Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Quamto Civil Law 2017 PDF
Quamto Civil Law 2017 PDF
Quamto Civil Law 2017 PDF
CIVIL LAW
Questions Asked More
Than Once
(QuAMTO 2017)
*QUAMTO is a compilation of past bar questions with answers as suggested by UPLC and
other distinct luminaries in the academe, and updated by the UST Academics Committee to
fit for the 2017 Bar Exams.
*Bar questions are arranged per topic in accordance with the bar syllabus released by the
Supreme Court and were selected based on their occurrence on past bar examinations from
1987 to 2016.
ACADEMICS COMMITTEE
CAMILLE ANGELICA B. GONZALES SECRETARY GENERAL
Q:
I. EFFECT AND APPLICATION OF LAWS (CIVIL CODE)
A. The Japan Air Lines (JAL), a foreign corporation
Conflict of Laws (Private International Law) (1990, licensed to do business in the Philippines, executed
1991, 1992, 1993, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2001, in Manila a contract of employment with Maritess
2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2014 BAR) Guapa under which the latter was hired as a
stewardess on the aircraft plying the Manila-Japan-
Q: Manila route. The contract specifically provides
that (1) the duration of the contract shall be two (2)
1. If a will is executed by a testator who is a Filipino years, (2) notwithstanding the above duration, JAL
citizen, what law will govern if the will is executed may terminate the agreement at any time by giving
in the Philippines? What law will govern if the will her notice in writing ten (10) days in advance, and
is executed in another country? Explain your (3) the contract shall be constued as governed
answers. under and by the laws of Japan and only the court in
2. If a will is executed by a foreigner, for instance, by a Tokyo, Japan shall have the jurisdiction to consider
Japanese, residing in the Philippines, what law will any matter arising from or relating to the contract.
govern if the will is executed in the Philippines?
And what law will govern if the will is executed in JAL dismissed Maritess on the fourth month of her
Japan, or some other country, for instance, the USA? employment without giving her due notice.
Explain your answers. Maritess then filed a complaint with the Labor
(1990 BAR) Arbiter for reinstatement, backwages and
damages. The lawyer of JAL contends that neither
A: the Labor Arbiter nor any other agency or court in
the Philippines has jurisdiction over the case in
1. a. If the testator who is a Filipino citizen executes his view of the above provision (3) of the contract
will in the Philippines, Philippine law will govern the which Maritess voluntarily signed. The contract is
formalities. the law between her and JAL. Decide the issue.
b. If said Filipino testator is a foreigner executes his will B. Where under a State’s own conflicts rule that
in another country, the law of the country where he domestic law of another State should apply, may
may be or Philippine law will govern the formalities. the courts of the former nevertheless refuse to
(Article 815, Civil Code) apply the latter? If so, under what circumstance?
2. a. If the testator is a foreigner residing in the (1991 BAR)
Philippines and he executes his will in the Philippines,
the law of the country of which he is a citizen or A:
Philippine law will govern the formalities.
b. If the testator is a foreigner and executes his will in a A. Labor Legislations are generally intended as
foreign country, the law of his place of residence or the expressions of public policy on employer-employee
law of the country of which he is a citizen or the law of relations. The contract therefore, between JAL and
the place of execution, or Philippine law will govern the Maritess may apply only to the extent that its
formalities. (Articles 17, 816, 817, Civil Code) provisions are not inconsistent with Philippine labor
laws intended particularly to protect employees.
Q: Jacob, a Swiss national, married Lourdes, a Filipina,
in Berne, Switzerland. Three years later, the couple Under the circumstances, the dismissal of Maritess
decided to reside in the Philippines. Jacob subsequently without complying with Philppine Labor law would be
acquired several properties in the Philippines with the invalid and any stipulation iun the contract to the
money he inherited from his parents. Forty years later, contrary is considered void. Since the law of the forum
Jacob died intestate, and is survived by several in this case is the Philippine law, the issues should be
legitimate children and duly recognized illegitimate resolved in accordance with Philippine law.
daughter Jane, all residing in the Philippines. B. The third paragraph of Art. 17 of the Civil Code provides
that:
a. Suppose that Swiss law does not allow illegitimate
children to inherit, can Jane, who is a recognized “Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their acts or
illegitimate child, inherit part of the properties of property, and those which have for their object public
Jacob under Philippine law? order, public policy and good customs shall not be
b. Assuming that Jacob executed a will leaving certain rendered ineffective by laws or judgments
properties to Jane as her legitime in accordance promulgated, or by determinations or conventions
with the law of succession in the Philippines, will agreed upon in a foreign country.”
such testamentary disposition be valid? (1991
BAR) Accordingly, a state’s own conflict of laws rule may,
exceptionally be inapplicable, given public policy
A: considerations by the law of the forum.
a. Yes. As stated in the problem, Swiss law does not allow Going into the specific provisions of the contract in
illegitimate children to inherit. Hence, Jane cannot question, I would rule as follows:
inherit the property of Jacob under Philippine law.
1
CIVIL LAW
1. The duration of the contract is not opposed to A:
Philippine law and it can therefore be valid as
stipulated 1. Under Art. 16 par. 1, NCC, real property is subject to the
2. The second provision to the effect that notwithstanding law of the country where it is situated. Since the
duration, JAL may terminate her employment is invalid property is situated in the Philippines, Philippine law
being inconsistent with our Labor laws; applies. The rule of lex rei sitae in Art. 16 prevails over
3. That the contract shall be construed as governed under lex loci contractus in Art. 17 of the NCC.
and by the laws of Japan andvonly the courts of Tokyo, 2. Japanese law governs the capacity of the Japanese to
Japan shall have jurisdiction, is invalid as clearly sell the land being his personal law on the basis of an
opposed to the aforcited third paragraph of Arts. 17 and interpretation of Art. 15, NCC.
1700 of the Civil Code which provides: 3. Philippine law governs the capacity of the Filipino to
buy the land. In addition to the principle of lex rei sitae
“Art. 1700. The relations between capital and labor are given above, Article 15 of the NCC specifically provides
not merele contractual. They are so impressed with that Philippine laws relating to legal capacity of persons
public interest that labor contracts must yield to the are binding upon citizens of the Philippine no matter
common good. Therefore, such contracts are subject to where they are.
the special laws on labor unions, collective bargaining,
strikes and lockouts, closed shop, wages, working Q: On 8 December 1991, Vanessa purchased from the
conditions, hours of labor and similar subjects.” Manila office of Euro-Aire on airline ticket for its Flight
No. 710 from Dallas to Chicago on 16 January 1992. Her
Q: X and Y entered into a contract in Australia, whereby Flight reservation was confirmed. On her scheduled
it was agreed that X would build a commercial building departure Vanessa checked in on time at the Dallas
for Y in the Philippines, and in payment for the airport. However, at the check-in counter she
construction, Y will transfer and convey his cattle ranch discovered that she was waitlisted with some other
located in the United States in favor of X. passengers because of intentional overbooking, a Euro-
Aire policy and practice. Euro-Aire admitted that
What law would govern: Vanessa was not advised of such policy when she
purchased her plane ticket. Vanessa was only able to fly
a. The validity of the contract? two days later by taking another airline.
b. The performance of the contract?
c. The consideration of the contract? (1992 BAR) Vanessa sued Euro-Aire in Manila for breach of contract
and damages. Euro-Aire claimed that it cannot be held
A: liable for damages because its practice of overbooking
passengers was allowed by the US Code of Federal
a. The validity of the contract will be governed by Regulations. Vanessa on the other hand contended that
Australian law, because the validity refers to the assuming that US Code of Federal Regulations allowed
element of the making of the contract in this case. intentional overbooking, the airline company cannot
b. The performance will be governed by the law of the invoke the US Code on the ground that the ticket was
Philippines where the contract is to be performed. purchased in Manila, hence, Philippine law should
c. The consideration will be governed by the law of apply, under which Vanessa can recover damages for
the United States where the ranch is located. breach of contract of carriage. Decide. Discuss fully.
(1995 BAR)
Q: A, a Filipino, executed a will in Kuwait while there as
a contract worker. Assume that under the laws of A: Vanessa can recover damages under Philippine law for
Kuwait, it is enough that the testator affix his signature breach of contract of carriage. Philippine law should govern
in the presence of two witnesses and that the will need as the law of the place where the plane tickets were bought
not be acknowledged before a notary public. and the contract of carriage was executed. In Zalamea v.
Court of Appeals (GR No. 104235, Nov. 10, 1993) the Supreme
May the will be probated in the Philippines? (1993 Court applied Philippine law in recovery of damages for
BAR) breach of contract of carriage for the reason that it is the law
of the place where the contract was executed.
A: Yes, under Articles 815 and 17 of the Civil Code, the
formality of the execution of a will is governed by the law of Q: Michelle, the French daughter of Penreich, a German
the place of execution, If the will was executed with the national, died in Spain leaving real properties in the
formalities prescribed by the laws of Kuwait and valid there Philippines as well as valuable personal properties in
as such, the will is valid and may be probated in the Germany.
Philippines.
1. What law determines who shall succeed the
Q: While in Afghanistan, a Japanese by the name of Sato, deceased? Explain your answer and give its legal
Sold to Ramoncito, a Filipino, a parcel of land situated basis.
in the Philippines which Sato inherited from his 2. What law regulates the distribution of the real
Filipino mother. properties in the Philippines? Explain your answer
and give its legal basis.
1. What law governs the formality in the execution of 3. What law governs the distribution of his personal
the contract of sale? Explain your answer and give properties in Germany? Explain your answer and
its legal basis. give its legal basis. (1995 BAR)
2. What law governs the capacity of the Japanese to
sell the land? A:
3. What law governs the capacity of the Filipino to buy
the land? Explain your answer with legal basis. 1. The national law of the decedent (French law) shall
(1995 BAR) govern in determining who will succeeed to his estate.
The legal basis is Art. 16 par. 2, NCC.
a. Yes. In relation to Art. 15 of the Civil Code, Conflict of A: The suit will not prosper under Art. 15, Civil Code, New
Laws provides that the recognition of an absolute Jersey law governs Francis Albert’s capacity to act, being his
divorce granted in another State rests on the personal law from the standpoint of both his nationality and
citizenship of the parties at the time the divorce was his domicile. He was, therefore, a minor at the time he
granted (Paras, Phil. Conflict of Laws, p. 259). Applied in entered into the contract.
this case, the divorce decree issued to Clara and Mario
will be recognized as valid here considering that at the Q: Alex was born a Filipino but was a naturalized
time the foreign decree was granted, both Clara and Canadian citizen at the time of his death on Decmber 25,
Mario are citizens of the USA., a country which 1998. He left behind a last will and testament in which
grants/allows absolute divorce. Since the marriage he bequeathed all his properties, real and personal, in
between Mario and Clara has been validly terminated, the Philippines to his acknowledged illegitimate
Mario and Juana can freely marry each other. Filipina daughter and nothing to his two legitimate
b. No. The renvoi doctrine is relevant in cases where one Filipino sons. The sons sought the annulment of the last
country applies the domiciliary theory and the other will and testament on the ground that it deprived them
the nationality theory, and the issue involved is which of their legitimes but the daughter was able to prove
of the laws of the two countries should apply to that there were no compulsory heirs or legitimes under
determine the order of succession, the amount of Canadian law. Who should prevail? Why? (2001 BAR)
successional rights, or, the intrinsic validity of
testamentary provisions. Such issue is not involved in A: The daughter should prevail because Art. 16 of the New
this case. Civil Code provides that intestate and testamentary
3
CIVIL LAW
succession shall be governed by the national law of the years. Both these firms were not doing, and still do not
person whose succession is under consideration. do, business in the Philippines. Felipe shuttled between
Sydney and Moscow to close the contract. He also
Q: Felipe and Felisa, both Filipino citizens, were executed in Sydney a commission contract with
married in Malolos, Bulacan on June 1, 1950. In 1960, Coals and in Moscow with Energy, under which
Felipe went to the United States, becoming a US citizen contracts he was guaranteed commissions by both
in 1975. In 1980, he obtained a divorce from Felisa, who firms based on a percentage of deliveries for the three-
was duly notified of the proceedings. The divorce year period, payable in Sydney and in Moscow,
decree became final under Califronia law. Coming back respectively, through deposits in accounts that he
to the Philippines in 1982, Felipe married Segundina, a opened in the two cities. Both firms paid Felipe his
Filipino citizen. In 2001, Felipe, then domiciled in Los commission for four months, after which they
Angeles, California, died, leaving one child by Felisa, stopped paying him. Felipe learned from his contacts,
and another one by Segundina. He left a will which was who are residents of Sydney and Moscow, that the
executed in Manila under which he left his estate to two firms talked to each other and decided to cut him
Segundina and his two children and nothing to Felisa. off. He now files suit in Manila against both Coals and
Energy for specific performance.
Segundina files a petition for the probate of Felipe’s
will. Felisa questions the intrinsic validity of the will, A. Define or explain the principle of “lex loci
arguing that her marriage to Felipe subsisted despite contractus”
the divorce obtained by Felipe because said divorce is B. Define or explain the rule of “forum non
not recognized in the Philippines. For this reason, she conveniens”
claims that the properties left by Felipe are their C. Should the Philipine court assume jurisdiction over
conjugal properties and that Segundina has no the case? Explain. (2002 BAR)
successional rights.
A:
A. Is the divorce secured by Felipe in California
recognizable and valid in the Philippines? How A. (1) It is the law of the place where contrats, wills, and
does it affect Felipe’s marriage to Felisa? Explain. other public instruments are executed and governs
B. What law governs the formalities of the will? their “forms and solemnities”, pursuant to the first
Explain. paragraph, Article 17 of the New Civil Code; or
C. Will Philippine law govern the intrinsic validity of (2) It is the proper law of the contract; i.e. the system of
the will? Explain. (2002 BAR) law intended to govern the entire contract, including its
essential requisites, indicating the law of the place with
A: which the contract has its closest connection or where
the main elements of the contract converge, as
A. (1) The divorce secured by Felipe in California is illustrated by Zalamea v. Court of Appeals (228 SCRA 23
recognizable and valid in the Philippines because he [1993]), it is the law of the place where the airline ticket
was no longer a Filipino at the time he secured it. Aliens was issued, where the passengers are nationals and
may obtain divorces abroad which may be recognized residents of, and where the defendant airline company
in the Philippines provided that they are valid maintained its office.
according to their national law (Van Dorn v. Romillo, Jr., B. Forum non conveniens means that a court has
139 SCRA 139 [1985]; Quita v. Court of Appeals, 300 discretionary authority to decline jurisdiction over a
SCRA 406 [1998]; Llorente v. Court of Appeals, 345 SCRA cause of action when it is of the view that the action may
592 [2002]). be justly and effectively adjudicated elsewhere.
(2) With respect to Felipe the divorce is valid, but with C. No, the Philippine courts cannot acquire jurisdiction
respect to Felisa it is not. The divorce will not capacitate over the case of Felipe. Firstly, under the rule of forum
Felisa to remarry because she and Felipe were both non conveniens, the Philippine court is not a
Filipino at the time of their marriage. However, in DOJ convenient forum as all the incidents of the case
Opinion No. 134 series of 1993, Felisa is allowed to occurred outside the Philippines. Neither are both
remarry because the injustice sought to be corrected by Coals and Energy doing business inside the Philippines.
Article 26 also obtains in her case. Secondly, the contracts were not perfected in the
Philippines. Under the principle of lex loci contractus,
B. The foreigner who executes his will in the Philippine the law of the place where the contract is made shall
may observe the formalities prescribed in: apply. Lastly, the Philippine court has no power to
1) The law of the country of which he is a citizen under determine the facts surrounding the execution of said
Art. 817 of the NCC, or contracts. And even if a proper decision could be
2) The law of the Philippines being the law of the place reached, such would have no binding effect on Coals
of execution under Art. 17 of the NCC. and Energy as the court was not able to acquire
C. Philippine law will not govern the intrinsic validity of jurisdiction over the said corporations (Manila Hotel
the will. Art. 16 of the New Civil Code provides that Corp. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 120077, October 13, 2000).
intrinsic validity of testamentary provisions shall be
governed by the national law of the person whose Q: Gene and Jane, Filipinos, met and got married in
succession is under consideration. California law will England while both were taking up post graduate
govern the intrinsic validity of the will. courses there. A few years after their graduation, they
decided to annul their marriage. Jane filed an action to
Q: Felipe is a Filipino citizen. When he went to annul her marriage to Gene in England on the ground of
Sydney for vacation, he met a former business associate, the latter’s sterility, a ground for annulment of
who proposed to him a transaction which took him to marriage in England. The English court decreed the
Moscow. Felipe brokered a contract between Sydney marriage annulled. Returning to the Philippines, Gene
Coals Corp. (Coals), an Australian firm, and Moscow asked you whether or not he would now be free to
Energy Corp. (Energy), a Russian firm, for Coals to marry his former girlfriend. What would your legal
supply coal to Energy on a monthly basis for three advice be? (2003 BAR)
B. In his lifetime, a Pakistani citizen, ADIL, married a) The divorce obtained by Sonny in Canada was not valid
three times under Pakistani law. When he died an because he and his wife were both Filipino citizens.
old widower, he left behind six children, two Divorce between a Filipino couple is not valid under
sisters, three homes and an estate worth at least 30 Philippine law even though they are living abroad.
million pesos in the Philippines. He was born in b) Since the divorce obtained by Sonny was void, his
Lahore but last resided in Cebu City where he had a marriage to Auring is necessarily void ab initio because
mansion and where two of his youngest children of his subsisting marriage to Lulu. (Art. 41, Family Code)
now live and work. Two of his oldest children are
farmers in Sulu, while the two middle-aged children Q: Roberta, a Filipino, 17 years of age, without the
are employees in Zamboanga City. Finding that the knowledge of his parents, can acquire a house in
deceased left no will, the youngest son wanted to Australia because Australian Laws allow aliens to
file intestate proceedings before the Regional Trial acquire property from the age of 16. (2007 BAR)
Court of Cebu City. Two other siblings objected,
arguing that it should be in Jolo before a Shari’a A: TRUE. Since Australian Law allows alien to acquire
court since his lands are in Sulu. But Adil’s sisters in property from the age of 16, Roberta may validly own a
Pakistan want the proceedings held in Lahore house in Australia, following the principle of lex rei sitae
before a Pakistani court. enshrined in Art. 16, which states "Real property as well as
personal property is subject to the law of the country where
Which court has jurisdiction and is the proper it is situated." Moreover, even assuming that the legal
venue for the intestate proceedings? The law of capacity of Roberta in entering the contract in Australia is
which country shall govern succession to his governed by Philippine Law, she will acquire ownership
estate? (2004 BAR) over the property bought until the contract is annulled.
A:
HUMAN RELATIONS (1996 BAR)
a) Yes, the holographic will of Dr. Fuentes may be admitted
to probate in the Philippines because there is no public Q: Rosa was leasing an apartment in the city. Because of
policy violated by such probate. The only issue at the Rent Control Law, her landlord could not increase
probate is the due execution of the will which includes the rental as much as he wanted to, nor terminate her
the formal validity of the will. As regards formal validity, lease as long as she was paying her rent. In order to
the only issue the court will resolve at probate is whether force her to leave the premises, the landlord stopped
or not the will was executed in accordance with the form making repairs on the apartment, and caused the water
prescribed by the law observed by the testator in the and electricity services to be disconnected. The
execution of his will. For purposes of probate in the difficulty of living without electricity and running water
Philippines, an alien testator may observe the law of the resulted in Rosa's suffering a nervous breakdown. She
place where the will was executed (Art. 17), or the sued the landlord for actual and moral damages. Will
formalities of the law of the place where he resides, or the action prosper? Explain. (1996 BAR)
according to the formalities of the law of his own
country, or in accordance with the Philippine Civil Code A: Yes, based on quasi-delict under the human relations
(Art. 816). Since Dr. Fuentes executed his will in provisions of the New Civil Code (Arts. 19, 20 and 21)
accordance with the Philippine law, the Philippine court because the act committed by the lessor is contrary to
shall apply the New Civil Code in determining the formal morals. Moral damages are recoverable under Art. 2219
validity of the holographic will. The subsequent change (10) in relation to Art. 21. Although the action is based on
in the citizenship of Dr. Fuentes did not affect the law quasi-delict and not on contract, actual damages may be
governing the validity of his will. Under the New Civil recovered if the lessee is able to prove the losses and
Code, which was the law used by Dr. Fuentes, the law expenses she suffered.
enforced at the time of execution of the will shall govern
the formal validity of the will (Art. 795).
b) No, Jay cannot insist because under New York law he is PART II – PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS
not a compulsory heir entitled to a legitime. The national
law of the testator determines who his heirs are, the
order that they succeed, how much their successional
7
CIVIL LAW
I. PERSONS AND PERSONALITY (CIVIL CODE) Q: Jaime, who is 65, and his son, Willy, who is 25, died in
a plane crash. There is no proof as to who died first.
Civil Personality (1995, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2008, 2009, Jaime’s only surviving heir is his wife, Julia, who is also
2012 BAR) Willy’s mother. Willy’s surviving heirs are his mother,
Julia and his wife, Wilma.
Q: Ricky donated P 1 Million to the unborn child of his
pregnant girlfriend, which she accepted. After six (6) 1. In the settlement of Jaime’s estate, can Wilma
months of pregnancy, the fetus was born and baptized successfully claim that her late husband, Willy had
as Angela. However, Angela died 20 hours after birth. a hereditary share since he was much younger than
Ricky sought to recover the P 1 Million. Is Ricky entitled his father and, therefore, should be presumed to
to recover? Explain. (2012 BAR) have survived longer?
2. Suppose Jaime had a life insurance policy with his
A: Yes, Ricky is entitled to recover the P1,000,000.00. The wife, Julia, and his son, Willy, as the beneficiaries.
NCC considers a fetus is considered a person for purposes Can Wilma successfully claim that one-half of the
favorable to it provided it is born later in accordance with proceeds should belong to Willy’s estate? (1998
the provision of the NCC. While the donation is favorable to BAR)
the fetus, the donation did not take effect because the fetus
was not born in accordance with the NCC. A:
To be considered born, the fetus that had an intrauterine life 1. No, Wilma cannot successfully claim that Willy had a
of less than seven (7) months should live for 24 hours from hereditary share in his father’s estate. Under Art. 43,
its complete delivery from the mother’s womb. Since Angela Civil Code, two persons “who are called to succeed each
had an intrauterine life of less than seven (7) months but other” are presumed to have died at the same time, in
did not live for 24 hours, she was not considered born and, the absence of proof as to which of them died first. This
therefore, did not become a person (Art. 41). Not being a presumption of simultaneous death applies in cases
person, she has no juridical capacity to be a donee, hence, involving the question of succession as between the
the donation to her did not take effect. The donation not two who died, who in this case are mutual heirs, being
being effective, the amount donated may be recovered. To father and son.
retain it will be unjust enrichment. 2. Yes, Wilma can invoke the presumption of survivorship
and claim that one-half of the proceeds should belong
Q: Isidro and Irma, Filipinos, both 18 years of age, were to Willy’s estate, under Sec. 3 (jj) par. 5 Rule 131, Rules
passengers of Flight No. 317 of Oriental Airlines. The of Court, as the dispute does not involve succession.
plane they boarded was of Philippine registry. While Under this presumption, the person between the ages
en route from Manila to Greece some passengers of 15 and 60 years is deemed to have survived one
hijacked the plane, held the chief pilot hostage at the whose age was over 60 at the time of their deaths. The
cockpit and ordered him to fly instead to Libya. During estate of Willy endowed with juridical personality
the hijacking Isidro suffered a heart attack and was on stands in place and stead of Willy, as beneficiary.
the verge of death. Since Irma was already eight months
pregnant by Isidro, she pleaded to the hijackers to allow Q: Elated that her sister who had been married for five
the assistant pilot to solemnize her marriage with years was pregnant for the first time, Alma donated P100,
Isidro. Soon after the marriage, Isidro expired. As the 000.00 to the unborn child. Unfortunately, the baby died
plane landed in Libya Irma gave birth. However, the one hour after delivery. May Alma recover the P100,
baby died a few minutes after complete delivery. Back 000.00 that she had donated to said baby before it was
in the Philippines, Irma Immediately filed a claim for born considering that the baby died? Stated otherwise, is
inheritance. The parents of Isidro opposed her claim the donation valid and binding? Explain. (1999 BAR)
contending that the marriage between her and Isidro A: The donation is valid and binding, being an act favorable to
was void ab initio on the following grounds: (a) they the unborn child, but only if the baby had an intra uterine life
had not given their consent to the marriage of their of not less than seven months and provided there was due
son; (b) there was no marriage license; (c) the acceptance of the donation by the proper person representing
solemnizing officer had no authority to perform the said child. If the child had less than seven months of intra-
marriage; and, (d) the solemnizing officer did not file an uterine life, it is not deemed born since it died less than 24
affidavit of marriage with the proper civil registrar. hours following its delivery, in which case the donation never
Does Irma have any successional rights at all? Discuss became effective since the donee never became a person,
fully. (1995, 1999 BAR) birth being determinative of personality.
A: Irma succeeded to the estate of Isidro as his surviving Q: Mr. and Mrs. Cruz, who are childless, met with a
spouse to the estate of her legitimate child. When Isidro serious motor vehicle accident with Mr. Cruz at the
died, he was succeeded by his surviving wife Irma, and his wheel and Mrs. Cruz seated beside him, resulting in the
legitimate unborn child. They divided the estate equally instant death of Mr. Cruz. Mrs. Cruz was still alive when
between them, the child excluding the parents of Isidro. An help came but she also died on the way to the hospital.
unborn child is considered born for all purposes favorable The couple acquired properties worth One Million (P1,
to it provided it is born later. The child was considered born 000, 000.00) Pesos during their marriage, which are
because, having an intra-uterine life of more than seven being claimed by the parents of both spouses in equal
months, it lived for a few minutes after its complete shares.
delivery. It was legitimate because it was born within the
valid marriage of the parents. Succession is favorable to it. a) Is the claim of both sets of parents valid and why?
When the child died, Irma inherited the share of the child. b) Suppose in the preceding question, both Mr. And
However, the share of the child in the hands of Irma is Mrs. Cruz were already dead when help came, so
subject to reserva troncal for the benefit of the relatives of that nobody could say who died ahead of the other,
the child within the third degree of consanguinity and who would your answer be the same to the question as
belong to the line of Isidro. to who are entitled to the properties of the
deceased couple? (1999 BAR)
In sum, the parents of Mr. Cruz will inherit 250, 000 Q: If a pregnant woman passenger of a bus were to
Pesos while the parents of Mrs. Cruz will inherit 750, suffer an abortion following a vehicular accident due
000 Pesos. to the gross negligence of the bus driver, may she and
b) This being a case of succession, in the absence of proof her husband claim damages from the bus company for
as to the time of death of each of the spouses, it is the death of their unborn child? Explain. (2003, 2014
presumed they died at the same time and no BAR)
transmission of rights from one to the other is deemed
to have taken place. Therefore, each of them is deemed A: No, the spouses cannot recover actual damages in the
to have an estate valued at P500, 000, or one-half of form of indemnity for the loss of life of the unborn child. This
their conjugal property of P1 million. Their respective is because the unborn child is not yet considered a person
parents will thus inherit the entire P1 million in equal and the law allows indemnity only for loss of life of person.
shares, or P500, 000.00 per set of parents. The mother, however may recover damages for the bodily
injury she suffered from the loss of the fetus which is
Q: Mr. Luna died, leaving an estate of Ten Million (P10, considered part of her internal organ. The parents may
000, 000.00) Pesos. His widow gave birth to a child four also recover damages for injuries that are inflicted directly
months after Mr, Luna's death, but the child died five upon them, e.g., moral damages for mental anguish that
hours after birth. Two days after the child's death, the attended the loss of the unborn child. Since there is gross
widow of Mr. Luna also died because she had suffered negligence, exemplary damages can also be recovered
from difficult childbirth. The estate of Mr. Luna is now (Geluz v. CA, G.R. No. L-16439, July 20, 1961).
being claimed by his parents, and the parents of his
widow. Who is entitled to Mr. Luna'a estate and why? Q: At age 18, Marian found out that she was pregnant.
(1999 BAR) She insured her own life and named her unborn child as
her sole beneficiary. When she was already due to give
A: Half of the estate of Mr. Luna will go to the parents of Mrs. birth, she and her boyfriend Pietro, the father of her
Luna as their inheritance from Mrs. Luna, while the other unborn child, were kidnapped in a resort in Bataan
half will be inherited by the parents of Mr. Luna as the where they were vacationing. The military gave chase
reservatarios of the reserved property inherited by Mrs. and after one week, they were found in an abandoned
Luna from her child. hut in Cavite. Marian and Pietro were hacked with
bolos. Marian and the baby were both found dead, with
When Mr. Luna died, his heirs were his wife and the unborn the baby's umbilical cord already cut. Pietro survived.
child. The unborn child inherited because the inheritance
was favorable to it and it was born alive later though it lived a) Can Marian's baby be the beneficiary of the
only for five hours. Mrs. Luna inherited half of the 10 Million insurance taken on the life of the mother? (1999,
estate while the unborn child inherited the other half. When 2012 BAR)
the child died, it was survived by its mother, Mrs. Luna. As b) Between Marian and the baby, who is presumed to
the only heir, Mrs. Luna inherited, by operation of law, the have died ahead?
estate of the child consisting of its 5 Million inheritance c) Will Pietro, as surviving biological father of the
from Mr. Luna. In the hands of Mrs. Luna, what she inherited baby, be entitled to claim the proceeds of the life
from her child was subject to reserva troncal for the benefit insurance on the life of Marian? (2008 BAR)
of the relatives of the child within the third degree of
consanguinity and who belong to the family of Mr. Luna, the A:
line where the property came from.
a) Yes, the baby can be the beneficiary of the life insurance
When Mrs. Luna died, she was survived by her parents as of Marian. Art. 40 of the FC provides that "birth
her only heirs. Her parents will inherit her estate consisting determines personality; but the conceived child shall be
of the 5 Million she inherited from Mr. Luna. The other 5 considered born for all purposes that are favorable to
Million she inherited from her child will be delivered to the it, provided that it be born later with the conditions
parents of Mr. Luna as beneficiaries of the reserved specified in Art. 41. Article 41 states that "for civil
property. purposes, the fetus shall be considered born if it is alive
at the time it is completely delivered from the mother's
In sum, 5 Million Pesos of Mr. Luna's estate will go to the womb. However, if the fetus had an intra-uterine life of
parents of Mrs. Luna, while the other 5 Million Pesos will go less than seven months, it is not deemed born if it dies
to the parents of Mr. Luna as reservatarios. within twenty-four (24) hours after its complete
delivery from the maternal womb. The act of naming
the unborn child as sole beneficiary in the insurance is
9
CIVIL LAW
favorable to the conceived child and therefore the fetus
acquires presumptive or provisional personality. Since succession is not involved as regards the insurance
However, said presumptive personality only becomes contract, the provisions of the Rules of Court on
conclusive if the child is born alive. The child need not survivorship shall apply. Under the Rules, Dr. Lopez,
survive for twenty-four (24) hours as required under who was 70 years old, is presumed to have died ahead of
Art. 41 of the Code because "Marian was already due to Roberto, who is presumably between the ages of 15 and
give birth," indicating that the child was more than 60. Having survived the insured, Roberto’s right as a
seven months old. beneficiary became vested upon the death of Dr. Lopez.
b) If the baby was not alive when completely delivered When Roberto died after Dr. Lopez, his right to receive
from the mother’s womb, it was not born as a person, the insurance proceeds became part of his hereditary
then the question of who between two persons estate, which in turn was inherited in equal shares by his
survived will not be an issue. Since the baby had an legal heirs, namely, his spouse and children. Therefore,
intra-uterine life of more than 7 months, it would be Roberto’s children and his spouse are entitled to
considered born if it was alive, at the time of its Roberto’s one-third share in the insurance proceeds.
complete delivery from the mother’s womb. We can
gather from the facts that the baby was completely MARRIAGE
delivered. But whether or not it was alive has to be
proven by evidence. Formal and Essential Requisites of Marriage (1994, 1995,
1996, 1999, 2009, 2016 BAR)
If the baby was alive when completely delivered from
the mother’s womb, then it was born as a person and Q: Brad and Angelina had a secret marriage before a
the question of who survived as between the baby and pastor whose office is located in Arroceros Street, City of
the mother shall be resolved by the provisions of the Manila. They paid money to the pastor who took care of
Rules of Court on survivorship. This is because the all the documentation. When Angelina wanted to go to
question has nothing to do with succession. Obviously, the U.S., she found out that there was no marriage license
the resolution of the question is needed just for the issued to them before their marriage. Since their
implementation of an insurance contract. Under Rule marriage was solemnized in 1995 after the effectivity of
13, Sec. 3, (jj), (5) as between the baby who was under the Family Code, Angelina filed a petition for judicial
15 years old and Marian who was 18 years old, Marian declaration of nullity on the strength of a certification by
is presumed to have survived. the Civil Registrar of Manila that, after a diligent and
exhaustive search, the alleged marriage license indicated
In both cases, therefore, the baby never acquired any in the marriage certificate does not appear in the records
right under the insurance policy. The proceeds of the and cannot be found.
insurance will then go to the estate of Marian.
1. Decide the case and explain.
c) Since the baby did not acquire any right under the 2. In case the marriage was solemnized in 1980 before
insurance contract, there is nothing for Pietro to the effectivity of the Family Code, is it required that a
inherit. judicial petition be filed to declare the marriage null
and void? Explain. (2016 BAR)
Q: Dr. Lopez, a 70-year old widower, and his son
Roberto both died in a fire that gutted their home while A:
they were sleeping in their air-conditioned rooms.
Roberto’s wife, Marilyn, and their two children were 1. I will grant the petition for judicial declaration of nullity
spared because they were in the province at the time. of Brad and Angelina’s marriage on the ground that there
Dr. Lopez left an estate worth P20M and a life insurance is a lack of marriage license. Article 3 of the Family Code
policy in the amount of P1M with his three children --- provides that one of the formal requisites of marriage is a
one of whom is Roberto --- as beneficiaries. Marilyn is valid marriage license and Article 4 of the same Code
now claiming for herself and her children her states that absence of any of the essential or formal
husband’s share in the estate left by Dr. Lopez, and her requisites shall render the marriage void ab initio. In
husband’s share in the proceeds of Dr. Lopez’s life Abbas v. Abbas [689 SCRA 646 (2013)], the Supreme Court
insurance policy. Rule on the validity of Marilyn’s declared the marriage as void ab initio because there is
claims with reasons. (1999, 2009 BAR) proof of lack of record of marriage license.
The certification by the Civil Registrar of Manila that, after
A: As to the estate of Dr. Lopez: diligent and exhaustive search, the alleged marriage
license indicated in the marriage certificate does not
Marilyn is not entitled to a share in the estate of Dr. appear in the records and cannot be found proves that the
Lopez. For purposes of succession, Dr. Lopez and his son marriage of Brad and Angelina was solemnized without
Roberto are presumed to have died at the same time, the requisite marriage license and is therefore void ab
there being no evidence to prove otherwise, and there initio. The absence of the marriage license was certified to
shall be no transmission of rights from one to the other by the local civil registrar who is the official custodian of
(Article 43). Hence, Roberto inherited nothing from his these documents and who is in the best position to certify
father that Marilyn would in turn inherit from Roberto. as to the existence of these records. Also, there is a
The children of Roberto, however, will succeed their presumption of regularity in the performance of official
grandfather, Dr. Lopez, in representation of their father duty. (Republic v. CA and Castro, 236 SCRA 257 [1994])
Roberto and together will receive 1/3 of the estate of Dr.
Lopez since their father Roberto was one of the three 2. No, it is not required that a judicial petition be filed to
children of Dr. Lopez. Marilyn cannot represent her declare the marriage null and void when said marriage
husband Roberto because the right is not given by law to was solemnized before the effectivity of the Family Code.
a surviving spouse. As stated in the cases of People v. Mendoza, 95 Phil. 845
(1954) and People v. Aragon 100 Phil. 1033 (1957), the old
As to the proceeds of the insurance on the life of Dr. rule is that where a marriage is illegal and void from its
Lopez:
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: Irrespective of when the marriage a) The marriage is void because of the absence of an
took place, other than for purposes of remarriage, no judicial essential and formal requisite, namely consent of the
acion is necessary to declare a marriage absolute nullity. For parties freely given in the presence of the solemnizing
other purposes, such as but not limitd to determination of officer and a marriage ceremony (Art. 2, FC).
heirship, legitimacy or illegitimacy of a child, settlement of b) The children are illegitimate, having been born outside
estate, dissolution of property regim, or a criminal case for a valid marriage.
that matter, the court may pass upon the validity of marriage
even in a suit not directly instituted to question the same so Q: Isidro and Irma, Filipinos, both 18 years of age, were
long as it is essential to the determination of the case. This is passengers of Flight No. 317 of Oriental Airlines. The
without prejudice to any issue that may arise in the case. plane they boarded was of Philippine registry. While en
When such need arises, a final judgmenet of declaration of route from Manila to Greece some passengers hijacked
nullity is necessary even if the purpose is other than to the plane, held the chief pilot hostage at the cockpit and
remarry. The clause on the basis of a final judgment declaring ordered him to fly instead to Libya. During the hijacking
such previous marriage void in Article 40 of the Family Code Isidro suffered a heart attack and was on the verge of
connotes that such final judgment need to be obtained only death. Since Irma was already eight months pregnant by
for purpose of remarriage. (Ablaza v. Republic, 628 SCRA 27 Isidro, she pleaded to the hijackers to allow the assistant
[2010]) pilot to solemnize her marriage with Isidro. Soon after
the marriage, Isidro expired. As the plane landed in Libya
Q: On Valentine's Day 1996, Ellas and Fely, both single Irma gave birth. However, the baby died a few minutes
and 25 years of age, went to the city hall where they after complete delivery. Back in the Philippines Irma
sought out a fixer to help them obtain a quickie immediately filed a claim for inheritance. The parents of
marriage. For a fee, the fixer produced an ante-dated Isidro opposed her claim contending that the marriage
marriage license for them, Issued by the Civil between her and Isidro was void ab initio on the
Registrar of a small remote municipality. He then following grounds:
brought them to a licensed minister in a restaurant
behind the city hall, and the latter solemnized their a) they had not given their consent to the marriage of
marriage right there and then. their son;
b) there was no marriage license;
1. Is their marriage valid, void or voidable? c) the solemnizing officer had no authority to perform
Explain. the marriage; and,
2. Would your answer be the same if it should turn out d) the solemnizing officer did not file an affidavit of
that the marriage license was spurious? Explain. marriage with the proper civil registrar.
(1996, 2008 BAR)
Resolve each of the contentions (a to d) raised by the
A: parents of Isidro. Discuss fully. (1995 BAR)
To support her petition, Maria presented three A. The marriage with Quercia is valid. The exemption from
witnesses- herself, Dr. Elsie Chan, and Ambrosia. Dr. the requirement of a marriage license under Article 34 of
Chan testified on the psychological report on Neil that the Family Code requires that the man and woman must
she prepared. Since Neil never acknowledged nor have lived together as husband and wife for at least five
responded to her invitation for interviews, her report years and without any legal impediment to marry each
is solely based on her interviews with Maria and the other during those five years. Although the cohabitation
spouses' minor children. Dr. Chan concluded that Neil is of Facundo and Quercia for six years from July 1, 1990 to
suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder, an July 1, 1996 when Petra died was one with a legal
ailment that she found to be already present since Neil's impediment, the cohabitation thereafter until the
early adulthood and one that is grave and incurable. marriage on July 1, 2002 was free from any legal
Maria testified on the specific instances when she found impediment since Facundo’s marriage with Petra has
Neil drunk, with another woman, or squandering the already been extinguished due to the latter’s death. The
family's resources in a casino. Ambrosia, the spouses' cohabitation of Facundo and Quercia from the time of
current household help, corroborated Maria's death of Petra up to the time of their marriage on July 1,
testimony. 2002 met the 5-year cohabitation requirement therefore
A: The gay or lesbian is psychologically incapacitated. Being Q: A and B, both 18 years old, were sweethearts studying
gay or lesbian is a mental disorder which prevents the in Manila. On August 3, 1988, while in first year college,
afflicted person from performing the essential duties of they eloped. They stayed in the house of a mutual friend
19
CIVIL LAW
A: Yes, the marriage can still be annulled because the fact for 2 years. Marsha is now estopped from filing an
that both of them are afflicted with sexually-transmissible annulment case against John. (2007, 2010 BAR)
diseases does not efface or nullify the ground.
A: FALSE. Marsha is not estopped from filing an annulment
Q: Which of the following remedies, i.e., (a) declaration case against John on the ground of his impotence, because
of nullity of marriage, (b) annulment of marriage, (c) she learned of his impotence after the celebration of the
legal separation, and/or (d) separation of property, can marriage and not before. Physical incapacity to consummate
an aggrieved spouse avail himself/herself of: is a valid ground for the annulment of marriage if such
incapacity was existing at the time of the marriage, continues
i. If the wife discovers after the marriage that her and appears to be incurable. The marriage may be annulled
husband has AIDS. on this ground within five years from its celebration (Art. 45
ii. If the wife goes (to) abroad to work as a nurse and [5], Family Code).
refuses to come home after the expiration of her
three-year contract there. Q: Emmanuel and Margarita, American citizens and
iii. If the husband discovers after the marriage that his employees of the U.S. State Department, got married in
wife has been a prostitute before they got married. the African state of Kenya where sterility is a ground for
iv. If the husband has a serious affair with his annulment of marriage. Thereafter, the spouses were
secretary and refuses to stop notwithstanding assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Manila. On the first year
advice from relatives and friends. of the spouses’ tour of duty in the Philippines, Margarita
v. If the husband beats up his wife every time he filed an annulment case against Emmanuel before a
comes home drunk. (2003 BAR) Philippine court on the ground of her husband’s sterility
at the time of the celebration of the marriage.
A: Assume Emmanuel and Margarita are both Filipinos.
After their wedding in Kenya, they come back and take
i. Since AIDS is a serious and incurable sexually- up residence in the Philippines. Can their marriage be
transmissible disease, the wife may file an action for annulled n the ground of Emmanuel’s sterility? (2009
annulment of the marriage on this ground whether BAR)
such fact was concealed or not from the wife, provided
that the disease was present at the time of the marriage. A: No, the marriage cannot be annulled under the Philippine
The marriage is voidable even though the husband was law. Sterility is not a ground for annulment of marriage
not aware that he had the disease at the time of under Art. 45 of the FC.
marriage.
ii. If the wife refuses to come home for three (3) months Q: Yvette was found to be positive for HIV virus,
from the expiration of her contract, she is presumed to considered sexually transmissible, serious and
have abandoned the husband and he may file an action incurable. Her boyfriend Joseph was aware of her
for judicial separation of property. If the refusal condition and yet married her. After two (2) years of
continues for more than one year from the expiration of cohabiting with Yvette, and in his belief that she
her contract, the husband may file an action for legal would probably never be able to bear him a healthy
separation under Article 55(10) of the FC on the ground child, Joseph now wants to have his marriage with
of abandonment of petitioner by respondent without Yvette annulled. Yvette opposes the suit contending
justifiable cause for more than one year. The wife is that Joseph is estopped from seeking annulment of
deemed to have abandoned the husband when she their marriage since he knew even before their
leaves the conjugal dwelling without any intention of marriage that she was afflicted with HIV virus. Can the
returning (Art. 101, FC). The intention not to return action of Joseph for annulment of his marriage with
cannot be presumed during the three-year period of Yvette prosper? Discuss fully. (1995 BAR)
her contract.
iii. If the husband discovers after the marriage that his wife A: No, Joseph knew that Yvette was HIV positive at the time
was a prostitute before they got married, he has no of the marriage. He is, therefore, not an injured party. The
remedy. No misrepresentation or deceit as to FC gives the right to annul the marriage only to an injured
character, health, rank, fortune or chastity shall party [Art. 47 (5), FC].
constitute fraud as legal ground for an action for the
annulment of marriage (Art. 46, FC). Q: Bert and Baby were married to each other on
iv. The wife may file an action for legal separation. The December 23, 1988. Six months later, she discovered
husband’s sexual infidelity is a ground for legal that he was a drug addict. Efforts to have him
separation (Art. 55, FC). She may also file an action for rehabilitated were unsuccessful. Can baby as for
judicial separation of property for failure of her annulment of marriage, or legal separation? Explain
husband to comply with his marital duty of fidelity (Art. (1996 BAR)
135 (4), 101, FC).
v. The wife may file an action for legal separation on the A: No, Baby cannot ask for annulment of her marriage or for
ground of repeated physical violence on her person legal separation because both these actions had already
(Art. 55 (1), FC). She may also file an action for judicial prescribed.
separation of propertyfor failure of the husband to
comply with his marital duty of mutual respect [Art. 135 While concealment of dug addition existing at the time of
(4), 101, FC]. She may also file an action for declaration marriage constitutes fraud under Art. 46 of the FC which
of nullity of the marriage if the husband’s behavior makes the marriage voidable under Art. 45 of the FC, the
constitute psychological incapacity existing at the time action must, however, be brought within 5 years from the
of the celebration of marriage. discovery thereof under Art. 47(3), FC. Since the drug
addiction of Bert was discovered by Baby in June 1989, the
Q: True or False. action had already prescribed in June of 1994.
The day after John and Marsha got married, John told her Although drug addiction is a ground for legal separation
that he was impotent. Marsha continued to live with John under Art. 55(5) and Art. 57 of the FC requires that the
Hence, the remaining 1⁄4 of the estate shall be divided 1) As the counsel of Saul, I will argue that an attempt by
among the 3 illegitimate children. the wife against the life of the husband is one of the
grounds enumerated by the Family Code for legal
separation and there is no need for criminal
1. Yes, Dorothy’s suit will prosper, unless the buyer is a A: It depends. On the assumption that the Family Code is the
buyer in good faith and for value. The rule of co- applicable law, the ownership of the properties depends on
ownership governs the property relationship in a union whether or not Jambrich and Descallar are capacitated to
without marriage between a man and a woman who are marry each other during their cohabitation, and whether or
capacitated to marry each other. Article 147 of the not both have contributed funds for the acquisition of the
Family Code is specifically applicable. Under this properties.
article, neither party can encumber or dispose by acts
inter vivos of his or her share in the property acquired If both of them were capacitated to marry each other, Art.
during cohabitation and owned in common, without the 147 will apply to their property relations and the properties
consent of the other, until after the termination of their in question are owned by them in equal shares even though
cohabitation, thus, Bernard may not validly dispose of all the funds used in acquiring the properties came only
the lot without the consent of Dorothy as the lot was from the salaries or wages or the income of Jambrich from
acquired through their work during their cohabitation. his business or profession. In such a case, while Jambrich is
disqualified to own any part of the properties, his
23
CIVIL LAW
subsequent transfer of all his interest therein to Borromeo, a) Rico and Cora are the co-owners of the rice land. The
a Filipino, was valid as it removed the disqualification. In Relations is that of co-ownership (Art. 147 par. 1, FC).
such case, the properties are owned by Borromeo and However, after Rico's marriage to Letty, the half interest
Descallar in equal shares. of Rico in the riceland will then become absolute
community property of Rico and Letty.
If, on the other hand, Jambrich and Descallar were not b) Rico is the exclusive owner of the coconut land. The
capacitated to marry each other, Article 153 governs their Relations is a sole/single proprietorship (Art. 148 par.
property relations. Under this regime, Jambrich and 1, FC, is applicable, and not Art. 147, FC). However, after
Descallar are owners of the properties but only if both of Rico's marriage to Letty, the coconut land of Rico will
them contributed in their acquisition. If all the funds used in then become absolute community property of Rico and
acquiring the properties in question came from Jambrich, Letty.
the entire property is his even though he is disqualified c) Rico and Letty are the co-owners. The relation is the
from owning it. His subsequent transfer to Borromeo, Absolute Community of Property (Arts. 75, 90 and 9l,
however, is valid as it removed the disqualification. In such FC).
case, all of the properties are owned by Borromeo. If, on the
other hand, Descallar contributed to their acquisition, the Q: On 10 September 1988 Kevin, a 26-year old
properties are co-owned by Descallar and Borromeo in businessman, married Karla, a winsome lass of 18.
proportion to the respective contributions of Descallar and Without the knowledge of their parents or legal
Jambrich.(Note: The facts of the problem are not exactly the guardians, Kevin and Karla entered into an antenuptial
same as in the case of Borromeo v. Descallar, G.R. No. 159310, contract the day beore their marriage stipulating that
February 24, 2009, hence, the difference in the resulting conjugal partnership of gains shall govern their
answer.) marriage. At the time of their marriage Kevin’s estate was
worth 50 Million while Karla’s was valued at 2 Million.
Q: Maria, wife of Pedro, withdrew P 5 Million from their
conjugal funds. With this money, she constructed a A month after their marriage Kevin died in a freak
building on a lot which she inherited from her father. Is helicopter accident. He left no will, no debts, no
the building conjugal or paraphernal? Reasons. (2012 obligations. Surviving Kevin, aside from Karla, are his
BAR) only relatives: his brother Luis and first cousin Lilia. What
property regime governed the marriage of Kevin and
A: It depends. If the value of the building is more than the Karla? Explain. (1995 BAR)
value of the land, the building is conjugal and the land
becomes conjugal property under Art. 120 of the FC. This is A: Since the marriage settlement was entered into without the
a case of reverse accession, where the building is consent and without the participation of the parents (they did
considered as the principal and the land, the accessory. If, not sign the document), the marriage settlement is invalid
on the other hand, the value of the land is more than the applying Art. 78, F.C. which provides that a minor who
value of the building, then the ordinary rule of accession according to law may contract marriage may also enter into
applies where the land is the principal and the building, the marriage settlements but they shall be valid only of the person
accessory. In such case, the land remains paraphernal who may give consent to the marriage are made parties to the
property and the building becomes paraphernal properly. agreement. (Karla was still a minor at the time the marriage
(Note: The rule on reverse accession is applicable only to the settlement was executed in September 1988 because the law,
regime of conjugal partnership of gains in both the Family RA 6809, reducing the age of majority to 18 years took effect
Code and the New Civil Code. The foregoing answer assumes on 18 December 1989). The marriage settlement being void,
that CPG is the regime of the property relations of the the property regime governing the marriage is, therefore,
spouses.) absolute community of property, under Art. 75 of the FC.
Q: In 1989, Rico, then a widower forty (40) years of Q: Tim came into possession of an old map showing
age, cohabited with Cora, a widow thirty (30) years of where a purported cache of gold bullion was hidden.
age. While living together, they acquired from their Without any authority from the government Tim
combined earnings a parcel of rice land. After Rico and conducted a relentless search and finally found the
Cora separated, Rico lived together with Mabel, a treasure buried in a new river bed formerly part of a
maiden sixteen (16) years of age. While living parcel of land owned by spouses Tirso and Tessie. The old
together, Rico was a salaried employee and Mabel river which used to cut through the land of Spouses
kept house for Rico and did full-time household chores Ursula and Urbito changed its course through natural
for him. During their cohabitation, a parcel of causes.
coconut land was acquired by Rico from his savings.
After living together for one (1) year, Rico and Mabel Suppose Tirso and Tessie were married on 2 August 1988
separated. Rico then met and married Letty, a single without executing any antenuptial agreement. One year
woman twenty-six (26) years of age. During the after their marriage, Tirso while supervising the clearing
marriage of Rico and Letty, Letty bought a mango of Tessie’s inherited land on the latter’s request,
orchard out of her own personal earnings. accidentally found the treasure not in the new river bed
but on the property of Tessie. To whom shall the treasure
a) Who would own the rice land, and what property belong? (1995 BAR)
relations govern the ownership? Explain.
b) Who would own the coconut land, and what A: Since Tirso and Tessie were married before the effectivity
property Relations governs the ownership? Explain. of the Family Code, their property relation is governed by
c) Who would own the mango orchard, and what conjugal partnership of gains. Under Art. 54 of the Civil Code,
property relation governs the ownership? Explain. the share of the hidden treasure which the law awards to the
(1992, 1997, 2000 BAR) finder or proprietor belongs to the conjugal partnership of
gains. The one-half share pertaining to Tessie as owner o the
A: land, and the one-half share pertaining to Tirso as finder of the
treasure, belong to the conjugal partnership of gains.
a) Discuss the status of the first and the amended a) As to form, is the Marriage Settlement valid? May it be
marriage settlements. registered in the registry of property? If not, what
b) Discuss the effects of the said settlements on the steps must be taken to make it registrable?
properties acquired by the spouses. b) Are the stipulations valid?
c) What properties may be held answerable for c) If the Marriage Settlement is valid as to form and the
Mila's obligations? Explain. (2005 BAR) above stipulations are likewise valid, does it now
A: follow that said Marriage Settlement is valid and
enforceable? (1991 BAR)
a) 1) The first marriage settlement was valid because it was
in writing, signed by the parties and executed before the A:
celebration of the marriage
2) The subsequent afreement of the parties was void as a a) Yes, it is valid as to form because it is in writing. However,
modification of their marriage settlement. To be valid, the it cannot be registered in the registry of property because
modification must be executed before the celebration of it is not a public document. To make it registrable, it must
the marriage. The subsequent agreement of the parties be reformed and has to be notarized.
did not effect a dissolution of their conjugal partnership b) Stipulations 1 and 3 are valid because they are not
and a separation of their properties because it was not contrary to law. Stipulation 4 is void because it is contrary
approved by the court. To be valid, an agreement by the to law. Stipulation 2 is valid up to 1/5 of their respective
parties to dissolve their conjugal partnership and to present properties by void as to the excess (Art. 84,
separate their properties during the marriage has to be Family Code).
approved by the court. c) No, on September 15, 1991, the marriage settlement is
b) Since the marriage settlement was binding between the not yet valid and enforceable until the celebration of the
parties, conjugal partnership of gains was the regime of marriage, to take place before the last day of the 1991 Bar
their property relations. Under the rgime of conjugal Examinations.
partnership of gains, all properties acquired by the
spouses during the marriage, jointly or by either one of Q: May succession be conferred by contracts or acts inter
them, through their work or undusty are conjugal. vivos? (1991 BAR)
Therfore, the residential house and lot, and the
condominium unit are conjugal having been jointly A: Under Art. 84 of the Family Code amending Art. 130 of the
acquired by the couple during the marriage. Inasmuch as Civil Code, contractual succession is no longer possible since
the subsequent agreement on dissolution of the conjugal the law now requires that donations of future property be
partnership and separation of property was invalid, governed by the provisions on the testamentary succession
conjugal partnership subsisted between the parties. and formalities of wills.
Therefore, the mansion and the agricultural land are also
conjugal having been acquired by one of the spouses Q: Paulita left the conjugal home because of the excessive
during the marriage. drinking of her husband, Alberto. Paulita, out of her own
c) The marriage settlement cannot prejudice third parties, endeavor, was able to buy a parcel of land which she was
such as the creditors, because it was not registered with able to register under her name with the addendum
the local civil registrar where the marriage was recorded. “widow”. She also acquired stocks in a listed corporation
To bind third parties, the Family Code requires registered in her name. Paulita sold the parcel of land to
registration of the marriage settlement not only with the Rafael, who first examined the original of the transfer
proper registers of deeds but also with the local civil certificate of title.
registrar where the marriage was recorded. Hence, if the
rules on conjugal partnership will prejudice the creditors, 1) Has Alberto the right to share in the shares of stock
the rles on absolute community will be applied instead. acquired by Paulita?
However, insofar as debts contracted by one spouse 2) Can Alberto recover the land from Rafael? (1994
without the consent of the other are concerned, the rule BAR)
is the same for both conjugal partnership and absolute
community. The partnership or community is liable for A:
25
CIVIL LAW
a) How, under the law, should the bank deposit of P200,
1) a) Yes. The Family Code provides that all property 000.00, the house and lot valued at P500, 000.00 and
acquired during the marriage, whether the acquisition the car worth P100, 000.00 be allocated to them?
appears to have been made, contracted or registered in b) What would your answer be (to the above question)
the community property unless the contrary is proved. had Luis and Rizza been living together all the time,
b) Yes. The shares are presumed to be absolute i.e., since twenty years ago, under a valid marriage?
community property having been acquired during the (1997 BAR)
marriage despite the fact that those shares were
registered only in her name. Alberto’s right to claim his A:
share will only arise, however, at dissolution
c) The presumption is still that the shares of stock are a) Art. 147 of the Family Code provides in part that when a
owned in common. Hence, they will form part of the man and a woman who are capacitated to marry each
absolute community or the conjugal partnership other, live exclusively with each other as husband and
depending on what the property regime is. wife without the benefit of marriage or under a void
d) Since Paulita acquired the shares of stock by onerous marriage, their wages and salaries shall be owned by
title during the marriage, these are part of the conjugal or them through their work or industry shall be governed by
absolute community property as the case may be or after, the rules of co-ownership.
the effectivity of the Family Code. Her physical separation
from her husband did not dissolve the community of In the absence of proof to the contrary, properties
property. Hence, the husband has a right to share in the acquired while they lived together shall be presumed to
shares of stock. have been obtained by their joint efforts, work or
2) a) Under a community of property, whether absolute or industry, and shall be owned by them in equal shares. A
relative, the disposition of property belonging to such party who did not participate in the acquisition by the
community is void if done by just one spouse without the other party of any property shall be deemed to have
consent of the other or authority of the proper court. contributed jointly in the acquisition thereof if the
However, the land was registered in the name of Paulita former’s efforts consisted in the care and maintenance of
as “widow”. Hence, the buyer has the right to rely upon the family and of the household.
what appears in the record of the Register of Deeds and
should, consequently, be protected. Alberto cannot Thus:
recover the land from Rafael but would have the right of
recourse against his wife. 1. The wages and salaries of Luis in the amount of P200,
b) The parcel of land is absolute community property 000.00 shall be divided equally between Luis and
having been acquired during the marriage and through Rizza.
Paulita’s industry despite the registration being only in 2. The house and lot valued at P500, 000.00 having
the name of Paulita. The land being community property, been acquired by both of them through work or
its sale to Rafael without the consent of Alberto is void. industry shall be divided between them in
However, since the land is registered in the name of proportion to their respective contribution in
Paulita as widow, there is nothing in the title which would consonance with the rules on co-ownership. Hence,
raise a suspicion for Rafael to make inquiry. He, therefore, Luis gets 2/5 while Rizza gets 3/5 of P500, 000.00.
is an innocent purchaser for value from whom the land 3. The car worth P100, 000.00 shall be exclusively
may no longer be recovered. owned by Rizza, the same having been donated to
c) The parcel of land is absolute community property her by her parents.
having been acquired during the marriage and through
Paulita’s industry despite registration only in the name of b) The property relations between Luis and Rizza, their
Paulita. The land being community property, its sale to marriage having been celebrated 20 years ago (under the
Rafael without the consent of Alberto is void. Civil Code) shall be governed by the conjugal partnership
of gains, under which the husband and wife place in a
Q: Luis and Rizza, both 26 years of age and single, live common fund the proceeds, products, fruits and income
exclusively with each other as husband and wife from their separate properties and those acquired by
without the benefit of marriage. Luis is gainfully either or both spouses through their efforts of by chance,
employed. Rizza is not employed, stays at home, and and upon dissolution of the marriage or of the
takes charge of the household. partnership, the net gains or benefits obtained by either
or both spouse shall be divided equally between them
After living together for a little over twenty years, Luis (Art. 142, Civil Code).
was able to save from his salary earnings during that
period the amout of P200, 000.00 presently deposited Thus:
in a bank. A house and lot worth P500, 000.00 used by
the common-law spouses to purchase the property, 1. The salary of Luis deposited in the bank in the
P200, 000.00 had come from the sale of palay harvested amount of P200, 000.00 and the house and lot valued
from the hacienda owned by Luis and P300, 000.00 at P500, 000.00 shall be divided equally between
from the rentals of a building belonging to Rizza. In fine, Luis and Rizza.
the sum of P500, 000.00 had been part of the fruits 2. However, the car worth P100, 000.00 donated to
received during the period of cohabitation from their Rizza by her parents shall be considered to her own
separate property. A car worth P100, 000.00, being paraphernal property, having been acquired by
used by the common-law spouses, was donated just luctrative title (par. 2, Art. 148, Civil Code).
months ago to Rizza by her parents.
Q: In 1970, Bob and Issa got married without
Luis and Rizza now decide to terminate their executing a marriage settlement. In 1975, Bob
cohabitation, and they ask you to give them your legal inherited from his father a residential lot upon which, in
advice on the following: 1981, he constructed a two-room bungalow with savings
from his own earnings. At that time, the lot was worth
P800, 000.00 while the house, when finished cost P600,
1. Since Bob and Sofia got married in 1970, then the law A:
that governs is the New Civil Code, in which case, the
property relations that should be applied as regards the a) Tony and Susan are entitled to the house and lot as co-
property of the spouses is the system of relative owners in equal shares. Under Article 147 of the Family
community or conjugal partnership of gains (Art. 119). Code, when a man and a woman who are capacitated to
By conjugal partnership of gains, the husband and the marry each other lived exclusively with each other as
wife place in a common fund the fruits of their separate husband and wife, the property acquired during their
property and the income from their work or Industry cohabitation are presumed to have been obtained by
(Art. 142). In this instance, the lot inherited by Bob their joint efforts, work or industry and shall be owned
in 1975 is his own separate property, he having by them in equal shares. This is true even though the
acquired the same by lucrative title (Art. 148, par. 2). efforts of one of them consisted merely in his or her care
However, the house constructed from his own savings and maintenance of the family and of the household.
in 1981 during the subsistence of his marriage with b) Yes, it would make a difference. Under Article 148 of
Issa is conjugal property and not exclusive property in the Family Code, when the parties to the cohabitation
accordance with the principle of "reverse accession" could not marry each other because of an impediment,
provided for in Art. 158 of the Civil Code. only those properties acquired by both of them through
2. Yes, the answer would still be the same. Since Bob and their actual joint contribution of money, property, or
Issa contracted their marriage way back in 1970, then industry shall be owned by them in common in
the property relations that will govern is still the proportion to their respective contributions. The
relative community or conjugal partnership of gains efforts of one of the parties in maintaining the family
(Art.119). It will not matter if Bob died before or after and household are not considered adequate
August 3, 1988 (effectivity date of the Family Code], contribution in the acquisition of the properties. Since
what matters is the date when the marriage was Susan did not contribute to the acquisition of the house
contracted. As Bob and Issa contracted their marriage and lot, she has no share therein. If Tony cohabited with
way back in 1970, the property relation that governs Susan after his legal separation from Alice, the house
them is still the conjugal partnership of gains (Art. 158). and lot is his exclusive property. If he cohabited with
Q: Adam, a building contractor, was engaged by Blas to Susan before his legal separation from Alice, the house
construct a house on a lot which he (Blas) owns. While and lot belongs to his community or partnership with
digging on the lot in order to lay down the foudation of Alice.
the house, Adam hit a very hard object. It turned out to
be the vault of the old Banco de las Islas Filipinas. Using Q: In December 2000, Michael and Anna, after obtaining
a detonation device, Adam was able to open the vault a valid marriage license, went to the Office of the Mayor
containing old notes and coins which were in of Urbano, Bulacan, to get married. The Mayor was not
circulation during the Spanish era. While the notes and there, but the Mayor’s secretary asked Michael and
coins are no longer legal tender, they were valued at Anna and their witnesses to fill up and sign the required
P100 million because of their historical value and the marriage contract forms. The secretary then told them
coins silver nickel content. The following filed legal to wait, and went out to look for the Mayor who was
claims over the notes and coins: attending a wedding in a neighboring municipality.
When the secretary caught up with the Mayor at the
i. Adam, as finder; wedding reception, she showed him the marriage
ii. Blas, as owner of the property where they were contract forms and told him that the couple and their
found; witnesses were waiting in his office. The Mayor
iii. Bank of the Philippine Islands, as successor-in- forthwith signed all the copies of the marriage contract,
interest of the owner of the vault; and gave them to the secretary who returned to the Mayor’s
iv. The Philippine Government because of their office. She then gave copies of the marriage contract to
historical value. the parties, and told Michael and Anna that they were
already married. Thereafter, the couple lived together
Assuming that either or both Adam and Blas are as husband and wife, and had three sons. What governs
adjudged as owners, will the notes and coins be deemed the properties acquired by the couple? Explain. (2009
part of their absolute community or conjugal BAR)
partnership of gains with their respective spouses?
(2008 BAR) A: The marriage being void, the property relationship that
governed their union is special co-ownership under Article
A: Yes. The hidden treasure will be part of the absolute 147 of the Family Code. This is on the assumption that there
community or conjugal property of the respective was no impediment for them to validly marry each other.
marriages (Arts 91, 93 and 106, Family Code).
Q: G and B were married on July 3, 1989. On March 4,
Q: For five years since 1989, Tony, a bank vice-president, 2001, the marriage, which bore no offspring, was
and Susan, an entertainer, lived together as husband and declared void ab initio under Article 36 of the Family
27
CIVIL LAW
Code. At the time of the dissolution of the marriage, the After summing up their prospective shares, B and G are
couple possessed the following properties: undivided co-owners of the house and lot in equal
shares.
1. a house and lot acquired by B on August 3, 1988,
one third (1/3) of the purchase price (representing As to the apartment, it is owned exclusive by B because
downpayment) of which he paid; one third (1/3) he acquired it before their cohabitation. Even if he
was paid by G on February 14, 1990 out of a cash gift acquired it during their cohabitation, it will still be his
given to her by her parents on her graduation on exclusive property because it did not come from his
April 6, 1989; and the balance was paid out of the wage or salary, or from his work or industry. It was
spouses’ joint income; and acquired gratuitously from his uncle.
2. an apartment unit donated to B by an uncle on June
19, 1987. b. The answer is the same as in letter A. Since the parties
a. Who owns the foregoing properties? Explain. to the marriage which was later declared void ab initio
b. If G and B had married on July 3, 1987 and their were capacitated to marry each other, the applicable
marriage was dissolved in 2007, who owns the law under the New Civil Code was Article 144.This
properties? Explain. (2010 BAR) Article is substantially the same as Article 147 of the
Family Code.
