What's up guys! Welcome back to my channel, Cruel Tax and Accounting Tutorial. And welcome to the Business Law Series.
Pagpatuloyin natin yung Obligations and Contracts. This time, pag-uusapan natin is yung Chapter 3, Different Kinds of Obligations, particularly yung Section 1, Pure and Conditional Obligations. Kaya lang, hatiin natin sa dalawa itong, didiscuss muna natin yung issue, Part 1, from Article 1179 to Article 1185. Okay?
Kasi itong chapter 3, yung different kinds of obligations, marami yan eh no? From section 1 to section 6, yung section 1, yun yung pure and conditional obligations. From article 1179 to 1192, so katikin natin sa dalawa yun.
Tapos susunod natin yung section 2 hanggang 6. Okay, so simulan natin yung section 1 pure and conditional obligations. Simula natin sa Classification of Obligation as to Demandability. Ang pag-uusapan natin dito is yung Pure Obligation and Conditional Obligation.
So, sa Section 1 dito, halos iikot yung ating discussion sa Pure Obligations and Conditional Obligations. Okay? So, tandaan nyo lang yan ha. Dapat alam natin ang pagkakaiba ng Pure and...
Conditional obligation after section 1. Okay, so simulan natin sa article 1179. According to article 1179, every obligation whose performance does not depend upon a future, future, or uncertain event, or upon a past event unknown to the parties, is demandable at once. Sir, ano ba yung tinutukoy dito sa paragraph 1? Ang tinutukoy dito sa paragraph 1 is a pure obligation. Okay, at ang pinoint out dito, ang isang pure obligation ay demandable at once.
Okay, ano daw yung isang pure obligation? Ito yung, it is an obligation whose performance does not depend upon a future or uncertain event o kaya upon a past event unknown to the parties. Okay, so mamaya explore pa natin yan.
Second one. Every obligation which contain a resolutory condition shall also be demandable. So ang pinoytaw na naman, another example of a demandable obligation.
Ano daw yun? An obligation with a resolutory condition. So mamaya, explore natin ano ba yung resolutory condition. Masabihin, ang tinutukay dito sa second paragraph na isa ring demandable obligation ay isang uri ng... conditional obligation.
So, pumasok na yung pure and conditional. Pero mamaya, i-define pa natin yung conditional obligation. Okay. Tuloy natin.
So, yung article 1179, it is about demandable obligations. Ano nga yun? Yung pure obligation, tsaka yung obligation with a resolutory condition.
Okay? So, tuloy natin. I-define pa natin ano nga ba yung pure obligation, although nabanggit na kanina sa article, ano?
Ulitin lang natin, it is an obligation that is demandable at once, okay? Bakit? Because it does not depend upon a future or uncertain event nor a past event anointed to the parties at hindi siya isang obligation with a resolutory condition, okay?
So, inulit lang yun na sa article. Eh, sir, di ko nga po ma-intindihan yun na sa article, eh. So, padalayin natin. Sa madaling salita, ang isang pure obligation, it is an obligation that has no condition or no period.
Okay, mamaya i-de-define natin yung condition, mamaya i-de-define din natin yung period. Sa madaling salita, ang pure obligation, walang condition, walang period. Ganon ka-simple.
Kasi may performance ng obligation, hindi nakadepende sa isang condition o sa isang period. Kaya siya... tinawag na demandable at once.
Okay? Masa na maliwanag yun. Tuloy natin. Sample natin.
First example, Tanjiro promised to give Musan a brand new car. Bakit bibigyan ni Tanjiro si Musan ng brand new car? Walang ibinigay na dahilan. Ano yung condition para bigyan ni Tanjiro si Musan ng brand new car? Wala rin ibinigay na condition.
Kailan ibibigay yung karin? Di sinabi kung bukas ba? Next month ba?
Next year ba? Or on a future date? Walang binanggit na gano'n? No period.
So, this is an example of a pure obligation. Number two, Tanjiro obliges himself to pay 10,000 to Musan. Wala na naman kondisyon na binigay.
Wala rin period na binigay. Pure obligation. Third one, Tanjiro obliges himself to pay Musan 10,000.
Kailan? Nagbigay na. Upon demand. Ibig sabihin kung kailan singilin ni Musan o hingin ni Musan yung 10,000, hindi bibigay ni Tanjiro kasi yun yung kanya obligation.
Yun yung pinangako niya, yung obliges himself. Okay? So, sa tatlong example na ito, lahat ito ay demandable. Ibig sabihin, anytime pwede nang i-require ni Musan na, halimbawa, makasa na yung kotse, pwede nang hingin yan anytime. It is demandable at once.
Okay? Tuloy natin. So, ano naman yung conditional?
