CIVREV2-1920-Dean-Delson-Case-Digests-Obligations-Contracts-Textbook-1719.pdf - SAN BEDA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW CIVIL LAW REVIEW II CASE DIGESTS

CIVREV2-1920-Dean-Delson-Case-Digests-Obligations-Contracts-Textbook-1719.pdf

This preview shows page 1 out of 265 pages.

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 265 pages?

Unformatted text preview: SAN BEDA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW CIVIL LAW REVIEW II CASE DIGESTS Obligations and Contracts I. Obligations A. General Provisions • Cases: (1) Leung Ben v. O’Brien, 38 Phil. 182 (2) Aldaba v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-21676, February 28, 1969 B. Nature and Effect • Cases: (3) Bayala v. Silang Traffic Co., 73 Phil. 557 (4) Lirag Textile Mills, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-30736, July 11, 1975 (5) Hanlon v. Hausserman, 40 Phil. 796 (6) Dela Rosa v. Bank, 51 Phil. 926 (7) Lasam v. Smith, 45 Phil. 657 (8) Real v. Belo, G.R. No. 146224, January 26, 2007 C. Kinds • Cases: (9) Baluran v. Navarro, 79 SCRA 309 (10) Smtih, Bell & Co. v. Sotelo, 44 Phil. 875 (11) Hermosa v. Longara, 93 Phil. 971 (12) Taylor v. Uy Tieng Piao, 43 Phil. 873 (13) Trillana v. Quezon Colleges, 93 Phil. 383 (14) PLDT Co. v. Jeturian, 97 Phil. 981 (15) Ramirez v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-6536, January 25, 1956 (16) Gil v. Court of Appeals, 411 SCRA 18, 2003 (17) Regalado v. Luchasingco & Co., 5 Phil. 625 (18) Hanlon v. Hausermann, 40 Phil. 796 (19) Sancho v. Lizarraga, 55 Phil. 601 (20) Song Fo v. Hawaiian-Philippine Co., 47 Phil. 821 (21) Nepomuceno v. Narciso, 84 Phil. 542 (22) Berg v. Magdalena Estate, Inc., 92 Phil 110 (23) Victorias Planters v. Victorias Milling Co., 7 Phil. 318 (24) Gonzales v. Jose, 66 Phil. 369 (25) Borromeo v. Court of Appeals, 47 SCRA 65 (26) Gaite v. Fonacier, 112 Phil. 728 (27) Nakpil & Sons v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 47851, October 3, 1986 (28) Mariveles Shipyard Co. v. Court of Appeals, 415 SCRA 573, 2003 (29) NYK International Knitwear Corp. Philippines v. NLRC, 397 SCRA 607, 2003 (30) Agoncillo v. Javier, 38 Phil. 424 (31) Ynchausti v. Yulo, 34 Phil. 978 (32) Stronghold Insurance Co., Inc. v. Republic-Asahi Glass Corp. (33) Nazareno v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 138842, October 18, 2000 (34) Government v. Lim, 61 Phil. 737 (35) Cabarroguis v. Vicente, 107 Phil. 340 (36) Rizal Commercial Banking Corp. v. Court of Appeals, 289 SCRA 242 (37) Insular Bank of Asia & America v. Spouses Salazar, 159 SCRA 111 (38) Garcia v. Court of Appeals, 167 SCRA 815 (39) Ibarra v. Aveyro, 37 Phil. 278 (40) Umali v. Miclat, 105 Phil. 1109 D. Extinguishment • Cases: (41) California Bus Lines, Inc. v. State Investment House, Inc., 418 SCRA 297, 2003 (42) Filinvest Credit Corp. v. Phil. Acetylene Co., 197 Phil. 394 (43) Pen v. Julian, G.R. No. 160408, January 11, 2016 (44) Philippine National Bank v. Tan Dee, G.R. No. 182128, February 19, 2014 (45) Inter-Asia Investments Industries, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 403 SCRA 452, 2003 (46) Harry E. Keeler Electric Co. v. Rodruguez, 44 Phil. 19 1 (47) Haw Pia v. China Banking Corp., 80 Phil. 604 (48) Philippine National Bank v. Teves, G.R. Nos. L-8706 & L-8813, December 14, 1951 (49) Zagala v. Jimenez, G.R. No. 33050, July 23, 1987 (50) Golez v. Camara, 101 Phil. 363 (51) Quiros v. Tan Guinlay, 5 Phil. 675 (52) New Pacific