University of the Philippines

COLLEGE OF LAW

OBLIGATION AND CONTRACTS Course Outline

Prof. R. D. Morales 2nd Sern., 2004-05

Reference Book Tolentino Vol IV, other Commentaries on t he Civil Code Definition and Concept

A. Definition A. 1156 in relation to Art. 2236 B Distinguished from natural obligation Art. 1156 in relation to 1423 C. Elements D. Sources of Obligation Art 1157 1162 Sagrada Ordenvs Nacoco, 91 Phi!. 503 Pelayo vs Lauron, 12 Phil. 44or 4-93 Leung Ben vs. O'Brien, 38 Phil. 182 People's Car vs. Commando Security, 51 SCRA 40

Pichel vs Alonzo, 111 SCRA 341 Del Rio vs. Palanca, 83 Phil. 867 People vs Ritter, 194
SCRA 690 Andamo vs. IAC, 191 SCRA 195 Federation of Free Farmers vs. CA, GR L-41161, Sept. 10, 1981 Brings vs. The People, G.R. No. L-30309. November 25, 1983 Tan vs. Nitafan, G.R. No. 76965. March 11, 1994 People vs. Abungan, G.R. No. 136843. September 28, 2000 ii. Nature and Effects of Obligation A. Obligation to give Determine Thing Art 1460. 1163 1 -165 Equatorial vs Mayfair. G R. No. 106063. November 21. 1996 De Leon vs. Soriano. [G R No. L-2724 August 24 1950 I t,~ari R4tc~ v CK No

Generic Thing Art, 11460, 1165, 1246 Norkis vs CA, G. .R No 91029, Februar y 7, 1991- Phil. Long Distance Co. vs. Jeturian, 97 Phil. 78 N" 3 Effect of Loss Art. 1262, 1263 Bunge Corp. vs. Cannenforte , G P. No L-4440 August 29, 1952 1 - Occena vs Jabson. 73 SCRA 637 Obligation to do Art. 1167, 1244 par 2, Hah n vs. C A G. N o L -5 53 72 . May 31 , 19 89 Chaves vs. Gonzales, 32 SCRA 547 Occena vs. Jabson, ibid. Woodhouse vs. Halili, 93 Phil. 526 C. Obligation not to do Art. 1168, 1244 par 2 D. Effect of breach 1. Delay in performance Art. 1 165, 1169,1262 Villaruel vs. Manila Motor, 104 Phil. 926 Lopez vs Tan Tioco, 8 Phil. 926 Dela Rosa vs. BPI, 51 Phil. 926 Lizares vs. Hernaez, 40 Phil. 98 Bachrach Motor Co. vs. Lee Tay, 90 Phil 540 Lawyers Coop. Pub. vs. Tabora, 13 SCRA 762 Equatorial vs. Mayfair, 11)1d. Cc vs. CA, GR 124922, June 22, 1998 - -Aerospace vs. CA, GR 108129, Sept. 23, 1999Non-fulfillment Art 1165, 1167, 1168, 1170 Chavez vs. Gonzales, supra Teiefast vs. Castro. 158 SCRA 445 Tanguiling Vs. CA, GR 117190, Jan. 2, 1997 - Perez vs. CA, GR No 107737, Oct. 1, 1999 ft

Ip "Js -4r'

__3 --Fraud
Art 117,2'- 1173 Board of Liquidators vs Heirs of Maximo Kalavv 20 SCRA 987 11,

lCB vs. Gueco, GR 141968, Feb. 12, 2001 Negligence Art. 1172 1173 .I Necessito vs Paras, GR L 10605-06, June 30, 1958

5 Convention of the tenor of the obligation Arrieta vs. Noric, 10 SCRA 79 Chavez vs. Gonzales,I 32 SCRA 547 E Effect of fortuitous event Art 1174 Necesito vs. Paras. ibid. tr A m 92 pang vs. Guinco, 91 Phil 1085 Victorian Planters vs. Victorian Milling, 97 Phi! 18
La Mallorca vs. De JesuO, 17 SCRA 23 Nakpil vs. CA, 144 SCRA 696 Austria vs. CA, 39 SCRA 527 Vasquez vs. CA, 138 SCRA 553

F- Usurious transactions
Art. 1175,- R.A. No. 2655 Angel Jose Warehousing Co. vs. Chelda, 23 SCRA 119 Briones vs. Cammayo, 41 SCPA 404 G. Presumption of interest and installments Art. 1 176, 1253 Hill vs. Veloso, 31 Phil. 160 Vda. De Ongsiako vs. Cabatuando, 105 Phil. 1262 H. Action Subrogation Arts. 1177 1178 G o ld st a r Mi n i n g vs. L im J im e n a , 2 5 S CR A 5 9 7 Estate of Hernandez vs. Luzon Surety, 100 Phil 388

Ill.

