Possible- capable of fulfillment in nature and in law
Impossible- not capable of fulfillment due to nature or due to the operation of the law or morals or public policy, or due to a contradiction on its terms
GR: Impossible and illegal conditions shall annul the obligation which depends upon them Exception:
Pre-existing obligation
If obligation is divisible
In simple or remuneratory donations
Testamentary dispositions
Conditions not to do an impossible thing As to number
Conjunctive- if all the conditions must be performed
Alternative- if only a few of the conditions has to be performed
PURE AND CONDITIONAL OBLIGATIONS (See Articles 1179-1190)
PURE- one whose effectivity or extinguishment does not depend upon the fulfillment or nonfulfillment of a condition or upon the expiration of a period and is demandable at once; Nothing to exempt the debtor from compliance therewith (no condition/date=immediately demandable)
CONDITION – future and uncertain event or a past event unknown to the parties
Must be imposed by the will of the party and not a necessary requisite of a legal act
CONDITIONAL – one whose effectivity is subordinated to the fulfillment of a future AND uncertain event or upon a past event unknown to the parties
CHARACTERISTICS OF CONDITIONS 1) Future and uncertain
An event which is NOT uncertain but must necessarily happen cannot be a condition, but a TERM. 2) Past but unknown
Future knowledge of a past event 3) Must NOT be impossible
PRINCIPAL KINDS
1. Suspensive- (condition precedent/antecedent)- happening of condition gives rise to obligation; demandability is suspended until the happening of a future and uncertain event which constitutes the condition
Birth of the contract takes place only if and when the condition happens or is fulfilled
It must appear that the performance of an act or the happening of an event was intended by the parties as a suspensive condition
There can be no rescission (1191) of an obligation that is still non-existent, the suspensive condition not having been fulfilled Effects:
a) Effectivity retroacts to the day of the constitution of the obligation b) No retroactivity with reference to fruits or interest and prescription c) Creditor may preserve rights
d) Debtor- recovery of payment by mistake or even w/o mistake
2. Resolutory (condition subsequent) happening of condition extinguishes obligation (or right) already existing
Effects: where a contract is subject to a resolutory condition, non-compliance with or non-fulfillment of the condition resolves the contract by force of law and without need of judicial intervention
WHEN OBLIGATION IS DEMANDABLE AT ONCE 1. When it is pure
2. Or when it has a resolutory condition
(I’ll give you my car, but you should not marry Maria this year.) (This is demandable NOW). 3. When it is subject to a resolutory period (Art. 1193, 2)
[1180] comments
1) Debtor to pay ‘when his means permit’: considers the obligation as one with a TERM or PERIOD
o Art. 1197 shall apply and the court is obliged to fix the duration of the period within which payment is to be made [1181] comments
1) Suspensive conditions
happening of which will give rise to the acquisition of a right (condition precedent)
not demandable at once
characterized by its efficacy or obligatory force is subordinated to the happening of a future AND uncertain event;
If the suspensive condition does not take place, the parties would stand as if the conditional obligation had never existed.
Where suspensive condition depends upon the will of the creditor, it is VALID
Positive suspensive condition:
o Contract to sell- property on installment
o Promise to give a book to a person if it rains the next day (uncertain event) 2) Resolutory conditions
Kristine Confesor
Demandable at once
Rights already acquired are lost once the condition is fulfilled
Where resolutory condition depends upon the will of the debtor, it is VALID 3) Conditional Perfection of a Contract
If the Nature of the contract depends upon the fulfillment of a condition, non-fulfillment thereof means the non-perfection of the contract since the suspensive condition should have been first fulfilled.
ACQUISITION AND EXTINGUISHMENT OF RIGHTS
DBP v. CA
J. Padilla FACTS:
Private respondents were original land owners of a parcel of agricultural land which they mortgaged to DBP on May 1977. When PR defaulted in their obligation, DBP foreclosed the mortgage and emerged as sole bidder in the ensuing auction sale.
On 1984, both parties entered into A deed of Conditional Sale where DBP agreed to reconvey the foreclosed property to PRs for 73k and the balance is payable on an installment basis for six years. The PRs religiously paid and were able to pay the full repurchase price on 1990.
However, DPB informed them that it was already legally impossible for them to reconvey the property in view of Sec. 6 of RA 6657 (CARL) approved on June 10, 1988 and Sec. 1 of EO 407 issue on June 10, 1990.
RTC ruled in favor of PR and maintained that Sec. of CARL taken in its entirety, is a provision dealing primarily with retention limits in agricultural land allowed the landowner and his family and that the 4th para , which nullifies any sale by the original landowner does not cover sale by DPB as they only acquired the property through the foreclosure
CA maintained that if the obligation depends upon a suspensive condition, the demandability as well as the acquisition or effectivity of the rights arising from the obligation is suspended pending the happening or fulfillment of the fact or event which constitutes the condition. Once the event which constitutes the condition is fulfilled resulting in the effectivity of the obligation, its effects retroact to the moment when the essential elements which gave birth to the obligation have taken place.
- In this case, full payment by the appellee on 1990 retroacts to the time the contract of Conditional sale was executed on 1984. As such, it cannot be covered by CARL.
- It also accepted payments until full payment
- EO 407 cannot affect appellant’s obligation since the property has already been obtained prior to the effectivity of the EO. ISSUE: W/N it is legally impossible for the DBP to reconvey the agricultural land to its original owners due to supervening event of enacting the laws they invoke?
HELD: No.
In conditional obligations, the acquisition of rights, as well as the extinguishment or loss of those already acquired, shall depend upon the happening of the event which constitutes the condition.
The deed of conditional sale executed by the parties on 1984 was faithfully complied with by PRs as they paid the full repurchase price on 1990. They allowed PRs to fulfill the condition and they only invoked Sec. 6 of RA 6657 after full payment and demand of PRs for the execution of Deed of Sale.
Sec. 6 of RA 6657 was enacted on June 10, 1988
(deals with “any sale, lease, management contract or transfer or possession of private lands executed by original landowner”)
DBP only acquired the land through foreclosure proceedings; original owner is PR CARL deals with retention limits
Enacted 2 months after PRs had legally fulfilled the condition in the contract of conditional sale by the payment of all installments on their due dates. (the laws are prospective in application)
CPU v. CA
J. Padilla
Don Ramon Lopez, Sr. was a member of the Board of Trustees of the CPU who donated a parcel of land in favor of CPU (petitioner) with a condition that the land shall be utilized by CPU exclusively for the establishment and use of a medical college with all its buildings as part of the curriculum. (1939)
Conditions
1. Utilized by CPU exclusively for establishment and use of medical college with all its buildings as part of the curriculum 2. CPU must not sell/transfer/convey to any 3rd persons or encumber the land