Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Additional Answers:
1. COMMON LAW refers to the traditional part
of the law as distinct from legislation; it refers
to the universal part of law as distinct from
particular local customs (Encyclopedia
Americana, Vol. 7). On the other hand, CIVIL
LAW is understood to be that branch of law
governing the relationship of persons in
respect of their personal and private interests
as distinguished from both public and
international laws.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(a) The marriage of Mans and Johnson was
valid when celebrated because all
marriages solemnized outside the
Philippines (Tokyo) in accordance with the
laws in force in the country where they are
"Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their
acts or property, and those which have for
their object public order, public policy and
good customs shall not be rendered
ineffective by laws or judgments
promulgated, or by determinations or
conventions agreed upon in a foreign
country."
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Under Art. 16 par. 1, NCC, real property is 3. The distribution of the personal properties in
subject to the Germany
law of the country where it is situated. Since the shall be governed by French law. The legal
property is basis is Art. 16,
situated in the Philippines, Philippine law
applies. The rule of NCC).
lex rei sitae in Article 16 prevails over lex loci
contractu in
Article 17 of the NCC. Applicable Laws; Wills executed abroad (1993)
A, a Filipino, executed a will in Kuwait
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: while there as a
Afghanistan law governs the formal contract worker. Assume that under the laws of
requirements of the Kuwait, it is
contract since the execution is in Afghanistan. enough that the testator affix his signature to
Art. 17 of the the presence of
Civil Code provides that the forms and two witnesses and that the will need not be
solemnities of acknowledged
contracts, wills, and other public instruments before a notary public. May the will be
shall be probated in the
governed by the laws of the country in Philippin
which they are es?
executed. However, if the contract was executed
before the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
diplomatic or consular officials of the Yes. Under Articles 815 and 17 of the Civil
Republic of the Code, the
Philippines in Afghanistan, Philippine law shall formality of the execution of a will is governed
apply. by the law of
the place of execution. If the will was
executed with the
formalities prescribed by the laws of Kuwait
Applicable Laws; Succession; Intestate & Testamentary and valid there
as such, the will is valid and may be
(2001) probated in the
Alex was born a Filipino but was a Philippin
naturalized Canadian es.
citizen at the time of his death on December 25,
1998. He left Definition; Cognovit; Borrowing Statute;
behind a last will and testament in which he
bequeathed all Characterization(1994)
his properties, real and personal, in the In Private International Law (Conflict of Laws)
Philippines to his what is:
acknowledged illegitimate Fillpina daughter and 1} Cognovit? 2) A borrowing
nothing to statute? 3)
his two legitimate Filipino sons. The sons
sought the Characterization?
annulment of the last will and testament on the
ground that it
deprived them of their legitimes but the
daughter was able to SUGGESTED ANSWER:
prove that there were no compulsory heirs or 1) a) COGNOVIT is a confession of judgment
legitimes under whereby a
portion of the complaint is confessed by the
Canadian law. Who should prevail? Why? (5%) defendant who
denies the rest thereof (Philippine law
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Dictionary, 3rd Ed.)
The daughter should prevail because Article 16 (Ocampo v. Florenciano, L-M 13553,
of the New 2/23/50).
Civil Code provides that intestate and
testamentary succession
shall be governed by the national law of the b) COGNOVIT is a "statement of confession"
person whose Oftentimes, it
is referred to as a "power of attorney" or simply
succession is under consideration. as a "power",
it is the written authority of the debtor and his
direction to the
clerk of the district court, or justice of the
Applicable Laws; Sucession of Aliens (1995) peace to enter
Michelle, the French daughter of Penreich, a judgment against the debtor as stated
German therein. (Words and
national, died in Spain leaving real Phrases, vol. 7, pp.
properties in the 115-166).
Philippines as well as valuable personal
properties in c) COGNOVIT is a plea in an action which
Germany. acknowledges
1. What law determines who shall succeed the that the defendant did undertake and promise
deceased? as the plaintiff
in its declaration has alleged, and that it cannot
Explain your answer and give its legal basis. deny that it
2. What law regulates the distribution of the owes and unjustly detains from the plaintiff the
real properties sum claimed
in the Philippines? Explain your answer and give by him in his declaration, and consents that
its legal judgment be
entered against the defendant for a certain
basis. sum. [Words and
3. What law governs the distribution of the Phrases, vol. 7, pp.
personal 115-166).
properties in Germany? Explain your answer
and give its
d) COGNOVIT is a note authorizing a lawyer for
legal basis. confession
of judgment by
SUGGESTED ANSWER: defendant.
Assuming that the estate of the decedent is
being settled in
2 "BORROWING STATUTE" -Laws of the
the Philippines) ) state or
1. The national law of the decedent (French law) jurisdiction used by another state in
shall govern deciding conflicts
in determining who will succeed to his estate. questioned involved in the choice of law
The legal basis (Black's Law
Dictionary, 5th ed.
is Art. 16 par. 2, NCC. 1979).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
French law shall govern the distribution of his
real properties 3 a) otherwi
in the Philippines except when the real property ) "CHARACTERIZATION" is se called
is land which "classification" or "qualification." It is the
may be transmitted to a foreigner only by process of assigning
hereditary disput question to correc lega categor (Priva
a ed its t l y te
succession. International Law,
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Salonga).
2. The distribution of the real properties in the
Philippines b) "CHARACTERIZATION" is a process in
shall be governed by French law. The legal determining
basis is Art. 16, under what category a certain set of facts or
rules fall. (Paras,
NCC).
Conflict of Laws, p. 94. 1984 ed.)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics granted, U.S. citizenship. In 1989, Mario,
Definition; forum non-conveniens; long-arm statute (1994) claiming to have been abandoned by Clara, was
23 What is the doctrine of Forum non able to secure a decree of divorce in Reno,
conveniens? Nevada, U.S.A.
24 What is a "long arm statute"?
SUGGESTED ANSWER: In 1990, Mario returned to the Philippines and
512⤀ĀᜀĀᜀĀᜀĀᜀĀᜀĀᜀĀᜀĀᜀĀĀȀ⤀ĀᜀĀᜀĀᜀĀᜀĀᜀĀ married Juana who knew well Mario's past life.
ᜀĀᜀĀᜀĀĀȀ⤀ĀᜀĀᜀĀᜀĀᜀĀᜀĀᜀĀᜀĀᜀĀĀȀ⸀ĀᜀĀᜀĀᜀĀ (a) Is the marriage between Mario and Juana
ᜀĀᜀĀᜀĀᜀ a) FORUM NON CONVENIENS valid?(b)Would the renvoi doctrine have any
is a principle in Private International Law that relevance to the case?
where the ends of justice strongly indicate
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
that the controversy may be more suitably
tried elsewhere, then jurisdiction should be 0 Yes, because Phil law recognizes the divorce
declined and the parties relegated to relief to between Mario and Clara as valid.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
be sought in another forum. (Moreno. No, The renvoi doctrine is relevant in cases where one country
Philippine Law Dictionary, p. 254, 1982 ed.). applies the domiciliary theory and the other the
FAMILY CODE
Emancipation (1993)
Julio and Lea, both 18 years old, were
sweethearts. At a party at the house of a
mutual friend. Lea met Jake, also 18 years
old, who showed interest in her. Lea seemed
to entertain Jake because she danced with
him many times. In a fit of jealousy, Julio shot
Jake with his father's 38 caliber revolver
which, before going to the party he was able
to get from the unlocked drawer inside his
father's bedroom. Jake died as a result of the
lone gunshot wound he sustained. His parents
sued Julio's parents for damages arising from
quasi-delict. At the time of the incident, Julio
was 18 years old living with his parents.
Julio's parents moved to dismiss the
complaint against them claiming that since
Julio was already of majority age, they were
no longer liable for his acts. 1) Should the
motion to dismiss be granted? Why? 2) What
is the liability of Julio's parents to Jake's
parents? Explain your answer.
Page 23 of 119
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics transferred to another house of his in Pasig. Can
SUGGESTED ANSWER: the two family homes be the subject of execution
0 No, the Motion to Dismiss should not be on a judgment against Victor's wife for non-
granted. Article 236 of the Family Code as payment of the purchase in 1992 of household
amended by Republic Act 6809, provides in appliances?
the third paragraph that "nothing in this Code
shall be construed to derogate from the duty SUGGESTED ANSWER:
or responsibility of parents and guardians for The two (2) so-called family homes can be the
children and wards below twenty-one years of subject of execution. Neither of the abodes are
age mentioned in the second and third considered family homes because for purposes of
paragraphs of Article 2180 of the Civil Code". availing the benefits under the Family Code,
2) The liability of Julio's parents to Jake's there can only be one (1) family home which is
parents arises from quasi-delict (Arts. 2176 defined as the "dwelling house" where the
and 2180 Civil Code) and shall cover husband and the wife and their family actually
specifically the following: "reside" and the land on which it is situated.
(Arts. 152 and 161, Family Code)
0 P50,000.00 for the death of the son;
1 such amount as would correspond to
lost earning capacity; and
2 moral damages.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
As judge, I will not grant the annulment. The
SUGGESTED ANSWER: facts do not show any taint of personality
It should be distinguished when the disorder on the part of the wife Marina so as
property was acquired. to lend substance to her husband's averment
If it was acquired before Mary's death, of psychological incapacity within the
the estate of Mary is entitled to 1/2 of the meaning of Art 36 of the Family Code. In
share of James. Santos vs. CA (240 SCRA 20) , this particular
If it was acquired after Mary's death, ground for nullity of marriage was held to be
there will be no share at all for the limited only to the most serious cases of
estate of Mary. personality disorders (clearly demonstrative
of utter sensitivity or inability to give meaning
Marriage; Psychological Incapacity (1996) and significance to the marriage. Marina's
On April 15, 1983, Jose, an engineer, and refusal to come home to her husband unless
Marina, a nurse, were married to each other in he agreed not to work overseas, far from
a civil ceremony in Boac. Marinduque. Six being indicative of an insensitivity to the
months after their marriage, Jose was meaning of marriage, or of a personality
employed in an oil refinery in Saudi Arabia for disorder, actually shows a sensitive awareness
a period of three years. When he returned to on her part of the marital duty to live together
the Philippines, Marina was no longer living in as husband and wife. Mere refusal to rejoin
their house, but in Zamboanga City, working in her husband when he did not accept the
a hospital. He asked her to come home, but she condition imposed by her does not furnish any
refused to do so, unless he agreed not to work basis for concluding that she was suffering
overseas anymore because she cannot stand from psychological incapacity to discharge the
living alone. He could not agree as in fact, he essential marital obligations.
had signed another three year contract. When
he returned in 1989, he could not locate Mere intention to live apart does not fall
Marina anymore. In 1992, Jose filed an action under Art. 36, FC. Furthermore, there is no
served by publication in a newspaper of proof that the alleged psychological
general circulation. Marina did not file any incapacity existed at the time of the
answer, a possible collusion between the marriage.
parties was ruled out by the Public Prosecutor.
Page 30 of 119
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics ground of psychological incapacity. She alleged
that after 2 months of their marriage, Arnell
showed signs of disinterest in her, neglected her
and went abroad. He returned to the Philippines
after 3 years but did not even get in touch with
her. Worse, they met several times in social
functions but he snubbed her. When she got sick,
he did not visit her even if he knew of her
confinement in the hospital. Meanwhile, Arnell
met an accident which disabled him from
reporting for work and earning a living to
support himself. Will Gemma's suit prosper?
Explain. (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, Gemma's suit will not prosper. Even if taken as
true, the grounds, singly or collectively, do not
constitute "psychological incapacity." In Santos v.
CA, G.R. No. 112019, January 4, 1995, the Supreme
Court clearly explained that "psychological
incapacity must be characterized by (a) gravity, (b)
juridical antecedence, and (c) incurability"
(Ferraris v. Ferraris, G.R. No. 162368, July 17,
2006; Choa v. Choa, G.R. No. 143376, November
26, 2002). The illness must be shown as downright
incapacity or inability to perform one's marital
obligations, not a mere refusal, neglect, difficulty or
much less, ill will. Moreover, as ruled in Republic v.
Molina, GR No. 108763, February 13, 1997, it is
essential that the husband is capable of meeting his
marital responsibilities due to psychological and not
physical illness
(Antonio v. Reyes, G.R. No. 155800, March 10,
2006; Republic
Quintero-Hamano, G.R. No. 149498, May 20,
2004). Furthermore, the condition
complained of did not exist at the time of the
celebration of marriage.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
By reason of public policy, the marriage
between Filipino first cousins is void [Art. 38,
par. (1), Family Code], and the fact that it is
considered a valid marriage in a foreign
country in this case, Spain— does not validate
it, being an exception to the general rule in
Art. 96 of said Code which accords validity to
all marriage solemnized outside the Philippine
x x x and valid there as such.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER
The marriage it void. Under Article 96 of the
Family Code, a marriage valid where
celebrated is valid in the Philippines except
those marriages enumerated in said Article
which marriages will remain void even though
valid where solemnized. The marriage between
first cousins is one of those marriages
(Year 1990-2006) The marriage is valid. The irregularity in the
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: issuance of a valid license does not adversely
If the two Filipinos believed in good faith affect the validity of the marriage. The
that the Notary Public is authorized to marriage license is valid because it was in fact
solemnize marriage, then the marriage is issued by a Civil Registrar (Arts. 3 and 4. FC).
valid. ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
It depends. If both or one of the parties was a member of
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the religious sect of the solemnizing officer, the marriage is
Under the Local Government Code, a town valid. If none of the parties is a member of the sect and
mayor may validly solemnize a marriage but both of them were aware of the fact, the marriage is void.
said law is silent as to the territorial limits
They cannot claim good faith in believing that the
for the exercise by a town mayor of such
solemnizing officer was authorized because the scope of
authority. However, by analogy, with the
the authority of the solemnizing officer is a matter of law.
authority of members of the Judiciary to
solemnize a marriage, it would seem that the If, however, one of the parties believed in good faith that
mayor did not have the requisite authority to the other was a member of the sect, then the marriage is
solemnize a marriage outside of his valid
territorial jurisdiction. Hence, the marriage
is void, unless it was contracted with either
or both parties believing in good faith that
the mayor had the legal authority to
solemnize this particular marriage (Art 35,
par 2 Family Code).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The marriage is valid. Under the Local
Government Code, the authority of a mayor
to solemnize marriages is not restricted
within his municipality implying that he has
the authority even outside the territory
thereof. Hence, the marriage he solemnized
outside his municipality is valid. And even
assuming that his authority is restricted
within his municipality, such marriage will
nevertheless, be valid because solemnizing
the marriage outside said municipality is a
mere irregularity applying by analogy the
case of Navarro v Domagtoy, 259 Scra 129. In
this case, the Supreme Court held that the
celebration by a judge of a marriage outside
the jurisdiction of his court is a mere
irregularity that did not affect the validity of
the marriage notwithstanding Article 7 of the
Family Code which provides that an
incumbent member of the judiciary is
authorized to solemnize marriages only
within the court’s jurisdiction.
If you were the counsel for Gigi, what Parental Authority; Child under 7 years of age (2006)
action/s will you take to enforce and
protect her interests? Explain.
(2.5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: I would file an action to
declare the marriage between Juliet and Ric
null and void ab initio and for Ric's share in
the co-ownership of that marriage to be
forfeited in favor and considered part of the
absolute community in the marriage between
Gigi and Ric [Arts. 148
147, Family Code]. I would also file an action
for damages against Ric on the grounds that
his acts constitute an abuse of right and they
are contrary to law and morals, causing
damages to Gigi (See Arts 19, 20, 21, New
Civil Code).
Teachers (2003)
If during class hours, while the teacher was
chatting with other teachers in the school
corridor, a 7 year old male pupil stabs the eye of
another boy with a ball pen during a fight,
causing permanent blindness to the victim, who
could be liable for damages for the boy’s injury: the
teacher, the school authorities, or the guilty boy’s
parents? Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The school, its administrators, and teachers
have special parental authority and
responsibility over the minor child while under
their supervision, instruction or custody
(Article 218, FC). They are principally and
solidarily liable for the damages caused by the
acts or omissions of the unemancipated minor
unless they exercised the proper diligence
required under the circumstances (Article 219,
FC). In the problem, the TEACHER and the
SCHOOL AUTHORITIES are liable for the
blindness of the victim, because the student
who cause it was under their special parental
authority and they were negligent. They were
negligent because they were chatting in the
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Distinguish briefly but clearly between: sperm. After a series of test, Andy's sperm was
Substitute parental medically
authority and special parental authority. introduced into Beth's ovary. She became pregnant and 9 months
SUGGESTED ANSWER: later, gave birth to a baby boy, named Alvin.
In substitute parental authority, the parents lose
their parental (1) Who is the Father of Alvin? Explain.
authority in favor of the substitute who acquires (2.5%)
it to the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Andy is the biological father of Alvin being the
exclusion of the parents. source of the
sperm. Andy is the legal father of Alvin
because there was
In special parental authority, the parents or neither consent nor ratification to the artificial
anyone exercising insemination.
parental authority does not lose parental Under the law, children conceived by artificial
authority. Those who insemination
are charged with special parental authority are legitimate children of the spouses,
exercise such provided, that both of
authority only during the time that the child is in them authorized or ratified the insemination
their custody in a written
instrument executed and signed by both of
or supervision. them before the
Substitute parental authority displaces parental birth of the child (Art. 164, Family Code).
authority while
special parental authority concurs with parental
authority. (2) What are the requirements, if any, in
order for Ed to
establish his paternity over Alvin. (2.5%)
Paternity & Filiation (1999) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(a) Two (2) months after the death of her The following are the requirements for Ed to
husband who was establish his
shot by unknown criminal elements on his way
home from paternity over Alvin:
office, Rose married her childhood boyfriend, The artificial insemination has been
and seven (7) • authorized or
months after said marriage, she delivered a ratified by the spouses in a written instrument
baby. In the executed and
absence of any evidence from Rose as to who is signed by them before the birth of the child;
her child's and
father, what status does the law give to said The written instrument is recorded in
child? Explain. • the civil
registry together with the birth certificate of
(2%) the child (Art.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: 164, 2nd paragraph, Family Code).
(a) The child is legitimate of the second
marriage under
Article 168(2) of the Family Code which
provides that a
"child born after one hundred eighty days
following the Paternity & Filiation; Common-Law Union (2004)
celebration of the subsequent marriage is A. RN and DM, without any impediment to
considered to have marry each
been conceived during such marriage, even other, had been living together without
though it be born benefit of church
within three hundred days after the termination blessings. Their common-law union resulted in
of the former the birth of
ZMN. Two years later, they got married in a
marriage." civil ceremony.
Could ZMN be legitimated? Reason. (5%)
Paternity & Filiation; Proofs (1999) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(b) Nestor is the illegitimate son of Dr. Perez. ZMN was legitimated by the subsequent
When Dr. marriage of RN and
Perez died, Nestor intervened in the settlement DM because at the time he was conceived, RN
of his father's and DM
estate, claiming that he is the illegitimate son of coul have validly married each other. Under
said deceased, d the Family
but the legitimate family of Dr. Perez is denying Code children conceived and born outside of
Nestor's wedlock of
claim. What evidence or evidences should parents who, at the time of the former's
Nestor present so conception, were not
that he may receive his rightful share in his disqualified by any impediment to marry
father's estate? each other are
legitimated by the subsequent marriage of the
(3%) parents.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
To be able to inherit, the illegitimate Paternity & Filiation; Proofs; Limitations; Adopted Child
filiation of Nestor must have been admitted (1995)
by his father in any of the following: Abraham died intestate on 7 January 1994
the record of birth appearing in the civil survived by his son Braulio. Abraham's older
register, son Carlos died on 14 February 1990. Danilo
a final judgment, who claims to be an adulterous child of Carlos
a public document signed by the father, or intervenes in the proceedings for the
a private handwritten document signed by the settlement of the estate of Abraham in
lather (Article 17S in relation to Article 172 of representation of Carlos. Danilo was legally
the Family Code). adopted on 17 March 1970 by Carlos with the
consent of the " latter's wife.
Paternity & Filiation; Artificial Insemination; 1. Under the Family Code, how may an
Formalities(2006) illegitimate filiation be proved? Explain.
Ed and Beth have been married for 20 years without children. As lawyer for Danilo, do you have to
Desirous to have a baby, they consulted Dr. Jun Canlas, a , prove Danilo's illegitimate filiation?
prominent medical specialist on human fertility. He advised Beth Explain.
to undergo artificial insemination. It was found that Ed’s sperm Can Danilo inherit from Abraham in
count was inadequate to induce pregnancy Hence, the couple representation of his father Carlos? Explain.
looked for a willing donor. Andy the brother of Ed, readily SUGGESTED ANSWER:
consented to donate his Under Art. 172 in relation to Art. 173 andArt. 175 of the
FC, the filiation of illegitimate children may be established
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
in the same way and by the same evidence recognition of an illegitimate child can be
as legitimate brought at any
children. Art. 172 provides that the filiation
of legitimate time during the lifetime of the child. However, if the action is based
children is established by any of the following:
(1) the record on "open and continuous possession of the status of an illegitimate
child, the same can be filed during the lifetime of the putative
of birth appearing in the civil register or a final
Judgment; or
(2) an admission of legitimate filiation in a father."
public document
or a private handwritten instrument and signed
by the parent
concerned. In the absence of the foregoing In the present case, the action for compulsory
evidence, the recognition was
legitimate filiation shall be proved by: (1) filed by Joey's mother, Dina, on May 16,1994,
the open and after the death
continuous possession of the status of a of Steve, the putative father. The action will
legitimate child; or prosper if Joey
(2) any other means allowed by the Rules can present his birth certificate that bears the
of Court and signature of his
special putative father. However, the facts clearly state
laws. that the birth
certificate of Joey did not indicate the father's
SUGGESTED ANSWER: name. A birth
2. No. Since Danilo has already been adopted certificate not signed by the alleged father
by Carlos, he cannot be taken as a
ceased to be an illegitimate child. An adopted record of birth to prove recognition of the
child acquires child, nor can said
all the rights of a legitimate child under Art, birth certificate be taken as a recognition in a
189 of the FC. public
instrument. (Reyes v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
39537, March
19, 1985) Consequently, the action filed by
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Joey's mother has
3. No, he cannot. Danilo cannot represent
Carlos as the
latter's adopted child in the inheritance of already prescribed.
Abraham because
adopti not Danilo a legitimate
on did make grandchild of b) Are the defenses set up by Tintin
Abraham. Adoption is personal between Carlos tenable? Explain.
and Danilo.
cannot represent th latte illegitima (2%)
He also Carlos as e r's te SUGGESTED ANSWER:
child because in such case he is barred by Art. Yes, the defenses of Tintin are tenable. In
992 of the Tayag v. Court of
NCC from inheriting from his illegitimate Appeals (G.R. No. 95229, June 9,1992), a
grandfather complaint to compel
recognition of an illegitimate child was brought
Abraham. before
effectivity of the Family Code by the mother of
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: a minor child
An adopted child's successional rights do not
include the right based on "open and continuous possession of
to represent his deceased adopter in the the status of an
inheritance of the illegitimate child." The Supreme Court held
latter's legitimate parent, in view of Art. 973 that the right of
which provides action of the minor child has been vested by
th orde tha representat tak place the filing of the
at in r t ion may e , the complaint in court under the regime of the
representa mus himself be o succeedi Civil Code and
tive t capable f ng the
prior to the effectivity of the Family Code. The
decedent. Adoption by itself did not render ruling in Tayag
Danilo an heir of v. Court of Appeals finds no application in the
th adopte legitim parent. his being instant case.
e r's ate Neither does a Although the child was born before the
effectivity of the
grandchild Abraha render heir of the Family Code, the complaint was filed after its
of m him an latter effectivity.
because as an illegitimate child of Carlos, who
was a legitimate Hence, Article 175 of the Family Code should
child of Abraham, Danilo is incapable of apply and not
succeeding Abraham
Article 285 of the Civil Code.
under Art. 992 of the Code.
Supposing that Joey died during the
Paternity & Filiation; Recognition of illegitimate Child
(2005) Steve was married to Linda, with whom pendency of the action, should the action
he had a daughter, Tintin. Steve fathered a be dismissed? Explain. (2%)
son with Dina, his secretary of 20 years, whom
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Dina named Joey, born on September 20,
If Joey died during the pendency of the action,
1981. Joey's birth certificate did not indicate
the action should still be dismissed because
the father's name. Steve died on August 13,
the right of Joey or his heirs to file the action
1993, while Linda died on December 3, 1993,
has already prescribed. (Art. 175, Family
leaving their legitimate daughter, Tintin, as
Code)
sole heir. On May 16, 1994, Dina filed a case
on behalf of Joey, praying that the latter be Paternity & Filiation; Rights of Legitimate Children (1990)
declared an acknowledged illegitimate son of B and G (college students, both single and not
Steve and that Joey be given his share in disqualified to marry each other) had a
Steve's estate, which is now being solely held romantic affair, G was seven months in the
by Tintin. Tintin put up the defense that an family way as of the graduation of B. Right
action for recognition shall only be filed after graduation B went home to Cebu City.
during the lifetime of the presumed parents Unknown to G, B had a commitment to C (his
and that the exceptions under Article 285 of childhood sweetheart) to marry her after
the Civil Code do not apply to him since the getting his college degree. Two weeks after B
said article has been repealed by the Family marriage in Cebu City, G gave birth to a son E
Code. In any case, according to Tintin, Joey's in Metro Manila. After ten years of married life
birth certificate does not show that Steve is in Cebu, B became a widower by the sudden
his father. death of C in a plane crash. Out of the union of
B and C, two children, X and Y were born.
Does Joey have a cause of action against Unknown to C while on weekend trips to
Tintin for recognition and partition? Manila during the last 5 years of their
Explain. (2%) marriage, B invariably visited G and lived at
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, Joey does not have a cause of action against Tintin for her residence and as a result of which, they
recognition and partition. Under Article 175 of the Family Code, as renewed their relationship. A baby girl F was
a general rule, an action for compulsory born to B and G two years
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
before the death of C. Bringing his family later Paulita left the conjugal home because of the
to Manila, B excessive
finally married G. Recently. G died. What are the drinking of her husband, Alberto. Paulita, out
rights of of her own
B's four children: X and Y of his first marriage; endeavor, was able to buy a parcel of land
and E and F, which she was able
to register under her name with the addendum
his children with G? Explain your answer. "widow." She
also acquired stocks in a listed corporation
registered in her
name. Paulita sold the parcel of land to Rafael,
SUGGESTED ANSWER: who first
Under the facts stated, X and Y are legitimate examined the original of the transfer
children of B certificate of title. 1) Has
and C. E is the legitimate children of B and G. E Alberto the right to share in the shares of
is the stock acquired by
legitimated child of B&G. F is the illegitimate Paulita? 2) Can Alberto recover the land from
child of B and Rafael?
C. As legitimate children of B and C, X and Y
have the
following rights: 1) To bear the surnames of the
father and
the mother, in SUGGESTED ANSWER:
conformity with the provisions of the Civil 1. a) Yes. The Family Code provides that all
Code on property acquired
Surnames; 2) To receive support from their during the marriage, whether the acquisition
parents, their appears to have
been made, contracted or registered in the
ascendants, name of one or
and in proper cases, their brothers and both spouses, is presumed to be absolute
sisters, in community
conformity with the provisions of the Family
Code on property unless the contrary is proved.
Support; and
To be entitled to the legitime and other b) Yes. The shares are presumed to be absolute
3) successional community
rights granted to them by the Civil Code. property having been acquired during the
(Article 174, Family marriage despite
Code the fact that those shares were registered only
). in her name.
Alberto's right to claim his share will only
E is the legitimated child of B and G. Under Art. arise, however, at
177 of the dissolution.
Family Code, only children conceived and born
outside of
wedlock of parents who, at the time of the c) The presumption is still that the shares
conception of the of stock are
former, were not disqualified by any impediment owned in common. Hence, they will form
to marry part of the
each other may be legitimated. E will have the absolute community or the conjugal
same rights partnership depending
as X and Y. on what the property Relations is.
F is the illegitimate child of B and G. F has the d) Since Paulita acquired the shares of stock
right to use by onerous title
the surname of G, her mother, and is entitled to during the marriage, these are part of the
support as conjugal or absolute
well as the legitime consisting of 1/2 of that of community property, as the case maybe
each of X, Y (depending on
and whether the marriage was celebrated prior to.
E. (Article 176, Family Code) or after, the
effectivity of the Family Code). Her physical
separation from
her husband did not dissolve the community of
Presumptive Legitime (1999) property.
What do you understand by "presumptive Hence, the husband has a right to share in the
legitime", in what shares of
case or cases must the parent deliver such
legitime to the stock.
children, and what are the legal effects in each
case if the
parent fails to do so? (5%) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
2) a) Under a community of property, whether
SUGGESTED ANSWER: absolute or
PRESUMPTIVE LEGITIME is not defined in the relative, the disposition of property
law. Its belonging to such
definition must have been taken from Act community is void if done by just one spouse
2710, the Old without the
Divorce Law, which required the delivery to the consent of the other or authority of the
legitimate proper court.
children of "the equivalent of what would have However, the land was registered in the name
been due to of Paulita as
them as their legal portion if said spouse had "widow". Hence, the buyer has the right to rely
died intestate upon what
immediately after the dissolution of the appears in the record of the Register of Deeds
community of and should,
property." As used in the Family Code, consequently, be protected. Alberto cannot
presumptive legitime recover the land
is understood as the equivalent of the legitimate from Rafael but would have the right of
children's recourse against his
legitimes assuming that the spouses had
died immediately wife
after the dissolution of the community of
property. b) The parcel of land is absolute community
property having
been acquired during the marriage and
through Paulita's
Presumptive legitime is required to be industry despite the registration being only in
delivered to the the name of
common children of the spouses when the Paulita. The land being community property,
marriage is its sale to Rafael
annulled or declared void ab initio and possibly, without the consent of Alberto is void.
when the However, since the
conjugal partnership or absolute community is land is registered in the name of Paulita as
dissolved as in widow, there is
the case of legal separation. Failure of the nothing in the title which would raise a
parents to deliver suspicion for Rafael
the presumptive legitime will make their to make inquiry. He, therefore, is an innocent
subsequent marriage purchaser for
null and void under Article 53 of the Family value from whom the land may no longer be
Code. recovered.
Property Relations; Absolute Community (1994)
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
c) No. Rafael is an innocent purchaser in good 1. Since Bob and Sofia got married In 1970,
faith who, then the law
upon relying on the correctness of the that governs is the New Civil Code (Persons), in
certificate of title, which case,
acquires rights which are to be protected by the the property relations that should be applied as
courts. regards the
property of the spouses is the system of relative
community
Under the established principles of land or conjugal partnership of gains (Article 119,
registration law, the Civil Code). By
presumption is that the transferee of registered conjugal partnership of gains, the husband and
land is not the wife place
aware of any defect in the title of the property in a common fund the fruits of their separate
he purchased. property and
(See Tojonera v. Court of Appeals, 103 SCRA the income from their work or Industry (Article
467). Moreover, 142, Civil
the person dealing with registered land may Code). In this instance, the lot inherited by Bob
safely rely on the in 1975 is his
correctness of its certificate of title and the law own separate property, he having acquired
will in no way the same by
oblige him to go behind the certificate to lucrative title (par. 2, Art. 148, Civil Code).
determine the However, the
condition of the property. [Director of Lands v. house constructed from his own savings in 1981
Abache, et al. during the
73 Phil. 606). No strong considerations of public subsistence of his marriage with Issa is
policy have conjugal property and
been presented which would lead the Court to not exclusive property in accordance with the
reverse the principle of
established and sound doctrine that the buyer in "reverse accession" provided for in Art. 158,
good faith of Civil Code.
a registered parcel of land does not have to look
beyond the
Torrens Title and search for any hidden defect
or inchoate ANOTHER ANSWER:
right which may later invalidate or diminish his Sofia, being her deceased son's legal heir
right to what 1. concurring
wit his surviving spouse 986 and 997,
he purchased. (Lopez v. Court of Appeals. 189 h (Arts. 985, Civil
SCRA 271)
Code), may rightfully claim that the house and
lot are not
conjugal but belong to the hereditary estate of
Bob. The value
d) The parcel of land is absolute community of the land being more than the cost of the
property having improvement
been acquired during the marriage and
through Paulita's (Art. 120, Family Code).
industry despite registration only in the name of
Paulita. The
land being community property, its sale to
Rafael without the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
2. Yes, the answer would still be the same.
consent of Alberto is void. Since Bob and Issa
contracted their marriage way back in 1970,
then the property
Property Relations; Ante Nuptial Agreement relations that will govern is still the relative
(1995) community or
Suppose Tirso and Tessie were married on 2 conjugal partnership of gains (Article 119, Civil
August 1988 Code). It will
without executing any ante nuptial not matter if Bob died before or after
agreement. One year August 3. 1988
after their marriage, Tirso while supervising the (effectivity date of the Family what matters is
clearing of Code], the
Tessie's inherited land upon the latter's request, date when the marriage was contracted. As
accidentally Bob and Issa
found the treasure not in the new river bed contracted their marriage way back in
but on the 1970. the property
property of Tessie. To whom shall the relation that governs them is still the conjugal
treasure belong? partnership of
Explain. gains. (Art. 158, Civil Code)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: ANOTHER ANSWER:
Since Tirso and Tessie were married before the 2. If Bob died be fore August 3, 1988. which is
effectivity of the date the
the Family Code, their property relation is Family Code took effect, the answer will not be
governed by the same.
conjugal partnership of gains. Under Art. 54 Art. 158. Civil Code, would then apply. The land
of the Civil would then
Code, the share of the hidden treasure which be deemed conjugal, along with the house,
the law awards since conjugal
to the finder or the proprietor belongs to funds were used in constructing it. The
the conjugal husband's estate
partnership of gains. The one-half share would be entitled to a reimbursement of the
pertaining to Tessie value of the land
as owner of the land, and the one-half share from conjugal partnership
pertaining to funds.
Tirso as finder of the belong th conjuga
Property Relations; Marriage Settlement; Conjugal
treasure, to e l
Partnership
partnership of gains.
of Gains (2005)
Gabby and Mila got married at Lourdes Church
Property Relations; Conjugal Partnership of Gains (1998) in Quezon
In 1970, Bob and Issa got married without City on July 10, 1990. Prior thereto, they
executing a executed a marriage
marriage settlement. In 1975, Bob inherited settlement whereby they agreed on the regime
from his father a of conjugal
residential lot upon 1981, constructed partnership of gains. The marriage settlement
which, in he a was registered
two-room bungalow with savings from his own in the Register of Deeds of Manila, where Mila
earnings. At is a resident.
that time, the lot was worth P800.000.00 while In 1992, they jointly acquired a residential
the house, house and lot, as
when finished cost P600,000.00. In 1989 Bob well as a condominium unit in Makati. In 1995,
died, survived they decided
only by his wife, Issa and his mother, Sofia. to change their property relations to the regime
Assuming that the of complete
relative values of both assets remained at separation of property. Mila consented, as
the same she was then
engaged in a lucrative business. The spouses
proportion: then signed a
1. State whether Sofia can rightfully claim that private document dissolving their conjugal
the house and partnership and
lot are not conjugal but exclusive property of
her deceased agreeing on a complete separation of property.
son. [3%]
Will your answer be the same if Bob died
before August 3, 1988? [2%]
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Thereafter, Gabby acquired a mansion in Baguio Bar Candidates Patricio Mahigugmaon and
City, and a Rowena Amor
5-hectare agricultural land in Oriental Mindoro, decided to marry each other before the last
which he day of the 1991
registered exclusively in his name. In the year Bar Examinations. They agreed to execute a
2000, Mila's Marriage
business venture failed, and her creditors sued Settlement. Rowena herself prepared the
her for document in her
P10,000,000.00. After obtaining a favorable own handwriting. They agreed on the
judgment, the following: (1) a conjugal
creditors sought to execute on the spouses' partnership of gains; (2) each donates to the
house and lot and other fifty
condominium unit, as well as Gabby's mansion percent (50%) of his/her present property, (3)
and Rowena shall
administer the conjugal partnership property;
agricultural land. and (4) neither
a) Discuss the status of the first and may bring an action for the annulment or
the amended declaration of
nullity of their marriage. Both signed the
marriage settlements. (2%) agreement in the
presence of two (2) witnesses. They did not,
SUGGESTED ANSWER: however,
The marriage settlement between Gabby and
Mila adopting acknowledge it before a notary public.
the regime of conjugal partnership of gains still As to form, is the Marriage Settlement
subsists. It is A. valid? May it
not dissolved by the mere agreement of the be registered in the registry of property? If
spouses during not, what steps
the marriage. It is clear from Article 134 of the
Family Code must be taken to make it registerable?
that in the absence of an express declaration in
the marriage B. Are the stipulations valid?
settlement, the separation of property between If the Marriage Settlement is valid as to
the spouses C. form and
during the marriage shall not take place except the above stipulations are likewise valid, does
by judicial it now follow
that said Marriage Settlement is valid and
order. enforceable?
claiming against the properties. (Ayala
Discuss the effects of the said settlements Investment v. Court of Appeals,
on the properties acquired by the spouses. G.R. No. 118305, February 12,1998, reiterated
(2%) in
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Homeowners Savings & Loan Bank v. Dailo,
The regime of conjugal partnership of gains G.R. No. 153802, March 11, 2005)
governs the properties acquired by the spouses. ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
All the properties acquired by the spouses after Except for the residential house which is the
the marriage belong to the conjugal partnership. family home, all other properties of Gabby
Under Article 116 of the Family Code, even if and Mila may be held answerable for Mila's
Gabby registered the mansion and 5 -hectare obligation. Since the said properties are
agricultural land exclusively in his name, still conjugal in nature, they can be held liable for
they are presumed to be conjugal properties, debts and obligations contracted during the
unless the contrary is proved. marriage to the extent that the family was
benefited or where the debts were contracted
by both spouses, or by one of them, with the
What properties may be held answerable consent of the other.
for Mila's obligations? Explain. (2%)
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Since all the properties are conjugal, they can A family home is a dwelling place of a person
be held answerable for Mila's obligation if the and his family. It confers upon a family the
obligation redounded to the benefit of the right to enjoy such property, which must
family. (Art. 121 [3], Family Code) However, remain with the person constituting it as a
the burden of proof lies with the creditor family home and his heirs. It cannot be seized
by creditors except in special cases. (Taneo, Jr. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 108532, Yes, it is valid as to form because it is in
March 9, 1999) writing. No, it cannot be registered in the
registry of property because it is not a
Property Relations; Marriage Settlements (1991) public document. To make it registerable, it
must be reformed and has to be notarized.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
B. Stipulations (1) and (3) are valid because
they are not contrary to law. Stipulation (4) is
void because it is contrary to law. Stipulation
(2) is valid up to 1/5 of their respective
present properties but void as to the excess
(Art 84, Family Code).
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
C. No. on September 15, 1991, the marriage
settlement is not yet valid and enforceable
until the celebration of the marriage, to take
place before the last day of the 1991 bar
Examinations.
Property Relations; Marriage Settlements (1995)
On 10 September 1988 Kevin, a 26-year old
businessman, married Karla, a winsome lass
of 18. Without the knowledge of their parents
or legal guardians, Kevin and Karla entered
into an ante-nuptial contract the day before
their marriage stipulating that conjugal
partnership of gains shall govern their
marriage. At the time of their marriage
Kevin's estate was worth 50 Million while
Karla's was valued at 2 Million. A month after
their marriage Kevin died in a freak
helicopter accident. He left no will, no debts,
no obligations. Surviving Kevin, aside from
Karla, are his only relatives: his brother Luis
and first cousin Lilia. 1) What property
Relations governed the marriage of
inherit?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Since the marriage settlement was entered
into without the consent and without the
participation of the parents (they did not sign
the document), the marriage settlement is
invalid applying Art. 78, F.C. which provides
that a minor
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
who according to law may contract marriage together, Rico was a salaried employee and
may also enter Mabel kept
into marriage settlements but they shall be house for Rico and did full-time household
valid only if the chores for him.
person who may give consent to the During their cohabitation, a parcel of coconut
marriage are made land was
parties to the agreement. (Karla was still a
minor at the time acquired by Rico from his savings.
the marriage settlement was executed in
September 1988
because the law, R.A. 6809, reducing the age of After living together for one (1) year, Rico and
majority to Mabel
18 years took effect on 18 December 1989). The separated. Rico then met and married Letty, a
marriage single woman
settlement being void, the property Relations twenty-six (26) years of age. During the
governing the marriage of Rico and
marriage is, therefore, absolute community Letty, Letty bought a mango orchard out of her
of property, own personal
earnings. a) Who would own the riceland, and
under Art. 75 of the FC. what
property Relations governs the ownership?
Explain. b) Who
2. All the properties which Kevin and Karla would own the coconut land, and what
owned at the property Relations
time of marriage became community property governs the ownership? Explain. c) Who
which shall be would own the
divided equally between them at dissolution. mango orchard, and what property Relations
Since Kevin governs the
owned 50 Million and Karla. 2 Million, at the
time of the ownership? Explain.
marriage, 52 Million constituted their
community property.
Upon the death of Kevin, the community was
dissolved and SUGGESTED ANSWER:
half of the 52 Million or 26 Million is his share (a) Rico and Cora are the co-owners of the
in the riceland. The
community. This 26 Million therefore is his Relations is that of co-ownership (Art. 147,
estate. Family Code,
first paragraph).
Karla and Luis are the Intestate heirs of Kevin. The levy is not proper there being no showing that
the surety agreement executed by the husband
They are entitled to share the estate equally redounded to the benefit of the family. An obligation
under Article 1001 of the NCC. Therefore. contracted by the husband alone is chargeable
Karla gets 13 Million and Luis gets 13 against the conjugal partnership only when it was
Million. contracted for the benefit of the family. When the
obligation was contracted on behalf of the family
Property Relations; Obligations; Benefit of the Family business the law presumes that such obligation will
(2000) redound to the benefit of the family. However, when
the obligation was to guarantee the debt of a third
As finance officer of K and Co., Victorino party, as in the problem, the obligation is presumed
arranged a loan of P5 Million from PNB for the for the benefit of the third party, not the family.
corporation. However, he was required by the Hence, for the obligation under the surety
bank to sign a Continuing Surety Agreement agreement to be chargeable against the partnership
to secure the repayment of the loan. The it must be proven that the family was benefited and
corporation failed to pay the loan, and the that the benefit was a direct result of such
bank obtained a judgment against it and agreement,
Victorino, jointly and severally. To enforce the
(Ayala Investment v. Ching, 286 SCRA 272)
judgment, the sheriff levied on a farm owned
by the conjugal partnership of Victorino and Property Relations; Unions without Marriage (1992)
his wife Elsa. Is the levy proper or not? (3%)
In 1989, Rico, then a widower forty (40) years
SUGGESTED ANSWER: of age, cohabited with Cora, a widow thirty
(30) years of age. While living together, they
acquired from their combined earnings a (Optional Addendum: However, after Rico's
parcel of riceland. marriage to Letty, the half interest of Rico
in the riceland will then become absolute
After Rico and Cora separated, Rico lived community property of Rico and Letty.)
together with Mabel, a maiden sixteen (16)
Rico is the exclusive owner of the coconut
years of age. While living land. The Relations is a sole/single
proprietorship (Art. 148. Family Code, first
paragraph is applicable, and not Art. 147
Family Code).
(Optional Addendum: However, after Rico's
marriage to Letty, the coconut land of Rico
will then become absolute community
property of Rico and Letty.)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
This is a case of ineffective disinheritance 1028 for being in consideration of her
because marrying adulterous relation
a man that the father did not approve of is not a
ground for with the testator. She is, therefore, disqualified to receive the
disinheritiD. Therefore, the institution of D-
ng l and D-2 legacy. Ernie will receive the legacy in his favor because it is not
shall be annulled insofar as it prejudices the inofficious. The institution of Baldo, which applies only to the free
legitime of D, portion, will be respected. In sum, the estate of Lamberto shall be
and the institution of D-l and D-2 shall only
apply on the distributed as follows:
free portion in the amount of P500,000.00.
Therefore, D, D-l
and D-2 will get their legitimes of P500.000.00
divided into
three equal parts and D-l and D-2 will get
a reduced Heir Legitime Legacy Institution TOTAL
testament disposition of P250,000.00
ary each. Hence, the Baldo 500,000 200.000 700,000 Elvira 250,000
shares will be: 250,000 Ernie
50,000 50,000 TOTAL 750,000 50,000 200,000
D P166,666.66 1,000,000
D-l P166,666.66 + P250.000.00
D-
2 P166,666.66 + P250,000.00
ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Disinheritance; Ineffective; Preterition (2000) Same answer as the first Alternative Answer
In his last will and testament, Lamberto 1) except as to distribution. Justice Jurado solved
disinherits his daughter Wilma because "she is this problem differently. In his opinion, the
disrespectful towards me and raises her voice legitime of the heir who was disinherited is
talking to me", 2) omits entirely his spouse distributed among the other compulsory heirs
Elvira, 3) leaves a legacy of P100,000.00 to his in proportion to their respective legitimes,
mistress Rosa and P50,000.00 to his driver while his share in the intestate portion. If any,
Ernie and 4) institutes his son Baldo as his is distributed among the other legal heirs by
sole heir. How will you distribute his estate of accretion under Article 1018 of the NCC in
P1,000,000.00? (5%) proportion to their respective intestate
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
shares. In sum the distribution shall be as
The disinheritance of Wilma was ineffective
follows:
because the ground relied upon by the testator
does not constitute maltreatment under Article
919(6) of the New Civil Code. Hence, the Heir Distribution
Legitime
testamentary provisions in the will shall be of Legacy TOTAL
annulled but only to the extent that her legitime Wilma’s Institution
was impaired. Legitime
the estate of Lamberto will be distributed as
The total omission of Elvira does not follows:
constitute preterition because she is not a
compulsory heir in the direct line. Only Baldo-------------- 450,0
compulsory heirs in the direct line may be the --- 00
subject of preterition. Not having been Wilma------------ 250,0
preterited, she will be entitled only to her --- 00
legitime. Elvira-------------- 250,0
--- 00
The legacy in favor of Rosa is void under Ernie-------------- 50,0
Article 1028 for being in consideration of her --- 00
adulterous relation with the testator. She is, 1,000,000
therefore, disqualified to receive the legacy of
100,000 pesos. The legacy of 50,000 pesos in ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The disinheritance of Wilma was effective because disrespect of,
favor of Ernie is not inofficious not having and raising of voice to, her father constitute maltreatment under
exceeded the free portion. Hence, he shall be Article 919(6) of the New Civil Code. She is, therefore, not entitled
entitled to receive it. to inherit anything. Her inheritance will go to the other legal heirs.
The total omission of Elvira is not preterition because she is not a
The institution of Baldo, which applies only to compulsory heir in the direct line. She will receive only her legitime.
The legacy in favor of Rosa is void under Article
the free portion, shall be respected. In sum,
Bald
o 250,0000 125,000 200,000 575,000
Wil
ma (250.000)
Elvi 250,000 125.000 375.000
Heirs; ra Intestate Heirs; Reserva Troncal (1995)
Isidro and Irma, Filipinos, both 18 years of
age, were passengers of Flight No. 317 of
Oriental Airlines. The plane they boarded was
of Philippine registry. While en route from
Manila to Greece some passengers hijacked
the plane, held the chief pilot hostage at the
cockpit and ordered him to fly instead to Libya.
During the hijacking Isidro suffered a heart
attack and was on the verge of death. Since
Irma was already eight months pregnant by
Isidro, she pleaded to the hijackers to allow the
assistant pilot to solemnize her marriage with
Isidro. Soon after the marriage, Isidro expired.
As the plane landed in Libya Irma gave birth.
However, the baby died a few minutes after
complete delivery. Back in the Philippines Irma
Immediately filed a claim for inheritance. The
parents of Isidro opposed her claim contending
that the marriage between her and Isidro was
void ab initio on the following grounds: (a) they
had not given their consent to the marriage of
their son; (b) there was no marriage license;
(c) the solemnizing officer had no authority to
perform the marriage; and, (d) the solemnizing
officer did not file an affidavit of marriage with
the proper civil registrar.
Explanation:
The mother (M) cannot inherit from T
because under Art. 985 the ascendants
shall inherit in default of legitimate
children and descendants of the deceased.
The widow's share is P30.000.00 because
under Art, 996 it states that if the widow or
widower and legitimate children or
descendants are left, the surviving
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
spouse has in the succession the same be set aside as Mario's conjugal share from
share as that of the community
each of the children, c) C has no share because
his father is property. The other half, amounting to one million pesos, is her
still alive hence succession by representation
shall not apply conjugal share (net estate), and should be distributed to her
intestate heirs. Applying the above provision of law, Michelle and
(Art. 975).
D inherits P30.000 which is the share of Jorelle, Tessie's nieces, are entitled to one-half of her conjugal
d) his father share worth one million pesos, or 500,000 pesos, while the other
E who predeceased T by virtue of Art. 981 on
the right of one-half amounting to P500,000 will go to Mario, Tessie's surviving
representation. spouse. Michelle and Jorelle are then entitled to P250,000 pesos
F has no share because his father G
e) repudiated the each as their hereditary share.
inheritance. Under Article 977 heirs who repudiate their
share may not be represented.
Intestate Succession (1998)
Intestate Succession (1998) Tessie died survived by her husband Mario,
Enrique died, leaving a net hereditary estate and two nieces, Michelle and Jorelle, who are
of P1.2 million. He is survived by his widow, the legitimate children of an elder sister who
three legitimate children, two legitimate had predeceased her. The only property she
grandchildren sired by a legitimate child left behind was a house and lot worth two
who predeceased him, and two recognized million pesos, which Tessie and her husband
illegitimate children. Distribute the estate in had acquired with the use of Mario's savings
intestacy. [5%] from his income as a doctor. How much of the
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
property or its value, if any, may Michelle and
Under the theory of Concurrence, the shares
Jorelle claim as their hereditary shares? [5%]
are as follows: A (legitimate child) = SUGGESTED ANSWER:
P200,000 B (legitimate child) = P200,000 C Article 1001 of the Civil Code provides, "Should brothers and sisters
(legitimate child) = P200,000 D (legitimate or their children survive with the widow or widower, the latter shall
be entitled to one-half of the inheritance and the brothers and
child) = O (predeceased] E (legitimate child of sisters or their children to the other half." Tessie's gross estate
D) = P100,000 - by right of representation F consists of a house and lot acquired during her marriage, making it
(legitimate child of D) = P100,000 - by right of part of the community property. Thus, one-half of the said property
representation G (illegitimate child) = P100,000 - would have to
1/2 share of the legitimate child H (illegitimate
child) = P100,000 - 1/2 share of the legitimate
child W (Widow) = P200.000 - same share as
legitimate child
ANOTHER ANSWER:
Under the theory of Exclusion the free portion
(P300,000) is distributed only among the
legitimate children and is given to them in
addition to their legitime. All other Intestate
heirs are entitled only to their respective
legitimes. The distribution is as follows:
Legitime Free Portion Total
A [legitimate child) P150.000 + - P225.000 B
P 75,000 {legitimate
child) P150.000 + P150.000 - C (legitimate
P225.000 child)
P150.000 + P 75.000 - D (legitimate child) 0
P225.000 00E
(legitimate child P 75,000 P35.50 - P112,500
of D) + 0 F
(legitimate child P P 37.500 - P112,500
of D) 75.000 + G
(illegitimate P 75,500 H
child) 75.000 0 -P (illegitimate
child) P 75.000 - P 75,500 W
0 (Widow) P150,000 0
-P150.000
The motion to dismiss should be granted. Article 992 does
Intestate Succession (1999) not apply. Antero is not claiming any inheritance from
Mr. and Mrs. Cruz, who are childless, met Eugenio. He is claiming his share in the inheritance of his
with a serious motor vehicle accident with Mr. father consisting of his father's share in the inheritance of
Cruz at the wheel and Mrs. Cruz seated
beside him, resulting in the instant death of
Mr. Cruz. Mrs. Cruz was still alive when help
came but she also died on the way to the
hospital. The couple acquired properties
worth One Million (P1,000,000.00) Pesos
during their marriage, which are being
claimed by the parents of both spouses in
equal shares. Is the claim of both sets of
parents valid and why? (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the claim of both parents is not valid.
When Mr. Cruz died, he was succeeded by his
wife and his parents as his intestate heirs who
will share his estate equally. His estate was
0.5 Million pesos which is his half share in the
absolute community amounting to 1 Million
Pesos. His wife, will, therefore, inherit O.25
Million Pesos and his parents will inherit 0.25
Million Pesos.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Yes, Alfredo and Racquel can bring an action for
ejectment against the Minister for recovery of
possession of the property evict the Minister and
recover possession of the property. An action for
annulment of the donation, reconveyance and
damages should be filed to protect the interests of
my client. The donation is an onerous donation and
therefore shall be governed by the rules on
contracts. Because there was no fulfillment or
compliance with the condition which is resolutory
in character, the donation may now be revoked and
all rights which the donee may have acquired
under it shall be deemed lost and extinguished
Page 71 of 119
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
homestead from him anymore because Cesar bought a residential condominium
their action has unit from High
prescribed and that furthermore, A was in Rise Co. and paid the price in full. He moved
pari delicto. into the unit, but
somehow he was not given the Condominium
Decide. (5%) Certificate of
Title covering the property. Unknown to him,
SUGGESTED ANSWER: High Rise Co.
The sale of the land by A to B 3 years after subsequently mortgaged the entire
issuance of the condominium building to
homestead patent, being in violation of Section Metrobank as security for a loan of P500
118 of the million. High Rise
Public Land Act, is void from its Co. failed to pay the loan and the bank
inception. foreclosed the
mortgage. At the foreclosure sale, the bank
acquired the
The action filed by the heirs of B to declare the building, being the highest bidder. When Cesar
nullity or learned about
inexistence of the contract and to recover the this, he filed an action to annul the foreclosure
land should be sale insofar as
given due his unit was concerned. The bank put up the
course. defense that it
relied on the condominium certificates of title
B's defense of is untenable actio presented by
prescription because an n High Rise Co., which were clean. Hence, it was
which seeks to declare the nullity or inexistence a mortgagee
of A contract and buyer in good faith. Is this defense tenable
does not prescribe. (Article 1410; Banaga vs. or not? Why?
Soler, 2 8CRA (5%.)
765) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Metrobank's defense is untenable. As a
rule, an innocent
On the other hand, B's defense of pari purchaser for value acquires a good and a
delicto is equally clean title to the
untenable. While as a rule, parties who are in property. However, it is settled that one who
pari delicto have closes his eyes
no recourse against each other on the to facts that should put a reasonable man on
principle that a guard is not an
transgressor cannot profit from his own innocent purchaser for value. In the present
wrongdoing, such problem the
rule does not apply to violations of Section 118 bank is expected, as a matter of standard
of the Public operating procedure,
Land Act because of the underlying public policy to have conducted an ocular inspection, of
in the said the promises
Act "to conserve the land which a homesteader before granting any loan. Apparently,
has acquired by gratuitous Metrobank did not
grant from the government for himself and his follow this procedure. Otherwise, it should
family". In keeping with have discovered
this policy, it has been held that one who that the condominium unit in question was
purchases a occupied by Cesar
homestead within the five-year prohibitory and that fact should have led it to make
period can only further inquiry.
recover the price which he has paid by filing a Under the circumstances, Metrobank cannot be
claim against considered a
the estate of the deceased seller (Labrador vs. mortgagee and buyer in
Delos Santos 66 good faith.
Phil. 579) under the principle that no one shall
enrich himself
at the expense of another. Applying the pari
delicto rule to Mirror Principle (1990)
violation of Section 118 of the Public Land Act, In 1950's, the Government acquired a big
the Court of landed estate in
Appeals has ruled that "the homesteader suffers Central Luzon from the registered owner for
the loss of subdivision into
the fruits realized by the vendee who in small farms and redistribution of bonafide
turn forfeits the occupants, F was
improvement that he has introduced into the a former lessee of a parcel of land, five
land." (Obot vs. hectares in area. After
SandadiUas, 69 OG, April 35, completion of the resurvey and subdivision, F
1966} applied to buy
in
th sai accordanc with the
FIRST ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: e d land e guidelines of the
The action to declare the nullity of the sale did
not prescribe implementing agency. payme pric
(Art. 1410}, such sale being one expressly Upon full nt of the e in
prohibited and 1957, the corresponding deed of absolute sale
declared void by the Public Lands Act [Art. was executed
1409, par. (7)]. in his favor and was registered, and in 1961, a
The prohibition of the law is clearly for the new title was
protection of the issued in his name. In 1963, F sold the said
heirs A such recoveri the woul land to X; and in
of that their ng property d 1965 X sold it to Y, new titles were successively
enhan the polic regardi ownership issued in the
ce public y ng of lands names of the said
acquired by homestead patent (Art. 1416). The purchasers.
defense of
pari delicto is not applicable either, since the In 1977, C filed an action to annul the deeds of
law itself allows sale to F, X
the homesteader to reacquire the land even if it and Y and their titles, on the ground that he (C)
has been sold. had been in
actual physical possession of the land, and that
the sale to F
SECOND ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
and the subsequent sales should be set aside
Prescription does not arise with respect to
on the ground of
actions to declare a
fraud. Upon motion of defendants, the trial
void contract a nullity (Article 1410). Neither is
court dismissed
the doctrine
th complai upholdi defens o thei
of pari delicto applicable because of public
e nt, ng their es f r being
policy. The law is
innoce purchasers value prescript lache
designed for the protection of the plaintiff so as
nt for , ion and s.
to enhance
Plaintiff appealed.
the public policy of the Public Land Act to give
(a) Is the said appeal meritorious?
land to the Explain your
landle answer(b)Suppose the government agency
ss. concerned joined C in
filing the said action against the
If the heirs are not allowed to recover, it could
defendants, would that
be on the
change the result of the
ground of laches inasmuch as 40 years had litigation? Explain.
elapsed and the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
owner had not brought any action against B (a) The appeal is not meritorious. The trial
especially if the court ruled
latter had improved the land. It would be correctly in granting defendant's motion to
detrimental to B if dismiss for the
the plaintiff is allowed to
recover. following reasons:
1. While there is the possibility that F, a
former lessee of the
Innocent Purchaser for Value (2001) land was aware of the fact that C was the bona
fide
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
occupant thereof and for this reason his transfer required to explore beyond what the record in
certificate the registry
of title may be vulnerable, the transfer of the indicates on its face in quest for any hidden
same land and defect or
the issuance of new TCTs to X and Y who are inchoate right which may subsequently defeat
innocent his right
purchasers for value render the latter's titles thereto. This is the "mirror principle' of the
indefeasible. A Torrens system
person dealing with registered land may safely which makes it possible for a forged deed to
rely on the be the root of a
correctness of the certificate of title and the law
will not in good title.
any way oblige him to go behind the certificate
to determine
the condition of the property in search for any Besides, it appears that spouses X and Y are
hidden defect guilty of
or inchoate right which may later invalidate or contributory negligence when they delivered
diminish the this OCT to the
right to the land. This is the mirror principle of mortgagee without annotating the mortgage
the Torrens thereon.
Between them and the innocent purchaser for
System of land registration. value, they
should bear the loss.
The action to annul the sale was instituted in 1977 or more ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
than (10) years from the date of execution If the buyer B, who relied on the teller A's
thereof in 1957, title, was not
aware of the adverse possession of the land by
hence, it has long prescribed. the spouses X
and Y, then the latter cannot recover the
2. Under Sec 45 of Act 496, ―the entry of a certificate of title property from
shall be regarded as an agreement running B. B has in his favor the presumption of good
with the land, and faith which
binding upon the applicant and all his can only be overthrown by adequate proof of
successors in title that bad faith.
the land shall be and always remain However, nobody buys land without seeing
registered land. A title the property,
hence, B could not have been unaware of such
adverse
possession. If after learning of such possession, B simply
under Act 496 is indefeasible and to preserve that character, the
OBLIGATIONS
Aleatory Contracts; Gambling (2004)
Mr. ZY lost P100,000 in a card game called
Russian poker, but he had no more cash to pay
in full the winner at the time the session
ended. He promised to pay PX, the winner,
two weeks thereafter. But he failed to do so
despite the lapse of two months, so PX filed in
court a suit to collect the amount of P50,000
that he won but remained unpaid. Will the
collection suit against ZY prosper? Could Mrs.
ZY file in turn a suit against PX to recover the
P100,000 that her husband lost? Reason. (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER (2): subject to the sole will of the debtor and,
A. (2). Mrs. ZY cannot file a suit to recover therefore the conditional obligation is void.
what her husband lost. Art 2014 of the Civil (Article 1182, NCC).
Code provides that any loser in a game of
chance may recover his loss from the winner, SUGGESTED ANSWER:
with legal interest from the time he paid the The obligation is valid. It is subject to a suspensive
amount lost. This means that only he can file condition, i.e. the future and uncertain event of his
the suit. Mrs. ZY cannot recover as a spouse becoming a lawyer. The performance of this obligation does
who has interest in the absolute community
property or conjugal partnership of gains,
because under Art. 117(7} of the Family Code,
losses are borne exclusively by the loser-
spouse. Therefore, these cannot be charged
against absolute community property or
conjugal partnership of gains. This being so,
Mrs. ZY has no interest in law to prosecute and
recover as she has no legal standing in court to
do so.
Conditional Obligations (2000)
Pedro promised to give his grandson a car if
the latter will pass the bar examinations. When
his grandson passed the said examinations,
Pedro refused to give the car on the ground
that the condition was a purely potestative
one. Is he correct or not? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, he is not correct. First of all, the condition
is not purely potestative, because it does not
depend on the sole will of one of the parties.
Secondly, even if it were, it would be valid
because it depends on the sole will of the
creditor (the donee) and not of the debtor (the
donor).
Conditional Obligations (2003)
Are the following obligations valid, why, and if
they are valid, when is the obligation
demandable in each case? a) If the debtor
promises to pay as soon as he has the
means to pay; b) If the debtor promises to pay
when he likes; c) If the debtor promises to pay
when he becomes a
Page 86 of 119
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
In 1971, Able Construction, Inc. entered into a has been extinguished by the novation or
contract extinction of the
with Tropical Home Developers, Inc. whereby
the former principal obligation insofar as third parties are concerned.
would build for the latter the houses within its
subdivision.
The cost of each house, labor and materials
included, was Extinguishment; Payment (1995)
P100,000.00. Four hundred units were to be In 1983 PHILCREDIT extended loans to
constructed Rivett-Strom
within five years. In 1973, Able found that it Machineries, Inc. (RIVETTT-STROM),
could no longer consisting of US$10
continue with the job due to the increase in the Million for the cost of machineries imported
price of oil and directly paid
and its derivatives and the concomitant by PHTLCREDIT, and 5 Million in cash
worldwide spiraling payable in
of prices of all commodities, including basic raw installments over a period of ten (10) years on
materials the basis of the
required for the construction of the houses. The value thereof computed at the rate of exchange
cost of of the U.S.
development had risen to unanticipated levels dollar vis-à-vis the Philippine peso at the time
and to such a of payment.
degree that the conditions and factors which
formed the
original basis of the contract had been totally
changed. Able
brought suit against Tropical Homes praying RIVETT-STROM made payments on both loans
that the Court which if
relieve it of its obligation. Is Able Construction based on the rate of exchange in 1983
entitled to the would have fully
relief sought? settled the loans.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: promissory note for P1 million payable two
Yes, the Able Construction. Inc. is entitled to years later or in 1980 became a natural
the relief sought under Article 1267, Civil obligation after the lapse of ten (10) years,
Code. The law provides: "When the service such natural obligation can be a valid
has become so difficult as to be manifestly consideration of a novated promissory note
beyond the contemplation of the parties, the dated in 1991 and payable two years later, or
obligor may also be released therefrom, in in 1993. All the elements of an implied real
whole or in part." novation are present: a) an old valid obligation;
b) a new valid obligation; c) capacity of the
Extinguishment; Novation (1994)
parties; d) animus novandi or intention to
In 1978, Bobby borrowed Pl,000,000.00 from novate; and e) The old and the new obligation
Chito payable in two years. The loan, which should be incompatible with each other on all
was evidenced by a promissory note, was material points (Article 1292). The two
secured by a mortgage on real property. No promissory notes cannot stand together, hence,
action was filed by Chito to collect the loan or the period of prescription of ten (10) years has
to foreclose the mortgage. But in 1991, Bobby, not yet lapsed.
without receiving any amount from Chito,
executed another promissory note which was
worded exactly as the 1978 promissory note,
except for the date thereof, which was the date SUGGESTED ANSWER:
of its execution. 1) Can Chito demand payment No. The mortgage being an accessory contract prescribed with
on the 1991 promissory note in 1994? 2) Can the loan. The novation of the loan, however, did not expressly
include the mortgage, hence, the mortgage is extinguished under
Chito foreclose the real estate mortgage if Article 1296 of the NCC. The contract
Bobby fails to make good his obligation under
the 1991 promissory note?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, Chito can demand payment on the 1991
promissory note in 1994. Although the 1978
PHILCREDIT contends that the payments on
both loans should be based on the rate of
exchange existing at the time of payment,
which rate of exchange has been
consistently increasing, and for which
reason there would still be a considerable
balance on each loan. Is the contention of
PHILCREDIT correct? Discuss fully.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
As regards the loan consisting of dollars, the
contention of PHILCREDIT is correct. It has to
be paid in Philippine currency computed on
the basis of the exchange rate at the TIME OF
PAYMENT of each installment, as held in
Kalalo v. Luz, 34 SCRA 337. As regards the P5
Million loan in Philippine pesos, PHILCREDIT
is wrong. The payment thereof cannot be
measured by the peso-dollar exchange rate.
That will be violative of the Uniform Currency
Act (RA, 529] which prohibits the payment of
an obligation which, although to be paid in
Philippine currency, is measured by a foreign
currency. (Palanca v. CA, 238 SCRA 593).
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
The matter should be decided in favor of 1. Juana has the right of action to recover (a)
Remigio (trustee) her one-half
because the action has not prescribed. The share in the proceeds of the sale with legal
case at bar interest thereof,
involves an express trust which does not and (b) such damages as she may be able to
prescribe as long as prove as having
they have not been repudiated by the been suffered by her, which may include actual
trustee (Diaz vs. or
compensatory damages as well as moral and
Gorricho. 103 Phil, 261). exemplary
damages due to the breach of trust and bad
faith (Imperial
vs. CA, 259 SCRA 65). Of course, if the buyer
Implied Trust (1998) knew of the
Juan and his sister Juana inherited from their co-ownership over the lot he was buying,
mother two Juana can seek (c)
parcels of farmland with exactly the same reconvenyance of her one-half share instead
areas. For but she must
convenience, the Torrens certificates of title implead the buyer as co-defendant and allege
covering both his bad faith in
lots were placed in Juan's name alone. In 1996, purchasing the entire lot. Finally, consistent
Juan sold to with the ruling in
an innocent purchaser one parcel in its entirety Imperial us. CA. Juana may seek instead (d) a
without the declaration that
knowledge and consent of Juana, and she is now the sole owner of the entire
wrongfully kept for remaining lot on the
theory that Juan has forfeited his one-half
himself the entire price paid. share therein.
What rights of action, if any, does Juana
1. have against
and/or the buyer? |3%] ADDITIONAL ANSWER:
2. Since the two lots have the same area, 1. Juana can file an action for damages against
suppose Juana Juan for having
flies a complaint to have herself declared sole fraudulently sold one of the two parcels which
owner of the he partly held
entire remaining second lot, contending that her in trust for Juana's benefit. Juana may claim
brother had actual or
forfeited his share thereof by wrongfully compensatory damage for the loss of her share
disposing of her in the land;
undivided share in the first lot. Will the suit moral damages for the mental anguish,
prosper? [2%] anxiety, moral shock
and wounded feelings she had suffered;
exemplary damage by
way of example for the common good, and
SUGGESTED ANSWER: attorney's fees.
1. When, for convenience, the Torrens title to Juana has no cause of action against the buyer
the two parcels who acquired
of land were placed in Joan's name alone, there the land for value and in good faith, relying on
was created the transfer
an implied trust (a resulting trust) for the certificate showing that Juan is the registered
benefit of Juana owner of the
with Juan as trustee of one-half undivided or
ideal portion of land.
each of the two lots. Therefore, Juana can file an
action for
damages against Joan for having fraudulently
sold one of the
two parcels which he partly held in trust for
Juana's benefit. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Juana may claim actual or compensatory 2. Juana's suit to have herself declared as sole
owner of the
damage for the loss
entire remaining area will not prosper because
of while Juan's
her share in the land; moral damages for
the mental act in selling the other lot was wrongful. It did
anguish, anxiety, moral shock and wounded not have the
feelings she had legal effect of forfeiting his share in the
suffered; exemplary damage by way of remaining lot.
example for the However, Juana can file an action against Juan
for partition
common good, and attorney's fees.
or termination of the co-ownership with a
prayer that the lot
Juana has no cause of action against the buyer sold be adjudicated to Juan, and the remaining
who acquired lot be
the land for value and in good faith, relying on
the transfer adjudicated and reconveyed to her.
certificate of title showing that Juan is the ANOTHER ANSWER:
registered owner 2. The suit will prosper, applying the ruling in
Imperial vs.
of the land.
CA cited above. Both law and equity authorize
ANOTHER ANSWER: such a result,
1. Under Article 476 of the Civil Code, Juana can
file an said the Supreme Court.
action for quieting of title as there is a cloud in
the title to the Strictly speaking, Juana's contention that her
subject real property. Second, Juana can also file brother had
an action for forfeited his share in the second lot is
damages against Juan, because the incorrect. Even if the
settled rule is that the
proper recourse of the true owner of the two lots have the same area, it does not follow
property who was that they have
the same value. Since the sale of the first lot
prejudiced and fraudulently dispossessed of the on the Torrens
same is to title in the name of Juan was valid, all that
bring an action for damages against those who Juana may recover
caused or is the value of her undivided interest therein,
employed the same. Third, since Juana had the plus damages.
right to her In addition, she can ask for partition or
share in the property by way of inheritance, she reconveyance of her
can demand undivided interest in the second lot, without
the partition of the thing owned in common, prejudice to any
under Article agreement between them that in lieu of the
494 of the Civil Code, and ask that the title to payment of the
the remaining value of Juana's share in the first lot and
damages, the second
property be declared as exclusively hers.
lot be reconveyed to her.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
However, since the farmland was sold to an
The suit will not prosper, since Juan's
innocent purchaser for value, then Juana has no
wrongful act of pocketing the entire proceeds
cause of action against the buyer consistent with
of the sale of the first lot is not a ground for
the established rule that the rights of an innocent
divesting him of his rights as a co-owner of
purchaser for value must be respected and
the second lot. Indeed, such wrongdoing by
protected notwithstanding the fraud employed by
Juan does not constitute, for the benefit of
the seller in securing his title. (Eduarte vs. CA,
Juana, any of the modes of acquiring
253 SCRA 391)
ownership under Art. 712, Civil Code.
ADDITIONAL ANSWER:
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics creditor. Will Peter Co's defense of absence of
Trust; Implied Resulting Trust (1995) agreement to a subrogation of creditor prosper?
In 1960, Maureen purchased two lots in a
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
plush subdivision registering Lot 1 in her name
and Lot 2 in the name of her brother Walter No, Co's defense will not prosper. This is not a
with the latter's consent. The idea was to case of subrogation, but an assignment of
circumvent a subdivision policy against the credit. ASSIGNMENT OF CREDIT is the process
acquisition of more than one lot by one buyer. of transferring the right of the assignor to the
Maureen constructed a house on Lot 1 with an assignee. The assignment may be done either
extension on Lot 2 to serve as a guest house. gratuitously or onerously, in which case, the
In 1987, Walter who had suffered serious assignment has an effect similar to that of a sale
(Nyco Sales Corp.v.BA Finance Corp. G.R
business losses demanded that Maureen
No.71694. Aug.16, 1991 200 SCRA 637). As a
remove the extension house since the lot on
which the extension was built was his property. result of the assignment, the plaintiff acquired
In 1992, Maureen sued for the reconveyance all the rights of the assignor including the right
to her of Lot 2 asserting that a resulting trust to sue in his own name as the legal assignee. In
was created when she had the lot registered in assignment, the debtor's consent is not essential
Walter's name even if she paid the purchase for the validity of the assignment
price. Walter opposed the suit arguing that
assuming the existence of a resulting trust the
action of Maureen has already prescribed
since ten years have already elapsed from the
registration of the title in his name. Decide.
Discuss fully.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
This is a case of an implied resulting trust. If
Walter claims to have acquired ownership of
the land by prescription or if he anchors his
defense on extinctive prescription, the ten
year period must be reckoned from 1987
when he demanded that Maureen remove the
extension house on Lot No. 2 because such
demand amounts to an express repudiation of
the trust and it was made known to Maureen.
The action for reconveyance filed in 1992 is
not yet barred by prescription.
(Spouses Huang v. Court of Appeals, Sept. 13,
1994).
SALES
Assignment of Credit vs. Subrogation (1993)
Peter Co, a trader from Manila, has dealt
business with Allied Commodities in
Hongkong for five years. All through the
years, Peter Co accumulated an indebtedness
of P500,000.00 with Allied Commodities. Upon
demand by its agent in Manila, Peter Co paid
Allied Commodities by check the amount
owed. Upon deposit in the payee's account in
Manila, the check was dishonored for
insufficiency of funds. For and in consideration
of P1.00, Allied Commodities assigned the
credit to Hadji Butu who brought suit against
Peter Co in the RTC of Manila for recovery of
the amount owed. Peter Co moved to dismiss
the complaint against him on the ground that
Hadji Butu was not a real party in interest
and, therefore, without legal capacity to sue
and that he had not agreed to a subrogation of
(Year 1990-2006) another couple, Bernie and Elena, offered a
(Art. 1624; 1475. CC; Rodriguez v. CA, et al, similar house at a lower price of P 1.5 Million.
G. R No. 84220, March 25. 1992 207 SCRA But Ray insisted on buying the house of Biong
553). and Linda for sentimental reasons. Ray
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
prepared a deed of sale to be signed by the
No, the defense of Peter Co will not prosper.
couple and a manager's check for P2 Million.
Hadji Butu validly acquired his right by an
After receiving the P2 Million, Biong signed
assignment of credit under Article 1624 of
the deed of sale. However, Linda was not able
the Civil Code. However, the provisions on
to sign it because she was abroad. On her
the contract of sale (Article 1475 Civil Code)
return, she refused to sign the document
will apply, and the transaction is covered by
saying she changed her mind. Linda filed suit
the Statute of Frauds. (Art. 1403 par. (2)
for nullification of the deed of sale and for
Civil Code)
moral and exemplary damages against Ray.
Conditional Sale vs. Absolute Sale (1997) Will the suit prosper? Explain. (2.5%)
Distinguish between a conditional sale, on ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
the one hand, and an absolute sale, on the
other hand.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A CONDITIONAL SALE is one where the
vendor is granted the right to unilaterally
rescind the contract predicated on the
fulfillment or non-fulfillment, as the case may
be, of the prescribed condition. An
ABSOLUTE SALE is one where the title to the
property is not reserved to the vendor or if
the vendor is not granted the right to rescind
the contract based on the fulfillment or
nonfulfillment, as the case may be, of the
prescribed condition.
Contract of Sale vs. Agency to Sell (1999)
A granted B the exclusive right to sell his
brand of Maong pants in Isabela, the price for
his merchandise payable within 60 days from
delivery, and promising B a commission of
20% on all sales. After the delivery of the
merchandise to B but before he could sell any
of them, B’s store in Isabela was completely
burned without his fault, together with all of
A's pants. Must B pay A for his lost pants?
Why? (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The contract between A and B is a sale not
an agency to sell because the price is
payable by B upon 60 days from delivery
even if B is unable to resell it. If B were an
agent, he is not bound to pay the price if he
is unable to resell it.
LEASE
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
contributed P5,000,000.00 provided that phenomenon are still unpredictable despite
the building as a the advances in
whole would be leased to him (B) for a period of
ten years science, the phenomenon is considered unforeseen.
from January 1. 1985 to December 31, 1995 at a
rental of
P100,000.00 a year. To such condition, A
agreed. On Leasee & Lessor; Rights and Obligations (1990)
December 20, 1990, the building was totally A vacant lot several blocks from the center of
burned. Soon the town was
thereafter, A's workers cleared the debris leased by its owner to a young businessman B
and started for a term of
construction of a new building. B then served fifteen (15) years renewal upon agreement of
notice upon A the parties.
that he would occupy the building being After taking possession of the lot, the lessee
constructed upon built thereon a
completion, for the unexpired portion of the building of mixed materials and a store. As the
lease term, years passed,
explaining that he had spent partly for the he expanded his business, earning more
construction of the profits. By the tenth
building that was burned. A rejected B's (10th) year of his possession, he was able to
demand. Did A has a build a three
right in rejecting B's (3)-story building worth at least P300,000.00.
demand? Before the end
of the term of the lease, B negotiated with the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: landowner for
Yes. A was correct in rejecting the demand of B. its renewal, but despite their attempts to do so,
As a result they could not
of the total destruction of the building by agree on the new conditions for the renewal.
fortuitous event, Upon the
the lease was extinguished. (Art. 1655, Civil expiration of the term of the lease, the
Code.) landowner asked B to
vacate the premises and remove his building
and other
improvements. B refused unless he was
Implied New Lease (1999) reimbursed for
Under what circumstances would an implied necessary and useful expenses. B claimed that
new lease or a he was a
tacita reconduccion possessor and builder in good faith, with right
arise? (2%) of retention.
This issue is now before the court for
SUGGESTED ANSWER: resolution in a pending
An implied new lease or tacita reconduccion arises if
at the litigation. a) What are the rights of B? b) What
end of the contract the lessee should continue are the rights
enjoying the
thing leased for 15 days with the acquiescence of the landowner?
of the lessor,
and unless a notice contrary by either
to the partieshas
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
previously been given (Art. 1670). In short, in a) B has the right to remove the building and
order that other
there may be tacita reconduccion there must be improvements unless the landowner decides to
expiration of retain the
the contract; there must be continuation of building at the time of the termination of the
possession for 15 lease and pay
days or more; and there must be no prior the lessee one-half of the value of the
demand to vacate. improvements at that
time. The lessee may remove the building even
though the
Lease of Rural Lands principal thing may suffer damage but B should
(2000) not cause any
more impairment upon the property leased
than is necessary.
In 1995, Mark leased the rice land of Narding in The claim of B that he was a possessor and
Nueva Ecija builder in good
for an annual rental of P1,000.00 per hectare. In faith with the right of retention is not tenable.
1998, due to B is not a
the El Nino phenomenon, the rice harvest fell to builder in good faith because as lessee he does
only 40% not claim
of the average harvest for the previous years.
Mark asked ownership over the property leased.
Narding for a reduction of the rental to P500.00
per hectare SUGGESTED ANSWER:
for that year but the latter refused. Is Mark b) The landowner/lessor may refuse to
legally entitled to reimburse 1/2 of the
value of the improvements and require the
such reduction? (2%) lessee to remove
SUGGESTED ANSWER: the improvements. [Article 1678, Civil Code),
No, Mark is not entitled to a reduction. Under
Article 1680 of
the Civil Code, the lessee of a rural land is
entitled to a Leasee; Death Thereof; Effects (1997)
reduction of the rent only in case of loss of more Stating briefly the thesis to support your
than 1/2 of answer to each of
the fruits through extraordinary and the following cases, will the death - a) of the
unforeseen fortuitous lessee extinguish
events. While the drought brought about by the
"El Nino" the lease agreement?
phenomenon may be classified as
extraordinary, it is not SUGGESTED ANSWER:
considered as No. The death of the lessee will not extinguish
unforeseen. the lease
agreement, since lease is not personal in
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: character and the
right is transmissible to the heirs. (Heirs of
Yes, Mark is entitled to a reduction of the rent. His loss was more Dimaculangan vs.
than 1/2 of the fruits and the loss was due to an extraordinary and
unforeseen fortuitous event. The "El Nino" phenomenon is IAC, 170 SCRA 393).
extraordinary because it is uncommon; it does not occur with
regularity. And neither could the parties have foreseen its Option to Buy; Expired (2001)
On January 1, 1980, Nestor leased the
occurrence. The event should be foreseeable by the parties so that fishpond of Mario for
a period of three years at a monthly rental of
the lessee can change the time for his planting, or refrain from P1,000.00, with
planting, or take steps to avoid the loss. To be foreseeable, the time an option to purchase the same during the
and the place of the occurrence, as well as the magnitude of the
period of the lease
for the price of P500,000.00. After the
adverse effects of the fortuitous event must be capable of being expiration of the
three-year period, Mario allowed Nestor to
predicted. Since the exact place, the exact time, and the exact remain in the
leased premises at the same rental rate. On
magnitude of the adverse effects of the "El Nino" June 15, 1983,
Nestor tendered the amount of P500,000.00 to
Mario and
demanded that the latter execute a deed of
absolute sale of
the fishpond in his favor. Mario refused, on the
ground that
Nestor no longer had an option to buy the
fishpond.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Nestor filed an action for specific performance. sublessee can invoke no right superior to that
Will the of his
action prosper or not? Why? (5%) sublessor, the moment the sublessor is duly ousted from the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: premises, the sublessee has no leg to stand on. The sublessee's
No, the action will not prosper. The implied
renewal of the right, if any, is to demand reparation for damages from his
lease on a month-to-month basis did not have sublessor, should the latter be at fault.
the effect of
extending the life of the option to purchase
which expired at (Heirs ofSevilla v. Court of Appeals G.R. No.
the end of the original lease period. The lessor 49823, February
is correct in
refusing to sell on the ground that the option 26, 1992).
had expired.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
None of the above. There is no pledge because
only movable property may be pledged (Art.
2094. NCC). If at all, there was a pledge of the
paper or document constituting the Torrens
Title, as a movable by itself, but not of the land
which the title represents.
QUASI-CONTRACT
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Quasi-Contracts; Negotiorium Gestio (1992) house under the principle of negotiorum gestio. He was not liable
In fear of reprisals from lawless elements as the burning of the house is a fortuitous event. Is B liable to A
besieging his barangay, X abandoned his for damages under the foregoing circumstances?
fishpond, fled to Manila and left for Europe.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Seeking that the fish in the fishpond were
ready for harvest, Y, who is in the business of No. B is not liable for damages, because he is
managing fishponds on a commission basis, a gestor in negotiorum gestio (Art. 2144,
took possession of the property, harvested the Civil Code) Furthermore, B is not liable to A
fish and sold the entire harvest to Z. because Article 2147 of the Civil Code is not
Thereafter, Y borrowed money from W and applicable.
used the money to buy new supplies of fish fry
B did not undertake risky operations which
and to prepare the fishpond for the next crop.
the owner was not accustomed to embark
a) What is the Juridical relation between X and
upon: a) he has not preferred his own
Y during X's absence? b) Upon the return of X
to the barangay, what are the obligations of Y interest to that of the owner; b) he has not
to X as regards the contract with Z? c) Upon failed to return the property or business after
X's return, what are the obligations of X as demand by the owner; and c) he has not
regards Y's contract with W? d) What legal assumed the management in bad faith.
effects will result if X expressly ratifies Y's
management and what would be the
obligations of X in favor of Y? Explain all your
answers.
they spent for the construction of stores at the ground floor and
the conversion of the second floor into a pension house. While
construction was going on, fire occurred at a nearby house. The
houses at the entire block, including A's were burned. After the
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
EDSA revolution in February 1986, A and his family returned from
The juridical relation is that of the quasi- the United States where they took refuge in 1972. Upon learning
contract of "negotiorum gestio". Y is the of what happened to his house. A sued B for damages, B pleaded
"gestor" or "officious manager" and X is the as a defense that he merely took charge of his
"owner" (Art. 2144, Civil Code).
Quasi-Contracts; Solutio Indebiti (2004) As regards the defense of ―last clear chance,‖ the
DPO went to a store to buy a pack of same is not tenable because according to the
cigarettes worth P225.00 only. He gave the SC in one case (De Roy v CA L-80718, Jan 29,
vendor, RRA, a P500-peso bill. The vendor 1988, 157 S 757) the doctrine of last clear
gave him the pack plus P375.00 change. Was chance is not applicable to instances covered
there a discount, an oversight, or an error in by Art 2190 of the Civil Code.
the amount given? What would be DPO’s duty, if
any, in case of an excess in the amount of
change given by the vendor? How is this
situational relationship between DPO and
RRA denominated? Explain. (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
There was error in the amount of change given
by RRA. This is a case of solutio indebiti in
that DPO received something that is not due
him. He has the obligation to return the
P100.00; otherwise, he will unjustly enrich
himself at the expense of RRA. (Art. 2154, Civil
Code)
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
DPO has the duty to return to RRA the excess
P100 as trustee under Article 1456 of the
Civil Code which provides: If property is
acquired through mistake or fraud, the
person obtaining it is, by force of law,
considered a trustee of an implied trust for
the benefit of the person from whom the
property comes. There is, in this case, an
implied or constructive trust in favor of RRA.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I would decide in favor of Mr & Mrs S. The
proprietor of a building or structure is
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Further, in Phoenix Construction, Inc. v. Availing of that portion of Section 12 of Article
Intermediate II of the
Appellate Court (G.R. L-65295, March 10, 1987.
148 SCRA 353) 1987 Constitution which reads;
the Supreme Court held that the role of the The State x xx shall equally protect the life
common law "last of the mother
clear chance" doctrine in relation to Article and the life of the unborn from conception,
2179 of the Civil "xxx" which
Code is merely to mitigate damages within the he claims confers a civil personality on the
context of unborn from
contributory negligence. the moment of conception.
Boy filed a case for damages against the
Damages (1994) abortionist, praying
On January 5, 1992, Nonoy obtained a loan of therein that the latter be ordered to pay him:
Pl,000,000.00 (a) P30,000.00 as
from his friend Raffy. The promissory note did indemnity for the death of the fetus, (b)
not stipulate P100.000.00 as moral
any payment for Interest. The note was due on damages for the mental anguish and anxiety
January 5, he suffered, (c)
1993 but before this date the two became P50,000.00 as exemplary damages, (d)
political enemies. P20,000.00 as nominal
Nonoy, out of spite, deliberately defaulted in damages, and (e) P25,000.00 as attorney's
paying the note, fees. May actual
thus forcing Raffy to sue him. 1) What actual damages be also recovered? If so, what facts
damages can should be alleged
Raffy recover? 2) Can Raffy ask for moral
damages from and proved?
Nonoy? 3) Can Raffy ask for nominal damages?
4) Can Raffy
ask for temperate damages? 5) Can Raffy ask
for attorney's SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, provided that the pecuniary loss suffered
fees? should be
substantiated and duly proved.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Raffy may ask for, but would most likely not be
Raffy may recover the amount of the awarded temperate damages, for the reason
promissory note of P1 million, together with that his actual damages may already be
interest at the legal rate from the date of compensated upon proof thereof with the
judicial or extrajudicial demand. In addition, promissory note. TEMPERATE DAMAGES may
however, inasmuch as the debtor is in bad be awarded only when the court finds that
faith, he is liable for all damages which may some pecuniary loss has been suffered but its
be reasonably attributed to the non- amount cannot, from the nature of the case, be
performance of the obligation. (Art. 2201(2). proved with certainty. (Article 2224, Civil
NCC). Code)
Yes, under Article 2220, NCC moral damages
are recoverable in case of breach of contract Yes, under paragraph 2, Article 2208 of the
where the defendant acted fraudulently or in Civil Code, considering that Nonoy's act or
bad faith. omission has compelled Raffy to litigate to
protect his interests. Furthermore. attorneys'
Nominal damages may not be recoverable in fees may be awarded by the court when it is
this case because Raffy may already be just and equitable. (Article 2208(110) Civil
indemnified of his losses with the award of Code).
actual and compensatory damages. NOMINAL
DAMAGES are adjudicated only in order that a Damages arising from Death of Unborn Child (1991)
right of the plaintiff, which has been violated or On her third month of pregnancy,
invaded by the defendant may be vindicated or Rosemarie, married to Boy, for reasons
recognized, and not for the purpose of known only to her, and without informing
indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss suffered Boy, went to the clinic of X, a known
by him. (Article 2231. Civil Code) abortionist, who for a fee, removed and
expelled the fetus from her womb, Boy
learned of the abortion six (6) months later.
Damages arising from Death of Unborn Child (2003)
If a pregnant woman passenger of a bus were
to suffer an abortion following a vehicular
accident due to the gross negligence of the
bus driver, may she and her husband claim
damages from the bus company for the death
of their unborn child? Explain. 5%
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the spouses cannot recover actual damages
in the form of indemnity for the loss of life of the
unborn child. This is because the unborn child is
not yet considered a person and the law allows
indemnity only for loss of life of person. The
mother, however may recover damages for the
bodily injury she suffered from the loss of the
fetus which is considered part of her internal
organ. The parents may also recover damages for
injuries that are inflicted directly upon them, e.g.,
moral damages for mental anguish that attended
the loss of the unborn child. Since there is gross
negligence, exemplary damages can also be
recovered. (Gelus v. CA, 2 SCRA 801
[1961])
Quasi-Delict (1992)
As the result of a collision between a public
service passenger bus and a cargo truck
owned by D, X sustained physical injuries and
Y died. Both X and Y were passengers of the
bus. Both drivers were at fault, and so X and
Z, the only heir and legitimate child of the
deceased Y, sued the owners of both vehicles.
a) May the owner of the bus raise the defense
of having exercised the diligence of a good
father of a family? b) May D raise the same
defense? c) May X claim moral damages from
both defendants? d) May Z claim moral
damages from both defendants? Give reasons
for all your answers,
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No. The owner of the bus cannot raise the
defense because the carrier's liability is
based on breach of contract
A carpenter in a construction
company accidentally hits the right
foot of his co-worker with a hammer.
Explain. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The owner of the construction company.
Article 2180, paragraph 4 states that "the
owners and managers of an establishment
or enterprise are likewise responsible for
damages caused by their employees in the
service of the branches in which the latter
are employed or on the occasion of their
functions."
A Compilation of the
In the
In
CIVIL LAW
Compiled and Arranged By:
Baratbate-Ladot, Delight
&
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 1 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
FOREWORD
The Authors.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 2 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Titles are based on Silliman’s Compilation [Arranged by Topic])
Persons
Capacity: Juridical Capacity (2008).......................................................................................................... 12
Conflict of Laws
Processual Presumption (2009)....................................................................................................................16
Jurisdiction; Courts may Assume Jurisdiction over Conflict of Laws Cases (2010)...........17
Adoption
Adoption; Termination; Death of Adopter (2009).................................................................................17
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 3 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Family Code
Marriage; Annulment; Grounds (2009).....................................................................................................20
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 4 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Paternity & Filiation; Legitimation of a Child from a Previous Valid Marriage (2008)......36
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 5 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Succession
Disposition; Mortis Causa vs. Intervivos; Corpse (2009)..................................................................46
Succession; Proof of Death between persons called to succeed each other (2008).............55
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 6 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Donation
Donations; Formalities; In Writing (2007).............................................................................................. 63
Property
Accretion; Alluvium (2008)............................................................................................................................65
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 7 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Contracts
Contract to Sell vs. Conditional Contract of Sale (2012)................................................................ 90
Obligations
Extinguishment; Compensation (2009)....................................................................................................91
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 8 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Trust
Trust De Son Tort (2007)................................................................................................................................ 98
Sales
Condominium Act; Partition of a Condominium (2009)...................................................................99
Lease
Builder; Good Faith; Useful Improvements (2013)...........................................................................103
Agency
Agency; Sale of a Real Property through an Agent (2010)............................................................104
Partnership
Liability; Liability of a Partner (2010)....................................................................................................105
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 9 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Guaranty
Guaranty (2009).................................................................................................................................................108
Surety
Surety (2010)......................................................................................................................................................108
Pledge
Pledge; Pactum Commissorium (2009)..................................................................................................109
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 10 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 11 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Yes, the baby can be the beneficiary of which she accepted. After six (6) months of
the life insurance of Marian. Art. 40 NCC pregnancy, the fetus was born and baptized
personality; but the conceived child after birth. Ricky sought to recover the P 1
shall be considered born for all purposes Million. Is Ricky entitled to recover?
To be considered born, the fetus that Roberta may validly own a house in
had an intrauterine life of less than Australia, following the principle of lex
seven (7) months should live for 24 rei sitae enshrined in Art. 16, NCC,
hours from its complete delivery from which states "Real property as well as
the mother’s womb. Since Angela had an personal property is subject to the law of
intrauterine life of less than seven (7) the country where it is situated."
months but did not live for 24 hours, she Moreover, even assuming that legal
was not considered born and, therefore, capacity of Roberta in entering the
person, she has no juridical capacity to Philippine Law, she will acquire
be a donee, hence, the donation to her ownership over the property bought until
did not take effect. The donation not the contract is annulled.
Capacity: Legal Capacity; Lex Rei Sitae upon the citizens of the Philippines,
even though living abroad (Art. 15, NCC).
(2007)
The age of majority under Philippine law
No.VII. Write "TRUE" if the statement is is 18 years (R.A. No. 6809); hence,
true or "FALSE" if the statement is false. If Roberta, being only 17 years old, has no
the statement is FALSE, state the reason. legal capacity to acquire and own land.
(2% each).
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 13 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Correction of Entries; Clerical Error Act the Rules of Court because said changes
No. IV. Gianna was born to Andy and (B). Instead of a judicial action, can
Aimee, who at the time Gianna's birth were administrative proceedings be brought for
not married to each other. While Andy was the purpose of making the above
single at the time, Aimee was still in the corrections? (2%)
process of securing a judicial declaration of
nullity on her marriage to her ex-husband. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(A). Can a judicial action for correction of registrar or the consul general to correct
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Nationality Principle (2009)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 14 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 15 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
cannot, for instance, order the Civil petitioner and his transactions in the
Registrar in the Philippines to change its Philippines. The Philippine court can
records. The judgment of the New York never acquire jurisdiction over the
court allowing a change in the name of custodian in the US of the records of the
the petitioner will be limited to the petitioner. Moreover, change of name
records of the petitioner in New York has nothing to do with the legal capacity
and the use of her new name in all or status of the alien. Since Philippine
transactions in New York. Since the records and transactions are the only
records and processes in New York are ones affected, the Philippine court may
the only ones affected, the New York effect the change only in accordance
court will apply New YorK law in with the laws governing those records
resolving the petition. and transactions that law cannot be but
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: Philippine law.
Philippine law shall apply (Art 15, NCC). ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Status, conditions, family rights and U.S. law shall apply as it is his national
duties are governed by Philippine laws as law. This is pursuant to the application
to Filipinos even though sojourning of lex patriae or the nationality
abroad. principle, by which his legal status is
ALTENATIVE ANSWER: governed by national law, the matter of
If Ligaya, a Filipino, files a petition for change of name being included in the
change of name with the District Court legal status. The Supreme Court has
of New YoRk, the laws of New York will reiterate in several cases, that the lex
govern since change of name is not one patriae as provided in Article 15 of the
of those covered by the principles of Civil Code is applicable to foreign
nationality. nationals in determining their legal
status (supra).
(B). If Henry, an American citizen residing
in the Philippines, files a petition for change Conflict of Laws
of name before a Philippine court, what law
shall apply? Explain. (2%) Processual Presumption (2009)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No.I. TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the
Philippine law will apply. The petition
statement is true, or FALSE if the
for change of name in the Philippines
statement is false. Explain your answer in
will affect only the records of the
not more than two (2) sentences.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 16 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
resolve an issue is not proven as a fact, party should not be left without remedy
the court of the forum may presume that in a forum even though the application
the foreign law is the same as the law of of the foreign law by the courts of the
Adoption
Jurisdiction; Courts may Assume
Jurisdiction over Conflict of Laws Cases
Adoption; Termination; Death of Adopter
(2010)
(2009)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 17 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
have been complied with and the case is Adoption; Illegitimate Child (2010)
already submitted for resolution, the
court may grant the petition and issue a No.VIII. Spouses Rex and Lea bore two
decree of adoption despite the death of children now aged 14 and 8. During the
the adopter (Section 13, RA 8552). subsistence of their marriage, Rex begot a
proceedings.
On Lea’s discovery of Rex’s fathering a child
(B). Will your answer be the same if it was by another woman, she filed a petition for
Dolly who died during the pendency of the legal separation which was granted.
who dies before the decree is issued, it is still adopt his illegitimate child? Explain.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 18 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 19 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Yes, there is a legal obstacle to the legal Can John file the petition for adoption? If
adoption of Amy by Andrew. Under Sec. yes, what are the requirements? If no, why?
9(d) of RA 8552, the New Domestic
(5%)
Adoption Act of 1998, the written
consent of the illegitimate SUGGESTED ANSWER:
sons/daughters, ten (10) years of age or
No, John cannot file the petition to
over, of the adopter, if living with said
adopt alone. Philippine law requires
adopter and the latter's spouse, if any, is
husband and wife to adopt jointly except
necessary to the adoption. All the
on certain situations enumerated in the
children of Andrew are living with him.
law. The case of John does not fall in
Andrew needs to get the written consent
any of the exceptions (R.A. 8552).
of Jon, Ryan, Vina and Wilma, who are
all ten (10) years old or more. Sandy's Family Code
consent to Amy's adoption is not
necessary because she was not legally Marriage; Annulment; Grounds (2009)
adopted by Andrew. Jane's consent is
likewise not necessary because she is No.XII. Emmanuel and Margarita, American
not a child of Andrew. Sandy, an orphan citizens and employees of the U.S. State
since birth, is eligible for adoption under Department, got married in the African
Sec. 8(f) of RA 8552, provided that state of Kenya where sterility is a ground
Andrew obtains the written consent of for annulment of marriage. Thereafter, the
the other children mentioned above, spouses were assigned to the U.S. Embassy
including Amy and Elena obtains the in Manila. On the first year of the spouses’
written consent of Jane, if she is over tour of duty in the Philippines, Margarita
ten years old (Sec. 9(d), RA 8552). filed an annulment case against Emmanuel
before a Philippine court on the ground of
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 20 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
her husband’s sterility at the time of the shall be determined by applying Kenyan
celebration of the marriage. law and not Philippine law.
(B). Assume Emmanuel and Margarita are However, while Kenyan law governs the
both Filipinos. After their wedding in formal validity of the marriage, the legal
Kenya, they come back and take up capacity of the Filipino parties to the
residence in the Philippines. Can their marriage is governed not by Kenyan law
marriage be annulled on the ground of but by Philippine law (Article 15, NCC).
Emmanuel’s sterility? Explain. (3%) Sterility of a party as a ground for the
annulment of the marriage is not a
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
matter of form but a matter of legal
No, the marriage cannot be annulled
capacity. Hence, the Philippine court
under the Philippine law. Sterility is not
must apply Phillippine law in
a ground for annulment of marriage
determining the status of the marriage
under Article 45 of the Family Code.
on the ground of absence or defect in the
legal capacity of the Filipino parties.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Since sterility does not constitute
No, the marriage cannot be annulled in
absence or defect in the legal capacity of
the Philippines.
the parties under Philippine law, there is
no ground to avoid or annul the
The Philippine court shall have
marriage. Hence, the Philippine court
jurisdiction over the action to annul the
has to deny the petition.
marriage not only because the parties
are residents of the Philippines but
because they are Filipino citizens. The
Philippine court, however, shall apply Marriage; Annulment; Grounds (2007)
the law of the place where the marriage
was celebrated in determining its formal No. VII. Write "TRUE" if the statement is
validity (Article 26, FC; Article 17, NCC). true or "FALSE" if the statement is false. If
the statement is FALSE, state the reason.
Since the marriage was celebrated in (2% each).
Kenya in accordance with Kenyan law,
the formal validity of such marriage is (4). The day after John and Marsha got
governed by Kenyan law and any issue as married, John told her that he was
to the formal validity of that marriage impotent. Marsha continued to live with
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 21 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
John for 2 years. Marsha is now estopped No, I do not agree. There are others who
from filing an annulment case against may file a petition for declaration of
John. nullity such as the other spouse in
bigamous marriages.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
consummate is a valid ground for the During the pendency of the case, the couple
was existing at the time of the marriage, dissolve their absolute community of
continues and appears to be incurable. property. B ceded his right to their house
The marriage may be annulled on this and lot and all his shares in two business
ground within five years from its firms to G and their two children, aged 18
agree? Explain your answer. (5%) day-to-day living expenses and upkeep of
the children. The Court approved the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: spouses’ agreement on September 8, 2000.
Yes, I agree. Under the rules Suppose the business firms suffered
promulgated by the Supreme Court, a reverses, rendering G unable to support
direct action for declaration of nullity herself and the children. Can G still ask for
may only be filed by any of the spouses. support pendente lite from B? Explain. (3%)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 22 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
SUGGESTED ANSRWER :
Yes, the two children can still ask for
support for schooling or training for
As to Wilma, the divorced obtained by
some professions, trade or vocation,
her is recognized as valid in the
even beyond the age of majority until
Philippines because she is now a
they shall have finished or completed
foreigner. Philippine personal laws do
their education (Article 194, Paragraph
not apply to a foreigner. However,
2, Family Code; Javier v. Lucero, 94
recognition of the divorce as regards
Phil. 634 {1954}].Their having
Harry will depend on the applicability to
squandered the money given to them for
his case of the second paragraph of
their education will not deprive them of
Article 26 of the Family Code. If it is
their right to complete an education, or
applicable, divorce is recognized as to
to extinguish the obligation of the
him and, therefore, he can remarry.
parents to ensure the future of their
However, if it is not applicable, divorce
children.
is not recognized as to him and,
consequently, he cannot remarry.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 23 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
In Republic v. Obrecido, however, the
Supreme Court ruled that a Filipino
I will advice Harry to:
spouse is given the capacity to remarry
even though the spouse who obtained
Dissolve and liquidate his property
the divorce was a Filipino at the time of
relations with Wilma ; and
the marriage, if the latter was already a
foreigner when the divorce was already
If he will remarry, file a petition for the
obtained abroad. According to the court,
recognition and enforcement of the
to rule otherwise will violate the equal
foreign judgment of divorced (Rule
protection clause of the Constitution.
39,Rules of Court ).
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 24 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Cipriano later learned all about this proving only that the foreign spouse has
including the fact that Lady Miros has obtained a divorce against her or him
divorced him in America and that she had abroad. (1%)
remarried there. He then filed a petition for
authority to remarry, invoking Par. 2, Art. SUGGESTED ANSWER :
(2012)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 25 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
the commission of the latest act of before you is a Petition for the Declaration
liaison is a ground for legal separation. the Family Code)filed by Maria against Neil.
Maria claims that Neil is psychologically
incapacitated to comply with the essential
obligations of marriage because Neil is a
Marriage; Legal Separation; Prescription
drunkard, a womanizer, a gambler, and a
(2007)
mama's boy- traits that she never knew or
No.VII. Write "TRUE" if the statement is saw when Neil was courting her. Although
summoned, Neil did not answer Maria's
true or "FALSE" if the statement is false. If
petition and never appeared in court.
the statement is FALSE, state the reason.
(2% each).
To support her petition, Maria presented
three witnesses- herself, Dr. Elsie Chan,
(2). If a man commits several acts of sexual
and Ambrosia. Dr. Chan testified on the
infidelity, particularly in 2002, 2003, 2004,
psychological report on Neil that she
2005, the prescriptive period to file for legal
prepared. Since Neil never acknowledged
separation runs from 2002.
n9r responded to her invitation for
SUGGESTED ANSWER: interviews, her report is solely based on her
interviews with Maria and the spouses'
FALSE. The five-year prescriptive period minor children. Dr. Chan concluded that
for filing legal separation runs from the Neil is suffering from Narcissistic
occurrence of sexual infidelity Personality Disorder, an ailment that she
committed in 2002 runs from 2002, for found to be already present since Neil's
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 26 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
early adulthood and one that is grave and mere conclusions. Being a drunkard, a
incurable. Maria testified on the specific womanizer, a gambler and a mama’s boy,
instances when she found Neil drunk, with merely shows Neil’s failure to perform
another woman, or squandering the his marital obligations. In a number of
family's resources in a casino. Ambrosia, cases, the Supreme Court did not find
the spouses' current household help, the existence of psychological incapacity
corroborated Maria's testimony. in cases where the respondent showed
habitual drunkenness (Republic v.
On the basis of the evidence presented, will Melgar, G.R. No. 139676, 2006), blatant
you grant the petition? (8%) display of infidelity and irresponsibility
(Dedel v. CA, 2004) or being hooked to
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
gambling and drugs (Republic v. Tanyag-
San Jose, G.R. No. 168328, 2007).
No. The petition should be denied.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The psychological incapacity under Art.
36 of the Family Code must be
Yes. The petition should be granted.
characterized by (a) gravity, (b) juridical
antecedence, and (c) incurability. It is The personal medical or psychological
not enough to prove that the parties examination of respondent is not a
failed to meet their responsibilities and requirement for declaration of
duties as married persons; it is essential psychological incapacity. It is the
that they must be shown to be incapable totality of the evidence presented which
of doing so, due to some physiological shall determine the existence of
(not physical) illness (Republic v. CA and psychological incapacity (Marcos v.
Molina, G.R. No. 108763, Feb 13, 1997). Marcos, G.R. No. 136490, Oct 19, 2000).
Dr. Chan’s report corroborated by
In this case, the pieces of evidence
Maria’s and Ambrosia’s testimonies,
presented are not sufficient to conclude
therefore, sufficiently prove Neil’s
that indeed Neil is suffering from
psychological incapacity to assume his
psychological incapacity [Narcissistic
marital obligations.
Personality Disorder] existing already
before the marriage, incurable and
serious enough to prevent Neil from
performing his essential marital
obligations. Dr. Chan’s report contains
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 27 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
not able to personally examine the sweethearts. When Roderick was 18 and
respondent and the psychological report Faye, 16 years old, they started to live
was based only on the narration of together as husband and wife without the
granted? Explain. (5%) years of age, her parents forcibly took her
back and arranged for her marriage to Brad.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Although Faye lived with Brad after the
marriage, Roderick continued to regularly
The annulment cannot be guaranteed
visit Faye while Brad was away at work.
solely on the basis of the psychological
During their marriage, Faye gave birth to a
report. For the report to prove the
baby girl, Laica. When Faye was 25 years old,
psychological incapacity of the
Brad discovered her continued liason with
respondent, it is required that the
Roderick and in one of their heated
psychologist should personally examine
arguments, Faye shot Brad to death. She lost
the respondent and the psychological
no time in marrying her true love Roderick,
report should be based on the
without a marriage license, claiming that they
psychologist’s independent assessment
have been continuously cohabiting for more
of the facts as to whether or not the
than 5 years.
respondent is psychologically
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 28 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
necessary for the marriage of a man and reqiured to submit the required certificate
a woman who have lived together as of capacity to marry from the German
husband and wife for at least 5 years and Embassy in Manila, Adolf stated in the
without any legal impediment to marry application for marriage license that he was
each other. In Republic v. Dayot, G.R. a Filipino citizen. With the marriage license
No. 175581, 28 March 2008, reiterating stating that Adolf was a Filipino, the couple
the doctrine in Niñal v. Bayadog, G.R. got married in a ceremony officiated by the
No. 133778, 14 March 2000, this five- Parish Priest of Calamba, Laguna in a
year period is characterized by beach in Nasugbu, Batangas, as the local
exclusivity and continuity. In the parish priest refused to solemnize
present case, the marriage of Roderick marriages except in his church. Is the
and Faye cannot be considered as a marriage valid? Explain fully. (5%)
marriage of exceptional character,
because there were 2 legal impediments SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Marriage; Subsequent Marriage (2008) the absent spouse was already dead, and
present spouse instituted a summary
No. I. Ana Rivera had a husband, a Filipino proceeding for the declaration of the
citizen like her, who was among the presumptive death of absent spouse.
passengers on board a commercial jet plane Otherwise, the second marriage shall be
which crashed in the Atlantic Ocean ten null and void. In the instant case, the
years earlier and had never been heard of husband of Ana was among the
ever since. Believing that her husband had passengers on board a commercial jet
died, Ana married Adolf Cruz Staedtler, a plane which crashed in the Atlantic
divorced German national born of a Ocean. The body of the deceased
German father and a Filipino mother husband was not recovered to confirm
residing in Stuttgart. To avoid being his death. Thus, following Art. 41, Ana
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 29 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
should have first secured a judicial while Jane is a child of Elena from a
declaration of his presumptive death previous relationship. Thus, their
before she married Adolf. The absence of marriage is not one of the prohibited
the said judicial declaration marriages enumerated under Art. 38 of
incapacitated Ana from contracting her the FC.
second marriage, making it void ab
initio.
years old. His second, with Carla, produced was 15 years old. Thereafter, Amor met
two sons: Jon and Ryan. His third, with David and they got married when she was
Donna, bore him no children although 20 years old. David had a son, Julian, with
Elena has a daughter Jane, from a previous his ex-girlfriend Sandra. Julian and Thelma
Yes. Jon and Jane can marry each other; No. III. In December 2000, Michael and
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 30 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
license, went to the Office of the Mayor of impediment for them to validity marry
Urbano, Bulacan, to get married. The Mayor each other.
was not there, but the Mayor’s secretary
asked Michael and Anna and their witnesses
to fill up and sign the required marriage Marriage; Void Marriages; Status of
contract forms. The secretary then told them Children (2009)
to wait, and went out to look for the Mayor
who was attending a wedding in a neighboring No. III. In December 2000, Michael and Anna,
and Anna that they were already married. Mayor at the wedding reception, she
Thereafter, the couple lived together as showed him the marriage contract forms
husband and wife, and had three sons. and told him that the couple and their
witnesses were waiting in his office. The
(C). What property regime governs the Mayor forthwith signed all the copies of the
properties acquired by the couple? Explain. marriage contract, gave them to the
(2%) secretary who returned to the Mayor’s
office. She then gave copies of the marriage
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
contract to the parties, and told Michael
and Anna that they were already married.
The marriage being void, the property
Thereafter, the couple lived together as
relationship that governed their union is
husband and wife, and had three sons.
special co-ownership under Article 147
of the Family Code. This is on the (A). Is the marriage of Michael and Anna
assumption that there was no valid, voidable, or void? Explain your
answer. (3%)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 31 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
SUGGESTED ANSWER : (C). When Rona reaches seven (7) years old,
she tells Rodolfo that she prefers to live
The marriage is void because the formal with him, because he is better off
requisite of marriage ceremony was financially than Nanette. If Rodolfo files an
absent ( Art.3, F.C. 209, Family Code). action for the custody of Rona, alleging that
he is Rona’s choice as custodial parent, will
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: the court grant Rodolfo’s petition? Why or
The marriage is void because an why not? (2%)
essential requisite was absent: consent
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
of the parties freely given in the
No, because Rodolfo has no parental
presence of the solemnizing officer (Art .
authority over Rona. He who has the
2, FC).
parental authority has the right to
(B). What is the status of the three children custody. Under the Family Code, the
of Michael and Anna? Explain your answer. mother alone has parental authority over
(2%) the illegitimate child. This is true even if
illegitimate father recognized the child
SUGGESTED ANSWER: and even though he is giving support for
The children are illegitimate, having the child. To acquire custody over Rona,
been born outside a valid marriage. Rodolfo should first deprive Nanette of
parental authority if there is ground
under the law, and in a proper court
Parental Authority; Illegitimate Minor proceedings. In the same action, the
Child (2009) court may award custody of Rona to
Rodolfo if it is for her best interest.
No.XIV. Rodolfo, married to Sharon, had an
illicit affair with his secretary, Nanette, a
19-year old girl, and begot a baby girl,
Parental Authority; In Vitro Fertilization
Rona. Nanette sued Rodolfo for damages:
(2010)
actual, for hospital and other medical
expenses in delivering the child by No.VI. Gigolo entered into an agreement
caesarean section; moral, claiming that with Majorette for her to carry in her womb
Rodolfo promised to marry her, his baby via in vitro fertilization. Gigolo
representing that he was single when, in undertook to underwrite Majorette’s pre-
fact, he was not; and exemplary, to teach a natal expenses as well as those attendant
lesson to like-minded Lotharios.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 32 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
to her delivery. Gigolo would thereafter pay in Parañaque. After four (4) years or in
Majorette P2 million and, in return, she 2001, G having completed her 4-year
would give custody of the baby to him. college degree as a fulltime student, she
and B contracted marriage without a
After Majorette gives birth and delivers the license.
baby to Gigolo following her receipt of P2
million, she engages your services as her The marriage of B and G was, two years
lawyer to regain custody of the baby. later, declared null and void due to the
absence of a marriage license.
Who of the two can exercise parental
authority over the child? Explain. (2.5%) (B). Is Venus legitimate, illegitimate, or
legitimated? Explain briefly. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Majorette, the mother, can exercise
parental authority. Since the child was Venus is illegitimate. She was conceived
born out of wedlock, the child is and born outside a valid marriage. Thus,
illegitimate and the mother has the she is considered illegitimate (Art 165,
exclusive parental authority and custody Family Code). While Venus was
over the child. legitimated by the subsequent marriage
of her parents, such legitimation was
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
rendered ineffective when the said
Gigolo can exercise parental authority marriage was later on declared null and
over the child. Majorette has no blood void due to absence of a marriage
relation to the child. She is just a license.
“carrier” of the child.
Under Article 178 of the Family Code,
“legitimation shall take place by a
subsequent valid marriage between
Paternity & Filiation; Child Born Under a parents. The annulment of a voidable
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 33 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
subsequent marriage is null or void, the action to impugn, B can pray for the
legitimation must also be null and void. correction of the status of the said
In the present problem, the marriage daughter in her record of birth.
between B and G was not voidable but
void. Hence, Venus has remained an (B). If B acquiesces to the use of his
No.IV. Spouses B and G begot two action to impugn the legitimacy of the
offsprings. Albeit they had serious child within the prescriptive period for
continued to live under one roof. B begot a Code, G's daughter by another man shall
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 34 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
million, she engages your services as her No, he cannot. Both he and Majorette are
lawyer to regain custody of the baby. guilty of violating the provision of the
Anti-Child Abuse Law (RA7610) on child
What legal action can you file on behalf of trafficking. Being in pari delicto, the
Majorette? Explain. (2.5%) partners shall be left where they are and
Gigolo cannot demand the return of what
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
he paid.
As her lawyer, I can file a petition for
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
habeas corpus on behalf Majorette to
recover custody of her child. Since she is Yes. The agreement between Gigolo and
the mother of the child that was born Majorette is a valid agreement.
out of wedlock, she has exclusive
parental authority and custody over the Is the child entitled to support and
child. Gigolo, therefore, has no right to inheritance from Gigolo? Explain. (2.5%)
return of the P2 million if he returns the No. III. Roderick and Faye were high school
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 35 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
benefit of marriage. When Faye reached 18 March 2002, the Supreme Court ruled
years of age, her parents forcibly took her that impugning the legitimacy of the
back and arranged for her marriage to Brad. child is a strictly personal right of
Although Faye lived with Brad after the husband, except: (a) when the husband
marriage, Roderick continued to regularly died before the expiration of the period
visit Faye while Brad was away at work. fixed for bringing the action; (b) if he
During their marriage, Faye gave birth to a should die after the filing of the
baby girl, Laica. When Faye was 25 years old, complaint, without having desisted
Brad discovered her continued liason with therefrom, or (c) if the child was born
Roderick and in one of their heated after the death of the husband. Laica's
arguments, Faye shot Brad to death. She lost case does not fall under any of the
no time in marrying her true love Roderick, exceptions.
without a marriage license, claiming that they
have been continuosly cohabiting for more (D). Can Laica be legitimated by the
(2%)
No. Laica cannot be legitimated by the
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 36 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 37 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
their own. Sandy was orphaned as a baby Paternity & Filiation; Use of Surname;
and was entrusted to them by the midwife Illegitimate Child (2009)
who attended to Sandy's birth. All the
children, including Amy, now live with No.XIV. Rodolfo, married to Sharon, had an
(C). Can Amy, Jon, Ryan, Vina, Wilma, and SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Sandy legally claim support from each No. he has no right to compel Rona to
other? (2%) use his surname. The law does not give
him the right simply because he gave her
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
support (RA 9255).
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 38 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
compel Rona, if already of age, to use They are not related at all to Edilberto.
the surname against her will. If Rona is They were born during the marriage of
still a minor, to use the surname of Conrado and Clarita, hence, are
Rodolfo will require the consent of considered legitimate children of the
Rona's mother who has sole parental said spouses. This status is conferred on
authority over her. them at birth by law.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 39 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(B). If there is no marriage settlement, the more than the value of the land, the
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 40 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 41 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Yes, the trial court was correct. At the Borromeo discovered that titles to the three
time the petitions for adoptions were lots have been transfereed in the name of
filed, petitioner had already remarried. Descallar. Who is the rightful owner of the
Under the law, husband and wife shall properties? Explain. (5%)
adopt jointly, except in the cases
enumerated in the law. The adoption SUGGESTED ANSWER:
and lived together with Descallar and them in equal shares even though all the
bought their houses and lots at Agro-Macro funds used in acquiring the properties
Subdivision. In the Contracts to Sell, came only from the salaries or wages, or
Jambrich and Descallar were referred to as the income of Jambrich from his
the buyers. When the Deed of Absolute Sale business or profession. In such case,
was presented for registration before the while Jambrich is disqualified to own
Register of Deeds, it was refused because any part of the properties, his
Jambrich was an alien and could not subsequent transfer of all his interest
separated, Jambrich purchased an engine In such case, the properties are owned
and some accessories for his boat from by Borromeo and Descallar in equal
rights and interests in the Agro-Macro If, on the other hand, Jambrich and
properties to Borromeo.
Descallar were not capacitated to marry
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 42 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 43 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
1/3 of the house and lot is owned by
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 44 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
The answer is the same as in letter A. in Parañaque. After four (4) years or in
Since the parties to the marriage which 2001, G having completed her 4-year
was later declared void ab initio were college degree as a fulltime student, she
capacitated to marry each other, the and B contracted marriage without a
applicable law under the New Civil Code license.
was Article 144.This Article is
substantially the same as Article 147 of The marriage of B and G was, two years
the Family Code. later, declared null and void due to the
absence of a marriage license.
Hence, the determination of ownership
will remain the same as in question A. (A). If you were the judge who declared the
And even assuming that the two nullity of the marriage, to whom would you
provisions are not the same, Article 147 award the lot? Explain briefly. (3%)
of the Family Code is still the law that
will govern the property relations of B SUGGESTED ANSWER:
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 45 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
showing that one party was in bad faith. Ruffa in his will as a devisee of a parcel of
Hence, both shall be presumed in good land which he owned. The will imposed
faith and no forfeiture shall take place. upon Ruffa the obligation of preseving the
land and transferring it, upon her death, to
her illegitimate daughter Scarlet who was
then only one year old. Raymond later died,
leaving behind his widowed mother, Ruffa
and Scarlet.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 46 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(A). Is the condition imposed upon Ruffa, to Ruffa (Art. 992, Civil Code). Moreover,
preserve the property and to transmit it Scarlet is not a compulsory heir of
upon her death to Scarlet, valid? (1%) Raymond, hence she can inherit only by
testamentary succession. Since
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Raymond executed a will in the case at
bar, Scarlet may inherit from Raymond.
Yes, the condition imposed upon Ruffa
to preserve the property and to transmit
it upon her death to Scarlet is valid
because it is tantamount to Heirs; Intestate Succession; Legitime;
fideicommissary substitution under Art. Computation (2010)
863 of the Civil Code.
No.XI. The spouses Peter and Paula had
(B). If Scarlet predeceases Ruffa, who three (3) children. Paula later obtained a
inherits the property? (2%) judgment of nullity of marriage. Their
absolute community of property having
SUGGESTED ANSWER: been dissolved, they delivered P1 million to
each of their 3 children as their
Ruffa will inherit the property as
presumptive legitimes.
Scarlet's heir. Scarlet acquires a right to
the succession from the time of Peter later re-married and had two (2)
Raymond's death, even though she children by his second wife Marie. Peter
should predecease Ruffa (Art. 866, Civil and Marie, having successfully engaged in
Code). business, acquired real properties. Peter
later died intestate.
(C). If Ruffa predeceases Raymond, can
Scarlet inherit the property directly from (A). Who are Peter’s legal heirs and how will
Raymond? (2%) his estate be divided among them? (5%)
If Ruffa predeceases Raymond, The legal heirs of Peter are his children
Raymond's widowed mother will be by the first and second marriages and his
entitled to the inheritance. Scarlet, an surviving second wife.
illegitimate child, cannot inherit the
Their shares in the estate of Peter will
property by intestate succession from
depend, however, on the cause of the
Raymond who is a legitimate relative of
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 47 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
If the ground of nullity is psychological (B). What is the effect of the receipt by
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 48 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(2012)
Heirs; Reserva Troncal (2009)
No.VIII.a) Ricky and Arlene are married.
They begot Franco during their marriage. No. I. TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the
Franco had an illicit relationship with statement is true, or FALSE if the
Audrey and out of which, they begot Arnel. statement is false. Explain your answer in
Frnaco predeceased Ricky, Arlene and not more than two (2) sentences.
Arnel. Before Ricky died, he executed a will
which when submitted to probate was (B).In reservatroncal, all reservatarios (reser
opposed by Arnel on the ground that he vees) inherit as a class and in equal shares
should be given the share of his father, regardless of their proximity in degree to
Why? (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
While Arnel is a legal heir of Franco, he ascending ,the nearer excludes the more
remote, the nephews and nieces exclude
is not a legal heir of Ricky because under
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 49 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
the uncles and the aunts, and half blood (1). The wife of Ramon will, therefore,
relatives inherit half the share of full- receive one half (½) of the estate or the
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 50 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Intestate Succession (2008) (D). How should the house and lot, and the
cash be distributed? (1%)
No.X. Arthur executed a will which contained
only: (i) a provision disinheriting his daughter SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Bernica for running off with a married man,
and (ii) a provision disposing of his share in Since the probate of the will cannot be
the family house and lot in favor of his other allowed, the rules on intestate
children Connie and Dora. He did not make succession apply. Under Art. 996 of the
any provisions in favor of his wife Erica, Civil Code, if a widow or widower and
because as the will stated, she would anyway legitimate children or descendants are
get ½ of the house and lot as her conjugal left, the surviving spouse has the same
share. The will was very brief and share as of the children. Thus, ownership
straightforward and both the above provisions over the house and lot will be created
were contained in page 1, which Arthur and among wife Erica and her children
his instrumental witness, signed at the Bernice, Connie and Dora. Similarly, the
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 51 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
twins, Hans and Gretel, with his girlfriend, also of the person from whom the person
Fiona. In 2005, Anna, Larry and Cherry being represented was supposed to
died in a car accident. In 2007, Ramon inherit. While Shelly is a legal heir of
died. Who may inherit from Ramon and Cherry, Shelly is not a legal heir of
who may not? Give your reason briefly. Ramon. Adoption created a purely
(10%) personal legal relation only between
Cherry and Shelly.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(2). Hans and Gretel are barred from
The following may inherit from Ramon: inheriting from Ramon under Art. 992,
NCC. Being illegitimate children, they
(1). Michelle, as an adopted child of
cannot inherit ab intestao from Ramon.
Ramon, will inherit as a legitimate child
of Ramon. As an adopted child, Michelle ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
has all the rights of a legitimate child
(Sec 18, Domestic Adoption Law). The problem expressly mentioned the
dates of the adoption of Cherry and
(2). Lia will inherit in representation of Michelle as 1971 and 1972. During that
Anna. Although Lia is an illegitimate time, adoption was governed by the New
child, she is not barred by Articles 992, Civil Code. Under the New Civil Code,
because her mother Anna is an husband and wife were allowed to adopt
illegitimate herself. She will represent separately or not jointly with the other
Anna as regards Anna's legitime under spouse. And since the problem does not
Art. 902, NCC and as regards Anna's specifically and categorically state, it is
intestate share under Art. 990, NCC. possible to construe the use of the word
"respectively" in the problem as
The following may not inherit from
indicative of the situation that Cherry
Ramon:
was adopted by Ramon alone and
Michelle was adopted by Dessa alone. In
(1). Shelly, being an adopted child, she
such case of separate adoption the
cannot represent Cherry. This is because
alternative answer to the problem will be
adoption creates a personal legal relation
as follows: Only Lia will inherit from
only between the adopter and the
Ramon in representation of Ramon's
adopted. The law on representation
illegitimate daughter Anna. Although Lia
requires the representative to be a legal
is an illegitimate child, she is not barred
heir of the person he is representing and
from inheriting from Ramon because her
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 52 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
No.VIII.b) How can RJP distribute his estate The mother and twin sons are entitled to
by will, if his heirs are JCP, his wife; HBR inherit from Ernesto. Art. 991 of the
and RVC, his parents; and an illegitimate Civil Code, provides that if legitimate
child, SGO?
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 53 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
ascendants are left, the twin sons shall The attestation clause stated the will was
divide the inheritance with them taking signed on the same occasion by Arthur and
one-half of the estate. Thus, the widowed his instrumental witnesses who all signed
mother gets P50,000.00 while the twin in the presence of each other, and the
sons shall receive P25,000.00 each. The notary public who notarized the will. There
common-law wife cannot inherit from are no marginal signatures or pagination
him because when the law speaks "widow appearing on any of the 3 pages. Upon his
or widower" as a compulsory heir, the death, it was discovered that apart from the
law refers to a legitimate spouse (Art. house and lot, he had a P 1 million account
887, par 3, Civil Code). deposited with ABC bank.
No.X. Arthur executed a will which contained Erica cannot be preterited. Art. 854 of
only: (i) a provision disinheriting his daughter the Civil Code provides that only
Bernica for running off with a married man, compulsory heirs in the direct line can
and (ii) a provision disposing of his share in be preterited.
the family house and lot in favor of his other
children Connie and Dora. He did not make (B). What other defects of the will, if any,
any provisions in favor of his wife Erica, can cause denial of probate? (2%)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 54 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
No. 122880, 12 Apr 2006 and cited cases (B). Between Marian and the baby, who is
therein, Art 805 and 806, Civil Code). presumed to have died ahead? (1%)
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
No. II. At age 18, Marian found out that she
was pregnant. She insured her own life and
The baby is presumed to have died ahead
named her unborn child as her sole
of Marian. Under Par. 5, rule 131, Sec. 5
beneficiary. When she was already due to
of the Rules of Court, if one is under 15
give birth, she and her boyfriend Pietro, the
or above 60 and the age of the other is in
father of her unboarn child, were
between 15 and 60, the latter is
kidnapped in a resort in Bataan where they
presumed to have survived. In the
were vacationing. The military gave chase
instant case, Marian was already 18
and after one week, they were found in an
when she found out that she was
abandoned hut in Cavite. Marian and Pietro
pregnant. She could be of the same age
were hacked with bolos. Marian and the
or maybe 19 years of age when she gave
baby delivered were both found dead, with
birth.
the baby's umbilical cord already cut. Pietro
survived. (C). Will Pietro, as surviving biological
father of the baby, be entitled to claim the
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 55 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Marilyn is now claiming for herself and her Since succession is not involved as
children her husband’s share in the estate regards the insurance contract, the
left by Dr. Lopez, and her husband’s share provisions of the Rules of Court (Rule
in the proceeds of Dr. Lopez’s life insurance 131, Sec. 3 , [jj] [5] ) on survivorship
policy. Rule on the validity of Marilyn’s shall apply. Under the Rules, Dr. Lopez,
claims with reasons. (4%) who was 70 years old, is presumed to
have died ahead of Roberto who is
SUGGESTED ANSWER :
presumably between the ages 15 and 60.
Having survived the insured, Roberto's
As to the Estate of Dr. Lopez:
right as a beneficiary became vested
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 56 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
upon the death of Dr. Lopez. When should be given effect must be denied.
Roberto died after Dr. Lopez, his right to The said cancellation has revoked the
receive the insurance became part of his entire will as nothing remains of the will
hereditary estate, which in turn was after the name of Rosa was cancelled.
inherited in equal shares by his legal Such cancellation is valid revocation of
heirs, namely, his spouse and children. the will and does not require
Therefore, Roberto's children and his authentication by the full signature of
spouse are entitled to Roberto's one- the testator to be effective.
third share in the insurance proceeds.
However, if the cancellation of Rosa’s
name was not done by the testator
himself, such cancellation shall not be
effective and the will in its original tenor
Wills; Holographic Wills; Insertions & shall remain valid. The effectively of the
Cancellations (2012) holographic will cannot be left to the
mercy of unscrupulous third parties.
No.VII.a) Natividad’s holographic will, which
The writing of Gregorio’s name as sole
had only one (1) substantial provision, as
heir was ineffective, even though written
first written, named Rosa as her sole heir.
by the testator himself, because such is
However, when Gregorio presented it for
an alteration that requires
probate, it already contained an alteration,
authentication by the full signature of
naming Gregorio, instead of Rosa, as sole
heir, but without authentication by the testator to be valid and effective. Not
authentication. She claims that the (Kalaw v. Relova, G.R. No. L-40207, Sept
name in the will was done by the Fuentes executed a holographic will,
testator himself, Rosa’s claimed that the wherein he gave nothing to his recognized
holographic will in its original tenor illegitimate son, Jay. Dr. Fuentes left for the
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 57 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
United States, passed the New York medical court shall apply the New Civil Code in
licensure examinations, resided therein, determining the formal validity of the
and became a naturalized American citizen. holographic will. The subsequent change
He died in New York in 2007. The laws of in the citizenship of Dr. Fuentes did not
New York do not recognize holographic wills affect the law governing the validity of
or compulsory heirs. his will. Under the new Civil Code, which
was the law used by Dr. Fuentes, the law
(A). Can the holographic will of Dr. Fuentes
enforced at the time of execution of the
be admitted to probate in the Philippines? will shall govern the formal validity of
Why or why not? (3%) the will (Art. 795, NCC).
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(B). Assuming that the will is probated in
Yes, the holographic will of Dr. Fuentes
the Philippines, can Jay validly insist that
may be admitted to probate in the
he be given his legitime? Why or why not?
Philippines because there is no public
(3%)
policy violated by such probate. The only
issue at probate is the due execution of SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the will which includes the formal No, Jay cannot insist because under New
validity of the will. As regards formal York law he is not a compulsory heir
validity, the only issue the court will entitled to a legitime.
resolve at probate is whether or not the
will was executed in accordance with the The national law of the testator
form prescribed by the law observed by determines who his heirs are, the order
the testator in the execution of his will. that they succeed, how much their
observe the law of the place where the is valid (Art 16, NCC). Since, Dr. Fuentes
will was executed (Art 17, NCC), or the was a US citizen, the laws of the New
formalities of the law of the place where York determines who his heirs are. And
he resides, or according to the since the New York law does not
formalities of the law of his own country, recognize the concept of compulsory
or in accordance with the Philippine heirs, Jay is not a compulsory heir of Dr.
Civil Code (Art. 816, NCC). Since Dr. Fuentes entitled to a legitime.
Fuentes executed his will in accordance
with the Philippine law, the Philippine
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 58 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
No. XI. John and Paula, British citizens at No. The testamentary dispositions are
birth, acquired Philippine citizenship by not valid because (a) omission of Mary, a
naturalization after their marriage. During legitimate child, is tantamount to
their marriage the couple acquired preterition which shall annul the
substanial landholdings in London and in institution of Peter and Paul as heirs
Makati. Paula bore John three children, (Art. 854, Civil Code); and, (b) the
Peter, Paul and Mary. In one of their trips disposition that Peter and Paul could not
to London, the couple executed a joint will dispose of nor divide the London estate
appointing each other as their heirs and for more than 20 years is void (Art. 870,
providing that upon the death of the Civil Code).
survivor between them the entire estate
would go to Peter and Paul only but the two
could not dispose of nor divide the London
Wills; Joint Wills; Probate (2012)
estate as long as they live. John and Paul
died tragically in the London Subway
No.VII.b) John Sagun and Maria Carla
terrorist attack in 2005. Peter and Paul
Camua, British citizens at birth, acquired
filed a petition for probate of their parent's
Philippine citizenship by naturalization
will before a Makati Regional Trial Court.
after their marriage. During their marriage,
the couple acquired substantial
(A). Should the will be admitted to probate?
landholdings in London and in Makati.
(2%)
Maria begot three (3) children, Jorge,
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Luisito, and Joshur. In one of their trips to
London, the couple executed a joint will
No. The will cannot be admitted to appointing each other as their heirs and
probate because a joint will is expressly providing that upon the death of the
prohibited under Art. 818 of the Civil survivor between them, the entire estate
Code. This provision applies John and would go to Jorge and Luisito only but the
Paula became Filipino citizens after their two (2) could not dispose of nor divide the
marriage. London estate as long as they live. John
and Maria died tragically in the London
(B). Are the testamentary dispositions subway terrorist attack in 2005. Jorge and
valid? (2%) Luisito filed a petition for probate of their
parents’ will before a Makati Regional Trial
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 59 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Should the will be admitted to probate? valid, the testamentary prohibition on the
division of the London estate shall be valid
Explain. (2%)
but only for 20 years. Under Arts 1083 and
SUGGESTED ANSWER: 494 of the NCC, a testamentary disposition
of the testator cannot forbid the partition of
No, the will should not be admitted to
all or part of the estate for a period longer
probate. Since the couples are both
than twenty (20) years.
Filipino citizens, Art 818 and 819 of the
NCC shall apply. Said articles prohibits
the execution of joint wills and make
them void, even though authorized of Wills; Prohibition to Partition of a Co-
receive nothing in testacy, and the facts not anytime demand the partition of the
do not show that he received anything as house and lot since it was expressly
an advance on his inheritance. He was provided by the decedent in his will that
totally excluded from the inheritance of the same cannot be partitioned while his
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 60 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
matter what his reason maybe. Hence, (B). Act as a witness to a will? (1%)
the three co-heir cannot demand its
partition at anytime but only after 20 SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Wills; Testamentary Disposition; Period
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 61 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
providing that upon the death of the that she can sign her full name later. While
survivor between them the entire estate the will was being signed, Roberta
would go to Peter and Paul only but the two experienced a stomach ache and kept going
could not dispose of nor divide the London to the restroom for long periods of time.
estate as long as they live. John and Paul Hannah, while waiting for her turn to sign
died tragically in the London Subway the will, was reading the 7th Harry Potter
terrorist attack in 2005. Peter and Paul book on the couch, beside the table on
filed a petition for probate of their parent's which everyone was signing. Benjamin,
will before a Makati Regional Trial Court. aside from witnessing the will, also offered
to notarize it. A week after, Clara was run
(C). Is the testamentary prohibition against over by a drunk driver while crossing the
the division of the London estate valid? (2%) street in Greenbelt.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 62 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
451, 1914). Therefore, the testatrix Because the Picasso painting reminded
signed the will in the presence of only Angie of him, Brad in his will bequeathed
two witnesses, and only two witnesses the painting to Angie. Brad died in 1995.
signed the will in the presence of the Saddened by Brad's death, Jennifer asked
testatrix and of one another. for the Picasso painting as a remembrance
of him. Angie refused and claimed that
It is to be noted, however, that the Brad, in his will, bequeathed the painting to
thumb mark intended by the testator to her. Is Angie correct? Why or why not?
be his signature in executing his last will (10%)
and testament is valid (Payad v.
Tolentino, 62 Phil 848, 1936; Matias v. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Salud, L-104 Phil 1046, 23 June, 1958).
The problem, however, states that Clara NO. Angie is not correct. The Picasso
"said that she can sign her full name painting is not given or donated by
later;" Hence, she did not consider her Jennifer to Brad. She merely "placed it
thumb mark as her "complete" signature, in his bedroom." Hence, she is still the
and intended further action on her part. owner of the painting. Not being the
The testatrix and the other witness owner of the Picasso painting, Brad
signed the will in the presence of cannot validly bequeath the same to
Hannah, because she was aware of her Angie (Art. 930, NCC). Even assuming
function and role as witness and was in a that the painting was impliedly given or
position to see the testatrix and the donated by Jennifer to Brad, the
other witnesses sign by merely casting donation is nevertheless void for not
her eyes in the proper direction. being in writing. The Picasso painting
must be worth more than 5,000 pesos.
Donation
Under Art. 748, NCC, the donation and
acceptance of a movable worth more
Donations; Formalities; In Writing (2007)
than 5,000 pesos must be in writing,
No. VIII. In 1986, Jennifer and Brad were otherwise the donation is void. The
madly in love. In 1989, because a certain donation being void, Jennifer remained
Picasso painting reminded Brad of her, the owner of the Picasso painting and
Jennifer acquired it and placed it in his Brad could not have validly disposed of
bedroom. In 1990, Brad and Jennifer broke said painting in favor of Angie in his will.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 63 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
YES. Angie is correct. Even assuming illegal and impossible donations imposed
that there was void donation because the in an onerous donation shall annul the
same was not in writing, Brad was in donation (Art. 1183, NCC). This is so,
uninterrupted possession of the Picasso because onerous donations are governed
painting from 1989 to 1995, lasting for by the law on contracts (Art. 733, NCC).
six (6) years prior to his death. Brad has
already acquired ownership of the
painting through acquisitive
Donation; Inter Vivos (2013)
prescription. Under Art. 1132, NCC,
ownership of movables prescribes
No.V. Josefa executed a deed of donation
through continuous possession for four
covering a one-hectare rice land in favor of
years in good faith and for eight (8) years
her daughter, Jennifer. The deed
without need of other conditions. A void
specifically provides that:
donation may be the basis of possession
in the concept of owner and of just title "For and in consideration of her love
for purposes of acquisitive prescription. and service Jennifer has shown and
given to me, I hereby freely,
voluntarily and irrevocably donate to
her my one-hectare rice land covered
Donations; Illegal & Impossible
by TCT No. 11550, located in San
Conditions (2007)
Fernando, Pampanga. This donation
No.I. Distinguish the following concepts: shall take effect upon my death."
(B). Illegal and impossible conditions in a The deed also contained Jennifer's signed
conditions in an onerous donation. (5%) declaration by Josefa and Jennifer that the
land will remain in Josefa's possession and
SUGGESTED ANSWER: cannot be alienated, encumbered, sold or
disposed of while Josefa is still alive.
Illegal and impossible conditions in a
simple donation are considered as not Advise Jennifer on whether the deed is a
written. Such conditions, shall therefore, donation inter vivos or mortis causa and
be disregarded but the donation remains explain the reasons supporting your advice.
valid (Art. 727, NCC). On the other hand, (8%)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 64 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
donation which state that the same will who are neighbors, lie along the banks of
only take effect upon the death of the the Marikina River. At certain times of the
donor and that there is a prohibition to year, the river would swell and as the water
alienate, encumber, dispose, or sell the recedes, soil, rocks and other materials are
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 65 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
deposited on Jessica's and Jenny's land but is also the consequences of the
properties. This pattern of the river direct and deliberate intervention of
swelling, receding and depositing soil and man, it is man-made accretion and a
other materials being deposited on the part of the public domain (Tiongco v.
neighbors' properties have gone on for Director of Lands, 16 C.A. Rep 211, cited
many years. Knowing his pattern, Jessica in Nazareno v. C.A., G.R. No. 98045, 26
constructed a concrete barrier about 2 June 1996). Thus, Jessica cannot legally
meters from her property line and claim ownership of the additional 2
extending towards the river, so that when meters of land along her property
the water recedes, soil and other materials because she constructed a concrete
are trapped within this barrier. After several barrier about 2 meters from her property
years, the area between Jessica's property causing deposits of soil and other
line to the concrete barrier was completely materials when the water recedes. In
filled with soil, effectively increasing other words, the increase in her property
Jessica's property by 2 meters. Jenny's was not caused by nature but was man-
property, where no barrier was constructed, made.
also increased by one meter along the side
of the river. (B). If Jessica's and Jenny's properties are
registered, will the benefit of such
(A). Can Jessica and Jenny legally claim registration extend to the increased area of
ownership over the additional 2 meters and their properties? (2%)
one meter, respectively, of land deposited
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
along their properties?(2%)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 66 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(C). Assume the two properties are on a cliff Ulpiano built three huts on this additional
adjoining the shore of Laguna Lake. Jessica area, where he and his two married
and Jenny had a hotel built on the children live. On this same area, Ulpiano
properties. They had the erath and rocks and his family planted peanuts, monggo
excavated from the properties dumped on beans and vegetables. Ulpiano also
the adjoining shore, giving rise to a new regularly paid taxes on the land, as shown
patch of dry land. Can they validly lay claim by tax declarations, for over thirty years.
to the patch of land? (2%)
When Marciano learned of the increase in
SUGGESTED ANSWER: the size of the land, he ordered Ulpiano to
demolish the huts, and demanded that he
No. Jessica and Jenny cannot validly lay be paid his share in the proceeds of the
claim to the patch of land because in harvest. Marciano claims that under the
order to acquire land by accretion, there Civil Code, the alluvium belongs to him as a
should be a natural and actual continuity registered riparian owner to whose land the
of the accretion to the land of the accretion attaches, and that his right is
riparian owner caused by natural ebb and enforceable against the whole world.
flow of the current of the river (Delgado
v. Samonte, CA-G.R. No. 34979-R, 10 (A). Is Marciano correct? Explain. (3%)
Aug 1966).
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Marciano’s contention is correct. Since
that accretion was deposited on his land
Accretion; Rights of the Riparian Owner by the action of the waters of the river
(2009) and he did not construct any structure
to increase the deposition of soil and
No.XVI. Marciano is the owner of a parcel of
silt, Marciano automatically owns the
land through which a river runs out into
accretion. His real right of ownership is
the sea. The land had been brought under
enforceable against the whole world
the Torrens System, and is cultivated by
including Ulpiano and his two married
Ulpiano and his family as farmworkers
children. Although Marciano’s land is
therein. Over the years, the river has
registered, the three (3) hectares land
brought silt and sediment from its sources
deposited through accretion was not
up in the mountains and forests so that
automatically registered. As an
gradually the land owned by Marciano
unregistered land, it is subject to
increased in area by three hectares.
acquisitive prescription by third persons.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 67 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 68 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
and options open to them to protect their However, the builder cannot be obliged
interests. (8%) to buy the land if its value is
considerable more than that of the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: building.. In such case, he shall pay
reasonable rent of the owner of the land
Based on the fact as stated, the spouses
does not choose to appropriate the
Dela Cruz as builders and the spouses
building or trees after proper indemnity
Rodriguez as land owners, are both in
(Art 448, Civil Code).
good faith. The spouses Dela Cruz are
builder in good faith because before The house constructed by the spouses
constructing the house they exercised Dela Cruz is considered as a useful
due diligence by asking the Agent of CRC expense, since it increased the value of
the location of the lot A, and they relied the lot. As such, should the spouses
on the information given by the agent Rodriguez decides to appropriate the
who is presumed to know the identity of house, the spouses Dela Cruz are
the lot purchased by the Dela Cruz entitled to the right of retention pending
spouses (Pleasantville v. CA, 253 SCRA reimbursement of the expenses they
10, 1996). On the other hand, there is no incurred or the increase in value which
showing that the land owners, spouse the thing may have acquired by reason
Rodriguez acted in bad faith. The facts of the improvement (Art 546, Civil
do not show that the building was done Code). Thus, the spouses Dela Cruz may
with their knowledge and without demand P1,000,000.00 as payment of
opposition on their part (Art 453, Civil the expenses in building the house or
Code). The good faith is always presumed increase in value of the land because of
(Art. 527, Civil Code). the house as a useful improvement, as
may be determined by the court form
The owner of the land on which anything
the evidence presented during the trial
has been built, sown, or planted in good
(Depra v. Dumlao, 136 SCRA 475, 1985;
faith shall have the right:
Technogas Phils v. CA, 268 SCRA 5,
1997).
to appropriate as his own the works after
payment of the indemnity provided for
in Art 546 and 548, or
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 69 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
No.VII.In 2005, Andres built a residential In light of the engineer's findings and the
house on a lot whose only access to the circumstances of the case, resolve the
national highway was a pathway crossing parties' right of way dispute. (6%)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 70 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Andres is not entitled to the easement of (Pathway B). Second, the right of way
right of way for Pathway A. Pathway B obtained (Pathway A) is not the least
must be used. prejudicial to Brando’s property, as
evidence by the reports of the geodetic
The owner of a dominant estate may
and civil engineer.
validly obtain a compulsory right of way
only after he has established the When there is already an existing
existence of four requisites, to wit: adequate outlet from the dominant
estate to the public highway, even if the
The (dominant) estate is surrounded by said outlet, for one reason or another, be
other immovables and is without inconvenient, the need to open up
adequate outlet to a public highway; another servitude is entirely unjustified
(Costabella Corporation v. CA, G.R. No.
After payment of the proper indemnity;
80511, Jan 25, 1991). The rule that the
The isolation was not due to the easement of right of way shall be
established at the point least prejudicial
proprietor’s own acts; and
to the servient estate is controlling
The right of way claimed is at a point (Quimen v. Quimen and CA, G.R. No.
least prejudicial to the servient estate, 112331, May 29, 1996).
and insofar as consistent with this rule,
(Note: It is not clear from the problem if there
where the distance from the dominant
exists an easement in favor of the lot
estate to the public highway maybe the
belonging to Andres and if Brando’s lot is
shortest (Art 650, civil Code).
burdened as a servient estate by a right of
However, the Supreme Court has way as a servient estate. If there is such an
consistently ruled that in case both easement burdening Brando’s lot, was it
criteria cannot be complied with, the created as legal easement or as a voluntary
right of way shall be established at the easement. If the used pathway was only a
point least prejudicial to the servient tolerance, then Brando may close it. Andres
estate. must ask for the constitution of a legal
easement through Brando’s lot by proving
The first and fourth requisites are not the four requisites required by Art 649 and
complied with. First, there is another 65, Civil Code).
available outlet to the national highway
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 71 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
because Franz had in the meantime sold discontinuous easement, the period of
Lot C to Julia who had it fenced. ten years of non-user, shall be computed
from the day it ceased to be used under
(A). Does Ava have a right to demand from Act 6341 (2) CC.
Julia the activation of her right of way?
Renunciation or waiver of an easement
Explain. (2.5%)
must be specific, clear, express and
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 72 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 73 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(iii). Bank of the Philippine Islands, as present case, Adam, as finder, and Blas,
successor-in-interest of the owner of the as owner of the land, are entitled to
vault; and share 50-50 in the treasure. The
government can only claim if it can
(iv). The Philippine Government because of establish that the notes and coins are of
their historical value. interest to science or the arts, then it
must pay just price of the things found,
(A). Who owns the notes and coins? (4%)
to be divided equally between Adam and
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 74 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Would it be legally significant - from the exceeds Five Hundred pesos (P500.00)
point of view of validity and enforceability - must appear in writing, even in private
if the loan and the mortgages were in public one. However, the requirement is not for
or private instruments? (6%) validity of the contract, but only for its
greater efficacy.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
With regard to the chattel mortgage, Art.
From the point of view of validity and 1508, the Chattel Mortgage Law,
enforceability, there would be legal requires an affidavit of good faith stating
significance if the mortgage was in a that the chattel mortgage is supposed to
public or private instrument. As for the stand as security of the loan; thus, for
loan, there is no legal significance the validity of the chattel mortgage, it
except of interest were charged on the must be in a public document and
loan, in which case, the charging of recorded in the Chattel Mortgage
interest must be in writing. Register in the Register of Deeds. A real
estate mortgage, under the provisions of
A contract of loan is a real contract and
Art. 2125 of the Civil Code, requires that
is perfected upon delivery of the object
in order that a mortgage may be validly
of the obligation (Art 1934, Civil Code).
constituted the document in which it
Thus, a contract of loan is valid and
appears be recorded. If the instrument is
enforceable even if it is neither in a
not recorded, the mortgage is
private nor in a public document.
nevertheless valid and binding between
the parties. Hence, for validity of both
As a rule, contracts shall be obligatory in
chattel and real estate mortgages, they
whatever form they may have been
must appear in a public instrument. But
entered into provided all the essential
the purpose of enforceability, it is
requisites for their validity are present.
submitted that the form of the contract,
With regards to its enforceability, a
whether in a public or private document,
contact of loan is not among those
would be immaterial (Mobil Oil v.
enumerated under Art. 1403 (2) of the
Diocaresa, 29 SCRA 656, 1969).
Civil Code, which are covered by the
Statute of Frauds. Also, under Art 1358, acts and contracts
which have for their object the creation
It is important to note that under Art.
or transmission of real rights over
1358 of the Civil Code, all the other
immovable property must be in a public
contracts where the amount involved
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 75 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
document for greater efficacy and a real right. Possession may be the real right of
estate mortgage is a real right over possession or jus possessiones or it can
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 76 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
property. The fact that he is giving up there are two or more heirs, the whole
his entire interest simply means that he estate of the decedent, is, before
partition, owned in common by such
is accepting the value of his interest as
heirs, subject to the payment of debts of
equivalent to his share in the taxes and
the deceased (Art. 1078, Civil Code),
expenses of preservation.
Under the rules on co-ownership, "none
of the co-owners shall, without the
(A). Can Cathy lawfully ask for demolition of (B). Can Bobby legally insist on purchasing
Bobby's house? (3%) the land? (2%)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 77 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Property; Movable or Immovable (2007)
The platform is a movable property
No.II. Manila Petroleum Co. owned and because it is attached to a movable
operated a petroleum operation facility off property, i.e. the vessel which was
the coast of Manila. The facility was located merely anchored to the seabed. The fact
on a floating platform made of wood and that the vessel is merely anchored to the
metal, upon which was permanently sea bed only shows that it is not
attached the heavy equipment for the intended to remain at a fixed place;
petroleum operations and living quarters of hence, it remains a movable property. If
the crew. The floating platform likewise the intention was to make the platform
contained a garden area, where trees, stay permanent where it was moored, it
plants and flowers were planted. The would not have been simply tethered to
platform was tethered to a ship, the MV a vessel but itself anchored to the
101, which was anchored to the seabed. seabed.
Please briefly give the reason for your (B). Are the equipment and living quarters
answers. (10%) movable or immovable property?
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 78 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
the object." Both the equipment and the The trees, plants and flowers planted in
living quarters are permanently attached the garden area of the platform are
to the platform which is also an immovable property under Art. 415 (2)
immovable. The equipment can also be NCC which classifies as an immovable
classified as an immovable property property "trees, plants and growing
under Art. 415 (5) NCC because such fruits, while they are attached to the
equipment are "machinery, receptacles, land or form an integral part of an
instruments or implements intended by immovable, the petroleum operation
the owner of the tenement for an facility.
industry or works which may be carried
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
on in a building or on a piece of land and
which tend directly to meet the needs of
The trees, plants and flowers planted in
the industry or works." It is logically
the garden area of the platform are
assumed that the petroleum industry
movable property because they are not
may be carried on in a building or on a
permanently attached t the land and do
piece of land and the platform is
not form an integral part of an
analogous to a building.
immovable. The platform is not an
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: immovable property for the same reason
already given in the Alternative Answer
The equipment and living quarters of the to Item (a) above.
crew are movable properties since they
are attached to a platform which is also Land Titles and Deeds
a movable property, because it is simply
attached to a vessel is likewise a Acquisition of Lands; Sale of Real
movable property since it was merely Property to an Alien (2009)
anchored on the seabed only shows that
it is not intended to remain at a fixed No.XIX. In 1972, Luciano de la Cruz sold to
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 79 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
2007, Luciano filed suit to recover the land Non-Registrable Properties (2007)
he sold to Chua, alleging that the sale was
void because it contravened the No.IV. (B). What properties are not
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 80 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(3.) Lands that are reserved by law or No. VII. Anthony bought a piece of untitled
Presidential proclamation for military, agricultural land from Bert. Bert, in turn,
civic or quasi-public purpose, Under Sec acquired the property by forging carlo's
88, Chapter XII of the Public Land Act, signature in a deed of sale over the
such lands shall be inalienable and shall property. Carlo had been in possession of
not be subject to occupation, entry, sale, the property for 8 years, declared it for tax
lease or other disposition. purposes, and religiously paid all taxes due
on the property. Anthony is not aware of
(4.) In general, all lands of the public the defect in Bert's title, but has been in
domain that has not been classified as actual physical possession of the property
alienable and disposable under the Public from the time he bought it from Bert, who
Land Act. had never been in possession of the
property for one year.
(5.) Lands that form part of the seabed,
riverbed or lakebed. These lands are not (A). Can Anthony acquire ownership of the
susceptible to private appropriation. property by acquisitive prescription? How
many more years does he have possess it to
(6.) Foreshore lands is that strip of land
acquire ownership? (2%)
that lies between the high and low water
marks and alternately wet and dry SUGGESTED ANSWER:
according to the flow of the tide belong
to the public domain, and can only be Yes, Anthony can acquire ownership of
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 81 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
faith because he was not aware of the shall have a right to a part of the
defect in Bert's title (Art. 526, Civil expenses of cultivation, and to a part of
Code). As such, Anthony can acquire the net harvest of the standing crops,
ownership and other real rights over both in proportion to the time of the
immovable property through open, possession (Art 545, Civil Code).
continuous possession of 10 years (Art.
1134, Civil Code). Anthony needs nine
more years of possession, in addition to
Prescription; Judicially Foreclosed Real
his one (1) year of possession in good
Property Mortgage (2012)
faith.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 82 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Purchaser in Good Faith; Mortgaged of Deeds under Act. 3344 and obtained a
Property (2008) tax declaration in its name.
No. XIX. Juliet offered to sell her house and (A). Was Dehlma a purchaser in good faith?
lot, together with all the furniture and (2%)
appliances therein to Dehlma. Before
agreeing to purchase the property, Dehlma SUGGESTED ANSWER:
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 83 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
purchaser unregistered lands sold to him land registration and acquisition of title to
under execution (Williams v. Suñer, 49 land. The manual should include the
Phil. ,534). following items:
(C). Who owns the movables inside the (A). What is the governing law? (5%)
house? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The governing law is the Land
Dehlma owns the movables because Registration Act as amended by Property
when she acquired the house and lot Registration Decree (Act 496 as amended
from Juliet, all the furniture and by PD 1529).
appliances therein were included in the
[Note: It is respectfully recommended
sale. As owner of the real property,
that full credit be given to examinees
Dehlma also owns the movables found
who did not give the exact title or
therein (Art. 542, Civil Code).
number of the law but merely stated a
description of the law.]
No.IV. Bedrock Land & Property In general, the governing law relating to
Development Corp. is a development registration and acquisition of title to
company engaged in developing and selling land is Act 496 of 1902 as amended by
subdivisions, condominium units and PD 1529, otherwise known as Property
industrial estates. In order to replenish its Registration Decree of June 11, 1978.
inventories, it embarked on an aggressive
land banking program. It employed "scouts" (1.) Chapter III-I governs original
who roam all over the Philippines to look for registration of land title under the
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 84 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(5.) Chapter V governs the registration of (11.) Section 113 governs the
(6.) Chapter V-II governs the registration register a deed or when he is in doubt as
of involuntary dealings on registered to what action to take on an instrument
land like attachments, adverse claims, presented for registration.
enforcement of liens on registered land,
notices of lis pendens. (7.) Chapter VI
governs the registration of judgments,
Registration; Party Who First took
orders and partitions, condemnation in
Possession (2013)
eminent domain proceedings, judicial
and extra-judicial settlement of estates. No.IX.Rica petitioned for the annulment of
her ten-year old marriage to Richard.
(8.) Sections 107, 108 and 109 govern
Richard hired Atty. Cruz to represent him
petitions and actions after original
in the proceedings. In payment for Atty.
registration like: (a).Compulsory
Cruz's acceptance and legal fees, Richard
surrender of withheld owner's duplicate
conveyed to Atty. Cruz a parcel of land in
certificate of title;
Taguig that he recently purchased with his
lotto winnings. The transfer documents
Amendment and alteration of certificate
were duly signed and Atty. Cruz
of title;
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 85 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 86 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
the years in the concept of an owner and ownership since June 12, 1945, or
his stay was uncontested by others. He has earlier. However, it is only necessary
also conscientiously and continuously paid that the land is already declared A & D
the realty taxes on the land. land “at the time for application for
registration is filed” (Malabanan v.
Michael died in 2000 and Manuel - as Republic, G.R. No. 180067, June 30,
Michael’s only son and heir -now wants to
2009).
secure and register title to the land in his
own name. He consults you for legal advice Manuel could also invoke Sec 14 (2) of
as he wants to perfect his title to the land the same Decree, which allows
and secure its registration in his name. registration through ordinary acquisitive
prescription for thirty years, provided,
What are the laws that you need to consider however, that the land is “patrimonial”
in advising Manuel on how he can perfect in character, i.e. already declared by the
his title and register the land in his name? government (a) as A & D, and (b) no
Explain the relevance of these laws to your longer needed for public use or public
projected course of action. (4%) service (Malabanan, supra).
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 87 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Aquino, G.R. No. L-33983, January 27, Manuel has a the burden to overcome
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 88 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
In 2006, the spouses Teodoro and Anita because he is an innocent purchaser for
came to the Philippines for a visit and value. The Title to the land he bought
discovered what had happened to their was already in the name of the person
property. They immediately hire you as who sold the property to him, and there
lawyer. What action or actions will you is nothing on the title which will make
institute in order to vindicate their rights? him suspect about the fraud committed
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 89 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(2008)
Contract to Sell vs. Conditional Contract
No.XVIII. AB Corp. entered into a contract
of Sale (2012)
with XY Corp. whereby the former agreed to
No.X.a) A contract to sell is the same as a construct the research and laboratory
conditional contract of sale. Do you agree? facilities of the latter. Under the terms of
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 90 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
will of the debtor or without his statement is false. Explain your answer in
participation or aggravation (Paras, Civil not more than two (2) sentences.
Code Annotated, vol. IV, 2000 ed., p
159). As mentioned in the facts, labor (A). A clause in an arbitration contract
unrest of the employees was caused by granting one of the parties the power to
AB Corp.'s failure to pay its employees choose more arbitrators than the other
AB Corp. need not return the 50% down monthly installments. Sarah issued in favor
payment because 45% of the work was of the bank post-dated checks, each in the
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 91 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 92 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No. XV. Eduardo was granted a loan by XYZ
Bank for the purpose of improving a No. Recardo has no basis for claiming
building which XYZ leased from him. novation of the original contract when
Eduardo, executed the promissory note the bank invoked compensation because
("PN") in favor of the bank, with his friend there was simply partial compensation
Recardo as co-signatory. In the PN, they (Art. 1290, Civil Code) and this would
both acknowledged that they are not bar the bank from recovering the
"individually and collectively" liable and remaining balance of the obligation.
waived the need for prior demand. To
secure the PN, Recardo executed a real ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
estate mortgage on his own property. When
Eduardo defaulted on the PN, XYZ stopped No. In order that an obligation may be
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 93 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
an ordinary check is not legal tender, payment to make said redemption valid
debt is not a valid tender of payment and G.R. No. 178242, Jan 20, 2009).
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 94 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Moreover, Ferdie’s refusal was justified there has been extraordinary deflation since
on the ground that the amount tendered 1998, and therefore, Felipe should pay him
does not include interest. In order to the value of the debt at the time it was
effect the redemption of the foreclosed incurred. Felipe refused to pay him again,
property, the payment to the purchaser claiming that Gustavo is estopped from
must include the following sums: (a) the raising the issue of legal tender, having
bid price; (b) the interest on the bid accepted the check in March, and that it
price, computed at one per centum (1%) was Gustavo's negligence in not depositing
per month; and (c) the assessments and the check immediately that caused the
taxes, if any, paid by the purchaser with check to become stale.
the same rate of interest (Sec 28, 1997
Rules of Civil Procedure). Unless there is (A). Can Gustavo now raised the issue that
an express stipulation to that effect, the the cashier's check is not legal tender? (2%)
No. XVII. Felipe borrowed $100 from (B). Can Felipe validly refuse to pay
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 95 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Code Annotated, Vol IV, 2000 ed., p. secure the PN, Recardo executed a real
394); (b) when the check has lost its estate mortgage on his own property. When
value because of the fault of the creditor Eduardo defaulted on the PN, XYZ stopped
(Art. 1249, 2nd par.),as when he was payment of rentals on the building on the
unreasonably delayed in presenting the ground that legal compensation had set in.
check for payment (PNB v. Seeto, G.R. Since there was still a balance due on the
No, L-4388, 13 August 1952). PN after applying the rentals, XYZ
foreclosed the real estate mortgage over
(C). Can Felipe compel Gustavo to receive Recardo's property. Recardo opposed the
US$100 instead? (1%) foreclosure on the ground that he is only a
co-signatory; that no demand was made
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
upon him for payment, and assuming he is
liable, his liability should not go beyond
Felipe cannot compel Gustavo to receive
half the balance of the loan. Further,
US$100 because under RA 529, payment
Recardo said that when the bank invoked
of loans should be at Philippine currency
compensation between the reantals and the
at the rate of exchange prevailing at the
amount of the loan, it amounted to a new
time of the stipulated date of payment.
contract or novation, and had the effect of
Felipe could only compel Gustavo to
extinguishing the security since he did not
receive US$ 100 if they stipulated that
give his consent (as owner of the property
obligation be paid in foreign currency
under the real estate mortgage) thereto.
(R.A. 4100).
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 96 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
the solidary debtors (Art. 1207, Civil latter, is obliged to continue the same
intention to create a trust, but is one fiduciary relationship uses trust funds
that arises in order to satisfy the for the purchase of property and causes
mainly operation of law and construed as operation of law in favor of the person to
a trust against one who, by fraud, duress whom the funds belong."
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 98 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 99 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
the contract shall be presumed to be an offering P800,000 in ready cash for the
equitable mortgage when it may be fairly land. When Roberto confirmed that he
inferred that the real intention of the could pay in cash as soon as Sergio could
parties is simply to secure the payment get the documentation ready, Sergio
of a debt or the performance of any decided to withdraw his offer to Marcelo,
other obligation. The present transaction hoping to just explain matters to his friend.
was clearly intended to just secure the Marcelo, however, objected when the
shortage incurred by Eulalia because withdrawal was communicated to him,
Bandung remained in possession of the taking the position that they have a firm
property inspite of the execution of the and binding agreement that Sergio cannot
sale. simply walk away from because he has an
option to buy that is duly supported by a
duly accepted valuable consideration.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 100 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
because any agreement relating to the sale partially executed which takes it outside
evidence in writing and they never reduced applicable only to executory contracts,
The contract at issue in the present case Right of First Refusal; Lessee; Effect
is the option contract, not the contract (2008)
of sale for the real property. Therefore,
Art. 1403 does not apply. No.XVI. Dux leased his house to Iris for a
period of 2 years, at the rate of P25,000.00
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 101 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
monthly, payable annually in advance. The refusal. This makes the mother a buyer
contract stipulated that it may be renewed in bad faith, hence giving more ground
for another 2-year period upon mutual for rescission of the sale to her
agreement of the parties. The contract also (Equatorial Realty, et al. v. Mayfair
granted Iris the right of first refusal to Theater, G.R. No. 106063, 21 Nov. 1996).
purchase the property at any time during
the lease, if Dux decides to sell the property ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
In his own written reply, Boboy signified use for which the lease is intended,
that he was ready to leave but Anselmo without altering the form or substance of
must first reimburse him the value of the the property leased, the lessor upon the
Anselmo refused, insisting that Boboy improvements at that time. Should the
mere lessee. Boboy responded by removing the lessee may remove the
the improvements and leaving the building improvements, even though the
in its original state. principal thing may suffer damage
thereby.
(IVa) Resolve Boboy's claim that as a
builder in good faith, he should be
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 103 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(IVb) Can Boboy be held liable for damages lease contracts between Jude and his
for removing the improvements over tenants? Explain your answer. (3%)
Anselmo's objection? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, Ildefonso must respect the lease
contracts between Jude and his tenants.
No. Boboy cannot be held liable for While it is true that the said lease
damages. contracts were not registered and
annotated on the title to the property,
The lessor, Anselmo, refused to
Ildefonso is still not an innocent
reimburse one-half of the value of the
purchaser for value. He ought to know
improvements, so the lessee, Boboy, may
the existence of the lease because the
remove the same, even though the
building was already occupied by the
principal thing may suffer damage
tenants at the time he bought it.
thereby. If in removing the useful
Applying the principle of caveat emptor,
improvements Boboy caused more
he should have checked and known the
impairment in the property leased than
status of the occupants of their right to
is necessary he will be liable for damages
occupy the building before buying it.
(Art. 1678, Civil Code).
Agency
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 104 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
B2, unaware of the sale of the land to B1, double sales of an immovable property,
signified to Y his interest to buy it but the ownership shall pertain to the
asked Y for her authority from X. Without person who is in good faith was first in
informing X that she had sold the land to possession and in the absence thereof to
B1, Y sought X for a written authority to the person who presents the oldest title,
sell. provide there is good faith.
X e-mailed Y an authority to sell the land. Y In a case, the Supreme Court has held
thereafter sold the land on May 1, 2001 to that in a sale of real estate the execution
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 105 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
The two remaining partners, A and B, are No.I. TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the
liable. When any partner dies and the statement is true, or FALSE if the
business is continued without any statement is false. Explain your answer in
settlement of accounts as between him
not more than two (2) sentences.
or his estate, the surviving partners are
held liable for continuing the business (C). An oral partnership is valid. (1%)
despite the death of C (Art 1841, 1785,
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
par 2, and Art 1833 of NCC).
TRUE. Partnership is a consensual
(B).What are the creditors’ recourse/s? contract, hence, it is valid even though
Explain. (3%) not in writing.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 106 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Share; Demand during the Existence of Is the payment of interest valid? Explain.
Partnership (2012) (3%)
Explain your answer. (5%) “no interest shall be due unless it has
been expressly stipulated in writing.”
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Is solution indebiti applicable? Explain.
(2%)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 107 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 108 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(5)The Guarantor insures the solvency (B). Will your answer to [a] be the same if
of the principal debtor; whereas, the the contract stipulates that upon failure of
surety insures the debt. Rosario to redeem the ring on due date,
Jennifer may immediately sell the ring and
(6)In a guaranty, the guarantor is
appropriate the entire proceeds thereof for
subsidiarlty liable; whereas, in a
herself as full payment of the loan?
suretyship, the surety binds himself
Reasons. (3%)
solidarity with the principal debtor (Art
2047, Civil Code). SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, my answer will be different. While
Pledge
the contract of pledge is valid, the
stipulation authorizing the pledgee to
Pledge; Pactum Commissorium (2009)
immediately sell the thing pledged is
void under Art 2088 of the New Civil
No.XVII. Rosario obtained a loan of
Code, which provides that “the creditor
P100,000.00 from Jennifer, and pledged
cannot appropriate the things given by
her diamond ring. The contract signed by
way of pledge or mortgage, or dispose of
the parties stipulated that if Rosario is
them xxx.” Jennifer cannot immediately
unable to redeem the ring on due date, she
sell by herself the thing pledged. It must
will execute a document in favor of Jennifer
be foreclosed by selling it at a public
providing that the ring shall automatically
auction in accordance with the
be considered full payment of the loan.
procedure under Art 2112 of the New
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 109 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
coordinator of the hotel noticed him and prosper. Otherwise, Roberto’s action will
asked him, allegedly in a loud voice, to not prosper.
leave as he was not in the guest list. He
The hotel is liable for the wrongful acts
retorted that he had been invited to the
of its employees.
affair by his friend, who however denied
doing so. Deeply embarrassed by the COMMENT:
incident, Roberto then sued the hotel for
The facts of the problem are almost
damages under Articles 19 and 21 of the
similar to the facts of Nikko Hotel
Civil Code. Will Roberto’s action prosper?
Manila Garden v. Reyes, G.R. No.
Explain. (5%)
154259, Feb 28, 2005. In the said case,
SUGGESTED ANSWER: however, there is a categorical finding
that the hotel employee did not, exposed
No. Roberto’s action will not prosper.
the complainant to the ridicule, shame
From the facts given in the problem, the
or embarrassment; hence, did not
wedding coordinator did not abuse her
commit any abuse of right. The present
right when she asked him to leave the
problem makes no statement of that
wedding reception because he was not in
finding. In the contrary, the problem
the guest list. Hotel Nikko could not be
states that it is a mere allegation.
held liable for damages as its liable
spring from the liability of its employee
(Nikko Hotel Manila Garden v. Reyes,
G.R. No. 154259, Feb 28, 2005). Damages; Moral & Exemplary (2009)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 110 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(A). If you were the judge, would you award Vinzons-Chato filed a Motion to Dismiss
all the claims of Nanette? Explain. (3%) arguing that she cannot be held liable for
damages for acts she performed while in
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the discharge of her duties as BIR
If Rodolfo's marriage could not have
Commissioner. Is she correct? Explain. (5%)
been possibly known to Nanette or there
is no gross negligence on the part of SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Nanette, Rodolfo could be held liable for
Yes. As a general rule, a public officer is
moral damages.
not liable for acts performed in the
discharge of his duties. The exceptions
If there is gross negligence in a suit for
are when he acted with malice, bad faith,
quasi-delict, exemplary could be
or gross negligence in the performance
awarded.
of his duty, or when his act is in
violation of a Constitutional guaranteed
right and liberties of a person under
Damages; Public Officers acting in the Art32 of the NCC.
Performance of their Duties (2012)
The public officer is not automatically
considered to have violated the rights or
No.II.a) Liwayway Vinzons-Chato was then
liberties of a person simply because the
the Commissioner of Internal Revenue
rule the public officer issued was
while Fortune Tobacco Corporation is an
entity engaged in the manufacture of declared invalid by the court. The
different brands of cigarettes, among which complainant must still allege and prove
are "Champion," "Hope," and "More" the particular injury or prejudice he has
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 111 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
cannot be held liable. The facts the driver and the defense of diligence is
presented are similar to facts of the case not available.
of Vinzons-Chato v. Fortune, G.R. No.
(B).Would your answer be the same if
141309, Dec 23, 2008.
Rommel was in the car at the time of the
accident? Explain. (2%)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 112 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(B). doctrine of discovered peril (last clear typhoon knocked down the fence of the
chance) (5%) pond and the iguana crawled out of the
gate of Primo’s residence. N, a neighbor
SUGGESTED ANSWER: who was passing by, started throwing
stones at the iguana, drawing the iguana to
The doctrine of last clear chance states
move toward him. N panicked and ran but
that where the plaintiff was guilty of
tripped on something and suffered a broken
prior or antecedent negligence, but the
leg.
defendant, who had the ultimate
opportunity to avoid the impending Is anyone liable for N’s injuries? Explain.
harm failed to do so, it is the defendant (4%)
who is liable for all the consequences of
the accident notwithstanding the prior SUGGESTED ANSWER:
negligence of the plaintiff. An example is
No one is liable. The possessor of an
where a person was riding a pony on a
animal or whoever may make use of the
bridge and improperly pulled the pony to
same is responsible for the damage it
the wrong side when he saw a car
may cause, although it may escape or be
coming. The driver of the car did not
lost. This responsibility shall cease only
stop or change direction, and nearly hit
in case the damage should come from
the horse, and, the frightened animal
force majeure or from the fault of the
jumped to its death. The driver of the
person who has suffered damage (Art
car is guilty of negligence because he
2183, NCC).
had a fair opportunity to avoid the
accident and failed to avail himself of
that opportunity. He is liable under the
doctrine of last clear chance (Picart v.
Liability; Special Parental Authority
Smith, 37 Phil. 809, 1918).
(2010)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 113 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
because the van rented by the school was (B). How about the damage to the jeepney?
too crowded. On the way to a museum Explain. (2%)
which the students were scheduled to visit,
Rozanno made a wrong maneuver, causing SUGGESTED ANSWER:
entity or institution. The field trip on 221 of the Family Code are no longer
which occasion Rozanno drove the car, applicable. In such case, only Rozanno
was an authorized activity, and , thus, will be personally responsible for all the
the parents of Rozanno are subsidiarily school or his parents were themselves
liable pursuant to Art 219 (FC), and also negligent and such negligence
principally liable under Art 221 (FC), if contributed to the happening of the
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 114 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
liable under general provision on the court to justify the damages that your client
Civil Code on quasi-delict. claims? (8%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The bicycle rider suffered a fractured right The case clearly involves quasi-delict
knee, sustained when he fell on his right where my client, the bicycle rider,
side on the concrete side walk. He was suffered injury as a result of the
hospitalized and was subsequently negligence of the over-speeding taxi
operated on, rendering him immobile for 3 driver, without fault on my client’s part.
weeks and requiring physical rehabilitation
for another 3 months. In his complaint for To prove actual damages aside from the
damages, the rider prayed for the award testimony of client, I will present his
damages, P1 00,000 nominal damages and presented. [The sentence in red should
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 115 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Exemplary damages may be granted if tort is not part of legal developments in civil
law. In Philippine legal tradition, quasi-
the defendant acted in wanton,
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 116 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
delict has been treated as the closest civil who can be held liable and their defenses
law equivalent of the common law tort. In would also apply.
fact, in a number of Supreme Court
Those liable for quasi-delict include:
decisions, the two terms have been
considered synonymous. In reality, however, Those tortfeasor or the person causing
the common law tort is much broader in damage to another through fault or
scope than the civil law quasi-delict. In negligence ( Article 2176 NCC ); and
recent developments in common law, the Persons vicariously liable under Article
concept of “quasi-torts” can be considered as 2180 (NCC ).
the closest common law equivalent of the
civil law concept of quasi-delict. This is
The defenses available include:
because it is argued that the growing
recognition of quasi-torts as a source of That the defendant was not negligent or
obligation is hinged on the acceptance at
that he exercised due diligence ( Article
common law of the civil law principles of
2176 NCC );
quasi-delict.
That although the defendant is negligent
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
his negligence is not the proximate
Quasi -tort is a legal concept upholding cause of the injury ( Article 2179 NCC );
the doctrine that some legal duty exists That the plaintiff's own negligence was
that cannot be classified strictly as a
the immediate and proximate cause of
personal duty (thus resulting in a tort),
his injury ( Article 2179 NCC );
nor as a contractual duty but rather
some other kind of duty recognizable by (d ) That the person vicariously liable
the law. ” Tort “ or ” Quasi-tort” is an has observed all the diligence of a good
Quasi -tort is considered as the The fact that the plaintiff had
rules of the latter pertaining to persons partial defense (Art 2179, NCC).
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 117 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 118 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(A) 0 or (E) None of the above. Should the share of insolvent debtor C be
The legal relationship created by divided only between the two other
adoption is strictly between the adopter remaining debtors, A and B? (1%)
and the adopted. It does not extend to Yes. Remission of D's share carries with it
the relatives of either party (Sayson v. total extinguishment of his obligation to the
CA, G.R. Nos. 89224-25, Jan 23, 1992). benefit of the solidary debtors.
(Note: “E. None of the above’” is another Yes. The Civil Code recognizes remission as
answer because Ernie has no share at a mode of extinguishing an obligation. This
all in the net estate). clearly applies to D.
No. The rule is that gratuitous acts should
I. (4) How much is Felix's share in the net be restrictively construed, allowing only the
estate? (1%) least transmission of rights.
P400,000. No, as the release of the share of one
P150,000. debtor would then increase the burden of
P300,000. the other debtors without their consent.
P0.
None of the above. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(D). No, as the release of the share of one
SUGGESTED ANSWER: debtor would then increase the burden of
(D). 0. Or (E) None of the above. the other debtors without their consent.
In the collateral line, representation is When one of the solidary debtors cannot,
granted only to children of brother or because of his insolvency, reimburse his
sisters, Felix is a grandson of a share to the debtor paying the
predeceased brother. obligation, such share shall be borne by
(Note: “E. None of the above: is another all his co-debtors, in proportion to the
answer because Felix has no share at debt of each (Art 1217, Civil Code).
all in the net estate) Additionally, D was released only from
his share of P10,000.00 not from the
A, B, C and D are the solidary debtors of X solidary tie that binds him to A, B and C.
for P40,000. X released D from the payment
of his share of PI 0,000. When the Amador obtained a loan of P300,000 from
obligation became due and demandable, C Basilio payable on March25, 2012. As
turned out to be insolvent. security for the payment of his loan,
Amador constituted a mortgage on his
residential house and lot in Basilio's favor.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 119 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Cacho, a good friend of Amador, guaranteed Basilio (the creditor) must first be
and obligated himself to pay Basilio, in case exhausted”)
Amador fails to pay his loan at maturity. (2) If Amador sells his residential house and
lot to Diego, can Basilio foreclose the real
(1) If Amador fails to pay Basilio his loan on estate mortgage? (1%)
March 25, 2012, can Basilio compel Cacho
to pay? (1%) Yes, Basilio can foreclose the real estate
mortgage because real estate mortgage
No, Basilio cannot compel Cacho to pay creates a real right that attaches to the
because as guarantor, Cacho can invoke property.
the principle of excussion, i.e., all the Yes, Basilio can foreclose the real estate
assets of Basilio must first be exhausted. mortgage. It is binding upon Diego as the
No, Basilio cannot compel Cacho to pay mortgage is embodied in a public
because Basilio has not exhausted the instrument.
available remedies against Amador. No, Basilio cannot foreclose the real
Yes, Basilio can compel Cacho to pay estate mortgage. The sale confers
because the nature of Cacho's undertaking ownership on the buyer, Diego, who
indicates that he has bound himself must therefore consent.
solidarily with Amador. No, Basilio cannot foreclose the real estate
Yes, Basilio can compel Cacho who bound mortgage. To deprive the new owner of
himself to unconditionally pay in case ownership and possession is unjust and
Amador fails to pay; thus the benefit of inequitable.
excussion will not apply.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, Basilio can foreclose the real estate
No, Basilio cannot compel Cacho to pay mortgage. It is binding upon Diego as the
because Basilio has not exhausted the mortgage is embodied in a public
available remedies against Amador. instrument.
The guarantor cannot be compelled to Since the mortgage is in a public
pay the creditor unless the latter has instrument, there is constructive notice
exhausted all the property of the debtor to Diego, who is the buyer if the
and has resorted to all the legal remedies mortgaged property.
against the debtor (Art. 2058, Civil Code)
(Note: “A” is not the correct answer ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
because it states that “all the assets of
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 120 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
No, Basilio cannot foreclose the real No, Jose's refusal is not justified. The
estate mortgage. The sale confers expenses he incurred are useful for the
ownership on the buyer, Diego, who preservation of the thing loaned. It is
must therefore consent. Jose's obligation to shoulder these useful
The mortgage is not registered, thus, expenses.
cannot be binding against third persons
(Art. 2125, Civil Code) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, Jose's refusal is not justified. The
IV. Cruz lent Jose his car until Jose expenses he incurred are useful for the
finished his Bar exams. Soon after Cruz preservation of the thing loaned. It is
delivered the car, Jose brought it to Jose's obligation to shoulder these useful
Mitsubishi Cubao for maintenance check expenses.
up and incurred costs of P8,000. Seeing the In commodatum, the bailee is obliged to
car's peeling and faded paint, Jose also had pay for the ordinary expenses for the use
the car repainted for P10,000. Answer the and preservation of the thing loaned (Art
two questions below based on these 1941, Civil Code).
common facts. The bailee, Jose, has no right of
retention on the ground that the bailor
IV. (1) After the bar exams, Cruz asked for owes him something, even if it may be
the return of his car. Jose said he would by reason of expenses. He can only
return it as soon as Cruz has reimbursed retain it if he suffers damages by reason
him for the car maintenance and repainting of a flaw or defect in the thing loaned of
costs of P 18,000. which the bailor knows (Art 1951, Civil
Is Jose's refusal justified? (1%) Code).
No, Jose's refusal is not justified. In this
kind of contract, Jose is obliged to pay for IV. (2) During the bar exam month, Jose
all the expenses incurred for the lent the car to his girlfriend, Jolie, who
preservation of the thing loaned. parked the car at the Mall of Asia's open
Yes, Jose's refusal is justified. He is obliged parking lot, with the ignition key inside the
to pay for all the ordinary and extraordinary car. Car thieves broke into and took the
expenses, but subject to reimbursement car.
from Cruz.
Yes, Jose's refusal is justified. The principle Is Jose liable to Cruz for the loss of the car
of unjust enrichment warrants the due to Jolie's negligence? (1%)
reimbursement of Jose's expenses.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 121 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
No, Jose is not liable to Cruz as the loss Securities and Exchange Commission,
was not due to his fault or negligence. designated L and 0 as managing partners; L
No, Jose is not liable to Cruz. In the was liable only to the extent of his capital
absence of any prohibition, Jose could lend contribution; and P was not liable for
the car to Jolie. Since the loss was due to losses.
force majeure, neither Jose nor Jolie is In 2006, the partnership earned a net profit
liable. of P800,000. In the same year, P engaged in
Yes, Jose is liable to Cruz. Since Jose a different business with the consent of all
lent the car to Jolie without Cruz's the partners. However, in 2007, the
consent, Jose must bear the consequent partnership incurred a net loss of
loss of the car. P500,000. In 2008,the partners dissolved
Yes, Jose is liable to Cruz. The contract the partnership. The proceeds of the sale of
between them is personal in nature. Jose partnership assets were insufficient to
can neither lend nor lease the car to a third settle its obligation. After liquidation, the
person. partnership had an unpaid liability
ofP300,000.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, Jose is liable to Cruz. Since Jose V. (l) Assuming that the just and equitable
lent the car to Jolie without Cruz's share of the industrial partner, P, in the
consent, Jose must bear the consequent profit in 2006 amounted to P1 00,000, how
loss of the car. much is the share of 0, a limited partner, in
The bailee is liable for the loss of the the P800,000 net profit? (1%)
thing, even if it should be through a P160,000.
fortuitous event if he lends or leases the P175,000.
thing to a third person, who is not a P280,000.
member of his household (Art 1942, Civil P200,000.
Code). None of the above.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 122 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
accurate.
V. (3) Can the partnership creditors hold L,
0 and Pliable after all the assets of the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
partnership are exhausted? (1%) None of the above is completely
Yes. The stipulation exempting P from accurate.
losses is valid only among the partners. L is VI. Gary is a tobacco trader and also a
liable because the agreement limiting his lending investor. He sold tobacco leaves to
liability to his capital contribution is not Homer for delivery within a month,
valid insofar as the creditors are concerned. although the period for delivery was not
Having taken part in the management of guaranteed. Despite Gary's efforts to deliver
the partnership, 0 is liable as capitalist on time, transportation problems and
partner. government red tape hindered his efforts
and he could only deliver after 30 days.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 123 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Homer refused to accept the late delivery No. Homer was not justified in refusing to
and to pay on the ground that the agreed accept the tobacco leaves. There was no
term had not been complied with. term in the contract but a mixed condition.
As lending investor, Gary granted a The fulfillment of the condition did not
Pl,000,000 loan to Isaac to be paid within depend purely on Gary's will but on other
two years from execution of the contract. As factors, e.g., the shipping company and the
security for the loan, Isaac promised to government. Homer should comply with his
deliver to Gary his Toyota Innova within obligation.
seven (7) days, but Isaac failed to do so.
Gary was thus compelled to demand SUGGESTED ANSWER:
payment for the loan before the end of the No. Homer was not justified in refusing
agreed two-year term. to accept the tobacco leaves. He
consented to the terms and conditions
VI. (l) Was Homer justified in refusing to of the sale and must abide by it.
accept the tobacco leaves? (1%) Obligations arising from contract have
Yes. Homer was justified in refusing to the force of law between the contracting
accept the tobacco leaves. The delivery was parties.
to be made within a month. Gary's promise It is clear under the facts that the period
of delivery on a "best effort" basis made the of delivery of the tobacco leaves was not
delivery uncertain. The term, therefore, was guaranteed. Gary anticipated other
ambiguous. factors which may prevent him from
No. Homer was not justified in refusing making the delivery within a month.
to accept the tobacco leaves. He True enough, transportation problems
consented to the terms and conditions and government red tape did. Such
of the sale and must abide by it. slight delay was, thus, excusable.
Obligations arising from contract have Obligations arising from contract have
the force of law between the contracting the force of law between the contracting
parties. parties and should be complied with in
Yes. Homer was justified in his refusal to good faith (Art. 1160, Civil Code)
accept the delivery. The contract
contemplates an obligation with a term. VI. (2) Can Gary compel Isaac to pay his
Since the delivery was made after 30 days, loan even before the end of the two-year
contrary to the terms agreed upon, Gary period? (1%)
could not insist that Homer accept the
tobacco leaves.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 124 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Yes, Gary can compel Isaac to Under Art 1198 (2) of the Civil Code, the
immediately pay the loan. Non- debtor shall lose every right to make use
compliance with the promised guaranty of the period when he does not furnish
or security renders the obligation to the creditor the guaranties or
immediately demandable. Isaac lost his securities which he has promised.
right to make use of the period.
Yes, Gary can compel Isaac to immediately VII. Lito was a commercial pilot who flew for
pay the loan. The delivery of the Toyota Pacific-Micronesian Air. In 1998, he was
Innova is a condition for the loan. Isaac's the co-pilot of the airline's Flight MA916
failure to deliver the car violated the that mysteriously disappeared two hours
condition upon which the loan was granted. after take-off from Agana, Guam,
It is but fair for Gary to demand immediate presumably over the Pacific Ocean. No trace
payment. of the plane and its 105 passengers and
No, Gary cannot compel Isaac to crew was ever found despite diligent search;
immediately pay the loan. The delivery of Lito himself was never heard of again. Lito
the car as security for the loan is an left behind his wife, Lita, and their two
accessory contract; the principal contract is children.
still the P 1,000,000 loan. Thus, Isaac can
still make use of the period. In 2008, Lita met and married Jaime. They
No, Gary cannot compel Isaac to now have a child of their own.
immediately pay the loan. Equity dictates While on a tour with her former high school
that Gary should have granted a reasonable classmates in a remote province of China in
extension of time for Isaac to deliver his 2010, Lita was surprised to see Lito or
Toyota Innova. It would be unfair and somebody who looked exactly like him, but
burdensome for Isaac to pay she was sure it was Lito because of the
the P 1,000,000 simplybecause the extreme surprise that registered in his face
promised security was not delivered. when he also saw her. Shocked, she
immediately fled to her hotel and post haste
SUGGESTED ANSWER: returned to the country the next day. Lita
Yes, Gary can compel Isaac to now comes to you for legal advice. She asks
immediately pay the loan. Non- you the following questions:
compliance with the promised guaranty
or security renders the obligation VII. (l) If Lito is alive, what is the status of
immediately demandable. Isaac lost his his marriage to Lita? (1%)
right to make use of the period.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 125 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
The marriage subsists because the marital The marriage is valid. After an absence of
bond has not been terminated by death. more than 10 years, Lito is already
The marriage was terminated when Lita presumed dead for all purposes.
married Jaime. The marriage is void. Lito's mere absence,
The marriage subsists because Lita's however lengthy, is insufficient to authorize
marriage to Jaime is void. Lita to contract a subsequent marriage.
The marriage is terminated because Lito is The marriage is void. If Lito is indeed alive,
presumed dead after his plane has been his marriage to Lita was never dissolved
missing for more than 4 years. and they can resume their marital relations
The marriage can be formally declared at any time.
terminated if Lito would not resurface.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Any answer is correct.
The marriage subsists because Lita's Under Art 390 of the Civil Code, after an
marriage to Jaime is void. absence of seven years, it being
For the purpose of contracting the unknown whether or not the absentee
subsequent marriage under Art 41 of the still lives, he shall be presumed dead doe
Family Code, the spouse present must all purposes, except for those of
institute a summary proceeding as succession. This provision was not
provided in the Family Code for the repealed by the present Family Code.
declaration of presumptive death of the Applying this to the problem, (A) may be
absentee, without prejudice to the effect correct. (B) may also be correct. (C) and
of the reappearance of the absent may also be correct under Art 41 of the
spouse. Family Code.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 126 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 127 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Tambunting Pawnshop, and used the I will rule in favor of Tambunting. Its good
money for herself. Aida failed to redeem the faith takes precedence over the right of
pawned jewelries and after a month, Betty Betty to recover the jewelries.
discovered what Aida had done. Betty I will rule in favor of Tambunting. Good
brought criminal charges which resulted in faith is always presumed. Tambunting's
Aida's conviction for estafa. lawful acquisition in the ordinary course of
business coupled with good faith gives it
Betty thereafter filed an action against legal right over the jewelries.
Tambunting Pawnshop for the recovery of
the jewelries. Tambunting raised the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
defense of ownership, additionally arguing I will rule in favor of Betty. My ruling is
that it is duly licensed to engage in the based on the Civil Code provision that
pawnshop and lending business, and that it one who has lost any movable or has
accepted the mortgage of the jewelry in been unlawfully deprived thereof may
good faith and in the regular course of its recover it from the person in possession
business. of the same. Tam bunting's claim of good
faith is inconsequential.
If you were the judge, how will you decide
the case? (1%) Although possession of movable property
acquired in good faith is equivalent to a
I will rule in favor of Betty. My ruling is title, nevertheless, one who has lost any
based on the Civil Code provision that movable or has been unlawfully deprived
one who has lost any movable or has thereof may recover it from the person
been unlawfully deprived thereof may in possession of the same. Betty has
recover it from the person in possession been deprived unlawfully of her jewelries
of the same. Tam bunting's claim of good by the estafa committed by Aida. The
faith is inconsequential. pledge of the said jewelries by Aida to
I will rule in favor of Betty. Tambunting's Tambunting pawnshop is void because
claim of good faith pales into insignificance the pledgor is not the owner (Art 2085
in light of the unlawful deprivation of the (2), Civil Code). Tambunting’s claim of
jewelries. However, equity dictates that good faith is inconsequential, because,
Tambunting must be reimbursed for the aside from good faith, Tambunting must
pawn value of the jewelries. prove also that it acquired the jewelries
at a public sale in order to be able to
retain the jewelries until reimbursed by
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 128 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Betty the amount of loan including If you were the judge, would you grant
interest (Art 559, Civil Code). Arlene's motion? (1%)
The only exception the law allows is Yes, I will grant the motion because the
when there is acquisition in good faith of lease contract between Arlene and Janet
the possessor at a public sale, in which was not in writing, hence, Janet may not
case, the owner cannot obtain its return enforce any right arising from the same
without reimbursing the price (Dizon v. contract.
Suntay, 47 SCRA 160, Sept 29, 1972). No, I will not grant the motion because to
allow Arlene to retain the advance
X. Arlene owns a row of apartment houses payments would amount to unjust
in Kamuning, Quezon City. She agreed to enrichment.
lease Apartment No. 1 to Janet for a period Yes, I will grant the motion because the
of 18 months at the rate of P10,000 per action for recovery is premature; Janet
month. The lease was not covered by any should first secure a judicial rescission of
contract. Janet promptly gave Arlene two the contract of lease.
months deposit and 18 checks covering the No. I will not grant the motion because
rental payment for 18 months. This show of the cause of action does not seek to
good faith prompted Arlene to promise enforce any right under the contract of
Janet that should Arlene decide to sell the lease.
property, she would give Janet the right of
first refusal. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
X. (1) Not long after Janet moved in, she No. I will not grant the motion because
received news that her application for a the cause of action does not seek to
Master of Laws scholarship at King's enforce any right under the contract of
College in London had been approved. lease.
Since her acceptance of the scholarship Janet is not asking for the continued use
entailed a transfer of residence, Janet of the leased premises. Moreover, the
asked Arlene to return the advance rental contract is aside the ambit of the
payments she made. Arlene refused, Statute of Frauds as the same has
prompting Janet to file an action to recover already been partially performed.
the payments. Arlene filed a motion to
dismiss, claiming that the lease on which X. (2)Assume that Janet decided not to
the action is based, is unenforceable. accept the scholarship and continued
leasing Apartment No. 1. Midway through
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 129 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
the lease period, Arlene decided to sell Frauds under Art 1403 (2)(e) of the Civil
Apartment No. 1 to Jun in breach of her Code. It must be in writing in order to be
promise to Janet to grant her the right of enforceable.
first refusal. Thus, Janet filed an action
seeking the recognition of her right of first
refusal, the payment of damages for the 2012 Taxation Law Exam
violation of this right, and the rescission of
the sale between Arlene and Jun.
MCQ (October 14, 2012)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 130 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
capacity to act, it restricts the capacity of a Yes, the will is not valid under
married person in cases of adoption.) Philippine law.
No, attestation clause is not an
This attribute or incident of a case act of the testator.
determine whether it is a conflict-of-laws No, the governing law is Spanish
case or one covered by domestic law. law.
Cause of action
Foreign element Note: The facts do not state the Law
Jurisdiction observed by the testator in executing his
Forum non conveniens will. He could have observed Spanish Law
or Philippine Law (see comment of Tolentino
The capacity of an heir to succeed shall be to Art. 815 NCC in 3Tolentino117, 1992). If
governed by the: he observed Spanish Law, the opposition is
national law of the decedent’s heirs not correct because the will is valid under
law of the country where the Spanish Law, hence choice (d) is the correct
decedent was a resident at the time answer. If he observed Philippine Law, the
of his death opposition is still not correct because
national law of the person who Philippine Law does not require the testator
died to sign the Attestation Clause of his will,
law of the country where the said clause not being his act. In such case,
properties of the decedent are choice (c) is the correct answer).
located.
Ramon, a Filipino, executed a will in
Atty. BUKO, a Filipino, executed a will Manila, where he left his house and located
while he was in Spain. The attestation in BP Homes Parañaque in favor of his
clause of the said will does not contain Filipino son, Ramgen. Ramon’s other
Buko’s signature. It is valid under Spanish children RJ and Ramona, both Turkish
law. At its probate in Manila, it is being nationals, are disputing the bequest to
opposed on the ground that the attestation Ramgen. They plotted to kill Ramgen.
clause does not contain BUKO’s signature. Ramon learned of the plot, so he tore his
Is the opposition correct? Choose the best will in two pieces out of anger. Which
answer.. statement is most accurate?
Yes, because it is a fatal defect. The mere act of Ramon Sr. is
immaterial because the will is still
readable.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 131 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 132 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
In the absence of contrary stipulation in a obligation, but Bill fails or refuses to pay,
marriage settlement, property relations of what law will govern?
Filipino spouses shall be governed by --- American law
Philippines laws Philippine law
Law of the place where the spouses Australian law
reside Japanese law
Law of the place where the (Facts for item numbers 15-18)
properties are situated In 1989, Charice (Filipina) and Justine
Law of the place where they were (American), were married in the Philippines.
married. In 1990, they separated and Justine went
to Las Vegas where he obtained a divorce in
The will of a Filipino executed in a foreign the same year. He then married another
country --- Filipina, Lea, in Canada on January 1,
cannot be probated in the 1992. They had two (2) sons, James and
Philippines; John (who were both born in 1992). In
may be probated in the Philippines 1993, after failing to hear from Justine,
provided that properties in the Charice married Bugoy (a Filipino), by
estate are located in the Philippines; whom she had a daughter, Regine. In 2009,
cannot be probated before the death Regine married James (son of Justine with
of the testator; Lea) in California, where such marriage is
may be probated in the valid.
Philippines provided it was
executed in accordance with the What is the current status of the marriage
laws of the place where the will of Charice and Justine under Philippine
was executed. laws?
Valid
Pedro (Filipino and Bill (American) entered Void
into a contract in Australia, whereby it was Voidable
agreed that Pedro will build a commercial Dissolved
building for Bill in the Philippines, and in (Note: While Art 26 of the FC does not
payment for the construction, Bill will categorically provide that the first marriage
transfer and convey his cattle ranch located is dissolved by the divorce obtained by the
in Japan in favor of Pedro. In case Pedro foreign spouse abroad, but provides that
performs his such divorce merely gives the Filipino
spouse the capacity to contract a second
marriage, it
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 133 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
is believed that the dissolution of the first examinations unless he marries Princess.
marriage us the necessary consequence of As a consequence of the threat, Ricky
the foreign divorce.) married Princess. Can the marriage be
annulled on the ground of intimidation
What id the status of the marriage between under Article 45 of the Family Code?
Charice and Bugoy under Philippine laws? Choose the best answer.
Valid Yes, because without the threat,
Void Ricky would not have married
Voidable Princess.
Unenforceable Yes, because the threat to enforce
the claim of Princess vitiates the
What is the status of the marriage between consent of Ricky in contracting the
Charice and Bugoy under Philippine laws? marriage.
Valid No, because the threat made by
Void Marforth is just and legal.
Voidable No, because Marforth is not a party
Unenforceable to the contract of marriage between
Princess and Ricky.
What is the status of the marriage between
Regine and James under Philippine laws? Audrey, single, bought a parcel of land in
Valid Malolos City from Franco for P 1Million. A
Void contract was executed between them which
Voidable already vested upon Audrey full ownership
Unenforceable of the property, although payable in
monthly installments for a period of four (4)
Ricky and Princess were sweethearts. years. One (1) year after the execution of
Princess became pregnant. Knowing that the contract, Audrey got married to Arnel.
Ricky is preparing for the examinations, They executed a marriage settlement
Marforth, a lawyer and cousin of Princess, whereby they agreed that their properties
threatened Ricky with the filing of a shall be governed by the regime of conjugal
complaint for immorality in the Supreme partnership of gains. Thereafter,
Court, thus preventing him from taking subsequent installments were paid from the
conjugal partnership funds. Is the land
conjugal or paraphernal?
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 134 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
The land is conjugal because the the laws of such consular official. Under
installments were paid from the Philippine law, what is the status of the
conjugal partnership funds. marriage of Agay and Topacio? Choose the
The land is paraphernal because best answer.
ownership thereof was acquired Void, because the consular official
before the marriage. only has authority to solemnize
The land is both conjugal and marriages between Filipinos.
paraphernal funds of installments Valid, because according to the laws
were paid from both the personal of Australia, such consular official
funds of Audrey and the conjugal has authority to celebrate the
partnership funds. marriage.
The land is paraphernal because it Voidable, because there is an
was Audrey who purchased the irregularity in the authority of the
same. consular official to solemnize
marriages.
Ernesto donated a mobile phone worth P Valid, because such marriage is
32,000 to Hubert orally and delivered the recognized as valid in the place
unit to Hubert who accepted. Which where it was celebrated.
statement is most accurate?
The donation is void and Ernesto (Note: The issues in the problem is whether
may get mobile phone back. or not the fact that one of the parties to the
The donation is void but Ernesto marriage was an alien constituted absence
cannot get the mobile phone back. of authority or mere irregularity of authority.
The donation is voidable and may be The problem only give the choice, letter (a),
anulled. in case it is interpreted as absence of
The donation is valid. authority. The problem does not give a
choice in case it is interpreted as an
Agay, a Filipino citizen and Topacio, an irregularity thereby making all the other
Australian citizen, got married in the answers wrong).
consular office of the Philippines in
Australia. According to the laws of
Australia, a marriage solemnized by a Separation of property between spouses
consular official is valid, provided that such during the marriage may take place only:
marriage is celebrated in accordance with by agreement of the spouses.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 135 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
If one of the spouses has given No trial shall be held without the 6-
ground for legal separation. month cooling off period being
Upon order of the court. observed.
If one spouse has abandoned the The spouses will be entitled to live
other. separately upon the start of the
trial.
The husband may impugn the legitimacy of The prosecuting attorney has to
his child but not on the ground that: conduct his own investigation.
the wife is suspected of infidelity.
the husband had a serious illness A husband by chance discovered hidden
that prevented him from engaging in treasure on the paraphernal property of his
sexual intercourse. wife. Who owns the discovered treasure?
they were living apart. The half pertaining to the husband
he is physically incapable of sexual (finder) belongs to the conjugal
intercourse. partnership.
The half pertaining to the wife (as
A marriage is void if: owner) belongs to the conjugal
solemnized with a marriage license partnership.
issued without complying with the One half shall belong to the
required 10-day posting. husband as finder and the other
solemnized by a minister whom the half shall belong to the wife as
parties believe to have the authority. owner of the property.
between parties both 23 years of age a and b
but without parental advice.
none of the above Which of the following marriages is void for
reasons of public policy?
In legal separation, which is not correct? Between brothers and sisters,
The aggrieved spouse may file the whether of the full or half blood.
action within five (5) years from the Between step-parents and step
time of the occurrence of the cause. children.
Between parents-in-law and
children-in-law.
b and c
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 136 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 137 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 138 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
and he may not remove the objects of the dominion over the property as owner.
for which such expenses have been What action is being referred to?
incurred. Accion publiciana
and he may not remove the objects Accion reinvindicatoria
for which such expenses have been Accion interdictal
incurred, unless he pays the value Quieting of Title
they may have at the time he
entered into possession. A summary action to recover physical or
but he may remove the objects for material possession only and must be
which such expenses have been brought within one (1) year from the time
incurred. the cause of action arises. What action is
being referred to?
The following are the limitations on the Accion publiciana
right of ownership imposed by the owner Accion reinvindicatoria
himself, except: Accion interdictal
Will/Succession Quieting of Title
Mortgage
Pledge The following things are property of public
Lease dominion, except:
ports and bridges constructed by
A plenary action for the recovery of the the State.
possession of real estate, upon mere vehicles and weapons of the Armed
allegation and proof of a better right Forces of the Philippines.
thereto, and without allegation of proof of rivers.
title. This action can only be brought after lands reclaimed by the state from
the expiration of one (1) year. What action the sea.
is being referred to?
Accion publiciana SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Accion reinvindicatoria This question should be disregarded
Accion interdictal because there is no correct answer.
Quieting of Title (Note: At first glance, one gets the
impression that vehicles and weapons of the
Action to recover real property based on AFP are not property of the public domain.
ownership. Here, the object is the recovery But they are actually property of the public
dominion under the second paragraph of Art
420 of
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 139 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
the NCC. Property of the state which are not the donee accepts the donation.
for public use but are intended for some the donor executes the deed of
public service are properties of the public donation.
dominion. While the vehicles and weapons the donor knows of the donee’s
of the AFP are not for public use, they are acceptance even if the latter has
used for the defense of the State which is a not received the copy of the deed
public service.) of donation.
the donee confirms that the donor
44. Which of the following statements is has learned the former’s acceptance.
wrong?
patrimonial property of the state, The following are the elements of an
when no longer intended for obligation, except:
public use or for public service, Juridical/Legal Tie
shall become property of public Active subject
dominion. Passive subject
all property of the State, which is Consideration
not of public dominion, is
patrimonial property. It is a conduct that may consist of giving,
The property of provinces, cities and doing, or not doing something.
municipalities is divided into Obligation
property for public use and Juridical necessity
patrimonial property. Prestation
Property is either of public dominion Contract
or of private ownership. It is a juridical relation arising from lawful,
voluntary and unilateral acts based on the
The following cannot ask for the reduction principle that no one should unjustly
of inofficious donation, except: enrich himself at the expense of another.
Creditors of the deceased Quasi-contract
Devisees or legatees Quasi-delict
Compulsory heirs of the donor Cotract
The surviving spouse of the donee. Delict
Donation is perfected from the moment The following are the elements of quasi-
--- delict, except:
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 140 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
The following are the requisites of mora A debtor may still be held liable for loss or
solvendi, except: damages even if it was caused by a
Obligation pertains to the debtor fortuitous event in any of the following
and is determinate, due, instances, except:
demandable, and liquidated. The debtor is guilty of dolo, malice
Obligation was performed on its or bad faith, has promised the same
maturity date. thing to two or more persons who do
There is judicial or extrajudicial not have the same interest.
demand by the creditor. The debtor contributed to the loss.
Failure of the debtor to comply with The thing to be delivered is
such demand. generic.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 141 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 142 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 143 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
parties but extends to the heirs, successors Acceptance of the offer by the
in interest, and assignees of the parties, offeree.
provided that the contract involved Qualified/conditional acceptance of
transmissible rights by their nature, or by the offer, which becomes counter-
stipulation or by law. offer.
Obligatory force of contracts Subject matter becomes
Mutuality of contracts illegal/impossible before acceptance
Autonomy of contracts is communicated.
Relativity of contracts
70. Which of the following statements is
It is rule which holds that the freedom of correct?
the parties to contract includes the freedom Offers in interrelated contracts are
to stipulate, provided the stipulations are perfected upon consent.
not contrary to law, morals, good customs, Offers in interrelated contracts
public order or public policy. require a single acceptance.
Obligatory force of contracts c) Business advertisements
Mutuality of contracts are definite offers that require
Autonomy of contracts specific acceptance.
Relativity of contracts Advertisements for Bidders are
only invitations to make
The following are the ways by which proposals and the advertiser is
innominate contracts are regulated, not bound to accept the
except: highest/lowest bidder, unless it
By the stipulation of the parties. appears otherwise.
By the general principles of quasi-
contracts and delicts 71. The following are solemn contracts
By the rules governing the most (Contracts which must appear in writing),
analogous nominate contracts. except:
By the customs of the place. Donations of real estate or of
An offer becomes ineffective on any of the movables if the value exceeds P
following grounds, except: 5,000.00.
Death, civil interdiction, Stipulation to pay interest in loans.
insanity/insolvency of either party Sale of land through an agent
before acceptance is conveyed. (authority must be in writing).
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 144 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
The following are the requisites before a The borrower in a contract of loan or
contract entered into in fraud of creditors mutuum must pay interest to the lender.
may be rescinded, except: If there is an agreement in writing
There must be credited existing to the effect.
prior to the celebration of the As a matter of course.
contract. If the amount borrowed is very
There must be fraud, or at least, the large.
intent to commit fraud to the If the lender so demands at the
prejudice of the creditor seeking maturity date.
rescission.
The creditor cannot in any legal The liability of the school, its administrators
manner collect his credit (subsidiary and teachers, or the individual, entity or
character of rescission) institution engaged in child care over the
The object of the contract must minor child or damage caused by the acts or
be legally in the possession of a omissions of the unemancipated minor while
3rd person in good faith. under their supervision, instruction or
custody shall be:
Joint and subsidiary
Principal and solidary
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 145 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 146 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 147 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 148 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
It is the omission in the testator’s will of consideration, which gives him the right to
one, some or all of the compulsory heirs in buy certain merchandise or specified
direct line, whether living at the time of property, from another person, at anytime
execution of the will or born after the death within the agreed period, at a fixed price.
of the testator. What principle is being What contract is being referred to?
referred to? Option Contract
reserva troncal Contract to Sell
preterition Contract of Sale
fideicommissary Lease
disposicion captatoria
Any disposition made upon the condition Which of the following contracts of sale is
that the heir shall make some provision in void?
his will in favor of the testator or of any Sale of EGM’s car by KRP, EGM’s
other person shall be void. Here, both the agent, whose authority is not
condition and the disposition are void. reduced into writing.
What principle is being referred to? Sale of EGM’s piece of land by
reserva troncal KRP, EGM’s agent, whose
preterition authority is not reduced into
fideicommissary writing.
disposicion captatoria Sale of EGM’s car by KRP, a person
stranger to EGM, without
Which phrase most accurately completes EGM’s consent or authority.
the statement – If at the time the contract Sale of EGM’s piece of land by
of sale is perfected, the thing which is the KRP, a person stranger to EGM,
object of the contract has been entirely lost: without EGM’s consent or authority.
the buyer bears the risk of loss.
the contract shall be without any
effect. 2011 Taxation Law Exam
the seller bears the risk of loss.
the buyer may withdraw from the
MCQ (November 13, 2011)
contract. (1)When does a declaration of absence of a
missing person take effect?
A contract granting a privilege to a person,
Immediately from the issuance of
for which he has paid a
the declaration of absence.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 149 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
without the latter’s consent. The creditor No, the breach of contract may in
fact be tortious as when it is
tainted as in this case with
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 150 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
arbitrariness, gross bad faith, and No, since the marriage did not take
malice. place.
No, denying Lennie the comfort and Yes, since all the requisites of a
amenities of the business class as donation of an immovable are
provided in the ticket is a tortious present.
act. No, since the donation and its
Yes, since the facts show a breach of acceptance are not in a public
contract, not a quasi-delict. instrument.
Yes, since quasi-delict presupposes Yes, since X freely donated the
the absence of a pre- property to Y who became its owner.
existing contractual relation
between the parties. Rene and Lily got married after a brief
courtship. After one month, Lily discovered
Which of the following is an indispensable that while Rene presented himself as a
requirement in an action for "quieting of macho man he was actually gay. He would
title" involving real property? The plaintiff not go to bed with her. He kept obscene
must magazines of nude men and always sought
be in actual possession of the the company of handsome boys. What legal
property. remedy does Lily have?
be the registered owner of the She can file an action for
property. annulment of marriage on ground
have legal or equitable title to the of fraud.
property. She can seek a declaration of nullity
be the beneficial owner of the of the marriage based on
property. Rene’s psychological incapacity.
She can go abroad and file for
X and Y were to marry in 3 months. divorce in a country that can grant
Meantime, to express his affection, X it.
donated a house and lot to Y, which She has none since she had the
donation X wrote in a letter to Y. Y wrote opportunity to examine the goods
back, accepting the donation and took and freely entered into the marriage.
possession of the property. Before the
wedding, however, Y suddenly died of heart Lucio executed a simple deed of donation of
attack. Can Y’s heirs get the property? P50 million on time deposit with a bank in
favor of A, B, C, D, and E,
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 151 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
without indicating the share of each donee. No, since there was no impediment
All the donees accepted the donation in to Raul selling his inheritance to a
writing. A, one of the donees, died. Will B, stranger.
C, D, and E get A’s share in the money?
Yes, accretion will automatically When one exercises a right recognized by
apply to the joint-donees in equal law, knowing that he thereby causes an
shares. injustice to another, the latter is entitled to
Yes, since the donor’s intention is to recover damages. This is known as the
give the whole of P50 million to the principle of
jointdonees in equal shares. res ipsa loquitur.
No, A"s share will revert to the donor damnum absque injuria.
because accretion applies only if the vicarious liability.
joint-donees are spouses. abuse of rights.
No, A’s share goes to his heirs
since the donation did not Which of the following is NOT a basis for
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 152 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 153 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
10 years from the receipt of the last principal two days after the principal died,
news about him. an event that neither the agent nor the
5 years from the receipt of the buyer knew at the time of the sale. What is
last news about him. the standing of the sale?
Voidable.
Which of the following claims against the Valid.
debtor enjoys preference over the others Void.
with respect to his specific immovable Unenforceable.
property and real rights?
Unpaid price of real property sold, Spouses A and B leased a piece of land
upon the immovable property. belonging to B's parents for 25 years. The
Mortgage credits recorded in the spouses built their house on it worth
registry of property, upon the P300,000.00. Subsequently, in a case that
mortgaged real estate. C filed against A and B, the court found the
Taxes due, upon the land or latter liable to C for P200,000.00. When the
building. sheriff was attaching their house for the
Expenses for the preservation and satisfaction of the judgment, A and B
improvement of property, when the claimed that it was exempt from execution,
law authorizes reimbursement, being a family home. Is this claim correct?
upon the preserved or improved Yes, because while B’s parents own
immovable. the land, they agreed to have their
daughter build her family home on
When bilateral contracts are vitiated with it.
vices of consent, they are rendered No, because there is no judicial
rescissible. declaration that it is a family home.
void. No, since the land does not belong
unenforceable. to A and B, it cannot qualify as a
voidable. family home.
Yes, because the A and B’s family
An agent, authorized by a special power of actually lives in that house.
attorney to sell a land belonging to the
principal succeeded in selling the same to a Solomon sold his coconut plantation to
buyer according to the instructions given Aragon, Inc. for P100 million, payable in
the agent. The agent executed the deed of installments of P10 million per month with
absolute sale on behalf of his 6% interest per annum. Solomon married
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 154 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Lorna after 5 months and they chose When A and B married, they chose conjugal
conjugal partnership of gains to govern partnership of gains to govern their
their property relations. When they property relations. After 3 years, B
married, Aragon had an unpaid balance of succeeded in getting her marriage to A
P50 million plus interest in Solomon’s annulled on ground of the latter’s
favor. To whom will Aragon’s monthly psychological incapacity. What liquidation
payments go after the marriage? procedure will they follow in disposing of
The principal shall go to the their assets?
conjugal partnership but the They will follow the rule governing
interests to Solomon. the liquidation of a conjugal
Both principal and interests shall go partnership of gains where the party
to Solomon since they are his who acted in bad faith forfeits his
exclusive properties. share in the net profits.
Both principal and interests shall go Since the marriage has been
to the conjugal partnership since declared void, the rule for
these become due after the liquidation of absolute community of
marriage. property shall be followed.
The principal shall go to Solomon The liquidation of a co-ownership
but the interests to the conjugal applies since the annulment
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 155 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Spouses X and Y have a minor daughter, Z, The husband’s acts of forcibly ejecting his
who needs support for her education. Both wife without just cause from the conjugal
X and Y, who are financially distressed, dwelling and refusing to take her back
could not give the needed support to Z. As constitutes
it happens, Z’s other relatives are desertion.
financially capable of giving that support. recrimination.
From whom may Z first rightfully demand constructive abandonment.
support? From her de facto separation.
grandfather.
brother. In his will, the testator designated X as a
uncle. legatee to receive P2 million for the purpose
first cousin. of buying an ambulance that the residents
of his Barangay can use. What kind of
Fidel, a Filipino with fair complexion, institution is this?
married Gloria. Before the marriage, Gloria a fideicomissary institution.
confessed to Fidel that she was two-month a modal institution.
pregnant with the child of a black African a conditional institution.
who had left the country for good. When the a collective institution.
child was born, Fidel could not accept it
being too black in complexion. What is the X insured himself for P5 million,
status of the child? designating Y, his wife, as his sole
Illegitimate, because Gloria beneficiary. The designation was
confessed that the child is not irrevocable. A few years later, X had their
Fidel’s. marriage annulled in court on the ground
that Y had an existing prior marriage. X
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 156 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
subsequently died, Is Y entitled to the Marlon gets 1/2 and Cecilia gets
insurance benefits? 1/2.
Yes, since the insurance was not Marlon gets 3/4 and Cecilia 1/4.
dependent on the marriage.
Yes, since her designation as Contracts take effect only between the
beneficiary was irrevocable. parties or their assigns and heirs, except
No, X’s designation of Y is where the rights and obligations arising
revoked by operation of law upon from the contract are not transmissible by
the annulment of their marriage their nature, by stipulation, or by provision
based on Y’s fault. of law. In the latter case, the assigns or the
Yes, since without judicial heirs are not bound by the contracts. This
revocation, X’s designation of Y is known as the principle of
remains valid and binding. Relativity of contracts.
May a spouse freely donate communal or Freedom to stipulate.
conjugal property without the consent of Mutuality of contracts.
the other? Obligatory force of contracts.
Absolutely not, since the spouses
co-own such property. A buyer ordered 5,000 apples from the
Yes, for properties that the family seller at P20 per apple. The seller delivered
may spare, regardless of value. 6,000 apples. What are the rights and
Yes, provided the donation is obligations of the buyer?
moderate and intended for charity He can accept all 6,000 apples
or family rejoicing. and pay the seller at P20 per
Yes, in a donation mortis causa that apple.
the donor may still revoke in his He can accept all 6,000 apples and
lifetime. pay a lesser price for the 1,000
excess apples.
The decedent died intestate leaving an He can keep the 6,000 apples
estate of P10 million. He left the following without paying for the 1,000 excess
heirs: a) Marlon, a legitimate child and b) since the seller delivered them
Cecilia, the legal spouse. Divide the estate. anyway.
Marlon gets 1/4 and Cecilia gets He can cancel the whole transaction
3/4. since the seller violated the terms of
Marlon gets 2/3 and Cecilia 1/3. their agreement.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 157 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Lino entered into a contract to sell with suffered from poisoning caused by a
Ramon, undertaking to convey to the latter noxious substance found in the sardines.
one of the five lots he owns, without Mylene filed a case for damages against
specifying which lot it was, for the price of Acme. Which of the following defenses will
P1 million. Later, the parties could not hold?
agree which of five lots he owned Lino The expiry date of the "Sards" was
undertook to sell to Ramon. What is the clearly printed on its can, still the
standing of the contract? store sold and Mylene bought it.
Unenforceable. Mylene must have detected the
Voidable. noxious substance in the sardines
Rescissible. by smell, yet she still ate it.
Void. Acme had no transaction with
Mylene; she bought the "Sards" from
Knowing that the car had a hidden crack in a store, not directly from Acme.
the engine, X sold it to Y without informing Acme enjoys the presumption of
the latter about it. In any event, the deed of safeness of its canning procedure
sale expressly stipulated that X was not and Mylene has not overcome such
liable for hidden defects. Does Y have the presumption.
right to demand from X a reimbursement of
what he spent to repair the engine plus Fernando executed a will, prohibiting his
damages? wife Marina from remarrying after his
Yes. X is liable whether or not he death, at the pain of the legacy of P100
was aware of the hidden defect. Million in her favor becoming a nullity. But
Yes, since the defect was not a year after Fernando’s death, Marina was
hidden; X knew of it but he acted so overwhelmed with love that she married
in bad faith in not disclosing the another man. Is she entitled to the legacy,
fact to Y. the amount of which is well within the
No, because Y is in estoppel, having capacity of the disposable free portion of
changed engine without prior Fernando’s estate?
demand. Yes, since the prohibition against
No, because Y waived the warranty remarrying is absolute, it is deemed
against hidden defects. not written.
Acme Cannery produced sardines in cans Yes, because the prohibition is
known as "Sards." Mylene bought a can of inhuman and oppressive and
Sards from a store, ate it, and
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 158 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 159 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 160 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
The term of a 5-year lease contract between Yes, the donation is not deemed
X the lessor and Y the lessee, where rents made until the suspensive condition
were paid from month to month, came to an has been fulfilled.
end. Still, Y continued using the property
with X’s consent. In such a case, it is Illegitimate children, those not recognized
understood that they impliedly renewed the by their biological fathers, shall use the
lease surname of their
from month to month under the biological father subject to no
same conditions as to the rest. condition.
under the same terms and mother or biological father, at the
conditions as before. mother’s discretion.
under the same terms except the mother.
rent which they or the court must biological father unless he judicially
fix. opposes it.
for only a year, with the rent raised
by 10% pursuant to the rental Asiong borrowed P1 million from a bank,
control law. secured by a mortgage on his land. Without
his consent, his friend Boyong paid the
Rex, a philanthropist, donated a valuable lot whole loan. Since Asiong benefited from the
to the municipality on the condition that it payment, can Boyong compel the bank to
will build a public school on such lot within 2 subrogate him in its right as mortgagee of
years from its acceptance of the donation. The Asiong's land?
municipality properly accepted the donation No, but the bank can foreclose and
but did not yet build the public school after 2 pay Boyong back.
years. Can Rex revoke the donation? No, since Boyong paid for
Yes, since the donation is subject Asiong’s loan without his
to a resolutory condition which approval.
was not fulfilled. Yes, since a change of creditor took
No, but Rex is entitled to recover the place by novation with the bank’s
value of the land from the consent.
municipality. Yes, since it is but right that Boyong
No, the transfer of ownership has be able to get back his money and, if
been completed. not, to foreclose the mortgage in the
manner of the bank.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 161 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Congress passed a law imposing taxes on Yes, since Fernando was a solidary
income earned out of a particular activity creditor, payment to him
that was not previously taxed. The law, extinguished the obligation.
however, taxed incomes already earned
within the fiscal year when the law took What happens to the property regimes that
effect. Is the law valid? were subsisting under the New Civil Code
No, because laws are intended to be when the Family Code took effect?
prospective, not retroactive. The original property regimes are
No, the law is arbitrary in that it immutable and remain effective.
taxes income that has already been Those enjoying specific regimes
spent. under the New Civil Code may adopt
Yes, since tax laws are the lifeblood the regime of absolute community of
of the nation. property under the Family Code.
Yes, tax laws are an exception; Those that married under the New
they can be given retroactive Civil Code but did not choose any of
effect. its regimes shall now be governed by
the regime of absolute community of
Rudolf borrowed P1 million from Rodrigo property.
and Fernando who acted as solidary They are superseded by the Family
creditors. When the loan matured, Rodrigo Code which has retroactive effect.
wrote a letter to Rudolf, demanding The testator executed a will following the
payment of the loan directly to him. Before formalities required by the law on
Rudolf could comply, Fernando went to see succession without designating any heir.
him personally to collect and he paid him. The only testamentary disposition in the
Did Rudolf make a valid payment? will is the recognition of the testator's
No, since Rudolf should have split illegitimate child with a popular actress. Is
the payment between Rodrigo and the will valid?
Fernando. Yes, since in recognizing his
No, since Rodrigo, the other illegitimate child, the testator has
solidary creditor, already made a made him his heir.
prior demand for payment from No, because the non-designation of
Rudolf. heirs defeats the purpose of a will.
Yes, since the payment covers the
whole obligation.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 162 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
No, the will comes to life only when Voidable, because the Judge
the proper heirs are instituted. acted beyond his territorial
Yes, the recognition of an jurisdiction and is administratively
illegitimate heir is an ample liable for the same.
reason for a will. Void, because the Judge did not
solemnize the marriage within the
A left B, his wife, in the Philippines to work premises of his court.
in Egypt but died in that country after a
year’s continuous stay. Two months after X and Y, Filipinos, got married in Los
A’s death, B gave birth to a child, claiming Angeles, USA, using a marriage license
it is A’s child. Who can assail the legitimacy issued by the Philippine consul in Los
of the child? Angeles, acting as Civil Registrar. X and Y
A’s other heirs apart from B. did not know that they were first cousins
The State which has interest in the because their mothers, who were sisters,
welfare of overseas contract were separated when they were quite
workers. young. Since X did not want to continue
Any one who is outraged by B’s with the relation when he heard of it, he left
claim. Y, came to the Philippines and married Z.
No one since A died. Can X be held liable for bigamy?
No since X’s marriage to Y is void ab
QR and TS who had a marriage license initio or did not exist.
requested a newly appointed Judge in No since X acted in good faith,
Manila to marry them on the beach of conscious that public policy did not
Boracay. Since the Judge maintained approve of marriage between first
Boracay as his residence, he agreed. The cousins.
sponsors were all public officials. What is Yes since he married Z without
the status of the marriage. first securing a judicial
Valid, since the improper venue is declaration of nullity of his
merely an irregularity; all the marriage to Y.
elements of a valid marriage are Yes since his first marriage to Y in
present. Los Angeles is valid.
Void, because the couple did not get
local permit for a beach wedding. Allan bought Billy’s property through
Carlos, an agent empowered with a special
power of attorney (SPA) to sell the same.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 163 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
When Allan was ready to pay as scheduled, No, the buyer is entitled to a
Billy called, directing Allan to pay directly customary 30-day extension of his
to him. On learning of this, Carlos, Billy's obligation to take delivery of the
agent, told Allan to pay through him as his goods.
SPA provided and to protect his No, since there was no express
commission. Faced with two claimants, agreement regarding automatic
Allan consigned the payment in court. Billy rescission.
protested, contending that the consignation No, the seller should first determine
is ineffective since no tender of payment that Y was not justified in failing to
was made to him. Is he correct? appear.
No, since consignation without The wife filed a case of legal separation
tender of payment is allowed in against her husband on the ground of
the face of the conflicting claims sexual infidelity
on the plaintiff. without previously exerting earnest efforts
Yes, as owner of the property sold, to come to a compromise with him. The
Billy can demand payment directly judge dismissed the case for having been
to himself. filed without complying with a condition
Yes, since Allan made no precedent. Is the dismissal proper?
announcement of the tender. No, efforts at a compromise will only
Yes, a tender of payment is required deepen the wife’s anguish.
for a valid consignation. No, since legal separation like
validity of marriage is not subject
X sold Y 100 sacks of rice that Y was to to compromise agreement for
pick up from X’s rice mill on a particular purposes of filing.
date. Y did not, however, appear on the Yes, to avoid a family feud that is
agreed date to take delivery of the rice. After hurtful to everyone.
one week, X automatically rescinded the Yes, since the dispute could have
sale without notarial notice to Y. Is the been settled with the parties
rescission valid? agreeing to legal separation.
Yes, automatic rescission is
allowed since, having the An Australian living in the Philippines
character of movables and acquired shares of stock worth P10 million
consumables, rice can easily in food manufacturing companies. He died
deteriorate. in Manila, leaving a legal wife and a child in
Australia and a live-in partner with whom
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 164 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
he had two children in Manila. He also left Yes, after full payment, the action
a will, done according to Philippine laws, became imprescriptible.
leaving all his properties to his live-in
partner and their children. What law will A court declared Ricardo, an old bachelor,
govern the validity of the disposition in the an absentee and appointed Cicero
will? administrator of his property. After a year,
Australia law since his legal wife it was discovered that Ricardo had died
and legitimate child are Australians abroad. What is the effect of the fact of his
and domiciled in Australia. death on the administration of his
Australian law since the intrinsic property?
validity of the provisions of a will With Ricardo no longer an absentee
is governed by the decedent’s but a deceased person, Cicero will
national law. cease to be administrator of his
Philippine law since the decedent properties.
died in Manila and he executed his The administration shall be given
will according to such law. by the court having jurisdiction
Philippine law since the decedent’s over the intestate
properties are in the proceedings to a new
Philippines. administrator whom it will
appoint.
X bought a land from Y, paying him cash. Cicero automatically becomes
Since they were friends, they did not execute administrator of Ricardo’s estate
any document of sale. After 7 years, the heirs until judicially relieved.
of X asked Y to execute a deed of absolute Cicero’s alienations of Ricardo's
sale to formalize the verbal sale to their property will be set aside.
father. Unwilling to do so, X’s heirs filed an
action for specific performance against Y. Will Baldo, a rejected suitor, intimidated Judy
their action prosper? into marrying him. While she wanted to
No, after more than 6 years, the question the validity of their marriage two
action to enforce the verbal years after the intimidation ceased, Judy
agreement has already elapsed. decided in the meantime to freely cohabit
No, since the sale cannot under the with Baldo. After more than 5 years
Statute of Frauds be enforced. following their wedding, Judy wants to file a
Yes, since X bought the land and case for annulment of marriage against
paid Y for it.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 165 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Baldo on ground of lack of consent. Will her all heirs in the higher level are disqualified
action prosper? or unable to inherit?
Yes, the action for annulment is Nephews and nieces.
imprescriptible. Brothers and sisters.
No, since the marriage was merely State.
voidable and Judy ratified it by Other collateral relatives up to the
freely cohabiting with Baldo after 5th degree of consanguinity.
the force and intimidation had
ceased. Roy and Carlos both undertook a contract
No, since the action prescribed 5 to deliver to Sam in Manila a boat docked in
years from the date of the Subic. Before they could deliver it, however,
celebration of the marriage. the boat sank in a storm. The contract
Yes, because the marriage was provides that fortuitous event shall not
celebrated without Judy's consent exempt Roy and Carlos from their
freely given. obligation. Owing to the loss of the motor
boat, such obligation is deemed converted
Is the wife who leaves her husband without into one of indemnity for damages. Is the
just cause entitled to support? liability of Roy and Carlos joint or solidary?
No, because the wife must always be Neither solidary nor joint since they
submissive and respectful to the cannot waive the defense of
husband. fortuitous event to which they are
Yes. The marriage not having been entitled.
dissolved, the husband continues to Solidary or joint upon the discretion
have an obligation to support his of Sam.
wife. Solidary since Roy and Carlos failed
No, because in leaving the to perform their obligation to deliver
conjugal home without just cause, the motor boat.
she forfeits her right to support. Joint since the conversion of
Yes, since the right to receive their liability to one of indemnity
support is not subject to any for damages made it joint.
condition.
Joanne married James, a person with no
In the order of intestate succession where known relatives. Through James' hard
the decedent is legitimate, who is the last work, he and his wife Joane prospered.
intestate heirs or heir who will inherit if When James died, his estate alone
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 166 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
amounted to P100 million. If, in his will, Ric and Josie, Filipinos, have been
James designates Joanne as his only heir, sweethearts for 5 years. While working in a
what will be the free portion of his estate. European country where the execution of
Joanne gets all; estate has no free joint wills are allowed, the two of them
portion left. executed a joint holographic will where they
Joanne gets 1/2; the other half is named each other as sole heir of the other
free portion. in case either of them dies. Unfortunately,
Joanne gets 1/3; the remaining 2/3 Ric died a year later. Can Josie have the
is free portion. joint will successfully probated in the
Joanne gets 1/4; the remaining 3/4 Philippines?
is free portion. Yes, in the highest interest of comity
of nations and to honor the wishes
A warranty inherent in a contract of sale, of the deceased.
whether or not mentioned in it, is known as No, since Philippine law prohibits
the the execution of joint wills and
warranty on quality. such law is binding on Ric and
warranty against hidden defects. Josie even abroad.
warranty against eviction. Yes, since they executed their joint
warranty in merchantability. will out of mutual love and care,
values that the generally accepted
The doctrine of stare decisis prescribes principles of international law
adherence to precedents in order to accepts.
promote the stability of the law. But the Yes, since it is valid in the country
doctrine can be abandoned where it was executed, applying the
When adherence to it would result principle of "lex loci celebrationis."
in the Government’s loss of its case.
When the application of the ML inherited from his father P5 million in
doctrine would cause great legitime but he waived it in a public
prejudice to a foreign national. instrument in favor of his sister QY who
When necessary to promote the accepted the waiver in writing. But as it
passage of a new law. happened, ML borrowed P6 million from PF
When the precedent has ceased to before the waiver. PF objected to the waiver
be beneficial and useful. and filed an action for its rescission on the
ground that he had the right to ML’s P5
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 167 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 168 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
T died intestate, leaving an estate of X, who was abroad, phoned his brother, Y,
P9,000,000. He left as heirs three legitimate authorizing him to sell X’s parcel of land in
children, namely, A, B, and C. A has two Pasay. X sent the title to Y by courier
children, D and E. Before he died, A service. Acting for his brother, Y executed a
irrevocably repudiated his inheritance from notarized deed of absolute sale of the land
T in a public instrument filed with the to Z after receiving payment. What is the
court. How much, if any, will D and E, as status of the sale?
A’s children, get from T’s estate? Valid, since a notarized deed of
Each of D and E will get absolute sale covered the
P1,500,000 by right of transaction and full payment was
representation since their father made.
repudiated his inheritance. Void, since X should have
Each of D and E will get P2,225,000 authorized agent Y in writing to
because they will inherit from the sell the land.
estate equally with B and C. Valid, since Y was truly his brother
D and E will get none because of X’s agent and entrusted with the
the repudiation; "B" and "C" will title needed to effect the sale.
get A’s share by right of Valid, since the buyer could file an
accretion. action to compel X to execute a deed
Each of D and E will get P2,000,000 of sale.
because the law gives them some
advantage due to the demise of "A". In a true pacto de retro sale, the title and
ownership of the property sold are
No decree of legal separation can be issued immediately vested in the vendee a retro
unless the children’s welfare is subject only to the resolutory condition of
attended to first. repurchase by the vendor a retro within the
without prior efforts at stipulated period. This is known as
reconciliation shown to be futile. equitable mortgage.
unless the court first directs conventional redemption.
mediation of the parties. legal redemption.
without prior investigation equity of redemption.
conducted by a public prosecutor. A natural obligation under the New Civil
Code of the Philippines is one which
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 169 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
the obligor has a moral obligation to When the donor gives donations without
do, otherwise entitling the obligee to reserving sufficient funds for his support or
damages. for the support of his dependents, his
refers to an obligation in writing to donations are
do or not to do. Rescissible, since it results in
the obligee may enforce through the economic lesion of more than 25% of
court if violated by the obligor. the value of his properties.
cannot be judicially enforced but Voidable, since his consent to the
authorizes the obligee to retain donation is vitiated by mindless
the obligor’s payment or kindness.
performance. Void, since it amounts to wanton
expenditure beyond his means.
The husband assumed sole administration Reducible to the extent that the
of the family’s mango plantation since his donations impaired the support
wife worked abroad. due to himself and his
Subsequently, without his wife’s knowledge, dependents.
the husband entered into an antichretic
transaction with a company, giving it Anne owed Bessy P1 million due on October
possession and management of the 1, 2011 but failed to pay her on due date.
plantation with power to harvest and sell Bessy sent a demand letter to Anne giving
the fruits and to apply the proceeds to the her 5 days from receipt within which to
payment of a loan he got. What is the pay. Two days after receipt of the letter,
standing of the contract? Anne personally offered to pay Bessy in
It is void in the absence of the wife’s manager's check but the latter refused to
consent. accept the same. The 5 days lapsed. May
It is void absent an authorization Anne’s obligation be considered
from the court. extinguished?
The transaction is void and can Yes, since Bessy’s refusal of the
neither be ratified by the wife nor manager’s check, which is
authorized by the court. presumed funded, amounts to a
It is considered a continuing offer satisfaction of the obligation.
by the parties, perfected only No, since tender of payment even
upon the wife’s acceptance or the in cash, if refused, will not
court’s authorization. discharge the obligation without
proper consignation in court.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 170 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Yes, since Anne tendered payment The owner of a thing cannot use it in a way
of the full amount due. that will injure the right of a third person.
No, since a manager’s check is not Thus, every building or land is subject to
considered legal tender in the the easement which prohibits its proprietor
Philippines. or possessor from committing nuisance like
noise, jarring, offensive odor, and smoke.
The residents of a subdivision have been This principle is known as
using an open strip of land as passage to Jus vindicandi.
the highway for over 30 years. The owner of Sic utere tuo ut alienum non
that land decided, however, to close it in laedas.
preparation for building his house on it. Jus dispondendi.
The residents protested, claiming that they Jus abutendi.
became owners of the land through
acquisitive prescription, having been in Janice and Jennifer are sisters. Janice sued
possession of the same in the concept of Jennifer and Laura, Jennifer’s business
owners, publicly, peacefully, and partner for recovery of property with
continuously for more than 30 years. Is this damages. The complaint did not allege that
claim correct? Janice exerted earnest efforts to come to a
No, the residents have not been in compromise with the defendants and that
continuous possession of the land such efforts failed. The judge dismissed the
since they merely passed through complaint outright for failure to comply
it in going to the highway. with a condition precedent. Is the dismissal
No, the owner did not abandon his in order?
right to the property; he merely No, since Laura is a stranger to
tolerated his neighbors’ use of it for the sisters, Janice has no moral
passage. obligation to settle with her.
Yes, residents of the subdivision Yes, since court should promote
have become owners by acquisitive amicable settlement among
prescription. relatives.
Yes, community ownership by Yes, since members of the same
prescription prevails over private family, as parties to the suit, are
claims. required to exert earnest efforts to
settle their disputes before coming
to court.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 171 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
No, the family council, which would When does the regime of conjugal
ordinarily mediate the dispute, has partnership of gains begin to exist?
been eliminated under the Family At the moment the parties take
Code. and declare each other as
husband and wife before
X borrowed money from a bank, secured by officiating officer.
a mortgage on the land of Y, his close At the time the spouses acquire
friend. When the loan matured, Y offered to properties through joint efforts.
pay the bank but it refused since On the date the future spouses
Y was not the borrower. Is the bank’s action executed their marriage settlements
correct? because this is the starting point of
Yes, since X, the true borrower, did their marital relationship.
not give his consent to Y’s offer to On the date agreed upon by the
pay. future spouses in their marriage
No, since anybody can discharge settlements since their agreement is
X’s obligation to his benefit. the law between them.
No, since Y, the owner of the
collateral, has an interest in the Josie, 18, married Dante, 25, without her
payment of the obligation. parents’ knowledge and consent, and lived
Yes, since it was X who has an with him. After a year, Josie returned to her
obligation to the bank. parents’ home, complained of the
unbearable battering she was getting from
The right of a mortgagor in a judicial Dante, and expressed a desire to have her
foreclosure to redeem the mortgaged marriage with him annulled. Who may
property after his default in the bring the action?
performance of the conditions of the Dante.
mortgage but before the sale of the Her parents.
mortgaged property or confirmation of the Josie herself.
sale by the court, is known as The State.
accion publiciana.
equity of redemption. X, a married man, cohabited with Y, an
pacto de retro. unmarried woman. Their relation bore them
right of redemption. BB, a baby boy. Subsequently, after X
became a widower, he married Y. Was BB
legitimated by that marriage?
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 172 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Yes, since his parents are now Yes, as long as they leave sufficient
lawfully married. property for themselves and for their
Yes, since he is an innocent party dependents.
and the marriage rectified the wrong
done him. X owed Y P1.5 million. In his will, X gave Y
No, since once illegitimate, a legacy of P1 million but the will provided
child shall always remain that this legacy is to be set off against the
illegitimate. P1.5 million X owed Y. After the set off, X
No, since his parents were not still owed Y P500,000. Can Y still collect
qualified to marry each other this amount?
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 173 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 174 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Notary Public notarized the will in his law Separate since their property
office where all signatories to the will relations with their legal spouses
acknowledged that the testator signed the are still subsisting.
will in the presence of the witnesses and Co-ownership since they agreed to
that the latter themselves signed the will in work for their mutual benefit.
the presence of the testator and of one Communal since they earned the
another. Was the will validly notarized? same as common-law spouses.
No, since it was not notarized on the
occasion when the signatories What is the prescriptive period for filing an
affixed their signatures on the will. action for revocation of a donation based on
Yes, since the Notary Public has acts of ingratitude of the donee?
to be present only when the 5 years from the perfection of the
signatories acknowledged the acts donation.
required of them in relation to 1 year from the perfection of the
the will. donation.
Yes, but the defect in the mere 4 years from the perfection of the
notarization of the will is not fatal to donation.
its execution. Such action does not prescribe.
No, since the notary public did not
require the signatories to sign their Before Karen married Karl, she inherited P5
respective attestations again. million from her deceased mother which
amount she brought into the marriage. She
Venecio and Ester lived as common-law later used part of the money to buy a new
spouses since both have been married to Mercedes Benz in her name, which Karen
other persons from whom they had been and her husband used as a family car. Is
separated in fact for several years. the car a conjugal or Karen’s exclusive
Hardworking and bright, each earned property?
incomes from their respective professions It is conjugal property since the
and enterprises. What is the nature of their spouses use it as a family car.
incomes? It is Karen’s exclusive property since
Conjugal since they earned the it is in her name.
same while living as husband and It is conjugal property having been
wife. bought during the marriage.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 175 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Yes, since the foetus is already breach of contract, and against B for tort
No, since X’s would not have known obliged to make all the necessary repairs
that the accident would result in Y’s in order to keep the leased property
abortion. suitable for the use to which it has been
No, since birth determines devoted. Consequently, under Article
personality, the accident did not 1659 NCC, the proprietor of a building or
result in the death of a person. structure is responsible for the damages
Yes, since the mother believed in her resulting from its total or partial
heart that she lost a child. collapse, if it is due to lack of necessary
repairs.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 176 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 177 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
share because the finding was not “by or mother alone, even in a public
No. 5 None of the above is sufficient to (2). The will is valid and effective
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 178 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
comodatario;
(C). Involves the payment of interests, if
owing;
(D). all the above;
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(E). letters a and b
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 179 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(D). All of the above; (D). 1/3 of the total debts must be
represented by the approving creditors;
(4). An, assignee in a proceeding under the
Insolvency Law does not have the duty of: (E). Letters a and b
(C). ensuring that a debtor corporation [Note: Items 4&5 on Insolvency Law are
operate the business efficiently and not included within the coverage of Civil
effectively while the proceedings are Law but Commercial Law. It is therefore
pending; suggested that the examinees be given
full credit for the two items regardless of
(D). collecting and discharging debts owed
their answers.]
to the insolvent debtor.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
References:
(C). ensuring that a debtor corporation
operate the business efficiently and ¾ Answers to Bar Examination
effectively while the proceedings are Questions by the UP LAW COMPLEX
pending; (2007, 2009, 2010)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 180 of 180
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
SUGGESTED ANSWERS IN CIVIL LAW
BAR EXAMINATIONS 2013
By: Assoc. Dean Viviana M. Paguirigan
QUESTION NO. I.
You are a Family Court judge and before you is a Petition for the Declaration of Nullity of
Marriage (under Article 36 of the Family Code) filed by Maria against Neil. Maria claims that
Neil is psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential obligations of marriage
because Neil is a drunkard, a womanizer, a gambler, and a mama's boy- traits that she never
knew or saw when Neil was courting her. Although summoned, Neil did not answer Maria's
petition and never appeared in court.
To support her petition, Maria presented three witnesses- herself, Dr. Elsie Chan, and
Ambrosia. Dr. Chan testified on the psychological report on Neil that she prepared. Since Neil
never acknowledged n9r responded to her invitation for interviews, her report is solely based
on her interviews with Maria and the spouses' minor children. Dr. Chan concluded that Neil is
suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder, an ailment that she found to be already
present since Neil's early adulthood and one that is grave and incurable. Maria testified on the
specific instances when she found Neil drunk, with another woman, or squandering the
family's resources in a casino. Ambrosia, the spouses' current household help, corroborated
Maria's testimony.
On the basis of the evidence presented, will you grant the petition? (8%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
If I were the judge, I will not grant the petition. Although psychological incapacity has not been
defined by the Family Code, the Supreme Court in several cases (Republic vs. San Jose - February
28, 2007; Zamora v. CA an Zamora G.R. No. 141917 February 7, 2007; Benjamin Ting v. Carmen
Ting G.R. No. 166562; March 31, 2009) has ruled that the intendment of the law is to confine
psychological incapacity to the most serious cases of personality disorders clearly demonstrative of
an utter insensitivity or inability to give meaning and significance to the marriage. What the law
requires is downright incapacity and not refusal or neglect or difficulty but a failure to perform
essential marital obligations due to causes psychological in nature.
Further, the presentation of expert proof presupposes a thorough and in-depth assessment of
the parties by the psychologist or expert for a conclusive diagnosis of grave, severe, and
incurable presence of psychological incapacity. (Paz vs. Paz – February 18, 2010) In this case,
the report of Dr. Chan is solely based on her interviews with Maria and the children. She did
not actually hear, see and evaluate Neil. Hence, the report cannot constitute a reasonable
basis to reach a conclusion as to Neil’s psychological incapacity.
QUESTION II.
A collision occurred at an intersection involving a bicycle and a taxicab. Both the bicycle rider
(a businessman then doing his morning exercise) and the taxi driver claimed that the other
was at fault. Based on the police report, the bicycle crossed the intersection first but the
taxicab, crossing at a fast clip from the bicycle's left, could not brake in time and hit the
bicycle's rear wheel, toppling it and throwing the bicycle rider into the sidewalk 5 meters away.
1
The bicycle rider suffered a fractured right knee, sustained when he fell on his right side on
the concrete side walk. He was hospitalized and was subsequently operated on, rendering him
immobile for 3 weeks and requiring physical rehabilitation for another 3 months. In his
complaint for damages, the rider prayed for the award ofP1,000,000 actual damages,P200,000
moral damages, P200,000 exemplary damages, P1 00,000 nominal damages and P50,000
attorney's fees.
Assuming the police report to be correct and as the lawyer for the bicycle rider, what evidence
(documentary and testimonial) and legal arguments will you present in court to justify the
damages that your client claims? (8%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
As lawyer for the bicycle rider, I will present in addition to the police report, the medical
abstract as to the injuries sustained by my client as well as copies of receipts of expenses
incurred in connection with the treatment of his injuries. I will also present the testimony of
my client and perhaps a bystander who witnessed the incident as to the circumstances
surrounding the accident.
As for the legal argument, I will rebut the claim of negligence on my client’s part by presenting
evidence that my client has actually crossed the intersection ahead of the taxicab and it was the
taxicab driver who rapidly cut the path of the bicycle which caused the collision. Also, even
assuming that there was contributory negligence on the part of my client, I will argue that it will
not preclude the recovery of damages but may only mitigate the damages to which he is entitled.
QUESTION III.
Sergio is the registered owner of a 500-square meter land. His friend, Marcelo, who has long
been interested in the property, succeeded in persuading Sergio to sell it to him. On June 2,
2012, they agreed on the purchase price of P600,000 and that Sergio would give Marcelo up
to June30, 2012 within which to raise the amount. Marcelo, in a light tone usual between
them, said that they should seal their agreement through a case of Jack Daniels Black and
P5,000 "pulutan" money which he immediately handed to Sergio and which the latter
accepted. The friends then sat down and drank the first bottle from the case of bourbon.
On June 15, 2013, Sergio learned of another buyer, Roberto, who was offering P800,000 in
ready cash for the land. When Roberto confirmed that he could pay in cash as soon as Sergio
could get the documentation ready, Sergio decided to withdraw his offer to Marcelo, hoping to
just explain matters to his friend. Marcelo, however, objected when the withdrawal was
communicated to him, taking the position that they have a firm and binding agreement that
Sergio cannot simply walk away from because he has an option to buy that is duly supported
by a duly accepted valuable consideration.
Can Sergio claim that whatever they might have agreed upon cannot be enforced because any
agreement relating to the sale of real property must be supported by evidence in writing and
they never reduced their agreement to writing? (3%)
2
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, Marcelo has a cause of action against Sergio. As a rule, an offer can be withdrawn at any
time before acceptance by communicating such withdrawal (Art. 1324) except when the option
is founded upon a consideration as something paid or promised. In this case, although there
was no separate consideration for the option, the offer had already been accepted and thus, it
resulted into a perfected contract of sale between Marcelo and Sergio. Sale being a consensual
contract is perfected by mere consent.
No, Sergio cannot claim that the agreement cannot be enforced because it was not reduced into
writing. Contracts shall be obligatory, in whatever form they may have been entered into,
provided all the essential requisites for their validity are present. (Art. 1356) In fact when the
law requires a document or other special form, as in the acts and enumerated by law, the
contracting parties may compel each other to observe that form, once the contract has been
perfected, and this right may be exercised simultaneously with the action upon the contract.
(Art. 1357) Even an oral sale of a parcel of land is valid between the parties (Campillo vs. CA
129 SCRA 513; Zaide v. CA 163 SCRA 71)
QUESTION IV.
Anselmo is the registered owner of a land and a house that his friend Boboy occupied for a
nominal rental and on the condition that Boboy would vacate the property on demand. With
Anselmo's knowledge, Boboy introduced renovations consisting of an additional bedroom, a
covered veranda, and a concrete block fence, at his own expense.
Subsequently, Anselmo needed the property as his residence and thus asked Boboy to vacate
and turn it over to him. Boboy, despite an extension, failed to vacate the property, forcing
Anselmo to send him a written demand to vacate.
In his own written reply, Boboy signified that he was ready to leave but Anselmo must first
reimburse him the value of the improvements he introduced on the property as he is a builder
in good faith. Anselmo refused, insisting that Boboy cannot ask for reimbursement as he is a
mere lessee. Boboy responded by removing the improvements and leaving the building in its
original state.
Resolve Boboy's claim that as a builder in good faith, he should be reimbursed the value of the
improvements he introduced. (4%)
Can Boboy be held liable for damages for removing the improvements over Anselmo's
objection? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Boboy’s claim that he is a builder in good faith is without merit. The contract between the parties
remains to be a lease despite the nominal rentals paid by Boboy. As such, Boboy’s right with
regard to the improvements he introduced on the property should not be resolved on the basis
of the provisions of the Civil Code on builder in good faith under Article 448 but by the
provision on lease, particularly Article 1678. A lessee who makes improvements on the
property cannot be considered a builder in good faith for he knows that he does not own the
property and his possession is merely temporary. Boboy may only claim one-half of the value
of the improvements from Anselmo but if the latter refuses to reimburse him, Boboy may
remove the improvements even if it may cause damage to the property.
3
No, Boboy cannot be held liable for damages except if he caused unnecessary impairment to the
property leased. Since Anselmo refused to appropriate the improvements and to reimburse
Boboy, the latter may exercise his right to remove the improvements provided he shall not
cause any more impairment to the property leased than is necessary.
QUESTION V.
Josefa executed a deed of donation covering a one-hectare rice land in favor of her daughter,
Jennifer. The deed specifically provides that:
"For and in consideration of he love and service Jennifer has shown and given to
me, I hereby freely, voluntarily and irrevocably donate to her my one-hectare
rice land covered by TCT No. 11550, located in San Fernando, Pampanga. This
donation shall take effect upon my death."
The deed also contained Jennifer's signed acceptance, and an attached notarized declaration
by Josefa and Jennifer that the land will remain in Josefa's possession and cannot be
alienated, encumbered, sold or disposed of while Josefa is still alive.
Advise Jennifer on whether the deed is a donation inter vivos or mortis causa and explain the
reasons supporting your advice. (8%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will advise Jennifer that the deed of donation executed in her favor by Josefa is a donation
inter vivos. An inter vivos donation is generally irrevocable once accepted, and the law
requires that if it involves immovable property, it must be in a public document and there must
be a deed of acceptance which must be in the same deed of donation. If the acceptance is in
a separate instrument, it has to be noted in both instruments. (Art. 749) In this case, the deed
of acceptance clearly signifies that it is a donation inter vivos because a donation mortis causa
need not be accepted by the donee during the lifetime of the donor although the donee in the
case of mortis causa donation is free to accept or repudiate it after the death of the donor.
Also, the prohibition on alienation during Josefa’s lifetime all the more indicates that the
donation is inter vivos because the fact that Josefa reserved the lifetime usufruct of the land
shows that her intent is to transfer the ownership of the donated property to Jennifer or else
there would have been no need for her to reserve the lifetime usufruct thereof if it were a
donation mortis causa. (Gestopa v. CA 342 SCRA 105 citing Reyes vs. Mosqueda, 187 SCRA
661, 671 (1990); Concepcion vs. Concepcion, 91 Phil. 823, 827 (1952).)
QUESTION VI.
Lito obtained a loan of P1,000,000 from Ferdie, payable within one year. To secure payment,
Lito executed a chattel mortgage on a Toyota Avanza and a real estate mortgage on a 200-
square meter piece of property.
Would it be legally significant - from the point of view of validity and enforceability - if the loan
and the mortgages were in public or private instruments? (6%)
Lito's failure to pay led to the extra-judicial foreclosure of the mortgaged real property. Within a
year from foreclosure, Lito tendered a manager's check to Ferdie to redeem the property. Ferdie
refused to accept payment on the ground that he wanted payment in cash: the
4
check does not qualify as legal tender and does not include the interest payment. Is Ferdie's
refusal justified? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
With respect to the loan, the same is both valid and enforceable regardless of whether it is in a
private or public document because as a rule, contracts shall be obligatory in whatever form
they may have been entered into provided all the essential requisites for their validity are
present. A loan is a contract which the law does not require to be in a particular form in order
that it may be valid or enforceable.
However, with regard to the chattel mortgage, since the law (Act 1508) requires an affidavit of
good faith stating that the chattel mortgage is supposed to stand as security for the loan, it is
submitted that for validity of the chattel mortgage, it must be in a public document. A real
estate mortgage under the provisions of Article 2125 requires that in order that a mortgage
may be validly constituted that the document in which it appears must be recorded. If it is not
recorded, the mortgage is nevertheless valid and binding between the parties. Hence, for
validity both chattel and real estate mortgages must be in a public document. But for purposes
of enforceability, it is submitted that the form of the contract whether in a public or private
document would be immaterial. (Mobil Oil vs. Diocares 29 SCRA 656).
Ferdie’s refusal to accept the check on the ground that it does not qualify as legal tender is correct
because a check, whether a manager's check or ordinary check, is not legal tender, and an offer of
a check in payment of a debt is not a valid tender of payment and may be refused receipt by the
obligee or creditor. (Philippine Airlines vs. CA and Amelia Tan – January 30, 1990) Mere delivery of
checks does not discharge the obligation under a judgment. The obligation is not extinguished and
remains suspended until the payment by commercial document is actually realized (Art. 1249, Civil
Code, par. 3). Also, redemption within the period allowed by law is not a matter of intent but a
question of payment or valid tender of full redemption price within the said period. Whether the
redemption is being made under Act 3135 or under the General Banking Law, the mortgagor or his
assignee is required to tender payment to make said redemption valid. (Heirs of Quisumbing vs.
PNB aand SLDC –G.R. No. 178242 January 20, 2009)
QUESTION VII.
In 2005, Andres built a residential house on a lot whose only access to the national highway
was a pathway crossing Brando's property. Andres and others have been using this pathway
(pathway A) since 1980.
In 2006, Brand0 fenced off his property, thereby blocking Andres' access to the national
highway. Andres demanded that part of the fence be removed to maintain his old access route
to the highway (pathway A), but Brando refused, claiming that there was another available
pathway (pathway B) for ingress and egress to the highway. Andres countered that pathway B
has defects, is circuitous, and is extremely inconvenient to use.
To settle their dispute, Andres and Brando hired Damian, a geodetic and civil engineer, to survey
and examine the two pathways and the surrounding areas, and to determine the shortest and the
least prejudicial way through the servient estates. After the survey, the engineer concluded that
pathway B is the longer route and will need improvements and repairs, but will not significantly
affect the use of Brando's property. On the other hand, pathway A that had long been in place, is
the shorter route but would significantly affect the use of Brando's property.
5
In light of the engineer's findings and the circumstances of the case, resolve the parties' right
of way dispute. (6%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will rule in favor of Brando. The easement of right of way should be established at a point least
prejudicial to the servient estate where the distance from the dominant estate to the public
highway may be the shortest. (Art. 650) If these two conditions do not concur in one estate, the
criterion of least prejudice prevails over shortest distance. (Anastacia Quimen vs. CA and Yolanda
Oliveros May 29, 1996) In this case, to establish the easement on the property of Brando would
significantly affect his use of his property whereas while Pathway B may prove to be the longer
route, it will cause least prejudice to Brando. Andres’ argument that Pathway B
is circuitous and inconvenient to use should not be given weight because the true test of the
establishment of an easement is adequacy. Convenience of the dominant estate has never
been the gauge for the establishment of the easement. (Costabella Corporation v. CA 193
SCRA 333; Cristobal vs. Ledesma 291 SCRA 122)
QUESTION VIII.
Ciriaco Realty Corporation (CRC) sold to the spouses Del a Cruz a500-square meter land (Lot
A) in Paranaque. The land now has a fair market value of Pl,200,000. CRC likewise sold to the
spouses Rodriguez, a 700-square meter land (Lot B) which is adjacent to Lot A. Lot B has a
present fair market value of P1,500,000.
The spouses Dela Cruz constructed a house on Lot B, relying on there presentation of the CRC
sales agent that it is the property they purchased. Only upon the completion of their house did
the spouses Dela Cruz discover that they had built on Lot B owned by the spouses Rodriguez,
not on Lot A that they purchased. They spent P 1 000,000 for the house.
As their lawyer, advise the spouses Dela Cruz on their rights and obligations under the given
circumstances, and the recourses and options open to them to protect their interests. (8%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will advise Spouses Dela Cruz that they have the right to retain possession of the premises
until Rodriguez exercises any of the options under Article 448 of the Civil Code. (Tecnogas
Manufacturing vs. CA February 10, 1997) Spouses Dela Cruz are builders in good faith because
before constructing the house, they exercised due diligence by asking the agent of CRC the
location of Lot A and they relied on the information given by the agent who is presumed to
know the identity of the lot purchased by the Dela Cruz. (Pleasantville vs. CA 253 SCRA 10)
The owner of the land on which anything has been built in good faith by another has the right
to appropriate as his own the works, sowing or planting after payment of the indemnity or to
oblige the builder to pay the price of the land if its value is not considerably higher than the
building or trees, or to ask the sower to pay proper rent. I will also advise my clients that
Rodriguez may not compel them to remove the improvements because it is not one of the
options granted to the landowner if the builder is in good faith.
6
QUESTION IX.
Rica petitioned for the annulment of her ten-year old marriage to Richard. Richard hired Atty.
Cruz to represent him in the proceedings. In payment for Atty. Cruz's acceptance and legal
fees, Richard conveyed to Atty. Cruz a parcel of land in Taguig that he recently purchased with
his lotto winnings. The transfer documents were duly signed and Atty. Cruz immediately took
possession by fencing off the property's entire perimeter.
Desperately needing money to pay for his mounting legal fees and his other needs and despite
the transfer to Atty. Cruz, Richard offered the same parcel of land for sale to the spouses
Garcia. After inspection of the land, the spouses considered it a good investment and
purchased it from Richard. Immediately after the sale, the spouses Garcia commenced the
construction of a three-story building over the land, but they were prevented from doing this
by Atty. Cruz who claimed he has a better right in light of the prior conveyance in his favor.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, Atty. Cruz is not correct. At first glance, it may appear that Atty. Cruz is the one who has a
better right because he first took possession of the property. However, as a lawyer of Richard he is
prohibited under Article 1491 from acquiring the property and rights which may the object of any
litigation in which they may take part by virtue of their profession. While the suit is for annulment
of marriage and it may be argued that the land itself is not the object of the litigation, the
annulment of marriage if granted, will carry with it the liquidation of the absolute community or
conjugal partnership of the spouses as the case may be (Article 50 in relation to Article 43 of the
Family Code). Richard purchased the land with his lotto winnings during the pendency of the suit
for annulment and on the assumption that the parties are governed by the regime of absolute
community or conjugal partnership, winnings from gambling or betting will form part thereof. Also,
since the land is part of the absolute community or conjugal partnership of the Richard and Rica it
may not be sold or alienated without the consent of the latter and any disposition or encumbrance
of the property of the community or conjugal property without the consent of the other spouse is
void. (Article 96 and Article 124, Family Code).
QUESTION X.
Manuel was born on 12 March 1940 in a 1 000-square meter property where he grew up
helping his father, Michael, cultivate the land. Michael has lived on the property since the land
was opened for settlement at about the time of the Commonwealth government in 193 5, but
for some reason never secured any title to the property other than a tax declaration in his
name. He has held the property through the years in the concept of an owner and his stay
was uncontested by others. He has also conscientiously and continuously paid the realty taxes
on the land.
Michael died in 2000 and Manuel - as Michael’s only son and heir -now wants to secure and
register title to the land in his own name. He consults you for legal advice as he wants to
perfect his title to the land and secure its registration in his name.
What are the laws that you need to consider in advising Manuel on how he can perfect his title
and register the land in his name? Explain the relevance of these laws to your projected
course of action. (4%)
7
What do you have to prove to secure Manuel's objectives and what documentation are
necessary? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
For purposes of confirmation of imperfect title, I will have to consider the provisions of
Commonwealth Act No. 141 as well as the Property Registration Decree or P.D. 1529 in giving my
advice to Manuel. C.A. No. 141 which amended the second Public Land Act (Act 2874) provides
that there are two requisites for judicial confirmation of imperfect title namely:1) open and
continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and occupation of the land by himself or through
his predecessor in interest under bona fide claim of ownership since June 12, 1945; and 2) the
classification of the land as alienable and disposable land of the public domain. (Secretary of DENR
v. Yap -G.R. NO. 167707, October 8, 2008) The Property Registration Decree or P.D. 1529
1
provides who may file an application for registration of title to the land under Section 14 thereof
which provides that those who by themselves or their predecessors-in-interest have been in open,
continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and occupation of alienable and disposable lands
for the public domain under a bona fide claim of ownership since June 12, 1945 or earlier. Since
Manuel’s father Michael had been in open, continuous, exclusive and notorious possession of the
land since 1935, and that the land was declared alienable in the same year, his possession has
ripened into ownership which entitles him or his successor Manuel to file an application for judicial
confirmation of imperfect title.
