Factual Questions:

1.

According to article 1180 of Civil Code of the Philippines, an obligation is deemed to be one with a period when the debtor
binds himself to pay when his means permit him to do so. It expresses that an obligation with a period arises when its
performance is subject to a day certain, which has been fixed and will necessarily come. A period refers to “future and
certain event upon the arrival of which the obligation subject to it either arises or is extinguished” (De Leon, 2014).
Obligation with a period is subject to the provisions of article 1197. An example is, A is obliged to deliver a furniture to B on
January 5, 2020. This is an obligation with a period, since the delivery is subject to a period and demandable only when the
period expires. Another example is, X borrowed money from Y worth PhP 10,000 and promised to pay ‘as soon as possible’.
If X and Y cannot agree as to the specific date of payment; Y can go to court to fix the date when the debt is to be paid
upon the will of the parties, as this type of obligation is subject to article 1197.

2.

A protestative condition is a suspensive condition, in which the fulfilment depends upon the sole will of the contracting
parties. It depends upon the exclusive will of one of the parties, which results to it being considered void if it depends upon
the will of the debtor (Art. 1182, NCC). Prostestative condition does not create obligations, does not impose duty on the
parties, and does not create a juridical tie, which makes it invalid. These characteristics of a prostestative condition is
contrary to the definition of contract, which is “a meeting of minds between two persons whereby one binds himself, with
respect to the other, to give something or to render some service” (Art. 1305, NCC). It also is opposing to article 1308,
which states that “the contract must bind both contracting parties; its validity or compliance cannot be left to the will of
one of them”.

3.

If the suspensive condition depends upon the will of the debtor, it will result to either the conditional obligation will be
considered void or only the condition will be void (Art. 1182, NCC). The conditional obligation is void because it is left to the
will of the debtor, which is contrary to Article 1308 that questions the validity of the obligation, as it should not be left to
solely the will of one of the parties. It does not create obligation as the debtor could fulfill the obligation when and if he
wants, resulting to the obligation not creating a juridical tie or burden on the debtor. However, if the obligation is already
existing or did not depend for its creation upon the fulfilment of the debtor of the prostestative condition, only the
condition is void, but not the obligation itself (De Leon, 2014). While, if the suspensive condition depends upon the will of
the creditor, it is considered valid, since the enforcement of the obligation depends on the rights of the creditor and the
fulfilment of the obligation is for the creditor’s benefit.

4.

According to article 1183, impossible conditions cannot be performed physically and are contrary to good customs or
public policy and prohibited by law. There are two kinds of impossible conditions, which are physically impossible
conditions and legally impossible conditions. Physically impossible conditions refer to circumstances that in nature of
things, cannot exist or cannot be done (De Leon, 2014). Example of which, is “X will give Y PhP 1,000,000, if he managed to
naturally grow back a severed limb”. While, legally impossible conditions are contrary to good customs or public policy
(Art. 1183, NCC). An example of legally impossible condition is “A will give a luxury condominium unit to B, if he will
terrorize the people of the Philippines”.

5.

An example of constructive fulfilment of suspensive condition in accordance with article 1186 of Civil Code of the
Philippines is “X promised to sell his house and lot to Y, if the latter managed to secure a huge amount of loan to a bank.
However, X changed his mind about selling the house and lot to Y, due to estimated losses. Instead, X convinced the bank
not to provide a loan to Y”. In this case, the obligor voluntarily prevents the fulfilment of the suspensive condition by
disrupting the obligee, which is the requisite for the application of article 1186.

An example of constructive fulfilment of resolutory condition is “C binds himself to lend his personal laptop to D until the
research of E is submitted. D then convinced E to not submit his research to the institution in order to keep the personal
laptop”. The obligation to lend is immediately demandable. However, when D voluntarily interrupted E in order to prevent
or postpone the fulfilment of resolutory condition, the obligation of C is extinguished and therefore, D is obliged to return
the personal laptop. This is in accordance with article 1190 paragraph 1, which states that “when the conditions have for
their purpose the extinguishment of an obligation to give, the parties, upon the fulfillment of said conditions, shall return
to each other what they have received”.

6.

