University of the PhilippinesCOLLEGE OF LAW

OUTLINE IN OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTSSecond Semester, AY 2010-2011

Prof. E. G. Ursua

Course Requirements:Class Participation 20%(including attendance)Oral Exam 30%Final Exam 50%

Introduction: “Social Contract Theory,” by Celeste Friend, The Internet Encylopedia of Philosophy, http://www.iep.utm.edu/, 13 November 2010

OBLIGATIONS

General Provisions

I. Concept

A. Definition – Arts. 1156B. ElementsC. Distinction between natural and civil obligations – Art. 1423

II. Sources of Obligations – Art. 1157A. Law – Art. 1158B. Contracts – Arts. 1159, 1305C. Quasi-Contracts – Arts. 1160, 2142, 2144, 2154, 2164 to 2175D. Acts or omissions punishable by law – Art. 1161; Arts. 100, 104, RPCE. Quasi-Delicts – Arts. 1162, 2176, 2180; Arts. 218, 219, FC

Arts. 3, 104, RPC

Barredo v. Garcia, 73 Phil. 607 (1942)Mendoza v, Arrieta, 91 SCRA 113 (1975)PSBA v. CA, 205 SCRA 729 (1992)Amadora v. CA, 160 SCRA 315 (1988)Air France v. Carrascoso, 18 SCRA 155 (1966)Pelayo v. Lauron, G.R. No. 4089, 12 Jan. 1909Virata v. Ochoa, G.R. No. 46179, 31 Jan. 1978

1

Great Asian Sales v. CA, G.R. No. 105774, 25 April 2002LG Foods v. Agraviador, G.R. No. 158995, 26 Sept. 2006ABS-CBN v. OMB, G.R. No. 133347, 15 Oct. 2008People v. Ritter, G.R. No. 88582, 5 March 1991

Nature and Effects of Obligations

I. Kinds of prestation

A. Obligations to give

1. Obligation to give a specific thinga. To deliver the thing itself (Art. 1244)b. To preserve the thing (Arts. 1163, 1173, 1174, 1165, 1306, 1755)c. To deliver the accessions and accessories (Arts. 1166, 445, 457,

459)d. To deliver the fruits (Arts. 1164, 441-444)e. To answer for damages in case of non-performance or breach

(Arts. 1169-1173)

2. Obligation to give a generic thinga. To deliver a thing of the quality specified (Art. 1246)b. To answer for damages in case of non-performance or breach

(Arts. 1169-1173)

B. Obligations to doa. To perform as promised (Art. 1244)b. To shoulder the cost if someone else does it/in case of

contravention (Art. 1167)c. To undo what has been poorly done (Art. 1167)d. To answer for damages in case of non-performance or breach

(Arts. 1169-1173)

C. Obligations not to doa. Not to do as promisedb. To shoulder the expense to undo what should not have been

done (Art. 1168)c. To answer for damages in case of non-performance or breach

(Arts. 1169-1173)

II. Breach of Obligation

A. Concept

1. Distinction between substantial and slight breach

2

Song Fo v. Hawaiian Phils., 47 Phil 821 (1928)Velarde, et al. v. CA, 361 SCRA 56 (2001)Angeles, et al v. Calasanz, et al., G.R. No. 42283, 18 March 1985Delta Motor Corp. v. Genuino, G.R. No. 55665, 8 February 1989Vermen Realty v. CA, G.R. No. 101762, 6 July 1993

B. Modes of Breach (Art. 1170)

1. Fraud (Art. 1171)

Woodhouse v. Halili, 93 Phil. 526 (1953)Geraldez v. CA, G.R. No. 108253, 23 Feb. 1994Cathay Pacific v. Vasquez, G.R. No. 150843, 14 March 2003

2. Negligence (Arts. 1172, 1173)

Gutierrez v. Gutierrez, 56 Phil. 177 (1932)Vasquez v. Borja, 74 Phil. 560 (1944)

