REVIEWER ON CIVIL LAW 8.07.02. Prescriptive Period. The action for Teforma 1000 instrument ; Mistake jistake. Mistake can result jn , 18.07.08. Mata 6 instrument does not me Situatog intention of the parties. The general rule jg tt ‘mistake must be mutual ony EXAMPLES: - A owns two lots, Lot 1 and Lot 2. Mr. A and Mr, Ove ntact of sale whereby Mr. A sold the lot wha the highway. They thought that the lot near the highway although itis actually Lot 2. Hence the deed of sales pa! ‘Asold Lot 1. There can be reformation in this case because hy ai does not express the true agreement that Mr. A sold Lot 2. (2) Mr. A sold a car to Mr. B. They agreed that ther isa gy repurchase for a period of one year. They did not notice hase that the period that was inserted in the document is ens ‘months. There can be reformation of the instrument in this as 18.07.04, Unilateral Mistake. Mistake need not be mutual in the instances covered by Arts. 1362 and 1363, Ts refomation is allowed even if mistake is unilateral in the following cases: (1) If one party was mistaken and the other aed fraudulently or inequitably;* (2) When one party was mistaken and the other knew or believed that the instrument did not state their real agreement, but concealed that fact from the former EXAMPLES: (Q)_ Mr. A owns two lots, Lot 1 and Lot 2. Mr. B wants to buy Lot2 st Mr. Ais only willing to sell Lot 1. Mr. A and Mr. B entered into? contract of sale whereby Mr. A sold Lot 1. However, Mr.B,whowss the one who prepared the Deed of Sale indicated that the lott “"Rosello-Bentirv, Art. 1362, NCC Art. 1363, bia Leanda, supray — OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS page D. CONTRACTS 463 was Lot 2. There can be reformation in this case beca was S010 Nes not express the true agreement that Mr. A sold ial ee isahe fraud committed by Mr. B, void 2 ca to ME-B. They agreed that thee is a sight to ) Me Ae ora period fone year Mr thought ht thepeodin sePGocument is one Year although what was stated is five months. the drat he pviod tha as inserted was ve months but Me 4 not inform Mr. A about it There can be reformation of the nee his case under Art. 1363. instrument in U 10 Third Persons. The instrument may be reformed if 180705. THT rument does not express the agreement of the parties due to a third person who drafted the document. The reason why the document does not express the true agreement of the parties maybe: (1) ignorance, (2) lack of skill, (3) negligence, or (4) bad faith." jg0706.No Reformation, Under Art. 1366, there shall be no reformation in the following cases: (4) Simple donations inter vivos wherein no condition is imposed; (2) Wills; (3). When the real agreement is void. 2) Simple donation is a contract whereby one person transfers a property to another and the consideration is pure liberality. A will on the other hand is a document which complies with the formalities of law whereby a person will leave his property to another when he dies. In both cases, the transfer of the property is gratuitous. b) Article 789 of the Civil Code allows the correction of wills if properties that are subject thereof are misdescribed. ©) With respect to void agreements, there is nothing to reform if the agreement is void. An. 1364, NCC. > aeREVIEWER ON CIVIL LAW volving the ward oF absentey erty; and Prop. (iv) The contract d 5 proval of the court ond ap spproval ofthe cour eat, the last requisite is provided e ai 1386 of the New Civil Coda fe words, if the court approved the ag the contract is valid and not Tesciss The defectis cured by the court approvat (3) However, there are contracts that neg court approval, Guardians and reprey” tatives cannot enter into certain coninae if the approval of the court is not first ob. tained. For example, transfer of real erty requires approval of the court. te guardian sells the real property ofthe wan without court approval, the contract is un enforceable under the first Paragraph of Art. 1403 of the New Civil Code and not tescissible. EXAMPLES: (1) Mr.A.was appointed by the court as guardian of the minot X. Me Asold the vegetables that were planted in the lot of X. The value of the vegetables is P5,000 but Mr. A sold the vegetables for ony 2,000. The contract is rescissible because the lesion is more than one-fourth. (2) If Mr. A in the first example also sold the lot of X without cut approval, the sale of the lot would be unenforceable even if theres ion. b) The Contract is in Fraud of Creditors. (Att 1381, par. 3). The action to rescind the contrat for being in fraud of creditor is called ‘tot In addition to the requirements for ion stated above, it is also necessary that (1) the creditor must have in his favor a cet that existed prior to the contract that is sought!”