Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Answer: No, fixing of the period means that it is Question: Can you give an example where demand
only demandable. There must still be a demand. is not necessary because the law provides that you
There was no demand in this case, therefore, there should pay?
is still no delay.
Answer: Taxes. Also, Art 1788.
Modified Problem: Supposing there was a
Article 1788. A partner who has undertaken to
demand, will he be liable for legal interest? If yes,
contribute a sum of money and fails to do so becomes a
how much?
debtor for the interest and damages from the time he
Answer: Yes, he will be liable for legal interest should have complied with his obligation.
since he has incurred delay. The amount of interest
The same rule applies to any amount he may have taken
would depend upon when the legal interest would
from the partnership coffers, and his liability shall begin
accrue; so if it accrues before the Central Bank
from the time he converted the amount to his own use.
Circular took effect, it is 12%, and if it accrues after
the effectivity it will be 6%. Question: If the lease is for a period and that
period has already expired, can you file for
Sir says: The situation would be different if there
unlawful detainer even without demand?
was an express stipulation like, “You pay in 30
days otherwise you will be in default.” Such Answer: Yes, according to Art. 1669.
express stipulation is absent in the problem above.
Article 1669. If the lease was made for a determinate
Problem: A brought his typewriter to B to have it time, it ceases upon the day fixed, without the need of a
repaired. They agreed that they have to change demand.
some parts in the typewriter. The repair will cost
Question: What if you did not file a case for
200,000 and the brand new parts will cost 300,000.
unlawful detainer and you did not demand, is the
When A came back to get it by the time it was due,
lease continuing?
it was still not repaired so he said, “I will just get it
after three days.” When A came back on the 3rd Answer: Yes, if the lessee stayed in the premises for
day, the typewriter still wasn’t fixed. So A got the at least 15 days, there will be an implied lease.
typewriter and had it fixed by another repairman
and the spare part change will cost him twice as Problem: A and B entered into a contract. A will
much. Can he recover from the first repairman? deliver his logs in the dock where the ship will pick
it up. The agreement was that B was supposed to
Answer: Yes. The obligation consists in the pick up the logs in May and not June because June
obligation to do something, and if the obligor fails was rainy. So they delivered the logs by May but
to perform it, the obligee may undertake to the ship that was supposed to carry it only got the
perform the obligation himself or have another logs by June. By this time, the logs have already
person do it at the expense of the obligor. dissipated because of the flash floods and the
typhoons. Is the shipping company (I think si B ni)
Follow-up Problem: Can he recover the labor and
liable?
the price of the spare parts? Or can he recover the
labor only? Answer: Yes, because the controlling motive for
entering into the agreement is that the logs will be
picked up in May because A knew that it will be 4) The obligor must be free from any participation
stormy in June and the logs will suffer damage. in the aggravation of the injury resulting to the
creditor. [Aquino, p. 435-436]
Problem: A found a wallet left by a passenger on a
bus whom he knew because cge niya makitan Problem: A is a workman in a logging company.
around Silliman. 30 days later the wallet was stolen The company had a sawmill along the Pasig River
from A. Is A liable to the owner of the wallet? where the logs were carried by the current bound
with a steal cable. There was a flood in Pasig where
Answer: Yes, because upon finding it he did not
the steel cable was damaged. A was asked by his
give it to the owner, so he must shoulder the loss
supervisor to jump to save the logs. Is the employer
brought about by the fortuitous event. This is
liable for the death of the laborer and can the
supported by Art. 1263.
widow claim from workmen’s compensation?
Article 1263. In an obligation to deliver a generic thing,
Answer: Yes. In this case, the SC overruled the
the loss or destruction of anything of the same kind does
lower court and decided that there was no gross
not extinguish the obligation.
negligence on the part of A as he was only obeying
Sir Says: This can be qualified qualified this kay ga the orders of his supervisor. It’s also not suicide.
wonder siya na since it took him more than 30
Follow-up Question: When is the employer not
days, and kaila siya sa owner maybe theft daw. So
liable in workmens’s compensation?
burden japn ni A ag loss according to Art 1268.
Answer: a) When the injury or death was not work-
Article 1268. When the debt of a thing certain and
related, b) suicide, c) notorious negligence.
determinate proceeds from a criminal offense, the debtor
shall not be exempted from the payment of its price, Problem: A worker in a sugar plantation was hit by
whatever may be the cause for the loss, unless the thing lightning. Is he employer liable?
having been offered by him to the person who should
receive it, the latter refused without justification to Answer: Yes, because the nature of the
accept it. employment increased the risk of sustaining the
injury.
Question: What are the four requirements for the
extinguishment of the obligation due to fortuitous Question: The insured person put out an insurance
event? for his life. What kind of obligation is that?
