COURSE OUTLINE IN

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS
(Atty. Elmer T. Rabuya)
BOOK IV
OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS
Title I. – OBLIGATIONS
CHAPTER I. – GENERAL PROVISIONS
Textbook : Tolentino, Vol. IV & Obligations and Contracts by Jurado
Article 1156
1. Concept of Obligation
2. Essential Elements of Obligation
(see : Ang Yu Asuncion vs. CA, 238 SCRA 602)
3. Civil Obligation Distinguished From Natural Obligation
(see : Arts. 1423 – 1430, Civil Code)
3.1 Concept of Natural Obligation
3.2 Natural Obligation Distinguished From Civil Obligation
3.3 Natural Obligation Distinguish From Moral Obligation
3.4 Meaning of “Voluntary Fulfillment” (see Arts. 1956 and 1960, Civil Code)
3.5 Guaranty of Natural Obligations
See : Art. 2052, Civil Code
Article 1157
1. Sources of Obligations
Article 1158
Cases :
Leung Ben vs. O’Brien, 38 Phil. 182
Pelayo vs. Lauron, 12 Phil. 453
Bautista vs. Borromeo, 35 SCRA 119
Manila Trading & Supply Co. vs. Saez, 66 Phil. 237
Dela Cruz vs. Northern Theatrical Enterprises, 50 O.G. 4225
Noel vs. CA, 240 SCRA 78
Article 1159

28 Phil. 1316. 156 SCRA 404 2. Orense. 2144 – 2153. 885 Rotea vs. 238 SCRA 602 Pichel vs. 34 Phil. CA. 89 Phil. CA. Sr. CC 2.Distinguished From Implied Agency. Vs. Cia. 217 SCRA 372 Sangalang vs. CA. Lim. Dec. 2144 Cases: Adille vs. 571 . 490 BPI vs. 2. CA. 38 Phil. 111 SCRA 341 Allied Banking Corp. 22. 2145 Case: MRR Co. 682 2. 157 SCRA 455 Sison vs. 105 Phil. 2149 Case: Gutierrez Hermanos vs. (a) (4) – Art. vs.. Inc. Two Kinds of Quasi-Contract (a) Negotiorum Gestio : see Arts. Alonzo. CC Cases: Leung Ben vs. Pineda. 395 Lao Chit vs. 1357. 238 SCRA 602 3. Obligatory Force of Contract Cases : Ang Yu Asuncion vs. 2. Security Bank and Trust Co.. 2142-2143. (a) (3) – Art. CA. CA. 284 SCRA 357 Intestate Estate of the Late Ricardo P. As To Perfection (a) Consensual Contract : See Art. 67 Phil. 875 US vs. 1315. Balgos.Art. 1988 Article 1160 1. O’Brien. CC (c) Solemn Contract : See Art. IAC.1. CC 4. Various Stages of Contract : see Ang Yu Asuncion vs. CC (b) Real Contracts : See Art. 330 2. vs. Definition of Contract : See Art. Presbiterio. 182 Tangco vs. Transatlantica. Delupio. 38 Phil. Concept of Quasi Contract : See Art. 36 Phil. (a) (2) . 1305. (a) (1) .

Revised Penal Code 2. (b) (1) . April 30.. Tadeo. 312 Manila Surety and Fidelity Co. 29. 110 Phil. 73 Phil. 274 SCRA 597 City of Cebu vs. Rodrigo. Implied Institution of Civil Action. 985 Globe Mackay Cable and Radio Corp. vs. 181 SCRA 328 3. Civil Liability Arising From Criminal Offenses: See Arts. l-9343. Balzarza. 177 SCRA 618 2. Rule 111 of the 2000 Rules on Criminal Procedure .No Solutio Indebiti Cases: Monte de Piedad vs.(b) Solutio Indebiti : See Arts. 1988 (c) Other Quasi-Contracts : Arts. vs.Requisites of Solutio Indebiti Cases: Power Commercial & Industrial Corp. Jr. Read : Sec. 100 . L-17447. 1. Dec. Inc. 2154 – 2163 2. (b) (4) . 1963 Andres vs. Basis of Civil Liability Cases: Banal vs. 1959 2. 2164 –2175 Article 1161 1. 630 2. Inc. 63 Phil. Sarmiento. City of Manila. Piccio. Balzarza. June 29.. (b) (3) . 261 Velez vs. 73 Phil. 32 Phil.103. Icamina. vs. NLRC.. (b) (2) . 2155 Cases: Gonzalo Puyat & Sons. Manufacturers Hanover Trust Corp. 117 Phil. CA. Muertequi. vs. 630 Puyat and Sons.. 156 SCRA 325 Occena vs. vs.Art. Inc. 558 Velez vs.Examples of Solutio Indebiti Cases: Aquinena and Co.

