€

,
Toe
De La Salle University
COLLBGE OF LAW
lts r ^l

Course Outline in

OBLIGATIONS and CONTRACTS

2'd Semester 2018 -2}lg

New Civil Code Art. 1156 to 1439

PART T _ OBLIGATIONS

PART I-A

I. General Provisions

A. Definition, NCC 1156

Makati Stock Exchange v. Miguel v. Campos, GR No
138814, April 76,2009
Ang Yu Asuncion v. CA, 238 SCRA 602 (1994)

B. Sources NCC ll57 -61; 2142; 217 6-2177 ; 2180

RPC 218-219
Rules of Court 111

Barredo v. Garcia, 73 Phil 607 (1942)

Mendoza v. Arrieta, 9l SCRA ll3 (1979)
Amador v. CA, 160 SCRA 729 (1992)
PSBA v. CA, 205 SCRA 729 (1992)

MetroBank v. Rosales, G.R. No. 183204, January 13,

2014

1. Law, NCC 1158

2. Contract, NCC 1159

PSBA v CA, G.R. No. 84698, February 4,1992

Cruz v Gruspe, G.R. No. 191431, March 13,2013
\
ACE Foods, Inc. v. Micro Pacific, G.R. No. 200602
December ll,2013

3. Quasi-Contract, NCC 1160

Locsin II v. Mekeni Food Corporation, G.R. No. l g2l}5,

December 9,2013
PNB v. CA and B.P. Mata and Co., GR No. 97995
U2U93
Sebastian Siga-an v. Alicia Villanueva, Gr No. 1 7OZZ7,
I

,
U20109

4. Delict, NCC 1161

Garcia vs. Ferro Chemicals, Inc., G.R. No. 172505,

October 1,2014
People of the Philippines vs. Dionaldo, G.R.No. 207949,
September 9,2015

5. Quasi-Delict, NCC 1162

Barredo v Garcia, 73 Phil. 607 (1942)

Gutierrez v Gutierrez, G.R.
No. 34840, September 23,1931
Llana v. Biong, G.R. No. 182356, December 4,2013
*7 JAN ltr l-ol1

II. Nature and Effects of Obligations - Arts. 1163-1178

A. Requisites/Elements of Obligation - (1) an active subject, also

known as the obligee or creditor, who has the power to demand the
prestation; (2) a passive subject, also known as the debtor, who is bound to
perform the prestation; (3) an object or the prestation, which is an object or
undertaking to give. to do or net to do; ( ) The juridical or legal tie, the
vinculum which binds the contracting parties.

1. To give, NCC 1 163- 1166

What are included in an obligation to give a determinate thing [1163]:

i. Principal obligation - Obligation to give a
determinate thing
ii. Accessory obligation - included in the obligation
to give a determinate thing:
. Take care of the thing to be delivereid with the
diligence of a good father of the family:

Francisco v. Chemical Bulk Carriers, Inc., GR No

193577, Sept.9,201 l

"Standard of conduct the level of exoected

conduct t is required bv the nature of the
n
circumstances of the erson, and place. The
most common standard of conduct is that of a
good father of a family or that of a reasonably
prudent person. To determine the diligence
a

which must be required of all persons, we use as

basis the abstract average standard
corresponding to a normal orderly person.

However, one who is physically disabled is

required to use the same degree of care that a
reasonably careful person who has the same
physical disability would use. Physical handicaps
and infirmities, such as blindness or deafness,
are treated as part of the circumstances under
which a reasonable person must act. Thus, the
standard of conduct for a blind person becomes
that of a reasonable person who is blind."

. Obligation to deliver the accessions and accessories

. Obligation to deliver the fruits from the moment the
obligation to deliver a determinate thing arises

Effect of failure to exercise due diligence:

i. The obligor or debtor maybe liable for damages

ii The obligor or debtor is liable even if there was
fortuitous event.

