SEPTEMBER 5

Article 1544. If the same thing should have been sold to different vendees, the ownership shall be transferred to the person who may have first taken possession thereof in good faith, if it should be movable property. Article 1165. When what is to be delivered is a determinate thing, the creditor, in addition to the right granted him by article 1170, may compel the debtor to make the delivery. If the thing is indeterminate or generic, he may ask that the obligation be complied with at the expense of the debtor. If the obligor delays, or has promised to deliver the same thing to two or more persons who do not have the same interest, he shall be responsible for any fortuitous event until he has effected the delivery. Article 1170. Those who in the performance of their obligations are guilty of fraud, negligence, or delay, and those who in any manner contravene the tenor thereof, are liable for damages.

B.

Double Sales (Articles 1544 and 1165) Cheng v. Genato (300 SCRA 722 [1998]) (because it was a contract to sell, it was still subject to a suspensive condition, article 1544 did not apply in this case BUT they applied the principles of the article ) (requirements: two valid sales, perfected, two parties with conflicting interests, SAME subject matter acquired from the SAME person who is the owner) (good faith: no previous knowledge of infirmity, the Da Joses were in good faith because they are the first buyers, they have no knowledge of any prior sale to speak of, unlike cheng, who knew that the spouses had an agreement with Genato)

Consolidated Rural Bank (Cagayan Valley, Inc. v. Court of Appeals (448 SCRA 347 [2005]) Carbonell v. Court of Appeals (69 SCRA 99 [1976]) (including Separate Opinion) (bad faith = bad for you) Abrigo v. De Vera (432 SCRA 544 [2004]) nd (2 buyer to have advantage as contemplated in 1544 ,first registrant in good faith IN THE PROPER REGISTRATION THINGYMAJIGY has better right over the land) Naawan Community Rural Bank, Inc. v. Court of Appeals (395 SCRA 43 [2003]) Naval v. Court of Appeals (483 SCRA 102 [2006]) Dagupan Trading Co. v. Macam (14 SCRA 179 [1965]) Carumba v. Court of Appeals (31 SCRA 558 [1970])

x Acabal v. Acabal (454 SCRA 555 [2005]) x San Lorenzo Development Corp. v. Court of Appeals (449 SCRA 99 [2005]) x Adalin v. Court of Appeals (280 SCRA 536 [1997]) x Carillo v. Court of Appeals (503 SCRA 66 [2006])

Article 1582. The vendee is bound to accept delivery and to pay the price of the thing sold at the time and place stipulated in the contract. If the time and place should not have been stipulated, the payment must be made at the time and place of the delivery of the thing sold. (1500a) Article 1583. Unless otherwise agreed, the buyer of goods is not bound to accept delivery thereof by installments. Where there is a contract of sale of goods to be delivered by stated installments, which are to be separately paid for, and the seller makes defective deliveries in respect of one or more installments, or the buyer neglects or refuses without just cause to take delivery of or pay for one or more instalments, it depends in each case on the terms of the contract and the circumstances of the case, whether

the breach of contract is so material as to justify the injured party in refusing to proceed further and suing for damages for breach of the entire contract, or whether the breach is severable, giving rise to a claim for compensation but not to a right to treat the whole contract as broken. (n) Article 1584. Where goods are delivered to the buyer, which he has not previously examined, he is not deemed to have accepted them unless and until he has had a reasonable opportunity of examining them for the purpose of ascertaining whether they are in conformity with the contract if there is no stipulation to the contrary. Unless otherwise agreed, when the seller tenders delivery of goods to the buyer, he is bound, on request, to afford the buyer a reasonable opportunity of examining the goods for the purpose of ascertaining whether they are in conformity with the contract. Where goods are delivered to a carrier by the seller, in accordance with an order from or agreement with the buyer, upon the terms that the goods shall not be delivered by the carrier to the buyer until he has paid the price, whether such terms are indicated by marking the goods with the words "collect on delivery," or otherwise, the buyer is not entitled to examine the goods before the payment of the price, in the absence of agreement or usage of trade permitting such examination. (n) Article 1585. The buyer is deemed to have accepted the goods when he intimates to the seller that he has accepted them, or when the goods have been delivered to him, and he does any act in relation to them which is inconsistent with the ownership of the seller, or when, after the lapse of a reasonable time, he retains the goods without intimating to the seller that he has rejected them. (n) Article 1586. In the absence of express or implied agreement of the parties, acceptance of the goods by the buyer shall not discharge the seller from liability in damages or other legal remedy for breach of any promise or warranty in the contract of sale. But, if, after acceptance of the goods, the buyer fails to give notice to the seller of the breach in any promise of warranty within a reasonable time after the buyer knows, or ought to know of such breach, the seller shall not be liable therefor. (n) Article 1587. Unless otherwise agreed, where goods are delivered to the buyer, and he refuses to accept them, having the right so to do, he is not bound to return them to the seller, but it is sufficient if he notifies the seller that he refuses to accept them. If he voluntarily constitutes himself a depositary thereof, he shall be liable as such. (n) Article 1588. If there is no stipulation as specified in the first paragraph of article 1523, when the buyer's refusal to accept the goods is without just cause, the title thereto passes to him from the moment they are placed at his disposal. (n) Article 1589. The vendee shall owe interest for the period between the delivery of the thing and the payment of the price, in the following three cases: (1) Should it have been so stipulated; (2) Should the thing sold and delivered produce fruits or income; (3) Should he be in default, from the time of judicial or extrajudicial demand for the payment of the price. (1501a)

C.

