Week 14 Activities Voidable Contracts Learning Activity 6.3
Week 14 Activities Voidable Contracts Learning Activity 6.3
MODULE 6
VOIDABLE CONTRACTS
2. Give period for filing an action for annulment, in each of the instances
provided in
Art1390.
ANSWER:
The four-year period for bringing an action for annulment is reckoned:
1. In case of intimidation, violence, or undue influence, from the time
the intimidation, etc. ceases. Before that time, the consent is still being
vitiated and, therefore, the victim cannot be expected to bring an
action in court.The running of the prescriptive period cannot be
interrupted by an extrajudicial demand made by the party whose
consent was vitiated. (Miailhe vs. Court of Appeals, 354 SCRA 675
[2001].)
2. In case of mistake or fraud, from the time it is discovered. This must
be so because before the time of discovery, the innocent party is
unaware of the reason which renders the contract voidable (Art.
1393.) and cannot also be expected to bring an action in court.
Furthermore, the guilty party should not be rewarded for successfully
hiding the mistake or fraud. The time of the discovery of the alleged
mistake or fraud, must be clear from the allegations of the complaint.
(Gonzales vs. Climax Mining Ltd., 512 SCRA 148 [2007].)
3. In the case of contracts entered into by minors or other
incapacitated persons, from the time the guardianship ceases. In the
case of a minor, guardianship ceases upon reading the age of
majority.An incapacitated person has no capacity to sue.
EXAMPLES:
(1) S, a minor, sold his land to B. Upon reaching the age of majority,
S, with full knowledge of his rights in the premises, instead of
repudiating the contract, disposed of the greater part of the
proceeds, or collected the unpaid balance of the purchase price
from B. In this case, there is tacit ratification by S. (see Uy Soo Lim
vs. Tan Unchuan, 38 Phil. 552 [1918].)
(2) In an action for annulment of a contract of sale, S alleged that
the sale was executed by him through the threat and intimidation
of B. It appears, however, that S deposited the check for the
purchase price and withdrew the money from time to time. The
contract is deemed ratififi ed. (see Liboro vs. Rogers, 106 Phil. 404
[1959].)
(2) The requisites for express ratification are the same as those for
implied ratification except that the former is effected expressly.
4. who, between the parties to a voidable contract, can file an action for
annulment.
ANSWER:
The consent of the guilty party is not required; otherwise,
he can conveniently disregard his contract by the simple expedient of
refusing to give his conformity. The innocent party
has the prerogative to annul or not to annul a voidable contract.