CLUTARIO, Ignacio Luis

BSBA OM I401

Mario is engaged in a pharmaceutical business. One day, Mario unnecessarily bought from Dario a
truckload of supplies and medicines to be sold in his pharmacy so that he could post the cost in his
ledger as expense to reduce his tax liability. Is the contract of sale between Mario and Dario valid?
Why or why not?

The contract is valid, there is no bad faith or bad intention on part of Dario to sell a truckload of
supplies and medicine. The contract was made in the understanding of both parties, they negotiate,
and set the obligation on a rightful term. As long as both parties have an acknowledgment that the
contract was established, and the parties involve fulfilled their obligations there’s nothing wrong
with the contract. Dario didn’t do anything to deceive or cause any misinformation on the part of
Mario, the mistake was made solely by Mario.

Joanna entered into a loan contract with Marie over Marie’s car where Joanna is the borrower and
Marie is the lender. It was stated in the contract that the ownership will be transferred to Joanna. The
title to the car was given to Joanna who registered the car in her name. Before the end date of the
contract, Joanna expressed her intention to buy the car. But Marie refused to agree to Joanna’s
intent. Was Marie correct in refusing to agree to Joanna’s intent? Why or why not?

The contract says that the ownership of the car will be transferred to Joanna and the title to the car
was given to Joanna who registered the car in her name, the transfer of ownership is not stated
when will that happen, perhaps on the end date of the contract. Therefore, the fulfillment of the
terms and conditions of the contract will only be acted on at the time of the end date of the
contract. So, Marie is correct in refusing the intent of Joanna to buy the car before the end date of
the contract.

Scott requested Jenny to work with the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) in further reducing the tax
liability of the company believing her to be an accountant. Meanwhile, Jenny took advantage of
Scott’s mistaken belief and trust and convinced him that he would reduce the company’s tax liability
by 50% in exchange for a substantive number of shares in the company. Is Scott’s donation of a
substantive number of the company’s shares to Jenny valid? Why or why not?

It is not valid, there is bad faith on the part of Jenny when she intentionally didn’t tell Scott that she
is not an accountant or Scott has a mistaken belief about her. She took advantage of that mistaken
belief and deceive Scott in order for her to gain something from that mistaken belief. It is a fraud on
the part of Jenny and can be punishable by law.
Nino is very much interested in buying Jasper’s business, but Jasper is not open to the idea of selling
his business. Since Nino is used to getting what he wants, he threatened Jasper that he has
connections with the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) and he can have Jasper’s business
closed. Out of fear, Jasper sold his business to Nino. What should Jasper do to get back the business?
What should be the basis of his remedy?

Get a lawyer and file a case against Nino, contracts cannot be valid with force or threatening
someone, Lesion or inadequacy of cause will invalidate a contract when there has been undue
influence, out of fear Jasper sold the business to Nino and that undue influence.