Practice question
A landowner's fixed offer is unsupported by separate option consideration. Before the owner communicates any withdrawal, the qualified offeree duly communicates an absolute acceptance of the specified property and price. The owner later invokes lack of option consideration to erase the accepted bargain. Which answer follows the controlling rule?
- The owner may withdraw even after effective acceptance solely because no option fee existed
- Timely communicated acceptance can generate a reciprocally demandable bilateral promise despite the unsupported option
- The absence of an option fee necessarily makes every later agreement void
- Acceptance automatically dispenses with every required form or delivery
- The buyer may change the price unilaterally
Legal references
- Civil Code Articles 1324 and 1479: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1949/ra_386_1949.html
- PNOC v. Keppel Philippines Holdings, GR 202050, July 25, 2016, main decision: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2016/jul2016/gr_202050_2016.html
- F.F. Cruz & Company v. NMC Container Lines, GR 270449, August 11, 2025, main decision: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/70224
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.