For the lack of "un" the reader was lost

Prof. Darryl  Largo, we fondly called him "Bretch of Contract" for his second name,  recommended the book of De Leon for our Oblicon class. I already had Paras' book but in order to better follow the discussions I got De Leon's book. But I found De Leon's book to be dense in many parts, not to mention the typos, so Paras came in handy at times.

In our discussion of unenforceable contracts I relied mostly on Paras. That's where I got lost.

On Page 784, Civil Code of the Philippines, Annotated, Book IV, 2008 Edition, by Paras we have this:

No wonder I couldn't make heads and tails of the rest of the article and the exposition of Paras because of the absence of the negative prefix.

I know I should have cleared the problem by reading the context. But under Prof. Largo's class and my other classes in my previous universe we were always in a hurry because of the numerous jurisprudence to read in conjunction with an article. So you get through the codal provision, zero in on the article, and catch a glimpse of the author's thoughts on the matter.

In my current universe I have more time to do contextual reading. So I checked the 2013 Edition last week, see my post here, while buying another book at Rex Bookstore. The "un" was still lacking. And other readers of my type are bound to get lost.

Unless you are reading only De Leon under Prof. Largo.