A:
Hence, the determination of ownership will remain the
a. Since the marriage was declared void ab initio in 2001, same as in question A. And even assuming that the two
no absolute community or conjugal partnership was provisions are not the same, Article 147 of the Family
ever established between B and G. Their property Code is still the law that will govern the property
relation is governed by a “special co-ownership” under relations of B and G because under Article 256, the
Article 147 of the Family Code because they were Family Code has retroactive effect insofar as it does not
capacitated to marry each other. prejudice or impair vested or acquired rights under the
new Civil Code or other laws. Applying Article 147
Under Article 147, wages and salaries of the “former retroactively to the case of G and B will not impair any
spouses” earned during their cohabitation shall be vested right. Until the declaration of nullity of the
owned by them in equal shares while properties marriage under the Family Code, B and G have not as
acquired thru their work for industry shall be owned by yet acquired any vested right over the properties
them in proportion to their respective contributions. acquired during their cohabitation.
Care and maintenance of the family is recognized as a
valuable contribution. In the absence of proof as to the Q: In 1997, B and G started living together without the
value of their respective contributions, they shall share benefit of marriage. The relationship produced one
equally. offspring, Venus. The couple acquired a residential lot in
Parañaque. After four (4) years or in 2001, G having
If ownership of the house and lot was acquired by B on completed her 4-year college degree as a fulltime
August 3, 1988 at the time he bought it on installment student, she and B contracted marriage without a
before he got married, he shall remain owner of the license.
house and lot but he must reimburse G for all the
amounts she advanced to pay the purchase price and The marriage of B and G was, two years later, declared
for one-half share in the last payment from their joint null and void due to the absence of a marriage license. If
income. In such case, the house and lot were not you were the judge who declared the nullity of the
acquired during their cohabitation, hence, are not co- marriage, to whom would you award the lot? Explain
owned by B and G. briefly. (2010 BAR)
But if the ownership of the house and lot was acquired A: Since the marriage was null and void, no Absolute
during the cohabitation, the house and lot will be Community or Conjugal Partnership was established
owned as follows: between B and G. Their properties are governed by the
“special co-ownership” provision of Article 147 of the Family
i. 1/3 of the house and lot is owned by B. He is an Code because both B and G were capacitated to marry each
undivided co-owner to that extent for his other. The said Article provides that when a man and a
contributions in its acquisition in the form of the woman who are capacitated to marry each other, live
down payment he made before the celebration of exclusively with each other as husband and wife without the
the marriage. The money he used to pay the down benefit of marriage, or under a void marriage: (1) their wages
payment was not earned during the cohabitation, and salaries shall be owned by them in equal shares; and (2)
hence, it is his exclusive property. property acquired by both of them through their work or
ii. 1/3 of the house and lot is owned by G. She is an industry shall be governed by the rules on co-ownership. In
undivided co-owner to the extent for her co-ownership, the parties are co-owners if they contributed
contribution in its acquisition when she paid 1/3 something of value in the acquisition of the property. Their
of the purchase price using the gift from her share is in proportion to their respective contributions. In an
parents. Although the gift was acquired by G ordinary co-ownership the care and maintenance of the
during her cohabitation with B, it is her exclusive family is not recognized as a valuable contribution for the
property. It did not consist of wage or salary or acquisition of a property. In the Article 147 “special co-
fruit of her work or industry. ownership”, however, care and maintenance is recognized as
iii. 1/3 of the house is co-owned by B and G because a valuable contribution which will entitle the contributor to
the payment came from their co-owned funds, i.e., half of the property acquired.
their joint income during their cohabitation which
is shared by them equally in the absence of any Having been acquired during their cohabitation, the
proof to the contrary. residential lot is presumed acquired through their joint work
and industry under Art. 147, hence B and G are co-owners of
the said property in equal shares.
Art. 147 also provides that when a party to the void marriage PATERNITY AND FILIATION (1990, 1995, 1999, 2003,
was in bad faith, he forfeits his share in the co-ownership in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2010 BAR)
favor of the common children or descendants. In default of
children or descendants, the forfeited share shall belong to Q: Ed and Beth have been married for 20 years without
the innocent party. In the foregoing problem, there is no children. Desirous to have a baby, they consulted Dr.
showing that one party was in bad faith. Hence, both shall be Jun Canlas, a, prominent medical specialist on human
presumed in good faith and no forfeiture shall take place. fertility. He advised Beth to undergo artificial
insemination. It was found that Ed’s sperm count was
Q: In June 1985, James married Mary. In September 1988, inadequate to induce pregnancy. Hence, the couple
he also married Ophelia with whom he begot two (2) looked for a willing donor. Andy the brother of Ed,
children, A and B. In July 1989, Mary died. In July 1990, he readily consented to donate his sperm. After a series
married Shirley and abandoned Ophelia. During their of test, Andy's sperm was medically introduced into
union, James and Ophelia acquired a residential lot worth Beth's ovary. She became pregnant and 9 months later,
P300, 000.00. gave birth to a baby boy, named Alvin.
Ophelia sues James for bigamy and prays that his 1. Who is the Father of Alvin? Explain.
marriage with Shirley be declared null and void. James, 2. What are the requirements, if any, in order for Ed to
on the other hand, claims that since his marriage to establish his paternity over Alvin?
Ophelia was contracted during the existence of his
marriage with Mary, the former is not binding upon him, A:
the same being void ab initio; he further claims that his
marriage to Shirley is valid and binding as he was already 1. Ed is the father of Alvin because Alvin was conceived and
legally capacitated at the time he married her. What born during the marriage of his mother to Ed. Under the
property regime governed the union of James and law, the child born during the marriage of the mother to
Ophelia? (1991 BAR) her husband is presumed to be the legitimate child of the
husband (Concepcion v. Almonte, 468 SCRA 438 [2005]).
A: The provisions of Art. 148 of the Family Code shall govern: While it is true that there was no written consent by the
husband to the artificial insemination, absence of such
Art. 148. In cases of cohabitation not falling under the consent may only give the husband a ground to impugn
preceding Article, only the properties acquired by both of the the legitimacy of the child but will not prevent the child
parties through their actual joint contribution of money from acquiring the status of legitimate child of the
property, or industry shall be owned by them in common in husband at the time of its birth.
proportion to their respective contributions. In the absence 2. To establish Ed’s paternity over Alvin, only two
of proof to the contrary, their contributions and requirements must concur: (1) the fact that Ed and the
corresponding shares are presumed to be equal. The same mother of Alvin are validly married, and (2) the fact that
rule and presumption shall apply to joint deposits of money Alvin was conceived or born during the subsistence of
and evidences of credit. such marriage.
Q: In 1973, Mauricio, a Filipino pensioner of the U.S. Q: Roderick and Faye were high school sweethearts.
Government, contracted a bigamous marriage with When Roderick was 18 and Faye, 16 years old, they
Erlinda, despite the fact that his first wife, Carol, was still started to live together as husband and wife without the
living. In 1975, Mauricio and Erlinda jointly bought a benefit of marriage. When Faye reached 18 years of age,
parcel of rice land, with the title being placed jointly in her parents forcibly took her back and arranged for her
their names. Shortly thereafter, they purchased another marriage to Brad. Although Faye lived with Brad after
property (a house and lot) which was placed in her name the marriage, Roderick continued to regularly visit
alone as the buyer. In 1981, Mauricio died and Carol Faye while Brad was away at work. During their
promptly filed an action against Erlinda to recover both marriage, Faye gave birth to a baby girl, Laica. When
the Riceland and the house and lot, claiming them to be Faye was 25 years old, Brad discovered her continued
conjugal property of the first marriage. Erlinda contends liaison with Roderick and in one of their heated
that she and the late Mauricio were co-owners of the arguments, Faye shot Brad to death. She lost no time in
Riceland; and with respect to the house and lot, she marrying her true love Roderick, without a marriage
claims she is the exclusive owner. Assuming she fails to license, claiming that they have been continuously
prove that she had actually used her own money in cohabiting for more than 5 years.
either purchase, how do you decide the case?
a) What is the filiation status of Laica?
A: Under Art. 148 of the Family Code, which applies to b) Can Laica bring an action to impugn her own status
bigamous marriages, only the properties through their actual on the ground that based on DNA results, Roderick
joint contribution of money, property or industry shall be is her biological father?
owned by them in common in proportion to their respective c) Can Laica be legitimated by the marriage of her
contributions. Moreover, if one of the parties is validly biological parents? (2008 BAR)
married to another, his share in the co-ownership shall
accrue to the absolute community/conjugal partnership A:
existing in such valid marriage.
a) Having been born during the marriage of Faye and Brad,
Thus, in this case, since Erlinda failed to prove that she used she is presumed to be the legitimate child of Faye and
her own money to buy the Riceland and house and lot, she Brad. This presumption had become conclusive because
cannot claim to be the co-owner of the Riceland nor the the period of time to impugn her filiation had already
exclusive owner of the house and lot. Such properties are prescribed.
Mauricio’s. And since his share accrues to the conjugal b) No, she cannot impugn her own filiation. The law does
partnership with Carol, Carol can validly claim such not allow a child to impugn his or her own filiation. In the
properties to the exclusion of Erlinda (Art. 144, Civil Code) problem, Laica’s legitimate filiation was accorded to her
29
CIVIL LAW
by operation of law which may be impugned only by Parañaque. After four (4) years or in 2001, G having
Brad, or his heirs in the cases provided by law within the completed her 4-year college degree as a fulltime
prescriptive period. student, she and B contracted marriage without a
c) No, she cannot be legitimated by the marriage of her license.
biological parents. In the first place she is not, under the The marriage of B and G was, two years later, declared
law, the child of Roderick, in the second place, her null and void due to the absence of a marriage license. Is
biological parents could not have validly married each Venus legitimate, illegitimate, or legitimated? Explain
other at the time she was conceived and born simply briefly. (2010 BAR)
because Faye was still married to Roderick at that time.
Under Article 177 of the Family Code, only children A: Venus is illegitimate. She was conceived and born outside
conceived or born outside of wedlock of parents who, at a valid marriage. Thus, she is considered illegitimate (Art 165,
the time of the conception of the child were not FC). While Venus was legitimated by the subsequent
disqualified by any impediment to marry each other, marriage of her parents, such legitimation was rendered
may be legitimated. ineffective when the said marriage was later on declared null
and void due to absence of a marriage license.
Q: Spouses B and G begot two offsprings. Albeit they had
serious personality differences, the spouses continued Under Article 178 of the Family Code, “legitimation shall take
to live under one roof. B begot a son by another woman. place by a subsequent valid marriage between parents. The
G also begot a daughter by another man. annulment of a voidable marriage shall not affect the
legitimation.” The inclusion of the underscored portion in the
A. If G gives the surname of B to her daughter by Article necessarily implies that the Article's application is
another man, what can B do to protect their limited to voidable marriages. It follows that when the
legitimate children's interests? Explain. subsequent marriage is null or void, the legitimation must
B. If B acquiesces to the use of his surname by G’s also be null and void. In the present problem, the marriage
daughter by another man, what is/are the between B and G was not voidable but void. Hence, Venus has
consequence/s? Explain. (2010 BAR) remained an illegitimate child.
Q: Honorato filed a petition to adopt his minor 1) Who has a better right to the custody of Bing, Carol
illegitimate child Stephanie, alleging that Stephanie’s or Norma?
mother is Gemma Astorga Garcia; that Stephanie has 2) Aside from taking physical custody of Bing, what
been using her mother’s middle name and surname; legal actions can Carol take to protect Bing?
and that he is now a widower and qualified to be her
adopting parent. He prayed that Stephanie’s middle A:
name be changed from "Astorga" to "Garcia," which is
her mother’s surname and that her surname "Garcia" 1) The natural mother, Carol should have the better right in
be changed to "Catindig," which is his surname. This the light of the principle that the child’s welfare is the
trial court denied. Was the trial court correct in denying paramount consideration in custody rights. Obviously,
Hororato’s request for Stephanie’s use of her mother’s Bing’s continued stay in her adopting parents’ house
surname as her middle name? Explain. (1996, 2012 where interaction with the call girls is inevitable, would
BAR) be detrimental to her moral and spiritual development.
This could be the reason for Bing’s expressed desire to
A: No, the trial court was not correct. There is no law return to her natural mother. It should be noted,
prohibiting an illegitimate child adopted by his natural however, that Bing is no longer a minor, being 19 years
father to use as middle name his mother's surname. The law of age now. It is doubtful that a court can still resolve the
is silent as to what middle name an adoptee may use. In the question of custody over one who is sui juris and not
case of In re: Adoption of Stephanie Nathy Astorga Garcia otherwise incapacitated.
(G.R. No, 148311, March 31, 2005), the Supreme Court ruled 2) Carol may file an action to deprive Norma of parental
that the adopted child may use the surname of the natural authority under Art. 231 of the Family Code. Or file an
mother as his middle name because there is no prohibition action for the rescission of the adoption under Article
in the law against it. Moreover, it will also be for the benefit 191 in relation to Art. 231 (2) of the Family Code.
of the adopted child who shall preserve his lineage on his
mother’s side and reinforce his right to inherit from his Q: Sometime in 1990, Sarah, born a Filipino but by then
mother and her family. Lastly, it will make the adopted child a naturalized American citizen, and her American
conform with the time-honored Filipino tradition of husband Tom, filed a petition in the Regional Trial Court
carrying the mother’s surname as the person’s middle of Makati, for the adoption of the minor child of her
name. sister, a Filipina. Can the petition be granted? (2000
BAR)
Q: Spouses Primo and Monina Lim, childless, were
entrusted with the custody of two (2) minor children, A: It depends. If Tom and Sarah have been residing in the
the parents of whom were unknown. Eager of having Philippines for at least 3 years prior to the effectivity of RA
children of their own, the spouses made it appear that 8552, the petition may be granted because the American
they were the children’s parents by naming them husband is not qualified to adopt.
Michelle P. Lim and Michael Jude Lim. Subsequently,
Monina married Angel Olario after Primo’s death. While the petition for adoption was filed in 1990, it was
considered refiled upon the effectivity of RA 8552, the
She decided to adopt the children by availing the Domestic Adoption Act if 1998. This is the law applicable, the
amnesty given under R.A. 8552 to those individuals petition being still pending with the lower court.
who simulated the birth of a child. She filed separate
petitions for the adoption of Michelle, then 25 years old Under the Act, Sarah and Tom must adopt jointly because
and Michael, 18. Both Michelle and Michael gave they do not fall in any of the exceptions where one of the may
consent to the adoption. The trial court dismissed the adopt alone. When husband and wife must adopt jointly, the
Supreme Court has held in a line of cases that both of them
33
CIVIL LAW
must be qualified to adopt. While Sarah, an alien, is qualified c) Supposing that they filed the petition to adopt Vicky
to adopt under Section 7(b)(1) of the Act for being a former in the year 2000, will your answer be the same?
Filipino citizen who seeks to adopt a relative within the 4th Explain. (2000, 2003, 2005 BAR)
degree of consanguinity or affinity, Tom an alien, is not
qualified because he is neither a former Filipino citizen, nor A:
married to a Filipino. One of them not being qualified to adopt
their petition has to be denied. However, if they have been a) Yes, the position of the government is tenable.
residents of the Philippines three years prior to the effectivity Foreigners are disqualified to adopt unless they fall in
of the Act and continues to reside here until the decree of any of the exceptions provided for in the law. Eva and
adoption is entered, they are qualified to adopt the nephew Paul are both foreigners. Eva, Falls in one of the
of Sara under Section 7(b) thereof, and the petition may be exceptions. She is qualified to adopt because she is a
granted. former Filipino citizen who wishes to adopt a relative by
consanguinity. Unfortunately, Paul is not qualified to
Q: A German couple filed a petition for adoption of a adopt because he does not fall in any of the exceptions.
minor Filipino child with the Regional Trial Court of Hence, they cannot adopt jointly. When husband and
Makati under the provisions of the Child and Youth wife are adopting jointly, both of them must be qualified
Welfare Code which allowed alien to adopt. Before the to adopt in their own right Eva cannot, alone by herself,
petition could be heard, the Family Code, which adopt her niece because husband and wife must adopt
repealed the Child and Youth Welfare Code, came into jointly unless they fall in any of the exceptions provided
effect. Consequently, the Solicitor General filed a motion for in the law. They cannot adopt separately because
to dismiss the petition, on the ground that the Family they do not fall in any of the exceptions. Hence, whether
Code prohibits aliens from adopting. If you were the separately or jointly, Eva and Paul cannot adopt Vicky in
judge, how will you rule on the motion? (2001 BAR) the Philippines (Domestic Adoption Law [RA 8552])
b) No, my answer would be different. Eva is qualified to
A: The motion to dismiss the petition for adoption should adopt her illegitimate daughter, because she falls in one
be denied. The law that should govern the action is the law of the exceptions that allow foreigners to adopt. She is a
in force at the time of filing of the petition. At that time, it was former Filipino citizen adopting her relative by
the Child and Youth Welfare Code that was in effect, not the consanguinity. Eva can adopt separately her illegitimate
Family Code. Petitioners have already acquired a vested child because her case is also an exception to the rule that
right on their qualification to adopt which cannot be taken husband and wife should adopt jointly.
away by the Family Code (Republic v. Miller, G.R. No. c) Yes, my answer will be the same. The new Law on
125932, April 21, 1999, citing Republic v. Court of Appeals, Domestic Adoption allows a foreigner to adopt in the
G.R. No. 92326, January 24, 1992). Philippines if he has been residing in the Philippines for
at least 3 years prior to the filing of the petition unless
Q: Lina, a former Filipina who became an American the law waives that residency requirement. Paul and Eva
citizen shortly after her marriage to an American have not resided in the Philippines for the last 3 years.
husband, would like to adopt in the Philippines, jointly However, Eva will qualify for waiver because she was a
with her husband, one of her minor brothers. Assuming former Filipino citizen who wishes to adopt a relative by
that all the required consents have been obtained, could consanguinity within the 4th degree. Unfortunately Paul
the contemplated joint adoption in the Philippine will not qualify to adopt because he does not fall in any
prosper? Explain. (2003 BAR) of the instances for waiver to apply. They cannot adopt
jointly because one of them is not qualified. Neither may
A: Yes, Lina and her American husband can jointly adopt a Eva adopt alone because she does not fall in any of the
minor brother of Lina because she and her husband are both exceptions that allow husband and wife to adopt
qualified to adopt. Lina, as a former Filipino citizen, can adopt separately.
her minor brother under Sec. 7(b)(i) of RA 8552 (Domestic
Adoption Act of 1998). Q: May an illegitimate child, upon adoption by her
natural father, use the surname of her natural mother as
The alien husband can now adopt under Sec. 7(b) of RA8552. the middle name? (2006 BAR)
The Supreme Court has held in several cases that when
husband and wife are required to adopt jointly, each one of A: Yes, an illegitimate child, upon adoption by her natural
them must be qualified to adopt in his or her own right father, can use the surname of her natural mother as her
(Republic v. Toledano, G.R. No. 94147, June 8, 1994).However, middle name. The Court has ruled that there is no law
the American husband must comply with the requirements prohibiting an illegitimate child adopted by her natural father
of the law including the residency requirement of three (3) to use, as middle name, her mother's surname. What is not
years. Otherwise, the adoption will not be allowed. prohibited is allowed. After all, the use of the maternal name
as the middle name is in accord with Filipino culture and
Q: In 1984, Eva, a Filipina, went to work as a nurse customs and adoption is intended for the benefit of the
in the USA. There, she met and fell in love with Paul, an adopted (In re: Adoption of Stephanie Nathy Astorga Garcia,
American citizen, and they got married in 1985. Eva G.R. No. 148311, March 31, 2005).
acquired American citizenship in 1987. During their
sojourn in the Philippines in 1990, they filed a joint Q: For purpose of this question, assume all formalities
petition for the adoption of Vicky, a 7-year old daughter and procedural requirements have been complied
of Eva's sister. The government, through the Office of with. In 1970, Ramon and Dessa got married. Prior to
the Solicitor General, opposed the petition on the their marriage, Ramon had a child, Anna. In 1971 and
ground that the petitioners, being both foreigners, are 1972, Ramon and Dessa legally adopted Cherry and
disqualified to adopt Vicky. Michelle respectively. In 1973, Dessa died while giving
birth to Larry Anna had a child, Lia. Anna never
a) Is the government's opposition tenable? Explain. married. Cherry, on the other hand, legally adopted
b) Would your answer be the same if they sought to Shelly. Larry had twins, Hans and Gretel, with his
adopt Eva's illegitimate daughter? Explain. girlfriend, Fiona. In 2005, Anna, Larry and Cherry died
in a car accident. In 2007, Ramon died. Who may inherit
1. Michelle, as an adopted child of Ramon, will inherit as a a) It depends on the stage of the proceedings when Rafael
legitimate child of Ramon. As an adopted child, Michelle died. If he died after all the requirements under the law
has all the rights of a legitimate child (Sec 18, Domestic have been complied with and the case is already
Adoption Law). submitted for resolution, the court may grant the
2. Lia will inherit in representation of Anna. Although Lia petition and issue a decree of adoption despite the death
is an illegitimate child, she is not barred by Articles 992, of the adopter (Sec. 13, RA 8552). Otherwise, the death of
because her mother Anna is an illegitimate herself. She the petitioner shall have the effect terminating the
will represent Anna as regards Anna's legitime under proceedings.
Art. 902 and as regards Anna's intestate share under b) No, if it was Dolly who died, the case should be
Art. 990. dismissed. Her death terminates the proceedings (Art.
13, RA 8552).
The following may not inherit from Ramon:
Q: Spouses Rex and Lea bore two children now aged 14
1. Shelly, being an adopted child, she cannot represent and 8. During the subsistence of their marriage, Rex
Cherry. This is because adoption creates a personal begot a child by another woman. He is now 10 years of
legal relation only between the adopter and the age. On Lea’s discovery of Rex’s fathering a child by
adopted. The law on representation requires the another woman, she filed a petition for legal separation
representative to be a legal heir of the person he is which was granted. Rex now wants to adopt his
representing and also of the person from whom the illegitimate child.
person being represented was supposed to inherit.
While Shelly is a legal heir of Cherry, Shelly is not a legal A. Whose consent is needed for Rex’s adoption of his
heir of Ramon. Adoption created a purely personal legal illegitimate child?
relation only between Cherry and Shelly. B. If there was no legal separation, can Rex still adopt
2. Hans and Gretel are barred from inheriting from his illegitimate child? Explain. (2010 BAR)
Ramon under Art. 992. Being illegitimate children, they
cannot inherit ab intestato from Ramon. A:
Q: Despite several relationships with different women, A. The consent of the 14-year-old legitimate child, of the 10-
Andrew remained unmarried. His first relationship with year-old illegitimate child and of the biological mother of
Brenda produced a daughter, Amy, now 30 years old. His the illegitimate child are needed for the adoption (Sec. 7
second, with Carla, produced two sons: Jon and Ryan. His and 9, RA 8552). The consent of Lea is no longer required
third, with Elena, bore him no children although Elena because there was already a final decree of legal
has a daughter Jane, from a previous relationship. His separation.
last, with Fe, produced no biological children but they B. Yes, he can still adopt his illegitimate child but with the
informally adopted without court proceedings, Sandy's consent of his spouse, of his 14-year-old legitimate child,
now 13 years old, whom they consider as their own. of the illegitimate child, and of the biological mother of
Sandy was orphaned as a baby and was entrusted to the illegitimate child (Sec. 7 and 9, RA 8552).
them by the midwife who attended to Sandy's birth. All
the children, including Amy, now live with Andrew in his Q: Eighteen-year old Filipina Patrice had a daughter out
house. Is there any legal obstacle to the legal adoption of of wedlock whom she named Laurie. At 26, Patrice
Amy by Andrew? To the legal adoption of Sandy by married American citizen John who brought her to live
Andrew and Elena? (2008 BAR) with him in the United States of America. John at once
signified his willingness to adopt Laurie. Can John file
A: No, there is no legal obstacle to the legal adoption of Amy the petition for adoption? If yes, what are the
by Andrew. While a person of age may not be adopted, Amy requirements? If no, why? (2010 BAR)
falls within two exceptions: (1) she is an illegitimate child and
she is being adopted by her illegitimate father to improve her A: No, John cannot file the petition to adopt alone.
status; and (2) even on the assumption that she is not an Philippine law requires husband and wife to adopt jointly
illegitimate child of Andrew, she may still be adopted, except on certain situations enumerated in the law. The
although of legal age, because she has been consistently case of John does not fall in any of the exceptions (RA 8552).
considered and treated by the adopter as his own child since
minority. In fact, she has been living with him until now. B. Inter-Country Adoption Act of 1995 (R.A. No. 8043)
(2005 BAR)
There is a legal obstacle to the adoption of Sandy by Andrew
and Elena. Andrew and Elena cannot adopt jointly because Q: Hans Berber, a German national, and his Filipino
they are not married. wife, Rhoda, are permanent residents of Canada. They
desire so much to adopt Magno, an 8-year old
Q: Rafael, a wealthy bachelor, filed a petition for the orphaned boy and a baptismal godson of Rhoda. Since
adoption of Dolly, a one-year old foundling who had a the accidental death of Magno's parents in 2004, he has
severe heart ailment. During the pendency of the been staying with his aunt who, however, could hardly
adoption proceedings, Rafael died of natural causes. The afford to feed her own family. Unfortunately, Hans and
Office of the Solicitor General files a motion to dismiss Rhoda cannot come to the Philippines to adopt Magno
the petition on the ground that the case can no longer although they possess all the qualifications as adoptive
proceed because of the petitioner’s death. parents. Is there a possibility for them to adopt Magno?
How should they go about it? (2005 BAR)
a) Should the case be dismissed? Explain.
35
CIVIL LAW
A: Under RA 8043, establishing the rules for inter-country 2) The following have been considered as “compelling
adoption of Filipino children, the spouses may file an reasons” to deprive a mother of custody:
application to adopt a Filipino child with the Inter-country
Adoption Board (ICAB) after they have been determined a. Neglect,
eligible and fit to adopt by the State Welfare Agency or a b. Abandonment,
licensed adoption agency in Canada. The Candian agency will c. Unemployment,
forward the required supporting documents to the ICAB for d. Immorality (Espiritu v. CA, 242 SCRA 362 [1995]),
matching with a Filipino child. The spouses, after filing a e. Alcoholism,
petition with the ICAB, shall be issued the Placement f. Drug addiction,
Authority and when all the travel documents of the child who g. Maltreatment,
is declared legally eligible for adoption as determined by the h. Insanity,
ICAB, are ready the adoptive parents or any one of them shall i. Highly communicable serious disease,
personally fetch the child in the Philippines for adoption in j. Grave physical handicap,
the court of the foreigner’s country. k. Serious and credible threat by the child to ham
himself if separated from his mother (Luna v. CA 137
ISUPPORT (FAMILY CODE) (2004, 2006, 2008, 2010 SCRA 7 [1985])
BAR)
Q: Distinguish briefly but clearly between: Substitute
Q: Despite several relationships with different women, parental authority and special parental authority. (2004
Andrew remained unmarried. His first relationship BAR)
with Brenda produced a daughter, Amy, now 30 years
old. His second, with Carla, produced two sons: Jon and A: In substitute parental authority, the parents lose their
Ryan. His third, with Elena, bore him no children parental authority in favor of the substitute who acquires it to
although Elena has a daughter Jane, from a previous the exclusion of the parents.
relationship. His last, with Fe, produced no biological In special parental authority, the parents or anyone exercising
children but they informally adopted without court parental authority does not lose parental authority. Those
proceedings, Sandy's now 13 years old, whom they who are charged with special parental authority exercise such
consider as their own. Sandy was orphaned as a baby authority only during the time that the child is in their custody
and was entrusted to them by the midwife who or supervision.
attended to Sandy's birth. All the children, including
Amy, now live with Andrew in his house. Substitute parental authority displaces parental authority
while special parental authority concurs with parental
a) In his old age, can Andrew be legally entitled to authority.
claim support from Amy, Jon, Ryan, Jane, and Sandy
assuming that all of them have the means to Q: If during class hours, while the teacher was chatting
support him? with other teachers in the school corridor, a 7 year old
b) Can Amy, Jon, Ryan, Jane, and Sandy legally claim male pupil stabs the eye of another boy with a ball pen
support from each other? (2008 BAR) during a fight, causing permanent blindness to the
victim, who could be liable for damages for the boy’s
A: injury: the teacher, the school authorities, or the guilty
boy’s parents? Explain. (2003 BAR)
a) Andrew can claim support from them all, except from
Sandy and Jane, who is not his child, legitimate, A: The school, its administrators, and teachers have
illegitimate or adopted. special parental authority and responsibility over the
b) Amy, Jon and Ryan, can legally claim support from each minor child while under their supervision, instruction or
other under Art. 196 of the FC which provides that custody (Art.218, FC). They are principally and solidarily
brothers and sisters not legitimately related, whether liable for the damages caused by the acts or omissions
of the full or half-blood, are bound to support each of the unemancipated minor unless they exercised the
other except when the need for support is due to a proper diligence required under the circumstances (Art.219,
cause imputable to the claimant’s fault or negligence. FC). In the problem, the TEACHER and the SCHOOL
Jane and Sandy, however, cannot legally claim support AUTHORITIES are liable for the blindness of the victim,
from each other and from Amy, Jon and Ryan because because the student who causes it was under their
they are not related to any of them. special parental authority and they were negligent. They
were negligent because they were chatting in the corridor
Q: Under Article 213 of the Family Code, no child during the class period when the stabbing incident
under 7 years of age shall be separated from the occurred. The incident could have been prevented had the
mother unless the court finds compelling reasons to teacher been inside the classroom at that time. The
order otherwise. guilty boy’s PARENTS are subsidiarily liable under Article
219 of the Family Code.
1) Explain the rationale of this provision.
2) Give at least 3 examples of “compelling reasons” Q: On May 5, 1989, 16-year old Rozanno, who was
which justify the taking away from the mother’s issued a student permit, drove to school a car, a gift
custody of her child under 7 years of age. (2006 BAR) from his parents. On even date, as his class was
scheduled to go on a field trip, his teacher requested
A: him to accommodate in his car, as he did, four (4) of his
classmates because the van rented by the school was
1) The rationale of the provision is that a child below 7 years too crowded. On the way to a museum which the
old needs the love and care which only its mother can students were scheduled to visit, Rozanno made a
give. The welfare of the child is given the highest priority wrong maneuver, causing a collision with a jeepney.
and the interest of the child prevails over procedural One of his classmates died. He and the three (3) others
rules. were badly injured.
A. At the time the incident occurred in May 1989, Rozanno After Majorette gives birth and delivers the baby to
was still a minor. Being a minor, Art. 218, (FC) applies. Gigolo following her receipt of P2 million, she engages
Pursuant to Art. 218, the school, its administrators and your services as her lawyer to regain custody of the
teachers shall be liable for the acts of minor Rozanno baby.
because of the special parental authority and
responsibility that they exercise over him. The A. What legal action can you file on behalf of Majorette?
authority applies to all authorized activities, whether Explain.
inside or outside the premises of the school, entity or B. Can Gigolo demand from Majorette the return of the
institution. The field trip on which occasion Rozanno P2 million if he returns the baby? Explain. (2010
drove the car, was an authorized activity, and, thus, BAR)
covered by the provision. Furthermore, the parents of
Rozanno are subsidiarily liable pursuant to Art. 219 A:
(FC), and principally liable under Art. 221 (FC), if they
are negligent. A. As her lawyer, I can file a petition for habeas corpus on
B. Since Rozanno was 16 years old in 1989, if the incident behalf Majorette to recover custody of her child. Since
happened sometime in the middle of 1994, Rozanno she is the mother of the child that was born out of
have been 21 years old at the time. Hence, he was wedlock, she has exclusive parental authority and
already of legal age. The law reducing the age of custody over the child. Gigolo, therefore, has no right to
majority to 18 years took effect in December 1989. have custody of the child and his refusal to give up
custody will constitute illegal detention for which habeas
Being of legal age, Arts. 218, 219, and 221(FC), are no corpus is the proper remedy.
longer applicable. In such case, only Rozanno will be B. No, he cannot. Both he and Majorette are guilty of
personally responsible for all the consequences of his violating the provision of the Anti-Child Abuse Law
act unless his school or his parents were themselves (RA7610) on child trafficking. Being in pari delicto, the
also negligent and such negligence contributed to the parties shall be left where they are and Gigolo cannot
happening of the incident. In that event, the school or demand the return of what he paid.
his parents are not liable under Art. 218, 218 or 221
(FC), but will be liable under general provision on the EMANCIPATION (1993 BAR)
Civil Code on quasi-delict.
Q: Julio and Lea, both 18 years old, were
Q: DON, an American businessman, secured parental sweethearts. At a party at the house of a mutual friend,
consent for the employment of five minors to play certain Lea met Jake, also 18 years old, who showed interest in
roles in two movies he was producing at home in Makati. her. Lea seemed to entertain Jake because she danced
They worked at odd hours of the day and night, but with him many times. In a fit of jealousy, Julio shot Jake
always accompanied by parents or other adults. The with his father's 38 calibre revolver which, before
producer paid the children talent fees at rates better than going to the party he was able to get from the unlocked
adult wages. drawer inside his father's bedroom. Jake died as a result
of the lone gunshot wound he sustained. His parents
But a social worker, DEB, reported to OSWD that these sued Julio's parents for damages arising from quasi-
children often missed going to school. They sometimes delict. At the time of the incident, Julio was 18 years
drank wine, aside from being exposed to drugs. In some old living with his parents. Julio's parents moved to
scenes, they were filmed naked or in revealing costumes. dismiss the complaint against them claiming that since
In his defense, DON contended all these were part of Julio was already of majority age, they were no longer
artistic freedom and cultural creativity. None of the liable for his acts.
parents complained, said DON. He also said they signed a
contract containing a waiver of their right to file any 1) Should the motion to dismiss be granted? Why?
complaint in any office or tribunal concerning the 2) What is the liability of Julio's parents to Jake's
working conditions of their children acting in the movies. parents? Explain your answer. (1993 BAR)
Is the waiver valid and binding? Why or why not? Explain.
(2004 BAR) A:
A: The waiver is not valid. Although the contracting parties 1) No, the Motion to Dismiss should not be granted.
may establish such stipulations, clauses, terms and conditions Article 236 of the Family Code as amended by RA6809,
as they may deem convenient, they may not do so if such are provides in the third paragraph that "nothing in this
contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order, or public Code shall be construed to derogate from the duty or
policy (Art. 1306). The parents' waiver to file a complaint responsibility of parents and guardians for children
concerning the working conditions detrimental to the moral and wards below twenty-one years of age
well-being of their children acting in the movies is in violation mentioned in the second and third paragraphs of
of the Family Code and Labor laws. Thus, the waiver is invalid Article 2180 of the Civil Code".
and not binding. 2) The liability of Julio's parents to Jake's parents arises
The Child Labor Law is a mandatory and prohibitory law and from quasi-delict and shall cover specifically the
the rights of the child cannot be waived as it is contrary to law following:
and public policy. a. P50,000.00 for the death of the son;
37
CIVIL LAW
b. such amount as would correspond to lost land was sold at public auction to PNB for being the
earning capacity; and highest bidder. PNB secured the title thereto in 1987.
c. moral damages.
In the meanwhile, Pedro, who was still in possession of
RETROACTIVITY OF THE FAMILY CODE (ART. 256) the land, constructed a warehouse on the property. In
(2000 BAR) 1988, the PNB sold the land to Pablo. The Deed of Sale
was amended in 1989 to include the warehouse.
Q: On April 15, 1980, Rene and Angelina were married to
each other without a marriage settlement. In 1985, they Pedro, claiming ownership of the warehouse, files a
acquired a parcel of land in Quezon City. On June 1, complaint to annul the amended Deed of Sale before the
1990, when Angelina was away in Baguio, Rene sold Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, where he resides,
the said lot to Marcelo. Is the sale void or voidable? against both the PNB and Pablo. The PNB filed a motion
(2000) to dismiss the complaint for improper venue
contending that the warehouse is real property under
A: The sale is voidable. The provisions of the Family Code Art. 415(1) of the Civil Code and therefore the action
may apply retroactively but only if such application will not should have instead been filed in Malolos, Bulacan.
impair vested rights. When Rene and Angelina got married Pedro claims otherwise. The question arose as to
in 1980, the law that governed their property relations was whether the warehouse should be considered as real or
the New Civil Code. Under the NCC, as interpreted by the personal property.
Supreme Court in Heirs of Felipe v. Aldon (G.R. No. L-
60174, February 16, 1983) and reiterated in Heirs of If consulted, what would your legal advice be? (1997
Ayuste v. Malabonga (G.R No, 118784, September 2, 1999), BAR)
the sale executed by the husband without the consent of
the wife is voidable. The husband has already acquired a A: The warehouse which is a construction adhered to the
vested right on the voidable nature of dispositions made soil is an immovable by nature under Art. 415(1), and the
without the consent of the wife. Hence, Article 124 of the proper venue of any case to recover ownership of th same
Family Code which makes the sale void does not apply. which is what the purpose of the complaint to annul the
amended Deed of Sale amounts to, should be the place
where the property is located, or the RTC of Bulacan.
PART III – PROPERTY Q: Manila Petroleum Co. owned and operated a
petroleum operation facility off the coast of Manila. The
facility was located on a floating platform made of wood
CLASSIFICATION (1995, 1997, 2007 BAR) and metal, upon which was permanently attached the
heavy equipment for the petroleum operations and
Q: Salvador, a timber concessionaire, built on his lot a living quarters of the crew. The floating platform
warehouse where he processes and stores his timber likewise contained a garden area, where trees, plants
for shipment. Adjoining the warehouse is a furniture and flowers were planted. The platform was tethered to
factory owned by NARRAMIX of which Salvador is a a ship, the MV 101, which was anchored to the seabed.
majority stockholder. NARRAMIX leased space in the
warehouse where it placed its furniture-making a) Is the platform movable or immovable property?
machinery. (1995 BAR) b) Are the equipment and living quarters movable or
1. How would you classify the furniture-making immovable property?
machinery as property under the Civil Code? c) Are the trees, plants and flowers immovable or
Explain. movable property? (2007 BAR)
2. Suppose the lease contract between Salvador and
NARRAMIX stipulates that at the end of the lease the A:
machinery shall become the property of the lessor,
will your answer be the same? Explain. a) The platform is an immovable property under Art. 415
(9) NCC, which provides that "docks and structures
A: which, though floating, are intended by their nature and
object to remain at a fixed place on a river, lake or
1. The furniture-making machinery is movable property coast." Since the floating platform is a petroleum
because it was not installed by the owner of the operation facility, it is intended to remain permanently
tenement. To become immovable under Art. 415 (5) of where it is situated, even if it is tethered to a ship which
the NCC, the machinery must be installed by the owner is anchored to the seabed.
of the tenement. b) The equipment and living quarters of the crew are
2. It is immovable property. When there is a provision in immovable property. Art. 415 (3) of the NCC classifies
the lease contract making the lessor, at the end of the as an immovable "everything attached to an immovable
lease owner of the machinery installed by the lessee, in a fixed manner, in such a way that it cannot be
the said machinery is considered to have been installed separated therefrom without breaking the material or
by the lessor through the lessee who acted merely as deterioration of the object." Both the equipment and
his agent. Having been installed by the owner of the the living quarters are permanently attached to the
tenement, the machinery became immovable under platform which is also an immovable. The equipment
Art. 415 of the NCC (Davao Sawmill v. Castillo, 61 Phil can also be classified as an immovable property under
709) Art. 415 (5) NCC because such equipment are
"machinery, receptacles, instruments or implements
Q: Pedro is the registered owner of a parcel of land intended by the owner of the tenement for an industry
situated in Malolos, Bulacan. In 1973, he mortgaged the or works which may be carried on in a building or on a
land to the Philippine National Bank (PNB) to secure a piece of land and which tend directly to meet the needs
loan of P100, 000.00. For Pedro’s failure to pay the loan, of the industry or works." It is logically assumed that
the PNB foreclosed on the mortgage in 1980, and the the petroleum industry may be carried on in a building
OWNERSHIP (1995, 1997, 2000, 2008, 2010, 2013, 1. Boboy’s claim that he is a builder in good faith has no
2016 BAR) legal basis. A builder in good faith is someone who
occupies the property in the concept of an owner. The
Q: Joven and Juliana are the owners of a 30-hectare provisions on builder-planter-sower under the Civil
plantation in Cotabato, covered by a title. One day, a Code cover cases in which the builder, planter and
group of armed men forcibly entered their house and, sower believe themselves to be owners of the land, or
at gun point, forced them to sign a Deed of Absolute Sale at least, to have a claim of title thereto. As Boboy is a
in favor of Romeo. Romeo got the title from them and lessee of the property, even if he was paying nominal
they were ejected from the house and threatened not to rental, Article 1678 Civil Code, is applicable. Under this
come back or else they will be killed. The spouses went provision, if the lessee makes, in good faith, useful
to Manila and resided there for more than 35 years. improvements which are suitable to the use for which
They never went back to Cotabato for fear of their lives. the lease is intended without altering the form or
Word came to them that peace and order have been substance of the property leased, the lessor upon the
restored in their former place of residence and they termination of the lease shall pay the lessee one-half of
decided to reclaim their land for the benefit of their the value of the improvements at that time. Should the
grandchildren. Joven and Juliana filed a suit for lessor refuse to reimburse said amount, the lessee may
reconveyance of their property. This was opposed by remove the improvements even though the principal
the grandson of Romeo to whom the title was thing may suffer damage thereby.
eventually transferred, on the ground of laches and 2. No. Boboy cannot be held liable for damages. The
prescription. Decide the case and rule on the defenses lessor, Anselmo, refused to reimburse one-half of the
of laches and prescription. Explain your answer. (2016 value of the improvements, so the lessee, Boboy, may
BAR) remove the same, even though the principal thing may
suffer damage thereby. If in removing the useful
A: The right of the registered owners, Joven and Juliana, to improvements Boboy caused more impairment on the
file suit to recover their property, is not barred by property leased than what is necessary, he will be liable
prescription. Under Section 47 of P.D. No. 1529, no title to for damages (Art. 1678).
registered land in derogation of the title of the registered
owner shall be acquired by prescription or adverse Q: Tim came into possession of an old map showing
possession. where a purported cache of gold bullion was hidden.
Without any authority from the government Tim
Proof of possession by the owner in an action for conducted a relentless search and finally found the
recoveyance is immaterial and inconsequential. The right to treasure buried in a new river bed formerly part of a
recover possession is equally imprescriptible since parcel of land owned by spouses Tirso and Tessie. The old
possession is a mere consequence of ownership. (Republic river which used to cut through the land of Spouses
v. Mendoza, 627 SCRA 443 [2010]). The right of Joven and Ursula and Urbito changed its course through natural
Juliana to recover is not barred by laches, either. Laches causes. To whom shall the treasure belong? Explain
deals with unreasonable delay in filing the action. The (1995 BAR)
owner’s delay, if any, cannot be construed as deliberate and
intentional. They were simply coerced out of Cotabato and A: The treasure was found in a property of public
threatened with death if they returned, and, thus, could not dominion, the new river bed. Since Tim did not have
have filed them. authority from the government and, therefore, was a
trespasser, he is not entitled to the one-half share allotted
Q: Anselmo is the registered owner of a land and a to a finder of hidden treasure. All of it will go to the State.
house that his friend Boboy occupied for a nominal In addition, under Art. 438 of the NCC in order that the
rental and on the condition that Boboy would vacate finder be entitled to the 1/2 share, the treasure must be
the property on demand. With Anselmo's knowledge, found by chance, that is by sheer luck. In this case, since Tim
Boboy introduced renovations consisting of an found the treasure not by chance but because he
additional bedroom, a covered veranda, and a concrete relentlessly searched for it, he is not entitled to any share in
block fence, at his own expense. Subsequently, Anselmo the hidden treasure.
needed the property as his residence and thus asked
Boboy to vacate and turn it over to him. Boboy, despite Q: Marcelino, a treasure hunter as just a hobby, has
an extension, failed to vacate the property, forcing found a map which appears to indicate the location of
Anselmo to send him a written demand to vacate. In his hidden treasure. He has an idea of the land where
own written reply, Boboy signified that he was ready to the treasure might possibly be found. Upon inquiry,
leave but Anselmo must first reimburse him the value Marcelino learns that the owner of the land, Leopoldo,
of the improvements he introduced on the property as is a permanent resident of Canada. Nobody, however,
he is a builder in good faith. Anselmo refused, insisting could give him Leopoldo's exact address. Ultimately,
that Boboy cannot ask for reimbursement as he is a anyway, he enters the land and conducts a search. He
mere lessee. Boboy responded by removing the succeeds. Leopoldo learning of Marcelino's "find",
improvements and leaving the building in its original seeks to recover the treasure from Marcelino but the
state. latter is not willing to part with it. Failing to reach an
agreement, Leopoldo sues Marcelino for the recovery
39
CIVIL LAW
of the property. Marcelino contests the action. How A: None of the above. The general rule us that the treasure
would you decide the case? (1997 BAR) shall belong to the spouses X and Y, the owners of Lot B.
Under Article 438 (NCC), the exception is that when the
A: I would decide in favor of Marcelino since he is discovery of a hidden treasure is made on the property of
considered a finder by chance of the hidden treasure, hence, another and by chance, one-half thereof shall belong to the
he is entitled to one-half (1/2) of the hidden treasure. While owner of the land and the other one-half is allowed to the
Marcelino may have had the intention to look for the hidden finer. In the problem, the finding of the treasure was not by
treasure, still he is a finder by chance since it is enough that chance because O knew that the treasure was in Lot B. While
he tried to look for it. By chance in the law does not mean a trespasser is also not entitled to any share, and there is no
sheer luck such that the finder should have no intention at indication in the problem whether or not O was a
all to look for the treasure. By chance means good luch, trespasser, O is not entitled to a share because the finding
umplying that one who intentionally looks for the treasure was not “by chance”.
is embraced in the provision. The reason is that it is
extremely difficult to find hidden treasure without looking ACCESSION (1992, 1996, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2003,
for it deliberately. 2008, 2009, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 BAR)
Marcelino is not a trespasser since there is no prohibition Q: Pedro bought a parcel of land described as Cadastral
for him to enter the premises, hence, he is entitled to half of Lot No. 123 and the title was issued to his name. Juan
the treasure. also bought a lot in the same place, which is described
as Cadastral Lot No. 124. Pedro hired a geodetic
Q: Adam, a building contractor, was engaged by Blas to engineer to determine the actual location of Lot No. 123
construct a house on a lot which he (Blas) owns. While but for some reason, the engineer pointed to Lot No.
digging on the lot in order to lay down the foundation 124 by mistake. Pedro hired a contractor to construct
of the house, Adam hit a very hard object. It turned out his house and the latter put up a sign stating the name
to be the vault of the old Banco de las Islas Filipinas. of the owner of the project and the construction permit
Using a detonation device, Adam was able to open the number. It took more than a year before the house was
vault containing old notes and coins which were in constructed. When Pedro was already residing in his
circulation during the Spanish era. While the notes and house, Juan told him to remove his house because it was
coins are no longer legal tender, they were valued at built on his (Juan's) lot.
P100 million because of their historical value and the
coins silver nickel content. The following filed legal Juan filed a Complaint for Recovery of Possession and
claims over the notes and coins: prayed that the house be removed because Pedro is a
builder in bad faith. Pedro filed his Answer with
i. Adam, as finder; Counterclaim that he is entitled to the payment of the
ii. Blas, as owner of the property where they were value of the house plus damages because he is a builder
found; in good faith and that Juan is guilty of estoppel and
iii. Bank of the Philippine Islands, as successor-in- laches.
interest of the owner of the vault; and 1. If Pedro is a builder in good faith, what are the
iv. The Philippine Government because of their rights given to Juan under the law? Explain.
historical value. 2. If Pedro is a builder in bad faith, what are the rights
given to Juan under the law? Explain. (2016 BAR)
Who owns the notes and coins? (2008 BAR)
A:
A: Hidden treasure is a money jewelry or other precious
objects the ownership of which does not appear (Art. 439, 1. If Pedro is a builder in good faith and Juan is an owner
CC). The vault of the Banco de las Islas Filipinas has been in good faith, Juan has the right to appropriate as his
buried for about a century and the Bank of the Philippine own the house after payment of indemnity provided for
Islands cannot succeed by inheritance to the property of in Articles 546 and 548 of the Civil Code, which are the
Banco de las Islas Filipinas. The ownership of the vault, necessary and useful expenses. As to useful expenses,
together with the notes and coins can now legally be Juan has the option to either refund the amount of the
considered as hidden treasure because its ownership is no expenses, or pay the increase in value which the land
longer apparent. The contractor, Adam, is not a trespasser may have acquired by reason thereof. Alternatively,
and therefore entitled to one-half of the hidden treasure under Article 448 of the Civil Code, Juan has the right to
and Blas as owner of the property, is entitled to the other oblige Pedro to pay the price of the land. However,
half (Art. 438, CC). Since the notes and coins have historical Pedro cannot be obliged to buy the land if its value is
value, the government may acquire them at their just price considerably more than that of the house. In such case,
which in turn will be divided equally between Adam and he shall pay reasonable rend, if Juan does not choose to
Blas (Art. 438, par. 3, CC). appropriate the house after proper indemnity. It is the
owner of the land who is authorized to exercise the
Q: O, owner of Lot A, learning that Japanese soldiers options under Article 448 because his right is older and
may have buried gold and other treasures at the by principle of accession, he is entitled to the ownership
adjoining vacant Lot B belonging to spouses X & Y, of the accessory thing.
excavated in Lot B where she succeeded in unearthing
gold and precious stones. How will the treasures found If Pedro is a builder in good faith and Juan is an owner
by O be divided? in bad faith because Juan knew that Pedro was building
on his lot and did not oppose it (Art. 453 par. 2), and Art.
1. 100% to O as finder 454 in relation to Art. 447 of the Civil Code applies. Juan
2. 50% to O and 50% to the spouses X and Y shall pay the value of the house and is also liable for
3. 50% to O and 50% to the state reparation of damage; however, Pedro also has the
4. None of the above (2010 BAR) right to remove or demolish the house and ask for
damages.
A: I will decide in favor of Daniel and dismiss the action to Q: A delayed accession is: (2014 BAR)
quite title filed by Benjamin. Under Art. 457 of the Civil
Code, the owner of lands adjoining the banks of rivers A. formation of an island
belong the accretion which they gradually receive from the B. avulsion
effects of the current of the waters. The accretion, however, C. alluvium
does not automatically become registered land. It must be D. change in the course of the riverbed
brought under the Torrens system of registration by
Benjamin, the riparian owner. Since he did not, then the A: B (Art. 459)
increment, not being registered land, was open to
acquisition through prescription by third persons, like Q: Mr. and Mrs. X migrated to the US with all their
Daniel. (Grande v. Court of Appeals, 5 SCRA 524 [1962]; Cureg children. As they had no intention of coming back, they
v. Intermediate Appellate Court, 177 SCRA 313 [1989]) offered their house and lot for sale to their neighbors,
Mr. and Mrs. A (the buyers) who agreed to buy the
Q: Ciriaco Realty Corporation (CRC) sold to the spouses property for 128 Million. Because Mr. and Mrs. A
Del a Cruz a 500-square meter land (Lot A) in needed to obtain a loan from a bank first, and since the
Paranaque. The land now has a fair market value of P1, sellers were in a hurry to migrate, the latter told the
200, 000. CRC likewise sold to the spouses Rodriguez, a buyers that they could already occupy the house,
700-square meter land (Lot B) which is adjacent to Lot renovate it as it was already in a state of disrepair, and
A. Lot B has a present fair market value of P1, 500, 000. pay only when their loan is approved and released.
The spouses Dela Cruz constructed a house on Lot B, While waiting for the loan approval, the buyers spent
relying on there presentation of the CRC sales agent P1 Million in repairing the house. A month later, a
that it is the property they purchased. Only upon the person carrying an authenticated special power of
completion of their house did the spouses Dela Cruz attorney from the sellers demanded that the buyers
discover that they had built on Lot B owned by the either immediately pay for the property in full now or
spouses Rodriguez, not on Lot A that they purchased. vacate it and pay damages for having made
They spent P , 000,000 for the house. As their lawyer, improvements on the property without a sale having
advise the spouses Dela Cruz on their rights and been perfected. What are the buyers' options or legal
obligations under the given circumstances, and the rights with respect to the expenses they incurred in
recourses and options open to them to protect their improving the property under circumstances? (2015
interests. (1992, 2001, 2013 BAR) BAR)
A: Based on the facts as stated, the spouses Dela Cruz as A: The buyers here may be deemed possessors or builders
builders and the spouses Rodriguez as landowners, are both in good faith because they were made to believe that they
in good faith. The spouses Dela Cruz are builders in good were allowed to make repairs or renovation by the sellers
faith because before constructing the house they exercised themselves. As builders in good faith, they have the right to
due diligence by asking the agent of CRC the location of Lot seek reimbursement for the value of the improvements in
A. and they relied on the information given by the agent who case the owner decides to appropriate them. They cannot
is presumed to know the identity of the lot purchased by the be asked to remove the improvements because that is not
Dela Cruz spouses (Pleasantville v. CA, G.R. No. one of the options given by law to the landowner in case the
79688, February 1, 1996). On the other hand, there is no builder is in good faith.
showing that the landowners, spouses Rodriguez, acted in
bad faith. The facts do not show that the building was done Q: A owns a parcel of residential land worth P500,
with their knowledge and without opposition on their part 000.00. Unknown to A, a residential house costing
(Art. 453). Good faith is always presumed (Art. 527). The P100, 000.00 is built on the entire parcel by B who
claims ownership of the land. Answer all the following
41
CIVIL LAW
questions based on the premise that B is a builder in Q:
good faith and A is a landowner in good faith.
a) Because of confusion as to the boundaries of the
a) May A acquire the house built by B? If so, how? adjoining lots that they bought from the same
b) If the land increased in value to P500, 000.00 by subdivision company, X constructed a house on the
reason of the building of the house thereon, what adjoining lot of Y in the honest belief that it is the
amount should be paid by A in order to acquire the land that he bought from the subdivision company.
house from B? What are the respective rights of X and Y with
c) Assuming that the cost of the house was P900, respect to X's house?
000.00 and not P100, 000.00, may A require B to b) Suppose X was in good faith but Y knew that X was
buy the land? constructing on his (Y's) land but simply kept quiet
d) If B voluntarily buys the land as desired by A, under about it, thinking perhaps that he could get X's
what circumstances may A nevertheless be entitled house later. What are the respective rights of the
to have the house removed? parties over X's house in this case? (1999 BAR)
e) In what situation may a “forced lease” arise
between A and B, and what terms and conditions A:
would govern the lease?
a) The rights of Y, as owner of the lot, and of X, as builder
Give reasons for your answers. (1992 BAR) of a house thereon, are governed by Art. 448 of the Civil
Code which grants to Y the right to choose between two
A: remedies: (a) appropriate the house by indemnifying X
for its value plus whatever necessary expenses the
a) Yes, A may acquire the house built by B by paying latter may have incurred for the preservation of the
indemnity to B. Article 448 of the Civil Code provides land, or (b) compel X to buy the land if the price of the
that the owner of the land on which anyting has been land is not considerably more than the value of the
built, sown or planted in good faith, shall have the right house. If it is, then X cannot be obliged to buy the land
to appropriate as his own works, sowing or planting, but he shall pay reasonable rent, and in case of
after payment of the indemnity provided for in Article disagreement, the court shall fix the terms of the lease.
546 of the Civil Code. b) Since the lot owner Y is deemed to be in bad faith (Art.
b) A should pay B the sum of P50, 000.00. Article 548 of 453), X as the party in good faith may (a) remove the
the Civil Code provides that useful expenses shall be house and demand indemnification for damages
refunded to the possessor in good faith with the right of suffered by him, or (b) demand payment of the value of
retention, the person who has defeated him in the the house plus reparation for damages (Art. 447, in
possession having the option of refunding the amount relation to Art 454). Y continues as owner of the lot and
of the expenses or of paying the increase in value which becomes, under the second option, owner of the house
the thing may have acquired by reason thereof. The as well, after he pays the sums demanded.
increase in value amounts to P50, 000.00.
c) Yes, A may require B to buy the land. Article 448 of the Q: In good faith, Pedro constructed a five-door
Civil Code provides that the owner of the land on which commercial building on the land of Pablo who was
anything has been built in good faith shall have the right also in good faith. When Pablo discovered the
to oblige the one who built to pay the price of the land construction, he opted to appropriate the building by
if its value is not considerably more than that of the paying Pedro the cost thereof. However, Pedro insists
building. that he should be paid the current market value of the
d) If B agrees to buy land but fails to pay, A can have the building, which was much higher because of inflation.
house removed (Depra v. Dumlao, 136 SCRA 475). (2000 BAR)
e) Art. 448 of the Civil Code provides that the builder 1) Who is correct Pedro or Pablo?
cannot be obliged to buy the land if its value is 2) In the meantime that Pedro is not yet paid, who is
considerably more than that of the building. In such entitled to the rentals of the building, Pedro or Pablo?
case, he shall pay reasonable rent, if the owner of the
land does not choose to appropriate the building after A:
proper indemnity. The parties shall agree upon the
terms of the lease and in case of disagreement, the court 1) Pablo is correct. Under Article 448 of the New Civil
fix the terms thereof. Code in relation to Article 546, the builder in good faith
is entitled to a refund of the necessary and useful
Q: Bartolome constructed a chapel on the land of Eric. expenses incurred by him, or the increase in value
What are Batolome’s rights of he were: which the land may have acquired by reason of the
improvement, at the option of the landowner. The
1) A possessor of the land in good faith? builder is entitled to a refund of the expenses he
2) A possessor of the land in bad faith? (1996 BAR) incurred, and not to the market value of the
improvement. The case of Pecson v. CA (G.R. No.
A: 115814, 26 May 1995), is not applicable to the problem.
In the Pecson case, the builder was the owner of the land
1) A chapel is a useful improvement. Bartolome may who later lost the property at a public sale due to non-
remove the chapel if it can be removed without damage payment of taxes. The Court ruled that Article 448
to the land, unless Eric chooses to acquire the chapel. In does not apply to the case where the owner of the land
the latter case, Bartolome has the right to the is the builder but who later lost the land; not being
reimbursement of the value of the chapel with right of applicable, the indemnity that should be paid to the
retention until he is reimbursed. (Art. 448 in relation to buyer must be the fair market value of the building
Art. 546 and 547, NCC) and not just the cost of construction thereof. The Court
2) Bartolome, under Art. 449 of the NCC, loses whatever opined in that case that to do otherwise would unjustly
he built, without any right to indemnity. enrich the new owner of the land.
1) Pablo is correct. Under Article 448 of the New Civil a) An easement over a usufruct?
Code in relation to Article 546, the builder in good faith b) A usufruct over an easement?
is entitled to a refund of the necessary and useful c) An easement over another easement?
expenses incurred by him, or the increase in value
which the land may have acquired by reason of the Explain. (1995 BAR)
47
CIVIL LAW
subsist for the number of years specified even if the third
A: person should die unless there is an express stipulation in
the contract that states otherwise. In the case at bar, there is
a) There can be no easement over a usufruct. Since an no express stipulation that the consideration for the
easement may be constituted only on a corporeal usufruct is the existence of Petronila's son. Thus, the
immovable property, no easement may be constituted on general rule and not the exception should apply in this case.
a usufruct which is not a corporeal right. EASEMENTS (1996, 1998, 2001, 2005, 2013, 2014)
b) There can be no usufruct over an easement. While a
usufruct may be created over a right, sich right must have Q: An easement that can be acquired by prescription:
an existence of its own independent of the property. A
servitude cannot be the object of a usufruct because it has A. Right of way
no existence independent of the property to which it B. Watering of an animal
attaches. C. Lateral and subjacent support
c) There can be no easement over another easement for the D. Light and view (2014 BAR)
same reason as in (a). An easement, although it is a real
right over an immovable, is not a corporeal right. There is A: D – only continuous and apparent easements maybe
a Roman maxim which says that: There can be no acquired by prescription.
servitude over another servitude.
Q: In 2005, Andres built a residential house on a lot
Q: Distinguish usufruct from commodatum and state whose only access to the national highway was a
whether these may be constituted over consumable pathway crossing Brando's property. Andres and
goods. others have been using this pathway (pathway A) since
1980. In 2006, Brando fenced off his property, thereby
A: Usufruct is a right given to a person (usufructuary) to enjoy blocking Andres' access to the national highway.
the property of another with the obligation of preserving its Andres demanded that part of the fence be removed to
form and substance (Art. 562, Civil Code) maintain his old access route to the highway (pathway
A), but Brando refused, claiming that there was another
On the other hand, commodatum is a contract by which one of available pathway (pathway B) for ingress and egress
the parties (bailor) delivers to another (bailee) something not to the highway. Andres countered that pathway B has
consumable so that the latter may use it for a certain time and defects, is circuitous, and is extremely inconvenient to
return it. use. To settle their dispute, Andres and Brando hired
Damian, a geodetic and civil engineer, to survey and
In usufruct, the usufructuary gets the right to the use and to examine the two pathways and the surrounding areas,
the fruits of the same, while in commodatum, the bailee only and to determine the shortest and the least prejudicial
acquires the use of the thing loaned but not its fruits. way through the servient estates. After the survey, the
engineer concluded that pathway B is the longer route
Usufruct may be constituted on the whole or a part of the and will need improvements and repairs, but will not
fruits of the thing. (Art. 564, Civil Code). It may even be significantly affect the use of Brando's property. On the
constituted over consumables like money (Alunan v. Veloso, other hand, pathway A that had long been in place, is
52 Phil. 545). On the other hand, in commodatum, consumable the shorter route but would significantly affect the use
goods may be subject thereof only when the purpose of the of Brando's property. In light of the engineer's findings
contract is not the consumption of the object, as when it is and the circumstances of the case, resolve the parties'
merely for exhibition. (Art. 1936, Civil Code) right of way dispute. (1996, 2013 BAR)
Q: Bartolome constructed a chapel on the land of Eric. A: Andres is not entitled to the easement of right of way for
What are Batolome’s rights of he were a usufructuary of Pathway A. Pathway B must be used.
the land? (1996 BAR)
The owner of a dominant estate may validly obtain a
A: Bartlome has the right to remove the improvement if it is
compulsory right of way only after he has established the
possible to do so without causing damage to the property (Art.
existence of four requisites, to wit:
579, NCC). He may also set off the improvement against any
damages which the property held in usufruct suffered
1. the (dominant) estate is surrounded by other
because of his act or the acts of his assignee. (Art. 580, NCC).
immovables and is without adequate outlet to a public
highway;
Q: On 1 January 1980, Minerva, the owner of a building,
2. after payment of the proper indemnity;
granted Petronila a usufruct over the property until 01
3. the isolation was not due to the proprietor's own acts;
June 1998 when Manuel, a son of Petronila, would have
and
reached his 30th birthday. Manuel, however, died on
4. the right of way claimed is at a point least prejudicial to
1 June 1990 when he was only 26 years old. Minerva
the servient estate, and insofar as consistent with this
notified Petronila that the usufruct had been
rule, where the distance from the dominant estate to
extinguished by the death of Manuel and demanded that
the public highway may be the shortest (Art. 650).
the latter vacate the premises and deliver the same to
the former. Petronila refused to vacate the place on the
However, the Supreme Court has consistently ruled that in
ground that the usufruct in her favor would expire only
case both criteria cannot be complied with, the right of way
on 1 June 1998 when Manuel would have reached his
shall be established at the point least prejudicial to the
30th birthday and that the death of Manuel before his
servient estate.
30th birthday did not extinguish the usufruct. Whose
contention should be accepted? (1997 BAR)
The first and fourth requisites are not complied with. First,
there is another available outlet to the national highway
A: Petronila's contention is correct. Under Article 606 of
(Pathway B). Second, the right of way obtained (Pathway A)
the Civil Code, a usufruct granted for the time that may
is not the least prejudicial to Brando's property as
elapse before a third person reaches a certain age shall
evidenced by the reports of the geodetic and civil engineer.
UST BAR OPERATIONS 48
QUAMTO (1987-2016)
B. Assuming Ava opts to demand a right of way from
When there is already an existing adequate outlet from the any of the owners of Lots A, B, and D, can she do
dominant estate to a public highway, even if the said outlet, that? Explain. (2010 BAR)
for one reason or another, be inconvenient, the need to open
up another servitude is entirely unjustified (Costabella A:
Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. 80511, January 25, 1991). The rule that
the easement of right of way shall be established at the point A. Yes. Ava has the right to demand from Julia the
least prejudicial to the servient estate is controlling activation of the right of way, for the following reasons:
(Quimen v. CA, G.R. No. 112331, May 29, 1996). 1. The easement of the right of way is a real right
which attaches to, and is inseperable from, the
Q: Distinguish between: estate to which it belongs.
1. Continuous and discontinuous easements; 2. The sale of the property includes the easement or
2. Apparent and non-apparent easements; and servitude, even if the deed of sale is silent on the
3. Positive and negative easements (1998 BAR) matter.
3. The vendee of the property in which a servitude or
A: easement exists cannot close or put obstructions
thereon to prevent the dominant estate from using
1. Continuous easements are those the use of which is or it.
may be incessant, without the intervention of any act of 4. Ava’s working abroad for more than ten (10) years
man, while discontinuous easements are those which are should not be construed as non-user, because it
used at intervals and depend upon the acts of man. (Art. cannot be implied from the fact that she or those
615, Civil Code) she left behind to cultivate the lot no longer use the
2. Apparent easements are those which are made known right of way.
and are continually kept in view by external signs that 5. Renunciation or waiver of an easement must be
reveal the use and enjoyment of the same, while non- specific, clear, express and made in a public
apparent easements are those which show no external instrument in accordance of Art. 1358 of the NCC.
indication of their existence. (Art. 615, Civil Code) B. Yes. Ava has the option to demand a right of way on any
3. Positive easements are those which impose upon the of the remaining lots of Franz more so after Franz sold
owner of the servient estate the obligation of allowing lot C to Julia. The essential elements of a legal right of
something to be done or of doing it himself, while way under Art. 649 and 650 of the NCC are complied
negative easements are those which prohibit the owner with.
of the servient estate from doing something which he
could lawfully do if the easement did not exist. (Art. 615, Q: David is the owner of the subdivision in Sta. Rosa,
Civil Code) Laguna, without an access to the highway. When he
applied for a license to establish the subdivision, David
Q: Emma bought a parcel of land from Equitable-PCI represented that he will purchase a rice field located
Bank, which acquired the same from Felisa, the between his land and the highway, and develop it into
original owner. Thereafter, Emma discovered that an access road. But when the license was already
Felisa had granted a right of way over the land in granted, he did not bother to buy the rice field, which
favor of the land of Georgina, which had no outlet to remains unutilized until the present. Instead, he chose
a public highway, but the easement was not annotated to connect his subdivision with the neighboring
when the servient estate was registered under the subdivision of Nestor, which has an access to the
Torrens system. Emma then filed a complaint for highway. Nestor allowed him to do this, pending
cancellation of the right of way, on the ground that it negotiations on the compensation to be paid. When
had been extinguished by such failure to annotate. they failed to arrive at an agreement, Nestor built a
How would you decide the controversy? (2001 BAR) wall across the road connecting with David's
subdivision. David filed a complaint in court, for the
A: The complaint for cancellation of easement of right of establishment of an easement of right of way through
way must fail. The failure to annotate the easement upon the subdivision of Nestor which he claims to be the
the title of the servient estate is not among the grounds most adequate and practical outlet to the highway.
for extinguishing an easement under Article 631 of the NCC.
Under Article 617, easements are inseparable from the 1) What are the requisites for the establishment of a
estate to which they actively or passively belong. Once it compulsory easement of a right of way?
attaches, it can only be extinguished under Article 631, 2) Is David entitled to a right of way in this case? Why
and they exist even if they are not stated or annotated or why not? (1996 BAR)
as an encumbrance on the Torrens title of the servient
estate. (II Tolentino 326, 1987 ed.) A:
Q: Franz was the owner of Lot E which was surrounded 1) Art. 649, NCC. The owner, or any person who by virtue
by four (4) lots one of which – Lot C – he also owned. He of a real right may cultivate or use any immovable
promised Ava that if she bought Lot E, he would give her which is surrounded by other immovables pertaining
a right of way in Lot C. Convinced, Ava bought Lot E and, to other persons and without adequate outlet to a
as promised, Franz gave her a right of way in Lot C. Ava public highway, is entitled to demand a right of way
cultivated Lot E and used the right of way granted by through the neighboring estates, after payment of the
Franz. Ava later found gainful employment abroad. On property indeminity.
her return after more than 10 years, the right of way
was no longer available to her because Franz had in the Should this easement be established in such a manner
meantime sold Lot C to Julia who had it fenced. that its use may be continuous for all the needs of the
dominant estate, establishing a permanent passage the
A. Does Ava have a right to demand from Julia the indemnity shall consist of the value of the land occupied
activation of her right of way? Explain. and the amount of the damage caused to the servient
estate.
49
CIVIL LAW
In case the right of way is limited to the necessary 1. According to Art. 694 of the Civil Code, a nuisance is any
passage for the cultivation of the estate surrounded by act, omission, establishment, business condition of
others and for the gathering of its crops through the property, or anything else which:
servient estate without a permanent way, the i. Injures or endangers the health or safety of others;
indemnity shall consist in the payment of the damage or
caused by such encumbrance. ii. Annoys or offends the sense; or
iii. Shocks, defies, or disregards decency or morality; or
This easement is not compulsory if the isolation of the iv. Obstructs or interferes with the free passage of any
immovable is due to the proprietor’s own acts. public highway or street, or any body of water; or
v. Hinders or impairs the use of property.
The easement of right of way shall be established at
the point least prejudicial to the servient estate, and A nuisance may be whether public or private. Under Art.
insofar as consistent with this rule, where the distance 685, a public nuisance affects a community or
from the dominant estate to a public highway may be neighbourhood or any considerable number of persons,
the shortest (Art. 650, NCC; Vda. de Baltazar v. CA, 245 although the extent of the annoyance, danger of damage
SCRA 333) upon individuals may be unequal. A private nuisance, on
the other hand, is one that violates only private rights and
2) No, David is not entitled to the right of way being produces damage to but one or a few persons.
claimed. The isolation of his subdivision was due to his
own act or omission because he did not develop into an a. A squatter’s hut being an illegal construction, constitutes
access road the rice field which he was supposed to a public nuisance per se, if it poses problems of health and
purchase according to his own representation when sanitation. (City of Manila v. Garcia, 19 SCRA 41, [1967]). If
he applied for a license to establish the subdivision. the squatter’s hut is built on a private land and hinders or
(Floro v. Llenado, 244 SCRA 713). impairs the owner’s use of his or her own property, then
it would constitute a private nuisance.
Q: Don was the owner of an agricultural land with no b. A swimming pool is not a nuisance and is an exception to
access to a public road. He had been passing through the attractive nuisance doctrine (Hidalgo v. Guillermo, 91
the land of Ernie with the latter's acquiescence for over Phil. 488 [1952]). It generally does not cause an injury,
20 years. Subsequently, Don subdivided his property harm or prejudice to an individual or the public (Art. 694,
into 20 residential lots and sold them to different par. 1).
persons. Ernie blocked the pathway and refused to c. A house of prostitution is a public nuisance because it
let the buyers pass through his land. shocks or disregards the decency or morality of the
community. (Art. 694 par. 3, Civil Code)
a) Did Don acquire an easement of right of way? d. A noisy or dangerous factory even if built in a private land
Explain. may be considered a nuisance if it offends the sense of the
b) What are the rights of the lot buyers, if any? owners of the adjacent property or poses a danger to
Explain. (2005 BAR) their safety (Art. 694, par. 1, Civil Code). This kind of
nuisance may be classified as a public nuisance if it affects
A: and annoys those who come within its sphere.
e. Uncollected garbage can be injurious to heath and even
a) Don did not acquire an easement of right of way. His the environment. It is thus, considered a public nuisance.
passage through Ernie’s land was by mere acquiescence
or tolerance. He cannot claim to have acquired the Q: A drug lord and his family reside in a small bungalow
easement of right of way by prescription, because this where they sell shabu and other prohibited drugs. When
easement is discontinuous although apparent. Only the police found the illegal trade, they immediately
continuous and apparent easements can be acquired by demolished the house because according to them, it
prescription of 10 years of uninterrupted use and was a nuisance per se that should be abated. Can this
enjoyment. demolition be sustained? Explain. (2006 BAR)
b) Prior to the grant of an easement, the buyers of the
dominant estate have no other right than to compel grant A: No, the demolition cannot be sustained. The house is not
of easement of right of way. Since the properties of the a nuisance per se or at law as it is not an act, occupation, or
buyers are surrounded by other immovable and has no structure which is a nuisance at all times and under any
adequate outlet to a public highway and the isolation is circumstances, regardless of location or surroundings. A
not due to their acts, buyers may demand an easement nuisance per se is a nuisance in and of itself, without regard
of a right of way provided proper indemnity is paid to circumstances.
and the right of way demanded is the shortest and
least prejudicial to Ernie. DONATIONS (1990, 1991, 1993, 1998, 2000, 2003, 2006,
2007, 2009 BAR)
NUISANCE (2005, 2006 BAR)
Q: Josefa executed a deed of donation covering a one-
Q: State with reason whether each of the following is a hectare rice land in favor of her daughter, Jennifer. The
nuisance, and if so, give its classification, whether public deed specifically provides that:
or private:
"For and in consideration of the love and
a) A squatter’s hut service Jennifer has shown and given to me, I
b) A swimming pool hereby freely, voluntarily and irrevocably
c) A house of prostitution donate to her my one-hectare rice land
d) A noisy or dangerous factory in a private land covered by TCT No. 11550, located in San
e) Uncollected garbage (2005 BAR) Fernando, Pampanga. This donation shall take
effect upon my death."
A:
Q: In 1950, Dr. Alba donated a parcel of land to Q: In two separate documents signed by him, Juan
Central University on condition that the latter must Valentino "obligated" himself each to Maria and to Perla,
establish a medical college on the land to be named thus -'To Maria, my true love, I obligate myself to give
after him. In the year 2000, the heirs of Dr. Alba filed an you my one and only horse when I feel like It."
action to annul the donation and for the reconveyance - and -
of the property donated to them for the failure, after 50 'To Perla, my true sweetheart, I obligate myself to pay
years, of the University to establish on the property a you the P500.00 I owe you when I feel like it."
medical school named after their father. The
University opposed the action on the ground of Months passed but Juan never bothered to make good
prescription and also because it had not used the his promises. Maria and Perla came to consult you on
property for some purpose other than that stated in whether or not they could recover on the basis of the
the donation. Should the opposition of the University foregoing settings. What would your legal advice be?
to the action of Dr. Alba’s heirs be sustained? Explain. (1997 BAR)
(2003, 2006 BAR)
A: I would advise Maria not to bother running after Juan
A: The donation may be revoked. The non-establishment of for the latter to make good his promise. This is because
the medical college on the donated property was a a promise is not an actionable wrong that allows a party
resolutory condition imposed on the donation by the donor. to recover especially when she has not suffered damages
Although the Deed of Donation did not fix the time for the resulting from such promise. A promise does not create an
established of the medical college, the failure of the donee obligation on the part of Juan because it is not something
to establish the medical college after fifty (50) years from which arises from a contract, law, quasi-contracts or quasi-
the making of the donation should be considered as delicts (Art, 1157). Under Art. 1182, Juan's promise to
occurrence of the resolutory condition, and the donation Maria is void because a conditional obligation depends upon
may now be revoked. While the general rule is that in case the sole will of the obligor. As regards Perla, the document
the period is not fixed in the agreement of the parties, the is an express acknowledgment of a debt, and the promise
period must be fixed first by the court before the obligation to pay what he owes her when he feels like it is equivalent
may be demanded, the period of fifty (50) years was more to a promise to pay when his means permits him to do so,
than enough time for the done to comply with the and is deemed to be one with an indefinite period under Art.
condition. Hence, in this case, there is no more need for the
53
CIVIL LAW
1180. Hence the amount is recoverable after Perla asks the Publico. Theirs is not a stipulation pour atrui. [Aforesaid]
court to set the period as provided by Art. 1197, par. 2. Such contracts do could not affect third persons like
Suplico because of the basic civil law principle of relativity
Q: Roland, a basketball star, was under contract for one of contracts which provides that contracts can only bind the
year to play-for-play exclusively for Lady Love, Inc. parties who entered into it, and it cannot favor or
However, even before the basketball season could prejudice a third person, even if he is aware of such
open, he was offered a more attractive pay plus contract and has acted with knowledge thereof. (Integrated
fringes benefits by Sweet Taste, Inc. Roland accepted Packaging Corporation v. CA, G.R. No. 115117, June 8, 2000)
the offer and transferred to Sweet Taste. Lady Love
sues Roland and Sweet Taste for breach of contract. Q: A van owned by Orlando and driven by Diego, while
Defendants claim that the restriction to play for Lady negotiating a downhill slope of a city road, suddenly
Love alone is void, hence, unenforceable, as it gained speed, obviously beyond the authorized limit
constitutes an undue interference with the right of in the area, and bumped a car in front of it, causing
Roland to enter into contracts and the impairment of severe damage to the care and serious injuries to its
his freedom to play and enjoy basketball. Can Roland be passengers. Orlando was not in the car at the time of the
bound by the contract he entered into with Lady Love incident. The car owner and the injured passengers sued
or can he disregard the same? Is he liable at all? How Orlando and Diego for damages caused by Diego’s
about Sweet Taste? Is it liable to Lady Love? (1991 BAR) negligence. In their defense, Diego claims that the
downhill slope caused the van to gain speed and that,
A: Yes, Roland is liable under the contract as far as Lady Love as he stepped on the brakes to check the acceleration,
is concerned. He is liable for damages under Article 1170 of the brakes locked, causing the van to go even faster
the Civil Code since he contravened the tenor of his and eventually to hit the car in front of it. Orlando and
obligation. Not being a contracting party, Sweet Taste is not Diego contend that the sudden malfunction of the
bound by the contract but it can be held liable under Art. van’s brake system is a fortuitous even and that,
1314. The basis of its liability is not prescribed by contract therefore, they are exempt from any liability. Is this
but is founded on quasi-delict, assuming that Sweet Taste contention tenable? Explain. (2002 BAR)
knew of the contract. Article 1314 of the Civil Code
provides that any third person who induces another to A: No. Mechanical defects of a motor vehicle do not constitute
violate his contract shall be liable for damages to the other fortuitous event, since the presence of such defects would
contracting party. have been readily detected by diligent maintenance check.
The failure to maintain the vehicle in safe running condition
Q: Printado is engaged in the printing business. constitutes negligence.
Suplico supplies printing paper to Printado pursuant
to an order agreement under which Suplico binds Q: AB Corp. entered into a contract with XY Corp.
himself to deliver the same volume of paper every whereby the former agreed to construct the research
month for a period of 18 months, with Printado in and laboratory facilities of the latter. Under the terms
turn agreeing to pay within 60 days after each of the contract, AB Corp. agreed to complete the facility
delivery. Suplico has been faithfully delivering under in 18 months, at the total contract price of P10 million.
the order agreement for 10 months but thereafter XY Corp. paid 50% of the total contract price, the
stopped doing so, because Printado has not made any balance to be paid upon completion of the work. The
payment at all. Printado has also a standing work stated immediately, but AB Corp. later
contractwith publisher Publico for the printing of 10, experienced work slippage because of labor unrest in
000 volumes of school textbooks. Suplico was aware his company. AB Corp.'s employees claimed that they
of said printing contract. After printing 1, 000 volumes, are not being paid on time; hence, the work slowdown.
Printado also fails to perform under its printing As of the 17th month, work was only 45% completed.
contract with Publico. Suplico sues Printado for the AB Corp. asked for extension of time, claiming that its
value of the unpaid deliveries under their order labor problems is a case of fortuitous event, but this
agreement. At the same time Publico sues Printado for was denied by XY Corp. When it became certain that the
damages for breach of contract with respect to their construction could not be finished on time, XY Corp.
own printing agreement. In the suit filed by Suplico, sent written notice cancelling the contract, and
Printado counters that: (a) Suplico cannot demand requiring AB Corp. to immediately vacate the premises.
payment for deliveries made under their order Can the labor unrest be considered a fortuitous event?
agreement until Suplico has completed performance (2008 BAR)
under said contract; (b) Suplico should pay damages for
breach of contract; and (c) with Publico should be A: Labor unrest is not a fortuitous event that will excuse AB
liable for Printado’s breach of his contract with Publico Corporation from complying with its obligation of
because the order agreement between Suplico and constructing the research and laboratory facilities of XY
Printado was for the benefit of Publico. Are the Corporation. The labor unrest, which may even be
contentions of Printado tenable? Explain your answers attributed in large part to AB Corporation itself, is not the
as to each contention. (2002 BAR) direct cause of non-compliance by AB Corporation. It is
independent of its obligation. It is similar to the failure of a
A: No, the contentions of Printado are untenable. DBP borrower to pay her loan just because her plantation
Printado having failed to pay for the printing paper suffered losses due to the cadang-cadang disease. It does
covered by the delivery invoices on time, Suplico has the not excuse compliance with the obligation (DBP v. Vda. de
right to cease making further delivery. And the latter did Moll, G.R. No. L-25802, January 31, 1972).
not violate the order agreement (Integrated Packaging
Corporation v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 115117, June 8, 2000). KINDS OF OBLIGATIONS (1991, 1992, 1998, 1999,
Suplico cannot be held liable for damages, for breach of 2000, 2001, 2003 BAR)
contract, as it was not he who violated the order agreement,
but Printado. Suplico cannot be held liable for Printado’s Q: Are the following obligations valid, why, and if they
breach of contract with Publico. He is not a party to the are valid, when is the obligation demandable in each
agreement entered into by and between Printado and case?
a. Suppose Manuel had sold the same house and lot to Y resisted the suit raising the following defenses:
another before Eva passed the 1998 bar
examinations, is such sale valid? Why? a) That Y should not be liable at all because X was not
b. Assuming that it is Eva who is entitled to buy said sued together with Y.
house and lot, is she entitled to the rentals b) That the obligation has been paid completely by A’s
collected by Manuel before she passed the 1998 bar acquisition of teh car through “dacion en pago” or
examinations? Why? (1999 BAR) payment by cession.
c) That Y should not be held liable for the deficiency of
A: P80, 000.00 because he was not a co-mortgagor in
teh chattel mortgage of the car, which contract was
a) Yes, the sale to the other person is valid. However, executed by X alone as owner and mortgagor.
the buyer acquired the property subject to a d) That assuming he is liable, he should only pay the
resolutory condition of Eva passing the 1998 Bar proportionate sum of P40, 000.00.
Examinations. Hence, upon Eva's passing the Bar, the
rights of the other buyer terminated and Eva acquired Decide the defense with reasons. (1992 BAR)
ownership of the property.
A:
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: Yes, the sale to the other
person is valid, as the contract between Manuel and Eva
55
CIVIL LAW
a) The first defense of Y is untenable. Y is still liable as the same, Butch already surrendered five (5) service
solidary debtor. The creditor may proceed against any utility vehicles (SUVs) to the company for it to sell and
one of the solidary debtors. The demand against one the proceeds to be credited to the loan as payment. Was
does not preclude further demand against the others so the obligation of Butch extinguished by reason of dacion
long as the debt is not fully paid. en pago upon the surrender of the SUVs? Decide and
b) The second defense of Y is untenable. Y is still liable. The explain. (2016 BAR)
chattel mortgage is only given as security and not as
payment for the debt in case of failure to pay. Y as a A: No, the obligation of Butch to Hagibis was not
solidary co-maker is not relieved of further liability on extinguished by the mere surrender of the SUV’s to the
the promissory note as a result of the foreclosure of teh latter. Dation in payment, whereby property is alienated to
chattel mortgage. the creditor in satisfaction of a debt in money, shall be
c) The third defense of Y is untenable. Y is a surety of X and governed by the law on sales (Art. 1245). In dacion en pago,
the extrajudicial demand against the principal debtor is as a special mode of payment, the debtor offers another
not inconsistent with a judicial demand against the thing to the credtor who accepts it as equivalent of payment
surety. A suretyship may co-exist with a mortgage. of an outstanding debt. The undertaking really partakes in
d) The fourth defense is untenable. Y is liable for the entire one sense of the nature of sale, that is, the creditor is really
prestation since Y incurred a solidary obligation with X. buying the thing or property of the debtor, payment for
which is to be charged against the debtor’s debt. As such, the
Q: Four foreign medical students rented the apartment essential elements of a contract of sale, namely, consent,
of Thelma for a period of one year. After one semester, object certain, and cause or consideration must be present.
three of them returned to their home country and In dacion en pago, there is in reality an objective novation of
the fourth transferred to a boarding house. Thelma the obligation where the thing offered as an accepted
discovered that they left unpaid telephone bills in the equivalent of the performance of an obligation is considered
total amount of P80, 000.00. The lease contract as the object of the contract of sale, while the debt is
provided that the lessees shall pay for the telephone considered as the purchase price. In any case, common
services in the leased premises. Thelma demanded consent is an essential pre-requisite, be it sale or innovation
that the fourth student pay the entire amount of the to have the effect of totally extinguishing the debt or
unpaid telephone bills, but the latter is willing to pay obligation. (Filinvest Credit Corporation v. Philippine
only one fourth of it. Who is correct? Why? (2001 BAR) Acetylene Company, G.R. No. L-50449, January 30, 1982)
There being no mention in the facts that Hagibis has given
A: The fourth student is correct. His liability is only its consent to accept the SUCs as equivalent payment, the
joint, hence, pro rata. There is solidary liability only obligation of Butch is not thereby extinguished be mere
when the obligation expressly so states or when the law or delivery of the SUVs.
nature of the obligation requires solidarity (Art. 1207). The
contract of lease in the problem does not, in any way, Q: Jerico, the project owner, entered into a Construction
stipulate solidarity. Contract with Ivan for the latter to construct his house.
Jojo executed a Surety undertaking to guarantee the
Q: Joey, Jovy and Jojo are solidary debtors under a loan performance of the work by Ivan. Jerico and Ivan later
obligation of P300, 000.00 which has fallen due. The entered into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
creditor has, however, condoned Jojo's entire share revising the work schedule of Ivan and the
in the debt. Since Jovy has become insolvent, the subcontractors. The MOA stated that all the stipulations
creditor makes a demand on Joey to pay the debt. of the original contract not in conflict with said
agreement shall remain valid and legally effective. Jojo
1. How much, if any, may Joey be compelled to pay? filed a suit to declare him relieved of his undertaking as
2. To what extent, if at all, can Jojo be compelled by Joey a result of the MOA because of the change in the work
to contribute to such payment? (1998 BAR) schedule. Jerico claims there is no novation of the
Construction Contract. Decide the case and explain.
A: (2016 BAR)
1. Joey can be compelled to pay only the remaining balance
of P200.000, in view of the remission of Jojo's share by A: I will decide in favor of Jerico as there is no novation of
the creditor (Art. 1219). the Construction Contract. Novation is never presumed, and
2. Jojo can be compelled by Joey to contribute P50.000 Art. may only take place when the following are present: (1) a
1217. par. 3, Civil Code provides. "When one of the previous valid obligation; (2) the agreement of all the parties
solidary debtors cannot, because of his insolvency, to the new contract; (3) the extinguishment of the old
reimburse his share to the debtor paying the contract; (4) validity of the new one. There must be consent
obligation, such share shall be borne by all his co- of all the parties to the substitution, resulting in the
debtors, in proportion to the debt of each." extinction of the old obligation and the creation of a new
valid one. In this case, the revision of the work schedule of
Since the insolvent debtor's share which Joey paid was Ivan and the subcontractors is not shown to be so
P100,000, and there are only two remaining debtors - substantial as to extinguish the old contract, and there was
namely Joey and Jojo - these two shall share equally also no irreconcilable incompatibility between the old and
the burden of reimbursement. Jojo may thus be new obligations. It has also been held in jurisprudence that
compelled by Joey to contribute P50.000.00. a surety may only be relieved of his undertaking if there is a
material change in the principal contract and such would
EXTINGUISHMENT OF OBLIGATIONS (1996, 1998, make the obligation of the surety onerous. The principal
2001, 2002, 2003, 2008, 2009, 2016 BAR) contract subject of the surety agreement still exists, and Jojo
is still bound as a surety.
Q: Butch got a loan from Hagibis Corporation (Hagibis)
but he defaulted in the payment. A case for collection of ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: I will decide against Jerico. The
a sum of money was filed against him. As a defense, provisions of the Civil Code on Guarantee, other than the
Butch claims that there was already an arrangement benefit of excusion (Art. 2059, CC), are applicable and
with Hagibis on the payment of the loan. To implement available to the surety because a surety is a guarantor who
Q: Sarah had a deposit in a savings account with Filipino 2) No. The mortgage being an accessory contract
Universal Bank in the amount of five million pesos (P5, prescribed with the loan. The novation of the loan,
000, 000.00). To buy a new car, she obtained a loan from however, did not expressly include the mortgage,
the same bank in the amount of P1, 200, 000.00, payable hence, the mortgage is extinguished under Article
in twelve monthly installments. Sarah issued in favor of 1296 of the NCC. The contract has been extinguished
the bank post-dated checks, each in the amount of P100,
Q: May a person sell something that does not belong to Q: In 1950, the Bureau of Lands issued a Homestead
him? patent to A. Three years later, A sold the homestead to
B. A died in 1990, and his heirs filed an action to
A: Yes, a person may sell something which does not belong recover the homestead from B on the ground that its
to him. For the sale to be valid, the law does not require the sale by their father to the latter is void under Section
seller to be the owner of the property at the time of the 118 of the Public Land Law. B contends, however, that
sale. (Art. 1434, NCC). If the seller cannot transfer the heirs of A cannot recover the homestead from him
ownership over the thing sold at the time of delivery anymore because their action has prescribed and that
because he was not the owner thereof, he shall be liable for furthermore, A was in pari delicto. Decide. (1999 BAR)
breach of contract A: The sale of the land by A to B 3 years after issuance of
teh homestead patent, being in violation of Section 118 of
Void or Inexistent Contracts (1991, 1999 BAR) the Public Land Act, is void from its inception. The action
filed by the heirs of B to declare the nullity or inexistence
Q: Maria Enriquez failed to pay the realty taxes on her of teh contract and to recover the land should be given due
unregistered agricultural land located in Magdugo, course.
Toledo City. In 1989, to satisfy the taxes due, the City
sold it at public auction to Juan Miranda, an employee B’s defense of prescription is untenable because an action
at the Treasurer’s Office of said City, whose bid at P10, which seeks to declare the nullity or inexistence of a
000.00 was the highest. In due time, a final bill of sale contract does not prescribe. (Article 1410; Banga v. Soler, 2
was executed in his favor. SCRA 755)
Maria refused to turn-over the possession of the On the other hand, B’s defense of pari delicto is equally
property to Juan alleging that (1) she had been, in the untenable. While as a rule, parties who are in pari delicto
meantime, granted a free pantent and on the basis have no recourse against each other on the principle that a
thereof an Original Cetificate of Title was issued to her, transgressor cannot profit from his own wrongdoing, such
and (2) the sale in favor of Juan is void from the rule does not apply to violations of Section 118 of the
beginning in view of the provision in the Public Land Act because of the underlying public policy in
Administrative Code of 1987 which prohibits officers the said Act “to conserve the land which a homesteader has
and employees of the government from purchasing acquired by gratuitous grant from the government for
directly or indirectly any property sold by the himself and his family”. In keeping with this policy, it has
government for non-payment of any tax, fee or other been held that one who purchases a homestead within the
public charge. five-year prohibitory period can only recover the price
which he has paid by filing a claim against the estate of the
a) Is the sale to Juan valid? If so, is the effect of the deceased seller (Labrador vs. Delos Santos 66 Phil. 579)
issuance of the Certificate of Title to Maria? under the principle that no one shall enrich himself at the
b) If the sale is void, may Juan recover the P10, expense of another. Applying the pari delicto rule to
000.00? If not, why not? violations of Section 118 of the Public Land Act, the Court
c) If the sale is void, did it not nevertheless, operate of Appeals has ruled that “the homesteader suffers the loss
to divent Maria of her ownership? If it did, who of the fruits realized by the vendee who in turn forfeits the
then is the owner of the property? (1991 BAR) improvement that he has introduced into the land.” (Obot
vs. Sandadlillas, 62 OG, April 25, 1966)
A:
NATURAL OBLIGATIONS
a) The sale of the land to Juan is not valid, being contrary
to law. Therefore, no transfer of ownership of the land Q: Distinguish briefly but clearly between Civil
was effected from the delinquent taxpayer to him. The Obligation and Natural Obligation:
original certificates of title obtained by Maria thru a
free patent grant from the Bureau of Lands (under A: Civil obligation is a juridical necessity to give, to do and
Chapter VII, CA 141) is valid but in view of her not to do. It gives the creditor the legal right to compel by
delinquency, the said title is subject to the right of the an action in court the performance of such obligation.
City Government to sell the land at public auction. The
issuance of the OCT did not exempt the land from the A natural obligation is based on equity and natural law.
tax sales. Section 44 of P.D. No. 1529 provides that There is no legal right to compel performance thereof but
every registered owner receiving a Certificate of Title if the debtor voluntarily pays it, he cannot recover what
shall hold the same free from all encumbrances, was paid.
subject to certain exemptions.
b) Juan may recover because he was not a party to the ESTOPPEL (1998, 2000, 2002 BAR)
violation of the law.
61
CIVIL LAW
Q: In 1965, Renren bought from Robyn a parcel of b) What are the essential elements of laches? (2000
registered land evidenced by a duly executed deed of BAR)
sale. The owner presented the deed of sale and the
owner's certificate of title to the Register of Deeds. The A:
entry was made in the daybook and corresponding fees
were paid as evidenced by official receipt. However, no a) No, the defense will not prosper. The problem did not
transfer of certificate of title was issued to Renren give facts from which laches may be inferred. Mere delay
because the original certificate of title in Robyn's name in filing an action, standing alone, does not constitute
was temporarily misplaced after fire partly gutted the laches (Agra v. PNB, G.R. No. 133317, June 29, 1999).
Office of the Register of Deeds. Meanwhile, the land had b) The four basic elements of laches are:
been possessed by Robyn's distant cousin, Mikaelo, 1) Conduct on the part of the defendant or of one
openly, adversely and continuously in the concept of under whom he claims, giving rise to the situation
owner since 1960. It was only in April 1998 that Renren of which complainant seeks a remedy;
sued Mikaelo to recover possession. Mikaelo 2) Delay in asserting the complainant’s rights, the
invoked: complainant having had knowledge or notice of
the defendant’s conduct and having been afforded
a) acquisitive prescription an opportunity to institute suit;
b) laches, asking that he be declared owner of the 3) Lack of knowledge on the part of the defendant
land. that the complainant would assert the right on
which he bases his suit; and
Decide the case by evaluating these defences. (1998 4) Injury or prejudice to the defendant in the event
BAR) relief is accorded to the complainant, or the suit is
not held to be barred.
A:
Q: Way back in 1948, Winda’s husband sold in favor of
a. Renren's action to recover possession of the land will Verde Sports Center Corp. (Verde) a 10-hectare property
prosper. In 1965, after buying the land from Robyn, belonging to their conjugal partnership. The sale was
he submitted the Deed of Sale to the Registry of made without Winda’s knowledge, much less consent. In
Deeds for registration together with the owner's 1950, Winda learned of the sale, when she discovered
duplicate copy of the title, and paid the corresponding the deed of sale among the documents in her husband’s
registration fees. Under Sec. 56 of PD No. 1529, the vault after his demise. Soon after, she noticed that the
Deed of Sale to Renren is considered registered from construction of the sports complex had started. Upon
the time the sale was entered in the Day Book (now completion of the construction in 1952, she tried but
called the Primary Entry Book). For all legal intents and failed to get free membership privileges in Verde.
purposes, Renren is considered the registered owner
of the land. After all, it was not his fault that the Winda now files a suit against Verde for the annulment
Registry of Deeds could not issue the corresponding of the sale on the ground that she did not consent to the
transfer certificate of title. Mikaelo's defense of sale. In answer, Verde contends that, in accordance with
prescription cannot be sustained. A Torrens title is the Spanish Civil Code which was then in force, the sale in
imprescriptible. No title to registered land in 1948 of the property did not need her concurrence.
derogation of the title of the registered owner shall Verde contends that in any case the action has
be acquired by prescription or adverse possession (Sec. prescribed or is barred by laches. Winda rejoins that her
47, P.D. No. 1529). The right to recover possession of Torrens title covering the property is indefeasible, and
registered land likewise does not prescribe because imprescriptible.
possession is just a necessary incident of ownership.
b. Mikaelo's defense of laches, however, appears to be A. Define or explain the term “laches”.
more sustainable. Renren bought the land and had the B. Decide the case, stating your reasons for your
sale registered way back in 1965. From the facts, it decision (2002 BAR)
appears that it was only in 1998 or after an inexplicable
delay of 33 years that he took the first step asserting his A:
right to the land. It was not even an action to recover
ownership but only possession of the land. By A. LACHES means failure or neglect, for an unreasonable
ordinary standards, 33 years of neglect or inaction is and unexplained length of time, to do what, by exercising
too long and may be considered unreasonable. As due diligence, could or should have been done earlier. It
often held by the Supreme Court, the principle of is negligence or omission to assert a right within a
imprescriptibility sometimes has to yield to the reasonable time (De Vera v. CA, G.R. No. 97761, April 14,
equitable principle of laches which can convert even a 1999).
registered land owner's claim into a stale demand. B. While Art. 1413 of the Spanish Civil Code did not require
Mikaelo's claim of laches, however, is weak insofar as the consent of the wife for the validity of the sale, an
the element of equity is concerned, there being no alienation by the husband in fraud of the wife is void as
showing in the facts how he entered into the ownership held in Uy Coque v. Navas (G.R. No. L-20392, November 20,
and possession of the land. 1923). Assuming that the alienation in 1948 was in fraud
of Winda and, therefore, makes the sale to Verde void,
Q: In an action brought to collect a sum of money based the action to set aside the sale, nonetheless, is already
on a surety agreement, the defense of laches was barred byprescription and laches. More than 52 years
raised as the claim was filed more than seven years have already elapsed from her discovery of the sale in
from the maturity of the obligation. However, the action 1950.
was brought within the ten-year prescriptive period
provided by law wherein actions based on written
contracts can be instituted. PART V – SALES
a) The first buyer has the better right if his sale was first a) Was Dehlma a purchaser in good faith?
to be registered, even though the first buyer knew of b) Who as between Dehlma and XYZ Bank has a better
the second sale. The fact that he knew of the second sale right to the house and lot? (2008 BAR)
at the time of his registration does not make him as
acting in bad faith because the sale to him was ahead in A:
time, hence, has a priority in right. What creates bad
faith in the case of double sale of land is knowledge of a a) Yes, Dehlma is a purchaser in good faith. She learned
previous sale. about the XYZ tax declaration and foreclosure sale
b) The first buyer is still to be preferred, where the second only after teh sale to her was registered. She relied on
sale is registered ahead of the first sale but with the certificate of title of her predecessor-in-interest.
knowledge of the latter. This is because the second Under the Torrens system, a buyer of registered lands
buyer, who at the time he registered his sale knew that is not required by law to inquire further than what the
the property had already been sold to someone else, Torrens certificated indicates on its face. If a person
acted in bad faith. (Article 1544) proceeds to buy it relying on the title, that person is
considered a buyer in good faith.
