CIVIL LAW PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS Effectivity of Laws Section 1 of P.O. No. 755 states: the Acquisition of a Commercial Bank for the Benefit of the Coconut Farmers’ Philippine Coconut Author by ‘orporated ich nt’ are hereby inc reference; nese rity, the terms of which ‘Agreemer ‘COPY ofthe Agroement was not attached to the Presidential Decree. din oo, ,Ne- 755 was published in the Ot but the text of the Agreement describes law? was not publisher 1e accorded the status of a la fan case. The pub cE Fate RD A sonic 9 ne Mere idéntal Gecfeo, (3) fle br AhdréaBouts\age-ils supposed date ication 4 P.D. 755 did not in any Way reproduce the & : thereof attached to the decree when publ Consequently, the A Governed by contractfa Promise to marry. Shes and Ross even sought.the-approv i im in his apartment. yt vi since Ross was insistent and enthusiastic about tue. A week before she 39-I¥e with him anymore. It also 64 ily bg el. Ross filed a counterclai oF Sseedher to live with him and he did partment because he discovered Ssport. He insisted that he must be a besmirched reputation due to the Stating that he never propo not mattreat her but ony toa he that she had des awarded for damages-for he sutfe fatande complaint of Rachel. Who should be entitied for d Rachels the one ented to damages. ©” foarte oa promise to marry per seis not an actionable wrong. Where @ man’s promise to marry isin Se per maie caine at te Steere se by wera ane tesserae fulfil that promise thereafter becomes the proxmate cause ofthe ging of herself n.a genes Congress, proof that Ge ad. n realty, no intention of marying her and that th promise was oly a sane son or deceptive device to antic or inveigl er to aoept him and to obtain her consent othe serials cy justity the Guat of damages pursuan Arle 21 not bacauso of such promise to many but seo feud ar cet behind it andthe wif ir to her honor and reputation which followed thence maswee that such injury should have been commited in a manner contary to morale ghee customs, oF public Policy (Baksh v. CA, G.R, No, 97366, February 19, 1993). Sax Broa Couurce oF Law 2017 Cenreauzen Bar Orenarions 1CIVIL Law Lea cruz is Marriage hot been hire otel and Restau Status, ishearten ant Management graduate. Despite her efforts, she stil Ree As fate we ed, Lea put “FUNemployed: Forever Unemployed” as her Facebook USA, saw i q the (© support US Visa nor is she fit to apply for one, as she does no the rescue, It'so happone aelt. Faced by this predicament, Tita ‘Cherry once again comes tO Phitppnes. She sugeeet Nate neon cousn Ca Kars easing vacate getanean oan gut an eta? Cohn tt she wh ae Aner rents. They go not see each other thereat et i Manila and Lea was able to go to the US. Lea and Clark did However, 5 5 years in when he was chech g nartiage and as a receptionist, Lea met her childhood sweetheart age flame. So in love, Jing ithe Rotel for ab onference. They had coffee and rekindled the mulity of macriag tour Lea seeks for the declaration of married state-gy compl ti of entering into 2 marriage as Sere tial ‘i ghe-described their No. it should oe we declaration of nulity of m & ee E marriage is vali yo Ive cure citizenship \puasr'a mariage is not ate RIN BED gene sate are = nd otobntob dal dco Fr otf el a gouple- chooses to lead. Any festyle would go into the realm of thei ight to pyvagf-arié would raise serious lure their marriages "0 children, to love one eee frifed or otherwise, such as eas eR, seep with al the legal onan ontract, is not the oniy ‘alidly support a marriage SGol be dissolved at the whim cient to show the juridical Marriage is an inviclab E protefted b of the parties, especidllpphére tHe gi “ antecedence, gravity t arty fed to be psychologically ‘incapacitated to assume nd perfQEMIRE ss acitaty Reba iyi Albios, G.R. No. 198780, October 16, 2013 Repu oe o) Disease loo esJder Atle 26 ofthe Family ode, Philippine law does not fi e grant it However, Article 26 of the Family Code - whialra a Brgages involving a Filipino and a foreigner = allows 2 Flin ge mn cane the divorce Ts valdy obtained abroad by an alien a ry. The law confers jurisdiction on Philippine courts to extend the effect ate 2 Filipino spouse without undergoing trial to determine the validity of the ess agd> (Fujk v. Marinay, G.R. No. 196049, June 26, 2013). The starting point in any recogni aq divorce judgment is the acknowledgment that eo otis do not take jusicil notice of foreign judgmentS.dnd laws. No sovereign fs bound to give effect carats dominion to judgment rendered by a tibunal of another country. This means tha the foreign Hingment and its auhently must be proven as facts under our rls on evidence, together with he srearrerplcable national law to show the effect of the judgment on the alien himself or Nersell The a aervaaion may be made in an acon insuted specicaly fo: the purpose or in another action where 2 rereatnvokes the foreign decree 28 an integral aspect of his sim defense (Corp v. Sto. Tomas, GR. a NTT August 11,2010) Fora dvore obtained abroad bythe alion spouse to be recognized in our fusdietion, it rust be show thal the divorce decrees vali according to he rational law of the foreigner. jurisdicton ge decree and the govesing persona aw ofthe aen spouse who obained the dorce Bot te ee Since our cours do not fake judicial note of foreign laws and judgment. ou lw op must Be Proveros that bath the divorce decree and the national la! of the alien must be alleged and rover ke any oer fact (Garcia v. cio, GR No, 198922 October 2, 2001) or baw Saw Broa CouECE OF EAM Sni7 Gentaauized BAR OPERATIONSCIVIL LAW Void Marriage 5. What arene grounds for detain» mariage od? following are the grounds fora vid marta ov i abr aE Geo ad ca one 6 ema (FAMILY CODE, Arts. 2.3,4,27-34,35). b. Bigamous or polygamous marriages not falling un c. Contracted through mistake of one contracting party as to the ide CODE Art. 35) 1 35) A ee re ages cnc ores Bl MOE eet tener etage eter tbe wagner beieate esac = an 1 ascendant and descendants of any degree 200 1 Ascendants and descondants of ay Hea ood (FAMILY CODE, ALT cope, At 36) f. Psychological incapacity to comply with the essential marital obigjations th civil degree: i. Collateral blood relatives, whether legitimate or illegitimate, UP to the four iL Step-parens and step- municipal treasurer, who Vor the intended marriage pre,of it, they got married. farfiage license and had not with the procurement of 6. Luke and Loretai wert and he was so busy.ibat he fo arms of her high s! _sweethe: because she is stlhijartied fo Luke. H Luke, her parents suniméned Maxime Paras, instructed him to ‘the neces between Lorelai ani Lorelai never went tothe office of seen much less signed any Pi t marriage license. =~) s * - ae ppily marriefi for fiveyyears, During ‘ine for Lorelal« | If'you were the judge, will yo. If | were the judge, | wo “g'void ab intio. Article 3 of the Family Code specifically < yes formal requisite of marriage. Furthermore, Article 5 provides na Guisites shall render the marriage void ab inito, The rationale fr Laidiiaye license is that itis the authority Granted by the State to the contre capacity to contract marriage. Th cara ation of fs volvement and parfpifaion M-eery mariage, in the maintenance of which the onoral public is interested (Kho w. Repub ofthe Phippines, GR. No, 187462, June 1, 2016) 7. Michael! met Naney as a young lieutenant and after a whirlwind courtship, they were married. In the racy part of his military career, Michael was assigned to different places all over the country. They carly PPtive together until the 12th year of their marriage. One day, while Michael was away on Sffclal business, one of his friends caught Nancy having sex with the corporal assigned as Michaet's driver. The aide immediately reported the matter to Michael who rushed home to aicraen his wife. Nancy admitted the affair and Michael sent her away in anger. Michaol would poorcome to know from his aides, his household staff, and former neighbors who informed him that Nancy has had intimate relations with various men throughout their marriage when Michael was away on assignment. fever Shu BrDA Couece oF Law 2017 Cevmatieed Bar Orernions 3CIVIL LAW Michael filed a petition ws from Michael, he son 2" declaration of nutty of martiage under Article 36. Based 0” intervie infidelity was di is aide, and the housek Nancy’ bets jousekeeper, a psychologist testified that e EXCESSIVE emotion tet aMtiction with Histrionic Personality Disorder, an illness ‘characterized BY abandonment ‘otionalism and unc Nancy's controllable attention-seeking _behavio! i 38 a child by her father. Michael hit side an RTC imself, his aide, and his houseke LUC granted the petition, relying an the iberaly espoused By Te legal separation over th® OSS filed an appeal, arguing that sexual infidelity Was ory Fn cacy Hea gbaration and that the RTC failed to abide by the guidelines laid down in the Molina C25%- {low would you decide the appeat? 29, 2004) e “ ‘appeal in favor of the Republic. In the case of Dedel v. Dedel. (GR. No 151867 January inde otto eee Court refused to dedlare the marriage ofthe parties void on the round of sexual exten he we Sharon, In case mentioned, the wife commited infieity with SOverl Ten oP tothe that the a te llegumate children witha foreigner. The court, however, said nel nat shown iat te sense dey was a producto 9 disordered personaly and that it wos rota ne NET Te Bat alleged tobe psychologically incapacitated. Also, the finding of psychological incapacity cannot d on the interviews conducted by fi 1a Prysband of his witnesses and the person alleged to be psychological hologist 1 he stad or Ns wi elation (Mas v Mocs By GR. No, 170729- December 8, What is the “strié standard” a proach peing|a rit ANS: The St Sie apo IR a Ppouleier ectraton of prepaptve death shall rot bead a 2 ner in) fr ter aCe to oper an so Seal of proper honest to goodnoss font spouse and whether the absert spouse ie een ated on well founded belief of deat drawn from a great many Geumstances occas el Jee and the nature and extent of the inquiries hate by acdeeh{ 5 eae Pe exported fo report the absence to the policerodbe8k tha aid of hass med 2019) Serpe What are the juri i uideines guidelines absolute? oe Ih Republic «. CA and (haya. GRAN stherwise known asthe Mel 1. Incapacity must be Pect 2 Root cause ofthe py 3 Medically or cinicaly 68 Alleged in the complaint: 1 Sticenty proven by eh i Clearly explained inthe debsion S anita Obligations refer to Ars. 68-747220, 227 an@225 of he Faily Code Paint has Burden of proot SS Incapacity proven to be Existing atthe time ofthe celebration of marriage: FeaeaiN must order the Prosecuting attomey or fiscal and the Soliator General to appear forthe state 7 Musrprtations ofthe National Appellate Matimoniat Tribunal ofthe Catholic Church ofthe Philippines Interpretations is shaud be qven great rospect and Oana are traagh to rng about dsabily to asume essential mata obligations No, these guidelines are not absolute. As held in Te v. Yu-To (G.R. No, 161793, February 19,2009), the Moores Court stressed that the determination is to be made on a case to case basis. Each must be Jpuged not an the basis of apr assumptions predlectons or generalizations but according to ts own eae Tecognition of te verty that no ease would be on “all fours’ with the next one inthe feld of foc ological Incapacity as aground fornulty of mariage; Hence, every "Wal judge rust take pains in an Bion Cousce oF Law Sa ee Cotnern Ban OPERATIONSCIVIL LAW examining th ludgment for 1 factual mili that of the leu and the appel 1g its. own eal cout SP PMARE Cou must, a5 much as possibo, avoid subsbiuting ts Hs C dec i fespondent is nat’ tenable? Yes. According pea te Surome Court Marcos v. Marcos, (G., Ho, 136490. Oetober 19, 2000, re ‘of psychological ological examination of respondent is not a requirement for a deciaration oudaines ry TeaPaciy. The totality of the evidence presented may determine such incapacity. The byte Ga ae of Republic v. Molina incorporated the three basic requirements earlier nee (6) juridical, antatOS ¥ Court of Appeals: “psychological incapacity must be characterized by (a) gravity Physician exer an 20 (©) incurabliy" The foregoing guidelines do not require that @ eramin he person fpegceMiBMsheoeuncapectatd nse tot ae may be “medically or clinicallpigSAlife (fis thelipresence of evidence that can adequately establish the party {he totaly of evidence presented 'S.Rnough to sustgin 3 finding of y concemed nesd clared the marria hich was however lage null and void under Art, 36 whic! Todi ow contends that personal medical or psychological examination of ‘Quirement for a declaration of psychological incapacity. Is the conten ng ning of BSyhciagealncapacty, then 2 oes SAN BEDA 4, COU E Woidanle) F | A, What are the grounds to annuf & Vale SPS A martiage may boa sed onf by Family Code. that ni 1. Absence of parental conse 2. Unsound mind: 3 &._ Concealment of dg ads Consent obtained by Foro i Impotency that contaues an ape Serious Sexually transipissible d Y What are the grounds for le The following are the exclusive. icle $5 of the Family Code: (PAA- ID-LAMBS) 1. Repeated Physical violence or ofosaly a 2. astempt to coruptor induce to engage irFrostiton 3. Attempt on life v . 4. Final judgment involving more than 6 years of Imprisonment: 5, Drug addiction or habitual aleoholism, 6. Lesbianism or homosexuality, 7. Unjustified Abandonment for more than 1 year, ; 8. Compulsion by physical violence or Moral pressure to change religious or political affiliation; 9. Bigamy: and 10, Sexual infidelity or perversion. San Broa Cotteor oF Law 2017 Cenreauizen Bar Oreearions 5CIVIL LAW Biatinguls Leal Separation om Deaton a uty, Annum and Absolute DSS! istinquish Legal S aration from Declaration of Nullity, Annulment, and Absolute DIvOTCe eaal Seperation ; PSEA TI eCity ‘Absolute Divorce | Not severed; bed- As to effect on the marriage bond. | and-board separation | Se* "ed: Allowed to Sei-aipwedto | severed; atowed remarry | roma sas After the colerat | celebration ofthe mar celetation of the the mariage ar ‘AS to recognition by Philippine Law. janie 49 Barry, not alowed | Article 55 ived Before Termination. Legitimate Legitimate 14, Ben and Mal were married, Ten yeard titel, Mallett daha ved with ancthet man. Hay, leaving ” their two children of school age\with Ben, When Ben dey for thelr children's educ he sold parcel af land vested in his name Hate Mars consent, whieh he purchased before his marriage. isthe sale by Ber-vaid-votd's gal basis. «The sale made by Batis considered wi The pallies Me {ag no mention was made whether they executedia marriage settlément. Initia eas be governed by absolit comm SMOBEEy time of the celebration ff te Mprdae ao el form part of the absolut commit ta ACP. ne the ACP without the consent ofthe other. Any Sd consent of the other shal be vei. altiough iti Consenting spouse upon autiontfi6f the cout Article 96), Foie , ¥ 45. 1n 1976, a parcel of land was sold to in 1909, Protacio, Jt. executed an Affi se yhoreby he afiemed under Gath that it was his father Protacio, St Yropery.tn the same year, Protacto Sr_and his other 8gp Rito Sold fester Servaci. \./s mother, Marta, died. Later, Wi tn 2001, Protacio, Jr. demanded) the reli lemand. Protacio, Jr. then sued,Servacio and ito Protacto, Jr averted that following his renunciation, Proto ee property to SeraclO mT between Protacio, Sr. and Marta was yl and void. ~ Tulment of the sale of the property. operty became conjugal property; and rlguidation of the community property What is the status of the sale? Wat me vai fo the extent of what wil bo alloted, inthe final partion, fo the vendors. There's no Giepute that Protaci, Sr and Marta were marred prior fo the effectity of Te Family Code on August 3, SOFy nora legal her. (Manuel v. Femer, G.R. No. 117246, August 21. 1995) No, because joint No, because joint adopt even undoNthe Spouses Jack ald Ross aie a 6 bore twoChirEhjnckaget)1¢‘gnd 8. During the.subsistonce of their mariage, Jack beGota eh by anaier woman eaaet equa of ae-On Roses SiscO¥eTY fathering @ child by fn e ration which was granted, sac “y shi ada potent filed petition for legal separation wh a) Whose consent is née 'b) If there was no la fe. Even if Ben and Jemy are Birily adopt under the Family Code or 23. nila) timate child? Explain a) The consent of tieht4-yeakold le year -cid\eqitimate child and of the biological mother of th by (Section 7 and 9, RA 8552), While the Adoption Law req d B consen{"6f,the adopter’s spouse in necessary, however, ar" Bxceptioh patates.f’om Zach other. Therefore, the consent of Rose is nd longer req) Binal degree of legal separation ) Yes, he can stil Sd3pf-his il legitimate child, ofthe sie AIBA with he _confont &tshis spouse, of his 14-year-old 9, RA 8552). biGlogidal mother of the legitimate child (Section 7 and 24. What are the effects of adép 9 The following are the eff 4. As to parental authority Se ‘frewjoiogical parents and the adoptee which shal be vested ini ica pasGAtis the spouse of the adopter 2. AS to legitimacy. The ado child of the adopters forall ntents and purposes; and . 