Manila: The Supreme Court (SC) has ruled that a land sale made through a verbal, unwritten agreement can be considered valid and binding, provided it has been partly or fully executed.

According to Philippines News Agency, the SC's 3rd Division issued an 18-page decision, recently made public, upholding the verbal sale of land between Marcos Batara and his nephew, Benedicto Ocampo. The court noted that Ocampo had received the land title, moved into the property, and made improvements on it, thereby validating the sale.

The land in question was registered in Batara's name. Following Batara's death in 1974, his children, Noblesa and Ernesto, were unaware of the property until they received a notice in 2007 about unpaid real estate taxes. They discovered their cousin, Ocampo, residing on the land and subsequently filed a case to reclaim it, asserting their rights as heirs.

Ocampo contended that he purchased the land from Batara during his lifetime and continued paying installments to Marcelo, Batara's brother and Noblesa's guardian, after Batara's death. Ocampo presented the land title as evidence, claiming it was given to him by Batara after an initial payment.

Initially, both the Regional Trial Court and the Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Batara's children, citing the land registration under their father's name and insufficient proof of sale beyond Ocampo's verbal claims. However, the SC reversed the decision, referencing the Civil Code, which states that a land sale must be in writing to be enforced in court.

Nonetheless, the SC clarified that a sale is still deemed valid even without a written contract if it has been fully or partly executed. In such instances, a verbal agreement can be legally binding, and witnesses may testify to prove the sale occurred. The court emphasized that possession of the land and improvements made on it are strong indicators of a verbal sale.

The SC further ruled that while the sale is valid, Ocampo's payments to Marcelo were ineffective since he was not authorized to accept them on behalf of Batara's heirs. Therefore, Ocampo must pay the remaining balance of the purchase price, with interest, to Batara's children.