Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Civil Law Compilation Bar Q&a 1990-2017 PDF
Civil Law Compilation Bar Q&a 1990-2017 PDF
*I do not own any of the materials I’ve compiled in this pdf file. It’s all found in the
internet, just have the patience to look for it since it’s scattered. Giving credits to the
authors of these materials. So sharing all of it for free to all my fellow law students. - Bek
MATERIALS COMPILED:
ANSWERS TO BAR
EXAMINATION QUESTIONS
IN
CIVIL LAW
ARRANGED BY TOPIC
(1990 – 2006)
FORWARD
This work is not intended for sale or commerce. This work is freeware. It may be freely copied and
distributed, nevertheless, PERMISSION TO COPY from the editors is ADVISABLE to protect the
all those who desire to have a deeper understanding of the issues touched by the Philippine Bar
Examinations and its trend. It is specially intended for law students from the provinces who, very
often, are recipients of deliberately distorted notes from other unscrupulous law schools and
students. Share to others this work and you will be richly rewarded by God in heaven. It is also
We would like to seek the indulgence of the reader for some Bar Questions which are improperly
classified under a topic and for some topics which are improperly or ignorantly phrased, for the
authors are just Bar Reviewees who have prepared this work while reviewing for the Bar Exams
under time constraints and within their limited knowledge of the law. We would like to seek the
The Authors
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Table of Contents
GENERAL PRINCIPLES ....................................................................................................................................... 10
Civil law vs. Common Law (1997) ................................................................................................................................ 10
Effect of Obiter & Dissenting Opinion; SC Decisions (1994).........................................................................................
10 Effectivity of Laws (1990)
............................................................................................................................................ 10 Equity follows the Law
(2003)...................................................................................................................................... 10 Ignorance of the Law
vs. Mistake of Fact (1996)........................................................................................................... 11 Inferior Courts
Decisions (1994) .................................................................................................................................. 11 Prejudicial
Questions (1997)........................................................................................................................................ 11
PERSONS................................................................................................................................................................... 11
Change of Name; Under RA 9048 (2006) ...................................................................................................................... 11
Death; Effects; Simultaneous Death (1998)..................................................................................................................
12 Death; Effects; Simultaneous Death
(1999).................................................................................................................. 12 Death; Effects; Simultaneous
Death (2000).................................................................................................................. 12 Juridical Capacity vs.
Capacity to Act (1996) ............................................................................................................... 12 Juridical Capacity;
Natural Persons (1999) .................................................................................................................. 13 Waiver of Rights
(2004) ...............................................................................................................................................
CONFLICT 13
OF LAWS............................................................................................................................................. 13
Appilicable Laws; laws governing contracts (1992) ..................................................................................................... 13
Applicable Laws; Arts 15, 16 & 17 (1998) ..................................................................................................................... 13
Applicable Laws; Arts 15, 16, 17 (2002)........................................................................................................................ 14
Applicable Laws; Capacity to Act (1998)...................................................................................................................... 14
Applicable Laws; Capacity to Buy Land (1995) ............................................................................................................ 15
Applicable Laws; Capacity to Contract (1995).............................................................................................................. 15
Applicable Laws; capacity to succeed (1991)............................................................................................................... 15
Applicable Laws; contracts contrary to public policy (1996) ........................................................................................ 15
Applicable Laws; Contracts of Carriage (1995) ............................................................................................................ 16
Applicable Laws; Labor Contracts (1991) .................................................................................................................... 16
Applicable Laws; laws governing marriages (1992) ..................................................................................................... 17
Applicable Laws; laws governing marriages (2003) ..................................................................................................... 17
Applicable Laws; Sale of Real Property (1995)............................................................................................................. 17
Applicable Laws; Succession; Intestate & Testamentary (2001)................................................................................... 18
Applicable Laws; Sucession of Aliens (1995)............................................................................................................... 18
Applicable Laws; Wills executed abroad (1993) ........................................................................................................... 18
Definition; Cognovit; Borrowing Statute; Characterization (1994) ................................................................................ 18
Definition; forum non-conveniens; long-arm statute (1994) ......................................................................................... 19
Divorce; effect of divorce granted to former Filipinos; Renvoi Doctrine (1997)............................................................. 19
Domiciliary theory vs. Nationality Theory (2004).......................................................................................................... 19
Forum Non Conveniens & Lex Loci Contractus (2002)................................................................................................. 19
Nationality Theory (2004)............................................................................................................................................. 20
Naturalization (2003) ................................................................................................................................................... 20
Theory; significant relationships theory (1994)............................................................................................................ 20
Torts; Prescriptive Period (2004) ................................................................................................................................. 21
ADOPTION................................................................................................................................................................. 21
Adoption; Use of Surname of her Natural Mother (2006) .............................................................................................. 21
Inter-Country Adoption; Formalities (2005)..................................................................................................................
21 Parental Authority; Rescission of Adoption (1994)
...................................................................................................... 21 Qualification of Adopter
(2005).................................................................................................................................... 22 Qualification of
Adopter; Applicable Law (2001) .......................................................................................................... 22 Qualifications
of Adopter (2000) .................................................................................................................................. 22
Qualifications of Adopter (2003) ..................................................................................................................................
23 Successional
FAMILY Rights of Adopted Child (2004) ..............................................................................................................
CODE.......................................................................................................................................................... 23
23
Emancipation (1993).................................................................................................................................................... 23
Family Code; Retroactive Application; Vested Rights
(2000)........................................................................................ 24
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006) Family Home; Dwelling House (1994)
.......................................................................................................................... 24 Family; Constitutional Mandates; Divorce
(1991) ......................................................................................................... 24 Marriage; Annulment; Effects; Requisites Before
Remarriage (1990) ........................................................................... 24 Marriage; Annulment; Grounds
(1991)......................................................................................................................... 25 Marriage; Annulment; Judicial
Declaration (1993)........................................................................................................ 25 Marriage; Annulment; Legal Separation;
Prescription of Actions (1996) ...................................................................... 25 Marriage; Annulment; Proper Party
(1990)................................................................................................................... 26 Marriage; Annulment; Proper Party
(1995)................................................................................................................... 26 Marriage; Divorce Decree; Void Marriages
(1992) ........................................................................................................ 26 Marriage; Divorce Decrees; Filiation of Children
(2005) ............................................................................................... 26 Marriage; Divorce Decrees; Filipino Spouses becoming
Alien (1996)........................................................................... 27 Marriage; Divorce Decrees; Filipino Spouses becoming Alien
(1999)........................................................................... 27 Marriage; Donations by Reason of Marriage; Effect of Declaration of
Nullity (1996) ..................................................... 28 Marriage; Grounds; Declaration of Nullity: Annulment: Legal Separation:
Separation of Property (2003) ..................... 28 Marriage; Grounds; Nullity; Annulment; Legal Separation
(1997)................................................................................. 29 Marriage; Legal Separation; Declaration of Nullity
(2002)............................................................................................. 29 Marriage; Legal Separation; Grounds; Prescriptive Period
(1994) ................................................................................ 29 Marriage; Legal Separation; Mutual guilt (2006)
........................................................................................................... 29 Marriage; Non-Bigamous Marriages (2006)
.................................................................................................................. 30 Marriage; Property Relations; Void Marriages (1991)
................................................................................................... 30 Marriage; Psychological Incapacity
(1996)................................................................................................................... 30 Marriage; Psychological Incapacity
(2006)................................................................................................................... 31 Marriage; Psychological Incapacity
(2006)................................................................................................................... 31 Marriage; Requisites (1995)
......................................................................................................................................... 31 Marriage; Requisites (1999)
......................................................................................................................................... 32 Marriage; Requisites; Marriage
License (1996) ............................................................................................................ 32 Marriage; Requisites; Marriage License
(2002) ............................................................................................................ 33 Marriage; Requisites; Solemnizing Officers
(1994)....................................................................................................... 33 Marriage; Requisites; Void Marriage (1993)
................................................................................................................. 33 Marriage; Void Marriages (2004)
.................................................................................................................................. 34 Marriage; Void Marriages (2006)
.................................................................................................................................. 34 Marriage; Void Marriages; Psychological
Incapacity (2002) ......................................................................................... 35 Parental Authority; Child under 7 years of age
(2006) .................................................................................................. 35 Parental Authority; Special Parental Authority; Liability
of Teachers (2003)................................................................. 35 Parental Authority; Substitute vs. Special (2004)
......................................................................................................... 35 Paternity & Filiation (1999)
.......................................................................................................................................... 36 Paternity & Filiation; Artificial
Insemination; Formalities (2006) ................................................................................... 36 Paternity & Filiation; Common-Law
Union (2004)......................................................................................................... 36 Paternity & Filiation; Proofs; Limitations;
Adopted Child (1995)................................................................................... 36 Paternity & Filiation; Recognition of illegitimate
Child (2005)....................................................................................... 37 Paternity & Filiation; Rights of Legitimate Children (1990)
........................................................................................... 37 Presumptive Legitime (1999)
....................................................................................................................................... 38 Property Relations; Absolute
Community (1994) ......................................................................................................... 38 Property Relations; Ante Nuptial
Agreement (1995) ..................................................................................................... 39 Property Relations; Conjugal Partnership of
Gains (1998) ........................................................................................... 39 Property Relations; Marriage Settlement; Conjugal
Partnership of Gains (2005) .......................................................... 39 Property Relations; Marriage Settlements (1991)
......................................................................................................... 40 Property Relations; Marriage Settlements (1995)
......................................................................................................... 40 Property Relations; Obligations; Benefit of the Family
(2000) ...................................................................................... 41 Property Relations; Unions without Marriage (1992)
.................................................................................................... 41 Property Relations; Unions without Marriage (1997)
.................................................................................................... 41 Property Relations; Unions without Marriage (2000)
.................................................................................................... 42
SUCCESSION........................................................................................................................................................... 42
Amount of Successional Rights (2004) ........................................................................................................................ 42
Barrier between illegitimate & legitimate relatives (1993)
............................................................................................. 42 Barrier between illegitimate & legitimate relatives
(1996) ............................................................................................. 43 Collation (1993)
........................................................................................................................................................... 43 Disinheritance
vs. Preterition (1993) ............................................................................................................................ 43
Disinheritance; Ineffective (1999) ................................................................................................................................
43 Disinheritance; Ineffective; Preterition (2000)
.............................................................................................................. 44
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006) Heirs; Intestate Heirs; Reserva Troncal (1995)
............................................................................................................. 44 Heirs; Intestate Heirs; Shares
(2003)............................................................................................................................ 45 Intestate Succession
(1992)......................................................................................................................................... 45 Intestate Succession
(1997)......................................................................................................................................... 45 Intestate Succession
(1998)......................................................................................................................................... 46 Intestate Succession
(1998)......................................................................................................................................... 46 Intestate Succession
(1999)......................................................................................................................................... 46 Intestate Succession
(2000)......................................................................................................................................... 46 Intestate Succession; Reserva
Troncal (1999) ............................................................................................................. 47 Legitime
(1997)............................................................................................................................................................ 47 Legitime;
Compulsory Heirs (2003).............................................................................................................................. 47 Legitime;
Compulsory Heirs vs. Secondary Compulsory Heirs (2005).......................................................................... 48 Preterition
(2001)......................................................................................................................................................... 48 Preterition;
Compulsory Heir (1999) ............................................................................................................................ 48 Proceedings;
Intestate Proceedings; Jurisdiction (2004) ............................................................................................. 48 Succession; Death;
Presumptive Legitime (1991) ........................................................................................................ 49 Wills; Codicil; Institution of
Heirs; Substitution of Heirs (2002).................................................................................... 49 Wills; Formalities (1990)
.............................................................................................................................................. 50 Wills; Holographic Wills;
Insertions & Cancellations (1996) ......................................................................................... 50 Wills; Holographic Wills; Witnesses
(1994).................................................................................................................. 50 Wills; Joint Wills (2000)
............................................................................................................................................... 50 Wills; Probate; Intrinsic Validity
(1990) ........................................................................................................................ 51 Wills; Probate; Notarial and Holographic
Wills (1997) .................................................................................................. 51 Wills; Revocation of Wills; Dependent Relative
Revocation (2003)............................................................................... 51 Wills; Testamentary Disposition
(2006)........................................................................................................................ 52 Wills; Testamentary Intent (1996)
................................................................................................................................ 52
DONATION ................................................................................................................................................................ 52
Donation vs. Sale (2003).............................................................................................................................................. 52
Donations; Condition; Capacity to Sue (1996) ............................................................................................................. 52
Donations; Conditions; Revocation (1991)................................................................................................................... 53
Donations; Effect; illegal & immoral conditions (1997)................................................................................................. 53
Donations; Formalities; Mortis Causa (1990) ............................................................................................................... 54
Donations; Formalities; Mortis Causa (1998) ............................................................................................................... 54
Donations; Inter Vivos; Acceptance (1993) .................................................................................................................. 54
Donations; Perfection (1998) ....................................................................................................................................... 54
Donations; Requisites; Immovable Property................................................................................................................ 55
Donations; Unregistered; Effects; Non-Compliance; Resolutory Condition (2006) ....................................................... 55
Donations; Validity; Effectivity; for Unborn Child (1999) .............................................................................................. 55
Donations; with Resolutory Condition (2003)............................................................................................................... 56
PROPERTY................................................................................................................................................................ 56
Accretion; Alluvion (2001) ........................................................................................................................................... 56
Accretion; Avulsion (2003) ..........................................................................................................................................
56 Builder; Good Faith
(1992)........................................................................................................................................... 57 Builder; Good
Faith vs. Bad Faith (1999) ..................................................................................................................... 57 Builder;
Good Faith vs. Bad Faith (2000) ..................................................................................................................... 57
Builder; Good Faith vs. Bad Faith; Accession (2000)
................................................................................................... 58 Builder; Good Faith vs. Bad Faith; Presumption
(2001)................................................................................................ 58 Chattel Mortgage vs. Pledge (1999)
............................................................................................................................. 58 Chattel Mortgage; Immovables
(1994).......................................................................................................................... 59 Chattel Mortgage;
Immovables (2003).......................................................................................................................... 59 Chattel
Mortgage; Possession (1993) .......................................................................................................................... 60
Chattel Mortgage; Preference of Creditors (1995)
........................................................................................................ 60 Easement vs. Usufruct
(1995)...................................................................................................................................... 60 Easement; Effects;
Discontinuous Easements; Permissive Use (2005) ........................................................................ 61 Easement;
Nuisance; Abatement (2002) ...................................................................................................................... 61
Easements; Classification (1998).................................................................................................................................
62 Easements; Right of Way
Page 5Right
(1993).................................................................................................................................. 62 Easements; of of119
Way (2000).................................................................................................................................. 62 Easements; Right
of Way; Inseparability (2001) ........................................................................................................... 62
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006) Easements; Right of Way; Requisites (1996)
............................................................................................................... 63 Ejectment Suit vs. Cancellation of Title (2005)
............................................................................................................. 63 Ejectment Suit; Commodatum (2006)
.......................................................................................................................... 63 Extra-Judicial Partition; Fraud
(1990)........................................................................................................................... 63 Hidden Treasure (1995)
............................................................................................................................................... 64 Hidden Treasures (1997)
............................................................................................................................................. 64 Mortgage; Pactum Commissorium
(1999) .................................................................................................................... 64 Mortgage; Pactum Commissorium (2001)
.................................................................................................................... 65 Mortgage; Right of Redemption vs. Equity of
Redemption (1999) ................................................................................ 65 Nuisance; Family House; Not Nuisance per se (2006)
.................................................................................................. 65 Nuisance; Public Nuisance vs. Private Nuisance
(2005)............................................................................................... 65 Ownership; Co-Ownership (1992)
................................................................................................................................ 66 Ownership; Co-Ownership; Prescription
(2000) ........................................................................................................... 66 Ownership; Co-Ownership; Prescription (2002)
........................................................................................................... 67 Ownership; Co-Ownership; Redemption (1993)
........................................................................................................... 67 Ownership; Co-Ownership; Redemption (2000)
........................................................................................................... 67 Ownership; Co-Ownership; Redemption (2002)
........................................................................................................... 67 Possession
(1998)....................................................................................................................................................... 68 Property; Real vs.
Personal Property (1995) ................................................................................................................ 68 Property; Real vs. Personal
Property (1997) ................................................................................................................ 68 Sower; Good Faith/ Bad Faith (2000)
........................................................................................................................... 69 Usufruct
(1997)............................................................................................................................................................ 69
LAND TRANSFER & DEEDS............................................................................................................................... 69
Acquisition of Lands; Citizenship Requirement (2003)................................................................................................. 69 Adverse
Claims; Notice of Levy (1998) ........................................................................................................................ 69 Annotation
of Lis Pendens; When Proper (2001).......................................................................................................... 70 Foreshore
Lands (2000)............................................................................................................................................... 70 Forgery;
Innocent Purchaser; Holder in Bad Faith (2005)............................................................................................. 70 Forgery;
Innocent Purchaser; Mirror Principle (1991) .................................................................................................. 71 Fraud;
Procurement of Patent; Effect (2000) ................................................................................................................ 71
Homestead Patents; Void Sale (1999) .......................................................................................................................... 71
Innocent Purchaser for Value (2001)............................................................................................................................ 72
Mirror Principle (1990) ................................................................................................................................................. 72
Mirror Principle; Forgery; Innocent Purchaser (1999) .................................................................................................. 73
Notice of Lis Pendens (1995) ....................................................................................................................................... 73
Notice of Lis Pendens; Transferee Pendente Lite (2002) .............................................................................................. 73
Prescription & Laches; Elements of Laches (2000) ...................................................................................................... 74
Prescription & Laches; Indefeasibility Rule of Torrens Title (2002) .............................................................................. 74
Prescription (1990) ...................................................................................................................................................... 75
Prescription; Real Rights (1992) .................................................................................................................................. 75
Primary Entry Book; Acquisitive Prescription; Laches (1998) ...................................................................................... 76
Reclamation of Foreshore Lands; Limitations (2000) ................................................................................................... 76
Registration; Deed of Mortgage (1994)......................................................................................................................... 77
Remedies; Judicial Confirmation; Imperfect Title (1993) .............................................................................................. 77
Remedies; Judicial Reconstitution of Title (1996) ........................................................................................................ 77
Remedies; Procedure; Consulta (1994)........................................................................................................................ 77
Remedies; Reconveyance vs. Reopening of a Decree; Prescriptive Period (2003)........................................................ 78
Remedies; Reconveyance; Elements (1995) ................................................................................................................ 78
Remedies; Reconveyance; Prescriptive Period (1997) ................................................................................................. 79
Remedies; Reopening of a Decree; Elements (1992).................................................................................................... 79
Torrens System vs. Recording of Evidence of Title (1994) ........................................................................................... 80
Unregistered Land (1991) ............................................................................................................................................ 80
CONTRACTS ............................................................................................................................................................ 80
Consensual vs. Real Contracts; Kinds of Real Contracts (1998) .................................................................................. 80
Consideration; Validity (2000)......................................................................................................................................
80 Contract of Option; Elements
(2005)............................................................................................................................ 81 Inexistent Contracts vs.
Annullable Contracts (2004)................................................................................................... 81 Nature of
Contracts; Obligatoriness (1991).................................................................................................................. 81 Nature
of Contracts; Privity of Contract (1996) ............................................................................................................ 82
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006) Nature of Contracts; Relativity of Contracts
(2002) ...................................................................................................... 82 Rescission of Contracts; Proper Party (1996)
.............................................................................................................. 82
OBLIGATIONS ......................................................................................................................................................... 83
Aleatory Contracts; Gambling (2004)........................................................................................................................... 83
Conditional Obligations (2000) .................................................................................................................................... 83
Conditional Obligations (2003) .................................................................................................................................... 83
Conditional Obligations; Promise (1997) ..................................................................................................................... 84
Conditional Obligations; Resolutory Condition (1999) ................................................................................................. 84
Extinguishment; Assignment of Rights (2001) ............................................................................................................. 84
Extinguishment; Cause of Action (2004)...................................................................................................................... 85
Extinguishment; Compensation (2002) ........................................................................................................................ 85
Extinguishment; Compensation vs. Payment (1998) .................................................................................................... 85
Extinguishment; Compensation/Set-Off; Banks (1998) ................................................................................................ 85
Extinguishment; Condonation (2000) .......................................................................................................................... 85
Extinguishment; Extraordinary Inflation or Deflation (2001)......................................................................................... 86
Extinguishment; Loss (1994) ....................................................................................................................................... 86
Extinguishment; Loss; Impossible Service (1993) ....................................................................................................... 86
Extinguishment; Novation (1994)................................................................................................................................. 87
Extinguishment; Payment (1995) ................................................................................................................................. 87
Liability; Lease; Joint Liability (2001) .......................................................................................................................... 87
Liability; Solidary Liability (1998)................................................................................................................................. 87
Liability; Solidary Obligation (1992)............................................................................................................................. 88
Liability; Solidary Obligation; Mutual Guaranty (2003) ................................................................................................. 88
Loss of the thing due; Force Majeure (2000) ................................................................................................................ 88
Non-Payment of Amortizations; Subdivision Buyer; When justified (2005)................................................................... 89
Period; Suspensive Period (1991)................................................................................................................................ 89
TRUST......................................................................................................................................................................... 89
Express Trust; Prescription (1997) .............................................................................................................................. 89
Implied Trust (1998).....................................................................................................................................................
90 Trust; Implied Resulting Trust
(1995)........................................................................................................................... 91
SALES.......................................................................................................................................................................... 91
Assignment of Credit vs. Subrogation (1993)............................................................................................................... 91
Conditional Sale vs. Absolute Sale (1997).................................................................................................................... 91
Contract of Sale vs. Agency to Sell (1999) ................................................................................................................... 91
Contract of Sale; Marital Community Property; Formalities (2006) ............................................................................... 91
Contract to Sell (2001)................................................................................................................................................. 92
Contract to Sell vs. Contract of Sale (1997).................................................................................................................. 92
Contract to Sell; Acceptance; Right of First Refusal (1991).......................................................................................... 92
Double Sales (2001)..................................................................................................................................................... 92
Double Sales (2004)..................................................................................................................................................... 93
Equitable Mortgage (1991).......................................................................................................................................... 93
Equitable Mortgage vs. Sale (2005).............................................................................................................................. 93
Immovable Property; Rescission of Contract (2003) .................................................................................................... 94
Maceda Law (2000)...................................................................................................................................................... 94
Maceda Law; Recto Law (1999).................................................................................................................................... 95
Option Contract (2002) ................................................................................................................................................ 95
Option Contract; Earnest Money (1993) ....................................................................................................................... 95
Perfected Sale; Acceptance of Earnest Money (2002) .................................................................................................. 95
Redemption; Legal; Formalities (2001) ........................................................................................................................ 96
Redemption; Legal; Formalities (2002) ........................................................................................................................ 96
Right of First Refusal; Lessee; Effect (1996) ................................................................................................................ 96
Right of First Refusal; Lessee; Effect (1998) ................................................................................................................ 97
Right of Repurchase (1993) ......................................................................................................................................... 97
Transfer of Ownership; Non-Payment of the Price (1991)............................................................................................. 97
Transfer of Ownership; Risk of Loss (1990) ................................................................................................................. 97
LEASE.......................................................................................................................................................................... 97
Extinguishment; Total Distruction; Leased Property (1993) ......................................................................................... 97
Implied New Lease (1999)............................................................................................................................................
98 Lease of Rural Lands (2000)
........................................................................................................................................ 98 Page 7 of 119
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006) Leasee & Lessor; Rights and Obligations (1990)
......................................................................................................... 98 Leasee; Death Thereof; Effects (1997)
......................................................................................................................... 98 Option to Buy; Expired
(2001)...................................................................................................................................... 98 Sublease vs. Assignment of
Lease; Rescission of Contract (2005) .............................................................................. 99 Sublease; Delay in Payment of
Rentals (1994) ............................................................................................................. 99 Sublease; Sublessee; Liability
(1999) ........................................................................................................................ 100 Sublease; Sublessee; Liability
(2000) ........................................................................................................................ 100 Sublease; Validity; Assignment of
Sublease (1990) ................................................................................................... 100
COMMON CARRIERS.......................................................................................................................................... 100
Extraordinary Diligence (2000) .................................................................................................................................. 100
AGENCY ................................................................................................................................................................... 101
Agency (2003) ........................................................................................................................................................... 101
Agency vs. Sale (2000) .............................................................................................................................................. 101
Agency; coupled with an interest (2001) ....................................................................................................................
101 Agency; Guarantee Commission (2004).....................................................................................................................
101 Agency; Real Estate Mortgage (2004)
........................................................................................................................ 101 Appointment of Sub-Agent
(1999).............................................................................................................................. 102 General Agency vs.
Special Agency (1992)................................................................................................................ 102 Powers of the
Agent (1994)........................................................................................................................................ 102 Termination;
Effect (1997) ............................................................................................................. 103
of Death of Agent......................................................................................................................................................
PARTNERSHIP 103
Composition of Partnerships; Spouses; Corporations (1994) .................................................................................... 103
Conveyance of a Partner’s Share Dissolution (1998)..................................................................................................
103 Dissolution of Partnership (1995)
.............................................................................................................................. 103 Dissolution of Partnership;
Termination (1993).......................................................................................................... 104 Effect of Death of Partner
(1997)................................................................................................................................ 104 Obligations of a Partner
(1992) .................................................................................................................................. 104 Obligations of a
COMMODATUM
Partner; Industrial Partner& MUTUUM ..................................................................................................... 104
(2001) .................................................................................................................................... 104
Commodatum (1993) ................................................................................................................................................. 104
Commodatum (2005) .................................................................................................................................................
105 Commodatum vs. Usufruct (1998)
............................................................................................................................. 105 Mutuum vs. Commodatum (2004)
.............................................................................................................................. 106 Mutuum; Interests
(2001)........................................................................................................................................... 106 Mutuum;
Interests (2002)........................................................................................................................................... 106
Mutuum; Interests (2004) ...........................................................................................................................................
DEPOSIT................................................................................................................................................................... 107
106
Compensation; Bank Loan (1997).............................................................................................................................. 107
Deposit; Exchange (1992)..........................................................................................................................................
107
SURETY.................................................................................................................................................................... 107
Recovery of Deficiency (1997) ................................................................................................................................... 107
ANTICHRESIS........................................................................................................................................................ 107
Antichresis (1995) ..................................................................................................................................................... 107
PLEDGE .................................................................................................................................................................... 108
Pledge (1994) ............................................................................................................................................................ 108
Pledge (2004) ............................................................................................................................................................
108 Pledge; Mortgage; Antichresis (1996)
........................................................................................................................ 108
QUASI-CONTRACT.............................................................................................................................................. 108
Quasi-Contracts; Negotiorium Gestio (1992) ............................................................................................................. 109
Quasi-Contracts; Negotiorium Gestio (1993) .............................................................................................................
109 Quasi-Contracts; Negotiorium Gestio (1995)
............................................................................................................. 109 Quasi-Contracts; Solutio Indebiti (2004)
.................................................................................................................... 110
TORTS & DAMAGES ........................................................................................................................................... 110
Collapse of Structures; Last Clear Chance (1990)...................................................................................................... 110
Damages (1994).........................................................................................................................................................
111 Damages arising from Death of Unborn Child (1991)
................................................................................................. 111 Damages arising from Death of Unborn Child
(2003) ................................................................................................. 111 Death Indemnity
111 8 of 119
(1994)..............................................................................................................................................Page
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006) Defense; Due Diligence in Selection
(2003)................................................................................................................ 112 Filing of Separate Civil Action; Need for
Reservation (2003) ...................................................................................... 112 Fortuitous Event; Mechanical Defects (2002)
............................................................................................................. 112 Liability; Airline Company; Non-Performance of an
Obligation (2004)........................................................................ 112 Liability; Airline Company; Non-Performance of an Obligation
(2005)........................................................................ 113 Liability; Employer; Damage caused by Employees (1997)
........................................................................................ 113 Liability; owner who was in the vehicle (1996)
........................................................................................................... 114 Liability; owner who was in the vehicle (1998)
........................................................................................................... 114 Liability; owner who was in the vehicle (2002)
........................................................................................................... 114 Moral Damages & Atty Fees (2002)
............................................................................................................................ 114 Moral Damages; Non-Recovery Thereof
(2006) .......................................................................................................... 115 Quasi-Delict (1992)
.................................................................................................................................................... 115 Quasi-Delict (2005)
.................................................................................................................................................... 115 Quasi-Delict; Acts contrary
to morals (1996) ............................................................................................................. 115 Quasi-Delict; Mismanagement of
Depositor’s Account (2006).................................................................................... 116 Vicarious Liability (1991)
........................................................................................................................................... 116 Vicarious Liability (2001)
........................................................................................................................................... 117 Vicarious Liability (2002)
........................................................................................................................................... 117 Vicarious Liability (2004)
........................................................................................................................................... 117 Vicarious Liability (2006)
........................................................................................................................................... 117 Vicarious Liability; Public Utility
(2000) ..................................................................................................................... 118
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ........................................................................................................................... 118
Intellectual Creation (2004)........................................................................................................................................ 118
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
As regards "governance": Governance in Civil Law is codal, 3) A decision of a division of the Supreme Court maybe set
statutory and written law. It is additionally derived from case aside by the Supreme Court sitting en banc, a Supreme Court
law. Common law is basically derived from case law. decision may be set aside by a contrary ruling of the Supreme
Court itself or by a corrective legislative act of Congress,
although said laws cannot adversely affect those favored
As regards "trend": Civil law is now tending to rely more and prior to the Supreme Court decision. [Civil Code, Paras).
more on decisions of the courts explaining the laws.
Common law is now codifying laws more and more. So they
are now merging towards similar systems. Effectivity of Laws (1990)
After a devastating storm causing widespread destruction in
four Central Luzon provinces, the executive and legislative
Additional Answers: branches of the government agreed to enact a special law
1. COMMON LAW refers to the traditional part of the appropriating P1 billion for purposes of relief and
law as distinct from legislation; it refers to the universal part rehabilitation for the provinces. In view of the urgent nature
of law as distinct from particular local customs (Encyclopedia of the legislative enactment, it is provided in its effectivity
Americana, Vol. 7). On the other hand, CIVIL LAW is
clause that it shall take effect upon approval and after
understood to be that branch of law governing the
completion of publication in the Official Gazette and a
relationship of persons in respect of their personal and private
newspaper of general circulation in the Philippines. The law
interests as distinguished from both public and international
was passed by the Congress on July 1, 1990. signed into law
laws.
by the President on July 3, 1990, and published in such
newspaper of general circulation on July 7, 1990 and in the
Official Gazette on July 10, 1990.
In common law countries, the traditional responsibility
has for the most part been with the judges; in civil law (a) As to the publication of said legislative enactment, is
countries, the task is primarily reposed on the lawmakers. there sufficient observance or compliance with the
Contemporary practices, however, so indicate a trend requirements for a valid publication? Explain your answer.
towards centralizing that function to professional groups (b) When did the law take effect? Explain your
that may indeed, see the gradual assimilation in time of (c)
answer. Can the executive branch start releasing and
both systems. [Vitug, Civil. Law and Jurisprudence, p. disbursing funds appropriated by the said law the day
XX) following its approval? Explain your answer.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
2. In Civil Law, the statutes theoretically take (a) Yes, there is sufficient compliance. The law itself
precedence over court decisions interpreting them; while in prescribes the requisites of publication for its effectivity, and
Common Law, the court decisions resolving specific cases are all requisites have been complied with. (Article 2, Civil Code)
regarded as law rather than the statutes themselves which are,
at the start, merely embodiments of case law. Civil Law is (b) The law takes effect upon compliance with all the
code law or written law, while Common Law is case law. Civil conditions for effectivity, and the last condition was complied
Law adopts the deductive method - from the general to the with on July 10, 1990. Hence, the" law became effective on
particular, while the Common Law uses the inductive that date.
approach from the particular to the general. Common Law (c) No. It was not yet effective when it was approved by
relies on equity. Civil Law anchors itself on the letter of the Congress on July 1, 1990 and approved by the President on
law. The civilists are for the judge-proof law even as the July 3, 1990. The other requisites for its effectivity were not
Common Law Is judge-made law. Civil Law judges are merely yet complete at the time.
supposed to apply laws and not interpret them.
Page 10 of 119
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
but never against statutory law. (Toyota Motor Phil. V CA 1. The civil action involves an issue similar or intimately
216 SCRA 236 [1992]). related to the issue raised in the criminal action, and
2. the resolution of such issue determines whether or not the
Ignorance of the Law vs. Mistake of Fact (1996) criminal action may proceed.
Is there any difference in their legal effect between ignorance
of the law and ignorance or mistake of fact? (c) Consequences The criminal case must be suspended.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Thus, in a criminal case for damages to one's property, a civil
Yes, there is a difference. While ignorance of the law is not an action that involves the ownership of said property should
excuse for not complying with it, ignorance of fact eliminates first be resolved (De Leon vs. Mabanag. 38 Phil. 202)
criminal intent as long as there is no negligence (Art, NCC).
In addition, mistake on a doubtful or difficult question of law
may be the basis of good faith (Art. 526. NCC). Mistake of
fact may, furthermore, vitiate consent in a contract and make PERSONS
it voidable (Art. 1390. NCC).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: Change of Name; Under RA 9048 (2006)
Yes. ignorance of the law differs in legal effect from
Zirxthoussous delos Santos filed a petition for change of
Ignorance or mistake of fact. The former does not excuse a
name with the Office of the Civil Registrar of Mandaluyong
party from the legal consequences of his conduct while the
City under the administrative proceeding provided in
latter does constitute an excuse and is a legal defense.
Republic Act No. 9048. He alleged that his first name sounds
ridiculous and is extremely difficult to spell and pronounce.
Inferior Courts Decisions (1994)
After complying with the requirements of the law, the Civil
Are decisions of the Court of Appeals considered laws?
ALTERNATIVE ANSWERS:
Registrar granted his petition and changed his first name
1) a) No, but decisions of the Court of Appeals may Zirxthoussous to "Jesus." His full name now reads "Jesus
serve as precedents for inferior courts on points of law not delos Santos."
covered by any Supreme Court decision, and a ruling of the
Court of Appeals may become a doctrine. (Miranda vs.. Jesus delos Santos moved to General Santos City to work in a
Imperial 77 Phil. 1066). multi-national company. There, he fell in love and married Mary
Grace delos Santos. She requested him to have his first name
b) No. Decisions of the Court of Appeals merely have changed because his new name "Jesus delos Santos" is the same
persuasive, and therefore no mandatory effect. However, a name as that of her father who abandoned her family and became a
conclusion or pronouncement which covers a point of law notorious drug lord. She wanted to forget him. Hence, Jesus filed
still undecided may still serve as judicial guide and it is another petition with the Office of the Local Civil Registrar to
possible that the same maybe raised to the status of doctrine. change his first name to "Roberto." He claimed that the change is
If after it has been subjected to test in the crucible of analysis, warranted because it will eradicate all vestiges of the infamy of Mary
the Supreme Court should find that it has merits and qualities Grace's father.
sufficient for its consideration as a rule of jurisprudence (Civil
Code, Paras). Will the petition for change of name of Jesus delos Santos to
Roberto delos Santos under Republic Act No. 9048 prosper?
Explain. (10%)
Prejudicial Questions (1997) SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, under the law, Jesus may only
In the context that the term is used in Civil Law, state the change his name once. In addition, the petition for change of
(a) concept, (b) requisites and (c) consequences of a
name may be denied on the following grounds:
prejudicial question. (1) Jesus is neither ridiculous, nor tainted with dishonor
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(a) Concept A prejudicial question is one which must be nor extremely difficult to write or pronounce.
decided first before a criminal action may be instituted or (2) There is no confusion to be avoided or created with
may proceed because a decision therein is vital to the the use of the registered first name or nickname of the
judgment in the criminal case. In the case of People vs. Adelo petitioner.
Aragon (L5930, Feb. 17, 1954), the Supreme Court defined it as (3) The petition involves the same entry in the same
one which arises in a case, the resolution of which question is document, which was previously corrected or changed under
a logical antecedent of the issues involved in said case and the this Order [Rules and Regulations Implementing RA 9048].
cognizance of which pertains to another tribunal (Paras, Vol.
1, Civil. Code Annotation, 1989 ed. p, 194).
What entries in the Civil Registry may be changed or corrected
without a judicial order? (2.5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Only clerical or typographical errors
(b) and first or nick names may be changed or corrected without
1
RequisitesThe prejudicial question must be determinative of the case
a judicial order under RA 9048.
before the court.
2 Jurisdiction to try said question must be lodged in another
Clerical or typographical errors refer to mistakes committed
tribunal. in the performance of clerical work in writing, copying,
ADDITIONAL ANSWER:
transcribing or typing an entry in the civil register. The
mistake is harmless and innocuous, such as errors in
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
spelling, visible to the eyes or obvious to the understanding, absolute community amounting to 1 Million Pesos. His
and can be corrected or changed only by reference to other wife, will, therefore, inherit O.25 Million Pesos and his parents will
existing records. Provided, however, that no correction must inherit 0.25 Million Pesos. When Mrs. Cruz died, she was
succeeded by her parents as her intestate heirs. They will inherit all
involve the change of nationality, age, status or sex of the of her estate consisting of her 0.5 Million half share in the absolute
petitioner. community and her 0.25 Million inheritance from her husband, or a
total of 0.750 Million Pesos.
In the given problem, Eva, a naturalized American citizen Qualifications of Adopter (2000)
would like to adopt Vicky, a 7-year old daughter of her
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Sometime in 1990, Sarah, born a Filipino but by then a under Sec. 7(b) of RA8552. The Supreme Court has held in
naturalized American citizen, and her American husband several cases that when husband and wife are required to
Tom, filed a petition in the Regional Trial Court of Makati, adopt jointly, each one of them must be qualified to adopt in
for the adoption of the minor child of her sister, a Filipina. his or her own right (Republic v. Toledano, 233 SCRA 9 (1994).
Can the petition be granted? (5%) However, the American husband must comply with the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: requirements of the law including the residency requirement
(per dondee) It depends. Rules on Adoption effective August of three (3) years. Otherwise, the adoption will not be allowed.
22, 2002 provides the following; SEC. 4. Who may adopt. –
The following may adopt: Any Filipino Citizen
Successional Rights of Adopted Child (2004)
of legal age,
in possession of full civil capacity and legal rights,
A Filipino couple, Mr. and Mrs. BM, Jr., decided to adopt
of good moral character, YV, an orphan from St. Claire’s orphanage in New York City.
has not been convicted of any crime involving moral They loved and treated her like a legitimate child for they
turpitude; have none of their very own. However, BM, Jr., died in an
who is emotionally and psychologically capable of caring accident at sea, followed to the grave a year later by his sick
for children, father, BM, Sr. Each left a sizable estate consisting of bank
at least sixteen (16) years older than the adoptee, deposits, lands and buildings in Manila. May the adopted
and who is in a position to support and care for his children
child, YV, inherit from BM, Jr.? May she also inherit from
in keeping with the means of the family.
BM, Sr.? Is there a difference? Why? Explain. (5%)
• The requirement of a 16-year difference between the age of
the adopter and adoptee may be waived when the adopter is SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the biological parent of the adoptee or is the spouse of the YV can inherit from BM, Jr. The succession to the estate of
adoptee’s parent; BM, Jr. is governed by Philippine law because he was a
Any Alien possessing the same qualifications as above-stated
Filipino when he died (Article 16, Civil Code). Under Article
for Filipino nationals: Provided, a) That his country has 1039 of the Civil Code, the capacity of the heir to succeed is
diplomatic relations with the governed by the national law of the decedent and not by the
Republic of the Philippines, national law of the heir. Hence, whether or not YV can
b) that he has been living in the Philippines for at least inherit from BM, Jr. is determined by Philippine law. Under
three (3) continuous years prior to the filing of the petition for Philippine law, the adopted inherits from the adopter as a
adoption and maintains such residence until the adoption legitimate child of the adopter.
decree is entered,
c) that he has been certified by his diplomatic or YV, however, cannot inherit, in his own right, from the father
consular office or any appropriate government agency to have
of the adopter, BM, Sr., because he is not a legal heir of BM,
the legal capacity to adopt in his country,
d) and that his government allows the adoptee to enter Sr. The legal fiction of adoption exists only between the
his country as his adopted child. adopted and the adopter. (Teotico v. Del Val 13 SCRA 406
[1965]). Neither may he inherit from BM, Sr. by representing
Provided, further, That the requirements on residency and BM, Jr. because in representation, the representative must be
certification of the alien’s qualification to adopt in his country a legal heir not only of the person he is representing but also
may be waived for the following: a) a former Filipino citizen of the decedent from whom the represented was supposed to
who seeks to adopt a relative inherit (Article 973, Civil Code).
within the fourth (4th) degree of consanguinity or affinity; or b)
one who seeks to adopt the legitimate child of his Filipino
spouse; or
Family Code; Retroactive Application; Vested Rights (2000) Section I, Article XV, further provides that: The State
On April 15, 1980, Rene and Angelina were married to each recognizes the Filipino family as the foundation of the nation.
other without a marriage settlement. In 1985, they acquired a Accordingly, it shall strengthen its solidarity and actively
parcel of land in Quezon City. On June 1, 1990, when promote its total development.
Angelina was away in Baguio, Rene sold the said lot to (Note: The Committee recommends that a citation of either one of
Marcelo. Is the sale void or voidable? (2%) the provisions be credited as a complete answer).
SUGGESTED ANSWER: SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The sale is void. Since the sale was executed in 1990, the B, No, the Constitutional policy, as well as the supporting
Family Code is the law applicable. Under Article 124 of the provision, does not amount to a prohibition to Congress to
FC, the sale of a conjugal property by a spouse without the enact a law on divorce. The Constitution only meant to help
consent of the other is void. the marriage endure, to "strengthen its solidarity and actively
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: promote its total development."
The sale is voidable. The provisions of the Family Code may ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
apply retroactively but only if such application will not impair B. Yes. Congress is barred from enacting a law allowing
vested rights. When Rene and Angelina got married in 1980, divorce, since Section 2 of Article XV provides: "Sec. 2.
the law that governed their property relations was the New Marriage, as an inviolable social institution, is the foundation
Civil Code. Under the NCC, as interpreted by the Supreme of the family and shall be protected by the State." Since
Court in Heirs of Felipe v. Aldon, 100 SCRA 628 and reiterated marriage is "Inviolable", it cannot be dissolved by an absolute
in Heirs of Ayuste v. Malabonga, G.R No, 118784, 2 September divorce.
1999, the sale executed by the husband without the consent of
the wife is voidable. The husband has already acquired a Marriage; Annulment; Effects; Requisites Before Remarriage
vested right on the voidable nature of dispositions made (1990)
without the consent of the wife. Hence, Article 124 of the The marriage of H and W was annulled by the competent
Family Code which makes the sale void does not apply. court. Upon finality of the judgment of nullity. H began
looking for his prospective second mate. He fell in love with
a sexy woman S who wanted to be married as soon as
Family Home; Dwelling House (1994) possible, i.e., after a few months of courtship. As a young
In 1991, Victor established judicially out of conjugal property, lawyer, you were consulted by H,
a family home in Manila worth P200.000.00 and extrajudicially (a) How soon can H be joined in lawful wedlock to his
a second family home in Tagaytay worth P50.000.00. Victor girlfriend S? Under existing laws, are there certain requisites
leased the family home in Manila to a foreigner. Victor and that must be complied with before he can remarry? What
his family transferred to another house of his in Pasig. Can advice would you give H?
the two family homes be the subject of execution on a (b) Suppose that children were born from the union of H
judgment against Victor's wife for non-payment of the and W, what would be the status of said children? Explain
purchase in 1992 of household appliances? your answer.
(c) If the subsequent marriage of H to S was
SUGGESTED ANSWER: contracted before compliance with the statutory condition
The two (2) so-called family homes can be the subject of for its validity, what are the rights of the children of the first
execution. Neither of the abodes are considered family homes marriage (i.e., of H and W) and of the children of the
because for purposes of availing the benefits under the subsequent marriage (of H and S)?
Family Code, there can only be one (1) family home which is SUGGESTED ANSWER:
defined as the "dwelling house" where the husband and the (a) H, or either spouse for that matter, can marry again after
wife and their family actually "reside" and the land on which complying with the provisions of Article 52 of the Family
it is situated. (Arts. 152 and 161, Family Code) Code, namely, there must be a partition and distribution, of
the properties of the spouses, and the delivery of the
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
children's presumptive legitimes which should be recorded sexually-transmissible disease, found to be serious and
in the appropriate civil registry and registries of property. H appears incurable. Two (2) years after their marriage, which took
should be so advised. place on 10 October 1988, Bethel discovered that her husband
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: for (a) James has a sexually-transmissible disease which he contracted
The following are the requisites prescribed by law and I even prior to their marriage although James did not know it
advice to H is to comply with them, namely: himself until he was examined two [2) years later when a child
1) If either spouse contracted the marriage in bad faith, was already born to them. Bethel sues James for annulment of
his or her share of the net profits of the community property : their marriage. James opposes the annulment on the ground that
or conjugal partnership property shall be forfeited in favor of he did not even know that he had such a disease so that there
the common children or, if there are none, the children of the was no fraud or bad faith on his part. Decide.
guilty spouse by a previous marriage or, in default of children,
the innocent spouse; B. Suppose that both parties at the time of their marriage
were similarly afflicted with sexually-transmissible diseases,
2) Donations by reason of marriage shall remain valid serious and incurable, and both knew of their respective
except that if the donee contracted the marriage in bad faith, infirmities, can Bethel or James sue for annulment of their
such donations made to said donee are revoked by operation marriage?
of law; SUGGESTED ANSWER:
3) The spouse who contracted the subsequent marriage A. The marriage can be annulled, because good faith is not a
in bad faith shall be disqualified to inherit from the innocent defense when the ground is based upon
spouse by testate and intestate succession; sexually-transmissible disease on the part of either party.
4) If both spouses of the subsequent marriage acted in SUGGESTED ANSWER:
bad faith all donations by reason of marriage and B. Yes, the marriage can still be annulled because the fact
testamentary dispositions made by one in favor of the other that both of them are afflicted with sexually-transmissible
are revoked by operation of law. diseases does not efface or nullity the ground.
Alternative Answer:
5) The judgment of annulment of the marriage, the
B. No, the marriage can no longer be annulled, because the
partition and distribution of the properties of the spouses,
fact that both were afflicted and that both knew of their
and the delivery of the children's presumptive legitimes shall
respective infirmities constitutes a waiver of that ground.
be recorded in the appropriate civil registry and registers of
property, (Articles 53. 52, 43.
Marriage; Annulment; Judicial Declaration (1993)
44. Family Code).
Maria and Luis, both Filipinos, were married by a Catholic
priest in Lourdes Church, Quezon City in 1976, Luis was
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(b) The children born from the union of H and W would be drunk on the day of his wedding. In fact, he slumped at the
legitimate children if conceived or born before the decree of altar soon after the ceremony. After marriage, Luis never had
annulment of the marriage (under Art. 45 of the Family a steady job because he was drunk most of the time. Finally,
Code) has become final and executory (Art. 54, Family he could not get employed at all because of drunkenness.
Code}. Hence, it was Maria who had to earn a living to support
herself and her child begotten with Luis. In 1986, Maria filed a
SUGGESTED ANSWER: petition in the church matrimonial court in Quezon City to
(c) The children of the first marriage shall be considered annul her marriage with Luis on the ground of psychological
legitimate children if conceived or born before the Judgment incapacity to comply with his marital obligation. Her petition
of annulment of the marriage of H and W has become final was granted by the church matrimonial court. 1) Can Maria
and executory. Children conceived or born of the subsequent now get married legally to another man under Philippine laws
marriage shall likewise be legitimate even if the marriage of H after her marriage to Luis was annulled by the church
and S be null and void for failure to comply with the requisites matrimonial court? Explain. 2) What must Maria do to
of Article 52 of the Family Code (Article 53, Family Code). As enable her to get married lawfully to another man under
legitimate children, they have the following rights; Philippine laws?