3. Delay (Art. 1169)

Cetus Development Corp. v. CA, SCRA 72 (1989)Aerospace Chemical Industries v. CA, G.R. No. 108129, 23 Sept. 1999Santos Ventura Hocorma Foundation v. Santos, G.R. No. 153064, 4 Nov. 2004Vasquez v. Ayala Corporation, G.R. No. 149734, 19 Nov. 2004Abella v. Francisco, 55 Phil. 447 (1931)De La Cruz v. Legaspi, G.R. No. 8024, 29 Nov. 1955Vda. De Villaruel v. Manila Motor Co., Inc. 104 Phil. 926 (1958)Central Bank v. CA, 139 SCRA 46 (1985)

4. Contravention of the tenor

Chavez v. Gonzales, 32 SCRA 547 (1970)Telefast v. Castro, 158 SCRA 445 (1988)Arrieta v. NARIC, 10 SCRA 79 (1964)Victoriano Magat v. Medialdea, 206 Phil. 341

III. Remedies in Case of Breach

A. Action for performance

1. Action for specific performance (in obligation to give a specific thing) – Art. 1165

3

2. Action for substituted performance (in obligation to give a generic thing) or undoing of poor work (in obligation to do) – Arts. 1165, 1167

Chavez v. Gonzales, supraTanguilig v. CA, 266 SCRA 78 (1997)

3. Action for undoing (in obligation not to do) – Art. 1168

B. Action for damages – Art. 1170C. Action for rescission – Art. 1191, 1192

IV. Subsidiary Remedies

A. Accion Subrogatoria – Art. 1177B. Accion Pauliana – Arts. 1177, 1381

Khe Hong Cheng v. CA, 335 SCRA 701 (2001)Maria Antonia Siguan v. Rosa Lim, et al., G.R. No. 134685, 19 Nov. 1999

C. Other Specific Remedies – Arts. 1652, 1729, 1608, 1893

V. Effect of Fortuitous Event - Arts. 1174, 1165 par. 3, 552, 1942, 1979, 2001, 2147, 1717, 1724, 1268

Lasam v. Smith, 45 Phil. 657Juan Nakpil & Sons v. CA, 144 SCRA 597 (1986)Republic v. Luzon Stevedoring Co., 21 SCRA 279 (1967)Dioquino v. Laureano, 33 SCRA 65 (1970)Austria v. CA, 39 SCRA 527 (1971)NPC v. CA, G.R. No. 47379, 161 SCRA 334 (1988)Yobido v. CA, 281 SCRA 1 (1997)Bacolod-Murcia Milling v. CA, G.R. No. 81100-01, 7 Feb. 1990Philcomsat v. Globe Telecom, G.R. No. 147324, 25 May 2004

VI. Usurious transactions

PD 858; PD 1685Central Bank Circular 416Monetary Board Circular 905Art. 2209

Eastern Shipping Lines v. CA, 234 SCRA 781 (1994)Crismina Garments v. CA, 304 SCRA 356 (1999)Keng Hua Products v. CA, 286 SCRA 257 (1998)Security Bank v. RTC Makati, 263 SCRA 453 (1996)

4

Almeda v. CA, 256 SCRA 292 (1996)Angel Warehousing v. Cheldea, 23 SCRA 19 (1968)First Metro Investment v. Este. Del Sol, 15 Nov. 2001

VII. Fulfillment of ObligationsSee Chapter 4: PaymentArt. 1176

VIII. Transmissibility of Rights – Art. 1178

Kinds of Obligations

I. Pure and Conditional Obligations

A. Pure Obligations - Art. 1179B. Conditional Obligations – Art. 1881

Naga Telephone v. CA, G.R. No. 107112, 24 Feb. 1994Polotan v. CA, G.R. No. 119379, 25 Sept. 1998Gaite v. Fonacier, 2 SCRA 830 (1961)Gonzales v. Heirs of Thomas, 314 SCRA 585 (1999)

1. Kinds of Conditions

a. As to the effect on the obligation – Art. 1181Gonzales v. Heirs of Thomas, supra

(1) Suspensive (condition precedent) – Arts. 1181, 1187, 1188

Coronel v. CA, G.R. No. 103577, 7 Oct. 1996

(2) Resolutory (condition subsequent) – Art. 1181

Parks v. Province of Tarlac, 49 Phil. 142 (1927)CPU v. CA, 246 SCRA 511 (1995)Quijada v. CA, G.R. No. 126444, 4 Dec. 1998

b. By the cause of their happening – Art. 1182

(1) Potestative(2) Casual(3) Mixed

Lim v. CA, G.R. No. 87047, 31 Oct. 1990

5

Naga Telephone Co., Inc. v. CA, supraOsmeña v. Rama, 14 Phil. 99 (1909)Hermosa v. Longora, 93 Phil. 971 (1953)Taylor v. Uy Tieng Piao, 43 Phil. 873 (1922)Rustan Pulp and Paper Mills v. IAC, 214 SCRA 665 (1992)Romero v. CA, G.R. No. 107207, 23 Nov. 1995

c. By the manner of the happening

(1) Positive(2) Negative

d. By their validity or legality – Arts. 1183, 873, 727, 1182

(1) Licit or illicit(2) Moral or immoral(3) Possible or impossible

Taylor v. Uy Tieng Pao, supraTrillana v. Quezon College, Inc., G.R. No. 5003, 27 Nov. 1953Roman Catholic Arch. of Manila v. CA, 198 SCRA 300 (1991)

2. Rules on the fulfilment of the condition

a. Time – Arts. 1184, 1185b. Prevention of fulfilment – Art. 1186

Taylor v. Uy Tieng Pao, supraHerrera v. Leviste, G.R. No. 55744, 28 Feb. 1985

3. Retroactivity of fulfilment of the condition – Art. 1187a. In obligations to giveb. In obligations to do or not to do

4. Loss, deterioration or improvement while the condition is pendinga. Suspensive condition – Arts. 1189, 579-580b. Resolutory condition – Art. 1190

Heirs of Timoteo Moreno v. Mactan-Cebu International Airport Authority, G.R. No. 156273, 15 Oct. 2003

C. Rescission (Resolution) in Reciprocal Obligations - Art. 1191 cf. Art. 1380, 1484, 1485, 1592, 1533, 1534, 1592, 1593, 1234

6

Boysaw v. Interphil Promotions, 47 Phil. 821 (1925)U.P. v. De Los Angeles, 35 SCRA 365 (1970)De Erguiaga v. CA, 178 SCRA 1 (1989)Angeles v. Calasanz, 135 SCRA 323 (1985)Ong v. CA, 310 SCRA 1 (1999)Iringan v. CA, 366 SCRA 41 (2001)Visayan Saw Mill v. CA, G.R. No. 83851, 3 March 1993Deiparine v. CA, G.R. No. 96643, 23 April 1993Grace Park Engineering Co. Inc. v. Dimaporo, G.R. No. 27482, 10 Sept. 1981

Daywalt v. La Corporacion de los Padres Agustinos Recoletos, G.R. No. 13505, 4 February 1919

II. Obligations with a Period – Arts. 1193-1198, 1189

Ponce de Leon v. Syjuco, 90 Phil. 311 (1951)Buce v. CA, 332 SCRA 151 (2000)

Araneta v. Philippine Sugar Estate Devt. Co., 20 SCRA 330 (1967)CPU v. CA, supraDeudor v. JM Tuason, G.R. No. 13768, 30 May 1961

III. Alternative and Facultative Obligations – Arts. 1199-1206

IV. Joint and Solidary Obligations – Arts. 1207-1222

Ramos v. Gibbon, G.R. No. 45418, 18 April 1939Inchausti v. Yulo, G.R. No. 7721, 25 March 1914Inciong v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 96405, 26 June 1996RCBC v. CA, G.R. No. 85396, Oct. 1989Lafarge Cement v. Continental Cement, G.R. No. 155173, 23 Nov. 2004Jaucian v. Querol, G.R. No. 11307, 5 October 1918Quiombing v. CA, G.R. No. 93219, 30 August 1990Alipio v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 134100, 29 September 2000,

V. Divisible and Indivisible Obligations – Arts. 1223-1225, 1233, 1248, 1720, 1420

VI. Obligations with a Penal Clause – Arts. 1226-1230

Makati Development Corp. v. Empire Insurance, 20 SCRA 557 (1967)Tan v. CA, 367 SCRA 571 (2001)Country Bankers Insurance v. CA, G.R. No. 85161, 9 Sept. 1991

7

Extinguishment of Obligations – Art. 1231

I. Voluntary

A. By execution

(1) Payment or performance – Arts. 1232-1251

(a) Requisites of a valid payment(b) Application of payments – Arts. 1252-1253,

1254(c) Payment by cession

Arrieta v. NARIC, supraKalalo v. Luz, 34 SCRA 377 (1970)St. Paul Fire v. Marine Insurance v. Mancondray, 70 SCRA 122 (1976)Papa v. A.V. Valencia, 284 SCRA 643 (1998)PAL v. CA, 181 SCRA 557 (1990)Reparations Commission v. Universal Deep See Fishing, 83 SCRA 764 (1978)Paculdo v. Regalado, 345 SCRA 134 (2000)

(2) Tender of Payment and Consignation

De Guzman v. CA, 137 SCRA 730 (1985)TLG International Continental Enterprising Inc. v. Flores, 47 SCRA 437 (1972)McLaughlin v. CA, 144 SCRA 693 (1986)Soco v. Militante, 123 SCRA 160 (1983)Sotto v. Mijares, 28 SCRA 17 (1969)Reinsenbeck v. CA, 209 SCRA 657 (1992)Rural Bank of Caloocan v. CA, G.R. No. 32116, 21 April 1981

Licuanan v. Diaz, G.R. No. 59805, 21 July 1989

Chan v. CA, G.R. No. 109020, 3 March 1994

Meat Packing Corp. v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 103068, 22 June 2001

B. By substitution

(1) Compensation – Arts. 1278-1290

Gan Tion v. CA, 28 SCRA 235 (1969)BPI v. Reyes, 255 SCRA 571 (1996)PNB v. Sapphire Shipping, 259 SCRA 174 (1996)

8

CKH Industrial Development v. CA, G.R. No. 111890, 7 May 1997Mirasol v. CA, G.R. No. 128448, 1 Feb. 2001Associated Bank v. Tan, G.R. No. 156940, 14 Dec. 2004Villanueva v. Tantuico Jr., G.R. No. 53585, 15 Feb. 1990Perez v. CA, G.R. No. 56101, 20 February 1984 Silahis Marketing Corp. v. IAC, G. R. No. 74027, 7 December

1989

BPI v. CA, G.R. No. 116792, 29 March 1996

(2) Dation in payment (datio in solutum) – Art. 1245

Development Bank v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 118342, 5 January 1998Filinvest Credit Corporation v. Philippine Acetylene, G.R. No. 50449, Jan. 1982

(3) Payment by cession – Art. 1255

(4) Novation – Arts. 1291-1304

Millar v. CA, 38 SCRA 642 (1971)Dormitorio v. Fernandez, 72 SCRA 388 (1976)Magdalena Estate v. Rodriguez, 18 SCRA 967 (1966)Reyes v. Secretary of Justice, 264 SCRA 35 (1996)Conchingyan v. RB Surety and Insurance, G.R. No. 47369, 30

June 1987

Broadway Centrum Condominium v. Tropical Hut, G.R. No.

79642, 5 July 1993

Molino v. Security Diners International, G.R. No. 136780, 16 Aug. 2001

Garcia v. Llamas, G.R. No. 154127, 8 Dec. 2003California Bus Line v. State Investment, G.R. No. 147950, 11 Dec.

2003Babst v. CA, G.R. No. 99398, 26 Jan. 2001Licaros v. Gatmaitan, G.R. No. 142838, 9 August 2001Astro Electronics Corp. v. Phil. Export, G.R. No. 136729, 23 Sept.

2003

C. By agreement between the parties

(1) At the time the obligation arises (resolutory condition, resolutory period)(2) Subsequent to the birth of the obligation

(a) Mutual dissent or compromise

9

(b) Unilateral termination(c) Remission of the debt – Arts. 1270-1274

YAM v. CA, G.R. No. 104726, 11 Feb. 1999

II. Involuntary

C. On account of the party

(1) Confusior or merger of the credit and the debt – Arts. 1275-1277(2) Death of the party (in strictly personal obligations)(3) Change of civil status

D. On account of the object (subject matter)

(1) Loss of the thing due – Arts. 1262-1265, 1268, 1269, 1189, 1165(2) Impossibility to perform the service due – Arts. 1266-1267, 1269,

1262, par. 2

Occena v. CA, 73 SCRA 637 (1976)Naga Telephone Co. v. CA, 230 SCRA 351 (1994)PNCC v. CA, G.R. No. 116896, 5 May 1997

C. On account of laches(1) Extinctive prescription

CONTRACTS

Concept – Art. 1305

Characteristics and Effect of Contracts

A. Autonomy – Arts. 1306, 1690, 1691, 448; Art. 87, FC; Arts. 1490-1491

Gabriel v. Monte de Piedad, 71 Phil. 497 (1941)Pakistan International Airlines v. Ople, 190 SCRA 90 (1990)Cui v. Arellano, 2 SCRA 205 (1961)Arroyo v. Berwin, 36 Phil. 386 (1917)Filipinas Compania de Seguros v. Mandanas, 17 SCRA 391 (1966)Bustamante v. Rosel, 319 SCRA 413 (1999)

B. Consensuality – Art. 1315, 1316, 1317

C. Mutuality – Arts. 1308, 1182, 1310, 1309

10

GSIS v. Court of Appeals, 228 SCRA 183 (1993)Professional Academic Plans, Inc., et al. v. Crisostomo, G.R. No. 148599, 14 March 2005

D. Obligatoriness and Performance in Good Faith – Arts. 1159, 1315, 1267

E. Relativity – Arts. 1311, 1312, 1313, 1314, 1651, 1652, 2150, 2151

Manila Railroad Co. v. La Compania Transatlantica, 83 Phil. 875 (1918)DKC Holdings Corp. v. CA, 329 SCRA 666 (2000)Florentino v. Encarnacion, 79 SCRA 192 (1977)Coquia v. Fieldmen’s Insurance Co., 26 SCRA 178 (1968)Constantino v. Espiritu, 39 SCRA 206 (1971)Young v. CA, 169 SCRA 213 (1989)Marmont Resort v. Guiang, 168 SCRA 373 (1988)Mandarin Villa v. CA, 257 538 (1996)Daywalt v. La Corporacion de los Padres Agustinos Recoletos, supra So Ping Bun v. CA, 314 SCRA 751 (1999)Lagon v. CA, G.R. No. 119107, 18 March 2005

Essential Requisites of Contracts - Art. 1318

A. Consent – Arts. 1319-1346

Rosenstock v. Burke, 46 Phil. 217 (1924)Malbarosa v. CA, G.R No. 125761, 30 April 2003San Lorenzo Devt. Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. 124242, 21 Jan. 2005MMDA v. Jancom, G.R. No. 147465, 30 Jan. 2002Sanchez v. Rigos, 45 SCRA 368 (1972)Asiain v. Jalandoni, 45 Phil. 296 (1923)Heirs of William Sevilla v. Sevilla, 402 SCRA 501 (2003)Andres v. Manufacturers Hanover and Trust, G.R. No. 82670, 15 Sept. 1989Spouses Theis v. CA, G.R. No. 126013, 12 Feb. 1997Dumasug v. Modelo, 34 Phil. 252 (1916)Hemedes v. CA, 316 SCRA (1990)Lustan v. CA, G.R. No. 111924, 27 Jan. 1997

Katipunan v. Katipunan, G.R. No. 132415, 30 Jan. 2002Leonardo v. CA, G.R. No. 125485, 13 Sept. 2004Martinez v. Hongkong and Shanghai Bank, 15 Phil. 252 (1910)Lee v. CA, G.R. No. 90423, 6 Sept. 1991Hill v. Veloso, 31 Phil. 161 (1915)Woodhouse v. Halili, supraGeraldez v. CA, 230 SCRA 320 (1994)Sierra v. CA, G.R. No. 90270, 24 July 1992Tuason v. Marquez, 45 Phil. 381 (1923)

11

Rural Bank of Sta. Maria v. CA, 314 SCRA 255 (1999)Azarraga v. Gay, 52 Phil. 599 (1928)Trinidad v. IAC, 204 SCRA 524 (1991)

(a) Simulation of Contracts

Rodriguez v. Rodriguez, 28 SCRA 229 (1914)Suntay v. CA, 251 SCRA 430 (1995)Pangadil v. CFI, G.R. No. 32437, 31 Aug. 1982Umali v. CA, G.R. No. 89561, 13 Sept. 1990Macapagal v. Remorin, G.R. No. 158380, 16 May 2005

B. Object – Arts. 1347-1349, 1409, 751; Art. 84, Family Code; Arts. 1309, 1310, 1246

Blas v. Santos, 1 SCRA 899 (1961)J.L.T. Agro v. Balansag, G.R. No. 141882, 11 March 2005

C. Cause – Arts. 1350-1355, 1409, 1479, 1405 (1), 1411, 1412, 1414, 1415, 1416

Liguez v. CA, 102 Phil. 577 (1957)Carantes v. CA, 76 SCRA 514 (1977)Sps. Buenaventura v. CA, 416 SCRA 263 (2003)

Form of Contracts – Arts. 1356-1358, 748, 749, 1874, 2134, 1771, 1773, 1403

Resuena v. CA, G.R. No. 128338, 28 March 2005

Reformation of Instruments – Arts. 1359-1369

Garcia v. Bisaya, 97 Phil. 609 (1955)Bentir v. Leande, 330 SCRA 591 (2000)Quiros v. Arjona, G.R. No. 158901, 9 March 2004Atilano v. Atilano, 28 SCRA 2232 (1969)Carantes v. CA, supraSarming v. Dy, 383 SCRA 131 (2002)

Interpretation of Contracts – Arts. 1370-1379

Borromeo v. CA, 47 SCRA 65 (1972)Kasilag v. Rodriguez, 69 Phil. 217 (1939)Santi v. CA, 227 SCRA 541 (1993)Rapanut v. CA, 246 SCRA 323 (1995)Oil and Natural Gas Commission v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 114323, 23

July 1998Spouses Rigor v. Consolidated Orix Leasing and Finance Corp., G.R. No.

12

136423, 20 August 2002Chua v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 119255, 9 April 2003RCBC v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 133107, 15 March 1999Gacos v. Court of Appeals, G.R. Nos. 85962-63, 3 August 1992

Defective Contracts

Rescissible Contracts – Arts. 1380-1389, 1539, 1556, 1560, 1567, 1526,1534, 1542, 1659, 1189, 1203, 1355, 1231

Universal Food v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 29155, 13 May 1970Pryce Corporation v. PAGCOR, G.R. No. 157480, 6 May 2005Sps. Cannu v. Sps. Galang, G.R. No. 139523, 26 May 2005Rivera v. Del Rosario, G.R. No. 144934, 15 January 2004Equatorial Realty Development Corp. v. Mayfair Theatre, G.R. No.

133879, 21 Nov. 2001The Union Insurance Society of Canton v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.