Kinds of Obligation

A. Pure and conditional obligations Pure obligations Art 1179 Pay vs. Palance, 57 SCRA 618 Conditional obligations a with suspensive,' resolutory conditions Art 1181, 1187, 1190 X Lichauco vs Figueras-Hermanos. 7 Phil 383 Wise & Co vs Kelly, G R No. L- 11073 February

vs. Millar, 68 Phil. 39 arks vs. Prov. of Tarlac, 49 Phil. 142 'Of u '-' - CA"C.K [ -tD '- t k,)Am duly vi 1946 Sq A ', b. pot e s t t tve mix e c&n cl i lio * 19q )" 2'00( Art. 1182

//Santiago

'aS

,9 otwell vs. Manila Motor, G.R. No. L-7637. December 29, 1956 ,Stith Bell s. Sotelo Matti, 44 Phil. 874 liana vs. Quezon Colleges, 93 Phil. 383 smena vs. Rama, 14 Phil. 99 Hermosa vs Longara. 93 Phil, 971 Impossible and illicit conditions Art. 1183 u neta Motor Co. vs. Abad, 67 Phi!, Z-3L q C A\aY)j . A CV, No. S0(04 [ -5 Vm - 5 nR-6 d. positive and negative conditions
Art. 1184-85

3. Constructive fulfillment
Art. 1186 aylor vs. Uy Tieng, 43 Phil. 760 er ra, vs. Leviste, G.R. No. 55744. February 28, 1985 -yag vs. CA, G.R. No. 96053. March 3, 1993 U M I RVA q CA , GV, No . to 3 5~~ 04. , 19% _ Retroactivity, of obligation Art 1187 "adilla vs. Paterno, 3 SCRA 678 6ronel vs. CA, G.R. No. 103577. October 7, 1996 5. 6. Preservation of creditor's rights Art. 1188 Rescission in reciprocal obligations 1491, A 1192 ego vs. Interbank, 37 Phil. 631

Albert vs. University Publishing, G.R. No. L9300. April 18, 1958 "~OP vs. Delos Angeles, 33 SCRA 102 ,Roque vs. Lapuz, G.R. 32811, March 31, 1980 Fera vs. Leviste G.R. No. 55744. February 28, 1985 ueta vs. Mariano, 111 SCRA 206 eIrta Motor Corp vs. Gentino, 170 SCRA 29 B Obligatjonc w ti7 h .9 period Ar-t 1180, 1193 - 1198 Vito, 84 Phil. 542 'XPN3 vs Lopes Smyth Bell vs. Matti, supra Gait-- vs. Fonacier. 2 SCRA 830 vs CA. 66 SCRA 523 ,r,miento vs. Villasenor, 43 Phil 880 ,aa'guhoy Enterprises vs Ponce. 96 Phil 15

Victorias Planter, supra. & Leon vs. Syjuco, 90 Phi[ 311 1 4illare vs. Hernando, 151 SCRA 484 .)<P cific Banking Corp. vs. CA, 73 SCRA 102 ' ng Fo vs. Oria, 33 Phil 3 C Alternative and facultative obligations .Art. 1199 1206 Agoncillo vs. Javier, 38 Phil. 424 Ong Guan Can vs Century, 46 Phil 592

D. Joint and solidary Art. 1207 1222 ,jz(ucl;an vs. Quer-ol, 38 Phil 707 ) (amos vs. Gibbon, 67 Phil 371 ,Versoza vs. Lim, 45 Phil 416 R(' )nquillo vs. CA, 132 SCRA 274 iz vs. Cayanon, 92 SCRA 146 Aerial Insurance vs. David, 133 SCRA 317 Aghausti vs. Yulo, 34 Phil. 978 P I v s . M c C o y , 5 2 P h i l 8 3 1 Wilson vs. Berkenkotter, 49 O.G. 1410 inese Chamber of Commerce vs. Pua Te Ching, 16 Phil 406
D. Divisibfe and indivisible obligation Art.

1223 1225 D. Obligation with a penal clause Art. 1226 12-30 nila Racing vs. Manila Jockey, 69 Phil 55 I ridad Est. vs. Santero, 71 Phil. 114 ,8pchrach Motors vs. Espiritu, 52 Phil 346 ~abarroguis vs. Vicente, 107 Phil 340 XLambert vs. Fox, 26 Phil 558 Vodges vs. Javellana, 4 SCRA 1228 Ramintuan vs. CA, 94 SCRA 556 -FZ'obes-Francisco Realty vs. CFJ, 86 SCRA 59 "ati Dev. Corp. vs. Empire Insurance Co., 20 SCRA 557 Umali vs. Miclat, 105 Phil 1007-

University of the Philippines

C O L L E G E

O F

L A W

OBLIGATION AND CONTRACTS Course Outline Part II

Prof. R. D. Morales 2"
d

Sem., 2006-07

IV. (a) 1261

EXTINGUISHMENT OF OBLIGATIONS General Provisions: Art. 1231

Payment Arts. 1232 -

Arrieta v. National Rice and Corn Corp., 10 SCRA 79-, Kalalo v. Luz, 34 SCRA 337-, Pacific Timber v. Macondray, 101 SCRA 685 McLaughlin vs. CA, [G.R. No. L-57552. Oct. 10; 1986- Tibajia vs. CA, G.R. No. 100290. June 4,
1993=4

Esguerra vs. Villanueva, G.R. No. L-23191. December 19, 1967.-~ Tolentino vs. CA, G.R. No. 50405-06. August 5,
1981

Filinvest Credit vs. Phil Acetylene., G.R. No. L-50449. January 30, 1982.' Legaspi vs. CA, G.R. No. L-45510. May 27, 1986 Hahn vs. CA, G.R. No. L-55372. May 31, 1989 - Baritua vs. CA, G.R. No. 82233. March 22, 1990 Aquino vs. CA, G.R. Caltex vs. 1AC, G.R. No. 72703. Nov. 13, 1992 , Sangrador vs. Sps. Valderrama,G.R. No. 79552. Nov. 29, 1988
(b) Loss Arts. 1262 -1269

Occena v. Jabson, 73 SCRA 637 -' ' , PNCC vs. CA, G.R. No. 116896. May 5,
1997--t (c) Condonation or Remission Arts. 1270 - 1274

Trans-Pacific vs. CA, G.R. No. 109172. Aug: 19, 1994:

(d) Confusion or Merger Arts. 1275 - 1277 Mota vs. Serra, G.R. No. 22825. Feb. 14, 1925

Enriquez vs. Ranola, G.R. No. 40908. Sept. 8,

1934

(e) Compensation Arts. 1278 - 1290 Gan Tion v. CA, 28 SCRA 235 -4 PNB vs. Acero, G.R. No. L-69255. Feb. 27, 1987--0 CKH vs. CA, G.R. No. 111890. May 7, 11997-o Pioneer insurance vs. CA, G.R. No. 76509. Dec. 15, 1989 " . ..BPI vs. CA, G.R. No. 116792. March 29_1996 Orata vs. IAC, G.R. No. 73471. May 8, 1990 (f) Novation Arts. 1291 - 1304

Millar v. CA, 38 SCRA 642 Dormitorio v. Fernandez, 72 SCRA 388 Zapanta vs. De Rotaeche, G.R. No. 6910. Jan. 9, 1912 Tiu Siuco vs. Habana, G.R. No. 21106. Feb. 21, 1924 Guerrero vs. CA, G.R. No. L-22366. Oct. 30, 1969 andico vs. Timbol, G.R. No. L-26115. Nov. Garcia, Jr. vs. CA, G.R. No. 80201. Nov. 20, 1990 Ligutan vs. De La Llana, G.R. No. 138677. Feb. 12, 2002Broadway Centrum vs. Tropical Food, G.R. No. 79642. July 5, 1993 g) Other causes: BPI vs. Boston Bank, [G.R. No. 94676. Sept. 30, 1992 Ace-Agro Development vs. CA, G.R. No 119729. Jan. 221, 1907

C O N TRAC TS GEN ERAL PRO VI SI ON S Arts. 1305 - 1317 Cui v. Arellano, 2 SCRA 205 Talisay-Silay Inc. vs.Talisay-Silay Milling, G.R.. L-19937. Feb. 19, 1979 Batchelder vs. C,$, G.R. No. L-25071. March 29, 1972 Asuncion vs. CA, G.R. No. 109125. Dec. 2, 1994 -- - tAwl 2. ESSENTIAL REQUISITES Arts. 1318 - 1355

