Brenda saw the online

advertisement of Evelyn,
who sells limited
edition
sneakers. Through an
exchange of text messages,
Evelyn and Brenda agreed
that:
(i) Evelyn will sell to
Brenda a pair of brand-new
sneakers for Php
25,000.00; (ii)
Brenda will deposit the
purchase price in Evelyn’s
bank account; and (iii)
Evelyn
will deliver the
sneakers within ten
days from deposit.
Brenda deposited the
purchase price and Evelyn
acknowledged receipt
thereof. Before the delivery
of
the sneakers, Evelyn
received an offer from
Rosela to buy the same
sneakers for
Php 35,000.00. Evelyn
candidly tells Brenda that
she is selling the sneakers
at a
higher price to another
buyer, and sends this text
message to Brenda: “Sizt,
may
iba pala akong buyer na
mas malaki yung offer,
sorry! Balik ko nalang
bayad mo,
keri?” Evelyn claims
that since the sneakers
have not yet been
delivered to
Brenda, she can still
withdraw the offer.
Brenda saw the online
advertisement of Evelyn,
who sells limited
edition
sneakers. Through an
exchange of text messages,
Evelyn and Brenda agreed
that:
(i) Evelyn will sell to
Brenda a pair of brand-new
sneakers for Php
25,000.00; (ii)
Brenda will deposit the
purchase price in Evelyn’s
bank account; and (iii)
Evelyn
will deliver the
sneakers within ten
days from deposit.
Brenda deposited the
purchase price and Evelyn
acknowledged receipt
thereof. Before the delivery
of
the sneakers, Evelyn
received an offer from
Rosela to buy the same
sneakers for
Php 35,000.00. Evelyn
candidly tells Brenda that
she is selling the sneakers
at a
higher price to another
buyer, and sends this text
message to Brenda: “Sizt,
may
iba pala akong buyer na
mas malaki yung offer,
sorry! Balik ko nalang
bayad mo,
keri?” Evelyn claims
that since the sneakers
have not yet been
delivered to
Brenda, she can still
withdraw the offer.
Brenda saw the online
advertisement of Evelyn,
who sells limited
edition
sneakers. Through an
exchange of text messages,
Evelyn and Brenda agreed
that:
(i) Evelyn will sell to
Brenda a pair of brand-new
sneakers for Php
25,000.00; (ii)
Brenda will deposit the
purchase price in Evelyn’s
bank account; and (iii)
Evelyn
will deliver the
sneakers within ten
days from deposit.
Brenda deposited the
purchase price and Evelyn
acknowledged receipt
thereof. Before the delivery
of
the sneakers, Evelyn
received an offer from
Rosela to buy the same
sneakers for
Php 35,000.00. Evelyn
candidly tells Brenda that
she is selling the sneakers
at a
higher price to another
buyer, and sends this text
message to Brenda: “Sizt,
may
iba pala akong buyer na
mas malaki yung offer,
sorry! Balik ko nalang
bayad mo,
keri?” Evelyn claims
that since the sneakers
have not yet been
delivered to
Brenda, she can still
withdraw the offer.
Brenda saw the online
advertisement of Evelyn,
who sells limited
edition
sneakers. Through an
exchange of text messages,
Evelyn and Brenda agreed
that:
(i) Evelyn will sell to
Brenda a pair of brand-new
sneakers for Php
25,000.00; (ii)
Brenda will deposit the
purchase price in Evelyn’s
bank account; and (iii)
Evelyn
will deliver the
sneakers within ten
days from deposit.
Brenda deposited the
purchase price and Evelyn
acknowledged receipt
thereof. Before the delivery
of
the sneakers, Evelyn
received an offer from
Rosela to buy the same
sneakers for
Php 35,000.00. Evelyn
candidly tells Brenda that
she is selling the sneakers
at a
higher price to another
buyer, and sends this text
message to Brenda: “Sizt,
may
iba pala akong buyer na
mas malaki yung offer,
sorry! Balik ko nalang
bayad mo,
keri?” Evelyn claims
that since the sneakers
have not yet been
delivered to
Brenda, she can still
withdraw the offer.
Brenda saw the online