Diba, meron tayong pure. Pag pure, hindi siya conditional. Pag conditional, ito siya.
Okay? Is an obligation. A conditional obligation is one, the fulfillment of which is subject to a certain condition. Ano nga yun?
Which may be an event. Which may or may not happen. Okay? So, ito ay isang obligation na meron condition.
Na yung condition pwedeng... Mangyari or matupad, pwedeng hindi. Ganun siya. Define natin yung condition.
Ano ba yung condition? It is a future and uncertain event. So ito ay isang event which is future and uncertain.
Pag sinabi natin uncertain, pwedeng mangyari or pwedeng makfulfill, pwedeng hindi. Okay? Paano pag nafulfill?
Sabi. Upon which the existence or extinguishment of an obligation is made to depend. Ibig sabihin, dalawa ang epekto. Kapag na-fulfill yung condition, ano yun? Pwedeng number one, mag-exist ang obligation.
Number two, pwedeng ma-extinguish ang obligation. So, ang epekto ng isang, yung the happening of the condition is two. Ano yun? Una, pwedeng...
Magkaroon ng obligation. Pangalawa, pwede mo extinction of obligation. Kaya meron tayong dalawang uri ng condition. Ano yun?
We have suspensive condition and we have resolutory condition. So, ito na yung nasa article kanina yung resolutory. Ano ang pagkakaiba ng suspensive at resolutory?
Okay? So, pag sinabi natin suspensive condition or condition precedent or antecedent, Ang effectionizing na ito is fulfillment gives rise to an obligation. Ibig sabihin, pag natupad yung condition, magkakaroon ng obligation. Okay, para siyang switch.
At pag nangyari siya, pag pinindot mo yung switch, magkakaroon ng illaw. Ito naman, pag nangyari yung condition, magkakaroon ng obligation. Pag hindi natupad yung condition, walang obligation.
Okay, e ano naman yung resolutory condition or condition subsequent? It's fulfillment. extinguishes the obligation. Ibig sabihin, pag nangyari ito, pag natapad yung condition, matatapos yung obligation or ma-extinguish yung obligation. Okay?
Yung isa, it gives rise. Yung pangalawa, it extinguishes the obligation. Okay? Suspensive, resolutory.
So, kailangan alam natin yung pagkakaiba niyan. Okay, sample lang natin. First example, Tanjiro promised to give Musan a brand new car.
Kamukha nung example kanina, kaya lang may kaduktong. This time, may kaduktong na condition. If he passes the CPA licensure examination.
Okay, so may condition na ngayon, di ba? Para ibigay ni Tanjiro kay Musan yung kotse, dapat makapasa muna siya sa CPA licensure examination. This is an example of a suspensive condition.
wherein pag nakapasa siya, ibigay yung car. Ibig sabihin, yung si Tanjiro, meron siya obligation to give Musan a brand new car. Ngayon, pag di naman pumasa, wala siya obligation. Kaya yung suspensive condition, it gives rise to the obligation. Second example, Inosuke agreed to give Toyo 5,000 monthly allowance until Toyo graduates from college.
So, ano obligation ni Inosuke? Bigyan ng 5,000 allowance. Itong si Toyo, monthly allowance. Hanggang kailan? Hanggang makagraduate ko siya.
That's the condition. Ibig sabihin, pag naka-graduate si Toyo, matitigil na yung pagbibigay or yung obligation ng Inosuke na magbigay ng 5,000 monthly allowance to Toyo. Ibig sabihin, the happening of the condition, yung pag-graduate ni Toyo, extinguishes the obligation of Inosuke.
Therefore, this is an example of a Resolutory Condition. Okay? Maliwanag pa yun? Okay.
Tuloy natin. Ngayon, ulitin lang natin. Kasi nga yung article na pinag-usapan natin, it is about demandable obligations. Kailan na nga demandable ang obligation?
Or demandable at once? Number one, it is a pure obligation. Okay? Yan yung nasa article 1179, first paragraph. O kaya naman, when it is subject...
to a Resolutory Condition. Yung paragraph 2 ng article 1179 naman. Yung pangatlo, idagdag natin when it is subject to a Resolutory Period.
Pag-uusapan yan sa article 1193 by paragraph 2. Okay? So, yan yung tatlong pagkakataon na demandable ang obligation. Discuss na natin yung dalawa. Okay?
So, isa na lang yung kulang natin dyan. Okay? Tuloy natin.
Ngayon, nabanggit dun sa may article 1179 sa first paragraph, unknown past event. So, mag-sample tayo ng isang condition na nakadepende sa isang past event, particularly an unknown past event. So, alimbawa, Nesuko is the owner of a parcel of land which is being claimed by Yahaba.
