LONG QUIZ # 1

Civil Law Review II

December 18, 2017

INSTRUCTION: Answer each item as brief as possible. HOWEVER, do not sacrifice substance for
brevity! Please make your handwriting readable and your English understandable. As always, any of
the following will result to a point deduction: improper marking or erasure, wrong spelling, erroneous
grammar, informal writing styles, abbreviations, non-observance of margins, mistakes in capitalization
or syntax, insertions between words, running sentences, and super-impositions. Good luck and Merry
Christmas in advance.
“If you know your enemy and know yourself, you need not
fear the result of a hundred battles…”
- The Art of War (Sun Tzu)
x-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x

A is indebted to B for P10,000 evidenced by a written instrument.

(a) Suppose the foregoing debt had already prescribed and thereafter B demanded payment from
A, can the latter be compelled to pay? Explain with legal basis. (5 points)

(b) What if A paid B despite the fact that the debt already prescribed, can he later on recover
what he paid? Explain with legal basis. (5 points)

(c) Three months after A paid to B P10,000, B gave back the said amount to A because he pitied
A, who lost his house to fire. Can the heirs of B (suppose B died 5 days after he returned the P10,000)
get back the said amount from A? Explain with legal basis. (5 points)

(d) What is civil obligation and how does it differ from natural obligation and moral
obligation? (5 points)

II

Mr. Raymundo is the absolute owner of a parcel of land, together with the house and other
improvements thereon. On August 8, 2008, he entered into an agreement with Ms. Velarde resulting to
the execution of a formal document denominated as “Deed of Sale with Assumption of Mortgage”. One
of the provisions in the said Deed is that “Mr. Raymundo sells, cedes, transfers, conveys, and delivers
the property to Ms. Velarde for P800,000 and that Ms. Velarde assumes to pay the mortgage obligations
on the property in the amount of P1.8M in favor of BPI. On the same date, Ms. Velarde also executed
an Undertaking, parts of which provide as follows:

“*****(3) Ms. Avelina binds and obligates herself to strictly and faithfully
comply with the following terms and conditions: a. until such time that the
assumption of mortgage obligations on the property is approved by BPI,
Ms. Avelina shall continue to pay said loan in accordance with its terms
and conditions; b. In the event Ms. Avelina violates any of the terms and
conditions, her down-payment of P800,000.00 plus all payments made
with BPI on the mortgage loan shall be forfeited in favor of Mr.
Raymundo, and that Mr. Raymundo shall resume total and complete
possession and ownership of the property, and the Deed of Sale with
Assumption of Mortgage shall be deemed automatically canceled.”

On December 15, 2008, after learning that BPI had disapproved the assumption of mortgage,
Ms. Velarde stopped making any further payment. Because of this, Mr. Raymundo canceled/rescinded
the aforesaid Deed of Sale with Assumption of Mortgage by sending a notarized notice thereabout to
Ms. Velarde. For her part, Ms. Velarde contended that she is willing to pay provided that Mr.
Raymundo shall, among others, cause the release of title and mortgage from BPI and make the title
available and free from any liens and encumbrances.

Given the foregoing facts, was the cancellation/rescission of the sale valid? Explain with legal
basis. (10 points)

III

(a) Mr. Tan borrowed money from Ms. Cortes. He executed a promissory note wherein he
undertakes to pay the said loan on or before February 14, 2013. Suppose today is February 15, 2013
and Mr. Tan failed to pay his indebtedness, is he already in default in the payment of this obligation?
Explain with legal basis. (5 points)

(b) Enumerate the exceptions to the rule that there is no legal delay on the part of the obligor
unless a demand, judicial or extra-judicial, is made upon him/her. (5 points)

IV

Atty. Crisostomo, a well-traveled person, contracted the services of Caravan Travel and Tours to
arrange and facilitate her booking, ticketing, and accommodation in a tour dubbed as “Jewels of
Europe”. Pursuant to the contract, the travel agency delivered to Atty. Crisostomo the travel documents
and plane tickets, and told her to be at the airport on Saturday two hours before her flight. Without
checking her travel documents and relying solely on the advice of the travel agency, Atty. Crisostomo
went to NAIA on Saturday. While in the airport, Atty. Crisostomo discovered that the flight she was
supposed to take had already departed the previous day.

