CAGAYAN STATE UNIVERSITY-COLLEGE OF LAW ANDREWS CAMPUS-TUGUEGARAO CITY PRELIM EXAMINATION - FIRST SEMESTER 2018-2019 | ANSWER THE QUESTIONS BRIEFLY AND SQUARELY. OBSERVE PROPER MARGINS AND AVOID ERASURES. UTILIZE THE WORDS AND PHRASES USED BY LAW AND JURISPRUDENCE. WRITE YOUR NAME IN YOUR TEST BOOKLET. Y +f Valderama and Co., a general merchandise partnership has become insolvent for maladministration of The business and entered into an agreement with its creditors to the effect that business should be continued for the time being under the direction and management of an experienced businessman appointed By the Greditors,/an arrangement to be carried out until the chims of the creditors are fully satisfied. Can you consider the creditors who are parties to the agreement partners? Explain. ey 1 Tre isa Sister, mile tones, cece Gol Wie he ABN, bi St activities of the partnership and to make, sign, seal, execute and deliver contracts- upon terms and conditions acceptable to him duly approved in writing by the capitalist partner. The firm was engaged in the business of buying and selling merchandise of all kinds One day, Tobeg purchased on credit certain goods regularly purchased by the company, but without first Securing the authos}¥ of the capitalist partners. Is the partnership bound? Esplin. “ES, yetye = john & b (A and B were partners. A was indebted to X. On A’s death, B voluntarily assumed A’s debt, so that X. would not sue A’s estate anymore. But B did not pay later on. Therefore X sued the partnership. Is the firm liable? Explain. W0 4q dpa wat be > 4-Faustino Lichauco was the managing partner of a firm for the carrying of a rice cleaning business. Because the enterprise was unprofitable, same was discontinued and the rice machinery was dismantled. ‘When sued for an accounting, he refused on the ground that under the terms of the partnership contract, dissolution could be done only by a vote of 2/3 of the members, and such vote had not yet taken place. Is his contention correct? Explain. 0, Why 6 UF vavesiany 1h custlatin aut : Pairon, granted Parsobs (in the Visayas) exclusive right to sell QSfoga bed in the Visayas. Quirogas was furnish beds to Parsons, and would demand the price sixty days from shipment, minus a commission oF deduction of 25%. Parsons agreed not (o sell any other kind of bed, and to pay the price as agreed upon. Is this a contract of agency to sell, ora contract of sale? Explain. 7 Ses _SCerman sod Co, authorized it agent Kommerel to direct and mint commer snes and among others, to collect sums of money and exct their payment by Tegal means. With this authority, can the agent in the principal’s name bring a court action for collection? Explain. awe An agent with general powers for administration, desirous of improving tS ei condition of his Principal’s business, sold a piece of land belonging to his principal for d the price that appeared in an ee prepared by the principal before leaving the office. Do you thing the agent Go ast - ? er on che . Mie awe, poe 2 8. Dielle, Karlo, Fiona and Una are general partners in a merchandising firm. Having contributed equal amounts to the capital, they agree the distribution of profit according to the following proportion, 40%, 3096, 2096 and 10% respectively without_any provision for the loss. In 2011, they gencrated the income amounting to P1,000,000, while in 2012 they sustained a loss amoumting to P2,000,000. Realizing that the venture will not be successfil/Una conveys her whole interest in the partnership to Justine without the knowledge and consent of Dielle Karlo and Fiona. aw Bex RE pm RE J a. Distribute the income in 2011 and the Joss in 2012, Explain”?! foe age b. Assuming there was no provision on the share of profit and loss, how will the income in 2011 and the loss in 2012 be distributed. Explain, cc. Is the partnership dissolved? Explain, YES « Wut ther”CAGAYAN STATE UNIVERSITY-COLLEGE OF LAW ANDREWS CAMPUS-TUGUEGARAO CITY FINAL EXAMINATION - FIRST SEMESTER 2018-2019 ANSWER THE QUESTIONS BRIEFLY AND SQUARELY. OBSERVE PROPER MARGINS AND AVOID ERASURES. UTILIZE THE WORDS AND PHRASES USED BY LAW AND JURISPRUDENCE. 