CHAPTER 1 – GENERAL PROVISIONS Topic: When strangers or third persons affected by a
contract; Stipulations Pour Autrui
Topic: Limitations on contractual stipulations.
1. A contract whereby X promised to live as the common-law
wife of Y without the benefit of marriage in consideration
of 100k is immoral, and therefore, void.
2. An agreement whereby X is to render service as a servant
to Y without compensation as long as X has not paid his
debt is reprehensible and censurable. It is also contrary to
law.
3. X entered into a contract whereby X binds himself to slap
his father. This contract is void because it is against the
good custom of showing respect to our parents.
4. X stole the car of Y. Later, they entered into a contract
whereby Y would not prosecute X in consideration of 50k.
It is the interest of society that crimes be punished. This
agreement between X and Y is contrary to public policy
because it seeks to prevent or stifle the prosecution of X
for theft. To permit X to escape the penalties prescribed by
law by the purchase of immunity from Y, a private
individual, would result in a manifest perversion of justice.
Topic: Contract binds both contracting parties.
5. S agreed to sell his car to B for 100k. The contract is
binding upon both contracting parties and either of them
can enforce the contract against the other.
A stipulation in the contract that the contract shall be
considered invalid if so declared by S or that S can comply
with his obligation if he want without the same privilege
be given to B is VOID because the contract does not bind
both of them. Nor can S alone determine the price of the
which price is binding upon B whether he accepts it or not.
A contract is a meeting of the minds, and thus, there must
be mutual consent.
But if the price fixed by S is accepted by B, the sale is
perfected. If S of B alleges fraud, he must adduce
satisfactory evidence.
6. S sold his parcel of land to B. It was agreed that C, a real
estate appraise would be the one to determine the
reasonable price of the land. C, then, fixed the price after
considering all the circumstance and factors affecting the
value of the land.
In this case, C must make known his decision to S, and B
who will be bound by the same.
Topic: Generally, contracts take effect only between parties,
their assigns, and heirs. (Except, contracts are only effective
between parties when rights and obligations are not
transmissible by law, stipulation, or by nature.)
7. D is indebted to C in the amount of 10k. D and C are the
parties to the contract.
If C dies, D must pay the heirs of C. If C assigns his credit
to X, then D is liable to pay X.
If D dies, and H is the heir, then H assumes the obligation
of D to C. H is bound by the contract entered into by D, his
predecessor in interest, in view of the privity of interest
between him and D. However, H is not liable beyond the
value of the property he inherits from D, the decedent.
8. D owes C 10k payable after 1 year at 12% interest. It was
agreed that the interest of 1,200 pesos would be given to
T to whom C is indebted for the same amount.
In this case, T must communicate his acceptance to D
before the revocation of the stipulation by the parties in
order that the same will be effective. From the moment
communication of acceptance is duly made, T becomes a
part to the contract. The promise (C) in a contract
containing a stipulation pour autrui is entitled to bring an
action for its enforcement or to prevent its breach in the
same manner as the beneficiary (T) thereof.
9. X contracts with Y for the erection of a building which will
enhance the value of Z/s adjoining property. The fact that
Z may incidentally derive some benefit from the contract
gives him no right to sue X for breach of the contract.
Topic: Third persons bound by contracts creating real rights
(exception to the general rule that a contract binds only the
parties).
10. D mortgaged his parcel of land in favor of C as a security
for his debt. The mortgage is duly registered in the
Registry of Property. Later on, D sold the same land to T.
In this case, T bought the land subject to the mortgage
constituted thereon. IOW, T is bound by the contract
between D and C although he is a stranger to said contract
because the right of C to the mortgage, being a real right,
follows the property wherever it goes.
Topic: Right of creditor to impugn contracts intended to
defraud them.
11. D is indebted to C in the amount of 10k. D sells a parcel of
land to T in order that C may not attach the land in
payment of his debt, and D has no other property.
C, who is a stranger to the contract between D and T, is
given by law the right to ask for the rescission or
cancellation of the sale in order that he may be paid by his
claim.
Topic: Liability of third person responsible for breach of
contract.
12. S agreed to sell his parcel of land to B for 1M. S sells the
land to C instead because of the inducement of D.
In this case, B can sue D for damages. However, the liability
of D for damages cannot be more than that of S for the
latter’s violation of his contract. To hold D liable for
damages in excess of those can be recovered against S
“would lead to a result once grotesque and unjust”.
Almost, D would be solidarily liable with S.
D’s source of obligation would be based on the theory of
quasi-delict.
Topic: Consummation and termination of contracts
13. S offers to sell his car to B for 500k. B asks S to show him
the car. Later, S brings the car and shows it to B. B offers
to pay 400k for the car.
Here, the parties are taking all the steps that may lead to
the perfection of the contract.
 If S agrees to sell the car for 400k, the contract is perfected
because there is a meeting of the minds upon the subject
matter and the cause of the contract.
The contract will be consummated after S delivers the car
to B and B pays 400k. B becomes the owner of the car and
S, the owner of the money paid by B. The contract is
completely executed. It ceases to be an active or existing
agreement and it is valuable only in case later dispute or
existing agreement and it is valuable only in case dispute
should arise between S and B about the agreement.
S and B may terminate their contract by mutual agreement
thereby releasing them from their respective obligation as
seller and buyer.
Topic: Perfection of consensual and real contracts.
14. Today S and B enter into a contract whereby S binds
himself to sell his car to B for 200k.
The contract is deemed perfected although there no
delivery yet of the car, and payment of the price. Both
parties acquire the right to demand from the other the
fulfillment of his obligation: to deliver the car on the part
of S, and to pay the amount of 200k.
15. D borrowed from C 5k. As security for the debt, D promised
to pledge his diamond ring to C.
Before the delivery of the ring to C, the contract of pledge
is not yet perfected.
If D alter on refuses to pledge the ring, C can demand the
payment of the obligation although it is with a period. But
C cannot require D to deliver the ring as security because
there is no real contract of pledge yet. There is merely a
consensual contract to constitute a pledge. What exists is
a personal right, the right of action on the part of C to
demand the constitution of the pledge.
Topic: Unauthorized contracts can be cured only ratification.
16. D borrowed 10k from C in whose favor he executed a
promissory note. In the note it is state that D is acting as
the agent of P and that the money is intended for P. P
never authorized D to borrow money from C.
In this case, the contract of D is not enforceable against P.
However, P can subsequently approve or sanction the
contract unless it has been revoked by C. Ratification
cleanses the contract from all its defects from the moment
the contract was entered into. If the contract has already
been ratified by P, it can no longer be revoked by C.
Topic: When a person is bound by the contract of another.
17. P authorized A to sell his car for 200k cash. A sold the car
to C for 200k payable in 10 monthly installments.
In this case, P cannot be compelled by C to accept the
monthly installments and to deliver the car because A
acted beyond his powers unless there has been ratification
by P. A is personally liable to C for damages.
STUDY GUIDE QUESTIONS FOR CHAPTER I
18. A and B entered into a contract not specifically provided in
the Civil Code. Is the contract valid and binding?
19. S (seller) and B (buyer) entered into a contract of sale. It
was agreed that the price shall be determined by T, a third
person. Can S or B refuse to be bound by T’s determination
of the price if he does not agree with the amount thereof?
20. D owes C 20k. Both are house painters. It was agreed that
D instead of paying C, will paint the house of E to which E
expressed his conformity to C whose service as painter was
previously contracted by E. Has B the right to enforce the
stipulation between C and D?
21. X made an office desk for Y. S told Y that the latter may
pay whatever amount he would like to pay for it. When the
desk was finished Y offered to pay 2k but instead X
demanded 3k for its fair value. Is X entitled to 3k?
CHAPTER 2: ESSENTIAL REQUISITES OF CONTRACTS
SECTION 1 – CONSENT
Topic: Offer must be certain and seriously intended.
22. S intending to play a joke, offered his expensive watch
worth 50k to B who knew the value of the watch for 500
pesos. Here, there is no valid offer. But if S offered his
