ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

5/13/2011

Civil Law

Kinds of Agency 1992 Bar Exam Question No. 8

A as principal appointed B as his agent granting him general and unlimited management over As properties, stating that A withholds no power from B and that the agent may execute such acts as he may consider appropriate. Accordingly, B leased As parcel of land in Manila to C for four (4) years at P60,000.00 per year, payable annually in advance. B leased another parcel of land of A in Caloocan City to D without a fixed term at P3,000.00 per month payable monthly.

AGENCY
Prof. Crisostomo A. Uribe

Ba r

All those contracts were executed by B while A was confined due to illness in the Makati Medical Center. Rule on the validity and binding effect of each of the above contracts upon A the principal.
xxx

bl

es

Agency

an

es

Ba bl
a.

r
Kinds of Agency 1992 Bar Exam Question No. 8
xxx the lease to C is valid and binding because B was granted a general and unlimited management of As properties while the lease to D is void because of the failure to fix the term of the lease. the lease to C is unenforceable because of the absence of a special power of attorney while the lease to D is valid and binding. the lease to C is void because of the absence of a special power of attorney while the lease to D is valid and binding as this is merely an act of administration. both contracts are unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds because they are not in writing.

38%

b. c.

Modes of Extinguishment 62%

an

d.

bl

es

Ba

Rights and Obligations of the Agent

an

Definition 2003 Bar Exam Question No. V (5%)

Jo-Ann asked her close friend, Aissa, to buy some groceries for her in the supermarket. Was there a nominate contract entered into between Jo-Ann and Aissa? a. None, because no legal relationship may be created between friends. b. Yes, a contract of sale was entered into. c. Yes, a contract of sale will be entered into if Aissa will actually buy the groceries. d. Yes, if Aissa agreed, a contract of agency was entered into.

Obligations of the Agent : To act within the Scope of his authority 1994 Bar Exam Question No. 18

Prime Realty Corporation appointed Nestor the exclusive agent in the sale of lots of its newly developed subdivision. Prime Realty told Nestor that he could not collect or receive payments from the buyers. Nestor was able to sell ten lots to Jesus and to collect the down payments for said lots. He did not turn over the collections to Prime Realty. Who shall bear the loss for Nestors defalcation, Prime Realty or Jesus? a. Prime Realty because a principal is bound to contracts entered into by its exclusive agent. b. Prime Realty if Jesus was not aware that Nestor has no authority to collect down payments.

an

o bl

es
6

Ba
1

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc. 5/13/2011

Obligations of the Agent : To act within the Scope of his authority 1994 Bar Exam Question No. 18

Obligations of the Agent : To be responsible for the acts of the substitute

1999 Bar Exam Question No. XV(a) (5%)

c. d.

Jesus because he did not inquire as to the limitations imposed by Prime Realty upon Nestor. Jesus if a Special Power of Attorney was given to Nestor wherein it is stated that he could not collect or receive payments but Jesus did not demand for the presentation of the power of attorney.

(a) X appoints Y as his agent to sell his products in Cebu City. Can Y appoint a subagent and if he does, what are the effects of such appointment? a. No, because he was not given the power to appoint a sub-agent. b. Yes, but the agent will be considered to have withdrawn from the agency.
10

bl

es

Ba r
7

Obligations of the Agent : To act in representation of his principal

an

an

bl

es

B. CX executed a special power of attorney authorizing DY to secure a loan from any bank and to mortgage his property covered by the owners certificate of title. In securing a loan from MBank, DY did not specify that he was acting for CX in the transaction with said bank.

bl

es o

2004 Bar Exam Question No. 4(B) (5%)

Ba

r
Obligations of the Agent : To be responsible for the acts of the substitute

1999 Bar Exam Question No. XV(a) (5%)

c. Yes, because the agent may appoint a substitute or sub-agent if the principal has not prohibited him from doing so. d. Yes, because by appointing a subagent, an agent is not considered to have dissociated himself from the agency.

Ba

11

an

Obligations of the Agent : To act in representation of his principal

2004 Bar Exam Question No. 4(B) (5%)

Prohibited Liable. All acts of the substitute appointed against the prohibition of the principal shall be void.

Not Prohibited (shall be responsible for the acts of the substitute) Not given power to appoint

Is CX liable for the bank loan? a. b. c. d. Yes, because he authorized DY to secure a loan from any bank. Yes, he authorized the mortgage on his property to secure the loan contracted by DY. No, because the object of the contract of loan belongs to the principal. No, because the bank has no cause of action against CX.

