ine slands *ould hae ta<en had the title been !erfected before the death of the holder of the certificate, u!on !roof of the holders thus entitled of com!liance *ith all the reuirements of the certificate.C -he assignment and sale of the lot to the
defendants Silbina and -eodora *ere therefore null and oid as to that !ortion sold to -eodora, and as *ell as to that !ortion *hich la*fully deoled in faor of the a!!ellants. -o the e%tent of the !artici!ation of the a!!ellants, a!!lication must be made of the !rinci!le that if !ro!erty is acuired through fraud, the !erson obtaining it is considered a trustee of an im!lied trust for the benefit of the !erson from *hom the !ro!erty comes.
. es. n 'ia, et al. s. :orricho, et al., 03 hil. >64=>62 (92/), this +ourt, s!ea<ing through "r. Fustice F.;.&. Deyes, declared in no uncertain terms that laches may bar an action brought to enforce a constructie trust such as the one in the case at bar. Crticle 426 of the ne* +iil +ode, *hile not retroactie in character, merely e%!resses a rule already recognied by our courts !rior to the +odeGs !romulgation (see :ayondato s. nsular -reasurer, 49 hil. >44), !!ellants are, ho*eer, in error in belieing that li<e e%!ress trust, such constructie trusts may not be barred by la!se of time. -he merican la* on trusts has al*ays maintained a distinction bet*een e%!ress trusts created by the
intention of the !arties, and the im!lied or constructie trusts that are e%clusiely created by la*, the latter not being trusts in their technical sense (:ayondato s. nsular -reasurer, su!ra). -he e%!ress trusts disable the trustee from acuiring for his o*n benefit the !ro!erty committed to his management or custody, at least *hile he does not o!enly re!udiate the trust, and ma<es such re!udiation <no*n to the beneficiary or cestui ue trust. $or this reason, the old +ode of +iil rocedure (ct 90) declared that the rules on aderse !ossession does not a!!ly to Gcontinuing and subsistingG (i.e., unre!udiated) trusts.C;ut in constructie trusts, . . . the rule is that laches constitutes a bar to actions to enforce the trust, and re!udiation is not reuired, unless there is a concealment of the facts giing rise to the trust.-he assignment of sale certificate 247 *as effected on 1ctober 2, 9>/, and the actual transfer of lot 64 *as made on the follo*ing Aoember 4. t *as only on Fuly /, 960, 3> big years later, that the a!!ellants for the first time came for*ard *ith their claim to the land. -he record does not reeal, and it is not seriously asserted, that the a!!ellees concealed the facts giing rise to the trust. H!on the contrary, !aragra!h 3 of the sti!ulation of facts of the !arties states *ith stri<ing clarity Cthat defendants herein hae been in !ossession of the land in uestion since 9>/ u! to the !resent !ublicly and continuously under claim of o*nershi! they hae cultiated it, harested and a!!ro!riated the fruits for themseles.C Si% years later, in :erona, et al s. 'e :uman, et al., &= 9060, "ay >9, 964, the factual setting attending *hich is substantially similar to that obtaining in the case at bar, this +ourt, in an e%cellently=!hrased decision !enned by +hief Fustice, then ssociate Fustice, Doberto +once!cion, uneuiocally reaffirmed the rule, oerruling !reious decisions to the contrary, that Can action for reconeyance of real !ro!erty based u!on a constructie or im!lied trust. resulting from fraud, may be barred by the statute of limitations,C and further that Cthe action therefore may be filed *ithin four years from the discoery of the fraud,C the discoery in that case being deemed to hae ta<en !lace *hen ne* certificates of title *ere issued e%clusiely in the names of the res!ondents therein. -he follo*ing is *hat Fustice +once!cion, s!ea<ing for the +ourt, said"$%lthough, as a general rule, an action for pa rtition among co&heirs does not prescribe, this is true only as long as the defendants do not hold the property in 'uestion under an adverse title (Cordova vs. Cordova, )&**+, -anuary /, */01. The statute of limitations operates, as in other cases, from the moment such adverse title is asserted by the possessor of the property (2amos vs. 2amos, /5 3hil., +4 argayo vs. Camumot, /6 3hil., 057 Castro vs. 8charri, 46 3hil., 4+1.H!on the undis!uted facts in the case at bar, not only had laches set in *hen the a!!ellants instituted their action for reconeyance in 960, b ut as *ell their right to enforce the constructie trust had already !rescribed. t logically follo*s from the aboe disuisition that acuisitie !rescri!tion has li<e*ise o!erated to est absolute title in the a!!ellees, !ursuant to the !roisions of section 4 of ct 90 that.C-en years actual aderse !ossession by any !erson claiming to be the o*ner for that time of any land or interest in land, uninterru!tedly continued for fen years by occu!ancy, descent, grants, or other*ise, in *hateer *ay such occu!ancy may hae commenced or continued, 6 shall est in eery actual occu!ant or !ossessor of such land a full and com!lete title . . .C (em!hasis ours)
E#O& M"GUE# and !EMETR"O M"GUE# v. CA$ ANAC#ETA V!A. !E RE&ES %acts(
'uring the S!anish regime #loy "iguel, then single and resident of &aoag, locos Aorte, *ent to sabela and stayed *ith his relatie Fuan $eli!e in barrio ngud norte. there he s!otted an uncultiated !arcel of land, hectare *hich he occu!ied and cleared and !lanted *ith corn. fter the reolution, he returned to &aoag and got married. e returned to ngud *ith his family and resettled there, cultiated the land and !lanted rich and declared the same for ta% !ur!oses, and !aid realty ta%es thereon.