watch for 30k to B who did not realize that S was joking
and accepted the seemingly serious offer, there is a true
meeting of the minds resulting in the existence of a
binding contract of sale.
Topic: Acceptance must be clear and absolute.
23. S asked B this question: “will you buy my (specific) car for
200k”. If B answers “yes I accept your offer” or “yes I agree”
or just “yes” the acceptance of is absolute or unconditional.
But, if B proposes to pay only 160k for the car or to buy
instead another car or a land for S for 200k, his acceptance
is qualified and becomes a counter-offer. In this case, B is
now the new offerer, and S the new offeree.
Topic: Withdrawal of offer where period stipulation for
acceptance.
24. X offers to construct the house of Y for a very reasonable
price of 1M giving the latter 10 days within which to make
up his mind.
X may withdraw the offer even before the lapse of 10 days,
unless Y has already accepted the offer. After acceptance,
withdrawal is not possible as there no more offer to
withdraw.
Even before acceptance, X may not withdraw the offer if
the option is covered by a consideration as when Y paid or
promised to pay a sum of money to X for giving him the
10-day period. There is here an option contract. After the
10-day period, in the absence of acceptance, the offer
becomes ineffective.
Topic Mistake or error
25. Mistake re object – A is buying from B a breeding cow but
B is selling a barren cow.
26. Mistake re condition of the contract – A is selling his parcel
of land for 200k cash but B is buying the land thinking that
the price is payable in installments.
27. Mistake re identity or qualifications –
 A sold his car to B. A thought that B was a lawyer, but
instead B was a doctor. The mistake here is not
material as to avoid the contract.
 A donated his car to B. A thought that B was his half-
brother. It turned out that B is not related to A. The
 mistake as to the identity in this case is material
because his identity was the principal reason for the
donation.
Topic: Effect of knowledge of risk.
28. B bought a parcel of land from S who informed him before
the contract was perfected that the land was involved in a
litigation in which C is the claimant.
In case the land is recovered later on by C, B cannot allege
mistake in his contract because he knew the risk that the
land might later on recovered by C.
Topic: Mutual error as to the legal effect of an agreement
when the real purpose of the parties is frustrated, may
vitiate consent (1334)
29. D borrowed 10k from C. As security for the debt, it was
agreed that D should mortgage his parcel of land in favor
of C. However, the document as written is one of
antichresis, the parties erroneously believing that it has the
same effect as mortgage. In this case, the contract is
voidable because there is no meeting of the minds.
If the parties really agreed on a sale, but the document as
written discloses a mortgage, there is meeting of the
minds but the document does not show their true
intention. In this case, the remedy is reformation.
30. C delivers as a deposit a movable property to D who
receives it as a loan.
Here, the mutual error is not on the legal effect but on the
nature of the contract entered into. D must return the
property as there is neither a deposit nor a loan.
Topic: Nature of violence, and intimidation.
31. If X signs a document because every time he refuses he is
hit by the butt of a gun which causes blood to flow from
his head, there is violence because serious or irresistible
force is employed.
32. If X signs the document because a gun is pointed at him
by Y who threatens to kill him, and he no reason to believe
that Y will not carry out his threat, the intimidation would
vitiate consent.
33. But if X was merely intimidated that he would be shot by Y
and the latter had no gun at the time of the threat, there
is no intimidation because the fear is not reasonable and
well-grounded.
Topic: Threat to enforce just or legal claim.
34. D owes C 5k. If D fails to pay his obligation, a threat by C
that he would enforce collection through a court does not
vitiate consent.
But if C knows that D is not obligated to him and D pays C
5k or a larger amount because of the threat, there is
intimidation sufficient to vitiate consent.
35. X committed a violation of law. Y threatens to report X to
the police unless the latter gives him 5k. Here, the threat
of Y amounts to intimidation because the claim is not just
or legal.
Topic: Undue influence
36. X, a tenant, is in need of 10k to pay his landlord who is
seeking to eject him for failure to pay the rents. X tries to
borrow form Y but the latter instead tells him to sell his
piano for 10k. X has nobody to turn to for assistance.
If X does not want to sell the piano but he is compelled to
sell it because of his financial situation, the sale may be
avoided on the ground of undue influence.
Topic Causal Fraud
37. S offered to sell to B a ring, claiming that the stone on the
ring is diamond. S knows that is not diamond but ordinary
glass. If B buys the ring relying on the truth of the
representation of S, the sale may be annulled on the
ground of fraud.
38. S sold to B a parcel of land representing that the same was
absolutely free of all liens and encumbrances. S gave his
consent on the faith of B’s representation. When the sale
was registered, it was found that lis pendens notice was
annotated on the title of the land.
Concealment constitutes fraud such as justifies that
avoidance of sale, and entitles B to damages.
39. S sold to B a house and lot, misrepresenting that the place
was easily accessible to means of public transportation.
The sale is voidable on the ground of fraud if B was
induced to give his consent because of the representation.
If B purchased the property without any inducement from
S, his mistaken belief that it was accessible does not vitiate
consent because the error refers merely to an incidental
quality or condition.
Topic: Fraud by concealment.
40. X and Y are partners engaged in the real estate business.
Here, the parties are bound by confidential relations. X
learned that C was interested in buying a certain parcel of
land owned by the partnership even for a high price.
Without informing Y, X was able to make Y sell to him his
share in the partnership. Then, X sold the land at a big
profit.
In this case, X is guilty of fraudulent concealment because
he as under the duty to make disclosure of facts having a
bearing on the value of the interests of Y in the partnership
which were not known to Y.
If the sale was at the initiative of Y and Y unintentionally
failed to inform Y of C’s offer, the cause for annulment is
mistake or error on the part of Y.
41. S sold to B stocks traded in the stock exchange at a certain
price. S believed that the price of the stocks would go
down at a certain price, and it did. This sale is valid because
S was not bound to make disclosure of his reasons for his
belief.
Topic: Expression of an opinion.
42. X, a farmer, found a ring. He does not know anything about
precious stones. He sells the ring to Y honestly believing,
and telling Y that it a diamond ring.
In this case, there is no fraud even if it turned out that the
ring is not diamond because his statement is merely an
expression of an opinion.
However, if X is an expert on precious stones and he sells
the ring to Y saying “I believe this is a diamond ring”, and
Y knowing that X is an expert, relies on his special
knowledge, the contract is voidable on the ground of
fraud. X being an expert, is making a misrepresentation of
 fact and he cannot escape liability by expressing it in the
form of an opinion.
Topic: Fraud by third persons.
43. B bought the land of S for 2k per sqm. The reasonable price
of lands in the same vicinity is 2, 500 pesos per sqm but S
sold it only for 2k because C had deceived him regarding
its market value.
In this case, the contract cannot be annulled unless it can
be shown that B was a party to the fraud.
44. B wants to buy a parcel of land on which to build a house.
S owns a land on which he wants to construct a commercial
building. C tells B and S that the area where the land is
located is residential zone. B and S then enter into a
contract of sale. It turns out that the area is a commercial
zone.
Under the facts, the sale may be annulled because of
substantial mistake which is mutual.
Topic: Misrepresentation in good faith.
45. S sold a ring to B. S honestly believed that what he sold to
B was a diamond ring. It turned out that it was not a
diamond ring.
The misrepresentation of B is a mere mistake and contract
is voidable on the ground and not on the ground of fraud.
Topic: Simulation of Contracts
46. D is indebted to C. Upon learning that C is going to enforce
his credit, D pretended to sell his land to B, his father-in-
law. D did not receive a single centavo for the transaction
and he continued in possession of the land as the contract
was merely simulated.
There is no contract of sale ins this as the parties do not
intend to be bound at all.
47. D and C entered into a contract of mortgage. But wanting
to hide the mortgage, it was made to appear in the form
of a deed of sale.
Here, there are two acts involved: the ostensible or
apparent act: the contract of sale, and the concealed or
hidden act: the contract of mortgage.
As far as D and C are concerned, the contract entered into
between them is a contract of mortgage. As to third
persons, the apparent contract, the contract of sale, is the
one entered into. Consequently, if C is the mortgagee but
is made to appear as the buyer and C sells the land to B,
the latter will acquire ownership. D and C are estopped or
barred from claiming that the real agreement entered into
by them is a contract of mortgage.
STUDY GUIDE QUESTIONS
48. In a contract containing an option period, when is the
offerer not allowed to withdraw his offer even before
acceptance by the offeree? When is the offerer allowed to
withdraw his offer even after acceptance?
49. S sold his house to B believing that B was C. Can S legally
withdraw from the contract on ground of mistake?
50. S agreed to deliver B 500 cavans of rice at 600 pesos per
cavan. S delivered only 490 cavans deliberately
misrepresenting that the delivery consisted of 500 cavans.
Can B asked the court to annul the contract on the ground
of fraud?
51. S sold to B commercial land for 1M. S assured B that it is
certain that in two years’ time, the land would increase in
market value by 50% or 1.5M. It turned out that the market
value of the land even decreased to about 800k. Is S liable
to B for misrepresentation?
52. Suppose in the same problem, what S sold to B, hardware
owner, are 500 bags of cement. S had every reason to
believe that the price of cement would go down. After two
weeks, it did go down. Has B the right to have the sale
annulled?
SECTION 2 – OBJECTS OF CONTRACTS
Topic: Quantity of object need not be determinate.
53. S sold to B all the chickens in his poultry. Here, the object
chickens is determinate but the quantity though not yet
determined can be ascertained without the necessity of
entering in a new contract.
54. S binds himself to deliver one of his carabaos to B. Here,
the object is determinable without the need of a new
contract between the parties. It becomes determinate the
moment it is delivered.
55. If the subject matter of the agreement is a parcel fo
agricultural land owned by S and S happens to own many
agricultural lands, the contract is void if the particular land
sold cannot be determined without a new agreement
between parties.
56. S obligates himself to sell to B for a price certain (4k) a
specified quantity of sugar (200kgs) of a given quality (first
or second grade) without designating a particular lot of
sugar.
The contract is not perfected until the quantity agreed
upon has been selected and is capable of being physically
designated and distinguished from all other sugar. In this
case, the contract is merely an executory contract to sell.
The promise of S is to deliver a generic thing which
determinable. The moment it is delivered, it becomes
determinate.
57. S obligates himself to deliver a “thing” or “property” to B.
The contract is void because the object is not determinate
as to its kind, nor is it capable of being made determinate
without the need of a new or further agreement between
the parties.
STUDY GUIDE QUESTIONS
58. S sold to B for 100k a parcel of land belonging to S located
in his hometown without specifying its exact location and
area. Is the sale valid?
59. S has several pigs. Under the contract of sale, S binds
himself to deliver a pig to B for 3k if the pig has a weight
of at least 30kgs. State the binding effect of the sale.
SECTION 3 – CAUSE OF CONTRACTS
Topic: Cause vs Motive
60. S sells his land to B for 100k. For S, the cause is the 100k.
But his motive may be to use the money in business. The
motive which impel one to a sale or purchase are not
always the cause of the contract as that term is understood
in law. With one’s motives, the law is not concerned.
If the motive of S in selling his land is to defraud C, a
creditor, who has a right to go after the land for its
satisfaction of an indebtedness of S, C may ask the court
for the rescission or cancellation of the sale.
Topic: Falsity of cause.
61. D promised to give C 1k as payment for past services
allegedly rendered by C which in truth and in fact have not
rendered; or for a carabao which unknown to D is already
dead.
Here, the cause for D, the service remunerated or the
promise of C to sell the carabao, is erroneous as it is based
upon facts believed to be existing, but really inexistent.
62. S sells to B a parcel of land. In the deed of sale, 1M is stated
as the price of the land. If this statement is false, then there
is no contract of sale.
However, if S can prove that the contract is founded upon
another consideration, as when B has exchanged his car
for the land, then the contract of barter shall be valid. In
this case, the statement of the price is simulated because
it is willfully made.
Topic: Cause presumed to exist and lawful.
63. M issued in favor of P a promissory note which recites:
thirty days after date, I promise to pay P or order the
amount of 10”. Signed M.
Although the promissory note does not mention the
consideration, the law presumes that M must have
received a consideration for the debt and that the same is
lawful. If M claims OW, then he has the burden to prove
his allegation.
Topic: Effect of lesion.
64. S sold to B his land worth 100k for only 80k. This contract
of sale is valid although the price is inadequate. The fact
that the bargain is unequal because of inadequacy of price
when both parties are in a position to form an independent
judgment concerning the transaction is not sufficient
ground for the cancellation of a contract. Profits or
benefits gained through skillful bargaining are the basis of
free competition.
However, if it is shown that B induced S to sell the land
through fraud, mistake, undue influence, the contract may
be annulled in court.
STUDY GUIDE QUESTIONS
65. S sold his fishing boat to B who intends to use the boat for
smuggling. Is the contract of sale illegal?
66. S sold to B a specific parcel of land for 500k. B failed to
pay. Has C the right to have the sale declared void by the
court on the ground of absence of cause for non-payment
of the price?
67. X gave 10k to Y who signed a receipt stating: this is to
acknowledge payment by X in the amount of 12k. X later
complains that he received nothing from Y for the 10k. Is
Y bound to return the 10k?
68. S sold his B to his car worth 250k for only 200k. There is no
question that the purchase price is grossly inadequate. Has
S the right to have the sale annulled?
CHAPTER 3 – FORM OF CONTRACTS
Topic: Form for validity, enforceability and convenience.
69. R donated real property to E in a private instrument. The
donation is void because a donation of real property is
required to be in a public instrument to be valid.
70. Suppose the contract is a sale of real property but it is
entered into orally. The contract is valid but it is
enforceable because the law requires that it be in writing
to be enforceable.
71. If the contract of sale is in private writing, there in is valid
and binding, although it is still executory, but only as
between the parties and not as against third persons
without notice until the sale is registered in the Registry of
Property.
If E is the vendee, he has the right to compel R to put the
contract in a public instrument so that it can be registered
to affect third persons, even in the absence of express
agreement between them to the effect. Inasmuch as the
contract is both valid and enforceable, the execution of a
public instrument becomes a mere matter of form and
convenience.
STUDY GUIDE QUESTIONS
72. Seller and buyer entered into a contract of sale of a parcel
of land. The sale is embodied only in a private document
and not in a public instrument because it was not
acknowledged before a notary public as required by law.
Is the sale valid?
73. In the same example, what rights if any are acquired by the
contracting parties?
CHAPTER 4 – REFORMATION OF INSTRUMENTS
Topic: Reformation vs Annulment
74. S sold his land to B. It was agreed that the sale will include
all the improvements. However, the contract as signed by
the parties, states that the land is being sold excluding the
improvements thereon. In this case, the remedy is
reformation because there has been a meeting of the
minds.
If S was selling his land “excluding” the improvements and
B was buying his land “including” the improvements, there,
there has been no meeting of the minds and the remedy
is annulment. Reformation cannot be the remedy because
it would not make the instrument express the real
intention of the parties.
STUDY GUIDE QUESTIONS
75. S sold his horse “X” to B under written contract of sale.
What B though S was selling him is horse “Y”. Can S ask for
the reformation of the contract against the object of B who
is agreeable to the sale of Horse X?
76. Suppose in the same example, S was intending to sell his
Horse Y. Give the 3 cases when he can ask for the
reformation of the contract.
CHAPTER 4 – INTERPRETATION OF CONTRACTS
Topic: Literal meaning controls.
77. One of the conditions specified in a fire insurance policy is
that “the insured must give notice of the existence of other
policies against fire upon the property insured; OW, the
policy shall be null and void”. The insured violated this
condition and the property was destroyed by fire.
Though the contract may be rather onerous, the insured
cannot recover. As its terms are clear an unambiguous,
they must be taken in their plain and ordinary sense
 Obligations arising from contracts have the force of law Topic: Rule in case doubts impossible to settle; gratuitous
between the contracting parties. and onerous contracts.