1. A PROPERTY WAS SUBJECT TO CO-OWNERSHIP. THERE WAS A “KASULATAN NG BILIMAN TULUYAN” BUT IT ERRONEOUSLY INCLUDED AN AREA OF 1,000 SQUARE METERS WHICH WAS ALLEGEDLY EXCESSIVE. THE TITLE WAS ISSUED UNDER THE NAME OF THE BUYER. THEREAFTER, SELLER FILED A COMPLAINT TO REMOVE THE EXCESS WHICH IS DENOMINATED AS AN ACTION FOR ANNULMENT OR CANCELLATION OF TITLE WITH DAMAGES. THE BUYER CONTENDS THAT THE ACTION HAS ALREADY PRESCRIBED AS IT WAS BASED ON IMPLIED TRUST WHICH PRESCRIBES IN 10 YEARS. THE COMPLAINT WAS FILED 19 YEARS FROM THE REGISTRATION OF THE LAND. IS THE CONTENTION CORRECT? WHY? 2. ON JANUARY 1, 1980, REDENTOR AND REMEDIES ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT BY VIRTUE OF WHICH THE FORMER WAS TO REGISTER A PARCEL OF LAND IN THE NAME OF REMEDIES UNDER THE EXPLICIT COVENANT TO RECONVEY THE LAND TO REMIGIO, SON OF REDENTOR, UPON,THE SON'S FROM COLLEGE. IN 1981, THE LAND WAS REGITERED IN THE NAME OF REMEDIES. REDENTOR DIED A YEAR LATER OR IN 1982. IN MARCH 1983,“REMIGIOARADUATED FROM COLLEGE. IN FEBRUARY 1992, REMIGIO ACCIDENTALLY FOUND A COPY OF THE Wit CONSTITUTING REMEDIES AS THE TRUSTEE OF THE LAND. IN MAY 1994, REMIGIO FILED A CASE AGAINGT REMEDIES FOR RECONVEYANCE OF THE LAND TO HIM, REMEDIES, IN HER ANSWER ALLEGE THAT THE ACTION HAS PRESCRIBED. HOW THE MATTER SHOULD BE DECIDED. Discuss 3. RICHARD SOLD A PARCEL OF LAND IN CEBU TO LEO FOR 100 MILLION PAYABLE IN ANNUAL INSTALMENTS OVER A PERIOD OF 10 YEARS, BUT TITLE WILL REMAIN WITH RICHARD UNTIL THE PURCHASE PRICE 15 FULLY PAID. TO ENABLE LEO TO PAY THE PRICE, RICHARD GAVE HIM A POWER OF ATTORNEY AUTHORIZING HIM TO SUBDIVIDE THE LAND, SELL THE INDIVIDUAL LOTS AND DELIVER THE PROCEEDS TO RICHARD, TO BE APPLIED TO THE PURCHASE PRICE. FIVE YEARS LATER, RICHARD REVOKED THE POWER OF ATTORNEY AND TOOK OVER THE SALE OF THE SALE OF THE SUBDIVISION LOTS HIMSELF. IS THE REVOCATION VALID OR NOT? way? 4. AS AN AGENT, AL WAS GIVEN A GUARANTEE COMMISSION IN ADDITION TO HIS REGULAR COMMISSION, AFTER HE SOLD 20 UNITS OF REFRIGERATORS TO A CUSTOMER, HT HOTEL. THE CUSTOMER HOWEVER FAILED TO PAY THE UNITS SOLD. AL'S PRINCIPAL, DRBI, DEMANDED FROM AL PAYMENT FOR THE CUSTOMER'S ACCOUNTABILITY. AL OBJECTED, ON THE GROUND THAT HIS JOB WAS ONLY TO SELL AND NOT TO COLLECT PAYMENT FOR UNITS BOUGHT BY THE CUSTOMER. IS AL'S OBJECTION VALID? CAN DRBI COLLECT FROM HIM OR NOT? REASON 5. PRIME REALTY CORPORATION APPOINTED NESTOR THE EXCLUSIVE AGENT IN THE SALE OF LOTS OF ITS NEWLY DEVELOPED SUBDIVISION. PRIME REALTY TOLD NESTOR THAT HE COULD NOT COLLECT OR RECEIVE PAYMENTS FROM THE BUYERS. NESTOR WAS ABLE TO SELL TEN LOTS To JESUS AND To COLLECT THE DOWN PAYMENTS FOR SAID LOTS. HE DID NOT TURN OVER THE COLLECTIONS TO PRIME REALTY. WHO SHALL BEAR THE LOSS FOR NESTOR’S DEFALCATION AND WHY? 6. W, X.Y AND Z ORGANIZED A GENERAL PARTNERSHIP WITH W AND X AS INDUSTRIAL PARTNERS AND Y AND Z AB CAPITALIST PARTNERS. Y CONTRIBUTED 50,000 AND Z CONTRIBUTED 20,000 TO THE COMMON FUND BY A UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THE PARTNERS, W AND X WERE APPOINTED MANAGING PARTNERS WITHOUT ANY SPECIFICATION OF THEIR RESPECTIVE POWERS AND DUTIES. A APPLIED FOR THE POSITION OF SECRETARY AND B FOR THE POSITION OF ACCOUNTANT OF THE PARTNERSHIP. THE HIRING OF A WAS DECIDED UPON BY W AND X, BUT WAS OPPOSED BY Y AND Z. THE HIRING OF B WAS DECIDED UPON W AND Z, BUT WAS OPPOSED BY X AND Y. WHO OF THE APPLICANTS SHOULD BE HIRED BY THE PARTNERSHIP? EXPLAIN. 7. DIELLE, KARLO, FIONA AND UNA ARE GENERAL PARTNERS IN A MERCHANDISING FIRM. HAVING CONTRIBUTED EQUAL AMOUNTS TO THE CAPITAL, THEY AGREE THE DISTRIBUTION OF PROFIT ACCORDING TO THE FOLLOWING PROPORTION, 40%, 30%, 20% AND 10% RESPECTIVELY WITHOUT ANY PROVISION FOR THE Loss. IN 2011, THEY GENERATED THE INCOME AMOUNTING TO P'1,000,000, WHILE IN 2012 THEY SUSTAINED & LOSS AMOUNTING TO P2,000,000. REALIZING THAT THE VENTURE WILL NOT BE SUCCESSFUL, UNA CONVEYS HER WHOLE INTEREST IN THE PARTNERSHIP 79 JUSTINE WITHOUT THE KNOWLEDGE AND CONSENT OF DIELLE KARLO AND FIONA. A. DISTRIBUTE THE INCOME IN 2011 AND THE Loss IN 2012. EXPLAIN 8. ASSUMING THERE WAS NO PROVISION ON THE SHARE OF PROFIT AND LOSS, HOW WILL THE INCOME IN 2011 AND THE LOSS IN 2012 BE DISTRIBUTED. EXPLAIN ¢. I3 THE PARTNERSHIP DISSOLVED? EXPLAIN ©. WHAT ARE THE RIGHTS OF JUSTINE IF ANY SHOULO THE DESIRE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE MANAGEMENT OF THE PARTNERSHIP AND IN THE DISTRIBUTION OF A NET PROFIT OF P360,000 WHICH WAS REALIZED AFTER HER PURCHASE OF UNA’S INTEREST. EXPLAIN PREPARED BY