1. Mr. C can start using the car upon the start of the obligation. At case at bar Mr.

C’s rights
here are already acquired are lost once the condition is fulfilled. It was a resolutory
condition where in the obligation can be extinguish upon the happening of the condition
which is if Mr. C finish his course in law.
2. Void. Potestative condition. Because it is upon the sole will of the debtor. The obligation
is based on the sole will of the debtor is void. At case at bar Mr. D may goes to Baguio or
Mr. D may not go to Baguio. Therefore, it is a Potestative Condition.
3. The fruits of the land are still entitled to the owner, since the fruit is not yet delivered.
Article 1164 provides that “The creditor has a right to the fruits of the thing from the time
the obligation to deliver it arises. However, he shall acquire no real right over it until the
same has been delivered to him.” therefore Mr. D is still entitled of the fruits, since the
fruit is not delivered.
4. The remedy I would advise to Mr. B is he should demand a specific performance or
compliance of the obligation. At case at bar Mr. S failed to deliver the Specific Car to
Mr.B, therefore Mr.B can compel Mr. S to deliver the Specific.
5. Yes, Mr.C may compel Mr.D to pay before January 1, 2020. Because article 1198
provides that the debtor shall lose every right to make use of the period: When after the
obligation has been contracted, he becomes insolvent, unless he gives a guaranty or
security for the debt. At case at bar, the term is extinguished, and the obligation is
demandable at once. The insolvency referred to does not have to be judicially declared; it
is sufficient for him to find a hard time paying off his obligations because of financial
reverses that have made his assets less than his liabilities.
6. Yes, because it is an obligation demandable only when the arrival of the certain or fixed
period which is when Mr. C will graduate from college in March 2010. At case at bar, it
is necessarily must come. The parties know when it will happen or not.
7. Mr. C should first go to the Homeowner’s Association and compel them to send a
demand letter to Mr. D to remove the fence which was build in violation of the
subdivision rules. If the same remains unacted upon, then Mr. C may file a case for
specifiv performance against the HOA and Mr. D to perform against their respective
obligations based on the subdivision rules. According to the Civil Code, an obligation is a
juridical necessity to give, to do or not to do. In this case, the subdivision rules provide an
 obligation not to do which is not to build a fence higher than 2.5 m. Hence, when Mr. D
build a fence 3 meters high, he violated his obligation not to do and he may be made
liable therefore.
8. Mr. C become the owner of the land from the day of the constitution of the obligation.
Because Art. 1187 provides that “The effects of a conditional obligation to give, once the
condition has been fulfilled, shall retroact to the day of the constitution of the obligation.
9. Obligation with a term or period. This is considered by the law as an obligation with a
term. “When the debtor binds himself to pay when his means permit him to do so, the
obligation shall be deemed to be one with a period, the fact remains that payment does
not depend on debtor’s will, for indeed he had promised payment. What depends really
on him is not payment, but the TIME when payment is to be made. Hence, the law under
Art. 1180 considers this obligation as one with a TERM or PERIOD.
10. Valid. Obligation with suspensive condition the happening of which will give rise to the
acquisition of a right, at case at bar Mr. C will only get the reward if he graduated from
college. its efficacy or obligatory force is subordinated to the happening of a future and
uncertain event; if the suspensive condition does not take place, the parties would stand
as if the conditional obligation had never existed.