A co-owner of a real estate property must give written notice to the other co-owners before selling his or her portion of the property, the Supreme Court (SC) said.

However, the SC said if the co-owners knew about the sale and they did not exercise their right to buy the sold portion of the land within 30 days, the written notice is no longer required.

In a decision written by Chief Justice Alexander G. Gesmundo, the SC settled the legal dispute between two brothers and the buyer of a part of the land in Aparri, Cagayan that was sold by their aunt, their co-owner.

Brothers Antonio Jr. and Rafael Azurin, and their aunt Adelaida Azurin Villanueva were co-owners of the land which was in possession of the siblings.

Adelaida sold her share of the land to Carlito Chua to whom a new title was issued after the whole property was surveyed and subdivided.

Chua filed a case before the regional trial court (RTC) for the possession of the portion of the land he bought from Adelaida. The RTC ruled in favor of Chua.

Years later, Antonio and Rafael attempted to buy back the land from Chua by filing a complaint for legal redemption. The RTC dismissed the complaint.

On appeal, the CA affirmed the RTC decision, stating that the case was filed too late—years after the sale and well beyond the 30-day period allowed by the Civil Code.

Undaunted, Antonio and Rafael appealed to the SC. They argued that they were denied their right to redeem the property as co-owners because Adelaida did not inform them of the sale in writing.

The SC denied the appeal of the siblings.

It said that generally, a co-owner intending to sell their share to a third party must notify the other co-owners in writing about the sale. The other co-owners then have 30 days from receipt of the written notice to redeem or buy back the portion sold, it also said.

If the co-owners failed to buy back the portion sold within the 30-day period, they lose the right to redeem the sold portion, it added.

The SC clarified that although written notice to co-owners is necessary, it can be waived if (1) unusual circumstances have made the co-owners aware of the sale, and (2) the co-owners did not take action or were negligent in their right to redeem the property, a situation referred to in law as laches.

It said that Antonio and Rafael were aware of the sale because they were in actual possession of the land and, therefore, were informed about the survey conducted on it.

Also, the SC said the siblings received Chua’s legal complaint to recover possession, which clearly showed the land had been sold. However, they waited more than six years before trying to redeem the property, it also said.

The SC said: “The written notice requirement may be dispensed with in the instant case due to the peculiar circumstances involved and the laches that had set in against petitioners. It would be the height of inequity to allow them to redeem despite their inaction of six years and two months.”

“Accordingly, the petition is denied. The Oct. 12, 2020 Decision and Feb. 14, 2022 Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA G.R. CV No. 112336 are affirmed,” the SC ruled.