Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 128 views

    12 Kinds of Promise

    Uploaded by

    Ron Ace
    This case discusses the difference between a contract to buy and sell versus a unilateral promise to sell under Article 1479 of the Civil Code. The document granted the plaintiff an "option to purchase" certain land, but did not include consideration to support treating it as a binding contract. Therefore, the court found it was a unilateral promise to sell by the defendant that was not legally enforceable, rather than an accepted bilateral contract to buy and sell. The judgment of the lower court ordering the defendant to sell the land to the plaintiff was reversed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    12 Kinds of Promise

    Uploaded by

    Ron Ace
    128 views2 pages
    This case discusses the difference between a contract to buy and sell versus a unilateral promise to sell under Article 1479 of the Civil Code. The document granted the plaintiff an "option to purchase" certain land, but did not include consideration to support treating it as a binding contract. Therefore, the court found it was a unilateral promise to sell by the defendant that was not legally enforceable, rather than an accepted bilateral contract to buy and sell. The judgment of the lower court ordering the defendant to sell the land to the plaintiff was reversed.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case discusses the difference between a contract to buy and sell versus a unilateral promise to sell under Article 1479 of the Civil Code. The document granted the plaintiff an "option to purchase" certain land, but did not include consideration to support treating it as a binding contract. Therefore, the court found it was a unilateral promise to sell by the defendant that was not legally enforceable, rather than an accepted bilateral contract to buy and sell. The judgment of the lower court ordering the defendant to sell the land to the plaintiff was reversed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    128 views2 pages

    12 Kinds of Promise

    Uploaded by

    Ron Ace
    This case discusses the difference between a contract to buy and sell versus a unilateral promise to sell under Article 1479 of the Civil Code. The document granted the plaintiff an "option to purchase" certain land, but did not include consideration to support treating it as a binding contract. Therefore, the court found it was a unilateral promise to sell by the defendant that was not legally enforceable, rather than an accepted bilateral contract to buy and sell. The judgment of the lower court ordering the defendant to sell the land to the plaintiff was reversed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    NICOLAS SANCHEZ vs.

    SEVERINA RIGOS
    45 SCRA 368, G.R. No. L-25494 June 14, 1972

    TOPIC: Article 1479. Kinds of Promise. An accepted unilateral promise to buy or to sell.

    DOCTRINE / CASE LAW:

    This case admittedly hinges on the proper application of Article 1479 of our Civil Code,
    which provides:
    ART. 1479. A promise to buy and sell a determinate thing for a price certain is
    reciprocally demandable. An accepted unilateral promise to buy or to sell a determinate thing for
    a price certain is binding upon the promisor if the promise is supported by a consideration
    distinct from the price.

    The option did not impose upon plaintiff the obligation to purchase defendant's property.

    This has the advantage of avoiding a conflict between Articles 1324 — on the general
    principles on contracts — and 1479 — on sales — of the Civil Code, in line with the cardinal
    rule of statutory construction that, in construing different provisions of one and the same law or
    code, such interpretation should be favored as will reconcile or harmonize said provisions and
    avoid a conflict between the same.

    FACTS:
    Rigos and Sanchez executed an instrument entitled "Option to Purchase,". Rigos "agreed,
    promised and committed ... to sell" to Sanchez the sum of P1,510.00, a parcel of land situated in
    the barrios of Abar and Sibot, municipality of San Jose, province of Nueva Ecija within two (2)
    years from said date with the understanding that said option shall be deemed "terminated and
    elapsed," if "Sanchez shall fail to exercise his right to buy the property" within the stipulated
    period. Rigos agreed and committed to sell and Sanchez agreed and committed to buy. But there
    is nothing in the contract to indicate that her agreement, promise and undertaking is supported
    by a consideration distinct from the price stipulated for the sale of the land.

    Several payments were made by Sanchez but Rigos rejected and so Sanchez filed an
    action for Specific Performance. The lower court rendered judgment in favor of Sanchez and
    ordered Rigos to accept the sum Sanchez judicially consigned, and to execute in his favor the
    requisite deed of conveyance. Rigos alleged as a special defense, that the contract between the
    parties "is a unilateral promise to sell, and the same being unsupported by any valuable
    consideration, by force of the New Civil Code, is null and void".

    ISSUE:
    Whether or not there was a contract to buy and sell between the parties or only a
    unilateral promise to sell?

    HELD:
    An accepted promise to sell is an offer to sell when accepted becomes a contract of sale.

    CALONIA, MA. LAUREVER O.


    Law 113 Sales
    August 22, 2020
    The instrument executed in 1961 is not a "contract to buy and sell," but merely granted
    plaintiff an "option" to buy, as indicated by its own title "Option to Purchase."
    Article 1479 must be read in relation to Article 1354. Article 1354 applies to contracts in
    general, whereas the second paragraph of Article 1479 refers to "sales" in particular, and, more
    specifically, to "an accepted unilateral promise to buy or to sell." In other words, Article 1479 is
    controlling in the case at bar.

    CALONIA, MA. LAUREVER O.


    Law 113 Sales
    August 22, 2020

    You might also like