Rules regarding improvement, loss, or deterioration

NCC 1189, 1190, 1194,566-571

De Guia v. Manila Electric Co., 40 Phil. 706 (1920)

US v. Barias,23 Phil. 434 (1912)
Sarmiento v. Sps. Cabrido, 401 SCRA 122 (2003)
Crisostomo v. CA, 409 SCRA 528 (2003)

2. To do, NCC 1167

Chavez v Gonzales, 32 SCRA 547

Tanguilig v CA, 266 SCRA 78 (1997)
Mackay vs. Caswell, G.R. No. 183872, November 17,
20t4

3. Not to do, NCC 1168

Nakpil v. Manila Towers Development Corp. , 502 SCRA

470 (2006)

B. Performance of the Obligation

Irregularity in the Performance
,

Delay (Mora there must be demand; Exception

NCC 1169

Cetus Dev. Corp. v. CA, 176 SCRA 72 (1989)

Santos Ventura Hocorna Foundation v. Santos, GR
153004, Nov. 4,2004
Vasquez v. Ayala Corp., GRNo. 149734, Nov. 1.9,2004
SSS v Moonwalk, G.R. No. 73345, April 7, 1993
Rivera vs. Spouses Chua, G.R. No. 184458,
January 14,2015
Maybank Philippines, Inc. v Spouses Tarrosa, G.R.
No. 2 13014, October 14, 2015
Rivera v. Chua, G.R. No. 184458, lanuary 14, 2015

Kinds of delay

i. morasolvendi, NCC 1169

Abella v Gonzaga, 55 Phil447 (1931)

Foundation v Santos, G.R. No. 153004, Nov.4,
2004
Vasquez v Ayala Co.p., G.R. No. 149734, Nov.
19,2004
Agner v BPI, G.R. No. t82963, June 3, 20t3

rt. moraoccipiendi

Vda. deVillaruel v Manila Motor Co.,

104 Phil 926 (19s8)
Tengco v CA, G.R. No. 49852, October 19, 1989

ili. compensatiomorae

Central Bank v CA, 139 SCRA 46 (1985)

Demand in Reciprocal Obligations

Leano v. CA, 369 SCRA 36

Irregularity in the Performance Attributable to Debtor, NCC

tt70
a. Fraud (dolo), NCC 1170,1171, cf. NCC 1338

Woodhouse v Halili, 93 Phil 526 (1953)

Geraldez v CA, 230 SCRA 329 (1994)
Metropolitan v. Prosperity, G.R.No. 154390,
March 17,2014
,
Intemational Corporate bank v. Gueco, 351 SCRA
7t6
Effects of Fraud

i. Specific Performance, NCC 1233

(1) Specific/determinate thing, NCC 1244,

tt70,1 165 (1), tt77
(2) Generic thing, NCC 1246
(3) Preserve, NCC 1163
(4) Deliver all its accessions, NCC 7166,
1164
(5) Interest, NCC 1176

Marquez v. Elisan Credit, G.R. No. 194642, April

06,2015

(6) Deliver all its accessories, NCC 1166

(7) Analogous circumstances

Surviving Heirs versus Lindo, et a1., G.R. No.

208232, March 10,2014

ii. Substituted perforunance, NCC I I 65 (2), I | 67

iii. Rescission, NCC 1 191-l]r92, 1786, 1788,

1484-1486, RA 6552

Boysaw v Interphil Promotions, 148 SCRA 364

(1e87)
U.P. v De los Angeles, 35 SCRA 365 (1970)
Vda. deMistica v Sps. Naguiat, 418 SCRA 72
(2003)
Fil-Estate v Vertex, G.R. No. 202079, June 10,
20t3
BPI vs. Sanchez, G.R. No. 179518, November 19,
20t4
Wellex Group vs. U-Land Airlines,
G.R. No. 167519, January 14,2075
Swire Realty v. Jayne Yu,G.R. No. 207133,
March 09,2015
Fong vs. Duenas, G.R. No. 185592, June 15,2015
Cupino v. Pacific Rehouse, G.R. No. 205113,
August 26,2015

iv. Damages, NCC ll70

,

(1) Unilateral obligations, NCC 1171

(2) Reciprocal obligations, NCC ll92

b. Negligence (culpa), NCC 1173,1172

Effects of Negligence, NCC I 17 0, 2201, 2202, 1233,

1191

Gutierrez v Gutierrez, 56 Phil 177 (1932)

Vasquez v Borja, 74Phil560 (1944)
Federal Builders v Foundation Specialists,
G.R. No. 194507 , September 8,2014

2. Not Attributable to the Debtor

a. Fortuitous event,NCC 1174,1221,1165(3)

Requisites for fortuitous event to justifu non-
performance

National Power Co.p. v. CA, 225 SCRA 415

(1ee3)
Nakpil v CA, L-47851, October 3, 1986
Fil-Estate v Ronquillo, G.R. No. 185789,
January 13,2014

2. Other Provisions, NCC 1175, 1957 , 1413, 1961, 1176

II75 - Usury is now legally non-existent by virtue

of the lifting of the ceiling on interest rates by the
BankoSentral

Medel v. CA, 359 Phils.820 (1998)

Dario Nacar v. Gallery Frames, GR 189871,
August 13, 1013

4. Remedies of creditors

a. Levy and execution, NCC 1177,2236

b. Accion Subrogatorza, NCC 1177,772

c. Accion Pauliana, NCC 1177,1380-1389

Khe Hong Cheng v CA, 355 SCRA 701 (2001)

Siguan v Lim, 318 SCRA 725 (1999)
Anchor Savings Bank v. Furigay, GR No. 191178
March 13,2013
, d. AccionDirecta, NCC 1652, 1729,1608, 1893

C. Transmissibility, NCC ll78

III. KINDS OF OBLIGATIONS 1179-1230

A. According to Demandability, NCC 1179-1192

L Pure obligations
2. Conditional obligations

Gaite v Fonacier, 2 SCRA 830 (1961)

Gonzales v Heirs of Thomas, 314 SCRA 585
( leee)
Direct Funders Holding Corp. v. Lavifra,373
scRA 64s (2002)

Types of Conditions

a. As to effect on obligation-

i. Suspensive (condition precedent)

Gonzales v Heirs of Thomas, supra

Coronel v CA,253 SCRA 15 (1996)

ii. Resolutory (condition subsequent)

Parks v Prov of Tarlac, 49 Phil 142 (1926)

Central Philippines v CA, 246 SCRA 511
( lees)
Quijada v CA, 299 SCRA 695 (1998)

b. As to cause or origin-

i. Potestative

Lim v CA, 191 SCRA 156 (1990)

Silos v PNB, G.R. No. 181045, July 2,2014

(ii) Casual

Naga Telephone v CA, 230 SCRA 351

(Lee4)

(iii) Mixed
7
,
Osmena v Rama, 14 Phil 99 (1909)
Smith Bell v Sotelo Matti, 44PhiI875
(te22)
Rustan Pulp v IAC, 214 SCRA 665 (1992)
Romero v CA, 250 SCR.A 223 (1995)

(c) As to possibility - Possible and Impossible

Roman Catholic Archbishop v CA, 198 SCRA

100(1ee1)

(d) As to mode - Positive and Negative

(e) As to expression - Express and Implied

(3) Obligations with a term, NCC 1 193-1 198

Types of Period/Term

(a) As to effect on obligation - Suspensive (ex die) and

Resolutory (in diem)

(b) As to source -Legal, Voluntary, and Judicial, NCC

1197,1191, 1687 (2,3,4 sentences), 1180

Araneta v Phil Sugar Estate, 20 SCRA 330 (1967)