Principle of retroactive in obligations to give subject to a suspensive condition becomes demandable only upon the
fulfilment of the condition, but once the condition is fulfilled, its effects shall retroact to the day when obligation was
constituted. In obligations to do or not to do, with respect to the retroactive effect of the fulfilment of a suspensive
condition no fixed rule is provided. However, this does not mean that principle of retroactivity is not applicable. In
reciprocal obligations, there is no retroactivity because the fruits and interests received during the pendency of the
condition are deemed to have been mutually compensated. In unilateral obligations, there is usually no retroactive effect
because they are gratuitous. The debtor receives nothing from the creditor, which in turn the fruits and interests belong to
the debtor.

7.

The requisites of article 1189 are: the obligation is a real obligation; the object is a specific or determinate thing; the
obligation is subject to suspensive conditions; the condition is fulfilled; and there is loss, deterioration, or improvement of
the thing during the pendency of the condition (De Leon, 2014). There are three kinds of loss in civil law, which may be
physical loss, legal loss, or civil loss. Physical loss refers to when a thing perishes, an example of which is when a car is
crushed into an unrecognizable state. Moreover, legal loss happens when a thing goes out of commerce or becomes illegal,
such as expropriation. Lastly, civil loss occurs when a thing disappears in such a way that its existence is unknown or it
cannot be recovered (Art. 1189, par. 2, NCC).

8.

In a reciprocal obligation, if one of the obligors does not comply with what is incumbent upon him, there are two remedies
for the obligee according to article 1191 of the New Civil Code. These are action for specific performance of the obligation
or action for rescission of the obligation with the payment of damages in either case. The rescission of the obligation refers
to a principal action that is based on the failure of a party without legal reason to comply with the terms of a contract
incumbent upon him as well as in demand of rescission in reciprocal obligation, the non-fulfillment by the other party of his
obligation is treated as a resolutory condition. The remedies are considered alternative and not cumulative, since the
aggrieved party may only chose one of the remedies and may change remedy even after choosing if its fulfilment is
impossible. However, the aggrieved party cannot demand the compliance of the obligation after choosing rescission of the
obligation.

9.

According to article 1189 of NCC, the rules in case of loss, deterioration, or improvement of a thing during the pendency of
a suspensive obligation are: the loss of thing without debtor’s fault, an example of which is “A binds himself to give B his
computer to B, but another person accidentally splashed water to the CPU, resulting to it being physically destroyed”. The
obligation of A is extinguished and A is not liable to B. Another rule is the loss of thing through debtor’s fault, an example of
which is the same as of the mentioned above, instead A himself accidentally splashed water to the CPU. In this case, B can
demand for damages due to the negligence of A. In case of deterioration of thing without debtor’s fault, which results
when its value is reduced or impaired, an example is “X sells his house to Z, but due to a house fire by a neighbor’s house,
the house of X is partially caused on fire, causing it to be deteriorated and lose some of its value”. Z will suffer because of
the deterioration. If the deterioration of a thing is caused by the debtor, an example of which is “X binds himself to give his
rare and expensive watch to Z, however due to X’s carelessness, he managed to destroy the glass of the watch”. Z may
choose rescission or fulfilment of the obligation with damages in either case. In case of improvement of thing by nature or
by time, a thing is considered improved when its value is increased through time. An example is “C obliges himself to sell a
land to D, over time, the value of the land appreciated”. The benefit of the appreciation of the value of the land will be
given to D. For improvement of thing at the expense of the debtor, an example is “H will sell computer to J and H decided
to upgrade the specifications of the computer at his own expense”. In this case, H have the right granted to a usufructuary,
which makes him not having the right to be indemnified, but he may remove such improvements if possible without
damage to property (Art. 579, NCC).

10.

There are many differences between period and condition. As to fulfilment, a period is a future and certain event, while a
condition is an uncertain event. In terms of time, a period refers only to the future, but a condition may as well refer to the
past. In terms of influence on the obligation, a period fixes the time for the performance of an obligation and cannot
prevent its existence and conception in due time. But, a condition causes the existence or the extinguishment of an
obligation. As to effect, when left to debtors will, a period which depends upon the will of the debtor empowers the court
to fix the duration (Art. 1197, par.2, NCC). While, a condition which depends on the will of the debtor invalidates the
obligation (Art. 1182, NCC). Lastly, in terms of retroactivity of effects, a period does not have any retroactive effect, except
when there is an agreement, while a condition has retroactive effect.

11.

According to article 1196, presumption as to benefit of period refers to the presumption of the period to have been
established for the benefit of the creditor as well as the debtor. This implies that before the expiration of the period, the
debtor may not fulfil the obligation and the creditor may not demand its fulfilment without the consent of the other,
especially if the latter would be prejudiced or inconvenienced, but the presumption is rebuttable. The exception occurs
then the intention of the parties is to constitute the period for the benefit of either the debtor or the creditor. When the
period is for the benefit of the debtor, the debtor cannot be compelled to pay or perform prematurely, but he can if he
desires to do so. When the period is for the benefit of the creditor, the creditor may demand fulfilment even before the
expiration of the period, but the debtor cannot require him to accept payment before the expiration of the stipulated
period (De Leon, 2014).

12.

For the computation of term or period, a period or term shall be based on time as defined by the administrative code of
1987 in terms of “year”, which is understood to be twelve (12) calendar months and are of three-hundred sixty five (365)
days each, whether it is a regular or a leap year. However, days may be irrelevant in a “year” (De Leon, 2014). Within ‘n’
years (Jan. 1, 2020 to Jan. 1, 2030) and within the ‘nth’ year (Jan. 1, 2020 to Dec. 31, 2030) are different. In addition,
“months” are of thirty (30) days, unless it refers to a specific calendar month, in which case it shall be computed according
to the number of days the specific month contains. “Days” is composed of twenty-four (24) hours and “night” as from
sunset to sunrise.

13.

A judicial period is fixed by the court, which is mention in article 1197, where it states that “If the obligation does not fix a
period but from its nature and the circumstances it can be inferred that a period was intended, the courts may fix the
duration thereof”. While, a contractual period is fixed by the parties in their contract.

14.

Article 1198 states the instances where the debtor shall lose every right to make use of the period. The period is
disregarded and the obligation becomes pure and demandable when the debtor becomes insolvent; does no furnish
guaranties or securities promised; guaranties or securities given have been impaired or have disappeared; violates an
undertaking; or attempts to abscond.

15.

In an alternative obligation, article 1203 states that “If through the creditor’s acts, the debtor cannot make a choice
according to the terms of the obligation, the latter may rescind the contract with damages”. Rescission creates the
obligation to return the things, which were the object of the contract together with their fruits, and the price with its
interest (Art. 1385, par. 1, NCC). The debtor can make his choice without the consent of the creditor in an alternative
obligation, which results to the right of the debtor to rescind the contract and recover damages if he cannot make a choice
according to the terms of the obligation caused by the creditor (De Leon, 2014).

16.

In an alternative obligation, the debtor is alternatively bound with various prestations that are due but the performance of
one of them is sufficient to extinguish the obligation. While, a facultative obligation makes the debtor bound to perform
one prestation is due to deliver one thing with a reserved right to choose another prestation or thing as substitute for the
principal. In terms of number of prestations, an alternative obligation has several prestations that are due, but compliance
with one is suffiecient, but in a facultative obligation, one prestation is due even though the debtor is allowed to substitute
it. In terms of right of choice, an alternative obligation gives right of choice to the creditor or the third party, while in the
facultative, the right to make the substitution is given only to the debtor. In terms of loss through a fortuitous event, the
loss of one or more of the prestations through a fortuitous event does not extinguish the obligation, in an alternative
obligation. While, in a facultative, the loss of the thing due extinguishes the obligation. Lastly, in terms of loss through the
fault of the debtor, in an alternative obligation, if the debtor causes the loss of the prestation, it does not make him liable,
meanwhile, in facultative, it is the contrary, which makes the debtor liable for the loss. In case where the choice belongs to
the debtor, the loss of one alternative due to the debtor will create a liability for the debtor. While in facultative, the loss of
the prestation before the substitution does not render the debtor liable for the loss.

17.

