You are here: 

Home ∼ 2013 ∼ May ∼ Civil Law  Bar Exam Answers: Commodatum and

Mutuum

CIVIL LAW BAR EXAM ANSWERS:

COMMODATUM AND MUTUUM
Published by adminC on May 18, 2013 | Leave a response

Commodatum (1993)

A,  upon  request,  loaned  his  passenger  Jeepney  to  B  to enable B to bring his sick

wife from Paniqui. Tarlac to the Philippine General Hospital in Manila for treatment. On
the way back to Paniqui, after leaving his wife at the hospital, people stopped the
passenger Jeepney. B stopped for them and allowed them to ride on board, accepting
payment from them just as  in the case  of ordinary  passenger  Jeepneys plying their
route. As B was crossing Bamban, there was an onrush  of  Lahar  from  Mt  Pinatubo,
the  Jeep  that  was loaned to him was wrecked.

1)    What do you call the contract that was entered into by A and B with respect to the

passenger Jeepney that was loaned by A to B to transport the latter’s sick wife to
Manila?

2)    Is B obliged to pay A for the use of the passenger jeepney?

3)    Is B liable to A for the loss of the Jeepney?

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

1)   The contract is called “commodatum”. [Art. 1933. Civil Code). COMMODATUM is a

contract by which one of the parties (bailor) delivers to another (bailee) something not
consumable so that the latter may use it for a certain time and return it.

2)  No, B is not obliged to pay A for the use of the passenger Jeepney because
commodatum is essentially gratuitous. (Art. 1933. Civil Code]

3)  Yes, because B devoted the thing to a purpose different from that for which it has
been loaned (Art. 1942, par. 2, Civil Code)

ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:

No, because an obligation which consists in the delivery of a determinate thing shall be
extinguished if it should be lost or destroyed without the fault of the debtor, and before
he has incurred in delay. (Art. 1262. Civil Code)

Commodatum (2005)
Before he left for Riyadh to work as a mechanic, Pedro left his Adventure van with Tito,
with the understanding that the latter could use it for one year for his personal or family
use while Pedro works in Riyadh. He did not tell Tito that the brakes of the van were
faulty. Tito had the van tuned up and the brakes repaired. He spent a total amount of
P15,000.00. After using the vehicle for two weeks, Tito discovered that it consumed too
much fuel. To make up for the expenses, he leased it to Annabelle.

Two months later, Pedro returned to the Philippines and asked Tito to return the van.
Unfortunately, while being driven by Tito, the van was accidentally damaged by a cargo
truck without his fault.

a) Who shall bear the P15,000.00 spent for the repair of the van? Explain.

ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:

Tito must bear the P15,000.00 expenses for the van. Generally, extraordinary expenses
for the preservation of the thing loaned are paid by the bailor, he being the owner of the
thing loaned. In this case however, Tito should bear the expenses because he incurred
the expenses without first informing Pedro about it. Neither was the repair shown to be 
urgent.  Under Article  1949  of  the  Civil  Code,  bailor generally bears the extraordinary
expenses for the preservation  of  the  thing  and  should  refund  the  said expenses if
made by the bailee; Provided, The bailee brings the  same to the  attention of
the  bailor before  incurring them, except only if the repair is urgent that reply cannot be
awaited.

ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:

The P15,000.00 spent for the repair of the van should be borne by Pedro. Where
the bailor delivers to the bailee a non-consummable thing so that the latter may use it
for a certain time and return the identical thing, the contract perfected is a Contract of
Commodatum. (Art. 1933, Civil Code) The bailor shall refund the extraordinary
expenses during the contract for the preservation of the thing loaned provided
the bailee brings the same to the knowledge of the bailor before incurring the same,
except when they are so urgent that the reply to the notification cannot be awaited
without danger. (Art. 1949 of the Civil Code)

In the given problem, Pedro left his Adventure van with Tito so that the latter could use
it for one year while he was in Riyadh. There was no mention of a consideration. Thus,
the contract perfected was commodatum. The amount of P15,000.00 was spent by Tito
to tune up the van and to repair its brakes. Such expenses are extra-ordinary expenses
because they are necessary for the preservation of the van Thus, the same should
be borne by the bailor, Pedro.

b)  Who shall bear the costs for the van’s fuel, oil and other materials while it was with

Tito? Explain.

