Francisco Delgado V. GQ Realty Development Corp. G.R. No. 241774 September 25, 2019 Facts

 

FRANCISCO DELGADO v. GQ REALTY DEVELOPMENT CORP. G.R. No. 241774 September 25, 2019 FACTS:

Pettoner Francisco is a widower who fell in love and enered ino a special relatonship wih Vicori Vicoria a Gon Gonzale zales, s, who, who, alon along g wi wih h her chi childr ldren, en, sa sare red d o pu up GQ Rea Realy ly Dev Develo elopme pmen n Corporaton (GQ Realy). In order o help Vicoria, show poental invesors ha GQ had sucien asses ass es and cap capial ial,, Fra Francis ncisco co bou bough gh a condom condomini inium um apa aparm rmen en.. Fra Franci ncisco sco live lived d in he sub subjec jec propery even if he CCT was issued in he name of responden GQ Realy. Aer Vicoria’s deah, Francisco learned ha Vicoria’s children chil dren disribued among hemselves he propertes held in rus by GQ Realy which included he subjec propery.

Due o his, Francisco led a Veried Complain for Reconveyance. Declaraton of Nulliy of Sale and Damages Damag es agains responden responden. . The RTC and he CA dismis dismissed sed he Compl Complain ain because according o i Francisco’s claim had already waived, abandoned or extnguished hrough he executon of an AneNuptal Agreemen made by Francisco and Vicoria.

ISSUE: Whehe Wheherr or no Franci Francisco, sco, in executng executng he Ane-N Ane-Nuptal uptal Agreemen, Agreemen, waived, abandoned, or

oherwise, extnguished his alleged ineres over he subjec propery

RULING:

Yes. Under RUle 16, Secton 6, if no moton o dismiss has been led, any of he grounds for dismissal provided for in his Rule may be pleaded as an armatve defense in he answer and, in he discreton of he cour, a preliminary hearing may be had hereon as if a moton o dismisshad been led. In he insan case, he respondens did no le any Moton o Dismiss. Insead, hey led a Moton for Preliminary Hearing so ha he RTC could receive evidence and hereaer decide wheher he armatve defenses raised by he respondens are meriorious.

According o he RTC and he CA, he respondens were able o prove heir armatve defense ha he alleged claim of Francisco over he subjec propery has been deemed waived, abandoned, or oherwise extnguished when he execued he Ane-Nuptal Agreemen. In his regard, he Cour holds ha Francisco indeed waived, abandoned, or extnguished his alleged righs over he subjec propery.