Perfecto de La Vega v. Tomas Ballilos (Or Balielos)

Summary

This case involved a property dispute between heirs of deceased landowners and an individual regarding the nature of a 1896 contract covering land parcels worth P430. The central legal issue was whether the contract constituted antichresis (creditor receives property fruits to offset debt) or sale with pacto de retro (sale with right of redemption within fixed period). The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's classification as antichresis, emphasizing the contracting parties' evident intent over literal contract language. The Court applied Civil Code provisions on antichresis and contract interpretation, ruling that despite using 'mortgage' terminology, the agreement's substance showed the creditor's right to property enjoyment in exchange for the loan, with the debtor retaining perpetual redemption rights upon debt payment. This decision established important precedent on distinguishing antichresis from other real property security arrangements and the primacy of contractual intent in legal classification.