Mendoza, Adeline Rose O.

2019162401 – 2nd year

Exercise 1:

1. In business, we should have a legal contract. The first thing that you should have been
the legal structure of your business. Because this will review in the BIR here in the
Philippines, to know what legal structure of business is its sole proprietorship or
corporation. Second is, the original trademark of the business because if you plagiarize
every aspect that you copy without a permit to do so. Third is the license of the
business, it is the most important thing of the business, it is to show how legal your
business is.
2. Law or law in general, it is an any rule of action or any system of uniformity. It is not only
the activities of men as a rational being but is also a movement or motion of all objects
of creation whether it is a simply alive or not living. Law is important to us because it will
help us to find a justice, it is also a proof of contract or any obligation that you need to
follow. It is also a rule of action, meaning it will applys in every aspect.

Exercise 2:

1. No, there is no contract that A and B agreed to it. They’re just agreed to each other that
they will meet at Manila Hotel by 7pm.

Stated in the
Article 1159,
“Obligations
arising from
contracts have
the force of law
between the
contracting
parties and
should be
complied with
in good faith”
In this case, X
delivered ten
bottles but two
of them were
filled with
brandy diluted
with black tea.
The two
bottles diluted
with black tea
is not stated in
their contract
and not in the
knowledge of
Y. Therefore, X
is
liable she did
not comply in
good faith.
Non-
compliance by
a party with his
legitimate
obligations
after
receiving the
benefits of a
contract would
constitute
unjust
enrichment on
his part.
2. In this case, X delivered ten bottles but two of them were filled with brandy diluted with
black tea. The two bottles diluted with black tea is not stated in their contract and not in
the knowledge of Y. Therefore, X is liable he did not comply in good faith. Non-
 compliance by a party with his legitimate obligations after receiving the benefits of a
contract would constitute unjust enrichment of his part.
3. Z can ask for imbursement from W’s brother. This case is somewhat related to quasi
contract.
4. The efficient cause of the juridical tie of this case is Quasi-contract specially Negotiorum
Gestion. The prestation or the subject matter of the obligation is the well and alive dog.
A, the one who saved the dog, is the debtor and his neighbor B is the creditor.

Exercise 3:

1. The obligation of A is to deliver the horse named Thunder to B.

2. No, the obligation of X is to only to deliver the lot.
3. If it’s in the contract or there is saying that they have third party in the contract or
others can perform. I think that can allow, but if they didn’t mention while they are
making the contract, there is no other perform need to perform.
4. No, B will be the owner of the cellphone if A delivers it to B and B received it, that is
when B is now the new owner of the cellphone.

Exercise 4:

1. A is not in delay. As a general rule “No demand no delay”. This is in accordance with
Article 1169. So even if A has not paid on due date, without the demand of B, he cannot
be in delay.
2. The case did not clearly specify if X committed fraud in the performance of an obligation
ready existing – incidental fraud. So we assume that what happened in the case is fraud
employed in the execution of a contract – causal fraud. In casual fraud, consent is
vitiated that’s why a person has the right to have the contract annulled. Thus, upon
knowing that the sack was filled with brown sugar, Y can ask for annulment of contract
but not with damages.
3. From the time A delivered coffee maker but B failed to pay, B is already in delay. Since
no date is set for performance of their respective obligations, it is understood that it
must be simultaneous. A cannot demand payment if he himself cannot deliver the
coffee maker. From the moment A delivers the coffee maker, B is in default if he does
not pay S without the need of any demand.
4. Yes, the obligation is extinguished. But X is not liable to pay for damages because he is
not guilty of delay since no demand was made by B. and that is in accordance with the
rule of Article 1174 of the Civil Code.
5. Yes, A can transfer his right to hold that office to another person unless it is prohibited
by stipulation of the parties. Because according to Article 1178, subject to the laws, all
 right acquired in virtue of an obligation are transmissible, if there has been no
stipulation to the contrary.

Exercise 5:

1. The obligation of A to give B is a bicycle is immediately demandable because there is no

condition and no date is mentioned for its fulfillment. A’s obligation is considered as
Pure Obligation.
2. The obligation is demandable if the latter passes his Law 1 subject this semester.
3. The obligation is demandable on the spot and in case B fails his Law 1 subject, he shall
have to return the bicycle. Then the obligation will be demandable by A if B fails his
subject.
4. The obligation is a period because it depends on the duration of the obligation that the
debtor such as “little by little” or “from time to time” is in to and not whether he can
pay.
5. The condition of obligation of Y to kill W for 50,000 is void. Both the obligation and
condition are void because it is a legally impossible condition that is contrary to law and
morals.
6. The conditional obligation is void because the validity and compliance is left to the will
of A and it cannot, therefore, be easily demanded. In order not to be liable, the debtor
will not just fulfill the condition. There is no burden on the debtor and consequently, no
juridical tie is created.
7. Since the car was loss without the fault of debtor, the obligation is extinguished and X is
not liable. A person, as a general rule, is not a liable for fortuitous event.

Exercise 6:

1. It is a period. It is a future and certain event. A birthday is certain that will happen to a
person and on Article 1193 states that this day or event must necessarily come although
not be know when. Specifically, it is a suspensive period because the obligation will only
take effect if the latter turns 21.
2. If the obligation does not state a period or no period is intended then the court is not
authorized to fix a period because the court has no right to make contracts for the
parties unless there is a period intended due to its nature or the duration of the period
depends on the will of the debtor. In this case, it does not state a period when will A
give B 10,000 and no period was intended.
3. In the first event, Y can either get the horse or get the cow/pig with damage however in
the second event, Y cannot ask for anything because the horse is lost due to a fortuitous
event. However, X will still be liable and his obligation is not extinguished because he is
 guilty of negligence in the first place. Y can cancel the obligation with payment for
damages.

Exercise 7:

1. X should collected the payment from A, B, C by telling or asking them. If it doesn’t work,
write a letter asking them to repay the amount they are indebted. The letter must
contain the names and addresses, how much they owe for what purpose they took the
amount, what X did to recover the amount.
2. It is a joint obligation because both the debtors promised to pay the amount
proportionately. So it is a joint obligation and X can recover from both A and B.
3. It is a solidarity obligation because one of the debtors is bound to render the entire
payment. Either A or B has promised to pay the amount to X.
4. X, Y and Z are the solidarity creditors of A in the sum of 30,000. Y made a demand on A
and A paid the entire amount to Z. This is called Active Solidarity where any one of the
solidary creditors can demand the whole amount on behalf of all the creditors. The
obligation here is extinguished between X, Y, Z, and A but X and Y should collect the
payment from Z who has the entire amount. It is completely extinguished only after
every creditors gets their portion of the amount.
5. A, B and C are individually and collectively indebted to X in the sum of 30,000. Besides
several demands, the debtors failed to pay the amount. But X sued B only for the whole
amount. It is not proper because each debtor is liable only up to the proportion he is
indebted to. It is not proper to sure B for the whole amount as B is not responsible for
the entire sum of 30,000. A and C must be also sued by X to recover the debt.

Exercise 8:

1. Yes
2. Yes, X is a third person and X made the payment to B. The obligation of A to B has been
extinguished on the date of the payment.
3. No, X cannot compel B to assign or transfer to him the right in the mortgage because
according to Article 1237 that whoever pays on behalf of the debtor without the
knowledge or against the will of the latter, cannot compel the creditor to subrogate him
in his rights, such as those arising from mortgage, guaranty or penalty.
4. X can recover from A the amount of 100,000 only because it is the only amount that has
been beneficial for A.
5. The obligation of A to repair the house of B has been extinguished due to fortuitous
event because according to Article 1266 which states that the debtor in obligations to
do shall also be released when the prestation becomes legally or physically impossible
without the fault of the obligor. The prestation to repair the house, since the house is
 destroyed the obligation is impossible because there is nothing to repair due to the
accidental fire.
6. No, because the check needs to be cashed by the bank to be considered that the
obligation is extinguished because according to Article 1249 which states that the
delivery of promissory notes payable to order, or bills of exchange or other mercantile
documents shall produce the effect of payment only when they have been cashed, or
when through the fault of the creditor they have been impaired. In the meantime, the
action derived from the original obligation shall be held in abeyance.
7. No, because it has to have a consignation of the thing or sum due because according to
Article 1256 which states that If the creditor to whom tender of payment has been
made refuses without just cause to accept it, the debtor shall be released from
responsibility by the consignation of the thing or sum due.
8. If the debtor dies without paying his debt, then his or her legal heir is obligated to pay
up to the extent wealth of the debtor. Similarly, if the debtor dies before due date of
payment, the legal heir is obliged to pay it up to the extent of the wealth of the
deceased creditors.
9. A’s payment is legitimate because he only repaid the money he borrowed from B, and
he cannot be concerned with what B will do to the money.

