You are on page 1of 7

2011 BAR 4.

Upon the proposal of a third person, a new debtor substituted the original debtor without the latters consent. The creditor accepted the substitution. ater, howe!er, the new debtor beca"e insol!ent and defaulted in his obligation. #hat is the effect of the new debtors default upon the original debtor$ A. The original debtor is freed of liability since novation took place and this relieved him of his obligation. B. The original debtor shall pa% or perfor" the obligation with recourse to the new debtor. &. The original debtor re"ains liable since he ga!e no consent to the substitution. '. The original debtor shall pa% or perfor" (0) of the obligation to a!oid un*ust enrich"ent on his part. (. ennie bought a business class tic+et fro" Alta Airlines. As she chec+ed in, the "anager downgraded her to econo"% on the ground that a &ongress"an had to be acco""odated in the business class. ennie suffered the disco"fort and e"barrass"ent of the downgrade. ,he sued the airlines for -uasi.delict but Alta Airlines countered that, since her tra!el was go!erned b% a contract between the", no -uasi. delict could arise. /s the airline correct$ A. No, the breach of contract may in fact be tortious as when it is tainted as in this case with arbitrariness, gross bad faith, and malice. B. 0o, den%ing ennie the co"fort and a"enities of the business class as pro!ided in the tic+et is a tortious act. &. 1es, since the facts show a breach of contract, not a -uasi.delict.
'. 1es, since -uasi.delict presupposes the absence of a pre.e2isting contractual relation between the parties.

33. &ontracts ta+e effect onl% between the parties or their assigns and heirs, e2cept where the rights and obligations arising fro" the contract are not trans"issible b% their nature, b% stipulation, or b% pro!ision of law. /n the latter case, the assigns or the heirs are not bound b% the contracts. This is +nown as the principle of A. Relativity of contracts. B. 4reedo" to stipulate. &. 5utualit% of contracts. '. 6bligator% force of contracts.

34. A bu%er ordered (,000 apples fro" the seller at 720 per apple. The seller deli!ered 8,000 apples. #hat are the rights and obligations of the bu%er$ A. He can accept all 6, apples and pay the seller at !" per apple. B. 9e can accept all 8,000 apples and pa% a lesser price for the 1,000 e2cess apples. &. 9e can +eep the 8,000 apples without pa%ing for the 1,000 e2cess since the seller deli!ered the" an%wa%. '. 9e can cancel the whole transaction since the seller !iolated the ter"s of their agree"ent. 3(. ino entered into a contract to sell with Ra"on, underta+ing to con!e% to the latter one of the fi!e lots he owns, without specif%ing which lot it was, for the price of 71 "illion. ater, the parties could not agree which of fi!e lots he owned ino undertoo+ to sell to Ra"on. #hat is the standing of the contract$ A. Unenforceable. B. :oidable. &. Rescissible. #. $oid. 38. ;nowing that the car had a hidden crac+ in the engine, < sold it to 1 without infor"ing the latter about it. /n an% e!ent, the deed of sale e2pressl% stipulated that < was not liable for hidden defects. 'oes 1 ha!e the right to de"and fro" < a rei"burse"ent of what he spent to repair the engine plus da"ages$ A. 1es. < is liable whether or not he was aware of the hidden defect. %. &es, since the defect was not hidden' ( knew of it but he acted in bad faith in not disclosing the fact to &. &. 0o, because 1 is in estoppel, ha!ing changed engine without prior de"and. '. 0o, because 1 wai!ed the warrant% against hidden defects. 3=. Ac"e &anner% produced sardines in cans +nown as >,ards.? 5%lene bought a can of ,ards fro" a store, ate it, and suffered fro" poisoning caused b% a no2ious substance found in the sardines. 5%lene filed a case for da"ages against Ac"e. #hich of the following defenses will hold$ A. The e)piry date of the *+ards, was clearly printed on its can, still the store sold and -ylene bought it. B. 5%lene "ust ha!e detected the no2ious substance in the sardines b% s"ell, %et she still ate it. &. Ac"e had no transaction with 5%lene@ she bought the >,ards? fro" a store, not directl% fro" Ac"e. '. Ac"e en*o%s the presu"ption of safeness of its canning procedure and 5%lene has not o!erco"e such presu"ption.

48. The ter" of a (.%ear lease contract between < the lessor and 1 the lessee, where rents were paid fro" "onth to "onth, ca"e to an end. ,till, 1 continued using the propert% with <s consent. /n such a case, it is understood that the% i"pliedl% renewed the lease A. from month to month under the same conditions as to the rest. B. under the sa"e ter"s and conditions as before. &. under the sa"e ter"s e2cept the rent which the% or the court "ust fi2. '. for onl% a %ear, with the rent raised b% 10) pursuant to the rental control law. 4A. Asiong borrowed 71 "illion fro" a ban+, secured b% a "ortgage on his land. #ithout his consent, his friend Bo%ong paid the whole loan. ,ince Asiong benefited fro" the pa%"ent, can Bo%ong co"pel the ban+ to subrogate hi" in its right as "ortgagee of Asiongs land$ A. 0o, but the ban+ can foreclose and pa% Bo%ong bac+. %. No, since %oyong paid for Asiong.s loan without his approval. &. 1es, since a change of creditor too+ place b% no!ation with the ban+s consent. '. 1es, since it is but right that Bo%ong be able to get bac+ his "one% and, if not, to foreclose the "ortgage in the "anner of the ban+. (1. Rudolf borrowed 71 "illion fro" Rodrigo and 4ernando who acted as solidar% creditors. #hen the loan "atured, Rodrigo wrote a letter to Rudolf, de"anding pa%"ent of the loan directl% to hi". Before Rudolf could co"pl%, 4ernando went to see hi" personall% to collect and he paid hi". 'id Rudolf "a+e a !alid pa%"ent$ A. 0o, since Rudolf should ha!e split the pa%"ent between Rodrigo and 4ernando. %. No, since Rodrigo, the other solidary creditor, already made a prior demand for payment from Rudolf. &. 1es, since the pa%"ent co!ers the whole obligation. '. 1es, since 4ernando was a solidar% creditor, pa%"ent to hi" e2tinguished the obligation. (=. Allan bought Bill%s propert% through &arlos, an agent e"powered with a special power of attorne% B,7AC to sell the sa"e. #hen Allan was read% to pa% as scheduled, Bill% called, directing Allan to pa% directl% to hi". 6n learning of this, &arlos, Bill%s agent, told Allan to pa% through hi" as his ,7A pro!ided and to protect his co""ission. 4aced with two clai"ants, Allan consigned the pa%"ent in court. Bill% protested, contending that the consignation is ineffecti!e since no tender of pa%"ent was "ade to hi". /s he correct$ A. No, since consignation without tender of payment is allowed in the face of the conflicting claims on the plaintiff. B. 1es, as owner of the propert% sold, Bill% can de"and pa%"ent directl% to hi"self. &. 1es, since Allan "ade no announce"ent of the tender.

'. 1es, a tender of pa%"ent is re-uired for a !alid consignation. (D. < sold 1 100 sac+s of rice that 1 was to pic+ up fro" <s rice "ill on a particular date. 1 did not, howe!er, appear on the agreed date to ta+e deli!er% of the rice. After one wee+, < auto"aticall% rescinded the sale without notarial notice to 1. /s the rescission !alid$ A. &es, automatic rescission is allowed since, having the character of movables and consumables, rice can easily deteriorate. B. 0o, the bu%er is entitled to a custo"ar% 30.da% e2tension of his obligation to ta+e deli!er% of the goods. &. 0o, since there was no e2press agree"ent regarding auto"atic rescission. '. 0o, the seller should first deter"ine that 1 was not *ustified in failing to appear. 81. < bought a land fro" 1, pa%ing hi" cash. ,ince the% were friends, the% did not e2ecute an% docu"ent of sale. After = %ears, the heirs of < as+ed 1 to e2ecute a deed of absolute sale to for"aliEe the !erbal sale to their father. Unwilling to do so, <s heirs filed an action for specific perfor"ance against 1. #ill their action prosper$ A. No, after more than 6 years, the action to enforce the verbal agreement has already elapsed. B. 0o, since the sale cannot under the ,tatute of 4rauds be enforced. &. 1es, since < bought the land and paid 1 for it. '. 1es, after full pa%"ent, the action beca"e i"prescriptible. 88. Ro% and &arlos both undertoo+ a contract to deli!er to ,a" in 5anila a boat doc+ed in ,ubic. Before the% could deli!er it, howe!er, the boat san+ in a stor". The contract pro!ides that fortuitous e!ent shall not e2e"pt Ro% and &arlos fro" their obligation. 6wing to the loss of the "otor boat, such obligation is dee"ed con!erted into one of inde"nit% for da"ages. /s the liabilit% of Ro% and &arlos *oint or solidar%$ A. 0either solidar% nor *oint since the% cannot wai!e the defense of fortuitous e!ent to which the% are entitled. B. ,olidar% or *oint upon the discretion of ,a". &. ,olidar% since Ro% and &arlos failed to perfor" their obligation to deli!er the "otor boat. #. /oint since the conversion of their liability to one of indemnity for damages made it 0oint. 8D. A warrant% inherent in a contract of sale, whether or not "entioned in it, is +nown as the A. warrant% on -ualit%. B. warrant% against hidden defects. 1. warranty against eviction.

'. warrant% in "erchantabilit%. =8. <, who was abroad, phoned his brother, 1, authoriEing hi" to sell <s parcel of land in 7asa%. < sent the title to 1 b% courier ser!ice. Acting for his brother, 1 e2ecuted a notariEed deed of absolute sale of the land to F after recei!ing pa%"ent. #hat is the status of the sale$ A. :alid, since a notariEed deed of absolute sale co!ered the transaction and full pa%"ent was "ade. %. $oid, since ( should have authori2ed agent & in writing to sell the land. &. :alid, since 1 was trul% his brother <s agent and entrusted with the title needed to effect the sale. '. :alid, since the bu%er could file an action to co"pel < to e2ecute a deed of sale. ==. /n a true pacto de retro sale, the title and ownership of the propert% sold are i""ediatel% !ested in the !endee a retro sub*ect onl% to the resolutor% condition of repurchase b% the !endor a retro within the stipulated period. This is +nown as A. e-uitable "ortgage. %. conventional redemption. &. legal rede"ption. '. e-uit% of rede"ption. =D. A natural obligation under the 0ew &i!il &ode of the 7hilippines is one which A. the obligor has a "oral obligation to do, otherwise entitling the obligee to da"ages. B. refers to an obligation in writing to do or not to do. &. the obligee "a% enforce through the court if !iolated b% the obligor. #. cannot be 0udicially enforced but authori2es the obligee to retain the obligor.s payment or performance. D1. Anne owed Bess% 71 "illion due on 6ctober 1, 2011 but failed to pa% her on due date. Bess% sent a de"and letter to Anne gi!ing her ( da%s fro" receipt within which to pa%. Two da%s after receipt of the letter, Anne personall% offered to pa% Bess% in "anagers chec+ but the latter refused to accept the sa"e. The ( da%s lapsed. 5a% Annes obligation be considered e2tinguished$ A. 1es, since Bess%s refusal of the "anagers chec+, which is presu"ed funded, a"ounts to a satisfaction of the obligation. %. No, since tender of payment even in cash, if refused, will not discharge the obligation without proper consignation in court. &. 1es, since Anne tendered pa%"ent of the full a"ount due. '. 0o, since a "anagers chec+ is not considered legal tender in the 7hilippines.

D4. Ganice and Gennifer are sisters. Ganice sued Gennifer and aura, Gennifers business partner for reco!er% of propert% with da"ages. The co"plaint did not allege that Ganice e2erted earnest efforts to co"e to a co"pro"ise with the defendants and that such efforts failed. The *udge dis"issed the co"plaint outright for failure to co"pl% with a condition precedent. /s the dis"issal in order$ A. No, since 3aura is a stranger to the sisters, /anice has no moral obligation to settle with her. B. 1es, since court should pro"ote a"icable settle"ent a"ong relati!es. &. 1es, since "e"bers of the sa"e fa"il%, as parties to the suit, are re-uired to e2ert earnest efforts to settle their disputes before co"ing to court. '. 0o, the fa"il% council, which would ordinaril% "ediate the dispute, has been eli"inated under the 4a"il% &ode. D(. < borrowed "one% fro" a ban+, secured b% a "ortgage on the land of 1, his close friend. #hen the loan "atured, 1 offered to pa% the ban+ but it refused since 1 was not the borrower. /s the ban+s action correct$ A. 1es, since <, the true borrower, did not gi!e his consent to 1s offer to pa%. B. 0o, since an%bod% can discharge <s obligation to his benefit. 1. No, since &, the owner of the collateral, has an interest in the payment of the obligation. '. 1es, since it was < who has an obligation to the ban+. D8. The right of a "ortgagor in a *udicial foreclosure to redee" the "ortgaged propert% after his default in the perfor"ance of the conditions of the "ortgage but before the sale of the "ortgaged propert% or confir"ation of the sale b% the court, is +nown as A. accion publiciana. %. e4uity of redemption. &. pacto de retro. '. right of rede"ption. A0. The presence of a !ice of consent !itiates the consent of a part% in a contract and this renders the contract A. Rescissible. B. Unenforceable. 1. $oidable. '. :oid. A4. An action for recon!e%ance of a registered piece of land "a% be brought against the owner appearing on the title based on a clai" that the latter "erel% holds such title in trust for the plaintiff. The action prescribes, howe!er, within 10 %ears fro" the registration of the deed or the date of the issuance of the certificate of title of the

propert% as long as the trust had not been repudiated. #hat is the e2ception to this 10. %ear prescripti!e period$ A. #hen the plaintiff had no notice of the deed or the issuance of the certificate of title. B. #hen the title holder concealed the "atter fro" the plaintiff. &. #hen fortuitous circu"stances pre!ented the plaintiff fro" filing the case sooner. #. 5hen the plaintiff is in possession of the property. 100. Because of <s gross negligence, 1 suffered in*uries that resulted in the abortion of the foetus she carried. 1 sued < for, a"ong other da"ages, 71 "illion for the death of a fa"il% "e"ber. /s 1 entitled to inde"nit% for the death of the foetus she carried$ A. 1es, since the foetus is alread% regarded as a child fro" conception, though unborn. B. 0o, since <s would not ha!e +nown that the accident would result in 1s abortion. 1. No, since birth determines personality, the accident did not result in the death of a person. '. 1es, since the "other belie!ed in her heart that she lost a child.

You might also like