This answer is written by AI. The information provided in this response is intended for general informational purposes only and should not be considered as legal advice. Do not rely solely on the information provided in this response for any legal decisions. Consult with a qualified legal professional before making any decisions.

What Differentiates Quasi-Delict from Quasi-Contract?

Question from kaso, What Differentiates Quasi-Delict from Quasi-Contract?

Answer from AI:

Quasi-Delict vs. Quasi-Contract

  • Quasi-Delict: This is a concept derived from the Latin term “delict,” which refers to a wrongful act or an act of negligence that causes harm to another person. Under the law, specifically in the context of the New Civil Code of the Philippines, a quasi-delict is an act or omission that causes damage to another, there being fault or negligence, but which does not arise from a contractual obligation. The person who suffers damage can demand compensation from the person at fault for the harm done (Article 2176).
  • Quasi-Contract: This refers to certain lawful, voluntary, and unilateral acts which are enforceable to the end that no one shall be unjustly enriched or benefited at the expense of another. A quasi-contract is not based on an explicit agreement but is established by the law to prevent injustice (Articles 2142-2175). Examples include payment of what is not due and mutual restitution in case of solutio indebiti (payment by mistake).

Essential Requisites of an Obligation

An obligation is a legal requirement by which a person is bound to perform a certain act or refrain from performing a certain act. The essential requisites of an obligation are:

  1. Active subject (creditor): The entity who has the right to demand the fulfillment of the obligation.
  2. Passive subject (debtor): The entity who has the duty to fulfill the obligation.
  3. The prestation or object of the obligation: The conduct required to be observed by the debtor, which may consist in giving, doing, or not doing something.
  4. The legal tie (vinculum juris): The legal or juridical relation established between the parties by virtue of which one can demand from the other the observance of the obligation.

Vinculum Juris in Relation to Obligation

The term vinculum juris refers to the legal bond or tie that binds the parties to an obligation. It is the legal relationship that exists between the creditor and the debtor because of the existence of an obligation. This bond gives the creditor the right to compel the debtor to perform or fulfill the obligation.

Other Sources of Obligation

Article 1157 of the New Civil Code lists the sources of obligations, which include law, contracts, quasi-contracts, acts or omissions punished by law (delicts), and quasi-delicts. However, there are other sources of obligations that may arise from:

  • Other specific laws that create obligations.
  • International agreements and treaties.
  • Principles of equity, when legally recognized.

Public Offer Through Advertisements as a Source of Obligation

False. A public offer made through advertisements is generally considered an invitation to make an offer rather than an offer itself. It invites the public to make proposals that the advertiser can either accept or reject. However, if the advertisement is clear, definite, and explicit, leaving nothing open for negotiation, it can constitute a valid offer that, once accepted, may result in a binding contract. The specifics of the advertisement and the intention behind it are crucial in determining whether it can be a source of a demandable obligation.

For personalized advice, it is recommended to consult with a legal professional who can provide guidance based on the specifics of the situation.

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

Leave a Comment