Timber & Supply Co. v. Seneris 101 SCRA 686 (53) Huibonhoa v. Court of Appeals, G.R. Nos. 95897 & 102604, December 14, 1999 (54) Commissioner of Public Highways v. Burgos, 96 SCRA 831 (55) Velasco v. Manila Electric Co., 42 SCRA 556 (56) Philippine National Bank v. Veraguth, 50 Phil. 253 (57) Menzi & Co. v. Quing Chuan, 69 Phil. 46 (58) Sanz v. Lavin, 6 Phil. 299 (59) Roman Catholic Bishop of Malolos, Inc. v. Intermediate Appellate Court, 191 SCRA 411 (60) Far East Bank & Trust Co. v. Diaz Realty, Inc., G.R. No. 138588, August 23, 2001 (61) Eternal Gardens Memorial Park Corp. v. Court of Appeals, 282 SCRA 554 (62) Ortigas & Co. v. Feati Bank & Trust Co., 94 SCRA 533 (63) Naga Telephone Co. v. Court of Appels, February 24, 1994 (64) Testate Estate of Mota v. Serra, 40 Phil. 464 (65) Sochayseng v. Trujillo, 31 Phil. 153 (65) Gullas v. National Bank, 62 Phil. 519 (66) Garcia v. Lim Chiu Sing, 59 Phil. 562 (67) Zapanta v. De Rostaeche, 21 Phil. 54 (68) Uraca v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 115158, September 5, 1997 (69) Autocorp Group v. Intra Strata Assurance Corp., G.R. No. 166662, June 27, 2008 (70) Arco Pulp and Paper Co., Inc. v. Lim, G.R. No. 206806, June 25, 2014 (71) Ocampo-Paule v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 145872, February 4, 2002 (72) Ramos v. Gibbon, 67 Phil. 371 (73) Ynchausti & Co. v. Yulo, 34 Phil. 978 (74) Dungo v. Lopena, 6 SCRA 1007 (75) Millar v. Court of Appeals (76) Sandico v. Piguing, 42 SCRA 322 (77) Kabankalan Sugar Co. v. Pacheco, 55 Phil. 55 (78) Spouses Reyes v. BPI Family Savings Bank, Inc. (79) People v. Nery, G.R. No. L-19567, February 5, 1964 (80) Tiu Suico v. Habana, 45 Phil. 707 (81) De Cortes v. Venturanza, 79 SCRA 709 (82) Babst v. Court of Appeals, G.R. Nos. 99398 & 104625 (83) Villanueva v. Girged, 110 Phil. 478 (84) Hodges v. Rey, 111 Phil. 219 (85) Chemphil Import & Export Corp. v. Court of Appeals, 251 SCRA 257 (86) Sison v. Yap Tico, 37 Phil. 587 (87) Rodriguez v. Court of Appeals, 207 SCRA 533 II. Contracts A. General Provisions • Cases: (88) Valles v. Villa, 35 Phil. 769 (89) Cuizon v. Court of Appeals, 260 SCRA 645 (90) Spouses Omengan v. Philippine National Bank, G.R. No. 161319, January 23, 2007 (91) Ferrazzini v. Gsell, 34 Phil. 697 (92) Del Castillo v. Richmond, 45 Phil. 697 (93) Sy Suan v. Regala, 105 Phil. 1024 (94) Allied Banking Corp. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 124290, January 16, 1998 (95) Liebnow v. Philippine Vegetable Oil Co., 39 Phil 60 (96) Encarnacion v. Baldemar, 77 Phil. 470 (97) Florentino v. Encarnacion, 79 SCRA 192 (98) Kauffman v. Philippine National Bank, 42 Phil. 182 2 B. Essential Requisites • Cases: (99) ABS-CBN v. Court of Appeals, 301 SCA 572 (100) Laudico v. Rodriguez, G.R. No. 16530, March 31, 1992 (101) Enriquez v. Sun Life Assurance Co., 41 Phil. 269 (102) Laudico v. Arias, 43 Phil. 270 (103) Marlboro v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 125761, April 30, 2003 (104) Technogas Philippines Manufacturing Corp. v. Philippine National Bank, G.R. No. 161004, April 14, 2008 (105) Yason v. Arciaga, G.R. No. 145017, January 28, 2005 (106) Mercado v. Espiritu, 37 Phil. 125 (107) Braganza v. Villa Abrille, 105 Phil. 456 (108) Luna v. Linatoc, 74 Phil. 15 (109) Constantino v. Court of Appeals, 264 SCRA 59 (110) Strong v. Gutierrez Repide, 41 Phil. 974 (111) Songco v. Sellner, 37 Phil. 254 (112) Sabalvaro v. Erlanger & Galinger, Inc., 34 Phil. 588 (113) Camacho