So, itong si Nesuko at si Yahaba, sila ay nag-aaway over a parcel of land. Sabi ni Nesuko, kanya yun. Sabi ni Yahaba, kanya yun.
Kaya ito ay dinala nila sa court. Hindi nila alam, last week, the Supreme Court has already rendered a final decision. Yun, hindi nila alam ha.
Meron nang lumabas o lumabas na yung decision ng Supreme Court upholding the right of Nesuko. So, si Nesuko ang tamang owner ng land. Okay, however, di pa natatanggap ni Nesuko yung notice that she had won the case. Kaya hindi niya alam.
Okay. Now, Nesuko obliged herself to sell the land to Rui. Okay. Hindi pa niya alam yung result. Nakipag-usap sa kay Rui.
Sabi niya kay Rui, ibebenta ko sa iyo yung land. Ano yung condition? Should she win the case against Yahaba?
Yun yung condition. Pag nanalo ako sa claim ko dun sa parcel of land versus Yahaba, ibebenta ko sa iyo itong land. Kay Rui. Okay, ibang tao, ibang person yun na hindi si Yaba, no?
Okay, ang tanong, valid ba yung kanilang usapan? Definitely, yes. Dahil panalo na nga actually si Ineso ko. Hindi lang niya alam.
So, that is an example of a condition depending on an unknown past event. Okay, so conditional obligation ito. Okay.
So, yun yun ha. Baka sabihin nyo, wala example. So, yan yun.
Okay. Sa mga law books, makikita naman natin, particularly yung kay Hector De Leon. Mababasa natin dun yung mga example na to. Okay. Tuloy natin.
Article 1180. When the debtor binds himself to pay when his means permit him to do so. Oops. Sabi ni debtor, babayaran kita. Pag ito sinabi ni debtor or sa usapan.
Sabi ni Dator, ay pabayaran kita when my means permit me to do so. Ibig sabihin, pag may pera na ako, pag kaya ko na, pabayaran kita. Ganun yung sabi ni Dator. Ang sabi, the obligation shall be deemed to be one with a period. Valid siya, pero hindi siya isang conditional obligation, hindi siya isang pure obligation, kundi isa siyang obligation with a period.
So, kailangan maintindihan natin ano ibig sabihin ng period. Subject to the provisions of Article 1197. Okay, kung ano binando sa Article 1197 na may kinalaman dito sa article na ito, mamaya bagong matapos itong article na ito. Okay, so ito yung instance na ang duration ng period nakadepende kay detor. Ibig sabihin kung kailan siya magbabayad sa kanya nakadepende kay detor, di ba?
Tulad nun, di ba? Mababayad ako pagka kaya ko na. Hindi natin alam kung kailan exacto yun, di ba?
So, define natin kung ano yung period. A period is a future... And certain event.
So, event din ito. Kung naalala mo kanina, dinify natin yung condition. Nakalagay doon, it is a future and uncertain event.
Pag sinabi nga certain, pwede yung matupad, pwede yung hindi. Pwede yung mangyari, pwede yung hindi. Pero ito, future pero certain. Ibig sabihin, future pero mangyayari. At pag nangyari siya, upon the arrival of which, the obligation subject to it either arises or is extinguished.
Ang efekto niya, kagaya ng efekto ng condition na pag natapad, halimbawa, yung isang suspensive condition, magkakaroon ng obligation. Pag natapad yung resolutory condition, ma-extinguish yung obligation. Ito naman, ganun din, it gives birth or death, causes death of the obligation. Ganun din yung efekto niya.
Kaya lang, we call this period. Kaya siya naging period, it is certain. Okay. At pag si debtor pinangako niya na halimbawa magbabayad ako, pagkaya ko na, we consider that as an obligation with a period. Di lang natin alam exacto kung kailan yung period na yan.
Parang ganito. Ano ba yung example ng isang future and certain event? Future pero mangyayari siya. Di lang natin alam exacto kung kailan. Halimbawa yung debt.
Alam mo ba kung kailan ka mamamatay? Di ba hindi naman. Debt is a future event. Di mo lang alam exacto, pero that is a certain event. Diba?
At lahat naman tayo ay dun papunta. Mamamatay, di ba ganun? So, certain.
Ngayon, tuloy natin. Example, pag sinabi ni Detor, ganito mga, yung mga ganitong wordings, o ganitong mga terms, obligations, sabi niya, I will pay you little by little, as soon as possible, o kaya prime time to time. Anytime I have the money or impartial payments ito ay lahat ito kamukha nung binabanggit sa article nato na obligations with a period.
Okay? So, ito yun mga kahawig niya. Kumbaga, valid ba itong mga ito?
