1

The payment made by Susan was rescissible because it was undertaken in

fraud of her other creditors.

In this case, the payment made by Susan was undertaken in fraud of her
other creditors. She was already in a state of insolvency when payment was
made. A set of rules became applicable in the payment of her debts, which Susan
ignored.

Therefore, the payment made by Susan was rescissible.

Do not use “each”.

Delia can demand the payment of the entire debt of P9M.

In solidary obligations, each one of the debtors are liable to the full amount of
the debt and each one of the creditors can demand compliance of the entire
obligation.

Here, Delia, as sole creditor, can demand the entire debt of P9M from Belinda,
as one of the solidary debtors.

3M.

Yes, Belinda may compel Amy to pay her back.

Under the New Civil Code, a solidary debtor is entitled to reimbursement if,
upon payment, a debt was condoned in favor of another solidary debtor.

In this case, since Amy’s debt was condoned after the demand by Delia and
payment of Belinda, Belinda may compel Amy to pay her back the amount of
P300K, the amount which corresponds to her share in the debt.

10

Indicate other elements to illustrate that it is not double sale.

No, I do not agree with Francisco’s contention.

The law on double sale requires that the sales were made by one seller.
In this case, the rst disposition was for 1/4 of the 400 sq. m. lot. The sale was
made by Dante to Efren. The second disposition is for the entire lot, which
was made by Alvin, Bernie, and Charlie to Francisco.

There being di erent sellers, Francisco cannot claim any preferred right he
may have under the law on double sale.

12

Donna is correct.

In an equitable mortgage, the mortgagee has the right to petition for the
consolidation of title upon the failure to redeem the immovable property within
the redemption period.

In this case, Donna and Cecilia entered into a contract of equitable mortgage.
The contract is an equitable mortgage because it is attended by the fact that it
was sold lower than its value.

15

No, I do not agree with Sonny because there was already a perfected contract
of sale.

No, I do not agree with Sonny.According to jurisprudence, an option money does

not form part of the purchase price. It is a price distinct from the purchase price
and according to jurisprudence, its object is to give the purchaser more time to
consider the option.

In this case, the P20,000 which was given by Romy to Sonny was an earnest
money. Furthermore, it was given with a promise to fully pay the purchase price of
P200,000. The intention of the parties was thus shown.

Therefore, I do not agree with Sonny because the P20,000 is not an option
money.
ff
fi