Answer: 1) The cause of the unforeseen and Answer: One with a period because death is
unexpected occurrence, or of the failure of the certain.
debtor to comply with his obligation must be
Question: What about an accident insurance?
independent of the human will;
Answer: One with a condition because it is
2) It must be impossible to foresee the event which
contingent upon the happening of the accident.
constitutes the “caso fortuito,”or if it can be
foreseen, it must be impossible to avoid; Problem: A sent a package with a statue. A told the
delivery boy to send it to B in apartment 9 when it
3) The occurrence must be such as to render it
should have been addressed to B in apartment 6.
impossible for the debtor to fulfill his obligation in
The delivery boy delivered it to C in apartment 9.
a normal manner; and
The statute was destroyed in a fortuitous event. Is
C liable?
Answer: Yes, because he failed to refuse the Answer: A is inly liable for reduced rent in
delivery, knowing that the statue should not have accordance with Art 1680. This is because locusts
been delivered to him. [Note: Answer ning Julius are considered an extraordinary fortuitous event
and then move-on dayun si sir so correct siguro.] and A lost more than half of the harvest.
Problem: Bailee let his mother who lives with him Article 1680. The lessee shall have no right to a
use the thing he borrowed. It was destroyed in a reduction of the rent on account of the sterility of the
fortuitous event. Is the bailee liable? land leased, or by reason of the loss of fruits due to
ordinary fortuitous events; but he shall have such
Answer: No, because the mother is a member of right in case of the loss of more than one-half of
the bailee’s household. the fruits through extraordinary and unforeseen
fortuitous events, save always when there is a
Modified Problem: What if it was a deposit?
specific stipulation to the contrary.
Answer: There will be liability because the nature
Extraordinary fortuitous events are understood to
of a deposit is strictly personal and it cannot govern
be: fire, war, pestilence, unusual flood, locusts,
the other members of the household.
earthquake, or others which are uncommon, and
Problem: Bailee borrowed a bicycle and there was which the contracting parties could not have
a flashflood and he decided to run and save his reasonably foreseen.
own bicycle. He left the bicycle that he borrowed. Is Problem: A promised to deliver the watch to B and
he liable? also-- without B’s knowledge-- to C. Before
Answer: Yes, this is according to Art. 1942 (5). delivery, the watch was lost by fortuitous event.
Can B or C demand damages?
Article 1942. The bailee is liable for the loss of the thing,
even if it should be through a fortuitous event: Answer: Yes, because A promised to deliver it to
two persons. This is supported by Art 1165 (3).
(1) If he devotes the thing to any purpose different from
that for which it has been loaned; Article 1165. When what is to be delivered is a
determinate thing, the creditor, in addition to the right
(2) If he keeps it longer than the period stipulated, or granted him by article 1170, may compel the debtor to
after the accomplishment of the use for which the make the delivery.
commodatum has been constituted;
If the thing is indeterminate or generic, he may ask that
(3) If the thing loaned has been delivered with appraisal the obligation be complied with at the expense of the
of its value, unless there is a stipulation exempting the debtor.
bailee from responsibility in case of a fortuitous event;
If the obligor delays, or has promised to deliver the
(4) If he lends or leases the thing to a third person, who same thing to two or more persons who do not
is not a member of his household; have the same interest, he shall be responsible for
any fortuitous event until he has effected the
(5) If, being able to save either the thing borrowed
delivery.
or his own thing, he chose to save the latter.
Problem: The officious manager finds a fishing
Problem: A rented a piece of rural land. He rents
vessel which was abandoned. He then saves the
the land for the whole cropping season. Before he
thing and uses it not just as a fishing vessel but as
can harvest, he lost all the rice planted to locusts. Is
an inter-island passenger vessel. It was destroyed
he liable for rent?
by fortuitous event. Is the manager liable?
Answer: Yes, according to Art 2147 (1). In this case, workers without union leadership's authorization,
the manager knowingly undertook a risky support, or approval) then that can be considered a
operation. fortuitous event in which there can be no liability
because that is out of the shipper’s control.
Article 2147. The officious manager shall be liable for
any fortuitous event: Sir Says: This is a variation of a bar problem in
which the strike was due to the employer’s non-
(1) If he undertakes risky operations which the
payment of overtime. In that case, that cannot be
owner was not accustomed to embark upon;
considered a fortuitous event because that was due
(2) If he has preferred his own interest to that of the to the employer’s fault. The employee in that case is
owner; liable.
(3) If he fails to return the property or business after Problem: A went to the furniture shop and said he
demand by the owner; wants to buy furniture made out of kamagong
(Note: I searched, and apparently this is like some
(4) If he assumed the management in bad faith.
expensive wood). The furniture maker said they
Sir says: That if the boat was not really abandoned, had kamagong furniture and sold the same to A. A
then the manager will be liable under Art 2147 (4) later found out that the furniture was not made of
[see above] because he assumed the management kamagong because it started to crack. Can A have it
in bad faith. annulled or only ask for damages?