Sanchez v. Rigos, 45 SCRA 368 Hill v. Veloso, 31 Phil 161 Asuncion vs. CA, supra. Mapalo vs. Mapalo, G.R. No. L-21489 and L-21628. May'! 9,,1968,;Sps. Santos. vs. CA, G.R. No. 120820. August 1, 2000 Santos vs. Heirs of Villanueva, G.R. No. 143325. October 24, 2000 MMDA vs. Jancom, G.R. No. 147465. Jan. 30, 2002 Palma vs. Canizares, G.R. No. 34. Dec. 31, 1902 Dumez vs. NLRC, G.R. No. 82340. Aug. 12, 1991 Somoso vs. CA, G.R. No. 78050. October 23, 1989 II

J?

Yuvienco vs. Dalcoycoy, G.R. No L-55048 May 27, 1981 FORM OF CON TRAC TS Arts. 1356 1358 --0 Aj'tsS Pernaez v. Delos Angeles, 27 SCRA 1276 Alano vs. Barbara. G.R. No. L-4274. March 23, 1908 REF ORMATI ON OF IN STRUMENTS Arts 1359 13690 Atilano v. Atilano, 28 SCRA 231 Investor Finance Corp. v. CA, 193 SCRA 547 INTERPRETATION OF CONTRACTS Arts. 1370 1379 Borromeo v. CA, 47 SCRA 65 Lim Yhi Luya vs. CA, G.R. No. L-40258, Sept. 11, 1980 Rivera Filipino vs. CA, G.R. No. 117355. April 5, 2002 DEF EC TI VE CO N TRAC TS (a) Rescissible Contracts Arts. 1380 1389 UFC v. CA, 33 SCRA 1 Equatorial vs. Mayfair, ibid. Guman, Bocaling vs. Bonnevie, G.R. No. 86150. March 2, 1992 (a) Voidable Contracts Arts. 1390 1402 Uy Soo Lin v. Tan Uno.huan, 38 Phil 552 Sps. Theis vs. CA, G.R. No. 126013. February 12, 1997 Rural Bank of Caloocan vs. Desiderio, G.R. No. L32116. April 21, 1981 MWSS vs. CA, G.R. No. 126000. October 7, 1998 MWSS vs. Lopez , , G.R. No. 128520. October 7, 1998 -YSps. Guiang vs. CA. G.R. No. 125172. June 26,1998 (b) Unenforceable Contracts Arts. 1403 1408 Yovienco case, ibid. Coronet vs. Constantino, G.R. No. 121069. February 7, 2003 Regal Films vs. Concepcion, G.R. No 139532, August 9, 2001 NPC vs. National Merchandising, G.R. Nos. L-33819 and L33897. October 23, 1982 Land, vs. CA, G.R. No. 125531. February 12, 1997

Cenido vs.Apacionado. G.R. No. 132474. Nov. 19, 1999 Villanueva vs. CIA G.R. No. 107624. January 28, 1997 (d) Void or Inexistent Contracts A rt s. 1 40 9 1 42 2
''AIN

Ll_qtleZ v. CA, 102 Phil Rellosa v. Gaw Ghee Hun, 93 Phil. 827 Phil. Banking Corp. v. Lui Sheh, 21 SCRA 52 Francisco vs. Herrera. G.R. No. 139982. November 21, 2002 Agars vs. PIATCO. G.R. No. 155001. May 5,2003_-

V.

NATURAL OBLIGATIONS

Arts. 1423 - 1430 VI. ESTOPPEL Arts 1431 - 1439 Kalalo v. Luz, ibid. Dela Cruz v. Paraz, 69 SCRA 556 Miguel v. Catalino , 26 SCRA 234 Manila Lodge No. 761 v. CA, 73 SCRA 168 %./co vs. BA ~-,',ance, G.R. No. 71694, August 16, 199' rI August

V . T R U S T S Arts. 1440 - 1457 Salao v. Salao, 70 SCRA 65 Fabian v. Fabian, 22 SCRA 231 Bueno v. Reyes, 27 SCRA 1179 Tamayo v. Callejo, 46 SCRA 27Mindanao Dev. Authority vs. CA, G.R. No. L-49087. April 5, 1982 Tala Realty vs. Banco Filipino, G.R. No. 137533. November 22, 2002 VII. QUASI-CONTRACTS A rt s. 21 42 - 21 75