Short answer. Not on the two lesion grounds. Where a guardian contracted for a ward, or someone contracted for an absentee, and a court approved the deal, the Civil Code shuts off rescission for the resulting loss. Other grounds for rescission are not affected by that approval.

What the law says

Rescission referred to in Nos. 1 and 2 of article 1381 shall not take place with respect to contracts approved by the courts.

Civil Code, Article 1386 — Court-Approved Contracts. Read the full provision →

The two grounds that court approval closes off

Rescission on the ground of lesion is available in two situations: contracts entered into by guardians whenever the wards whom they represent suffer lesion by more than one-fourth of the value of the things which are the object thereof, and contracts agreed upon in representation of absentees where the absentee suffers the same loss. Both involve someone contracting over property that is not his own, for a person who cannot protect himself. The Civil Code lets the disadvantaged ward or absentee undo the deal when the shortfall crosses one-fourth of value. Court approval of the contract removes exactly that remedy - and only that remedy.

Why approval has that effect

The lesion remedy exists because nobody was watching over the ward's or absentee's interest at the moment of contracting. When a court has already examined the transaction and approved it, that gap has been filled: a judge has passed on whether the terms serve the represented person. Reopening the same bargain later, on the sole ground that the price turned out to be a quarter below value, would make the approval meaningless and would leave every buyer from a guardianship or an absentee's estate holding an unstable title. The rule protects the finality of judicial approval, which is what makes anyone willing to deal with a court-supervised estate at all.

What court approval does not immunise

This is a narrow shield, and it is often overread. It covers the two lesion grounds only. It does not bar rescission of contracts undertaken in fraud of creditors when the latter cannot in any other manner collect the claims due them, nor of contracts referring to things under litigation entered into without the required knowledge and approval, nor of the other contracts specially declared by law to be subject to rescission. Just as importantly, approval does not turn a void contract into a valid one, and it does not cure fraud, mistake, or lack of authority. A contract attacked as void or voidable is attacked on a different footing entirely, and the shield has nothing to say about it.

What this means if you are the ward, heir, or buyer

A ward who reaches majority and finds that guardianship property was sold cheaply cannot simply count the shortfall and demand rescission if the sale carried judicial approval; the attack has to be built on some other ground, such as fraud on the court, want of authority, or a defect in the approval proceeding itself. A buyer, conversely, should treat the approval order as a document worth obtaining and keeping, since without it the sale stays exposed to the lesion remedy. Either way the first step is to read the order and the petition behind it. This is general legal information, not advice on your own transaction.

Related provisions

Note. Statute text quoted on this page is reproduced from the official enactment and is linked to the full provision. The explanation around it is general legal information from Vivas & Nobles Law Office, not legal advice. Whether it applies to your situation depends on facts only a lawyer reviewing them can assess.