3. As to succession: In legal or eae and the adopteris shall have reciprocal fights of succession without distinction Homrlegtiat filation. However, if there is a wil the rules on testamentary succession shall be followed (RA 8552,SECS. 16,17. and 18). 25. What are the grounds for the rescission of adoption? Upon the petition of the adoptee, with the assistance of the Department if a minor or if over 18 years of age but is incapacitated, 2s quardian/counsel, the adoption may be rescinded on any of the following {grounds committed by the adopter(s) o Repeated physical and verbal maltreatment by the adopter(s) despite having undergone counseling; 'b. Attempt on the life of the adoptee: . sexual assault of violence; and 1d. abandonment and failure to comply with parental obligations, ‘Adoption, being in the best interest of the child, shall not be subject to rescission by the adopters) However, the adopter(s) may disinhert the adoptee for causes provided in Article 919 of the Civil Gode(RA 8552, Sec. 19). ‘San Broa Couecr or LAW 102017 Cetrauizeo Bar Orexations26. What are the of The ef fects of res, 1° fleets ate the folowing. oof option? '© Parental authont * 2, DeParnent shal be reste oe Baleical parents). f known, oF the legal custody of Ne Festored if he reciprocal rights sig a adoptee is stil a minor or incapacitated: 3, Sttnauishes igatons of the adopters) and the adoptee to each other shall be 'e Court shall orde oth Festore histher Civil Registrar to cancel t inth of the adoptee and ‘a ofg the amended certificate of birth § inal int Succession rights al birth certificate: and shall iudicial rescission pd to its status prior to adoption, but only as of the date of judgment of 8552, Soc 29)” V°St04 "H's acquted prior to judicial rescission shall be respected (RA No 27. Distin guish {the Rules on Domestic Adoption and Inter-Country Adoptio the Philippines DO} kel a Teo ea } (RA 8043) (inno natoraes XR FA © Fiipho cl VO OES ea : Filipino Citize ee | (2) Legal age; (b) Of good moral | (c) Not convictedd-a | turpitude: (d) Emotionally abd | of caring for chide (0) Atleast 16 yeats at and assume all | Exception: of parental ‘propriate counseling ‘ounselor in. hisiher 7 (b) Histher country ha’ with the Republic of the | (c) Has been living in the least 3 continuous years. prot é and to qe the necessary moral | application and-maintains such ‘and example to all his children | Until adoption decree is entered, incl the child to be adopted: (4) Has been certified by _ histher | (hy) Agrees to uphold the basic rights of the | Giplomaticiconsular ofice or any appropriate | chid as embodied under Philippine laws and | government agency that helshe has legal | the UN. Convention on the Rights of the | Capacity to adopt in hist county, chia |e) Hisher goverment alls the ade to (I) Comes from a country with whom the her the county as hishher adopted child, | Pilippines has diplomatic relations i. (i) Possesses all the qualifications and none | NOTE: Residency and certification of | Of the disqualifications provided herein and in | qualification may be waived if ‘other applicable Philippine laws. [Sec. 9], (i) Former Filipino citizen who seeks to adopt | [0 Fegatne arin the ath dogee of consanguinity or affinity; oF | One who seeks to adopt legitimate child of San Broa Counce or Law 2017 Centeauizen Bar Orcravions 17CIVIL Law lopt jointly with jy ra vee ah a iguinity or affinity of the 4 use. (Sec. 7(b)] . pee Co SON below 18. year has Deon admins gH of 898 ho | Ont a egal ee ld may be the subject of | declared avaiable °F judicially intercountry adoption. (Sec 8] for adoption; i | (©) The legitimate son di via | SPouse by the other Spouse; — (C) An ilegitimate | adopter to improve nea legitimacy; Legali-ree child means a child who has Been voluntarily or voluntary commited to the Department, in accordance with the Chi nt wualifi rove hisney eye’, 2 Waliied | and Youth Wetfare Code. [Sec.3(f of one histher ownchlisince minority, 3E (©) A child “hose eet hag: EDA Previously res CULEEGH OF LAW () A chi : | parent(s)has Rojaldo ha iToresit custody of Maria's mother, in ica, During their marriage, entrusted to the care and them at Teresita's house. abut Teresita asked upon pany of the child to at least james and their acquaintance i USA. Subsequently, Maria formed Teresita her des Maria of having abandorie i saeven on important occasions, such as her birthday, and ne! is. Should Maria be still entitled for the custody of her child? - Yes. Maria’ merely gave temporagy”p citld 10 Teresita. did not constitute abandonment or renunciation of parental afthorty~ Por tie ight attached to parental authonty, being purely personal, the law allows a waiver@Parental eutngity only in cases of adoption, guardianship and Surrender to a children’s home oF an orphan institution Which do not appear in the case. The right of parents to the custody of their minor children is one of the natural rights incident to parenthood, a right supported by law and sound public policy. (Teresita Sagala-Esiao vs.CA, G.R. No. 116773, January 16 1997) 29. Can a mother lose her right to the custody of her illegitimate son just because she signed an greement that she is turning over the child to his father and waived she waived her rights? MereAntcle 176 of the Family Code of the Philipines provide illegitimate chiidren shall be under the parental authority ofthe mother. The ight to take the custody ofa son shal be exercised by the one wn Enjoys parental autho over tim. Such right may not be renounced, waived or transferred to another pervon, except in the cases authorized bylaw. Hence, inthe absence of exceptions under the Family Pee. the mother is stil the parent vested with parental authority of the ilgitimate child therefore, she has the right over the child's custody. ‘San Bepa Cousot oF LAW 2017 Cewreauszeo Bar OrerarionsCIVIL LAW Use of Sumame Antonio ti somoone 2 {2gether as husband and wife, athough Antonio was at that time area0y Antonio as his own ia aoe p He had two sons. The children were not expressly recognizes Ty to file a Petition to hare pit Fecords in the Civil Registry. The eventually separated and Anton his sons, ave parental authority and custody and the correction/change of Sur 30. Grace and married to. Can the father c No. is clear th ‘Smpel the use of his surname by his illegitimate children? The es reap tts General rule i that an legitimate child shall use the surname of his or her metres through thee vided by RA 9255 is, in case his or her filaton is expressly recognized by the {ainer private howe cot of bith appearing in the cl register or when an admission in a public document of the surmamatitteninstuments made by the father. Hence, iegtimate chidren are gen the choice 00 (Grande aay hich they val be known. They cannot be compelled to use the surmame oftheir ¥. Antonio, G.R. No. 206248, February 16.2014) 3. Role ted a etton fr to change Trial Court of Lucena City. Rélem al ‘August 4, 1962, His name jis birth certificate in the Regional is born in the City of Lucena on F and his sex registered.as “male”. He {urther alleged that he is a male transsexual, that is, “anatomifcally male but foals, thinks and acts 8 a female” and that he had alwayéidontitied himself Hh girls since childhood. Feeling trapped in a man’s body, he consulted seveta doctors hte Dates States, He underwent psychological examination, hormone treatment and breast augmentation. Hig attempts to transform himself to a oman” culminated on January 27, 2001 when he underwent sex reassignment surgery in Bangkok, Thailand. He then sought fo have Wis haffié if fi certifigatechanged from “Rolen Cruz” to “Mely Cruz,"and his sex froin “male” fo “female. € other hand, can Rolen change his sex on the ground | No, Rolan cannot change his nama, Repubiie Aci ‘enumerates the grouhdg thereoffor Such chaige of sex reassignment: Gtianging p petitgner's frst imam f red purpose may only create grave ‘complications in the civifregisry and te public i ersor\fcan legally change his given name, he must presént pfoper of easanable ny ing foagorgustiving such change. In addition, he must show that he will be prejudiced by the use of hig tue ané-official name. Lastly, while a person may have succeétled in altering his ody and zppearanée through the intervention of modern surgery, no law authorizes the chal aS (5,56x in'the Civil registfy Tor that reason. Hence, there 's no lag basis fora pe range of tng entresfrhis bith cerfcate (Sivero v Wverns.thte Change of first name and change of first name on the ground 32. Whatare the characteristics of prope lic dominiott? > The characteristics of property of puble dominlorrare te folowing: 1,) iis outside the commerce of man except insofar as they may be the abject of repair or improvement or other sintilar things (Roman Catholic Bishop v. Municipaity of Buruanga, 486 SCRA 229), 2) itis Inalenable, however, when itis no longer needed for public use or service, it may be declared as patrimonial property; 3.) It cannot be acquired by prescription (Harty v. Municipality of Victoria, 13 Phi. 162); 4.) It cannot be burdened with easements (rt B13), 4) I is not subject to attachment or execution (Manila International Aiport Authority v. Court of ‘Appeals, 495 SCRA 591; and 6.) It cannot be registered under the Property Registration Decree (PD No 1529). Classification 33, What is the classification ofa building constructed from strong materials? Buildings are always immovable under the Code. A building treated separately from the land on which it ‘Sood is immovable property and the mere fact that the parties to a contract seem to have dealt with i Spparateand apat fom the land on which it stood in no wise changed its character as immovable propery, (Punsaian dv. Lacsamana, GR. NOL-$5729, Mar 26,1963), ai Broa Coutce oF Law 2017 Cereauizeo Bar Onna34. Give an in n instance wh Machiney en a Movabl operty or having Only a tomontY OF plant, ty MPOrarY right, unl 1 Not so et Movable Under Art. 415, when placed by the owner of 0.61 Phirgay when placed by a tenant, usuructuary, or any other person Person acted as the agent of the owner (Davao Sawrnl CO. v. s less such Ownership ership include? 'ght 10 possess, to ession automatic oy San IT IED Fa acon thay he owner of the beat Fe Ee aiybats Howse 2 right in cf ivodprduibga by fe rasuipoF the right of accretion, principal, and there need not be aff tehdency to the thing or eto ipso jure trom the ears>@Spondent Juan applied on oe ety) fr ional Trial Court (RTC) in ity. THe h re located in Barangay San Dionigie belonging to respondent Pedroia t abandoned road, and in thé Nor hi amended his applicati the laters o-cuners iy;had been formed through accretion and had bee! tiduotis and adverse possession for more than 30 years. 32d the application for land WSLprogram; thatthe property was anf tKat assuming that the property could not be registered in favor of the er b was not covered by the legateasement, title to the py applicants for the reason that the prdi fat had dried up and had not resulted. from accretion. Whether or not Article 487 0 is applicable herein. Decide. No, Article 457 does not apply inthis cage Ace 457.Ghthe Gil Code provides tat “os re ouners of lands ajoining the banks of rivers belohy the accretion wich they gradually receive fom the effects of the currents of the waters.” Similar to this case is the case of Republic of the Philppines v. Arcocio iyay A. Santos Ill In that case the Court stated that “The process of drying up of a river to form diy land involved the recession of the water level from the river banks, and the cried-up land did not equate to accretion, which was the gradual and imperceptible deposiion of sol on the river banks through the effects of the current” Hence, respondents Juan as the riparian owners had ne legal nigh te clare ‘ownership of Lot 38. Considering thatthe clear and categorical language of Article 457 of the Civil Gade has confined the provision only to accretion, we should apply the provision as its clear and categorical language tells us to (Republic of the Phiippines v. Arcadio lvan A. Santos Ill and Arcadlo ©. Saree GR. No. 160453; November 12, 2012) San Bepa Couurce oF LAW 142017 Crnteauizen Bax Orexanions{ CIVIL LAW ae Quieting of Title hat are the re Tequisites for For an action to qt an action to quiet title to prosper? : complainant has regal ot O32" ho indispensable equstes must concur, namely: (1) ee ee the deed, dam, encumbrance: tah eto x interest in the real eropety subject ofthe actor in fact invalis s OF inoperative sac proceeding claimed to be casting cloud on his tile must be shown to be Moico. GR No raConaty® despite its prima fac efficacy.” (Managua v. i appearance of validity or legal efficacy. . 6. November 21, 2012) Co-Ownership arents. They ings who inherited a 12-storey building from their pare fe the net profits = 38 co-owned property for leaving out and to divide the ne coowners rnselves equally for a period of 15 years, On the Sih yew, Kevin wanted to get out ofthe Kevin's boos ar escO4l get his 1/3 share in the property. Angelo and Derick refused, saying | — ut their agreeme to r ei re Angelo anc ri | conect? Exe! \areement to ke inership for 15 years. Are Angi Angelo andQerick are partly femain in Nay 1e co-owners shall be obliged to G-aumership a | anytime. Ofe Seer Jor partion of te co-ownership Epon to thee is ithe co-oaners agree to Reem thing AnXAGed which period wy years. In tis | Ios for ten yeaa 404, nh OREN TAT EDEL EARP 1 Ura AESHB! be valid at he , COLLEGE OF LAW pX& Possession 7 Foligaged the land. This was redeemed in 1943. This was redeemed in 1962. In 1967, Aurel | ~ | In 1973, Jose, Jesus- 4uitelaim over the lane urposes in her name. ‘Concepcion. The latter fi and Juana, The trial court ruled in favor of Cor ° iecision of the trial court. Which decision is cor d ‘The decision of the tri fy lan belonged 0 ther presumption that she po | Bbsence of any proot that | of the executors, the principt exaclly as itis @quidaim (Tr Angelina bought a diamond ring in February 1952. Before Angelina lost the ring, she had been wearing it for more than § years and therefore, she became fa one occasion, Angelina saw the missing ring in the finger \ of Consuelo who said that she purchased the ring from Mrs. Miranda who got the ring from 1 fAngelta who in tur got from AlingPering, Claiming that her possession ot the ring iene coony faith, Consuelo now refused to return the ring to Angelina. May Angelina recover the ring from | Consuelo? Discuss the applicable law. { ‘The controlling provision is Article $59 of the Civil Code, Angelina, having been unlawfully deprived of the diamond ring in question, is ened to recover it from Consuelo who was found in peseeceon of the same. The only exception the law allows is when there is acquisition in good faith by the posssevor ato public sale, in which case the owner cannot obtain is retun without reimbursing the pice. Ae Suthortatvely interpreted in Cruz vs. Paha (98 Phil 788), height ol the owner canvtot Le dotentea even by proof that there was good fathn the acquisition of the possessor There isa reiteration of thc sonciole in Aznar vs. Yapchiangco, thus: “Suffice it to say in this regard that the right of the owner to recover personal property acquired in good faith by another, is based on his being dispossessed withont tre Consent. The common law principle that where one of two innocent persons must suffer by & fava ° i 3, 1947. This ring was stolen sometime Saw Broa Couuree or Law 1 2017 Cenreauizen Bar Ovenarions 15CIVIL LAW perpettated by another, the enabled the fraud to be coma Me loss pon the party who; by his, misplaced com 30264 en Hecate Soy AOpen a case whichis covered by a oats at as, L 0264, Janry 301871 3F See 12g Consuelo Sd Gari, etal vs. Court of Anped 42, commited’by' oe ledges the Same to R Pawnshop. B does not readily discover the Ae -— ue ae en X fails to redeem the ring, R Pawnshop sells the same or B ‘Sues Y to recover the a tone, oe This is 5 because ¥ acquire 8B indomnifes ¥ for what the latter pays for the ring ; Code thal hee 9 ube aucton a stusbonexenat oro aea tte $89 ofthe Cv rdommy n° Unauly deprived of his personal property may wecover the same without Paying any indemnity Pprved of his personal property may Usutruct 43 Ais a usufructuary of a land Possession of the land, Whil the land. 1S. fiable to B fofithe Har reasons. <= ; hho took atihils usufructuary right to C wi b kfgwled ye of A, cut 100 coconut trees on land under usufsuct? Give your 5 " v 13 coconut trees the Pehstomecnen Ing authorized. G, ugdér Article 557, NCC. e re cane i ROE REI PR acre Sen acl ut © shall first infor tye! onkrdf hb decbsdiy for the AF ‘Bugli i&figl the-cage of the given problem. eat Ais labled ps under Arie SEO.NCG, Sutuinetean wn ajbgptser leases his ght of Usuftuct shall answer fin. any PESmSgS whch Gt may ghtfer through the fault or Regligence of the pers9f who sibstitutes him, 1G Of the rightof way 4 ould cut the trebs 44. X is granted an ease in ten railroad cars a” V,, The\railway was cof of A to supply sufficient sugar cane, production, X takes.the sugar eane of B, them over the railway thru the land of imposed by Y for the usé of the easement? If Based on the opinion in Valderrama festrctons for use of easement on t sefvient estate, Only “20 ralload cars¥g different. No undue prejadibgig substantial enough to justiied ‘substantially apart from that pre Cwil Code, WY to tra structed by X ov ad cars a day, transports his ‘Sugat central. Has/X/iolated the restrictions, ot whyindt? Give youre ros Gentil (48 Phil ("ere would be no violation of iJonal burden to the owner of the -sdppliers of the sugar cane are 2. The violation, if any, is not 45, The sight of may between the ovnet SPWREBLS oF and separatly belonging to Marina, hand or S808 Mary, Aurora are denominated as Lot No. SUB. Fi, Lot No. Sh08F Fespoctively. The lots were portions of Lot No, S808. with an area of 2,680 square motere a registered under Transfer Cerificate of Tile No, 78426, Another subdivision lol uerved tera wee No, 5608+ was Lot No. S808-F-3. On May 11, 1992, the Clarta Vilage Associaton exeeres concrete perimeter fence to close the exit point of the right of way of Atvore fan ag Nene to use the second exit to 2.8 to the existing road within Clarita Village. The closure forced Aurora t. Buhisan Road, which is from her Lot No. 5808-F-3. Aurora, through Alty. Alfredo, informed the Mary of the encroachment by about 14 square meters ofthe latter's residential house and fence on the right of way. Mary, through Atty. Rolindo A, Navarro, responded by insisting that as, the owners of Lot No. S808-F-2-A she was equally entitled to the right of way: and that she wee Proposing to buy the equivalent portion of the right of way to which she was entitled at's Feasonable price, Aurora rejected the claim of Mary she was entitled tothe use of the right of way, De Saw Bena Couor oF haw 2017 Cenreauizen Bar Orerarions re). May the City Engineer of the City of Manila summarily remove houses constructed CIVIL LAW and may use the san" ‘elains ownership of the portion on which the easements established the easement an incu uct manner as not o affect the exercise of the easement. It gives the holder of he casera ietest on the Tand but grants no tile thereto. Theretore: an "easement is an admission that the property belongs to another. It 1s seltied that Not, may be acquired ony fos to" aPPALEN! easements, and discontinuous ones, whether apparent OF ‘one of the modes of acne, WAtUe of ttle, But the phrase with existing "Right of Way" in the TCT is no AML. 622 of the Gu Canton oF te easement by wtue ofa tle. Acquisiton by virtue of tive, as used in donation, contract ancy aes 0 “the junc act which gives bth 1 the easement, such a8 law, sat tl Of the testator” What realy defines a piece of land is nat the area mentiones 1m its description, but th ‘ its fimits. An encumbrance “subjct ty 3 eae therein laid down, as enclosing the and and indicating its Ject to 3 meters wid - ‘T No. 107915, which covers te vide right of way was annotated on TCT No ‘ssuming that said encumbrance was for the benefit of Lot No. 5808-F-2-A of the cles tla fo oun even a potion of the road ight of way bacause Article 630 ofthe Ci Fight of way even a The latter could n Code expressly provides that" hich vides that "ihe owner st ins ownership of the portion on whic coeneement's established “1 Spmanggr a: not to afect the exerise of the easement." With the right of wpe i : ers of the burdened property, ‘Aurora remained entitled to av da (Sps. Bernabe Mercader, Jr- ati Lorna Morcad@P ve fo, 163157, June 2 Ie edi ape orcad Sp. Jes Burdias and Nc SAN BEDA ine voluttary casémentsin Arce oba othe’ Givi Co in nature; they canstute the act ofthe owner fhe expels ary condition, like the payment of he nd tne €agerpent Ifthe contention be made that a contraot say the time all those who desie to make use'os i (North Negros Sugar | Is the construction by a brovine actionable nuisance? ae Yes, because in such-cébe, the ‘SaRBSnis BEE + lighnbise, vibrations, smoke. eto. coming from the staton- during ts © ths danger alin, and even the lives of the persons concerned in ease of fir 6) How do you characteri They are not contractual ih affects injuriously the health jury to a particular person in a peculiar position or of specifit chart fender the noise an actionable ‘nuisance. In the conditions “of to the conditions ofthe locality and of the‘nséds of the isener. What those limits, are not fixed by any definite measure of quantity or quality. They depend updn the circumstances of the particular case. They may be affected, but are not contvolled, by zoning ordinance. The delimitation of designated areas to use for manufacturing, industy or general business isnot a license to emit every noise profitable attending the conduct of any one of them (Velasco vs. Meralco, L-18390, August 6, 1971) jout governmental authority on public streets and waterways? ‘Yes, he is so authorized under the Charter of the City of Manila which shall prevail over the Civil Code. such Charter being a special law (Sitchon vs. Aquino, G.R. No, L-8191, February 27, 2956: Quinto vs Lacson L-137700, May 30, 1960) Saw Broa Couct oF Law 2017 Cextrauzen Bar Orcearions 17CIVIL Law MODES OF ACQUIRING OWNERSHIP Donation, 80. Can a person donate a pro A donati »Perty which is Not owne in wane tothe donc. al feb te dng ngs naher ownership me weal rg tate car ana vo nen der Art 712, NCC in relation to At 725, NCC is also @ mode © ae aha etetship and other real rights by an act of liberality whereby @ person meticacous pea na SUPE or real tg ee a acres co oer tt would bea etal, GR Ne soragy te donor Would have nothing to convey at the time itis made (Hemedes vs. CA 8 1509) October 8, 1999; R & B Insurance Comp vs. CA. ef al. GR No. 108472, October eae illegal and impossible conditions in a ‘simple donation vs. illegal and impossible is donation. ¥ Conditions in simple donatig sidered as not imposed, hence the donation is them." Thus; ea gpoips donalidf's void, - aon f AR ops nS 52 For donation ins musa, wnat eth lealagy Ve they MOTTCAUSA should cbdply dt thd fontalles df alias Gl ancktSRartent. not complied dona sonar Word and would produce no eect the donaton Is rags contemplation of the donor's death meaning that thaffalror heked oar SSE jes'will pass to the donee because of the donor's bctand it is donation mortis didez, 78 SCRA 245) 53. Applicant Mario Malat iran, fil Tibig, Silang Cavite ctaiming t P the public domain, anc 1 that hi Uninterrupted, public and adver thereby entitling him to the judi an Spplicati {regiatratidnBovering a parcel of land in rt of tt decessors-in-intefest, ad been in open, continuous, | and oceupati of aland for more than 30 years, | : | | ion fis ile. To prpve that the property was an ie-Womtaiy, alabanan presented during trial a the Goimaniy Envicgiment and Natural Resources enland Natura} Reyources (DENR). RTC rendered land registrato certification dated June 4 Office (CENRO) of the Di judgment granting Malaba application? Decide. « ‘AS a general rule and pursu and are inalienable. Lands tha \t Healy under private obi State and, therefore, may not be“ 0s to wit {hp RTC correct in granting the ‘ublic domain belong to the State Hip are also presumed to belong to the ing are excepted from the general rule, (2) Agricultural lands of the public domatf\are renidet@d. alienable and disposable through any of the exclusive modes enumerated under Section 11 of the Pubic Land Act. Ifthe mode is judicial confirmation of imperfect ttle under Section 48(b) of the Public Land Act, the agricultural land subject of the application. needs only to be classified as alienable and disposable as of the time of the application, provided the applicant's possession and occupation of the land dated back to June 12, 1945, of earlier Thereby, a ‘conclusive presumption that the applicant has performed all the conditions essential to a government | {grant arises, and the applicant becomes the ovmer ofthe land by virtue of an imperfect or incomplete ttle } By legal fiction, the land has already ceased to be part of the public domain and has become private property, (0) Lands ofthe public domain subsequently classified of declared as no longer intended for public use or for the development of national wealth are removed from the sphere of public dominion and are considered converted into patrimonial lands or lands of private ownership that may be alienated or disposed through any of the modes of acquiring ownership under the Civil Code, I the mode of acquisition is prescription, whether ordinary or extraordinary, proof that the land has been alteady converisd to ‘San Bros Coutect oF baw 18 2017 Cewresuize Bar Orerations55. 56. 87. Private ownership prior to it ‘observance of the ae law (Atticle 1113, Cyy@ uisiive Prescriptive period is @ NO, a condition eahtained in_an insiraked policy that clards must be presented within one year ater fejection is not merely a progéddirdl requiferten. but in We nature ofa condition precedent to the liability of the insurer, oF in-lber terms, a resoluory clause, the purpose of which is p teininate all labities in cease the action is notified by ihe TeUTee Tr WelperodlasGUIBIBD (Ang vFutton Fre Insurance Co GR _No. L-15862, (uYS4, 1969], 112 AHI 8446 : Bee 62. Aentered into a contract of sale Wath where! RSLAI on the conditigh that B would be allo could approve the assimptio RSLAI and sold the same pro YES, under Art. 1186. Vig ondiion, shal be. del fulfilment. Thus, the saidjcondition Was 0 outstanding obligation angtaking b G.R. No, 170408, [Februaty, 2010}}an parka! of land mortgaged with the mortgage. However, before RSLAI roe ois igen, recovered his title fom fe land to Tfifled nn te,doigor voluntary prevents its SBS uted when A provedted ts flment by paying Ns Bras esto i who evap ntijng 8 (De Leon ¥. Og, 63. A borrowed from B thea A made several partial pay B's acceptance of the partiat INO, the acceptance ofa part sn}vof P1,000,000 to be paid after two years. However, within one year é accepted by 8, Was the contract novated in lieu of {bya creditor i not d novation ofthe contract. ts merely waiver of his right to reluse any payment. vpiralion ats term Hino explanation given why the Creditor received sald partial paymot lily of he obligation, it may be presumed that his ‘eunqulshiment was inentona ad is Chole to dspense vith the term, voluntary. (Lope v. Ochoa, G R No. U-7955, May 30, 1958) 64, Suppose in the previous question a period has been fixed by the court. Can the court give a new period in which to comply with the condition? . NO, the period fied by a court supplements that of the contract. Courts may extend only a period allowed by a judicial decree forthe fulliment of an obligation, but not a period fixed by a judgment which becomes, part of a contract. The latter ts not designated simply for the execution of a judicial decree and, in Consequence merely procedural in its natute; iis @ period fixed in a final judgment and is res judicata Sa ac such forms an integral part ofthe imperfect contract which gave rise to its designation by the court. aM thencelorward part of a perfect and binding contract (Barreto v. City of Manila, G.R. No, 4372, [March 27, 1908). San Broa Couuece or Law 2017 Cearmauizeo Bar Orerarions 22i -— — =r CIVIL LAW Alternative Obligations 65. JA ~ in pve w from MM and mortgaged his house and lot as security in case of fallre to pay the debt, all his rights to the house and fot at aP 2PP 'o MM. JA paid no part of their indebtedness. Is the agreement 10 and lot at an i joney at i lid appraised valuation in the event of failure to pay the debt in moueY Yes, the agreement to convey avent of failure tO Pé jareement to convey the house and at at an appraised valuaion nthe eveML ANA or paid i debt in money atts matuty 1s perfect vad tis simply an undertaking hal 8° CET 0 permit trey. willbe paid in ater way. The spat i ot pact coms RSMO ane matty the creditor to declare afrfetue ofthe secunty upon te faut ofthe debtor 1 00) Ce ee Bite I's simply proud that te dt sre pl in money t sal be pad ater speaTe NAY SP transfer of property at a valuation (Agoncilov. Javier, GR No, 12611, August 7. 19160) viding that the d, or any part 66. B insured his mansion with J Insurance Co, The policy contained a clause Pre fs jand payment company may at its option reinstate or re thereof, instead of paying the 7 ; Obligation of the insurance company an alternative ofie that is to say! ma vas insured, of repuid I i either pay the amount in whiehthe house was I at its option (Ong Gyan Can v. Centumnsurange Go, Ld 7/8, No. L-22738, [December 2. 19241) 67. For a valuable consideration A, B| ahd © obliged theniselves to X'to either convey 2 parcel of land containing 1,000 coi convey a different land of equal value'to X, Suppose X chose the land containing ear ren jélhiaimind’and choose the other land? NO, an election once fiode is Unding of the pers ‘ot thereafter be permitted to renounce his chol eyes v. Martinez, G.R. No 32226, [December 23. 1 68. A,B, and C jointly Siered in8.a.contrat of fan 3 the former borrowed from the latter the amount of P1,000,006."There are no. indications in the contract as to their respective liability. Can the partles be made sel ‘ab the amount of the loan? NO, they are each only lable for ta B the orighal Dyfigation I three persons sign a contract under the provisions of the Ci ie Gedjto make each liable for the full amount, teach is only liable for tie pfoportionale smoum of the eontract (Paras, 2008, p. 278. Pimentel v. Gullertez 4m 49) Oe a) hs / y/ 69. A,B, C, D, and E borrowed hiohay con xa sia te onan to be solidary, but the airs er sid und Norns and conditions. F brought an action to recover from A, whose obi was already due-\A ‘claims that he cannot be made to pay because the obligations incurred ary co.debilors were not yet due. When the debtors of a solidary obligation are bound by diff ie and conditions, may the creditor sue one of them? G SN Yes. the creditor may sue the one whosé share has already become due and demandable but the creditor cannot recover yet from the debtor sued, the shares of the other debtors, until the conditions or terms of the others have already been fulfilled. In other words, F may recover now from A only A's share; and ‘hen the conditions and terms have been fulfilled for the shares of B, C, D, and E, the creditor F can Fecover their shares from A. This, after als stil a soidary obligation (Paras, 2008, p.294: Inchausti & Co. v. Yulo, 34 Phil. 978). 70, Under a contract, the obligation of A, B, and C was solidary. However, a judgment was rendered Suainst them for the total amount without stating the nature or extent of their liability. May judgment be executed on the property of C alone to satisfy the entire obligation? No, when it is not provided in a judgment that the defendants are liable to pay jointly and severally a seiain sum of money. none of them may be compelled to satisty in full said judgment. Each of the sefeltants is lable only for his proportionate part of the judgment (De Leon, 2010, p. 214. Oriental ‘Commercial vs. Cebato, 60 Phil. 723 [1934)). Sax Bros Cottece oF Law 22 2017 Cewrnauzen Bar Orenarionsey CIVIL LAW Dbligations with'a Penal Clause 71, The inhabit tants of Barr tr Vicente Ferret Bitto XYZ raised a su placed the sum int Cast nth the ther of Ate snag to be ya tsi work. P12.000 was pad st eae a on Seay should fall toed at the completion ofthe chapel. Ae Denalty it was agreed that if Githe’ Pony vay of dermnity te uth 8 of ts conditions or stipulations eect sereschel pay te ote stees. May the tustege sau of PAOGD The chapel aed tomech ta poe eats cre four i NO. Ths tS rtuse to pay the remaining P4000 ong en Penalty agreed Upon? aisle 1a © U82d fr the purpose for wich t nee marae me, fe nuslees are notated the stpulates ao P4.000 which s yet unpald won the perce tse aah sa me 10 's yet unpaid upon the purchase price m bo set a 227200, The resus al he pony so ea re use ol We contact mist ath the rast hat potion ofthe contact price wie fe cen setae iste hands ofthe utens Toate, Sul that nether party can worear et ro v. Mali [October's tapay MN PAY can ecover anything a he eer (aa mf 10000 o erecta chapel fo the pan sit. $3” the hands of four trustees. The trustee: 72. The municipality of Westera incandescent. lamps into the made in install 19 company to install 200 i per lamp with the payment to be liménts. it was ‘st that, as a penalty of noncompliance on the part of inva nate company coulddomand thegarsen 140 the company ofall the materials used the installation,paid for by the Tithe pal of Wostetos Thereafter) the municipality had a financial probiem tesutting ta-the lacie Of funds and violation ofthe agreement. Is the company Trae 1 Breve lose ox damage ih araor to domaral the cntercerien of the eevel clause? When @ penal claus nas begw agreed-upon ° aiher that aysecurity and sanction as Bunishment for the inlet ip Restor wees 4 loss and damages, and upon evidence of the violatdlof the eonditioh Airy is folyBbiged to prove losses and damages sue, tobe onde apse mand cifefoeinent of the penal clause agreed upon, which 18 grr xceftig to the gam ip apdpsemnity clause (Palacios v. Municipality of Cavite Gio, 1508, Nevember 73. A building was leased, EBT F600 fos roa in the contrac that i the tat aoa on : 3 the contract will be automatically confistation is, granted the lessor of the lessee's ede uilGus DE uncafscioftaule in a sense, itis not void, but tbSarfobht thaf can be Bcovered is not limited merely to Ng00f, Apr 29/1957) HMENT oF oplcationsé 74. Constante and Corazon authofized) slate broker in the sale of four lots for the amount of P23,000,000, 8% of which wil the latter as commission. Artigo then entered inke # contract of sale with TT Corp. over {wo ofthe four lots forthe price of P7 090,000, Anta ita Sale was consummated, Artigo receivéd from Constante and Corazon P48,893, however feeling Giareved because according to him, his total commission should be P352 500.00 which is wa canara! price of the two lots, he sued Constante and Corazon, Citing AM. 1295 of the Woo Constante and Corazo contends that Artigas inaction as wel as failure to protest estops Nanterg ‘eeovering more than what was actualy paid him. Was the contention of Constante sed Come correct? NO, Artig's acceptance of partial payment of his commission nether amounts to a waver ofthe balance nor Puls him in estoppel. This is the impor of At. 1235 which was explained in Nis wise, “The soy acoapl, as used in At 1235 ofthe NCC. means to tke as satisfactory or sufficient or agree ee Incomplete or iroguar performance. Hence, the mero recip of apart payments nl equigee to ne required acceptance of performance 28 would extinguish the whole obigaton” Thare trae dene distinction between acceptance and mere receipt. In this case, tis evident tat Argo murely reenicosa, Barta payin without wong the belance (a Catv. Couto Appaals, GA Na, THCOSS Tne ne 2002) Sau Broa Course or baw nteauizep Bak Overations 2375, 76. 24 CIVIL LAW LSW placed deposi Posited wi LSW instructed an en ‘ABC @ money market placement. Thereafter; a person ctaiming to BE representing the proceeds nntc,t© Preterminate the money market placement, Issue 9 ENE NO pat I the obligation of ames te same to 8, who in turn deposited the check Fa ae eather ate eT Person. the payment to ay one uh cet as provided in ait ng Mt 'S Not suspended by it (Allied Banking ¢ mn of his creditor, or through error induced by the a in fact his creditor, of authorized to receive such payment Pieal ch payment does not prejudice the creditor, and accrual of inter Pen, Comp. v. Lim Sio Wan, G.R_No. 133179, {March 27, 2008)) ‘efiarroyo throu ; Paying the ae entered into a contract of sale with Papa over a parcel of land. Ate Payment of the balanos 0 8 earnest money Pefarroyo and Valencia issued a check for the carr However, Papa did not present the check for payment for more than 10 “Y of the check produced the effect of payment? over Of aaah ces the effect of payment only when it 1s cashed, bier Is prejudiced by the creditors presenting Sydeyer al ok BBGipn undertaking of due diligence in be held topes or Valencia and C3: it wall & by want of such diligence, it wil ich it wagighven (Papa v. AU BaMent of the debt or obligation “C598 Pay BO) COL L tase ti Tiga obo a5 actual Re IGR No YES, the bortowe aver generic ty if the crops, with interest ther than the mortgaged 2 callect jing agreement whereby ABF would i ns fihatin.thg eventithat’'no work on Sundays is, Bvailable through fa f rayangh eget fp payinem of ter wages 38 though they had worked:that da. Govefnmentjenacied a law prohibiting the ‘opening of any commiérelal, industrial efprise og Sundays. Can the employees: demand payment of the NNO, when ine law pron Gh ts one iE abishments on Sunday was enforced, the performance-at he prestd iS; the employer is relieved from cao wi agen Ry rr Bae nage AP Fay Naa Bod Kapok Industries Workers’ Urion eNO, L-9126, (Jan 7 ; o> A sold a portion of his interest i-a’ ca a8 agreed upon that a stated portion of the purchase price should be applied to the cost of insfalling a new air conditioning system. The car was lost in an earthquake before the air conditioning}system was purchased. Thus, installing the air-conditioning system became impossible. Is B released from the obligation to pay so much of the purchase price as was to be applied to the installation of the air conditioning system? NO, the obligation to pay the balance independently ofthe purpose for which it was intended to be used continues to subsist notwithstanding the fact that it has become impossible to use it in the particular way that was intended (Milan v. Olabarrieta, G.R. No. 21087, [February 23, 1924)). It should be noted here that payment has not become impossible; it 's merely the act to be performed after the payment that has, become impossible. Thus, the obligation or prestation (to pay) remains, ‘san Bens Couece oF Law 2017 Cexraauizen Bax OPERATIONSCIVIL LAW 80. D execut ondona a tuted a prom orrow from ¢ bar soo ote 800.0 in favor of C. Later, € ded, D contends that he did not and that att ration tact 35 itemmedary to estat oan fr O rom FC's end, in, te WAS Notified of the de ate ath of C, he paid F P200.00 as part payment of the P500.00 {ime to pay the balance in's fon days but F made him understand that he oD was ote he facts, isthe alleged remission sufficiently established? Payment of P29 go eae the debt was never retugiet by F to C or his legal representative. The partial H8ould Benetton ee by D belies the alleges condonation, Moreover, if the said remission were true, elit only the estate of C and not D, The act of generog Of the |; I generosity of F must have been towards his fiend C whose death bereaved him, or the family latter. D had no elation of al cs Leon, 2010, p.367) voluntarily, and gh ‘rendship with F,(Vilahermosa vs. Medina, [CA] 44 0.G. 4429: De ned by a promissory note executed by Mths=»D is now in possession of the Ellered the promissory note to O a Umea ta condonéhlte obligation. Here the folowing reget oe this imalies that Cas condone o fe y ane impli Mt: (1) the: document evidencin e imp eden che a sara eee present: ( document: (3) that 82. conjugal two-story bui iding was leased in favor Paid to the husbahdigione. th Spouses? i No, for the waiver applies ohly to) conjugal properties, as welts fut GR. No. L-19571, [Decembéy 31 Er ‘1 83. ABC Corp, borrowed P104,000 Corp, became the president of DEF majority members DEF Corp 4s th NO, There cannot be a merger Persons, if the said entities keep certain tenant dei ¥2s deliver bythe crc to tha debi: (2) suph documents a prvate Ihe delivery was Voluntary Law Reviower; Jurado, 2009/p. 788) iVing separately from each other, ipulated that the rents would be ialsp{nithe course of the trial, a omnes by a tween S effect thiat-the wife would pay the io os valve ade By te abort te a gh ne ene the property wa Mm. The compromise was then approved to this property iu ‘the eotionertin the aareeri@nt. With reference to all other be-schyugal parership sil remains. (Puzon v. Gaerian, ona Partnership between the from 1 ently thereafter, the president of ABC jority mefbers of ABC Corp. became the e ‘itor and debtor under Art. 1276 of the NCC? ier and deblor unde AHHE-1276 of the Ci Cons nah Gea their 0 majority of the members of thecbdars.of the two geganialions partes to the contact are the same act ilies. (Kapisanan ng mga Manggagawa sa Manta Raitoad Co. v. Crest Union, GR N5ct-14332, May 20,1960) 84. A and B were co-owners of a pi 200,000, Because they were lece of property worth P1,000,000. For some repairs thereon, B paid co-owners, A had to share in said expenses, and so A owed 8 Bes Sold his share in the property to C and B also sold his share in the property to @ Late, B brought this action to recover P100,000 from A, A claimed that sinee ¢ ie n BrpPerty, © owes himself, and therefore sald merger had extinguished his debt to B. Should Arey B? 1ow the owner of the YES. mere transfer toa third person of ights belonging to both the deblor andthe creditor BUT not the credit as against the debt does not result in merger. {The rights of creditor and debtor ae not merged in one same person by the fact that the tings pertaining to said creditor and debtor which were tho subject of the obligation were tansferred to hin whens ng transfer did not include, among against the debtor. (Paras, 2008, 1925)) the nights and obligations transferred, the credit that the creditor had . 457; Testate Estate of Mota v. Serva, G.R. No. 22825, (February 14 Saw Broa Cousce oF Law 2017 Cenmauzeo Bar Orerations 25— OO —_ see CIVIL LAW 00.00 with oreclosur ne SState of X, praying fora personal fat quectgue of mortgage securing said debt This mortgage on assessed at P28.000.00, 85. A sued B, as adm interest and the f parcel of land in inistrator of u I appeared that a under an execution denial correct?" “PO” * judgment against D. The tial Gourt denied the prayer YES. when A an a merger of ng rch ifs sale Purchased the land from ¥ who, in turn, purchased the same Och Saath duifed through ¥ the equit conve) him (A) as mortgagee, Hs took alt ¥ te equity oF in he very sme land conveyed obi a a nee wih Rhone sesame er te mer ah ATS Paced Ste mer gis en Se eet ee he Acquired the rights of Y. (De Leon fiola, G.R. No. 40908, [September 1834) 60 PHIL Sey eget Y (08 Leon. 2010,» 377; Erngues v. Raila, GR. No. 40908, Compensation G maintained an account wi i oan for the rer ee correo ce aroun of Pon mae pas ALGEN EI ee cata G discovered that PNBank mnces of his account. Can PNBank rigi Pas eee eae sldtatiphsing vetadetra depostor and a bank is Pet Beato and del The general rule nt HS\ufkciction that a bawvngeca ne ceoat nts r e pyr Ot any idebtedesto ion the part SE So Eales Nationalbank, GR. No. 43191 November 13, 939! “COLLEGE OF LAV SP LCS is the owner of Shares of SGER'SFMCH quently, LCS became indebted to MCB “MCB compensated the amount of LCS's itl je Shares of stock of LCS. Was the compensat a NO, the shares of A ? stockholder and, there ‘ater | cei uch shares, Moreover, A stockholders indebted anki with the amount of his “ sion wih regard to such shares (Garcia v. Lim Chu Sing, 6.R. No! (Febrilary 24, 1924)) . B borrowed from ¢ P1000 payable In one ye ep SA im arsine, 17- yard son borrowed P5000 from-8:for his school tu ever the son When the debt to C\fellydue, B' borrowed by C’s son. Is*there ‘legal comp: NO, under the NCC, in onde AV it instead in a strip club. aiming eompensation on the ‘P5,000 spSation, itis essential that there must be two parties, who incipal debtors of each other in the instant case, C cannot 3 -#T-year old son in bortowing PS00 from B. consequently, he did ite.bep EB Ffieither did B become a principal debtor of C. Therefore, there can be nc pat 10,000 borrowed by B from C. (Civil Law Reviewer, Jurado, 2009, pp.792-795 89. Jose subscribed 160 shares of stock, at par value, in a company whose authorized capital stock was P300,000. At the time of the subscription, and without his knowledge and consent, the \ company increased the capital stock to P600,000. Can the company compel Jose to pay for said shares? NO, because not having given his consent to said increase consttules a novation by changing the principal conditions (Art, 1291, Civil Code). Said increase in authorized capital stock diluted the expected ‘ownership of the subscriber in the corporation amounting to a change in the principal conditions ‘of the agreement. Hence, he is not bound by the contract thus novated and is relieved of the obligation contracted by him inthe original contract, which became extinguished as a consequence of said novation (art. 1231, Civil Code}; even it he made some partial payments, not having been informed of said increase at the time of having made them. (National Exchange Co., Ltd. v. Ramos, G.R. No. 27850, December 24 1927) San Broa Coutrce oF Law | 26 2017 Centeauizen Bar OrenarionsCIVIL LAW 90.A rented a house ——_ lease to strangess“@ nthe contact of ese te tease wae iver autnority to assign the lessor B? ‘eCaUSe Of this A leased it to C. ts A released from his obligati NO, under el anes a 1292 of the Civil Code the only situation where a novation having ey eae sof o'd obligat 8 & prior Obligation will be implied. in the absence of ‘express stipulation, is where ee assumed by th oma in every respect. In the case under consideration the new obligation abies PY the successive eet ree incompatible with the continues "abitty ofthe onginal teens, “alte taking over the lease was not a al incompatibl (Rios v. Ja cinto.G.R.No. 23893, March 23, 1926) Ot D owes ¢ P1,000,000. F, friend of o, owes Cag approaches C and tells him: “I will pay you what D NO, the more tas tMe"® &Xpromision sons te eleve Dee ite obligation? eed 1? fAct that the creditor recele ono. does not constitute nova ss creditor can stil enforce the obligation against the Snainal deblor. (Magdalena Estates ne Rodriguez, G R. No. L-18411, December 17, 1966) 92. Johnny filed @ petition with the et Fer net Michael alleging that the latter obtained # lose £7 PurBoses of expediency, the wansor le indicating that Johnny gaPediency, the teansaction wasidehominated as a sale in bought Bank bons coumed Te at eee vi we ata discounted ice. Michael eonfends that the contract was not a loan but fete case at bar, thas is nol qudstiod tia tha However, Johnny failed to prova what the true i the record which wil intigate that the coftract wad ¥ of thelminds between the parties sd conifact is, for there is nothing in aa \, © ] tiction and development of housing subdivisions, ing cotporation. To /speed up the processing, A 20,000 which was accepted by B. evidenced by 2 iMngfotion jwise: 93. A, a domestic. corporation jengag applied for a toan with B, a de allegedly offered the fatter a ser ‘Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) es toBay a Series: fee of THREE which shiall-be’paid in 2 equal ‘a “That the Client da HUNDRED TWENTY THOUSAND Pl installments.” AU AU. aS < a poet See Wuaramtor extended security obligaQiNG RMBET pay the sald loan upon A’s default, Out of the loan, B deducted the P320,000 service fee. A'was. able to construct only 35 out of 160 units, and defaulted to pay its loan obligation. G, as the-guarantor, paid only 2,990,757 withholding 250,000. B demanded payment and fied an ation to recover the 50,000 withthe RG wa Isis ol 780 ae athe wae a8. eed wae se ana No. Article 1370 of the Civil Code states that ‘if the terms of the: Contract are clear and leave no doubt Pee enon ofthe partis, the Keral meaning ofits stipulations shall contoF. This is alse Han the Plain Meaning Rule In this case, the agreement between the parties is the for obligations. It is the best evidence of the partes, it is th clearly and leaves no doubt that the amount shall be pai Units constructed. ‘mal expression of the parties rights, duties and w law between them. The MOA stated its terms id in lump sum and not based on the number of San Broa Coueot oF Law 2017 Cunreauzed Bax Orenations 27; | i CIVIL Law =f 95. 96. 28 RESCISSIBLE CONTRACTS accordance to the ope for th ae aise Sn \ plans. an 8 'e construction of a three-story dormitory Prescribed the minimum acs Pecification: 's a roan delvre ’ the minimum ace be 's. The General Conditions and Spe * d : Toric ng pUPressive strength ofthe building was thereafter delivere testing which showel that ating fom the i ted several 7 Said plans and specifications, A conduct Sulcturally detective. As a ee Mailed the required 3000 psi which meant that the building was that rescission was range 8 60 tends mA a ta mplaint for rescission of the contract. B cont POPSr arguing that the applicable ute is cle 1388 of the Civil Code 1s B correct? No, 8 seems to be cont Re “Onfused over the right of fescission which is used in two different context in the Civil Under the law on contracts, there (0c ct aie he reccenon on te rescissible contracts as enumerated under Article 1381, and right of construction contac ute, 2 Bppkcabe les ol 1381 m ron to 1386 but 1701 because the contract obliges B to,bulkl tha’ et . Sinlelite Wiis theobigation to pay upon the completion Article 1191, untke 1385 is not EMD, eS Waa, Glas brea ‘SSS Is not predicated.on prejudice but based on the The apc Bk0N8 of them Ma woltes reenter ee RE oni ne stipuated : ciprocty. The right 10% Sa lang and ‘Specifications. , 5 ak = ee N BED Sometime in 1979, ¥ died: W died, Jeaving allot to Kis wite, Order for X to obtain.a toan, W sold the lotto X. X ol to the latter but X failed to pay the Toa: Rohe Sold the lot to A, whdjpaid the full price. After Of the sale and partition of the lot against X W, and to his/ehildren, one of whom was X. In btained a loan from ¥ afid mortgaged the same ridge Was"foreclosed. On January 1, 1983, Y lis chitin ied forthe annulment le Was declared to be valid only wit tre naet to the shares bt W anid Xi and void wih fespust tha shares one otter hele, orcerng De Letum of the said Bortion. The decision betame final Sed orceinie 4, 1993. On Pecember 10, 1998: Allied ar action for rescasion ag On théBround that he was ousted from the subject lot due:to eviction, depriving him of almost 80% Iereot, Has the action for rescission prescribed? aaereeee | \] {CS Aisle 1389 oF the Givi Cos providss tal he action o claim rescissfon must be commenced within {our years. The cause of-acion ofthe stems fi im having Yeen ousted by final judgment from the Ownership of the lot thet he bought in Violation of tis warranty 2gginst evietion that comes with every sale Of property or thing under Article 1548 of the Givl Code, With thé loss f§0°% Of the subject lot by reason Of the udgment,& had teh o leaps fr rasision pursuant pt provision of Arico 1586 of the Civil Code. And that clignfor rest h Based én a sybseauént economic loss suffered by the buyer, was precisely the\aotion that against ¥. ConseQiety, it prescribed as Article 1389 provides in four years rom tretinethe a ued wp is fren September 4, 1983. Salvador and the Star Semicddductor Company (SSC).éxécuted a Deed of Conditional Sale wherein the former agreed to sell his fot i fal ppatte ‘the latter for the price of P1M. The down payment payable is P100,000, and-the balanée Ts to\be paid 60 days after the squatters in the property have been removed. It was further agreed upon that if the squatters were not removed within six months, the down payment shall be returned by the vendor to the vende. Due to his failure to have the squatters removed, Salvador offered to return the down payment to SSC but the latter refused to accept the money and demanded that Salvador execute a deed of absolute sale of the property in its favor, at which time it will pay the balance of the price. Incidentally, the value of the land had doubled by that time. Salvador consigned the P 100,000.00 in court, and filed an action for rescission of the deed of conditional sale, plus damages. Will the action prosper? nee eee contract, Since it was Salvador who failed to comply with his conditional obligation, he is not the aggrieved party who may file the action for rescission but the Star Semiconductor Company. The company. condition which it can do under Art. 1545, NCC nuece oF baw San Bepa Couece oF DONT Crwrauzep Bar OFTRATIONSCIVIL LAW VOIDABLE CONTRACTS 97. Jackie, ‘hol, she sold 9 ete her townhouse oy Signing a Dent, Because she wanted to study in a by buyer. When the use “4 of Sale and turning over possession of the same to the buy eat scovered she was still and return ne, t8: When Jackie tune f 3 mer. sh promised to execute another Deed of Sale S and was already working, she wanted to d, voidable or her townhouse. Was the sale contract void, r Over the property? Explain ime o Te coat ot sae was votes ye ound tha Jacke is incapable of giving consent at the time of “PHENO Ne Salo. tte 1327) Jackie can no to "92! Tecover the townhouse unit Since Ys ction to annul t mea fled within f su eke was already 35 yom ld, the action hi before she reached the age of, (Article 1391, Civ because if a contract is voidable on the ground of our (4) years from attainment of the age of majority las clearly prescribed because she should have filed it il Code) ™ P lonered into ireb mi: Supp M8 with shabu got one year as Mr. Was authorized to look for retailers. Later, Mr ‘B gave Mr. X Fight to sell on Heagthe goods 8 tr. A withou oe aA TAANEIthoUs Mr. X knowing the tedl-gBods to be sold Tie var AN® only goods to be sors gn ‘heiegal rugs. isthe contract between Mr. B an valid? Cc LAW No, itis voig, The firstlcontract forthe supp “thereto of shabu is illegal, therefore, the'r@Sultihg contract with Mr. x the nov and nextel A vl ear ay the very begin ofits defect because itis void from rind, I Hs/no ledal effec |Conseq a ich 8 th direct result of a previous ‘egal contract is aio rd anc estan erica, cate f- ‘Sold her house and lot ‘by signi buyer. When the buyer a Sale when she turns 18, When Paulh timed 23 and was already working, the sale an a ‘return the buyer's money tolrecover re house/and lot-Was th Teeter vate? Can Pie ailreeuer ne pare 928 OL The contac f sale was vidabe OREM A A Pah “incapable of giving consent at the time of Unt pelt” ofthe sale ARrice 1380 eRBlARe taut tS S2qpt dager recover the townhouse unit because if a contract is) ‘idable nfl id of minogity, the Jor $0 annul it must be filed within four (4) years from attainment of the ag ity. Singé Paul has clearly prescribed becauss' he shoul dat before’ 23-dlready 23 years old, the action pack Civil Code) a fed the age of 22. (Article 1391 0 1 SY Uses 100 June, 1965, 25 acing enitoe{SeIRFE) MOSSE tSboec> at ther Cooperative Exchange (CCE) at Agoo, La Urn s Procedures, While watts ‘drying plant of the Central ith the PVTA regulations and ‘ere totally destroyed by fire. It Jn accordance wi Saw BEDA Coueoe oF Law 2017 Cenreauszeo Ban Operarions 2?101. al : Ks Conpactit Justiniano purchased a set of Supreme Court Reports Annotated from Law Boots Of P5800. Ati a Pee Of P5000 which, in addition to the cost of freight of P50O. a rhe contract proviion wtiniane made a partial payment of P2500, leaving a balance of P34 Justiniano failed to pay the remaining a COmmanY demanded payment of the installments due snd having failed to pay the same, Yes. The sant action in the trial court forthe recovery ofthe obligation, Will he case prosp _ hen He eee OF the books purchased on instalment were retained by the seller although ie ave already been delivered to the buys the condition that ownership thereof wll be transferre e ® buyer. under the condtion that ownership t Tose weufat UPON his full purchase pce Iwas nly tha despte i los te books a re the ik of 088 would be bore by the buyer although he a wise such was agreed r 8 not the owner yet, not only bec ; Healt wate te Performance bythe buyer of his ablgaton bu also because n the very conlact itself, it was agreed that los ° the SS of damage to the books after dalivery to the buyer shall be bore by buyer. (Lawyer's Cooperative Pubishing Company ve Tabor) 102, Alex bought a bike from Mina.by issuing) a Bé: ‘ull payment therefor. Before the check matured, Alex sold ti bike to Ania wha isersl iste Jock, Upon presentment of Payment, the.check issued by Alex was dishonored because he had already closed hs account before he isstied his check. Mina then Sued to recover the bike from Jack alleging that she had been unlawfully deprived of it by reason of Alex's deception. Will the suit,prosper? No. The suit vil 6 prosper because Nina was nol urleduly Jepived of grea athough she was unlawfuly dpaved the pice. The erection ofthe ao anita agery af re car was onoudh (0 allow Alex to havg.alpght of ownership over the car, which can be lawiully trafisferred to Anita, Art. 559 Soules only to a pers wino fT possesiom TW BOOR/FAMRGERE/BRGperty” age Tot to the ower thereof a fie title to the gar. Non-payment of the Anita, in the Pete the bwner, drid, hence price ina contract sve does nol acaernei fay deka The obigaton to daver a Shing Co..vgSantos) ish thing is diferent from. te obligaiomto Bay its pri 1s agreement between Debbie and Paid upon delivery of the car to [monthly installments of P15,000.00 . Se Debbie sold a second-hand tar to Eman for P15 Eman was that half of the purchase price, or Pre Eman and the balafice of P75,000.00 shall be paid in'five eq each. The car was delivered to Eman, and Eman paid the amount of P75,000.00 to Debbie. Less than one month thereafter, the ear was stolert from Eman's garage jwith no fault on Eman's part and was never recovered. ts Eman legally bound to pay the said unpaid balance of P75.000.007 Yes, Eman is legally tolnd.to pay. the ‘balance of P75,000,00. Thelownership of the car sold was ‘acquired by Eman from the momentit Was delivered fo ins Having éeqyrod ownership, Eman bears the Hot fos Beriomino Thus, the obligation to pay is not risk of the loss of the thing under the dot extingushesbytelos of He cal 46897. Coe, 104. Ricardo sotd a parcel of land fo Peping for P700,600 as\evidénced by a deed of absolute sale. Upon failure of Peping to pay.the purchase price, Ricarda filed a complaint for rescission of contract on the ground of Peping's failure to. pay tht Balance. Was the sale made merely executory? No, the sale was already consummated. Devoid of any stipulation that “ownership in the thing shall not pass to the purchaser until he has fully paid the price,” Gwiership in the thing shall pass from the vendor to the vendee upon actual or constructive delivery of the thing sold even if the purchase price has not yet been fully paid. The failure ofthe buyer to make good the price does not, in law, cause the ownership to Fevest to the seller unless the bilateral contract of sale is first rescinded or resolved pursuant to Article 41191 of the Civil Code. Non-payment only creates a right to demand the fulfilment of the obligation or to rescind the contract (Balatbat vs. CA) 105. Amanda and Byron entered into a contract of sale over a parcel of land in Davao. Amanda delivered the parcel of land. Byron, on the other hand, was bound to pay on December 16. 2016. ‘Amanda became incapacitated on December 15, 2016. On December 16, 2016, Byron came to ‘Amanda to pay and Amanda accepted the payment. Is the payment of Byron to Amanda valid? Yes. As a general rule, payment tothe incapacitated is void. However, if the incapacitated has kept the thing delivered or if payment has been beneficial to him, the payment is valid (Article 1241) San Broa Couot oF baw 2017 Cenreauizen Bar Orcrarions 30106. 107, 108, 109. CIVIL LAW is right Sell his iron throne for 55,000 pesos sadon Soom. eens visi Nanced the entire purchase price to Daene 9020 Unrate mac tat etre ouchase price to Daenerys February 27,2020 a stranger 9/00 February 18, 2020 ue Subject ron throne was completely destroyed BY Corer eens Aggrieved by the Situation, Jon Snow wanted reimbursement of the price On acenun ocO¥e the fll amount ot $c ee account fa cine St boy eoproa he xing of ebigatons de re sh of bath th vendo and the vende, Ifthe vendor obligation [ins lave cbigaton of he vendoe to pay snow exingushed. 78 consist TCG: hich sites among oors tat te subject obngtins ae lxgushed sr the 0 ete faut ofthe vendor Furthermore «would be jill slogical and st #98 the vende to Pay the price despite complete loss of the thing before its delivery. In conf ry Selvery gem3® 118 part donna Be ensayo gery, n on ny Gelivery from the vendor to the vendee, the law presumes that the ownership of the thing sold sti ‘on Sra the former. Hence, Dasnorys tae tum the advance payment of 55,000 pesos to ‘lon Show 128, Daenerys is bound to return the advance pay tre and ety executed » iM A ay Ue i bound himself to pay ‘sale ot» dagger phe ater boun the purchasa\ rice of 20 nce Siesta dae ib. And fo secure his payment, patyr execitad! a chattel m@Flgsee swe ae same dagger. Thtee months later, and despite minds from Arya, Pay ete pay We somstanns Sea ieee sre instituted a aetion of specific petformiance against Pete for the payment of {he purchase. Unsatisfied, Arya tsb moved fer we foreclosure of the chattel mortgage. Is Arya’s Courses of action proper? No. Arya’s actions wero, improper AH 148% Rte INGC Ign {uftments ofthe obligation, Should Uf wracteaiG chattel mortgage chased they * case the vendee, Pely, to recat any gees rh Re a not cumulative. Hehe the ue Cf ong ha requiring specific Perfodmahce Predludas herself f Daenerys bound hi mse to the sale, Jon grog co BERR vondinfoioe on ster xa Wd BE Imore iggtaiments, or foreciose the bad fe torore rears Fenfpon fyesht aehon ante pea onsen Sansa leased her TX120 Epson Printer to Bran at a ‘one year with the option on Bran to purchase the ox atthe end of the lease contract for pritay Pesce Under the said contac, the partion ave agjecd to ppl te neaas Gate th ofthe yore aeaeetitse price of the same, caving Bran witha balance of 2000 pees oy tna tnd! ofthe year. Unfoiunately, Bran has fled to say tre of ee nic installments, which chon eaygance to fermato thelaaee ad retieve the subject winter Ago Sena Nor saagainst Bran forthe recovery af the unpaid Semonth lease Wil the ut precceek Imig cans ail nk nbipe or SHARIA opossosseg Wide pinch heer oicable rule former prossen tad ee et ME NCC wakes reigréhco 1 ligBAags ot tne some cane arn oe rate ame print 000 (p¢80s-a month for a period of condominium unit In the course of the contract, Mama Sita p However, on the 41" and 42" month, Mama Sita failed to pay. Won his nonpayment, Mama Sita tried to tender her payment on the Corp. refused to receive the payment. Thereafter. the corporat letter, about the automatic rescission of their Deed of Condition the condominium unit. Aggrieved, Mama Sita invoked that tr without prior judicial demand. Can WAMI Builders Corp. rescind the comers {im tent Gabe ale the aneontion ihe cena Iw wih merits Ge fhe vere ar yeiaren Insaiment may not rescind We contact without giving the vendee or buyer a SOc goes nec ain ih fe eye elec Io yt Yr eraty one yaw of itahmara vaprtoces aie ried about the consequences of 53° month, but WAM! Builders n notified Mama Sita, through a ial Sale and demanded to vacate fe contract cannot be rescinded Swi BiDA Cousce oF baw 5 2017 Cenreauized Ban OrreanionsSaid-law requires CIVIL LAW Vendee, Here, WAN fon aot tothe MI Builders Con? 9 39-day-notce of cancelation oF sascssion of the contact entiled to a grace pono ar oe, ffusal ofthe 43 payment i improper, for Mama Stas deat corpor to Mart! lender of payment was well within the said period. Me i rere dor aa Sta wa haw sense news ok mare WHE veda Law. Hence, WAN cannot rescind the subject contract, 110. Ned Star installments fora yen pee Monty instalments for ive yeas. Ned Stark has competed the to Ned's default, Sar wince" Se60Nd year, Ned has defaulted in paying for the 13°" month. Me On his defense Na 2% Corp notified the former about the cancellation of the conditional sale | Ned argued thatthe sale ca is entitled to the benefits t le cannot be rescinded for he Smnbisseuran camel the 30°day grace period and the 30-day notarized notice of sancalation si s Subject of the sale ig ones thet hand contended that Ned is not enfitied tothe said benef \igher commercial lot, and not lot which the law accords with hig ae } and not a residential lot whict No ooh de tothe its nature. ts San Bida Buide ens lo. San Bida Builder's “er ention is untenable sluisprudence has consistently dectared that Maceda rattan odes) Uwe reste vent that gg canes! hone fan instalment by the buyer, ‘6 simply an event that prevents the obiiga Lfaymen! of aniinstaliment by the buy ti macg| right of 7 : “slibje tie from Boguiring binding force. This rig! Fear ote Sue 0 the 2-818 process rule: fet, the extern ef a 30-day, grabe period for every i bu yor ote 4d second, the notarizBd BQ idajinétice of cancellation of the sale. Thus. Ned Stark, as buyer ofa commefcal real estate Sayabib ntnstalgzrts fe snd to the bane af Maceda Law ‘111. Mara and Clara exe years. However, destroyed by Yo! ted a gontractlaf lease fo ie 3 year, ‘abit ie house was completely I: Terdath Waa eon se ofthe same lot and withthe é Jossession and enjoyment of the & for the remaining p TS of theif original contract of lease. But Mara would not aecede t@ Clara’s demands Is Clara entitled to possess the house by way of Substitution of the Ubjéct/of lease? ES mtudns NP No. Notwithstanding lack of faulf ontClaatalpan, the law does hot grant an innocent lessor to Possession of a newly.censtructed propelty on the)simple.theary,of substitution. At. 1655 of the NCC is applicable in this case-vihich states that if Ng teased is totally destroyed by a fortuitous event, the contract of tease is extingbished. Fy ja8"na clear evidence of'ény express or implied renewal Of the original contrat whith. 