PART 1

Facts: The issue started when defendant was alleged to wrongfully discharge the plaintiff who had been employed by the defendant for an indefinite time, admitting that he discharged the plaintiff without written advice, however, asserting that such discharge is lawful on account of absence and disobedience of the plaintiff. The previous judgment was in favor of the plaintiff; hence, the defendant now seeks an appeal. The defendant asserts that in their contract, the petitioner cannot enter into an employment within five years after the termination of their agreement. However, it is discovered that the plaintiff has contracted another employment, hence, violating their agreement. Issue: Whether or not the right of the plaintiff to enter into contract can be restrained and such agreement is against public policy?FACTS: On March 16, 1998, petitioner DKC Holdings Corporation (DKC) entered into a Contract of Lease with Option to Buy with Encarnacion Bartolome, decedent herein, whereby petitioner was given the option to lease or lease with purchase the subject land. Encarnacion died. Thereafter, petitioner coursed its payment to private respondent Victor Bartolome, being the sole heir of Encarnacion. Victor, however, refused to accept these payments. On March 14, 1990, petitioner served upon Victor, via registered mail, notice that it was exercising its option to lease the property, tendering the amount of P15,000.00 as rent. Again, Victor refused to accept the tendered rental fee and to surrender possession of the property to petitioner. On April 23, 1990, petitioner filed a complaint for specific performance and damages against Victor and the Register of Deeds ISSUE: Whether or not the rights under a Contact of Lease with Option to Buy were transmissible