Question: If the thing is lost in the possession of Answer: He can have it annulled according to Art
the debtor, what is the presumption? Is he liable for 1390 because the buyer was induced into entering
the loss? into the contract. A wouldn’t have bought the
furniture if it weren’t for the furniture maker’s
Answer: Yes, he is liable. According to Art 1265, assurances that the same was kamagong. (Note:
the loss is presumed to be the fault of the debtor. This is dolo causante)
Article 1265. Whenever the thing is lost in the Article 1390. The following contracts are voidable or
possession of the debtor, it shall be presumed that the annullable, even though there may have been no damage
loss was due to his fault, unless there is proof to the to the contracting parties:
contrary, and without prejudice to the provisions of
article 1165. This presumption does not apply in case of (1) Those where one of the parties is incapable of giving
earthquake, flood, storm, or other natural calamity. consent to a contract;
Problem: The shipper had an agreement with the (2) Those where the consent is vitiated by mistake,
common carrier that the goods will be delivered to violence, intimidation, undue influence or fraud.
the consignee within 30 days. So the carrier left the These contracts are binding, unless they are annulled by
port and he expects to land in 15 days. Therefore, a proper action in court. They are susceptible of
he still has 15 days to deliver. The porters went on ratification.
strike so there were no people to unload the cargo.
So the carrier was not able to deliver within 30 Modified Problem: What if the situation was, A
days. Is the shipper liable? asked if the furniture was made of kamagong and
it really was. But what was sent to him was one
Answer: Qualified. If there was already a notice of that wasn’t made of kamagong?
strike and they entered into a contract, that can no
longer be a fortuitous event. But if it was a wildcat Answer: A has the option to rescind the contract
strike (i.e., a strike action undertaken by unionized according to 1191. In this case, there was fraud in
the performance of the obligation since the Modified Problem: Supposing that what was
furniture maker sent him the furniture that was not agreed upon was a dresser made of kamagong with
made of kamagong. (Note: This is dolo incidente) 3 drawers. What was delivered was a kamagong
dresser with only 2 drawers. Was there a
Article 1191. The power to rescind obligations is
substantial breach? Can he have it rescinded?
implied in reciprocal ones, in case one of the obligors
should not comply with what is incumbent upon him. Answer: No. Art 1191[see previous problem] must
be read in accordance with Art 1234. In order to
The injured party may choose between the fulfillment
rescind, there must have been substantial breach. In
and the rescission of the obligation, with the payment of
this case, there was no substantial breach.
damages in either case. He may also seek rescission, even
after he has chosen fulfillment, if the latter should Article 1234. If the obligation has been substantially
become impossible. performed in good faith, the obligor may recover as
though there had been a strict and complete fulfillment,
The court shall decree the rescission claimed, unless
less damages suffered by the obligee.
there be just cause authorizing the fixing of a period.
Penalty Interest Monetary Interest
This is understood to be without prejudice to the rights
Article 1229. The judge Article 1413. Interest
of third persons who have acquired the thing, in
shall equitably reduce paid in excess of the
accordance with articles 1385 and 1388 and the the penalty when the interest allowed by the
Mortgage Law. principal obligation has usury laws may be
been partly or recovered by the debtor,
Sir Says: Be careful, the above problem talks of irregularly complied with interest thereon
rescinded (note: Tolentino said the term should be with by the debtor. Even from the date of the
“resolution” but sir says rescinded is okay as long if there has been no payment.
as you qualify) under Art 1191 which is different performance, the
from rescissible CONTRACTS under Art 1381. penalty may also be
reduced by the courts if
Article 1381. The following contracts are rescissible: it is iniquitous or
unconscionable.
(1) Those which are entered into by guardians whenever For the delay For the use
the wards whom they represent suffer lesion by more Can be equitably If void because it is
than one-fourth of the value of the things which are the reduced contrary to law, then
object thereof; you pay the legal
interest which is in
(2) Those agreed upon in representation of absentees, if excess of the allowed by
the latter suffer the lesion stated in the preceding law
number; If there is a monetary
interest stipulated by
(3) Those undertaken in fraud of creditors when the the parties, and that is
latter cannot in any other manner collect the claims due the only interest
them; imposed, jurisprudence
dictates that it should
(4) Those which refer to things under litigation if they not exceed 36%. If more
have been entered into by the defendant without the than 36%, it can be
reduced to legal interest.
knowledge and approval of the litigants or of competent
judicial authority;
If in addition to
(5) All other contracts specially declared by law to be monetary interest, there
is also a penalty interest
subject to rescission.
stipulated then you can
impose up to 36% Modified Problem: Supposing that the creditor
because that is in does not accept the 50,000. Is he in mora
addition. accipiendi?