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (ii) If the wife refuses to come home for three (3) months
No, Digna's father may not revoke the donation because from the expiration of her contract, she is presumed to have
Digna was not in bad faith, applying Art. 86(3) of the Family abandoned the husband and he may file an action for judicial
Code. separation of property. If the refusal continues for more than
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
a) Yes, the donation is revocable. Since the ground for the one year from the expiration of her contract, the husband may
annulment of the marriage is the psychological immaturity of file the action for legal separation under Art. 55 (10) of the
George, the judgment was in the nature of a declaration of Family Code on the ground of abandonment of petitioner by
nullity under Art. 36 of the FC and, therefore, the donation respondent without justifiable cause for more than one year.
may be revoked under Art. 86( 1) of the FC for the reason The wife is deemed to have abandoned the husband when she
that the marriage has been judicially declared void ab initio. leaves the conjugal dwelling without any intention of
returning (Article 101, FC). The intention not to return
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: cannot be presumed during the 30year period of her contract.
b) No, the donation cannot be revoked. The law provides
that a donation by reason of marriage may be revoked by the
donor if among other cases, the marriage is judicially declared
void ab initio [par. (1) Art. 86. Family Code], or when the
marriage is annulled and the donee acted in bad faith [par. (3),
Id.]. Since the problem states that the marriage was annulled
and there is no intimation of bad faith on the part of the
donee Digna, the conclusion is that the donor cannot revoke
the donation.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
c) Yes, the donation can be revoked. The ground used in dissolving
the marriage was the psychological immaturity of George, which is
not a ground for annulment of marriage. If this term is equated with
psychological incapacity as used in Art. 36 of the Family Code,
then it is a ground for declaration of nullity of the marriage.
Consequently, par. (1) of Art. 86, FC, is the applicable law. Since
Art. 86 of the FC makes no qualification as to who furnished the
ground or who was in bad faith in connection with the nullification of
(iii) If the husband discovers after the marriage that his wife
was a prostitute before they got married, he has no remedy.
No misrepresentation or deceit as to character, health, rank,
fortune or chastity shall constitute fraud as legal ground for
an action for the annulment of marriage (Article 46 FC).
(iv) The wife may file an action for legal separation. The
husband’s sexual infidelity is a ground for legal separation
9Article 55, FC). She may also file an action for judicial
separation of property for failure of her husband to comply
with his martial duty of fidelity (Article 135 (4), 101, FC).
(v) The wife may file an action for legal separation on the
ground of repeated physical violence on her person (Article
55 (1), FC). She may also file an action for judicial
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
separation of property for failure of the husband to comply Saudi Arabia to work. There, after being converted into Islam,
with his marital duty of mutual respect (Article 135 (4), Article Ariel married Mystica, Rosa learned of the second marriage of
101, FC). She may also file an action for declaration of nullity Ariel on January 1, 1992 when Ariel returned to the Philippines
of the marriage if the husband’s behavior constitute with Mystica. Rosa filed an action for legal separation on
psychological incapacity existing at the time of the celebration February 5, 1994, 1) Does Rosa have legal grounds to ask for
of marriage. legal separation? 2) Has the action prescribed?
Paternity & Filiation; Artificial Insemination; 1. Under the Family Code, how may an illegitimate filiation
Formalities(2006) be proved? Explain.
Ed and Beth have been married for 20 years without children. 2. As lawyer for Danilo, do you have to prove Danilo's
Desirous to have a baby, they consulted Dr. Jun Canlas, a , illegitimate filiation? Explain.
prominent medical specialist on human fertility. He advised Beth 3. Can Danilo inherit from Abraham in representation of his
to undergo artificial insemination. It was found that Ed’s sperm father Carlos? Explain.
count was inadequate to induce pregnancy Hence, the couple SUGGESTED ANSWER:
looked for a willing donor. Andy the brother of Ed, readily 1. Under Art. 172 in relation to Art. 173 andArt. 175 of the
consented to donate his FC, the filiation of illegitimate children may be established
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
in the same way and by the same evidence as legitimate recognition of an illegitimate child can be brought at any
children. Art. 172 provides that the filiation of legitimate time during the lifetime of the child. However, if the action is based
children is established by any of the following: (1) the record on "open and continuous possession of the status of an illegitimate
child, the same can be filed during the lifetime of the putative
of birth appearing in the civil register or a final Judgment; or father."
(2) an admission of legitimate filiation in a public document
or a private handwritten instrument and signed by the parent
concerned. In the absence of the foregoing evidence, the In the present case, the action for compulsory recognition was
legitimate filiation shall be proved by: (1) the open and filed by Joey's mother, Dina, on May 16,1994, after the death
continuous possession of the status of a legitimate child; or of Steve, the putative father. The action will prosper if Joey
(2) any other means allowed by the Rules of Court and can present his birth certificate that bears the signature of his
special laws. putative father. However, the facts clearly state that the birth
SUGGESTED ANSWER: certificate of Joey did not indicate the father's name. A birth
2. No. Since Danilo has already been adopted by Carlos, he certificate not signed by the alleged father cannot be taken as a
ceased to be an illegitimate child. An adopted child acquires record of birth to prove recognition of the child, nor can said
all the rights of a legitimate child under Art, 189 of the FC. birth certificate be taken as a recognition in a public
instrument. (Reyes v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 39537, March
SUGGESTED ANSWER: 19, 1985) Consequently, the action filed by Joey's mother has
3. No, he cannot. Danilo cannot represent Carlos as the already prescribed.
latter's adopted child in the inheritance of Abraham because
adoption did not make Danilo a legitimate grandchild of
b) Are the defenses set up by Tintin tenable? Explain.
Abraham. Adoption is personal between Carlos and Danilo.
(2%)
He cannot also represent Carlos as the latter's illegitimate SUGGESTED ANSWER:
child because in such case he is barred by Art. 992 of the Yes, the defenses of Tintin are tenable. In Tayag v. Court of
NCC from inheriting from his illegitimate grandfather Appeals (G.R. No. 95229, June 9,1992), a complaint to compel
Abraham. recognition of an illegitimate child was brought before
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: effectivity of the Family Code by the mother of a minor child
An adopted child's successional rights do not include the right based on "open and continuous possession of the status of an
to represent his deceased adopter in the inheritance of the illegitimate child." The Supreme Court held that the right of
latter's legitimate parent, in view of Art. 973 which provides action of the minor child has been vested by the filing of the
that in order that representation may take place, the complaint in court under the regime of the Civil Code and
representative must himself be capable of succeeding the prior to the effectivity of the Family Code. The ruling in Tayag
decedent. Adoption by itself did not render Danilo an heir of v. Court of Appeals finds no application in the instant case.
the adopter's legitimate parent. Neither does his being a Although the child was born before the effectivity of the
grandchild of Abraham render him an heir of the latter Family Code, the complaint was filed after its effectivity.
because as an illegitimate child of Carlos, who was a legitimate Hence, Article 175 of the Family Code should apply and not
child of Abraham, Danilo is incapable of succeeding Abraham Article 285 of the Civil Code.
under Art. 992 of the Code.
c) Supposing that Joey died during the pendency of the
Paternity & Filiation; Recognition of illegitimate Child (2005)
action, should the action be dismissed? Explain. (2%)
Steve was married to Linda, with whom he had a daughter,
Tintin. Steve fathered a son with Dina, his secretary of 20 SUGGESTED ANSWER:
years, whom Dina named Joey, born on September 20, 1981. If Joey died during the pendency of the action, the action
Joey's birth certificate did not indicate the father's name. should still be dismissed because the right of Joey or his heirs
Steve died on August 13, 1993, while Linda died on to file the action has already prescribed. (Art. 175, Family
December 3, 1993, leaving their legitimate daughter, Tintin, Code)
as sole heir. On May 16, 1994, Dina filed a case on behalf of
Joey, praying that the latter be declared an acknowledged Paternity & Filiation; Rights of Legitimate Children (1990)
illegitimate son of Steve and that Joey be given his share in B and G (college students, both single and not disqualified to
Steve's estate, which is now being solely held by Tintin. marry each other) had a romantic affair, G was seven months
Tintin put up the defense that an action for recognition shall in the family way as of the graduation of B. Right after
only be filed during the lifetime of the presumed parents and graduation B went home to Cebu City. Unknown to G, B had
that the exceptions under Article 285 of the Civil Code do a commitment to C (his childhood sweetheart) to marry her
not apply to him since the said article has been repealed by after getting his college degree. Two weeks after B marriage
the Family Code. In any case, according to Tintin, Joey's birth in Cebu City, G gave birth to a son E in Metro Manila. After
certificate does not show that Steve is his father. ten years of married life in Cebu, B became a widower by the
sudden death of C in a plane crash. Out of the union of B
a) Does Joey have a cause of action against Tintin for and C, two children, X and Y were born. Unknown to C
recognition and partition? Explain. (2%) while on weekend trips to Manila during the last 5 years of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: their marriage, B invariably visited G and lived at her
No, Joey does not have a cause of action against Tintin for
recognition and partition. Under Article 175 of the Family Code, as a residence and as a result of which, they renewed their
general rule, an action for compulsory relationship. A baby girl F was born to B and G two years
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
before the death of C. Bringing his family later to Manila, B Paulita left the conjugal home because of the excessive
finally married G. Recently. G died. What are the rights of drinking of her husband, Alberto. Paulita, out of her own
B's four children: X and Y of his first marriage; and E and F, endeavor, was able to buy a parcel of land which she was able
his children with G? Explain your answer. to register under her name with the addendum "widow." She
also acquired stocks in a listed corporation registered in her
SUGGESTED ANSWER: name. Paulita sold the parcel of land to Rafael, who first
Under the facts stated, X and Y are legitimate children of B examined the original of the transfer certificate of title. 1) Has
and C. E is the legitimate children of B and G. E is the Alberto the right to share in the shares of stock acquired by
legitimated child of B&G. F is the illegitimate child of B and Paulita? 2) Can Alberto recover the land from Rafael?
C. As legitimate children of B and C, X and Y have the
following rights: 1) To bear the surnames of the father and
the mother, in SUGGESTED ANSWER:
conformity with the provisions of the Civil Code on 1. a) Yes. The Family Code provides that all property acquired
Surnames; 2) To receive support from their parents, their during the marriage, whether the acquisition appears to have
ascendants, been made, contracted or registered in the name of one or
and in proper cases, their brothers and sisters, in both spouses, is presumed to be absolute community
conformity with the provisions of the Family Code on property unless the contrary is proved.
Support; and
3) To be entitled to the legitime and other successional b) Yes. The shares are presumed to be absolute community
rights granted to them by the Civil Code. (Article 174, Family property having been acquired during the marriage despite
Code). the fact that those shares were registered only in her name.
Alberto's right to claim his share will only arise, however, at
E is the legitimated child of B and G. Under Art. 177 of the dissolution.
Family Code, only children conceived and born outside of
wedlock of parents who, at the time of the conception of the c) The presumption is still that the shares of stock are
former, were not disqualified by any impediment to marry owned in common. Hence, they will form part of the
each other may be legitimated. E will have the same rights absolute community or the conjugal partnership depending
as X and Y. on what the property Relations is.
F is the illegitimate child of B and G. F has the right to use d) Since Paulita acquired the shares of stock by onerous title
the surname of G, her mother, and is entitled to support as during the marriage, these are part of the conjugal or absolute
well as the legitime consisting of 1/2 of that of each of X, Y community property, as the case maybe (depending on
and E. (Article 176, Family Code) whether the marriage was celebrated prior to. or after, the
effectivity of the Family Code). Her physical separation from
Presumptive Legitime (1999) her husband did not dissolve the community of property.
What do you understand by "presumptive legitime", in what Hence, the husband has a right to share in the shares of
case or cases must the parent deliver such legitime to the stock.
children, and what are the legal effects in each case if the
parent fails to do so? (5%) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER: 2) a) Under a community of property, whether absolute or
PRESUMPTIVE LEGITIME is not defined in the law. Its relative, the disposition of property belonging to such
definition must have been taken from Act 2710, the Old community is void if done by just one spouse without the
Divorce Law, which required the delivery to the legitimate consent of the other or authority of the proper court.
children of "the equivalent of what would have been due to However, the land was registered in the name of Paulita as
them as their legal portion if said spouse had died intestate "widow". Hence, the buyer has the right to rely upon what
immediately after the dissolution of the community of appears in the record of the Register of Deeds and should,
property." As used in the Family Code, presumptive legitime consequently, be protected. Alberto cannot recover the land
is understood as the equivalent of the legitimate children's from Rafael but would have the right of recourse against his
legitimes assuming that the spouses had died immediately wife
after the dissolution of the community of property.
b) The parcel of land is absolute community property having
been acquired during the marriage and through Paulita's
Presumptive legitime is required to be delivered to the industry despite the registration being only in the name of
common children of the spouses when the marriage is Paulita. The land being community property, its sale to Rafael
annulled or declared void ab initio and possibly, when the without the consent of Alberto is void. However, since the
conjugal partnership or absolute community is dissolved as in land is registered in the name of Paulita as widow, there is
the case of legal separation. Failure of the parents to deliver nothing in the title which would raise a suspicion for Rafael
the presumptive legitime will make their subsequent marriage to make inquiry. He, therefore, is an innocent purchaser for
null and void under Article 53 of the Family Code. value from whom the land may no longer be recovered.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c) What properties may be held answerable for Mila's
C. No. on September 15, 1991, the marriage settlement is not
obligations? Explain. (2%)
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: yet valid and enforceable until the celebration of the
Since all the properties are conjugal, they can be held marriage, to take place before the last day of the 1991 bar
answerable for Mila's obligation if the obligation redounded to Examinations.
the benefit of the family. (Art. 121 [3], Family Code)
However, the burden of proof lies with the creditor claiming Property Relations; Marriage Settlements (1995)
against the properties. (Ayala Investment v. Court of Appeals, On 10 September 1988 Kevin, a 26-year old businessman,
G.R. No. 118305, February 12,1998, reiterated in
married Karla, a winsome lass of 18. Without the
Homeowners Savings & Loan Bank v. Dailo, G.R. No. 153802, knowledge of their parents or legal guardians, Kevin and
March 11, 2005) Karla entered into an ante-nuptial contract the day before
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: their marriage stipulating that conjugal partnership of gains
Except for the residential house which is the family home, all shall govern their marriage. At the time of their marriage
other properties of Gabby and Mila may be held answerable Kevin's estate was worth 50 Million while Karla's was valued
for Mila's obligation. Since the said properties are conjugal in at 2 Million. A month after their marriage Kevin died in a
nature, they can be held liable for debts and obligations freak helicopter accident. He left no will, no debts, no
contracted during the marriage to the extent that the family obligations. Surviving Kevin, aside from Karla, are his only
was benefited or where the debts were contracted by both relatives: his brother Luis and first cousin Lilia. 1) What
spouses, or by one of them, with the consent of the other. property Relations governed the marriage of
Intestate Succession (1992) W, the widow is limited to the legitime of P20.000.00 Under
F had three (3) legitimate children: A, B, and C. B has one the Theory of Concurrence. In addition to their legitimes,
(1) legitimate child X. C has two (2) legitimate children: Y the heirs of A, B, D and W will be given equal shares in the
and Z. F and A rode together in a car and perished together free portions:
at the same time in a vehicular accident, F and A died, each A: P20.000.00 plus P10.000.00 (1 /4 of the free portion)
of them leaving substantial estates in intestacy. B: P20,000.00 plus P10.000.00 (l/4 of the free portlon)
C: P20,000.00 plus P10.000.00 (1/4 of the free portion)
a) Who are the intestate heirs of F? What are their W: P20,000.00 plus P10,000.00 (l/4 of the free portion) Alternative
respective fractional shares? Answer: Shares in Intestacy T - decedent Estate: P120.000.00
b) Who are the intestate heirs of A? What are their Survived by: M - Mother............................None W -
respective fractional shares? Widow.............................P 30,000.00 A - Son.................................P 30,000.00 B
c) If B and C both predeceased F, who are F’s intestate - Son.................................P30.000.00 C - Grandson (son of B).............None D -
heirs? What are their respective fractional shares? Do Grandson (son of E who predeceased T)................P 30,000.00 F - Grandson
they inherit in their own right or by representation? (son of G who repudiated the Inheritance from"T").......................None
Explain your answer.
d) If B and C both repudiated their shares in the estate of
F who are F's intestate heirs? What are their respective
fractional shares? Do they inherit in their own right or by
representation? Explain your answer, Explanation:
SUGGESTED ANSWER: a) The mother (M) cannot inherit from T because
(a) B = under Art. 985 the ascendants shall inherit in default of
1/2 legitimate children and descendants of the deceased.
(b) B = 1/2 Z = 1/4 by representation of C C= 1/2 Article 982 b) The widow's share is P30.000.00 because under Art,
of the Civil Code provides that grandchildren inherit by right 996 it states that if the widow or widower and legitimate
of representation. children or descendants are left, the surviving
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
spouse has in the succession the same share as that of be set aside as Mario's conjugal share from the community
each of the children, c) C has no share because his father is property. The other half, amounting to one million pesos, is her
still alive hence succession by representation shall not apply conjugal share (net estate), and should be distributed to her
intestate heirs. Applying the above provision of law, Michelle and
(Art. 975). Jorelle, Tessie's nieces, are entitled to one-half of her conjugal
d) D inherits P30.000 which is the share of his father share worth one million pesos, or 500,000 pesos, while the other
E who predeceased T by virtue of Art. 981 on the right of one-half amounting to P500,000 will go to Mario, Tessie's surviving
representation. spouse. Michelle and Jorelle are then entitled to P250,000 pesos
each as their hereditary share.
e) F has no share because his father G repudiated the
inheritance. Under Article 977 heirs who repudiate their
share may not be represented.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: "It would be unjust for the mother to revoke the sales to a
In so far as the properties of the decedent located in the son and to execute a simulated sale in favor of a daughter
Philippines are concerned, they are governed by Philippine who already benefited by the partition."
law (Article 16, Civil Code). Under Philippine law, the proper
venue for the settlement of the estate is the domicile of the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
decedent at the time of his death. Since the decedent last C. Yes, under Arts. 51 and 52 of the New Family Code. In
resided in Cebu City, that is the proper venue for the intestate case of legal separation, annulment of marriage, declaration
settlement of his estate. of nullity of marriage and the automatic termination of a
subsequent marriage by the reappearance of the absent
However, the successional rights to the estate of ADIL are spouse, the common or community property of the spouses
governed by Pakistani law, his national law, under Article 16 shall be dissolved and liquidated.
of the Civil Code.
Art, 51. In said partition, the value of the presumptive
Succession; Death; Presumptive Legitime (1991) legitimes of all common children, computed as of the date of
a) For purposes of succession, when is death deemed to the final judgment of the trial court, shall be delivered in
occur or take place? b) May succession be conferred by cash, property or sound securities, unless the parties, by
contracts or acts inter mutual agreement, judicially approved, had already provided
vivos? Illustrate. c) Is there any law which allows the delivery for such matters.
to
compulsory heirs of their presumptive legitimes during The children of their guardian, or the trustee of their
the lifetime of their parents? If so, in what instances? property, may ask for the enforcement of the judgment.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. Death as a fact is deemed to occur when it actually takes The delivery of the presumptive legitimes herein prescribed
place. Death is presumed to take place in the circumstances shall in no way prejudice the ultimate successional rights of
under Arts. 390-391 of the Civil Code. The time of death is the children accruing upon the death of either or both of the
presumed to be at the expiration of the 10year period as parents; but the value of the properties already received
prescribed by Article 390 and at the moment of disappearance under the decree of annulment or absolute nullity shall be
under Article 391. considered as advances on their legitime.
B. Under Art. 84 of the Family Code amending Art 130 of Art. 52. The judgment of annulment or of absolute nullity of
the Civil Code, contractual succession is no longer possible the marriage, the partition and distribution of the properties
since the law now requires that donations of future property of the spouses, and the delivery of the children's presumptive
be governed by the provisions on the testamentary succession legitimes shall be recorded in the appropriate civil registry and
and formalities of wills. registries of property; otherwise, the same shall not affect
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: third persons.
B. In the case of Coronado vs.CA(l91 SCRA81), it was ruled
that no property passes under a will without its being Wills; Codicil; Institution of Heirs; Substitution of Heirs
probated, but may under Article 1058 of the Civil Code of (2002)
1898, be sustained as a partition by an act inter vivos By virtue of a Codicil appended to his will, Theodore devised
[Many-Oy vs. CA 144SCRA33). to Divino a tract of sugar land, with the obligation on the part
of Divino or his heirs to deliver to Betina a specified volume
And in the case of Chavez vs, IAC 1191 SCRA211), it was ruled of sugar per harvest during Betina’s lifetime. It is also stated
that while the law prohibits contracts upon future inheritance, in the Codicil that in the event the obligation is not fulfilled,
the partition by the parent, as provided in Art. 1080 is a case Betina should immediately seize the property from Divino or
expressly authorized by law. A person has two options in latter’s heirs and turn it over to Theodore’s compulsory heirs.
making a partition of his estate: either by an act inter vivos or Divino failed to fulfill the obligation under the Codicil. Betina
by will. If the partition is by will, it is imperative that such brings suit against Divino for the reversion of the tract of
partition must be executed in accordance with the provisions land. a) Distinguish between modal institution and
of the law on wills; if by an act inter vivos, such partition may substation
even be oral or written, and need not be in the form of a will, of heirs. (3%) b) Distinguish between simple and
provided the legitime is not prejudiced. fideicommissary
substitution of heirs. (2%) c) Does Betina have a cause of
action against Divino?
"Where several sisters execute deeds of sale over their 1 /6 Explain (5%)
undivided share of the paraphernal property of their SUGGESTED ANSWER:
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
A. A MODAL INSTITUTION is the institution of
an heir made for a certain purpose or cause (Arts. 871 and b. In the case of a foreigner, his national law shall govern
882, NCC). SUBSTITUTION is the appointment of another substantive validity whether he executes his will in the
heir so that he may enter into the inheritance in default of the Philippines or in a foreign country.
heir originality instituted. (Art. 857, NCC).
Wills; Holographic Wills; Insertions & Cancellations (1996)
B. In a SIMPLE SUBSTITUTION of heirs, the testator Vanessa died on April 14, 1980, leaving behind a holographic
designates one or more persons to substitute the heirs will which is entirely written, dated and signed in her own
instituted in case such heir or heirs should die before him, or handwriting. However, it contains insertions and cancellations
should not wish or should be incapacitated to accept the which are not authenticated by her signature. For this reason,
inheritance. In a FIDEICOMMISSARY SUBSTITUTION, the probate of Vanessa's will was opposed by her relatives
the testator institutes a first heir and charges him to preserve who stood to inherit by her intestacy. May Vanessa's
and transmit the whole or part of the inheritance to a second holographic will be probated? Explain.
heir. In a simple substitution, only one heir inherits. In a SUGGESTED ANSWER:
fideicommissary substitution, both the first and second heirs Yes, the will as originally written may be probated. The
inherit. (Art. 859 and 869, NCC) insertions and alterations were void since they were not
authenticated by the full signature of Vanessa, under Art. 814,
NCC. The original will, however, remains valid because a
C. Betina has a cause of action against Divino. This is a case holographic will is not invalidated by the unauthenticated
of a testamentary disposition subject to a mode and the will insertions or alterations (Ajero v. CA, 236 SCRA 468].
itself provides for the consequence if the mode is not ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
complied with. To enforce the mode, the will itself gives It depends. As a rule, a holographic will is not adversely
Betina the right to compel the return of the property to the affected by Insertions or cancellations which were not
heirs of Theodore. (Rabadilla v. Conscoluella, 334 SCRA 522 authenticated by the full signature of the testator (Ajero v. CA,
236 SCRA 468). However, when the insertion or cancellation
[2000] GR 113725, 29 June 2000).
amounts to revocation of the will, Art.814 of the NCC does
Wills; Formalities (1990) not apply but Art. 830. NCC. Art. 830 of the NCC does not
(1) If a will is executed by a testator who is a Filipino citizen, require the testator to authenticate his cancellation for the
what law will govern if the will is executed in the Philippines? effectivity of a revocation effected through such cancellation
What law will govern if the will is executed in another (Kalaw v. Relova, 132 SCRA 237). In the Kalaw case, the
country? Explain your answers. original holographic will designated only one heir as the only
substantial provision which was altered by substituting the
(2) If a will is executed by a foreigner, for instance, a original heir with another heir. Hence, if the unauthenticated
Japanese, residing in the Philippines, what law will govern if cancellation amounted to a revocation of the will, the will may
the will is executed in the Philippines? And what law will not be probated because it had already been revoked.
govern if the will is executed in Japan, or some other country,
for instance, the U.S.A.? Explain your answers.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Wills; Holographic Wills; Witnesses (1994)
(1) a. If the testator who is a Filipino citizen executes his will On his deathbed, Vicente was executing a will. In the room
in the Philippines, Philippine law will govern the formalities. were Carissa, Carmela, Comelio and Atty. Cimpo, a notary
public. Suddenly, there was a street brawl which caught
b. If said Filipino testator executes his will in another country, Comelio's attention, prompting him to look out the window.
the law of the country where he maybe or Philippine law will Cornelio did not see Vicente sign a will. Is the will valid?
govern the formalities. (Article 815, Civil Code}
SUGGESTED ANSWERS:
a) Yes, The will is valid. The law does not require a witness to
SUGGESTED ANSWER: actually see the testator sign the will. It is sufficient if the
(2) a. If the testator is a foreigner residing in the Philippines witness could have seen the act of signing had he chosen to
and he executes his will in the Philippines, the law of the do so by casting his eyes to the proper direction.
country of which he is a citizen or Philippine law will govern
the formalities. b) Yes, the will is valid. Applying the "test of position",
although Comelio did not actually see Vicente sign the will,
b. If the testator is a foreigner and executes his will in a Cornelio was in the proper position to see Vicente sign if
foreign country, the law of his place of residence or the law of Cornelio so wished.
the country of which he is a citizen or the law of the place of
execution, or Philippine law will govern the formalities Wills; Joint Wills (2000)
(Articles 17. 816. 817. Civil Code). Manuel, a Filipino, and his American wife Eleanor, executed
a Joint Will in Boston, Massachusetts when they were residing
POSSIBLE ADDITIONAL ANSWERS: in said city. The law of Massachusetts allows the execution of
a. In the case of a Filipino citizen, Philippine law shall joint wills. Shortly thereafter, Eleanor died. Can the said Will
govern substantive validity whether he executes his will in the be probated in the Philippines for the settlement of her
Philippines or in a foreign country. estate? (3%)
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, the will may be probated in the Philippines insofar as Wills; Probate; Notarial and Holographic Wills (1997)
the estate of Eleanor is concerned. While the Civil Code Johnny, with no known living relatives, executed a notarial
prohibits the execution of Joint wills here and abroad, such will giving all his estate to his sweetheart. One day, he had a
prohibition applies only to Filipinos. Hence, the joint will serious altercation with his sweetheart. A few days later, he
which is valid where executed is valid in the Philippines but was introduced to a charming lady who later became a dear
only with respect to Eleanor. Under Article 819, it is void friend. Soon after, he executed a holographic will expressly
with respect to Manuel whose joint will remains void in the revoking the notarial will and so designating his new friend as
Philippines despite being valid where executed. sole heir. One day when he was clearing up his desk, Johnny
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: mistakenly burned, along with other papers, the only copy of
The will cannot be probated in the Philippines, even though his holographic will. His business associate, Eduardo knew
valid where executed, because it is prohibited under Article well the contents of the will which was shown to him by
818 of the Civil Code and declared void under Article 819, Johnny the day it was executed. A few days after the burning
The prohibition should apply even to the American wife incident, Johnny died. Both wills were sought to be probated
because the Joint will is offensive to public policy. Moreover, in two separate petitions. Will either or both petitions
it is a single juridical act which cannot be valid as to one prosper?
testator and void as to the other. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The probate of the notarial will will prosper. The holographic
Wills; Probate; Intrinsic Validity (1990) will cannot be admitted to probate because a holographic will
H died leaving a last will and testament wherein it is stated can only be probated upon evidence of the will itself unless
that he was legally married to W by whom he had two there is a photographic copy. But since the holographic will
legitimate children A and B. H devised to his said forced was lost and there was no other copy, it cannot be probated
heirs the entire estate except the free portion which he gave and therefore the notarial will will be admitted to probate
to X who was living with him at the time of his death. because there is no revoking will.
ADDITIONAL ANSWERS:
In said will he explained that he had been estranged from his 1. In the case of Gan vs. Yap (104 Phil 509), the execution
wife W for more than 20 years and he has been living with X and the contents of a lost or destroyed holographic will
as man and wife since his separation from his legitimate may not be proved by the bare testimony of witnesses
family. who have seen or read such will. The will itself must be
presented otherwise it shall produce no effect. The law
In the probate proceedings, X asked for the issuance of regards the document itself as material proof of
letters testamentary in accordance with the will wherein she is authenticity. Moreover, in order that a will may be
named sole executor. This was opposed by W and her revoked by a subsequent will, it is necessary that the
children. latter will be valid and executed with the formalities
(a) Should the will be admitted in said probate proceedings? required for the making of a will. The latter should
(b) Is the said devise to X valid? possess all the requisites of a valid will whether it be
(c) Was it proper for the trial court to consider the intrinsic ordinary or a holographic will, and should be probated in
validity of the provisions of said will? Explain your answers, order that the revocatory clause thereof may produce
SUGGESTED ANSWER: effect. In the case at bar, since the holographic will itself
(a) Yes, the will may be probated if executed according to the cannot be presented, it cannot therefore be probated.
formalities prescribed by law. Since it cannot be probated, it cannot revoke the notarial
will previously written by the decedent.
(b) The institution giving X the free portion is not valid, 2. On the basis of the Rules of Court, Rule 76, Sec. 6,
because the prohibitions under Art. 739 of the Civil Code on provides that no will shall be proved as a lost or
donations also apply to testamentary dispositions (Article destroyed will unless its provisions are clearly and
1028, Civil Code), Among donations which are considered distinctly proved by at least two (2) credible witnesses.
void are those made between persons who were guilty of Hence, if we abide strictly by the two-witness rule to
adultery or concubinage at the time of the donation. prove a lost or destroyed will, the holographic will which
Johnny allegedly mistakenly burned, cannot be probated,
since there is only one witness, Eduardo, who can be
(c) As a general rule, the will should be admitted in probate called to testify as to the existence of the will. If the
proceedings if all the necessary requirements for its extrinsic holographic will, which purportedly, revoked the earlier
validity have been met and the court should not consider the notarial will cannot be proved because of the absence of
intrinsic validity of the provisions of said will. However, the the required witness, then the petition for the probate of
exception arises when the will in effect contains only one the notarial will should prosper.
testamentary disposition. In effect, the only testamentary Wills; Revocation of Wills; Dependent Relative Revocation
disposition under the will is the giving of the free portion to X, (2003)
since legitimes are provided by law. Hence, the trial court may Mr. Reyes executed a will completely valid as to form. A week
consider the intrinsic validity of the provisions of said will. later, however, he executed another will which expressly
(Nuguid v. Nuguid, etal.. No. L23445, June 23, 1966, 17 SCRA; revoked his first will, which he tore his first will to pieces.
Nepomuceno v. CA, L-62952,
Upon the death of Mr. Reyes, his second will was presented
9 October 1985. 139 SCRA 206). for probate by his heirs, but it was denied probate
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
due to formal defects. Assuming that a copy of the first will excluded by a legitimate son of the decedent [Art. 887, New
is available, may it now be admitted to probate and given Civil Code]. This follows the principle that the descendants
effect? Why? exclude the ascendants from inheritance.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, the first will may be admitted to probate and given
effect. When the testator tore first will, he was under the Wills; Testamentary Intent (1996)
mistaken belief that the second will was perfectly valid and he Alfonso, a bachelor without any descendant or ascendant,
would not have destroyed the first will had he known that the wrote a last will and testament in which he devised." all the
second will is not valid. The revocation by destruction properties of which I may be possessed at the time of my
therefore is dependent on the validity of the second will. death" to his favorite brother Manuel. At the time he wrote
Since it turned out that the second will was invalid, the tearing the will, he owned only one parcel of land. But by the time he
of the first will did not produce the effect of revocation. This died, he owned twenty parcels of land. His other brothers and
is known as the doctrine of dependent relative revocation sisters insist that his will should pass only the parcel of land
(Molo v. Molo, 90 Phil 37.) he owned at the time it was written, and did not cover his
ALTERNATIVE ANSWERS: properties acquired, which should be by intestate succession.
No, the first will cannot be admitted to probate. While it is true Manuel claims otherwise. Who is correct? Explain.
that the first will was successfully revoked by the second will
because the second will was later denied probate, the first will SUGGESTED ANSWER:
was, nevertheless, revoked when the testator destroyed it after Manuel is correct because under Art. 793, NCC, property
executing the second invalid will. acquired after the making of a will shall only pass thereby, as
(Diaz v. De Leon, 43 Phil 413 [1922]). if the testator had possessed it at the time of making the will,
should it expressly appear by the will that such was his
Wills; Testamentary Disposition (2006) intention. Since Alfonso's intention to devise all properties he
Don died after executing a Last Will and Testament leaving owned at the time of his death expressly appears on the will,
his estate valued at P12 Million to his common-law wife then all the 20 parcels of land are included in the devise.
Roshelle. He is survived by his brother Ronie and his
half-sister Michelle.
(1) Was Don's testamentary disposition of his estate in
accordance with the law on succession? Whether you agree or
not, explain your answer. Explain.
DONATION
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, Don's testamentary disposition Donation vs. Sale (2003)
of his estate is in accordance with the law on succession. Don a) May a person sell something that does not belong to
has no compulsory heirs not having ascendants, descendants him? Explain. b) May a person donate something that does
nor a spouse [Art. 887, New Civil Code]. Brothers and sisters not belong
to him? Explain. 5%
are not compulsory heirs. Thus, he can bequeath his entire
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
estate to anyone who is not otherwise incapacitated to inherit (a) Yes, a person may sell something which does not belong
from him. A common-law wife is not incapacitated under the to him. For the sale to be valid, the law does not require the
law, as Don is not married to anyone. seller to be the owner of the property at the time of the sale.
(Article 1434, NCC). If the seller cannot transfer ownership
over the thing sold at the time of delivery because he was not
(2) If Don failed to execute a will during his lifetime, as his the owner thereof, he shall be liable for breach of contact.
lawyer, how will you distribute his estate? Explain. (2.5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: After paying the legal obligations of
the estate, I will give Ronie, as full-blood brother of Don, 2/3 (b) As a general rule, a person cannot donate something which
of the net estate, twice the share of Michelle, the half-sister he cannot dispose of at the time of the donation (Article 751,
who shall receive 1/3. Roshelle will not receive anything as New Civil Code).
she is not a legal heir [Art. 1006 New Civil Code].
Donations; Condition; Capacity to Sue (1996)
Sometime in 1955, Tomas donated a parcel of land to his
(3) Assuming he died intestate survived by his brother Ronie, stepdaughter Irene, subject to the condition that she may not
his half-sister Michelle, and his legitimate son Jayson, how will sell, transfer or cede the same for twenty years. Shortly
you distribute his estate? Explain. (2.5%) thereafter, he died. In 1965, because she needed money for
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Jayson will be entitled to the entire medical expenses, Irene sold the land to Conrado. The
P12 Million as the brother and sister will be excluded by a following year, Irene died, leaving as her sole heir a son by
legitimate son of the decedent. This follows the principle of the name of Armando. When Armando learned that the land
proximity, where "the nearer excludes the farther." which he expected to inherit had been sold by Irene to
Conrado, he filed an action against the latter for annulment
(4) Assuming further he died intestate, survived by his father of the sale, on the ground that it violated the restriction
Juan, his brother Ronie, his half-sister Michelle, and his imposed by Tomas. Conrado filed a motion to dismiss, on
legitimate son Jayson, how will you distribute his estate? the ground that Armando did not have the legal capacity to
Explain. (2.5%) sue. If you were the Judge, how will you rule on this motion
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Jayson will still be entitled to the to dismiss? Explain.
entire P12 Million as the father, brother and sister will be
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: property to Ferdinand who then sued to recover the land
As judge, I will grant the motion to dismiss. Armando has no from the city government. Will the suit prosper?
personality to bring the action for annulment of the sale to
Conrado. Only an aggrieved party to the contract may bring SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the action for annulment thereof (Art. 1397. NCC). While Ferdinand has no right to recover the land. It is true that the
Armando is heir and successor-in-interest of his mother (Art. donation was revocable because of breach of the conditions.
1311, NCC), he [standing in place of his mother) has no But until and unless the donation was revoked, it remained
personality to annul the contract. Both are not aggrieved valid. Hence, Spouses Michael and Linda had no right to sell
parties on account of their own violation of the condition of, the land to Ferdinand. One cannot give what he does not
or restriction on, their ownership imposed by the donation. have. What the donors should have done first was to have the
Only the donor or his heirs would have the personality to donation annulled or revoked. And after that was done, they
bring an action to revoke a donation for violation of a could validly have disposed of the land in favor of Ferdinand.
condition thereof or a restriction thereon. (Garrido u. CA, 236
SCRA 450). Consequently, while the donor or his heirs were ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
not parties to the sale, they have the right to annul the A. Until the contract of donation has been resolved or
contract of sale because their rights are prejudiced by one of rescinded under Article 1191 of the Civil Code or revoked
the contracting parties thereof [DBP v. CA, 96 SCRA 342; under Art. 764 of the Civil Code, the donation stands
Teves vs. PHHC. 23 SCRA 114]. Since Armando is neither the effective and valid. Accordingly, the sale made by the donor
donor nor heir of the donor, he has no personality to bring to Ferdinand cannot be said to have conveyed title to
the action for annulment. Ferdinand, who, thereby, has no cause of action for recovery
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: of the land acting for and in his behalf.
As judge, I will grant the motion to dismiss. Compliance with
a condition imposed by a donor gives rise to an action to B. The donation is onerous, And being onerous, what applies
revoke the donation under Art. 764, NCC. However, the right is the law on contracts, and not the law on donation (De
of action belongs to the donor. Is transmissible to his heirs, Luna us. Abrigo, 81 SCRA 150). Accordingly, the
and may be exercised against the donee's heirs. Since prescriptive period for the filing of such an action would be
Armando is an heir of the donee, not of the donor, he has no the ordinary prescriptive period for contacts which may
legal capacity to sue for revocation of the donation. Although either be six or ten depending upon whether it is verbal or
he is not seeking such revocation but an annulment of the sale written. The filing of the case five years later is within the
which his mother, the donee, had executed in violation of the prescriptive period and, therefore, the action can prosper,
condition imposed by the donor, an action for annulment of a Alternative Answer:
contract may be brought only by those who are principally or The law on donation lays down a special prescriptive period
subsidiarily obliged thereby (Art. 1397, NCC). As an exception in the case of breach of condition, which is four years from
to the rule, it has been held that a person not so obliged may non-compliance thereof (Article 764 Civil Code). Since the
nevertheless ask for annulment if he is prejudiced in his rights action has prescribed, the suit will not prosper,
regarding one of the contracting parties (DBP us. CA. 96
SCRA 342 and other cases) and can show the detriment which Donations; Effect; illegal & immoral conditions (1997)
would result to him from the contract in which he had no Are the effects of illegal and immoral conditions on simple
intervention, (Teves vs. PHHC, 23 SCRA 1141). donations the same as those effects that would follow when
such conditions are imposed on donations con causa
onerosa?
Such detriment or prejudice cannot be shown by Armando. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
As a forced heir, Armando's interest in the property was, at No, they don't have the same effect. Illegal or impossible
best, a mere expectancy. The sale of the land by his mother conditions in simple and remuneratory donations shall be
did not impair any vested right. The fact remains that the considered as not imposed. Hence the donation is valid. The
premature sale made by his mother (premature because only donation will be considered as simple or pure. The condition
half of the period of the ban had elapsed) was not voidable at or mode is merely an accessory disposition, and its nullity
all, none of the vices of consent under Art. 139 of the NCC does not affect the donation, unless it clearly appears that the
being present. Hence, the motion to dismiss should be donor would not have made the donation without the mode
granted. or condition.
Donations; Conditions; Revocation (1991) Donations con causa onerosa is governed by law on
Spouses Michael and Linda donated a 3-hectare residential obligations and contracts, under which an impossible or Illicit
land to the City of Baguio on the condition that the city condition annuls the obligation dependent upon the
government would build thereon a public park with a boxing condition where the condition is positive and suspensive. If
arena, the construction of which shall commence within six the impossible or illicit condition is negative, it is simply
(6) months from the date the parties ratify the donation. The considered as not written, and the obligation is converted into
donee accepted the donation and the title to the property was a pure and simple one. However, in order that an illegal
transferred in its name. Five years elapsed but the public park condition may annul a contract, the impossibility must exist at
with the boxing arena was never started. Considering the the time of the creation of the obligation; a supervening
failure of the donee to comply with the condition of the impossibility does not affect the existence of the obligation.
ADDITIONAL ANSWER:
donation, the donor-spouses sold the
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
No. In simple or pure donation, only the illegal or irrevocable, the latter is revocable. In the problem given, all
impossible condition is considered not written but the the clauses or conditions mentioned in the deed of donation,
donation remains valid and becomes free from conditions. except one, are consistent with the rule of irrevocability and
The condition or mode being a mere accessory disposition. would have sustained the view that the donation is inter vivos
Its nullity does not affect the donation unless it clearly and therefore valid. The lone exception is the clause which
appears that the donor would not have made the donation reserves the donor's right to sell the property at any time
without the mode or condition. On the other hand, onerous before his death. Such a reservation has been held to render
donation is governed by the rules on contracts. Under Article the donation revocable and, therefore, becomes a donation
1183, Impossible or illegal conditions shall annul the mortis causa (Puig vs. Penqflorida, 15 SCRA 276, at p. 286).
obligation which depends upon them. In these cases, both the That the right was not exercised is immaterial; its reservation
obligation and the condition are void. was an implied recognition of the donor's power to nullify the
donation anytime he wished to do so. Consequently, it should
Donations; Formalities; Mortis Causa (1990) have been embodied in a last will and testament. The suit for
B donated to M a parcel of land in 1980. B made the deed of nullity will thus prosper.
donation, entitled ―Donation Inter Vivos,‖ in a public
instrument and M accepted the donation in the same
document. It was provided in the deed that the land donated Donations; Inter Vivos; Acceptance (1993)
shall be immediately delivered to M and that M shall have the On January 21, 1986, A executed a deed of donation inter
right to enjoy the fruits fully. The deed also provided that B vivos of a parcel of land to Dr. B who had earlier constructed
was reserving the right to dispose of said land during his (B’s) thereon a building in which researches on the dreaded disease
lifetime, and that M shall not register the deed of donation AIDS were being conducted. The deed, acknowledged before
until after B’s death. Upon B’s death, W, B’s widow and sole a notary public, was handed over by A to Dr. B who received
heir, filed an action for the recovery of the donated land, it. A few days after, A flew to Davao City. Unfortunately, the
contending that the donation made by B is a donation mortis airplane he was riding crashed on landing killing him. Two
causa and not a donation inter vivos. Will said action prosper? days after the unfortunate accident. Dr. B, upon advice of a
Explain your answer. lawyer, executed a deed acknowledged before a notary public
SUGGESTED ANSWER: accepting the donation. Is the donation effective? Explain
Yes, the action will prosper. The donation is a donation your answer.
mortis causa because the reservation is to dispose of all the
property donated and, therefore, the donation is revocable at SUGGESTED ANSWER:
will. Accordingly, the donation requires the execution of a No, the donation is not effective. The law requires that the
valid will, either notarial or holographic (Arts 755, 728 NCC). separate acceptance of the donee of an immovable must be
done in a public document during the lifetime of the donor
(Art. 746 & 749, Civil Code) In this case, B executed the
Donations; Formalities; Mortis Causa (1998) deed of acceptance before a notary public after the donor
Ernesto donated in a public instrument a parcel of land to had already died.
Demetrio, who accepted it in the same document. It is there
declared that the donation shall take effect immediately, with Donations; Perfection (1998)
the donee having the right to take possession of the land and On July 27, 1997, Pedro mailed in Manila a letter to his
receive its fruits but not to dispose of the land while Ernesto brother, Jose, a resident of Ilollo City, offering to donate a
is alive as well as for ten years following his death. Moreover, vintage sports car which the latter had long been wanting to
Ernesto also reserved in the same deed his right to sell the buy from the former. On August 5, 1997, Jose called Pedro
property should he decide to dispose of it at any time - a right by cellular phone to thank him for his generosity and to
which he did not exercise at all. After his death, Ernesto's inform him that he was sending by mail his letter of
heirs seasonably brought an action to recover the property, acceptance. Pedro never received that letter because it was
alleging that the donation was void as it did not comply with never mailed. On August 14, 1997, Pedro received a telegram
the formalities of a will. Will the suit prosper? [5%] from Iloilo informing him that Jose had been killed in a road
accident the day before (August 13, 1997)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: 1. Is there a perfected donation? [2%]
Yes, the suit will prosper as the donation did not comply with 2. Will your answer be the same if Jose did mail his
the formalities of a will. In this instance, the fact that the acceptance letter but it was received by Pedro in Manila days
donor did not intend to transfer ownership or possession of after Jose's death? [3%]
the donated property to the donee until the donor's death, SUGGESTED ANSWER:
would result in a donation mortis causa and in this kind of 1. None. There is no perfected donation. Under Article 748
disposition, the formalities of a will should be complied with, of the Civil Code, the donation of a movable may be made
otherwise, the donation is void. In this Instance, donation orally or in writing. If the value of the personal property
mortis causa embodied only in a public instrument without donated exceeds five thousand pesos, the donation and the
the formalities of a will could not have transferred ownership acceptance shall be made in writing. Assuming that the value
of disputed property to another. of the thing donated, a vintage sports car, exceeds P5,000.00
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: then the donation and the acceptance must be in writing. In
One of the essential distinctions between a donation inter vivos this instance, the acceptance of Jose was not in writing,
and a donation mortis causa is that while the former is
therefore, the donation is void. Upon the other
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
hand, assuming that the sports car costs less than P5,000.00 Code which requires the donation and the acceptance
then the donation maybe oral, but still, the simultaneous thereof to be in a public instrument in order to be valid. The
delivery of the car is needed and there being none, the acceptance not being in a public instrument, the part which is
donation was never perfected. not onerous is void and Rosa may recover it from Amanda.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
2. Yes, the answer is the same. If Jose's mail containing his Donations; Unregistered; Effects; Non-Compliance; Resolutory
acceptance of the donation was received by Pedro after the Condition (2006)
former's death, then the donation is still void because under Spouses Alfredo and Racquel were active members of a
Article 734 of the Civil Code, the donation is perfected the religious congregation. They donated a parcel of land in favor
moment the donor knows of the acceptance by the donee. of that congregation in a duly notarized Deed of Donation,
The death of Jose before Pedro could receive the acceptance subject to the condition that the Minister shall construct
indicates that the donation was never perfected. Under Article thereon a place of worship within 1 year from the acceptance
746 acceptance must be made during the lifetime of both the of the donation. In an affidavit he executed on behalf of the
donor and the donee. congregation, the Minister accepted the donation. The Deed
of Donation was not registered with the Registry of Deeds.