Topic: Evident intention of parties prevails over terms of 84. R have his car to E. It is not clear whether the contract is a
contract. donation or commodatum.

78. S sold to B a parcel of agricultural land. It is not disputed The contract should be presumed as a mere commodatum
that the reasonable value of the land is 50k. However, the because it would transmit lesser rights that a donation
contract of sale states that the purchase price is 500k. since R retains his ownership of the car.
85. D borrowed from C 5k at 12% interest. It cannot be
In this case, as the amount of 500k appears to be contrary determined from the terms of the contract whether the
to the evident intention of the parties, the latter shall loan is payable in 6 months or in 1 year.
prevail (50k).
It must be assumed that the period agreed upon is 1 year
79. R entered into a contract called “contract of lease” with E which results in a greater reciprocity of interests since D
whereby R leased his car to E. It is stipulated that E shall can use the money for one year, and C can earn interest
pay 100k upon the signing of the contract, and 5k by way due for one year instead of only 6 months.
of “rental” on or before the 5th fay of every month and that
at the end of one year, E would become the absolute STUDY GUIDE QUESTIONS
owner of the car. The contract fixed the value of the car to
86. S Sold to B his condo unit “including all its contents”. In the
be 160k.
unit, there is an antique chair belonging to X which X
agreed to sell to S. Is the chair included in the sale of the
There can hardly be any question that the contract is not a
unit?
lease of the car, but a sale on installments. The so called
87. X, architect, designed and supervised the construction of
rent must necessarily be regarded as payment of the price
the house of Y. The parties failed to agree beforehand the
in installments inasmuch as the due payment of the agreed
professional fee of X. How much is Y bound to pay X?
amount results, by the terms of the bargain, in the transfer
of title to E, the alleged lessee.
88. Suppose in the same problem, the professional fee was
Topic: Contemporaneous and subsequent acts. agreed upon, but it is not clear from the written contract
prepared by X upon the requires of Y whether it should be
80. R and E entered into a contract entitled “Contract of Lease” fixed amount of 200k or 1% of the cost of construction.
Although the contract refers to R as lessor, and to E as How much is Y liable to pay?
lessee, it states that the possession and ownership of the
land are transferred to E. The title to the land was given by
R to E who registered the land in his name. Before the date
of the contract, E wrote a letter to R offering to buy the
land.

By their acts, the parties clearly indicated their evident

intention to make E the owner of the land. Hence, the
contract should be interpreted as one of sale.

Topic: Special intent prevails over general intent.

81. S sold parcels of land to B. IN the deed of sale, the

description stated a greater extension that the actual area
of the lands sold thereby including a piece of land
belonging to C.

This piece of land cannot be among the subject matter of

the sale simply because it was included in the description.

82. R mortgaged his land to secure the debt of D to C, without

expressly assuming the personal liability for the debt. In
case there is deficiency remaining after the mortgage is
foreclosed, R cannot be compelled to pay the same.

Topic: Interpretation of various stipulations.

83. R leased his house to E. In the contract, it was stated that

E should not sublease the house without the written
consent of R. Another stipulation stated that E should pay
1k as additional rent should he violate this condition. E
subleased the house without the consent of R. Has R the
right to eject E?

No, in the light of the clause stating the penalty for the
violation of the condition.