2013 (Civil Law) Bar Exam Questions: Multiple Choice Question 10

[Discuss/answer the question below. Or see Civil Law Instructions; Civil Law Instructions; Civil Law Essay Questions: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10; Civil Law Multiple Choice Questions: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9; See also 2013 Bar Exam: Information, Discussions, Tips, Questions and Results]


Arlene owns a row of apartment houses in Kamuning, Quezon City. She agreed to lease Apartment No. 1 to Janet for a period of 18 months at the rate of P10,000 per month. The lease was not covered by any contract. Janet promptly gave Arlene two (2) months deposit and 18
checks covering the rental payment for 18 months. This show of good faith prompted Arlene to promise Janet that should Arlene decide to sell the property, she would give Janet the right of
first refusal.

X.(1) Not long after Janet moved in, she received news that her application for a Master of Laws scholarship at King’s College in London had been approved. Since her acceptance of the scholarship entailed a transfer of residence, Janet asked Arlene to return the advance rental payments she made. Arlene refused, prompting Janet to file an action to recover the payments. Arlene filed a motion to dismiss, claiming that the lease on which the action is based,
is unenforceable.

If you were the judge, would you grant Arlene’s motion? (1%)

(A) Yes, I will grant the motion because the lease contract between Arlene and Janet was not
in writing, hence, Janet may not enforce any right arising from the same contract.

(B) No, I will not grant the motion because to allow Arlene to retain the advance payments would amount to unjust enrichment.

(C) Yes, I will grant the motion because the action for recovery is premature; Janet should first secure a judicial rescission of the contract of lease.

(D) No. I will not grant the motion because the cause of action does not seek to enforce any right under the contract of lease.

X.(2) Assume that Janet decided not to accept the scholarship and continued leasing Apartment No. 1. Midway through the lease period,Arlene decided to sell Apartment No. 1 to Jun in breach
of her promise to Janet to grant her the right of first refusal. Thus, Janet filed an action seeking the recognition of her right of first refusal, the payment of damages for the violation of this right, and the rescission of the sale between Arlene and Jun.

Is Janet’s action meritorious? (1%)

(A) Yes, under the Civil Code, a promise to buy and sell a determinate thing is reciprocally demandable.

(B) No, the promise to buy and sell a determinate thing was not supported by a consideration.

(C) Yes, Janet’s right of first refusal was clearly violated when the property was not offered for sale to her before it was sold to Jun.

(D) No, a right of first refusal involves an interest over real property that must be embodied in a written contract to be enforceable.

(E) None of the above.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *