Nature and Form

Earnest Money in Contract of Sale and Contract to Sell | Nature and Form | Contract of Sale | SPECIAL CONTRACTS

Earnest Money in a Contract of Sale and Contract to Sell: Comprehensive Guide

Earnest money, often referred to as "arras," plays a significant role in contracts involving the sale of goods, real estate, and other transactions in Philippine civil law. Its legal implications and treatment differ depending on whether the transaction is a Contract of Sale or a Contract to Sell. Below is an exhaustive explanation of the topic under Philippine law:

1. Definition and Legal Basis of Earnest Money

  • Earnest Money: It is a deposit made by the buyer to the seller to show the buyer's good faith and intent to purchase.
  • Under Article 1482 of the Civil Code of the Philippines, earnest money in a contract of sale serves as proof of the perfection of the contract of sale unless there is a stipulation to the contrary.

2. Earnest Money in a Contract of Sale

Characteristics

  1. Proof of Perfection:

    • When earnest money is given, the sale is deemed perfected, as there is already consent between the parties on the object and the price (Art. 1475, Civil Code).
    • The payment of earnest money is evidence of mutual agreement and the binding nature of the sale.

  2. Part of the Purchase Price:

    • Unless otherwise stipulated, earnest money forms part of the purchase price.
    • Example: If the agreed price is ₱1,000,000 and the buyer gives ₱100,000 as earnest money, the remaining balance due is ₱900,000.

  3. Non-Refundable in a Perfected Sale:

    • If the buyer fails to fulfill their obligation to pay the full price, the earnest money is typically forfeited as liquidated damages unless otherwise agreed.

Effect of Earnest Money

  • In a Contract of Sale, earnest money indicates that the seller and buyer are already bound to perform their respective obligations:
    • Seller: Deliver the object sold.
    • Buyer: Pay the balance of the purchase price.

3. Earnest Money in a Contract to Sell

A Contract to Sell is distinct from a Contract of Sale, as ownership does not transfer until the buyer fulfills all obligations, including full payment. Earnest money in this context has different implications:

Characteristics

  1. Reservation Fee:

    • In a Contract to Sell, earnest money is often treated as a reservation fee or down payment.
    • It does not signify the perfection of the sale but merely the buyer's intent to purchase upon fulfillment of conditions.

  2. Not Part of the Purchase Price Unless Stipulated:

    • Earnest money may or may not form part of the purchase price, depending on the parties' agreement.
    • If the sale does not push through, the reservation fee may be refundable or forfeited depending on contractual terms.

  3. Conditional Obligations:

    • The seller's obligation to transfer ownership is conditional on the buyer's full payment or performance of other stipulations.
    • The earnest money is merely a form of security for the prospective transaction.

Effect of Earnest Money

  • Unlike in a Contract of Sale, the giving of earnest money does not perfect the sale. Ownership remains with the seller until the conditions precedent are fulfilled.

4. Distinction Between Earnest Money in a Contract of Sale and a Contract to Sell

Aspect Contract of Sale Contract to Sell
Purpose Evidence of the perfected sale. Proof of good faith and intent to purchase.
Effect on Ownership Ownership transfers upon delivery. Ownership remains with the seller until full payment.
Part of Purchase Price Automatically forms part of the purchase price. Depends on the agreement of the parties.
Perfection of Contract Earnest money signifies a perfected sale. No perfection of sale; conditional.
Refundability Generally non-refundable if the buyer defaults. Refundable or forfeitable based on stipulation.

5. Case Law and Jurisprudence

Key Cases Interpreting Earnest Money

  1. Santos v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 111020, January 4, 1995):

    • The Court clarified that earnest money in a Contract of Sale indicates the sale's perfection. Once given, the seller and buyer are obligated to perform their respective commitments.

  2. Villanueva v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 138184, October 12, 2000):

    • In a Contract to Sell, the Court emphasized that the giving of earnest money or a reservation fee does not automatically create a perfected contract of sale. Ownership remains with the seller until full compliance with conditions.

  3. Heirs of Augusto Salas v. Laperal Realty Corporation (G.R. No. 157383, January 31, 2008):

    • The Court distinguished between earnest money as part of the purchase price in a Contract of Sale and as a mere deposit or reservation in a Contract to Sell.

6. Practical Implications

For Sellers:

  • Clearly stipulate the nature of earnest money in the contract:
    • Is it a reservation fee?
    • Is it refundable or forfeitable?