Donations; Requisites; Immovable Property
Anastacia purchased a house and lot on installments at a
housing project in Quezon City. Subsequently, she was However, instead of constructing a place of worship, the Minister
employed in California and a year later, she executed a deed of constructed a bungalow on the property he used as his residence.
donation, duly authenticated by the Philippine Consulate in Disappointed with the Minister, the spouses revoked the donation
Los Angeles, California, donating the house and lot to her and demanded that he vacate the premises immediately. But the
friend Amanda. The latter brought the deed of donation to Minister refused to leave, claiming that aside from using the
the owner of the project and discovered that Anastacia left bungalow as his residence, he is also using it as a place for worship
unpaid installments and real estate taxes. Amanda paid these on special occasions. Under the circumstances, can Alfredo and
so that the donation in her favor can be registered in the Racquel evict the Minister and recover possession of the
project owner's office. Two months later, Anastacia died, property? If you were the couple's counsel, what action you
leaving her mother Rosa as her sole heir. Rosa filed an action take to protect the interest of your clients? (5%)
to annul the donation on the ground that Amanda did not
give her consent in the deed of donation or in a separate
public instrument. Amanda replied that the donation was an ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
onerous one because she had to pay unpaid installments and Yes, Alfredo and Racquel can bring an action for ejectment against
taxes; hence her acceptance may be implied. Who is correct? the Minister for recovery of possession of the property evict the
(2%) Minister and recover possession of the property. An action for
SUGGESTED ANSWER: annulment of the donation, reconveyance and damages should be
Rosa is correct because the donation is void. The property filed to protect the interests of my client. The donation is an onerous
donated was an immovable. For such donation to be valid, donation and therefore shall be governed by the rules on contracts.
Article 749 of the New Civil Code requires both the donation Because there was no fulfillment or compliance with the condition
and the acceptance to be in a public instrument. There being which is resolutory in character, the donation may now be revoked
no showing that Amanda's acceptance was made in a public and all rights which the donee may have acquired under it shall be
instrument, the donation is void. The contention that the deemed lost and extinguished
donation is onerous and, therefore, need not comply with
Article 749 for validity is without merit. The donation is not (Central Philippine University, G.R. No. 112127, July 17,1995).
onerous because it did not impose on Amanda the obligation ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
to pay the balance on the purchase price or the arrears in real No, an action for ejectment will not prosper. I would advice
estate taxes. Amanda took it upon herself to pay those Alfredo and Racquel that the Minister, by constructing a
amounts voluntarily. For a donation to be onerous, the structure which also serves as a place of worship, has pursued
burden must be imposed by the donor on the donee. In the the objective of the donation. His taking up residence in the
problem, there is no such burden imposed by the donor on bungalow may be regarded as a casual breach and will not
the donee. The donation not being onerous, it must comply warrant revocation of the donation. Similarily, therefore, an
with the formalities of Article 749. action for revocation of the donation will be denied (C. J. Yulo
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: & Sons, Inc. v. Roman Catholic Bishop, G.R. No. 133705,
Neither Rosa nor Amanda is correct. The donation is onerous March 31, 2005; Heirs ofRozendo Sevilla v. De Leon, G.R. No.
only as to the portion of the property corresponding to the 149570, March 12,
value of the installments and taxes paid by Amanda. 2004).
The portion in excess thereof is not onerous. The onerous Donations; Validity; Effectivity; for Unborn Child (1999)
portion is governed by the rules on contracts which do not Elated that her sister who had been married for five years
require the acceptance by the donee to be in any form. The was pregnant for the first time, Alma donated P100,000.00 to
onerous part, therefore, is valid. The portion which is not the unborn child. Unfortunately, the baby died one hour
onerous must comply with Article 749 of the New Civil after delivery. May Alma recover the P100.000.00 that she
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
had donated to said baby before it was born considering not been fixed in the Deed of Donation, the donee is not
that the baby died? Stated otherwise, is the donation valid yet default in his obligation until the period is fixed by order
and binding? Explain. (5%) of the court under Article 1197 of the New Civil Code. Since
SUGGESTED ANSWER: the period has not been fixed as yet, the donee is not yet
The donation is valid and binding, being an act favorable to default, and therefore the donor has no cause of action to
the unborn child, but only if the baby had an intra-uterine life revoke the donation. (Dissenting opinion of Davide, CJ,
of not less than seven months and provided there was due Central Philippine University v. Court of Appeals, 246 SCRA
acceptance of the donation by the proper person representing 511 [1995])
said child. If the child had less than seven months of
PROPERTY
intra-uterine life, it is not deemed born since it died less than
24 hours following its delivery, in which ease the donation
never became effective since the donee never became a
person, birth being determinative of personality. Accretion; Alluvion (2001)
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: For many years, the Rio Grande river deposited soil along its
Even if the baby had an intra-uterine life of more than seven bank, beside the titled land of Jose. In time, such deposit
months and the donation was properly accepted, it would be reached an area of one thousand square meters. With the
void for not having conformed with the proper form. In permission of Jose, Vicente cultivated the said area. Ten years
order to be valid, the donation and acceptance of personal later, a big flood occurred in the river and transferred the
property exceeding five thousand pesos should be in writing. 1000 square meters to the opposite bank, beside the land of
(Article 748, par. 3) Agustin. The land transferred is now contested by Jose and
Agustin as riparian owners and by Vicente who claims
Donations; with Resolutory Condition (2003) ownership by prescription. Who should prevail,? Why? (5%)
In 1950, Dr. Alba donated a parcel of land to Central
University on condition that the latter must establish a SUGGESTED ANSWER:
medical college on the land to be named after him. In the Jose should prevail. The disputed area, which is an alluvion,
year 2000, the heirs of Dr. Alba filed an action to annul the belongs by right of accretion to Jose, the riparian owner (Art.
donation and for the reconveyance of the property donated 457 CC). When, as given in the problem, the very same area"
to them for the failure, after 50 years, of the University to was "transferred" by flood waters to the opposite bank, it
established on the property a medical school named after became an avulsion and ownership thereof is retained by Jose
their father. The University opposed the action on the who has two years to remove it (Art. 459, CC). Vicente's claim
ground of prescription and also because it had not used the based on prescription is baseless since his possession was by
property for some purpose other than that stated in the mere tolerance of Jose and, therefore, did not adversely affect
donation. Should the opposition of the University to the Jose's possession and ownership (Art. 537, CC). Inasmuch as
action of Dr. Alba’s heirs be sustained? Explain. his possession is merely that of a holder, he cannot acquire the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: disputed area by prescription.
The donation may be revoked. The non-established of the medical
college on the donated property was a resolutory condition imposed
on the donation by the donor. Although the Deed of Donation did Accretion; Avulsion (2003)
not fix the time for the established of the medical college, the failure Andres is a riparian owner of a parcel of registered land. His
of the donee to establish the medical college after fifty (50) years land, however, has gradually diminished in area due to the
from the making of the donation should be considered as occurrence current of the river, while the registered land of Mario on the
of the resolutory condition, and the donation may now be revoked. opposite bank has gradually increased in area by 200square
While the general rule is that in case the period is not fixed in the meters.
agreement of the parties, the period must be fixed first by the court
before the obligation may be demanded, the period of fifty (50) years (a) Who has the better right over the 200-square meter area
was more than enough time for the donee to comply with the that has been added to Mario’s registered land, Mario or
condition. Hence, in this case, there is no more need for the court to Andres?
(b) May a third person acquire said 200-square meter land by
fix the period because such procedure with the condition. (Central prescription?
Philippine University v. CA. 246 SCRA 511). SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a. Mario has a better right over the 200 square meters increase
in area by reason of accretion, applying Article 457 of the
New Civil Code, which provides that ―to the owners of lands
ANOTHER SUGGESTED ANSWER: adjoining the banks of rivers belong the accretion which they
The donation may not as yet revoked. The establishment of gradually received from the effects of the current of the
a medical college is not a resolutory or suspensive condition waters‖.
but a ―charge‖, obligation‖, or a ―mode‖. The non- Andres cannot claim that the increase in Mario’s land is his
compliance with the charge or mode will give the donor the own, because such is an accretion and not result of the
right to revoke the donation within four (4) years from the sudden detachment of a known portion of his land and its
time the charge was supposed to have been complied with, or attachment to Mario’s land, a process called ―avulsion‖. He
to enforce the charge by specific performance within ten can no longer claim ownership of the portion of his registered
(10) years from the time the cause of action accrued. land which was gradually and naturally eroded due to the
Inasmuch as the time to established the medical college has current of the river, because he
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
had lost it by operation of law. That portion of the land has reasonable rent, if the owner of the land does not choose to
become part of the public domain. appropriate the building after proper indemnity. The parties
shall agree upon the terms of the lease and in case of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: disagreement, the court fix the terms thereof.
b. Yes, a third party may acquire by prescription the 200
square meters, increase in area, because it is not included in Builder; Good Faith vs. Bad Faith (1999)
the Torrens Title of the riparian owner. Hence, this does not
involve the imprescriptibility conferred by Section 47, (a) Because of confusion as to the boundaries of the
P.D. No. 1529. The fact that the riparian land is registered adjoining lots that they bought from the same subdivision
does not automatically make the accretion thereto a registered company, X constructed a house on the adjoining lot of Y in
land. (Grande v. CA, 115 521 (1962); Jagualing v. CA, 194 SCRA the honest belief that it is the land that he bought from the
607 (1991). subdivision company. What are the respective rights of X
Builder; Good Faith (1992)
and Y with respect to X's house? (3%)
A owns a parcel of residential land worth P500,000.00
(b) Suppose X was in good faith but Y knew that X was
unknown to A, a residential house costing P 100,000.00 is
constructing on his (Y's) land but simply kept quiet about it,
built on the entire parcel by B who claims ownership of the
thinking perhaps that he could get X's house later. What are
land. Answer all the following questions based on the premise
the respective rights of the parties over X's house in this
that B is a builder in good faith and A is a landowner in good
case? (2%)
faith. a) May A acquire the house built by B? If so, how? b) If SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the land increased in value to P500,000.00 by reason (a) The rights of Y, as owner of the lot, and of X, as builder
of a house thereon, are governed by Art. 448 of the Civil
of the building of the house thereon, what amount Code which grants to Y the right to choose between two
should be paid by A in order to acquire the house from remedies: (a) appropriate the house by indemnifying X for its
B? value plus whatever necessary expenses the latter may have
c) Assuming that the cost of the house was P90,000.00 incurred for the preservation of the land, or (b) compel X to
and not P100,000.00, may A require B to buy the land? buy the land if the price of the land is not considerably more
d) If B voluntarily buys the land as desired by A, under than the value of the house. If it is, then X cannot be obliged
what circumstances may A nevertheless be entitled to have to buy the land but he shall pay reasonable rent, and in case
the house removed? of disagreement, the court shall fix the terms of the lease.
e) In what situation may a "forced lease" arise between
A and B. and what terms and conditions would govern the
lease? SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Give reasons for your answers. (b) Since the lot owner Y is deemed to be in bad faith (Art
SUGGESTED ANSWER: 453), X as the party in good faith may (a) remove the house
(a) Yes, A may acquire the house build by B by paying and demand indemnification for damages suffered by him, or
indemnity to B. Article 448 of the Civil Code provides that (b) demand payment of the value of the house plus
the owner of the land on which anything has been built, sown reparation for damages (Art 447, in relation to Art 454). Y
or planted in good faith, shall have the right to appropriate as continues as owner of the lot and becomes, under the second
his own the works, sowing or planting, after payment of the option, owner of the house as well, after he pays the sums
indemnity provided for in Articles 546 and 546 of the Civil demanded.
Code.
Builder; Good Faith vs. Bad Faith (2000)
(b) A should pay B the sum of P50,000. Article 548 of the In good faith, Pedro constructed a five-door commercial
Civil Code provides that useful expenses shall be refunded to building on the land of Pablo who was also in good faith.
the possessor in good faith with the right of retention, the When Pablo discovered the construction, he opted to
person who has defeated him in the possession having the appropriate the building by paying Pedro the cost thereof.
option of refunding the amount of the expenses or of paying However, Pedro insists that he should be paid the current
the increase in value which the thing may have acquired by market value of the building, which was much higher because
reason thereof. The increase in value amounts to P50,000.00. of inflation. 1) Who is correct Pedro or Pablo?(1%) 2) In the
meantime that Pedro is not yet paid, who is entitled to the
rentals of the building, Pedro or Pablo? (1%)
(c) Yes, A may require B to buy the land. Article 448 of the
Civil Code provides that the owner of the land on which SUGGESTED ANSWER:
anything has been built in good faith shall have the right to Pablo is correct. Under Article 448 of the New Civil Code in
oblige the one who built to pay the price of the land if its relation to Article 546, the builder in good faith is entitled to
value is not considerably more than that of the building, a refund of the necessary and useful expenses incurred by
(d) If B agrees to buy land but fails to pay, A can have the him, or the increase in value which the land may have
house removed ( Depra vs. Dumlao, 136 SCRA 475). acquired by reason of the improvement, at the option of the
landowner. The builder is entitled to a refund of the expenses
(e) Article 448 of the Civil Code provides that the builder he incurred, and not to the market value of the improvement
cannot be obliged to buy the land if its value is considerably
more than that of the building. In such case, he shall pay
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
The case of Pecson v. CA, 244 SCRA 407, is not applicable to square meters. Jose claims that Mike is a builder in bad faith
the problem. In the Pecson case, the builder was the owner because he should know the boundaries of his lot, and demands
of the land who later lost the property at a public sale due to that the portion of the house which encroached on his land should
non-payment of taxes. The Court ruled that Article 448 does be destroyed or removed. Mike replies that he is a builder in good
not apply to the case where the owner of the land is the faith and offers to buy the land occupied by the building instead.
builder but who later lost the land; not being applicable, the 1) Is Mike a builder in good faith or bad faith? Why? (3%) 2)
indemnity that should be paid to the buyer must be the fair Whose preference should be followed? Why? (2%)
market value of the building and not just the cost of
construction thereof. The Court opined in that case that to SUGGESTED ANSWER:
do otherwise would unjustly enrich the new owner of the 1) Yes, Mike is a builder in good faith. There is no showing
land. that when he built his house, he knew that a portion thereof
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: encroached on Jose's lot. Unless one is versed in the science
Pedro is correct. In Pecson vs. CA, it was held that Article of surveying, he cannot determine the precise boundaries or
546 of the New Civil Code does not specifically state how the location of his property by merely examining his title. In the
value of useful improvements should be determined in fixing absence of contrary proof, the law presumes that the
the amount of indemnity that the owner of the land should encroachment was done in good faith [Technogas Phils, v.
pay to the builder in good faith. Since the objective of the law CA, 268 SCRA 5, 15 (1997)].
is to adjust the rights of the parties in such manner as "to
administer complete justice to both of them in such a way as 2} None of the preferences shall be followed. The preference
neither one nor the other may enrich himself of that which of Mike cannot prevail because under Article 448 of the Civil
does not belong to him", the Court ruled that the basis of Code, it is the owner of the land who has the option or
reimbursement should be the fair market value of the choice, not the builder. On the other hand, the option
building. belongs to Jose, he cannot demand that the portion of the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: house encroaching on his land be destroyed or removed
2) Pablo is entitled to the rentals of the building. As the because this is not one of the options given by law to the
owner of the land, Pablo is also the owner of the building owner of the land. The owner may choose between the
being an accession thereto. However, Pedro who is entitled to appropriation of what was built after payment of indemnity,
retain the building is also entitled to retain the rentals. He, or to compel the builder to pay for the land if the value of the
however, shall apply the rentals to the indemnity payable to land is not considerably more than that of the building.
him after deducting reasonable cost of repair and Otherwise, the builder shall pay rent for the portion of the
maintenance. land encroached.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Pablo is entitled to the rentals. Pedro became a possessor in 1) Mike cannot be considered a builder in good faith
bad faith from the time he learned that the land belongs to because he built his house without first determining the
Pablo. As such, he loses his right to the building, including corners and boundaries of his lot to make sure that his
the fruits thereof, except the right of retention. construction was within the perimeter of his property. He
could have done this with the help of a geodetic engineer as
Builder; Good Faith vs. Bad Faith; Accession (2000) an ordinary prudent and reasonable man would do under the
a) Demetrio knew that a piece of land bordering the beach circumstances.
belonged to Ernesto. However, since the latter was studying
in Europe and no one was taking care of the land, Demetrio 2) Jose's preference should be followed. He may have
occupied the same and constructed thereon nipa sheds with the building removed at the expense of Mike, appropriate the
tables and benches which he rented out to people who want building as his own, oblige Mike to buy the land and ask for
to have a picnic by the beach. When Ernesto returned, he damages in addition to any of the three options. (Articles
demanded the return of the land. Demetrio agreed to do so 449, 450, 451, CC)
after he has removed the nipa sheds. Ernesto refused to let
Demetrio remove the nipa sheds on the ground that these Chattel Mortgage vs. Pledge (1999)
already belonged to him by right of accession. Who is Distinguish a contract of chattel mortgage from a contract of
correct? (3%) pledge. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Ernesto is correct, Demetrio is a builder in bad faith because In a contract of CHATTEL MORTGAGE possession
he knew beforehand that the land belonged to Ernesto, under belongs to the creditor, while in a contract of PLEDGE
Article 449 of the New Civil Code, one who builds on the possession belongs to the debtor.
land of another loses what is built without right to indemnity.
Ernesto becomes the owner of the nipa sheds by right of A chattel mortgage is a formal contract while a pledge is a
accession. Hence, Ernesto is well within his right in refusing real contract.
to allow the removal of the nipa sheds.
A contract of chattel mortgage must be recorded in a public
Builder; Good Faith vs. Bad Faith; Presumption (2001) instrument to bind third persons while a contract of pledge
Mike built a house on his lot in Pasay City. Two years later, a must be in a public instrument containing description of the
survey disclosed that a portion of the building actually stood on thing pledged and the date thereof to bind third persons.
the neighboring land of Jose, to the extent of 40
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Chattel Mortgage; Immovables (1994) foreclosure sale, foreclosed the mortgage and acquired X’s
Vini constructed a building on a parcel of land he leased from house and lot. Learning of the proceedings conducted by the
Andrea. He chattel mortgaged the land to Felicia. When he bank, Z is now demanding that the bank reconvey to him X’s
could not pay Felicia. Felicia initiated foreclosure proceedings. house or pay X’s loan to him plus interests. Is Z’s demand
Vini claimed that the building he had constructed on the against the bank valid and sustainable? Why? 5%
leased land cannot be validly foreclosed because the building SUGGESTED ANSWER:
was, by law, an immovable. Is Vini correct? No, Z’s demand is not valid. A building is immovable or real
property whether it is erected by the owner of the land, by a
SUGGESTED ANSWERS: usufructuary, or by a lessee. It may be treated as a movable by
a) The Chattel Mortgage is void and cannot be foreclosed the parties to chattel mortgage but such is binding only
because the building is an immovable and cannot be an between them and not on third parties (Evangelista v. Alto
object of a chattel mortgage. Surety Col, inc. 103 Phil. 401 [1958]). In this case, since the
bank is not a party to the chattel mortgage, it is not bound by
b) It depends. If the building was intended and is built of it, as far as the Bank is concerned, the chattel mortgage, does
light materials, the chattel mortgage may be considered as not exist. Moreover, the chattel mortgage does not exist.
valid as between the parties and it may be considered in Moreover, the chattel mortgage is void because it was not
respect to them as movable property, since it can be removed registered. Assuming that it is valid, it does not bind the Bank
from one place to another. But if the building is of strong because it was not annotated on the title of the land
material and is not capable of being removed or transferred mortgaged to the bank. Z cannot demand that the Bank pay
without being destroyed, the chattel mortgage is void and him the loan Z extended to X, because the Bank was not
cannot be foreclosed. privy to such loan transaction.
c) If it was the land which Vini chattel mortgaged, such ANOTHER SUGGESTED ANSWER:
mortgage would be void, or at least unenforceable, since he No, Z’s demand against the bank is not valid. His demand
was not the owner of the land. that the bank reconvey to him X’s house presupposes that he
If what was mortgaged as a chattel is the building, the chattel has a real right over the house. All that Z has is a personal
mortgage is valid as between the parties only, on grounds of right against X for damages for breach of the contract of
estoppel which would preclude the mortgagor from assailing loan.
the contract on the ground that its subject-matter is an
immovable. Therefore Vini's defense is untenable, and Felicia The treatment of a house, even if built on rented land, as
can foreclose the mortgage over the building, observing, movable property is void insofar as third persons, such as the
however, the procedure prescribed for the execution of sale bank, are concerned. On the other hand, the Bank already
of a judgment debtor's immovable under Rule 39, Rules of had a real right over the house and lot when the mortgage
Court, specifically, that the notice of auction sale should be was annotated at the back of the Torrens title. The bank later
published in a newspaper of general circulation. became the owner in the foreclosure sale. Z cannot ask the
bank to pay for X’s loan plus interest. There is no privity of
contract between Z and the bank.
d) The problem that Vini mortgaged the land by way of a ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
chattel mortgage is untenable. Land can only be the subject The answer hinges on whether or not the bank is an innocent
matter of a real estate mortgage and only an absolute owner mortgagee in good faith or a mortgagee in bad faith. In the
of real property may mortgage a parcel of land. (Article 2085 former case, Z’s demand is not valid. In the latter case, Z’s
(2) Civil Code). Hence, there can be no foreclosure. demand against the bank is valid and sustainable.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Lawrence's insurance claim for damage to the aircraft was
denied thus leaving him nothing else but the aircraft which
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
2. (a) There can be no easement over a usufruct. Since an there is a degree of regularity to indicate continuity of
easement may be constituted only on a corporeal immovable possession and that if coupled with an apparent sign, such
property, no easement may be constituted on a usufruct which easement of way may be acquired by prescription.
is not a corporeal right ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
(b) There can be no usufruct over an easement. While a Yes, Ernie could close the pathway on his land. Don has not
usufruct maybe created over a right, such right must have an acquired an easement of right of way either by agreement or
existence of its own independent of the property. A servitude by judicial grant. Neither did the buyers. Thus, establishment
cannot be the object of a usufruct because it has no existence of a road or unlawful use of the land of Ernie would
independent of the property to which It attaches. constitute an invasion of possessory rights of the owner,
which under Article 429 of the Civil Code may be repelled or
ALTERNATIVE ANSWERS: prevented. Ernie has the right to exclude any person from the
There cannot be a usufruct over an easement since an enjoyment and disposal of the land. This is an attribute of
easement presupposes two (2) tenements belonging to ownership that Ernie enjoys.
different persons and the right attaches to the tenement and ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
not to the owner. While a usufruct gives the usufructuary a Yes, Ernie may close the pathway, subject however, to the
right to use, right to enjoy, right to the fruits, and right to rights of the lot buyers. Since there is no access to the public
possess, an easement gives only a limited use of the servient road, this results in the creation of a legal easement. The lot
estate. buyers have the right to demand that Ernie grant them a right
However, a usufruct can be constituted over a property that of way. In turn, they have the obligation to pay the value of
has in its favor an easement or one burdened with servitude. the portion used as a right of way, plus damages.
The usufructuary will exercise the easement during the period
of usufruct.
c) What are the rights of the lot buyers, if any? Explain.
(c) There can be no easement over another easement for the (2%)
same reason as in (a). An easement, although it is a real right SUGGESTED ANSWER:
over an immovable, is not a corporeal right. There is a Prior to the grant of an easement, the buyers of the dominant
Roman maxim which says that: There can be no servitude estate have no other right than to compel grant of easement of
over another servitude. right of way. Since the properties of the buyers are surrounded
by other immovables and has no adequate outlet to a public
Easement; Effects; Discontinuous Easements; Permissive highway and the isolation is not due to their acts, buyers may
Use (2005) demand an easement of a right of way provided proper
Don was the owner of an agricultural land with no access to a indemnity is paid and the right of way demanded is the
public road. He had been passing through the land of Ernie shortest and least prejudicial to Ernie. (Villanueva v. Velasco,
with the latter's acquiescence for over 20 years. Subsequently, G.R. No. 130845, November 27, 2000).
Don subdivided his property into 20 residential lots and sold
them to different persons. Ernie blocked the pathway and
Easement; Nuisance; Abatement (2002)
refused to let the buyers pass through his land. Lauro owns an agricultural land planted mostly with fruit
trees. Hernando owns an adjacent land devoted to his piggery
a) Did Don acquire an easement of right of way? Explain. business, which is two (2) meters higher in elevation.
(2%) Although Hernando has constructed a waste disposal lagoon
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
No, Don did not acquire an easement of right of way. An for his piggery, it is inadequate to contain the waste water
easement of right of way is discontinuous in nature — it is containing pig manure, and it often overflows and inundates
exercised only if a man passes over somebody's land. Under Lauro’s plantation. This has increased the acidity of the soil in
Article 622 of the Civil Code, discontinuous easements, the plantation, causing the trees to wither and die. Lauro sues
whether apparent or not, may only be acquired by virtue of a for damages caused to his plantation. Hernando invokes his
title. The Supreme Court, in Abellana, Sr. v. Court of Appeals right to the benefit of a natural easement in favor of his
(G.R. No. 97039, April 24, 1992), ruled that an easement of higher estate, which imposes upon the lower estate of Lauro
right of way being discontinuous in nature is not acquirable by the obligation to receive the waters descending from the
prescription. higher estate. Is Hernando correct? (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Further, possession of the easement by Don is only
Hernando is wrong. It is true that Lauro’s land is burdened
permissive, tolerated or with the acquiescence of Ernie. It is
with the natural easement to accept or receive the water
settled in the case of Cuaycong v. Benedicto (G.R. No. 9989,
which naturally and without interruption of man descends
March 13, 1918) that a permissive use of a road over the land
from a higher estate to a lower estate. However, Hernando
of another, no matter how long continued, will not create an
has constructed a waste disposal lagoon for his piggery and it
easement of way by prescription.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
is this waste water that flows downward to Lauro’s land.
Yes, Don acquired an easement of right of way. An easement that Hernando has, thus, interrupted the flow of water and has
is continuous and apparent can be acquired by prescription and created and is maintaining a nuisance. Under Act. 697 NCC,
title. According to Professor Tolentino, an easement of right of way abatement of a nuisance does not preclude recovery of
may have a continuous nature if
damages by Lauro even for the past existence of a nuisance.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
The claim for damages may also be premised in Art. 2191 to time. As Tomas' business grows, the need for use of
(4) NCC. modern conveyances requires widening of the easement.
ANOTHER ANSWER: ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Hernando is not correct. Article 637 of the New Civil Code The facts show that the need for a wider right of way arose
provides that the owner of the higher estate cannot make from the increased production owing to the acquisition by
works which will increase the burden on the servient estate. Tomas of an additional area. Under Art. 626 of the Civil
(Remman Enterprises, Inc. v. CA, 330 SCRA 145 [2000]). The Code, the easement can be used only for the immovable
owner of the higher estate may be compelled to pay damages originally contemplated. Hence, the increase in width is
to the owner of the lower estate. justified and should have been granted.
This easement is not compulsory if the isolation of the If you were George's counsel, what legal steps will you
immovable is due to the proprietor's own acts. (564a). The take? Explain. (5%)
easement of right of way shall be established at the point least SUGGESTED ANSWER:
If I were George's counsel, I would first demand that Manny
prejudicial to the servient estate, and insofar as consistent
vacate the apartment. If Manny refuses, I will file an
with this rule, where the distance from the dominant estate to
a public highway may be the shortest (Art. 650, NCC: Vda. de ejectment suit. When Manny was allowed by his parents to
Baltazar v. CA. 245 SCRA 333}
occupy the premises, without compensation, the contract of
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: commodatum was created. Upon the death of the father, the
The requisites for a compulsory easement of right of way are: (a) contract was extinguished as it is a purely personal contract.
the dominant estate is surrounded by other immovables and is As the new owner of the apartment George is entitled to
without an adequate outlet to a public street or highway; (b) proper exercise his right of possession over the same.
indemnity must be paid; (c) the isolation must not be due to the acts
of the owner of the dominant estate; and (d) the right of way
claimed is at a point least prejudicial to the servient estate and, Extra-Judicial Partition; Fraud (1990)
insofar as is X was the owner of a 10,000 square meter property. X
married Y and out of their union. A, B and C were born.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
After the death of Y, X married Z and they begot as share allotted by law to the finder since the phrase "by
children, D, E and F. After the death of X, the children of chance" means "by accident", meaning an unexpected discovery.
the first and second marriages executed an extrajudicial The liberal view, however, would sustain Tim's right to the allocated
share interpreting the phrase in question as meaning "by a stroke of
partition of the aforestated property on May 1, 1970. D, E good fortune", which does not rule out deliberate or intentional
and F were given a one thousand square meter portion of the search. It is submitted that the liberal view should prevail since in
property. They were minors at the time of the execution of practical reality, hidden treasure is hardly ever found without
the document. D was 17 years old, E was 14 and F was 12; conscious effort to find it, and the strict view would tend to render
the codal provision in question illusory.
and they were made to believe by A, B and C that unless they
sign the document they will not get any share. Z was not
present then. In January 1974, D, E and F filed an action in
court to nullify the suit alleging they discovered the fraud
only in 1973. Hidden Treasures (1997)
(a) Can the minority of D, E and F be a basis to nullify the Marcelino, a treasure hunter as just a hobby, has found a map
partition? Explain your answer. which appears to indicate the location of hidden treasure. He
(b) How about fraud? Explain your answer. has an idea of the land where the treasure might possibly be
SUGGESTED ANSWER: found. Upon inquiry, Marcelino learns that the owner of the
(a) Yes, minority can be a basis to nullify the partition land, Leopoldo, is a permanent resident of Canada, Nobody,
because D, E and F were not properly represented by their however, could give him Leopoldo's exact address.
parents or guardians at the time they contracted the extra- Ultimately, anyway, he enters the land and conducts a search.
judicial partition. (Articles 1327. 1391, Civil Code). He succeeds.
(b) In the case of fraud, when through insidious words or Leopoldo learning of Marcelino's "find", seeks to recover the
machinations of one party the other is induced to enter into treasure from Marcelino but the latter is not willing to part
the contract without which he would not have agreed to, the with it. Failing to reach an agreement, Leopoldo sues
action still prosper because under Art, 1391 of the Civil Marcelino for the recovery of the property. Marcelino
Code, in case of fraud, the action for annulment may be contests the action. How would you decide the case?
brought within four years from the discovery of the fraud.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I would decide in favor of Marcelino since he is considered a
Hidden Treasure (1995) finder by chance of the hidden treasure, hence, he is entitled
Tim came into possession of an old map showing where a to one-half (1/2) of the hidden treasure. While Marcelino
purported cache of gold bullion was hidden. Without any may have had the intention to look for the hidden treasure,
authority from the government Tim conducted a relentless still he is a finder by chance since it is enough that he tried to
search and finally found the treasure buried in a new river look for it. By chance in the law does not mean sheer luck
bed formerly part of a parcel of land owned by spouses Tirso such that the finder should have no intention at all to look
and Tessie. The old river which used to cut through the land for the treasure. By chance means good luck, implying that
of spouses Ursula and Urbito changed its course through one who intentionally looks for the treasure is embraced in
natural causes. To whom shall the treasure belong? Explain. the provision. The reason is that it is extremely difficult to
find hidden treasure without looking for it deliberately.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Marcelino is not a trespasser since there is no prohibition for
The treasure was found in a property of public dominion, the him to enter the premises, hence, he is entitled to half of the
new river bed. Since Tim did not have authority from the treasure.
government and, therefore, was a trespasser, he is not
entitled to the one-half share allotted to a finder of hidden ALTERNATIVE ANSWERS:
treasure. All of it will go to the State. In addition, under Art. 1. Marcelino did not find the treasure by chance because he
438 of the NCC in order that the finder be entitled to the had a map, he knew the location of the hidden treasure and
1/2 share, the treasure must be found by chance, that is by he intentionally looked for the treasure, hence, he is not
sheer luck. In this case, since Tim found the treasure not by entitled to any part of the treasure.
chance but because he relentlessly searched for it, he is not
entitled to any share in the hidden treasure. 2. Marcelino appears to be a trespasser and although there
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: may be a question of whether he found it by chance or not,
The law grants a one-half share to a finder of hidden treasure as he has found the hidden treasure by means of a treasure
provided he is not a trespasser and the finding is by chance. It is
submitted that Tim is not a trespasser despite his not getting map, he will not be entitled to a finder's share. The hidden
authority from the government, because the new river bed where he treasure shall belong to the owner.
found the treasure is property for public use (Art. 420 NCC), to
which the public has legitimate access. The question, therefore, 3. The main rule is that hidden treasure belongs to the
boils down to whether or not the finding was by chance in view of
the fact that Tim "conducted a relentless search" before finding the
owner of the land, building or other property on which it is
treasure. The strict or literal view holds that deliberate or intentional found. If it is found by chance by a third person and he is not
search precludes entitlement to the one-half a trespasser, he is entitled to one-half (1/2). If he is a
trespasser, he loses everything.
ANOTHER ANSWER: In the meanwhile, Pedro, who was still in possession of the
No, the suit will not prosper. The sale is valid and Jerico is a land, constructed a warehouse on the property. In 1988, the
buyer in good faith. PNB sold the land to Pablo, the Deed of Sale was amended
ANOTHER ANSWER: in 1989 to include the warehouse.
Under the law on Sales, when the thing sold is delivered by
the seller to the buyer without reservation of ownership, the Pedro, claiming ownership of the warehouse, files a complaint
ownership is transferred to the buyer. Therefore in the suit of to annul the amended Deed of Sale before the Regional Trial
United Car Sales, Inc. against Jerico for the recovery of the Court of Quezon City, where he resides, against both the
car, the plaintiff should not be allowed to recover the car PNB and Pablo. The PNB filed a motion to dismiss the
without reimbursing the defendant for the price that the latter complaint for improper venue contending that the warehouse
paid. (EDCA Publishing and Distributing Corp. vs. Santos, 184 is real property under Article 415(1) of the Civil Code and
SCRA 614, April 26, 1990) therefore the action should have instead been filed in Malolos,
Bulacan. Pedro claims otherwise. The question arose as to
Property; Real vs. Personal Property (1995)
whether the warehouse should be considered as real or as
personal property.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
If consulted, what would your legal advice be? latter vacate the premises and deliver the same to the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: former. Petronila refused to vacate the place on the ground
The warehouse which is a construction adhered to the soil is that the usufruct in her favor would expire only on 1 June
an immovable by nature under Art. 415 (1) and the proper 1998 when Manuel would have reached his 30th birthday and
venue of any case to recover ownership of the same, which is that the death of Manuel before his 30th birthday did not
what the purpose of the complaint to annul the amended extinguish the usufruct. Whose contention should be
Deed of Sale amounts to, should be the place where the accepted?
property is located, or the RTC of Bulacan. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
ADDITIONAL ANSWERS: Petronila's contention is correct. Under Article 606 of the
1. Buildings are always immovable property, and even in the Civil Code, a usufruct granted for the time that may elapse
instances where the parties to a contract seem to have dealt with before a third person reaches a certain age shall subsist for
it separate and apart from the land on which it stood in no wise the number of years specified even if the third person should
does it change its character as immovable property. A building is die unless there is an express stipulation in the contract that
an immovable even if not erected by the owner of the land. The states otherwise. In the case at bar, there is no express
only criterion is union or incorporation with the soil. (Ladera vs. stipulation that the consideration for the usufruct is the
Hodges (CA) 48 existence of Petronila's son. Thus, the general rule and not
O.G. 4374) (Reyes and Puno, Outline of Philippine Civil Law, the exception should apply in this case.
Vol. 2. p.7) ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
This is a usufruct which is clearly intended for the benefit of
2. The warehouse built by Pedro on the mortgaged property Manuel until he reaches 30 yrs. of age with Petronila serving
is real property within the context of Article 415 of the New only as a conduit, holding the property in trust for his
Civil Code, although it was built by Pedro after the benefit. The death of Manuel at the age of 26 therefore,
foreclosure sale without the knowledge and consent of the terminated the usufruct.
new owner which makes him a builder in bad faith, this does
not alter the character of the warehouse as a real property by
incorporation. It is a structure which cannot be removed LAND TRANSFER &
without causing injury to the land. So, my advice to Pedro is
to file the case with the RTC of Bulacan, the situs of the DEEDS
property,
(Note: If the examinee does not mention that the structure was built Acquisition of Lands; Citizenship Requirement (2003)
by a builder in bad faith, it should be given full credit). In 1970, the spouses Juan and Juana de la Cruz, then
Filipinos, bought the parcel of unregistered land in the
Sower; Good Faith/ Bad Faith (2000) Philippines on which they built a house which became their
Felix cultivated a parcel of land and planted it to sugar cane, residence. In 1986, they migrated to Canada and became
believing it to be his own. When the crop was eight months Canadian citizens. Thereafter, in 1990, they applied, opposed
old, and harvestable after two more months, a resurvey of by the Republic, for the registration of the aforesaid land in
the land showed that it really belonged to Fred. What are the their names. Should the application of the spouses de la Cruz
options available to Fred? (2%) be granted over the Republic’s opposition? Why? 5%
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
As to the pending crops planted by Felix in good faith, Fred
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
has the option of allowing Felix to continue the cultivation Yes, the application should be granted. As a rule, the
and to harvest the crops, or to continue the cultivation and Constitution prohibits aliens from owning private lands in the
harvest the crops himself. In the latter option, however, Felix Philippines. This rule, however, does not apply to the spouses
shall have the right to a part of the expenses of cultivation Juan and Juana de la Cruz because at the time they acquired
and to a part of the net harvest, both in proportion to the ownership over the land, albeit imperfect, they were still
time of possession. (Art. 545 NCC), Filipino citizens. The application for registration is a mere
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Since sugarcane is not a perennial crop. Felix is considered a confirmation of the imperfect title which the spouses have
sower in good faith. Being so, Art. 448 applies. The options already acquired before they became Canadian citizens.
available to Fred are: (a) to appropriate the crop after paying (Republic v. CA, 235 SCRA 567 [1994]).
Felix the indemnity under Art. 546, or (b) to require Felix to
pay rent. Adverse Claims; Notice of Levy (1998)
Section 70 of Presidential Decree No. 1529, concerning
Usufruct (1997) adverse claims on registered land, provides a 30-day period of
On 1 January 1980, Minerva, the owner of a building, granted effectivity of an adverse claim, counted from the date of its
Petronila a usufruct over the property until 01 June 1998 registration. Suppose a notice of adverse claim based upon a
when Manuel, a son of Petronila, would have reached his contract to sell was registered on March 1, 1997 at the
30th birthday. Manuel, however, died on 1 June 1990 when instance of the BUYER, but on June 1, 1997, or after the
he was only 26 years old. lapse of the 30-day period, a notice of levy on execution in
favor of a JUDGMENT CREDITOR was also registered to
Minerva notified Petronila that the usufruct had been enforce a final judgment for money against the registered
extinguished by the death of Manuel and demanded that the owner. Then, on June 15, 1997 there having been no formal
cancellation of his notice of adverse claim, the BUYER pays
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
to the seller-owner the agreed purchase price in full and residential, commercial, industrial, or similar productive
registers the corresponding deed of sale. Because the purposes, and only by lease when not needed by the
annotation of the notice of levy is carried over to the new title government for public service.
in his name, the BUYER brings an action against the
JUDGMENT CREDITOR to cancel such annotation, but (2) If the land is suited or actually used for fishpond or
the latter claims that his lien is superior because it was aquaculture purposes, it comes under the Jurisdiction of the
annotated after the adverse claim of the BUYER had ipso Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) and can
facto ceased to be effective. Will the suit prosper? [5%] only be acquired by lease. (P.D. 705)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The suit will prosper. While an adverse claim duly annotated (3) Free Patent is a mode of concession under Section 41,
at the back of a title under Section 7O of P.D. 1529 is good Chapter VII of the Public Land Act, which is applicable only
only for 30 days, cancellation thereof is still necessary to for agricultural lands.
render it ineffective, otherwise, the inscription thereof will
remain annotated as a lien on the property. While the life of (4) The certificate of the district forester that the land is
adverse claim is 3O days under P.D. 1529, it continuous to already "alienable and disposable" simply means that the land
be effective until it is canceled by formal petition filed with is no longer needed for forest purposes, but the Bureau of
the Register of Deeds. Lands could no longer dispose of it by free patent because it
is already covered by a lease contract between BFAR and
The cancellation of the notice of levy is justified under Regina. That contract must be respected.
Section 108 of P.D. 1529 considering that the levy on
execution can not be enforced against the buyer whose (5) The free patent of Jorge is highly irregular and void ab
adverse claim against the registered owner was recorded initio, not only because the Bureau has no statutory authority
ahead of the notice of levy on execution. to issue a free patent over a foreshore area, but also because
of the false statements made in his sworn application that he
Annotation of Lis Pendens; When Proper (2001) has occupied and cultivated the land since July 4, 1945, as
Mario sold his house and lot to Carmen for P1 million required by the free patent law. Under Section 91 of the
payable in five (5) equal annual installments. The sale was Public Land Act, any patent concession or title obtained thru
registered and title was issued in Carmen's name. Carmen false representation is void ab initio. In cases of this nature, it
failed to pay the last three installments and Mario filed an. is the government that shall institute annulment proceedings
action for collection, damages and attorneys fees against her. considering that the suit carries with it a prayer for the
Upon filing of the complaint, he caused a notice of lis reversion of the land to the state. However, Regina is a party
pendens to be annotated on Carmen's title. Is the notice of lis in interest and the case will prosper because she has a lease
pendens proper or not? Why? (5%) contract for the same land with the government.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The notice of lis pendens is not proper for the reason that
the case filed by Mario against Carmen is only for collection, Forgery; Innocent Purchaser; Holder in Bad Faith (2005)
damages, and attorney's fees. Rod, the owner of an FX taxi, found in his vehicle an
envelope containing TCT No. 65432 over a lot registered in
Annotation of a lis pendens can only be done in cases Cesar's name. Posing as Cesar, Rod forged Cesar's signature
involving recovery of possession of real property, or to quiet on a Deed of Sale in Rod's favor. Rod registered the said
title or to remove cloud thereon, or for partition or any other document with the Register of Deeds, and obtained a new
proceeding affecting title to the land or the use or occupation title in his name. After a year, he sold the lot to Don, a buyer
thereof. The action filed by Mario does not fall on anyone of in good faith and for value, who also registered the lot in his
these. name.
a) Did Rod acquire title to the land? Explain. (2%)
Foreshore Lands (2000) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Regina has been leasing foreshore land from the Bureau of No, Rod did not acquire title to the land. The inscription in
Fisheries and Aquatic Resources for the past 15 years. the registry, to be effective, must be made in good faith. The
Recently, she learned that Jorge was able to obtain a free defense of indefeasibility of a Torrens Title does not extend
patent from the Bureau of Agriculture, covering the same to a transferee who takes the certificate of title with notice of
land, on the basis of a certification by the District Forester a flaw. A holder in bad faith of a certificate of title is not
that the same is already "alienable and disposable". Moreover, entitled to the protection of the law, for the law cannot be
Jorge had already registered the patent with the Register of used as a shield for frauds. (Samonte v. Court of Appeals, G.R.
Deeds of the province, and he was issued an Original No. 104223, July 12, 2001)
Certificate of Title for the same. Regina filed an action for
annulment of Jorge's title on the ground that it was obtained In the case at bar, Rod only forged Cesar's signature on the
fraudulently. Will the action prosper? (2%) -Deed of Sale. It is very apparent that there was bad faith on
SUGGESTED ANSWER: the part of Rod from the very beginning. As such, he is not
An action for the annulment of Jorge's Original Certificate of entitled to the protection of the Land Registration Act.
Title will prosper on the following grounds: b) Discuss the rights of Don, if any, over the property.
(1) Under Chapter IX of C .A, No. 141, otherwise known as (2%)
the Public Land Act, foreshore lands are disposable for SUGGESTED ANSWER:
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
It is a well-known rule in this jurisdiction that persons
dealing with registered land have the legal right to rely on the The mortgage to Desiderio should be cancelled without
face of the Torrens Certificate of Title and to dispense with prejudice to his right to go after Catalino and/or the
the need to inquire further, except when the party concerned government for compensation from the assurance fund.
has actual knowledge of facts and circumstances that would
impel a reasonably cautious man to make such inquiry. Fraud; Procurement of Patent; Effect (2000)
(Naawan Community Rural Bank v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. In 1979, Nestor applied for and was granted a Free Patent
128573, January 13, 2003) over a parcel of agricultural land with an area of 30 hectares,
located in General Santos City. He presented the Free Patent
In the given problem, the property was already registered in to the Register of Deeds, and he was issued a corresponding
the name of Rod when he bought the same from the latter. Original Certificate of Title (OCT) No. 375, Subsequently,
Thus, Don could be considered as a buyer in good faith and Nestor sold the land to Eddie. The deed of sale was
for value. However, since Rod did not actually sell any submitted to the Register of Deeds and on the basis thereof,
property to him, Don has no right to retain ownership over OCT No, 375 was cancelled and Transfer Certificate of Title
the property. He has only the right to recover the purchase (TCT) No. 4576 was issued in the name of Eddie. In 1986,
price plus damages. the Director of Lands filed a complaint for annulment of
OCT No, 375 and TCT No. 4576 on the ground that Nestor
Forgery; Innocent Purchaser; Mirror Principle (1991) obtained the Free Patent through fraud. Eddie filed a motion
Bruce is the registered owner, of a parcel of land with a to dismiss on the ground that he was an innocent purchaser
building thereon and is in peaceful possession thereof. He for value and in good faith and as such, he has acquired a title
pays the real estate taxes and collects the rentals therefrom. to the property which is valid, unassailable and indefeasible.
Later, Catalino, the only brother of Bruce, filed a petition Decide the motion. (5%)
where he, misrepresenting to be the attorney-in-fact of Bruce SUGGESTED ANSWER:
and falsely alleging that the certificate of title was lost, The motion of Nestor to dismiss the complaint for annulment
succeeded in obtaining a second owner's duplicate copy of of O.C.T. No. 375 and T.C.T. No. 4576 should be denied for
the title and then had the same transferred in his name the following reasons: 1) Eddie cannot claim protection as an
through a simulated deed of sale in his favor. Catalino then innocent
mortgaged the property to Desiderio who had the mortgage purchaser for value nor can he interpose the defense of
annotated on the title. Upon learning of the fraudulent indefeasibility of his title, because his TCT is rooted on a
transaction, Bruce filed a complaint against Catalino and void title. Under Section 91 of CA No. 141, as amended,
Desiderio to have the title of Catalino and the mortgage in otherwise known as the Public Land Act, statements of
favor of Desiderio declared null and void. Will the complaint material facts in the applications for public land must be
prosper, or will the title of Catalino and the mortgage to under oath. Section 91 of the same act provides that such
Desiderio be sustained? statements shall be considered as essential conditions and
SUGGESTED ANSWER: parts of the concession, title, or permit issued, any false
The complaint for the annulment of Catalino's Title will statement therein, or omission of facts shall ipso facto
prosper. In the first place, the second owner's copy of the produce the cancellation of the concession. The patent
title secured by him from the Land Registration Court is void issued to Nestor in this case is void ab initio not only
ab initio, the owner's copy thereof having never been lost, let because it was obtained by fraud but also because it
alone the fact that said second owner's copy of the title was covers 30 hectares which is far beyond the maximum of
fraudulently procured and improvidently issued by the Court. 24 hectares provided by the free patent law.
In the second place, the Transfer Certificate of Title procured
by Catalino is equally null and void, it having been issued on 2) The government can seek annulment of the original
the basis of a simulated or forged Deed of Sale. A forged and transfer certificates of title and the reversion of the land
deed is an absolute nullity and conveys no title. The mortgage to the state. Eddie's defense is untenable. The protection
in favor of Desiderio is likewise null and void because the afforded by the Torrens System to an innocent purchaser for
mortgagor is not the owner of the mortgaged property. While value can be availed of only if the land has been titled thru
it may be true that under the "Mirror Principle" of the Torrens judicial proceedings where the issue of fraud becomes
System of Land Registration, a buyer or mortgagee has the academic after the lapse of one (1) year from the issuance of
right to rely on what appears on the Certificate of Title, and the decree of registration. In public land grants, the action of
in the absence of anything to excite suspicion, is under no the government to annul a title fraudulently obtained does
obligation to look beyond the certificate and investigate the not prescribe such action and will not be barred by the
mortgagor's title, this rule does not find application in the transfer of the title to an innocent purchaser for value.
case at hand because here. Catalino's title suffers from two
fatal infirmities, namely: a) The fact that it emanated from a
forged deed of a Homestead Patents; Void Sale (1999)
In 1950, the Bureau of Lands issued a Homestead patent to
simulated sale; b) The fact that it was derived from a A. Three years later, A sold the homestead to B. A died in
fraudulently 1990, and his heirs filed an action to recover the homestead
procured or improvidently issued second owner's copy, from B on the ground that its sale by their father to the latter
the real owner's copy being still intact and in the is void under Section 118 of the Public Land Law. B
possession of the true owner, Bruce. contends, however, that the heirs of A cannot recover the
Page 71 of 119
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
homestead from him anymore because their action has Cesar bought a residential condominium unit from High
prescribed and that furthermore, A was in pari delicto. Rise Co. and paid the price in full. He moved into the unit, but
Decide. (5%) somehow he was not given the Condominium Certificate of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Title covering the property. Unknown to him, High Rise Co.
