Practice question
Cora supplies legally required support to a child without the obligated parent’s knowledge. She intended reimbursement, not a gift or act of piety, and the facts satisfy Article2164. The parent argues that Cora had no contract with him. Which is correct?
- Article2164 grants the stranger a reimbursement claim on the stated facts
- No agreement always means no civil duty
- Every stranger supplying support must be treated as a donor
- The child alone must reimburse Cora
- The support necessarily becomes a loan to the child
Legal references
- Civil Code RA386: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1949/ra_386_1949.html Articles1157,1161,2142–2152,2164.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.