G.R. No.

L-15127 May 30, 1961

EMETERIO CUI, plaintiff-appellant,
vs.
ARELLANO UNIVERSITY, defendant-appellee.

FACTS: Emeritio Cui was granted scholarship by the defendant university on

scholarship merit as a student of the College of Law. Stipulated in the contract for the
scholarship grant is the following:“In consideration of the scholarship granted to me by
the University, I hereby waive my right to transfer to another school without having
refunded to the University (defendant) the equivalent of my scholarship cash.”

On his last semester on the University, Cui transferred to Abad Santos University where
his uncle, the previous dean and legal adviser of Arellano University, was now the dean
of the College of Law of Abad Santos University.

Before taking the bar, Cui petitioned the defendant university for the release of his TOR.
The university refused until Cui refunded the scholarship granted to him totaling the
amount of Php 1,033.87, which he did under protest.

Thereafter, he filed for recovery plus damages. The Court of First Instance of Manila
ruled in favor or Arellano University. Hence, this petition for review.

ISSUE: Whether or not the stipulation on waiver of right to transfer without having
refunded the scholarship is void.

HELD: Yes. The stipulation contravenes both moral and public policy. Scholarship
grants are not for propaganda purposes but are awards for merits.

Scholarship are awarded in recognition of merit not to keep outstanding students in

school to bolster its prestige. In the understanding of that university scholarships award is
a business scheme designed to increase the business potential of an education institution.
Thus conceived it is not only inconsistent with sound policy but also good morals. But
what is morals? Manresa has this definition. It is good customs; those generally accepted
principles of morality which have received some kind of social and practical
confirmation. The practice of awarding scholarships to attract students and keep them in
school is not good customs nor has it received some kind of social and practical
confirmation except in some private institutions as in Arellano University. The University
of the Philippines which implements Section 5 of Article XIV of the Constitution with
reference to the giving of free scholarships to gifted children, does not require scholars to
reimburse the corresponding value of the scholarships if they transfer to other schools.
 G.R. No. L-13403 March 23, 1960
RAMON E. SAURA, plaintiff-appellant,
vs.
ESTELA P. SINDICO, defendant-appellee.

FACTS: Ramon E. Saura and Estela P. Sindico were contesting for nomination as the
official candidate of the Nacionalista Party in the fourth district of Pangasinan in the
congressional elections of November 12, 1957. On August 23, 1957, the parties entered
into a written agreement bearing the same date, containing among other matters stated
therein, a pledge that —
Each aspirant shall respect the result of the aforesaid convention, i.e., no one of us
shall either run as a rebel or independent candidate after losing in said convention.

In the provincial convention held by the Nacionalista Party on August 31, 1957, Saura
was elected and proclaimed the Party's official congressional candidate for the aforesaid
district of Pangasinan. Nonetheless, Sindico, in disregard of the covenant, filed, on
September 6, 1957, her certificate of candidacy for the same office.

ISSUE: WON the Agreement sued upon is null and void for: (1) the subject matter of the
contract, being a public office, is not within the commerce of man; and (2) the "pledge"
was in curtailment of the free exercise of elective franchise and therefore against public
policy.

HELD: Yes. The contract or agreement in question a nullity. Among those that may not
be the subject matter (object) of contracts are certain rights of individuals, which the law
and public policy have deemed wise to exclude from the commerce of man. Among them
are the political rights conferred upon citizens, including, but not limited to, once's right
to vote, the right to present one's candidacy to the people and to be voted to public office,
provided, however, that all the qualifications prescribed by law obtain. Such rights may
not, therefore, be bargained away curtailed with impunity, for they are conferred not for
individual or private benefit or advantage but for the public good and interest.