Dela Cruz, Mike Angelo R.

Section 1

1. Yes. According to article 1497 of the Civil Code, “…there is actual or physical delivery when the
thing sold is placed in the control and possession of the buyer.” Since it is the buyer who stole
the watch, it is considered that watch had been placed under the control of the buyer (Power
Commercial and Industrial Corp. v. Court of Appeals).
2. Yes. Since the sale between Beybi and Mikmik was not avoided at the time of sale, and Maymay
bought the car in good faith, and without knowing the previous act of Mikmik thus, the
ownership will retain to her. Under Article 1506, “Where the seller of goods has a voidable title
thereto, but his title has not been avoided at the time of sale, the buyer acquires a good title to
the goods, provided he buys them in good faith, for value, and without notice of the seller’s
defect of title. “
3. Kasan is still the owner. Nemo dat quod non habet - no one can give what one does not have.
Under the article 1505, a person can only sell what he owns or is authorized to sell, and the
buyer can acquire no more than what the seller can transfer legally.
4. Yes. Fetmalu is bound to deliver all that is included within the boundaries, even when it exceeds
the area of the land in the contract. If Fetmalu will not be able to do so, the price will be
reduced in proportion of what is lacking, or Sakalam can rescind the contract if Fetmalu will not
be able to deliver the whole area.