100319, 8 August 1996Siguan v. Lim, 318 SCRA 725 (1999)Oria v. Memicking, 21 Phil. 243 (1912)China Banking Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. 129644, 7 March 2000MR Holdings Ltd. v. Carlos, G.R. No. 138104, 11 April 2002

Voidable Contracts – Arts. 1390-1402, cf. 1403 (3), 1239, 1355, 1327, 1328, 1329, 1330-1344

Mercado v. Espiritu, G.R. No. 11872, 1 Dec. 1917Braganza v. De Villa Abrille, G.R. No. 12471, 13 April 1959Singsong v. Isabela Sawmill, G.R. No. L-27343 February 28, 1979

Samahan ng Magsasaka sa San Josep v. Valisno, G.R. No. 158314, 3 June 2004Malabanan v. Gaw Ching, G.R. No. 74938-39, 17 January 1990

Arra Development Corp. v. Guarantee Development Corp., G.R. No. 142310, 20 Sept. 2004Katipunan v. Katipunan, G.R. No. 132415, 30 Jan. 2002Ines v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 114051, 14 Aug. 1995

Unenforceable Contracts – Arts. 1403 -1408, 1317, 1868, cf. 1898

Ortega v. Leonardo, G.R. No. 11311, 28 May 1958Babao v. Perez, G.R. No. 8334, 28 Dec. 1957Cabague v. Auxilio, G.R. No. 5028, 26 Nov. 1952Asia Production v. Paño, G.R. No. 51058, 27 January 1992Western Mindanao Lumber Co. v. Medalle, G.R. No. L-23213, 28 October 1977

Limketkai Sons v. CA, G.R. No. 118509, 1 December 1995Litonjua v. Fernandez, G.R. No. 148116, 14 April 2004

13

Carbonnel v. Poncio, G.R. No. 11231, 12 May 1958

Void or Inexistent Contracts – Arts. 1409-1422, 1306Tongoy v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-45645, 28 June 1983

Cui v. Arellano, G.R. No. 15127, 30 May 1961Saura v. Sindico, G.R. No. 13403, 23 March 1960Yu Bun v. Ong, G.R. No. 144735, 18 Oct. 2001Menchavez v. Teves, G.R. No. 153201, 26 Jan. 2005Angel v. Mondales, G.R. No. 145031, 22 Jan. 2004Liguez v. CA, supraRelloza v. Gaw Cheen Hum, 93 Phil. 827 (1953)Philippine Banking Corp. v. Lui She, 21 SCRA 52 (1967)Frenzel v. Catito, G.R. No. 143958, 11 July 2003Acabal v. Acabal, G.R. No. 148376, 31 March 2005

NATURAL OBLIGATIONS – Arts. 1423-1430

Villaroel v. Estrada, 71 Phil. 140 (1940)Fisher v. Robb, 69 Phil. 101 (1939)Uniwide v. Titan-Ikeda Construction, G.R. No. 126619, 20 Dec. 2006

ESTOPPEL – Arts. 1431-1439

Kalalo v. Luz, 34 SCRA 337 (1970)Manila Lodge No. 761 v. CA, 73 SCRA 168 (1976)Miguel v. Catalino, 26 SCRA 234 (1969)Mendoza v. Reyes, G.R. No. 31618, 17 August 1983Annotation, 32 SCRA 542

TRUSTS – Arts. 1440-1457

Salao v. Salao, 70 SCRA 168 (1976)Fabian v. Fabian, 22 SCRA 231 (1968)Bueno v. Reyes, 27 SCRA 1179 (1969)Tamayo v. Callejo, 46 SCRA 27 (1972)Heirs of Sanjorjo v. Quijano, G.R. No. 140457, 19 Jan. 2005Aznar Brothers v. Aying, G.R. No. 144773, 16 May 2005PNB v. CA, G.R. No. 97995, 21 January 1993Canezo v. Rojas, G.R. No. 148788, 23 Nov. 2007

14