Spouses Renato v. Spouses Gil

Summary

This civil case involved a contract dispute between sisters over a property purchase arrangement. Petitioners sought to annul a 1991 written agreement claiming Florinda's consent was vitiated by mistake regarding when the 10-year payment period commenced. The Supreme Court affirmed lower courts' rulings that the action for annulment had prescribed under Article 1391 of the Civil Code, as it was filed more than four years after the alleged mistake was discovered. The Court found the agreement valid, noting that the transaction involved property acquisition rather than disposition of conjugal assets, and that Renato's consent was evidenced by his conduct despite not signing the agreement. The decision demonstrates the importance of the prescriptive period for contract annulment actions and the principle that signing without reading does not necessarily vitiate consent.