Central Philippines v CA, supra

(c) As to expression - Express and Implied

(d) As to definiteness - Definite and Indefinite

(e) OriginalPeriod and Grace Period

B. According to Plurality of Object, NCC 1199-1206

1. Alternative Obligations, NCC 1199-1206

(a) Kinds

(i) Simple alternative, NCC lI99

(ii) Facultative, NCC 1206

(b) Right to choose

(i) In general, NCC 1200-1201,1205

8
,
(ii) Loss of right, NCC 1200, 1202-1203

(c) Loss/Impossibility

(i) Liability for loss of thing/impossibility of

performance, NCC 1205
(ii) Creditor's right to indemnity for damages,
NCC I2O4

C. According to Plurality of Subjects, NCC 1207-1222

l. Single
2. Joint

(a) General rule, NCC 1207

(b) Presumption, NCC 1208
(c) Indivisibility, NCC 1209

3. Solidary

(a) When solidary, NCC 1207

(b) Kinds

Lafarge Cement v Continental Cement,443 SCRA 522 (2004)

Sinamban v. China Banking Corporation, G.R. No. 193890,
March ll,2015

LBP v Belle, G.R. No. 205271, September 02,2015

D. According to Performance, NCC 1223-1225

1. Divisible
2. Indivisible

E. According to Sanction for Breach, NCC 1226-1230

Rivelisa Realty v. First Sta. Clara Builders, G.R. No. 189618,

January 15,2014

1. Obligations with a Penal Clause, NCC 2226-2228

Lambert v Fox,G.R. No. L-7991, January 29,1914

SSS v Moonwalk, supra
Robes-Francisco v CFI, G.R. No. L-41093, October 30,
l'979
a

Rivera v. Chua, G.R. No. 184458, January 14,2015

New World Developers and Management vs. AMA,
G.R. No. 187930, February 23,2015

2. Characteristics of penal clause

(a) Subsidiary or alternative, NCC 1227

(b) Exclusive, NCC 1226

PART I.B

III. Extinguishment of Obligations, NCC 123 1

Definition - 1232
How made
Ways - 1233, 1248-1250
No substitution - 1244-1246
Costs/expenses - 1247

St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance v. Macondray, 70 SCRA

122 (te76)
Papa v. A.V. Valencia, 284 SCRA 643 (1998)
Metro Concast Steel Corp., et al. v. Allied Bank
Corporation, G.R. No. 177921, December 4,2013
Arco Pulp v Lim, G.R. No. 206806, June 25, 2014

A. Payment or performance, NCC 1232-1251

1. As to prestation

(a) Identity

Exceptions:

(i) Dacion en pago, NCC 1245

PNB v Dee, G.R. No. 182128, February 19,2014

(ii) Novation

Magbanua v Uy, G.R. No. 161003, May 6, 2005

Phil. Charter v Petroleum, G.R. No. 180898,
April 18,2012
ACE Foods, Inc. v. Micro Pacific Technologies
Co., Ltd., G.R. No. 200602, December Il,2013
Arco Pulp v Lim, June 2014
a
Wellex Group vs. U-Land Airlines, supra
BPI v. Domingo, G.R.No. 169407, March 25,
2015

(b) Integrify, NCC 1233, cf. 1234, 1235,1254(2)

Sub stantial compliance NCC 1234

International Hotel Co.p. v. Joaquin, GR No.

158361, April 10,2013

(c) Indivisibility, cf. NCC 1248, 1225(2), 1248, 1208,

tztt,
1290,1720,2065

(2) As to parties

(a) Payor, Obligor, Debtor

Effect if Third Person, NCC 1236-1238,1427

De la Cruz v. Concepcion 684 SCRA74

2012)

(b) Payee, Obligee, Creditor, NCC 1240,1626

Effect if Third Person, NCC 124l-1242

Panganiban v. Cuevas, 7 Phil. 477, 1907

(3) As to time and place of performance, NCC 1251,1169

PCIB v Franco, G.R. No. 180069, March 5,2014

NOTE: Special forms of payment

(l) Dacion en pago, NCC 1245

Filinvest v Philippine Acetylene, 111 SCRA 421 (1982)

Tan Shuy v SpsMaulawin, G.R. No. 190375, February
2012

(2) Application of payments, NCC 1252-1254

Reparations Commission v Universal Deep Sea Fishing,

83 SCRA 764 (re78)
Paculdo v Regalado,345 SCRA 134 (2000)
Sps. Sinamban vs. China Bank, G.R. No. 193890,

11
a March ll,2015
Marquez v. Elisan Credit, G.R. No. 194642, April 06,
20r5

(3) Cession, NCC 1255

(4) Tender of payment and consignation, NCC 1256-

t26t

Meat Packing Corp. v Sandiganbayan,359 SCRA 409

(2001)
Allandale Sports Line, Inc. v. The Good Development
Corp., GRNo. 164521, Dec. 18,2008
Sps. Cacyurin v AFPMB, G.R. No. 177298, April 15,
2013
Bonrostro v Juan, G.R. No. 172346, July 24,2013
Del Carmen v Sabordo, G.R. No. 181723, Aug. ll,2014

B. Loss of Thing Due, NCC 1262-1269

1. Impossibility of Performance

(a) Original
(b) Supervening

C. Condonation or remission of the debt, NCC 1270-1274

Yam v CA, G.R. No. 104726, February ll,1999

Golezv. Nemeff.o, G.R. No. 1783 17, September 23,2015

D. Confusion or merger of rights of the creditor, NCC 1275-1277

E. Compensation, NCC 1278-1290

GanTion v CA, 28 SCRA 235 (1969)

Mirasol v CA, 351 SCRA 44 (2001)
Montemayor v Millora, G.R. No. 1 68251,July 27 ,2011
Union Bank v DBP, G.R. No. 191555, January 20,2014
First United v. Bayanihan, G.R. No. 164985, January 15,
2014
Philippine Trust Company vs. dps. Roxas, G.R. No. 171897,
October 14, 2015

F. Novation, NCC l29l - 1304

1. Subjective or Personal

12
,

Starbright Sales v Philippine Realty Corporation, G.R. No

177936,January 18,2012
S.C. Megaworld Construction vs. Engr. Luis U. Parada,
G.R, No. 183804, September ll,2013
Magbanua v Uy, G.R. No. 161003, May 6, 2005
Phil. Charter v Petroleum, G.R. No. 180898, April 18,2012
ACE Foods, Inc. v. Micro Pacific Technologies Co., Ltd.,
G.R. No. 200602, December ll,2013
Arco Pulp v Lim, lune 2074

2. Objective or real
3. Mixed

G. Invalid payment, NCC 1243

H. Annulment
I. Rescission
J. Fulfillment of a Resolutory Condition
K. Prescription
L. Death in certain Instances
M. Renunciation by the creditor, NCC 6
N. Compromise
O. Arrival of a Resolutory Term
P. Mutual Desistance

Saura v DBP, April 27, 1972

Talampas vs. Moldex Realty, G,R. I'{o. l70l34, June 17, 2015

Q. Unilateral Withdrawal

GBMLT Manpower vs. Malinao, G.R. No. 189262, July 6, 2015

R. Change of Civil Status

S. Rebus Sic Stantibus, NCC 1267

Naga TelCo v CA, G.R. No. I07ll2, February 24,1994

PNCC v CA, G.R. No. 116896, May 5, 1997
Osmena v SSS, G.R. No. 165272, September 13, 2007
So v FoodFest, G.R. No. 183268, April 7,2010
Comglasco Corporation v. Santos Car Check Center, G.R. I'{o.
202989, March 25, 2015
Tagaytay Realty v. Gacutan, G.R. No. 1600 j3, July 01, 201 5