&eonor Deyes (husband of nacleta) *as a notary !ublic that time. e used to isit barrio ngud loo<ing for documents to notarie. e the net #loy "iguel and offered the latter for an e%!editious !rocess of titling his land to his name. Deyes !re!ared and filed a homestead a!!lication in the name of #loy "iguel and !romised to *or< for the early a!!roal of the a!!lication. reyes gae the recei!t for the filing fee of the a!!lication to #loy but *ithheld the ta% recei!ts and ta% dec, assuring miguel that he *ould return them as soon as the homestead !atent *as issued in "iguel5s name he li<e*ise adised "igue to sto! !aying the and ta%es until the !atent *as issued.
fter a long *ait "iguel inuired from Deyes about the status of his a!!lication. the latter !romised to send him a letter=tracer (blan<) on *hich he affi%ed his thumb mar<. 88 bro<e out and "iguel did not hear of and about his homestead a!!lication. Deyes died during the Fa!anese occu!ation.
$or the serices rendered and still to be rendered by &eonor Deyes in !re!aring the homestead a!!lication and in securing the issuance of the corres!ondent !atent, "iguel gae the former I2 of his yearly harest from the land. fter the death of &eonor Deyes, "iguel continued to delier an eual number of caanes of !alay to the formerGs *ido*, nacleta ". Jda. de Deyes, *ho li<e*ise !romised to hel! him secure the necessary homestead !atent.
'emetrio, son of #loy, declared the 4 hectares of land ceded to him by his father for ta%ation !ur!oses in his name.
o*eer, un<no*n to #loy and 'emetrio, &eonor Deyes filed sales a!!lication in the name of his *ife, nacleta coering the same !arcel of land occu!ied and cultiated by the "iguels. -he a!!lication *as
duly ac<no*ledged by the ;ureau of &ands.
H!on discoery, the "iguels filed a !rotest *ith the ;ureau against the sales a!!lication of nacleta. 'irector of lands conducted an inestigation EK hearing of the !rotest E=K but not*ithstanding the !rotest the "iguels discoered that the sales !atent and original certificate of the lands in dis!ute *ere granted and issued to nacleta.
-he "iguels filed a com!laint *ith the +$ against nacleta and the 'irector and Degister of 'eeds for the annulment of the sales !atent and the cancellation of original certificate of title.
+$ E dismissed the "oguls did not hae locus standi and the com!laint *as !rematurely filed for not haing e%hausted all administratie remedies.
-he "iguels commenced reconeyance of the title to them.
+$ E found that #loy "iguel Chas al*ays been, and u! to this time, in !hysical !ossession of the *hole tract of land in uestion under claim of o*nershi! thru occu!ancy, he haing occu!ied and cultiated the land since the S!anish regimeC that he *as a homestead a!!licant *ay bac< in 93> for the land !ossessed by him that there e%ists a trust relationshi! bet*een the "iguels and the !riate res!ondent and her deceased husband, &eonor Deyes, a notary !ublic, *ith res!ect to the same !ro!erty, *ithout *hich relationshi! #loy "iguel *ould himself hae !ersonally attended to his o*n a!!lication and that, through fraud and misre!resentations, &eonor Deyes caused the filing and a!!roal of an a!!lication and the issuance by the ;ureau of &ands of a sales !atent coering the !ro!erty in the name of his *ife, the !riate res!ondent, *ith out the consent and <no*ledge of the "iguels. -he lo*er courtGs, ho*eer, held that reconeyance is not !ro!er because the land in uestion is not the !riate !ro!erty of the "iguels
since time immemorial but remains a !art of the !ublic domain, and instead declared that #loy "iguel Cshould be gien !riority to acuire the land under the homestead !roisions of the ublic &and &a* . C"oreoer, a situation of trust has been created in the instant case bet*een the !laintiff and the defendant=a!!ellantGs deceased husband u!on *hom the !laintiff #loy "iguel relied through his (DeyesG) re!resentations that the corres!onding title to said land *ould be secured in faor of the !laintiff #loy "iguel. -he eidence li<e*ise sho*s that the defendant Jda. de Deyes !romised the !laintiff to continue the *or< begun by her late husband *ith the ultimate result of securing the raid homestead !atent and title in faor of the !laintiff #loy "iguel. nasmuch as the said !romise *as iolated by the defendant *ho secretly *or<ed to*ard the acuisition of the said land for her o*n self, fraudulently and stealthily, no !rescri!tion can run as against !laintiffsG right to claim o *nershi! of the said !ro!erty.C
"ssue(
8hether or not reconeyance is !ro!er since the trust relationshi! e%isting bet*een #loy "iguel and the Deyes s!ouses *as breached by the latter.