For Buyers:

  • Understand the legal effects of giving earnest money:
    • In a Contract of Sale, you are bound to complete the payment.
    • In a Contract to Sell, you may lose the earnest money if you fail to meet the conditions precedent.

Drafting Considerations:

  • Clearly state whether earnest money:
    • Forms part of the purchase price.
    • Is refundable or forfeitable upon failure to meet obligations.
    • Indicates the perfection of the sale or serves only as a reservation fee.

Conclusion

The treatment of earnest money under Philippine civil law hinges on whether the agreement constitutes a Contract of Sale or a Contract to Sell. It is crucial for parties to explicitly agree on its terms and conditions to avoid disputes. Jurisprudence underscores the need for clarity in contracts to determine the intent of the parties and the legal implications of earnest money.

Right of First Refusal | Nature and Form | Contract of Sale | SPECIAL CONTRACTS

Right of First Refusal in Civil Law (Philippines):

I. Definition and Nature

The Right of First Refusal (ROFR) is a preferential right granted to a party (referred to as the "optionee") to purchase a specific property under terms to be offered by the owner, should the owner decide to sell it. It does not compel the owner to sell but merely ensures that the optionee has the first opportunity to purchase when the property is placed on the market.

II. Legal Basis

  1. No Specific Codal Provision: The Civil Code of the Philippines does not explicitly define the ROFR. However, it is recognized as part of contractual obligations under Articles 1306, 1319, and 1159:

    • Article 1306: The contracting parties may establish such stipulations, clauses, terms, and conditions as they may deem convenient, provided they are not contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order, or public policy.
    • Article 1319: Consent is essential in contracts, and the ROFR derives its validity from the voluntary agreement of the parties.
    • Article 1159: Obligations arising from contracts have the force of law between the contracting parties.

  2. Judicial Interpretation: Philippine jurisprudence has extensively developed the concept and enforceability of the ROFR.

III. Essential Characteristics

  1. Consensual Nature: The ROFR arises solely from the agreement of the parties. Its validity is contingent on the consent of both parties and the existence of a valid contract.
  2. Not a Sale: It is distinct from a contract of sale or an option contract. It does not obligate the grantor to sell; it only ensures that the grantee has the first opportunity to purchase if the grantor decides to sell.
  3. Conditional Nature: The right becomes exercisable only upon the fulfillment of the condition—i.e., when the owner decides to sell the property.

IV. Key Elements

  1. Grant of the ROFR:

    • The grant must be clear, unequivocal, and in writing to avoid disputes regarding its existence or scope.
    • It should specify the terms under which the right may be exercised.

  2. Triggering Event:

    • The right is triggered only when the owner decides to sell the property to a third party.
    • It requires the owner to notify the holder of the ROFR of their intent to sell and the terms of the prospective sale.

  3. Exercise of the ROFR:

    • The optionee must accept the terms offered by the owner within the prescribed period.
    • Failure to exercise within the stipulated period allows the owner to sell the property to another party under the same terms.

V. Jurisprudence on the ROFR

  1. Ang Yu Asuncion v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 109125, December 2, 1994):

    • Landmark case clarifying that a ROFR is distinct from an option contract.
    • The ROFR does not bind the owner to sell the property but merely grants the grantee the first opportunity to purchase should the owner decide to sell.
    • Breach of the ROFR does not make the subsequent sale void but gives rise to an action for damages.

  2. Equatorial Realty Development, Inc. v. Mayfair Theater, Inc. (G.R. No. 106063, November 21, 1996):

    • A ROFR in a lease agreement was upheld, and the lessor's breach of the ROFR entitled the lessee to damages.

  3. Rosencor Development Corporation v. Inquing (G.R. No. 201315, March 23, 2016):

    • Affirmed that the ROFR requires full compliance with its terms and conditions. The optionee cannot unilaterally modify the terms presented by the owner.

  4. Sps. Villonco v. Carlos (G.R. No. 139652, March 20, 2000):

    • Highlighted that the optionee must match the terms offered to third parties to exercise the ROFR.

VI. Enforceability

  1. Writing Requirement:

    • While verbal agreements may suffice for general contracts, a ROFR, given its implications on property transactions, is best set in writing to ensure enforceability under Article 1403 (Statute of Frauds).