T. Want of Interest
U. Judicial Insolvency
a CONTRACTS

PART II-A

I. General Provisions

A. Definition, NCC 1305

Jardine Davis v. CA, 333SCRA 684

Heirs of Intac v CA, G.R. No. 17321, October 11,2012
MIAA v Avia, G.R. No. 180168, February 27,2012
Heirs of Uy v Castillo,G.R. No. 176425, June 5, 2013

Stages of contracts:
Bugatti v. CA, 343 SCRA 335 (2000)

B. Characteristics

1. Autonomy of will, NCC 1306

Riviera Filipina, Inc. v. CA, 380 SCRA 245 (2003)

Malbarosa v CA, G.R. No. 125761,2003
Capalla v COMELEC, G.R. No. 201112, June 2012
(concurring of J. Sereno)

Should not be contrary to law

Heirs of Severina San Miguel v. CA, 364 SCRA 523
Manila Prince Hotel v. GSIS, 267 scra 408

Should not be contrary to morals and good customs

De los Reyes v. Alojado, 16 Phil.499

Should not be against public policy

Gabriel v. Monte de Piedad, 71 Phi1.500

2. Mutuality, NCC 1308- 13 10

Garcia v. Rita Legarda,Inc.,21 SCRA 555

PNB v Manalo, G.R.No. 174433, February 24,2014
Silos v PNB, G.R. No. 181045, JuIy 2,2014

3. Relativify, NCC 13 1 1

DKC Holdings Corp. v. CA, 239 SCRA 666

Direct Funders Co.p. v. Lavina,373 SCRA 645
PNB v. Dee, et a1., G.R. No. 182128, February 19,2014
MBTC vs. Chiok, G.R.No. 171652, November 26,2014

t4
,
FBDC v. Fong, G.R. No. 209370, March 25,2015

Exceptions

(a) AccionPauliana
(b) AccionDtrecta
(c) Article 1312
(d) Stipulationpour autrod, NCC l3ll(2)
Coquia v. Fieldman'slnsurance Co., Inc.,26 SCRA 178
Mandarin Villa, Inc. v. CA,257 SCRA 538

4. Obligatory force, NCC 1315, l3l4

R.S. Tomas, Inc. v Rizal, G.R. No. 173155, March 21,
20t2

C. Elements of a Contract

Gironella v. PNB, G.R. No. 194515, September 16, 2015

1. Essential, NCC 1318

(a) Consent of the contracting pafiies, NCC 1319

(b) Offer, NCC 1321,1323-1326
(c) Acceptance, NCC 1320, 1322, l3l9

Rosenstock v Burke, 46 PhiI 217 (1924)

Sanchez v Rigos, 45 SCRA 368 (1972)
Capalla v COMELEC, G.R. No. 201112, June
2012 (concurring of J. Sereno)
Malbarosa v CA, 402 SCRA 108 (2003)
Traders Royal Bank v Cuison, June 5, 2009
Talampas vs. Moldex Realty, G.R. No. 170134,
June 17,2015

(d) Object, NCC 1347 - 1349

BIas v. Santos, 1 SCRA 899 (1961)

Tanedo v CA,252 SCRA 80 (1996)

(e) Cause, NCC 1350 - 1355

Liguez v CA, 102 Phil 577 (1957)
Carantes v CA, 76 SCRA 524 (1977)
Sps. Buenaventura v CA, 416 SCRA 263 (2003)

