Short answer. Yes. The vendor may still exercise the right to repurchase within thirty days from the time final judgment was rendered in the civil action holding the contract was a true sale with right to repurchase — this gives you a fresh window even if the ordinary redemption period already expired.

What the law says

However, the vendor may still exercise the right to repurchase within thirty days from the time final judgment was rendered in a civil action on the basis that the contract was a true sale with right to repurchase.

Civil Code, Article 1606 — Period to Repurchase. Read the full provision →

A fresh thirty-day window opens after the judgment

The statute gives you exactly the relief your situation calls for: the vendor may still exercise the right to repurchase within thirty days from the time final judgment was rendered in a civil action confirming the contract was a true sale with right to repurchase. Once the court's ruling that your pacto de retro was a genuine sale with a right to repurchase becomes final, this thirty-day window opens for you specifically.

How this fits with the ordinary redemption periods

Ordinarily, the right to repurchase lasts four years from the date of the contract if there was no express agreement on the period, or up to ten years if the parties agreed on a period. Litigation over whether a contract was really a sale with right to repurchase, rather than something else such as an equitable mortgage, can easily run past those ordinary periods. This thirty-day rule exists precisely to keep the vendor's right meaningful even when that has happened.

The trigger is finality of the judgment, on this specific basis

The thirty days runs from final judgment — meaning the ruling that the contract was a true sale with right to repurchase is no longer subject to ordinary appeal. It is also tied to that specific finding: the judgment must have been rendered on the basis that the contract was a true sale with right to repurchase, which matches the situation you describe, where the court determined your pacto de retro was indeed such a sale.

This is a narrow, additional opportunity, not an extension of the general period

This thirty-day period functions as a specific, additional opportunity tied to the litigation outcome — it does not lengthen the general four-year or ten-year periods for every vendor, only for one who had to go to court to establish that the contract was genuinely a sale with right to repurchase and obtained a final judgment saying so. If you did not go through that kind of litigation, this specific thirty-day rule would not be the basis for extending your time; the ordinary periods would instead control.

Cases citing this provision

These Supreme Court decisions cite the provision above. We list them so you can read them yourself; the summaries of what each decided are not ours to give.

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.