v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 127520, February 9, 2007 (114) Liguez v. Court of Appeals, 102 Phil. 577 (115) Fisher v. Rob, 69 Phil. 101 (116) Vllaroel v. Estrada, 71 Phil. 14 (117) Velez v. Ramas, 40 Phil. 787 (118) Mactal v. Melegrito, 111 Phil. 363 C. Reformation of Instruments • Cases: (119) Dauden-Hernaez v. De los Angeles, 27 SCRA 1276 (120) Huibonhoa v. COA, 320 SCRA 625 (121) Bentir v. Leanda, G.R. No. 128991, April 12, 2000 (122) Development Bank of the Philippines v. Perez, G.R. No. 148541, November 11, 2004 (123) Aznar v. Citibank, N.A. (Philippines), G.R. No. 164273, March 28, 2007 D. Interpretation of Contracts E. Rescissible Contracts • Cases: (124) Guzman, Bocaling & Co., Inc. v. Bonnevie (125) Khe Hong Cheng v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 144169, March 28, 2001 (126) Concepcion v. Sta. Anna, 87 Phil. 787 (127) Oria v. McMicking, 21 Phil. 243 F. Voidable Contracts • Cases: (128) Braganza v. Villa Abrille, 105 Phil. 466 (129) Teves v. People’s Homesite & Housing Corp., 23 SCRA 1114 (130) Caddwallader & Co. v. Smith, Bell & Co., 7 Phil. 416 G. Unenforceable Contracts • Cases: (131) Rosencore Development Corp. v. Inquing (132) Carbonell v. Poncio, 103 Phil. 655 (133) Reiss v. Memije, 15 Phil. 350 (134) Luna v. Linatoc, 74 Phil. 15 H. Void or Inexistent Contracts • Cases: (135) Liguez v. Court of Appeals, 102 Phil. 577 (136) Mapalo v. Mapalo, 17 SCRA 114 3 (137) Rodriguez v. Rodriguez, 20 SCRA 908 (138) Angeles v. Court of Appeals, 102 Phil. 1006 III. Natural Obligations IV. Estoppel • Cases: (139) Tijam v. Sibonghanoy, 23 SCRA 29 (140) Miguel v. Catalino, 26 SCRA 234 (141) Philippine National Bank v. Barreto, 52 Phil. 818 Cases Decided Within January 2017 to December 2019 I. Obligations and Contracts • Cases: (1) Spouses Villaluz v. Land Bank of the Philippines, G.R. No. 192602, January 18, 2017 (2) Werr Corporation International v. Highlands Prime, Inc., G.R. No. 187543, February 8, 2017 (3) San Francisco Inn v. San Pablo City Water District, G.R. No. 204639, February 15, 2017 (4) Federal Builders, Inc. v. Power Factors, Inc., G.R. No. 211504, March 8, 2017 (5) B.H. Chua Securities Corp. v. Sia-Uy, G.R. No. 202485, February 22, 2017 (6) Philippine National Bank v. Chan, G.R. No. 206037, March 13, 2017 (7) Felix Plazo Urban Poor Settlers Community Association, Inc. v. Lipat, Sr., G.R. No. 182409; March 20, 2017 (8) Province of Camarines Sur v. Bodega Glassware, G.R. No. 194199, March 22, 2017 (9) Lavarez v. Guevarra, G.R. No. 206103, March 29, 2017 (10) SM Systems Corp. v. Camerino, G.R. No. 178591, March 29, 2017 (11) Van de Brug v. Philippine National Bank, G.R. No. 207004, June 6, 2018 (12) Reyes v. BANCOM Development Corp., G.R. No. 190286, January 11, 2018 (13) Specified Contractors & Development, Inc. v. Pobocan, G.R. No. 212472, January 11, 2018 (14) Orient Freight International, Inc. v. Keihin-Everett Forwarding Co., Inc., G.R. No. 191937, August 9, 2017 (15) Federal Express Corp. v. Antonino, G.R. No. 199455, June 27, 2018 (16) Chinatrust (PhiIs.) Commercial Bank v. Turner, G.R. No. 191458, July 3, 2017 (17) Encarnacion Construction v. Phoenix Ready Mix Concrete Development & Construction, G.R. No. 225402, September 4, 2017 (18) Evangelista v. Screenex, Inc., G.R. No. 211564, November 20, 2017 (19) H. Villarica Pawnshop v. Social Security Commission, G.R. No. 228087, January 24, 2018 (20) Asian Terminals, Inc. v. Padoson Stainless Steel Corp., G.R. No. 211876, June 25, 2018 (21) Diampoc v. Buenaventura, G.R. No. 200383, March 19, 2018 (22) Almeda v. Heirs of Almeda, G.R. No. 194189, September 14, 2017 (23) Spouses Ong v. BPI Family, G.R. No. 208638, January 24, 2018 (24) Mendoza v. Spouses Ramon, Sr., G.R. No. 220517, June 20, 2018 (25) Northern Mindanao Industrial Port & Services Corp. v. Iligan Cement Corp., G.R. No. 215387, April 23, 2018 (26) Team Image Entertainment, Inc. v. Solar Team Entertainment, G.R. No. 191658, September 13, 2017 (27) Makati Tuscany Condominium Corp. v. Multi-Realty Development Corp., G.R. No. 185530, April 18, 2018 (28) G Holdings v. Cagayan Electric Power & Light Co., G.R. No. 226213, September 27, 2017 (29) Chua Ping Hian v. Manas, G.R. No. 198867, October 16, 2019 (30) Spouses Bernardo v. Union Bank of the Philippines, G.R. No. 208892, September 18, 2019 (31) Allied Banking Corp. v. Sia, G.R. No. 195341, August 28, 2019 (32) Henson, Jr. v. UCPB General Insurance Co., Inc., G.R. No. 223134, August 14, 2019 4 (33) San Miguel Foods, Inc. v. Magtuto, G.R. No. 225007, July 24, 2019 (34) Dupasquier v. Ascendas (Philippines) Corp., G.R. No. 211044, July 24, 2019 (35) Municipality of Dasmariñas v. Campos, G.R. Nos. 232675 & 233078, July 17, 2019 (36) BDO Unibank, Inc. v. Pua, G.R. No. 230923, July 08, 2019 (37) Cruz v. Children's Medical Center Philippines and General Hospital, Inc., G.R. No. 224868 (Notice), June 26, 2019 (38) Rizal Commercial Banking Corp. v. Plast-Print Industries, Inc., G.R. No. 199308, June 19, 2019 (39) Sepe v. Heirs of Kilang, G.R. No. 199766, April 10, 2019 (40) Kung v. Tan, G.R. No. 243245 (Notice), April 01, 2019 (41) Century Iron Works, Inc. v. FEU, G.R. No. 217329 (Notice), April 01, 2019 (42) Nuñez v. Moises-Palma, G.R. No. 224466, March 27, 2019 (43) Domestic Petroleum Retailer Corp. v. Manila International Airport Authority, G.R. No. 210641, March 27, 2019 (44) Garmill Co., Inc. v. Pioneer Hi-bred Philippines, Inc., G.R. No. 196032 (Notice), March 20, 2019 (45) People v. Robles, G.R. No. 229943 (Resolution), March 18, 2019 (46) Castro v. Commission on Audit, G.R. No. 233499 (Notice), February 26, 2019 (47) Clark Resort Travel & Amusement Corp. v. Agustin, G.R. No. 202253 (Notice), February 11, 2019 (48) Credit Merchants & Lending Investors Corp. v. Spouses Ganancial, G.R. No. 211910 (Notice), January 23, 2019 (49) Goldstar Rivermount, Inc. v. Advent Capital and Finance Corp., G.R. No. 211204, December 10, 2018 (50) Spouses Loquellano v. Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corp., Ltd., G.R. No. 200553, December 10, 2018 (51) Romillo v. Cosmo Sealand Co., Ltd., G.R. No. 203173 (Notice), December 05, 2018 (52) Geronimo v. Commission on Audit, G.R. No. 224163, December 04, 2018 (53) Gonzales-Saldana v. Spouses Niamatali, G.R. No. 226587, November 21, 2018 (54) Cezar Yatco Real Estate Services, Inc. v. Bel-Air Village Association, Inc., G.R. No. 211780, November 21, 2018 (55) Villa Crista Monte Realty & Development Corp. v. Equitable PCI Bank, G.R. No. 208336, November 21, 2018 (56) Planters Development Bank v. Lubiya Agro Industrial Corp., G.R. No. 207976, November 14, 2018 (57) Industrial Personnel & Management Services, Inc. v. Country Bankers Insurance Corp., G.R. No. 194126, October 17, 2018 (58) Alejaga, Sr. v. Spouses Libardo, G.R. No. 239997 (Notice), September 12, 2018 (59) Yujuico v. Far East Bank and Trust Co., G.R. No. 186196 (Resolution), August 15, 2018 (60) Lara's Gifts & Decors, Inc. v. Midtown Industrial Sales, Inc., G.R. No. 225433, August 28, 2019 (61) Pineda v. Zuñiga Vda. de Vega, G.R. No. 233774, April 10, 2019 (62) Oropeza v. Allied Banking Corp., G.R. No. 222078, April 01, 2019 (63) Heirs of Arao v. Heirs of Eclipse, G.R. No. 211425, November 19, 2018 (64) Philippine International Trading Corp. v. Threshold Pacific Corp., G.R. No. 209119, October 03, 2018 (65) First Lepanto-Taisho Insurance Corp. v. Lavine Loungewear Manufacturing, Inc., G.R. No. 197219, October 01, 2019 (65) Camp John Hay Development Corp. v. Charter Chemical and Coating Corp., G.R. No. 198849, August 07, 2019 (66) Makati Water, Inc. v. Agua Vida Systems, Inc., G.R. No. 205604, June 26, 2019 (67) BNL Management Corp. v. Uy, G.R. No. 210297, April 03, 2019 5 OBLIGATIONS General Provisions PAYMENT OF DEBT EVEN IF ARISING FROM GAMBLING MUST BE PAID FOR 1. LEUNG BEN v. OBRIEN G.R. No. L-13602, April 6, 1918 Street, J. FACTS: In a petition for a writ of certiorari, petitioner Leung Ben seeks to quash an attachment issued from the Court of First Instance. On December 12, 1917, an action was instituted in the Court of First Instance of Manila by P.J. O’Brien to recover of Leung Ben the sum of P15,000, all alleged to have been lost by the plaintiff to the defendant in a series of gambling, banking, and percentage games conducted during the two or three months prior to the institution of the suit. The plaintiff asked for an attachment against the property of the defendant, on the ground that the latter was about to depart from the Philippines with intent to defraud his creditors. This attachment was issued. The provision of law under which this attachment was issued requires that there should be a cause of action arising upon contract, express or implied. The contention of the petitioner is that the statutory action to recover money lost at gaming is not such an action as is contemplated in this provision, and he insists that the original complaint shows on its face that the remedy of attachment is not available in aid thereof; that the Court of First Instance acted in excess of its jurisdiction in granting the writ of attachment; that the petitioner has no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy by appeal or otherwise; and that consequently the writ of certiorari supplies the appropriate remedy for this relief. ISSUE: Is the statutory obligation to restore money won at gaming is an obligation arising from contract, express or implied? RULING: Yes. In permitting the recovery money lost at play, Act No. 1757 has introduced modifications in the application of Articles 1798, 1801, and 1305 of the Civil Code. The first two of these articles relate to gambling contracts, while article 1305 treats of the nullity of contracts proceeding from a vicious or illicit consideration. Taking all these provisions together, it must be apparent that the obligation to return money lost at play has a decided affinity to contractual obligation; and the Court believes that it could, without violence to the doctrines of the civil law, be held that such obligations is an innominate quasi-contract. It is however, unnecessary to place the decision on this ground. In the opinion of the Court, the cause of action stated in the complaint in the court below is based on a contract, express or implied, and is therefore of such nature that the court had authority to issue the writ of attachment. Hence, the application for the writ of certiorari must therefore be denied and the proceedings dismissed. 6 OBLIGATIONS General Provisions LETTER WITH INTENTION TO DONATE IS NOT SUFFICENT 2. ALDABA v. COURT OF APPEALS G.R. No. L-21676, February 28, 1969 Zaldivar, J. FACTS: This is a petition for review by the Supreme Court for a decision rendered by the Court of Appeals. The Court of First Instance decided that donation was not present in the case at bar. Vicente Aldaba, the petitioner, is the doctor of Belen Aldaba. On the other hand Cesar Aldaba, the brother of Belen Aldaba, is one of the respondents. Belen Aldaba died leaving her heirs surviving spouse Estanislao Bautista and her brother Cesar Aldaba. Dr. Vicente Aldaba together with his daughter lived in a house owned by Mrs. Aldaba. Mrs. Aldaba allowed them to live in one of her properties because a fire burned down Dr. Aldaba's house. After Belen Aldaba's death, the partition of the properties left Cesar Aldaba and Emmanel Bautista as the owners of the two lots in question. Petitioners contend that having rendered services for the deceased for more than ten years without compensation, the said lots were the actual compensation. Furthermore a letter saying, "Huwag kayong umalis diyan. Talagang iyan ay para sa inyo. Alam nila na iyan ay sa inyo" was used as evidence to prove donation. Respondents contend that the evidence of the letter does not disclose that donation has been made. ISSUE: Was there a disposition of the property in question made by the deceased Belen Aldaba in favor of petitioners by virtue of the letter? RULING: No. There was no disposition of the property in question made by the deceased Belen Aldaba in favour of petitioner by virtue of the letter. For the following reasons: (1) The note was insufficient conveyance, and hence could not be considered as evidence of a donation with onerous cause. The note can be considered, at most, as indicative of the intention to donate. (2) no notarial document was executed by Belen to the petitioners during those 10 years. (3) P53,000 worth of services made by the petitioners no way proves the alleged donation. Again, donation must be clearly stated. Mere intention to donate is not sufficient. If at all, the petitioners believed that the gratuitous use of the property was not sufficient to compensate them for their services, they could have presented their claims in the intestate proceedings, which they themselves could have initiated, if none was instituted. Hence there was no donation for the services rendered. A letter showing an intention to donate is not sufficient to prove donation. 7 OBLIGATIONS Nature and Effect NECESSITY OF DEMAND UPON DEFAULT AS REQUISITE TO FORFEITURE 3. BAYLA v. SILANG TRAFFIC CO. 73 Phil 557, May 1, 1942 Ozaeta, J. FACTS: This is a petition and cross-petition for certiorari filed by both parties to the Supreme Court. Petitioners decided to purchase several shares of stock from Silang Traffic Co (SILANG). The purchase price is to be paid 5% upon the execution of the contract and the remainder in installments of 5%, payable within the 1st month of each and every quarter starting July 1, 1935, with interest on deferred payments at 6% per annum until paid. Both parties also agreed to forfeit in favor of seller in case of default without court proceedings. On July 31, 1937, petitioners failed to pay the installment. A r...
View Full Document

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture