CREDIT TRANSACTIONS Fungible a.

longa manu – long hand

JANUARY 14, 2018 (ABSENT) Consumable b. redi manu – short hand

JANUARY 21, 2018 Tangible

* What is Commodatum? *Obligor: Active Subject

a. Gratuitous. * Obligee: Passive Subject; has the

right to demand the prestation.
b. As to object: * What is the formality required?

specific * Real Contacts – require the

delivery of the thing. * What is the degree of care
non-fungible
required?
* Nominate Contracts vs.
non-consummable
Innominate * When there is no express
non-tangible stipulation?
*Delivery by:
c. as to the degree of care a. that which is provided by law;
a. Actual
“ODC” deemed incorporated
b. Symbolic (ex: delivery of ignition
“HDC” other than the “ODC” b. “Normal/ ordinary diligence”;
key)
what is the latin maxim
c. Constructive
c. “Higher degree of diligence”
MUTUUM

How about Loan? *Delivery:

* as to object:
* Parties cannot stipulate “DC”  INSOLVENCY – more
lower than the “ODC” (Public liabilities than assets
*Delay “mora”
Policy)
* “positive/negative net worth”
- performance
* Bailor does not have to be the
- “you are in the woods”
owner of the things. - acceptance
-“you are in the red ink”

* Pari Passu
* What are the attributes of CASES:
property? - in equal footing
- Sigaan vs. Valenzuela
JUS: - Republic vs. bagtas
-
A. Utendi (+) *May he legally demand the
B. Vindi Candi (+) payment of the interest? JANUARY 28, 2018 (ABSENT)
C. Possedendi (+)
- agreement
D. Fruendi (x)
E. Dis Ponendi (x) - in writing, otherwise it is FEBRUARY 4, 2018
unenforeceable.
* Exemplary Damage DEPOSIT:
* “Compensatory interest”
* Contractual Breach A. Depository
- cannot be imposed by the B. Depositary
* “UNSECURED TRANSACTION” C. Perfection:
Court, but may impose other
What is the rationale behind damages  ex: punitive a. “Real Contract”/Upon
this? damages Delivery
 i. Conventional *Bank Account , Shares of Stock =
Deposit Chattel
“Implied Contract of Pledge”
1. Always
movable The Managements Acts as
property Depository: *Example of Judicial Deposit :
ii. Necessary/Legal No Payment = Hold Things 1. TCT
iii. Judicial
1. Ex: Hotel, SM 2. OCT = Original Certificate of
Transfer
Take note: Judicial Deposit: Personal /
Incorporeal
Mutuum
“Les Pen diens”
Commodatum
H.W.
Principal
1. Course of Attachment “Warehouse Receipt Law”

“Principle of Autonomy”
“Contract of Deposit”
-safekeeping
May the depository use the thing
deposited? No. Unless it is for
preservation or safekeeping.
2. Replevin
3. Receivership Depository = Lien Over the _____.
*Rules of Court = Rule 57
*Constituted Judicial Fiat = Judicial “Warehouse Man Lien”
Order
“Contract of Pledge”
“Pledge” 2. Real Estate Mortgage *Contract of Guarantee vs.
Sureytyship (*both are not
presumed, hence they must always
“What are the Accessory What will happen if there is no be in writing)
Contracts that may be entered payment?
*Which is Governed by
into…… for security?
A. Could enter into a new Statute of Frauds?
1. Pledge. Contact
* Which is consensual
a. Define a. Ex: Dacion En Pago
contract (perfected upn meeting of
b. “sanglaan” “pawnshop”
minds)?
(mutuum)
c. Commadatum, Foreclosure (Rule 68) * Which of the two must be
Mutuum, Deposit A. Judicial always reduced in writing to be
2. Art. 1245, NCC / Dacion En 1. Equity of enforceable? If enforceable, no
Pago Redemption case. Art. 1043 states that certain
3. “Pactum Commisorium” B. Extra-Judicial contracts must be reduced in
a. Not allowed 1. Right of writing.
b. Automatic Redemption
appropriation of the
thing itself INSOLVENT = more liabilities
FEBRUARY 11, 2018 instead of assets

