Oblicon Finals (Article 1327-1457)

Art. 1327.

The following cannot give consent to a contract:

(1) Unemancipated minors;
(2) Insane or demented persons, and deaf-mutes who do not know how to write.

Effect of Incapacity: Art. 1318 requires consent of contracting parties as an essential element for
the validity of the contract. The present article indicates who cannot give consent to a contract.
Legal consequence: contract entered into by one of these persons would be wanting in consent,
hence, inexistent or void.
Legally, if both parties are incapable of giving consent, the contract is unenforceable. If only one
is capable, it is annullable.
By way of exception: if necessaries are sold and delivered to a minor or other person
without capacity to act, he must pay a reasonable price therefor.
(necessaries: include everything indispensable for sustenance, dwelling, clothing,
& medical attendance.)
Unemancipated minors:

cannot enter into valid contracts; contracts entered into by them is

not binding upon them.
Unless:
1. Upon reaching majority they ratify the same
2. Contract has been entered into through a guardian (check Paras
annotations.)

Estoppel.
The courts have laid down the rule that the sale of real estate, effected by minors
who have already passed the age of puberty and adolescence and are near the adult age, whent hey
pretend to have already reached their majority, while in fact they have not, is VALID, and they
cannot be permitted afterwards to excuse themselves from compliance with obligations assumed
by them or seek their annulment.
However, in the case of Young v. Tecson, the liability resulting from
misrepresentation has its juridical source in the capacity of the person making the representation
to bind himself. If the person making the representation cannot bind himself by a contract, he
cannot also be bound by any misrepresentation he may have made in connection therewith. A
person entering into a contract must see to it that the other party has sufficient capacity to bind
himself.
Justice Padilla, dissenting: It would be illogical to uphold the validity of a contract on
the ground of estoppel, because if the contract executed by a minor is null and void for lack of
consent and produces no legal effect, how could such a minor be bound by misrepresentation
about his age? If he could not be bound by a direct act, such as the execution of a deed of sale,
how could he be bound by an indirect act, such as misrepresentation as to his age? The rule laid
down in Young v, Tecson in my opinion, is the correct one.

Oblicon Finals (Article 1327-1457)

Insane persons.
The presumption of sanity is generally favored. The burden of proving such
incapacity at the time of the execution rests upon he who alleges it. If no sufficient proof to this
effect is presented, his capacity will be presumed.
During lucid intervals, contract executed is valid.
Deaf-mutes.

Capable of entering into contract if shown that they have sufficient mental
capacity.

Art. 1328.

Contracts entered into during a lucid interval are VALID. Contracts agreed to in a
state of drunkenness or during a hypnotic spell are VOIDABLE.

Lucid intervals.

A person under guardianship for insanity may still enter into a valid
contract and even convey property, provided it is proven that at the time of
entering into said contract, he was not insane.

Liquor and Drugs.

A person may take liquor and still retain his mental faculties. It is the result
of the use of alcohol or drugs upon the condition of the mind which
determines whether the user has capacity to contract at a given moment.

Hypnotism and Somnambulism.

both.

Art. 1329.

The utter want of understanding is a common element of

The incapacity declared in article 1327 is subject to the modifications

determined by law, and is understood to be without prejudice to special
disqualifications established in the laws.

Other causes of Incapacity

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

Civil Interdiction
Hospitalized lepers
Prodigals
Deaf and Dumb (unable to read and write)
Unsound mind
Age (minority)
Disease
Weak mind
Other similar causes; cannot without outside aid, take care of
themselves (because they become an easy prey for deceit)

Special Disqualification:
Incapacity of a person declared as insolvent or bankrupt
Incapacity of the husband and the wife to sell property to each other
Incapacity vs. Disqualification
2

Oblicon Finals (Article 1327-1457)

Incapacity is a restriction upon the exercise of a right; renders the contract merely
voidable.
Disqualification is a restriction upon the very right itself; makes it void.

Art. 1330.

A contract where consent is given through mistake, violence, intimidation, undue

influence, or fraud is voidable.

Defects of the will or Vices of consent

Requisites of Consent:

IFS

Intelligent, or with an exact notion on the matter

Should be free.
Should be spontaneous.
Vitiated consent does not make a contract unenforceable but merely voidable.
Proof necessary:
Must be established by full, clear and convincing evidence
Not merely by a preponderance thereof.

Art. 1331.
In order that mistake may invalidate consent, it should refer to the substance of the
thing which is the object of the contract, or to those conditions which have principally
moved one or both parties to enter into the contract.
Mistake as to the identity or qualifications of one of the parties will vitiate consent
only when such identity or qualifications have been the principal cause of the contract.
A simple mistake of account shall give rise to its correction.
Concept of Error: Ignorance v. Error
Ignorance means the complete absence of any notion about a particular matter.
Error means a wrong or false notion about such matter; A belief in the existence of some
circumstance, fact or event, which in reality do not exist.
Thus, a person who has purchased a machine in his own name, cannot elude payment of the price
and claim that the vendor should collect it from a third person with whom such vendor had never
contracted, by alleging that he made a mistake in contracting for himself and not in the name of
such third person who is his client.
3

Oblicon Finals (Article 1327-1457)

Mistake of Fact or Law

This article refers to error of fact.
Error of law is not a ground for annulment. (Invoking Art. 3, NCC)