Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Midterm Sales 1
Midterm Sales 1
SALES
Petitioner argues that the impostor acquired no title to the books that he could have validly
transferred to Mr. Delgado, the private respondent. Its reason is that as the payment check bounced
for lack of funds, there was a failure of consideration that the nullified the contract of sale between it
and Mr. Hermoso.
• Question: Has EDCA been unlawfully deprived of the books because the check issued by the
impostor Mr. Hermoso in payment therefor was dishonored?
8. Facts: Geneva (buyer) sold to Melissa (seller) lot No. 20, Calle San
Jose, Ermita, Manila for the sum of P3,200. The document recites that
the tract contains 152.46 square meters. On the date assigned for the
execution of the final deed of sale, Geneva refused to pay the agreed price
claiming that the land was less in area than that stated in the contract.
Geneva claimed a proportional reduction of the price or else he would
not buy. So, Melissa brought action for specific performance.
• Question: Is Geneva relieved from the obligation of paying the price?
9. Facts: Melba (seller) sold to Amada (buyer) the hacienda Maria which, according to
Melba, contained an area of 258 hectares more or less, the standing crop thereon
capable of yielding not less than 2,000 piculs of sugar. During the negotiations, Amada
always doubted the correctness of the area and the amount of crop given by Melba who
always assured Amada that they were correct.
In short, the parties made the sale with particular attention to the area.
It turned out that the land contained only 18 hectares and the crop yielded only 800
piculs of sugar.
• Question: Has Amada the right to ask for rescission of the sale or the proportionate
reduction of the price?
10. Facts: Benedict (seller) sold a parcel of land to Marlyn (buyer) under
pacto de retro. The sale was executed in a public instrument but was not
recorded in the registry of deeds. Marlyn never took material possession
of land. The period for repurchase elapsed without Benedict making use
of it. Later, Benedict sold the same by means of a private document to
Joed (third person), who immediately took material possession thereof.
Marlyn brought action for recovery of the land.
• Question: Who has better right to the land, Marlyn or Joed?