The sale of the land by A to B 3 years after issuance of the subsequently mortgaged the entire condominium building to
homestead patent, being in violation of Section 118 of the Metrobank as security for a loan of P500 million. High Rise
Public Land Act, is void from its inception. Co. failed to pay the loan and the bank foreclosed the
mortgage. At the foreclosure sale, the bank acquired the
The action filed by the heirs of B to declare the nullity or building, being the highest bidder. When Cesar learned about
inexistence of the contract and to recover the land should be this, he filed an action to annul the foreclosure sale insofar as
given due course. his unit was concerned. The bank put up the defense that it
relied on the condominium certificates of title presented by
B's defense of prescription is untenable because an action High Rise Co., which were clean. Hence, it was a mortgagee
which seeks to declare the nullity or inexistence of A contract and buyer in good faith. Is this defense tenable or not? Why?
does not prescribe. (Article 1410; Banaga vs. Soler, 2 8CRA (5%.)
765) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Metrobank's defense is untenable. As a rule, an innocent
On the other hand, B's defense of pari delicto is equally purchaser for value acquires a good and a clean title to the
untenable. While as a rule, parties who are in pari delicto have property. However, it is settled that one who closes his eyes
no recourse against each other on the principle that a to facts that should put a reasonable man on guard is not an
transgressor cannot profit from his own wrongdoing, such innocent purchaser for value. In the present problem the
rule does not apply to violations of Section 118 of the Public bank is expected, as a matter of standard operating procedure,
Land Act because of the underlying public policy in the said to have conducted an ocular inspection, of the promises
Act "to conserve the land which a homesteader has acquired by gratuitous before granting any loan. Apparently, Metrobank did not
grant from the government for himself and his family". In keeping with follow this procedure. Otherwise, it should have discovered
this policy, it has been held that one who purchases a that the condominium unit in question was occupied by Cesar
homestead within the five-year prohibitory period can only and that fact should have led it to make further inquiry.
recover the price which he has paid by filing a claim against Under the circumstances, Metrobank cannot be considered a
the estate of the deceased seller (Labrador vs. Delos Santos 66 mortgagee and buyer in good faith.
Phil. 579) under the principle that no one shall enrich himself
at the expense of another. Applying the pari delicto rule to Mirror Principle (1990)
violation of Section 118 of the Public Land Act, the Court of In 1950's, the Government acquired a big landed estate in
Appeals has ruled that "the homesteader suffers the loss of Central Luzon from the registered owner for subdivision into
the fruits realized by the vendee who in turn forfeits the small farms and redistribution of bonafide occupants, F was
improvement that he has introduced into the land." (Obot vs. a former lessee of a parcel of land, five hectares in area. After
SandadiUas, 69 OG, April 35, 1966} completion of the resurvey and subdivision, F applied to buy
FIRST ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: the said land in accordance with the guidelines of the
The action to declare the nullity of the sale did not prescribe implementing agency. Upon full payment of the price in
(Art. 1410}, such sale being one expressly prohibited and 1957, the corresponding deed of absolute sale was executed
declared void by the Public Lands Act [Art. 1409, par. (7)]. in his favor and was registered, and in 1961, a new title was
The prohibition of the law is clearly for the protection of the issued in his name. In 1963, F sold the said land to X; and in
heirs of A such that their recovering the property would 1965 X sold it to Y, new titles were successively issued in the
enhance the public policy regarding ownership of lands names of the said purchasers.
acquired by homestead patent (Art. 1416). The defense of
pari delicto is not applicable either, since the law itself allows In 1977, C filed an action to annul the deeds of sale to F, X
the homesteader to reacquire the land even if it has been sold. and Y and their titles, on the ground that he (C) had been in
actual physical possession of the land, and that the sale to F
SECOND ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
and the subsequent sales should be set aside on the ground of
Prescription does not arise with respect to actions to declare a
fraud. Upon motion of defendants, the trial court dismissed
void contract a nullity (Article 1410). Neither is the doctrine
the complaint, upholding their defenses of their being
of pari delicto applicable because of public policy. The law is
innocent purchasers for value, prescription and laches.
designed for the protection of the plaintiff so as to enhance
Plaintiff appealed.
the public policy of the Public Land Act to give land to the (a) Is the said appeal meritorious? Explain your
landless. (b) Suppose the government agency concerned joined C in
answer
filing the said action against the defendants, would that
If the heirs are not allowed to recover, it could be on the
change the result of the litigation? Explain.
ground of laches inasmuch as 40 years had elapsed and the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
owner had not brought any action against B especially if the (a) The appeal is not meritorious. The trial court ruled
latter had improved the land. It would be detrimental to B if correctly in granting defendant's motion to dismiss for the
the plaintiff is allowed to recover. following reasons:
1. While there is the possibility that F, a former lessee of the
Innocent Purchaser for Value (2001) land was aware of the fact that C was the bona fide
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
occupant thereof and for this reason his transfer certificate required to explore beyond what the record in the registry
of title may be vulnerable, the transfer of the same land and indicates on its face in quest for any hidden defect or
the issuance of new TCTs to X and Y who are innocent inchoate right which may subsequently defeat his right
purchasers for value render the latter's titles indefeasible. A thereto. This is the "mirror principle' of the Torrens system
person dealing with registered land may safely rely on the which makes it possible for a forged deed to be the root of a
correctness of the certificate of title and the law will not in good title.
any way oblige him to go behind the certificate to determine
the condition of the property in search for any hidden defect Besides, it appears that spouses X and Y are guilty of
or inchoate right which may later invalidate or diminish the contributory negligence when they delivered this OCT to the
right to the land. This is the mirror principle of the Torrens mortgagee without annotating the mortgage thereon.
System of land registration. Between them and the innocent purchaser for value, they
should bear the loss.
1. The action to annul the sale was instituted in 1977 or more ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
than (10) years from the date of execution thereof in 1957, If the buyer B, who relied on the teller A's title, was not
hence, it has long prescribed. aware of the adverse possession of the land by the spouses X
2. Under Sec 45 of Act 496, ―the entry of a certificate of title and Y, then the latter cannot recover the property from
shall be regarded as an agreement running with the land, and B. B has in his favor the presumption of good faith which
binding upon the applicant and all his successors in title that can only be overthrown by adequate proof of bad faith.
the land shall be and always remain registered land. A title However, nobody buys land without seeing the property,
under Act 496 is indefeasible and to preserve that character, the hence, B could not have been unaware of such adverse
title is cleansed anew with every transfer for value (De Jesus v possession. If after learning of such possession, B simply
City of Manila; 29 Phil. 73; Laperal v City of Manila, 62 Phil 313;closed his eyes and did nothing about it, then the suit for
Penullar v PNB 120 S 111). reconveyance will prosper as the buyer's bad faith will have
become evident.
B. To protect his right over the subject property, Pacifico B. While Article 1413 of the Spanish Civil Code did not
should have timely filed an action for reconveyance and require the consent of the wife for the validity of the sale, an
reinstated the notice of lis pendens. alienation by the husband in fraud of the wife is void as held
in Uy Coque v. Navas, 45 Phil. 430 (1923). Assuming that the
Prescription & Laches; Elements of Laches (2000) alienation in 1948 was in fraud of Winda and, therefore,
In an action brought to collect a sum of money based on a makes the sale to Verde void, the action to set aside the sale,
surety agreement, the defense of laches was raised as the nonetheless, is already barred by
claim was filed more than seven years from the maturity of
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
prescription and laches. More than 52 years have already (a) The mortgage contract executed by O, if at all, is only a
elapsed from her discovery of the sale in 1950. voidable contract since it involves a conjugal partnership
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: property. The action to annul the same instituted in 1977, or
B. Winda’s claim that her Torrens Title covering the property eleven years after the execution of the sheriff's final sale, has
is indefeasible and imprescriptible [does not hold water] is not obviously prescribed because: 1) An action to annul a
tenable. The rule of indefeasibility of a Torrens Title contract on the ground of fraud
means that after one year from the date of issue of the decree must be brought within four (4) years from the date of
of registration or if the land has fallen into the hands of an discovery of the fraud. Since this is in essence an action
innocent purchaser for value, the title becomes incontestable to recover ownership, it must be reckoned from the
and incontrovertible. date of execution of the contract or from the registration
of the alleged fraudulent document with the assessor's
IMPRESCRIPTIBILITY, on the other hand, means that no office for the purpose of transferring the tax declaration,
title to the land in derogation of that of the registered owner this being unregistered land, (Bael u. Intermediate
may be acquired by adverse possession or acquisitive Appellate Court G. R. L-74423 Jan.30, 1989 169 SCRA 617).
prescription or that the registered owner does not lose by
extinctive prescription his right to recover ownership and 2) If the action is to be treated as an action to recover
possession of the land. ownership of land, it would have prescribed just the same
because more than 10 years have already elapsed since the
The action in this case is for annulment of the sale executed by date of the execution of the sale.
the husband over a conjugal partnership property covered by a SECOND ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Torrens Title. Action on contracts are subject to (a) The action to recover has been barred by acquisitive
prescription. prescription in favor of M considering that M has possessed
the land under a claim of ownership for ten (10) years with a
Prescription (1990) just title.
In 1960, an unregistered parcel of land was mortgaged by
owner O to M, a family friend, as collateral for a loan. O acted (b) If M had secured a Torrens Title to the land, all the more
through his attorney-in-fact, son S, who was duly authorized S and P could not recover because if at all their remedies
by way of a special power of attorney, wherein O declared would be:
that he was the absolute owner of the land, that the tax
declarations/receipts were all issued in his name, and that he 1. A Petition to Review the Decree of Registration. This can
has been in open, continuous and adverse possession in the be availed of within one (1) year from-the entry thereof, but
concept of owner. only upon the basis of "actual fraud." There is no showing
that M committed actual fraud in securing his title to the
As O was unable to pay back the loan plus interest for the land; or
past five [5) years, M had to foreclose the mortgage. At the 2. An action in personam against M for the reconveyance of
foreclosure sale, M was the highest bidder. Upon issuance of the title in their favor. Again, this remedy is available within
the sheriff’s final deed of sale and registration in January, four years from the date of the discovery of the fraud but not
1966, the mortgage property was turned over to M's later than ten (10) years from the date of registration of the
possession and control M has since then developed the said title in the name of M.
property. In 1967, O died, survived by sons S and P.
Prescription; Real Rights (1992)
In 1977, after the tenth (10th) death anniversary of his father A owned a parcel of unregistered land located on the Tarlac
O. son P filed a suit to annul the mortgage deed and side of the boundary between Tarlac and Pangasinan. His
subsequent sale of the property, etc., on the ground of fraud. brother B owned the adjoining parcel of unregistered land on
He asserted that the property in question was conjugal in the Pangasinan side.
nature actually belonging, at the time of the mortgage, to O
and his wife, W, whose conjugal share went to their sons (S A sold the Tarlac parcel to X in a deed of sale executed as a
and P) and to O. public instrument by A and X. After X paid in full the, price
(a) Is the suit filed by P barred by prescription? Explain your of the sale, X took possession of the Pangasinan parcel in the
answer. belief that it was the Tarlac parcel covered by the deed of
(b) After the issuance of the sheriff's final deed of sale in sale executed by A and X.
1966 in this case, assuming that M applied for registration
under the Torrens System and was issued a Torrens Title to After twelve (12) years, a controversy arose between B and X
the said property in question, would that added fact have any on the issue of the ownership of the Pangasinan parcel, B
significant effect on your conclusion? State your reason. claims a vested right of ownership over the Pangasinan parcel
SUGGESTED ANSWER: because B never sold that parcel to X or to anyone else.
(a) Under Art. 173 of the Civil Code, the action is barred by
prescription because the wife had only ten (10) years from
the transaction and during the marriage to file a suit for the On the other hand, X claims a vested right of ownership over
annulment of the mortgage deed. Alternative Answers to (a) the Pangasinan parcel by acquisitive prescription, because X
first Alternative Answer: possessed this parcel for over ten (10] years under claim of
ownership.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Decide on these claims, giving your reasons. The right to recover possession of registered land likewise
SUGGESTED ANSWER: does not prescribe because possession is just a necessary
At this point in time, X cannot claim the right of vested incident of ownership.
ownership over the Pangasinan parcel by acquisitive
prescription. In addition to the requisites common to ordinary SUGGESTED ANSWER:
and extraordinary acquisitive prescription consisting of b) Mikaelo's defense of laches, however, appears to be more
uninterrupted, peaceful, public, adverse and actual possession sustainable. Renren bought the land and had the sale
in the concept of owner, ordinary acquisitive prescription for registered way back in 1965. From the facts, it appears that it
ten (10) years requires (1) possession in good faith and (2) just was only in 1998 or after an inexplicable delay of 33 years that
title. "Just title" means that the adverse claimant came into he took the first step asserting his right to the land. It was not
possession of the property through one of the modes even an action to recover ownership but only possession of
recognized by law for the acquisition of ownership but the the land. By ordinary standards, 33 years of neglect or
grantor was not the owner or could not transmit any right (Art. inaction is too long and maybe considered unreasonable. As
1129. Civil Code). In this case, there is no "just title" and no often held by the Supreme Court, the principle of
"mode" that can be invoked by X for the acquisition of the imprescriptibility sometimes has to yield to the equitable
Pangasinan parcel. There was no constructive delivery of the principle of laches which can convert even a registered land
Pangasinan parcel because it was not the subject-matter of the owner's claim into a stale demand.
deed of sale. Hence, B retains ownership of the Pangasinan
parcel of land. Mikaelo's claim of laches, however, is weak insofar as the
element of equity is concerned, there being no showing in
the facts how he entered into the ownership and possession
Primary Entry Book; Acquisitive Prescription; Laches (1998) of the land.
In 1965, Renren bought from Robyn a parcel of registered Reclamation of Foreshore Lands; Limitations (2000)
land evidenced by a duly executed deed of sale. The owner Republic Act 1899 authorizes municipalities and chartered
presented the deed of sale and the owner's certificate of title cities to reclaim foreshore lands bordering them and to
to the Register of Deeds. The entry was made in the daybook construct thereon adequate docking and harbor facilities.
and corresponding fees were paid as evidenced by official Pursuant thereto, the City of Cavite entered into an agreement
receipt. However, no transfer of certificate of title was issued with the Fil-Estate Realty Company, authorizing the latter to
to Renren because the original certificate of title in Robyn's reclaim 300 hectares of land from the sea bordering the city,
name was temporarily misplaced after fire partly gutted the with 30% of the land to be reclaimed to be owned by
Office of the Register of Deeds. Meanwhile, the land had Fil-Estate as compensation for its services. The Solicitor
been possessed by Robyn's distant cousin, Mikaelo, openly, General questioned the validity of the agreement on the
adversely and continuously in the concept of owner since ground that it will mean reclaiming land under the sea which
1960. It was only in April 1998 that Renren sued Mikaelo to is beyond the commerce of man. The City replies that this is
recover possession. Mikaelo invoked a) acquisitive authorized by RA. 1899 because it authorizes the construction
prescription and b) laches, asking that he be declared owner of docks and harbors. Who is correct? (3%)
of the land. Decide the case by evaluating these defenses,
[5%] SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER: The Solicitor General is correct. The authority of the City of
a) Renren's action to recover possession of the land will Cavite under RA 1899 to reclaim land is limited to foreshore
prosper. In 1965, after buying the land from Robyn, he lands. The Act did not authorize it to reclaim land from the
submitted the Deed of Sale to the Registry of Deeds for sea. "The reclamation being unauthorized, the City of Cavite
registration together with the owner's duplicate copy of the did not acquire ownership over the reclaimed land. Not being
title, and paid the corresponding registration fees. Under the owner, it could not have conveyed any portion thereof to
Section 56 of PD No. 1529, the Deed of Sale to Renren is the contractor.
considered registered from the time the sale was entered in ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
the Day Book (now called the Primary Entry Book). It depends. If the reclamation of the land from the sea is
necessary in the construction of the docks and the harbors,
For all legal intents and purposes, Renren is considered the the City of Cavite is correct. Otherwise, it is not. Since RA
registered owner of the land. After all, it was not his fault that 1899 authorized the city to construct docks and harbors, all
the Registry of Deeds could not issue the corresponding works that are necessary for such construction are deemed
transfer certificate of title. authorized. Including the reclamation of land from the sea.
The reclamation being authorized, the city is the owner of
Mikaelo's defense of prescription can not be sustained. A the reclaimed land and it may convey a portion thereof as
Torrens title is imprescriptible. No title to registered land in payment for the services of the contractor.
derogation of the title of the registered owner shall be ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
acquired by prescription or adverse possession. (Section 47, On the assumption that the reclamation contract was entered
P.D. No, 1529) into before RA 1899 was repealed by PD 3-A, the City of
Cavite is correct. Lands under the sea are "beyond the
commerce of man" in the sense that they are not susceptible of
private appropriation, ownership or
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
alienation. The contract in question merely calls for the answer or show up on the date of initial hearing, does not
reclamation of 300 hectares of land within the coastal waters guarantee the success of the application. It is still incumbent upon
of the city. Per se, it does not vest, alienate or transfer the applicant to prove with well nigh incontrovertible evidence that
he has acquired a title to the land that is fit for registration. Absent
ownership of land under the sea. The city merely engaged the such registrable title, it is the clear duty of the Land Registration
services of Fil-Estate to reclaim the land for the city. Court to dismiss the application and declare the land as public
land.
four (4) years from discovery of the fraud and not later
than ten (10} years from the date of registration of
Rommel's title. d) Title to the land has not passed into the
hands of an
innocent purchaser for value.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Yes. The property registered is deemed to be held in trust This action does not prescribe. With respect to Percival's
for the real owner by the person in whose name it is action for reconveyance, it would have prescribed, having been filed more
registered. The Torrens system was not designed to shield than ten (10) years after registration and issuance of an O.C.T. in the
one who had committed fraud or misrepresentation and thus name of Melvin, were it not for the inherent infirmity of the latter's title.
holds the title in bad faith. (Walstrom v. Mapa Jr., (G .R 38387, Under the facts, the statute of limitations will not apply to Percival
29 Jan. 1990) as cited in Martinez, D., Summary of SC because Melvin knew that a part of the land covered by his title actually
Decisions, January to June, 1990, p. 359], belonged to Percival. So, instead of nullifying in toto the title of Melvin,
the court, in the exercise of equity and jurisdiction, may grant prayer for
Remedies; Reconveyance; Prescriptive Period (1997) the reconveyance of Lot B to Percival who has actually possessed the land
On 10 September 1965, Melvin applied for a free patent under a claim of ownership since 1947. After all, if Melvin's title is
covering two lots - Lot A and Lot B - situated in Santiago, declared void ab initio and the land is reverted to the public domain,
Isabela. Upon certification by the Public Land Inspector that Percival would just the same be entitled to preference right to acquire the
Melvin had been in actual, continuous, open, notorious, land from the government. Besides, well settled is the rule that once
exclusive and adverse possession of the lots since 1925, the public land has been in open, continuous, exclusive and notorious
Director of Land approved Melvin's application on 04 June possession under a bonafide claim of acquisition of ownership for the
1967. On 26 December 1967, Original Certificate of Title period prescribed by Section 48 of the Public Land Act, the same ipso
(OCT) No. P-2277 was issued in the name of Melvln. jure ceases to be public and in contemplation of law acquired the
character of private land. Thus, reconveyance of the land from Melvin to
On 7 September 1971, Percival filed a protest alleging that Percival would be the better procedure, (Vitale vs. Anore, 90 Phil. 855;
Lot B which he had been occupying and cultivating since Pena, Land Titles and Deeds, 1982, Page 427)
1947 was included in the Free Patent issued in the name of
Melvin. The Director of Lands ordered the investigation of
Percival's protest. The Special Investigator who conducted
the investigation found that Percival had been in actual
cultivation of Lot B since 1947. ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The action of the Solicitor General should prosper,
On 28 November 1986, the Solicitor General filed in behalf considering that the doctrine of indefeasibility of title does not
of the Republic of the Philippines a complaint for cancellation apply to free patent secured through fraud. A certificate of
of the free patent and the OCT issued in the name of Melvin title cannot be used as shield to perpetuate fraud. The State is
and the reversion of the land to public domain on the ground not bound by the period of prescription stated in Sec. 38 of
of fraud and misrepresentation in obtaining the free patent. Act 496. (Director of Lands vs. Abanilla, 124 SCRA 358)
On the same date, Percival sued Martin for the reconveyance
of Lot B.
The action for reconveyance filed by Percival may still prosper
Melvin filed his answers interposing the sole defense in both provided that the property has not passed to an innocent third party
cases that the Certificate of Title issued in his name became for value (Dablo us. Court of Appeals. 226 SCRA 618), and provided
incontrovertible and indefeasible upon the lapse of one year that the action is filed within the prescriptive period of ten years
from the issuance of the free patent. (Tale vs. Court of Appeals. 208 SCRA 266). Since the action was filed
by Percival 19 years after the issuance of Melvin's title, it is submitted
Given the circumstances, can the action of the Solicitor that the same is already barred by prescription. ALTERNATIVE ANSWER
General and the case for reconveyance filed by Percival (to second part of question) The action for reconveyance filed by
possibly prosper? Percival will prosper, because the land has ceased to be public land
SUGGESTED ANSWER: and has become private land by open, continuous, public, exclusive
"If fraud be discovered in the application which led to the possession under a bona fide claim of ownership for more than thirty
issuance of the patent and Certificate of Title, this Title years, and Percival is still in possession of the property at present. His
becomes ipso facto null and void. Thus, in a case where a action for reconveyance can be considered as an action to quiet title,
person who obtained a free patent, knowingly made a false which does not prescribe if the plaintiff is in possession of the
statement of material and essential facts in his application for property.
the same, by stating therein that the lot in question was part of
the public domain not occupied or claimed by any other
person, his title becomes ipso facto canceled and consequently (Olviga v. CA. GR 1048013. October 21, 1993)
rendered null and void." "It is to the public interest that one
who succeeds In fraudulently acquiring title to public land Remedies; Reopening of a Decree; Elements (1992)
should not be allowed to benefit therefrom and the State, What are the essential requisites or elements for the allowance
through the Solicitor General, may file the corresponding of the reopening or review of a decree of registration?
action for annulment of the patent and the reversion of the
land involved to the public domain" (Dinero us. Director of SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Lands; Kayaban vs. Republic L-33307,8-20-73; Director of The essential elements are: (1) that the petitioner has a real or
dominical right; (2) that he has been deprived thereof through
Lands us. Hon. Pedro Samson Animas, L-37682, 3-29-74.) fraud; (3) that the petition is filed within one (1) year from the
issuance of the decree; and (4) that the property has not yet
been transferred to an innocent
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
purchaser {Rublico vs. Orellana 30 SCRA 511; Ubudan vs. Gil Administrative Code of 1987 which prohibits officers and
45 SCRA 17). employees of the government from purchasing directly or indirectly
OPTIONAL EXTENDED ANSWER: any property sold by the government for nonpayment of any tax,
Petition for review of the Decree of Registration. A remedy fee or other public charge.
expressly provided in Section 32 of P. D. No. 1529 (formerly (a) Is the sale to Juan valid? If so, what is the effect of the
Section 38. Act 496), this remedy has the following elements: Issuance of the Certificate of Title to Maria?
a) The petition must be filed by a person claiming (b) If the sale is void, may Juan recover the P10,000.00? If
not, why not?
dominical or other real rights to the land registered in (c) If the sale is void, did it not nevertheless, operate to divert
the name of respondent. Maria of her ownership? If it did, who then is the owner of
b) The registration of the land in the name of the property?
respondent was procured by means of actual, (not just SUGGESTED ANSWER:
constructive) fraud, which must be extrinsic. Fraud is actual A. The sale of the land to Juan is not valid, being contrary to
if the registration was made through deceit or any other law. Therefore, no transfer of ownership of the land was
intentional act of downright dishonesty to enrich oneself at the effected from the delinquent taxpayer to him. The original
expense of another. It is extrinsic when it is something that certificates of title obtained by Maria thru a free patent grant
was not raised, litigated and passed upon in the main from the Bureau of Lands under Chapter VII, CA 141 is
proceedings. valid but in view of her delinquency, the said title is subject to
c) The petition must be filed within one (1) year from the right of the City Government to sell the land at public
the date of the issuance of the decree. auction. The issuance of the OCT did not exempt the land
d) Title to the land has not passed to an Innocent from the tax sales. Section 44 of P.O. No. 1529 provides that
purchaser for value (Libudan vs. Gil, 45_ SCRA 27, 1972), every registered owner receiving a Certificate of Title shall
Rublico vs. Orrelana. 30 SCRA 511, 1969); RP vs. CA, 57 G. hold the same free from an encumbrances, subject to certain
R No. 40402. March 16, 1987). exemptions.
Torrens System vs. Recording of Evidence of Title (1994) B. Juan may recover because he was not a party to the
Distinguish the Torrens system of land registration from the violation of the law.
system of recording of evidence of title.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: C. No, the sale did not divest Maria of her title precisely
a) The TORRENS SYSTEM OF LAND REGISTRATION is a because the sale is void. It is as good as if no sale ever took
system for the registration of title to the land. Thus, under this place. In tax sales, the owner is divested of his land initially
system what is entered in the Registry of Deeds, is a record of upon award and issuance of a Certificate of Sale, and finally
the owner's estate or interest in the land, unlike the system under after the lapse of the 1 year period from date of registration,
the Spanish Mortgage Law or the system under Section 194 of to redeem, upon execution by the treasurer of an instrument
the Revised Administrative Code as amended by Act 3344 where sufficient in form and effects to convey the property. Maria
only the evidence of such title is recorded. In the latter system, remained owner of the land until another tax sale is to be
what is recorded is the deed of conveyance from hence the performed in favor of a qualified buyer.
owner's title emanated—and not the title itself.
CONTRACTS
b) Torrens system of land registration is that which is
prescribed in Act 496 (now PD 1529), which is either Judicial Consensual vs. Real Contracts; Kinds of Real Contracts
or quasi-judicial. System or recording of evidence of title is (1998)
merely the registration of evidence of acquisitions of land Distinguish consensual from real contracts and name at least
with the Register of Deeds, who annotates the same on the four (4) kinds of real contracts under the present law. [3%]
existing title, cancels the old one and issues a new title based
on the document presented for registration. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
CONSENSUAL CONTRACTS are those which are perfected
Unregistered Land (1991) by mere consent (Art. 1315. Civil Code). REAL
Maria Enriquez failed to pay the realty taxes on her unregistered CONTRACTS are those which are perfected by the delivery of
agricultural land located in Magdugo, Toledo City. In 1989, to the object of the obligation. (Art. 1316, Civil Code) Examples
satisfy the taxes due, the City sold it at public auction to Juan of real contracts are deposit, pledge, commodatum and simple
Miranda, an employee at the Treasurer's Office of said City, loan (mutuum).
whose bid at P10,000.00 was the highest. In due time, a final bill
of sale was executed in his favor. Maria refused to turn-over the Consideration; Validity (2000)
possession of the property to Juan alleging that (1) she had been, Lolita was employed in a finance company. Because she could
in the meantime, granted a free patent and on the basis thereof an not account for the funds entrusted to her, she was charged
Original Certificate of Title was issued to her, and (2) the sale in with estafa and ordered arrested. In order to secure her release
favor of Juan is void from the beginning in view of the provision in from jail, her parents executed a promissory note to pay the
the finance company the amount allegedly misappropriated by
their daughter. The finance company
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
then executed an affidavit of desistance which led to the
withdrawal of the information against Lolita and her release My answer will not be the same as to damages. Marvin will be
from jail. The parents failed to comply with their promissory liable for damages for breach of contract of option. With the
note and the finance company sued them for specific payment of the consideration for the option given, and with the
performance. Will the action prosper or not? (3%) consent of the parties and the object of contract being present, a
SUGGESTED ANSWER: perfected contract of option was created.
The action will prosper. The promissory note executed by (San Miguel, Inc. v. Huang, G.R. No. 137290, July 31,
Lolita's parents is valid and binding, the consideration being 2000) Under Article 1170 of the Civil Code, those who in the
the extinguishment of Lolita's civil liability and not the stifling performance of their obligation are guilty of contravention
of the criminal prosecution. thereof, as in this case, when Marvin did not give Carlos the
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
agreed period of ten days, are liable for damages.
The action will not prosper because the consideration for the
promissory note was the non-prosecution of the criminal case ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
for estafa. This cannot be done anymore because the My answer will not be the same if Carlos paid Marvin
information has already been filed in court and to do it is P10,000.00 because an option contract was perfected. Thus,
illegal. That the consideration for the promissory note is the if Marvin withdrew the offer prior to the expiration of the
stifling of the criminal prosecution is evident from the 10-day period, he breached the option contract. (Article 1324,
execution by the finance company of the affidavit of Civil Code)
desistance immediately after the execution by Lolita's parents
of the promissory note. The consideration being illegal, the c) Supposing that Carlos accepted the offer before
promissory note is invalid and may not be enforced by court Marvin could communicate his withdrawal thereof?
action. Discuss the legal consequences. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Contract of Option; Elements (2005) A contract to construct the house of Carlos is perfected.
Marvin offered to construct the house of Carlos for a very Contracts are perfected by mere consent manifested by the
reasonable price of P900,000.00, giving the latter 10 days meeting of the offer and the acceptance upon the thing and
within which to accept or reject the offer. On the fifth day, the cause which are to constitute the contract. (Gomez v.
before Carlos could make up his mind, Marvin withdrew his Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 120747, September 21, 2000)
offer.
a) What is the effect of the withdrawal of Marvin's offer? Under Article 1315 of the Civil Code, Carlos and Marvin are
(2%) bound to fulfill what has been expressly stipulated and all
SUGGESTED ANSWER: consequences thereof. Under Article 1167, if Marvin would
The withdrawal of Marvin's offer will cause the offer to cease refuse to construct the house, Carlos is entitled to have the
in law. Hence, even if subsequently accepted, there could be construction be done by a third person at the expense of
no concurrence of the offer and the acceptance. In the Marvin. Marvin in that case will be liable for damages under
absence of concurrence of offer and acceptance, there can be Article 1170.
no consent. (Laudico v. Arias Rodriguez, G.R. No. 16530,
March 31, 1922) Without consent, there is no perfected Inexistent Contracts vs. Annullable Contracts (2004)
contract for the construction of the house of Carlos. Distinguish briefly but clearly between Inexistent contracts
(Salonga v. Farrales, G.R. No. L-47088, July 10, 1981) and annullable contracts.
Article 1318 of the Civil Code provides that there can be no SUGGESTED ANSWER:
contract unless the following requisites concur: (1) consent of INEXISTENT CONTRACTS are considered as not having
the parties; (2) object certain which is the subject matter of the been entered into and, therefore, void ob initio. They do not
contract; and (3) cause of the obligation. create any obligation and cannot be ratified or validated, as
there is no agreement to ratify or validate. On the other hand,
Marvin will not be liable to pay Carlos any damages for ANNULLABLE or VOIDABLE CONTRACTS are valid
withdrawing the offer before the lapse of the period granted. until invalidated by the court but may be ratified. In inexistent
In this case, no consideration was given by Carlos for the contracts, one or more requisites of a valid contract are
option given, thus there is no perfected contract of option for absent. In anullable contracts, all the elements of a contract
lack of cause of obligation. Marvin cannot be held to have are present except that the consent of one of the contracting
breached the contract. Thus, he cannot be held liable for parties was vitiated or one of them has no capacity to give
damages. consent.
b) Will your answer be the same if Carlos paid Marvin Nature of Contracts; Obligatoriness (1991)
P10,000.00 as consideration for that option? Explain. Roland, a basketball star, was under contract for one year to
(2%) play-for-play exclusively for Lady Love, Inc. However, even
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: before the basketball season could open, he was offered a
My answer will be the same as to the perfection of the more attractive pay plus fringes benefits by Sweet Taste, Inc.
contract for the construction of the house of Carlos. No Roland accepted the offer and transferred to Sweet Taste.
perfected contract arises because of lack of consent. With the Lady Love sues Roland and Sweet Taste for breach of
withdrawal of the offer, there could be no concurrence of contract. Defendants claim that the restriction to play for
offer and acceptance. Lady Love alone is void, hence, unenforceable, as it
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
constitutes an undue interference with the right of Roland any payment at all. Printado has also a standing contract
to enter into contracts and the impairment of his freedom to with publisher Publico for the printing of 10,000 volumes of school
play and enjoy basketball. textbooks. Suplico was aware of said printing contract. After
printing 1,000 volumes, Printado also fails to perform under its
Can Roland be bound by the contract he entered into with printing contract with Publico. Suplico sues Printado for the value
Lady Love or can he disregard the same? Is he liable at all? of the unpaid deliveries under their order agreement. At the same
How about Sweet Taste? Is it liable to Lady Love? time Publico sues Printado for damages for breach of contract
SUGGESTED ANSWER: with respect to their own printing agreement. In the suit filed by
Roland is bound by the contract he entered into with Lady Suplico, Printado counters that: (a) Suplico cannot demand
Love and he cannot disregard the same, under the principles payment for deliveries made under their order agreement until
of obligatoriness of contracts. Obligations arising from Suplico has completed performance under said contract; (b)
contracts have the force of law between the parties. Suplico should pay damages for breach of contract; and (c) with
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, Roland is liable under the contract as far as Lady Love is Publico should be liable for Printado’s breach of his contract with
concerned. He is liable for damages under Article 1170 of the Publico because the order agreement between Suplico and
Civil Code since he contravened the tenor of his obligation. Printado was for the benefit of Publico. Are the contentions of
Not being a contracting party, Sweet Taste is not bound by Printado tenable? Explain your answers as to each contention.
the contract but it can be held liable under Art. 1314. The (5%)
basis of its liability is not prescribed by contract but is SUGGESTED ANSWER:
founded on quasi-delict, assuming that Sweet Taste knew of No, the contentions of Printado are untenable. Printado
the contract. Article 1314 of the Civil Code provides that any having failed to pay for the printing paper covered by the
third person who induces another to violate his contract shall delivery invoices on time, Suplico has the right to cease
be liable for damages to the other contracting party. making further delivery. And the latter did not violate the
order agreement (Integrated Packaging Corporation v. Court
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: of Appeals, (333 SCRA 170, G.R. No. 115117, June 8, [2000]).
It is assumed that Lady Love knew of the contract. Neither
Roland nor Sweet Taste would be liable, because the Suplico cannot be held liable for damages, for breach of contract, as
restriction in the contract is violative of Article 1306 as being it was not he who violated the order agreement, but Printado.
contrary to law morals, good customs, public order or public Suplico cannot be held liable for Printado’s breach of contract with
policy. Publico. He is not a party to the agreement entered into by and
between Printado and Publico. Theirs is not a stipulation pour atrui.
Nature of Contracts; Privity of Contract (1996) [Aforesaid] Such contracts do could not affect third persons like
Baldomero leased his house with a telephone to Jose. The Suplico because of the basic civil law principle of relativity of
lease contract provided that Jose shall pay for all electricity, contracts which provides that contracts can only bind the parties
water and telephone services in the leased premises during the who entered into it, and it cannot favor or prejudice a third person,
period of the lease. Six months later. Jose surreptitiously even if he is aware of such contract and has acted with knowledge
vacated the premises. He left behind unpaid telephone bills thereof. (Integrated Packaging Corporation
for overseas telephone calls amounting to over P20,000.00.
Baldomero refused to pay the said bills on the ground that
Jose had already substituted him as the customer of the v. CA, supra.)
telephone company. The latter maintained that Baldomero
remained as his customer as far as their service contract was Rescission of Contracts; Proper Party (1996)
concerned, notwithstanding the lease contract between In December 1985, Salvador and the Star Semiconductor
Baldomero and Jose. Who is correct, Baldomero or the Company (SSC) executed a Deed of Conditional Sale wherein
telephone company? Explain. the former agreed to sell his 2,000 square meter lot in Cainta,
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Rizal, to the latter for the price of P1,000,000.00, payable
The telephone company is correct because as far as it is P100,000.00 down, and the balance 60 days after the squatters
concerned, the only person it contracted with was Baldomero. in the property have been removed. If the squatters are not
The telephone company has no contract with Jose. Baldomero removed within six months, the P100,000.00 down payment
cannot substitute Jose in his stead without the consent of the shall be returned by the vendor to the vendee, Salvador filed
telephone company (Art. 1293, NCC). Baldomero is, ejectment suits against the squatters, but in spite of the
therefore, liable under the contract. decisions in his favor, the squatters still would not leave. In
August, 1986, Salvador offered to return the P100,000.00
Nature of Contracts; Relativity of Contracts (2002) down payment to the vendee, on the ground that he is unable
Printado is engaged in the printing business. Suplico supplies to remove the squatters on the property. SSC refused to
printing paper to Printado pursuant to an order agreement under accept the money and demanded that Salvador execute a deed
which Suplico binds himself to deliver the same volume of paper of absolute sale of the property in its favor, at which time it
every month for a period of 18 months, with Printado in turn will pay the balance of the price. Incidentally, the value of the
agreeing to pay within 60 days after each delivery. Suplico has land had doubled by that time.
been faithfully delivering under the order agreement for 10 months
but thereafter stopped doing so, because Printado has not made
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Salvador consigned the P 100,000.00 in court, and filed an property of ZY, his wife may also sue to recover it under
action for rescission of the deed of conditional sale, plus Article 2016 of the Civil Code if she and the family needed
damages. Will the action prosper? Explain. the money for support.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: ALTERNATIVE ANSWER (2):
No, the action will not prosper. The action for rescission may A. (2). Mrs. ZY cannot file a suit to recover what her husband
be brought only by the aggrieved party to the contract. Since it lost. Art 2014 of the Civil Code provides that any loser in a
was Salvador who failed to comply with his conditional game of chance may recover his loss from the winner, with
obligation, he is not the aggrieved party who may file the legal interest from the time he paid the amount lost. This
action for rescission but the Star Semiconductor Company. means that only he can file the suit. Mrs. ZY cannot recover
The company, however, is not opting to rescind the contract as a spouse who has interest in the absolute community
but has chosen to waive Salvador's compliance with the property or conjugal partnership of gains, because under Art.
condition which it can do under Art. 1545, NCC. 117(7} of the Family Code, losses are borne exclusively by the
loser-spouse. Therefore, these cannot be charged against
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: absolute community property or conjugal partnership of
The action for rescission will not prosper. The buyer has not gains. This being so, Mrs. ZY has no interest in law to
committed any breach, let alone a substantial or serious one, prosecute and recover as she has no legal standing in court to
to warrant the rescission/resolution sought by the vendor. On do so.
the contrary, it is the vendor who appears to have failed to
comply with the condition imposed by the contract the Conditional Obligations (2000)
fulfillment of which would have rendered the obligation to Pedro promised to give his grandson a car if the latter will
pay the balance of the purchase price demandable. Further, pass the bar examinations. When his grandson passed the
far from being unable to comply with what is incumbent said examinations, Pedro refused to give the car on the
upon it, ie., pay the balance of the price the buyer has offered ground that the condition was a purely potestative one. Is he
to pay it even without the vendor having complied with the correct or not? (2%)
suspensive condition attached to the payment of the price, SUGGESTED ANSWER:
thus waiving such condition as well as the 60-day term in its No, he is not correct. First of all, the condition is not purely
favor The stipulation that the P100,000.00 down payment potestative, because it does not depend on the sole will of
shall be returned by the vendor to the vendee if the squatters one of the parties. Secondly, even if it were, it would be valid
are not removed within six months, is also a covenant for the because it depends on the sole will of the creditor (the
benefit of the vendee, which the latter has validly waived by donee) and not of the debtor (the donor).
implication when it offered to pay the balance of the purchase
price upon the execution of a deed of absolute sale by the Conditional Obligations (2003)
vendor. (Art. 1545, NCC) Are the following obligations valid, why, and if they are valid,
when is the obligation demandable in each case? a) If the
debtor promises to pay as soon as he has the
means to pay; b) If the debtor promises to pay when he likes;
OBLIGATIONS c) If the debtor promises to pay when he becomes a
Aleatory Contracts; Gambling (2004) lawyer; d) If the debtor promises to pay if his son, who is
A. Mr. ZY lost P100,000 in a card game called Russian sick with cancer, does not die within one year. 5%
poker, but he had no more cash to pay in full the winner at
the time the session ended. He promised to pay PX, the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
winner, two weeks thereafter. But he failed to do so despite (a) The obligation is valid. It is an obligation subject to an
the lapse of two months, so PX filed in court a suit to collect indefinite period because the debtor binds himself to pay
the amount of P50,000 that he won but remained unpaid. when his means permit him to do so (Article 1180, NCC).
Will the collection suit against ZY prosper? Could Mrs. ZY When the creditor knows that the debtor already has the
file in turn a suit against PX to recover the P100,000 that her means to pay, he must file an action in court to fix the
husband lost? Reason. (5%) period, and when the definite period as set by the court
SUGGESTED ANSWER: arrives, the obligation to pay becomes demandable 9Article
A. 1. The suit by PX to collect the balance of what he won 1197, NCC).
from ZY will not prosper. Under Article 2014 of the Civil
Code, no action can be maintained by the winner for the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
collection of what he has won in a game of chance. Although (b) The obligation ―to pay when he likes‖ is a suspensive
poker may depend in part on ability, it is fundamentally a condition the fulfillment of which is subject to the sole will of
game of chance. the debtor and, therefore the conditional obligation is void.
(Article 1182, NCC).
2) If the money paid by ZY to PX was conjugal or
community property, the wife of ZY could sue to recover it SUGGESTED ANSWER:
because Article 117(7) of the Family Code provides that (c) The obligation is valid. It is subject to a suspensive
losses in gambling or betting are borne exclusively by the condition, i.e. the future and uncertain event of his becoming
loser-spouse. Hence, conjugal or community funds may not a lawyer. The performance of this obligation does
be used to pay for such losses. If the money were exclusive
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
not depend solely on the will of the debtor but also on condition of Eva passing the 1998 Bar Examinations.
other factors outside the debtor’s control. Hence, upon Eva's passing the Bar, the rights of the other buyer
terminated and Eva acquired ownership of the property.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(d) The obligation is valid. The death of the son of cancer SECOND ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
within one year is made a negative suspensive condition to his The sale to another person before Eva could buy it from
making the payment. The obligation is demandable if the son Manuel is valid, as the contract between Manuel and Eva is a
does not die within one year (Article 1185, NCC). mere promise to sell and Eva has not acquired a real right
over the land assuming that there is a price stipulated in the
contract for the contract to be considered a sale and there
Conditional Obligations; Promise (1997) was delivery or tradition of the thing sold.
In two separate documents signed by him, Juan Valentino
"obligated" himself each to Maria and to Perla, thus - 'To SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Maria, my true love, I obligate myself to give you my one and (b) No, she is not entitled to the rentals collected by Manuel
only horse when I feel like It." - and -'To Perla, my true because at the time they accrued and were collected, Eva was
sweetheart, I obligate myself to pay you the P500.00 I owe not yet the owner of the property.
you when I feel like it." Months passed but Juan never FIRST ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
bothered to make good his promises. Maria and Perla came Assuming that Eva is the one entitled to buy the house and
to consult you on whether or not they could recover on the lot, she is not entitled to the rentals collected by Manuel
basis of the foregoing settings. What would your legal advice before she passed the bar examinations. Whether it is a
be? contract of sale or a contract to sell, reciprocal prestations are
deemed imposed A for the seller to deliver the object sold
SUGGESTED ANSWER: and for the buyer to pay the price. Before the happening of
I would advise Maria not to bother running after Juan for the the condition, the fruits of the thing and the interests on the
latter to make good his promise. [This is because a promise is money are deemed to have been mutually compensated under
not an actionable wrong that allows a party to recover Article 1187.
especially when she has not suffered damages resulting from SECOND ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
such promise. A promise does not create an obligation on the Under Art. 1164, there is no obligation on the part of Manuel
part of Juan because it is not something which arises from a to deliver the fruits (rentals) of the thing until the obligation
contract, law, quasi-contracts or quasidelicts (Art, 1157)]. to deliver the thing arises. As the suspensive condition has
Under Art. 1182, Juan's promise to Maria is void because a not been fulfilled, the obligation to sell does not arise.
conditional obligation depends upon the sole will of the
obligor.
Extinguishment; Assignment of Rights (2001)
As regards Perla, the document is an express acknowledgment The sugar cane planters of Batangas entered into a long-term
of a debt, and the promise to pay what he owes her when he milling contract with the Central Azucarera de Don Pedro
feels like it is equivalent to a promise to pay when his means Inc. Ten years later, the Central assigned its rights to the said
permits him to do so, and is deemed to be one with an milling contract to a Taiwanese group which would take over
indefinite period under Art. 1180. Hence the amount is the operations of the sugar mill. The planters filed an action
recoverable after Perla asks the court to set the period as to annul the said assignment on the ground that the
provided by Art. 1197, par. 2. Taiwanese group was not registered with the Board of
Investments. Will the action prosper or not? Explain briefly.
Conditional Obligations; Resolutory Condition (1999) (5%)
(Note: The question presupposes knowledge and requires the
In 1997, Manuel bound himself to sell Eva a house and lot
application of the provisions of the Omnibus Investment Code, which
which is being rented by another person, if Eva passes the
properly belongs to Commercial law)
1998 bar examinations. Luckily for Eva, she passed said SUGGESTED ANSWER:
examinations. The action will prosper not on the ground invoked but on the
(a) Suppose Manuel had sold the same house and lot to ground that the farmers have not given their consent to the
another before Eva passed the 1998 bar examinations, is assignment. The milling contract imposes reciprocal
such sale valid? Why? (2%) obligations on the parties. The sugar central has the obligation
(b) Assuming that it is Eva who is entitled to buy said house to mill the sugar cane of the farmers while the latter have the
and lot, is she entitled to the rentals collected by Manuel obligation to deliver their sugar cane to the sugar central. As
before she passed the 1998 bar examinations? Why? (3%) to the obligation to mill the sugar cane, the sugar central is a
debtor of the farmers. In assigning its rights under the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: contract, the sugar central will also transfer to the Taiwanese
(a) Yes, the sale to the other person is valid as a sale with a its obligation to mill the sugar cane of the farmers. This will
resolutory condition because what operates as a suspensive
amount to a novation of the contract by substituting the
condition for Eva operates a resolutory condition for the
debtor with a third party. Under Article 1293 of the Civil
buyer.
Code, such substitution cannot take effect without the
FIRST ALTERNATIVE ANS WER:
Yes, the sale to the other person is valid. However, the buyer consent of the creditor. The formers, who are creditors as far
acquired the property subject to a resolutory as the obligation to mill their sugar cane is
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
concerned, may annul such assignment for not having given Even [if] assuming that there was a perfect right of first
their consent thereto. refusal, compensation did not take place because the claim is
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: unliquidated.
The assignment is valid because there is absolute freedom to
transfer the credit and the creditor need not get the consent Extinguishment; Compensation vs. Payment (1998)
of the debtor. He only needs to notify him. Define compensation as a mode of extinguishing an
obligation, and distinguish it from payment. [2%]
Extinguishment; Cause of Action (2004) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
TX filed a suit for ejectment against BD for non-payment of COMPENSATION is a mode of extinguishing to the
condominium rentals amounting to P150,000. During the concurrent amount, the obligations of those persons who in
pendency of the case, BD offered and TX accepted the full their own right are reciprocally debtors and creditors of each
amount due as rentals from BD, who then filed a motion to other (Tolentino, 1991 ed., p. 365, citing 2 Castan 560 and
dismiss the ejectment suit on the ground that the action is Francia vs. IAC. 162 SCRA 753). It involves the simultaneous
already extinguished. Is BD’s contention correct? Why or balancing of two obligations in order to extinguish them to
why not? Reason. (5%) the extent in which the amount of one is covered by that of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: the other. (De Leon, 1992 ed., p. 221, citing 8 Manresa 401).
BD's contention is not correct. TX can still maintain the suit
for ejectment. The acceptance by the lessor of the payment
by the lessee of the rentals in arrears even during the PAYMENT means not only delivery of money but also
pendency of the ejectment case does not constitute a waiver performance of an obligation (Article 1232, Civil Code). In
or abandonment of the ejectment case. (Spouses Clutario v. payment, capacity to dispose of the thing paid and capacity to
CA, 216 SCRA 341 [1992]). receive payment are required for debtor and creditor,
respectively: in compensation, such capacity is not necessary,
Extinguishment; Compensation (2002) because the compensation operates by law and not by the act
Stockton is a stockholder of Core Corp. He desires to sell his of the parties. In payment, the performance must be complete;
shares in Core Corp. In view of a court suit that Core Corp. while in compensation there may be partial extinguishment of
has filed against him for damages in the amount of P 10 an obligation (Tolentino, supra)
million, plus attorney’s fees of P 1 million, as a result of
statements published by Stockton which are allegedly Extinguishment; Compensation/Set-Off; Banks (1998)
defamatory because it was calculated to injure and damage the X, who has a savings deposit with Y Bank in the sum of
corporation’s reputation and goodwill. The articles of P1,000,000.00 incurs a loan obligation with the said Bank in
incorporation of Core Corp. provide for a right of first refusal the sum of P800.000.00 which has become due. When X tries
in favor of the corporation. Accordingly, Stockton gave to withdraw his deposit, Y Bank allows only P200.000.00 to
written notice to the corporation of his offer to sell his shares be withdrawn, less service charges, claiming that
of P 10 million. The response of Core corp. was an acceptance compensation has extinguished its obligation under the
of the offer in the exercise of its rights of first refusal, offering savings account to the concurrent amount of X's debt. X
for the purpose payment in form of compensation or set-off contends that compensation is improper when one of the
against the amount of damages it is claiming against him, debts, as here, arises from a contract of deposit. Assuming
exclusive of the claim for attorney’s fees. Stockton rejected the that the promissory note signed by X to evidence the loan
offer of the corporation, arguing that compensation between does not provide for compensation between said loan and his
the value of the shares and the amount of damages demanded savings deposit, who is correct? [3%]
by the corporation cannot legally take effect. Is Stockton SUGGESTED ANSWER:
correct? Give reason for your answer. (5%) Y bank is correct. An. 1287, Civil Code, does not apply. All
the requisites of Art. 1279, Civil Code are present. In the case
SUGGESTED ANSWERS: of Gullas vs. PNB [62 Phil. 519), the Supreme Court held:
Stockton is correct. There is no right of compensation "The Civil Code contains provisions regarding compensation
between his price of P10 million and Core Corp.’s (set off) and deposit. These portions of Philippine law
unliquidated claim for damages. In order that compensation provide that compensation shall take place when two persons
may be proper, the two debts must be liquidated and are reciprocally creditor and debtor of each other. In this
demandable. The case for the P 10million damages being still connection, it has been held that the relation existing between
pending in court, the corporation has as yet no claim which is a depositor and a bank is that of creditor and debtor, x x x As
due and demandable against Stockton. a general rule, a bank has a right of set off of the deposits in
ANOTHER MAIN ANSWER: its hands for the payment of any indebtedness to it on the part
The right of first refusal was not perfected as a right for the of a depositor." Hence, compensation took place between the
reason that there was a conditional acceptance equivalent to a mutual obligations of X and Y bank.
counter-offer consisting in the amount of damages as being
credited on the purchase price. Therefore, compensation did
not result since there was no valid right of first refusal (Art. Extinguishment; Condonation (2000)
1475 & 1319, NCC) Arturo borrowed P500,000.00 from his father. After he had
ANOTHER MAIN ANSWER:
paid P300,000.00, his father died. When the administrator of
his father's estate requested payment of the balance of
P200,000.00. Arturo replied that the same had been
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
condoned by his father as evidenced by a notation at the The action will not prosper. The existence of inflation or
back of his check payment for the P300,000.00 reading: "In deflation requires an official declaration by the Bangko
full payment of the loan". Will this be a valid defense in an Sentral ng Pilipinas.
action for collection? (3%) ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER: The unlawful detainer action will prosper. It is a given fact in
It depends. If the notation "in full payment of the loan" was the problem, that there was inflation, which caused the
written by Arturo's father, there was an implied condonation exchange rate to double. Since the contract itself authorizes
of the balance that discharges the obligation. In such case, the the increase in rental in the event of an inflation or
notation is an act of the father from which condonation may devaluation of the Philippine peso, the doubling of the
be inferred. The condonation being implied, it need not monthly rent is reasonable and is therefore a valid act under
comply with the formalities of a donation to be effective. The the very terms of the contract. Brian's refusal to pay is thus a
defense of full payment will, therefore, be valid. ground for ejectment.
Liability; Solidary Obligation (1992) the consent of the other four co-debtors. State the effect of
In June 1988, X obtained a loan from A and executed with Y each of the above defenses put up by A on his obligation to
as solidary co-maker a promissory note in favor of A for the pay X, if such defenses are found to be true.
sum of P200,000.00. The loan was payable at P20,000.00 with
interest monthly within the first week of each month SUGGESTED ANSWERS:
(a) A may avail the minority of B as a defense, but only for
beginning July 1988 until maturity in April 1989. To secure the
B’s share of P 10,000.00. A solidary debtor may avail himself
payment of the loan. X put up as security a chattel mortgage
of any defense which personally belongs to a solidary
on his car, a Toyota Corolla sedan. Because of failure of X
co-debtor, but only as to the share of that codebtor.
and Y to pay the principal amount of the loan, the car was
extrajudicially foreclosed. A acquired the car at A's highest bid
of P120,000.00 during the auction sale.
(b) A may avail of the condonation by X of C’s share of P 10,
000.00. A solidary debtor may, in actions filed by the creditor,
After several fruitless letters of demand against X and Y, A avail himself of all defenses which are derived from the
sued Y alone for the recovery of P80.000.00 constituting the nature of the obligation and of those which are personal to
deficiency. Y resisted the suit raising the following defenses: him or pertain to his own share. With respect to those which
personally belong to others, he may avail himself thereof only
a) That Y should not be liable at all because X was not
sued together with Y. as regards that part of the debt for which the latter are
b) That the obligation has been paid completely by A's responsible. (Article 1222, NCC).
acquisition of the car through "dacion en pago" or payment
by cession. (c) A may not interpose the defense of insolvency of D as a
c) That Y should not be held liable for the deficiency defense. Applying the principle of mutual guaranty among
of P80,000.00 because he was not a co-mortgagor in the solidary debtors, A guaranteed the payment of D’s share and
chattel mortgage of the car which contract was executed by X of all the other co-debtors. Hence, A cannot avail of the
alone as owner and mortgagor. defense of D’s insolvency.
d) That assuming that Y is liable, he should only pay the
proportionate sum of P40,000.00. Decide each defense with (d) The extension of six (6) months given by X to E may be
reasons. availed of by A as a partial defense but only for the share of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: E, there is no novation of the obligation but only an act of
(a) This first defense of Y is untenable. Y is still liable as liberality granted to E alone.
solidary debtor. The creditor may proceed against any one of
the solidary debtors. The demand against one does not Loss of the thing due; Force Majeure (2000)
preclude further demand against the others so long as the Kristina brought her diamond ring to a jewelry shop for
debt is not fully paid. cleaning. The jewelry shop undertook to return the ring by
February 1, 1999." When the said date arrived, the jewelry
(b) The second defense of Y is untenable. Y is still liable. The shop informed Kristina that the Job was not yet finished.
chattel mortgage is only given as a security and not as They asked her to return five days later. On February 6, 1999,
payment for the debt in case of failure to pay. Y as a solidary Kristina went to the shop to claim the ring, but she was
co-maker is not relieved of further liability on the informed that the same was stolen by a thief who entered the
shop the night before. Kristina filed an action
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
for damages against the jewelry shop which put up the Bernie 50% of the total payments made. (Rillo v. Court of
defense of force majeure. Will the action prosper or not? Appeals, G.R. No. 125347, June 19,1997)
(5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The action will prosper. Since the defendant was already in Period; Suspensive Period (1991)
default not having delivered the ring when delivery was In a deed of sale of a realty, it was stipulated that the buyer
demanded by plaintiff at due date, the defendant is liable for would construct a commercial building on the lot while the
the loss of the thing and even when the loss was due to force seller would construct a private passageway bordering the lot.
majeure. The building was eventually finished but the seller failed to
complete the passageway as some of the squatters, who were
Non-Payment of Amortizations; Subdivision Buyer; When already known to be there at the time they entered into the
justified (2005) contract, refused to vacate the premises. In fact, prior to its
Bernie bought on installment a residential subdivision lot from execution, the seller filed ejectment cases against the
DEVLAND. After having faithfully paid the installments for squatters. The buyer now sues the seller for specific
48 months, Bernie discovered that DEVLAND had failed to performance with damages. The defense is that the obligation
develop the subdivision in accordance with the approved to construct the passageway should be with a period which,
plans and specifications within the time frame in the plan. He incidentally, had not been fixed by them, hence, the need for
thus wrote a letter to DEVLAND informing it that he was fixing a judicial period. Will the action for specific
stopping payment. Consequently, DEVLAND cancelled the performance of the buyer against the seller prosper?
sale and wrote Bernie, informing him that his payments are
forfeited in its favor. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No. the action for specific performance filed by the buyer is
a) Was the action of DEVLAND proper? Explain. (2%) premature under Art. 1197 of the Civil Code. If a period has
not been fixed although contemplated by the parties, the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: parties themselves should fix that period, failing in which, the
No, the action of DEVLAND is not proper. Under Section 23 of Court maybe asked to fix it taking into consideration the
Presidential Decree No. 957, otherwise known as the Subdivision probable contemplation of the parties. Before the period is
and Condominium Buyer's Protection Decree, non-payment of fixed, an action for specific performance is premature.
amortizations by the buyer is justified if non-payment is due to ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
the failure of the subdivision owner to develop the subdivision It has been held in Borromeo vs. CA (47 SCRA 69), that the
project according to the approved plans and within the limit for Supreme Court allowed the simultaneous filing of action to
complying. fix the probable contemplated period of the parties where
(Eugenio v. Drilon, G.R. No. 109404, January 22, 1996) none is fixed in the agreement if this would avoid multiplicity
of suits. In addition, technicalities must be subordinated to
b) Discuss the rights of Bernie under the circums- substantial justice.
tances. (2%) ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER: The action for specific performance will not prosper. The
Under P.D. No. 957, a cancellation option is available to filing of the ejectment suit by the seller was precisely in
Bernie. If Bernie opts to cancel the contract, DEVLAND compliance with his obligations and should not, therefore, be
must reimburse Bernie the total amount paid and the faulted if no decision has yet been reached by the Court on
amortizations interest, excluding delinquency interest, plus the matter.
interest at legal rate. (Eugenio v. Drilon, G.R. No. 109404,
TRUST
January 22, 1996)
Double Sales (2004) Juliet died in January I973 without having repurchased the
JV, owner of a parcel of land, sold it to PP. But the deed of property. Her only surviving heir, her son X, failed to
sale was not registered. One year later, JV sold the parcel repurchase the property on or before 3 June 1973. In 1975,
again to RR, who succeeded to register the deed and to Romeo sold the property to Y for P50,000.00. Upon learning
obtain a transfer certificate of title over the property in his of the sale, X filed an action for the nullification of the sale
own name. Who has a better right over the parcel of land, and for the recovery of the property on the ground that the
RR or PP? Why? Explain the legal basis for your answer. so-called deed of absolute sale executed by his mother was
(5%) merely an equitable mortgage, taking into account the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: inadequacy of the price and the failure of Romeo to take
It depends on whether or not RR is an innocent purchaser possession of the property and to pay the taxes thereon.
for value. Under the Torrens System, a deed or instrument Romeo and Y maintain that there was a valid absolute sale
operated only as a contract between the parties and as and that the document signed by the former on 3 June 1973
evidence of authority to the Register of Deeds to make the was merely a promise to sell. a) If you were the Judge, would
registration. It is the registration of the deed or the you uphold the theory of
instrument that is the operative act that conveys or affects X? b) If you decide in favor of Romeo and Y, would you
the land. (Sec. 51, P.D. No. 1529).
uphold the validity of the promise to sell?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
In cases of double sale of titled land, it is a well-settled rule A. I will not uphold the theory of X for the nullification of
that the buyer who first registers the sale in good faith the sale and for the recovery of the property on the ground
acquires a better right to the land. (Art. 1544, Civil Code). that the so-called sale was only an equitable mortgage. An
equitable mortgage may arise only if, in truth, the sale was one
Persons dealing with property covered by Torrens title are with the right of repurchase. The facts of the case state that
not required to go beyond what appears on its face. the right to repurchase was granted after the absolute deed of
(Orquiola v. CA 386, SCRA 301, [2002]; Domingo v. Races 401 sale was executed. Following the rule in Cruzo vs. Carriaga
SCRA 197, [2003]). Thus, absent any showing that RR knew (174 SCRA 330), a deed of repurchase executed independently
about, or ought to have known the prior sale of the land to of the deed of sale where the two stipulations are found in
PP or that he acted in bad faith, and being first to register the two instruments instead of one document, the right of
sale, RR acquired a good and a clean title to the property as repurchase would amount only to one option granted by the
against PP. buyer to the seller. Since the contract cannot be upheld as a
contract of sale with the right to repurchase, Art. 1602 of the
Equitable Mortgage Civil Code on equitable mortgage will not apply. The rule
(1991)
On 20 December 1970, Juliet, a widow, borrowed from could have been different if both deeds were executed on the
Romeo P4,000.00 and, as security therefore, she executed a same occasion or date, in which case, under the ruling in
deed of mortgage over one of her two (2) registered lots spouses Claravall v. CA (190 SCRA 439), the contract may still
which has a market value of P15,000.00. The document and be sustained as an equitable mortgage, given the
the certificate of title of the property were delivered to circumstances expressed in Art. 1602. The reserved right to
Romeo. repurchase is then deemed an original intention.
Accordingly, B leased A's parcel of land in Manila to C for b) Considering that Prime Realty Corporation only "told"
four (4) years at P60,000.00 per year, payable annually in Nestor that he could not receive or collect payments, it
advance. appears that the limitation does not appear in his written
authority or power of attorney. In this case, insofar as Jesus,
B leased another parcel of land of A in Caloocan City to D who is a third person is concerned, Nestor's acts of collecting
without a fixed term at P3,000.00 per month payable payments is deemed to have been performed within the scope
monthly. of his authority {Article 1900. Civil Code). Hence, the
principal is liable.
B sold to E a third parcel of land belonging to A located in
Quezon City for three (3) times the price that was listed in However, if Jesus was aware of the limitation of Nestor's
the inventory by A to B. power as an agent, and Prime Realty Corporation does not
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
ratify the sale contract, then Jesus shall be liable (Article allowing the other general partner to bind the corporation
1898. Civil Code). will violate the corporation law principle that only the board
of directors may bind the corporation.
Termination; Effect of Death of Agent (1997)
Stating briefly the thesis to support your answer to each of SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the following cases, will the death - (c) of an agent end an 3) No, for the same reasons given in the Answer to Number
agency? 2 above.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes. The death of an agent extinguishes the agency, by Conveyance of a Partner’s Share Dissolution (1998)
express provision of par. 3, Art 1919 of the Civil Code. Dielle, Karlo and Una are general partners in a merchandising
firm. Having contributed equal amounts to the capital, they
also agree on equal distribution of whatever net profit is
PARTNERSHIP realized per fiscal period. After two years of operation,
however, Una conveys her whole interest in the partnership to
Composition of Partnerships; Spouses; Corporations (1994) Justine, without the knowledge and consent of Dielle and
Karlo.
1) Can a husband and wife form a limited partnership 1. Is the partnership dissolved?
to engage in real estate business, with the wife being a limited 12%]
2. What are the rights of Justine, if any, should she desire to
partner? participate in the management of the partnership and in the
2) Can two corporations organize a general partnership under distribution of a net profit of P360.000.00 which was realized
the Civil Code of the Philippines? 3) Can a corporation and after her purchase of Una's interest? [3%]
an individual form a general partnership? SUGGESTED ANSWER:
1. No, a conveyance by a partner of his whole interest in a
SUGGESTED ANSWER: partnership does not of itself dissolve the partnership in the
1) a) Yes. The Civil Code prohibits a husband and wife from absence of an agreement. (Art. 1813. Civil Code)
constituting a universal partnership. Since a limited
partnership is not a universal partnership, a husband and wife SUGGESTED ANSWER:
may validly form one. b) Yes. While spouses cannot enter 2. Justine cannot interfere or participate in the management or
into a universal partnership, they can enter into a limited administration of the partnership business or affairs. She may,
partnership or be members thereof (CIR u. Suter, etal. 27 however, receive the net profits to which Una would have
SCRA 152). otherwise been entitled. In this case, P120.000 (Art. 1813,
Civil Code)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
2) a) No, A corporation is managed by its board of Dissolution of Partnership (1995)
directors. If the corporation were to become a partner, Pauline, Patricia and Priscilla formed a business partnership
co-partners would have the power to make the corporation for the purpose of engaging in neon advertising for a term of
party to transactions in an irregular manner since the partners five (5) years. Pauline subsequently assigned to Philip her
are not agents subject to the control of the Board of interest in the partnership. When Patricia and Priscilla learned
Directors. But a corporation may enter into a joint venture of the assignment, they decided to dissolve the partnership
with another corporation as long as the nature of the venture before the expiration of its term as they had an unproductive
is in line with the business authorized by its charter. (Tuason business relationship with Philip in the past. On the other
& Co., Inc. v. Bolano, 95 Phil. 106). hand, unaware of the move of Patricia and Priscilla but
sensing their negative reaction to his acquisition of Pauline's
b) As a general rule a corporation may not form a general interest, Philip simultaneously petitioned for the dissolution
partnership with another corporation or an individual because of the partnership.
a corporation may not be bound by persons who are neither 1. Is the dissolution done by Patricia and Priscilla without
directors nor officers of the corporation. the consent of Pauline or Philip valid? Explain.
2. Does Philip have any right to petition for the
However, a corporation may form a general partnership with dissolution of the partnership before the expiration of its
another corporation or an individual provided the following specified term? Explain.
conditions are met: SUGGESTED ANSWER:
1) The Articles of Incorporation of the 1, Under Art. 1830 (1) (c) of the NCC, the dissolution by
corporation expressly allows the corporation to enter Patricia and Priscilla is valid and did not violate the contract
into partnerships; of partnership even though Pauline and Philip did not
2) The Articles of Partnership must provide that consent thereto. The consent of Pauline is not necessary
all partners will manage the partnership, and they shall be because she had already assigned her interest to Philip. The
jointly and severally liable; and consent of Philip is not also necessary because the assignment
3) In case of a foreign corporation, it must be to him of Pauline's interest did not make him a partner, under
licensed to do business in the Philippines. Art, 1813 of the NCC.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
c) No. A corporation may not be a general partner because Interpreting Art. 1830 (1) (c) to mean that if one of the
the principle of mutual agency in general partnership partners had assigned his interest on the partnership to
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
another the remaining partners may not dissolve the A should be hired as Secretary. The decision for the hiring
partnership, the dissolution by Patricia and Priscilla without of A prevails because it is an act of administration which can
the consent of Pauline or Philip is not valid. be performed by the duly appointed managing partners, W
and X.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
2. No, Philip has no right to petition for dissolution because B cannot be hired, because in case of a tie in the decision of
he does not have the standing of a partner (Art. 1813 NCC). the managing partners, the deadlock must be decided by the
partners owning the controlling interest. In this case, the
opposition of X and Y prevails because Y owns the
Dissolution of Partnership; Termination (1993) controlling Interest (Art. 1801, Civil Code).
A, B and C formed a partnership for the purpose of
contracting with the Government in the construction of one Obligations of a Partner; Industrial Partner (2001)
of its bridges. On June 30, 1992, after completion of the Joe and Rudy formed a partnership to operate a car repair
project, the bridge was turned over by the partners to the shop in Quezon City. Joe provided the capital while Rudy
Government. On August 30, 1992, D, a supplier of materials contributed his labor and industry. On one side of their shop,
used in the project sued A for collection of the indebtedness Joe opened and operated a coffee shop, while on the other
to him. A moved to dismiss the complaint against him on the side, Rudy put up a car accessories store. May they engage in
ground that it was the ABC partnership that is liable for the such separate businesses? Why? [5%]
debt. D replied that ABC partnership was dissolved upon SUGGESTED ANSWER:
completion of the project for which purpose the partnership Joe, the capitalist partner, may engage in the restaurant
was formed. Will you dismiss the complaint against A If you business because it is not the same kind of business the
were the Judge? partnership is engaged in. On the other hand, Rudy may not
engage in any other business unless their partnership
SUGGESTED ANSWER: expressly permits him to do so because as an industrial
As Judge, I would not dismiss the complaint against A. partner he has to devote his full time to the business of the
because A is still liable as a general partner for his pro rata partnership [Art. 1789, CC).
share of 1/3 (Art. 1816, C. C.J. Dissolution of a partnership
caused by the termination of the particular undertaking
specified in the agreement does not extinguish obligations, Commodatum & Mutuum
which must be liquidated during the "winding up" of the
partnership affairs (Articles 1829 and 1830. par. 1-a, Civil Commodatum (1993)
Code). A, upon request, loaned his passenger Jeepney to B to enable
B to bring his sick wife from Paniqui. Tarlac to the Philippine
Effect of Death of Partner (1997) General Hospital in Manila for treatment. On the way back to
Stating briefly the thesis to support your answer to each of Paniqui, after leaving his wife at the hospital, people stopped
the following cases, will the death - of a partner terminate the the passenger Jeepney. B stopped for them and allowed them
partnership? to ride on board, accepting payment from them just as in the
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes. The death of a partner will terminate the partnership, by case of ordinary passenger Jeepneys plying their route. As B
express provision of par. 5, Art. 1830 of the Civil Code. was crossing Bamban, there was an onrush of Lahar from Mt
Pinatubo, the Jeep that was loaned to him was wrecked. 1)
Obligations of a Partner (1992) What do you call the contract that was entered into by
W, X, Y and Z organized a general partnership with W and X
A and B with respect to the passenger Jeepney that was
as industrial partners and Y and Z as capitalist partners. Y
loaned by A to B to transport the latter's sick wife to
contributed P50,000.00 and Z contributed P20,000.00 to the
Manila? 2) Is B obliged to pay A for the use of the passenger
common fund. By a unanimous vote of the partners, W and
X were appointed managing partners, without any
jeepney? 3) Is B liable to A for the loss of the
specification of their respective powers and duties.
Jeepney?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A applied for the position of Secretary and B applied for the 1) The contract is called "commodatum". [Art. 1933. Civil
position of Accountant of the partnership. Code). COMMODATUM is a contract by which one of the
parties (bailor) delivers to another (bailee) something not
The hiring of A was decided upon by W and X, but was consumable so that the latter may use it for a certain time
opposed by Y and Z. and return it.
The hiring of B was decided upon by W and Z, but was 2) No, B is not obliged to pay A for the use of the passenger
opposed by X and Y. Jeepney because commodatum is essentially gratuitous. (Art.
1933. Civil Code]
Who of the applicants should be hired by the partnership?
Explain and give your reasons. 3) Yes, because B devoted the thing to a purpose different
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
from that for which it has been loaned (Art. 1942, par. 2,
Civil Code)
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: Tito must also pay for the ordinary expenses for the use and
No, because an obligation which consists in the delivery of a preservation of the thing loaned. He must pay for the
determinate thing shall be extinguished if it should be lost or gasoline, oil, greasing and spraying. He cannot ask for
destroyed without the fault of the debtor, and before he has reimbursement because he has the obligation to return the
incurred in delay. (Art. 1262. Civil Code) identical thing to the bailor. Under Article 1941 of the Civil
Code, the bailee is obliged to pay for the ordinary expenses
Commodatum (2005) for the use and preservation of the thing loaned.
Before he left for Riyadh to work as a mechanic, Pedro left
his Adventure van with Tito, with the understanding that the c) Does Pedro have the right to retrieve the van even
latter could use it for one year for his personal or family use before the lapse of one year? Explain. (2%)
while Pedro works in Riyadh. He did not tell Tito that the ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
brakes of the van were faulty. Tito had the van tuned up and No, Pedro does not have the right to retrieve the van before
the brakes repaired. He spent a total amount of P15,000.00. the lapse of one year. The parties are mutually bound by the
After using the vehicle for two weeks, Tito discovered that it terms of the contract. Under the Civil Code, there are only 3
consumed too much fuel. To make up for the expenses, he instances when the bailor could validly ask for the return of
leased it to Annabelle. the thing loaned even before the expiration of the period.
These are when: (1) a precarium contract was entered (Article
Two months later, Pedro returned to the Philippines and 1947); (2) if the bailor urgently needs the thing (Article 1946);
asked Tito to return the van. Unfortunately, while being and (3) if the bailee commits acts of ingratitude (Article 1948).
driven by Tito, the van was accidentally damaged by a cargo Not one of the situations is present in this case.
truck without his fault.
a) Who shall bear the P15,000.00 spent for the repair of
the van? Explain. (2%) The fact that Tito had leased the thing loaned to Annabelle
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: would not justify the demand for the return of the thing
Tito must bear the P15,000.00 expenses for the van. loaned before expiration of the period. Under Article 1942 of
Generally, extraordinary expenses for the preservation of the the Civil Code, leasing of the thing loaned to a third person
thing loaned are paid by the bailor, he being the owner of the not member of the household of the bailee, will only entitle
thing loaned. In this case however, Tito should bear the bailor to hold bailee liable for the loss of the thing loaned.
expenses because he incurred the expenses without first
informing Pedro about it. Neither was the repair shown to be ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
urgent. Under Article 1949 of the Civil Code, bailor generally As a rule, Pedro does not have the right to retrieve the van
bears the extraordinary expenses for the preservation of the before the lapse of one year. Article 1946 of the Code
thing and should refund the said expenses if made by the provides that "the bailor cannot demand the return of the
bailee; Provided, The bailee brings the same to the attention of thing loaned till after the expiration of the period stipulated,
the bailor before incurring them, except only if the repair is or after the accomplishment of the use for which the
urgent that reply cannot be awaited. commodatum has been constituted. However, if in the
meantime, he should have urgent need of the thing, he may
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: demand its return or temporary use." In the given problem,
The P15,000.00 spent for the repair of the van should be Pedro allowed Tito to use the van for one year. Thus, he
borne by Pedro. Where the bailor delivers to the bailee a should be bound by the said agreement and he cannot ask for
non-consummable thing so that the latter may use it for a the return of the car before the expiration of the one year
certain time and return the identical thing, the contract period. However, if Pedro has urgent need of the van, he may
perfected is a Contract of Commodatum. (Art. 1933, Civil demand for its return or temporary use.
Code) The bailor shall refund the extraordinary expenses
during the contract for the preservation of the thing loaned
provided the bailee brings the same to the knowledge of the d) Who shall bear the expenses for the accidental damage
bailor before incurring the same, except when they are so caused by the cargo truck, granting that the truck driver
urgent that the reply to the notification cannot be awaited and truck owner are insolvent? Explain. (2%)
without danger. (Art. 1949 of the Civil Code)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
In the given problem, Pedro left his Adventure van with Tito Generally, extraordinary expenses arising on the occasion of
so that the latter could use it for one year while he was in the actual use of the thing loaned by the bailee, even if
Riyadh. There was no mention of a consideration. Thus, the incurred without fault of the bailee, shall be shouldered
contract perfected was commodatum. The amount of equally by the bailor and the bailee. (Art. 1949 of the Civil
P15,000.00 was spent by Tito to tune up the van and to Code). However, if Pedro had an urgent need for the vehicle,
repair its brakes. Such expenses are extra-ordinary expenses Tito would be in delay for failure to immediately return the
because they are necessary for the preservation of the van same, then Tito would be held liable for the extraordinary
Thus, the same should be borne by the bailor, Pedro. expenses.
b) Who shall bear the costs for the van's fuel, oil and
other materials while it was with Tito? Explain. (2%) Commodatum vs. Usufruct (1998)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Distinguish usufruct from commodatum and state whether
these may be constituted over consumable goods. [2%] Mutuum; Interests (2001)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Samuel borrowed P300,000.00 housing loan from the bank at
1. USUFRUCT is a right given to a person (usufructuary) to 18% per annum interest. However, the promissory note
enjoy the property of another with the obligation of contained a proviso that the bank "reserves the right to
preserving its form and substance. (Art. 562. Civil Code) increase interest within the limits allowed by law," By virtue
of such proviso, over the objections of Samuel, the bank
On the other hand, COMMODATUM is a contract by which increased the interest rate periodically until it reached 48%
one of the parties (bailor) delivers to another (bailee) per annum. Finally, Samuel filed an action questioning the
something not consumable so that the latter may use it for a right of the bank to increase the interest rate up to 48%. The
certain time and return it. bank raised the defense that the Central Bank of the
Philippines had already suspended the Usury Law. Will the
In usufruct the usufructuary gets the right to the use and to action prosper or not? Why? (5%)
the fruits of the same, while in commodatum, the bailee only SUGGESTED ANSWER:
acquires the use of the thing loaned but not its fruits. The action will prosper. While it is true that the interest
ceilings set by the Usury Law are no longer in force, it has
Usufruct may be constituted on the whole or a part of the been held that PD No. 1684 and CB Circular No. 905 merely
fruits of the thing. (Art. 564. Civil Code). It may even be allow contracting parties to stipulate freely on any adjustment
constituted over consumables like money (Alunan v. Veloso, in the interest rate on a loan or forbearance of money but do
52 Phil. 545). On the other hand, in commodatum, not authorize a unilateral increase of the interest rate by one
consumable goods may be subject thereof only when the party without the other's consent (PNB
purpose of the contract is not the consumption of the object, v. CA, 238 SCRA 2O [1994]]). To say otherwise will violate the
as when it is merely for exhibition. (Art. 1936, Civil Code) principle of mutuality of contracts under Article 1308 of the
Civil Code. To be valid, therefore, any change of interest must
ANOTHER ANSWER: be mutually agreed upon by the parties (Dizon v, Magsaysay,
1. There are several points of distinction between usufruct and 57 SCRA 25O [1974]). In the present problem, the debtor not
commodatum. Usufruct is constituted by law, by contract, by having given his consent to the increase in interest, the
testamentary succession, or by prescription (Art. 1933. Civil increase is void.
Code). Usufruct creates a real right to the fruits of another's
property, while commodatum creates only a purely personal Mutuum; Interests (2002)
right to use another's property, and requires a stipulation to Carlos sues Dino for (a) collection on a promissory note for a
enable the bailee to "make use" of the fruits (Arts. 1939& loan, with no agreement on interest, on which Dino
1940, Civil Code). Usufruct maybe onerous while defaulted, and (b) damages caused by Dino on his (Carlos’)
commodatum is always or essentially gratuitous (Arts. 1933 & priceless Michaelangelo painting on which Dino is liable on
1935, Civil Code). The contract constituting usufruct is the promissory note and awards damages to Carlos for the
consensual, while commodatum is a real contract (perfected damaged painting, with interests for both awards. What rates
only by delivery of the subject matter thereof). However, both of interest may the court impose with respect to both awards?
involve the enjoyment by a person of the property of another, Explain. (5%)
differing only as to the extent and scope of such enjoyment SUGGESTED ANSWER:
[jus fruendi in one and Jus utendi in the other); both may have With respect to the collection of money or promissory note,
as subject matter either an immovable or a movable; and, both it being a forbearance of money, the legal rate of interest for
maybe constituted over consumable goods (Arts. 574 & 1936, having defaulted on the payment of 12% will apply. With
Civil Code). A consumable thing may be the subject-matter of respect to the damages to the painting, it is 6% from the time
an abnormal usufruct but in a normal usufruct, the of the final demand up to the time of finality of judgment
subject-matter may be used only for exhibition. A until judgment credit is fully paid. The court considers the
commodatum of a consumable thing may be only for the latter as a forbearance of money. (Eastern Shipping Lines,
purpose of exhibiting, not consuming it. Inc. v. CA, 234 SCRA 78 [1994]; Art 2210 and
2211, CC)
DEPOSIT The Mayor of Manila cannot invoke. Article 719 of the Civil
Code which requires the finder to deposit the thing with the
Compensation; Bank Loan (1997) Mayor only when the previous possessor is unknown.
In order to secure a bank loan, XYZ Corporation surrendered
its deposit certificate, with a maturity date of 01 September In this case , a must return the bag of money to the bank as
1997 to the bank. The corporation defaulted on the due the previous possessor and known owner (Arts. 719 and
repayment of the loan, prompting the bank to encash the 1990. Civil Code.)
deposit certificate. XYZ Corporation questioned the above
action taken by the bank as being a case of pactum
commissorium. The bank disagrees. What is your opinion? SURETY
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Recovery of Deficiency (1997)
We submit that there is no pactum commissorium here. AB sold to CD a motor vehicle for and in consideration of
Deposits of money in banks and similar institutions are P120,000.00 to be paid in twelve monthly equal installments
governed by the provisions on simple loans (Art. 1980. Civil of P10,000,00, each installment being due and payable on the
Code). The relationship between the depositor and a bank is 15th day of each month starting January 1997.
one of creditor and debtor. Basically this is a matter of
compensation as all the elements of compensation are present To secure the promissory note, CD (a) executed a chattel
in this case (BPI vs. CA, 232 SCRA 302). mortgage on the subject motor vehicle, and (b) furnished a
ADDITIONAL ANSWER: surety bond issued by Philam life, CD failed to pay more than
Where the security for the debt is also money deposited in a two (2) installments, AB went after the surety but he was only
bank, it is not illegal for the creditor to encash the time able to obtain three-fourths (3/4) of the total amount still
deposit certificates to pay the debtor's overdue obligation. due and owing from CD. AB seeks your advice on how he
(Chu us. CA, et al., G.R 78519, September 26, 1989). might, if at all, recover the deficiency. How would you
counsel AB?
Deposit; Exchange (1992) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
X and Y staged a daring bank robbery in Manila at 10:30 AM Yes, he can recover the deficiency. The action of AB to go
in the morning of a regular business day, and escaped with after the surety bond cannot be taken to mean a waiver of his
their loot of two (2) bags, each bag containing P50,000,00. right to demand payment for the whole debt, The amount
During their flight to elude the police, X and Y entered the received from the surety is only payment pro tanto, and an
nearby locked house of A, then working in his Quezon City action may be maintained for a deficiency debt.
office. From A's house, X and Y stole a box containing cash
totaling P50,000.00 which box A had been keeping in deposit
for his friend B. ANTICHRESIS
Antichresis (1995)
In their hurry, X and Y left in A's bedroom one (1) of the Olivia owns a vast mango plantation which she can no longer
bags which they had taken from the bank. properly manage due to a lingering illness. Since she is
indebted to Peter in the amount of P500.000.00 she asks
With X and Y now at large and nowhere to be found, the bag Peter to manage the plantation and apply the harvest to the
containing P50.000.00 is now claimed by B, by the Mayor of payment of her obligation to him, principal and interest, until
Manila, and by the bank. her indebtedness shall have been fully paid. Peter agrees. 1)
What kind of contract is entered into between Olivia
B claims that the depository. A, by force majeure had
obtained the bag of money in place of the box of money and Peter? Explain. 2) What specific obligations are imposed
deposited by B. by law on Peter
as a consequence of their contract? 3) Does the law require
The Mayor of Manila, on the other hand, claims that the bag any specific form for the validity
of money should be deposited with the Office of the Mayor of their contract? Explain 4) May Olivia re-acquire the
as required of the finder by the provisions of the Civil Code. plantation before her entire
indebtedness shall have been fully paid? Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The bank resists the claims of B and the Mayor of Manila.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
1. A contract of antichresis was entered into between payment of the loan. However, the loan was not paid on
Olivia and Peter. Under Article 2132 of the New Civil Code, time. A month after 4 years, may the shares of stock
by a contract of antichresis the creditor acquires the right to pledged be deemed owned by ABC or not? Reason. (5%)
receive the fruits of an immovable of his debtor, with the
obligation to apply them to the payment of the interest, and SUGGESTED ANSWER:
thereafter to the principal of his credit. The shares of stock cannot be deemed owned by ABC upon
default of MNO. They have to be foreclosed. Under Article
SUGGESTED ANSWER: 2088 of the Civil Code, the creditor cannot appropriate the
2. Peter must pay taxes and charges upon the land and bear things given by way of pledge. And even if the parties have
the necessary expenses for preservation and repair which he stipulated that ABC becomes the owner of the shares in case
may deduct from the fruits. (Art, 2135, NCC) MNO defaults on the loan, such stipulation is void for being
a pactum commissorium.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
3. The amount of the principal and interest must be specified Pledge; Mortgage; Antichresis (1996)
in writing, otherwise the antichresis will be void. (Art. 2134, In the province, a farmer couple borrowed money from the
NCC) local merchant. To guarantee payment, they left the Torrens
Title of their land with the merchant, for him to hold until
SUGGESTED ANSWER: they pay the loan. Is there a - a) contract of pledge, b)
4. No. Art. 2136 specifically provides that the debtor cannot contract of mortgage, c) contract of antichresis, or d)
re-acquire the enjoyment of the immovable without first none of the above? Explain.
having totally paid what he owes the creditor. However, it is
potestative on the part of the creditor to do so in order to
exempt him from his obligation under Art. 2135, NCC, The
debtor cannot re-acquire the enjoyment unless Peter compels SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Olivia to enter again the enjoyment of the property. None of the above. There is no pledge because only movable
property may be pledged (Art. 2094. NCC). If at all, there was
a pledge of the paper or document constituting the Torrens
PLEDGE
Title, as a movable by itself, but not of the land which the title
represents.
(b) Y must render an account of his operations and deliver to Quasi-Contracts; Negotiorium Gestio (1995)
X the price he received for the sale of the harvested fish Armando owns a row of residential apartments in San Juan,
(Art, 2145, Civil Code). Metro Manila, which he rents out to tenants. On 1 April 1991
he left for the United States without appointing any
(c) X must pay the loan obtained by Y from W because X administrator to manage his apartments such that uncollected
must answer for obligations contracted with third persons in rentals accumulated for three (3) years. Amparo, a niece of
the interest of the owner (Art. 2150, Civil Code), Armando, concerned with the interest of her uncle, took it
upon herself to administer the property. As a consequence,
(d) Express ratification by X provides the effects of an she incurred expenses in collecting the rents and in some
express agency and X is liable to pay the commissions instances even spent for necessary repairs to preserve the
habitually received by the gestor as manager (Art. 2149, Civil property.
Code).
1. What Juridical relation between Amparo and Armando, if
Quasi-Contracts; Negotiorium Gestio (1993) any, has resulted from Amparo's unilateral act of assuming the
In September, 1972, upon declaration of martial rule in the administration of Armando's apartments? Explain.
Philippines. A, together with his wife and children. disappeared 2. What rights and obligations, if any, does Amparo have
from his residence along A. Mabini Street. Ermita, Manila. B, his under the circumstances? Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
immediate neighbor, noticing that mysterious disappearance of A
1. Negotiorum gestio existed between Amparo and
and his family, closed the doors and windows of his house to
Armando, She voluntarily took charge of the agency or
prevent it from being burglarized. Years passed without B hearing management of the business or property of her uncle without
from A and his family, B continued taking care of A's house, even any power from her uncle whose property was neglected. She
causing minor repairs to be done at his house to preserve it. In is called the gestor negotiorum or officious manager, (Art.
1976, when business began to perk up in the area, an enterprising 2144, NCC)
man. C, approached B and proposed that they build stores at the
ground floor of the house and convert its second floor into a 2. It is recommended by the Committee that an enumeration
pension house. B agreed to Cs proposal and together they spent of any two (2) obligations and two (2) rights as enumerated in
for the construction of stores at the ground floor and the Arts. 2145 to 2152, NCC, would entitle the examinee to full
conversion of the second floor into a pension house. While credit.
construction was going on, fire occurred at a nearby house. The
houses at the entire block, including A's were burned. After the
EDSA revolution in February 1986, A and his family returned from
the United States where they took refuge in 1972. Upon learning
of what happened to his house. A sued B for damages, B pleaded
as a defense that he merely took charge of his
Art. 2145. The officious manager shall perform his duties
with all the diligence of a good father of a family, and pay the
damages which through his fault or negligence may be
suffered by the owner of the property or business under
management.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
The courts may, however, increase or moderate the (2) When the contract refers to things pertaining to the
indemnity according to the circumstances of each case. owner of the business,
(NOTE: It is recommended by the Committee that an enumeration of any
Art. 2146. If the officious manager delegates to another two (2) obligations and any two (2) rights as enumerated la Arts. 2145 to
person all or some of his duties, he shall be liable for the acts 2152, NCC would entitle the examinee to full credit.)
of the delegate, without prejudice to the direct obligation of Quasi-Contracts; Solutio Indebiti (2004)
the latter toward the owner of the business. DPO went to a store to buy a pack of cigarettes worth
P225.00 only. He gave the vendor, RRA, a P500-peso bill.
The responsibility of two or more officious managers shall be The vendor gave him the pack plus P375.00 change. Was
solidary, unless management was assumed to save the thing there a discount, an oversight, or an error in the amount
or business from imminent danger. given? What would be DPO’s duty, if any, in case of an
excess in the amount of change given by the vendor? How
Art. 2147. The officious manager shall be liable for any is this situational relationship between DPO and RRA
fortuitous event: denominated? Explain. (5%)
(1) If he undertakes risky operations which the owner was SUGGESTED ANSWER:
not accustomed to embark upon; There was error in the amount of change given by RRA. This
(2) If he has preferred his own interest to that of the owner; is a case of solutio indebiti in that DPO received something that
is not due him. He has the obligation to return the P100.00;
(3) If he fails to return the property or business after demand otherwise, he will unjustly enrich himself at the expense of
by the owner, RRA. (Art. 2154, Civil Code)
(4) If he assumed the management in bad faith. ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
DPO has the duty to return to RRA the excess P100 as
Art. 2148. Except when the management was assumed to trustee under Article 1456 of the Civil Code which provides:
save the property or business from imminent danger, the If property is acquired through mistake or fraud, the person
officious manager shall be liable for fortuitous events obtaining it is, by force of law, considered a trustee of an
(1) If he is manifestly unfit to carry on the management; implied trust for the benefit of the person from whom the
(2) If by his Intervention h e prevented a more competent property comes. There is, in this case, an implied or
person from taking up the management. constructive trust in favor of RRA.
Damages (1994) Boy filed a case for damages against the abortionist, praying
On January 5, 1992, Nonoy obtained a loan of Pl,000,000.00 therein that the latter be ordered to pay him: (a) P30,000.00 as
from his friend Raffy. The promissory note did not stipulate indemnity for the death of the fetus, (b) P100.000.00 as moral
any payment for Interest. The note was due on January 5, damages for the mental anguish and anxiety he suffered, (c)
1993 but before this date the two became political enemies. P50,000.00 as exemplary damages, (d) P20,000.00 as nominal
Nonoy, out of spite, deliberately defaulted in paying the note, damages, and (e) P25,000.00 as attorney's fees. May actual
thus forcing Raffy to sue him. 1) What actual damages can damages be also recovered? If so, what facts should be alleged
Raffy recover? 2) Can Raffy ask for moral damages from and proved?
Nonoy? 3) Can Raffy ask for nominal damages? 4) Can Raffy
ask for temperate damages? 5) Can Raffy ask for attorney's SUGGESTED ANSWER:
fees? Yes, provided that the pecuniary loss suffered should be
substantiated and duly proved.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
1) Raffy may recover the amount of the promissory note of Damages arising from Death of Unborn Child (2003)
P1 million, together with interest at the legal rate from the If a pregnant woman passenger of a bus were to suffer an
date of judicial or extrajudicial demand. In addition, abortion following a vehicular accident due to the gross
however, inasmuch as the debtor is in bad faith, he is liable negligence of the bus driver, may she and her husband
for all damages which may be reasonably attributed to the claim damages from the bus company for the death of their
non-performance of the obligation. (Art. 2201(2). NCC). unborn child? Explain. 5%
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
2) Yes, under Article 2220, NCC moral damages are No, the spouses cannot recover actual damages in the form
recoverable in case of breach of contract where the defendant of indemnity for the loss of life of the unborn child. This is
acted fraudulently or in bad faith. because the unborn child is not yet considered a person and
the law allows indemnity only for loss of life of person. The
3) Nominal damages may not be recoverable in this case mother, however may recover damages for the bodily injury
because Raffy may already be indemnified of his losses with she suffered from the loss of the fetus which is considered
the award of actual and compensatory damages. NOMINAL part of her internal organ. The parents may also recover
DAMAGES are adjudicated only in order that a right of the damages for injuries that are inflicted directly upon them, e.g.,
plaintiff, which has been violated or invaded by the defendant moral damages for mental anguish that attended the loss of
may be vindicated or recognized, and not for the purpose of the unborn child. Since there is gross negligence, exemplary
indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss suffered by him. (Article damages can also be recovered. (Gelus v. CA, 2 SCRA 801
2231. Civil Code) [1961])
4) Raffy may ask for, but would most likely not be awarded Death Indemnity (1994)
temperate damages, for the reason that his actual damages Johnny Maton's conviction for homicide was affirmed by the
may already be compensated upon proof thereof with the Court of Appeals and in addition, although the prosecution
promissory note. TEMPERATE DAMAGES may be had not appealed at all. The appellate court increased the
awarded only when the court finds that some pecuniary loss indemnity for death from P30,000.00 to P50,000.00. On his
has been suffered but its amount cannot, from the nature of appeal to the Supreme Court, among the other things Johnny
the case, be proved with certainty. (Article 2224, Civil Code) Maton brought to the high court's attention, was the increase
of indemnity imposed by the Court of Appeals despite the
clear fact that the People had not appealed from the appellate
5) Yes, under paragraph 2, Article 2208 of the Civil Code, court's judgment. Is Johnny Maton correct?
considering that Nonoy's act or omission has compelled Raffy
to litigate to protect his interests. Furthermore. attorneys' fees SUGGESTED ANSWER:
may be awarded by the court when it is just and equitable. a) In Abejam v. Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court said
(Article 2208(110) Civil Code). that even if the issue of damages were not raised by the
appellant in the Court of Appeals but the Court of Appeals
Damages arising from Death of Unborn Child (1991) in its findings increased the damages, the Supreme Court will
On her third month of pregnancy, Rosemarie, married to not disturb the findings of the Court of Appeals.