advertisement of Evelyn,
who sells limited
edition
sneakers. Through an
exchange of text messages,
Evelyn and Brenda agreed
that:
(i) Evelyn will sell to
Brenda a pair of brand-new
sneakers for Php
25,000.00; (ii)
Brenda will deposit the
purchase price in Evelyn’s
bank account; and (iii)
Evelyn
will deliver the
sneakers within ten
days from deposit.
Brenda deposited the
purchase price and Evelyn
acknowledged receipt
thereof. Before the delivery
of
the sneakers, Evelyn
received an offer from
Rosela to buy the same
sneakers for
Php 35,000.00. Evelyn
candidly tells Brenda that
she is selling the sneakers
at a
higher price to another
buyer, and sends this text
message to Brenda: “Sizt,
may
iba pala akong buyer na
mas malaki yung offer,
sorry! Balik ko nalang
bayad mo,
keri?” Evelyn claims
that since the sneakers
have not yet been
delivered to
Brenda, she can still
withdraw the offer.
Brenda saw the online
advertisement of Evelyn,
who sells limited
edition
sneakers. Through an
exchange of text messages,
Evelyn and Brenda agreed
that:
(i) Evelyn will sell to
Brenda a pair of brand-new
sneakers for Php
25,000.00; (ii)
Brenda will deposit the
purchase price in Evelyn’s
bank account; and (iii)
Evelyn
will deliver the
sneakers within ten
days from deposit.
Brenda deposited the
purchase price and Evelyn
acknowledged receipt
thereof. Before the delivery
of
the sneakers, Evelyn
received an offer from
Rosela to buy the same
sneakers for
Php 35,000.00. Evelyn
candidly tells Brenda that
she is selling the sneakers
at a
higher price to another
buyer, and sends this text
message to Brenda: “Sizt,
may
iba pala akong buyer na
mas malaki yung offer,
sorry! Balik ko nalang
bayad mo,
keri?” Evelyn claims
that since the sneakers
have not yet been
delivered to
Brenda, she can still
withdraw the offer.
Brenda saw the online
advertisement of Evelyn,
who sells limited
edition
sneakers. Through an
exchange of text messages,
Evelyn and Brenda agreed
that:
(i) Evelyn will sell to
Brenda a pair of brand-new
sneakers for Php
25,000.00; (ii)
Brenda will deposit the
purchase price in Evelyn’s
bank account; and (iii)
Evelyn
will deliver the
sneakers within ten
days from deposit.
Brenda deposited the
purchase price and Evelyn
acknowledged receipt
thereof. Before the delivery
of
the sneakers, Evelyn
received an offer from
Rosela to buy the same
sneakers for
Php 35,000.00. Evelyn
candidly tells Brenda that
she is selling the sneakers
at a
higher price to another
buyer, and sends this text
message to Brenda: “Sizt,
may
iba pala akong buyer na
mas malaki yung offer,
sorry! Balik ko nalang
bayad mo,
keri?” Evelyn claims
that since the sneakers
have not yet been
delivered to
Brenda, she can still
withdraw the offer.
Brenda saw the online advertisement of Evelyn, who sells limited edition sneakers. Through
an exchange of text messages, Evelyn and Brenda agreed that:(i) Evelyn will sell to Brenda a pair of
brand-new sneakers for Php 25,000.00; (ii)Brenda will deposit the purchase price in Evelyn’s bank
account; and (iii) Evelyn will deliver the sneakers within ten days from deposit. Brenda
deposited the purchase price and Evelyn acknowledged receipt thereof. Before the delivery of the
sneakers, Evelyn received an offer from Rosela to buy the same sneakers forPhp 35,000.00. Evelyn
candidly tells Brenda that she is selling the sneakers at a higher price to another buyer, and sends this
text message to Brenda: “Sizt, may iba pala akong buyer na mas malaki yung offer, sorry! Balik ko nalang
bayad mo, keri?” Evelyn claims that since the sneakers have not yet been delivered to
Brenda, she can still withdraw the offer. Is Evelyn’s contention tenable?
No, Evelyn’s contention is not tenable.