*Mortgage See Rule 16, Section 1 = Dismissal

MORTGAGE (Lot)
BONUS QUESTION!
1. Chattel Mortgage
“Fiadtur In Solelum” principal indorse
obligation) .
*depends
 Action in Rem
EXTRA-JUDICIAL FORECLOSURE
*liability will arise only when o Sheriff
the principal obligation, despite of  Out of court  To execute a
being demandable, still went  Requisites: certificate of sale.
unheeded. o Stipulation on that  Is it tantamount
effect to a deed of sale?
o Mortgage – Creditor  No, because
MORTGAGE: must be specially instead of
*is an accessory contract authorized for that Deed of sale,
purpose. there is a
a. REAL ESTATE:  How? right of
1. Judicial Foreclosure: There  Court redemption.
is court intervention/act instituted  Special  NOTE:
by the Court. Power of o Mortga
Attorney gor-
2. Extrajudicial Foreclosure:
o Mere Debtor
Limited court intervention.
act of has 1
WHAT IS FORECLOSURE? admini year to
stration retriev
1. Public Auction
. e said
2. Proceeds (will be
o Right propert
added to the
to y.
 o 1-year  Ex: adoption, judicial foreclosure, but
period custody, equity of redemption.
shall be marriage etc.
DIFFERENTIATE THE TWO KINDS
counte o Who has jurisdiction?
OF REDEMPTION (RR vs ER)
d from BONUS QUESTION!
the  RTC  Book of Entry of Judgment:
date of  If not Not less than 90 days or more
registra capable of than 120 days.
tion. pecuniary  Will be counted from the
Beyond estimation. date of judgment.
that,  MTC/RTC Rule 68, Section 1 (Equity of
there  Action for Redemption)
will be sum of
a money.  Testimonial evidence
change  Depends on  Documentary evidence
of title. the amount  Object evidence
of money. o Evidence of optic
JUDICIAL FORECLOSURE
reference
 How will you initiate? “You will initiate an action
o Cephalocaudal = from
o If you want to establish through complaint.”
head to toe
facts/status:  Apply the totality rule. “Final and Executory” = the court
 Petition  GENERAL RULE: There is no may now enforce its decision.
right of redemption in extra-
“Book of entry of judgment” =
mere logbook (of cases) but from
the SC.
“Dispositive Portion”/”wherefore”
= decision that can be enforced by
writ of execution.
NOTE: If the bank or quasi-bank is
the petitioner, then there is
always a right of redemption.
CHATTEL MORTGAGE vs. PLEDGE
 Both are accessory contracts
CHATTEL MORTGAGE:
 Always personal property,
subject to estoppels.
 No actual physical transfer.
 Constructive/symbolic
through registration, which
will be registered where the
registration resides.
TRANSCRIBED NOTES FROM ALL
THE RECORDED DISCUSSIONS:
A description of the subject, under
the umbrella of the subjects….
Discuss on law on contracts
Meeting of minds between two
persons whereby one. .. .
The basic rule,. . . . contract is
perfected by mere perfected upon
meeting of the minds. . . it is called
consensual contracts. . . generally.
. ..
COMMODATUM is a contract
which the law requires that some
must be done before it becomes
perfected. . .
Real contracts.. . . delivery of the
thing. . .
Consensual contracts. . .
Contract of sale
Contract of commodatum
Contract of mortgage
Guarantte
Antichresis
Nominate contracts
Perfection of contract without
name. . .innominate. . .
Facio
Facia
Actual kissing
Constructive kissng
Symbolic kissing
The delivery of the object may be
actual, symbolic. . .
Symbolic delivery may be in the
form of delivery by long hand or
lunga manu or short hand or brevi
manu. . .
Bailee borrow the car of the bailor
What is commodatum?
It is a contract which is essentially
gratuitous. . ..
Traditio longa manu
Tradition brevi manu
Consideration in commodatum?
Obligee – the one who has the
right to demand the prestation of
the obligation.
Obligor – the active subject
How could you exercise prudence?
What is the decree of care
required? Was there a stipulation?
None. Because of the absence of
the expressed stipulation, the
decree of care is always supplied
by law.
The Principle of Incorporation. It is
deemed incorporated in the
contracts?
The Ordinary of Diligence =
diligence required by law.
Can parties agreeto higher than
ordinary diligence? Yes.
How about lower diligence? No. It
will run contrary to public policy.
Anatema , anthetical to public
policy.
BAILEE VS BAILOR
Is it necessary that the bailor be
the owner of property in order to .
..
What are the attributes of
property?
The right to use
Jus posedendi. . .
Jus fruendi. . .
The right to destroy. . . Loan

Jus dispodensi. . . Pledgor pledgee

In the contract of commodatum . . Mortgage-creditor

.
Who bears the loss of the car if it
The right to litigate. . . due to fortuitous event? RES PERIT
DOMINO
The right to possess… .
MORA SOLVENDI
As a bailee.. . is not entitled to
certain attributes. . . MORA ACCEDIENDI
In the contract of commodatum. . . What is contract of…
. is , like commodatum, a real
Commodatum – contract of loan
If the bailor is not the owner, he for use
cannot have
Bailor bailee
Mutuum – contract of loan for
You cannot dispose something that consumption
you do not have. . .
Deposit – is a contract for
What is the materiality of damage safekeeping under the custody of
here? the depositary (the recipient of the
thing or has the obligation for the
Action for specific performance.
safekeeping of the thing)
How is contract of deposit
constituted? DC is material,
physical possession is transferred,
the ownership remains in the
depositor.
Why didn’t I discuss the degree of
care in contract of mutuum which
contract? In commodatum, the
decree of care is material. . . in the
case of the mutuum, all the
attributes of ownership is
transferred. Once the thing is
transferred to him, he bears the
loss, res perit domino.
ANATIMA TO PUBLIC POLICY
When necessary for the purpose of
preserving. . ..
Mortgage is manifestedthrough
registration. There mjust be a
document to that effect. Affidavit
of good faith as registered
property where the mortgage-
debtor is residing. Aside from the
registration, there must also be a
corresponding regeistration with
the appropriate land registration,
you also. . . .
foregoing provision, payment of
monetary interest is allowed
CASE DIGESTS:
only if: (1) there was an express
SIGA-AN CASE stipulation for the payment of
interest; and (2) the agreement
Issue: (1) Whether or not
for the payment of interest was
interest was due to petitioner;
reduced in writing. The
and (2) whether the principle of
concurrence of the two
solutio indebiti applies to the
conditions is required for the
case at bar.
payment of monetary interest.
Thus, we have held that
Ruling: (1) No. Compensatory
collection of interest without any
interest is not chargeable in the
stipulation therefor in writing is
instant case because it was not
prohibited by law.
duly proven that respondent
defaulted in paying the loan and
(2) Petitioner cannot be
no interest was due on the loan
compelled to return the alleged
because there was no written
excess amount paid by
agreement as regards payment
respondent as interest. Under
of interest. Article 1956 of the
Article 1960 of the Civil Code, if
Civil Code, which refers to
the borrower of loan pays
monetary interest, specifically
interest when there has been no
mandates that no interest shall
stipulation therefor, the
be due unless it has been
provisions of the Civil Code
expressly stipulated in writing.
concerning solutio indebiti shall
As can be gleaned from the
be applied. Article 2154 of the
Civil Code explains the principle
of solutio indebiti. Said
provision provides that if
something is received when
there is no right to demand it,
and it was unduly delivered
through mistake, the obligation
to return it arises. In such a
case, a creditor-debtor
relationship is created under a
quasi-contract whereby the
payor becomes the creditor who
then has the right to demand the
return of payment made by
mistake, and the person who
has no right to receive such
payment becomes obligated to
return the same. The quasi-
contract of solutio indebiti harks
back to the ancient principle that
no one shall enrich himself
unjustly at the expense of
another. The principle of solutio
indebiti applies where (1) a
payment is made when there
exists no binding relation
between the payor, who has no
duty to pay, and the person who
received the payment; and (2)
the payment is made through
mistake, and not through
liberality or some other cause.
We have held that the principle
ofsolutio indebiti applies in case
of erroneous payment of undue
interest.
Article 2232 of the Civil Code
states that in a quasi-contract,
such as solutio indebiti,
exemplary damages may be
imposed if the defendant acted
in an oppressive manner.
Petitioner acted oppressively
when he pestered respondent to
pay interest and threatened to
block her transactions with the
PNO if she would not pay
interest. This forced respondent
to pay interest despite lack of
agreement thereto. Thus, the
award of exemplary damages is
appropriate so as to deter
petitioner and other lenders
from committing similar and
other serious wrongdoings.
VSICAR CASE
ISSUE: WON the failure of Vicar
to return the subject property to
private respondents would
constitute an adverse possession
that would entitle Vicar to have a
just title in order for ordinary
acquisitive prescription to set in.
RULING:Private respondents were
able to prove that their
predecessors' house was borrowed
by petitioner Vicar after the church
and the convent were destroyed.
They never asked for the return of
the house, but when they allowed
its free use, they became bailors
incommodatumand the petitioner
the bailee. The bailees' failure to
return the subject matter
ofcommodatumto the bailor did not
mean adverse possession on the
part of the borrower. The bailee
held in trust the property subject
matter of commodatum. The
adverse claim of petitioner came
only in 1951 when it declared the
lots for taxation purposes. The
action of petitioner Vicar by such
adverse claim could not ripen into
title by way of ordinary acquisitive
prescription because of the absence
of just title.The Court of Appeals
found that the predecessors-in-
interest and private respondents
were possessors under claim of
ownership in good faith from 1906;
that petitioner Vicar was only a
bailee incommodatum; and that the
adverse claim and repudiation of
trust came only in 1951
REPUBLIC CASE
ISSUES & RULING: 1. WON
the contract was
commodatum; WON Bagtas
should be held liable for its
loss due to force majeure.
NO, the contract is not
commodatum. YES, he is
liable for the loss.
A contract of commodatum
is essentially gratuitous.
Supreme Court held that
Bagtas was liable for the
loss of the bull even though
it was caused by a
fortuitous event. If the
contract was one of lease,
then the 10% breeding
charge is compensation
(rent) for the use of the bull
and Bagtas, as lessee, is
subject to the
responsibilities of a
possessor. He is also in bad
faith because he continued
to possess the bull even
though the term of the
contract has already
expired.
If the contract was one of
commodatum, he is still
liable because: (1) he kept
the bull longer than the
period stipulated; and (2)
the thing loaned has been
delivered with appraisal of
its value (10%). No
stipulation that in case of
loss of the bull due to
fortuitous event the late
husband of the appellant
would be exempt from
liability.
The original period of the
loan was from 8 May 1948
to 7 May 1949. The loan of
one bull was renewed for
another period of one year
to end on 8 May 1950. But
the appellant kept and used
the bull until November
1953 when during a Huk
raid it was killed by stray
bullets. Furthermore, when
lent and delivered to the
deceased husband of the
appellant the bulls had each
an appraised book value, to
with: the Sindhi, at
P1,176.46, the Bhagnari at
P1,320.56 and the
Sahiniwal at P744.46. It
was not stipulated that in
case of loss of the bull due
to fortuitous event the late
husband of the appellant
would be exempt from
liability.