Ateneo Law School

Sales - A
25 July 2013

Atty. Ray Paolo J. Santiago

Part II: Essay. Read the problem carefully. Do not assume facts which are not stated
in the problem. Make sure to discuss and support your answers with the relevant

provision of the law and/or jurisprudence. Disregard rule on Statute of Frauds whenever
applicable. Good luck!

I.

a pavement for DMPI. It needed some concrete

blocks that will be installed on the pavement so it contracted with Dynablocks (which
MWFF Contractors was constructing

produces concrete blocks in its ordinary course of business) to supply the blocks. Based
on the Supply Agreement, Dynablocks is to supply the concrete blocks based on
MWFF'S speciiications and that the unit price per block is P10. MWFF Contractors

needed 100,000 concrete block.

devote its
since time was also of the essence of'the project, Dynablocks also agreed to
blocks
concrete
production
the
of
entire plant and casting machines for the extlusive
fabrication
the
for
machines
needed by MWFF. oynJbbcks then started assembling the
MWFF
of the concrete blocks which MWFF initially specified to be hexagonal in sha.pe.
The
Dynablocks.
from
then changed its mind and instead required S-shaped blocks
that
blocks
S-shaped
produces
the
tatter nad io modify its equipment to ensure that it
will be supplied to MWFF.

and reasons' (10

Is the transaction a sale or for a piece of work? Discuss with basis
pts.)

u.

known as the Country Estates'

ABC Realty developed a subdivision project in Oftigas
was at the perimeter of the
project-whic.!
Julie purchased the lisi available lot of ihe
to Julie' the lot she
Unknown
subdivision adjoining the lots of the Spouses Sandico'
mistake in its survey
a
made
latter
purchased was actually nofowneO Uy nAC since the
of the lots of the
poftion
of
of the subdivision lots and wrongly occupied a
,one
purchased by
propefi
said
the
Sandicos. fhe tecnntaf Oeicriptioi bn the title over
Julie does not correspond to the lot'
buy the said portion of the Iot
upon discovery of the encroachment, ABC offered to
the time this happened, lulie has
from the sandicos. trtegotiations, however, failed. By
already Purchased the lot.
of the lot and for reconveyance'
The sandicos now sued Julie and ABC for the recovery
Julie purchased the lot, it knows that it is
ABC admitted during ihe trial that at the time
there is no valid sale between ABC
not the owner of the iind. fhe Sandicos insist that
prope0. Thus, they should be allowed
and Julie since they nuu.i lost ownersnip oitne
that she is a buyer in good
to recover the property. Julie, on the other nand,'insiits
i.itff nut is now the owner of the lot she purchased'
(10 pts')
you are the judge of this case. Rule on the matter with basis and reasons'

On July 20,20L3, Atty. Sosa wrote SMPPI demanding the execution within five days of '
a deed of sale covering the propefties. SMPPI attempted to return the "earnest-deposit"
but Atty. Sosa refused on the ground that the option to purchase had already expired.
Rule on the matter with basis. (10 pts.)

ry.
Dang leased for five years a house and lot from Gina. Under the terms of their
agreement, Dang has an option to buy the house and lot should Gina decide to sell it
later on. At the time of the signing of the agreement, the house and lot had a market
value of P2 million. However, at towards the end of the lease, the house and lot now
had a fair market value of P3 million.
Gina decided to sell the house and lot to Dang and the latter exercised her option to
buy based on the option contract. However, Gina is insisting on the P3 million while
Dang is insisting on [he P2 million price. Since they could not agree, Dang sued Gina for
specific performance.
You are the judge. Decide with reasons. (10 pts.)
V.

Nina was scouting for a house and lot in Forbes Park. He chanced upon Denise who
was selling her property in Forbes. The agreed total price was 50,000,000'00'
p10,000,00.-0.00 wiil Ub piiA as downpayment, while the terms of the balance will be
propefi'
discussed later. Upon payment of the downpayment, Nina moved in to the
to the
as
terms
into
not
come
could
Denise
and
After a month of negotiaiions, Nina
on
Nina,
sale.
the
to
invalidate
couft
to
manner of payment o1tfle balance. Denise went
pay
balance.
the
to
period
which
within
the other hand, asked the court to fix the
You are the judge. Decide with reasons. (10 pts.)
END