Under the civil code, upon the perfection of the contract, there arise reciprocal obligations of the
parties. In a contract of sale, the seller is bound to deliver and transfer ownership of the thing, while the
buyer is bound to pay the price.

In this case, Evelyn and Brenda had a perfected contract when they had a meeting of minds over the
sale of a brand new sneakers for P25,000. Brenda had deposited the purchase price as agreed. Evelyn
was bound to deliver the item. She could no longer withdraw the offer as it was already accepted by
Brenda and, more importantly, Brenda had already performed her end of the contract.

Thus, Evelyn should deliver the sneakers to Brenda.

In 2017, Alma orally sold a

parcel of unregistered land
to the spouses Ray and
Shane for Php 500,000.00.
Upon receipt of the initial
payment of Php
350,000.00,
Alma delivered possession
of the land to the spouses.
Shortly thereafter, Alma
died. In order to formalize
the sale, Ray and Shane
convinced Josie, one of
Alma’s
children, to sign a notarized
deed of confirmation of
sale. In consideration
thereof,
Josie received Php
150,000.00 representing
the balance of the purchase
price. On
the strength of the
notarized confirmation
of sale, the spouses
were able to
transfer the tax declaration
of the property in their
names. Later, Josie died. In
2020, the surviving
children of Alma
discovered the oral sale of
the land to Ray
and Shane. They demanded
the return of the property
on the following grounds:
(i) the oral contract of
sale is void because it
does not appear in a
public
instrument; and
(ii) assuming the sale is not
void, it is unenforceable
under the Statute of Frauds.
Ray and Shane insisted that
the sale of the land to them
was both valid and
enforceable.
Are the contentions of the
heirs of Alma tenable?
Explain briefly. (5 points
In 2017, Alma orally sold a parcel of unregistered land to the spouses Ray andShane for Php 500,000.00.
Upon receipt of the initial payment of Php 350,000.00,Alma delivered possession of the land to the
spouses. Shortly thereafter, Alma died. In order to formalize the sale, Ray and Shane convinced Josie,
one of Alma’schildren, to sign a notarized deed of confirmation of sale. In consideration thereof,Josie
received Php 150,000.00 representing the balance of the purchase price. Onthe strength of the
notarized confirmation of sale, the spouses were able to transfer the tax declaration of the
property in their names. Later, Josie died. In2020, the surviving children of Alma discovered the oral sale
of the land to Rayand Shane. They demanded the return of the property on the following grounds:

(i) the oral contract of sale is void because it does not appear in a public instrument; and

(ii) assuming the sale is not void, it is unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds. Ray and Shane insisted
that the sale of the land to them was both valid and enforceable. Are the contentions of the heirs of
Alma tenable? Explain briefly. (5 points

No, the contentions of the heirs of Alma are not tenable.

Under the Civil Code, the sale of real property should not only be in writing but must also be in public
instrument. However, these rules are only for convenience and enforceability. An oral sale of real
property is valid and may be enforced if it is partly or fully consummated.
In this case, the sale was originally made between Alma and the Spouses Ray and Shane. A portion of
the purchase price was already paid by the buyers. The balance was paid to Josie, one of Alma’s
children, because Alma had already died. Although it was only Josie, and not all the heirs, who executed
the notarized deed of sale, this is an issue between the heirs which did not render the original oral sale
invalid or unenforceable.

Hence, the other heirs of Alma cannot assail the sale.

Aida, for the

consideration of Php
5,000,000.00, sold her
parcel of land to
Lorna, as evidenced by a
notarized Deed of Sale.
Lorna, however, failed to
deliver
the amount in full, paying
only Php 500,000.00 as
down payment. Because of
the
nonpayment of the balance,
Aida simply sold the same
parcel of land to Fe with
the intention of returning to
Lorna the Php 500,000.00
down payment
Aida, for the consideration of Php 5,000,000.00, sold her parcel of land to Lorna, as evidenced by a
notarized Deed of Sale. Lorna, however, failed to deliver the amount in full, paying only Php 500,000.00
as down payment. Because of the nonpayment of the balance, Aida simply sold the same parcel of land
to Fe with the intention of returning to Lorna the Php 500,000.00 down payment.

Who among Aida, Lorna and Fe owns the property? Explain briefly.

Lorna owns the property.

Under the Civil Code, ownership is transferred to the buyer either by actual or constructive delivery. The
execution of public instrument such as a notarized deed of sale is a mode of constructive delivery . The
failure of the buyer to pay the price simply gives the seller the right to demand payment or to rescind
the sale.
In this case, Aida sold the property to Lorna, and they executed a notarized deed of sale. Ownership has
already transferred to Lorna. Lorna’s failure to pay the balance of the purchase price did not revert
ownership to Aida. Aida should first either demand payment of the price or properly rescind the sale.

Thus, no longer the owner of the property, Aida could not sell it to Fe.