  2. Specific Performance or Damages:

    • If the owner breaches the ROFR by selling to a third party without offering the property to the grantee, the remedy may include:
      • Damages: Compensation for the loss of opportunity to purchase.
      • Specific Performance: If the property has not been transferred in bad faith to an innocent purchaser for value, courts may order the transfer of the property to the grantee.

  3. Limitations:

    • The ROFR must not be perpetual; the agreement must specify a reasonable period for its exercise.
    • It cannot contravene existing laws on public policy, such as restrictions under the Condominium Act or laws on foreign ownership of real estate.

VII. Common Issues in ROFR

  1. Ambiguity in Terms:

    • Vague stipulations on the purchase price, payment terms, or exercise period may render the ROFR unenforceable.

  2. Third-Party Purchasers:

    • If the property is sold to a third party in bad faith, the ROFR holder may pursue remedies such as rescission of the sale.

  3. Failure to Notify the Grantee:

    • The owner's failure to notify the grantee of the intended sale may result in liability for damages or nullification of the subsequent sale.

VIII. Drafting Considerations

When drafting a ROFR, the following elements should be addressed:

  1. Identification of the Property: Clearly specify the property subject to the ROFR.
  2. Triggering Event: Define what constitutes the owner’s decision to sell (e.g., receipt of a bona fide offer from a third party).
  3. Notification Mechanism: Include details on how the owner will notify the grantee and the timeline for such notification.
  4. Acceptance Period: State a reasonable timeframe within which the grantee must exercise the right.
  5. Purchase Terms: Specify the purchase price or the mechanism for determining it (e.g., matching a third-party offer).

IX. Conclusion

The Right of First Refusal is a powerful contractual right that safeguards a party’s interest in acquiring property before others. However, its enforceability hinges on meticulous drafting, clear terms, and adherence to legal principles. While the Civil Code does not directly govern ROFRs, jurisprudence ensures its recognition and protects the parties' rights through appropriate remedies.

Option Contract | Nature and Form | Contract of Sale | SPECIAL CONTRACTS

Option Contract in Civil Law

An option contract in the Philippine civil law framework, as governed by the Civil Code, is a preparatory contract distinct from a contract of sale. It is designed to ensure a party's privilege to buy or sell a specific object under stipulated terms within an agreed period. Below is a meticulous breakdown of the nature, elements, requirements, and key jurisprudence regarding option contracts.

1. Nature of an Option Contract

  1. Definition:

    • An option contract is a bilateral agreement where one party (the offeror) binds themselves to keep their offer open for a specified period, granting the other party (the offeree) the exclusive right to accept the offer during that time.
    • It does not immediately create a contract of sale but constitutes a promise that can lead to a sale upon acceptance.

  2. Principal Characteristics:

    • Unilateral or Bilateral:
      • Initially, the obligation to keep the offer open lies only with the offeror.
      • If there is consideration from the offeree for the option, it becomes a binding bilateral agreement.
    • Separate from the Principal Contract:
      • The option contract stands independently of the eventual contract of sale or lease it contemplates.

  3. Binding Nature:

    • Without separate consideration, the option contract is merely an unaccepted offer and can be withdrawn at will (Article 1479 of the Civil Code).

2. Legal Basis and Elements

The rules governing option contracts are grounded primarily in Articles 1318, 1324, 1479, and related provisions of the Civil Code. For an option contract to be valid and enforceable, the following elements must exist:

a. Consent:

  • There must be a meeting of the minds where the offeror agrees to grant the option, and the offeree agrees to the terms.

b. Object:

  • The subject matter of the option must be definite and specific, typically involving the sale or lease of a determinate thing or the rendering of a particular service.

c. Cause or Consideration:

  • A separate and distinct consideration must exist for the option contract to be binding.
  • Article 1479 provides that an accepted unilateral promise to buy or sell, if supported by consideration distinct from the price, gives rise to a binding option contract.

3. Distinction Between Offer and Option Contract

  • Offer:

    • A unilateral proposal to enter into a contract, subject to acceptance. It is not binding if revoked before acceptance unless coupled with consideration.

  • Option Contract:

    • A perfected preparatory agreement that binds the offeror to hold their offer open for a fixed period, regardless of whether the principal contract is eventually perfected.

4. Requisites for Enforceability

  1. Separate Consideration:

    • Jurisprudence (e.g., Sanchez v. Rigos, G.R. No. L-25494, June 14, 1972) affirms that a separate and distinct consideration (e.g., money, services, or another valuable thing) must support the option contract to make it enforceable. Without such consideration, the promise is not binding.

