PASSED BY : ERIC JANSEN ENDRINA BSBA MM-1

On January 5, 1992, Nonoy obtained a loan of P1,000,000.00 from his friend Raffy. The
promissory note did not stipulate any payment for interest. The note was due on
January 5, 1993 but before this date the two became political enemies. Nonoy, out of
spite, deliberately defaulted in paying the note, thus forcing Raffy to sue him. (20%)
1) What actual damages can Raffy recover?
Raffy may recuperate the measure of the promissory note of P1 million, along with
premium at the lawful rate from the date of legal or extrajudicial interest. Furthermore,
notwithstanding, because of the fact that the debt holder is in dishonesty, he is
responsible for all harms which might be sensibly ascribed to the non-execution of the
commitment. (Art. 2201)
2) Can Raffy ask for moral damages from Nonoy?
YES, under Article 2220, moral harms are recoverable if there should arise an
occurrence of penetrate of agreement where the litigant tried to pull a fast one.
3) Can Raffy ask for nominal damages?
Nominal damages may not be recoverable for this situation in light of the fact that Raffy
may as of now be repaid of his misfortunes with the honor of real and compensatory
harms. Ostensible DAMAGES are settled uniquely all together that a right of the
offended party, which has been disregarded or attacked by the respondent might be
vindicated or perceived, and not to reimburse the offended party for any misfortune
endured by him. (Article 2231. Civil Code)
4) Can Raffy ask for temperate damages?
Raffy may request, yet would undoubtedly not be granted calm harms, for the
explanation that his real harms may as of now be remunerated upon evidence thereof
with the promissory note. Calm DAMAGES might be granted just when the court tracks
down that some monetary misfortune has been endured however its sum can't, from the
idea of the case, be demonstrated with sureness. (Article 2224, Civil Code)
5) Can Raffy ask for attorney's fees?
Yes, under section 2, Article 2208 of the Civil Code, taking into account that Nonoy's
demonstration or oversight has constrained Raffy to dispute to ensure his inclinations.
Besides. lawyers' charges might be granted by the court when it is simply and impartial.
(Article 2208 Civil Code).

QUESTION NO. 2
On 8 December 1991 Vanessa purchased from the Manila office of Euro-Aire an airline
ticket for its Flight No. 710 from Dallas to Chicago on 16 January 1992. Her flight
reservation was confirmed. On her scheduled departure Vanessa checked in on time at
the Dallas airport. However, at the check-in counter she discovered that she was
waitlisted with some other passengers because of intentional overbooking, a Euro-Aire
policy and practice. Euro-Aire admitted that Vanessa was not advised of such policy
when she purchased her plane ticket. Vanessa was only able to fly two days later by
taking another airline.
Vanessa sued Euro-Aire in Manila for breach of contract and damages. Euro-Aire
claimed that it cannot be held liable for damages because its practice of overbooking
passengers was allowed by the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations. Vanessa on the
other hand contended that assuming that the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations allowed
intentional overbooking, the airline company cannot invoke the U.S. Code on the ground
that the ticket was purchased in Manila, hence, Philippine law should apply, under
which Vanessa can recover damages for breach of contract of carriage.
Decide. Discuss fully. (20%)
Vanessa can recuperate harms under Philippine law for penetrate of agreement of
carriage,Philippine law ought to administer as the law of where the boarding passes
were purchased and thecontract of carriage was executed. In Zalamea v. Court of
Appeals (G.R No. 104235, Nov. 10,1993) the Supreme Court applied Philippine law in
recuperation of harms for break of agreement ofcarriage for the explanation that it is the
law of where the agreement was executed.
OR IF
If the infringement of the agreement was gone to with dishonesty, there is a ground to
recovermoral harms. In any case, since there was a government guideline which was
the premise of the actcomplained of, the carrier can't be in dishonesty. Subsequently,
just real harms can be recovered.The same is valid with respect to commendable
harms.

QUESTION NO 3
X, who has a savings deposit with Y Bank in the sum of P1,000,000.00, incurs a loan
obligation with the said Bank in the sum of P800,000.00 which has become due. When
X tires to withdraw his deposit, Y Bank allows only P200.000.00 to be withdrawn, less
service charges, claiming that compensation has extinguished its obligation under the
savings account to the concurrent amount of X's debt. X contends that compensation is
improper when one of the debts, as here, arises from a contract of deposit. Assuming
that the promissory note signed by X to evidence the loan does not provide for
compensation between said loan and his savings deposit, who is correct? (20%)
ANS:compensation is a method of quenching to the simultaneous sum, the
commitments of those people who In their own right are proportionally account holders
and lenders of one another ,It includes the concurrent adjusting of two commitments to
smother them to the degree in which the measure of one is covered by that of the other.
Installment implies conveyance of cash as well as execution of a commitment (Article
1232, Civil Code). In installment, ability to discard the thing

QUESTION NO. 4
Marcial, who does not know how to drive, has always been driven by Ben, his driver of
ten years whom he had chosen carefully and has never figured in a vehicular mishap.
One day, Marcial was riding at the back seat to his Mercedes Benz being driven along
EDSA by Ben. Absorbed in reading a book, Marcial did not notice that they were
approaching the corner of Quezon Avenue, when the traffic light had just turned yellow.
Ben suddenly stepped on the gas to cross the intersection before the traffic light could
turn red. But, too late. Midway in the intersection, the traffic light changed, and a
jeepney full of passengers suddenly crossed the car's path. A collision between the two
vehicles was inevitable. As a result, several jeepney passengers were seriously injured.
A suit for damages based on culpa aquiliana was filed against Marcial and Ben, seeking
to hold them jointly and severally liable for such injuries.
May Marcial be held liable? Explain. (20%)
Marcial may not be obligated on the grounds that under Art. 2184 NCCC, the proprietor
who is in the vehicle isn't at risk with the driver if by the activity of due steadiness he
might have forestalled the injury. The law doesn't need the proprietor to oversee the
driver consistently that he was driving. Just when through his carelessness, the
proprietor has lost a chance to forestall the mishap would he be responsible . For this
situation, the way that the proprietor was caught up in perusing a book doesn't
definitively show that he lost the chance to forestall the mishap through his
carelessness
Or
Yes, Marcial ought to be expected to take responsibility. Workmanship. 2164. NCC
makes a proprietor of an engine vehicle solidarily at risk with the driver if, being in the
vehicle at the hour of the setback, he might have forestalled it by the activity of due
industriousness. The traffic conditions along EDSA whenever of day or night are, for
example, to require the recognition of most extreme consideration and absolute
sharpness taking into account the huge number of vehicles running at incredible speed.
Marcial was careless in that he delivered himself negligent of the traffic risks by
perusing a book as opposed to concentrating out and about and overseeing the way
wherein his vehicle was being driven. Accordingly he neglected to keep his driver from
endeavoring to beat the traffic signal at the intersection of Quezon Avenue and EDSA,
which Marcial, without being a driver himself might have effectively seen as a foolish
course of direct.

QUESTION NO. 5
Dino sued Ben for damages because the latter had failed to deliver the antique
Mercedes Benz car Dino had purchased from Ben, which was-by agreement-due for
delivery on December 31, 1993. Ben, in his answer to Dino's complaint, said Dino's
claim has no basis for the suit, because as the car was being driven to be delivered to
Dino on January 1, 1994, a reckless truck driver had rammed into the Mercedes Benz.
The trial court dismissed Dino's complaint, saying Ben's obligation had, indeed, been
extinguished by force majeure.
Is the trial court correct? (20%)

No, the preliminary court is inaccurate. Loss of a thing because of an accidental

occasion as to its conveyance may just be represented in situations where the borrower
is not yet in default during such conveyance and during such accidental occasion .
Subsequently, in the case in question, Dino, being in default as of now when the vehicle
was being conveyed, can't be cleared because of chance occasion.