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Tito must also pay for the ordinary expenses for the use and preservation of the thing
loaned. He must pay for the gasoline, oil, greasing and spraying. He cannot ask for
reimbursement because he has the obligation to return the identical thing to the bailor.
Under Article 1941 of the Civil Code, the bailee is obliged to pay for the ordinary
expenses for the use and preservation of the thing loaned.

c)    Does Pedro have the right to retrieve the van even before the lapse of one year?

Explain.

ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:

No, Pedro does not have the right to retrieve the van before the lapse of one year. The
parties are mutually bound by the terms of the contract. Under the Civil Code, there are
only 3 instances when the bailor could validly ask for the return of the thing loaned even
before the expiration of the period. These  are  when:  (1)  a  precarium  contract  was 
entered (Article 1947); (2) if the bailor urgently needs the thing (Article 1946); and (3) if
the bailee commits acts of ingratitude  (Article  1948).  Not  one  of  the  situations  is
present in this case.

The fact that Tito had leased the thing loaned to Annabelle would not justify the demand
for the return of the thing loaned before expiration of the period. Under Article 1942 of
the Civil Code, leasing of the thing loaned to a third person not member of the
household of the bailee, will only entitle bailor to hold bailee liable for the loss of the
thing loaned.

ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:

As a rule, Pedro does not have the right to retrieve the van before the lapse of one
year. Article 1946 of the Code provides that “the bailor cannot demand the return of the
thing loaned till after the expiration of the period stipulated, or after
the accomplishment of the use for which the commodatum has been constituted.
However, if in the meantime, he should have urgent need of the thing, he may demand
its return or temporary use.”

In the given problem, Pedro allowed Tito to use the van for one year. Thus, he should be

bound by the said agreement and  he  cannot  ask  for the  return  of  the car before the
expiration of the one year period. However, if Pedro has urgent need of the van, he may
demand for its return or temporary use.

d) Who shall bear the expenses for the accidental damage caused by the cargo truck,

granting that the driver and truck owner are insolvent? Explain.

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

Generally, extraordinary expenses arising on the occasion of the actual use of the thing
loaned by the bailee, even if incurred  without  fault  of the  bailee,  shall be  shouldered
equally by the bailor and the bailee. (Art. 1949 of the Civil Code).  However,  if  Pedro
had  an  urgent  need  for  the vehicle, Tito would be in delay for failure to immediately
return the same, then Tito would be held liable for the extraordinary expenses.

Commodatum vs. Usufruct (1998)

Distinguish usufruct from commodatum and state whether these may be constituted
over consumable goods.

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

1. USUFRUCT is a right given to a person (usufructuary) to enjoy the property of

another with the obligation of preserving its form and substance. (Art. 562. Civil Code)

On  the  other  hand,  COMMODATUM  is  a  contract  by which one of the parties
(bailor) delivers to another (bailee) something not consumable so that the latter may use
it for a certain time and return it.

In usufruct the usufructuary gets the right to the use and to the fruits of the same, while
in commodatum, the bailee only acquires the use of the thing loaned but not its fruits.

Usufruct may be constituted on the whole or a part of the fruits of the thing. (Art. 564.
Civil Code). It may even be constituted over consumables like
money (Alunan v. Veloso, 52 Phil. 545). On the other hand, in commodatum,
consumable goods may be subject thereof only when the purpose  of  the  contract  is 
not  the  consumption  of  the object, as when it is merely for exhibition. (Art. 1936, Civil
Code)

ANOTHER ANSWER:

1.  There  are  several  points  of  distinction  between usufruct and commodatum.
Usufruct is constituted by law, by contract, by testamentary succession, or by
prescription (Art. 1933. Civil Code). Usufruct creates a real right to the fruits  of
another’s  property,  while  commodatum  creates only a purely personal right to use
another’s property, and requires a stipulation to enable the bailee to “make use” of the
fruits (Arts. 1939& 1940, Civil Code). Usufruct maybe onerous while commodatum is
always or essentially gratuitous (Arts. 1933 & 1935, Civil Code).   The contract
constituting usufruct is consensual, while commodatum is a real  contract  (perfected
only  by  delivery  of  the  subject matter thereof). However, both involve the enjoyment
by a person of the property of another, differing only as to the extent and scope of such
enjoyment [jus fruendi in one and Jus utendi in the other); both may have as subject
matter either an immovable or a movable; and, both maybe constituted over
consumable goods (Arts. 574 & 1936, Civil Code).

A  consumable  thing  may  be  the  subject-matter  of  an abnormal usufruct but in a

normal usufruct, the subject- matter may be used only for exhibition. A commodatum of
a consumable thing may be only for the purpose of exhibiting, not consuming it.