  2. Definiteness:

    • The option contract must specify a clear and determinable period within which the offer is held open.

  3. Written Form:

    • While not explicitly required, for enforceability, an option contract is often in writing, especially when dealing with immovable property, under the Statute of Frauds (Article 1403).

5. Effects of Breach or Withdrawal

  1. If Consideration Exists:

    • The withdrawal or revocation of the offer by the offeror before the expiration of the stipulated period constitutes a breach of the option contract, rendering the offeror liable for damages.

  2. If No Consideration Exists:

    • The option contract lacks enforceability, and the offeror may revoke the offer at any time before acceptance.

6. Perfection of the Principal Contract

  • The principal contract (e.g., contract of sale) is perfected when the offeree exercises the option within the agreed period and communicates acceptance to the offeror, provided all essential requisites for a valid sale are present under Article 1458 of the Civil Code.

7. Key Jurisprudence

  1. Sanchez v. Rigos (1972):

    • The Court clarified that for an option contract to be binding, it must be supported by a distinct consideration. Otherwise, it is merely an unaccepted offer.

  2. Topacio v. Court of Appeals (1992):

    • Held that when the offeree exercises the option within the agreed period, the offeror becomes bound to the terms of the principal contract, leading to its perfection.

  3. Equatorial Realty v. Mayfair Theater (1995):

    • An option to renew a lease included in the principal lease contract does not require separate consideration, as it forms part of the mutual covenants of the main contract.

8. Practical Applications

  1. Real Estate Transactions:

    • Often used in property sales or leases to grant potential buyers or lessees the exclusive right to purchase or lease property within a specified time.

  2. Business Agreements:

    • Provides flexibility in negotiations by allowing parties to secure rights while exploring other opportunities.

9. Remedies for Breach

  • Specific Performance: If the offeror refuses to honor the option despite valid consideration and acceptance.
  • Damages: The injured party may seek monetary compensation for losses incurred due to the offeror's failure to comply.

Conclusion

An option contract serves as a strategic tool in civil law, allowing parties to secure future contractual obligations while preserving flexibility. Its enforceability depends on strict adherence to the principles of consideration, consent, and definiteness. As highlighted by jurisprudence, the separate consideration is crucial for binding the offeror to the terms of the option, ensuring fairness and predictability in commercial and legal transactions.

Contract of Sale vs. Contract to Sell | Nature and Form | Contract of Sale | SPECIAL CONTRACTS

Contract of Sale vs. Contract to Sell

The distinction between a Contract of Sale and a Contract to Sell is fundamental in Philippine Civil Law, specifically under the law on obligations and contracts. These two agreements, while closely related and often confused, have distinct legal implications, especially concerning the transfer of ownership and remedies available in case of breach. Below is a comprehensive analysis:

1. Definition and Key Features

Contract of Sale

  • Nature: A principal contract wherein one party (the seller) obligates himself to transfer ownership of and deliver a determinate thing to another party (the buyer), who, in turn, obligates himself to pay a price certain in money or its equivalent.
  • Ownership Transfer: Ownership is transferred to the buyer upon the perfection of the contract (or upon delivery, if agreed upon as a condition).
  • Risk of Loss: The risk of loss is immediately borne by the buyer once ownership has passed.

Contract to Sell

  • Nature: A preparatory contract where the seller reserves ownership of the property until the buyer fulfills a suspensive condition (e.g., full payment of the purchase price).
  • Ownership Transfer: Ownership is not transferred until the suspensive condition is met.
  • Risk of Loss: The seller retains the risk of loss since ownership remains with him until the condition is fulfilled.

2. Legal Basis

Contract of Sale

  • Article 1458, Civil Code of the Philippines:

    "By the contract of sale one of the contracting parties obligates himself to transfer the ownership of and to deliver a determinate thing, and the other to pay therefor a price certain in money or its equivalent."

Contract to Sell

  • Not explicitly defined in the Civil Code but recognized by jurisprudence as a valid contract. The courts characterize it as distinct from a Contract of Sale due to the conditional nature of the transfer of ownership.

