Oblicon Finals Practice Test 1 PDF

**PRACTICE TEST NO. 1: Special Review Answers** **CONSTITUTION** - - **LEGISLATION** - **JURISPRUDENCE** - - **PASSIVE SUBJECT** - - **ACTIVE SUBJECT** - - **EFFICIENT CAUSE** - **LAW** - **QUASI-CONTRACT** - - **CONTRACTS** - **QUASI-DELICT**...

**PRACTICE TEST NO. 1: Special Review Answers** **CONSTITUTION** - - **LEGISLATION** - **JURISPRUDENCE** - - **PASSIVE SUBJECT** - - **ACTIVE SUBJECT** - - **EFFICIENT CAUSE** - **LAW** - **QUASI-CONTRACT** - - **CONTRACTS** - **QUASI-DELICT** - *Application of Sources of Obligations:* A man was driving his car at a very high rate of speed and on the wrong side of the road. A temporary structure was placed thereat by B by virtue of the permit granted by the municipal mayor. A's negligence is the proximate cause of the accident which badly injured him. A sued B for damages, B denies liability. Decide. (5 points)   **A has a valid claim against B.** B has a better right to deny liability for damages issued by A. B placed a temporary structure by virtue of the permit granted by the municipal mayor. Meaning, B followed a legal process in accordance to requirements. However, we can see in the situation that at first, A was driving his car at a very high rate of speed and on the wrong side or the road. Here we can see that it clearly demonstrate negligence. Since A was speeding and driving at the wrong side of the road, his own action cause an accident. It demonstrate that A didn\'t follow rules and guidelines of traffic law which he has a duty or responsibility tp drive responsibly and follow traffic rules. In conclusion, A\'s own negligence was the reason of the accident, which also absolve B in liability in A\'s injuries. Meaning, B is not liable for damages issued by A. **Requisites for the application of Quasi-delicts:** - - - - - **TRADITIO LONGA MANU** - **CONSTITUTUM POSSESSORIUM** - **TRADITIO SYMBOLICA** - **TRADITIO BREVI MANU** - - **Enumerate Duties of the Debtor who has the obligation to give a determinate thing:**  1. 2. 3. 4. 5. **MORA ACCIPIENDI ** - **COMPENSATIO MORA** - **MORA SOLVENDI** - - - *Application of Obligation to Deliver:* Fr. Juarez was a custodian of certain charity funds that were deposited together with his personal account in Rural Bank of Taal shortly before the American invasion of the Philippines. During the revolution Fr. Juarez became a political prisoner and his bank deposit was confiscated on the ground that they were being used for revolutionary purposes.  Fr. Juarez was sued by the Bishop of Lipa for the loss of the funds of the charity. Is Fr. Juarez liable for the loss of the trust fund because he co-mingled it with his personal account?  (5 points) Yes, Fr. Juarez is liable for the loss of the trust fund because he co-mingled it with his personal account in Rural Bank of Taal. Fr. Juarez was entrusted with funds for a specific purpose, meaning he has duty or responsibility to handle the funds with proper care and diligence. In the name of law, Fr. Juarez must keep the trust fund separately from his personal assets. This will ensure that the trust funds are safe and used for a specific purpose. In other words, Bishop of Lipa has a right to sued Fr. Juarez for the loss of the funds, and Fr. Juarez is liable for the damages. **FALSE / NO** - - **TRUE / YES** - **NEITHER TRUE NOR FALSE** - **BOTH TRUE AND FALSE / NONE OF THE ABOVE** - Loss of a firearm which fell to the bottom of the sea when the ship sank during a storm: - Loss of specific radio caused by armed robbery. - Loss of sum of money caused by armed robbery. - Copra deposited in a warehouse that was subject of seizure by Japanese Military Forces. - Damage to train passengers when the train was hit by a lightning. - *Application of the Different kinds of obligations:* The insurance contract stipulates that the driver of the insured vehicle must be the owner and possessor of a valid and subsisting license. At the time of the accident, the driver had an expired license. There was a claim on the