Cui v. Arellano University [G.R. No. L-15127.

May 30, 1961]

Emeterio Cui, Plaintiff

Vs.
Arellano Universtiy, Defendant
Art 6. Rights may be waived, unless the waiver is contrary to Laws, Morals, Good
Customs, Public Order and Public Policy, or is prejudicial to a 3 rd person in
regards to his rights recognized by law
Facts:
Plaintiff, Emeterio Cui, started his preparatory law course in the defendant
University. Upon finishing his preparatory law course, plaintiff enrolled in the College of
Law of the defendant University from 1948-1949. Plaintiff finished his law studies in the
defendant University up until his 4th year 1st sem. During all the school years in which
plaintiff was studying law school in the defendant University, Francsico R. Capistrano,
brother of the mother of plaintiff, was the dean of the College of Law and legal counsel
of the defendant university. Plaintiff enrolled for his last sem but failed to pay his tuition
fees due to his uncle severing his ties with the defendant university and accepting
deanship and chancellorship in the Abad Santos University – College of Law. Plaintiff
left the defedant’s law college and enrolled for the last sem of his 4th yr in Abad Santos
University – Colleg of Law and graduating from the college of the latter university.
Plaintiff, during all the time of his studying in the defendant university, was granted
scholarship grants, for scholastic merit, so that his semestral tuiton fees were returned
to him after the end of semesters. The whole amount of tuition fees paid by plaintiff, up
until his 4th yr 1st sem, is in a total of P1,033.87. After graduating from ASU-CoL he
applied to take the bar examinations. To secure permission for the bar, he needed his
transcripts of records in the defendant university. The defendant university refused him
until after he had paid the P1,033.87 which defendant refunded to him as stated above.
As plaintiff could not take the bar examinations wihtout those transcripts, he reluctantly
paid to the defendant univerrsity the said amount. This is the sum in which the plaintiff
seeks to recover in this case.
“Before defendant awarded to plaintiff the scholarship grants, he was made to sign the
following contract and agreement:
‘In consideration of the scholarship granted to me by the University, i hereby waive my
right to transfer to another school without having refunded to the University (defendant)
the equivalent of my scholarship cash.
Emeterio Cui’.”
Issue(s):
Is the contract between Cui and AU, whereby Cui waived his rights to transfer
without refunding the equivalent of his scholarship in cash, is valid or not
Ruling: YES. The court ruled that the stipulation in question, the contract plaintiff
entered into, is contrary to public policy hence, null and void. Thus the decision
appealed from is reversed and another shall be entered sentencing the defendant to
pay the plaintiff the sum of P1,033.87, with interest thereon at the legal rate from Sept.
1, 1954, as well as the costs, and dismissing defendant’s counterclaim.