3. Differences

Aspect Contract of Sale Contract to Sell
Nature Consummated contract upon delivery and payment of price. Conditional contract dependent on the fulfillment of a condition.
Ownership Transfer Ownership passes upon perfection (or delivery). Ownership passes only upon fulfillment of a suspensive condition.
Risk of Loss Risk transfers to the buyer upon perfection (or delivery). Risk remains with the seller until the suspensive condition is fulfilled.
Remedy for Breach Specific performance or rescission under Article 1191. No rescission; mere non-fulfillment of the condition prevents the transfer of ownership.
Reservation of Ownership Not applicable; ownership is not reserved. Ownership is expressly reserved by the seller.

4. Essential Elements

Contract of Sale

  1. Consent: Mutual agreement between parties.
  2. Object: A determinate thing or specific good.
  3. Price: Must be certain in money or its equivalent.

Contract to Sell

  1. Consent: Agreement on the conditional transfer of ownership.
  2. Object: A specific property to be sold in the future.
  3. Condition: Fulfillment of a suspensive condition (e.g., full payment of the price).

5. Legal and Jurisprudential Implications

Ownership Transfer

  • In a Contract of Sale, the seller cannot recover the property once delivered, unless there is a legal ground for rescission.
  • In a Contract to Sell, failure to fulfill the condition prevents ownership transfer, and the seller can retain the property without needing rescission proceedings.

Breach of Contract

  • In a Contract of Sale, breach may give rise to rescission under Article 1191 or damages under Articles 1170-1174.
  • In a Contract to Sell, failure to fulfill the condition is not considered a breach; rather, it results in the automatic non-transfer of ownership.

Risk of Loss

  • Under Article 1262, loss or deterioration of the thing sold is borne by the buyer if ownership has already passed.
  • In a Contract to Sell, the seller bears the risk as ownership remains with him.

Remedies for the Seller

  • In a Contract of Sale, the seller may:
    1. Demand payment of the price.
    2. Rescind the sale for breach.
  • In a Contract to Sell, the seller need not rescind because the failure to fulfill the suspensive condition automatically negates the obligation to sell.

6. Jurisprudence

Philippine courts have repeatedly clarified the distinction between these two contracts:

Heirs of Felipe Lazo v. Spouses Lazo (G.R. No. 176545)

  • The Court held that a Contract to Sell is a conditional sale where ownership is retained by the seller until the buyer pays in full. The non-fulfillment of the condition means no sale arises.

Coronel v. CA (G.R. No. 103577)

  • The Court distinguished a Contract of Sale, where ownership transfers upon delivery, from a Contract to Sell, where ownership remains with the seller until payment of the full price.

Sps. Santos v. CA (G.R. No. 102428)

  • The Court emphasized that in a Contract to Sell, the failure to pay the purchase price is not a breach but merely prevents the sale from being perfected.

7. Practical Application

  • Contract of Sale is often used in cash sales or transactions where payment is immediate or installment arrangements are accompanied by delivery of ownership.
  • Contract to Sell is preferred in real estate transactions where full payment is required before the transfer of title to safeguard the seller’s interest.

Conclusion

Understanding the distinction between a Contract of Sale and a Contract to Sell is crucial for both buyers and sellers. It affects ownership, risk allocation, and available remedies. Legal practitioners must carefully draft contracts to ensure the parties' intent is clear and to prevent disputes regarding ownership and obligations.

Nature and Form | Contract of Sale | SPECIAL CONTRACTS

Contract of Sale under Philippine Civil Law: Nature and Form

Nature of a Contract of Sale

A contract of sale is a special contract defined under Article 1458 of the Civil Code of the Philippines. It is a reciprocal agreement wherein one party (the seller or vendor) obligates himself to deliver and transfer ownership of a determinate thing, and the other party (the buyer or vendee) obligates himself to pay a price certain in money or its equivalent.

  1. Essential Characteristics:

    • Nominate and Principal Contract: A contract of sale is nominate, as it is expressly defined and regulated by law, and principal, because it exists independently of any other contract.
    • Bilateral: Obligations exist on both parties—delivery and ownership transfer on the part of the seller, and payment of the price on the part of the buyer.
    • Onerous: The buyer pays a price or consideration, making it a contract where obligations are undertaken in exchange for valuable consideration.
    • Commutative: There is an exchange of value that is deemed equivalent—ownership of the thing for the price.
    • Consensual: The contract is perfected by mere consent, regardless of whether the thing or price has been delivered or paid.

