Practice question
A valid regulatory law already applies when parties sign a contract. One party omits any reference to it and later calls its enforcement a new impairment solely because the document is silent. No later law changed the obligations. Which response best follows Ortigas?
- Silence in a contract automatically repeals every existing law.
- Every preexisting law becomes a later enactment when first enforced.
- Existing law is part of the legal setting read into the agreement; silence alone does not create the asserted later impairment.
- The Constitution guarantees every party ignorance of existing law.
- Only the contract’s font determines the law’s application.
Legal references
- Ortigas & Co. v. Feati Bank and Trust Co., G.R. No. L-24670, December 14, 1979, main decision: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1979/dec1979/gr_l-24670_1979.html
- 1987 Constitution, Article III, Section 10: https://lawphil.net/consti/cons1987.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.