Practice question
A lessee claims the lessor’s ordinary statutory right to retain qualifying improvements upon due payment is, without more, consideration for a purchase option. The clause does not identify it as option consideration and no separate valuable concession is proved. Under F.F. Cruz, is that assertion sufficient?
- No; restating the statutory right did not establish the required separate consideration
- Yes; any reference to improvements conclusively proves an option fee
- Yes; every right already supplied by law is a new bargain for every option
- Yes; the grantee need not prove anything
- Yes; the purchase price automatically becomes separate consideration
Legal references
- Civil Code RA386: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1949/ra_386_1949.html Articles1324,1479.
- PNOC v Keppel Philippines Holdings GR202050 July25,2016 MAIN: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2016/jul2016/gr_202050_2016.html Separate consideration and burden of proof.
- F.F. Cruz v NMC Container Lines GR270449 August11,2025 MAIN: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/70224 Option versus first refusal; consideration.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.