I have to prove that the land was already declared alienable at the time that Manuel or his father
Michael took possession of the land and that their possession was open, continuous, exclusive and
notorious which started prior to or on June 12, 1945 as required by C.A. No. 141. To prove the
first requisite, the original classification of the land as approved by the DENR Secretary (Republic
v. T.A. N. Properties 555 SCRA 4777 (2008) or in lieu thereof, a Certification by the DENR Regional
office attesting to the alienable and disposable character of the land (Republic v. Serrano G.R. No.
183063 – February 24, 2010) must have to be submitted. I also have to file together with the
application for registration all original muniments of title or copies thereof and a survey plan of the
2
land approved by the Bureau of Lands in accordance with Section 17 of P.D. 1529. Manuel may
also submit the tax declarations and tax payment receipts which have been ruled to be good
indications of possession in the concept of owner (Republic vs. Candy Maker, Inc. G.R. No.
163766, June 22, 2006).
Section 14. Who may apply. The following persons may file in the proper Court of First Instance an application for
registration of title to land, whether personally or through their duly authorized representatives:
Those who by themselves or through their predecessors-in-interest have been in open, continuous, exclusive and
notorious possession and occupation of alienable and disposable lands of the public domain under a bona fide claim
of ownership since June 12, 1945, or earlier.
Those who have acquired ownership of private lands by prescription under the provision of existing laws.
Those who have acquired ownership of private lands or abandoned river beds by right of accession or accretion
under the existing laws.
Those who have acquired ownership of land in any other manner provided for by law.
Section 17. What and where to file. The application for land registration shall be filed with the Court of First Instance of the
province or city where the land is situated. The applicant shall file together with the application all original muniments of titles
or copies thereof and a survey plan of the land approved by the Bureau of Lands.
The clerk of court shall not accept any application unless it is shown that the applicant has furnished the Director of Lands
with a copy of the application and all annexes.
8
2014 BAR EXAMINATIONS UNIVERSITY of the PHILIPPINES LAW CENTER SUGGESTED
ANSWERS IN CIVIL LAW Assoc. Dean Viviana M. Paguirigan
I.
Ariz and Paz were officemates at Perlas ng Silangan Bank (PSB). They fell in love with each other and
had a civil and church wedding. Meanwhile, Paz rapidly climbed the corporate ladder of PSB and
eventually became its Vice President, while Ariz remained one of its bank supervisors, although he was
short of 12 units to finish his Masters of Business Administration (MBA) degree.
Ariz became envious of the success of his wife. He started to drink alcohol until he became a drunkard.
He preferred to join his "barkadas"; became a wifebeater; would hurt his children without any reason;
and failed to contribute to the needs of the family. Despite rehabilitation and consultation with a
psychiatrist, his ways did not change.
After 19 years of marriage, Paz, a devout Catholic, decided to have their marriage annulled by the
church. Through the testimony of Paz and a psychiatrist, it was found that Ariz was a spoiled brat in his
youth and was sometimes involved in brawls. In his teens, he was once referred to a psychiatrist for t
reatment due to his violent tendencies. In due time, the National Appellate Matrimonial Tribunal
(NAMT) annulled the union of Ariz and Paz due to the failure of Ariz to perform and fulfill his duties as
a husband and as a father to their children. The NAMT concluded that it is for the best interest of Paz,
Ariz and their children to have the marriage annulled.
In view of the NAMT decision, Paz decided to file a Petition for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage of
their civil wedding before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Makati City using the NAMT decision and
the same evidence adduced in the church annulment proceedings as basis.
If you are the judge, will you grant the petition? Explain. (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
If I were the judge, I will not grant the petition. While the decision of the church tribunal annulling the
marriage of the parties may be persuasive, it is not however, binding upon the civil courts. For
psychological incapacity to be a ground for nullity, it must be shown that it was rooted in the history of
the party alleged to be suffering from it, must be grave and serious, and incurable such that it renders
the person incapacitated to perform the essential marital obligations due to causes psychological in
nature. In the case presented, it appears that Ariz fulfilled his marital obligations at the beginning and
it was only after feeling envious about the success of Paz that he started exhibiting violent tendencies
and refused to comply with marital obligations. Psychological incapacity is not mere refusal but outright
incapacity to perform marital obligations which does not appear to be present in the case of Ariz.
(Marcos v. Marcos G.R. No. 136490- October 19, 2000)
II.
Crispin died testate and was survived by Alex and Josine, his children from his first wife; Rene and
Ruby, his children from his second wife; and Allan, Bea, and Cheska, his children from his third wife.
"Ang lupa at bahay sa Lungsod ng Maynila ay ililipat at ilalagay sa pangalan nila Alex at Rene hindi
bilang pamana ko sa kanila kundi upang pamahalaan at pangalagaan lamang nila at nang ang sinuman
sa aking mga anak, sampu ng aking mga apo at kaapuapuhan ko sa habang panahon, ay may
tutuluyan kung magnanais na mag-aral sa Maynila o sa kalapit na mga lungsod."
9
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the provision is not valid. At first glance, the provision may appear valid as it provides for the
transfer of title in favor of Alex and Rene over the parcel of land. A legacy or devise is to be construed
as a donation effective mortis causa, and it is intended to transfer ownership to the legatee or devisee.
Since the ownership is legally transferred to the Alex and Rene, they cannot be prohibited by the
testator from alienating or partitioning the same perpetually. The dispositions of the testator declaring
all or part of the estate inalienable for more than twenty years are void. (Article 870)
III.
The Roman Catholic Church accepted a donation of a real property located in Lipa City. A deed of
donation was executed, signed by the donor, Don Mariano, and the donee, the Church, as represented
by Fr. Damian. Before the deed could be notarized, Don Mariano died. Is the donation valid? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The donation is void. The donation of an immovable property must be in a public instrument in order
for it to be valid. In this case, the donor died even before the notarization of the deed of donation.
Hence, it does not satisfy the requirement of being in a public instrument for the donation to be valid.
IV.
Nante, a registered owner of a parcel of land in Quezon City, sold the property to Monica under a deed
of sale which reads as follows:
"That for and in consideration of the sum of P500,000.00, value to be paid and delivered to me, and
receipt of which shall be acknowledged by me to the full satisfaction of Monica, referred to as Vendee,
I hereby sell, transfer, cede, convey, and assign, as by these presents, I do have sold, transferred,
ceded, conveyed and assigned a parcel of land covered by TCT No. 2468 in favor of the Vendee."
After delivery of the initial payment of P100,000.00, Monica immediately took possession of the
property. Five (5) months after, Monica failed to pay the remaining balance of the purchase price.
Nante filed an action for the recovery of possession of the property. Nante alleged that the agreement
was one to sell,which was not consummated as the full contract price was not paid. Is the contention
of Nante tenable?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The contention of Nante is not tenable. The deed itself states that for consideration received, he sells,
transfers, and conveys the land to Monica and there was delivery of the property to the latter. The
contract is clearly one of sale as there was no reservation of ownership on the part of the seller Nante.
The non-payment of the price in a contract of sale would only entitle the seller to rescind the contract
but it does not thereby prevent the transfer of ownership particularly so as in this case, where there
was already delivery to the buyer.
V.
10
Answer is letter B (preterition annuls the institution of heirs)
VI.
Miko and Dinah started to live together as husband and wife without the benefit of marriage in 1984.
Ten (10) years after, they separated. In 1996, they decided to live together again, and in 1998, they
got married.
On February 17, 2001, Dinah filed a complaint for declaration of nullity of her marriage with Miko on
the ground of psychological incapacity under Article 36 of the Family Code. The court rendered the
following decision:
Declaring that a decree of absolute nullity of marriage shall only be issued after liquidation, partition
and distribution of the parties’ properties under Article 147 of the Family Code."
Dinah filed a motion for partial reconsideration questioning the portion of the decision on the issuance
of a decree of nullity of marriage only after the liquidation, partition and distribution of properties
under Article 147 of the Code.
If you are the judge, how will you decide petitioner’s motion for partial reconsideration? Why? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will grant partial reconsideration. If the marriage is declared void under Article 36, the provisions of
the Family Code on liquidation, partition, and distribution of the properties on absolute community or
conjugal partnership will not apply but rather Article 147 or Article 148 depending on the presence or
3
absence of a legal impediment between them. In Dino v. Dino, the SC ruled that Art. 50 of the Family
Code and Section 19 of the Rules on Declaration of Nullity applies only to marriages which are declared
void ab initio or annulled by final judgment under Articles 40 and 45 of the Family. In short, Art. 50 of
the Family Code does not apply to marriages which are declared void ab initio under Art. 36 of the FC
which should be declared void without waiting for the liquidation of the properties of the parties.
VII.
Due to the continuous heavy rainfall, the major streets in Manila became flooded. This compelled Cris
to check-in at Square One Hotel. As soon as Crisgot off from his Toyota Altis, the Hotel’s parking
attendant got the key of his car and gave him a valet parking customer’s claim stub. The attendant
parked his car at the basement of the hotel. Early in the morning, Cris was informed by the hotel
manager that his car was carnapped. (4%)
What contract, if any, was perfected between Cris and the Hotel when Cris surrendered the key of his
car to the Hotel’s parking attendant?
What is the liability, if any, of the Hotel for the loss of Cris’ car?
Alain Dino vs. Ma. Caridad Dino G.R. No. 178044, January 19, 2011
11
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The contract between Cris and Square One Hotel is one of necessary deposit. Deposit of effects
4
made by travelers or guests in hotels or inns is considered a necessary deposit. This includes
not only the personal effects brought inside the hotel premises but also vehicles or animals and
articles which have been introduced or placed in the annexes of the hotel.
5
In the case of Durban Apartments vs. Pioneer Insurance, the Supreme Court held the hotel liable
for the loss of the vehicle of the guest after its valet parking attendant parked the vehicle in
front of a bank near the hotel premises. The court ruled that the bank’s parking area became
an annex of the hotel when the management of the bank allowed the hotel to park vehicles
there on the night in question. The contract of deposit was perfected when the guest
surrendered the keys to his vehicle to the parking attendant and the hotel is under obligation of
safely keeping and returning it. Ultimately, Square One Hotel is liable for the loss of the vehicle.
VIII.
Tess leased her 1,500 sq. m. lot in Antipolo City to Ruth for a period of three (3) years, from
January 2010 to February 2013.
On March 19, 2011, Tess sent a letter to Ruth, part of which reads as follows:
"I am offering you to buy the property you are presently leasing at P5,000.00 per sq. m. or for a total of
P7,500,000.00. You can pay the contract price by installment for two (2) years without interest.
I will give you a period of one (1) year from receipt of this letter to decide whether you will buy the
property."
After the expiration of the lease contract, Tess sold the property to her niece for a total
consideration of P4 million.
Ruth filed a complaint for the annulment of the sale, reconveyance and damages against Tess and
her niece. Ruth alleged that the sale of the leased property violated her right to buy under the
principle of right of first refusal.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the allegation of Ruth is not tenable. The letter written by Tess did not grant a right of first
refusal to Ruth. At most, it is to be construed as an option contract whereby Ruth was given the
right to buy or not to buy the leased property. An option is itself not a purchase but it merely
secures the privilege to buy. However, the option is not valid because it was not supported by a
cause or consideration distinct from the price of the property. (Article 1479) Also, Ruth does not
appear to have exercised her option before the offer was withdrawn by the subsequent sale of the
property to the niece of Tess.
IX.
5
G.R. No. 179419 January 12, 2011
12
Spouses Macario and Bonifacia Dakila entered into a contract to sell with Honorio Cruz over a
parcel of industrial land in Valenzuela, Bulacan for a price of Three Million Five Hundred Thousand
Pesos (P3,500,000.00). The spouses would give a downpayment of Five Hundred Thousand Pesos
(P500,000.00) upon the signing of the contract, while the balance would be paid for the next three
consecutive months in the amount of One Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00) per month. The spouses
paid the first two (2) installments but not the last installment. After one (1) year, the spouses
offered to pay the unpaid balance which Honorio refused to accept.
The spouses filed a complaint for specific performance against Honorio invoking the application of
the Maceda Law. If you are the judge, how will you decide the case? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will rule in favor of Honorio. The invocation of the Maceda Law is misplaced. The law applies only to
sale or financing of realty on installment payments including residential units or residential condominium
apartments and does not apply to sales of industrial units or industrial lands like in the case presented.
Another reason why the Maceda law will not apply is that, the sale in the case at bar is not the sale on
installment as contemplated by the law. The sale on installment covered by the Maceda Law is one
where the price is paid or amortized over a certain period in equal installments. The sale to the Spouses
Dakila is not a sale on installment but more of a straight sale where a down payment is to be made and
the balance to be paid in a relatively short period of three months.
X.
Dorotea leased portions of her 2,000 sq. m. lot to Monet, Kathy, Celia, and Ruth for five (5) years.
Two (2) years before the expiration of the lease contract, Dorotea sold the property to PM Realty
and Development Corporation. The following month, Dorotea and PM Realty stopped accepting
rental payments from all the lessees because they wanted to terminate the lease contracts.
Due to the refusal of Dorotea to accept rental payments, the lessees , Ruth, et al., filed a complaint
for consignation of the rentals before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila without notifying
Dorotea.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the consignation is not valid. For consignation of the thing or sum due to be proper, there must
be prior notice to the creditor that the debtor is going to consign the payment in court. This notice
is intended to give the creditor the opportunity to accept payment and thus avoid liability for costs
in case it is found that the act of consignation was properly made. Even on the assumption that
Dorotea was no longer the creditor as she had already sold the property to DM Realty, the facts do
not state that the realty corporation was also given notice before filing the case for consignation.
XI.
Right of way
Watering of an animal
13
XII.
J.C. Construction (J.C.) bought steel bars from Matibay Steel Industries (MSI) which is owned by
Buddy Batungbacal. J.C. failed to pay the purchased materials worth P500,000.00 on due date. J.C.
persuaded its client Amoroso with whom it had receivables to pay its obligation to MSI. Amoroso
agreed and paid MSI the amount of P50,000.00. After two (2) other payments, Amoroso stopped
making further payments.
Buddy filed a complaint for collection of the balance of the obligation and damages against J.C. J.C.
denied any liability claiming that its obligation was extinguished by reason of novation which took
place when MSI accepted partial payments from Amoroso on its behalf.
Was the obligation of J.C. Construction to MSI extinguished by novation? Why? (4%)
SUGEGSTED ANSWER:
No, the obligation of JC was not extinguished by novation. Novation may either be objective or
subjective. Subjective novation takes place by the substitution of debtor or subrogation of a third
person to the rights of the creditor. Novation by substituting a new debtor may take place even without
the knowledge or against the will of the original debtor but not without the consent of the creditor.
Moreover, novation must be expressed and it cannot be implied and there must be an agreement that
the old obligation is extinguished. In the case of JC, it does not appear that MSI had agreed to release
JC from the obligation. Hence, the obligation of JC was not extinguished.
XIII.
Esteban and Martha had four (4) children: Rolando, Jun, Mark, and Hector. Rolando had a daughter,
Edith, while Mark had a son, Philip. After the death of Esteban and Martha, their three (3) parcels of
land were adjudicated to Jun. After the death of Jun, the properties passed to his surviving spouse
Anita, and son Cesar. When Anita died, her share went to her son Cesar. Ten (10) years after, Cesar
died intestate without any issue. Peachy, Anita’s sister, adjudicated to herself the properties as the only
surviving heir of Anita and Cesar. Edith and Philip would like to recover the properties claiming that they
should have been reserved by Peachy in their behalf and must now revert back to them.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the contention is not valid. The property adjudicated to Jun from the estate of his parents which he in
turn left to Anita and Cesar is not subject to reservation in favor of Edith and Philip. In Mendoza et. al.
6
vs.Policarpio, et. al. the court ruled that lineal character of the reservable property is reckoned from the
ascendant from whom the propositus received the property by gratuitous title. The ownership should be
reckoned only from Jun, as he is the ascendant from where the first transmission occurred or from whom
Cesar inherited the properties. Moreover, Article 891 provides that the person obliged to reserve the
property should be an ascendant. Peachy is not Cesar’s ascendant but a mere collateral relative. On the
assumption that the property is reservable, Edith and Philip being first cousins of Cesar who is the
propositus are disqualified to be reservatarios as they are not third degree relatives of Cesar.
XIV.
14
A pedestrian, who was four (4) months pregnant, was hit by a bus driver while crossing the street.
Although the pedestrian survived, the fetus inside her womb was aborted. Can the pedestrian recover
damages on account of the death of the fetus? (1%)
Yes, because of Article 2206 of the Civil Code which allows the surviving heirs to demand damages
for mental anguish by reason of the death of the deceased.
Yes, for as long as the pedestrian can prove that she was not at fault and the bus driver was the
one negligent.
No, if the fetus did not comply with the requirements under Article 41 of the Civil Code.
Correct Answer is letter D – Article 41 of the Civil Code requires that to be considered a person, a
fetus with an intrauterine life of less than seven months must survive for the full twenty-four hours from
complete separation from the mother’s womb.
XV.
Mr. Bong owns several properties in Pasig City. He decided to build a condominium named Flores de
Manila in one of his lots. To fund the project, he obtained a loan from the National Bank (NB) secured
by a real estate mortgage over the adjoining property which he also owned.
During construction, he built three (3) pumps on the mortgaged property to supply water to the
condominium. After one (1) year, the project was completed and the condominium was turned over to
the buyers. However, Mr. Bong failed to pay his loan obligation to NB. Thus, NB foreclosed the
mortgaged property where the pumps were installed. During the sale on public auction of the
mortgaged property, Mr. Simon won in the bidding. When Mr. Simon attempted to take possession of
the property, the condominium owners, who in the meantime constituted themselves into Flores de
Manila Inc. (FMI), claimed that they have earlier filed a case for the declaration of the existence of an
easement before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Pasig City and prayed that the easement be
annotated in the title of the property foreclosed by NB. FMI further claimed that when Mr. Bong installed
the pumps in his adjoining property, a voluntary easement was constituted in favor of FMI.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the action will not prosper. The essence of a mortgage is that it immediately subjects the property upon
which it is imposed, and whoever the possessor may be, to the fulfillment of the obligation for whose security
7
it was constituted. There was no voluntary easement in this case because at the time the water pumps were
constructed, the subject lot where the water pumps were constructed and the condominium belong to the
same person. No one can have an easement over his own property. (Bogo- Medellin vs. CA G.R. 124699, July
31, 2003.) Even of the assumption that an easement was created in favor of FMI that alone will not defeat
the right of the mortgagee to enforce the security if the debtor defaults.
XVI.
A congregation for religious women, by way of commodatum, is using the real property owned and
registered in the name of Spouses Manuel as a retreat house.
Maria, a helper of the congregation discovered a chest in the backyard. When she opened the chest, it
contained several pieces of jewelry and money. (4%)
Article 2126
15
Can the chest containing the pieces of jewelry and money be considered as hidden treasure?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, for property to be considered hidden treasure it must consist of money, jewelry or other
precious objects, the lawful ownership of which does not appear. In the case at bar, the chest
was just lay in the backyard and the real property where it was found belongs to the Spouses
Manuel. They are thus presumed the owner of the chest where the jewelry was found.
Since it does not come within the purview of hidden treasure, the spouses Manuel have the right to
claim ownership over the chest as well as its contents.
XVII.
On March 30, 2000, Mariano died intestate and was survived by his wife, Leonora, and children, Danilo
and Carlito. One of the properties he left was a piece of land in Alabang where he built his residential
house.
After his burial, Leonora and Mariano’s children extrajudicially settled his estate. Thereafter, Leonora
and Danilo advised Carlito of their intention to partition the property. Carlito opposed invoking Article
159 of the Family Code. Carlito alleged that since his minor child Lucas still resides in the premises, the
family home continues until that minor beneficiary becomes of age.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
8
No, the contention of Carlito is not tenable. In the case of Patricio v. Dario, with similar facts to the
case at bar, the court ruled that to qualify as beneficiary of the family home the person must be among
those mentioned in Article 154, he/she must be actually living in the family home and must be
dependent for legal support upon the head of the family. While Lucas, the son of Carlito satisfies the
first and second requisites, he cannot however, directly claim legal support from his grandmother,
Leonora because the person primarily obliged to give support to Lucas is his father, Carlito. Thus,
partition may be successfully claimed by Leonora and Danilo.
XVIII.
Spouses Magtanggol managed and operated a gasoline station on a 1,000 sq.m. lot which they leased
from Francisco Bigla -awa. The contract was for a period of three (3) years. When the contract expired,
Francisco asked the spouses to peacefully vacate the premises. The spouses ignored the demand and
continued with the operation of the gasoline station.
One month after, Francisco, with the aid of a group of armed men, caused the closure of the gasoline
station by constructing fences around it.
Was the act of Francisco and his men lawful? Why? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the act was not lawful. Even if the lessee’s right to occupy the premises has expired, the lessor cannot
physically oust the lessee from the leased premises if the latter refuses to vacate. The lessor must go
through the proper channels by filing an appropriate case for unlawful detainer or recovery of possession.
Every possessor has a right to be respected in his possession (Article 539) and in no case my possession be
acquired through force or intimidation as long as there is a possessor who objects thereto. (Article
16
The act of Francisco is an abuse of rights because even if he has the right to recover possession of his
property, he must act with justice and give the lessees their day in court and observe honesty and good
faith.
XIX.
Lessee if he advances the expenses for the repair of the leased premises.
Builder in bad faith for the recovery of necessary and useful expenses.
XX.
Mabuhay Elementary School organized a field trip for its Grade VI students in Fort Santiago,
Manila Zoo, and Star City. To be able to join, the parents of the students had to sign a piece of
paper that reads as follows:
"I allow my child (name of student), Grade – Section, to join the school’s field trip on February
14, 2014.
I will not file any claim against the school, administrator or teacher in case something happens
to my child during the trip."
Joey, a 7-year-old student of Mabuhay Elementary School was bitten by a snake while the
group was touring Manila Zoo. The parents of Joey sued the school for damages. The school,
as a defense, presented the waiver signed by Joey’s parents.
Was there a valid waiver of right to sue the school? Why? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, there was no valid waiver of the right to sue the school. A waiver to be valid must have three
requisites 1) existence of the right; 2) legal capacity of the person waiving the right and 3) the waiver
must not be contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order or public policy or prejudicial to a third
person with a right recognized by law. In the case presented, the waiver may be considered contrary to
public policy as it exonerates the school from liability for future negligence. The waiver in effect allows
the school to not exercise even ordinary diligence.
XXI.
formation of an island
avulsion
alluvium
17
(D) change in the course of the riverbed
XXII.
On March 27, 1980, Cornelio filed an application for land registration involving a parcel of
agricultural land that he had bought from Isaac identified as Lot No. 2716 with an area of one
hectare. During the trial, Cornelio claimed that he and his predecessors-in-interest had been in
open, continuous, uninterrupted, public and adverse possession and occupation of the land for
more than thirty (30) years. He likewise introduced in evidence a certification dated February
12, 1981 citing a presidential declaration to the effect that on June 14, 1980, agricultural lands
of the public domain, including the subject matter of the application, were declared alienable
and disposable agricultural land. (4%)
If you are the judge, will you grant the application for land registration of Cornelio?
Can Cornelio acquire said agricultural land through acquisitive prescription, whether
ordinary or extraordinary?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, I will not grant the application. To be entitled to registration of the parcel of land, the applicant
must show that the land being applied for is alienable land. At the time of the filing of the
application, the land has not yet been declared alienable by the state. (Republic v. CA, G.R. No.
144057, January 17, 2005)
Cornelio can acquire the land by acquisitive prescription only after it was declared part of alienable
land by the state by possession for the required number of years for ordinary prescription, ten
years possession in good faith with just title or extraordinary prescription by possession for thirty
years without need of any other condition. (Article 1134, Civil Code)
XXIII.
After undergoing sex reassignment in a foreign country, Jose, who is now using the name
of "Josie," married his partner Ador. Is the marriage valid? (1%)
Yes, the marriage is valid for as long as it is valid in the place where it is celebrated
following Article 17 of the Civil Code.
Yes, the marriage is valid if all the essential and formal elements of marriage under
the Family Code are present.
No, the marriage is not valid because one essential element of marriage is absent.
No, the marriage is not valid but is voidable because "Josie" concealed her real
identity.
Correct answer is letter C – not valid for lack of one essential requirement (Silverio v.
Republic G.R. No. 174689, October 22, 2007)
XXIV.
18
Ted, married to Annie, went to Canada to work. Five (5) years later, Ted became a naturalized
Canadian citizen. He returned to the Philippines to convince Annie to settle in Canada.
Unfortunately, Ted discovered that Annie and his friend Louie were having an affair. Deeply
hurt, Ted returned to Canada and filed a petition for divorce which was granted. In December
2013, Ted decided to marry his childhood friend Corazon in the Philippines. In preparation for
the wedding, Ted went to the Local Civil Registry of Quezon City where his marriage contract
with Annie was registered. He asked the Civil Register to annotate the decree of divorce on his
marriage contract with Annie. However, he was advised by the National Statistics Office (NSO)
to file a petition for judicial recognition of the decree of divorce in the Philippines.
Is it necessary for Ted to file a petition for judicial recognition of the decree of divorce he
obtained in Canada before he can contract a second marriage in the Philippines? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, a divorce decree even if validly obtained abroad cannot have effect in the Philippines unless it is
judicially recognized through an appropriate petition filed before Philippine courts. In Corpuz v. Sto.
9
Tomas, the SC ruled that the foreigner must file a petition under Rule 108 and prove therein the fact
of divorce by presenting an official copy attested by the officer having custody of the original. He must
also prove that the court which issued the divorce has jurisdiction to issue it and the law of the foreign
country on divorce.
XXV.
Mario executed his last will and testament where he acknowledges the child being conceived by
his live-in partner Josie as his own child; and that his house and lot in Baguio City be given to
his unborn conceived child. Are the acknowledgment and the donation mortis causa valid?
Why? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, the acknowledgment is considered valid because a will (although not required to be filed by the
notary public) may still constitute a document which contains an admission of illegitimate filiation. Article
834 also provides that the recognition of an illegitimate child does not lose its legal effect even though
the will wherein it was made should be revoked. This provision by itself warrants a conclusion that a will
may be considered as proof of filiation. The donation mortis causa may be considered valid because
although unborn, a fetus has a presumptive personality for all purposes favorable to it provided it be
born under the conditions specified in Article 41.
XXVI.
Isaac leased the apartment of Dorotea for two (2) years. Six (6) months after, Isaac subleased
a portion of the apartment due to financial difficulty. Is the sublease contract valid? (1%)
Yes, it is valid for as long as all the elements of a valid sublease contract are present.
Yes, it is valid if there is no express prohibition for subleasing in the lease contract.
Gerbert Corpuz vs. Daisylyn Sto. Tomas G.R. No. 186571; August 11, 2010
19
(D) No, it is void because of breach of the lease contract.
XXVII.
Fe, Esperanza, and Caridad inherited from their parents a 500 sq. m. lot which they leased to
Maria for three (3) years. One year after, Fe, claiming to have the authority to represent her
siblings Esperanza and Caridad, offered to sell the leased property to Maria which the latter
accepted. The sale was not reduced into writing, but Maria started to make partial payments
to Fe, which the latter received and acknowledged. After giving the full payment, Maria
demanded for the execution of a deed of absolute sale which Esperanza and Caridad refused
to do. Worst, Maria learned that the siblings sold the same property to Manuel. This compelled
Maria to file a complaint for the annulment of the sale with specific performance and damages.
If you are the judge, how will you decide the case? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will dismiss the case for annulment of the sale and specific performance filed by Maria with respect to
the shares pertaining to Esperanza and Caridad. Since the object of the sale is a co -owned property, a
co-owner may sell his undivided share or interest in the property owned in common but the sale will be
subject to the result of the partition among the co-owners. In a co-ownership there is no mutual agency
except as provided under Article 487. Thus, Fe cannot sell the shares of Esperanza and Caridad without
a special power of attorney from them and the sale with respect to the shares of the latter without their
written authority is void under Article 1874. Hence, the sale of the property to Manuel is not valid with
respect to the shares of Esperanza and Caridad. Maria can only assail the portion pertaining to Fe as the
same has been validly sold to her by Fe.
XXVIII.
Spouses Esteban and Maria decided to raise their two (2) nieces, Faith and Hope, both minors,
as their own children after the parents of the minors died in a vehicular accident.
Ten (10) years after, Esteban died. Maria later on married her boss Daniel, a British national
who had been living in the Philippines for two (2) years.
With the permission of Daniel, Maria filed a petition for the adoption of Faith and Hope. She
did not include Daniel as her co-petitioner because for Maria, it was her former husband
Esteban who raised the kids.
If you are the judge, how will you resolve the petition? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will dismiss the petition for adoption. The rule is that the husband and wife must jointly adopt and there are
only three recognized exceptions to joint adoption by the husband and wife: 1) if one spouse seeks to adopt
the legitimate child of the other; 2) if one spouse seeks to adopt his or her own illegitimate child;
if the spouses are legally separated. The case of Maria and Daniel does not appear to fall under any of
the recognized exceptions, accordingly the petition filed by the wife alone should be dismissed.
XXIX
20
Timothy executed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with Kristopher setting up a business
venture covering three (3) fastfood stores known as "Hungry Toppings" that will be
established at Mall Uno, Mall Dos, and Mall Tres.
Timothy shall be considered a partner with thirty percent (30%) share in all of the
stores to be set up by Kristopher;
The proceeds of the business, after deducting expenses, shall be used to pay the
principal amount of P500,000.00 and the interest therein which is to be computed
based on the bank rate, representing the bank loan secured by Timothy;
The net profits, if any, after deducting the expenses and payments of the principal and
interest shall be divided as follows: seventy percent (70%) for Kristopher and thirty
percent (30%) for Timothy;
Kristopher shall have a free hand in running the business without any interference from
Timothy, his agents, representatives, or assigns , and should such interference happen,
Kristopher has the right to buy back the share of Timothy less the amounts already paid
on the principal and to dissolve the MOA; and
Kristopher shall submit his monthly sales report in connection with the business to
Timothy.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The contractual relationship between Timothy and Kristopher is a contract of partnership as defined
under Article 1767 of the Civil Code, since they have bound themselves to contribute money, property
or industry to a common fund, with the intention of dividing the profits of the partnership between
them. With a seed money of P500, 000.00 obtained by Timothy through a bank loan, they agreed to
divide the profits, 70% for Kristopher and 30% for Timothy.
However, to be more specific, theirs is a limited partnership as defined under Article 1843 of the Civil
Code because Timothy does not take part in the control of the business pursuant to Article 1848, Civil
Code. Nevertheless, Timothy is entitled to monthly sales reports in connection with the business, a
right enshrined in Article 1851 of the Civil Code.
XXX.
Joe Miguel, a well-known treasure hunter in Mindanao, executed a Special Power of Attorney
(SPA) appointing his nephew, John Paul, as his attorney -infact. John Paul was given the
power to deal with treasure-hunting activities on Joe Miguel’s land and to file charges against
those who may enter it without the latter’s authority. Joe Miguel agreed to give John Paul forty
percent (40%) of the treasure that may be found on the land.
Thereafter, John Paul filed a case for damages and injunction against Lilo for illegally entering
Joe Miguel’s land. Subsequently, he hired the legal services of Atty. Audrey agreeing to give
the latter thirty percent (30%) of Joe Miguel’s share in whatever treasure that may be found in
the land.
Dissatified however with the strategies implemented by John Paul, Joe Miguel unilaterally
revoked the SPA granted to John Paul.
21
Is the revocation proper? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
10
No, the revocation was not proper. As a rule, a contract of agency may be revoked by the principal at will.
However, an agency ceases to be revocable at will if it is coupled with an interest or if it is a means of
fulfilling an obligation already contracted. (Article 1922). In the case at bar, the agency may be deemed an
agency coupled with an interest not only because of the fact that John Paul expects to receive 40% of
whatever treasure may be found but also because he also contracted the services of a lawyer pursuant to
his mandate under the contract of agency and he therefore stands to be liable to the lawyer whose services
he has contracted. (Sevilla v. Tourist World Service, G.R. No. L-41182-3 April 16, 1988)
I.
Alden and Stela were both former Filipino citizens. They were married in the Philippines
but they later migrated to the United States where they were naturalized as American citizens.
In their union they were able to accumulate several real properties both in the US and in the
Philippines. Unfortunately, they were not blessed with children. In the US, they executed a
joint will instituting as their common heirs to divide their combined estate in equal shares, the
five siblingsand of Alden the seven siblings of Stela. Alden passed away in 2013 and a year
later, Stela also died. The siblings of Alden who were all citizens of the US instituted probate
proceedings in a US court impleading the siblings of Stela who were all in the Philippines.
Was the joint will executed by Alden and Stela who were both former Filipinos valid?
Explain with legal basis. (3%)
Can the joint will produce legal effect in the Philippines with respect to the
propertiesand of Alden Stela found here? If so, how? (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, the joint will of Alden and Stela is considered valid. Being no longer Filipino citizens at the
time they executed their joint will, the prohibition under our Civil Code on joint wills will no
longer apply to Alden and Stela. For as long as their will was executed in accordance with the
law of the place where they reside, or the law of the country of which they are citizens or even
in accordance with the Civil Code, a will executed by an alien is considered valid in the
Philippines. (Article 816)
Yes, the joint will of Alden and Stela can take effect even with respect to the properties
located in the Philippines because what governs the distribution of their estate is no longer
Philippine law but their national law at the time of their demise. Hence, the joint will produces
legal effect even with respect to the properties situated in the Philippines.
Article 1920
22
No, because depecage is a process of applying rules of different states on the basis of the
precise issue involved. It is a conflict of laws where different issues within a case may be
governed by the laws of different states. In the situation in letter (a) no conflict of laws will
arise because Alden and Stela are no longer Filipino citizens at the time of the execution of
their joint will and the place of execution is not the Philippines.
II.
Marco and Gina were married in 1989. Ten years later, or in 1999, Gina left Marco and
lived with another man, leaving their two children of school age with Marco. When Marco
needed money for their children's education he sold a parcel of land registered in his name,
without Gina's consent, which he purchased before his marriage. Is the sale by Marco valid,
void or voidable? Explain with legal basis. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The sale made by Marco is considered void. The parties were married in 1989 and no mention
was made whether they executed a marriage settlement. In the absence of a marriage
settlement, the parties shall be governed by absolute community of property whereby all the
properties owned by the spouses at the time of the celebration of the marriage as well as
whatever they may acquire during the marriage shall form part of the absolute community. In
ACP, neither spouse can sell or encumber property belonging to the ACP without the consent
of the other. Any sale or encumbrance made by one spouse without the consent of the other
shall be void although it is considered as a continuing offer on the part of the consenting
spouse upon authority of the court or written consent of the other spouse. (Article 96 FC)
III.
Julie had a relationship with a married man who had legitimate children. A son was born out of
that illicit relationship in 1981. Although the putative father did not recognize the child in his
certificate of birth, he nevertheless provided the with child all the support he needed and
spent time regularly with the child and his mother. When the man died in 2000, the child was
already 18 years old so he filed a petition to be recognized as an illegitimate child of the
putative father and sought to be given a share in his putative father's estate. The legitimate
family opposed, saying that under the Family Code his action cannot prosper because he did
not bring the action for recognition during the lifetime of his putative father.
If you were the judge in this case, would how you rule? (4%)
Wishing to keep the peace, the child during the pendency of the case decides to
compromise with his putative father's family by abandoning his petition in exchange for Yi
of what he would have received as inheritance if he were recognized as an illegitimate
child. As the judge, would you approve such a compromise? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
23
If I were the judge, I will not allow the action for recognition filed after the death of the
putative father. Under the Family Code, an illegitimate child who has not been recognized
by the father in the record of birth, or in a private handwritten instrument, or in a public
document and may prove his filiation based on open and continuous possession of the
status of an illegitimate child but pursuant to Article 175, he or she must file the action for
recognition during the lifetime of the putative father. The provision of Article 285 of the
Civil Code allowing the child to file the action for recognition even after the death of the
father will not apply because in the case presented, the child was no longer a minor at the
time of death of the putative father.
No, I will not approve the compromise agreement because filiation is a matter to be decided
by law. It is not for the parties to stipulate whether a person is a legitimate or illegitimate
child of another. (De Jesus v. Estate of Dizon 366 SCRA 499) In all cases of illegitimate
children, their filiation must be duly proved. (Article 887, Civil Code)
IV.
Bert and Joe, both male and single, lived together as common law spouses and agreed to raise a
son of Bert's living brother as their child without legally adopting him. Bert worked while Joe took
care of their home and the boy. In their 20 years of cohabitation they were able to acquire real
estate assets registered in their names as co-owners. Unfortunately, Bert died of cardiac arrest,
leaving no will. Bert was survived by his biological siblings, Joe, and the boy.
Can Article 147 on co-ownership apply to Bert and Joe, whereby all properties they
acquired will be presumed to have been acquired by their joint industry and shall be owned
by them in equal shares? (2%)
What are the successional rights of the boy Bert Joe and raised as their son? (2%)
If Bert and Joe had decided in the early years of their cohabitation to jointly adopt the boy,
would they have been legally allowed to do so? Explain with legal basis. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, Article 147 cannot apply to Bert and Joe because the law only applies to a man and a
woman who are capacitated to marry each other who live together as husband and wife
without the benefit of marriage or under a void marriage. In the case of Bert and Joe, they
are both men so the law does not apply.
Neither of the two will inherit from Bert. Joe cannot inherit because the law does not recognize the
right of a stranger to inherit from the decedent in the absence of a will. Their cohabitation will
not vest Joe with the right to inherit from Bert. The child will likewise not inherit from Bert
because of the lack of formal adoption of the child. A mere ward or “ampon” has no right to
inherit from the adopting parents. (Manuel v. Ferrer, 247 SCRA 476)
24
No, because joint adoption is allowed between husband and wife. Even if Bert and Joe are
cohabiting with each other, they are not vested with the right to jointly adopt under the
Family Code or even under the Domestic Adoption Act. (Section 7, R.A. 8552)
V.
Mrs. L was married to a ship captain who worked for an international maritime vessel. For her
and her family's support, she would claim monthly allotments from her husband's company.
One day, while en route from Hong Kong to Manila, the vessel manned by Captain L
encountered a severe typhoon at sea. The captain was able to send radio messages of distress
to the head office until all communications were lost. In the weeks that followed, the search
operations yielded debris of the lost ship but the bodies of the crew and the passengers were
not recovered. The insurance company thereafter paid out the death benefits to all the heirs of
the passengers and crew. Mrs. L filed a complaint demanding that her monthly allotments
continue for the next four years until her husband may be legally presumed dead because of
his absence. If you were the magistrate would how you rule? (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I would rule against Mrs. L. There is no merit in her contention that the monthly allotments to
her should continue despite the presumptive death of the husband. In case of disappearance
where there is danger of death, the person shall be presumed to have died at the beginning of
the four (4) year period although his succession will be opened only at the end of the four
year period. (Article 391, Civil Code) Since the husband of Mrs. L is presumed to have died at
about the time of disappearance, he is no longer entitled to receive his salary from the day the
presumption of death arises.
VI.
Kardo met Glenda as a young lieutenant and after a whirlwind courtship, they were
married. In the early part of his military career, Kardo was assigned to different places all over
the country but Glenda refused to accompany him as she preferred to live in her hometown.
They did not live together until the 12th year of their marriage when Kardo had risen up the
ranks and was given his own command. They moved to living quarters in Fort Gregorio. One
day, while Kardo was away on official business, one of his military aides caught Glenda having
sex with the corporal assigned as Kardo's driver. The aide immediately reported the matter to
Kardo who rushed home to confront his wife. Glenda readily admitted the affair and Kardo
sentawayher in anger. Kardo would later come to know the true extent of Glenda's
unfaithfulness from his aides, his household staff, and former neighbors who informed him
that Glenda has had intimate relations with various men throughout their marriage whenever
Kardo was away on assignment.
Kardo filed a petition for declaration of nullity of marriage under Article 36. Based on
interviews from Kardo, his aide, and the housekeeper, a psychologist testified that Glenda's
habitual infidelity was due to her affliction with Histrionic Personality Disorder, an illness
characterized by excessive emotionalism and uncontrollable attention-seeking behavior rooted
in Glenda's abandonment as a child by her father. Kardo himself, his aide, and his
housekeeper also testified in court. The RTC granted the petition, relying on the liberality
espoused by Te v. Te and Azcueta v. Republic. However, the OSG filed an appeal, arguing that
sexual infidelity was only a ground for legal separation and that the RTC failed to abide by the
guidelines laid down in the Molina case. How would you decide the appeal? (5%)
25
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will resolve the appeal in favor of the Republic. In the case of Dedel v. Dedel, (G.R. No.
151867 January 29, 2004) the Supreme Court refused to declare the marriage of the parties
void on the ground of sexual infidelity of the wife Sharon. In case mentioned, the wife
committed infidelity with several men up to the extent of siring two illegitimate children with a
foreigner. The court, however, said that it was not shown that the sexual infidelity was a
product of a disordered personality and that it was rooted in the history of the party alleged to
be psychologically incapacitated. Also, the finding of psychological incapacity cannot be based
on the interviews conducted by the clinical psychologist on the husband or his witnesses and
the person alleged to be psychologically incapacitated must be personally examined to arrive
at such declaration. (Marcos v. Marcos, 343 SCRA 755; Agraviador v. Agraviador, G.R. No.
170729- December 8, 2010)
VII.
Mr. and Mrs. X migrated to the US with all their children. As they had no intention of coming
back, they offered their house and lot for sale to their neighbors, Mr. and Mrs. A (the buyers)
who agreed to buy the property for 128 Million. Because Mr. and Mrs. A needed to obtain a
loan from a bank first, and since the sellers were in a hurry to migrate, the latter told the
buyers that they could already occupy the house, renovate it as it was already in a state of
disrepair, and pay only when their loan is approved and released. While waiting for the loan
approval, the buyers spent .Pl Million in repairing the house. A month later, a person carrying
an authenticated special power of attorney from the sellers demanded that the buyers either
immediately pay for the property in full now or vacate it and pay damages for having made
improvements on the property without a sale having been perfected.
What are the buyers' options or legal rights with respect to the they expenses incurred
in improving the property under circumstances? (3%)
Can the buyers be made to immediately vacate on the ground that the sale was not
perfected? Explain briefly. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The buyers here may be deemed possessors or builders in good faith because they were made to
believe that they were allowed to make repairs or renovation by the sellers themselves. As
builders in good faith, they have the right to seek reimbursement for the value of the
improvements in case the owner decides to appropriate them. They cannot be asked to
remove the improvements because that is not one of the options given by law to the
landowner in case the builder is in good faith.
No, the buyers cannot be made to vacate on the ground that the sale was not perfected for the
fact of the matter is that a contract of sale is consensual and is perfected by mere consent.
(Article 1315, Civil Code) In this case, there was an agreement to deliver a determinate thing
for a price certain in money. When the owners made an offer to sell their property to Mr. and
Mrs. A and the latter accepted the offer, there was already a meeting of the minds between
the parties resulting in the perfection of the contract of sale.
26
VIII.
X, Y, Z are siblings who inherited a IO-storey building from their parents. They agreed in writing
to maintain it as a co -owned property for leasing out and to divide the net profits among
themselves equally for a period of 20 years. On the gth year, X wanted to get out of the co-
ownership so he could get his 1/3 share in the property. Y and Z refused, saying X is bound by
their agreement to keep the co-ownership for 20 years. Are Y and Z correct? Explain. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Y and Z are partly correct. The law provides that none of the co-owners shall be obliged to
remain in the co-ownership and it is the right of a co-owner to ask for partition of the co-
ownership anytime. One exception to the rule is if the co -owners agree to keep the thing
undivided which period shall not exceed ten years. In this case, the agreement to keep the
thing undivided shall be valid at the most for ten years. (Article 494, Civil Code)
IX.
Jose, single, donated a house and lot to his only niece, Maria, who was of legal age and who
accepted the donation. The donation and Maria's acceptance thereof were evidenced by a
Deed of Donation. Maria then lived in the house and lot donated to her, religiously paying real
estate taxes thereon. Twelve years later, when Jose had already passed away, a woman
claiming to be an illegitimate daughter of Jose filed a complaint against Maria. Claiming rights
as an heir, the woman prayed that Maria be ordered to reconvey the house and lot to Jose's
estate. In her complaint she alleged that the notary public who notarized the Deed of
Donation had an expired notarial commission when the Deed of Donation was executed by
Jose. Can Maria be made to reconvey the property? What can she put up as a defense? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No. Maria cannot be compelled to reconvey the property. The Deed of Donation was void
because it was not considered a public document. However, a void donation can trigger
acquisitive prescription. (Solis v. CA 176 SCRA 678; Doliendo v. Biarnesa 7 Phil. 232) The void
donation has a quality of titulo colorado enough for acquisitive prescription especially since 12
years had lapsed from the deed of donation.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: Yes, Maria can be made to reconvey the property. The law provides
that no person may give or receive by way of donation more than what he may give or receive
by will. On the assumption that the property donated to Maria is the only property of Jose, the
legitime of his illegitimate child would be impaired if Maria would be allowed to keep the entire
property. After taking into account the value of the property, Maria can be made to reconvey
the property to the extent necessary to satisfy the legitime of Jose’s illegitimate daughter
provided that the woman claiming to be Jose’s child can prove her filiation to the deceased.
Maria can set up the defense that the action has prescribed. An action for revocation of the
donation on the ground that it impaired the legitime of a compulsory heir may only be filed
within ten (10) years from the time the cause of action accrues which is at the time of the
death of Jose. The facts are not clear as to when Jose died but on the assumption that he died
ten years prior to the filing of the action, the same has clearly prescribed.
X.
X, a dressmaker, accepted clothing materials from Karla to make two dresses for her.
dayOn the X was supposed to deliver Karla's dresses, X called up Karla to say that she had an
27
urgent matter to attend to and will deliver them the next day. That night, however, a robber
broke into her shop and took everything including Karla's two dresses. X claims she is not
liable to deliver Karla's dresses or to pay for the clothing materials considering she herself was
a victim of the robbery which was a fortuitous event and over which she had no control. Do
you agree? Why? (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, I do not agree with the contention of X. The law provides that except when it is otherwise
declared by stipulation or when the law provides or the nature of the obligation requires the
assumption of risk, no person shall be liable for those events which could not be foreseen or
which though foreseen were inevitable. (Article 1174, Civil Code) In the case presented, X
cannot invoke fortuitous event as a defense because she had already incurred in delay at the
time of the occurrence of the loss. (Article 1165, Civil Code)
XI.
Jackie, 16, inherited a townhouse. Because she wanted to study in an exclusive school, she
sold her townhouse by signing a Deed of Sale and turning over possession of the same to the
buyer. Whenthatthe buyer discovered she was still a minor, she promised to execute another
Deed of Sale when she turns 18. When Jackie turned 25 and was already working, she wanted
to annul the sale and return the buyer's money to recover her townhouse. Was the sale
contract void, voidable or valid? Can Jackie still recover the property? Explain. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The contract of sale was voidable on the ground that Jackie is incapable of giving consent at
the time of the execution of the sale. (Article 1390 and Article 1327) Jackie can no longer
recover the townhouse unit because if a contract is voidable on the ground of minority, the
action to annul it must be filed within four (4) years from attainment of the age of majority.
Since Jackie was already 25 years old, the action has clearly prescribed because she should
have filed it before she reached the age of 22. (Article 1391, Civil Code)
XII.
A. Iya and Betty owed Jun P500,000.00 for advancing their equity in a corporation they
joined as incorporators. Iya and Betty bound themselves solidarily liable for the debt. Later,
Iya and Jun became sweethearts so Jun condoned the debt of P500,000.00. May lya demand
from Betty ~250,000.00 as her share in the debt? Explainlegal with basis. (2%)
B. Juancho, Don and Pedro borrowed ~150,000.00 from their friend Cita to put up an
internet cafe orally promising to pay her the full amount after one year. Because of their lack
of business know-how, their business collapsed. Juancho and Don ended up penniless but
Pedro was able to borrow money and put up a restaurant which did well. Can Cita demand
that Pedro pay the entire obligation since he, together with the two others, promised to pay
the amount in full after one year? Defend your answer. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, Iya may not demand the 250,000 from Betty because the entire obligation has been
condoned by the creditor Jun. In a solidary obligation the remission of the whole obligation
obtained by one of the solidary debtors does not entitle him to reimbursement from his co-
debtors. (Article 1220, Civil Code)
28
No, Cita cannot demand that Pedro pay the entire obligation because the obligation in this case is
presumed to be joint. The concurrence of two or more creditors or of two or more debtors in
one and the same obligation does not imply that each one of the former has a right to
demand, or that each one of the latter is bound to render, entire compliance with the
prestation. (Article 1207) In a joint obligation, there is no mutual agency among the joint
debtors such that if one of them is insolvent the others shall not be liable for his share.
XIII.
A. X and Y are partners in a shop offering portrait painting. Y provided the capital and
the marketing while X was the portrait artist. They accepted the PS0,000.00 payment of Kyla
to do her portrait but X passed away without being able to do it. Can Kyla demand that Y
deliver the portrait she had paid for because she was dealing the with business establishment
and not with the artist personally? Why or why not? (3%)
B. In this jurisdiction, is a joint venture (i.e., a group of corporations contributing
resources for a specific project and sharing the profits therefrom) considered a partnership?
(3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No Kyla cannot demand that Y deliver the portrait. The death of X has the effect of dissolving the
partnership. (Article 1830, Civil Code) Also, while the obligation was contracted by the
partnership, it was X who was supposed to create the portrait for Kyla. Since X died before
creating the portrait, the obligation can no longer be complied because of impossibility of
performance. (Article 1266) In obligations to do, the debtor shall be released when the
prestation becomes legally or physically impossible without the debtor’s fault.
Yes, under Philippine law, a joint venture is understood to mean an organization formed for some
temporary purpose and is hardly distinguishable form a partnership since its elements are
similar which are: community of interest in business, sharing of profits, and losses, and a
mutual right of control. (Primelink Properties v. Lazatin June 27, 2006 citing Blackner v.
Mcdermott, 176 F. 2d 498[1949])
XIV.
A driver of a bus owned by company Z ran over a boy who died instantly. A criminal case for
reckless imprudence resulting in homicide was filed against the driver. He was convicted and
was ordered to pay P2 Million in actual and moral damages to the parents of the boy who was
an honor student and had a bright future. Without even trying to find out if the driver had
assets or means to pay the award of damages, the parents of the boy filed a civil action
against the bus company to make it directly liable for the damages.
Will their action prosper? (4%)
If the parents of the boy do not wish to file a separate civil action against. the bus
company, can they still make the bus company liable if the driver cannot' pay the award for
damages? If so, what is the nature of the employer's liability and how may civil damages be
satisfied? (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
29
Yes, the action will prosper. The liability of the employer in this case may be based on quasi-delict
and is included within the coverage of independent civil action. It is not necessary to enforce
the civil liability based on culpa aquiliana that the driver or employee be proven to be insolvent
since the liability of the employer for the quasi-delicts committed by their employees is direct
and primary subject to the defense of due diligence on their part. (Article 2176; Article 2180)
Yes, the parents of the boy can enforce the subsidiary liability of the employer in the criminal case
against the driver. The conviction of the driver is a condition sine qua non for the subsidiary
liability of the employer to attach. Proof must be shown that the driver is insolvent. (Article
103, Revised Penal Code)
XV.
Sara borrowed PS0,000.00 from Julia and orally promised to pay it within six months.
When Sara tried to pay her debt on the gth month, Julia demanded the payment of interest of
12o/o per annum because of Sara's delay in payment. Sara paid her debt and the interest
claimed by Julia. After rethinking, Sara demanded back from Julia the amount she had paid as
interest. Julia claims she has no obligation to return the interest paid by Sara because it was a
natural obligation which Sara voluntarily performed and can no longer recover. Do you agree?
Explain. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the case is not one of a natural obligation because even if the contract of loan is verbal, the
delay of Julia made her liable for interest upon demand by Sara. This is not a case of a natural
obligation but a civil obligation to pay interest by way of damages by reason of delay. (Article
1956; Article 1169; Article 2209 Civil Code)
A civil obligation is based on positive law which gives a right of action to compel their
performance in case of breach. A natural obligation is based on equity and natural law and
cannot be enforced by court action but after voluntary fulfilment by the obligor, they authorize
the retention of what may have been delivered or rendered by reason thereof. (Article 1423,
Civil Code)
XVI.
Donna pledged a set of diamond ring and earrings to Jane for P200,000.00 She was
made to sign an agreement that if she cannot pay her debt within six months, Jane could
immediately appropriate the jewelry for herself. After six months, Donna failed to pay. Jane
then displayed the earrings and ring set in her jewelry shop located in a mall. A buyer, Juana,
bought the jewelry set for P300,000.00.
Was the agreement which Donna signed with Jane valid? Explain with legal basis. (2%)
Can Donna redeem the jewelry set from Juana by paying the amount she owed Jane to
Juana? Explain with legal basis. (2%)
Give an example of a pledge created by operation of law. (2%)
30
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
appropriate the jewelry upon default of Donna is considered pactum commissorium and it is
considered void by law. ( Article 2088)
No, Donna cannot redeem it from Juana because the pledge contract is between her and Jane.
Juana is not a party to the pledge contract. (Article 1311, Civil Code)
One example of a pledge created by operation of law is the right of the depositary to retain the
thing deposited until the depositor shall have paid him whatever may be due to the depositary
by reason of the deposit. (1994) Another is the right of the agent to retain the thing which is
the object of the agency until the principal reimburses him the expenses incurred in the
execution of the agency. (Article 1914, Civil Code)
XVII.
Z, a gambler, wagered and lost P2 Million in baccarat, a card game. He was pressured into
signing a Deed of Absolute Sale in favor of the winner covering a parcel ·of land with
improvements worth P20 Million. One month later, the supposed vendee of the property
demanded that he and his family vacate the property subject of the deed of sale. Was the
deed of sale valid? What can Z do? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The sale is valid. Being pressured to sign the deed of sale is not equivalent to vitiation of
consent. Z however, can recover his losses from the winner because the law provides that no
action can be maintained by the winner for the collection of what he has won in any game of
chance. But any loser in a game of chance may recover his loss from the winner, with legal
interests from the time he paid the amount lost. (Article 2014)
XVIII.
A lawyer was given an authority by means of a Special Power of Attorney by his client to sell a
parcel of land for the amount of P3 Million. Since the client owed the lawyer Pl Million in
attorney's fees in a prior case he handled, the client agreed that if the property is sold, the
lawyer was entitled to get 5% agent's fee plus Pl Million as payment for his unpaid attorney's
fees. The client, however, subsequently found a buyer of his own who was willing to buy the
property for a higher amount. Can the client unilaterallythe rescind authority he gave in favor
of his lawyer? Why or why not? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the agency in the case presented is one which is coupled with an interest. As a rule,
agency is revocable at will except if it was established for the common benefit of the agent
and the principal. In this case, the interest of the lawyer is not merely limited to his
commission for the sale of the property but extends to his right to collect his unpaid
professional fees. Hence, it is not revocable at will. (Article 1927)
XIX.
31
Mr. A, a businessman, put several real estate properties under the name of his eldest son X
because at that time, X was the only one of legal age among his four children. He told his son
he was to hold those assets for his siblings until they become adults themselves. X then got
married. After 5 years, Mr. A asked X to transfer the titles over three properties to his three
siblings, leaving two properties for himself. To A’s surprise, X said that he can no longer be
made to transfer the properties to his siblings because more than 5 years have passed since
the titles were registered in his name. Do you agree? Explain. ( 4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the transfer of the properties in the name of X was without cause or consideration and it
was made for the purpose of holding these properties in trust for the siblings of X. If the
transfer was by virtue of a sale, the same is void for lack of cause or consideration. Hence, the
action to declare the sale void is imprescriptible. (Article Heirs of Ureta vs. Ureta September
14, 2011- G.R. No. 165748 September 14, 2011
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
No, I do not agree. A trust was created in favor of the siblings of X when their father A
transferred the titles in his name. The facts are clear that X was to hold these assets for his
siblings until they reach the age of majority. An action to recover property based on an implied
trust prescribes in ten years from the time the title was issued in favor of the trustee. In the
case presented, only five years had lapsed from the issuance of the title hence, the action has
not yet prescribed.
XX.
Mr. and Mrs. Roman and Mr. and Mrs. Cruz filed an application for registration of a parcel of
land which after due proceedings was granted by the RTC acting registration as land court.
However, before the decree of registration could be issued, the spouses Roman and the
spouses Cruz sold the lot to Juan. In the notarized deed of sale, the sellers expressly
undertook to submit the deed of sale to the land registration court so that the title to the
property would be directly issued in Juan's name. Is such a stipulation valid? (2%)
Distinguish a direct attack from a collateral attack on a title. (2%)
If the title in Item XX.A is issued in the names of the original sellers, would a motion filed by Juan
in the same case to correct or amend the title in order to reflect his name as owner
considered be collateral attack? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, because when one who is not the owner of the property sells or alienates it and later the
seller or grantor acquires title, such title passes by operation of law to the buyer or grantee.
(Article 1434, Civil Code)
A direct attack on a title is one where the action filed is precisely for the purpose of pointing out
the defects in the title with a prayer that it be declared void. A collateral attack is one where
the action is not instituted for the purpose of attacking the title but the nullity of the title is
raised as a defense in a different action.
32
No, because Juan is not attacking the title but merely invoking his right as transferee. Hence, it
does not involve a collateral attack on the title.
33
I.
State whether the following marital unions are valid, void, or voidable, and give the
corresponding justifications for your answer:
a. Ador and Becky’s marriage wherein Ador was afflicted with AIDS prior to the
marriage. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Voidable. Under the Family Code, a marriage is voidable if either of
the party was afflicted with a sexually transmissible disease which is serious and incurable,
such as AIDS. Here, Ador was afflicted with AIDS at the time of the celebration of the
marriage, a sexually transmissible disease considered to be serious and incurable. [Basis:
Article 45(6), Family Code; discussed in p. 122, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s Civ Reviewer Book]
b. Carlos’ marriage to Dina which took place after Dina had poisoned her previous
husband Edu in order to free herself from any impediment in order to live with
Carlos. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Void. Under the Family Code, a marriage is declared void by reason
of public policy when one, with the intention to marry the other, killed that other spouse or
his or her own spouse. Here, the wife killed her previous husband for the purpose of
marrying the second husband. [Basis: Article 38 (9), Family Code; discussed in p. 94, Vol. 1,
Rabuya’s Civ Reviewer Book]
c. Eli and Fely’s marriage solemnized seven years after the disappearance of Chona,
Eli’s previous spouse, after the plane she had boarded crashed in the West Philippine
Sea. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: If the marriage took place during the effectivity of the Family Code
and Chona is in fact alive, the subsequent marriage is void for being bigamous because Eli
failed to obtain a judicial declaration of presumptive death of the absentee spouse prior to
contracting the subsequent marriage. Under the Family Code, a judicial declaration of
presumptive death of the absentee is required to be obtained by the spouse present to
make the subsequent marriage valid. However, had Chona really died when the plane
crashed, the subsequent marriage of Eli is valid because the prior marriage was already
terminated. [Basis: Article 41, Family Code; Armas v. Calisterio, 330 SCRA 201 (2000);
discussed in pp. 99-100, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s Civ Reviewer Book]
But if the subsequent marriage took place during the effectivity of the Civil Code, the
In 1960, Rigor and Mike occupied two separate but adjacent tracts of land in
Mindoro. Rigor’s tract was classified as timber land while Mike’s was classified as
agricultural land. Each of them fenced and cultivated his own tract continuously for
30 years. In 1991, the Government declared the land occupied by Mike as alienable
and disposable, and the one cultivated by Rigor as no longer intended for public use
or public service.
Rigor and Mike now come to you today for legal advice in asserting their right of
ownership of their respective lands based on their long possession and occupation
since 1960.
a. What are the legal consequences of the 1991 declarations of the Government
respecting the lands? Explain your answer. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
As to the land occupied Mike, the same remains property of the public dominion. According
to jurisprudence, the classification of the property as alienable and disposable land of the
public domain does not change its status as property of the public dominion. There must be
an express declaration by the State that the public dominion property is no longer intended
for public service or the development of the national wealth or that the property has been
converted into patrimonial. Without such express declaration, the property, even if
classified as alienable or disposable, remains property of the public dominion. [Basis: Heirs
of Mario Malabanan v. Republic, 587 SCRA 172 (2009); Heirs of Mario Malabanan v.
Republic, 704 SCRA 561 (2013); discussed in my FB wall on October 15 and 16, 2017 and
pp. 338-344, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer]
As to the land occupied by Rigor, the declaration that it is no longer intended for public use
or public service converted the same into patrimonial property provided that such express
declaration was in the form of a law duly enacted by Congress or in a Presidential
Proclamation in cases where the President was duly authorized by law. According to
jurisprudence, when public land is no longer intended for public use, public service or for
the development of the national wealth it is thereby effectively removed from the ambit of
public dominion and converted into patrimonnial provided that the declaration of such
conversion must be made in the form of a law duly enacted by Congress or by a Presidential
proclamation in cases where the President is duly authorized by law to that effect. [Basis:
Heirs of Mario Malabanan v. Republic, 587 SCRA 172 (2009); Heirs of Mario Malabanan v.
Republic, 704 SCRA 561 (2013); discussed in my FB wall on October 15 and 16, 2017 and
pp. 338-344, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer]
b. Given that, according to Section 48(b) of Commonwealth Act No. 141, in relation to
Section 14(1) of Presidential Decree No. 1529, the open, continuous, exclusive, and
notorious possession and occupation of alienable and disposable lands of the public
domain as basis for judicial confirmation of imperfect title must be from June 12,
1945, or earlier, may Mike nevertheless validly base his assertion of the right of
ownership on prescription under the Civil Code? Explain your answer. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, because the land remains property of public dominion and, therefore, not susceptible to
acquisition by prescription.
According to jurisprudence, the classification of the subject property as alienable and
disposable land of the public domain does not change its status as property of the public
dominion. In order to convert the property into patrimonial, there must be an express
declaration by the State that the public dominion property is no longer intended for public
service or the development of the national wealth or that the property has been converted
into patrimonial. Without such express declaration, the property, even if classified as
alienable or disposable, remains property of the public dominion, and thus incapable of
acquisition by prescription. [Basis: Heirs of Mario Malabanan v. Republic, 587 SCRA 172
(2009); Heirs of Mario Malabanan v. Republic, 704 SCRA 561 (2013); discussed in my FB
wall on October 15 and 16, 2017 and pp. 338-344, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer]
Here, the declaration of the property into alienable and disposable land of the public
domain in 1991 did not convert the property into patrimonial in the absence of an express
declaration of such conversion into patrimonial in the form of a law duly enacted by
Congress or by a Presidential proclamation in cases where the President is duly authorized
by law to that effect.
c. Does Rigor have legal basis for his application for judicial confirmation of
imperfect title based on prescription as defined by the Civil Code given that, like
Mike, his open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession and occupation was
not since June 12, 1945, or earlier, and his tract of land was timber land until the
declaration in 1991? Explain your answer. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
None, because Rigor’s possession was short of the period required by the Civil Code for
purposes of acquisitive prescription which requires ten (10) years of continuous
possession, if possession was in good faith and with a just title, or thirty years, in any event.
While the property may be considered converted into patrimomial because of the 1991
declaration that it is no longer intended for public use or public service (provided that the
declaration be in the form of a law of a law duly enacted by Congress or by a Presidential
proclamation in cases where the President is duly authorized by law to that effect), Rigor
failed to complete the 30-year period required by law in case of extra-ordinary
prescription. Since the property was converted into patrimonial only in 1991, the period of
presciption commenced to run beginning that year only. Rigor’s possession prior to the
conversion of the property into patrimonial cannot be counted for the purpose of
completing the prescriptive period because prescription did not operate against the State at
that time, the property then being public dominion property.
Rigor may not likewise acquire ownership by virtue of the shorter 10-year ordinary
prescription because his possession was not in good faith and without a just title.
[Basis: Heirs of Mario Malabanan v. Republic, 587 SCRA 172 (2009); Heirs of Mario
Malabanan v. Republic, 704 SCRA 561 (2013); discussed in my FB wall on October 15 and
16, 2017 and pp. 338-344, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer]
III.
Josef owns a piece of land in Pampanga. The National Housing Authority (NHA)
sought to expropriate the property for its socialized housing project. The trial court
fixed the just compensation for the property at P50 million. The NHA immediately
deposited the same at the authorized depository bank and filed a motion for the
issuance of a writ of possession with the trial court. Unfortunately, there was delay in
the resolution of the motion. Meanwhile, the amount deposited earned interest.
When Josef sought the release of the amount deposited, NHA argued that Josef should
only be entitled to P50 million.
Who owns the interest earned? (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The interest earned belongs to Josef because bank interest partakes of the nature of civil
fruits under Article 442 of the Civil Code and shall belong to the owner of the principal
thing.
When the National Housing Authority deposited the P50 Million as payment for the just
compensation with an authorized depositary bank for the purpose of obtaining a writ of
possession, it is deemed to be a constructive delivery of the said amount to Josef. Since Josef
is entitled to the P50 Million and undisputably the owner of the said principal amount, the
interest yield, as accession, in a bank deposit should likewise pertain to the owner of the
money deposited. Being an attribute of ownership (jus fruendi), Josef’s right over the fruits,
that is the bank interests, must be respected. [Basis: Republic v. Holy Trinity Realty
Development Corp., G.R. No. 172410, April 14, 2008]
IV.
Antichresis is always a contract while usufruct need not arise from a contract because it
may also be constituted by law or by other acts inter vivos, such as donation, or in a last will
and testament, or by prescription.
The subject matter of antichresis is always a real property while the subject matter of
usufruct may either be real property or personal property.
Antichresis is an accessory contract or contract of security while usufruct is a real right.
While in both, the fruits do not pertain to the owner, the usufructuary is entitled to enjoy
the fruits while the antichretic creditor has the obligation to apply the fruits to the payment
returned while in mutuum, the borrower discharges himself, not by returning the identical
thing loaned, but by paying its equivalent in kind, quality and quantity. [Discussed in pp.
V.
Jacob has owned a farm land in Ramos, Tarlac. In 2012, Liz surreptitiously entered
and cultivated the property. In 2014, Jacob discovered Liz’s presence in and
cultivation of the property. Due to his being busy attending to his business in Cebu, he
tolerated Liz’s cultivation of the property. Subsequently, in December 2016, Jacob
wanted to regain possession of the property; hence, he sent a letter to Liz demanding
that she vacate the property. Liz did not vacate despite the demand.
Jacob comes to enlist your legal assistance to bring an action against Liz to recover
the possession of the property.
What remedies are available to Jacob to recover possession of his property under the
circumstances? Explain your answer. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The remedy available to Jacob is accion publiciana, or an action for the recovery of the
better right of possession. It also refers to an ejectment suit filed after the expiration of one
year from accrual of the cause of action or from the unalwful withholding of possession of
the realty.
Since the entry made by Liz is through stealth, Jacob could have filed an action for forcible
entry. Ordinarily, the one-year period within which to bring an action for forcible entry is
generally counted from the date of actual entry on the land, except that when the entry is
through stealth, the one -year period is counted from the time the plaintiff learned thereof.
Here, since more than one year had elapsed since Jacob learned of the entry made by Liz
through stealth, the action that may be filed by Jacob is no longer forcible entry, but an
accion publiciana. [Basis: Canlas v. Tubil, 601 SCRA 147 (2009); Valdez v. CA, 489 SCRA 369
(2006); discussed in pp. 353-354, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer]
VI.
Tyler owns a lot that is enclosed by the lots of Riley to the North and East, of Dylan to
the South, and of Reece to the West. The current route to the public highway is a
kilometer’s walk through the northern lot of Riley, but the route is a rough road that
gets muddy during the rainy season, and is inconvenient because it is only 2.5 meters
wide. Tyler’s nearest access to the public highway would be through the southern lot
of Dylan.
May Dylan be legally required to afford to Tyler a right of way through his property?
Explain your answer. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, Dylan is not entitled to a grant of compulsory right of way because he has an adequate
outlet going to the public highway.
One of the requisites for a compulsory grant of right of way is that the estate of the claimant
of a right of way must be isolated and without adequate outlet to a public highway. The true
standard for the grant of compulsory right of way is “adequacy” of outlet going to a public
highway and not the convenience of the dominant estate.
In the case at bar, there is already an existing adquate outlet from the dominant estate to a
public highway. Even if said outlet be incovenient, the need to open up another servitude is
entirely unjustified. [Basis: Article 649, Civil Code; Dichoso, Jr. v. Marcos, 647 SCRA 495
(2011); Costabella Corp. v. CA, 193 SCRA 333 (1991); discussed in pp. 559-561, Vol. 1,
Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer]
VII.
Alice agreed to sell a parcel of land with an area of 500 square meters registered in
her name and covered by TCT No. 12345 in favor of Bernadette for the amount of
P900,000. Their agreement dated October 15, 2015, reads as follows:
I, Bernadette, agree to buy the lot owned by Alice covered by TCT No. 12345 for the
amount of P900,000 subject to the following schedule of payment:
Title to the property shall be transferred upon full payment of P900,000 on or before
February 15, 2016.
After making the initial payment of P100,000 on October 15, 2015, and the second
installment of P200,000 on November 15, 2015, Bernadette defaulted despite
repeated demands from Alice.
In December 2016, Bernadette offered to pay her balance but Alice refused and told
her that the land was no longer for sale. Due to the refusal, Bernadette caused the
annotation of her adverse claim upon TCT No. 12345 on December 19, 2016. Later
on, Bernadette discovered that Alice had sold the property to Chona on February 5,
2016, and that TCT No. 12345 had been cancelled and another one issued (TCT No.
67891) in favor of Chona as the new owner.
Bernadette sued Alice and Chona for specific performance, annulment of sale and
cancellation of TCT No. 67891. Bernadette insisted that she had entered into a
contract of sale with Alice; and that because Alice had engaged in double sale, TCT
No. 67891 should be cancelled and another title be issued in Bernadette’s favor.
a. Did Alice and Bernadette enter into a contract of sale of the lot covered by TCT No.
12345? Explain your answer. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, because in the agreement between Alice and Bernadette the ownership is reserved in
the vendor and is not to pass to the vendee until full payment of the purchase price, which
makes the contract one of contract to sell and not a contract of sale.
NO, because there was no previous sale of the same property prior to its sale to Chona.
Despite the earlier transaction of Alice with Bernadette, the former is not guilty of double
sale because the previous transaction with Bernadette is charactrerized as a contract to
sell. In a contract to sell, there being no previous sale of the property, a third person buying
such property despite the fulfillment of the suspensive condition such as the full payment
of the purchase price, for instance, cannot be deemed a buyer in bad faith and the
prospective buyer cannot seek the relief of reconveyance of the property. There is no double
sale in such case. Title to the property will transfer to the buyer after registration because
there is no defect in the owner-sellers title per se, but the latter, of course, may be sued for
damages by the intending buyer. [Basis: Coronel v. CA, 263 SCRA 15 (1996); discussed in pp.
363-366, Vol. 2, Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer]
VIII.
Pedro had worked for 15 years in Saudi Arabia when he finally decided to engage in
farming in his home province where his 10-hectare farmland valued at P2,000,000
was located. He had already P3,000,000 savings from his long stint in Saudi Arabia.
Eagerly awaiting Pedro’s arrival at the NAIA were his aging parents Modesto and
Jacinta, his common-law spouse Veneranda, their three children, and Alex, his child
by Carol, his departed legal wife. Sadly for all of them, Pedro suffered a stroke
because of his over-excitement just as the plane was about to land, and died without
seeing any of them.
The farmland and the savings were all the properties he left.
State who are Pedro’s legal heirs, and the shares of each legal heir to the estate?
Explain your answer. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Pedro’s legal heirs are his legitimate child, Alex, and his three illegitimate chidlren with
Veneranda. Pedro’s chidlren with Veneranda are illegitimate because they were conceived
and born outside of a valid marriage. Alex, on the other hand, is a legitimate child because
she was conceived or born inside a valid marriage.
Pedro’s surviving parents are not legal heirs because they are excluded by Alex. In intestate
succession, the legitimate ascendants do not become legal heirs if there is a surviving
legitimate descendant, such as Alex in the problem. Veneranda is not a legal heir of Pedro
because she and Pedro were not married.
Ordinarily, the share of an illegitimate child in intestate succession is one-half of the share
of the legitimate child. Considering, however, that the three illegitimate chidlren will impair
the legitime of Alex if the foregoing formula is followed, Alex is entitled instead to get his
legitime, which is ½ of the estate, or P2.5 Million, while the remaining P2.5 Million is to be
divided equally among the three illegitimate children of Pedro. Their legitimes in this case
will likewise be their shares in intestate succession. [Discussed in pp. 944, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s
Civil Law Reviewer]
Assuming that Pedro’s will is discovered soon after his funeral. In the will, he
disposed of half of his estate in favor of Veneranda, and the other half in favor of his
children and his parents in equal shares. Assuming also that the will is admitted to
probate by the proper court. Are the testamentary dispositions valid and effective
under the law on succession? Explain your answer. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, because the testamentary dispositions impair the legitimes of Pedro’s compulsory
heirs.
Following the provisions of the Civil Code, only Alex and Pedro’s three illegitimate children
are Pedro’s compulsory heirs. Since Alex is Pedro’s legitimate descendant and a primary
compulsory heir, she excludes Pedro’s parents as compulsory heirs, the latter being merely
secondary compulsory heirs. However, the three illegitimate chidlren are considered
concurring compulsory heirs who are also entitled to a share of the legitime.
Under the law, the legitime of Alex, being a legitimate descendant, is ½ of Pedro’s estate, or
P2.5 Million. The legitime of each of the illegitimate children is supposed to be ½ of the
share of Alex, or P1.25 Million each. Considering, however, that the remaining portion of the
estate is no longer sufficient to cover the supposed legitimes of the three illegitimate
children, they will simply share equally in the remaining P2.5 Million. Consequently, there is
no disposable free portion that Pedro may validly give to Veneranda or to his parents.
Hence, the will is intrinsically invalid. [Discussed in pp. 859, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s Civil Law
Reviewer]
IX.
Danny and Elsa were married in 2002. In 2012, Elsa left the conjugal home and her
two minor children with Danny to live with her paramour. In 2015. Danny sold
without EIsa’s consent a parcel of land registered in his name that he had purchased
prior to the marriage. Danny used the proceeds of the sale to pay for his children’s
tuition fees.
The sale is void because the subject property is a community property which was sold
without the consent of one of the spouses.
Since the marriage of Danny and Elsa was celebrated during the effectivity of the Family
Code without a marriage settlement, their property regime is absolute community of
property, which is the property regime that applies by default under the Family Code in the
absence of a marriage settlement. Under the regime of absolute community, properties
acquired by the future spouses prior to the celebration of the marriage shall become
community property after the marriage. Hence the subject property is a community
property.
Under the regime of absolute community, the disposition or encumbrance of community
property must have the written consent of the other spouse or the authority of the court
without which the disposition or encumbrance is void Here, the sale of the absolute
community property by the husband without the consent of the wife or the authority of the
court renders the sale void, whatever may be the reason for such sale. The husband should
have obtained court authorization in selling the community property for the purpose of
using the proceeds thereof to pay his children’s tuition fees. [[Basis: Articles 75, 91 and 96,
Family Code; discussed in pp. 145, 147 and 153, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer].
X.
Briefly explain whether the following contracts are valid, rescissible, unenforceable,
or void:
A contract of sale between Lana and Andy wherein 16-year old Lana agreed to sell
her grand piano for 25,000.00. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Voidable. Under the Civil Code, a contract where one of the parties is
incapable of giving consent to a contract is voidable. A minor, like Andy in this case, is
incapable of giving consent to a contract. Hence, the contract is voidable. [Basis: Articles
1390(1) and 1327, Civil Code; discussed in p. 278, Vol. 2, Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer]
A contract of lease of the Philippine Sea entered by and between Mitoy and Elsa. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Void. Under the Civil Code, a contract whose cause, object or
purpose is contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order or public policy is void. The
Philippine Sea is either a property of public dominion (if within Philippine territory) or a
common thing (if outside of Philippine territory) and, therefore, outside the commerce of
men. Hence, it cannot be made the object of a contract. [Basis: Articles 1409(1) and 1347,
Civil Code; discussed in pp. 217 -218, Vol. 2, Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer]
(c) A barter of toys executed by 12-year old Clarence and 10-year old Czar (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Unenforceable. Under the Civil Code, a contract where both parties
are incapable of giving consent to a contract is unenforceable. Here, both parties to the
contract are minors and, therefore, incapable of giving consent to a contract. [Basis: Articles
1403(3) and 1327, Civil Code; discussed in p. 278, Vol. 2, Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer]
(d)A sale entered by Barri and Garri, both minors, which their parents later ratified.
(2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Valid. Under the Civil Code, while both parties to the contract are
minors and, therefore, incapable of giving consent, the ratification made by the parents of
both the contracting parties shall nonetheless validate the contract from the inception.
[Basis: Article 1407, Civil Code; discussed in p. 297, Vol. 2, Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer]
Jenny’s sale of her car to Celestine in order to evade attachment by Jenny’s creditors.
(2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Rescissible. Under the Civil Code, a contract undertaken in fraud of
creditors is rescissible when the latter cannot in any other manner collect the claims due
them. [Basis: Article 1381 (3), Civil Code; discussed in p. 256, Vol. 2, Rabuya’s Civil Law
Reviewer]
XI.
Zeny and Nolan were best friends for a long time already. Zeny borrowed 310,000.00
from Nolan, evidenced by a promissory note whereby Zeny promised to pay the loan
“once his means permit.” Two months later, they had a quarrel that broke their long-
standing friendship.
Nolan seeks your advice on how to collect from Zeny despite the tenor of the
promissory note. what will your advice be? Explain your answer. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will advice Nolan to file first an action to fix the term or period because the fulfillment of
the obligation itself cannot be demanded unti after the court has fixed the period for
compliance therewith, and such period has arrived. Any action to compel performance
brought before that would be premature.
Under the Civil Code, when the debtor binds himself when his means permit to do so, the
obligation shall be deemed to be one with a period, but which period shall be fixed by the
court. In such a situation, the court is authorized to fix the period because the duration of
the period depends exclusively upon the will of the debtor. Any action filed prior to the
expiration of the period to be fixed by the court would be premature. [Basis: Articles 1180
and 1197, Civil Code; Concepcion v. People, 74 Phil. 63; Gonzales v. Jose, 66 Phil. 369;
dicussed in pp. 70-72, Vol. 2, Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer]
XII.
Krystal owns a parcel of land covered by TCT No. 12345 in Angeles City, Due to severe
financial constraints, Krystal was lorc based in the property to RBP Corporation, a
foreign corporation based in South Korea. Subsequently, RBP Corporation sold the
property to Gloria, one of its most valued clients.
Wanting her property back, Krystal, learning of the transfer of the property from
RBP Corporation to Gloria, sued both of them in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) for
annulment of sale and for reconveyance. She alleged that the sale by RBP Corporation
to Gloria was void because RBP Corporation was a foreign corporation prohibited by
the Constitution from acquiring and owning lands in the Philippines.
Will KrystaI’s suit for annulment of sale and reconveyance prosper? Explain your
answer. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, because the flaw in the original transaction is considered cured by the subsequent
transfer of the property to a Filipino citizen who is constitutionally qualified to own land in
the Philippines.
While the Constitutuion prohibits an alien from acquiring or holding title to private lands or
to lands of the public domain in the Philippines, except only by way of hereditary
succession, jurisprudence is consistent that if land is invalidly transferred to an alien who
subsequently becomes a citizen or transfers it to a citizen, the flaw in the original
transaction is considered cured and the title of the transferee is rendered valid.
In the case at bar, the subsequent transfer of the property to Gloria, a Filipino citizen, has
the effect of curing the defect of the original transaction in favor of RBP Corporation
because the land has since become the property of a Filipino citizen who is constitutionally
qualified to own land. As such, the prior invalid transfer can no longer be assailed because
the objective of the constitutional provision -- to keep our land in Filipino hands -- has been
served. [Basis: United Church Board of World Ministries vs. Sebastian, 159 SCRA 446, 451-
452, March 30, 1988; per Cruz, J. See also Tejido vs. Zamacoma, 138 SCRA 78, August 7,
1985; Sarsosa vda. de Barsobiavs. Cuenco, 113 SCRA 547, April 16, 1982; Godinez vs. Fong
Pak Luen, 120 SCRA 223, January 27, 1983; Yap vs. Maravillas, 121 SCRA 244, March 28,
1983; De Castro vs. Tan, 129 SCRA 85, April 30, 1984]
XIII.
acquired either by virtue of a title or by prescription. [Basis: Article 620, Civil Code;
Plutarco owned land that borders on a river. After several years the action of the
water of the river caused the deposit of soil, and increased the area of Plutarco’s
property by 200 square meters.
a. If Plutarco wants to own the increase in area, what will be his legal basis for doing
so? Explain your answer. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Plutarco acquires ownership over the increased area by virtue of accession. According to
the Civil Code, the accretion gradually receive from the effects of the current of the waters
shall belong to the owner of the lands adjoining the banks of rivers.
In order for the above rule to apply, however, the following requisites must be present: (1)
that the deposit of soil be gradual and imperceptible; (2) that it be made through the effects
of the current of the waters; and (3) that the land where accretion takes place is adjacent to
the banks of the rivers. All foregoing requirements are present in this case. Hence, Plutarco
aquires ownership over the increased area by operation of law. [Basis: Article 457, Civil
Code; Republic v. CA, 132 SCRA 514 (1984); discussed in pp. 402-405, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s Civil
Law Reviewer]
b. On the other hand, if the river dries up, may Plutarco validly claim a right of
ownership of the dried-up river bed? Explain your answer. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, because the dried-up river bed shall continue to belong to the State as its property of
public dominion. As such, it is not susceptible to private appropriation and acquisitive
prescription. Therefore, Plutarco may not validly claim a right of ownership of the dried-up
river bed. [Republic v. Santos III, 685 SCRA 51 (2012); Celestial v. Cachopero, 431 SCRA 469
(2003); 657 SCRA 499 (2011); discussed in p. 409, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer]
XV.
Kevin signed a loan agreement with ABC Bank. To secure payment, Kevin requested
his girlfriend Rosella to execute a document entitled “Continuing Guaranty
Agreement” whereby she expressly agreed to be solidarily liable for the obligation of
Kevin.
Can ABC Bank proceed directly against Rosella upon Kevin’s default even without
proceeding against Kevin first? Explain your answer. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, ABC Bank may proceed directly against Rosella upon Kevin’s default even without
proceeding against Kevin first because Rosella is a surety after she bound herself solidarily
with the principal debtor.
Notwithstanding the use of the word “guaranty” circumstances may be shown which
convert the contract into one of suretyship. Under the Civil Code, when the guarantor binds
himself solidarily with the principal debtor, the contract becomes one of suretyship and not
of guaranty proper. In a contract of suretyship, the liability of the surety is direct, primary
and absolute. He is directly and equally bound with the principal debtor. Such being the
case, a creditor can go directly against the surety although the principal debtor is solvent
and is able to pay or no prior demand is made on the principal debtor. [Basis: Article 2047,
Civil Code; Ong v. PCIB, 448 SCRA 705; discussed in pp. 810-812, Vol. 2, Rabuya’s Civil Law
Reviewer]
In this case, since Rosella is a surety, ABC Bank can go directly against her even without
proceeding against the principal debtor because the surety insures the debt, regardless of
whether or not the principal debtor is financially capable to fulfil his obligation.
XVI.
Jovencio operated a school bus to ferry his two sons and five of their schoolmates
from their houses to their school, and back. The parents of the five schoolmates paid
for the service. One morning, Porfirio, the driver, took a short cut on the way to
school because he was running late, and drove across an unmanned railway crossing.
At the time, Porfirio was wearing earphones because he loved to hear loud music
while driving. As he crossed the railway tracks, a speeding PNR train loudly blared its
horn to warn Porfirio, but the latter did not hear the horn because of the loud music.
The train inevitably rammed into the school bus. The strong impact of the collision
between the school bus and the train resulted in the instant death of one of the
classmates of Jovencio’s younger son.
The parents of the fatality sued Jovencio for damages based on culpa contractual
alleging that Jovencio was a common carrier; Porfirio for being negligent; and the
PNR for damages based on culpa aquiliana.
Jovencio denied being a common carrier. He insisted that he had exercised the
diligence of a good father of a family in supervising Porfirio, claiming that the latter
had had no history of negligence or recklessness before the fatal accident.
Did his operation of the school bus service for a limited clientele render Jovencio a
common carrier? Explain your answer. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, because a common carrier is one who is engaged in the business of carrying or
transporting passengers or goods or both, or one who holds himself or itself out to the
public as being engaged in said business.
In Perena v. Zarate [679 SCRA 208 (2012)], the Court definitively ruled that the operators of
a school bus service are common carriers even if they are catering to a limited clientele
because of the following reasons: (1) they are engaged in transporting passengers generally
as a business, not just as a casual occupation; (2) they are undertaking to carry passengers
over established roads by the method by which the business was conducted; and (3) they
are transporting students for a fee.
The Court additionally explained that despite catering to a limited clienteè le, they operate as
common carriers because they held themselves out as a ready transportation
indiscriminately to the students of a particular school living within or near where they
operated the service and for a fee. [Discussed and posted on my FB wall as early as October
23, 2017]
In accordance with your answer to the preceding question, state the degree of
diligence to be observed by Jovencio, and the consequences thereof. Explain your
answer. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The basis for the computation of the deceased’s earning capacity should be the minimum
wage in effect at the time of his death, pursuant to the ruling of the Court in Perena v. Zarate
[679 SCRA 208 (2012)]. In the same case, the Court also ruled that the computation of the
victim’s life expectancy rate should not be reckoned from his age of 15 years at the time of
his death, but on 21 years, his age when he would have graduated from college.
In the same case, the Court justified the indemnification of the victim’s loss of earning
capacity despite him having been unemployed because compensation of this nature is
awarded not for loss of time or earnings but for loss of the deceased’s power or ability to
earn money.