BAR QUESTIONNAIRE.docx - Today is Saturday Constitution Statutes Executive Issuances Judicial Issuances Other Issuances Jurisprudence International

BAR QUESTIONNAIRE.docx - Today is Saturday Constitution...

This preview shows page 1 - 3 out of 26 pages.

Today is Saturday, October 17, 2020 Constitution Statutes Executive Issuances Judicial Issuances Other Issuances Jurisprudence International Legal Resources AUSL Exclusive Bar Examination Questionnaire for Commercial Law Set A rode a Sentinel Liner bus going to Baguio from Manila. At a stop-over in Tarlac, the bus driver, the conducto he passengers disembarked for lunch. P decided, however, to remain in the bus, the door of which was not d. At this point, V, a vendor, sneaked into the bus and offered P some refreshments. When P rudely decline ked him, resulting in P suffering from bruises and contusions. Does he have cause to sue Sentinel Liner? (A) Yes, since the carrier's crew did nothing to protect a passenger who remained in the bus during the sto over. (B) No, since the carrier's crew could not have foreseen the attack. (C) Yes, since the bus is liable for anything that goes wrong in the course of a trip. (D) No, since the attack on P took place when the bus was at a stop-over. cargo ship of X Shipping, Co. ran aground off the coast of Cebu during a storm and lost all its cargo amoun p50 Million. The ship itself suffered damages estimated at Php80 Million. The cargo owners filed a suit agai ping but it invoked the doctrine of limited liability since its vessel suffered an Php80 Million damage, more th ollective value of all lost cargo. Is X Shipping correct? (A) Yes, since under that doctrine, the value of the lost cargo and the damage to the ship can be set-off. (B) No, since each cargo owner has a separate and individual claim for damages. (C) Yes, since the extent of the ship’s damage was greater than that of the value of the lost cargo. (D) No, since X Shipping neither incurred a total loss nor abandoned its ship. writes a promissory note in favor of his creditor, B. It says: "Subject to my option, I promise to pay B Php1 M s order or give Php1 Million worth of cement or to authorize him to sell my house worth Php1 Million. Signed e note negotiable?
Image of page 1
(A) No, because the exercise of the option to pay lies with A, the maker and debtor. (B) No, because it authorizes the sale of collateral securities in case the note is not paid at maturity. (C) Yes, because the note is really payable to B or his order, the other provisions being merely optional. (D) Yes, because an election to require something to be done in lieu of payment of money does not affect negotiability. BC Corp. increased its capital stocks from Php10 Million to Php15 Million and, in the process, issued 1,000 es divided into Common Shares "B" and Common Shares "C." T, a stockholder owning 500 shares, insists o g the newly issued shares through a right of pre-emption. The company claims, however, that its By-laws de ight of pre-emption. Is the corporation correct? (A) No, since the By-Laws cannot deny a shareholder his right of pre-emption.
Image of page 2
Image of page 3

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture