By Modesto P. Sa-onoy
The issue in the conflict concerning the apartment occupied by Nico Causing revolves around the issue of who owns it. The enforcers of Olivia Yanson claim that their employer is the owner but so far there is no document presented showing ownership, only allegations. That the enforcers have not filed a case in court means that they have no such document, especially for a lawyer who should have filed a case in court.
From the information on hand, the six apartments in Sta. Clara Executive Village is owned by the Yanson family and as we know family or corporate properties could be used by any member of the family, of course with the consent of the family members. They can make improvements to them and utilize them for their personal or business purposes.
I recall this when last year the three Yansons – Olivia, Ginnette and Leo Rey took over Vallacar Transit Inc. Emily’s personal business, the Ceres Pasalubong, was ordered removed from Ceres terminals. It was then that the public learned of the arrangement that the Yanson siblings could use company or family properties for personal purposes free of charge, rental or fees for five years; thereafter they will pay rentals to the family corporation.
Emily then cried “foul” but the matriarch was persistent and Emily had no choice because Ceres Pasalubong stores were inside the company compound and she was locked out as were her other three siblings. It did not affect her other outlets. It seems that Emily was targeted by an avenging mother because the personal businesses of the children allied with Olivia were left untouched.
It was not without basis that I wrote earlier that the actions of Olivia was more for spite and to satisfy her unquenchable anger. Emily became a victim as were other people who have no part in the family feud, like the Causing family and the employees of Ceres Pasalubong.
All the children of Ricardo B. Yanson are aware and have agreed to this arrangement years ago when the patriarch was still alive. Thus Emily had these apartments for over 20 years and the rest of the family, including Ricardo and Olivia respected this arrangement.
In fact, even after the death of Ricardo B. Yanson in 2015, the family agreed in their 2017 Family Estate Meeting that the 5-year moratorium would be implemented from April 26, 2017 – April 27, 2022 when the free use of family-owned assets and properties would run. Thus the right of Emily to her Ceres Pasalubong and the Sta. Clara Executive Village apartments free of charge would end by 2022.
Everything went well until 2019. Then hell broke loose publicly when the family splintered into two factions. New data had come my way about the long-term purpose of the family quarrel but I will write about them later.
The present conflict in Sta. Clara Executive Village is only a tip of the iceberg in an emerging pattern in a long-term objective for the total elimination of the legacy of Ricardo B. Yanson. The earlier data were indications of a conspiracy but the pieces were not yet clear. I used the word “conspiracy” before but then certain events and facts were still incomplete.
Back to the apartment issue. The possession and utilization by Emily of the six apartments in Sta. Clara Executive Village was never questioned for over 20 years, not even by Olivia although she has full knowledge of Emily’s leasing business at the village. For all intents and purposes, Olivia is estopped in questioning it now, more so because she has not shown a piece of paper she personally owns these apartments. Her claim, parroted by her enforcers are all verbal claims.
However, if Olivia has the documents, her lawyer should attach them to a complaint before the court. There the issue should be settled as lawyers ought to advise their clients rather resort to bully tactics backed up armed men. That does not seem befitting in the practice of law. That approach reflects the weakness of the claim as well a mind propelled not by a sense of justice but of revenge and the need to shortcut the process because time and truth are not on their side.
We will revisit this issue later.