Obligations of the Buyer (Articles 1582-1589)

D. Effect of Sale by a Non-Owner or One with Voidable Title (Articles 1505 and 1506) Paulmitan v. Court of Appeals (215 SCRA 866 [1992]) Mindanao Academy, Inc. v. Yap (13 SCRA 190 [1965]) Bucton v. Gabar (55 SCRA 499 [1974]) EDCA Publishing v. Santos (184 SCRA 614 [1990]) Aznar v. Yapdiangco (13 SCRA 486 [1965]) x Cruz v. Pahati (98 Phil 788 [1956]) x Dizon v. Suntay (47 SCRA 160 [1972]) VII. Documents of Title (Articles 1507-1520, 1636) VIII. Loss, Deterioration, Fruits A. Applicability (Article 1263) B. Effects of Loss or Deterioration of the Subject Matter (Articles 1493-1494, 1164, 1189, 1262, 1480, 1504, 1538, 1480, 1163, 1164, 1165, 1504, 1538, 1189)

C.

Fruits (Articles 1480, 1537-1538)

SEPTEMBER 12 IX. Remedies for Breach (Articles 1594-1599) A. Remedies of the Seller 1. Movables (Articles 1593, 1595-1597) 2. Unpaid Seller (Articles 1524-1535) 3. Recto Law (Articles 1484-1486) Levy v. Gervacio (69 Phil 52 [1939] Delta Motor Sales Corp. v. Niu Kim Duan (213 SCRA 259 [1992]) Tajanglangit v. Southern Motors (101 Phil. 606 [1957]) Nonato v. IAC (140 SCRA 255 [1985]) Ridad v. Filipinas Investment (120 SCRA 246 [1983]) Northern Motors v. Sapinoso (33 SCRA 356 [1970]) Cruz v. Filipinas Investment (23 SCRA 791 [1968]) Borbon II v. Servicewide Specialists, Inc. (258 SCRA 634 [1996]) Filipinas Investment v. Ridad (30 SCRA 564 [1969]) PCI Leasing and Finance, Inc. v. Giraffe-X Creative Imaging, Inc. (527 SCRA 405 [2007]) x Zayas v. Luneta Motors (117 SCRA 726 [1982]) x Macondray & Co. v. Eustaquio (64 Phil 446 [1937])

4.

B. SEPTEMBER 19 C.

Immovables i. Subdivision Lots and Condominium Units: Sections 23 and 24, Presidential Decree No. 957 ii. Maceda Law (Republic Act No. 6552) Jestra Development and Management Corp. v. Pacifico (513 SCRA 413 [2007]) x Mc Laughlin v. Court of Appeals (144 SCRA 693 [1986]) x Garcia v. Court of Appeals (619 SCRA 280 [2010]) iii. Non-Residential Immovables: Articles 1191 and 1592 iv. Remedies of the Buyer (Articles 1590, 1598-1599, 1191; PD 957, Sections 23 and 24)

Cancellation of Contracts to Sell v. Breach of Contract of Sale 1. Resolution (Rescission) (Articles 1191, 1479, 1592) 2. Definitions and Distinctions Adelfa Properties, Inc. v. Court of Appeals (240 SCRA 575 [1995]) Coronel v. Court of Appeals (263 SCRA 15 [1996]) PNB v. Court of Appeals (262 SCRA 464 [1996]) Babasa v. Court of Appeals (290 SCRA 532 [1998]) Valdez v. Court of Appeals (439 SCRA 55 [2004]) De Leon v. Ong (611 SCRA 381 [2010]) Dignos v. Court of Appeals (158 SCRA 375 [1988]) 3. Cancellation of CTS University of the Philippines v. De Los Angeles (35 SCRA 103 [1970]) x Palay, Inc. v. Clave (124 SCRA 638 [1983]) x Lim v. Court of Appeals (182 SCRA 564 [1990]) x AFP Mutual Benefit Association, Inc. v. Court of Appeals (364 SCRA 768 [2001])

X.

Conditions and Warranties x Power Commercial and Industrial Corp. v. Court of Appeals (274 SCRA 597 [1997]) A. Conditions (Article 1545) Laforteza v. Machuca (333 SCRA 643 [2000]) Heirs of Pedro Escanlar v. Court of Appeals (281 SCRA 176 [1997]) B. Warranties

1. 2. 3.

Express (Article 1546) x Guinhawa v. People (468 SCRA 278 [2005]) Implied (Articles 1547-1580) Ang v. Court of Appeals (567 SCRA 53 [2008]) Nutrimix Feeds Corp. v. Court of Apeals (441 SCRA 357 [2004]) Remedies (Article 1599)

XI. Extinguishment of Sale A. Modes of Extinguishment of Obligations (Article 1231 and 1600) B. Conventional Redemption (Articles 1601 to 1618) x Roberts v. Papio (515 SCRA 346 [2007]) x Misterio v. Cebu State College of Science and Technology (461 SCRA 122 [2005]) x Solid Homes, Inc. v. Court of Appeals (275 SCRA 267 [1997]) x A. Francisco Realty v. Court of Appeals (298 SCRA 349 [1998]) x Abilla v. Gobonseng (374 SCRA 51 [2002]) C. Legal Redemption (Articles 1619 to 1623) Francisco v. Boiser (332 SCRA 305 [2000]) XII. XIII. XIV. Assignment of Credit and Other Incorporeal Rights (Articles 1624 to 1635) xNyco Sales Corp. v. BA Finance (200 SCRA 637 [1991]) xLicaros v. Gatmaitan (362 SCRA 548 [2001]) Bulk Sales Law (Act No. 3952) xChin v. Uy (40 O.G. 4 Supp. 52) xDBP v. The Honorable Judge of the RTC of Manila (86 O.G. No. 6 1137, 5 February 1990) Retail Trade Liberalization Act of 2000 xBalmaceda v. Union Carbide Philippines, Inc. (124 SCRA 893 [1983]) xGoodyear Tire v. Reyes, Sr. (123 SCRA 273 [1983])