Under article 1207, solidary liability occurs when the obligation expressly so states; the law requires solidarity; or the
nature of the obligation requires solidarity. In addition, solidary liability also exists when it is imposed in a final judgment
against several defendants. There are different kinds of solidarity. They are passive, active, and mixed solidarity according
to the parties bound. Passive solidarity is the solidarity on the part of the debtors, where one of the several debtors can be
made liable for the payment or the performance of the entire obligation. While. Active solidarity is solidarity on the part of
the creditors, where one of the solidary creditors can demand the payment or performance of the entire obligation from
the debtor or any of the debtors. Mixed solidarity however, is the solidarity on the part of both the debtors and creditors,
where each one of the debtor is liable to render, and each one of the creditor has a right to demand the entire compliance
with the obligation. According to source, there are conventional solidarity, which the solidarity is agreed upon by the
parties (Art. 1306, NCC). If nothing is mentioned in the contract relating to solidarity, the obligation is only joint. Legal
solidarity refers to solidarity imposed by the law itself. Lastly, real solidarity is when solidarity is imposed by the nature of
the obligation. In this case, the law does not expressly indicate the circumstances where the liability is solidary due to the
nature of the obligation.

18.

Indivisibility and solidarity should be distinguished from each other. Indivisibility refers to the prestation, while solidarity
refers to the juridical or legal tie. In addition, indivisibility can exist although there is only one debtor and one creditor,
while in solidarity, there must be at least two debtors or two creditors (Art.1207 and 1208, NCC). In indivisible obligations,
only the debtor is guilty of breach of obligation and liable for damages and the others are not liable in case of insolvency of
one debtor. However, in solidary obligations, all of the debtors are liable for the breach of the obligation committed by a
debtor and the other debtors are proportionately liable in case of solvency of a debtor.

19-20

Novation is the total or partial extinction of an obligation through the creation of a new one which substitutes it (De Leon,
2014). It is the substitution or change of an obligation by another, which extinguishes or modifies the obligation, either by
changing their object or principal conditions; substituting the person of the debtor; or subrogating a third person in the
rights of the creditor (Art. 1291, NCC).

Compensation is the extinguishment to the concurrent amount of the debts, which shall take place when two persons, in
their own right, are creditors and debtors of each other (Article 1278, NCC).
Confusion or merger is the meeting in one person or the4 qualities of creditor and debtor with respect to the same
obligation. Article 1275 signifies that, “the obligation is extinguished from the time the characters of creditor and debtor
are merged in the same person”.

Remission mentioned in article 1231 means a release of debt, which may also mean condonation of an offense. Remission
is a mode of extinguishment of obligation, in which the creditor gratuitously renounced his right against the debtor with
the latter's acceptance.

Hypothetical Questions:

A. The law applicable in this case is article 1186 of New Civil Code and yes, there is constructive fulfilment of the obligation,
because Aira voluntarily prevented the fulfilment of the condition. The requisites for constructive fulfilment of the
suspensive obligation is applicable, since the obligation in this case is suspensive, the obligor prevents the fulfilment of the
obligation by denying the housing loan to Moira through the use of her connections, in which she voluntarily acted upon.

B. If the parties could not agree as to when the rescission of the contract was made, the provisions of article 1192 shall be
applied where it states that “In case both parties have committed a breach of the obligation, the liability of the first
infractor shall be equitably tempered by the courts. If it cannot be determined which of the parties first violated the
contract, the same shall be deemed extinguished, and each shall bear his own damages”. In this case, since it cannot be
determined. Therefore, the court shall extinguish the obligation and both parties shall bear the damages. But, when a
contract is breached, or a party does not perform its obligations, this does not instantly affect the validity of a contract. It
will continue to be valid and binding unless it is rescinded.

C. The obligation is considered as a period that depends upon the will of the debtor because of the term “As soon as she
sells the insurance policies”. However, the obligation is pre-existing, meaning the obligation existed primarily without the
condition depending solely upon the will of the debtor. With the application of the provisions of article 1182, only the
condition is void because the condition is imposed on its fulfilment and not on the conception of the obligation. This results
to the obligation being unaffected and therefore is still demandable.