HENRY JAMES B.

NEPOMUCENO
ASSIGNMENT 2
LAW ON SALES AND SPECIAL CONTRACTS

1. Sam is the owner of a parcel of unregistered land in Alfonso, Cavite. Sam executed a
notarized deed of sale over the land in favor of Abet. The deed of sale was not
registered nor did Abet occupy the land. Subsequently Sam sold the same parcel of land
in favor of Bobot. The deed of sale in favor of Bobot. The deed of sale was registered
with the register of deeds. Bobot occupied the land after the execution of the sale.
When Abet learned of the sale in favor of Bobot, Abet filed an action for Annulment of
the sale against Bobot. Will Abet’s action prosper? (20pts.)
-Yes, Art. 1544 par. 3 will govern. Since the parcel of land is unregistered, the ownership
will pertain to Abet because he is the one who was first in possession.

2. M bought from S a specific parcel of land Php1, 000,000.00 Three months later M sold
his land to her daughter Php50, 000.00. Is the sale to M’s daughter valid? (10pts.)
-No, because there is a lack of consideration. It appears in this case that the price is
simulated hence the contract of sale is void. Art. 1471 will governed.

3. S on March 1, 2019 sold for 1M to B a house and lot. It was agreed that the delivery of
the house and lot and payment would be made on April 20, 2020. Unfortunately, X, a
stranger negligently set the house on fire on March 2, 2019 which completely destroyed
it. On April 1, 2020, does S still have to deliver anything and does B have to pay
anything? (20pts.)
-No, Both the buyer and seller has no obligation to each other because the subject
matter has been loss through fortuitous event. Hence there is no subject matter which
results to inexistence of contract.
4. B bought from S (a minor), a Ferrari – flaming red, B sold the same car to X, a buyer in
good faith. Is X the owner of the car? (10pts.)
-Yes, Art. 1506 will govern. Here X is a buyer in good faith, he is with no knowledge of
B’s defective title and the title has not been avoided during the sale therefore X acquire
ownership of the car.

5. B, in good faith, bought a diamond ring from S. Two years after, X identified the ring
as one she lost about a year ago. There is no question as to the veracity of X’s claim. Can
X get the ring from B without reimbursing B the value of the ring even if B is a buyer in
good faith? (10 pts.)
-Yes, because the title of S is that of a thief. He fails to return the lost ring of X and
failure to return lost object constitute theft it is according to Art. 308 of the Revised
Penal Code of the Philippines. Hence, Art. 1505 will govern. B acquires no better title
than S had over it. X may therefore get the ring from B without any obligation on his
part to reimburse B.
(Nemo Dat Quod Non Habet)