(a) Suppose Atty. Crisostomo would file a case against the travel agency for reimbursement and
damages on account of “negligence” for its failure to observe extraordinary diligence, do you think the
case would prosper? Explain with legal basis. (5 points)

(b) When is there fault or negligence according to Article 1173 of the New Civil Code? (5
points)

D is obliged to deliver 5 bags of powder soap to C seven (7) days from their agreement. On due
date, D fraudulently delivered 5 bags of powder soap mixed with chalk. What is the effect, if any, of the
fraud committed by D on the status of the agreement? Explain with legal basis. (5 points)

VI

Mr. Bilibid obligates himself in favor of Ms. Phil the following:

1. to give Ms. Phil a house and lot located at 5 Sesame St., Don Juan Village,
Pembo, Makati City, Philippines; and

2. to give Ms. Phil a silver Toyota Fortuner, 2013 model and manufactured in Japan;
and

3. to bake and prepare a guyabano cake.

Mr. Bilibid did not perform any of the foregoing obligations. Under the circumstances, what are
the rights and legal remedies available to Ms. Phil? Explain with legal basis. (10 points)
 VII

State the Doctrine of Fortuitous Event? What are the requisites that should concur in order that
the Doctrine of Fortuitous Even may be validly invoked as a matter of defense? (10 points)

VIII

Jose de Leon, Cecilio de Leon and Albina de Leon (the “De Leons”) are illegitimate children of
Felix de Leon, deceased, while respondent Asuncion Soriano is his widow. In the administration and
settlement of the decedent's estate before the court, the parties had reached an agreement, which was
later approved by the probate court, whereby the illegitimate children obligated themselves, among
other things, as follows:

“xxx

2. At the end of each of agricultural year, by which shall understood for the purposes of this
agreement the month of March of every year, the following amounts of palay shall be given to
the party of the FIRST PART (Asuncion Soriano) by the parties of the SECOND PART (De
Leons): in the month of March of the current year 2003; one thousand two hundred (1,200)
cavanes of palay (macan); in the month of March 2004, one thousand four hundred (1,400)
cavanes of palay (macan); in the month March of 2005, one thousand five hundred (1,500)
cavanes of palay (macan); and in the month of March 2006 and every succeeding year
thereafter, one thousand six hundred (1,600) cavanes of palay (macan). Delivery of the palay
shall be made in the warehouse required by the government, or if there be none such, at the
warehouse to be selected by the party of the FIRST PART, in San Miguel, Bulacan, free from
the cost of hauling, transportation, and from any all taxes or charges.

It is expressly stipulated that this annual payment of palay shall cease upon the death of the
party of the FIRST PART and shall not be transmissible to her heirs or to any other person, but
during her lifetime this obligation for the annual payment of the palay hereinabove mentioned
shall constitute a first lien upon all the rice lands of the estate of Dr. Felix de Leon in San
Miguel, Bulacan.”

The De Leons made deliveries to Asuncion Soriano 1,200 cavanes of palay in 2003, 700 in 2004, 200
in 20055, and another 200 in 20066, a total of 2,300 cavanes which was 3,400 cavanes short of the
5,700 cavanes which should have been delivered up to and including 2006. For the purpose of
recovering the said shortage, Asuncion Soriano filed a case against the De Leons, who defended
themselves by claiming that their failure to pay the exact quantities of palay was due to the Huk
troubles in Central Luzon which rendered impossible full compliance with the terms of the agreement.

If you were the judge, how would you decide the case? (10 points)

IX

When did the New Civil Code of the Philippines take effect? (5 points)

Enumerate the ten (10) different kinds of obligations under the Civil Code and briefly discuss
each. (10 points)

---0---