2007 6.4. No. 512 SCRA 642 (2007) Ching v. CA. Bayotas.R. 29. Jalandoni. Court of Appeals. Elements of Quasi-delict Cases: Taylor vs. 395 ... 2176. CA. 171 SCRA 429 5. Gerochi. 392 Elcano vs. 93 Phil. 77 SCRA 93 Jarantilla vs. Manila Electric Co. CC (b) Cases : Padilla vs. Culpa Aquiliana Distinguished From Culpa Contractual Case: Rakes vs. 607 Diana vs. Two kinds of acquittal: (Manantan v. 16 Phil. 350 SCRA 387) (A) Acquittal of the Accused Based on Reasonable Ground (a) See: Art. Jr. 73 Phil. 7 Phil. CC 2. 269 SCRA 695 3. Garcia and Almario. 129 SCRA 558 People vs. Hill. Dual Concept of Civil Liability Cases: Barredo vs. Atlantic Gulf & Pac. 236 SCRA 239 Villegas vs. Calaunan. Rule 111 of the 2000 Rule on Criminal Procedure (b) Cases: Manliclic v. 131 SCRA 454 Maximo vs. 144 SCRA 325 Castillo vs. 2. April 27. CA. Effect of Death of Accused During Pendency of Appeal Cases: People vs. G. Concept of Quasi-delict see : Art. 271 SCRA 148 Article 1162 1. Court of Appeals. 269 SCRA 283 (B) Acquittal Based on Ground That Accused Not Author of Act or Omission (a) See: Sec. 8 Philippine Bank of Commerce vs.. CA. Court of Appeals. Co. 141181. vs. jr. Batangas Transportation Co.. 176 SCRA 591 Heirs of the Late Teodoro Guaring. Nicdao.

18 SCRA 155. 171 SCRA 429 Imson vs. 177 4. 81 SCRA 472 Mendoza vs. 21 SCRA 1433 Jocaon vs. Palileo. CA. Manila Electric Co. Palileo. 392 (b) Quasi-Delict and Breach of Contract Cases. Culpa Aquiliana Distinguish From Culpa Criminal Cases: Barredo vs. 77 SCRA 98 5. Arrieta. 607 Elcano vs. 2177. 77 SCRA 98 Diana vs. 2003 6. 91 SCRA 113 Joseph vs. Ochoa. 21 SCRA 346 Tactaquin vs. Air France vs. 82 SCRA 243 Mendoza vs. Bautista. Robles. Hill. Gutierrez. Hill.. 93 Phil. Scope of Quasi-delicts (a) Quasi-Delict and Delict.. Glorioso. CC Cases: Diana vs.. 56 Phil. Garcia and Almario. 40 Phil. 93 Phil. 73 Phil. CA. 73 Phil.. No. Prohibition Against Double Recovery See: Art. Cases: Barredo vs. Feb. Garcia and Almario. 145804. 170 SCRA 540 Jarantilla vs. Batangas Transportation Co. 28. 66 SCRA 485 Virata vs. 23 SCRA 1117 LRTA v. Batangas Transportation Co. Natividad. Manila Railroad Co. G. 22 SCRA 316 Padua vs. 33 Phil.R. Carrascoso. 607 Elcano vs. 391 Tactaquin vs. Sept. BPI.. 6. 768 De Guia vs. 1966 Singson vs. 239 SCRA 58 .Cangco vs. 706 Gutierrez vs. La Mallorca Bus Co.