Boy, for reasons known only to her, and without informing
Boy, went to the clinic of X, a known abortionist, who for a b) No, the contention of the accused is not correct because
fee, removed and expelled the fetus from her womb, Boy upon appeal to the Appellate Court, the court acquired
learned of the abortion six (6) months later. jurisdiction over the entire case, criminal as well as civil. Since
the conviction of homicide had been appealed, there
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
is no finality in the amount of indemnity because the civil A van owned by Orlando and driven by Diego, while
liability arising from the crime and the judgment on the crime negotiating a downhill slope of a city road, suddenly gained
has not yet become final speed, obviously beyond the authorized limit in the area, and
bumped a car in front of it, causing severed damage to the
c) Yes. Since the civil indemnity is an award in the civil action care and serious injuries to its passengers. Orlando was not in
arising from the criminal offense, the rule that a party cannot the car at the time of the incident. The car owner and the
be granted affirmative relief unless he himself has appealed injured passengers sued Orlando and Diego for damages
should apply. Therefore, it was error for the Court of Appeals caused by Diego’s negligence. In their defense, Diego claims
to have expanded the indemnity since the judgment on the that the downhill slope caused the van to gain speed and that,
civil liability had become final. as he stepped on the brakes to check the acceleration, the
brakes locked, causing the van to go even faster and
d) No. Courts can review matters not assigned as errors. eventually to hit the car in front of it. Orlando and Diego
(Hydro Resource vs. CA . 204 SCRA 309). contend that the sudden malfunction of the van’s brake
system is a fortuitous even and that, therefore, they are
Defense; Due Diligence in Selection (2003) exempt from any liability. Is this contention tenable? Explain.
As a result of a collision between the taxicab owned by A (2%)
and another taxicab owned by B, X, a passenger of the first SUGGESTED ANSWER:
taxicab, was seriously injured. X later filed a criminal action No. Mechanical defects of a motor vehicle do not constitute
against both drivers. fortuitous event, since the presence of such defects would
have been readily detected by diligent maintenance check.
May both taxicab owners raise the defense of due diligence in The failure to maintain the vehicle in safe running condition
the selection and supervision of their drivers to be absolved constitutes negligence.
from liability for damages to X? Reason. 5%
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Liability; Airline Company; Non-Performance of an Obligation
It depends. If the civil action is based on a quasi-delict the (2004)
taxicab owners may raise the defense of diligence of a good DT and MT were prominent members of the frequent
father of a family in the selection and supervision of the travelers’ club of FX Airlines. In Hongkong, the couple were
driver; if the action against them is based on culpa contractual assigned seats in Business Class for which they had bought
or civil liability arising from a crime, they cannot raise the tickets. On checking in, however, they were told they were
defense. upgraded by computer to First Class for the flight to Manila
because the Business Section was overbooked.
Filing of Separate Civil Action; Need for Reservation (2003)
As a result of a collision between the taxicab owned by A Both refused to transfer despite better seats, food, beverage
and another taxicab owned by B, X, a passenger of the first and other services in First Class. They said they had guests in
taxicab, was seriously injured. X later filed a criminal action Business Class they should attend to. They felt humiliated,
against both drivers. embarrassed and vexed, however, when the stewardess
allegedly threatened to offload them if they did not avail of
Is it necessary for X to reserve his right to institute a civil the upgrade. Thus they gave in, but during the transfer of
action for damages against both taxicab owners before he luggage DT suffered pain in his arm and wrist. After arrival in
can file a civil action for damages against them? Why Manila, they demanded an apology from FX’s management as
SUGGESTED ANSWER: well as indemnity payment. When none was forthcoming,
It depends. If the separate civil action is to recover damages they sued the airline for a million pesos in damages. Is the
arising from the criminal act, reservation is necessary. If the airline liable for actual and moral damages? Why or why not?
civil action against the taxicab owners is based on culpa Explain briefly. (5%)
contractual, or on quasi-delict, there is no need for
reservation. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: FX Airlines committed breach of contract when it upgraded
No, such reservation is not necessary. Under Section 1 of DT and MT, over their objections, to First Class because they
Rule 111 of the 2000 Rules on Criminal Procedure, what is had contracted for Business Class passage. However,
―deemed instituted‖ with the criminal action is only the action although there is a breach of contract, DT and MT are
to recover civil liability arising from the crime or ex delicto. entitled to actual damages only for such pecuniary losses
All the other civil actions under Articles 32, 33, 34 and 2176 suffered by them as a result of such breach. There seems to
of the New Civil Code are no longer ―deemed instituted‖, and be no showing that they incurred such pecuniary loss. There
may be filed separately and prosecuted independently even is no showing that the pain in DT's arm and wrist resulted
without any reservation in the criminal action (Section 3, Rule directly from the carrier's acts complained of. Hence, they
111, Ibid). The failure to make a reservation in the criminal are not entitled to actual damages. Moreover, DT could have
action is not a waiver of the right to file a separate and avoided the alleged injury by requesting the airline staff to do
independent civil action based on these articles of the New the luggage transfer as a matter of duty on their part. There is
Civil Code (Casupanan v. Laroya GR No. 145391, August 26, also no basis to award moral damages for such breach of
2002). contract because the facts of the problem do not show bad
faith or fraud on the part of the airline. (Cathay Pacific v.
Fortuitous Event; Mechanical Defects (2002) Vazquez, 399 SCRA 207 [2003]). However, they
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
may recover moral damages if the cause of action is based The action may or may not prosper. Moral damages include
on Article 21 of the Civil Code for the humiliation and physical suffering, mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety,
embarrassment they felt when the stewardess threatened to besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral shock, social
offload them if they did not avail of the upgrade. humiliation, and similar injury. Although incapable of
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: pecuniary computation, moral damages may be recovered if
If it can be proved that DT's pain in his arm and wrist they are the proximate result of the defendant's wrongful act
occasioned by the transfer of luggage was caused by fault or or omission. Moral damages predicated upon a breach of
negligence on the part of the airline's stewardess, actual contract of carriage are recoverable only in instances where
damages may be recovered. the carrier is guilty of fraud or bad faith or where the mishap
resulted in the death of a passenger. (Cathay Pacific Airways,
The airline may be liable for moral damages pursuant to Art. Ltd. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 60501, March 5, 1993) Where
2219 (10) if the cause of action is based on Article 21 or an there is no showing that the airline acted fraudulently or in
act contrary to morals in view of the humiliation suffered by bad faith, liability for damages is limited to the natural and
DT and MT when they were separated from their guests and probable consequences of the breach of the contract of
were threatened to be offloaded. carriage which the parties had foreseen or could have
reasonably foreseen. In such a case the liability does not
Liability; Airline Company; Non-Performance of an Obligation include moral and exemplary damages.
(2005)
Dr. and Mrs. Almeda are prominent citizens of the country In the instant case, if the involuntary upgrading of the
and are frequent travelers abroad. In 1996, they booked Almedas' seat accommodation was not attended by fraud or
round-trip business class tickets for the Manila-Hong bad faith, the award of moral damages has no leg to stand on.
Kong-Manila route of the Pinoy Airlines, where they are
holders of Gold Mabalos Class Frequent Flier cards. On their
return flight, Pinoy Airlines upgraded their tickets to first class Thus, spouses would not also be entitled to exemplary
without their consent and, inspite of their protestations to be damages. It is a requisite in the grant of exemplary damages
allowed to remain in the business class so that they could be that the act of the offender must be accompanied by bad
with their friends, they were told that the business class was faith or done in wanton, fraudulent or malevolent manner.
already fully booked, and that they were given priority in (Morris v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 127957, February 21, 2001)
upgrading because they are elite members/holders of Gold Moreover, to be entitled thereto, the claimant must first
Mabalos Class cards. Since they were embarrassed at the establish his right to moral, temperate, or compensatory
discussions with the flight attendants, they were forced to take damages. (Art. 2234, Civil Code) Since the Almedas are not
the flight at the first class section apart from their friends who entitled to any of these damages, the award for exemplary
were in the business class. Upon their return to Manila, they damages has no legal basis. Where the awards for moral and
demanded a written apology from Pinoy Airlines. When it exemplary damages are eliminated, so must the award for
went unheeded, the couple sued Pinoy Airlines for breach of attorney's fees be eliminated. (Orosa v. Court of Appeals, G.R.
contract claiming moral and exemplary damages, as well as No. 111080, April 5, 2000; Morris v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
attorney's fees. Will the action prosper? Give reasons. (5%) 127957, February 21, 2001) The most that can be adjudged in
their favor for Pinoy Airlines' breach of contract is an award
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
for nominal damages under Article 2221 of the Civil Code.
Yes, the action will prosper. Article 2201 of the Civil Code
(Cathay Pacific Airways v. Sps. Daniel & Maria Luisa Vasquez,
entitles the person to recover damages which may be
G.R. No. 150843, March 14, 2003)
attributed to non-performance of an obligation. In Alitalia
Airways v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 77011, July 24, 1990),
when an airline issues ticket to a passenger confirmed on a However, if spouses Almeda could prove that there was bad
particular flight, a contract of carriage arises and the passenger faith on the part of Pinoy Airlines when it breached the
expects that he would fly on that day. When the airline contract of carriage, it could be liable for moral, exemplary as
deliberately overbooked, it took the risk of having to deprive well as attorney's fees.
some passengers of their seat in case all of them would show
up. For the indignity and inconvenience of being refused the Liability; Employer; Damage caused by Employees (1997)
confirmed seat, said passenger is entitled to moral damages. a) When would an employer's liability for damage, caused
by an employee in the performance of his assigned
tasks, be primary and when would it be subsidiary in
In the given problem, spouses Almeda had a booked nature? b) Would the defense of due diligence in the
roundtrip business class ticket with Pinoy Airlines. When selection and
their tickets were upgraded to first class without their supervision of the employee be available to the
consent, Pinoy Airlines breached the contract. As ruled in employer in both instances?
Zulueta v. Pan American (G.R. No. L-28589, January 8, 1973), SUGGESTED ANSWER::
in case of overbooking, airline is in bad faith. Therefore, (a) The employer's liability for damage based on culpa
spouses Almeda are entitled to damages. aquiliana under Art, 2176 and 2180 of the Civil Code is
primary; while that under Art. 103 of the Revised Penal Code
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: is subsidiary.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
(b) The defense of diligence in the selection and the vehicle at the time of the accident, be held solidarily
supervision of the employee under Article 2180 of the Civil liable with his driver, John? (5%)
Code is available only to those primarily liable thereunder, SUGGESTED ANSWER:
but not to those subsidiarily liable under Article 103 of the Yes. Art may be held solidary liable with John, if it was proven
Revised Penal Code (Yumul vs. Juliano, 72 Phil. 94). that the former could have prevented the misfortune with the
use of due diligence. Article 2184 of the Civil Code states: "In
Liability; owner who was in the vehicle (1996) motor mishaps, the owner is solidary liable with his driver, if
Marcial, who does not know how to drive, has always been the former, who was in the vehicle, could have, by the use of
driven by Ben, his driver of ten years whom he had chosen due diligence, prevented the misfortune, x x x"
carefully and has never figured in a vehicular mishap. One
day, Marcial was riding at the back seat of his Mercedes Benz ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
being driven along EDSA by Ben. Absorbed in reading a 1. It depends. The Supreme Court in Chapman vs, Underwood
book, Marcial did not notice that they were approaching the (27 Phil 374), held: "An owner who sits in his automobile, or
corner of Quezon Avenue, when the traffic light had just other vehicle, and permits his driver to continue in a violation
turned yellow. Ben suddenly stepped on the gas to cross the of law by the performance of negligent acts, after he has had a
intersection before the traffic light could turn red. But, too reasonable opportunity to observe them and to direct that the
late. Midway in the intersection, the traffic light changed, and driver cease therefrom, becomes himself responsible for such
a Jeepney full of passengers suddenly crossed the car's path. A acts, x x x On the other hand, if the driver, by a sudden act of
collision between the two vehicles was inevitable. As a result, negligence, and without the owner having a reasonable
several jeepney passengers were seriously injured. A suit for opportunity to prevent the act or its continuance, injures a
damages based on culpa aquiliana was filed against Marcial person or violates the criminal law, the owner of the
and Ben, seeking to hold them jointly and severally liable for automobile, although present therein at the time the act was
such injuries. May Marcial be held liable? Explain. committed is not responsible, either civilly or criminally,
therefor. The act complained of must be continued in the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: presence of the owner for such a length of time that the
Marcial may not be liable because under Art. 2184, NCC, the owner, by his acquiescence, makes his driver's act his own."
owner who is in the vehicle is not liable with the driver if by
the exercise of due diligence he could have prevented the
injury. The law does not require the owner to supervise the Liability; owner who was in the vehicle (2002)
driver every minute that he was driving. Only when through Does the presence of the owner inside the vehicle causing
his negligence, the owner has lost an opportunity to prevent damage to a third party affect his liability for his driver’s
the accident would he be liable (Caedo v. Ytt Khe Thai, 26 negligence? Explain (2%)
SCRA 410 citing Chapman v. Underwood and Manlangit v. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Mauler, 250 SCRA 560). In this case, the fact that the owner In motor vehicle mishaps, the owner is made solidarily liable
was absorbed in reading a book does not conclusively show with his driver if he (the owner) was in the vehicle and could
that he lost the opportunity to prevent the accident through have, by the use of due diligence, prevented the mishap.
his negligence. (Caedo v. Yu Khe Thai, 26 SCRA 410 [1968]).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Yes, Marcial should be held liable. Art. 2164. NCC makes an Moral Damages & Atty Fees (2002)
owner of a motor vehicle solidarily liable with the driver if, Ortillo contracts Fabricato, Inc. to supply and install tile
being in the vehicle at the time of the mishap, he could have materials in a building he is donating to his province. Ortillo
prevented it by the exercise of due diligence. The traffic pays 50% of the contract price as per agreement. It is also
conditions along EDSA at any time of day or night are such agreed that the balance would be payable periodically after
as to require the observance of utmost care and total alertness every 10% performance until completed. After performing
in view of the large number of vehicles running at great about 93% of the contract, for which it has been paid an
speed. Marcial was negligent in that he rendered himself additional 40% as per agreement, Fabricato, Inc. did not
oblivious to the traffic hazards by reading a book instead of complete the project due to its sudden cessation of
focusing his attention on the road and supervising the operations. Instead, Fabricato, Inc. demands payment of the
manner in which his car was being driven. Thus he failed to last 10% of the contract despite its non-completion of the
prevent his driver from attempting to beat the traffic light at project. Ortillo refuses to pay, invoking the stipulation that
the junction of Quezon Avenue and EDSA, which Marcial, payment of the last amount 10% shall be upon completion.
without being a driver himself could have easily perceived as Fabricato, Inc. brings suit for the entire 10%. Plus damages,
a reckless course of conduct. Ortillo counters with claims for (a) moral damages for
Fabricato, Inc.’s unfounded suit which has damaged his
Liability; owner who was in the vehicle (1998) reputation as a philanthropist and respect businessman in his
A Gallant driven by John and owned by Art, and a Corolla driven community, and (b) attorney’s fees.
by its owner, Gina, collided somewhere along Adriatico Street. As A. Does Ortillo have a legal basis for his claim for moral
a result of the accident, Gina had a concussion. Subsequently. damages? (2%)
Gina brought an action for damages against John and Art. There B. How about his claim for attorney’s fees, having hired a
is no doubt that the collision is due to John's negligence. Can Art, lawyer to defend him? (3%)
who was in SUGGESTED ANSWER:
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
A. There is no legal basis to Ortillo’s claim for moral a) When a 7-year old boy injures his playmate while
damages. It does not fall under the coverage of Article 2219 playing with his father's rifle. Explain. (2%)
of the New Civil Code. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The parents of the 7-year old boy who caused injury to his
B. Ortillo is entitled to attorney’s fees because Fabricato’s playmate are liable under Article 219 of the Family Code, in
complaint is a case of malicious prosecution or a clearly relation to Article 2180 of the Civil Code since they exercise
unfounded civil action. (Art. 2208 [4] and [11], NCC). parental authority over the person of the boy. (Tamargo v.
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 85044, June 3, 1992; Elcano v. Hill,
Moral Damages; Non-Recovery Thereof (2006) G.R. No. L-24803, May 26, 1977)
Under Article 2219 of the Civil Code, moral damages may be
recovered in the cases specified therein several of which are b) When a domestic helper, while haggling for a lower
enumerated below. Choose the case wherein you cannot price with a fish vendor in the course of buying foodstuffs
recover moral damages. Explain. (2.5%) a) A criminal offense for her employer's family, slaps the fish vendor, causing
resulting in physical injuries b) Quasi-delicts causing physical her to fall and sustain injuries. Explain. (2%)
injuries c) Immorality or dishonesty d) Illegal search e)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Malicious prosecution SUGGESTED ANSWER: Immorality and Employer of the domestic helper who slapped a fish vendor.
dishonesty, per se, are not among those cases enumerated in Under Article 2180, par. 5 of the Civil Code, "employers shall
Article 2219 which can be the basis of an action for moral be liable for the damages caused by their employees and
damages. The law specifically mentions adultery or household helpers acting within the scope of their assigned
concubinage, etc. but not any and every immoral act. tasks, even though the former are not engaged in any business
or industry."
SUGGESTED ANSWER: When the employee causes damage due to his own negligence
The insurance company is not liable because when the while performing his own duties, there arises the juris tantum
accident occurred, Alberto was not acting within the assigned presumption that the employer is negligent, rebuttable only by
tasks of his employment. proof of observance of the diligence of a good father of a
family (Metro Manila Transit v. CA, 223 SCRA 521 [1993];
It is true that under Art. 2180 (par. 5), employers are liable for Delsan Transport Lines v, C&tA Construction, 412 SCRA 524
damages caused by their employees who were acting within 2003).
the scope of their assigned tasks. However, the mere fact that
Alberto was using a service vehicle of the employer at the time Likewise, if the driver is charged and convicted in a criminal
of the injurious accident does not necessarily mean that he was case for criminal negligence, BT is subsidiarily liable for the
operating the vehicle within the scope of his employment. In damages arising from the criminal act.
Castilex Industrial Corp. v. Vasquez Jr (321 SCRA393 [1999]).
the Supreme Court held that notwithstanding the fact that the Vicarious Liability (2006)
employee did some overtime work for the company, the Arturo sold his Pajero to Benjamin for P1 Million. Benjamin
former was, nevertheless, engaged in his own affairs or took the vehicle but did not register the sale with the Land
carrying out a personal purpose when he went to a restaurant Transportation Office. He allowed his son Carlos, a minor who
at 2:00 a.m. after coming out from work. The time of the did not have a driver's license, to drive the car to buy pan de sal
accident (also in a bakery. On the way, Carlos driving in a reckless manner,
2:00 a. m.) was outside normal working hours. sideswiped Dennis, then riding a bicycle. As a result, he suffered
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: serious physical injuries. Dennis filed a criminal complaint against
The insurance company is liable if Alberto was negligent in Carlos for reckless imprudence resulting in serious physical
the operation of the car and the car was assigned to him for injuries.
the benefit of the insurance company, and even though he 1. Can Dennis file an independent civil action against Carlos
was not within the scope of his assigned tasks when the and his father Benjamin for damages based on quasi-delict?
accident happened. In one case decided by the Supreme Explain. (2,5%)
Court, where an executive of a pharmaceutical company was SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, Dennis can file an independent
given the use of a company car, and after office hours, the civil action against Carlos and his father for damages based on
executive made personal use of the car and met an accident, quasi-delict there being an act or omission causing damage to
the employer was also made liable under Art. 2180 of the another without contractual obligation. Under Section 1 of
Civil Code for the injury caused by the negligent operation of Rule 111 of the 2000 Rules on Criminal Procedure, what is
the car by the executive, on the ground that the car which deemed instituted with the criminal action is only the action to
caused the injury was assigned to the executive by the recover civil liability arising from the act or omission punished
employer for the prestige of the company. The insurance by law. An action based on quasi-delict is no longer deemed
company was held liable even though the employee was not instituted and may be filed separately [Section 3, Rule 111,
performing within the scope of his assigned tasks when the Rules of Criminal Procedure].
accident happened [Valenzuela v. CA, 253 SCRA 3O3 (1996)].
Vicarious Liability (2002) 2. Assuming Dennis' action is tenable, can Benjamin raise the
Explain the concept of vicarious liability in quasi-delicts. defense that he is not liable because the vehicle is not
registered in his name? Explain. (2.5%)
(1%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, Benjamin cannot raise the called ―oncomouse‖ in Manila? What will be your advice to
defense that the vehicle is not registered in his name. His liability, him? (5%)
vicarious in character, is based on Article 2180 because he is the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
father of a minor who caused damage due to negligence. While (1) The reciprocity principle in private international law may
the suit will prosper against the registered owner, it is the actual be applied in our jurisdiction. Section 3 of R.A. 8293, the
owner of the private vehicle who is ultimately liable (See Duavit v. Intellectual Property Code, provides for reciprocity, as follows:
CA, G.R. No. L-29759, May 18, 1989). The purpose of car "Any person who is a national, or who is domiciled, or has a
registration is to reduce difficulty in identifying the party liable in real and effective industrial establishment in a country which is
case of accidents a party to any convention, treaty or agreement relating to
(Villanueva v. Domingo, G.R. No. 144274, September 14, 2004). intellectual property rights or the repression of unfair
competition, to which the Philippines is also a party, or
extends reciprocal rights to nationals of the Philippines by law,
Vicarious Liability; Public Utility (2000) shall be entitled to benefits to the extent necessary to give
Silvestre leased a car from Avis-Rent-A-Car Co. at the effect to any provision of such convention, treaty or reciprocal
Mactan International Airport. No sooner had he driven the law, in addition to the rights to which any owner of an
car outside the airport when, due to his negligence, he intellectual property right is otherwise entitled by this Act. (n)"
bumped an FX taxi owned and driven by Victor, causing To illustrate: the Philippines may refrain from imposing a
damage to the latter in the amount of P100,000.00. Victor requirement of local incorporation or establishment of a local
filed an action for damages against both Silvestre and Avis, domicile for the protection of industrial property rights of
based on quasi-delict. Avis filed a motion to dismiss the foreign nationals (citizens of Canada, Switzerland, U.S.) if the
complaint against it on the ground of failure to state a cause countries of said foreign nationals refrain from imposing said
of action. Resolve the motion. (3%) requirement on Filipino citizens.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The motion to dismiss should be granted, AVIS is not the
employer of Silvestre; hence, there is no right of action ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
against AVIS under Article 2180 of the Civil Code. Not being Reciprocity principle cannot be applied in our jurisdiction
the employer, AVIS has no duty to supervise Silvestre. because the Philippines is a party to the TRIPS agreement
Neither has AVIS the duty to observe due diligence in the and the WTO. The principle involved is the most-favored
selection of its customers. Besides, it was given in the nation clause which is the principle of non-discrimination.
problem that the cause of the accident was the negligence of The protection afforded to intellectual property protection in
Silvestre. the Philippines also applies to other members of the WTO.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: Thus, it is not really reciprocity principle in private
The motion should be denied. Under the Public Service Law, international law that applies, but the most-favored nation
the registered owner of a public utility is liable for the clause under public international law.
damages suffered by third persons through the use of such
public utility. Hence, the cause of action is based in law, the (2) There is no legal reason why "oncomouse" cannot be
Public Service Law. protected under the law. Among those excluded from patent
protection are "plant varieties or animal breeds, or essentially
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY biological process for the production of plants and animals"
(Section 22.4 Intellectual Property Code, R.A. No. 8293). The
"oncomouse" in the problem is not an essentially biological
Intellectual Creation (2004) process for the production of animals. It is a real invention
Dr. ALX is a scientist honored for work related to the human because its body cells do not naturally occur in nature but are
genome project. Among his pioneering efforts concern stem the product of man's ingenuity, intellect and industry.
cell research for the cure of Alzheimer’s disease. Under
corporate sponsorship, he helped develop a microbe that ate
and digested oil spills in the sea. The breeding of oncomouse has novelty, inventive step and
industrial application. These are the three requisites of
Now he leads a college team for cancer research in MSS State. patentability. (Sec. 29, IPC)
The team has experimented on a mouse whose body cells
replicate and bear cancerous tumor. Called ―oncomouse‖, it is There are no ethical reasons why Dr. ADX and his college
a life-form useful for medical research and it is a novel team cannot be given exclusive ownership over their
creation. Its body cells do not naturally occur in nature but invention. The use of such genetically modified mouse, useful
are the product of man’s intellect, industry and ingenuity. for cancer research, outweighs considerations for animal
However, there is a doubt whether local property laws and rights.
ethics would allow rights of exclusive ownership on any
life-form. Dr. ALX needs your advice: (1) whether the There are no legal and ethical reasons that would frustrate
reciprocity principle in private international law could be Dr. ALX's claim of exclusive ownership over "oncomouse".
applied in our jurisdiction; and (2) whether there are legal and Animals are property capable of being appropriated and
ethical reasons that could frustrate his claim of exclusive owned'. In fact, one can own pet dogs or cats, or any other
ownership over the life-form animal. If wild animals are capable of being owned, with
more reason animals technologically enhanced or corrupted
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
by man's invention or industry are susceptible to exclusive
ownership by the inventor.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The oncomouse is a higher life form which does not fall
within the definition of the term "invention". Neither may it
fall within the ambit of the term "manufacture" which usually
implies a non-living mechanistic product. The oncomouse is
better regarded as a "discovery" which is the common
patrimony of man.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The "oncomouse" is a non-patentable invention. Hence,
cannot be owned exclusively by its inventor. It is a method
for the treatment of the human or animal body by surgery or
therapy and diagnostic methods practiced on said bodies are
not patentable under Sec. 22 of the IPC.
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
A Compilation of the
In the
In
CIVIL LAW
Compiled and Arranged By:
Baratbate-Ladot, Delight
&
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 1 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
FOREWORD
This work is a compilation of the ANSWERS TO BAR
EXAMINATION QUESTIONS by the UP LAW COMPLEX ,
Philippine Association of Law Schools from 2007-2010 and
local law students and lawyers’ forum sites from 2011-2013
and not an original creation or formulation of the author.
The Authors.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 2 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Titles are based on Silliman’s Compilation [Arranged by Topic])
Persons
Capacity: Juridical Capacity (2008)...............................................................................12
Conflict of Laws
Processual Presumption (2009)......................................................................................16
Jurisdiction; Courts may Assume Jurisdiction over Conflict of Laws Cases (2010).........17
Adoption
Adoption; Termination; Death of Adopter (2009)............................................................17
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 3 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Family Code
Marriage; Annulment; Grounds (2009)...........................................................................20
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 4 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Paternity & Filiation; Legitimation of a Child from a Previous Valid Marriage (2008).....36
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 5 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Succession
Disposition; Mortis Causa vs. Intervivos; Corpse (2009).................................................46
Succession; Proof of Death between persons called to succeed each other (2008)..........55
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 6 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Donation
Donations; Formalities; In Writing (2007)......................................................................63
Property
Accretion; Alluvium (2008)............................................................................................65
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 7 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Contracts
Contract to Sell vs. Conditional Contract of Sale (2012)................................................90
Obligations
Extinguishment; Compensation (2009)..........................................................................91
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 8 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Trust
Trust De Son Tort (2007)...............................................................................................98
Sales
Condominium Act; Partition of a Condominium (2009)..................................................99
Lease
Builder; Good Faith; Useful Improvements (2013)........................................................103
Agency
Agency; Sale of a Real Property through an Agent (2010).............................................104
Partnership
Liability; Liability of a Partner (2010)..........................................................................105
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 9 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Guaranty
Guaranty (2009)...........................................................................................................108
Surety
Surety (2010)...............................................................................................................108
Pledge
Pledge; Pactum Commissorium (2009).........................................................................109
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 10 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 11 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Yes, the baby can be the beneficiary of which she accepted. After six (6) months of
the life insurance of Marian. Art. 40 NCC pregnancy, the fetus was born and baptized
personality; but the conceived child after birth. Ricky sought to recover the P 1
shall be considered born for all purposes Million. Is Ricky entitled to recover?
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 12 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
To be considered born, the fetus that Roberta may validly own a house in
had an intrauterine life of less than Australia, following the principle of lex
seven (7) months should live for 24 rei sitae enshrined in Art. 16, NCC,
hours from its complete delivery from which states "Real property as well as
the mother’s womb. Since Angela had an personal property is subject to the law of
intrauterine life of less than seven (7) the country where it is situated."
months but did not live for 24 hours, she Moreover, even assuming that legal
was not considered born and, therefore, capacity of Roberta in entering the
person, she has no juridical capacity to Philippine Law, she will acquire
be a donee, hence, the donation to her ownership over the property bought
did not take effect. The donation not until the contract is annulled.
Capacity: Legal Capacity; Lex Rei Sitae upon the citizens of the Philippines,
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 13 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Correction of Entries; Clerical Error Act the Rules of Court because said changes
(2008) are substantive corrections.
No. IV. Gianna was born to Andy and (B). Instead of a judicial action, can
Aimee, who at the time Gianna's birth were administrative proceedings be brought for
not married to each other. While Andy was the purpose of making the above
single at the time, Aimee was still in the corrections? (2%)
process of securing a judicial declaration of
nullity on her marriage to her ex-husband. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(A). Can a judicial action for correction of registrar or the consul general to correct
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Nationality Principle (2009)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 14 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 15 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
cannot, for instance, order the Civil petitioner and his transactions in the
Registrar in the Philippines to change its Philippines. The Philippine court can
records. The judgment of the New York never acquire jurisdiction over the
court allowing a change in the name of custodian in the US of the records of the
the petitioner will be limited to the petitioner. Moreover, change of name
records of the petitioner in New York has nothing to do with the legal capacity
and the use of her new name in all or status of the alien. Since Philippine
transactions in New York. Since the records and transactions are the only
records and processes in New York are ones affected, the Philippine court may
the only ones affected, the New York effect the change only in accordance
court will apply New YorK law in with the laws governing those records
resolving the petition. and transactions that law cannot be but
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: Philippine law.
Philippine law shall apply (Art 15, NCC). ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Status, conditions, family rights and U.S. law shall apply as it is his national
duties are governed by Philippine laws as law. This is pursuant to the application
to Filipinos even though sojourning of lex patriae or the nationality
abroad. principle, by which his legal status is
ALTENATIVE ANSWER: governed by national law, the matter of
If Ligaya, a Filipino, files a petition for change of name being included in the
change of name with the District Court legal status. The Supreme Court has
of New YoRk, the laws of New York will reiterate in several cases, that the lex
govern since change of name is not one patriae as provided in Article 15 of the
of those covered by the principles of Civil Code is applicable to foreign
nationality. nationals in determining their legal
status (supra).
(B). If Henry, an American citizen residing
in the Philippines, files a petition for change
Conflict of Laws
of name before a Philippine court, what law
shall apply? Explain. (2%)
Processual Presumption (2009)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No.I. TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the
Philippine law will apply. The petition
statement is true, or FALSE if the
for change of name in the Philippines
statement is false. Explain your answer in
will affect only the records of the
not more than two (2) sentences.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 16 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(A). The doctrine of "processual (1) Public Order. To maintain peace and
presumption" allows the court of the forum order, disputes that disturb the peace of
to presume that the foreign law applicable the forum should be settled by the court
to the case is the same as the local or of the forum even though the application
domestic law. (1%) of the foreign law is necessary for the
purpose.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
TRUE. If the foreign law necessary to the (2) Humanitarian Principle. An aggrieved
resolve an issue is not proven as a fact, party should not be left without remedy
the court of the forum may presume that in a forum even though the application
the foreign law is the same as the law of of the foreign law by the courts of the
Adoption
Jurisdiction; Courts may Assume
Jurisdiction over Conflict of Laws Cases
Adoption; Termination; Death of Adopter
(2010)
(2009)
(C) Give at least two reasons why a court year old foundling who had a severe heart
may assume jurisdiction over a conflict of ailment. During the pendency of the
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 17 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
have been complied with and the case is Adoption; Illegitimate Child (2010)
already submitted for resolution, the
court may grant the petition and issue a No.VIII. Spouses Rex and Lea bore two
decree of adoption despite the death of children now aged 14 and 8. During the
the adopter (Section 13, RA 8552). subsistence of their marriage, Rex begot a
proceedings.
On Lea’s discovery of Rex’s fathering a child
(B). Will your answer be the same if it was by another woman, she filed a petition for
Dolly who died during the pendency of the legal separation which was granted.
who dies before the decree is issued, it is still adopt his illegitimate child? Explain.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 18 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 19 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Yes, there is a legal obstacle to the legal Can John file the petition for adoption? If
adoption of Amy by Andrew. Under Sec. yes, what are the requirements? If no, why?
9(d) of RA 8552, the New Domestic (5%)
Adoption Act of 1998, the written
consent of the illegitimate SUGGESTED ANSWER:
sons/daughters, ten (10) years of age or
No, John cannot file the petition to
over, of the adopter, if living with said
adopt alone. Philippine law requires
adopter and the latter's spouse, if any, is
husband and wife to adopt jointly except
necessary to the adoption. All the
on certain situations enumerated in the
children of Andrew are living with him.
law. The case of John does not fall in
Andrew needs to get the written consent
any of the exceptions (R.A. 8552).
of Jon, Ryan, Vina and Wilma, who are
all ten (10) years old or more. Sandy's Family Code
consent to Amy's adoption is not
necessary because she was not legally Marriage; Annulment; Grounds (2009)
adopted by Andrew. Jane's consent is
likewise not necessary because she is No.XII. Emmanuel and Margarita, American
not a child of Andrew. Sandy, an orphan citizens and employees of the U.S. State
since birth, is eligible for adoption under Department, got married in the African
Sec. 8(f) of RA 8552, provided that state of Kenya where sterility is a ground
Andrew obtains the written consent of for annulment of marriage. Thereafter, the
the other children mentioned above, spouses were assigned to the U.S. Embassy
including Amy and Elena obtains the in Manila. On the first year of the spouses’
written consent of Jane, if she is over tour of duty in the Philippines, Margarita
ten years old (Sec. 9(d), RA 8552). filed an annulment case against Emmanuel
before a Philippine court on the ground of
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 20 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
her husband’s sterility at the time of the shall be determined by applying Kenyan
celebration of the marriage. law and not Philippine law.
(B). Assume Emmanuel and Margarita are However, while Kenyan law governs the
both Filipinos. After their wedding in formal validity of the marriage, the legal
Kenya, they come back and take up capacity of the Filipino parties to the
residence in the Philippines. Can their marriage is governed not by Kenyan law
marriage be annulled on the ground of but by Philippine law (Article 15, NCC).
Emmanuel’s sterility? Explain. (3%) Sterility of a party as a ground for the
annulment of the marriage is not a
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
matter of form but a matter of legal
No, the marriage cannot be annulled
capacity. Hence, the Philippine court
under the Philippine law. Sterility is not
must apply Phillippine law in
a ground for annulment of marriage
determining the status of the marriage
under Article 45 of the Family Code.
on the ground of absence or defect in the
legal capacity of the Filipino parties.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Since sterility does not constitute
No, the marriage cannot be annulled in
absence or defect in the legal capacity of
the Philippines.
the parties under Philippine law, there is
no ground to avoid or annul the
The Philippine court shall have
marriage. Hence, the Philippine court
jurisdiction over the action to annul the
has to deny the petition.
marriage not only because the parties
are residents of the Philippines but
because they are Filipino citizens. The
Philippine court, however, shall apply
Marriage; Annulment; Grounds (2007)
the law of the place where the marriage
was celebrated in determining its formal No. VII. Write "TRUE" if the statement is
validity (Article 26, FC; Article 17, NCC). true or "FALSE" if the statement is false. If
the statement is FALSE, state the reason.
Since the marriage was celebrated in (2% each).
Kenya in accordance with Kenyan law,
the formal validity of such marriage is (4). The day after John and Marsha got
governed by Kenyan law and any issue as married, John told her that he was
to the formal validity of that marriage impotent. Marsha continued to live with
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 21 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
John for 2 years. Marsha is now estopped No, I do not agree. There are others who
from filing an annulment case against may file a petition for declaration of
John. nullity such as the other spouse in
bigamous marriages.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
consummate is a valid ground for the During the pendency of the case, the couple
was existing at the time of the marriage, dissolve their absolute community of
continues and appears to be incurable. property. B ceded his right to their house
The marriage may be annulled on this and lot and all his shares in two business
ground within five years from its firms to G and their two children, aged 18
agree? Explain your answer. (5%) day-to-day living expenses and upkeep of
the children. The Court approved the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: spouses’ agreement on September 8, 2000.
Yes, I agree. Under the rules (A) Suppose the business firms suffered
promulgated by the Supreme Court, a reverses, rendering G unable to support
direct action for declaration of nullity herself and the children. Can G still ask for
may only be filed by any of the spouses. support pendente lite from B? Explain. (3%)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 22 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
SUGGESTED ANSRWER :
Yes, the two children can still ask for
support for schooling or training for
As to Wilma, the divorced obtained by
some professions, trade or vocation,
her is recognized as valid in the
even beyond the age of majority until
Philippines because she is now a
they shall have finished or completed
foreigner. Philippine personal laws do
their education (Article 194, Paragraph
not apply to a foreigner. However,
2, Family Code; Javier v. Lucero, 94
recognition of the divorce as regards
Phil. 634 {1954}].Their having
Harry will depend on the applicability to
squandered the money given to them for
his case of the second paragraph of
their education will not deprive them of
Article 26 of the Family Code. If it is
their right to complete an education, or
applicable, divorce is recognized as to
to extinguish the obligation of the
him and, therefore, he can remarry.
parents to ensure the future of their
However, if it is not applicable, divorce
children.
is not recognized as to him and,
consequently, he cannot remarry.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 23 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
In Republic v. Obrecido, however, the
Supreme Court ruled that a Filipino
I will advice Harry to:
spouse is given the capacity to remarry
even though the spouse who obtained
(1) Dissolve and liquidate his property
the divorce was a Filipino at the time of
relations with Wilma ; and
the marriage, if the latter was already a
foreigner when the divorce was already
(2) If he will remarry, file a petition for
obtained abroad. According to the court,
the recognition and enforcement of the
to rule otherwise will violate the equal
foreign judgment of divorced (Rule
protection clause of the Constitution.
39,Rules of Court ).
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 24 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Cipriano later learned all about this proving only that the foreign spouse has
including the fact that Lady Miros has obtained a divorce against her or him
divorced him in America and that she had abroad. (1%)
remarried there. He then filed a petition for
authority to remarry, invoking Par. 2, Art. SUGGESTED ANSWER :
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 25 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
the commission of the latest act of before you is a Petition for the Declaration
liaison is a ground for legal separation. the Family Code)filed by Maria against Neil.
Maria claims that Neil is psychologically
incapacitated to comply with the essential
obligations of marriage because Neil is a
Marriage; Legal Separation; Prescription
drunkard, a womanizer, a gambler, and a
(2007)
mama's boy- traits that she never knew or
saw when Neil was courting her. Although
No.VII. Write "TRUE" if the statement is
summoned, Neil did not answer Maria's
true or "FALSE" if the statement is false. If
petition and never appeared in court.
the statement is FALSE, state the reason.
(2% each).
To support her petition, Maria presented
three witnesses- herself, Dr. Elsie Chan,
(2). If a man commits several acts of sexual
and Ambrosia. Dr. Chan testified on the
infidelity, particularly in 2002, 2003, 2004,
psychological report on Neil that she
2005, the prescriptive period to file for legal
prepared. Since Neil never acknowledged
separation runs from 2002.
n9r responded to her invitation for
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 26 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
early adulthood and one that is grave and mere conclusions. Being a drunkard, a
incurable. Maria testified on the specific womanizer, a gambler and a mama’s boy,
instances when she found Neil drunk, with merely shows Neil’s failure to perform
another woman, or squandering the his marital obligations. In a number of
family's resources in a casino. Ambrosia, cases, the Supreme Court did not find
the spouses' current household help, the existence of psychological incapacity
corroborated Maria's testimony. in cases where the respondent showed
habitual drunkenness (Republic v.
On the basis of the evidence presented, will Melgar, G.R. No. 139676, 2006), blatant
you grant the petition? (8%) display of infidelity and irresponsibility
(Dedel v. CA, 2004) or being hooked to
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
gambling and drugs (Republic v. Tanyag-
San Jose, G.R. No. 168328, 2007).
No. The petition should be denied.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The psychological incapacity under Art.
36 of the Family Code must be
Yes. The petition should be granted.
characterized by (a) gravity, (b) juridical
antecedence, and (c) incurability. It is The personal medical or psychological
not enough to prove that the parties examination of respondent is not a
failed to meet their responsibilities and requirement for declaration of
duties as married persons; it is essential psychological incapacity. It is the
that they must be shown to be incapable totality of the evidence presented which
of doing so, due to some physiological shall determine the existence of
(not physical) illness (Republic v. CA and psychological incapacity (Marcos v.
Molina, G.R. No. 108763, Feb 13, 1997). Marcos, G.R. No. 136490, Oct 19, 2000).
Dr. Chan’s report corroborated by
In this case, the pieces of evidence
Maria’s and Ambrosia’s testimonies,
presented are not sufficient to conclude
therefore, sufficiently prove Neil’s
that indeed Neil is suffering from
psychological incapacity to assume his
psychological incapacity [Narcissistic
marital obligations.
Personality Disorder] existing already
before the marriage, incurable and
serious enough to prevent Neil from
performing his essential marital
obligations. Dr. Chan’s report contains
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 27 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
not able to personally examine the sweethearts. When Roderick was 18 and
respondent and the psychological report Faye, 16 years old, they started to live
was based only on the narration of together as husband and wife without the
granted? Explain. (5%) years of age, her parents forcibly took her
back and arranged for her marriage to
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Brad. Although Faye lived with Brad after
the marriage, Roderick continued to
The annulment cannot be guaranteed
regularly visit Faye while Brad was away at
solely on the basis of the psychological
work. During their marriage, Faye gave
report. For the report to prove the
birth to a baby girl, Laica. When Faye was
psychological incapacity of the
25 years old, Brad discovered her continued
respondent, it is required that the
liason with Roderick and in one of their
psychologist should personally examine
heated arguments, Faye shot Brad to death.
the respondent and the psychological
She lost no time in marrying her true love
report should be based on the
Roderick, without a marriage license,
psychologist’s independent assessment
claiming that they have been continuously
of the facts as to whether or not the
cohabiting for more than 5 years.
respondent is psychologically
incapacitated. (A). Was the marriage of Roderick and Faye
valid? (2%)
Since, the psychologist did not
personally examine the respondent, and SUGGESTED ANSWER:
his report is based solely on the story of
the petitioner who has an interest in the No. The marriage of Roderick and Faye is
outcome of the petition, the marriage not valid. Art. 4, FC provides that the
cannot be annulled on the ground of absence of any of the essential or formal
respondent’s psychological incapacity if requisites renders the marriage void ab
initio. However, no license shall be
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 28 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
necessary for the marriage of a man and reqiured to submit the required certificate
a woman who have lived together as of capacity to marry from the German
husband and wife for at least 5 years and Embassy in Manila, Adolf stated in the
without any legal impediment to marry application for marriage license that he was
each other. In Republic v. Dayot, G.R. a Filipino citizen. With the marriage license
No. 175581, 28 March 2008, reiterating stating that Adolf was a Filipino, the couple
the doctrine in Niñal v. Bayadog, G.R. got married in a ceremony officiated by the
No. 133778, 14 March 2000, this five- Parish Priest of Calamba, Laguna in a
year period is characterized by beach in Nasugbu, Batangas, as the local
exclusivity and continuity. In the parish priest refused to solemnize
present case, the marriage of Roderick marriages except in his church. Is the
and Faye cannot be considered as a marriage valid? Explain fully. (5%)
marriage of exceptional character,
because there were 2 legal impediments SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Marriage; Subsequent Marriage (2008) the absent spouse was already dead, and
(C) present spouse instituted a summary
No. I. Ana Rivera had a husband, a Filipino proceeding for the declaration of the
citizen like her, who was among the presumptive death of absent spouse.
passengers on board a commercial jet plane Otherwise, the second marriage shall be
which crashed in the Atlantic Ocean ten null and void. In the instant case, the
(10) years earlier and had never been heard husband of Ana was among the
of ever since. Believing that her husband passengers on board a commercial jet
had died, Ana married Adolf Cruz Staedtler, plane which crashed in the Atlantic
a divorced German national born of a Ocean. The body of the deceased
German father and a Filipino mother husband was not recovered to confirm
residing in Stuttgart. To avoid being his death. Thus, following Art. 41, Ana
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 29 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
should have first secured a judicial while Jane is a child of Elena from a
declaration of his presumptive death previous relationship. Thus, their
before she married Adolf. The absence of marriage is not one of the prohibited
the said judicial declaration marriages enumerated under Art. 38 of
incapacitated Ana from contracting her the FC.
second marriage, making it void ab
initio.
years old. His second, with Carla, produced was 15 years old. Thereafter, Amor met
two sons: Jon and Ryan. His third, with David and they got married when she was
Donna, bore him no children although 20 years old. David had a son, Julian, with
Elena has a daughter Jane, from a previous his ex-girlfriend Sandra. Julian and Thelma
Yes. Jon and Jane can marry each other; No. III. In December 2000, Michael and
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 30 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
license, went to the Office of the Mayor of impediment for them to validity marry
Urbano, Bulacan, to get married. The each other.
Mayor was not there, but the Mayor’s
secretary asked Michael and Anna and
their witnesses to fill up and sign the Marriage; Void Marriages; Status of
required marriage contract forms. The Children (2009)
secretary then told them to wait, and went
out to look for the Mayor who was attending No. III. In December 2000, Michael and
and Anna that they were already married. Mayor at the wedding reception, she
Thereafter, the couple lived together as showed him the marriage contract forms
husband and wife, and had three sons. and told him that the couple and their
witnesses were waiting in his office. The
(C). What property regime governs the Mayor forthwith signed all the copies of the
properties acquired by the couple? Explain. marriage contract, gave them to the
(2%) secretary who returned to the Mayor’s
office. She then gave copies of the marriage
SUGGESTED ANSWER: contract to the parties, and told Michael
and Anna that they were already married.
The marriage being void, the property Thereafter, the couple lived together as
relationship that governed their union is husband and wife, and had three sons.
special co-ownership under Article 147
of the Family Code. This is on the (A). Is the marriage of Michael and Anna
assumption that there was no valid, voidable, or void? Explain your
answer. (3%)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 31 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
SUGGESTED ANSWER : (C). When Rona reaches seven (7) years old,
she tells Rodolfo that she prefers to live
The marriage is void because the formal with him, because he is better off
requisite of marriage ceremony was financially than Nanette. If Rodolfo files an
absent ( Art.3, F.C. 209, Family Code). action for the custody of Rona, alleging that
he is Rona’s choice as custodial parent, will
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: the court grant Rodolfo’s petition? Why or
The marriage is void because an why not? (2%)
essential requisite was absent: consent
of the parties freely given in the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
presence of the solemnizing officer (Art No, because Rodolfo has no parental
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 32 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
to her delivery. Gigolo would thereafter pay in Parañaque. After four (4) years or in
Majorette P2 million and, in return, she 2001, G having completed her 4-year
would give custody of the baby to him. college degree as a fulltime student, she
and B contracted marriage without a
After Majorette gives birth and delivers the license.
baby to Gigolo following her receipt of P2
million, she engages your services as her The marriage of B and G was, two years
lawyer to regain custody of the baby. later, declared null and void due to the
absence of a marriage license.
(C) Who of the two can exercise parental
authority over the child? Explain. (2.5%) (B). Is Venus legitimate, illegitimate, or
legitimated? Explain briefly. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Majorette, the mother, can exercise
parental authority. Since the child was Venus is illegitimate. She was conceived
born out of wedlock, the child is and born outside a valid marriage. Thus,
illegitimate and the mother has the she is considered illegitimate (Art 165,
exclusive parental authority and custody Family Code). While Venus was
over the child. legitimated by the subsequent marriage
of her parents, such legitimation was
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
rendered ineffective when the said
Gigolo can exercise parental authority marriage was later on declared null and
over the child. Majorette has no blood void due to absence of a marriage
Paternity & Filiation; Child Born Under a parents. The annulment of a voidable
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 33 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
subsequent marriage is null or void, the action to impugn, B can pray for the
legitimation must also be null and void. correction of the status of the said
In the present problem, the marriage daughter in her record of birth.
between B and G was not voidable but
void. Hence, Venus has remained an (B). If B acquiesces to the use of his
No.IV. Spouses B and G begot two action to impugn the legitimacy of the
offsprings. Albeit they had serious child within the prescriptive period for
continued to live under one roof. B begot a Code, G's daughter by another man shall
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No.VI. Gigolo entered into an agreement
B can impugn the status of G's daughter with Majorette for her to carry in her womb
by another man as his legitimate his baby via in vitro fertilization. Gigolo
daughter on the ground that for undertook to underwrite Majorette’s pre-
biological reason he could not have been natal expenses as well as those attendant
the father of the child, a fact that may to her delivery. Gigolo would thereafter pay
be proven by the DNA test. Having been Majorette P2 million and, in return, she
born during the marriage between B and would give custody of the baby to him.
G, G's daughter by another man is
presumed as the child of B under Article After Majorette gives birth and delivers the
164 of the Family Code. In the same baby to Gigolo following her receipt of P2
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 34 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
million, she engages your services as her No, he cannot. Both he and Majorette are
lawyer to regain custody of the baby. guilty of violating the provision of the
Anti-Child Abuse Law (RA7610) on child
(A) What legal action can you file on behalf trafficking. Being in pari delicto, the
of Majorette? Explain. (2.5%) partners shall be left where they are and
Gigolo cannot demand the return of
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
what he paid.
child. Gigolo, therefore, has no right to inheritance from Gigolo? Explain. (2.5%)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 35 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
benefit of marriage. When Faye reached 18 March 2002, the Supreme Court ruled
years of age, her parents forcibly took her that impugning the legitimacy of the
back and arranged for her marriage to child is a strictly personal right of
Brad. Although Faye lived with Brad after husband, except: (a) when the husband
the marriage, Roderick continued to died before the expiration of the period
regularly visit Faye while Brad was away at fixed for bringing the action; (b) if he
work. During their marriage, Faye gave should die after the filing of the
birth to a baby girl, Laica. When Faye was complaint, without having desisted
25 years old, Brad discovered her continued therefrom, or (c) if the child was born
liason with Roderick and in one of their after the death of the husband. Laica's
heated arguments, Faye shot Brad to death. case does not fall under any of the
She lost no time in marrying her true love exceptions.
Roderick, without a marriage license,
claiming that they have been continuosly (D). Can Laica be legitimated by the
cohabiting for more than 5 years. marriage of her biological parents? (1%)
(2%)
No. Laica cannot be legitimated by the
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 36 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Paternity & Filiation; Legitimation of a Elena has a daughter Jane, from a previous
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 37 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
their own. Sandy was orphaned as a baby Paternity & Filiation; Use of Surname;
and was entrusted to them by the midwife Illegitimate Child (2009)
who attended to Sandy's birth. All the
children, including Amy, now live with No.XIV. Rodolfo, married to Sharon, had an
(C). Can Amy, Jon, Ryan, Vina, Wilma, and SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Sandy legally claim support from each No. he has no right to compel Rona to
other? (2%) use his surname. The law does not give
him the right simply because he gave her
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
support (RA 9255).
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 38 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
compel Rona, if already of age, to use They are not related at all to Edilberto.
the surname against her will. If Rona is They were born during the marriage of
still a minor, to use the surname of Conrado and Clarita, hence, are
Rodolfo will require the consent of considered legitimate children of the
Rona's mother who has sole parental said spouses. This status is conferred on
authority over her. them at birth by law.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 39 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(B). If there is no marriage settlement, the more than the value of the land, the
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 40 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 41 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Yes, the trial court was correct. At the Borromeo discovered that titles to the three
time the petitions for adoptions were (3) lots have been transfereed in the name
filed, petitioner had already remarried. of Descallar. Who is the rightful owner of
Under the law, husband and wife shall the properties? Explain. (5%)
adopt jointly, except in the cases
enumerated in the law. The adoption SUGGESTED ANSWER:
and lived together with Descallar and them in equal shares even though all the
bought their houses and lots at Agro-Macro funds used in acquiring the properties
Subdivision. In the Contracts to Sell, came only from the salaries or wages, or
Jambrich and Descallar were referred to as the income of Jambrich from his
the buyers. When the Deed of Absolute Sale business or profession. In such case,
was presented for registration before the while Jambrich is disqualified to own
Register of Deeds, it was refused because any part of the properties, his
Jambrich was an alien and could not subsequent transfer of all his interest
separated, Jambrich purchased an engine In such case, the properties are owned
and some accessories for his boat from by Borromeo and Descallar in equal
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 42 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
came from Jambrich, the entire property third (1/3) was paid by G on
is his even though he is disqualified from February 14, 1990 out of a cash gift
owning it. His subsequent transfer to given to her by her parents on her
removed the disqualification. In such balance was paid out of the spouses’
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 43 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
But if the ownership of the house and lot of the house and lot in equal shares.
(1) 1/3 of the house and lot is owned by acquired it during their cohabitation, it
extent for his contributions in its because it did not come from his wage or
acquisition in the form of the down salary, or from his work or industry. It
payment he made before the celebration was acquired gratuitously from his
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 44 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
The answer is the same as in letter A. in Parañaque. After four (4) years or in
Since the parties to the marriage which 2001, G having completed her 4-year
was later declared void ab initio were college degree as a fulltime student, she
capacitated to marry each other, the and B contracted marriage without a
applicable law under the New Civil Code license.
was Article 144.This Article is
substantially the same as Article 147 of The marriage of B and G was, two years
the Family Code. later, declared null and void due to the
absence of a marriage license.
Hence, the determination of ownership
will remain the same as in question A. (A). If you were the judge who declared the
And even assuming that the two nullity of the marriage, to whom would you
provisions are not the same, Article 147 award the lot? Explain briefly. (3%)
of the Family Code is still the law that
will govern the property relations of B SUGGESTED ANSWER:
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 45 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
showing that one party was in bad faith. Ruffa in his will as a devisee of a parcel of
Hence, both shall be presumed in good land which he owned. The will imposed
faith and no forfeiture shall take place. upon Ruffa the obligation of preseving the
land and transferring it, upon her death, to
her illegitimate daughter Scarlet who was
then only one year old. Raymond later died,
leaving behind his widowed mother, Ruffa
and Scarlet.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 46 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(A). Is the condition imposed upon Ruffa, to Ruffa (Art. 992, Civil Code). Moreover,
preserve the property and to transmit it Scarlet is not a compulsory heir of
upon her death to Scarlet, valid? (1%) Raymond, hence she can inherit only by
testamentary succession. Since
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Raymond executed a will in the case at
bar, Scarlet may inherit from Raymond.
Yes, the condition imposed upon Ruffa
to preserve the property and to transmit
it upon her death to Scarlet is valid
because it is tantamount to Heirs; Intestate Succession; Legitime;
fideicommissary substitution under Art. Computation (2010)
863 of the Civil Code.
No.XI. The spouses Peter and Paula had
(B). If Scarlet predeceases Ruffa, who three (3) children. Paula later obtained a
inherits the property? (2%) judgment of nullity of marriage. Their
absolute community of property having
SUGGESTED ANSWER: been dissolved, they delivered P1 million to
each of their 3 children as their
Ruffa will inherit the property as
presumptive legitimes.
Scarlet's heir. Scarlet acquires a right to
the succession from the time of Peter later re-married and had two (2)
Raymond's death, even though she children by his second wife Marie. Peter
should predecease Ruffa (Art. 866, Civil and Marie, having successfully engaged in
Code). business, acquired real properties. Peter
later died intestate.
(C). If Ruffa predeceases Raymond, can
Scarlet inherit the property directly from (A). Who are Peter’s legal heirs and how will
Raymond? (2%) his estate be divided among them? (5%)
If Ruffa predeceases Raymond, The legal heirs of Peter are his children
Raymond's widowed mother will be by the first and second marriages and
entitled to the inheritance. Scarlet, an his surviving second wife.
illegitimate child, cannot inherit the
Their shares in the estate of Peter will
property by intestate succession from
depend, however, on the cause of the
Raymond who is a legitimate relative of
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 47 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
nullity of the first marriage. If the (B) If the ground of nullity is not
nullity of the first marriage was psychological capacity:
psychological incapacity of one or both 2 legitimate ¼ of the estate for
spouses, the three children of that void children each of second
marriage are legitimate and all of the marriage
legal heirs shall share the estate of Peter
Surviving ¼ of the estate
in equal shares. If the judgment of
second spouse
nullity was for other causes, the three
children are illegitimate and the estate 3 illegitimate 1/12 of estate for
(A) If the ground of nullity is (B). What is the effect of the receipt by
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 48 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
opposed by Arnel on the ground that he vees) inherit as a class and in equal shares
should be given the share of his father, regardless of their proximity in degree to
Why? (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 49 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
the uncles and the aunts, and half blood (1). The wife of Ramon will, therefore,
relatives inherit half the share of receive one half (½) of the estate or the
full-blooded relatives. amount of P5,000,000.00.
(2). The three (3) full-blood brothers, will,
therefore, receive P1,000,000.00 each.
(3). The nephew will receive
Intestate Succession (2008)
P1,000,000.00 by right of
representation.
No. VII. Ramon Mayaman died intestate,
(4). The two (2) half-brothers will receive
leaving a net estate of P10,000,000.00.
P500,000.00 each.
Determine how much each heir will receive
from the estate:
(B). If Ramon is survived by his wife, a half-
sister, and three nephews (sons of a
(A). If Ramon is survived by his wife, three
deceased full-blood brother)? Explain. (3%)
full-blood brothers, two half-brothers, and
one nephew (the son of a deceased full-
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
blood brother)? Explain. (3%)
The wife will receive one half (1/2) of the
estate or P5,000,000.00. The other half
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
shall be inherited by (1) the full-blood
Having died intestate, the estate of
brother, represented by his three
Ramon shall be inherited by his wife and
children, and (2) the half-sister. They
his full and half blood siblings or their
will divide the other half between them
respective representatives. In intestacy,
such that the share of the half-sister is
if the wife concurs with no one but the
just half the share of the full-blood
siblings of the husband, all of them are
brother. The share of the full-blood
the intestate heirs of the deceased
brother shall in turn be inherited by the
husband. The wife will receive half of the
three nephews in equal shares by right of
intestate estate, while the siblings or
presentation.
their respective representatives, will
inherit the other half to be divided
Therefore, the three (3) nephews will
among them equally. If some siblings are
receive P1,111,111.10 each the half-
of the full-blood and the other of the half
sister will receive the sum of
blood, a half blood sibling will receive
P1,666,666.60.
half the share of a full-blood sibling.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 50 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Intestate Succession (2008) (D). How should the house and lot, and the
cash be distributed? (1%)
No.X. Arthur executed a will which
contained only: (i) a provision disinheriting SUGGESTED ANSWER:
his daughter Bernica for running off with a
married man, and (ii) a provision disposing Since the probate of the will cannot be
of his share in the family house and lot in allowed, the rules on intestate
favor of his other children Connie and Dora. succession apply. Under Art. 996 of the
He did not make any provisions in favor of Civil Code, if a widow or widower and
his wife Erica, because as the will stated, legitimate children or descendants are
she would anyway get ½ of the house and left, the surviving spouse has the same
lot as her conjugal share. The will was very share as of the children. Thus, ownership
brief and straightforward and both the over the house and lot will be created
above provisions were contained in page 1, among wife Erica and her children
which Arthur and his instrumental witness, Bernice, Connie and Dora. Similarly, the
signed at the bottom. Page 2 contained the amount of P 1 million will be equally
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 51 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
twins, Hans and Gretel, with his girlfriend, also of the person from whom the person
Fiona. In 2005, Anna, Larry and Cherry being represented was supposed to
died in a car accident. In 2007, Ramon inherit. While Shelly is a legal heir of
died. Who may inherit from Ramon and Cherry, Shelly is not a legal heir of
who may not? Give your reason briefly. Ramon. Adoption created a purely
(10%) personal legal relation only between
Cherry and Shelly.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(2). Hans and Gretel are barred from
The following may inherit from Ramon: inheriting from Ramon under Art. 992,
NCC. Being illegitimate children, they
(1). Michelle, as an adopted child of
cannot inherit ab intestao from Ramon.
Ramon, will inherit as a legitimate child
of Ramon. As an adopted child, Michelle ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
has all the rights of a legitimate child
(Sec 18, Domestic Adoption Law). The problem expressly mentioned the
dates of the adoption of Cherry and
(2). Lia will inherit in representation of Michelle as 1971 and 1972. During that
Anna. Although Lia is an illegitimate time, adoption was governed by the New
child, she is not barred by Articles 992, Civil Code. Under the New Civil Code,
because her mother Anna is an husband and wife were allowed to adopt
illegitimate herself. She will represent separately or not jointly with the other
Anna as regards Anna's legitime under spouse. And since the problem does not
Art. 902, NCC and as regards Anna's specifically and categorically state, it is
intestate share under Art. 990, NCC. possible to construe the use of the word
"respectively" in the problem as
The following may not inherit from
indicative of the situation that Cherry
Ramon:
was adopted by Ramon alone and
Michelle was adopted by Dessa alone. In
(1). Shelly, being an adopted child, she
such case of separate adoption the
cannot represent Cherry. This is because
alternative answer to the problem will be
adoption creates a personal legal relation
as follows: Only Lia will inherit from
only between the adopter and the
Ramon in representation of Ramon's
adopted. The law on representation
illegitimate daughter Anna. Although Lia
requires the representative to be a legal
is an illegitimate child, she is not barred
heir of the person he is representing and
from inheriting from Ramon because her
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 52 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
No.VIII.b) How can RJP distribute his estate The mother and twin sons are entitled to
by will, if his heirs are JCP, his wife; HBR inherit from Ernesto. Art. 991 of the
and RVC, his parents; and an illegitimate Civil Code, provides that if legitimate
child, SGO?
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 53 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
ascendants are left, the twin sons shall The attestation clause stated the will was
divide the inheritance with them taking signed on the same occasion by Arthur and
one-half of the estate. Thus, the widowed his instrumental witnesses who all signed
mother gets P50,000.00 while the twin in the presence of each other, and the
sons shall receive P25,000.00 each. The notary public who notarized the will. There
common-law wife cannot inherit from are no marginal signatures or pagination
him because when the law speaks "widow appearing on any of the 3 pages. Upon his
or widower" as a compulsory heir, the death, it was discovered that apart from the
law refers to a legitimate spouse (Art. house and lot, he had a P 1 million account
887, par 3, Civil Code). deposited with ABC bank.
No.X. Arthur executed a will which Erica cannot be preterited. Art. 854 of
contained only: (i) a provision disinheriting the Civil Code provides that only
his daughter Bernica for running off with a compulsory heirs in the direct line can
married man, and (ii) a provision disposing be preterited.
of his share in the family house and lot in
favor of his other children Connie and Dora. (B). What other defects of the will, if any,
He did not make any provisions in favor of can cause denial of probate? (2%)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 54 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
No. 122880, 12 Apr 2006 and cited cases (B). Between Marian and the baby, who is
therein, Art 805 and 806, Civil Code). presumed to have died ahead? (1%)
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
No. II. At age 18, Marian found out that she
was pregnant. She insured her own life and
The baby is presumed to have died ahead
named her unborn child as her sole
of Marian. Under Par. 5, rule 131, Sec. 5
beneficiary. When she was already due to
(KK) of the Rules of Court, if one is
give birth, she and her boyfriend Pietro, the
under 15 or above 60 and the age of the
father of her unboarn child, were
other is in between 15 and 60, the latter
kidnapped in a resort in Bataan where they
is presumed to have survived. In the
were vacationing. The military gave chase
instant case, Marian was already 18
and after one week, they were found in an
when she found out that she was
abandoned hut in Cavite. Marian and Pietro
pregnant. She could be of the same age
were hacked with bolos. Marian and the
or maybe 19 years of age when she gave
baby delivered were both found dead, with
birth.
the baby's umbilical cord already cut. Pietro
survived. (C). Will Pietro, as surviving biological
father of the baby, be entitled to claim the
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 55 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Marilyn is now claiming for herself and her Since succession is not involved as
children her husband’s share in the estate regards the insurance contract, the
left by Dr. Lopez, and her husband’s share provisions of the Rules of Court (Rule
in the proceeds of Dr. Lopez’s life insurance 131, Sec. 3 , [jj] [5] ) on survivorship
policy. Rule on the validity of Marilyn’s shall apply. Under the Rules, Dr. Lopez,
claims with reasons. (4%) who was 70 years old, is presumed to
have died ahead of Roberto who is
SUGGESTED ANSWER :
presumably between the ages 15 and 60.
Having survived the insured, Roberto's
As to the Estate of Dr. Lopez:
right as a beneficiary became vested
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 56 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
upon the death of Dr. Lopez. When should be given effect must be denied.
Roberto died after Dr. Lopez, his right to The said cancellation has revoked the
receive the insurance became part of his entire will as nothing remains of the will
hereditary estate, which in turn was after the name of Rosa was cancelled.
inherited in equal shares by his legal Such cancellation is valid revocation of
heirs, namely, his spouse and children. the will and does not require
Therefore, Roberto's children and his authentication by the full signature of
spouse are entitled to Roberto's the testator to be effective.
one-third share in the insurance
However, if the cancellation of Rosa’s
proceeds.
name was not done by the testator
himself, such cancellation shall not be
effective and the will in its original tenor
Wills; Holographic Wills; Insertions & shall remain valid. The effectively of the
Cancellations (2012) holographic will cannot be left to the
mercy of unscrupulous third parties.
No.VII.a) Natividad’s holographic will, which
had only one (1) substantial provision, as The writing of Gregorio’s name as sole
first written, named Rosa as her sole heir. heir was ineffective, even though written
However, when Gregorio presented it for by the testator himself, because such is
heir, but without authentication by the testator to be valid and effective. Not
authentication. She claims that the (Kalaw v. Relova, G.R. No. L-40207, Sept
name in the will was done by the Fuentes executed a holographic will,
testator himself, Rosa’s claimed that the wherein he gave nothing to his recognized
holographic will in its original tenor illegitimate son, Jay. Dr. Fuentes left for the
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 57 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
United States, passed the New York medical court shall apply the New Civil Code in
licensure examinations, resided therein, determining the formal validity of the
and became a naturalized American citizen. holographic will. The subsequent change
He died in New York in 2007. The laws of in the citizenship of Dr. Fuentes did not
New York do not recognize holographic wills affect the law governing the validity of
or compulsory heirs. his will. Under the new Civil Code, which
was the law used by Dr. Fuentes, the law
(A). Can the holographic will of Dr. Fuentes enforced at the time of execution of the
be admitted to probate in the Philippines? will shall govern the formal validity of
Why or why not? (3%) the will (Art. 795, NCC).
form prescribed by the law observed by determines who his heirs are, the order
the testator in the execution of his will. that they succeed, how much their
observe the law of the place where the is valid (Art 16, NCC). Since, Dr. Fuentes
will was executed (Art 17, NCC), or the was a US citizen, the laws of the New
formalities of the law of the place where York determines who his heirs are. And
he resides, or according to the since the New York law does not
formalities of the law of his own country, recognize the concept of compulsory
or in accordance with the Philippine heirs, Jay is not a compulsory heir of Dr.
Civil Code (Art. 816, NCC). Since Dr. Fuentes entitled to a legitime.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 58 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
No. XI. John and Paula, British citizens at No. The testamentary dispositions are
birth, acquired Philippine citizenship by not valid because (a) omission of Mary, a
naturalization after their marriage. During legitimate child, is tantamount to
their marriage the couple acquired preterition which shall annul the
substanial landholdings in London and in institution of Peter and Paul as heirs
Makati. Paula bore John three children, (Art. 854, Civil Code); and, (b) the
Peter, Paul and Mary. In one of their trips disposition that Peter and Paul could not
to London, the couple executed a joint will dispose of nor divide the London estate
appointing each other as their heirs and for more than 20 years is void (Art. 870,
providing that upon the death of the Civil Code).
survivor between them the entire estate
would go to Peter and Paul only but the two
could not dispose of nor divide the London
Wills; Joint Wills; Probate (2012)
estate as long as they live. John and Paul
died tragically in the London Subway
No.VII.b) John Sagun and Maria Carla
terrorist attack in 2005. Peter and Paul
Camua, British citizens at birth, acquired
filed a petition for probate of their parent's
Philippine citizenship by naturalization
will before a Makati Regional Trial Court.
after their marriage. During their marriage,
the couple acquired substantial
(A). Should the will be admitted to probate?
landholdings in London and in Makati.
(2%)
Maria begot three (3) children, Jorge,
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 59 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(1) Should the will be admitted to probate? valid, the testamentary prohibition on the
receive nothing in testacy, and the facts not anytime demand the partition of the
do not show that he received anything as house and lot since it was expressly
an advance on his inheritance. He was provided by the decedent in his will that
totally excluded from the inheritance of the same cannot be partitioned while his
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 60 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
matter what his reason maybe. Hence, (B). Act as a witness to a will? (1%)
the three co-heir cannot demand its
partition at anytime but only after 20 SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Wills; Testamentary Disposition; Period
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 61 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
providing that upon the death of the that she can sign her full name later. While
survivor between them the entire estate the will was being signed, Roberta
would go to Peter and Paul only but the two experienced a stomach ache and kept going
could not dispose of nor divide the London to the restroom for long periods of time.
estate as long as they live. John and Paul Hannah, while waiting for her turn to sign
died tragically in the London Subway the will, was reading the 7th Harry Potter
terrorist attack in 2005. Peter and Paul book on the couch, beside the table on
filed a petition for probate of their parent's which everyone was signing. Benjamin,
will before a Makati Regional Trial Court. aside from witnessing the will, also offered
to notarize it. A week after, Clara was run
(C). Is the testamentary prohibition against over by a drunk driver while crossing the
the division of the London estate valid? (2%) street in Greenbelt.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 62 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
451, 1914). Therefore, the testatrix Because the Picasso painting reminded
signed the will in the presence of only Angie of him, Brad in his will bequeathed
two witnesses, and only two witnesses the painting to Angie. Brad died in 1995.
signed the will in the presence of the Saddened by Brad's death, Jennifer asked
testatrix and of one another. for the Picasso painting as a remembrance
of him. Angie refused and claimed that
It is to be noted, however, that the Brad, in his will, bequeathed the painting to
thumb mark intended by the testator to her. Is Angie correct? Why or why not?
be his signature in executing his last will (10%)
and testament is valid (Payad v.
Tolentino, 62 Phil 848, 1936; Matias v. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Salud, L-104 Phil 1046, 23 June, 1958).
The problem, however, states that Clara NO. Angie is not correct. The Picasso
"said that she can sign her full name painting is not given or donated by
later;" Hence, she did not consider her Jennifer to Brad. She merely "placed it
thumb mark as her "complete" signature, in his bedroom." Hence, she is still the
and intended further action on her part. owner of the painting. Not being the
The testatrix and the other witness owner of the Picasso painting, Brad
signed the will in the presence of cannot validly bequeath the same to
Hannah, because she was aware of her Angie (Art. 930, NCC). Even assuming
function and role as witness and was in a that the painting was impliedly given or
position to see the testatrix and the donated by Jennifer to Brad, the
other witnesses sign by merely casting donation is nevertheless void for not
her eyes in the proper direction. being in writing. The Picasso painting
must be worth more than 5,000 pesos.
Donation
Under Art. 748, NCC, the donation and
acceptance of a movable worth more
Donations; Formalities; In Writing (2007)
than 5,000 pesos must be in writing,
No. VIII. In 1986, Jennifer and Brad were otherwise the donation is void. The
madly in love. In 1989, because a certain donation being void, Jennifer remained
Picasso painting reminded Brad of her, the owner of the Picasso painting and
Jennifer acquired it and placed it in his Brad could not have validly disposed of
bedroom. In 1990, Brad and Jennifer broke said painting in favor of Angie in his will.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 63 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
YES. Angie is correct. Even assuming illegal and impossible donations imposed
that there was void donation because the in an onerous donation shall annul the
same was not in writing, Brad was in donation (Art. 1183, NCC). This is so,
uninterrupted possession of the Picasso because onerous donations are governed
painting from 1989 to 1995, lasting for by the law on contracts (Art. 733, NCC).
six (6) years prior to his death. Brad has
already acquired ownership of the
painting through acquisitive
Donation; Inter Vivos (2013)
prescription. Under Art. 1132, NCC,
ownership of movables prescribes
No.V. Josefa executed a deed of donation
through continuous possession for four
covering a one-hectare rice land in favor of
(4) years in good faith and for eight (8)
her daughter, Jennifer. The deed
years without need of other conditions.
specifically provides that:
A void donation may be the basis of
possession in the concept of owner and "For and in consideration of her love
of just title for purposes of acquisitive and service Jennifer has shown and
prescription. given to me, I hereby freely,
voluntarily and irrevocably donate to
her my one-hectare rice land covered
by TCT No. 11550, located in San
Donations; Illegal & Impossible
Fernando, Pampanga. This donation
Conditions (2007)
shall take effect upon my death."
simple donation v. illegal and impossible declaration by Josefa and Jennifer that the
conditions in an onerous donation. (5%) land will remain in Josefa's possession and
cannot be alienated, encumbered, sold or
SUGGESTED ANSWER: disposed of while Josefa is still alive.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 64 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
donation inter vivos (Art. 729, Civil donation shall take effect upon the
that the deed is a donation inter vivos. mortis causa disposition, the formalities
of a will should have been complied with
Furthermore, what is most significant in under Art. 728 of the Civil Code,
determining the type of donation is the otherwise, the donation is void and
absence of stipulation that the donor would produce no effect (The National
could revoke the donation; on the Treasure of the Philippines v. Vda. de
contrary, the deeds expressly declare Meimban, G.R. No. L-61023, Aug 22,
them to be “irrevocable,” a quality 1984).
absolutely incompatible with the idea of
conveyances mortis causa where Property
revocability is the essence of the act, to
the extent that a testator cannot Accretion; Alluvium (2008)
lawfully waive or restrict his right of
revocation. The provisions of the deed of No. IX. The properties of Jessica and Jenny,
donation which state that the same will who are neighbors, lie along the banks of
only take effect upon the death of the the Marikina River. At certain times of the
donor and that there is a prohibition to year, the river would swell and as the water
alienate, encumber, dispose, or sell the recedes, soil, rocks and other materials are
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 65 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
deposited on Jessica's and Jenny's land but is also the consequences of the
properties. This pattern of the river direct and deliberate intervention of
swelling, receding and depositing soil and man, it is man-made accretion and a
other materials being deposited on the part of the public domain (Tiongco v.
neighbors' properties have gone on for Director of Lands, 16 C.A. Rep 211, cited
many years. Knowing his pattern, Jessica in Nazareno v. C.A., G.R. No. 98045, 26
constructed a concrete barrier about 2 June 1996). Thus, Jessica cannot legally
meters from her property line and claim ownership of the additional 2
extending towards the river, so that when meters of land along her property
the water recedes, soil and other materials because she constructed a concrete
are trapped within this barrier. After several barrier about 2 meters from her property
years, the area between Jessica's property causing deposits of soil and other
line to the concrete barrier was completely materials when the water recedes. In
filled with soil, effectively increasing other words, the increase in her property
Jessica's property by 2 meters. Jenny's was not caused by nature but was man-
property, where no barrier was constructed, made.
also increased by one meter along the side
of the river. (B). If Jessica's and Jenny's properties are
registered, will the benefit of such
(A). Can Jessica and Jenny legally claim registration extend to the increased area of
ownership over the additional 2 meters and their properties? (2%)
one meter, respectively, of land deposited
along their properties?(2%) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 66 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(C). Assume the two properties are on a cliff Ulpiano built three huts on this additional
adjoining the shore of Laguna Lake. Jessica area, where he and his two married
and Jenny had a hotel built on the children live. On this same area, Ulpiano
properties. They had the erath and rocks and his family planted peanuts, monggo
excavated from the properties dumped on beans and vegetables. Ulpiano also
the adjoining shore, giving rise to a new regularly paid taxes on the land, as shown
patch of dry land. Can they validly lay claim by tax declarations, for over thirty years.
to the patch of land? (2%)
When Marciano learned of the increase in
SUGGESTED ANSWER: the size of the land, he ordered Ulpiano to
demolish the huts, and demanded that he
No. Jessica and Jenny cannot validly lay be paid his share in the proceeds of the
claim to the patch of land because in harvest. Marciano claims that under the
order to acquire land by accretion, there Civil Code, the alluvium belongs to him as a
should be a natural and actual registered riparian owner to whose land the
continuity of the accretion to the land of accretion attaches, and that his right is
the riparian owner caused by natural ebb enforceable against the whole world.
and flow of the current of the river
(Delgado v. Samonte, CA-G.R. No. 34979- (A). Is Marciano correct? Explain. (3%)
R, 10 Aug 1966).
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Marciano’s contention is correct. Since
that accretion was deposited on his land
Accretion; Rights of the Riparian Owner by the action of the waters of the river
(2009) and he did not construct any structure
to increase the deposition of soil and
No.XVI. Marciano is the owner of a parcel of
silt, Marciano automatically owns the
land through which a river runs out into
accretion. His real right of ownership is
the sea. The land had been brought under
enforceable against the whole world
the Torrens System, and is cultivated by
including Ulpiano and his two married
Ulpiano and his family as farmworkers
children. Although Marciano’s land is
therein. Over the years, the river has
registered, the three (3) hectares land
brought silt and sediment from its sources
deposited through accretion was not
up in the mountains and forests so that
automatically registered. As an
gradually the land owned by Marciano
unregistered land, it is subject to
increased in area by three hectares.
acquisitive prescription by third persons.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 67 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 68 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
and options open to them to protect their However, the builder cannot be obliged
interests. (8%) to buy the land if its value is
considerable more than that of the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: building.. In such case, he shall pay
reasonable rent of the owner of the land
Based on the fact as stated, the spouses
does not choose to appropriate the
Dela Cruz as builders and the spouses
building or trees after proper indemnity
Rodriguez as land owners, are both in
(Art 448, Civil Code).
good faith. The spouses Dela Cruz are
builder in good faith because before The house constructed by the spouses
constructing the house they exercised Dela Cruz is considered as a useful
due diligence by asking the Agent of CRC expense, since it increased the value of
the location of the lot A, and they relied the lot. As such, should the spouses
on the information given by the agent Rodriguez decides to appropriate the
who is presumed to know the identity of house, the spouses Dela Cruz are
the lot purchased by the Dela Cruz entitled to the right of retention pending
spouses (Pleasantville v. CA, 253 SCRA reimbursement of the expenses they
10, 1996). On the other hand, there is no incurred or the increase in value which
showing that the land owners, spouse the thing may have acquired by reason
Rodriguez acted in bad faith. The facts of the improvement (Art 546, Civil
do not show that the building was done Code). Thus, the spouses Dela Cruz may
with their knowledge and without demand P1,000,000.00 as payment of
opposition on their part (Art 453, Civil the expenses in building the house or
Code). The good faith is always presumed increase in value of the land because of
(Art. 527, Civil Code). the house as a useful improvement, as
may be determined by the court form
The owner of the land on which anything
the evidence presented during the trial
has been built, sown, or planted in good
(Depra v. Dumlao, 136 SCRA 475, 1985;
faith shall have the right:
Technogas Phils v. CA, 268 SCRA 5,
1997).
(1) to appropriate as his own the works
after payment of the indemnity provided
for in Art 546 and 548, or
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 69 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
No.VII.In 2005, Andres built a residential In light of the engineer's findings and the
house on a lot whose only access to the circumstances of the case, resolve the
national highway was a pathway crossing parties' right of way dispute. (6%)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 70 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Andres is not entitled to the easement of (Pathway B). Second, the right of way
right of way for Pathway A. Pathway B obtained (Pathway A) is not the least
must be used. prejudicial to Brando’s property, as
evidence by the reports of the geodetic
The owner of a dominant estate may and civil engineer.
validly obtain a compulsory right of way
only after he has established the When there is already an existing
existence of four requisites, to wit: adequate outlet from the dominant
estate to the public highway, even if the
(1) The (dominant) estate is surrounded said outlet, for one reason or another, be
by other immovables and is without inconvenient, the need to open up
adequate outlet to a public highway; another servitude is entirely unjustified
(Costabella Corporation v. CA, G.R. No.
(2) After payment of the proper
80511, Jan 25, 1991). The rule that the
indemnity;
easement of right of way shall be
established at the point least prejudicial
(3) The isolation was not due to the
to the servient estate is controlling
proprietor’s own acts; and
(Quimen v. Quimen and CA, G.R. No.
(4) The right of way claimed is at a point 112331, May 29, 1996).
However, the Supreme Court has easement burdening Brando’s lot, was it
criteria cannot be complied with, the easement. If the used pathway was only a
right of way shall be established at the tolerance, then Brando may close it. Andres
point least prejudicial to the servient must ask for the constitution of a legal
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 71 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
because Franz had in the meantime sold discontinuous easement, the period of
Lot C to Julia who had it fenced. ten years of non-user, shall be computed
from the day it ceased to be used under
(A). Does Ava have a right to demand from Act 6341 (2) CC.
Julia the activation of her right of way?
(5) Renunciation or waiver of an
Explain. (2.5%)
easement must be specific, clear,
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 72 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Yes. Ava has the option to demand a No. VIII. Adam, a building contractor, was
right of way on any of the remaining lots engaged by Blas to construct a house on a
of Franz more so after Franz sold lot C to lot which he (Blas) owns. While digging on
Julia. The essential elements of a legal the lot in order to lay down the foudation of
right of way under Art 649 and 650 of the house, Adam hit a very hard object. It
the New Civil Code are complied with. turned out to be the vault of the old Banco
de las Islas Filipinas. Using a detonation
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
device, Adam was able to open the vault
Yes. Ava has the option to demand a containing old notes and coins which were
right of way from the other lots. The law in circulation during the Spanish era. While
provides that whenever a piece of land the notes and coins are no longer legal
acquired by sale, exchange or partition is tender, they were valued at P100 million
surrounded by other estates of the because of their historical value and the
vendor, exchanger, or co-owner, he shall coins silver nickel content. The following
be obliged to grant a right of way filed legal claims over the notes and coins:
without indemnity (Art 652, NCC).
(i). Adam, as finder;
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
(ii). Blas, as owner of the property where
No. There was merely a promise to Ava
they were found;
that a right of way shall be granted to
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 73 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(iii). Bank of the Philippine Islands, as present case, Adam, as finder, and Blas,
successor-in-interest of the owner of the as owner of the land, are entitled to
vault; and share 50-50 in the treasure. The
government can only claim if it can
(iv). The Philippine Government because of establish that the notes and coins are of
their historical value. interest to science or the arts, then it
must pay just price of the things found,
(A). Who owns the notes and coins? (4%)
to be divided equally between Adam and
Blas (Art. 438, Civil Code).
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 74 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(A) Would it be legally significant - from the exceeds Five Hundred pesos (P500.00)
point of view of validity and enforceability - must appear in writing, even in private
if the loan and the mortgages were in public one. However, the requirement is not for
or private instruments? (6%) validity of the contract, but only for its
greater efficacy.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
With regard to the chattel mortgage, Art.
From the point of view of validity and 1508, the Chattel Mortgage Law,
enforceability, there would be legal requires an affidavit of good faith stating
significance if the mortgage was in a that the chattel mortgage is supposed to
public or private instrument. As for the stand as security of the loan; thus, for
loan, there is no legal significance the validity of the chattel mortgage, it
except of interest were charged on the must be in a public document and
loan, in which case, the charging of recorded in the Chattel Mortgage
interest must be in writing. Register in the Register of Deeds. A real
estate mortgage, under the provisions of
A contract of loan is a real contract and
Art. 2125 of the Civil Code, requires that
is perfected upon delivery of the object
in order that a mortgage may be validly
of the obligation (Art 1934, Civil Code).
constituted the document in which it
Thus, a contract of loan is valid and
appears be recorded. If the instrument is
enforceable even if it is neither in a
not recorded, the mortgage is
private nor in a public document.
nevertheless valid and binding between
the parties. Hence, for validity of both
As a rule, contracts shall be obligatory in
chattel and real estate mortgages, they
whatever form they may have been
must appear in a public instrument. But
entered into provided all the essential
the purpose of enforceability, it is
requisites for their validity are present.
submitted that the form of the contract,
With regards to its enforceability, a
whether in a public or private document,
contact of loan is not among those
would be immaterial (Mobil Oil v.
enumerated under Art. 1403 (2) of the
Diocaresa, 29 SCRA 656, 1969).
Civil Code, which are covered by the
Statute of Frauds.
Also, under Art 1358, acts and contracts
which have for their object the creation
It is important to note that under Art.
or transmission of real rights over
1358 of the Civil Code, all the other
immovable property must be in a public
contracts where the amount involved
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 75 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
document for greater efficacy and a real right. Possession may be the real right of
estate mortgage is a real right over possession or jus possessiones or it can
immovable property. be merely the right to possess or jus
possedendi, which are among the basic
rights of ownership. If the real right of
possession is possession in the concept
Occupation vs. Possession (2007)
of owner, but subject to certain
limitations, it may ripen into full
No.I. Distinguish the following concepts:
ownership of the thing or property right
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 76 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
owned property. The fact that he is there are two or more heirs, the whole
giving up his entire interest simply estate of the decedent, is, before
his interest as equivalent to his share in heirs, subject to the payment of debts of
the taxes and expenses of preservation. the deceased (Art. 1078, Civil Code),
Under the rules on co-ownership, "none
of the co-owners shall, without the
(A). Can Cathy lawfully ask for demolition of (B). Can Bobby legally insist on purchasing
Bobby's house? (3%) the land? (2%)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 77 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Property; Movable or Immovable (2007)
The platform is a movable property
No.II. Manila Petroleum Co. owned and because it is attached to a movable
operated a petroleum operation facility off property, i.e. the vessel which was
the coast of Manila. The facility was located merely anchored to the seabed. The fact
on a floating platform made of wood and that the vessel is merely anchored to the
metal, upon which was permanently sea bed only shows that it is not
attached the heavy equipment for the intended to remain at a fixed place;
petroleum operations and living quarters of hence, it remains a movable property. If
the crew. The floating platform likewise the intention was to make the platform
contained a garden area, where trees, stay permanent where it was moored, it
plants and flowers were planted. The would not have been simply tethered to
platform was tethered to a ship, the MV a vessel but itself anchored to the
101, which was anchored to the seabed. seabed.
Please briefly give the reason for your (B). Are the equipment and living quarters
answers. (10%) movable or immovable property?
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 78 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
the object." Both the equipment and the The trees, plants and flowers planted in
living quarters are permanently attached the garden area of the platform are
to the platform which is also an immovable property under Art. 415 (2)
immovable. The equipment can also be NCC which classifies as an immovable
classified as an immovable property property "trees, plants and growing
under Art. 415 (5) NCC because such fruits, while they are attached to the
equipment are "machinery, receptacles, land or form an integral part of an
instruments or implements intended by immovable, the petroleum operation
the owner of the tenement for an facility.
industry or works which may be carried
on in a building or on a piece of land and ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 79 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
2007, Luciano filed suit to recover the land Non-Registrable Properties (2007)
he sold to Chua, alleging that the sale was
void because it contravened the No.IV. (B). What properties are not
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 80 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(3.) Lands that are reserved by law or No. VII. Anthony bought a piece of untitled
Presidential proclamation for military, agricultural land from Bert. Bert, in turn,
civic or quasi-public purpose, Under Sec acquired the property by forging carlo's
88, Chapter XII of the Public Land Act, signature in a deed of sale over the
such lands shall be inalienable and shall property. Carlo had been in possession of
not be subject to occupation, entry, sale, the property for 8 years, declared it for tax
lease or other disposition. purposes, and religiously paid all taxes due
on the property. Anthony is not aware of
(4.) In general, all lands of the public the defect in Bert's title, but has been in
domain that has not been classified as actual physical possession of the property
alienable and disposable under the Public from the time he bought it from Bert, who
Land Act. had never been in possession of the
property for one year.
(5.) Lands that form part of the seabed,
riverbed or lakebed. These lands are not (A). Can Anthony acquire ownership of the
susceptible to private appropriation. property by acquisitive prescription? How
many more years does he have possess it to
(6.) Foreshore lands is that strip of land acquire ownership? (2%)
that lies between the high and low water
marks and alternately wet and dry SUGGESTED ANSWER:
according to the flow of the tide belong
to the public domain, and can only be Yes, Anthony can acquire ownership of
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 81 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
faith because he was not aware of the shall have a right to a part of the
defect in Bert's title (Art. 526, Civil expenses of cultivation, and to a part of
Code). As such, Anthony can acquire the net harvest of the standing crops,
ownership and other real rights over both in proportion to the time of the
immovable property through open, possession (Art 545, Civil Code).
continuous possession of 10 years (Art.
1134, Civil Code). Anthony needs nine
(9) more years of possession, in addition
Prescription; Judicially Foreclosed Real
to his one (1) year of possession in good
Property Mortgage (2012)
faith.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 82 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Purchaser in Good Faith; Mortgaged of Deeds under Act. 3344 and obtained a
Property (2008) tax declaration in its name.
No. XIX. Juliet offered to sell her house and (A). Was Dehlma a purchaser in good faith?
lot, together with all the furniture and (2%)
appliances therein to Dehlma. Before
agreeing to purchase the property, Dehlma SUGGESTED ANSWER:
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 83 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
purchaser unregistered lands sold to him land registration and acquisition of title to
under execution (Williams v. Suñer, 49 land. The manual should include the
Phil. ,534). following items:
(C). Who owns the movables inside the (A). What is the governing law? (5%)
house? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The governing law is the Land
Dehlma owns the movables because Registration Act as amended by Property
when she acquired the house and lot Registration Decree (Act 496 as amended
from Juliet, all the furniture and by PD 1529).
appliances therein were included in the
sale. As owner of the real property, [Note: It is respectfully recommended
Dehlma also owns the movables found that full credit be given to examinees
therein (Art. 542, Civil Code). who did not give the exact title or
number of the law but merely stated a
description of the law.]
No.IV. Bedrock Land & Property In general, the governing law relating to
Development Corp. is a development registration and acquisition of title to
company engaged in developing and selling land is Act 496 of 1902 as amended by
subdivisions, condominium units and PD 1529, otherwise known as Property
industrial estates. In order to replenish its Registration Decree of June 11, 1978.
inventories, it embarked on an aggressive
land banking program. It employed "scouts" (1.) Chapter III-I governs original
who roam all over the Philippines to look for registration of land title under the
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 84 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(5.) Chapter V governs the registration of (11.) Section 113 governs the
(6.) Chapter V-II governs the registration register a deed or when he is in doubt as
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 85 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 86 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
the years in the concept of an owner and ownership since June 12, 1945, or
his stay was uncontested by others. He has earlier. However, it is only necessary
also conscientiously and continuously paid that the land is already declared A & D
the realty taxes on the land. land “at the time for application for
registration is filed” (Malabanan v.
Michael died in 2000 and Manuel - as Republic, G.R. No. 180067, June 30,
Michael’s only son and heir -now wants to 2009).
secure and register title to the land in his
own name. He consults you for legal advice Manuel could also invoke Sec 14 (2) of
as he wants to perfect his title to the land the same Decree, which allows
and secure its registration in his name. registration through ordinary acquisitive
prescription for thirty years, provided,
(A) What are the laws that you need to however, that the land is “patrimonial”
consider in advising Manuel on how he can in character, i.e. already declared by the
perfect his title and register the land in his government (a) as A & D, and (b) no
name? Explain the relevance of these laws longer needed for public use or public
to your projected course of action. (4%) service (Malabanan, supra).
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 87 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Aquino, G.R. No. L-33983, January 27, Manuel has a the burden to overcome
1983). the presumption of State ownership by
“well-nigh incontrovertible” evidence
Manuel may also invoke “vested rights’ (Ong v. Republic, G.R. No. 175746,
acquired under Rep. Act. No. 1942, dated March 12, 2008). Accordingly, he must
June 2, 1957, which amended Sec. 48 (b) show that ht eland is already classified
of the PLA by providing for a prescriptive as A & D “at the time the application for
period of thirty years for judicial registration is filed” and that he has
confirmation of imperfect title. It must been in “possession and occupation
only be demonstrated that possession thereof” in the manner required by law
and occupation commenced on January since June 12, 1945, or earlier.
24, 1947 and the 30-year period was
completed prior to the effectivity of PD Manuel may tack his possession to that
No. 1073 on January 25, 1977. PD No. of his predecessor-in-interest (Michael)
1073 now requires possession and by the testimony of disinterested and
occupation since June 12, 1945 knowledgeable eyewitnesses. Overt acts
(Republic v. Espinosa, G.R. No. 171514, of possession may consist in introducing
July 18, 2012). valuable improvements like fencing the
land, constructing a residential house
Another alternative is for Manuel to thereon, cultivating the land and
secure title through administrative planting fruit bearing trees, declaring
proceedings under the homestead or free the land for taxation purposes and
patent provisions of the PLA. The title paying realty taxes, all of which are
issued has the same efficacy and validity corroborative proof of possession.
as a title issued through judicial
proceedings, but with the limitations To identify the land, he must submit the
that the land cannot be sold or disposed tracing cloth plan or a duly-certified
of within five years from the issuance of blueprint or whiteprint copy thereof
patent (Sec. 118, CA No. 141, as (Director of Lands v. Reyes, G.R. No. L-
amended). 27594, November 28, 1975; Director of
Lands v. CA and Iglesia ni Cristo, G.R.
(B) What do you have to prove to secure No. L-56613, March 14, 1988).
Manuel's objectives and what
documentation are necessary? (4%) To show the classification of the land as
A & D, the application must be
SUGGESTED ANSWER: accompanied by (1) a CENRO or PENRO
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 88 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
In 2006, the spouses Teodoro and Anita because he is an innocent purchaser for
came to the Philippines for a visit and value. The Title to the land he bought
discovered what had happened to their was already in the name of the person
property. They immediately hire you as who sold the property to him, and there
lawyer. What action or actions will you is nothing on the title which will make
institute in order to vindicate their rights? him suspect about the fraud committed
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 89 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
No.X.a) A contract to sell is the same as a construct the research and laboratory
conditional contract of sale. Do you agree? facilities of the latter. Under the terms of
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 90 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
will of the debtor or without his statement is false. Explain your answer in
participation or aggravation (Paras, Civil not more than two (2) sentences.
Code Annotated, vol. IV, 2000 ed., p
159). As mentioned in the facts, labor (A). A clause in an arbitration contract
unrest of the employees was caused by granting one of the parties the power to
AB Corp.'s failure to pay its employees choose more arbitrators than the other
immediately cancel the contract? (2%) True. The Civil Code provides that “Any
clause giving one of the parties power to
SUGGESTED ANSWER: choose more arbitrators than the other
is void and of no effect” (Art 2045, NCC).
No, XY Corp. cannot unilaterally and
Obligations
immediately cancel the contract. In the
absence of any stipulation for automatic
Extinguishment; Compensation (2009)
rescission, rescission must be judicial
(Art. 1191, Civil Code). No.XV. Sarah had a deposit in a savings
account with Filipino Universal Bank in the
(C). Must AB Corp. return the 50%
amount of five million pesos
downpayment? (2%)
(P5,000,000.00). To buy a new car, she
obtained a loan from the same bank in the
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
amount of P1,200,000.00, payable in twelve
AB Corp. need not return the 50% down monthly installments. Sarah issued in favor
payment because 45% of the work was of the bank post-dated checks, each in the
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 91 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 92 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No. XV. Eduardo was granted a loan by
XYZ Bank for the purpose of improving a No. Recardo has no basis for claiming
building which XYZ leased from him. novation of the original contract when
Eduardo, executed the promissory note the bank invoked compensation because
("PN") in favor of the bank, with his friend there was simply partial compensation
Recardo as co-signatory. In the PN, they (Art. 1290, Civil Code) and this would
both acknowledged that they are not bar the bank from recovering the
"individually and collectively" liable and remaining balance of the obligation.
waived the need for prior demand. To
secure the PN, Recardo executed a real ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
estate mortgage on his own property. When
Eduardo defaulted on the PN, XYZ stopped No. In order that an obligation may be
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 93 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
an ordinary check is not legal tender, payment to make said redemption valid
debt is not a valid tender of payment G.R. No. 178242, Jan 20, 2009).