15
,
NOTE: Natural Elements

(l) Right to resolve, NCC I 191

(2) Warranties in sales contracts

Toledo vs. CA, G.R. No. 167838, August 5,2015

D. Stages of a Contract, NCC 1315, 1316

E. Essential Requisites of Contracts - 13 18- 13 19

a) Consent freely gtven
Offer and Acceptance;
Advertisement is not an offer but an invitation to make
an offer;
Qualified acceptance; counter-offer;
Capacity to give consent:
i. If one pafiy is a minor and the other is not,
the contract is voidable
ii. If both parties are minors, the contract is
unenforceable
Vices of consent
i. Mistake - 1330-1334 - Spr.
Theis v. CA, GR No. L-1260I3, February
12,lgg7
ii. Violence and Intimidation - 1335-1337
Martinez v. Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank,
1s Phil. 2s2 (ter})
iii. Fraud - 1338-1346
International Corporate Bank v. Gueco, 351
SCRA 516
Two kinds of fraud:
Dolocausante; requisites
Tankeh v. DBP et a1., GRNo. 171428,Nov.
ll,2013
Doloincidente
Usual exaggeration does not vitiate consent:
Songco v. Sellner, 37 Phil. 254 (1917)
Simulation:
JR Blanco v. Quasha, 318SCRA373 (1999)
Cruz v. Bancom Finance Corp., 379 SCRA 490
(2002)
b) Object certain - 1347-1349
J.L.T. Agro v. Balansag, GR No. 141882, March
1 1,2005

c) Cause of the obligation- 1350-1355

II. Form of Contracts, NCC 1356-1358

76
I

Hemaez v de Los Angeles, 27 SCRA 1276 (1969)

Zamora v Miranda, G.R. No. 162930, December 5,2012
SMPI vs. BF Homes, G.R. No. 169343, August 5,2015

A. For validity
B. For enforceability Statute of Fraud Art. 1403
C. For registrability

F. Classification of Contracts

1. According to degree of dependence

(a) Preparatory
(b) Principal
(c) Accessory

2. According to perfection

(a) Consensual
(b) Real

3. According to form

(a) Common or informal

(b) Special or formal

4. According to purpose

(a) Transfer of ownership

(b) Conveyance of use
(c) Rendition of service

WT Construction, Inc. v. The Province of Cebu, G.R. No.

208984, September 1 6, 201 5

5. According to subject matter

(a) Things
(b) Services

6. According to the nature of the obligation

(a) Bilateral
(b) Unilateral

7. According to cause

t7
, (a) Onerous
(b) Gratuitous

8. According to risk

(a) Commutative
(b) Aleatory

9. According to name

(a) Nominate
(b) Innominate, NCC 1307

Tinsay v. Yusay, 47 Phil.639 (1925)

Dizon v Gaborro, 83 SCRA 688 (1978)

III. Reformation of Instruments, NCC 1359-1369

Garcia v Bisaya, 97 Phil 609 (1955)

Bentir v Leande, 330 SCRA 591 (2000)
Sarming u Dy, 383 SCRA \31 (2002)
Cosio v. Palileo, 14 SCRA 170
Emilio v. Rapal, 617 SCRA 199

IV. Interpretation of Contracts, NCC 1370 - 1379, Rule 130,

Secs. 10-19, Rules of Courl

Sps. Bonifacio vs. Kimwa Construction, G.R. No. 17160l,

April 8,2015

PART II-B

V. Defective Contracts

A. Rescissible Contracts, NCC 1380-1389 (read also Arts. 1526;

1534; 1539; 1542; 1556; 1 560; 1567; 1569

Oria v NlcMicking,2l Phil 243 (1912)

Siguan v Lim, 3 18 SCRA 725 (1999)
Velarde v CA, 361 SCRA 56 (2001)
Miguel v Montanez, G.R. No. 191336, January 25,2012
Ada v Baylon, G .R. No. 182435, August 13,?012

B. Voidable Contracts, NCC 1390 - 1402

Caldwallader v Smith, Bell, 7 Phil 461 (1907)

18
, PNB v Phil. Vegetable, G.R. No. L-25400, January \4, 1927
Singsong v Isabela Sawmill, 88 SCRA 623 (1979)
Metropolitan v. Prosperity, G.R. No. 1 54390, March 17,2014
*First Philippine Holdings v. Trans Middle East (Phils.)
Equities, GR No. 179505,1214109
*Marlene Crisostomo and Jose C. Crisostomo, v. Florito M.
Garcia, GR No. 164787, 1131106
*Julian Francisco et al. v. Pastor Herrera, GR No. 13998,
tU2U02

Ratification, NCC 1392-1396

UySoo Lim v Tan Unchuan, 38 Phil 552 (1918)

Viloria v CAI, G.R. No. 188288, January 16,2012
ECE Realty v Mandap, G.R. No. 196182, September 1,2014

1. Incapable of giving consent, NCC 1327

Catalanv. Basa, GRNo. 159567, July 31,2007
2. Insanity, NCC 1328-1329
Crewlink v. Teringtering, GRl66803, Oct. 14,20t2
3. Mistake, NCC 1330-1343
The City of Manila, et al. v. Juan Entote, GR No. L-24776,
June 28, 1974
4. Violence, NCC 1335(1)
Sps. Victor and EunaBinua v. Lucia P. Ong, GR No.
207176, June18,2014
5. Intimidation, NCC 1335(2)
6. Undue influence, NCC 1337
Armando V. Sierra v. CA and EpifaniaEbarle, GR No.
90270,Iuly 24,1992
7. Fraud, NCC 1332,1338-1344

Roman Catholic Church v Pante, April I1,2072

ECE Realty and Development Inc. v Rachel Mandap,
G.R. No. 196182, September 1,2014
Metropolitan v. Prosperity, G.R. No. 1 54390, March 17,2014

C. Unenforceable Contract, NCC 1403 - 1408, l3l7

PNB v Phil. Vegetableoil,49 Phil 857 (1927)
Carbonnel v Poncio, 103 Phil 655 (1958)
Limketkai v CA, March 29, 1996
Swedish Match v CA, 441 SCRA 1 (20q4)
Neri v Heirs of Uy, G.R. No. 194366, October 2012
Iglesia v Heirs of Bernardino Taeza, G.R. No. 179597, Feb. 3,
2014

D. Void Contracts, NCC 1409-1410, l4ll-1412, 1473-1416,

1.9
,

t4t7-r4t9, t420-t422

1. NCC t345-1346
2. NCC 1490-149r
3. NCC t378
4. NCC 1409

Ureta v Ureta, Septembei 14,20ll

Formaranvs Ong, G.R. No. 186264, July 8 2013
Constantino v Heirs of Constantino, G.R. No. 181508, October
2,2013
THE CPG of the SP. Cadavedo vLacaya, G.R. No. 173188,
January l5,2Al4
De Leon v. Delallana, G.R. No. 212277, February 11,2015
Tolentino vs. Sps. Latagan, G.R. No. 179874,Iune22,2015
Tingalan vs. Sps. Melliza, G.R. No. 195247, Jwe 29,2015
Clemente vs. CA, G.R. No. 175483, October 14,2015

5. NCC 1422
6. NCC 1782
7.FC87

Liguez v CA, supra

Rellosa v Gaw Cheen Hum, 93 Phil 827 (1953)
Frenzel v catito,406 scRA 55 (2003)
Gonzalo v Tarnate, Jr., G.R. No. 160600, January 15 2014

Contracts of Adhesion

Piltel v Tecson, May 7,2004

Alpha Insurance v Castor, G.R. No. 198174, September 2,2013
Ejercito vs. Oriental Assurance Corporation, G.R. No. 192099,
July 8, 2015
*Norton Resources and Development Corp. v. A11 Asia Bank
Corp., GR No. 162523, lll25l09
*Benguet Co.p. v. Cesar Cabildo, GR No. 151402,8122108
ECE Realty v. Rachel Mandap, GR No. 196182,9llll4

*ESTOPPEL
Howard Co Chieng v. Sta. Lucia Realty, GR No. 162090,
U3U07 \
Jose B. Go et al. v. Bangko Sentral, GRNo. 202262,718115
PBCom v. CA,GRNo. 106858, 915197
PNB v. IAC, GRNo. 66715,9118190
Kalalo v.Luz,34 SCRA 337
Phil Realty Holdings v. Firematic, GR No. L1OZ1I,4127lO7