3 pn he lessoF's surg of right to claim or demand repossession of the subject property f° ‘s 112. Harry leased his residentia)jiduse with’a Griveway-fo Herinloné for 10 years. in their contract, there was no stipulation a: NY pro ments ifitroduced inthe property. During the course of the contract, Hermione built.a'garage right next to the S4me flouse and on the same lot subject of the lease. Upon termination of Jease,contract, Harty:now claims superior right over the garage without need of any payment. Decide. — Considering the nature and primary use of thé subject leased property, the garage is deemed as a useful improvement that is suitable to the purpose intended by the lease and pursuant to Art. 1678 of NCC. tho lessor may retain useful improvements after the expiration or termination of the contract, provided he pays % ofits value at the time of acquisition, ; spe house in Leyte for 5 sinuote now chaifas that ¢he is entitled newly constructedsh 517)? ‘Sax Broa Couutce or Law 92 2017 Cenveauizen Bar OrenarionsCIVIL LAW PARTNERSHIP, AGENCY AND TRUST lectus personarum, 2e8NS ‘choice of the person’ Delectus Of del confidence betwee Which delectus. Personae is an important element. It is based on rustleod It Of the lence, no one may be introduced into the firm as a partner without ( Ve © other partners. This element of delectus personae, however, is true only in the 8 regards a limited partn was formed oy wor the lace cant more than PSO0 was contributed in cash. Now then, unde oe ett At 1358, contracts “where the amount involved exceeds P500, such contract valid? NG, even a private one.” Should the oral partnership formed be considered Yes, because Art. 1358 applies oni for the pur the contract sAretairtealn can be putin wr D refused, fs, the partnership BREDA mse calocmanee halicEAfes Sithot beading parr. Re was 9 mere azsignes atevor profs hs faher A could have coheed, 9k that A's interest in the X{of whatever has not yet t a nership (his share in the Profits or surplus) may ‘ aah cana aes is be attached | (Article-t i serder? | a !, A charging order is a judgment Subjecting the interest of the debtor-partner in the partnership, By virtue.ofné chafging of 6unbot parién therebf which the parnership would otherwise pay to thecdet h ag He fiven to’ the judgment creditor. This remedy is, however, without pre) i Staab Credits uhder Article 1827. It moans ‘fied 73 betore the Aeparate creditors of the partners FAridle 1814;NCC) A, B, and C were part artner. During the first year of ‘operation, the firm made = ‘Year, a loss of P1.5 million was sustained. Thus, the net pi ratih(Was only P1.5 million. in the articles, Of partnership it was stipulate: iat patiner would get 1/3 of the profits, but ‘would not participate in the losses . (a) Is the stipulation valid? Why? The stipulation is valid, for even the tavbiGelf exempts the indust Of stipulation, the share of each partner in the profits and loeeo rial partner from losses. In the absence have contributed, but the industrial partner shall not be able to s shall be in proportion to what they may F the losses (Article 1797, NCC), (b) How much will A get: 1/3 of P3 million or 1/3 of P1.5 mi A will get only 1/3 of P1.5 million, the net profit and not 1/ share in the losses, this only means that he will not share in the losses insofar as these can be accommodated in th transactions in determining the net profits or losses (GR No. L-12371, March 23, 1918) n? Why? ‘3 of P3 milion. While itis true that he does not in the net losses. It is understood that he share 16 Profits. Is but fair 0 compute all the various No. L-12371 Griado v. Gutierrez Hermanos, GR Siw Bron Cource or baw 5, 2017 Certenuren Bak Orenarions 93120, 121 122 123, 34 Partnerships tt"orized to “manage; operate, and direct the affairs, trsiness: oF hit, duly approved in writing by the capitalist pal ie business ©f buying and Selling merchandise of all kinds. One day, Tobes the capital , @aUarly purchased by the Company, but without first in, eva alist partner. Is the Partnership bound? at { olied authority to purcnon cea Mas a routine one. Moreover, authority to purchase © Te ep teait The requirement of yritten authonty refers obviously (0 Nets In weitng (Smith, Bel and Go ee sete 40.0. 1882), (5) general partners for payment of a of the Civil Code, the partners are liable “pro Bigraly. cach ofthe fve (6) panners was able by ir gan that said discharged defendant is merely condng Rare” Whe jt against said fith partner, it was condonatign remission vil nol A.B. and ¢ fomea ‘ Fares sbesiti¢aly for fhb purbosdctéghtracting wit jovernment t0 San duanico bridge, ater (re seo kal or purbosd ct Gghtraoting withthe mpletion of the ° Project, the bridges were turned over by the raat Heat fare pa ESGIREAVE:. The puppies of the sratcrts against him eae Ato" thelcolection of Shim. A moved to dismiss the complaint ter" NT on Wels Ha ad eaerse ole ee Tags ames ie compli Bhip\is hot terminated but continues Gf is thejchange in the relation of the ‘business (CIVIL CODE, Art p buSingss-or affairs after dissolution Fe comeotes aNVparinerpeasing tobe od 1828), Winding up MW actual and the partnership is tofminated ee | oy de\a/partierYofm lability? State the rules thefbxisinalfsbilty of ay partner A partner ihe Partngrstib by an agreement to that effect gf pariebtie-continuing the business wee creditor having knowledge ot Will the dissolution ofthe partn No. The dissolution ofa senate {5 discharged from any existing labiify uf iu Ke between hinsel, the partes cri mE woh Such agreement may be i : the essoluton and the pcs The individual property of a & ‘Abligation of the partnership incurred while he was a partner, but subject} debts. (Art. 1835) .X. transferred his two (2) parcel of tan to residence. One year after the transfer, Proceeds among themselves, treating i therefor. In April 2017, the Commissioner of BIR required the tax. The Commissioner's theory is that have a joint or common right or interes in any propery from which the retums are derived. There must be an unmistakatle en partnership or joint venture. establish a partnership, whether or not the persons sharing them m9 to form a Sax Beva Couece oF Law 2017 Crxrrauizeo Bar OrrearionsCIVIL LAW 0 contract o 1 barinership where they intended to operate a fishspond, not to De attached to the maeusiness. Is th i tory 4 ; 7 Tye Reed to comply with the requirement that an invent No. While itis tue te ‘astrument? Why? Times that a contract of partnership is void, whenever immovable UL instant ane of the said property isnot made, signed by he parce ane TatPONd Since there UNL However, tng Case, the purpose of the partnership is operation of rae WOWed oF the shpond itself was not eonlnbuted, te requirement % parties must be attached to the contract need not be complied with. 0 lable as a gener: ‘8S Part in control or Hp bot Fa Management of the iinership (CIVIL CODE, Art. 1848), ENCE Of reg, Partnership Commission (Seq), “°@SMation . om (SEC) Of the limited partnership’ with the Secunties and. Exchange & When re _ 2 General partner by estoppel CODE, An. 1953) "UY Sesignated as a general Partner and fails to correct such error (CIVIL © When he is a gerra Neral part When tis Sur Li 53) Civil cy ame appeal jons provided by Art. 1846 of the x tutes 1, . AY shored uodicing¢ Sp een. When anym: '$ 8géncy and told him\not to report for work payment of sa ett asin the hae of iz tnen seis baeoee Sora agency? Why? we dealings of ¥ with Z-even after X cancelled his miey 10 a third person, the “person who received the ed in the same manner in the authority in the same iVX's agent, hence, his acts + Give the concept and Fé Its a stuation by vitue enlarged in orderto cops Its requisites are: . 2. The existence of emg b. The inability ofthe ay ©. The exercise of additonal Antpan, 4. The adoption of faiiy and ogee dy ©. Ceasing of authority at the mémanl What isthe doctrine of apparent authoriy? : One who clothes another with apparent-uthorty as his dgent and cannot be permitted to deny tho authority third persons dealing with such person in be. (Cuison vs. CA, G.R. No, 88539, Octat 129, When may an act of an agent be binding upon the principal even fhe acted beyond the scope of his authority? Explain, Under At. 1898 and 1910, an agents act even if principal if he ratifies them, whether expressly done beyond the scope of his authony, may bind the principal, and not the agent, can ray unauthoric Sr caaty. It must be stressed though that only the acts, which the principal must have Knowledge cf The principal must have full knowledge at the time of ratii cation of all material fa relating to the unauthorized act of the person who assul ics and circumstances med to act as agent. Sau Beos Couscr or ba 45 2017 Crvreauizen Bak Orenarions‘sno tay arg we — slant con) <8) nr ones yang ne incl wen benefit of led in his ow e agent acted for the aN undisclosed pring m name during the transaction, (2) the ager Principal ’ al (3) the transaction did not involve a property of the undiscloses Alt. 1883 provig cos Provides {hat if an agent actin his ‘own name, the principal has no right of action against the whom the agent has Contracted; neither have such persons against the principal. tn such case, th s “Ane agentis the one ditectly b ihom he has contracted, as if the Hrectly bound in favor of the person with who! the transaction were his ovn xcept when the contact involves things belonging tothe principal ihe ‘shall be understood, to be without prejudice to the actions between the principal Inc. v Morning Star Travel and Tours, Inc. G.R. No. 186305, July 22, 2015). X constituted ¥ as his agent to sell his Ie n Nove Without registering the contact, X gold the land to A. On February trent on Noverber 1, 1991 rT and obtained a title. A discomr feconveyance. Will the action No. Under Ant/4916, NCC. wi the agent ari:the otter with the Brior date shall 38 preferred wiho tne Ale 154 Woe ids ESSE Gn aba bane Yujerin good fath and for value, has a pie tins cae een oe ay ett right, In ths case, Bean be ob faith and for value, hence, the action for econvey ite Wil LASER : N f] - What is the Concept of Trust\Fideicp Wis a fiduciary relatighship equitable title while Provisions of this article and the agent. (V-Gent h oy 198 bP aartem legal re sated ary) Who coud be the eet . Distinguish trust fram g Contract. Trust always involves cgnershy of the property has the holds the property for the ast! of rights and dbties fiery in character, which may pn},0n the. oth (Cohtract is a legal obligation based on an undertake ya consid y oF may not be fiduciary in character. ) a b. In implied trust, the rule'is Betions to enforce the trust and no repudiation is required, unless. facts giving rise to the trust (Sotto vs Teves, GR. No. L-38018, Octovér supposes that all ofthe elements of laches aro present : SS 135, What is the concept of trust de son tort? 7 the demands of ructive trust) is a form of implied trust created by equity to moot Fistce, Tere ea conucive tus when a rpoty i amufed ough faite Sask tee, String I by fre of lon conlered a Vuste ofan ped tst br he benef of tc pees fy wwhom the property Comes (CIVIL CODE. Ar, 1456) ae of their transaction. In constructive trust, the trust is created irrespective of or even Law San Broa Cousot oF aw 36 2017 Cenreauizen Bar Orrear iCIVIL LAW D.AS tothe Ter ‘Ckoning =) cfiptive period shal be counes heme 88 Pesto pro in cet use 0:yar ee crip p 137. What is the Tru Equity will pursue the restitution to th Into the hands S of a tr proceeds. - are capable of i 175073 ne caPAb OF ide Nv® repudiation is made known to the beneficiary. In email trust, the 0d shall be counted from the ime the constructive trust arise St Pursuit Rule? ropert iciary, or otherwise compel 'y that is wrongful fed by the fiduciary, or benef ‘5 wronglully converted by rm even ust will follow the property through all changes in its state and for mfefee other than a bona fide purchaser for value, provided is product or GR. No ntiication (Estate of Margarita Cabacungan v. Marilou Laigo, gust 15.2019) jon (Estate of Margar F Can a Trustee claim tit Whether the trust e over the property held in trust by acquisitive prescription? Kor im lute ownership 1p 2tPFeSs oF implied, as a general rule, the trustee cannot acquire absol over the trust by a¢ Sa eee Such act of repud ation i lear and conclu iCquisitive sive, he may be able to aca, the beneficiary, and (2) Prescription. However, if (1) he repudiates the right oft 2) ® prought othe knowiedge of such benefciary, and (3) the evidence thereon solule ownership over the trust but only (4) after the on is made known to the beneficiary must be strict )oomplied wit -xpress b M8, October 31 reas a ge ores 1978). In ime tists, CO Lcrebit tRansattions A \/\V Distinguish commo¥atum tr Gita CORTESE ‘Commodatum is a latter may use it fora another with the obligat Purpose is the transte fact fain tithe ton of kafgly fhe ngumable thing so that the ves a thing belonging to “(CIVIL CODE, Arts. 1933, 1962). + . Distinguish surety fr Surety s sos i | Ine solvency of the debtor and thus binds himself to pay i the obligates himself to payfif the pringlpal d 463116, June 29, 2016), 4 Phitippine National Ban insurer of the debt, and he poration v, Yujuico, Gr. No. aed property after his default in 20s4ay period trom the date of service fON.pI the sale. Right of Redemption from the date of registration of ‘BOF the extrajudicial foreclosure of the ‘Cept only where the mortgagee is the k oF a bar luerta Alba Resort, Inc. vs. CA, G.R. No. 128567, September 1, 2000) Z 142, What is the significance of the benefit of Excussion? The creditor must exhaust all the property of the debtor and must resort to all available legal remedies against the debtor before proceeding against the guarantor. (Art 2058, NCC) 143. Is the writ of possessi to debtor-mortgagor? “ho wil of possession is valid even witout pfornotce given tothe 4 betohdela frecosure under Act No. 215, the proceeding Upon a aps ok jon for extra judicial foreclosure valid even though no notice has been sent lebtor-mortgagor. In ‘a writ of possession is ex parte, nor-itigious.and summary in nature, brought for the benefit of one party only and without notice being sent by the court to any person adverse in interest, The relief is Granted even without giving {an opportunity to be heard to the person against whom the relief is sought (Malia v. GSIS. GA Ns 157659, January 25, 2010). ‘San Beoa Course oF Law 2017 Crreauzen Bar Overanions 37144. A stipulation in, 2 contac the current purchase mat ot lodged at ledge wherein the pledgee could purchase the things Pri te spuaten does Me AEB as nt pad on me const pactm COMME, with pactocorm Constute a pactuny commisoriun, What is prohibited by fon the oxen mea sorte appomaonsy eed or page in payee Fe a 3 350 the Gaal Petiod agraed upon "Wines ens express. authorizavon of be pledgeo (0 Dutchase the things pledge ee! UPON. Where there 1s expe he tomas jet would not come within tl Drohibition, that is, then the current market price, the contract wou area Os a freon re NO automatic appropriation of the thing upon default (Warmer. Buenator and Macoy (CA) 380 Gwaun Fe Hn 145 Giza Se Special requisites of chattel mortgage : o erconar wt ony Personal oF movable propery in general, However, the parties may We | Pacanal property that which by ts nature would be real property ides. the vereuallon ofthe mortgage withthe Chattel Mortgage Register whore the mortgagor resides, Deen 'S located in a diferent province, registration in both provinces 1s required © Description of the pr roperty as would enable the partes or other persons to identify the same alter feasonable investigation and in Wt must be accompanied by a“prefBtres mortgage ©. Itcan cavBnatly obligation i (Art 2085°3 "a That the podge bent eee REAM > fo secure The Talshment of That the pled: ning an already valid mortgage to ‘ferson by agreement id the instruments proving {that when the pei may be alonate 147. What is a Dragnet claus? / A blanket mortgage clat AN Juyisprudence, is one which is specifically based tod % We panies ss commen ig 150197, July 28, 2005) Credits for services rendered by empoyses of laborets.to the debtor shall enjoy first preference under Article 2244 of the Civil Code, unless.the claims cohstitute legal liens under Article 2241 and 2242 thereof or unless a preferred creditor voluntanly waives his preferred rights. (Section 133 of FRIA) WILLS AND SUCCESSION 149, What is the importance of distinguishing heirs on the one hand and devisees or legates on the other hand? Itis important to distinguish heirs and devisees and legates + in.cases of pretention (Art, 854) because it annuls the institution of heir, but the devises and legacies shall be valid insofar as they ate not inoficious, + in cases of imperfect or defective disinheritance (Art. 918) because it annuls the insttution of heies insofar as it may prejudice the person disinherited, but the devises and legacies shall be valid to such extent as will not impair the legitime, and Sau Beon Cousot oF Law 38-2017 Centeauze Bar Orexarions: ete pe ON of the will a Posed on of the testator This only i" re, 223) hic lates that propery acre dir the tena ad the death of the testator are not, a5 @ used rong ‘ould exesiy appear in the wil sal tat such was the nenton HY applies to legatoes and devisees, and not to the institut 150. Whatis the form fy "tl mustte ea MH? a ologaphie wil? “et and executed ina language or calet known to the testator aa (Rat 2 holographic wil, must be subscribed at the end thereof bythe testator himself or attested ang ae riten by some other person in lis presence, and by his express een a another et by te or more credible witnesses inne presence ofthe testator an The testator oF the shall also sign, ag sory Mest by him to wite his name and the instrumental vitnesses ofthe wil Pages shal reestld each and every page thereat, xcept the last. on the left margin, and al the ® numbered coelatvely inlets aca an the upper part of each page The ates nat vie! Ss state the fliibeesy bagee i Hypo iis wniten, and the fact that the testator sigh Ine wi cee echoed hi “ et Rsote he person to write is name, under ed thew a the Rance of ho instumenal Me ERbe ot Ea signed the will ang af ne pages ther sa pofangs pryyéestator and of ae anolier ‘atestation lass isin alangdade 453 io fin td belwitries sas \f bhai bs ipterpreted to them Every wil must Boab gowiedf Dube sa ce eee oan the witnesses. The notary U the testator be deailiora debt i bié to do so; otherwise, he Shall designate two-persons fo 4 17 practicable manner, the Contents thereof, % " If the testator is blind, the will shalkbe read to ne 6f fhe subscribing witnesses, and again, by the notary pubis heforsih lis acknpydedged.) A holographic wil is one which I atten) dated, Bnd Sigfied By the hand of the testator himself. It is subject to.n9 other ierade?in, oF but wp Philippines, and need not be rare tet ya Stop 151. Alicia executed a will a in the amount of 12 millidh’ Alicia then diet 4 by Her illegitimate grandmother and two sisters, Cindy and Divi pbte,the estate according to your answer. \ 7 None. According to Art. 886 Sf tha\GiylGode, these fry heirs: (1) legitimate children and descendants, with respect to ter Teoitha ints; (2) in default of such, legitimate e-Dhildren and descendants: the ‘concurring 152. What is one exception to the rule of lex loci celet succession? ‘An exception to said rule are joint will, Joint wills executes valid in the Philippines, even though they may be authori, have been executed (Art. 819). Joint wills are those whi "more persons jointly signed by them, either for their reci (Art 818). rationis that can be found in the law on *d by Filipinos in a foreign country shall not be 2d by the laws of the country where they may ich contain in one instrument the will of two oF iprocal benefit or for the benefit of a third person ‘Sax Bron Coutzce or Law 2017 Ceneauzen Bar Orenanions 3°—L——=— a CIVIL Law they haa nano ant fOr havin 2 ‘children, Carlo and Danielle, Alice disinherited Bong, i woe atone 832inst the life of lice's brother, Gerry Alice died with and gave Noe, Distribute the estate ra0.000 The hereditary estate is 900,000.00. Was the disinheritance 921 ata a8 ay gas BE re could be a valig ron Of the testato he des 6 fo there was no suticient cause forthe asishentance Under Ate itanc inst the life "his OF her descengaen® the Spouse has been convicted ofan attempt against oe Petg PT ety, Fise ware vad cs cambios we Oe te receive his shee Against Alice SS descendants or ascendants, but to her brother. Bong shall stil Article 888 provides th, hereditary fas tl . the legitime of legitimate children and descendants consists of one-half of the Spuch shall be divided bonnet Mother. Carlo and Daniele are ented to. P460,000 ofthe estate Saat feeeive 225,000 whe Thus, each ofthem shall ceive P225,000. Bong, the husband a 1 P228 ony ecu¥aent to the share of one legitimate chid as provded under Arie 5.000 shall be given to Rio as legacy. Rica and Hi i land ean tad @IEhid)LIG™ Rea died leaving a will, one provision of wiih save Parcel of nd a Debi ns ono ine naceet orate aes aus by way Of Intestate suecessio Ea 's maternal grandfather, knowing Hercules also solgine (23 4 @Servable property in his favdt- 60M) the parcavot land fo Geers and Eva both cab yesreoe Fla fea) ag gat atack anc eveploaly died. Gaotne eve ees at the Property, who between them Is” ‘the rightful owner? Dropery which the fey e831 brome that the ascertanl vy hats ffm iis descendant any oe Ne lattet may have acquired by gratuitous ttle from another. aScefidant, or a brother or lr, Is obliged to ragerve sueh Tapeh ‘She tayhe Say operator of law for the benefit of relatives who are witht the thifd degres land wi e ffm which the property came, In this case, Sam waslp Suppdsed’ Seeeeataig Tesenista to the resemfatano are: (1) cham Survived the reservatafio {Cano v. Diteebor of | Bredeceased Hercules. he aid rt acquye nights the owner of the propefty without the. obigationta § roperty to Eva was valid Se 1 remaining P2 1 cs lercules were Oni KeAUisles for tie adsing of the title from the HViSia; and (2) the fact that the reservista had Hal, £10701, January 16,1959). Since Sam Beny and coufenot sell. Hercules became TM the résehyatario, Thus, tis sale of the | ur-children ‘and his friends, Wally and Charles as d by Wally and Charles, Femando tore a litte piece of 9 any part 6f its/walting and signature. Fernando Hs sh naire Son be toe ernanle ly ahd Charles clans thatthe frst wll be allowed on the and only a slight tear of thie bottom edge of the will wee writings on the-willand shat. they-have reconciled with Fernando, | 155. Fernando made a will instituting his heirs. Due to anger for having been betray : the edge of the will without, however, & ‘made another will, without including ‘burnt the second will Fetjaido died ground that such will was-not revoke made which do not affect the Can the will be allowed? Vii 1 No, The wall cannot be allowed far tetelas aleady peer ereress revocation of he frst wil by the overt act of tearing under Antcle 830 (3). Pematidovfiriselore the wil The intent to revoke con te shown by the fact of betrayal and the furthsr act of Fern and Charles as heirs. There has been tearing in is subjective phase, Therefor, complete act of revocation notwithstanding the fact that the tear did not therein, there has already been affect the writings contained Furthermore, the Doctrine of Dependent Relative Revocation provides that if the testator revokes a will with a present intention of making a new one immediately and as a substiute, and the new wil © rot made or i invalid, i willbe presumed thatthe testator preferted the old wil instead of intestacy and the | ld one wil be admitted to probated in the absence of evidence overcoming the presumption, provided 1 its contents can be ascertained In this case, since there was no new will made by Fernando, he intended his ‘second will which does not institute his friends as heirs to preval, provided that its contents can be ascertained San Bea Couece or Law 40 2017 Cenraauizen Bar Oreration* mother, Rose, as the sole heir of her estate and cisinheriting s Ch act. Eye, nd attempted against her virtue, In the same will, Evelyn forgave her Claming that she hag pe HE without any taue, John aeeks to receive his part of the estate ohn receive any Fart hat” fraiven by Evelyn inthe wil thus, revoking the disinheritance. Can No. John can, Tees OM the estate? 820 (1) provides (roo? @Y art frm the estate for he has been validly disinherited by Evelyn. Article Virtue of the toot hat ‘ent OF ascendant can be disinherited on the ground of attempt against the Pamies a8 prowded ra Stance can ony be revoked by subsequent reconcilalon between the stud hn Me Arh ayant feared Ye ie dered he an lestator inthe very een the mutual restoration of euings to the status quo. A pardon given by the there only is sonar ml herein he rows for tne enmertance isnot equivalent fo reconciliation there a new wil a3 Fe oF spntualinfuence whch forgives inthe name of morality. Nor was receive any pa ret Present case, Thereloe, Jam's deertance [ssl Vaid and he cannot NY Par from the estate, (Paras, GA¥ Code ardhe Philigpines Annotated) 187. Grace mac and Demag wiletting her children, het Tricia, and her friends, lina and Aiko as heirs ian a ied, leaving Dexter his son. Grace ihe sare its and ade ae ee cae cn at he shoul recsve te ‘shares of Mina and Aiko’ estate of 4,0 fae et Tiida shall receive BOSD" 00 each as their legitime half of the)éstate or P500,000 ¥ free’ portion of 500,009. to'He equal Between them, as\yoluntary heirs since no other Person s qualifies to inhant) a seneen er trangimfsnothing to his heirs. A itatedI-succeed, and one who epbit-gases expressly provided for pe Staded between thentaspmed! je 868. They shall.glSd-feceive 250,000 each from th ERP Mahe O LLEG Article 856 provides volunkfy RE TRS See ranean whies Cre fl etc d da onOunces the inheritance, shall transah po sigh te hl inthis Coda \ 141} 3 Mina and Aiko are incdpalstatad and, thersore therefore, Dexter cannot ‘Claim from Grave's est: one Sora predecesed Groce durned two yeats old, he was adopted by 0 accident. In’ 2008, John died childless and that she is the ie other tlaives; Bera led clam against the estate of John, alleging the sol 158 John is the legitimate son of Bia Jonn Cornelio. Two years later, however, Gorela that she i the biologie! mothe prospe o Yes, Bema's claim wil prdpen, whl Under such circumstance, parental aul parents (Bartolome v. Socal Sedat of the Family Code. which repealed/Art. 984-0F b Toalves ofthe adopted survive tiseainary ules of egal Berna, the biological mother. reaisteighs of ucten subject of adoption ae fe remaining beneficiary of John. Will Berna’s claim ied at he Gh, at about four years of age Id be deghod a bade reverted in favor ef the balogeal wiper 12,2074). Further. Art 190 6 that when ony collateral blood e succession shall apply. Therelore, the estate of her chid who was the 159. Don Bernard has three legitimate children: Jojo, Koko and Lal Koko has one legitimate daughter, Karla Lala has two legitimate children, Leo and Lea, Koke avi Lala both predeceased Don Bernard. Don Bernard and Jojo perished together at the same time i a plane accident. They both left substantial estates in intestacy. Don Barnard let an estate in the amount of P 1,500,000, while Jojo left an estate in the amount of P1,000,000. Distribute the ectnte of (a) Don Bernard and (b) Jojo. Do they inherit in their own right, By accretion or by vight of representation? (c) f Koko, Lala and Momo repudiated their shares in the estate of Don Beonard, how will his estate be distributed? Explain your answers, (2) Under Art, 888, the legitime of legitimate children and hereditary estate of the father and ofthe mother. At. 963 provi leglimate children, the shares of the former shal children or descendants. Under Art. $81, shoul children who are dead, survive, the former sh representation ind one illegitimate son, Momo. descendants consists of one-half of the ides that if illegitimate children survive with Il be one-half of the legitime of each of the legitimate 1d children of the deceased and descendants of other ill inherit in their own right, and the latter by right of San Bea Coueoe or baw 2017 Cenreauizen Bar Operarions 4142 CIVIL LAW In this case the net Momo 1n the proportion of 2a et estate must be diy Lea, and Momo in the proportion ot ded among Karla, Leo; Sera erreetaa Teptesentaon: Sl ier nyo Tight, while Kara, Leo and Lea shall inherit by right of Th lerefore, the sh hares of ia ares of th He heirs shall be as follow Kar PaO one hall be as follows: le 300,000 300.000, Momo 300.00 Not Estate 300,000, 1,500,000 Att. 1003, if there al relatives sh; Ind Sisters of th Shall be entited to a sh and sisters survive tog and sisters of the full by (b) Under the collater 1 a surviving spou: are No descendants, ascendants, illegitimate children, or a surviving spouse, brothers a al Succeed to the entre estate of the deceased. Art. 1006 provides that should « fl blood survive together wth trothers and sisters of the Nalf blood, the lrmer fe double that of the latter. It is also provided in Art. 1005 that should brothers ynet with nephews and nieces, who are the children of the decedent's brothers (00, the fo In this case’ estate must Momo shalt in i bor capita Xi ‘ Therelore, the Skah of the hos shafibd de Pluk ED A, la 900.000 Fy rpm Ll / Leo. 200000 OF LAW lea 0.000 si Momo 109,000| Net Estate 00,0 the e WBarest descendants, Karla, (6) It all of Don Berard ann Sorc Leo, and Lea, shall ye fs intospshenty Uni ares eave, should al one on. oroy Py law to succeed, should there be several, those, ithe fdlowing/degree shall Int ei Mt and cannot represent the Person or persons repudiating theif veritanioe wuld be repudiated by the the net estate must besdivider jal:prbpertiercamtong Kalté, Leo and Lea, Each of them shall receive 1/3 of thi; Tie pal i Inherit in th€ir-own right and not by right of representation, 9 i 5. his wife, and te y left a will giving his friend, bestate be spain. succession tHe testap isposition shall be given effect first Rep balance of te re prion abBLeebucing he esta arbepsetion sal oo caste et hit. The intestate her who sho 4 Ptrtion under intestacy shall bear any reducton due tothe testamentary cispostion(TOleatno, Chi Cade Vo.) Tray Ge, teatime of Nomsy ard Posy 12 and esate oP, 00000, he oie of Woy ig 48 of te exatorP250.00, whl he lio of ary sao te osts oe ins OOS eg £20 ote Gt Coe, On nth tres ong ten, te shares ee OA wile 120 eeu "1.00.00, he the te hal a tee Sha bs noes eh okey ear the reduction in order to satisty the legacy of Beshie. Therefore, the net estate shall be distibuted as follows Momsy and Popsy 1,000,000 or P500,000 each Witey 500,000 less the legacy of P100,000 = 400,000 Baby 500,000, Beshie 100,000, Net Estate 2,000,000 San Broa Couurce or Law 2017 Centeauizen Bak Orerarionsse, uld ver 2s, oS 6 id e —_— 161. A designated CIVIL LAW entitled to 114°! ldren x, ¥ — in his will I was stated that X is 4 Y, and 2 as hi al heir in his Predeceased A onthe portion, 48 Would be given to Y and 1/2 to Z. Unfortunately, x Due to gret A hag the Pane where X was s paocengursrashed landed inthe Pace Ocvon happen to X'S ‘share a tack and subsequently died leaving an estate of P240,000, What wil sistributeda” “M8€ X's survived by hs ehidren X1 and X2? How shall the estate be The childrey eye en the free porie%1 ANd X2, shall be entitled to X's legitime by right of representation while X's share in Y and Z by right of accretion. X1 and X2 shall divide the legitime of x ‘de X's in proportion to their share inthe institution which in this case will be 1.2. il be as follows, 40,000 as compulsory heir 30,000 as voluntary heir Z) 10,000 by right of accretion 40,000 as compulsory heir £60,000 as voluntary heir x1 x2. wf TOTAL 240,000 Not Estate 162. T. the Testator has 2 sons, A and'b? Athas's chilared-X/ha Y. On Marcil, ma vehicular accident which led ta A verbally told B.that he is repudiatin 8, 2016 due to cardiac, arrest A’ estate, with B oppaging their claim stating that Can X and ¥ validly dain A's inheritance evet a es, for repudiation 9B vali t myst 88 ation Court which has juristition over the testator the repudiation of A's: Sah wag done Verbally, i where an heir dies priofite accel ting or repudiati to his heirs (Art, 1083) \Mferefor’.A's share in. the est 046, T was involved death. During a drinking session petween the 2 brothers, is share in thei Father's estate, Thereafter A died on Oct Ipheritancdfis right shall be transmitted Ye tfangrmtted to his heirs, X and Y 163. T while on his deathbiéd called for his son A, a priest, and cénfessed-to’him and asked the latter to bless him as he neats the en T thereafter executed a holographic will bequeathing to his children the follawing shares: 1/2 of his estate to A) 1/4 to B and another 1/4 toc, Under our law, will A be able tainterit anything fom T?. N Of anyUfldhe jhfluence Oh the testator (Art. 1027). Such Grits a nghiséseryel \hinrby law by virtue of being the sel ganot dao IS hers. Therefore, A will stil be ablto Mert his legtime fromm T 3 ‘Compulsory heir but he is incapable to inherit fom the free portion of TS e8tate fo. being the phestaig heard T's last confession in accordance with Art, 1027 par. 1 of the Civil Code x 164.0, a wealthy businessman, during his Wetime donated the folowing amounts to the following people: 1) A car worth PIM to his Son, A after the latter passed the medical board exam 3) 5 house & Lot worth P1.5M as a wedding gift to his daughter 8 and her husband: and 3)'A Relor watch worth 250,000 to his best frond F on F's 50” birthday. D's health subsequently devena oven due stress and fatigue, D succumbed to his illness leaving a net estate of PEM. How shoud tre estat be alstributed if in his wil D instituted as his sole hers (D's spouse), A, and 8 and ave a legacy of P250,000 to his best friend F. First, the value of the properties subject to collation must be added to the net estate in the following ‘manner, NET ESTATE 6,000,000 Car to A 1,000,000 HAL to B (half, Art. 1066) 750,000 Rolex Watch to F 250,000 o TOTAL 8,000,000 = Saw Bepa Cource’or baw 2017 Cenreauzeo Ban Oreearions 43x CIVIL LAW The legitme of dS, the surviving spouse will get an. amount 42°48 will be half of Pom divided equally among them ant noun -yalue of the properties they Teceived as dongien Mat the. share_of one. chid winch #8 POM: THE ive legitimes in the rat sted to their respective following manner.” "3 '8 Subject to collation shall be subtracted 10 Legitime of Walue of Car) bey otal 1,000,000 Legitime of }00,000 (Hal the value of the Hg ) iran 4,250,000 Legitime of s 2,000,000 (equal to legtime oft chi) The remaining P2i it is here where the Would then be considered as a disposable free portion and it is donations to stranger FS Subject to c ‘wile charged; my (Rolex Watan fo F) ce SOOO) ei i (Devise tof (250-900) er Remaining OSposable Free Portiod

You might also like

• BIR Ruling 093-98 - Absence of ATP

  

  Document2 pages

  BIR Ruling 093-98 - Absence of ATP

  Cha Galang

  No ratings yet
• PIL - 1 To 8

  

  Document22 pages

  PIL - 1 To 8

  Cha Galang

  No ratings yet
• BIR Rul. 23-02

  

  Document6 pages

  BIR Rul. 23-02

  Leia Veracruz

  No ratings yet
• • Magazines
  • Podcasts
  • Sheet music
• BIR Ruling 055-99 - Fringe Benefits

  

  Document2 pages

  BIR Ruling 055-99 - Fringe Benefits

  Cha Galang

  No ratings yet
• Naval Vs COMELEC G.R. No. 207851 July 8, 2014

  

  Document3 pages

  Naval Vs COMELEC G.R. No. 207851 July 8, 2014

  Cha Galang

  No ratings yet
• Transpo Digest Revised

  

  Document50 pages

  Transpo Digest Revised

  Cha Galang

  No ratings yet
• Disputes Where The Lupon Has The Authority PP

  

  Document5 pages

  Disputes Where The Lupon Has The Authority PP

  Nadzlah Bandila

  No ratings yet
• BIR Ruling 055-99 - Fringe Benefits

  

  Document2 pages

  BIR Ruling 055-99 - Fringe Benefits

  Cha Galang

  No ratings yet
• Admin Case Digests (Part 2)

  

  Document2 pages

  Admin Case Digests (Part 2)

  Cha Galang

  No ratings yet
• Magsaysay-Labrador vs. CA

  

  Document7 pages

  Magsaysay-Labrador vs. CA

  Cha Galang

  No ratings yet
• SCL To Print

  

  Document33 pages

  SCL To Print

  Cha Galang

  No ratings yet
• Isidro Lico v. COMELEC (G.R. No. 205505, September 29, 2015)

  

  Document5 pages

  Isidro Lico v. COMELEC (G.R. No. 205505, September 29, 2015)

  Cha Galang

  No ratings yet
• Disputes Where The Lupon Has The Authority PP

  

  Document5 pages

  Disputes Where The Lupon Has The Authority PP

  Nadzlah Bandila

  No ratings yet
• SRC Digest For Print

  

  Document27 pages

  SRC Digest For Print

  Cha Galang

  No ratings yet
• Ramon E. Reyes and Clara R. Pastor v. BANCOM Development Corp

  

  Document20 pages

  Ramon E. Reyes and Clara R. Pastor v. BANCOM Development Corp

  Cha Galang

  No ratings yet
• FAQs

  

  Document9 pages

  FAQs

  Cha Galang

  No ratings yet
• Letter of Intent Dissertation Proposal Defense

  

  Document1 page

  Letter of Intent Dissertation Proposal Defense

  Cha Galang

  No ratings yet
• Trademark Application

  

  Document1 page

  Trademark Application

  Cha Galang

  No ratings yet
• Judicial Declaration of Nullity Allows Separation of Property

  

  Document14 pages

  Judicial Declaration of Nullity Allows Separation of Property

  Cha Galang

  No ratings yet
• Digests Legal Separation

  

  Document5 pages

  Digests Legal Separation

  Cha Galang

  No ratings yet
• Poli Case Doctrines

  

  Document42 pages

  Poli Case Doctrines

  Cha Galang

  No ratings yet
• C.5. Rodriguez vs. Macapagal-Arroyo, G.R. No. 191805. November 15, 2011

  

  Document31 pages

  C.5. Rodriguez vs. Macapagal-Arroyo, G.R. No. 191805. November 15, 2011

  Cha Galang

  No ratings yet
• LEONEN DECIDED CASES

  

  Document24 pages

  LEONEN DECIDED CASES

  Christopher Ronn Pagco

  No ratings yet
• Hon. Julie Conger (Ret.) Superior Court of Alameda County

  

  Document59 pages

  Hon. Julie Conger (Ret.) Superior Court of Alameda County

  Cha Galang

  No ratings yet
• 204 Scra 837

  

  Document15 pages

  204 Scra 837

  Cha Galang

  No ratings yet
• SCRA Vda Jacob v. CA

  

  Document21 pages

  SCRA Vda Jacob v. CA

  goma21

  No ratings yet
• 429 Scra 736

  

  Document43 pages

  429 Scra 736

  Cha Galang

  No ratings yet
• National Economy and Patrimony

  

  Document9 pages

  National Economy and Patrimony

  Cha Galang

  No ratings yet
• Election Law

  

  Document9 pages

  Election Law

  Cha Galang

  No ratings yet
• Cui vs. Arellano

  

  Document7 pages

  Cui vs. Arellano

  Pia Christine Bungubung

  No ratings yet
• Shoe Dog: A Memoir by the Creator of Nike

  

  From Everand

  Shoe Dog: A Memoir by the Creator of Nike

  Phil Knight

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (537)
• Grit: The Power of Passion and Perseverance

  

  From Everand

  Grit: The Power of Passion and Perseverance

  Angela Duckworth

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (587)
• Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win the Space Race

  

  From Everand

  Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win the Space Race

  Margot Lee Shetterly

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (890)
• The Yellow House: A Memoir (2019 National Book Award Winner)

  

  From Everand

  The Yellow House: A Memoir (2019 National Book Award Winner)

  Sarah M. Broom

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (98)
• The Little Book of Hygge: Danish Secrets to Happy Living

  

  From Everand

  The Little Book of Hygge: Danish Secrets to Happy Living

  Meik Wiking

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (399)
• On Fire: The (Burning) Case for a Green New Deal

  

  From Everand

  On Fire: The (Burning) Case for a Green New Deal

  Naomi Klein

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (73)
• The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck: A Counterintuitive Approach to Living a Good Life

  

  From Everand

  The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck: A Counterintuitive Approach to Living a Good Life

  Mark Manson

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (5794)
• Never Split the Difference: Negotiating As If Your Life Depended On It

  

  From Everand

  Never Split the Difference: Negotiating As If Your Life Depended On It

  Chris Voss

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (838)
• Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Future

  

  From Everand

  Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Future

  Ashlee Vance

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (474)
• Yes Please

  

  From Everand

  Yes Please

  Amy Poehler

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1891)
• A Heartbreaking Work Of Staggering Genius: A Memoir Based on a True Story

  

  From Everand

  A Heartbreaking Work Of Staggering Genius: A Memoir Based on a True Story

  Dave Eggers

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (231)
• Principles: Life and Work

  

  From Everand

  Principles: Life and Work

  Ray Dalio

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (599)
• The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer

  

  From Everand

  The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer

  Siddhartha Mukherjee

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (271)
• The Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think You're Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are

  

  From Everand

  The Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think You're Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are

  Brené Brown

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1090)
• The World Is Flat 3.0: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century

  

  From Everand

  The World Is Flat 3.0: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century

  Thomas L. Friedman

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (2219)
• Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln

  

  From Everand

  Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln

  Doris Kearns Goodwin

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (234)
• The Hard Thing About Hard Things: Building a Business When There Are No Easy Answers

  

  From Everand

  The Hard Thing About Hard Things: Building a Business When There Are No Easy Answers

  Ben Horowitz

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (344)
• Devil in the Grove: Thurgood Marshall, the Groveland Boys, and the Dawn of a New America

  

  From Everand

  Devil in the Grove: Thurgood Marshall, the Groveland Boys, and the Dawn of a New America

  Gilbert King

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (265)
• Fear: Trump in the White House

  

  From Everand

  Fear: Trump in the White House

  Bob Woodward

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (738)
• Angela's Ashes: A Memoir

  

  From Everand

  Angela's Ashes: A Memoir

  Frank McCourt

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (440)
• Rise of ISIS: A Threat We Can't Ignore

  

  From Everand

  Rise of ISIS: A Threat We Can't Ignore

  Jay Sekulow

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (137)
• Steve Jobs

  

  From Everand

  Steve Jobs

  Walter Isaacson

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (806)
• John Adams

  

  From Everand

  John Adams

  David McCullough

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (2409)
• The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America

  

  From Everand

  The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America

  George Packer

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (45)
• Bad Feminist: Essays

  

  From Everand

  Bad Feminist: Essays

  Roxane Gay

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1015)
• The Glass Castle: A Memoir

  

  From Everand

  The Glass Castle: A Memoir

  Jeannette Walls

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (1711)
• Wolf Hall: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  Wolf Hall: A Novel

  Hilary Mantel

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (3811)
• The Outsider: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  The Outsider: A Novel

  Stephen King

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1839)
• The Perks of Being a Wallflower

  

  From Everand

  The Perks of Being a Wallflower

  Stephen Chbosky

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (2099)
• The Woman in Cabin 10

  

  From Everand

  The Woman in Cabin 10

  Ruth Ware

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (2322)
• The Light Between Oceans: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  The Light Between Oceans: A Novel

  M.L. Stedman

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (789)
• The Sympathizer: A Novel (Pulitzer Prize for Fiction)

  

  From Everand

  The Sympathizer: A Novel (Pulitzer Prize for Fiction)

  Viet Thanh Nguyen

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (119)
• Little Women

  

  From Everand

  Little Women

  Louisa May Alcott

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (104)
• Brooklyn: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  Brooklyn: A Novel

  Colm Toibin

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (1937)
• A Man Called Ove: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  A Man Called Ove: A Novel

  Fredrik Backman

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (4609)
• The Art of Racing in the Rain: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  The Art of Racing in the Rain: A Novel

  Garth Stein

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (4200)
• Manhattan Beach: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  Manhattan Beach: A Novel

  Jennifer Egan

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (792)
• A Tree Grows in Brooklyn

  

  From Everand

  A Tree Grows in Brooklyn

  Betty Smith

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (1929)
• Sing, Unburied, Sing: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  Sing, Unburied, Sing: A Novel

  Jesmyn Ward

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1103)
• The Constant Gardener: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  The Constant Gardener: A Novel

  John le Carre

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (104)
• Her Body and Other Parties: Stories

  

  From Everand

  Her Body and Other Parties: Stories

  Carmen Maria Machado

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (821)