IN contract law, we learn that one of the requirements for a valid object of a contract is for the same not to be impossible. Article 1348 of the New Civil Code specifically states, “Impossible things or services cannot be the object of contracts.” How do we know if a thing is impossible? There are certain things in life that are absolutely impossible, like turning a square into a circle. Others are relatively impossible, like in my case, dunking a basketball. But the more important question in contract law is at what point should we determine the impossibility of the thing or the service—at the point of perfection or at the point of consummation of the contract?
But there are certain things that appear to be impossible but, in truth, they are merely improbable. Such as erstwhile Environment Secretary Regina Paz L. Lopez getting the nod of the Commission of Appointments (CA)—was it improbable or impossible inasmuch as her environmental advocacy campaign is diametrically opposite to the interests of mining companies, which, for the most part, contributed to the election fund of some of the members of the CA.
Another seemingly impossible but was merely an improbable incident is the fact that no Bar candidate coming from any of the Metro Manila-based law schools placed in the top 10 in the Bar exam. It may certainly be unheard of, but the 2016 Bar exam results have virtually shown that improbability is different from impossibility. For one thing, improbability means “not likely to happen” whereas impossibility means “not capable of happening”. After producing around 242 lawyers since 1953, a not-so-famous law school, Andres Bonifacio College in Dipolog City, has achieved another seemingly impossible, but merely an improbable, feat. The school finally produced a law graduate in the top 10 of the Bar exam in the person of Athalia Briones Liong, who was working as a bank employee while pursuing her law studies.
One Bar candidate who shared her per sona l e x per ience i n taking the Bar exam was my former student in the University of the East College of Law. Ivy Tomboc knows how it feels like to take the bar, twice! To her, it was a roller-coaster ride of emotions of self-pity, frustration, disappointment when she failed, and subsequent feelings of relief, satisfaction and thanksgiving when she passed. Considering the shattered confidence of some Bar candidates who failed it the first time, the likelihood of passing it the next year will be just as low as their self-esteem. But despite such improbability, Ivy took it again and passed it. I think passing the Bar exam is dependent on one’s mental preparation, psychological mind-set and divine providence. In her Facebook post, Ivy said, “Some people will judge you when you fail, yet they absolutely have no idea what you went through. You have to fight that. Because in the end, He, in His own mysterious ways, will lead you to where you are.” And I would add to Ivy’s statement one of my favorite mantra—wherever we are, we are exactly where He wants us to be.
Another former student and now a new lawyer, Marlyn Manuel, entered law school at the age of 20, graduated at the age of 24, but became a lawyer only at the age of 37. She took the Bar five times. She publicly shared that God allowed her to experience multiple failures to fortify her resilience. In Marlyn’s own words, “God allowed me to become a lawyer 13 years after my graduation because He had prepared and molded my character to face the challenges of the law profession.” Taking the Bar exam more than once creates a stigma that, for some people, they can be broken. Author Ernest Hemingway once said, “The world breaks everyone and afterward many are strong in the broken places.” For Ivy and Marlyn, and for others who took the Bar exam more than once, passing the Bar was never an impossibility, for in their belief, nothing is impossible with God. As it has been said in Philippians 4:13—“I can do all things through Him who strengthens me.”
One unanswered question remains as regards the recent rejection by the CA of Ms. Lopez as Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) secretary. Is the fact of having an environmentalist like her to head the DENR a “need” or a “want” of our country? If it is a need, as opposed to a want, then her supporters should be appeased for such situation, similar to Ivy and Marlyn passing the Bar, will just be a matter of “when” and not “if”. If it is a need, though it might seem impossible at this time considering that she has been rejected by the CA more than once, then her supporters should simply take comfort and trust that if it is meant to be, no force on earth can stop it. Getting what we need, as opposed to what we want, is a matter of God’s perfect timing. Just ask Ivy and Marlyn.
For questions and comments, please e-mail me at sbmison@gmail.com.