Liable if Not liable if the Designated substitute substitute Not liable, acted acted within unless he knew outside the the scope of that the scope of authority and designated authority in person is OR there is representation notoriously bad faith or of the incompetent negligence principal and or already on the part acted with insolvent. of the due diligence (Art. 1888) substitute. and in good faith. (The agent is not an insurer of the success of the business of the principal.)

an

o bl

Obligations of the Agent : Effects of appointment of Substitute / Liability in case of damage to principal - Art. 1892
Given power to appoint Not designated Agent shall be Not liable as agent responsible shall NOT be for the acts of responsible the substitute for the acts of if the the substitute substitute is if the notoriously substitute is incompetent NOT or insolvent. notoriously incompetent nor insolvent.

es

Ba
12

r
2

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc. 5/13/2011

Guarantee Commission Agent 2004 Bar Exam Question No. 6(B) (5%)
B. As an agent, AL was given a guarantee commission, in addition to his regular commission, after he sold 20 units of refrigerators to a customer, HT Hotel. The customer, however, failed to pay for the units sold. ALs principal, DRBI, demanded from AL payment for the customers accountability. AL objected on the ground that his job was only to sell and not to collect payment for units bought by the customer. Is ALs objection valid? Can DRBI collect from him or not? Reason.

Modes of Extinguishment 1988 Bar Exam Question No. 8(a)

a) I will decide in favor of Edgar because the defense raised is not one of the grounds enumerated for the extinguishment of a contract of agency under Article 1919. I will decide in favor of Edgar because there must be a prior conviction of robbery before such defense can be availed of. I will decide in favor of Mario because the principal, being the owner, bears the loss, regardless of the cause of the loss. I will decide in favor of Mario because a prior conviction of robbery is not required before such defense can be availed of as long as there was no negligence on his part .

b. c. d.

Ba r
13

16

bl

es

an

es o bl

Guarantee Commission Agent 2004 Bar Exam Question No. 6(B) (5%)
Is ALs objection valid? Can DRBI collect from him or not? Reason. a. Yes, ALs objection is valid because as a commission agent his obligation is only to sell. b. No, DRBI cannot collect from him because an agent is not the insurer of the success of the business of the principal. c. No, ALs objection is not valid because the agency is one coupled with interest. d. Yes, DRBI can collect from him because as a guarantee commission agent, he bears the risk of collection.

Ba

r
Modes of Extinguishment 1997 Bar Exam Question No. 17(c)
Stating briefly the thesis to support your answer to each of the following cases, will the death (c) of an agent end an agency? a. b. c. d. No, if the agency was constituted for the benefit of both the principal and the agent. No, if the agency was constituted for the benefit of a third person who accepted the benefit. Yes, if notice is given by his heirs to the principal. Yes, because agency is representative in character.

an

14

bl

es

Ba

17

an

Modes of Extinguishment 1988 Bar Exam Question No. 8(a)

a) Mario received from Edgar a pendant with diamonds valued at P5,000.00 to be sold on commission basis or to be returned on demand. In the evening of August 31, 1987, while he was walking home, two men snatched his clutch bag containing the pendant and ran away. Subsequently, the snatchers were apprehended and charged. During the pendency of the criminal case, Edgar brought an action against Mario for the recovery of the pendant or its value and damages. Mario interposed the defense of fortuitous event but Edgar contends-1. That the defense of fortuitous event is untenable because there was negligence on the part of the defendant; and; 2. That if the defense is tenable, there must be a prior conviction of robbery before it can be availed of. Decide the case.
15

Modes of Extinguishment 1997 Bar Exam Question No. 13(a)

b) In 1950, in a telephone conversation, A authorized B to sell a parcel of land consisting of more than 14 hectares. A died in 1954. In 1956, his four children sold the land to C. In 1957, B sold the same land to D. It appears that C did not register the sale executed by the children. D, who was not aware of the previous sale, registered the sale executed by B, whose authority to sell was annotated at the back of the Original Certificate of Title. Assuming that B still had the authority to sell the landwho has a better right over the said land, C or D?

an

o bl

es
18

Ba
3

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc. 5/13/2011

Modes of Extinguishment 1997 Bar Exam Question No. 13(a)

Ba r

a. C, because the sale to D is void. b. C, because he is the first buyer and he bought the land from the heirs of the principal. c. D, because he was the only one who registered the sale. d. D, because he bought the land in good faith.

Good Luck!
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph

19

22

bl

es

Modes of Extinguishment : Agency coupled with interest

20

bl

es

Richard sold a large parcel of land in Cebu to Leo for P100 million payable in annual installments over a period of ten years, but title will remain with Richard until the purchase price is fully paid. To enable Leo to pay the price, Richard gave him a power-of-attorney authorizing him to subdivide the land, sell the individual lots, and deliver the proceeds to Richard, to be applied to the purchase price. Five years later, Richard revoked the power of attorney and took over the sale of the subdivision lots himself. Is the revocation valid or not? Why?

bl

es

2001 Bar Exam Question No. XV(5%)

an

Ba

r R an Ba r R an C h an R o bl es
4

2001 Bar Exam Question No. XV(5%)

a. b.

c.

d.

Yes, because the principal can revoke the authority of the agent at will. Yes, because revocation may be express of implied. When the principal took over the sale of the subdivision lots himself, there was an implied revocation. No, because there can be no valid revocation before the expiration of the period agreed upon. No, because the agency is one coupled with interest.

21

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph

Modes of Extinguishment : Agency coupled with interest

Ba