Rulin)( es.
ssuming the res!ondent +ourt to be correct a legion of cases there are *hich can be cited in faor of the !etitionersG !osition. Since the la* of trust has been more freuently a!!lied in #ngland and in the Hnited States than it has been in S!ain, *e may dra* freely u!on merican !recedents in determining the effects of trusts, es!ecially so because the trusts <no*n to merican and #nglish euity juris!rudence are deried from the fidei commissa of the Doman &a* and are based entirely u!on ciil la* !rinci!les. 7 $urthermore, because the case !resents !roblems not d irectly coered by statutory !roisions by S!anish or local !recedents, resort for their solution must be had to the underlying !rinci!les of the la* on the subject. ;esides, our +iil +ode itself directs the ado!tion of the !rinci!les of the general la* of trusts, insofar as they are not in conflict *ith said +ode, the +ode of +ommerce, the Dules of +ourt and s!ecial la*s.
n holding that the eases cited by the !etitioners in their motion for reconsideration (i.e., De!ublic of the hili!!ines . +arle eirs, su!ra, and Doco, et al. . :imeda, su!ra) are ina!!licable, the res!ondent +ourt adances the theory that an action for reconeyance based on constructie trust *ill !ros!er only if the !ro!erties inoled belong to the !arties suing for and entitled to reconeyance. -his is not entirely accurate. n $o% . Simons 9 the !laintiff em!loyed the defendant to assist him in obtaining oil leases in a certain locality in llinois, the former !aying the latter a salary and his e%!enses. -he defendant acuired some leases for the !laintiff and others for himself. 8hereu!on, the !laintiff brought suit to com!el the defendant to assign the leases *hich he had acuired for himself. -he court found for the !laintiff, holding that it *as a breach of the defendantGs fiduciary duty to !urchase for himself the <ind of !ro!erty *hich he *as em!loyed to !urchase for the !laintiff.
t is to be obsered that in $o% . Simons, su!ra, the !laintiff *as not the original o*ner of the oil leases. e merely em!loyed the defendant to obtain them for him. but the latter obtained some for the !laintiff and some for himself. et, des!ite the absence of this former=o*nershi! circumstance, the court there did not hesitate to order the defendant to assign or coney the leases he obtained for himself to the !laintiff because of the breach of fiduciary duty committed by said defendant. ndeed, there need only be a fiduciary relation and a breach of fiduciary duty before reconeyance may be adjudged. n fact, a fiduciary may een be chargeable as a constructie trustee of !ro!erty *hich he !urchases for himself, een though he has not underta<en to !urchase it for the beneficiary, if in !urchasing it he *as im!ro!erly com!eting *ith the beneficiary.
arenthetically, a fiduciary relation arises *here one man assumes to act as agent for another and the other re!oses confidence in him, although there is no *ritten contract or no contract at all. f the agent iolates his duty as fiduciary, a constructie trust arises. t is immaterial that there *as no antecedent
fiduciary relation and that it arose contem!oraneously *ith the !articular transaction.
n the case at bar, &eonor Deyes, the !riate res!ondentGs husband, suggested that #loy "iguel file a homestead a!!lication oer the land and offered his serices in assisting the latter to secure a homestead !atent. #loy "iguel acce!ted &eonor DeyesG offer of serices, thereby relying on his *ord and re!osing confidence in him. nd in !ayment for the serices rendered by &eonor Deyes in !re!aring and filing the homestead a!!lication and those still to be rendered by him in securing the homestead !atent, #loy "iguel deliered to Deyes I2 of his yearly harest from the said land. 8hen &eonor Deyes died, the !etitioners continued to delier the same !ercentage of their annual harest to the !riate res!ondent *ho undertoo< to continue assisting the former to secure a homestead !atent oer said land. o*eer, in breach of their fiduciary duty and through fraud, &eonor Deyes and the !riate res!ondent filed a sales a!!lication and obtained a sales !atent and ultimately an original certificate of title oer the same !arcel of land. -herefore, follo*ing the ruling in $o% . Simons, su!ra, the !riate res!ondent can be com!elled to reconey or assign to the !etitioners the !arcel of land in the !ro!ortion of nine hectares in faor of #loy "iguel and 4 hectares in faor of 'emetrio "iguel res!ectiely.
