I. A, upon request, loaned his passenger Jeepney to B to enable B to bring his sick wife from Tagum City to the SPMC in Davao City for treatment. On the way back to Tagum CIty, after leaving his wife at the hospital, people stopped the passenger Jeepney. B stopped for them and allowed them to ride on board, accepting payment from them just as in the case of ordinary passenger Jeepneys plying their route. As B was crossing Panabo City, there was an onrush of flood, the Jeep that was loaned to him was wrecked.

1) What do you call the contract that was entered into by A and B with respect to the passenger Jeepney that was loaned by A to B to transport the latter's sick wife to Davao City?

2) Is B obliged to pay A for the use of the passenger jeepney?

3) Is B liable to A for the loss of the Jeepney?

II. A granted B the exclusive right to sell his brand of pants in Davao City, the price for his merchandise is payable within 60 days from delivery, and promising B a commission of 20% on all sales. After the delivery of the merchandise to B but before he could sell any of them, B's store in Davao City was completely burned without his fault, together with all of A's pants. Must B pay A for his lost pants? Why?

III. On June 15, 2020, X sold a parcel of registered land to Y. On June 30, 2020, he sold the same land to Z. Who has a better right if:

a) the first sale is registered ahead of the second sale, with knowledge of the latter. Why?

b) the second sale is registered ahead of the first sale, with knowledge of the latter? Why?

IV. Sergio is the registered owner of a 500-square meter land. His friend, Marcelo, who has long been interested in the property, succeeded in persuading Sergio to sell it to him. On June 2, 2012, they agreed on the purchase price of P600,000.00 and that Sergio would give Marcelo up to June 30, 2012 within which to raise the amount. Marcelo, in a light tone usual between them, said that they should seal their agreement through a case of Jack Daniels Black and P5,000.00 "pulutan" money which he immediately handed to Sergio and which the latter accepted. The friends then sat down and drank the first bottle from the case of bourbon. On June 15, 2013, Sergio learned of another buyer, Roberto, who was offering P800,000.00 in ready cash for the land. When Roberto confirmed that he could pay in cash as soon as Sergio could get the documentation ready, Sergio decided to withdraw his offer to Marcelo, hoping to just explain matters to his friend. Marcelo, however, objected when the withdrawal was communicated to him, taking the position that they have a firm and binding agreement that Sergio cannot simply walk away from because he has an option to buy that is duly supported by a duly accepted valuable consideration.

A. Does Marcelo have a cause of action against Sergio?

B. Can Sergio claim that whatever they might have agreed upon cannot be enforced because any agreement relating to the sale of real property must be supported by evidence in writing and they never reduced their agreement to writing?

V. Dux leased his house to Iris for a period of 2 years, at the rate of P25,000.00 monthly, payable annually in advance. The contract stipulated that it may be renewed for another 2-year period upon mutual agreement of the parties. The contract also granted Iris the right of first refusal to purchase the property at any time during the lease, if Dux decides to sell the property at the same price that the property is offered for sale to a third party. Twenty-three months after execution of the lease contract, Dux sold breach of her right of first refusal. Dux said there was no breach because the property was sold to his mother who is not a third party. Iris filed an action to rescind the sale and to compel Dux to sell the property to her at the same price. Alternatively, she asked the court to extend the lease for another 2 years on the same terms.

A. Can Iris seek rescission of the sale of the property to Dux's mother?

B. Will the alternative prayer for extension of the lease prosper?

VI. Rosario obtained a loan of P100,000.00 from Jennifer, and pledged her diamond ring. The contract signed by the parties stipulated that if Rosario is unable to redeem the ring on due date, she will execute a document in favor of Jennifer providing that the ring shall automatically be considered full payment of the loan. Is the contract valid? Explain .