Exercise 9:

1. Yes, because it is a joint obligation which means that they should be a different or
distinct payment to A. Unless it is solidary because in solidary the obligation will be
extinguished.
2. No, because they only have the same value but not the same kind. According to Article
1279 which states that both debts consist in a sum of money, or if the things due are
consumable, they be of the same kind, and also of the same quality if the latter has
been stated;
3. No, because they only secure it, which means that it is just an addition of a penal clause
in the obligation and the real estate mortgage is just a security in case A might not pay
B.

Exercise 10:

1. Yes, the contract is perfected because it was consensual contract. They both agreed and
had a mutual consent that the motorcycle will be bought at 15,000.
2. Nothing will happen because there is no consent of the seller that they will sell the
motorcycle. The contract is also not perfected because there was no meeting of minds.
3. Yes, the contract is perfected because it was consensual contract and the also have
mutual consent, so the contract is perfected.
4. No, the contract is not perfected because it is only a real contract. It needs to be
delivered first for the contract to be called perfected.
 Exercise 11:
1. No, there is no true acceptance of the bid because B rejects A’s bid to sell the car for
200,000 and B instead offered 150,000. When both parties agrees on terms of the
contracts it became legally binding. There will be a contract if B accepts the offer price
of A which is 200,000.
2. If the contracts states that A is responsible for losses, A is not liable for them. The offer
is time limited and A gives B more time to accept it. Liability for losses incurred as a
resulting of the selling to a third party should be agreed with another deal to bid on the
contract.
3. X is the who has better rights over the car because B issued his letter of acceptance on
march 10 after the car has been sold to X on march 7, resulting in the bid being is null
and void after march 7 because the car is already sold and B did not provide his
acceptance before X buys the car.
4. B can sue A for the annulment of contract and damages because B has the rights. Since
the deal between A and B has been committed even though it is a false commitment
because it has two out of ten bottles are black tea, which results to a right to sue A for
contract annulment with damages.
5. It is a deal between two parties to regain the payment using the land because X has a
huge debt and is unable to pay his creditors, that resulted from A selling his home. If the
buyer refuses to sell, then the creditors have the rights to sue them in court. The
contract is legally binding and serves to ensure the payment of creditors, which is
sometimes done in good faith.
6. Basically, if there is no consideration then there is no deal or contract. Since
consideration is one of the contracts essential elements.

Exercise 12:

1. This is not a rescissible contract because it must be entered by the contracting party, but
no one of the parties has suffered economic harm and there is no economic losses to
either of the parties because the loss is only limited to M because he is the owner of the
land.
2. Yes, Y can enforce the contract against X because the contract is binded and the earnest
money is part of the purchasing price. Upon receipt, 450,000 is the only amount that is
left which is needed to be paid and upon receipt of the earnest money, there is already
a sale. It can be considered as a sale even though it is oral.
3. Yes, the object is valid because a contract can be valid if it is established with goals of
the future in mind.
4. The contract is void and has no legal effects on all sides. They cannot sue each other
because if one of them fails to comply to the terms of the contract.
5. Yes, the money will be back because the government controls the price of basic goods
during an emergency. If someone paid more than the worth of the item, then they can
recover the difference with legal interest.