Yes, valid. Kaya lang, may nakikita ka bang problema sa ganitong klase ng obligation? Tama, mayroon, di ba? Ang problema dito, hindi alam exacto ni creditor ka ilan siya.
pwedeng makasingil, no? Kung kailan siya dapat bayaran talaga kasi ito ay nakadepende kay debtor. Kaya, sabi dun sa bandang dulong na article, subject to the provisions of article 1197, nakalagay dun sa article 1197, the court may fix the duration of the period. Kapag ganyan.
Hindi kasi pwedeng forever ganun, eh. Diba? Kung kailangan lang maisip ni debtor yan, eh. Parang ganun. So, si creditor may remedy siya.
To ask the court to fix the duration of the period. Okay? Tuloy natin. Article 1181. Balik tayo sa conditional obligations.
The acquisition of rights. Okay? As well as the extinguishment or loss of those already acquired. The right pa rin yung pinag-uusapan.
Okay? Balik tayo sa isang obligation. Sa isang obligation, merong debtor, merong creditor.
Si debtor merong obligation. So, obligor siya. Sa obligor, si creditor meron siyang right.
Okay. Kaya dito, the acquisition of right ni creditor or the loss of right ni creditor shall depend upon the happening of the event which constitute the condition. Okay.
Parang binaligtad lang eh, diba? Alimbawa, yung suspensive condition, pag nangyari siya, magkakaroon ng obligation si obligor or seed. Debtor, ganun din naman sa kabilang side.
Si creditor, meron siyang right ngayon. O anuman yung napag-usapan nila, mag-accruce siya ng right, acquisition of right. Kailan siya mag-acquire ng right?
Pag nangyari yung condition. Balik na rin naman natin, pag-resolutory yung condition, yung right ni creditor ay mawawala kapag nangyari yung condition. Ito lang yung binabanggit dito.
Okay, yung acquisition of rights or extinguishment of rights depends upon the happening. of the condition in which doon nakabase yung ating obligation. Okay. Sample lang natin para mas maintindihan. Example ng acquisition of rights, particularly kapag ito ay syempre yung suspensive condition.
Diba? Iaabangan mo kung magkakaroon ka ng right. Si debtor naman, aabangan niya kung magkakaroon siya ng obligation.
Si creditor, yung kanyang right. Example, yushiro, detestator. in his last will and testament gave some property to his heir, Hinaki.
Okay. So, sa last will and testament, sabi niya, ibibigay ko sa itong building na to. Kunwari ganun. Provided Yushiro would die within 2 years. May condition.
Suspensive condition. Pag namatay ako within 2 years, yung sinulat ko sa last will and testament na to, ay mapapasayo yung building. Ibig sabihin, kailan magkakaroon ng right more, makuwer ni Hinaki yung kanyang right over the property, kapag natapad yung condition na yun, namatay si Yujiro within 2 years.
Di ba halimawa? After 1 year, namatay na siya o may karapatan na si Hinaki. Doon sa right. Okay?
Kasi nangyari na yung condition. Or natupad na yung condition. Another example, nanalo ka sa loto, sa sweepstakes, tapos pumunta ka sa PCSO to claim your prize.
Tanong, ibibigay ba sa'yo agad? Talimang, narecite mo yung number, kabisado mo yung number, sinabi mo sa kanila, ibibigay ba agad sa'yo? Siyempre, hindi. May condition.
Ano yung condition? I-surrender mo yung ticket. Kasi kahit ikaw pa talaga yung nalaw pero wala ka ba ipakita yung ticket, hindi nila ilalabas o i-release yung price. Okay?
So, pag umuakwari yung right mo over the price, you have to surrender the ticket. Ganun ka simple itong example na ito. Okay?
So, tuloy natin. This time, loss of rights already acquired. Ibig sabihin, nangyari yung resolutory condition. Kamukha na example kanina.
Ganyan niya binds himself to support. Kanao until Kanao graduates from college. So, supportahan ni Kanao hanggang makagraduate.
Kailan magsisimula yung support? Ngayon na. Habang nag-aaral.
Ngayon, yung right ni Kanao to receive support shall be extinguished once the condition is fulfilled. Kailan yun? Pag nakagraduate ng college si Kanao.
Diba? So, ma-extinguish na yung kanyang right to receive support. Okay?
Another example, Kiyo binenta na lupa si Sumi. Pero sa usapan nila subject to Kiyo's right to repurchase, itong si Kiyo pwede niyang bilhin ulit. Okay?
Ngayon, nung binenta ni Kiyo kay Sumi yung property, nagkaroon ng right si Sumi over the property kasi siya na yung owner nun. Tama? Pero once na si Kiyo inexercise niya yung right niya to repurchase the property, nangyari yung condition. Siyempre, mawawala or ma-extinguish yung right ni Sumi over the property mababalik kay Kiyo. Okay, so ganun lang yan.
Okay, tuloy natin. Article 1182. Mag-uusapan dito is classification of conditions as to origin. Okay, so when the fulfillment of the condition depends upon the sole will of the debtor, ito daw ay void.
The conditional obligation shall be void. Inulit ka ba? The fulfillment of the condition, kanina daw nakadepende?
Kay Detor, on his soul will, void yun. Diba? Kumbaga, diba yung condition, yung haabangan natin kung matutupad o hindi.
Yung pagkatupad niya, nakadepende kay Detor, diba? Diba delikado yun? Kaya sabi ng batas, it is void. Eh kasi kung nakadepende kay Detor, di niya gagawin, matutupad rin yung condition para hindi siya magkaroon ng obligation, ganun kasi yung mangyayari din eh.
Kaya sabi, it's void. If the condition depends upon chance or upon the will of a third person, the obligation is valid and it shall take effect in uniformity with the provisions of this code. Okay, so valid siya.
Kapag yung happening of the condition depends upon chance or upon the will of a third person. Okay, halimbawa, pag malanbukas babayaran kita, ganun, it depends upon chance. O, diba? O, kaya pag sinabi ni, sinabi ni, ano, nabayaran na kita, babayaran kita.
It depends upon the will of a third person. Halimbawa, gano'n, diba? So, that is valid. Pero pagki debtor lang, nakadepende yung fulfillment of the condition, it's void. Okay?
Explore pa natin yan. So, ang pag-uusapan natin dito is yung potestative condition, yung casual condition, tsaka yung mixed condition. Okay?
Pag sinabi natin potestative, ito yung the condition depends upon the sole will of one of the contracting parties. Ibig sabihin, the fulfillment of the condition either depends kay debtor or kay creditor. Kahit sino sa kanila, isa sa kanila.
Pag nakadepende kay debtor, sabihin natin kanina, boy, pag nakadepende kay creditor, valid kaya or void, sagutin natin mamaya. Pero basta yung potestative condition, nakadepende sa isa sa kanila. The fulfillment of the condition. Pag sinabi naman natin cash well, the condition depends upon chance.
or upon the will of a third person. Or. Okay. So, the happening of the condition depends upon chance or upon the will of a third person. Okay.
So, wala kay debt or wala kay credit or hindi sa kanila nakadepend. Pag sinabi naman natin mix, ginamit natin the condition depends upon chance and, ayun, dalawa, upon the will of a third person. Kapag ganon, you call that mix condition.
Tanong, valid pa rin kaya yan? So, mamaya. Pag-isapan pa natin, ano?
Pero isang alam natin, base sa pagkakabasa natin ng article na ito, kapag ang fulfillment ng condition depends on the sole will of the debtor, it is void. Yun ay isang example ng potestative. Okay?
So, follow-up question, lahat ba ng potestative condition ay void? Sige, explore pa natin. So, dun tayo sa potestative condition.
Example. For example, limbawa, yung suspensive condition nakadepende kay debtor upon the sole will of the debtor that is void. Yan yung binanggit sa article.
For example, pag sinabi ni debtor na bayaran kita pag gusto ko na. O kaya I will pay you after I recover what Goto owes. Magsasabing babayaran kita pag nakolekta ko na yung utang ko kay Goto.
O kaya I will pay you upon the sale of the house in which I live. So lahat ito nakadepende kay debtor. Pwedeng gawin niya, pwedeng hindi.
Pwedeng tuparin niya, pwedeng hindi Pag di niya tinapad, wala siya obligation Pag tinapad niya, magkakre-creation obligation O kung ikaw yan, ano gagawin mo? Diba? So, sabi ng law, it is void Makatarungan lang, tama? Okay? Another example Example naman natin yung isang pre-existing obligation Tapos nagkaroon ng protestative condition Na nakadepende kay debtor Valid pa rin kaya yun, tinan natin Ito yung senaryo Tamari o borrowed?
Anong Tamayo? Tamayo borrowed 150,000 from Osaki payable within 6 months. Period. Yun ang usapan nila ng utang. 150 payable within 6 months.
Okay? So, perfected yung agreement ni Tamayo at Osaki dun sa loan nila. Subsequently, sabi ni Tamayo, Tamayo promised to pay Osaki after Tamayo sells his cart to which Osaki agreed.
Sabi ni Tamayo, bayaran kita Pag nabenta ko yung kotse ko, pumayag naman si Osaki. Ang tanong, kanino nakadepende yung fulfillment ng kondisyon? Yung kotse yung ibibenta, kay Tamayo, tama?
Si Detor. Sa kanya nakadepende. Kung ibibenta niyo, karo hindi. Pag nabenta niya, magbabayad siya. Pag di niya ibinenta, wala siyang babayar.
Parang ganun yung gusto niyang sabihin, eh. Diba? So, ang tanong, is this obligation valid or void? Ang sagot... The obligation is valid, pero yung condition is void.
Why? Because it is a pre-existing obligation. Nauna nilang, may nauna na silang na perfect na contract yung tungkol sa loob. Tapos sinunod mo lang itong condition. So, hindi siya valid yung condition, pero yung obligation, valid.
Ibig sabihin, parang hanggang dito lang yung effective. Hanggang sa tamayo borrowed 150 rupes mas payable within 6 months. Okay, yung mga kasunod niya, that is void. Okay, hindi kailangan ito pa rin.
Okay, next. Potestative condition pa rin, pero yung condition nakadepende kay creditor at ito daw ay valid. Okay, halimbawa, sabi ni debtor, I will pay you my debt.
Kabayaran kita, creditor, kapag sinangil mo ako. Ayun, kayo na nakadepende kung magbabayad na si debtor. Kay creditor, tama? Kasi po sabi niya, pag sinigil mo na ako, bayaran kita. Okay, so definitely valid ito.
Walang problema dito sa ganitong obligation. Tuloy natin. Potestative condition, pero this time, ang pag-usapan natin is, example natin is a resolutory condition that depends upon the will of the debtor.
Sabi niyo, valid. Pero pag suspensive, void. Aba, take a sample lang nga natin.
Ang isang example dyan yung kaninang nabanggit natin yung Pacto de Retro Sale or yung Sale with a Right to Repurchase. Yun ang isang example dito na Resolutory Condition na kadepende kay Dehator. Okay.
Tuloy natin. This time, pag-usapan naman natin is Casual Condition. Ano na nga ito?
The condition depends upon chance or upon... Or upon the will of a third person. Ganun siya, sampulan natin.
Kapag ito ay suspensive condition at ito ay nakadepende, A third person, casual nga, is this valid? Example, Shin binds himself to Celestland Tunagi. Penta ko sa Ilan Tunagi kung mananalo ako sa pending court ko sa Supreme Court.
Okay, tanong si Shin ba ang may control kung mananalo siya? O hindi. Sinagot agad, hindi.
Siyempre, sino yung Supreme Court? A third person, body, Supreme Court. Hindi niya kontrolado kaya ito ay valid. Okay?
Nakalagay naman din sa article natin. Valid ito. Next.
Another example nung casual condition. Okay? Bab.
Si Bab ay isang building contractor. Sabi niya, sabi niya, binagawa niya ng building si Bones, si Chi. Okay? At sabi niya nung natapos na yung construction, sabi niya, I oblige myself. to repair at my expense any damage that may be caused to the building by any earthquake occurring within 10 years from the completion date.
Ayun ang pangako ni Bob. Pag may nasira dyan due to an earthquake na mangyayari within 10 years after the completion period ng sabi, ako gagastos, babayaran ko, i-repair ko at my expense. Ibig sabihin, kailan mag-aarise yung obligation ni Bob? Para i-repair yung damage building.
Kapag nasira yung building due to an earthquake. At ang earthquake, eh hindi natin tiyak kung kailan yan. Hindi naman masasabi na kung sino-sino kung kailan magkakaroon ng earthquake. It depends upon chance. Hindi natin alam kung kailan yan mangyayari.
So, this is valid. Okay. Eh, ibahin natin ako.
Gawin natin yung mixed condition. Valid pa rin siya pero... Ibahin natin ako. Ano ba yung mix? Depends upon chance and upon the will of a third person.
Si Bob Ulet, building contractor, pinagtayo niya si Boon Sichi ng building. Sabi niya, I oblige myself to repair at my expense any damage to the building after an earthquake. Yun yung upon chance.
Kung masisira yung building due to an earthquake. Eto na yung dependi... And the will of a third person ito na, if found by a parcel of a panel of arbitrators that construction defects contributed in any way to the damage. So, meron pang kasama pala sa usapan kapag yung isang panel of arbitrators, sinabi nila na ang dahilan ng pagkasira is construction defects. Ayun, nakadepende sa will of third person.
Tama? Mix siya. Nasira due to an earthquake.
Pangalawa, kapag yung mga nag-investigate, sinabi nila na ang cause nga ng pagkasira is yung construction defect mo. Therefore, doon palang magiging liable si Bob. Okay, pero pag alam mo nasira due to an earthquake, tapos sabi ng panel, ay hindi ito due to construction defects. Walang obligation si Bob. Pag ganoon ang senaryo.
Okay, so summarize lang natin yung classification of conditions as to cost or region. We have potestative, we have casual, we have mix. Pag sinabing potestative, the happening of the condition or the fulfillment of the condition depends upon the will of one of the parties, pwedeng si debtor, pwedeng si redditor. Okay? Pag sinabi naman natin casual, depends upon chance or the will of a third person.
Pag mix, chance and will of a third person. O, ganun naman siya. Kung mapapansin mo, isa lang ang void.
Void, tangi siya. Void. Alin yun?
Yung potestative condition na nakadepende on the will of the debtor. Tapos, ang condition ay suspensive. Sabi that is void.
Okay? So, ituloy natin. Article 11. 83. Ang pag-uusapan natin dito is impossible and unlawful conditions. Okay?
Ang tanong, pwede ba yun? Tingnan natin. Dito, impossible conditions and those contrary to good customs, public policy, and those prohibited by law shall annul the obligation. So, hindi siya valid. Pag ang obligation ay mayroong provision na impossible condition, unlawful condition, that is void.
Pero, ang sabi dito, pag tinuloy mo, if the obligation is divisible, The part thereof which is not affected by the impossible or unlawful condition shall be valid. Okay? So, dalawa.
Limbawa, yung condition. Yung isa, lawful. Ayos naman. Yung isa, unlawful. Ang sabi, yung part na lawful, yun ang valid.
Yung part na unlawful, yung condition, yun yung valid. Okay? Ngayon, e, paano pag pinag-usapan nyo ganito? The condition not to do an impossible thing. Huwag mong gawing...
ang isang bagay na imposible. Ganun yung nasa agreement ninyo. Sabi, it shall be considered as not having been agreed upon.
Siya, cancelled siya. So, hindi siya in effect. Magkaganoon, wala.
Wala siyang effect. Pag ganun, huwag mong gawin ng isang imposible bagay. Tama lang naman yun, diba? So, kaya ito ay wala lang.
Okay? Ngayon, pag-usapan natin yung kinds of impossible. conditions. We have physically impossible and legally impossible conditions. Pag sinabi natin physically impossible, yung by its nature it cannot exist or cannot be done.
Limbawa sabi, ang condition is kung makakalipad ka from the 10th floor hanggang sa baba, diba? On your own, bigyan kita ng 100,000. So, that's impossible. Okay? Impossible yun.
Pag sinabi naman natin, legally impossible, those contrary to the law, morals, good customs, public order, or public policy. Pag ang isang obligation merong impossible condition, that is void. Sample ng physically impossible condition. Halimbawa, sabi ni Noriko, Noriko will pay 100,000 to Dogen. If it will not rain in the Philippines for one year, di ba, impossible.
Bayaran kita 100,000 pag di umulan ng isang taon dito sa Philippines, that's impossible. So, ang tanong, ito ba yung valid? Hindi ito valid.
This is void. Okay, another example, Chiaki will give Madoka a car if Madoka swims across the Pacific Ocean, di ba, impossible na naman. Therefore, this is void. Okay, it shall annul the obligation, di ba, sabi ng gano'n. Paano naman?
Di magagawa yan mga yan eh, diba? At pag hindi nagawa yan, di walang epekto, walang mag-arrest na obligation. Ganun siya.
Okay, so another example naman sa legally impossible condition. Okay, halimbawa, bigyan ka ng tenta ako sa negasa yo, patayin mo si ganito, unlawful. Diba? So, void. Kaya, limbawa naman, bigyan kita ng 1 million, basta ikaw ay maging common law wife.
Okay, so magsama tayo for 10 years. Hanggang sa magsama tayo, ganun, bigyan kita ng 1 million. So, that is also void. Bakit?
Ano to? Against moral, diba? Against moral. Kaya naman nakalagay sa ano, sabi, bigyan kita ng 50,000 kung kasampalin mo yung parents mo. So, hindi rin yan kasama.
Bakit? It is against good customs. O kaya sabi, bigyan kita ng 5 million. Para may kilala tayong ganyan na bigyan kita ng 5 million.
Mag-advocate ka para mapatalsik yung sino may nasa government. Okay? To overthrow the government.
That is... Also, void. Bakit?
It's legally impossible. Bakit nga? It's against public order.
Diba? And then yung panghuli, babayaran. Kalimbawa, if you will not appear as a witness in a criminal case, that's against public policy. So, pag ganyan na mga conditions, wala lang yan.
No effect. Yung mga yan. Okay?
So, ito na nga. Since effect ang pinag-usapan natin, kapag ang usapan nyo, to do an impossible thing, But the condition and obligation are void. Siyempre.
Pag naman ito ay not to do an impossible thing, valid as if. Parang wala nga ito kayo napag-usapan eh. Diba?
Pag ganyan. If the obligation is divisible, gaya ng nabanggit ko kanina, yung part na valid yung condition or hindi naman siya impossible, so valid yun. Pero yung part na merong impossible condition, siyempre, void yun. Then number 4, pagka ang obligation ay pre-existing na tapos biglang dinagdagan ng isang Impossible condition, syempre only the condition is void pero yung obligation is still valid. Okay?
So tuloy natin, Article 1184. Ang pag-uusapan natin dito is positive condition. The condition that some event happened at a determined time shall extinguish the obligation as soon as the time expires or if it has become indubitable that the event will not take place. Okay?
sample natin para mas maintindihan nyo. Ang sabi doon sa article, an obligation with positive suspensive condition is extinguished. So, ang obligation ay ma-extinguish kapag daw, as soon as the time expires without the event taking place. Hindi nangyari yung condition, hindi natupad yung condition doon sa time, kung kailan nyo siya, na pag-usapan.
Okay, sabi, Extinguish yung obligation. May extinguish. Kasi nga, hindi nangyari yung condition eh. Suspensive yan. So, walang mangyaring or walang mag-arise na obligation.
Number two, as soon as it has become indubitable that the event will not take place. Ang baga, nakikita mo na hindi na talaga matutupad yung condition. Kahit hindi pahintayin yung time na yun. Okay?
So, sampulan natin. Halimbawa, Reka obliges himself to give Kurei 50,000. So, sila yung may usapan. Bigyan ka ng 50,000, Kurei. If Kurei will marry Fuku before Kurei reaches the age of 23. Ayun.
Pag pinakasalan mo daw, pag pinakasalan mo Kurei si Fuku, bago ka mag 23, bigyan ka ng 50,000. Pag pinakasalan ni Kurei si Fuku bago siya mag 23, magiging liable si Reka. kay Kurey para ibigay yung 50,000. Paano pag hindi pinakasalan? Siyempre, Reka is not liable.
Diba? Olimpaw, hindi yun ang pinakasalan at age of 23. O kaya pinakasalan nung 23 na siya mismo. O kaya nung 24 na siya.
So, hindi na liable si Reka. Bakit? Ano usapan?
Before Kurey reaches the age of 23. Ito naman yung example ng kahit hindi pa maabot sa 23 years old si Reka. Kure, alam na natin hindi mangyayari yung condition. Diba? If Kure dies at the age of 22. Diba? May nabanggit kanina.
If indubitable, diba? Ikaw gano'n, diba? Tulad dito, namatay.
Ibig sabihin, pag namatay, makakasal pa ba yun? So, hindi na, diba? Kaya the obligation is extinguished. Okay? Kasi ang uusapan, dapat makasal before 23. Hindi na makakasal, kaya ma-extinguish yung obligation.
So, maliwanag sana yun, ano? Ngayon, babalik na rin natin yung senaryo. This time, negative condition.
Di naman baliktad. Parang gagawin lang natin negative. Ano naman ang mangyayari dito?
Ang sabi, the condition that some event will not happen, kaya siya negative, shall render the obligation effective from the moment the time indicated has elapsed or it has become evident that the event cannot occur. If no time has been fixed, the condition shall be deemed fulfilled at such time as may have been probably been contemplated, bearing in mind the nature of the obligation. Okay, so paliwanag pa natin.
Kapag naman obligation is an obligation with a negative condition, shall become effective in binding. O diba? Pag lumabas na dun sa time, o kaya dumabon na dun sa time na nabagusapan ninyo without the event taking place, o kaya naman. Alam mo na talaga hindi na mangyayari yung event.
Okay? From the moment it has become evident that the event cannot occur. Ang sampulan natin, sa Rey ka pa din. This time, ang usapan ganito.
Rey, bigyan niya si Coray ng 50,000 if Coray is not yet married to Foucault on December 30. Pag hindi ka pakasal kay Foucault on December 30, 2020, bigyan ka ng 50,000. E paano kung nagpakasal? On or before, nakalimutan ko, on or before December 20 ay December 30. O reyka is not liable to korey pag ganoon.
Kasi yung usapan, if korey is not yet married on Fuku on December 30, ay nagpakasal December 30, o hindi na liable si korey. E what if hindi nagpakasal? Halimbawa, Reka is liable to Kurei if on December 30, Kurei is not married to Fuku.
O kaya, if Kurei marries Fuku after December 30. Okay. Sinunod nila. So, liable.
Ito naman yung example ng hindi na talaga mangyayari. If Foucault dies on November 20 without having been married to Couray, the obligation is rendered effective. Bakit? Ang sabi, Couray is not yet married to Foucault on December 30. Eh, ang nangyari, namatay November 20 without having married. Ang sabi, the obligation is rendered.
effective. Okay, so binaliktad lang yung kanina ang senaryo. Okay, so that is part 1 of section 1, pure and conditional obligations. So, don't forget to like, subscribe sa ating channel and see you on the next video.