Paredes vs. Espino

FACTS:

Espino “had entered into the sale” to Paredes a parcel of land and the deal was closed by letter and telegram. Espino refused to execute the deed of sale despite the willingness of Paredes to pay the price. Paredes filed an action for specific performance and damages against Espino. Espino contended that the contract was unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds.

ISSUE:

WON the contract is barred by the Statute of Frauds and unenforceable?

HELD:

Under Article 1403 of Civil Code, Statute of Frauds does not require that the contract itself be in writing. It is clear that a written note or memorandum make the verbal agreement enforceable. In this case, the deal had been closed by letter and telegram. Therefore, the contract of sale is not under the Statute of Frauds.

Digest Credit: Kelly Espera

One thought on “Paredes vs. Espino

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: