SAINT MARY’S UNIVERSITY

College of Law
OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS

WORKPLAN AND DISTRIBUTION

A. FOR THE MIDTERMS

1. General Principles of Obligations
2. Nature and Effects of Obligations
3. Kinds of Obligations
4. Extinguishment of Obligations
a. Payment/Performance
b. Loss of the Prestation
c. Condonation/Remission of Debt

B. FOR THE FINALS

d. Confusion or Merger
e. Compensation
f. Novation
g. Prescription/Estoppel
5. General Principles: Contracts
6. Essential Requisites
7. Form of Contracts
8. Reformation of Contracts
9. Interpretation of Contracts
10. Defective Contracts
11. Natural Obligations
12. Trust

COURSE REQUIREMENTS

A. To pass the course, the law student must fulfil the following requirements as a minimum:
1. Satisfactory performance in all quizzes and examinations;
2. Satisfactory performance in class recitations;
3. Submission and satisfactory performance in other requirements such as analysis tree and/or
case digest.
B. Student performance shall be evaluated based on the following formula:
1. Class standing (recitation, quizzes, analysis tree) 50%
2. Periodic Examination 50%

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 1 of 28
 COURSE OUTLINE

I. General Principles
A. Obligation, meaning and concept
B. Classification of Obligations
1. Civil Obligations (A. 1156)
2. Natural Obligations (A. 1423
3. Moral Obligations
4. Distinctions
C. Elements/Requisites of Civil Obligations
Subjective Elements:
1. Active Subject (Creditor/Obligee)
2. Passive Subject (Debtor/Obligor)
 Ocampo III v. People, 543 SCRA 487

Objective Elements:

3. Prestation/Object (A. 1156)

a. Real Obligation
1. Purpose
b. Personal Obligation
Positive personal obligation
Negative Personal Obligation
4. Efficient Cause/Legal Tie or Vinculum Juris
Sources of Obligations (A. 1157)
a. Law (A. 1158)
 Leung Ben v. O’Brien, 38 Phil 182
 Pelayo v. Lauron, 12 Phil 453
 ASJ Corp v. Evangelista, 545 SCRA 300
 Ramas V. Quiamco, 6 December 2006
 Hotel Nikko v. Reyes, 452 SCRA 532
 St. Mary’s Academy v. Carpitanos, 6 February 2002
b. Contracts (A. 1159)
 Sps Guanio v. Makati Shangri-la Hotel, 7 February 2011
 TSPI, Inc v. TSPOC Employees Union, 545 SCRA 215
 Regino v. Pangasinan Colleges, 18 November 2004
 PSBA v. CA, 4 February 1992
 Cosmo Entertainment v. La Ville, 20 August 2004
 Ayala Corp v. Rosa Diana Realty, 346 SCRA 663

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 2 of 28
  Bricktown Development v. Amor Tierra Development, 239 SCRA 126
 Pilipinas Hino v. CA, 338 SCRA 255
c. Quasi-Contracts (A. 1160 in relation to Arts. 2142-2175)
 Sarte Flores v. Sps Lindo, 13 April 2011
 Phil Realty and Holding Corp v. Ley Construction and Dev Corp, 13 June
2011
 Titan-Ikeda Construction v. Primetown Property, 544 SCRA 466
 PADCOM v. Ortigas, 9 May 2002
 MC Engineering v. CA, 380 SCRA 116
 BPI v. Pineda, 156 SCRA 404
 State Investment v. CA, 198 SCRA 391
d. Delicts (A. 1161 in relation to Arts. 20, 29-30, 35 in relation to Art 100 et seq of the
Revised Penal Code)
 People v. Nurfrashir Hashim, et al. 13 June 2012
 Abellana v. Peopke, 17 August 2011
 People v. Malicsi, 543 SCRA 93
 People v. Sia, 21 November 2001
 People v. Doctolero, 20 August 2001
 People v. Abulencia, 22 August 2001
 Bermudez v. Melecio-Herrera, 26 February 1988
 People v. Relova, 6 March 1987
 Manantan v. CA, 29 January 2001
 People v. Bayotas, 236 SCRA 239
e. Quasi-Delicts (A. 1162 in relation to Arts 2176-2194)
 Barredo v. Garcia, 73 Phil 607
 Del Carmen, Jr v. Geronimo Bacoy, 25 April 2012
 Ludo & Luym Corp v. CA, 1 February 2001
 Thermochem v. Naval, 30 October 2000
 Philippine Hawk Corporation v. Lee, 16 February 2010
 Dy Teban v. Ching, 543 SCRA 560
 Safeguard Security v. Tangco, 511 SCRA 67
 Villanueva v. Domingo, 438 SCRA 485
 Calalas v. CA, 31 May 2000
 Picart v. Smith, 37 Phil 813
II. Nature and Effect of Obligations
A. The Nature of Rights in General
1. Basis of Rights
2. Legal Rights
3. Real Rights (Jus in rem) vs. Personal Rights (Jus in Personam)
B. Correlation of Rights and Obligations

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 3 of 28
 C. Real Obligations: Rights and Obligations
1. Delivery/Tradition: Concept
2. Generic Real Obligation / Indeterminate Thing (A. 1246 in relation to A. 1165 par 2, A. 1170)
3. Specific Real Obligations/Determinate Thing (A. 1165)
a. To preserve: Bonus Pater Familias (A. 1163)
b. To deliver the Thing Itself
c. To deliver the Fruits (A. 1164)
d. To deliver thenAccesories and Accessions (A. 1166)
 Durban Apartments v. Pioneer Insurance, 12 January 2011
4. Time of Delivery: Pure, Conditional Obligations; Obligations with a Term
5. Modes of Delivery
a. Actual Delivery
b. Symbolic Delivery
c. Delivery through Execution of Legal Instruments
d. Tradito Longa Manu
e. Traditio Brevi Manu
f. Traditio Constitum Possesorium
6. Parties to Delivery
 Lagon v. Hooven Comalco, 349 SCRA 363
D. Personal Obligations: Rights and Obligations
1. Positive Personal Obligations / To Do
 Francisco v. CA, 401 SCRA 549
 Tanguiling v. CA, 266 SCRA 78
2. Negative Personal Obligations / Not To Do
E. Breach of Obligations: Causes and Effects (A. 1170)
 Periquet v. CA, 238 SCRA 697
 Legaspi Oil v. CA, 224 SCRA 213
1. Default (Mora): Meaning (A. 1169, 1170)
 Philippine Charter v. Central Colleges, 22 February 2012
 Titan-Ikeda Construction v. Primetown Property, 544 SCRA 466

Kinds of Delay:

a. Ordinary Delay
b. Legal Delay/Default (A. 1169)
Demand: Nature
Necessity of Demand: Extra-Judicial or Judicial
 PNB Madecor v. Uy, 363 SCRA 128

When Deman NOT Necessary

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 4 of 28
  Barzaga v. CA, 268 SCRA 105
 Tanguiling v. CA, 266 SCRA 78
 Tayag v. CA, 219 SCRA 480
 Periquet v. CA, 238 SCRA 697

KINDS OF DEFAULT

a. Mora Solvendi: Effects

 Racquel-Santos v. CA, 7 July 2009
 RCBC v. CA, 305 SCRA 449
b. Mora Accipiendi: Effects
 State Investment v. CA, 198 SCRA 392
c. Compensatio Morae: Effects
Bilateral Obligations
Mutual Obligations
Reciprocal Obligations
 BPI Investment v. CA, 371 SCRA 295
 Leano v. CA, 369 SCRA 36
 Heirs of Bacus v. CA, 371 SCRA 295
 Integrated Packing v. CA, 333 SCRA 170
 Laforteza v. Machuca, 333 SCRA 643
2. FRAUD (DOLO): Meaning (A. 1170 in relation to A. 1171)
 Regala v. Carin, 6 April 2011
a. Dolo Causante: Effects
b. Dolo Incidente: Effects
 International Corporate Bank v. Gueco, 351 SCRA 516
 Republic v. Court of Tax Appeals, 366 SCRA 489
c. Malicious Prosecution
 Diaz v. Davao Light, 4 April 2007
 Yasonna v. De Ramos, 440 SCRA 154
3. Negligence (Culpa): Meaning (A. 1170, 1172-1173)
a. Degrees of Diligence: Extraordinary, Ordinary or Slight
b. Negligence as a Question of Fact: Test (A. 1173)
 Yambao v. Zuniga, 418 SCRA 266
 Smith, Bell Dodwell v. Borja, 383 SCRA 341
 Ilusorio v. CA, 393 SCRA 69
 NPC v. CA, 161 SCRA 334
c. Culpa Contractual
 Muaje-Tuazon v. Wenphil, 511 SCRA 521
 RCPI v. Verchez, 481 SCRA 384

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 5 of 28
  Vixtory Liner v. Gammad, 444 SCRA 355
 FGU v. Sarmiento, 386 SCRA 312
 LRTA v. Natividad, 397 SCRA 75
 Rodzssen v. Far East Bank, 357 SCRA 618
 UE v. Jader, 17 February 2000
 Bayne Adjusters v. CA, 323 SCRA 231
d. Culpa Aquiliana
 Delsan Transport v. C & A Consortium, 1 October 2003
 PCIB v. CA, 350 SCRA 446
 SMC and Heirs of Ouana v. CA, 4 July 2002

Solidary vs. Independent Liability of Employer and/or Employee

 Heirs of Ochoa v. G & S Transport, 9 March 2011

 Pacis v. Morales, 25 February 2010
 Philippine Hawk Corporation v. Tan Lee, 16 February 2010
 Mercury Drug v. Spouses Huang, 22 June 2007
 Mendoza v. Soriano, 8 June 2007
 Cerezo v. Tuazon, 426 SCRA 167

Presumption Of Fault / Negligence of Employer: Vicarious Liability

 Filcar Transports v. Espinas, 20 June 2012

 FEB Leasing v. Spouses Baylon, 29 June 2011
 Filipinas Synthetic v. De Los Santos, 16 March 2011
 Viron v. De Los Santos, 345 SCRA 509

Proof of Employees Fault/Negligence

 Mercury Drug vs. Baking, 523 SCRA 184

 Safeguard Security v. Tangco, 511 SCRA 67
 Pleyto v. Lomboy, 432 SCRA 329

Proof of Due Diligence

 Viron v. De Los Santos, 345 SCRA 509

 Sykl v. Begasa, 414 SCRA 237
 Yambao v. Zuniga, 418 SCRA 266

Quasi-Delictual liability even in the existence of a contract between parties

 Mindanao Terminal V. Phoenix, 587 SCRA 429

 YHT Realty v. CA, 451 SCRA 638

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 6 of 28
 Medical Negligence/Medical Malpractice Cases

 Ramos v. CA, 321 SCRA 584 and 380 SCRA 467 as compared to
 Reyes v. Sisters of Mercy, 3 October 2000
 Nogales v. Capitol Medical Center, 511 SCRA 204 on “apparent authority”
 Professional Services v. Agana, 513 SCRA 478 on “control test”
 Professional Services v. CA, 544 SCRA 170 and 2 February 2010
 Cantre v. Spouses Go, 522 SCRA 547
 Dr. Rubi Li v. Spouses Soliman, 7 June 2011 on “informed consent”

Culpa Crminal

 People v. Delos Santos, 355 SCRA 415

 LG Foods v. Agraviador, 503 SCRA 170
4. Contravention of the Terms (A. 1170)
 Magat v. Medialdea, 20 April 1983
F. Remedies in Case of Breach (A. 1169, 1170, 1177 and A. 1191-1192)
1. Specific Performance: Necessity (A. 1165)
 Vda. De Mistica v. Naguiat, 418 SCRA 73
 Co v. CA, 17 August 1999
2. Resolution/Rescission (A. 1191-1192 as compared to A. 1380-1389)
a. Nature as a Remedy
 Heirs of Quirong v. DBP, 3 December 2009
 Heirs of Gaite v. The Plaza, 26 January 2011
 Solar Harvest Incorporated vs. Davao Corrugated, 26 July 2010
b. Right to Resolve.Rescind: Requisites
 Reyes v. Tuparan, 1 June 2011
 G.G. Sportswear Mfg Corp v. World Class Properties, Inc, 2 March 2010
 Movido v. Reyes Pastor, 11 February 2010
 Spouses Tongson v. Emergency Pawnshop, 15 January 2010
 Sanz Maceda v. DBO, 11 August 2010
 Racquel-Santos v. CA, 7 July 2009
 Francisco v. DEAC Const Inc., 543 SCRA 644
 Cannu v. Galang, 459 SCRA 80
 Villanueva v. Estate of Gonzaga, 498 SCRA 285
 Paguyo v. Astorga, 470 SCRA 33
 Casino v. CA, 470 SCRA 57
 Carrascoso v. CA, 477 SCRA 666
 Goldenrod v. CA, 299 SCRA 141
c. Effects
 Serrano vs. CA, 417 SCRA 415

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 7 of 28
  Gil v. CA, 411 SCRA 18
 Reyes v. Lim, 408 SCRA 560
 Ong v. Tiu, 1 February 2002
 Equatorial Realtyv. Mayfair Theater, 370 SCRA 56
 Velarde v. CA, 361 SCRA 56
 Asuncion v. Evangelista, 13 October 1999
 Uy v. CA, 9 September 1999
3. Damages: Kinds
 Tamayo v. Abad-Senora, 15 November 2010 on loss of earning capacity
 Tan v. OMC Carriers, 12 January 2011
 Victory Liner v. Heirs, 394 SCRA 341
 GSIS v. Labung Deang, 365 SCRA 341
 BPI Investment v. D.G. Carreon, 371 SCRA 58
4. Exhaustion of All Property of the Debtor: Exemptions (A. 1177 in relation to A. 2236)
5. Accion Subrogatoria: How, Exceptions (A. 1177)
6. Accion Pauliana (A. 1177 in relation to A. 1380-1389)
 Khe Kong v. CA, 355 SCRA 701
G. Fortuitous Event/ Caso Fortuito (A. 1174 in relation to 1165)
1. Kinds
a. Fortuitous Event Proper v. Force Majeure (Fuerza Mayor)
b. Ordinary v. Extraordinary
2. Requisites
 Philippine Realty v. Ley Const and Dev Corp., 13 June 2011
 Megaworld Globus Asia, Inc v. Tanseco, 9 October 2009
 Sicam v. Jorge, 8 August 2007
 Huibonhoa v. CA, 14 December 1999
 Ace Agro v. CA, 266 SCRA 429
3. Effects of Fortuitous Event Upon Obligation
 Dioquino v. Laureano, 33 SCRA 65
 Bachelor Express v. CA, 188 SCRA 216
 Vasquez v. CA, 138 SCRA 558
 Yobido v. CA, 17 October 1997
 Juntilla v. Fontanar, 136 SCRA 625
 Philamgen Insurance v. MGG Marine, 8 March 2002
 Mindez v. Morillo, 12 March 2002
 NAPOCOR v. Phillip Bros., 369 SCRA 629
H. Transmissibility of Rights and Obligations (A. 1178)
 Ong Genato v. Bayhon., et al., 24 August 2009
 Union Bank v. Santibanez, 452 SCRA 228
 San Agustin v. CA, 371 SCRA 348

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 8 of 28
  Project Builders. Inc v. CA, 368 SCRA 626

III. KINDS OF OBLIGATIONS

A. Pure Obligations (A. 1179, par 1)
1. Meaning
2. Characteristics
 Hongkong and Shanghai Bank v. Spouses Broqueza, 17 November 2010
B. Conditional Obligations (A. 1179)
1. Meaning and Definition of a Condition
2. Requisites (A. 1179 in relation to A. 1183)
 DBP v. CA, 262 SCRA 245
3. Classifications
4. Suspensive Conditions
a. Meaning (A. 1181)
 Tomimbang v. Tomimbang, 4 August 2009
 Gonzales v. Heirs, 314 SCRA 385
 Insular Life v. Young, 373 SCRA 626
 Direct Funders v. Lavina, 373 SCRA 645
b. Potestative Suspensive Conditions (A. 1182)
 Vda de Mistica v. Naguiat, 418 SCRA 73
 Hermosa v. Longara, 93 Phil 971
 Trillana v. Quezon Colleges, 93 Phil 383
c. Potestative Suspensive Conditions (A. 1184)
 Visayan Sawmill v. CA, 219 SCRA 378
 Leano v. CA, 369 SCRA 36
d. Negative Suspensive Conditions (A. 1185)
e. Constructive Fulfillment (A. 1186)
f. Effects of Non-Fulfillment of Suspensive Condition
 De Leon v. Ong, 2 February 2010
 Heirs of Sandejas v. Lina, 351 SCRA 183
g. Effects of Fulfillment of Suspensive Condition
Retroactivity (A. 1187)
As to Fruits/Interests (A. 1187)
As to Loss (A. 1189, 1 and 2)
As to Deterioration (A. 1189, 3 and 4)
As to Improvement (A. 1189, 5 and 6)
h. Rights Pending Condition (A. 1188)
5. Resolutory Conditions (A. 1179, 1181, 1190)
a. Meaning (A. 1181)
b. Demandability (A. 1179)

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 9 of 28
 c. Constructive Fulfillment (A. 1186)
d. Effects
Mutual Restitution (A. 1190)
As to Loss (A. 1189, 1 and 2)
As to Deterioration (A. 1189, 3 and 4)
As to Improvement (A. 1189, 5 and 6)
e. Rights Pending Condition (A. 1188)
C. Obligations with a Term/Period (A. 1193-1198)
1. Period or Term, Meaning and Definition (A. 1193, 1180)
Art 13 of the Civil Code in relation to
 CIR v. Primetown, 28 August 2007 compared to
 NAMARCO v. Tecson, 139 Phil 584
2. Distinctions: Condition v. Period/Term
 Berg v. Magdalena Estates, 92 Phil 110
 Lirag v. CA, 63 SCRA 375
 Daguhoy v. Ponce, 96 Phil 15
 Victoria Planters v. Victoria Miling, 97 Phil 318
3. Requisites
4. Kinds of Periods/Terms
a. Suspensive (ex die) v. resolutory (in diem)
b. Legal v. conventional v. judicial
c. Definite v. indefinite
5. Potestative Period (A. 1180 in relation to A. 1197)
 Jespajo v. CA, 390 SCRA 27
 Borromeo v. CA, 27
 Gonzalez v. Jose, 66 Phil 369
6. Effects (A. 1195-1197)
 Baluyut v. Poblete, 514 SCRA 370
 Malayan Realty v. Uy, 10 November 2006
 Kasapian ng Manggagawa ng Coca-Cola v. CA, 487 SCRA 487
 Santos v. Santos, 441 SCRA 472
 Melotindos v. Tobias, 391 SCRA 299
 LL and Co v. Huang, 378 SCRA 612
 Brent School v. Zamora, 5 February 1990
 Lim v. People, 21 November 1984
 Pacifico Banking v. CA, 5 Msy 1989
7. Loss, Deterioration, Improvement (A. 1194in relation to 1189)
8. Loss of Benefit of Period/Term (A. 1198)
D. Alternative Obligations (A. 1199-1205)
1. Meaning and Definition (A. 1199)

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 10 of 28
  Agoncillo v. Javier, 38 SCRA 424
 Ong Guan v. Century, 46 Phil 592
2. Distinguished from Conjunctive Obligations
3. Effects:
a. As to Debtor
Right of Choice/Election: Nature and Limitations (A. 1200, 1202-1203)
 Legarda v. Miailhe, 88 Phil 637

Effectivity of Choice (A. 1201)

 Reyes v. Martinez, 55 Phil 492

Liability for loss of alternatives: Partial v. Total (A. 1203-1204)

b. As to Creditor
Right of Choice/Election (A. 1205)
Effectivity of Choice
Right of First Refusal vs. Partial Performance
E. Facultative Obligations (A. 1206)
1. Meaning
2. Alternative v. Facultative Obligations
 Quizana v. Redugerio, 94 Phil 922
F. Joint Obligations (mancommunada, pro-rata)
1. Individual v. Collective Obligations
2. Nature
3. Joint Obligations, How created (A. 1208 in relation to A. 1207)
 Marsman v. Philippine Geoanalytics, 29 June 2010
 Alipio v. CA, 341 SCRA 441
4. Effects of Joint Liability
 PH Credit Corp v. CA, 370 SCRA 155 (joint v. liability)
G. Solidary Obligations (in solidum, solidaria, joint and several)
1. Nature and Definition (A. 1207)
2. Solidarity v. Indivisibility
3. How created (A. 1207)
 CDCP v. Estrella, 501 SCRA 228
 Republic Glass Corp v. Qua, 30 July 2004
 Industrial Management v. NLRC, 331 SCRA 640
 Metro Manila Transit v. CA, 21 June 1993
4. Active Solidarity or Mutual Agency: Effects (A. 1211-1216)
 Inciong V. CA, 257 SCRA 578
 Philippine Blooming Mills v. CA, 15 October 2003

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 11 of 28
 5. Passive Solidarity or Mutual Guaranty: Effects (A. 1217-1222)
 Queensland Tokyo v. George, 8 September 2010
 Shrimp Specialist, Inc v. Fuji-Triumph, 7 December 2009
 Asset Builders v. Stronghold, 18 October 2010
 Esparwa Security V. Liceo de Cagayan, 508 SCRA 373
 Dimayuga v. PCIB, 5 August 1991
 Cerna v. CA, 30 March 1993
H. Divisible Obligations
1. Nature (A. 1223)
2. Kinds of Divivion: Qualitative, Quantitative and Ideal/Intellectual
3. Kinds of Divisible Obligations (A. 1225, par 3-4)
I. Indivisible Obligations
1. Nature (A. 1223)
2. Kinds of Indivisibility: Natural, Legal or Conventional (A. 1225)
 Nazareno v. CA, 343 SCRA 637
J. Joint: Indivisible Obligations (A. 1224 and A. 1209)
1. Nature
2. Effects
a. As to creditors
b. As to debtors
K. Obligations with a Penal Clause (A. 1226-1230)
1. Meaning and Definition
2. Penalty Clause, defined (A. 1226)
3. Purposes
4. Kinds of Penalties
a. Legal v. Conventional
 Alonzo v. San Juan, 451 SCRA 45
 David v. CA, 316 SCRA 710
b. Compensatory v. Punitive
c. Subsidiary v. Joint (A. 1226 in relation to 1227-1228)
5. Penalties v. Interest
 RP v. Thi Thu Thuy De Guzman, 15 June 2011
 Marquez v. Far East Bank, 10 January 2011
 Prisma Construction v. Menchavez, 9 March 2010
 Macalalag v. People, 511 SCRA 400
 Tan v. CA, 367 SCRA 571 (on monetary v. penalty interest)
 Eastern Shipping v. CA, 234 SCRA 78
6. Penalties v. Liquidated Damages
7. Escalation Clause v. Acceleration Clause
 PCI v.Ng Sheung Ngor, 541 SCRA 223

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 12 of 28
  NSBC v. PNB, 435 SCRA 565
 Polotan v. CA, 296 SCRA 247
 New Sampaguita v. PNB, 435 SCRA 565
8. Legal Rate: Loans and Forbearances of Money v. Other Monetary Obligations
 Estores v. Spouses Supangan, 18 April 2012
 Hung v. BPI Card, 20 July 2010
 Marquez v. Far East Bank, 10 January 2011
 Land Bank v. Ong, 24 November 2010
9. Reduction of Conventional Penalties: Nullity of Penalties/Usurious Transactions
(A. 1175 in relation to A. 1229-1230)
 RGM Industries v. United Pacific, 27 June 2012
 Prisma Construction v. Menchavez, 9 March 2010
 Maceda, Jr v. DBO/DBP v. Maceda, Jr., 11 August 2010
 PNB v. Encina, 344 SCRA 608
 Imperialv. Jaucian, 427 SCRA 517
 Pabugais v. Sahijwani, 423 SCRA 596
 Lo v. CA 411 SCRA 523 (23 September 2003)
 Ligutan v. CA, 12 February 2002
 Pascual v. Ramos, 384 SCRA 105
 First Metro Investment v. Este del Sol, 369 SCRA 99
 Domel Trading v. CA, 315 SCRA 13
 Reformina v. Tomol, 139 SCRA 260 (11 October 1985)

IV. EXTINGUISHMENT OF OBLIGATIONS (A. 1231)

A. Payment/Performance (A. 1232-1261)
1. Meaning (A. 1232) / Effects
 Lo v. KJH, 413 SCRA 182
2. Characteristics
3. Kinds: Normal /Voluntary v. Abnormal/Involuntary
4. Requisites (A. 1233)
 PNB v. CA, 256 SCRA 44
5. Identity of Prestation
 Cathay Pacific v. Vasquez, 399 SCRA 207
a. Real Obligations: General Requirements (A. 1239)
b. Specific Real Obligations (A. 1244)
c. Generic Real Obligations (A. 1246)
d. Personal Obligations (A. 1244)
e. Obligations to Pay Money (A. 1249-1250 in relation to RA 8183)
 Citibank v. Sabeniano, 504 SCRA 378
 Telengton Bros v. US Lines, 483 SCRA 458

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 13 of 28
  CF Sharp v. Northwest Airlines, 381 SCRA 314
 Padilla v. Paredes, 328 SCRA 434
 Tibajia v. CA, 223 SCRA 163
 DBP v. CA, 494 SCRA 25
Currency, defined (Secs. 48-49, RA 7633 or the Bangko ng Sentral ng
Pilipinas Act)
Legal tender, defined (Sec 52, RA 7653)
Demand Deposits, defined (Secs 58-60, RA 7653)
Instruments/Evidences of Credit

 Vitarich v. Locsin, 15 November 2010

 Metrobank v. Cabilzo, 510 SCRA 259

Effects of Inflation (A. 1250)

 Almeda v. Bathala Marketing , 542 SCRA 470

 PCI v. Ng Sheung Ngor, 541 SCRA 223
6. Integrity of Prestation
a. Strict Payment for the Entire Prestation: Exceptions (A. 1248)
b. Substantial Payment/Performance (A. 1234-1235)
 Palanca v. Guides, 452 SCRA 461
7. Who May Demand Payment
a. Creditor’s Right of Payment (A. 1240)
 PCIB v. CA, 481 SCRA 127
 Lagon v. Hooven Comalco, 349 SCRA 363
 BPI v. CA, 232 SCRA 302
b. Payment to an Incapacitated (A. 1241)
c. Payment to Third Person
8. Who Must Pay
a. Debtor (A. 1236 in relation to A. 1243 and A. 1247)
 RP v. Thi Thu Thuy De Guzman, 15 June 2011
 Audion Electric v. NLRC, 308 SCRA 340
b. Persons Having Interest in the Obligation (A. 1236)
c. Payment by a Third Person
As Agent of Debtor
Without Knowledge / Against consent of debtor (A. 1236 par 2, 1237-1238)
With Knowledge/ Consent of Debtor
 Land Bank v. Ong, 24 November 2010
9. Where Payment Must Be Made (A. 1251)

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 14 of 28
  Binalbagan v. CA, 256 SCRA 44
10. When Payment Must Be Made
 Lorenzo Shipping v. BJ Marthel, 443 SCRA 163
11. Special Forms of Payment
a. Dacion En Pago/Dation in Payment (A. 1245)
 Luzon Development Bank v.Enriquez, 12 January 2011
 Estanislao v. East-West Banking Corp., 544 SCRA 369
 Aquintey v. Tibong, 511 SCRA 414
 Vda de Jayme v. CA, 390 SCRA 380
 Caltex v. IAC, 13 November 1992
b. Payment by Cession or Assignment (A. 1255 in relation to Act No. 1956 or
Insolvency Law)
 Lo v. CA, 411 SCRA 523
c. Application of Payments (A. 1252-1254 in relation to A. 1176)
 ASI Corp v. Evangelista, 545 SCRA 300
 Paculdo v. Regalado, 345 SCRA 134
 CBC v. CA, 265 SCRA 327
 Mobil v. CA, 272 SCRA 523
d. Tender of Payment and Consignation (A. 1256-1261)
 Dalton v. FGR Realty and Development Corp, 19 January 2011
 Benos v. Lawilao, 509 SCRA 549
 People’s Industrial v. CA, 24 October 1997
 Eternal Gardens v. CA, 9 December 1997
 Rayos v. Reyes, 398 SCRA 24
 Cebu International v. CA, 316 SCRA 488
 De Mesa v. CA, 19 October 1999
B. Loss of the Prestation / Impossibility of Performance (A. 1262-1269)
1. Kinds of Loss/Impossibility: Physical, Civil or Legal (A. 1189[2])
 Ocena v. CA, 29 October 1976
 Ortigas v. Feati Bank, 94 SCRA 533
2. When Obligation Extinguished (A. 1262, 1266-1267)
3. Rebus Sic Stantibus (A. 1267)
 So v. Food Fest Land Inc., 7 April 2010
 Magat v. CA, 337 SCRA 298
 PNCC v. CA, 272 SCRA 183
 NATELCO v. CA, 230 SCRA 351
4. Remedies of Creditor in Case of Loss (A. 1269)
5. Liability in Case of Loss (A. 1262 par 2; A. 1265, 1268 in relation to A. 1174, A. 1165)
6. Partial Loss: Effects (A. 1264 in relation to A. 1189 [3] [4])
C. Condonation / Remission of the Debt (A. 1270-1274)

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 15 of 28
 1. Meaning and Nature
 Reyna v. COA, 8 February 2011
2. Requisites (A.1270)
a. Legal Capacity
b. Gratuitousness, defined
c. Acceptance
d. Form
e. Not Officious (A. 1271)
 Trans Pacific v. CA, 235 SCRA 494
3. Kinds
a. Inter Vivos (A. 1275, et seq.) v. Mortis Causa (A. 935-937)
b. Complete v. Partial (A. 1273-1274)
c. Express v. Implied (A. 1270)
d. Implied Condonation
Presumption of Condonation / Remission (A. 1271)
Presumption of Delivery (A. 1272)
 Dalupan v. Harden, 27 November 1951
 Lopez Vito v. Tambunting, 33 Phil 226
D. Confusion or Merger of Rights (A. 1275-1277)
1. Meaning and Definition (A. 1275)
 Estate of Mota v. Serra, 47 Phil 464
 Yek Ton Lin v. Yusingco, 64 Phil 1062
2. Requisites (A. 1276-1277)
3. Effects
E. Compensation (A. 1278-1290)
1. Meaning and Definition (A. 1278)
2. Requisites (A. 1279)
 EGV Realty v. CA, 20 July 1999
 Aerospace Chemical v. CA, 23 September 1999
 Apodaca v. NLRC, 172 SCRA 442
3. Total v. Partial (A. 1281)
 Spouses Chung v. Ulanday Construction, 11 October 2010
4. Voluntary (A. 1282)
5. Judicial (A. 1283-1284)
6. Legal Compensation (A. 1290 in relation to A. 1279)
a. Requisites (A. 1280, 1282)
 Insular Investment v. Capital One, 25 April 2012
 Lao, et al v. Special Plans Inc., 29 June 2010
 United Planters Sugar v. CA, 2 April 2009
b. How Established

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 16 of 28
 c. When Prohibited (A. 1287-1288)
 PNB Management v. R&R Metal, 373 SCRA 1
 Silahis v. IAC, 7 December 1989
 Francia v. CA, 28 June 1988
 Trinidad v. Acapulco, 494 SCRA 179
7. Effects:
a. Upon Principal or Upon Several Debts (A. 1289)
b. Upon Guarantor (A. 1280)
c. Of Assignment of Rights (A. 1285)
F. Novation (A. 1291-1304)
1. Meaning and Definition: How Effected (A. 1291)
 Heirs of Franco v. Spouses Gonzales, 27 June 2012
2. Effects (A. 1296)
3. Kinds (A. 1292)
4. Objective Novation (A. 1297-1298)
 Hernandez-Nievera v. Hernandez, 14February 2011
 St. James College v. equitable PCI Bank, 9 August 2010
 Tomimbang v. Tomimbang, 4 August 2009
5. Subjective Novation
a. Substitution of the debtor (A. 1293): Expromision (A. 1236-1237, 1294) v.
Delegacion (A. 1236-1237, 1295)
 Mindanao Savings v. Willkom, 20 October 2010
 Aquintey v. Tibong, 511 SCRA 414
b. Subrogation of the Rights of the Creditor (A. 1300, 1303-1304): Legal v.
Conventional (A. 1301)
 Loadmasters v. Glodel Brokerage, 10 January 2011
 Metrobank v. Rural Bank of Gerona, 5 July 2010
 Swagman v. CA, 455 SCRA 175
 Azolla Farms v. CA, 11 November 2004
 California Bus Lines v. State Investment, 418 SCRA 297
 Ocampo-Paule v. CA, 4 February 2002
 Reyes v. CA, 383 SCRA 471
 Bautista v. Pilar Development, 312 SCRA 611
 Evadel Realtyv. Soriano, 357 SCRA 395
G. Prescription (A. 1106-1116)
1. Definition (A. 1106)
2. Right of Prescription
a. In Favor of /Against (A. 1107-1108,1110-1111;1114)
b. Prohibited (A. 1108-1109;1113)
c. Who May Renounce; How (A. 1112)

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 17 of 28
 3. Extinctive Prescription (A. 1139-1155)
a. Meaning and Effects (A. 1139)
b. As a Defense; Rationale
c. Statute of Limitations/Prescriptive Periods (A. 1140-1149; A. 1577,1542-
1543;1571)
 Villeza v. German Management, 8 August 2010
 Insurance of the Philippine Islands v. Spouses Gregorio, 14 February
2011
 Mariano v. Petron, 21 January 2010
 Spouses Bernales v. Heirs of Sambaan, 15 January 2010
d. Computation of the Period (A. 1150-1154)
e. Interruption (A. 1155)
 B & I Realty v. Caspe, 543 SCRA 1
 Mesina v. Garcia, 509 SCRA 431
 Heirs of Gaudiane v. CA, 11 March 2004
 Laureano v. CA, 9 March 2000
 Banco Filipino v. CA, 30 May 2000
 Vda De Delgado v. CA, 28 August 2001
 Maestrado v. CA, 9 March 2000
H. Estoppel (A. 1431-1439)
1. Definition and Meaning (A. 1431)
 F.A.T. Kee Computer v. Online Networks, 2 February 2011
 Tanay Recreation v. Fausto, 455 SCRA 436
 Mendoza v. CA, 9 March 2000
 Lim v. Queensland, 373 SCRA 31
2. Kinds
 Placewell v. Camote, 26 June 2006
 Heirs of Ragua v. CA, 31 January 2000
a. Estoppel by Record: Estoppel by Judgment v. Res Judicata
b. Estoppel by Deed (A. 1436)
 Metrobank v. CA, 8 June 2000
 Spouses Manuel v. CA, 1 February 2001
c. Estoppel in Pais: meaning and Requisites
By Representation/Positive Acts (A. 1434-1435; A. 1437)
 Cuenco v. Cuenco, 458 SCRA 496 (13 October 2004)
 Laurel v. Desierto, 383 SCRA 493
 Hanopol v. SM, 390 SCRA 439
By Admisssion
By Promise (Promissory Estoppel)
 Terminal Facilities v. PPA, 378 SCRA 82

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 18 of 28
  Mendoza v. CA, 25 June 2001
By Silence
 Marquez v. Far East Bank, 10 January 2011
 Roblett Construction v. CA, 266 SCRA 71
By Acquiesence/ By Acceptance ofBenefits (A. 1438)
d. Estoppel by Laches: Prescription v. Laches
 Simedarby v. Goodyear, 8 June 2011
 Far East Bank v. Borja, 25 January 2010
 Kings Properties Corp. Inc v. Galido, 27 November 2009
 Metrobank v. Cabilzo, 510 SCRA 259
 Mesina v. Garcia, 509 SCRA 431
 Pahamantong v. PNB, 31 March 2005
 Shopper’s Paradisev. Roque, 13 January 2004
 Meatmasters v. Lelis Integrated, 452 SCRA 626
 Larena v. Mapili, 7 August 2003
 Santos v. Santos, 2 October 2001
 Villanueva-Mijares v. CA, 12 April 2000

V. CONTRACTS (A. 1305-1317)

A. Definition and Meaning
B. Characteristics/Principles
1. Autonomy (A. 1306 in relation to A. III Sec 10 1987 Phil Constitution)
 Garcia v. Villar, 27 June 2012, and
 Spouses Edralin v. Phil Veterans Bank, 9 March 2011 re:Pactum Commisorium
 University Physicians Services v. Marian Clinics, 1 September 2010
 Martin v. DBS Bank Phil. Inc., 16 June 2010
 Heirs of Zabala v. CA, 6 May 2010
 Duncan v. Glaxo, 438 SCRA 343 as compared to
 Star Paper v. Simbol, 487 SCRA 228 re: prohibition to marry clause
 Tiu v. Platinum Plans, 28 February 2007 re: non-involvement clause
 Avon Cosmetics v. Luna, 511 SCRA 376; re: exclusivity clause
 Del Castillo v. Richmond, 45 Phil 679
 Arwood v. DM Consunji, 394 SCRA 11
 Spouses Tecklo v. Rural Bank of Pamplona, 18 June 2010 re: dragnet clause
 Banate v. Phil Countryside, 13 July 2010
 Pascual v. Ramos, 384 SRA 105
 Chua Tee Dee v. CA, 429 SCRA 418 (2004) re: Deprivacion de derecho v.
Deprivacion de mero hecho [Arts 1654/1664] in lease
 GQ Garments v. Miranda, 495 SCRA 741 (2006)
 Bercero v. Capitol development, 519 SCRA 484 (2007)

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 19 of 28
 Pactum de non alienado
Pactum leonine
2. Obligatory Force (A. 1159, A. 1315)
 Hemedes v. CA, 8 October 1999

Right of First Refusal – Meaning and Definition

 PUP v. Golden Horizon, 15 March 2010

 Villegas v. CA, 499 SCRA 276
 Equatorial Realty v. Carmelo, 264 SCRA 483
 PUP v. CA, 368 SCRA 691
 Litonja v. L & R, 320 SCRA 405
3. Mutuality of Contracts (A. 1308-1310; 1317)
 Josefa v. Zhandong, 417 SCRA 269
a. Equality / Contracts of Adehesion
 Saludo v. Security Bank, 13 October 2010
 PCI v. Ng Sheung Ngor, 541 SCRA 223
 Dio v. St. Ferdinand Memorial, 509 SCRA 453
 PILTEL v. Tecson, 428 SCRA 378
 PAL v. CA, 255 SCRA 48
 Ermitano v. CA, 306 SCRA 218

b. Non-Binding as to Third Parties: Exceptions (A. 1309-1310);

Arbitration, Art 2042-2046 of NCC in relation to RA 876 and RA 9285

 Uniwide v. Titan-Ikeda, 511 SCRA 335

 Heirs of Salas v. Laperal, 13 december 1999
 Medrano v. CA, 452 SCRA 77
 Tan v. Gullas, 393 SCRA 334

c. Enforceability (A. 1317)

 Gozun v. Mercado, 511 SCRA 305
4. Relativity (A. 1311-1314)
a. Privity: exceptions (A. 1311)
 Sta. Lucia Realty v. Spouses Buenaventura, 2 October 2009
 Chan v. Maceda, 402 SCRA 352
b. Stipulations Pour Autrui (A. 1311, par 2)
 Baluyot v. CA, 22 July 1999
c. Contracts Creating Real Rights (A. 1312)

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 20 of 28
  Cuyco v. Cuyco, 487 SCRA 693
d. Contracts in Fraud of creditors (A. 1313 in relation to A. 1381 [3])
e. Tortious Interference (A. 1314)
 Go, doing business under the name and style of “ACG Express Liner” v. Cordero,
4 May 2010
 Tayag v. CA, 25 March 2004
 So v. CA, 21 september 1999
f. Collective Contracts
C. Stages in the Execution of a Contract
 International Freeport v. Danzas, 26 January 2011
 Rockland v. Mid-Pasig Development, 543 SCRA 596

Generation/Negotiation/Preparation/Conception

1. Perfection?Birth: Obligation Phase

2. Consummation/Termination
 MMDA v. JANCOM, 375 SCRA 320
D. Elements
1. Essential elements (A. 1315-1316): Consensual Contracts; Real Contracts; Formal
Contracts
2. Natural Elements
3. Accidental Elements

VI. ESSENTIAL REQUISITES OF CONTRACTS

A. Consent/”Meeting of Minds”
1. Meaning
2. Elements: Offer and Acceptance
 Rockland v. Mid-Pasig Land Development, 543 SCRA 596
 Manila Metal v. PNB, 511 SCRA 444
 Montecillov. Reynes, 385 SCRA 244
 Soler v. CA, 358 SCRA 57
 Palattao v. CA, 7 May 2002
 ABS-CBN v. CA, 21 January 1999
3. Other Requisites (A. 1321-1323; 1325): distinguished from option (A. 1324 in relation to A.
1479)
 Limson v. CA, 357 SCRA 209
4. Acceptance: requisites: distinguished from Counter-Offer (A. 1319-1320)
 Villanueva v. PNB, 6 December 2006
5. Consent: How manifested (A. 1319)
6. Vices of Consent

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 21 of 28
 a. Vice of Capacity (A. 1327-1329)
Minority
Insanity/Imbecillity/Dementia
 Catalan v. Basa, 31 July 2007
 Domingo v. CA, 17 October 2001
 Mendezona v. Ozamiz, 6 February 2002

Drunkenness/Hypnotic Spell

Special Incapacities

b. Vices of Will
Mistake/Error (A. 1331-1334)
Violence/intimidation (A. 1335-1336)
Undue Influence (A. 1337)
 Ruiz v. CA, 401 SCRA 594

Fraud: Kinds: How Committed (A. 1338-1344)

 Dela Cruz v. Sison, 451 SCRA 754

 Rural Bank of Sta. Maria v. CA, 314 SCRA 255
B. Object/Subject Matter (A. 1347-1349)
1. Requisites
a. Within Commerce of Man
b. Existing v. Future Things (A. 1347)
 Carabeo v. Spouses Dingo, 4 April 2011
c. Licit (A. 1347)
 Chavez v. PEA, 415 SCRA 403
d. Possible (A. 1348)
e. Determinate (A. 1349)
 Carabeo v. Spouses Dingco, 4 April 2011
 Melliza v. City of Iloilo, 23 SCRA 477
2. Distinguished from Object of Obligations
C. Cause/Consideration (A. 1350-1355)
1. Meaning
2. Requisites
a. Existing: Absence of Cause v. Failure of Cause v. inadequacy of Cause
 Catindigv. Vda de Meneses, 2 February 2011
 Orduna v. Fuentebella, 29 June 2010
 Brobio Mangahas v. Brobio, 20 October 2010
 Golden Apple Realty v. Sierra Grande Realty, 28 July 2010
 Askay v. Cosalan, 46 Phil 179

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 22 of 28
 b. Lawful (A. 1352, 1354)
c. True/Real: Simulation of Contracts (A. 1352, 1355, 1343-1344)
 Heirs of balite v. Lim, 446 SCRA 56
 Suntay v. CA, 252 SCRA 430
3. Cause v. Motive (A. 1351)
 Uy v. CA, 9 september 1999
4. Kinds (A. 1350)
a. Onerous
 Pentacapital v. Makilito Mahinay, 5 July 2010
b. Remuneratory
 Heirs of Gaite v. The Plaza, Inc, 26 january 2011 on “quantum meruit”
 Catly v. Navarro, 5 May 2010
c. Gratuitous
 Liguez v. CA, 102 Phil 577
 Philbank v. Lui She, 21 SCRA 52

VII. FORM OF CONTRACTS (A. 1356-1358)

A. Form of validity/ as an essential Element of Contracts (A. 1356-1357)
 Londrez v. CA 384 SCRA 133
B. Form for Enforceability/ Statute of Frauds (A. 1403, [2])
RA 8792 or the Electronic Commerce Act
C. Form for Conveniennce (A. 1358)
 Spouses Vega v. SSS, 20 September 2010
 Balatbat v. CA, 261 SCRA 128
VIII. REFORMATION OF INSTRUMENTS (A. 1359-1369)
A. As a remedy (A. 1359-1360, 1368-1369)
B. Requisites (A. `1359)
C. When Available (A. 1361-1367)
D. When Prohibited (A. 1366-1367)
 Sarming v. Dy, 6 June 2002
 Cebu v. CA, 407 SCRA 154
IX. INTERPRETATION OF CONTRACTS (A. 1370-1379)
A. Literal interpretation (A. 1370)
 ADR Shipping v. Gallardo, 389 SCRA 82
B. In Case of Doubt (A. 1371-1379)
 Movido v. Pastor, 11 february 2010
 TSPIC Corp v. TSPIC Employees Union, 545 SCRA 215
 Estanislao v. East-Wset Banking Corp, 544 SCRA 369
 Aquintey v. Tibong, 511 SCRA 414
 Cruz v. CA, 456 SCRA 165

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 23 of 28
  Gonzales v. CA, 354 SCRA 8
 Almira v. CA, 399 CRA 351
C. Doctrine of “complimentary contracts construed together”
 Philbank v. Lim, 455 SCRA 436
 Rigor v. Consolidated Leasing, 387 SCRA 437
 Velasquez v. CA, 30 June 1999
X. DEFECTIVE CONTRACTS
A. Rescissible Contracts (A. 1380-1389)
1. Requisites (A. 1380)
2. Rescission v. Resolution
 Heirs of Quirong v. DBP, 3 December 2009
3. Kinds
a. Lesion (A.1381[1] [2], 1386)
b. In Fraud of Creditors/Accion Pauliana (A.1381[3], 1387-1388 in relation to A. 1177)
c. Contracts for Things Under Litigation (A. 1381[4])
d. Declared by Law (A. 1381 [5])
e. Payments in Insolvency (A. 1382)
4. Nature and Effects (A. 1383-1385, 1389) Mutual Restitution
 Lee vs. Bangkok Bank, 9 February 2011
 Equatorial Realty v. Mayfair Theater, 370 SCRA 56
 Siguan v. Lim, 19 Nov 1999
 Khe Kong v. CA, 355 SCRA 701
 Suntay v. CA, 251 SCRA 430
B. Voidable Contracts (A.1390-1402)
1. Nature/Kinds (A. 1390)
 Brobio Mangahas v. Brobio, 20 October 2010
 Hernandez v. Hernandez, 9 March 2011
 Fuentez v. Rocam 21 April 2010
2. Annulment
a. As a remedy
b. Who may bring (A. 1397-1401)
c. Prescriptive Period (A. 1391, 1401)
 Associated Bank vs. Spouses Montano, 16 October 2010
 Miailhe v. CA, 354 SCRA 675
 First Philippine Holdings v. Trans Middle East, 4 december 2009
d. Effects (A. 1398, 1402)
 Sanchez v. Mapalad Realty, 541 SCRA 397
 Oesmer v. PDC, 514 SCRA 228
 Vda de Ape v. CA, 456 SCRA 193
 Francisco v. Herrera, 392 SCRA 317

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 24 of 28
  Braganza v. Villa Abrille, 105 Phil 456
 Katipunan v. Katipunan, 30 January 2002
 Jumalon v. CA, 30 January 2002
3. Confirmation/Ratification (A. 1392)
a. Requisites
b. How made: Express v. Implied (A.1393)
c. Who may ratify (A.1393-1395)
d. Effects (A. 1396)
C. Unenforceable Contracts (A. 1403-1408)
1. Nature
2. Kinds
a. Unauthorized Contracts (A. 1317 in relation to A. 1403 [1]; 1404)
 Cabales et al v. CA, 31 August 2007
b. Both parties Incapacitated (A. 1403[3]; A. 1407)
c. Contracts Infringing the Statute of Frauds (A. 1403 [2]) in relation to the E-Commerce Law
Necessity of Writing
 Vda de Ouano v. RP, 9 February 2011
 Shoemaker v. La Tondena, 68 Phil 24
 PNB v. Philippine Vegetable Oil Company, 49 Phil 897

Parol Evidence Rule (A. 1405-1406)

 Vda de Ouano v. RP, 9 february 2011

Executory v. Executed v. Partially Executory Contracts

 Municipality of Hagonoy v. Dumdum, 22 March 2010

 Tan v. Villapaz, 475 SCRA 720
 Spouses David v. Tiongson, 25 August 1999
 Cordial v. Miranda, 14 December 2000
 Villanueva-Mijares v. CA, 12 April 2000
3. Effects
4. Remedies
 Rosencor v. Inquing, 354 SCRA 119
 Firme v. Buka, 414 SCRA 190
D. Void/Inexistent Contracts (A. 1409-1422)
1. Void Contract v. Inexistent Contract (A. 1409; 1422)
 Heirs of M. Doronio v. Heirs of F. Doronio, 541 SCRA 479
 Guerra v. Suplico, 488 SCRA 332
 Frenzel v. Catito, 406 SCRA 55
 La Buga’al-Blaan v. Ramos, 1 December 2004

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 25 of 28
  Agan v. PIATCO, 21 january 2004
 COMELEC v. Quijano-Padilla, 389 SCRA 353
 Jaworski v. PAGCOR, 14 January 2004
 Oesmer v. PDC, 514 SCRA 228
2. Action for Declaration of Nullity
a. Prescriptive Period (A. 1410)
b. Divisibility (A. 1420)
c. Who May Bring (A. 1421)
 Heirs of Balite v. Lim, 446 SCRA 56
 Pineda v. CA, 376 SCRA 222
 Cruz v. Bancom, 379 SCRA 490
 Cauton v. Salud, 27 January 2004
3. Prohibited Contracts: Effects and Remedies
a. In case of In Pari Delicto
b. In case One Party is Innocent/Disadvantaged (A. 1411-1412; A. 1413-1419)
 Infotech v. COMELEC, 13 January 2004
 Pabuguias v. Sahijwani, 423 SCRA 596
 Liguez v. CA, 102 Phil 577
 Philbank v. Lui She, 21 CRA 52
 Vigilar v. Aquino, 18 January 2011
 EPG Construction v. Vigilar, 354 SCRA 566
 Go Chan v. Young, 354 SCRA 207
 Francisco v. Herrera, 392 SCRA 317
 Mendezona v. Ozamiz, 376 SCRA 482
XI. NATURAL OBLIGAION (A. 1423-1430)
A. Definition and meaning; Rationale
B. Natural Obligations v. Civil Obligations (A. 1423)
C. Kinds (A. 1423-1430)
 Manzanilla v. CA, 15 March 1990
 Rural Bank of Paranaque v. Remolado, 18 March 1985
XII. TRUSTS (A. 1440-1457)
A. Meaning; Nature of Legal Relationship
 Cojuangco v. Republic, 12 April 2011
 Ringor v. Ringor, 436 SCRA 484 (13 August 2004)
 Salvador v. CA, 313 SCRA 369 (1995)
B. Parties to a Trust (A. 1440)
C. Kinds: Express Trust v. Implied Trust (A. 1441)
 Huang v. CA, 236 SCRA 420
 Vda. De Esconde v. CA, 253 SCRA 66
 Tala realty v. Banco Filipino, 392 SCRA 506

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 26 of 28
1. Express Trust: (A. 1443-1446)
a. How established (A. 1444)
 Medina v. CA, 196 SCRA 205 (1981)
b. Appointment of Trustee (A. 1445)
c. Acceptance by beneficiary (A. 1446)
d. How Proven (A. 1443)
 Filipinas Port v. Go, 16 March 2007
e. Repudiation of Express Trust: Effects
f. Prescription and Laches: Effects
2. Implied Trust (A. 1447-1457)
a. Resulting Trust v. Constructive Trust
 Mendizabel v. Apao, 20 February 2006
 Vda. De Alberta v. Go, 21 July 2005
 Heirs of Yap v. CA, 371 SCRA 523 (1999)
b. How Established/Kinds (A. 1448-1456)
c. How Proven (A. 1457)
d. Prescriptive Periods of Action to Enforce Implied Trusts

In Annullable/Voidable Contracts (A. 1391, 4)

In case of Fraud in registration (A. 1144, 2)

In Void Contracts (A. 1410)

In Actions to Quiet Title

 Heirs of Kionisala v. Heirs of Dacut, 378 SCRA 206

 Ramos v. Ramos, 61 SCRA 284
 Intestate Estate of Ty v. CA, 356 SCRA 661
 Vda de Reterto v. Barz, 372 SCRA 712
 Chia Liong Tan v. CA, 228 SCRA 75
 O’laco v. Co Cho Chit, 220 SCRA 656

-End of Course Outline-

OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS

Page 27 of 28
OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS COURSE SYLLABUS
Page 28 of 28