insurance while the insurance denies liability because of the existence of a condition. In this situation, applying the different kinds of obligations, decide whether the Insurance company is liable to pay. The insurance company is not liable to pay the claim. The stipulation that the driver must possess a valid and subsisting license is a condition of the insurance contract. Since the driver had an expired license at the time of the accident, this condition was not met, allowing the insurance company to deny liability based on the breach of contract. Conditions in an insurance policy must be adhered to for coverage to be valid. **POTESTATIVE** - - **RESOLUTORY** - - **CASUAL** - **SUSPENSIVE** - *Application of Obligation:* Yorme, upon assumption of Office arbitrarily dismissed an employee (a civil service eligible) in the Office of the Municipal Treasury, without due investigation. He claimed that he has given the power by virtue of the Local Government Code to enforce it. The employee sued the Mayor for reinstatement. Decide who has the better right. The employee has the better right. While the Local Government Code grants mayors certain administrative powers, these powers must be exercised in accordance with due process and the principle of equal protection. Arbitrarily dismissing an employee without due investigation violates these principles. The employee\'s right to due process and security of tenure outweighs the mayor\'s discretionary power.   Give the importance of knowing Law on Obligations in your daily life. Knowing the law on obligation is important in daily life because it helps us to understand our responsibilities. It also guide us on how we handle agreements with others. If we know these laws, we can avoid conflicts and stay organized. In short, understanding obligation helps us act responsibly and protects us from being taken advantage of. Moreover, it helps us act fairly, be responsible, and know our rights when dealing with others. **PRACTICE TEST NO. 2** *Different Kind of Obligations. (Arts. 1179 - 1230 of the NCC)* Pink Coral, a 4 star resort-Hotel denied the liability imposed upon by a guest for the loss of their SLR cam and 2 units of iPhone 12 because there is a policy that the hotel shall not be held liable for the loss of valuables by the guest which is signed by the guests as waiver when they check-in. The guests who lost their belongings contend that it was printed in very small letters and could not have read it and they simply adhered to it. Decide whether the Resort-Hotel is liable to pay. What is the basis of your answer? The resort-hotel is liable or accountable to pay for the loss of the guests' belongings. Since the waiver was printed in very small letters and the guests could not have read it and simply adhered to it, the waiver is not valid because it was not clearly communicated to the guests, making it unfair and against the law. Also, according to Article 2000 of the Civil Code, hotels are responsible for their guests\' property unless the loss is caused by the guest\'s fault or force majeure. Therefore, the resort-hotel is liable for the loss of the guest\'s belongings. **FACULTATIVE** - - - **ALTERNATIVE** - - - - - **CONJUCTIVE** - - *Application of Nature and Effects of Obligation* On January 1, 2022, Sally promised to sell to Bayo her house if Bayo passed the October 2022 CPA Licensure Exam. The house and lot was leased to Leslie from Jan 1, 2022 to Oct 2022. If Bayo passed the CPALE, who shall be entitled to the rentals for the period of Jan 1, 2022 (when the obligation was constituted) to Oct 2022 (when the condition was fulfilled)? If Bayo passed the CPALE, there is a fulfillment on the condition. Therefore, Bayo is entitled to the rentals from January 1, 2022, to October 2022. Even though Leslie rented the house, the law considers the rental income to be part of the property\'s benefits which Bayo is entitled to as the rightful owner after meeting the condition. **NO** - *Application of Liability on Obligations.* The Defendants, as partners in the management of a bakery, owed the Plaintiff the amount of Php 1,000.00. If the Trial Court ordered each of the defendants liable for the whole amount in solidum. Is this correct? Are the defendants jointly or solidarily liable? Yes, the Trial Court\'s order that each defendant be accountable for the entire amount in solidum is correct. In a solidary obligation, each debtor is liable for the entire amount, rather than simply a proportionate share. This means that the plaintiff may seek the whole sum from any of the defendants, who are all jointly and severally liable. In this case, the defendants are solidary accountable for the Php 1,000.00, which means the plaintiff can collect the entire amount from any of them, and the defendants must settle among themselves. **JOINT** - - - - - - **JOINT OR SOLIDARY** - **NONE OF THE ABOVE** - **SOLIDARY** - - - When there are two or more debtors or two or more creditors, the obligation is JOINT, except on the following circumstances? 1. 2. 3. *Modes of Extinguishment of Obligation* X is indebted to A for Php 100,000.00. A became insane and still suffering with the disease when X paid the amount. If A kept the money in a box that in placed in a hole he dug at the back of his house, can there be a valid payment? Why or why not? No, the payment is invalid in this case. Payment to an insane individual is not valid under the law unless a guardian or legal representative acts on their behalf. Because A is suffering from a mental illness, A cannot lawfully consent accepting the payment, rendering the transaction invalid. Furthermore, storing the money in a box at the back of his house does not constitute an effective payment because it lacks the requisite acknowledgment from the appropriate party. As a result, X\'s money is not legally effective until it is delivered to someone who may receive it on A\'s behalf. **CONSIGNATION** - - **PAYMENT BY CESSATION** - **CONDONATION** - - **COMPENSATION** - - **VALID ONLY IF REDOUNDED TO THE BENEFIT OF THE CREDITOR** - **CONFUSION** - *Contracts in General* **EXISTENTIALISM** - **RELATIVE** - **ONLY STATEMENT 2 IS CORRECT** - - **BOTH STATEMENTS 1 AND 2 ARE TRUE** - **ONLY STATEMENT 1 IS TRUE.** - **PRACTICE TEST NO. 3** **TRUE** - - - **FALSE** - - - - **BOTH STATEMENT IS CORRECT** - - - - - - - **BOTH STATEMENTS ARE INCORRECT.** - - **ONLY STATEMENT 1 IS CORRECT** - - - **ONLY STATEMENT 2 IS CORRECT.** - - - **IN WRITING ONLY IF THE VALUE EXCEEDS PHP 5,000.00** - **YES, WHEN THE THIRD PERSON INTERESTED IN THE OBLIGATION PAYS.** - **CUSTOMS** - **SOLIDARY OBLIGATION** - - **AN OBLIGATION NOT TO SELL A HORSE.** - **MARCEL CAN RECOVER P100,000 FROM HEIDI** - **VOIDABLE** - - - **NATURAL OBLIGATION** - **PAYMENT MADE IS SUFFICIENT TO COVER ALL DEBTS** - **THE OBLIGATION IS EXTINGUISHED** - **THE OFFER HERE IS UNCERTAIN** - **PRESTATION** - **WHATEVER FORM** - **CIVIL OBLIGATION** - **AN OBLIGATION TO SAFEGUARD THE REAL PROPERTY** - **LESION** - **40K or 60K** - **CONVENTIONAL SUBROGATION** - **A contract of agency, for the sale of a piece of land or any interest therein, in order to consider the sale by the agent as valid** - **Are to be construed liberally in favor of the insured and strictly against the insurer who drafted the insurance policy** - **CONSUMMATION** - **DIVISIBLE OBLIGATION** - **Valid only if redounded to the benefit of the creditor, and the burden of proving rests upon the debtor** - **VALID, BUT WILL NOT BID THIRD PERSONS** - **The debtor and A third person who has no interest in the obligation when there is a stipulation that he can make payment** \- Persons from whom a creditor must accept payment. **VALID** - **THE PRINCIPAL OBLIGATION REMAINS VALID** - **ALL OF THEM** - - **DELIVERY OF MONEY** - **DEPOSIT** - **At least Php1M or At least 25% of the subscribed capital stock, whichever is higher** - **JOINT OBLIGATION** - **INVALID** - - **Yes. Ed can recover pursuant to the principle of solutio indebiti** - **A CONTRACT OF SIMPLE DONATION** -