  2. Objects of Sale:

    • The subject matter of the sale may include:
      • Things already existing or future goods (Article 1461).
      • Rights, provided they are transmissible.
      • All kinds of property, whether movable or immovable, unless prohibited by law.
    • Things that cannot be the subject of sale:
      • Those outside the commerce of men (e.g., public domain property, illicit goods).
      • Future inheritance (Article 1347).
      • Rights or properties explicitly prohibited by special laws (e.g., homestead rights under the Public Land Act).

  3. Price or Consideration:

    • The price must be in money or its equivalent. Payment in kind transforms the agreement into a barter or exchange (Article 1638).
    • The price must be:
      • Certain or ascertainable at the time of the contract.
      • Real and not fictitious. A nominal price, intended merely to evade legal requirements, renders the sale void.

  4. Distinction from Other Contracts:

    • Sale vs. Barter (Article 1638): If the consideration consists partly of money and partly of goods, it is considered a sale if the value of the money is greater; otherwise, it is barter.
    • Sale vs. Lease: A sale involves transfer of ownership, whereas a lease involves mere transfer of use or possession.
    • Sale vs. Dation in Payment (Dacion en Pago): Dation in payment occurs when property is given in satisfaction of a debt; a sale is an independent contract.
    • Sale vs. Agency to Sell: In an agency to sell, ownership remains with the principal until the agent disposes of the goods.

Form of a Contract of Sale

A contract of sale, like most contracts under Philippine law, does not require a specific form for validity, except in cases specified by law.

  1. General Rule: No Formality Required (Article 1356):

    • A contract of sale is perfected by mere consent and may be verbal or written, unless specific forms are mandated by law for enforceability or validity.

  2. Exceptions:

    • Sale of Real Property (Statute of Frauds, Article 1403(2)):
      • The sale of real property or an interest therein must be in writing and signed by the parties to be enforceable.
    • Sale of Goods Worth PHP 500 or More:
      • The law requires evidence in writing for enforceability under the Statute of Frauds (Article 1403(2)(d)) unless there has been partial delivery or payment.
    • Donations of Movable Property with Value Exceeding PHP 5,000:
      • Requires acceptance in writing to be valid (Article 748).

  3. Form Required for Registration or Special Transactions:

    • Sale of Immovable Property (Article 1358):
      • Though not required for validity, the sale must be embodied in a public instrument and registered with the Register of Deeds to affect third parties.
    • Sale of Large Cattle:
      • Subject to the Cattle Registration Act, requiring compliance with special documentary requirements.
    • Sale of Vessels, Aircraft, or Motor Vehicles:
      • Requires registration with specific government agencies (e.g., MARINA, LTO, CAAP).

Perfection of a Contract of Sale

  1. Stages of a Contract of Sale:

    • Negotiation: Preliminary discussions where the parties agree on the terms.
    • Perfection: The moment consent is given regarding the thing and the price.
    • Consummation: Fulfillment of the obligations (delivery of the thing and payment of the price).

  2. Obligations Upon Perfection:

    • Seller’s Obligations:
      • To transfer ownership of a determinate thing.
      • To deliver the thing in a condition as agreed.
    • Buyer’s Obligations:
      • To pay the price at the time and place agreed upon.
      • To accept delivery of the thing.

Key Legal Doctrines and Jurisprudence

  1. Consent and Meeting of Minds:

    • Consent is essential for the perfection of a sale. A valid offer and acceptance are necessary.
    • The meeting of minds must include agreement on the thing and the price (Vasquez vs. Ayala Corporation, G.R. No. 195878, 2017).

  2. Delivery and Ownership Transfer:

    • Ownership is transferred not upon perfection but upon delivery, unless stipulated otherwise (Article 1496).
    • In real property sales, delivery is symbolized by registration with the Register of Deeds (Article 1498).

  3. Earnest Money vs. Option Money:

    • Earnest Money (Article 1482):
      • Considered part of the purchase price and proof of the perfection of the sale.
    • Option Money:
      • A distinct consideration for the privilege of holding the offer open for a period; it does not bind the offeree to sell.

  4. Conditional Sales:

    • Sales subject to a suspensive condition (e.g., payment in installments) or a resolutory condition (e.g., failure to fulfill an obligation).
    • In pacto de retro sales, the seller retains the right to repurchase the property within a specific period.

This discussion provides a comprehensive yet succinct overview of the nature and form of the contract of sale under Philippine Civil Law, addressing all essential elements, exceptions, and jurisprudential nuances.

Privacy Policy

Terms of Use

Lawyer Login

 
 
Privacy Policy         Terms of Use         Lawyer Login