Q: JV, owner of a parcel of land, sold it to PP. But the deed
of sale was not registered. One year later, JV sold the The “priority in time” rule could not be invoked by XYZ
parcel again to RR, who succeeded to register the Bank because the foreclosure sale of the land in favor
deed and to obtain a transfer certificate of title over of the bank was recorded under Act No. 3344, the law
the property in his own name. Who has a better right governing transactions affecting unregistered land,
over the parcel of land, RR or PP? Why? Explain the legal and thus, does not bind the land.
basis for your answer. (2001, 2004 BAR)
b) Between Dehlma and the bank, the former has a better
A: It depends on whether or not RR is an innocent purchaser right to the house and lot.
for value. Under the Torrens System, a deed or instrument
operated only as a contract between the parties and as Q: In December 1985, Salvador and the Star
evidence of authority to the Register of Deeds to make the Semiconductor Company (SSC) executed a Deed of
registration. It is the registration of the deed or the Conditional Sale wherein the former agreed to sell his
instrument that is the operative act that conveys or affects 2,000 square meter lot in Cainta, Rizal, to the latter for
the land (Sec. 51, P.D. No. 1529). the price of P1,000,000.00, payable P100,000.00
down, and the balance 60 days after the squatters in
In cases of double sale of titled land, it is a well-settled rule the property have been removed. If the squatters are
that the buyer who first registers the sale in good faith not removed within six months, the P100, 000.00
acquires a better right to the land(Art. 1544). down payment shall be returned by the vendor to the
vendee.
Persons dealing with property covered by Torrens title are
not required to go beyond what appearsonitsface (Orquiola Salvador filed ejectment suits against the squatters,
v. CA 386, G.R. No. 141463, August 6, 2002; Spouses Domingo v. but in spite of the decisions in his favor, the squatters
Races, G.R. No. 147468, April 9, 2003). Thus, absent any still would not leave. In August, 1986, Salvador offered
showing that RR knew about, or ought to have known the to return the P100, 000.00 down payment to the
prior sale of the land to PP or that he acted in bad faith, and vendee, on the ground that he is unable to remove the
being first to register the sale, RR acquired a good and a squatters on the property. SSC refused to accept the
clean title to the property as against PP. money and demands that Salvador executed a deed of
Paul did not reply to this letter for five (5) years. Thus, On March 21, 2010, Ariel sent a letter to Noel, attaching
Peter decided to sell his lot to Henry in 2021. After thereto a manager's check for P300, 000.00 manifesting
hearing that Henry bought the lot, Paul now questions the that he is redeeming the property. Noel rejected the
sale of the lot to Henry and files a complaint for redemption claiming that the DAS was a true and valid
nullification of the sale. sale representing the true intent of the parties. Ariel
filed a suit for the nullification of the DAS or the
1. Is the exercise by Peter of his power to rescind extra- reformation of said agreement to that of a Loan with
judicially the Contract to Sell the proper and legal Real Estate Mortgage. He claims the DAS and the
way of rescinding said contract? Explain. redemption agreement constitute an equitable
2. In case Paul made a downpayment pursuant to a mortgage. Noel however claims it is a valid sale with
stipulation in the Contract to Sell, what is the legal pacto de retro and Ariel clearly failed to redeem the
remedy of Peter? (2016 BAR) property.
Q: What are the so-called "Maceda" and "Recto" laws in A: I will decide in favor of Ariel and allow the reformation
connection with sales on installments? Give the most of the agreement. The DAS and the redemption agreement
important features of each law. (1999 BAR) constitute an equitable mortgage and Ariel may ask for the
reformation of the agreement to that of a Loan with Real
A: The MACEDA LAW (RA 6552) is applicable to sales of Estate Mortgage as allowed by Article 1605 of the Civil
immovable property on installments. The most important Code. The circumstances clearly show that the agreement is
features are (Rillo v. CA, G.R. No. 125347, June 19, 1997): an equitable mortgage, such as the: a) price of the lot was
inadequate since it was only sold at P300, 000 when the
1. After having paid installments for at least two years, the prevailing market value of such was P900, 000; b) the
buyer is entitled to a mandatory grace period of one vendor, Ariel, remained in the actual possession of the
month for every year of installment payments made, to property after the purported sale; and c) Ariel was the one
pay the unpaid installments without interest. who paid the real property taxes. Under the circumstances,
a presumption arise under Art. 1602, CC that what was
If the contract is cancelled, the seller shall refund to the really executed was an equitable mortgage. Moreover, Art.
buyer the cash surrender value equivalent to fifty 1603, CC provides that in case of doubt, a contract
percent (50%) of the total payments made, and after purporting to be a sale with right to repurchase shall be
five years of installments, an additional five percent construed as an equitable mortgage.
(5%) every year but not to exceed ninety percent
(90%) of the total payments made. Q: On 20 December 1970, Juliet, a widow, borrowed
from Romeo P4, 000.00 and, as security therefore, she
2. In case the installments paid were less than 2 years, the executed a deed of mortgage over one of her two (2)
seller shall give the buyer a grace period of not less than registered lots which has a market value of P15,
60 days. If the buyer fails to pay the installments due at 000.00. The document and the certificate of title of the
the expiration of the grace period, the seller may cancel property were delivered to Romeo.
the contract after 30 days from receipt by the buyer of
the notice of cancellation or demand for rescission by On 2 June 1971, Juliet obtained an additional sum of P3,
notarial act. 000.00 from Romeo. On this date, however, Romeo
caused the preparation of a deed of absolute sale of the
The RECTO LAW (Art. 1484) refers to sale of movables above property, to which Juliet affixed her signature
payable in installments and limiting the right of seller, in without first reading the document. The consideration
case of default by the buyer, to one of three remedies: indicated is P7, 000.00 She thought that this document
was similar to the first she signed. When she reached
a) exact fulfillment; home, her son X, after reading the duplicate copy of teh
b) cancel the sale if two or more installments have not deed, informed her that what she signed was not a
been paid; mortgage but a deed of absolute sale. On the following
c) foreclose the chattel mortgage on the things sold, also day, 3 June 1971, Juliet accompanied by X, went back to
in case of default of two or more installments, with no Romeo and demanded the reformation. Romeo
further action against the purchaser. prepared and signed a document wherein, as vendee in
the deed of sale above mentioned, he obligated and
EXTINGUISHMENT OF SALE (1991, 1993, 1995, 2001, bound himself to resell the land to Juliet or her heirs
2002, 2005, 2016 BAR) and successors for the same consideration as reflected
in the deed of sale (P7, 000.00) within a period of two
b) In case of rescission, the rights and obligations of the A: The lessees may proceed against A for breach of contract,
parties should be as follows: At the time that Victor filed and against B for tort or statutory liability.
69
CIVIL LAW
materials and a store. As the years passed, he expanded
Under Article 1654 (2) of the New Civil Code, the lessor is his business, earning more profits. By the tenth (10 th)
obliged to make all the necessary repairs in order to keep year of his possession, he was able to build a three (3) –
the leased property suitable for the use to which it has been storey building worth at least P300, 000.00 before the
devoted. Consequently, under Article 1659 NCC the end of the term of the lease, B negotiated with the
proprietor of a building or structure is responsible for the landowner for its renewal, but despite their attempts to
damages resulting from its total or partial collapse, if it is do so, they could not agree on the new conditions for
due to the lack of necessary repairs. the renewal. Upon the expiration of the term of the
lease, the landowner asked B to vacate the premises
Under Article 1723 NCC, the engineer or architect who drew and remove his building and other improvements. B
up the plans and specifications for a building is liable for refused unless he was reimbursed for necessary and
damages if within 15 years from the completion of the useful expenses. B claimed that he was a possessor and
structure, the same should collapse by reason of a defect in builder in good faith, with right of retention. This issue
those plans and specifications, or due to the defects in the is now before the court for resolution in a pending
ground. This liability may be enforced against the architect litigation.
or engineer even by a third party who has no privity of
contract with the architect or engineer under Article 2192 a) What are the rights of B?
NCC. b) What are the rights of the landowner? (1990 BAR)
A:
Q: Under what circumstances would an implied new
lease or a tacita reconduccion arise? (1999 BAR) a) B has the right to remove the building and other
improvements unless the landowner decides to retain
A:An implied new lease or tacita reconduccion arises if at the building at the time of the termination of the lease
the end of the contract the lessee should continue enjoying and pay the lessee one-half of the value of the
the thing leased for 15 days with the acquiescence of the improvements at that time. The lessee may remove the
lessor, and unless a notice to the contrary by either parties building even though the principal thing may suffer
has previously been given (Art. 1670). In short, in order that damage but B should not cause any more impairment
there may be tacita reconduccion there must be expiration upon the property leased than is necessary. The claim
of the contract; there must be continuation of possession for of B that he ws a possessor and builder in good faith
15 days or more; and there must be no prior demand to with the right of retention is not tenable. B is not a
vacate. builder in good faith, because as lessee he does not
Q: On January 1, 1980, Nestor leased the fishpond of claim ownership over the property leased.
Mario for a period of three years at a monthly rental of b) The landowner/lessor may refuse to reimburse ½ of
P1, 000.00, with an option to purchase the same during the value of the improvements and require the lessee to
the period of the lease for the price of P500, 000.00. remove the improvements. (Art. 1678, Civil Code)
After the expiration of the three-year period, Mario
allowed Nestor to remain in the leased premises at the Q: Bartolome constructed a chapel on the land of Eric.
same rental rate. On June 15, 1983, Nestor tendered What are Batolome’s rights of he were a lessee of the
the amount of P500, 000.00 to Mario and demanded that land? (1996 BAR)
the latter execute a deed of absolute sale of the fishpond
in his favor. Mario refused, on the ground that Nestor A: The owner of the land, as lessor, can acquire the
no longer had an option to buy the fishpond. Nestor improvement by paying for one-half of its value. Should the
filed an action for specific performance. Will the lessor refuse to reimburse said amount, the lessee may
action prosper or not? Why? (2001 BAR) remove the improvement, even though the principal thing
may suffer damage thereby (Art. 1678, NCC).
A: No, the action will not prosper. The implied renewal of the
lease on a month-to-month basis did not have the effect of Special Rules for Lease of Rural/Urban Lands (2000
extending the life of the option to purchase which expired BAR)
at the end of the original lease period. The lessor is correct
in refusing to sell on the ground that the option had expired. Q: In 1995, Mark leased the rice land of Narding in
Nueva Ecija for an annual rental of P1, 000.00 per
Q: TX filed a suit for ejectment against BD for non- hectare. In 1998, due to the El Nino phenomenon, the
payment of condominium rentals amounting to P150, rice harvest fell to only 40% of the average harvest
000. During the pendency of the case, BD offered and TX for the previous years. Mark asked Narding for a
accepted the full amount due as rentals from BD, who reduction of the rental to P500.00 per hectare for that
then filed a motion to dismiss the ejectment suit on the year but the latter refused. Is Mark legally entitled to
ground that the action is already extinguished. Is BD’s such reduction? (2000 BAR)
contention correct? Why or why not? Reason. (2004
BAR) A: No, Mark is not entitled to a reduction. Under Art.1680,
the lessee of a rural land is entitled to a reduction of the
A: BD's contention is not correct. TX can still maintain the rent only in case of loss of more than 1/2 of the fruits
suit for ejectment. The acceptance by the lessor of the through extraordinary and unforeseen fortuitous
payment by the lessee of the rentals in arrears even during events. While the drought brought about by the "El Nino"
the pendency of the ejectment case does not constitute a phenomenon may be classified as extraordinary, it is not
waiver or abandonment of the ejectment case (Spouses considered as unforeseen.
Clutario v. CA, G.R. No. 76656, December 11, 1992).
Q: A vacant lot several blocks from the center of the PART VII – PARTNERSHIP
town was leased by its owner to a young businessman
B, for a term of fifteen (15) years renewal upon
agreement of the parties. After taking possession of the CONTRACT OF PARTNERSHIP (2001, 2010)
lot, the lessee built thereon a building of mixed
A: TRUE. Partnership is a consensual contract, hence, it is The hiring of B was decided upon by W and Z, but was
valid even though not in writing. opposed by X and Y.
Q: A, B, and C entered into a partnership to operate a Who of the applicants should be hired by the
restaurant business. When the restaurant had gone partnership? Explain and give your reasons. (1992
past break-even stage and started to garner BAR)
considerable profits, C died. A and B continued the
business without dissolving the partnership. They in A: A should be hired as Secretary. The decision for the hiring
fact opened a branch of the restaurant, incurring of A prevails because it is an act of administration which can
obligations in the process. Creditors started demanding be perfomed by the duly appointed managing partners, W
for the payment of their obligations. and X.
A. Who are liable for the settlement of the B cannot be hired, because in case of a tie in the decision of
partnership’s obligations? Explain? the managing partners, the deadlock must be decided by the
B. What are the creditors’ recourse/s? Explain. (2010 partners owning the controlling interest. In this case, the
BAR) opposition of X and Y prevails because Y owns the
controlling interest. (Art. 1801, Civil Code)
A:
Q: Pauline, Patricia and Priscilla formed a business
A. The two remaining partners, A and B, are liable. When partnership for the purpose of engaging in neon
any partner dies and the business is continued without advertising for a term of five (5) years. Pauline
any settlement of accounts as between him or his subsequently assigned to Philip her interest in the
estate, the surviving partners are held liable for partnership. When Patricia and Priscilla learned of the
continuing the business provided that A and B had assignment, they decided to dissolve the partnership
knowledge or notice of the death of C (Art. 1841, 1785, before the expiration of its term as they had an
par 2, and Art 1833). unproductive business relationship with Philip in the
B. Creditors can file the appropriate actions, for instance, past. On the other hand, unaware of the move of Patricia
an action for collection of sum of money against the and Priscilla but sensing their negative reaction to his
“partnership at will” and if there are no sufficient funds, acquisition of Pauline's interest, Philip simultaneously
the creditors may go after the private properties of A petitioned for the dissolution of the partnership.
and B (Art 1816). Creditors may also sue the estate of C.
The estate is not excused from the liabilities of the 1. Is the dissolution done by Patricia and Priscilla
partnership even if C is dead already but only up to the without the consent of Pauline or Philip valid?
time that he remained a partner (Art. 1829, 1835, par 2; Explain.
Testate Estate of Mota v. Serra, G.R. No. L-22825, 2. Does Philip have any right to petition for the
February 14, 1925). However, the liability of C’s dissolution of the partnership before the expiration
individual properties shall be subject to the prior of its specified term? Explain. (1995 BAR)
payment of his separate debts (Art. 1835, par 3).
A:
Q: Joe and Rudy formed a partnership to operate a car
repair shop in Quezon City. Joe provided the capital 1. Under Art. 1830 (1) (c), the dissolution by Patricia and
while Rudy contributed his labor and industry. On Priscilla is valid and did not violate the contract of
one side of their shop, Joe opened and operated a partnership even though Pauline and Philip did not
coffee shop, while on the other side, Rudy put up a car consent thereto. The consent of Pauline is not
accessories store. May they engage in such separate necessary because she had already assigned her
businesses? Why? (2001 BAR) interest to Philip. The consent of Philip is not also
necessary because the assignment to him of Pauline's
A: Joe, the capitalist partner, may engage in the interest did not make him a partner, under Art. 1813.
restaurant business because it is not the same kind of 2. No, Philip has no right to petition for dissolution
business the partnership is engaged in. On the other hand, because he does not have the standing of a partner. (Art.
Rudy may not engage in any other business unless their 1813)
partnership expressly permits him to do so because as
an industrial partner he has to devote his full time to the Q: Dielle, Karlo and Una are general partners in
business of the partnership (Art. 1789). a merchandising firm. Having contributed equal
amounts to the capital, they also agree on equal
RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF PARTNERS AMONG distribution of whatever net profit is realized per
THEMSELVES (1992, 1995, 1998 BAR) fiscal period. After two years of operation, however,
Una conveys her whole interest in the partnership to
Q: W, X, Y and Z organized a general partnership with W Justine, without the knowledge and consent of Dielle
and X as industrial partners and Y and Z as capitalist and Karlo.
partners. Y contributed P50, 000.00 and Z contributed
P20, 000.00 to the common fund. By a unanimous vote 1. Is the partnership dissolved?
of the partners, W and X were appointed managing 2. What are the rights of Justine, if any, should she
partners, without any specification of their respective desire to participate in the management of the
powers and duties. partnership and in the distribution of a net profit of
P360, 000.00 which was realized after her purchase
A applied for the position of Secretary and B applied for of Una’s interest? (1995, 1998 BAR)
the position of Accountant of the partnership.
71
CIVIL LAW
A: Q: Can two corporations organize a general partnership
under the Civil Code of the Philippines? (1994 BAR)
1. No, a conveyance by a partner of his whole interest in a
partnership does not of itself dissolve the partnership A: No. A corporation is managed by its board of directors. If
in the absence of an agreement. (Art. 1813) the corporation were to become a partner, co-partners
2. Justine cannot interfere or participate in the would have the power to make the coporation party to
management or administration of the partnership transactions in an irregular manner since the partners are
business or affairs. She may, however, receive the not agents subject to the control of the Board of Directors.
net profits to which Una would have otherwise been But a corporation may enter into a joint venture with
entitled. In this case, P120, 000 (Art. 1813). another corporation as long as the nature of the venture is
in line with the business authorized by its charter. (Tuason
OBLIGATIONS OF PARTNERSHIP/PARTNERS TO THIRD & Co., Inc. v. Bolano, 95 Phil. 106)
PERSONS (1993, 1994, 2010 BAR)
Q: Can a corporation and an individual form a general
Q: A, B and C formed a partnership for the purpose of partnership? (1994 BAR)
contracting with the Government in the construction of
one of its bridges. On June 30, 1992, after completion of A: No. A corporation may not be a general partner because
the project, the bridge was turned over by the partners to the principle of mutual agency in general partnership
the Government. On August 30, 1992, D, a supplier of allowing the other general partner to bind the corporation
materials used in the project sued A for collection of the will violate the corporation law principle that only the
indebtedness to him. A moved to dismiss the complaint board of directors may bind the corporation.
against him on the ground that it was the ABC
partnership that is liable for the debt. D replied that ABC DISSOLUTION AND WINDING UP (1997 BAR)
partnership was dissolved upon completion of the Q: Will death of a partner terminate the partnership?
project for which purpose the partnership was formed. (1997 BAR)
Will you dismiss the complaint against A If you were the
Judge? (1993 BAR) A: Yes. Death of a partner will terminate the partnership, by
express provision of par. 5, Art. 1830 of the Civil Code.
A: No, as Judge, I would not dismiss the complaint against A
because A is still liable as a general partner for his pro rata
share of 1/3 (Art. 1816). Dissolution of a partnership caused PART VIII – AGENCY
by the termination of the particular undertaking specified in
the agreement does not extinguish obligations, which must be
liquidated during the "winding up" of the partnership affairs DEFINITION (2000, 2003 BAR)
(Arts. 1829 and 1830, par. 1[a]).
Q: A foreign manufacturer of computers and a
Q: A, B, and C entered into a partnership to operate a Philippine distributor entered into a contract whereby
restaurant business. When the restaurant had gone past the distributor agreed to order 1, 000 units of the
break-even stage and started to garner considerable manufacturer’s computers every month and to resell
profits, C died. A and B continued the business without them in the Philippines at the manufacturer’s
dissolving the partnership. They in fact opened a branch suggested prices plus 10%. All unsold units at the end
of the restaurant, incurring obligations in the process. of the year shall be bought back by the manufacturer at
Creditors started demanding for the payment of their the same price they were ordered. The manufacturer
obligations. shall hold the distributor free and harmless from any
claim for defects in the units. Is the agreement one for
A. Who are liable for the settlement of the sale or agency? (2000 BAR)
partnership’s obligations? Explain?
B. What are the creditors’ recourse/s? Explain. (2010 A: The contract is one of agency not sale. The notion of sale
BAR) is negated by the following indicia: (1) the price is fixed by
the manufacturer with the 10% mark up constituting the
A: commission; (2) the manufacturer reacquires the unsold
units at exactly the same price; and (3) warranty for the
A. The two remaining partners, A and B, are liable. When units was borne by the manufacturer. The foregoing indicia
any partner dies and the business is continued without negate sale because they indicate that ownership over the
any settlement of accounts as between him or his units was never intended to transfer to the distributor.
estate, the surviving partners are held liable for
continuing the business provided that A and B had Q: Jo-Ann asked her close friend, Aissa, to buy some
knowledge or notice of the death of C (Art. 1841, 1785, groceries for her in the supermarket. Was there a
par 2, and Art 1833). nominate contract entered into between Jo-Ann and
B. Creditors can file the appropriate actions, for instance, Aissa? In the affirmative, what was it? Explain. (2003
an action for collection of sum of money against the BAR)
“partnership at will” and if there are no sufficient funds,
the creditors may go after the private properties of A A: Yes, there was a nominate contract. On the assumption
and B (Art 1816). Creditors may also sue the estate of C. that Aissa accepted the request of her close friend Jo-Ann to
The estate is not excused from the liabilities of the buy some groceries for her in the supermarket, what they
partnership even if C is dead already but only up to the entered into was the nominate contract of Agency. Art. 1898
time that he remained a partner (Art. 1829, 1835, par 2; of the New Civil Code provides that by the contract of
Testate Estate of Mota v. Serra, G.R. No. L-22825, agency a person binds himself to render some service or to
February 14, 1925). However, the liability of C’s do something in representation or on behalf of another,
individual properties shall be subject to the prior with the consent or authority of the latter.
payment of his separate debts. (Art. 1835, par 3)
73
CIVIL LAW
him or to a third person, a trust is established to whom 2) Is B obliged to pay A for the use of the passenger
the findings belong. jeepney?
3) Is B liable to A for the loss of the jeepney? (1993
BAR)
PART X – CREDIT TRANSACTIONS
A:
LOAN (1993, 1996, 1998, 2001, 2004, 2005, 2016 BAR) 1) The contract is called “commodatum”. (Art. 1933, Civil
Code)
Q: With regard to an award of interest in the concept of 2) No, B is not obliged to pay A for the use of the passenger
actual and compensatory damages, please state the jeepney because commodatum is essentially
guidelines regarding the manner of computing legal gratuitous. (Art. 1933, Civil Code)
interest in the following situations: 3) Yes, because B devoted the thing to a purpose different
from that for which it has been loaned (Art. 1942, par. 2
1. When the obligation is breached and it consists in Civil Code)
the payment of a sum of money like a loan or
forbearance of money; Q: Distinguish briefly but clearly between Mutuum and
2. When the obligation does not constitute a loan or commodatum. (2004 BAR)
forbearance of money.
A: In mutuum, the object borrowed must be a consumable
Consider the issuance of BSP-MB Circular No. 799, thing the ownership of which is transferred to the borrower
which became effective on July 1, 2013. (2016 BAR) who incurs the obligation to return the same consumable to
the lender in an equal amount, and of the same kind and
A: quality. In commodatum, the object borrowed is usually a
non-consumable thing the ownership of which is not
1. When the obligation is breached and it consists in the transferred to the borrower who incurs the obligation to
payment of sum of money like a loan or forbearance of return the very thing to the lender.
money, in the absence of stipulation, the rate of interest
shall be the legal rate of 6% per annum, (Art. 2209, CC) Q: Before he left for Riyadh to work as a mechanic, Pedro
which was increased to 12% per NB Circular No. 905, left his Adventure van with Tito, with the
series of 1982 to be computed from default. The twelve understanding that the latter could use it for one year
percent (12%) per annum legal interest shall apply for his personal or family use while Pedro works in
only until June 30, 2013. From July 1, 2013, the new rate Riyadh. He did not tell Tito that the brakes of the van
of six percent (6%) per annum shall be the prevailing were faulty. Tito had the van tuned up and the brakes
rate of interest when applicable. (Nacar v. Gallery repaired. He spent a total amount of P15, 000.00.
Frames, 703 SCRA 439 [2013], applying BSP-MB Circular After using the vehicle for two weeks, Tito
No. 799) discovered that it consumed too much fuel. To make up
2. The interest on the amount of damages awarded may for the expenses, he leased it to Annabelle. Two months
be imposed at the discretion of the court at the rate of later, Pedro returned to the Philippines and asked
6% per annum. No interest, however, shall be adjudged Tito to return the van. Unfortunately, while being
on unliquidated claims or damages, exept when or until driven by Tito, the van was accidentally damaged by a
the demand can be established with reasonable cargo truck without his fault.
uncertainty. Accordingly, where the demand is
established with reasonable certainty, the interest shall a) Who shall bear the P15, 000.00 spent for the repair
begin to run from the time the claim is made judicially of the van? Explain.
or extra-judicially, but when such certainty cannot be b) Who shall bear the costs for the van's fuel, oil and
so reasonably established at the time the demand is other materials while it was with Tito? Explain.
made, the interest shall begin to run only from the date c) Does Pedro have the right to retrieve the van even
the judgment of the court is made (at which time the before the lapse of one year? Explain.
quantification of damages may be deemed to have been d) Who shall bear the expenses for the accidental
reasonably ascertained). The actual base for the damage caused by the cargo truck, granting that
computation of legal interest shall, in any case, be on the truck driver and truck owner are insolvent?
the amount finally adjudged. (Nacar v. Gallery Frames, Explain. (2005 BAR)
703 SCRA 439 [2013])
A:
Q: A, upon request, loaned his passenger jeepney to B to
enable B to bring his sick wife from Paniqui, Tarlac to a) The contract between Pedro and Tito is one of
the Philippine General Hospital in Manila for commadatum. Of the P15, 000.00 spent, Pedro, the
treatment. On the way back to Paniqui, after leaving his bailor, shall bear the expenses for the repair of the
wife at the hospital, people stopped the passenger faulty brakes, they being extraordinary expenses
jeepney. B stopped for them and allowed them to ride incurred due to the non-disclosure by the bailor of the
on board, accepting payment from them just as in the defect or fault; Tito, on the other hand, shall shoulder
case of ordinary passenger jeepneys plying their route. that part of the P15, 000.00 spent for the tune-up, said
As B was crossing Bamban, there was an onrush of lahar expense being ordinary for the use and preservation of
from Mt. Pinatubo. The jeep that was loaned to him was the van.
wrecked. b) The costs for the fuel and other materials are
considered ordinary expenses, and consequently Tito,
1) What do you call the contract that was entered into the bailee, shall shoulder them. (Art. 1941, Civil Code)
by A and B with respect to the passenger jeepney c) No, Pedro cannot demand the return of the van until
that was loaned by A to B to transport the latter’s after the expiration of the one-year period stipulated.
sick wife to Manila? However, if in the meantime he should have urgent
75
CIVIL LAW
6. In a guaranty, the guarantor is subsidiarlty liable; does not find application in the case at hand because here,
whereas, in a suretyship, the surety binds himself Catalino’s title suffers from two fatal infirmities, namely:
solidarity with the principal debtor (Art. 2047)
1. The fact that it emanated from a forged deed of a
Q: AB sold to CD a motor vehicle for and in simulated sale;
consideration of P120, 000, to be paid in twelve 2. The fact that it was derived from a fraudulently
monthly equal instalments of P10, 000.00, each procured or improvidently issued second owner’s copy,
instalment being due and payable on the 15 th day of the real owner’s copy being still intact and in the
each month starting January 1997. possession of the true owner, Bruce.
To secure the promissory note, CD (a) executed a The mortgage to Desiderio should be cancelled without
chattel mortgage on the subject motor vehicle, and (b) prejudice to his right to go after Catalino and/or the
furnished a surety bond issued by Philamlife. CD failed government for compensation from the assurance fund.
to pay more than two (2) instalments.
Q: In 1982, Steve borrowed P400, 000.00 from Danny,
AB went after the surety but he was only able to obtain collateralized by a pledge of shares of stock of
three-fourths (3/4) of the total amount still due and Concepcion Corporation worth P800, 000.00. In 1983,
owing from CD. AB seeks your advice on how he might, because of the economic crisis, the value of the shares
if at all recover the deficiency. pledged fell to only P100, 000.00. Can Danny demand
that Steve surrender the other shares worth P700,
How would you counsel AB? (1997 BAR) 000.00? (1994 BAR)
A: Yes, he can recover the deficiency. The action of AB to go A: No. Bilateral contracts cannot be changed unilaterally. A
after the surety bond cannot be taken to mean a waiver of pledge is only a subsidiary contract, and Steve is still
his right to demand payment for the whole debt. The indebted to Danny for the amount of P400, 000.00 despite
amount received from the surety is only payment pro tanto, the fall in the value of the stocks pledged.
and an action may be maintained for a deficiency debt.
Q: Distinguish a contract of chattel mortgage from a
PLEDGE, MORTGAGE AND ANTICHRESIS (1991, 1994, contract of pledge. (1999 BAR)
1995, 1999, 2003 BAR)
A: In a contract of CHATTEL MORTGAGE possession
Q: Bruce is the registered owner, of a parcel of land with belongs to the creditor, while in a contract of PLEDGE
a building thereon and is in peacefull possession possession belongs to the debtor.
thereof. He pays the real estate taxes and collects the
rentals therefrom. Later, Catalino, the only brother of A chattel mortgage is a formal contract while a pledge is a
Bruce, filed a petition where he, misrepresenting to be real contract.
the attorney-in-fact of Bruce and falsely alleging that
the certificate of title was lost, succeeded in obtaining a A contract of chattel mortgage must be recorded in a public
second owner’s duplicate copy of the title and then had instrument to bind third persons while a contract of pledge
the same transferred in his name through a simulated must be in a public instrument containing description of the
deed of sale in his favor. Catalino then mortgaged the thing pledged and the date thereof to bind third persons.
property to Desiderio who had the mortgage annotated Q: Are the right of redemption and the equity of
on the title. Upon learning of the fraudulent redemption given by law to a mortgagor the same?
transaction, Bruce filed a complaint against Catalino Explain. (1999 BAR)
and Desiderio to have the tilte of Catalino and the
mortgage in favor of Desiderio declared null and void. A: The equity of redemption is different from the right of
redemption. EQUITY OF REDEMPTION is the right of the
Will the complaint prosper, or will the tilte of Catalino mortgagor after judgment in a judicial foreclosure
and the mortgage to Desiderio be sustained? (1991 proceedings, within a period of not less than 90 days, before
BAR) the sale or confirmation of the sale, to pay into the court the
amount of the judgment debt. On the other hand, RIGHT OF
A: The complaint for the annulment of Catalino’s Title will REDEMPTION is the right of the mortgagor, after the sale of
prosper. In the first place, the second owner’s copy of the the mortgaged property, to redeem the property by paying
title secured by him form the Land Registration Court is to the purchaser in the sale or for him to the sheriff who
void ab initio, the owner’s copy thereof having never been made the sale, the amount paid by him, with interest, within
lost let alone the fact that said second owner’s copy of the one year from the sale. There is no right of redemption, only
title was fraudulently procured and improvidently issued equity of redemption, in a judicial foreclosure under the
by the Court. In the second place, the Transfer Certificate of Rules of Court.
Title procured by Catalino is equally null and void, it having
been issued on the basis of a simulated or forged Deed of Q: Olivia owns a vast mango plantation which she
Sale. A forged deed is an absolute nullity and conveys no can no longer properly manage due to a lingering
title. illness. Since she is indebted to Peter in the amount of
P500, 000.00 she asks Peter to manage the plantation
The mortgage in favor of Desiderio is likewise null and void and apply the harvest to the payment of her obligation
because the mortgagor is not the owner of the mortgaged to him, principal and interest, until her indebtedness
property. While it may be true that under the “Mirror shall have been fully paid. Peter agrees.
Principle” of the Torrens System of Land Registration, a
buyer or mortgagee has the right to rely on what appears on 1. What kind of contract is entered into between
the Certificate of Title, and in the absence of anything to Olivia and Peter? Explain.
excite suspicion, is under no obligation to look beyond the 2. What specific obligations are imposed by law on
certificate and investigate the mortgagor’s title, this rule Peter as a consequence of their contract?
Q: In fear of reprisals from lawless elements besieging Q: Armando owns a row of residential apartments in
his barangay, X abandoned his fishpond, fled to Manila San Juan, Metro Manila, which he rents out to tenants.
and left for Europe. Seeking that the fish in the fishpond On 1 April 1991 he left for the United States without
were ready for harvest, Y, who is in the business of appointing any administrator to manage his
managing fishponds on a commission basis, took apartments such that uncollected rentals accumulated
for three (3) years. Amparo, a niece of Armando,
77
CIVIL LAW
concerned with the interest of her uncle, took it upon The same obligation shall be incumbent upon him when
herself to administer the property. As a consequence, the management had for its purpose the prevention of
she incurred expenses in collecting the rents and in an imminent and manifest loss, although no benefit
some instances even spent for necessary repairs to may have been derived.
preserve the property.
Art. 2151. Even though the owner did not derive any
1. What juridical relation between Amparo and benefit and there has been no imminent and manifest
Armando, if any, has resulted from Amparo’s danger to the property or business, the owner is liable
unilateral act of assuming the administration of as under the first paragraph of the preceding article,
Armando’s apartments? Explain. provided:
2. What rights and obligations, if any, does Amparo
have under the circumstances? Explain. (1995 1. The officious manager has acted in good faith, and
BAR) 2. The property or business is intact, ready to be
returned to the owner.
A:
Art. 2152. The officious manager is personally liable for
1. Negotiorum gestio existed between Amparo and contracts which he has entered into with third persons,
Armando. She voluntarily took charge of the angency or even though he acted in the name of the owner, and
management of the business or property of her uncle there shall be no right of action between the owner and
without any power from her uncle whose property was third persons. These provisions shall not apply:
neglected. She is called the gestor negotiorum or
officious manager. (Art. 2144, NCC) 1. If the owner has expressly or tacitly ratified the
2. Art. 2145. The officious manager shall perform his management, or
duties with all the diligence of a good father of a family, 2. When the contract refers to things pertaining to the
and pay the damages which through his fault or owner of the business.
negligence may be suffered by the owner of the
property or business under management. Q: DPO went to a store to buy a pack of cigarettes worth
P225.00 only. He gave the vendor, RRA, a P500-peso
The courts may, however, increase or moderate the bill. The vendor gave him the pack plus P375.00 change.
indemnity according to the circumstances of each case. Was there a discount, an oversight, or an error in the
amount given? What would be DPO’s duty, if any, in case
Art. 2146. If the officious manager delegates to another of an excess in the amount of change given by the
person all or some of his duties, he shall be liable for the vendor? How is this situational relationship between
acts of the delegate, without prejudice to the direct DPO and RRA denominated? Explain. (2004 BAR)
obligation of the latter toward the owner of the
business. A: There was error in the amount of change given by RRA.
The responsibility of two or more officious managers This is a case of solution indebiti in that DPO received
shall be solidary, unless management was assumed to something that is not due him. He has the obligation to
save the thing or business from imminent danger. return the P100.00; otherwise, he will unjustly enrich
himself at the expense of RRA (Art. 2154).
Art. 2147. The officious manager shall be liable for any
fortuitous event:
PART XI – SUCCESSION
1. If he undertakes risky operations which the owner
was not accustomed to embark upon;
2. If he has preferred his own interest to that of the TESTAMENTARY SUCCESSION (1990, 1994, 1996,
owner; 1997, 1999, 2000, 2002, 2003, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009,
3. If he fails to return the property or business after 2012, 2014, 2015 BAR)
demand by the owner; Q: What do you understand by "presumptive legitime",
4. If he assumed the management in bad faith. in what case or cases must the parent deliver such
legitime to the children, and what are the legal effects
Art. 2148. Except when the management was assumed in each case if the parent fails to do so? (1999 BAR)
to save the property or business from imminent danger,
the officious manager shall be liable for fortuitous A: PRESUMPTIVE LEGITIME is not defined in the law. Its
events: (1) If he is manifestly unfit to carry on the definition must have been taken from Act 2710, the Old
management; (2) If by his Intervention h e prevented a Divorce Law, which required the delivery to the legitimate
more competent person from taking up the children of “the equivalent of what would have been due to
management. them as their legal portion if said spouse had died intestate
immediately after the dissolution of the community of
Art. 2149. The ratification of the management by the property.” As used in the Family Code, presumptive legitime
owner of the business produces the effects of an is understood as the equivalent of the legitimate children’s
express agency, even if the business may not have been legitimes assuming that the spouses had died immediately
successful. after the dissolution of the community of property.
Art. 2150. Although the officious management may not Presumptive legitime is required to be delivered to the
have been expressly ratified, the owner of the property common children of the spouses when the marriage is
or business who enjoys the advantages of the same annulled or declared void ab initio and possibly, when the
shall be liable for obligations incurred in his interest, conjugal partnership or absolute community is dissolved as
and shall reimburse the officious manager for the in the case of legal separation. Failure of the parents to
necessary and useful expenses and for the damages deliver the presumptive legitime will make their
which the latter may have suffered in the performance subsequent marriage null and void under Art. 53, FC.
of his duties.
1. Yes. Assuming that he is of legal age (Art. 797) and of 1. Upon his death, how should Mr. Cruz's estate be
sound mind at the time of execution of the will (Art. divided? Explain.
798), Stevie, a blind person, can make a notatial will, 2. In the preceding question, suppose Mr. Cruz
subject to compliance with the “two-reading rule” (Art. instituted his two children A and B as his heirs in
808) and the provisions of Arts. 804 and 806 of the Civil his Will, but gave a legacy of P 100,000.00 to his
Code. friend F. How should the estate of Mr, Cruz be
2. No. Stevie cannot be a witness to a will. Art. 820 of the divided upon his death? Explain. (1999 BAR)
Civil Code provides that “any person of sound mind and
of age of eighteen years or more, and not blind, deaf or A:
dumb, and able to read and write, may be a witness to
the execution of a will. 1. Assuming that the institution of A, B and F were to the
3. Yes. The will must be read to him twice, once by one of entire estate, there was preterition of C since C is a
the subscribing witnesses, and again, by the notary compulsory heir in the direct line. The preterition will
public before whom the will is acknowledged (Art. 808). result in the total annulment of the institution of heirs.
Therefore, the institution of A, B and F will be set aside
Q: Arthur executed a will which contained only: (i) a and Mr. Cuz's estate will be divided, as in intestacy,
provision disinheriting his daughter Bernica for equally among A, B and C as follows: A - P333,333.33; B
running off with a married man, and (ii) a provision - P333.333.33; and C - P333,333.33.
disposing of his share in the family house and lot in 2. On the same assumption as letter (a), there was
favor of his other children Connie and Dora. He did not preterition of C. Therefore, the institution of A and B is
make any provisions in favor of his wife Erica, because annulled but the legacy of P100.000.00 to F shall be
as the will stated, she would anyway get ½ of the house respected for not being inofficious. Therefore, the
and lot as her conjugal share. The will was very brief remainder of P900.000.00 will be divided equally
and straightforward and both the above provisions among A, B and C.
were contained in page 1, which Arthur and his
instrumental witness, signed at the bottom. Page 2 Q: H died leaving a last will and testament wherein it is
contained the attestation clause and the signatures, at stated that he was legally married to W by whom he
the bottom thereof, of the 3 instrumental witnesses had two legitimate children A and B. H devised to his
which included Lambert, the driver of Arthur; Yoly, the said forced heirs the entire estate except the free
family cook, and Attorney Zorba, the lawyer who portion which he gave to X who was living with him at the
prepared the will. There was a 3 rd page, but this only time of his death. In said will he explained that he had
contained the notarial acknowledgement. been estranged from his wife W for more than 20
years and he has been living with X as man and wife
The attestation clause stated the will was sighed on the since his separation from his legitimate family. In the
same occasion by Arthur and his instrumental probate proceedings, X asked for the issuance of
witnesses who all signed in the presence of each other, letters testamentary in accordance with the will
and the notary public who notarized the will. There are wherein she is named sole executor. This was
no marginal signatures or pagination appearing on any opposed by W and her children.
of the 3 pages. Upon his death, it was discovered that
apart from the house and lot, he has a P1 million 1. Should the will be admitted in said probate
account deposited with ABC back. proceedings?
2. Is the said devise to X valid?
1. Was Erica preterited? 3. Was it proper for the trial court to consider the
2. What other defects of the will, if any, can cause intrinsic validity of the provisions of said will?
denial of probate? Explain your answers. (1990 BAR)
3. Was the disinheritance valid? (2008 BAR)
A:
A:
1. No. Erica was not preterited. Art. 854 of the Civil Code 1. Yes, the will may be probated if executed according to
provides that only compulsory heirs in the direct line the formalities prescribed by law.
can be preterited. 2. No, the institution giving X the free portion is not valid,
because the prohibitions under Art. 739 of the Civil
Q: Clara, thinking of her mortality, drafted a will and Q: Mr. Reyes executed a will completely valid as to
asked Roberta, Hannah, Luisa and Benjamin to be form. A week later, however, he executed another
witnesses. During the day of signing of her will, Clara will which expressly revoked his first will, which he tore
fell down the stairs and broke her arms. Coming from his first will to pieces. Upon the death of Mr. Reyes, his
the hospital, Clara insisted on signing her will by thumb second will was presented for probate by his heirs, but
mark and said that she can sign her full name later. it was denied probate due to formal defects. Assuming
While the will was being signed, Roberta experienced a that a copy of the first will is available, may it now be
stomach ache and kept going to the restroom for long admitted to probate and given effect? Why? (2003
periods of time. Hannah, while waiting for her turn to BAR)
sign the will, was reading the 7th Harry Potter book on
the couch, beside the table on which everyone was A: Yes, the first will may be admitted to probate and
signing. Benjamin, aside from witnessing the will, also given effect. When the testator tore first will, he was
offered to notarize it. A week after, Clara was run over under the mistaken belief that the second will was perfectly
by a drunk driver while crossing the street in valid and he would not have destroyed the first will had
Greenbelt. May the will of Clara be admitted to probate? he known that the second will is not valid. The revocation
Give your reasons briefly. (1994, 2007 BAR) by destruction therefore is dependent on the validity of
the second will. Since it turned out that the second will
A: No. Probate should be denied. The requirement that the was invalid, the tearing of the first will did not produce
testator and at least three (3) witnesses must sign all in the the effect of revocation.This is known as the doctrine of
“presence” of one another was not complied with. Benjamin dependent relative revocation (Molo v. Molo, G.R. No. L-2538,
who notarized the will is disqualified as a witness, hence he September 21, 1951).
cannot be counted as one of the three witness (Cruz v.
Villasor, G.R. No. L-32213, November 26, 1973). The testatrix Q: In 1986, Jennifer and Brad were madly in love. In
and the other witnesses signed the will not in the presence 1989, because a certain Picasso painting reminded
of Roberta because she was in the restroom for extended Brad of her, Jennifer acquired it and placed it in his
periods of time. Inside the restroom, Roberta could not have bedroom. In 1990, Brad and Jennifer broke up. While
possibly seen the testatrix and the other witnesses sign the Brad was mending his broken heart, he met Angie and
will by merely casting her eyes in the proper direction fell in love. Because the Picasso painting reminded
(Jaboneta v. Gustilo, G.R. No. 1641, January 19, 1906); (Nera Angie of him, Brad in his will bequeathed the painting
v. Rimando, G.R. No. L-5971, February 27, 1911). Therefore, to Angie. Brad died in 1995. Saddened by Brad's death,
the testatrix signed the will in the presence of only two Jennifer asked for the Picasso painting as a
witnesses, and only two witnesses signed the will in the remembrance of him. Angie refused and claimed that
presence of the testatrix and of one another. Brad, in his will, bequeathed the painting to her. Is
Angie correct? Why or why not? (2007 BAR)
It is to be noted, however, that the thumb mark intended by
the testator to be his signature in executing his last will and A: No, Angie is not correct. The Picasso painting is not given
testatment is valid (Payad v. Tolentino, G.R. No. 42258, or donated by Jennifer to Brad. She merely “placed it in his
September 5, 1936; Matias v. Salud, G.R. No. L-10751, June 23, bedroom.” Hence, she is still the owner of the painting. Not
1958). The problem, however, states that Clara “said that being the owner of the Picasso painting, Brad cannot validly
she can sign her full name later;” Hence, she did not bequeath the same to Angie (Art. 930). Even assuming that
consider her thumb mark as her “complete” signature, and the painting was impliedly given or donated by Jennifer to
intended further action on her part. The testatrix and the Brad, the donation is nevertheless void for not being in
other witness signed the will in the presence of Hannah, writing. The Picasso painting must be worth more that
because she was aware of her function and role as witness 5,000 pesos. Under Art. 748, the donation and acceptance of
and was in a position to see the testatrix and the other a movable worth more than 5,000 pesos must be in writing,
witnesses sign by merely casting her eyes in the proper otherwise the donation is void, Jennifer remained the
direction. owner of the Picasso painting and Brad could not have
validly disposed of said painting in favor of Angie in his will.
Q: Johnny, with no known living relatives, executed a
notarial will giving all his estate to his sweetheart. One Q: Don died after executing a Last Will and Testament
day, he had a serious altercation with his sweetheart. A leaving his estate valued at P12 Million to his
few days later, he was introduced to a charming lady common-law wife Roshelle. He is survived by his
who later became a dear friend. Soon after, he executed brother Ronie and his half-sister Michelle.
a holographic will expressly revoking the notarial will
81
CIVIL LAW
1. Was Don's testamentary disposition of his estate in
accordance with the law on succession? Whether A: Manuel is correct because property acquired after the
you agree or not, explain your answer. Explain. making of a will shall only pass thereby, as if the testator had
2. If Don failed to execute a will during his lifetime, as possessed it at the time of making the will, should it
his lawyer, how will you distribute his estate? expressly appear by the will that such was his intention(Art.
Explain. 793). Since Alfonso's intention to devise all properties he
3. Assuming he died intestate survived by his owned at the time of his death expressly appears on the
brother Ronie, his half-sister Michelle, and his will, then all the 20 parcels of land are included in the
legitimate son Jayson, how will you distribute his devise.
estate? Explain.
4. Assuming further he died intestate, survived by his Q: Natividad’s holographic will, which had only one (1)
father Juan, his brother Ronie, his half-sister substantial provision, as first written, named Rosa as
Michelle, and his legitimate son Jayson, how will her sole heir. However, when Gregorio presented it for
you distribute his estate? Explain. (2006 BAR) probate, it already contained an alteration, naming
Gregorio, instead of Rosa, as sole heir, but without
A: authentication by Natividad’s signature. Rosa opposes
1. Yes, Don's testamentary disposition of his estate is in the probate alleging such lack of proper authentication.
accordance with the law on succession. Don has no She claims that the unaltered form of the will should be
compulsory heirs not having ascendants, descendants given effect. Whose claim should be granted? Explain.
nor a spouse (Art. 887). Brothers and sisters are not (1996, 2012 BAR)
compulsory heirs. Thus, he can bequeath his entire
estate to anyone who is not otherwise incapacitated to A: It depends. If the cancellation of Rosa's name in the will
inherit from him. A common-law wife is not was done by the testator himself, Rosa's claim that the
incapacitated under the law, as Don is not married to holographic will in its original tenor should be given effect
anyone. must be denied. The said cancellation has revoked the
2. After paying the legal obligations of the estate, I will entire will as nothing remains of the will after the name of
give Ronie, as full-blood brother of Don, 2/3 of the net Rosa was cancelled. Such cancellation is valid revocation of
estate, twice the share of Michelle, the half-sister who the will and does not require authentication by the full
shall receive 1/3. Roshelle will not receive anything as signature of the testator to be effective. However, if the
she is not a legal heir (Art.1006). cancellation of Rosa's name was not done by the testator
3. Jayson will be entitled to the entire P12 Million as the himself, such cancellation shall not be effective and the will
brother and sister will be excluded by a legitimate son in its original tenor shall remain valid. The efficacy of a
of the decedent. This follows the principle of proximity, holographic will cannot be left to the mercy of unscrupulous
where "the nearer excludes the farther." third parties. The writing of Gregorio‘s name as sole heir
4. Jayson will still be entitled to the entire P12 Million as was ineffective, even though written by the testator himself,
the father, brother and sister will be excluded by a because such is an alteration that requires the
legitimate son of the decedent (Art. 887). This follows the authentication by the full signature of the testator to be
principle that the descendants exclude the ascendants valid and effective. Not having been authenticated. The
from inheritance. designation of Gregorio as an heir was ineffective. (Kalaw v.
Relova, G.R. No. L-40207, September 28, 1984).
Q: Mario executed his last will and testament where he
acknowledges the child being conceived by his live-in Q: On December 1, 2000, Dr. Juanito Fuentes executed a
partner Josie as his own child; and that his house and holographic will, wherein he gave nothing to his
lot in Baguio City be given to his unborn conceived recognized illegitimate son, Jay. Dr. Fuentes left for the
child. Are the acknowledgment and the donation mortis United States, passed the New York medical licensure
causa valid? Why? (2014 BAR) examinations, resided therein, and became a
naturalized American citizen. He died in New York in
A: Yes, the acknowledgment is considered valid because a 2007. The laws of New York do not recognize
will (although not required to be filed by the notary public) holographic wills or compulsory heirs.
may still constitute a document, which contains an
admission of illegitimate filiation. The recognition of an 1. Can the holographic will of Dr. Fuentes be admitted
illegitimate child does not lose its legal effect even though to probate in the Philippines? Why or why not?
the will wherein it was made should be revoked (Art. 834). 2. Assuming that the will is probated in the
This provision by itself warrants a conclusion that a will Philippines, can Jay validly insist that he be given
may be considered as proof of filiation. The donation mortis his legitime? Why or why not? (2009 BAR)
causa may be considered valid because although unborn, a
fetus has a presumptive personality for all purposes A:
favorable to it provided it be born under the conditions
specified in Art. 41. 1. Yes, the holographic will of Dr. Fuentes may be
admitted to probate in the Philippines because there is
Q: Alfonso, a bachelor without any descendant or no public policy violated by such probate. The only
ascendant, wrote a last will and testament in which he issue at probate is the due execution of the will which
devised." all the properties of which I may be includes the formal validity of the will. As regards
possessed at the time of my death" to his favorite formal validity, the only issue the court will resolve at
brother Manuel. At the time he wrote the will, he owned probate is whether or not the will was executed in
only one parcel of land. But by the time he died, he accordance with the form prescribed by the law
owned twenty parcels of land. His other brothers and observed by the testator in the execution of his will. For
sisters insist that his will should pass only the parcel of purposes of probate in the Philippines, an alien testator
land he owned at the time it was written, and did not may observe the law of the place where the will was
cover his properties acquired, which should be by executed (Art 17), or the formalities of the law of the
intestate succession. Manuel claims otherwise. Who is place where he resides, or according to the formalities
correct? Explain. (1996 BAR) of the law of his own country, or in accordance with the
This is a clear case of reserva troncal. The origin is Onofre. 1. Can Article 147 on co-ownership apply to Bert and
The Prepositus is Pepito. The mode of transmission from Joe, whereby all properties they acquired will be
Onofre to Pepito is donation (hence, by gratuitous title). The presumed to have been acquired by their joint
Reservista is Mark, who acquired it from his descendant industry and shall be owned by them in equal
(son) Pepito by legitime and intestacy (hence, by operation shares?
of law). 2. What are the successional rights of the boy Bert and
Joe raised as their son?
The Reservatario is Princess, a relative of the Prepositus 3. If Bert and Joe had decided in the early years of
Pepito within the third degree and who belonged to the line their cohabitation to jointly adopt the boy, would
of origin is the maternal line because Onofre (the Origin) they have been legally allowed to do so? Explain
and Pepito (the Prepositus) are maternal half-blood siblings. with legal basis. (2015 BAR)
Q: Eugenio died without issue, leaving several parcels Q: At the age 18, Marian found out that she was
of land in Bataan. He was survived by Antonio, his pregnant. She insured her own life and named her
legitimate brother; Martina, the only daughter of his unborn child as her sole beneficiary. When she was
predeceased sister Mercedes; and five legitimate already due to give birth, she and her boyfriend Pietro,
children of Joaquin, another predeceased brother. the father of her unborn child, were kidnapped in a
Shortly after Eugenio's death, Antonio also died, leaving resort in Bataan where they were vacationing. The
three legitimate children. Subsequently, Martina, the military gave chase and after one week, they were found
children of Joaquin and the children of Antonio in an abandoned hut in Cavite. Marian and Pietro were
executed an extrajudicial settlement of the estate of hacked with bolos. Marian and the baby were both
Eugenio, dividing it among themselves. The succeeding found dead, with the baby’s umbilical cord already cut.
year, a petition to annul the extrajudicial settlement was Pietro survived.
filed by Antero, an illegitimate son of Antonio, who
claims he is entitled to share in the estate of Eugenio.
1. Marian is presumed to have died ahead of the baby. Art. The following may not inherit from Ramon:
43 applies to persons who are called to succeed each
other. The proof of death must be established by 1. Shelly, being an adopted child, she cannot represent
positive or circumstatial evidence derived from facts. It Cherry. This is because adoption creates a personal
can never be established from mere inference. In the legal relation only between the adopter and the
present case, it is very clear that only Marian and Pietro adopted. The law on representation requires the
were hacked with bolos. There was no showing that the representative to be a legal heir of the person he is
baby was also hacked to death. The baby’s death could representing and also of the person from whom the
have been due to lack of nutrition. person being represented was supposed to inherit.
2. Pietro, as the biological father of the baby, shall be While Shelly is a legal heir of Cherry, Shelly is not a legal
entitled to claim the proceeds of life insurance of Marian heir of Ramon. Adoption created a purely personal legal
because he is a compulsory heir of his child. relation only between Cherry and Shelly.
2. Hans and Gretel are barred from inheriting from
Q: A is the acknowledged natural child of B who died Ramon under Art. 992. Being illegitimate children, they
when A was already 22 years old. When B's full blood cannot inherit ab intestato from Ramon.
brother, C, died, he (C) was survived by his widow and
four children of his other brother D. Claiming that he is PROVISIONS COMMON TO TESTATE AND INTESTATE
entitled to inherit from his father's brother C. A SUCCESSION (1993, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2005, 2009
brought suit to obtain his share in the estate of C. Will BAR)
his action prosper? (1993 BAR)
Q: Maria, to spite her husband Jorge, whom she
A: No, the action of A will not prosper. On the premise that B, suspected was having an affair with another woman,
C and D are legitimate brothers, as an illegitimate child of B, executed a will, unknown to him, bequeathing all the
A cannot inherit in intestacy from C who is a legitimate properties she inherited from her parents, to her sister
brother of B. Only the wife of C in her own right and the Miguela. Upon her death, the will was presented for
legitimate relatives of C (i.e. the children of D as C's probate. Jorge opposed probate of the will on the
legitimate nephews inheriting as collateral relatives) can ground that the will was executed by his wife without
inherit in intestacy (Arts. 992, 1001, 1OO5 and 975). his knowledge, much less consent, and that it deprived
him of his legitime. After all, he had given her no cause
Q: Cristina the illegitimate daughter of Jose and for disinheritance, added Jorge in his opposition.
Maria, died intestate, without any descendant or How will you rule on Jorge's opposition to the probate
ascendant. Her valuable estate is being claimed by Ana, of Maria's will. If you were the Judge? (1993 BAR)
the legitimate daughter of Jose, and Eduardo, the
legitimate son of Maria. Is either, both, or neither of A: As Judge, I shall rule as follows: Jorge's opposition should
them entitled to inherit? Explain. (1996 BAR) be sustained in part and denied in part. Jorge's omission as
spouse of Maria is not preterition of a compulsory heir in
A: Neither Ana nor Eduardo is entitled to inherit of ab the direct line. Hence, Art. 854 of the Civil Code does not
intestato from Cristina. Both are legitimate relatives of apply, and the institution of Miguela as heir is valid, but only
Cristina's illegitimate parents and therefore they fall under to the extent of the free portion of one-half. Jorge is still
the prohibition prescribed by Art. 992 (Manuel v. Ferrer, entitled to one-half of the estate as his legitime (Art. 1001).
G.R. No. 117246, August 21, 1995; Diaz v. IAC, G.R. No. L-
66574, February 21, 1990). Q: Mr. Palma, widower, has three daughters D, D-1 and
D-2. He executes a Will disinheriting D because she
Q: For purpose of this question, assume all formalities married a man he did not like, and instituting
and procedural requirements have been complied daughters D-1 and D-2 as his heirs to his entire estate of
with. In 1970, Ramon and Dessa got married. Prior to P 1,000,000.00, Upon Mr, Palma's death, how should
their marriage, Ramon had a child, Anna. In 1971 and his estate be divided? Explain. (1999, 2000 BAR)
1972, Ramon and Dessa legally adopted Cherry and
Michelle respectively. In 1973, Dessa died while giving A: This is a case of ineffective disinheritance because
birth to Larry Anna had a child, Lia. Anna never marrying a man that the father did not approve of is not a
married. Cherry, on the other hand, legally adopted ground for disinheriting D. Therefore, the institution of D-
Shelly. Larry had twins, Hans and Gretel, with his 1 and D-2 shall be annulled insofar as it prejudices the
girlfriend, Fiona. In 2005, Anna, Larry and Cherry died legitime of D, and the institution of D-1 and D-2 shall only
in a car accident. In 2007, Ramon died. Who may inherit apply on the free portion in the amount of P500, 000.00.
from Ramon and who may not? Give your reason Therefore, D, D-1 and D-2 will get their legitimes of P500,
brieftly. (2007 BAR) 000.00 divided into three equal parts and D-1 and D-2 will
get a reduced testamentary disposition of P250,b000.00
A: each. Hence, the shares will be:
Q: Four children, namely: Alberto, Baldomero, Caridad, Q: Macario bought a titled lot from Ramon, got the title
and Dioscoro, were born to the spouses Conrado and and took possession of the lot. Since Macario did not
Clarita de la Costa. The children’s birth certificates have the money to pay the taxes, fees and registration
were duly signed by Conrado, showing them to be the expenses, he was not able to register the Deed of
Q: Mario sold his house and lot to Carmen for P1 Q: In 1979, Nestor applied for and was granted a Free
million payable in five (5) equal annual installments. Patent over a parcel of agricultural land with an area of
The sale was registered and title was issued in 30 hectares, located in General Santos City. He
Carmen's name. Carmen failed to pay the last three presented the Free Patent to the Register of Deeds, and
installments and Mario filed an action for collection, he was issued a corresponding Original Certificate of
damages and attorney’s fees against her. Upon filing Title (OCT) No. 375, Subsequently, Nestor sold the land
of the complaint, he caused a notice of lis pendens to be to Eddie. The deed of sale was submitted to the
Register of Deeds and on the basis thereof, OCT No.
91
CIVIL LAW
375 was cancelled and Transfer Certificate of Title 2. It is a well-known rule in this jurisdiction that persons
(TCT) No. 4576 was issued in the name of Eddie. In dealing with registered land have the legal right to
1986, the Director of Lands filed a complaint for rely on the face of the Torrens Certificate of Title and
annulment of OCT No, 375 and TCT No. 4576 on the to dispense with the need to inquire further, except
ground that Nestor obtained the Free Patent through when the party concerned has actual knowledge of
fraud. Eddie filed a motion to dismiss on the ground facts and circumstances that would impel a reasonably
that he was an innocent purchaser for value and in cautious man to make such inquiry (Naawan
good faith and as such, he has acquired a title to the Community Rural Bank v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
property which is valid, unassailable and indefeasible. 128573, January 13, 2003). In the given problem, the
Decide the motion. (2000 BAR) property was already registered in the name of Rod
when he bought the same from the latter. Thus, Don
A: The motion of Nestor to dismiss the complaint for could be considered as a buyer in good faith and for
annulment of O.C.T. No. 375 and T.C.T. No. 4576 should be value. However, since Rod did not actually sell any
denied for the following reasons: property to him, Don has no right to retain ownership
over the property. He has only the right to recover the
1. Eddie cannot claim protection as an innocent purchase price plus damages.
purchaser for value nor can he interpose the defense of
indefeasibility of his title, because his TCT is rooted on a Q: In 1950, the Bureau of Lands issued a Homestead
void title. Under Section 91 of CA No. 141, as amended, patent to A. Three years later, A sold the homestead to
otherwise known as the Public Land Act, statements of B. A died in 1990, and his heirs filed an action to recover
material facts in the applications for public land must be the homestead from B on the ground that its sale by
under oath. Section 91 of the same act provides that such their father to the latter is void under Section 118 of
statements shall be considered as essential conditions the Public Land Law. B contends, however, that the
and parts of the concession, title, or permit issued any heirs of A cannot recover the homestead from him
false statement therein, or omission of facts shall anymore because their action has prescribed and that
ipso facto produce the cancellation of the furthermore, A was in pari delicto. Decide. (1999 BAR)
concession. The patent issued to Nestor in this case is
void ab initio not only because it was obtained by A: The sale of the land by A to B 3 years after issuance of the
fraud but also because it covers 30 hectares which is homestead patent, being in violation of Sec. 118 of the
far beyond the maximum of 24 hectares provided by the Public Land Act, is void from its inception The action filed by
free patent law. the heirs of B to declare the nullity or inexistence of the
2. The government can seek annulment of the original contract and to recover the land should be given due
and transfer certificates of title and the reversion of the course. B's defense of prescription is untenable because an
land to the state. Eddie's defense is untenable. The action which seeks to declare the nullity or inexistence of A
protection afforded by the Torrens System to an contract does not prescribe. On the other hand, B's
innocent purchaser for value can be availed of only if defense of pari delicto is equally untenable. While as a
the land has been titled thru judicial proceedings where rule, parties who are in pari delicto have no recourse
the issue of fraud becomes academic after the lapse of against each other on the principle that a transgressor
one year from the issuance of the decree of cannot profit from his own wrongdoing, such rule does not
registration. In public land grants, the action of the apply to violations of Sec. 118 of the Public Land Act
government to annul a title fraudulently obtained does because of the underlying public policy in the said Act "to
not prescribe such action and will not be barred by the conserve the land which a homesteader has acquired by
transfer of the title to an innocent purchaser for value. gratuitous grant from the government for himself and his
family". In keeping with this policy, it has been held that
Q: Rod, the owner of an FX taxi, found in his vehicle one who purchases a homestead within the five-year
an envelope containing TCT No. 65432 over a lot prohibitory period can only recover the price which he has
registered in Cesar's name. Posing as Cesar, Rod forged paid by filing a claim against the estate of the deceased seller
Cesar's signature on a Deed of Sale in Rod's favor. Rod (Labrador v. Delos Santos, G.R. No. 44947, November 26,
registered the said document with the Register of 1938) under the principle that no one shall enrich himself
Deeds, and obtained a new title in his name. After a at the expense of another. Applying the pari delicto rule to
year, he sold the lot to Don, a buyer in good faith and violation of Section 118 of the Public Land Act, the Court of
for value, who also registered the lot in his name. Appeals has ruled that "the homesteader suffers the loss of
the fruits realized by the vendee who in turn forfeits the
1. Did Rod acquire title to the land? Explain. improvement that he has introduced into the land." (Obot v.
2. Discuss the rights of Don, if any, over the Sandadiuas, 69 OG, April 35, 1966)
property. (1991, 2005 BAR)
Q: Cesar bought a residential condominium unit from
A: High Rise Co. and paid the price in full. He moved into
the unit, but somehow he was not given the
1. No, Rod did not acquire title to the land. The inscription Condominium Certificate of Title covering the
in the registry, to be effective, must be made in good property. Unknown to him, High Rise Co. subsequently
faith. The defense of indefeasibility of a Torrens Title mortgaged the entire condominium building to
does not extend to a transferee who takes the Metrobank as security for a loan of P500 million. High
certificate of title with notice of a flaw. A holder in bad Rise Co. failed to pay the loan and the bank foreclosed
faith of a certificate of title is not entitled to the the mortgage. At the foreclosure sale, the bank
protection of the law, for the law cannot be used as acquired the building, being the highest bidder. When
a shield for frauds (Samonte v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. Cesar learned about this, he filed an action to annul the
104223, July 12, 2001). In the case at bar, Rod only forged foreclosure sale insofar as his unit was concerned. The
Cesar's signature on the Deed of Sale. It is very apparent bank put up the defense that it relied on the
that there was bad faith on the part of Rod from the very condominium certificates of title presented by High
beginning. As such, he is not entitled to the protection of Rise Co., which were clean. Hence, it was a mortgagee
the Land Registration Act.
A: No, the defense will not prosper. The problem did not give A:
facts from which laches may be inferred. Mere delay in filing
an action, standing alone, does not constitute laches (Agra v. a) Renren's action to recover possession of the land will
PNB, G.R. No. 133317, June 29, 1999). prosper. In 1965, after buying the land from Robyn,
he submitted the Deed of Sale to the Registry of
Q: Way back in 1948, Winda’s husband sold in favor of Deeds for registration together with the owner's
Verde Sports Center Corp. (Verde) a 10-hectare property duplicate copy of the title, and paid the corresponding
belonging to their conjugal partnership. The sale was registration fees. Under Sec. 56 of PD No. 1529, the
made without Winda’s knowledge, much less consent. In Deed of Sale to Renren is considered registered from
1950, Winda learned of the sale, when she discovered the time the sale was entered in the Day Book (now
the deed of sale among the documents in her husband’s called the Primary Entry Book). For all legal intents and
vault after his demise. Soon after, she noticed that the purposes, Renren is considered the registered owner
construction of the sports complex had started. Upon of the land. After all, it was not his fault that the
completion of the construction in 1952, she tried but Registry of Deeds could not issue the corresponding
failed to get free membership privileges in Verde. transfer certificate of title. Mikaelo's defense of
prescription cannot be sustained. A Torrens title is
Winda now files a suit against Verde for the annulment imprescriptible. No title to registered land in
of the sale on the ground that she did not consent to the derogation of the title of the registered owner shall
sale. In answer, Verde contends that, in accordance with be acquired by prescription or adverse possession (Sec.
the Spanish Civil Code which was then in force, the sale in 47, P.D. No. 1529). The right to recover possession of
1948 of the property did not need her concurrence. registered land likewise does not prescribe because
Verde contends that in any case the action has possession is just a necessary incident of ownership.
prescribed or is barred by laches. Winda rejoins that her b) Mikaelo's defense of laches, however, appears to be
Torrens title covering the property is indefeasible, and more sustainable. Renren bought the land and had the
imprescriptible. sale registered way back in 1965. From the facts, it
appears that it was only in 1998 or after an inexplicable
1. Define or explain the term ―laches. delay of 33 years that he took the first step asserting his
2. Decide the case, stating your reasons for your right to the land. It was not even an action to recover
decision. (2002 BAR) ownership but only possession of the land. By
A: ordinary standards, 33 years of neglect or inaction is
too long and maybe considered unreasonable. As
1. LACHES means failure or neglect, for an unreasonable often held by the Supreme Court, the principle of
and unexplained length of time, to do what, by exercising imprescriptibility sometimes has to yield to the
due diligence, could or should have been done earlier. It equitable principle of laches which can convert even a
is negligence or omission to assert a right within a registered land owner's claim into a stale demand.
reasonable time (De Vera v. CA, G.R. No. 97761, April 14, Mikaelo's claim of laches, however, is weak insofar as
1999). the element of equity is concerned, there being no
2. While Art. 1413 of the Spanish Civil Code did not require showing in the facts how he entered into the ownership
the consent of the wife for the validity of the sale, an and possession of the land.
alienation by the husband in fraud of the wife is void as
held in Uy Coque v. Navas (G.R. No. L-20392, November 20, Q: A owned a parcel of unregistered land located on the
1923). Assuming that the alienation in 1948 was in fraud Tarlac side of the boundary between Tarlac and
of Winda and, therefore, makes the sale to Verde void, Pangasinan. His brother B owned the adjoining parcel
the action to set aside the sale, nonetheless, is already of unregistered land on the Pangasinan side. A sold the
barred byprescription and laches. More than 52 years Tarlac parcel to X in a deed of sale executed as a public
have already elapsed from her discovery of the sale in instrument by A and X. After X paid in full the price of the
1950. sale, X took possession of the Pangasinan parcel in the
belief that it was the Tarlac parcel covered by the deed
Q: In 1965, Renren bought from Robyn a parcel of of sale executed by A and X. After twelve (12) years, a
registered land evidenced by a duly executed deed of controversy arose between B and X on the issue of the
sale. The owner presented the deed of sale and the ownership of the Pangasinan parcel, B claims a vested
owner's certificate of title to the Register of Deeds. The right of ownership over the Pangasinan parcel
entry was made in the daybook and corresponding fees because B never sold that parcel to X or to anyone else.
were paid as evidenced by official receipt. However, no On the other hand, X claims a vested right of
transfer of certificate of title was issued to Renren ownership over the Pangasinan parcel by acquisitive
because the original certificate of title in Robyn's name prescription, because X possessed this parcel for
was temporarily misplaced after fire partly gutted the over ten (10] years under claim of ownership. Decide
Office of the Register of Deeds. Meanwhile, the land had on these claims, giving your reasons. (1992 BAR)
been possessed by Robyn's distant cousin, Mikaelo,
openly, adversely and continuously in the concept of A: At this point in time, X cannot claim the right of vested
owner since 1960. It was only in April 1998 that Renren ownership over the Pangasinan parcel by acquisitive
sued Mikaelo to recover possession. Mikaelo prescription. In addition to the requisites common to
invoked: ordinary and extraordinary acquisitive prescription
consisting of uninterrupted, peaceful, public, adverse and
a) acquisitive prescription actual possession in the concept of owner, ordinary
b) laches, asking that he be declared owner of the acquisitive prescription for ten (10) years requires (1)
land. possession in good faith and (2) just title. "Just title" means
that the adverse claimant came into possession of the
property through one of the modes recognized by law for
95
CIVIL LAW
the acquisition of ownership but the grantor was not the
owner or could not transmit any right (Art.1129). In this Q: Distinguish the Torrens system of land registration
case, there is no "just title" and no "mode" that can be from the system of recording of evidence of title. (1994
invoked by X for the acquisition of the Pangasinan parcel. BAR)
There was no constructive delivery of the Pangasinan
parcel because it was not the subject-matter of the deed of A:
sale. Hence, B retains ownership of the Pangasinan
parcel of land. 1. The TORRENS SYSTEM OF LAND REGISTRATION is a
system for the registration of title to the land. Thus,
ORIGINAL REGISTRATION (1992, 1994, 2003, 2013, under this system what is entered in the Registry of
2014 BAR) Deeds, is a record of the owner's estate or interest in
the land, unlike the system under the Spanish Mortgage
Q: Louie, before leaving the country to train as a chef in a Law or the system under Sec. 194 of the Revised
five-star hotel in New York, U.S.A., entrusted to his first- Administrative Code as amended by Act 3344 where
degree cousin Dewey an application for registration, only the evidence of such title is recorded. In the latter
under the Land Registration Act, of a parcel of land system, what is recorded is the deed of conveyance
located in Bacolod City. A year later, Louie returned to from hence the owner's title emanated—and not the
the Philippines and discovered that Dewey registered title itself.
the land and obtained an Original Certificate of Title 2. Torrens system of land registration is that which is
over the property in his Dewey’s name. Compounding prescribed in Act 496 (now PD 1529), which is either
the matter, Dewey sold the land to Huey, an innocent Judicial or quasi-judicial. System or recording of
purchaser for value. Louie promptly filed an action for evidence of title is merely the registration of evidence
reconveyance of the parcel of land against Huey. of acquisitions of land with the Register of Deeds, who
annotates the same on the existing title, cancels the old
1. Is the action pursued by Louie the proper remedy? one and issues a new title based on the document
2. Assuming that reconveyance is the proper remedy, presented for registration.
will the action prosper if the case was filed beyond
one year, but within ten years, from the entry of the Q: On March 27, 1980, Cornelio filed an application for
decree of registration? (2003 BAR) land registration involving a parcel of agricultural land
that he had bought from Isaac identified as Lot No. 2716
A: with an area of one (1) hectare. During the trial,
Cornelio claimed that he and his predecessors-in-
1. An action for reconveyance against Huey is not the interest had been in open, continuous, uninterrupted,
proper remedy, because Huey is an innocent purchaser public and adverse possession and occupation of the
for value. The proper recourse is for Louie to go land for more than thirty (30) years. He likewise
after Dewey for damages by reason of the fraudulent introduced in evidence a certification dated February
registration and subsequent sale of the land. If 12, 1981 citing a presidential declaration to the effect
Dewey is insolvent, Louie may file a claim against the that on June 14, 1980, agricultural lands of the public
Assurance Fund (Heirs of Pedro Lopez v. De Castro, G.R. domain, including the subject matter of the application,
No. 112905, February 3, 2000 citing Sps. Eduarte v. CA, were declared alienable and disposable agricultural
G.R. No. 105944, February 9, 1996). land.
2. Yes, the remedy will prosper because the action
prescribes in ten (10) years, not within one (1) year 1. If you are the judge, will you grant the application
when a petition for the reopening of the registration for land registration of Cornelio?
decree may be filed. The action for reconveyance is 2. Can Cornelio acquire said agricultural land through
distinct from the petition to reopen the decree of acquisitive prescription, whether ordinary or
registration (Grey Alba v. De la Cruz, G.R. No. 5246, extraordinary? (2014 BAR)
September 16, 1910). There is no need to reopen the
registration proceedings, but the property should just be A:
reconveyed to the real owner. The action for
reconveyance is based on implied or constructive 1. No, I will not grant the application. To be entitled to
trust, which prescribes in ten (10) years from the date registration of the parcel of land, the applicant must
of issuance of the original certificate of title. This rule show that the land being applied for is alienable land.
assumes that the defendant is in possession of the land. At the time of the filing of the application, the land has
Where it is the plaintiff who is in possession of the land, not yet been declared alienable by the state (Republic v.
the action for reconveyance would be in the nature of a CA, G.R. No. 144057, January 17, 2005).
suit for quieting for the title which action is 2. Cornelio can acquire the land by acquisitive
imprescriptible (David v. Malay, G.R. No. 132644, prescription only after it was declared part of alienable
November 19, 1999). land by the state by possession for the required number
of years for ordinary prescription, ten years possession
Q: What are the essential requisites or elements for in good faith with just title or extraordinary
the allowance of the reopening or review of a decree prescription by possession for thirty years without
of registration? (1992 BAR) need of any other condition (Art. 1134).
A: The essential elements are: (1) that the petitioner has a Q: Manuel was born on 12 March 1940 in a 1000-square
real or dominical right; (2) that he has been deprived meter property where he grew up helping his father,
thereof through fraud; (3) that the petition is filed within Michael, cultivate the land. Michael has lived on the
one (1) year from the issuance of the decree; and (4) that property since the land was opened for settlement at
the property has not yet been transferred to an innocent about the time of the Commonwealth government in
purchaser (Rublico vs. Orellana, G.R. No. L-26582, November 193 5, but for some reason never secured any title to
28, 1969; Libudan vs. Palma Gil, G.R. No. L-21163, May 17, the property other than a tax declaration in his name.
1972). He has held the property through the years in the
1. What is the governing law? Assuming the police report to be correct and as the
2. What properties are not registrable? (2007 BAR) lawyer for the bicycle rider, what evidence
(documentary and testimonial) and legal arguments
A: will you present in court to justify the damages that
your client claims? (1994, 2002, 2013 BAR)
1. The governing law is the Land Registration Act as
amended by Property Registration Decree (Act 496 as A: I will base the claim of my client on quasi-delict under
amended by PD 1529). Art. 2176.
2. The following properties are not registrable:
a. Properties of the Public Dominion; The requisites for a claim under quasi-delict to prosper are
b. Properties for publis use or public service; as follows:
c. Inalienable lands of the public domain;
d. Military installations, civil and quasi public lands; 1. Act or omission, there being fault or negligence;
and 2. Damage or injury; and
e. All lands not classified as alienable and disposable. 3. Causal connection between the damage and the act or
omission.
DEALINGS WITH UNREGISTERED LANDS (2000 BAR)
The case clearly involves a quasi-delict where my client, the
Q: Republic Act 1899 authorizes municipalities and bicycle rider, suffered injury as a result of the negligence of
chartered cities to reclaim foreshore lands bordering the over-speeding taxi driver, without fault on my client’s
them and to construct thereon adequate docking and part.
harbor facilities. Pursuant thereto, the City of Cavite
entered into an agreement with the Fil-Estate Realty To prove actual damages, aside from the testimony of my
Company, authorizing the latter to reclaim 300 hectares client, I will present his hospital and medical bills. Receipts
of land from the sea bordering the city, with 30% of the of the fees paid on the rehabilitation will also be presented.
land to be reclaimed to be owned by Fil-Estate as Furthermore, I will present income tax returns, contracts
compensation for its services. The Solicitor General and other documents to prove unrealized profits as a result
questioned the validity of the agreement on the ground of this temporary injury.I will also call the attending
that it will mean reclaiming land under the sea which is physician to testify as to the extent of the injuries suffered
beyond the commerce of man. The City replies that this is by my client, and to corroborate the contents of the medical
authorized by RA. 1899 because it authorizes the documents.
construction of docks and harbors. Who is correct? (2000
BAR) Based on Art. 2202, in quasi-delicts, the defendant shall be
liable for all damages which are the natural and probable
A: The Solicitor General is correct. The authority of the City of consequences of the act or omission complained of. It is not
Cavite under RA 1899 to reclaim land is limited to foreshore necessary that such damages have been foreseen or could
lands. The Act did not authorize it to reclaim land from the sea. have been foreseen by the defendant.
"The reclamation being unauthorized, the City of Cavite did
not acquire ownership over the reclaimed land. Not being the Unlike actual damages, no proof of pecuniary loss is
owner, it could not have conveyed any portion thereof to the necessary in order that moral, nominal, temperate,
contractor. liquidated or exemplary damages may be adjudicated. The
assessment is left to the discretion of the Court (Art. 2216).
There must still be proof of pecuniary estimation, however.
PART XIII – TORTS AND DAMAGES
Moral damages can be recovered by my client under Arts.
2219 and 2200. Moral damages may be recovered in case of
Book I – Torts/Quasi-Delicts a quasi-delict causing physical injuries. Additionally, it must
Articles 2176 – 2194 (Civil Code) be proved that such damages were the proximate result of
the act complained of. Medical certificates will be
DEFINITION, ELEMENTS (1994, 2002, 2010, 2012, 2013 presented, along with the testimony from my client and
BAR)
A: Quasi-tort is considered as the equivalent of quasi-delict. Fortune filed a complaint against Vinzons-Chato to
Hence the rules of the latter pertaining to persons who can recover damages for the alleged violation of its
be held liable and their defenses would also apply. constitutional rights arising from Vinzons-Chato’s
issuance of Revenue Memorandum Circular No. 37-934
Those liable for quasi-delict include: (which re-classified Fortune cigarettes as locally
manufactured with foreign brands and thereby imposed
1. Those tortfeasor or the person causing damage to higher taxes), which the Supreme Court later declared
another through fault or negligence (Art. 2176); and invalid.
2. Persons vicariously liable under Art. 2180.
Vinzons-Chato filed a Motion to dismiss arguing that
The defenses available include: she cannot be held liable for damages for acts she
a. That the defendant was not negligent or that he performed while in the discharge of her duties as BIR
exercised due diligence (Art. 2176); Commissioner. Is she correct? Explain (2012 BAR)
b. That although the defendant is negligent his negligence
is not the proximate cause of the injury (Art. 2179); A: Yes. As a general rule, a public officer is not liable for acts
c. That the plaintiff's own negligence was the immediate performed in the discharge of his duties. The exceptions are
and proximate cause of his injury (Art. 2179); when he acted with malice, bad faith, or gross negligence in
d. That the person vicariously liable has observed all the the performance of his duty, or when his act is in violation
diligence of a good father of a family to prevent damage of the constitutionally guaranteed rights and liberties of a
(Art. 2180); and person under Art. 32.
e. That the cause of action has prescribed after the lapse s
(Art. 2179). The public officer is not automatically considered to have
f. The fact that the plaintiff had committed contributory violated the rights or liberties of a person simply because
negligence is a partial defense (Art. 2179). the rule the public officer issued was declared invalid by the
g. Court. The complainant must still allege and prove the
particular injury or prejudice he has suffered from the
99
CIVIL LAW
violation of his constitutional right by the issuance of the THE TORTFEASOR (1991, 1992, 1996, 1997, 1998,
invalidated rule. 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2010, 2014, 2015
BAR)
The problem does not state any fact from which any malice,
bad faith or gross negligence on the part of Vinzons-Chato Q: Silvestre leased a car from Avis-Rent-A-Car Co. at the
may be inferred, or the particular injury or prejudice the Mactan International Airport. No sooner had he driven
complainant may have suffered as a result of the violation the car outside the airport when, due to his negligence,
of his constitutional rights. Hence, she cannot be held liable. he bumped an FX taxi owned and driven by Victor,
The facts presented are similar to the facts of the case of causing damage to the latter in the amount of P100,
Vinzons-Chato v. Fortune, (G.R. No. 141309, December 23, 000.00. Victor filed an action for damages against both
2008). Silvestre and Avis, based on quasi-delict. Avis filed a
motion to dismiss the complaint against it on the
Q: Tony bought a Ford Expedition from a car dealer in ground of failure to state a cause of action. Resolve the
Muntinlupa City. As payment, Tony issued a check motion. (2000 BAR)
drawn against his current account with Premium
Bank. Since he has a good reputation, the car dealer A: The motion to dismiss should be granted, AVIS is not the
allowed him to immediately drive home the vehicle employer of Silvestre; hence, there is no right of action
merely on his assurance that his check is sufficiently against AVIS under Art. 2180. Not being the employer, AVIS
funded. When the car dealer deposited the check, it has no duty to supervise Silvestre. Neither has AVIS the duty
was dishonored on the ground of "Account Closed." to observe due diligence in the selection of its customers.
After an investigation, it was found that an employee of Besides, it was given in the problem that the cause of the
the bank misplaced Tony's account ledger. Thus, the accident was the negligence of Silvestre.
bank erroneously assumed that his account no longer
exists. Later it turned out that Tony's account has Q: Mabuhay Elementary School organized a field trip
more than sufficient funds to cover the check. The for its Grade VI students in Fort Santiago, Manila Zoo,
dealer however, immediately filed an action for and Star City. To be able to join, the parents of the
recovery of possession of the vehicle against Tony for students had to sign a piece of paper that reads as
which he was terribly humiliated and embarrassed. follows:
Does Tony have a cause of action against Premium
Bank? Explain. (2006 BAR) "I allow my child (name of student), Grade – Section, to
join the school’s field trip on February 14, 2014.
A: Yes, Tony may file an action against Premium Bank I will not file any claim against the school,
for damages under Art. 2176. Even if there exists a administrator or teacher in case something happens to
contractual relationship between Tony and Premium my child during the trip."
Bank, an action for quasi-delict may nonetheless prosper.
The Supreme Court has consistently ruled that the act Joey, a 7-year-old student of Mabuhay Elementary
that breaks the contract may also be a tort. There is a School was bitten by a snake while the group was
fiduciary relationship between the bank and the depositor, touring Manila Zoo. The parents of Joey sued the school
imposing utmost diligence in managing the accounts of the for damages. The school, as a defense, presented the
depositor. The dishonor of the check adversely affected the waiver signed by Joey’s parents.
credit standing of Tony, hence, he is entitled to damages
(Singson v. BPI, G.R.No.L-24932, June 27, 1968; American Was there a valid waiver of right to sue the school?
Express International, Inc. v. IAC, G.R. No. 72383, November 9, Why? (2014 BAR)
1988; Consolidated Bank and Trust v. CA, G.R. No. L-70766
November 9, 1998). A: No, there was no valid waiver of the right to sue the
school. A waiver to be valid must have three requisites: 1)
Q: OJ was employed as professional driver of MM Transit existence of the right; 2) legal capacity of the person
bus owned by Mr. BT. In the course of his work, OJ waiving the right and 3) the waiver must not be contrary to
hit a pedestrian who was seriously injured and later law, morals, good customs, public order or public policy or
died in the hospital as a result of the accident. The prejudicial to a third person with a right recognized by law.
victim’s heirs sued the driver and the owner of the bus In the case presented, the waiver may be considered
for damages. Is there a presumption in this case that Mr. contrary to public policy as it exonerates the school from
BT, the owner, had been negligent? If so, is the liability for future negligence. The waiver in effect allows
presumption absolute or not? Explain. (2004 BAR) the school to not exercise even ordinary diligence.
A: Yes, there is a presumption of negligence on the part of Q: Arturo sold his Pajero to Benjamin for P1 Million.
the employer. However, such presumption is rebuttable. Benjamin took the vehicle but did not register the sale
The liability of the employer shall cease when they prove with the Land Transportation Office. He allowed his
that they observed the diligence of a good father of a family son Carlos, a minor who did not have a driver's license,
to prevent damage (Art. 2180). When the employee causes to drive the car to buy pan de sal in a bakery. On the
damage due to his own negligence while performing his way, Carlos driving in a reckless manner, sideswiped
own duties, there arises the juris tantum presumption that Dennis, then riding a bicycle. As a result, he suffered
the employer is negligent, rebuttable only by proof of serious physical injuries. Dennis filed a criminal
observance of the diligence of a good father of a family complaint against Carlos for reckless imprudence
(Metro Manila Transit v. CA, G.R. No. 104408, June 21, resulting in serious physical injuries.
1993; Delsan Transport Lines v. C&A Construction, G.R. No.
156034, October 1, 2003). Likewise, if the driver is charged 1. Can Dennis file an independent civil action against
and convicted in a criminal case for criminal negligence, BT Carlos and his father Benjamin for damages based
is subsidiarily liable for the damages arising from the on quasi-delict? Explain.
criminal act. 2. Assuming Dennis' action is tenable, can Benjamin
raise the defense that he is not liable because the
Q: Dr. Jack, a surgeon, holds clinic at the St. Vincent's A: A CONSTRUCTIVE TRUST is a trust not created by any
Hospital and pays rent to the hospital. The fees of Dr. word or phrase, either expressly or impliedly, evincing a
Jack are paid directly to him by the patient or through direct intention to creaet a trust, but is one that arises in
the cashier of the hospital. The hospital publicly order to satisfy the demands of justice. It does not come
displays in the lobby the names and specializations of about by agreement or intention but mainly operation of
the doctors associated or accredited by it, including law and construed as a trust against one who, by fraus,
that of Dr. Jack. Marta engaged the services of Dr. Jack duress or abuse of confidence, obtains or holds the legal
because of recurring stomach pain. It was diagnosed right to property which he ought not, in equity and good
that she is suffering from cancer and had to be operated conscience to hold (Heirs of Lorenzo Yap v. CA, G.R. No.
on. Before the operation, she was asked to sign a 133047, August 17, 1990). The following are examples of
"consent for hospital care," which reads: constructive trust:
"Permission is hereby given to the medical, nursing 1. Art. 1455 which provides: “If property is acquired
and laboratory staff of the St. Vincent's Hospital to through mistake or fraud, the person obtaining it is, by
perform such procedures and to administer such force of law considered a trustee of an implied trust for
medications and treatments as may be deemed the benefit of the person for whom the property comes.
necessary or advisable by the physicians of this 2. Art. 1451 which provides: “When land passes by
hospital for and during the confinement." succession through any person and he causes the legal
title to be put in the name of another, a trust is
After the surgery, the attending nurses reported that established by implication of law for the benefit of the
two (2) sponges were missing. Later, Marta died due to true owner.”
complications brought about by the sponges that were 3. Art. 1454 which provides: “If an absolute conveyance of
left in her stomach. The husband of Marta sued the property is made in order to secure the perfomance of
hospital and Dr. Jack for damages arising from an obligation of the grantor toward the grantee, a trust
negligence in the medical procedure. The hospital by virtue of law is established. If the fulfillment of the
raised the defense that Dr. Jack is not its employee as it obligation is offered by the grantee when it becomes
did not hire Dr. Jack nor pay him any salary or due, he may demand the reconveyance of the property
compensation. It has absolutely no control over the to him.”
medical services and treatment being provided by Dr. 4. Art. 1455 which provides: “When any trustee, guardian
Jack. Dr. Jack even signed an agreement that he holds or any person holding a fiduciary relationship uses
the hospital free and harmless from any liability arising trust funds for the purchase of property and causes
from his medical practice in the hospital. conveyance to be made to him or to third person, a trust
us established by operation of law in favor of the person
Is St. Vincent's Hospital liable for the negligence of Dr. to whom the funds belong.”
Jack? Explain your answer. (2016 BAR)
The DOCTRINE OF LAST CLEAR CHANCE states that where
A: Yes, St. Vincent’s Hospital is liable. In the case of the plaintiff was guilty of prior or antecedent negligence,
Professional Services v. Agana (513 SCRA 478 [2007]), the but the defendant, who had the ultimate opportunity to
Supreme Court held that the hospital is liable to the Aganas, avoid the impending harm failed to do so, it is the defendant
not under the principle of respondent superior for lack of who is liable for all the consequences of the accident
evidence of an employer-employee relationship with Dr. notwithstanding the prior negligence of the plaintiff. An
Ampil but under the principle of ostensible agency for the example is where a person was riding a pony on a bridge
negligence of Dr. Ampil an, pro hac vice, under the principle and improperly pulled the pony to the wrong side when he
103
CIVIL LAW
saw a car coming. The driver of the car did not stop or A: FX Airlines committed breach of contract when it
change direction, and nearly hit the horse, and, the upgraded DT and MT, over their objections, to First Class
frightened animal jumped to its death. The driver of the car because they had contracted for Business Class passage.
is guilty of negligence because he had a fair opportunity to However, although there is a breach of contract, DT and MT
avoid the accident and failed to avail himself of that are entitled to actual damages only for such pecuniary losses
opportunity. He is liable under the doctrine of last clear suffered by them as a result of such breach. There seems to
chance (Picart v. Smith, G.R. No. L-12219, March 15, 1918). be no showing that they incurred such pecuniary loss. There
is no showing that the pain in DT's arm and wrist resulted
Q: Mr and Mrs R own a burned-out building, the directly from the carrier's acts complained of. Hence, they
firewall of which collapsed and destroyed the shop are not entitled to actual damages. Moreover, DT could have
occupied by the family of Mr and Mrs S, which resulted avoided the alleged injury by requesting the airline staff to
in injuries to said couple and the death of their do the luggage transfer as a matter of duty on their part.
daughter. Mr and Mrs S had been warned by Mr & Mrs There is also no basis to award moral damages for such
R to vacate the shop in view of its proximity to the breach of contract because the facts of the problem do not
weakened wall but the former failed to do so. Mr. & show bad faith or fraud on the part of the airline. (Cathay
Mrs. S filed against Mr and Mrs R an action for Pacific v. Vazquez, G.R. No. 150843, March 14, 2003).
recovery of damages the former suffered as a result of However, theymay recover moral damages if the cause of
the collapse of the firewall. In defense, Mr and Mrs R action is based on Art. 21 for the humiliation and
rely on the doctrine of last clear chance alleging that Mr embarrassment they felt when the stewardess threatened to
and Mrs S had the last clear chance to avoid the offload them if they did not avail of the upgrade.
accident if only they heeded the former’s warning to
vacate the shop, and therefore Mr and Mrs R’s prior Q: Dr. and Mrs. Almeda are prominent citizens of the
negligence should be disregarded. If you were the judge, country and are frequent travellers abroad. In 1996,
how would you decide the case? State your reasons. they booked round-trip business class tickets for the
(1990 BAR) Manila-Hong Kong-Manila route of the Pinoy Airlines,
where they are holders of Gold Mabalos Class Frequent
A: I would decide in favor of Mr. & Mrs. S. The proprietor of Flier cards. On their return flight, Pinoy Airlines
a building or structure is responsible for the damages upgraded their tickets to first class without their
resulting from its total or partial collapse, if it should be due consent and, in spite of their protestations to be
to the lack of necessary repairs (Art. 2190). As regards the allowed to remain in the business class so that they could
defense of “last clear chance,” the same is not tenable be with their friends, they were told that the business
because according to the SC the doctrine of last clear class was already fully booked, and that they were
chance is not applicable to instances covered by Art 2190 given priority in upgrading because they are elite
of the Civil Code (De Roy v. CA, G.R. L-80718, January 29, members/holders of Gold Mabalos Class cards. Since
1988). The role of the common law "last clear chance" they were embarrassed at the discussions with the
doctrine in relation to Art. 2179 is merely to mitigate flight attendants, they were forced to take the flight at
damages within the context of contributory negligence the first class section apart from their friends who
(Phoenix Construction, Inc. v. IAC, G.R. No. L-65295, March were in the business class. Upon their return to Manila,
10, 1987). they demanded a written apology from Pinoy Airlines.
When it went unheeded, the couple sued Pinoy
Q: Explain the concept of vicarious liability in quasi- Airlines for breach of contract claiming moral and
delicts. (2002 BAR) exemplary damages, as well as attorney's fees. Will the
action prosper? Give reasons. (2004, 2005 BAR)
A: The doctrine of VICARIOUS LIABILITY is that which
renders a person liable for the negligence of others for A: Yes, the action will prosper. Art. 2201 entitles the person
whose acts or omission the law makes him responsible on to recover damages which may be attributed to non-
the theory that they are under his control and supervision. performance of an obligation. In Alitalia Airways v. Court of
Appeals (G.R. No. 77011, July 24, 1990), when an airline
LEGAL INJURY (2004, 2005 BAR) issues ticket to a passenger confirmed on a particular flight,
a contract of carriage arises and the passenger expects that
Q: DT and MT were prominent members of the frequent he would fly on that day. When the airline deliberately
travelers’ club of FX Airlines. In Hongkong, the couple overbooked, it took the risk of having to deprive some
were assigned seats in Business Class for which they had passengers of their seat in case all of them would show
bought tickets. On checking in, however, they were told up. For the indignity and inconvenience of being refused
they were upgraded by computer to First Class for the the confirmed seat, said passenger is entitled to moral
flight to Manila because the Business Section was damages. In the given problem, spouses Almeda had a
overbooked. booked roundtrip business class ticket with Pinoy
Airlines. When their tickets were upgraded to first class
Both refused to transfer despite better seats, food, without their consent, Pinoy Airlines breached the
beverage and other services in First Class. They said contract. As ruled in Zulueta v. Pan American (G.R. No. L-
they had guests in Business Class they should attend to. 28589, January 8, 1973), in case of overbooking, airline is in
They felt humiliated, embarrassed and vexed, however, bad faith. Therefore, spouses Almeda are entitled to
when the stewardess allegedly threatened to offload damages.
them if they did not avail of the upgrade. Thus they gave
in, but during the transfer of luggage DT suffered pain in Book II – Damages
his arm and wrist. After arrival in Manila, they Articles 2195 – 2235 (Civil Code)
demanded an apology from FX’s management as well as
indemnity payment. When none was forthcoming, they GENERAL PROVISIONS (1994, 2009)
sued the airline for a million pesos in damages. Is the
airline liable for actual and moral damages? Why or why Q: Johnny Maton's conviction for homicide was
not? Explain briefly. (2004 BAR) affirmed by the Court of Appeals and in addition
although the prosecution had not appealed at all.
1. Is Rommel liable for damages to the heirs of the Q: On her third month of pregnancy, Rosemarie
deceased? Explain. married to Boy. For reasons known only to her, and
2. Would your answer be the same if Rommel was in without informing Boy, went to the clinic of X, a known
the car at the time of the accident? Explain. (1994, abortionist, who for a fee, removed and expelled the
2009 BAR) fetus from her womb, Boy learned of the abortion six (6)
months later. Availing of that portion of Section 12 of
A: Article II of the 1987 Constitution which reads:
1. Yes, Rommel may be held liable for damages if he fails The State xxx shall equally protect the life of the mother
to prove that he exercised the diligence of a good father and the life of the unborn from conception, xxx which he
of a family (Art. 2180, par 5) in selecting and supervising claims confers a civil personality on the unborn from the
his family driver. The owner is presumed liable unless moment of conception. Boy filed a case for damages
he proves the defense of diligence. If the driver was against the abortionist, praying therein that the latter be
performing his assigned task when the accident ordered to pay him: (a) P30, 000.00 as indemnity for the
happened, Rommel shall be solidarily liable with the death of the fetus, (b) P100, 000.00 as moral damages
driver. for the mental anguish and anxiety he suffered, (c) P50,
000.00 as exemplary damages, (d) P20, 000.00 as
In case the driver is convicted of reckless imprudence nominal damages, and (e) P25, 000.00 as attorney's
and cannot pay the civil liability, Rommel is subsidiarily fees.
liable for the damage awarded against the driver and the
defense of diligence is not available. May actual damages be also recovered? If so, what
facts should be alleged and proved? (1991 BAR)
2. Yes, my answer would be the same. Rommel, who was
in the car, shall be liable for damages if he could have A: Yes, provided that the pecuniary loss suffered should
prevented the misfortune by the use of due diligence in be substantiated and duly proved.
supervising his driver but failed to exercise it (Art.
2184). In such case, his liability is solidary with his Q: If a pregnant woman passenger of a bus were to
driver. suffer an abortion following a vehicular accident due
to the gross negligence of the bus driver, may she
ACTUAL AND COMPENSATORY DAMAGES (1991, 2002, and her husband claim damages from the bus company
2014, 2016 BAR) for the death of their unborn child? Explain. (2003, 2014
BAR)
Q: Peter, a resident of Cebu City, sent through Reliable
Pera Padala (RPP) the amount of P20, 000.00 to his A: No, the spouses cannot recover actual damages in the
daughter, Paula, for the payment of her tuition fee. form of indemnity for the loss of life of the unborn child. This
Paula went to an RPP branch but was informed that is because the unborn child is not yet considered a person
there was no money remitted to her name. Peter and the law allows indemnity only for loss of life of person.
inquired from RPP and was informed that there was a The mother, however may recover damages for the bodily
computer glitch and the money was credited to another injury she suffered from the loss of the fetus which is
person. Peter and Paula sued RPP for actual damages, considered part of her internal organ. The parents may
moral damages and exemplary damages. The trial court also recover damages for injuries that are inflicted directly
ruled that there was no proof of pecuniary loss to the upon them, e.g., moral damages for mental anguish that
plaintiffs but awarded moral damages of P20, 000.00 attended the loss of the unborn child. Since there is gross
and exemplary damages of P5, 000.00. On appeal, RPP negligence, exemplary damages can also be recovered
questioned the award of moral and exemplary (Geluz v. CA, G.R. No. L-16439, July 20, 1961).
damages. Is the trial court correct in awarding moral
and exemplary damages? Explain. (2016 BAR) MORAL DAMAGES (1996, 2002 BAR)
A: No, the trial court is not correct in awarding moral and Q: Ortillo contracts Fabricato, Inc. to supply and install
exemplary damages. The damages in this case are prayed tile materials in a building he is donating to his
for based on the breach of contract committed by RPP in province. Ortillo pays 50% of the contract price as per
failing to deliver the sum of money to Paula. Under the agreement. It is also agreed that the balance would be
105
CIVIL LAW
payable periodically after every 10% performance
until completed. After performing about 93% of the
contract, for which it has been paid an additional 40%
as per agreement, Fabricato, Inc. did not complete the
project due to its sudden cessation of operations.
Instead, Fabricato, Inc. demands payment of the last
10% of the contract despite its non-completion of the
project. Ortillo refuses to pay, invoking the stipulation
that payment of the last amount 10% shall be upon
completion. Fabricato, Inc. brings suit for the entire
10%. Plus damages, Ortillo counters with claims for (a)
moral damages for Fabricato, Inc.’s unfounded suit
which has damaged his reputation as a philanthropist
and respect businessman in his community, and (b)
attorney’s fees.
A:
If you were the judge, would you award all the claims of
Nanette? Explain.