The Armadas were expecting to inherit some lots from their uncle. Marin had hereditary rights in the estates of her parents. A deed of exchange was executed wherein it was stipulated that both parties acknowledge that the exchange operates to their individual and mutual benefit and advantage, for the reason that the property being ceded, transferred, conveyed and unclaimed by one party to the other is situated in the place where either is a resident resulting in better administration of the properties. But the expected land was adjudicated to Soledad, sister of Marin. So, the Armadas and other heirs sued Soledad for claiming to be the sole heir of their uncle, but ended in a compromise where the Armadas were awarded two lots. Marin waived, renounced and quitclaimed her share in her parents’ estate in favour of her another sister Aurora. She cannot anymore fulfil her obligations in her signed deed of exchange with the Armadas. The Armadas filed a rescisorry action against Marin.

Issue:

Did Armadas’ action prescribe?

Held:

No. The action to declare contracts void and inexistent does not prescribe. It is evident from the deed of exchange that the intention of the parties relative to the lots cannot be definitely ascertained. This circumstance renders the exchange void.