Law School @ Malcolm Hall

[judge_ojo]

mga ilang oras o araw mo magagawa un?

casual questions lang naman. don't worry...

[judge_ojo]

Kailangan na ba yung information sheets and questionnaire bukas?

di naman. walang tinanong about sa kanila...

[luna_cyro16]

mga ilang oras o araw mo magagawa un?

casual questions lang naman. don't worry...

siguro isang buong araw if maaga ka or if hindi mahaba ang pila..pila lang kasi ang nagpapatagal eh..maximum na siguro yung two days..

[Kirkegaard]

Hi, guys! I think the CRS is open, although not for the upperclassmen. Just to be frank, because of deblocking, we are more in the dark than you are when it comes to enlistment. We don't know even know when to enlist. Most of us still have Finals (yes, the second sem extends this late in the summer) but I'm done with mine. But the grades aren't even out yet.

By the way, you should get your admission slips before your enrollment. By enrollment, you should be done with your physical exams, too. Good luck, guys! See you in June.

[judge_ojo]

questions for you guys...

But first, allow me to tell a brief background why I am asking these questions: I've just passed the cpa boards last oct and am currently resigned from job due to some reasons (that's another story though). since i don't have money and I am going to take up law this June, I applied as a reviewer in Business Law in the pre-review program of our school. Luckily, I was accepted. I am currently reviewing my Business Law Subjects (include ObliCon) in preparation for my job. Since I haven't really mastered and I have kind of forgotten some of the reasons behind, i have these questions:

1. Why is a potestative suspensive obligation void?

2. Why can't we waiver future fraud (unlike past fraud)?

I lost my basic ObliCon book and all I have now is my reviewer. Sadly, my reviewer isn't complete when it comes to explaining things that's why I have these queries.

Please answer if you have time. Thanks...

Ojo

[jayr_emlano]

questions for you guys...

But first, allow me to tell a brief background why I am asking these questions: I've just passed the cpa boards last oct and am currently resigned from job due to some reasons (that's another story though). since i don't have money and I am going to take up law this June, I applied as a reviewer in Business Law in the pre-review program of our school. Luckily, I was accepted. I am currently reviewing my Business Law Subjects (include ObliCon) in preparation for my job. Since I haven't really mastered and I have kind of forgotten some of the reasons behind, i have these questions:

1. Why is a potestative suspensive obligation void?

2. Why can't we waiver future fraud (unlike past fraud)?

I lost my basic ObliCon book and all I have now is my reviewer. Sadly, my reviewer isn't complete when it comes to explaining things that's why I have these queries.

Please answer if you have time. Thanks...

Ojo

I am not a 100% sure but I'm willing to bet on my answer. hehe! I am also not a lawyer and not yet a CPA (October 2009 pa) hehehe! So if anyone has a better answer I definitely yield to his answer.

1. As I can remember it only potestative suspensive obligations where the condition depends on the sole will of the debtor is void. Because there is no juridical tie created; it can't be demanded. But I think if the obligation already exists and they create a new potestative suspensive condition which is dependent on the sole will of the debtor only the condition shall be void the pre-existing obligation is still valid. If it depends on the will of the creditor it is valid.

2. Because it will encourage fraud. The debtor will not fear committing fraud because he knows that he will not be liable for it. It makes the obligation basically non-existent.

Hopefully this helps.

[judge_ojo]

1. As I can remember it only potestative suspensive obligations where the condition depends on the sole will of the debtor is void. Because there is no juridical tie created; it can't be demanded.

thanks for the answers. However, you mentioned "juridical tie" in your explanation. does this mean a potestative suspensive obligation is a "natural" obligation? Also, why can't the courts enforce the obligation even if the debtor fulfills the condition? are we presuming that even if the condition was fulfilled, the debtor will still not pay his obligation?

[jayr_emlano]

thanks for the answers. However, you mentioned "juridical tie" in your explanation. does this mean a potestative suspensive obligation is a "natural" obligation? Also, why can't the courts enforce the obligation even if the debtor fulfills the condition? are we presuming that even if the condition was fulfilled, the debtor will still not pay his obligation?

Again im not sure sir. hehe! I just graduated and will be taking the CPA board this October so im not really an expert on the topic.

I think the law assumes that if the fulfillment of the obligation is dependent on the sole will of the debtor then why will he fulfill the said condition? He can just simply do away with the obligation by not fulfilling the condition hence no juridical tie? Again this is just based on recall, I also can't find my notes on this.

[judge_ojo]

Again im not sure sir. hehe! I just graduated and will be taking the CPA board this October so im not really an expert on the topic.

I think the law assumes that if the fulfillment of the obligation is dependent on the sole will of the debtor then why will he fulfill the said condition? He can just simply do away with the obligation by not fulfilling the condition hence no juridical tie? Again this is just based on recall, I also can't find my notes on this.

Exercise your brain, dude. You need that for the cpa boards. hehehh...

[judge_ojo]

ways, back to the question. This is my main concern:

why is potestative suspensive obligation still considered void even if the condition is fulfilled? what if the debtor indeed pay the creditor?

[jayr_emlano]

Exercise your brain, dude. You need that for the cpa boards. hehehh...

What the?!!! For trying to help this is what I get? I do hope that you learn some manners quick, something you forgot with all your intelligence. Ang taas pa naman ng tingin ko sa UP law students.

[jayr_emlano]

ways, back to the question. This is my main concern:

why is potestative suspensive obligation still considered void even if the condition is fulfilled? what if the debtor indeed pay the creditor?

What condition is there left to fulfill? Void na nga e. Maybe you need some exercise yourself. And yes I admit you're probably smarter than me. CPA ka na nga e, accepted pa sa UP law. But no need to be "harsh" I was just trying to help. Siguro you felt insulted because a "probinsyano" like me was the one who "tried" to answer your query, but hey nobody else wanted to help so I tried. Again I was just trying to help.

[Flamer]

^- As far as I know, probinsyano din siya.

[Semper]

"A potestative condition is one which makes the execution of the agreement depend on an event which it is in the power of the one or the other of the contracting parties to bring about or to hinder.' Hence, the nature of the condition is such that it depends upon the occurrence of an event, uncertain in that only one party to the contract is given the right, through whim or caprice, to either bring about the event or hinder it."

I read somewhere that potestative conditions are void (although the obligation may remain valid) because they depend on the EXCLUSIVE will of one of the parties, ergo, there is no mutuality.

Anyway, I thought I'd try to help, pero wala ako masyadong idea dito. HR ako walang board! =P

[judge_ojo]

I don't get the overreaction.

I just merely gave a word of advice. I said, u need to exercise your brain on that one. you probably need that for the cpa boards. Constant brain exercising is good!

No, I don't intend to be harsh. I'm clearly misunderstood. Peace!

[judge_ojo]

What condition is there left to fulfill?

Soriano stated that even if a potestative condition is fulfilled on a suspensive obligation, the whole obligation is still considered void. I wanna know why. Anyways, thanks for the help.

[judge_ojo]

^- As far as I know, probinsyano din siya.

Yup. I'm also a probinsyano. Not just any probinsyano, but a probinsyano coming from one of the poorest regions in the nation.

jayr_emlano, i viewed your responses with much objectivity. I set aside the prejudice that I have. I didn't mean to be harsh but I'm sorry if I looked the way you perceive me to be. peace...

[jayr_emlano]

Soriano stated that even if a potestative condition is fulfilled on a suspensive obligation, the whole obligation is still considered void. I wanna know why. Anyways, thanks for the help.

Ok ok. Peace all around! hehe! I think the stress of solving Aud Prob reviewers is getting into me. I just took exception to the way you replied the other day, it sounded (or reads) offensive for me, if it's not well I am sorry also.

From what I know, a potestative condition is not necessarily void, it is only void if the condition depends on the sole will of the debtor. If it depends on the sole will of the creditor it is valid.

When the creation of the obligation depends on the potestative suspensive condition dependent or will be created on the sole will of the debtor, then that said obligation is also void, because there can be no demand.

But when there is a pre-existing obligation, then only the potestative condition is void. The obligation is valid.

Again, I sure hope someone with better knowledge clears this topic up.

PS. I think i also owe you a "thank you" message. hehe! I was the one persistently asking about SGV employees studying at Malcolm hall and the possibility of that.

[Flamer]

Question po:

Ano yung required na ipasa sa college on or before April 30? Documents po ba, or yung payment lang po?

Yung documents po namin kasi hindi pa magiging available until next week because of the staff break.

[Semper]

1. Certificate of Transfer Credentials
2. Photocopy of Birth Certificate
3. Student Directory Form
4. Information Sheet

You should have also paid the admission fee (P100) by April 30. That's all I submitted. I'm not sure if there's more.