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 94 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Moreover, Ferdie’s refusal was justified there has been extraordinary deflation since
on the ground that the amount tendered 1998, and therefore, Felipe should pay him
does not include interest. In order to the value of the debt at the time it was
effect the redemption of the foreclosed incurred. Felipe refused to pay him again,
property, the payment to the purchaser claiming that Gustavo is estopped from
must include the following sums: (a) the raising the issue of legal tender, having
bid price; (b) the interest on the bid accepted the check in March, and that it
price, computed at one per centum (1%) was Gustavo's negligence in not depositing
per month; and (c) the assessments and the check immediately that caused the
taxes, if any, paid by the purchaser with check to become stale.
the same rate of interest (Sec 28, 1997
Rules of Civil Procedure). Unless there is (A). Can Gustavo now raised the issue that
an express stipulation to that effect, the the cashier's check is not legal tender? (2%)
No. XVII. Felipe borrowed $100 from (B). Can Felipe validly refuse to pay
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 95 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Code Annotated, Vol IV, 2000 ed., p. secure the PN, Recardo executed a real
394); (b) when the check has lost its estate mortgage on his own property. When
value because of the fault of the creditor Eduardo defaulted on the PN, XYZ stopped
(Art. 1249, 2nd par.),as when he was payment of rentals on the building on the
unreasonably delayed in presenting the ground that legal compensation had set in.
check for payment (PNB v. Seeto, G.R. Since there was still a balance due on the
No, L-4388, 13 August 1952). PN after applying the rentals, XYZ
foreclosed the real estate mortgage over
(C). Can Felipe compel Gustavo to receive Recardo's property. Recardo opposed the
US$100 instead? (1%) foreclosure on the ground that he is only a
co-signatory; that no demand was made
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
upon him for payment, and assuming he is
liable, his liability should not go beyond
Felipe cannot compel Gustavo to receive
half the balance of the loan. Further,
US$100 because under RA 529, payment
Recardo said that when the bank invoked
of loans should be at Philippine currency
compensation between the reantals and the
at the rate of exchange prevailing at the
amount of the loan, it amounted to a new
time of the stipulated date of payment.
contract or novation, and had the effect of
Felipe could only compel Gustavo to
extinguishing the security since he did not
receive US$ 100 if they stipulated that
give his consent (as owner of the property
obligation be paid in foreign currency
under the real estate mortgage) thereto.
(R.A. 4100).
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 96 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
the solidary debtors (Art. 1207, Civil latter, is obliged to continue the same
Code). until the termination of the affair and its
incidents, or to require the person
concerned to substitute him, if the
owner is in a position to do so (Art.
Obligations; Without Agreement (2007)
2144, NCC).
benefited at the expense of another. (Art. injured or becomes seriously ill, and he
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 97 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
created by any word or phrase, either Art 1455 NCC which provides: "When any
intention to create a trust, but is one fiduciary relationship uses trust funds
that arises in order to satisfy the for the purchase of property and causes
mainly operation of law and construed as operation of law in favor of the person to
a trust against one who, by fraud, duress whom the funds belong."
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 98 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 99 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
the contract shall be presumed to be an offering P800,000 in ready cash for the
equitable mortgage when it may be fairly land. When Roberto confirmed that he
inferred that the real intention of the could pay in cash as soon as Sergio could
parties is simply to secure the payment get the documentation ready, Sergio
of a debt or the performance of any decided to withdraw his offer to Marcelo,
other obligation. The present transaction hoping to just explain matters to his friend.
was clearly intended to just secure the Marcelo, however, objected when the
shortage incurred by Eulalia because withdrawal was communicated to him,
Bandung remained in possession of the taking the position that they have a firm
property inspite of the execution of the and binding agreement that Sergio cannot
sale. simply walk away from because he has an
option to buy that is duly supported by a
duly accepted valuable consideration.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 100 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(B) Can Sergio claim that whatever they No. Sergio’s claim has no legal basis.
might have agreed upon cannot be enforced
because any agreement relating to the sale The contract of sale has already been
evidence in writing and they never reduced the ambit of the Statute of Frauds is
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 101 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
monthly, payable annually in advance. The refusal. This makes the mother a buyer
contract stipulated that it may be renewed in bad faith, hence giving more ground
for another 2-year period upon mutual for rescission of the sale to her
agreement of the parties. The contract also (Equatorial Realty, et al. v. Mayfair
granted Iris the right of first refusal to Theater, G.R. No. 106063, 21 Nov. 1996).
purchase the property at any time during
the lease, if Dux decides to sell the property ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 102 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
In his own written reply, Boboy signified use for which the lease is intended,
that he was ready to leave but Anselmo without altering the form or substance of
must first reimburse him the value of the the property leased, the lessor upon the
Anselmo refused, insisting that Boboy improvements at that time. Should the
mere lessee. Boboy responded by removing the lessee may remove the
the improvements and leaving the building improvements, even though the
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 103 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(IVb) Can Boboy be held liable for damages lease contracts between Jude and his
for removing the improvements over tenants? Explain your answer. (3%)
Anselmo's objection? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, Ildefonso must respect the lease
contracts between Jude and his tenants.
No. Boboy cannot be held liable for While it is true that the said lease
damages. contracts were not registered and
annotated on the title to the property,
The lessor, Anselmo, refused to
Ildefonso is still not an innocent
reimburse one-half of the value of the
purchaser for value. He ought to know
improvements, so the lessee, Boboy, may
the existence of the lease because the
remove the same, even though the
building was already occupied by the
principal thing may suffer damage
tenants at the time he bought it.
thereby. If in removing the useful
Applying the principle of caveat emptor,
improvements Boboy caused more
he should have checked and known the
impairment in the property leased than
status of the occupants of their right to
is necessary he will be liable for damages
occupy the building before buying it.
(Art. 1678, Civil Code).
Agency
Lease; Caveat Emptor (2009)
Agency; Sale of a Real Property through
an Agent (2010)
No.VIII. Jude owned a building which he
had leased to several tenants. Without
No.XVI. X was the owner of an unregistered
informing his tenants, Jude sold the
parcel of land in Cabanatuan City. As she
building to Ildefonso. Thereafter, the latter
was abroad, she advised her sister Y via
notified all the tenants that he is the new
overseas call to sell the land and sign a
owner of the building. Ildefonso ordered the
contract of sale on her behalf.
tenants to vacate the premises within thirty
(30) days from notice because he had other Y thus sold the land to B1 on March 31,
plans for the building. The tenants refused 2001 and executed a deed of absolute sale
to vacate, insisting that they will only do so on behalf of X. B1 fully paid the purchase
when the term of their lease shall have price.
expired. Is Ildefonso bound to respect the
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 104 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
B2, unaware of the sale of the land to B1, double sales of an immovable property,
signified to Y his interest to buy it but the ownership shall pertain to the
asked Y for her authority from X. Without person who is in good faith was first in
informing X that she had sold the land to possession and in the absence thereof to
B1, Y sought X for a written authority to the person who presents the oldest title,
sell. provide there is good faith.
X e-mailed Y an authority to sell the land. Y In a case, the Supreme Court has held
thereafter sold the land on May 1, 2001 to that in a sale of real estate the execution
years, the first installment to be paid at the tantamount to delivery of the possession
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 105 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
The two remaining partners, A and B, are No.I. TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the
liable. When any partner dies and the statement is true, or FALSE if the
business is continued without any statement is false. Explain your answer in
settlement of accounts as between him not more than two (2) sentences.
or his estate, the surviving partners are
held liable for continuing the business (C). An oral partnership is valid. (1%)
despite the death of C (Art 1841, 1785,
par 2, and Art 1833 of NCC). SUGGESTED ANSWER:
TRUE. Partnership is a consensual
(B).What are the creditors’ recourse/s? contract, hence, it is valid even though
Explain. (3%) not in writing.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 106 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Share; Demand during the Existence of (1) Is the payment of interest valid?
Partnership (2012) Explain. (3%)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 107 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 108 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(5)The Guarantor insures the solvency (B). Will your answer to [a] be the same if
of the principal debtor; whereas, the the contract stipulates that upon failure of
surety insures the debt. Rosario to redeem the ring on due date,
Jennifer may immediately sell the ring and
(6)In a guaranty, the guarantor is
appropriate the entire proceeds thereof for
subsidiarlty liable; whereas, in a
herself as full payment of the loan?
suretyship, the surety binds himself
Reasons. (3%)
solidarity with the principal debtor (Art
2047, Civil Code). SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, my answer will be different. While
Pledge
the contract of pledge is valid, the
stipulation authorizing the pledgee to
Pledge; Pactum Commissorium (2009)
immediately sell the thing pledged is
void under Art 2088 of the New Civil
No.XVII. Rosario obtained a loan of
Code, which provides that “the creditor
P100,000.00 from Jennifer, and pledged
cannot appropriate the things given by
her diamond ring. The contract signed by
way of pledge or mortgage, or dispose of
the parties stipulated that if Rosario is
them xxx.” Jennifer cannot immediately
unable to redeem the ring on due date, she
sell by herself the thing pledged. It must
will execute a document in favor of Jennifer
be foreclosed by selling it at a public
providing that the ring shall automatically
auction in accordance with the
be considered full payment of the loan.
procedure under Art 2112 of the New
(A). Is the contract valid? Explain. (3%) Civil Code.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 109 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
coordinator of the hotel noticed him and prosper. Otherwise, Roberto’s action will
asked him, allegedly in a loud voice, to not prosper.
leave as he was not in the guest list. He
The hotel is liable for the wrongful acts
retorted that he had been invited to the
of its employees.
affair by his friend, who however denied
doing so. Deeply embarrassed by the COMMENT:
incident, Roberto then sued the hotel for
The facts of the problem are almost
damages under Articles 19 and 21 of the
similar to the facts of Nikko Hotel
Civil Code. Will Roberto’s action prosper?
Manila Garden v. Reyes, G.R. No.
Explain. (5%)
154259, Feb 28, 2005. In the said case,
SUGGESTED ANSWER: however, there is a categorical finding
that the hotel employee did not, exposed
No. Roberto’s action will not prosper.
the complainant to the ridicule, shame
From the facts given in the problem, the
or embarrassment; hence, did not
wedding coordinator did not abuse her
commit any abuse of right. The present
right when she asked him to leave the
problem makes no statement of that
wedding reception because he was not in
finding. In the contrary, the problem
the guest list. Hotel Nikko could not be
states that it is a mere allegation.
held liable for damages as its liable
spring from the liability of its employee
(Nikko Hotel Manila Garden v. Reyes,
G.R. No. 154259, Feb 28, 2005). Damages; Moral & Exemplary (2009)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 110 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(A). If you were the judge, would you award Vinzons-Chato filed a Motion to Dismiss
all the claims of Nanette? Explain. (3%) arguing that she cannot be held liable for
damages for acts she performed while in
SUGGESTED ANSWER: the discharge of her duties as BIR
If Rodolfo's marriage could not have Commissioner. Is she correct? Explain. (5%)
been possibly known to Nanette or there
is no gross negligence on the part of SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Nanette, Rodolfo could be held liable for
Yes. As a general rule, a public officer is
moral damages.
not liable for acts performed in the
discharge of his duties. The exceptions
If there is gross negligence in a suit for
are when he acted with malice, bad faith,
quasi-delict, exemplary could be
or gross negligence in the performance
awarded.
of his duty, or when his act is in
violation of a Constitutional guaranteed
right and liberties of a person under
Damages; Public Officers acting in the Art32 of the NCC.
Performance of their Duties (2012)
The public officer is not automatically
No.II.a) Liwayway Vinzons-Chato was then considered to have violated the rights or
while Fortune Tobacco Corporation is an rule the public officer issued was
different brands of cigarettes, among which complainant must still allege and prove
are "Champion," "Hope," and "More" the particular injury or prejudice he has
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 111 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
cannot be held liable. The facts the driver and the defense of diligence is
presented are similar to facts of the case not available.
of Vinzons-Chato v. Fortune, G.R. No.
141309, Dec 23, 2008. (B).Would your answer be the same if
Rommel was in the car at the time of the
accident? Explain. (2%)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 112 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(B). doctrine of discovered peril (last clear typhoon knocked down the fence of the
chance) (5%) pond and the iguana crawled out of the
gate of Primo’s residence. N, a neighbor
SUGGESTED ANSWER: who was passing by, started throwing
stones at the iguana, drawing the iguana to
The doctrine of last clear chance states
move toward him. N panicked and ran but
that where the plaintiff was guilty of
tripped on something and suffered a broken
prior or antecedent negligence, but the
leg.
defendant, who had the ultimate
opportunity to avoid the impending Is anyone liable for N’s injuries? Explain.
harm failed to do so, it is the defendant (4%)
who is liable for all the consequences of
the accident notwithstanding the prior SUGGESTED ANSWER:
negligence of the plaintiff. An example is
No one is liable. The possessor of an
where a person was riding a pony on a
animal or whoever may make use of the
bridge and improperly pulled the pony to
same is responsible for the damage it
the wrong side when he saw a car
may cause, although it may escape or be
coming. The driver of the car did not
lost. This responsibility shall cease only
stop or change direction, and nearly hit
in case the damage should come from
the horse, and, the frightened animal
force majeure or from the fault of the
jumped to its death. The driver of the
person who has suffered damage (Art
car is guilty of negligence because he
2183, NCC).
had a fair opportunity to avoid the
accident and failed to avail himself of
that opportunity. He is liable under the
doctrine of last clear chance (Picart v.
Liability; Special Parental Authority
Smith, 37 Phil. 809, 1918).
(2010)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 113 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
because the van rented by the school was (B). How about the damage to the jeepney?
too crowded. On the way to a museum Explain. (2%)
which the students were scheduled to visit,
Rozanno made a wrong maneuver, causing SUGGESTED ANSWER:
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 114 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
liable under general provision on the court to justify the damages that your client
Civil Code on quasi-delict. claims? (8%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The bicycle rider suffered a fractured right The case clearly involves quasi-delict
knee, sustained when he fell on his right where my client, the bicycle rider,
side on the concrete side walk. He was suffered injury as a result of the
hospitalized and was subsequently negligence of the over-speeding taxi
operated on, rendering him immobile for 3 driver, without fault on my client’s part.
weeks and requiring physical rehabilitation
for another 3 months. In his complaint for To prove actual damages aside from the
damages, the rider prayed for the award testimony of client, I will present his
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 115 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 116 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
delict has been treated as the closest civil who can be held liable and their defenses
law equivalent of the common law tort. In would also apply.
fact, in a number of Supreme Court
Those liable for quasi-delict include:
decisions, the two terms have been
considered synonymous. In reality, however, (1) Those tortfeasor or the person
the common law tort is much broader in causing damage to another through fault
scope than the civil law quasi-delict. In or negligence ( Article 2176 NCC ); and
recent developments in common law, the (2) Persons vicariously liable under
concept of “quasi-torts” can be considered as Article 2180 (NCC ).
the closest common law equivalent of the
civil law concept of quasi-delict. This is
because it is argued that the growing The defenses available include:
recognition of quasi-torts as a source of (a) That the defendant was not negligent
obligation is hinged on the acceptance at or that he exercised due diligence (
common law of the civil law principles of
Article 2176 NCC );
quasi-delict.
(b) That although the defendant is
SUGGESTED ANSWER: negligent his negligence is not the
proximate cause of the injury ( Article
Quasi -tort is a legal concept upholding
2179 NCC );
the doctrine that some legal duty exists
that cannot be classified strictly as a (c) That the plaintiff's own negligence
personal duty (thus resulting in a tort), was the immediate and proximate cause
nor as a contractual duty but rather of his injury ( Article 2179 NCC );
some other kind of duty recognizable by
the law. ” Tort “ or ” Quasi-tort” is an (d ) That the person vicariously liable
Anglo American or Common Law has observed all the diligence of a good
encyclopedia).
(e) That the cause of action has
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 117 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 118 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(A) 0 or (E) None of the above. Should the share of insolvent debtor C be
The legal relationship created by divided only between the two other
adoption is strictly between the adopter remaining debtors, A and B? (1%)
and the adopted. It does not extend to (A) Yes. Remission of D's share carries with
the relatives of either party (Sayson v. it total extinguishment of his obligation to
CA, G.R. Nos. 89224-25, Jan 23, 1992). the benefit of the solidary debtors.
(Note: “E. None of the above’” is another (B) Yes. The Civil Code recognizes remission
answer because Ernie has no share at as a mode of extinguishing an obligation.
all in the net estate). This clearly applies to D.
(C) No. The rule is that gratuitous acts
I. (4) How much is Felix's share in the net should be restrictively construed, allowing
estate? (1%) only the least transmission of rights.
(A) P400,000. (D) No, as the release of the share of one
(B) P150,000. debtor would then increase the burden of
(C) P300,000. the other debtors without their consent.
(D) P0.
(E) None of the above. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(D). No, as the release of the share of one
SUGGESTED ANSWER: debtor would then increase the burden of
(D). 0. Or (E) None of the above. the other debtors without their consent.
In the collateral line, representation is When one of the solidary debtors cannot,
granted only to children of brother or because of his insolvency, reimburse his
sisters, Felix is a grandson of a share to the debtor paying the
predeceased brother. obligation, such share shall be borne by
(Note: “E. None of the above: is another all his co-debtors, in proportion to the
answer because Felix has no share at debt of each (Art 1217, Civil Code).
all in the net estate) Additionally, D was released only from
his share of P10,000.00 not from the
II. A, B, C and D are the solidary debtors of solidary tie that binds him to A, B and C.
X for P40,000. X released D from the
payment of his share of PI 0,000. When the III. Amador obtained a loan of P300,000
obligation became due and demandable, C from Basilio payable on March25, 2012. As
turned out to be insolvent. security for the payment of his loan,
Amador constituted a mortgage on his
residential house and lot in Basilio's favor.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 119 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Cacho, a good friend of Amador, guaranteed Basilio (the creditor) must first be
and obligated himself to pay Basilio, in case exhausted”)
Amador fails to pay his loan at maturity. III. (2) If Amador sells his residential house
and lot to Diego, can Basilio foreclose the
III. (1) If Amador fails to pay Basilio his loan real estate mortgage? (1%)
on March 25, 2012, can Basilio compel
Cacho to pay? (1%) (A) Yes, Basilio can foreclose the real estate
mortgage because real estate mortgage
(A) No, Basilio cannot compel Cacho to pay creates a real right that attaches to the
because as guarantor, Cacho can invoke property.
the principle of excussion, i.e., all the (B) Yes, Basilio can foreclose the real
assets of Basilio must first be exhausted. estate mortgage. It is binding upon Diego
(B) No, Basilio cannot compel Cacho to as the mortgage is embodied in a public
pay because Basilio has not exhausted instrument.
the available remedies against Amador. (C) No, Basilio cannot foreclose the real
(C) Yes, Basilio can compel Cacho to pay estate mortgage. The sale confers
because the nature of Cacho's undertaking ownership on the buyer, Diego, who
indicates that he has bound himself must therefore consent.
solidarily with Amador. (D) No, Basilio cannot foreclose the real
(D) Yes, Basilio can compel Cacho who estate mortgage. To deprive the new owner
bound himself to unconditionally pay in of ownership and possession is unjust and
case Amador fails to pay; thus the benefit of inequitable.
excussion will not apply.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (B) Yes, Basilio can foreclose the real
(B) No, Basilio cannot compel Cacho to estate mortgage. It is binding upon Diego
pay because Basilio has not exhausted as the mortgage is embodied in a public
the available remedies against Amador. instrument.
The guarantor cannot be compelled to Since the mortgage is in a public
pay the creditor unless the latter has instrument, there is constructive notice
exhausted all the property of the debtor to Diego, who is the buyer if the
and has resorted to all the legal remedies mortgaged property.
against the debtor (Art. 2058, Civil Code)
(Note: “A” is not the correct answer ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
because it states that “all the assets of
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 120 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(C) No, Basilio cannot foreclose the real (D) No, Jose's refusal is not justified. The
estate mortgage. The sale confers expenses he incurred are useful for the
ownership on the buyer, Diego, who preservation of the thing loaned. It is
must therefore consent. Jose's obligation to shoulder these useful
The mortgage is not registered, thus, expenses.
cannot be binding against third persons
(Art. 2125, Civil Code) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(D) No, Jose's refusal is not justified. The
IV. Cruz lent Jose his car until Jose expenses he incurred are useful for the
finished his Bar exams. Soon after Cruz preservation of the thing loaned. It is
delivered the car, Jose brought it to Jose's obligation to shoulder these useful
Mitsubishi Cubao for maintenance check expenses.
up and incurred costs of P8,000. Seeing the In commodatum, the bailee is obliged to
car's peeling and faded paint, Jose also had pay for the ordinary expenses for the use
the car repainted for P10,000. Answer the and preservation of the thing loaned (Art
two questions below based on these 1941, Civil Code).
common facts. The bailee, Jose, has no right of
retention on the ground that the bailor
IV. (1) After the bar exams, Cruz asked for owes him something, even if it may be
the return of his car. Jose said he would by reason of expenses. He can only
return it as soon as Cruz has reimbursed retain it if he suffers damages by reason
him for the car maintenance and repainting of a flaw or defect in the thing loaned of
costs of P 18,000. which the bailor knows (Art 1951, Civil
Is Jose's refusal justified? (1%) Code).
(A) No, Jose's refusal is not justified. In this
kind of contract, Jose is obliged to pay for IV. (2) During the bar exam month, Jose
all the expenses incurred for the lent the car to his girlfriend, Jolie, who
preservation of the thing loaned. parked the car at the Mall of Asia's open
(B) Yes, Jose's refusal is justified. He is parking lot, with the ignition key inside the
obliged to pay for all the ordinary and car. Car thieves broke into and took the
extraordinary expenses, but subject to car.
reimbursement from Cruz.
(C) Yes, Jose's refusal is justified. The Is Jose liable to Cruz for the loss of the car
principle of unjust enrichment warrants the due to Jolie's negligence? (1%)
reimbursement of Jose's expenses.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 121 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(A) No, Jose is not liable to Cruz as the loss Securities and Exchange Commission,
was not due to his fault or negligence. designated L and 0 as managing partners; L
(B) No, Jose is not liable to Cruz. In the was liable only to the extent of his capital
absence of any prohibition, Jose could lend contribution; and P was not liable for
the car to Jolie. Since the loss was due to losses.
force majeure, neither Jose nor Jolie is In 2006, the partnership earned a net profit
liable. of P800,000. In the same year, P engaged in
(C) Yes, Jose is liable to Cruz. Since Jose a different business with the consent of all
lent the car to Jolie without Cruz's the partners. However, in 2007, the
consent, Jose must bear the consequent partnership incurred a net loss
loss of the car. of P500,000. In 2008,the partners dissolved
(D) Yes, Jose is liable to Cruz. The contract the partnership. The proceeds of the sale of
between them is personal in nature. Jose partnership assets were insufficient to
can neither lend nor lease the car to a third settle its obligation. After liquidation, the
person. partnership had an unpaid liability
ofP300,000.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(C) Yes, Jose is liable to Cruz. Since Jose V. (l) Assuming that the just and equitable
lent the car to Jolie without Cruz's share of the industrial partner, P, in the
consent, Jose must bear the consequent profit in 2006 amounted to P1 00,000, how
loss of the car. much is the share of 0, a limited partner, in
The bailee is liable for the loss of the the P800,000 net profit? (1%)
thing, even if it should be through a (A) P160,000.
fortuitous event if he lends or leases the (B) P175,000.
thing to a third person, who is not a (C) P280,000.
member of his household (Art 1942, Civil (D) P200,000.
Code). (E) None of the above.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 122 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 123 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Homer refused to accept the late delivery (D) No. Homer was not justified in refusing
and to pay on the ground that the agreed to accept the tobacco leaves. There was no
term had not been complied with. term in the contract but a mixed condition.
As lending investor, Gary granted a The fulfillment of the condition did not
Pl,000,000 loan to Isaac to be paid within depend purely on Gary's will but on other
two years from execution of the contract. As factors, e.g., the shipping company and the
security for the loan, Isaac promised to government. Homer should comply with his
deliver to Gary his Toyota Innova within obligation.
seven (7) days, but Isaac failed to do so.
Gary was thus compelled to demand SUGGESTED ANSWER:
payment for the loan before the end of the (B) No. Homer was not justified in
agreed two-year term. refusing to accept the tobacco leaves. He
consented to the terms and conditions
VI. (l) Was Homer justified in refusing to of the sale and must abide by it.
accept the tobacco leaves? (1%) Obligations arising from contract have
(A) Yes. Homer was justified in refusing to the force of law between the contracting
accept the tobacco leaves. The delivery was parties.
to be made within a month. Gary's promise It is clear under the facts that the period
of delivery on a "best effort" basis made the of delivery of the tobacco leaves was not
delivery uncertain. The term, therefore, was guaranteed. Gary anticipated other
ambiguous. factors which may prevent him from
(B) No. Homer was not justified in making the delivery within a month.
refusing to accept the tobacco leaves. He True enough, transportation problems
consented to the terms and conditions and government red tape did. Such
of the sale and must abide by it. slight delay was, thus, excusable.
Obligations arising from contract have Obligations arising from contract have
the force of law between the contracting the force of law between the contracting
parties. parties and should be complied with in
(C) Yes. Homer was justified in his refusal good faith (Art. 1160, Civil Code)
to accept the delivery. The contract
contemplates an obligation with a term. VI. (2) Can Gary compel Isaac to pay his
Since the delivery was made after 30 days, loan even before the end of the two-year
contrary to the terms agreed upon, Gary period? (1%)
could not insist that Homer accept the
tobacco leaves.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 124 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(A) Yes, Gary can compel Isaac to Under Art 1198 (2) of the Civil Code, the
immediately pay the loan. Non- debtor shall lose every right to make use
compliance with the promised guaranty of the period when he does not furnish
or security renders the obligation to the creditor the guaranties or
immediately demandable. Isaac lost his securities which he has promised.
right to make use of the period.
(B) Yes, Gary can compel Isaac to VII. Lito was a commercial pilot who flew for
immediately pay the loan. The delivery of Pacific-Micronesian Air. In 1998, he was
the Toyota Innova is a condition for the the co-pilot of the airline's Flight MA916
loan. Isaac's failure to deliver the car that mysteriously disappeared two hours
violated the condition upon which the loan after take-off from Agana, Guam,
was granted. It is but fair for Gary to presumably over the Pacific Ocean. No trace
demand immediate payment. of the plane and its 105 passengers and
(C) No, Gary cannot compel Isaac to crew was ever found despite diligent search;
immediately pay the loan. The delivery of Lito himself was never heard of again. Lito
the car as security for the loan is an left behind his wife, Lita, and their two
accessory contract; the principal contract is children.
still the P 1,000,000 loan. Thus, Isaac can
still make use of the period. In 2008, Lita met and married Jaime. They
(D) No, Gary cannot compel Isaac to now have a child of their own.
immediately pay the loan. Equity dictates While on a tour with her former high school
that Gary should have granted a reasonable classmates in a remote province of China in
extension of time for Isaac to deliver his 2010, Lita was surprised to see Lito or
Toyota Innova. It would be unfair and somebody who looked exactly like him, but
burdensome for Isaac to pay she was sure it was Lito because of the
the P1,000,000 simply because the extreme surprise that registered in his face
promised security was not delivered. when he also saw her. Shocked, she
immediately fled to her hotel and post haste
SUGGESTED ANSWER: returned to the country the next day. Lita
(A) Yes, Gary can compel Isaac to now comes to you for legal advice. She asks
immediately pay the loan. Non- you the following questions:
compliance with the promised guaranty
or security renders the obligation VII. (l) If Lito is alive, what is the status of
immediately demandable. Isaac lost his his marriage to Lita? (1%)
right to make use of the period.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 125 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(A) The marriage subsists because the (B) The marriage is valid. After an absence
marital bond has not been terminated by of more than 10 years, Lito is already
death. presumed dead for all purposes.
(B) The marriage was terminated when Lita (C) The marriage is void. Lito's mere
married Jaime. absence, however lengthy, is insufficient to
(C) The marriage subsists because Lita's authorize Lita to contract a subsequent
marriage to Jaime is void. marriage.
(D) The marriage is terminated because Lito (D) The marriage is void. If Lito is indeed
is presumed dead after his plane has been alive, his marriage to Lita was never
missing for more than 4 years. dissolved and they can resume their marital
(E) The marriage can be formally declared relations at any time.
terminated if Lito would not resurface.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Any answer is correct.
(C) The marriage subsists because Lita's Under Art 390 of the Civil Code, after an
marriage to Jaime is void. absence of seven years, it being
For the purpose of contracting the unknown whether or not the absentee
subsequent marriage under Art 41 of the still lives, he shall be presumed dead doe
Family Code, the spouse present must all purposes, except for those of
institute a summary proceeding as succession. This provision was not
provided in the Family Code for the repealed by the present Family Code.
declaration of presumptive death of the Applying this to the problem, (A) may be
absentee, without prejudice to the effect correct. (B) may also be correct. (C) and
of the reappearance of the absent (D) may also be correct under Art 41 of
spouse. the Family Code.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 126 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 127 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Tambunting Pawnshop, and used the (C) I will rule in favor of Tambunting. Its
money for herself. Aida failed to redeem the good faith takes precedence over the right
pawned jewelries and after a month, Betty of Betty to recover the jewelries.
discovered what Aida had done. Betty (D) I will rule in favor of Tambunting. Good
brought criminal charges which resulted in faith is always presumed. Tambunting's
Aida's conviction for estafa. lawful acquisition in the ordinary course of
business coupled with good faith gives it
Betty thereafter filed an action against legal right over the jewelries.
Tambunting Pawnshop for the recovery of
the jewelries. Tambunting raised the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
defense of ownership, additionally arguing (A) I will rule in favor of Betty. My ruling
that it is duly licensed to engage in the is based on the Civil Code provision that
pawnshop and lending business, and that it one who has lost any movable or has
accepted the mortgage of the jewelry in been unlawfully deprived thereof may
good faith and in the regular course of its recover it from the person in possession
business. of the same. Tam bunting's claim of good
faith is inconsequential.
If you were the judge, how will you decide
the case? (1%) Although possession of movable property
acquired in good faith is equivalent to a
(A) I will rule in favor of Betty. My ruling title, nevertheless, one who has lost any
is based on the Civil Code provision that movable or has been unlawfully deprived
one who has lost any movable or has thereof may recover it from the person
been unlawfully deprived thereof may in possession of the same. Betty has
recover it from the person in possession been deprived unlawfully of her jewelries
of the same. Tam bunting's claim of good by the estafa committed by Aida. The
faith is inconsequential. pledge of the said jewelries by Aida to
(B) I will rule in favor of Betty. Tambunting pawnshop is void because
Tambunting's claim of good faith pales into the pledgor is not the owner (Art 2085
insignificance in light of the unlawful (2), Civil Code). Tambunting’s claim of
deprivation of the jewelries. However, equity good faith is inconsequential, because,
dictates that Tambunting must be aside from good faith, Tambunting must
reimbursed for the pawn value of the prove also that it acquired the jewelries
jewelries. at a public sale in order to be able to
retain the jewelries until reimbursed by
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 128 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Betty the amount of loan including If you were the judge, would you grant
interest (Art 559, Civil Code). Arlene's motion? (1%)
The only exception the law allows is (A) Yes, I will grant the motion because the
when there is acquisition in good faith of lease contract between Arlene and Janet
the possessor at a public sale, in which was not in writing, hence, Janet may not
case, the owner cannot obtain its return enforce any right arising from the same
without reimbursing the price (Dizon v. contract.
Suntay, 47 SCRA 160, Sept 29, 1972). (B) No, I will not grant the motion because
to allow Arlene to retain the advance
X. Arlene owns a row of apartment houses payments would amount to unjust
in Kamuning, Quezon City. She agreed to enrichment.
lease Apartment No. 1 to Janet for a period (C) Yes, I will grant the motion because the
of 18 months at the rate of P10,000 per action for recovery is premature; Janet
month. The lease was not covered by any should first secure a judicial rescission of
contract. Janet promptly gave Arlene two the contract of lease.
(2) months deposit and 18 checks covering (D) No. I will not grant the motion
the rental payment for 18 months. This because the cause of action does not
show of good faith prompted Arlene to seek to enforce any right under the
promise Janet that should Arlene decide to contract of lease.
sell the property, she would give Janet the
right of first refusal. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
X. (1) Not long after Janet moved in, she (D) No. I will not grant the motion
received news that her application for a because the cause of action does not
Master of Laws scholarship at King's seek to enforce any right under the
College in London had been approved. contract of lease.
Since her acceptance of the scholarship Janet is not asking for the continued use
entailed a transfer of residence, Janet of the leased premises. Moreover, the
asked Arlene to return the advance rental contract is aside the ambit of the
payments she made. Arlene refused, Statute of Frauds as the same has
prompting Janet to file an action to recover already been partially performed.
the payments. Arlene filed a motion to
dismiss, claiming that the lease on which X. (2)Assume that Janet decided not to
the action is based, is unenforceable. accept the scholarship and continued
leasing Apartment No. 1. Midway through
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 129 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
the lease period, Arlene decided to sell Frauds under Art 1403 (2)(e) of the Civil
Apartment No. 1 to Jun in breach of her Code. It must be in writing in order to be
promise to Janet to grant her the right of enforceable.
first refusal. Thus, Janet filed an action
seeking the recognition of her right of first
refusal, the payment of damages for the 2012 Taxation Law Exam
violation of this right, and the rescission of
MCQ (October 14, 2012)
the sale between Arlene and Jun.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(D) No, a right of first refusal involves an
This question should be disregarded.
interest over real property that must be
(NOTE: There is no correct answer among
embodied in a written contract to be
the choices given. All choices are restrictions
enforceable.
on one’s capacity to act. While Marriage is
The right of first refusal involves a
the only one not mentioned in Articles 38
transfer of interest in the real property.
and 39 of the NCC as a restriction on
As such, it is covered by the Statute of
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 130 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
capacity to act, it restricts the capacity of a b) Yes, the will is not valid under
married person in cases of adoption.) Philippine law.
c) No, attestation clause is not an
3. This attribute or incident of a case act of the testator.
determine whether it is a conflict-of-laws d) No, the governing law is
case or one covered by domestic law. Spanish law.
a) Cause of action
b) Foreign element Note: The facts do not state the Law
c) Jurisdiction observed by the testator in executing his
d) Forum non conveniens will. He could have observed Spanish Law
or Philippine Law (see comment of Tolentino
4. The capacity of an heir to succeed shall to Art. 815 NCC in 3Tolentino117, 1992). If
be governed by the: he observed Spanish Law, the opposition is
a) national law of the decedent’s not correct because the will is valid under
heirs Spanish Law, hence choice (d) is the correct
b) law of the country where the answer. If he observed Philippine Law, the
decedent was a resident at the time opposition is still not correct because
of his death Philippine Law does not require the testator
c) national law of the person who to sign the Attestation Clause of his will,
died said clause not being his act. In such case,
d) law of the country where the choice (c) is the correct answer).
properties of the decedent are
located. 6. Ramon, a Filipino, executed a will in
Manila, where he left his house and located
5. Atty. BUKO, a Filipino, executed a will in BP Homes Parañaque in favor of his
while he was in Spain. The attestation Filipino son, Ramgen. Ramon’s other
clause of the said will does not contain children RJ and Ramona, both Turkish
Buko’s signature. It is valid under Spanish nationals, are disputing the bequest to
law. At its probate in Manila, it is being Ramgen. They plotted to kill Ramgen.
opposed on the ground that the attestation Ramon learned of the plot, so he tore his
clause does not contain BUKO’s signature. will in two pieces out of anger. Which
Is the opposition correct? Choose the best statement is most accurate?
answer.. a) The mere act of Ramon Sr. is
a) Yes, because it is a fatal defect. immaterial because the will is still
readable.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 131 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 132 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
12. In the absence of contrary stipulation in obligation, but Bill fails or refuses to pay,
a marriage settlement, property relations of what law will govern?
Filipino spouses shall be governed by --- a) American law
a) Philippines laws b) Philippine law
b) Law of the place where the c) Australian law
spouses reside d) Japanese law
c) Law of the place where the (Facts for item numbers 15-18)
properties are situated In 1989, Charice (Filipina) and Justine
d) Law of the place where they were (American), were married in the Philippines.
married. In 1990, they separated and Justine went
to Las Vegas where he obtained a divorce in
13. The will of a Filipino executed in a the same year. He then married another
foreign country --- Filipina, Lea, in Canada on January 1,
a) cannot be probated in the 1992. They had two (2) sons, James and
Philippines; John (who were both born in 1992). In
b) may be probated in the 1993, after failing to hear from Justine,
Philippines provided that properties Charice married Bugoy (a Filipino), by
in the estate are located in the whom she had a daughter, Regine. In 2009,
Philippines; Regine married James (son of Justine with
c) cannot be probated before the Lea) in California, where such marriage is
death of the testator; valid.
d) may be probated in the
Philippines provided it was 15. What is the current status of the
executed in accordance with the marriage of Charice and Justine under
laws of the place where the will Philippine laws?
was executed. a) Valid
b) Void
14. Pedro (Filipino and Bill (American) c) Voidable
entered into a contract in Australia, d) Dissolved
whereby it was agreed that Pedro will build (Note: While Art 26 of the FC does not
a commercial building for Bill in the categorically provide that the first marriage
Philippines, and in payment for the is dissolved by the divorce obtained by the
construction, Bill will transfer and convey foreign spouse abroad, but provides that
his cattle ranch located in Japan in favor of such divorce merely gives the Filipino spouse
Pedro. In case Pedro performs his the capacity to contract a second marriage, it
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 133 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
is believed that the dissolution of the first examinations unless he marries Princess.
marriage us the necessary consequence of As a consequence of the threat, Ricky
the foreign divorce.) married Princess. Can the marriage be
annulled on the ground of intimidation
16. What id the status of the marriage under Article 45 of the Family Code?
between Charice and Bugoy under Choose the best answer.
Philippine laws? a) Yes, because without the threat,
a) Valid Ricky would not have married
b) Void Princess.
c) Voidable b) Yes, because the threat to enforce
d) Unenforceable the claim of Princess vitiates the
consent of Ricky in contracting the
17. What is the status of the marriage marriage.
between Charice and Bugoy under c) No, because the threat made by
Philippine laws? Marforth is just and legal.
a) Valid d) No, because Marforth is not a
b) Void party to the contract of marriage
c) Voidable between Princess and Ricky.
d) Unenforceable
20. Audrey, single, bought a parcel of land
18. What is the status of the marriage in Malolos City from Franco for P 1Million.
between Regine and James under A contract was executed between them
Philippine laws? which already vested upon Audrey full
a) Valid ownership of the property, although
b) Void payable in monthly installments for a
c) Voidable period of four (4) years. One (1) year after
d) Unenforceable the execution of the contract, Audrey got
married to Arnel. They executed a marriage
19. Ricky and Princess were sweethearts. settlement whereby they agreed that their
Princess became pregnant. Knowing that properties shall be governed by the regime
Ricky is preparing for the examinations, of conjugal partnership of gains. Thereafter,
Marforth, a lawyer and cousin of Princess, subsequent installments were paid from the
threatened Ricky with the filing of a conjugal partnership funds. Is the land
complaint for immorality in the Supreme conjugal or paraphernal?
Court, thus preventing him from taking
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 134 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
a) The land is conjugal because the the laws of such consular official. Under
installments were paid from the Philippine law, what is the status of the
conjugal partnership funds. marriage of Agay and Topacio? Choose the
b) The land is paraphernal best answer.
because ownership thereof was a) Void, because the consular
acquired before the marriage. official only has authority to
c) The land is both conjugal and solemnize marriages between
paraphernal funds of installments Filipinos.
were paid from both the personal b) Valid, because according to the
funds of Audrey and the conjugal laws of Australia, such consular
partnership funds. official has authority to celebrate the
d) The land is paraphernal because marriage.
it was Audrey who purchased the c) Voidable, because there is an
same. irregularity in the authority of the
consular official to solemnize
21. Ernesto donated a mobile phone marriages.
worth P 32,000 to Hubert orally and d) Valid, because such marriage is
delivered the unit to Hubert who accepted. recognized as valid in the place
Which statement is most accurate? where it was celebrated.
a) The donation is void and
Ernesto may get mobile phone (Note: The issues in the problem is whether
back. or not the fact that one of the parties to the
b) The donation is void but Ernesto marriage was an alien constituted absence
cannot get the mobile phone back. of authority or mere irregularity of authority.
c) The donation is voidable and may The problem only give the choice, letter (a),
be anulled. in case it is interpreted as absence of
d) The donation is valid. authority. The problem does not give a
choice in case it is interpreted as an
22. Agay, a Filipino citizen and Topacio, an irregularity thereby making all the other
Australian citizen, got married in the answers wrong).
consular office of the Philippines in
Australia. According to the laws of
Australia, a marriage solemnized by a 23. Separation of property between spouses
consular official is valid, provided that such during the marriage may take place only:
marriage is celebrated in accordance with a) by agreement of the spouses.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 135 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
b) If one of the spouses has given b) No trial shall be held without the
ground for legal separation. 6-month cooling off period being
c) Upon order of the court. observed.
d) If one spouse has abandoned the c) The spouses will be entitled to live
other. separately upon the start of the
trial.
24. The husband may impugn the d) The prosecuting attorney has
legitimacy of his child but not on the to conduct his own investigation.
ground that:
a) the wife is suspected of 27. A husband by chance discovered
infidelity. hidden treasure on the paraphernal
b) the husband had a serious illness property of his wife. Who owns the
that prevented him from engaging in discovered treasure?
sexual intercourse. a) The half pertaining to the
c) they were living apart. husband (finder) belongs to the
d) he is physically incapable of conjugal partnership.
sexual intercourse. b) The half pertaining to the wife (as
owner) belongs to the conjugal
25. A marriage is void if: partnership.
a) solemnized with a marriage c) One half shall belong to the
license issued without complying husband as finder and the other
with the required 10-day posting. half shall belong to the wife as
b) solemnized by a minister whom owner of the property.
the parties believe to have the d) a and b
authority.
c) between parties both 23 years of 28. Which of the following marriages is void
age but without parental advice. for reasons of public policy?
d) none of the above a) Between brothers and sisters,
whether of the full or half blood.
26. In legal separation, which is not b) Between step-parents and step
correct? children.
a) The aggrieved spouse may file the c) Between parents-in-law and
action within five (5) years from the children-in-law.
time of the occurrence of the cause. d) b and c
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 136 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 137 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 138 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
b) and he may not remove the of the dominion over the property as owner.
objects for which such expenses What action is being referred to?
have been incurred. a) Accion publiciana
c) and he may not remove the b) Accion reinvindicatoria
objects for which such expenses c) Accion interdictal
have been incurred, unless he pays d) Quieting of Title
the value they may have at the time
he entered into possession. 42. A summary action to recover physical
d) but he may remove the objects for or material possession only and must be
which such expenses have been brought within one (1) year from the time
incurred. the cause of action arises. What action is
being referred to?
39. The following are the limitations on the a) Accion publiciana
right of ownership imposed by the owner b) Accion reinvindicatoria
himself, except: c) Accion interdictal
a) Will/Succession d) Quieting of Title
b) Mortgage
c) Pledge 43. The following things are property of
d) Lease public dominion, except:
a) ports and bridges constructed by
40. A plenary action for the recovery of the the State.
possession of real estate, upon mere b) vehicles and weapons of the
allegation and proof of a better right Armed Forces of the Philippines.
thereto, and without allegation of proof of c) rivers.
title. This action can only be brought after d) lands reclaimed by the state from
the expiration of one (1) year. What action the sea.
is being referred to?
a) Accion publiciana SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b) Accion reinvindicatoria This question should be disregarded
c) Accion interdictal because there is no correct answer.
d) Quieting of Title (Note: At first glance, one gets the impression
that vehicles and weapons of the AFP are
41. Action to recover real property based on not property of the public domain. But they
ownership. Here, the object is the recovery are actually property of the public dominion
under the second paragraph of Art 420 of
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 139 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
the NCC. Property of the state which are not a) the donee accepts the donation.
for public use but are intended for some b) the donor executes the deed of
public service are properties of the public donation.
dominion. While the vehicles and weapons of c) the donor knows of the donee’s
the AFP are not for public use, they are used acceptance even if the latter has
for the defense of the State which is a public not received the copy of the deed
service.) of donation.
d) the donee confirms that the donor
44. Which of the following statements has learned the former’s acceptance.
is wrong?
a) patrimonial property of the 47. The following are the elements of an
state, when no longer intended obligation, except:
for public use or for public a) Juridical/Legal Tie
service, shall become property of b) Active subject
public dominion. c) Passive subject
b) all property of the State, which is d) Consideration
not of public dominion, is
patrimonial property. 48. It is a conduct that may consist of
c) The property of provinces, cities giving, doing, or not doing something.
and municipalities is divided into a) Obligation
property for public use and b) Juridical necessity
patrimonial property. c) Prestation
d) Property is either of public d) Contract
dominion or of private ownership. 49. It is a juridical relation arising
from lawful, voluntary and unilateral acts
45. The following cannot ask for the based on the principle that no one should
reduction of inofficious donation, except: unjustly enrich himself at the expense of
a) Creditors of the deceased another.
b) Devisees or legatees a) Quasi-contract
c) Compulsory heirs of the donor b) Quasi-delict
d) The surviving spouse of the c) Cotract
donee. d) Delict
46. Donation is perfected from the moment 50. The following are the elements of quasi-
--- delict, except:
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 140 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
53. The following are the requisites of mora 56. A debtor may still be held liable for loss
solvendi, except: or damages even if it was caused by a
a) Obligation pertains to the debtor fortuitous event in any of the following
and is determinate, due, instances, except:
demandable, and liquidated. a) The debtor is guilty of dolo, malice
b) Obligation was performed on its or bad faith, has promised the same
maturity date. thing to two or more persons who do
c) There is judicial or extrajudicial not have the same interest.
demand by the creditor. b) The debtor contributed to the
d) Failure of the debtor to comply loss.
with such demand. c) The thing to be delivered is
generic.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 141 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 142 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 143 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
parties but extends to the heirs, successors b) Acceptance of the offer by the
in interest, and assignees of the offeree.
parties, provided that the contract involved c) Qualified/conditional acceptance
transmissible rights by their nature, or by of the offer, which becomes counter-
stipulation or by law. offer.
a) Obligatory force of contracts d) Subject matter becomes
b) Mutuality of contracts illegal/impossible before acceptance
c) Autonomy of contracts is communicated.
d) Relativity of contracts
70. Which of the following statements
67. It is rule which holds that the freedom is correct?
of the parties to contract includes the a) Offers in interrelated contracts
freedom to stipulate, provided the are perfected upon consent.
stipulations are not contrary to law, morals, b) Offers in interrelated contracts
good customs, public order or public policy. require a single acceptance.
a) Obligatory force of contracts c) Business advertisements
b) Mutuality of contracts are definite offers that require
c) Autonomy of contracts specific acceptance.
d) Relativity of contracts d) Advertisements for Bidders
are only invitations to make
68. The following are the ways by which proposals and the advertiser is
innominate contracts are not bound to accept the
regulated, except: highest/lowest bidder, unless it
a) By the stipulation of the parties. appears otherwise.
b) By the general principles of
quasi-contracts and delicts 71. The following are solemn
c) By the rules governing the most contracts (Contracts which must appear in
analogous nominate contracts. writing), except:
d) By the customs of the place. a) Donations of real estate or of
69. An offer becomes ineffective on any of movables if the value
the following grounds, except: exceeds P 5,000.00.
a) Death, civil interdiction, b) Stipulation to pay interest in
insanity/insolvency of either party loans.
before acceptance is conveyed. c) Sale of land through an agent
(authority must be in writing).
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 144 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 145 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 146 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 147 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 148 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
96. It is the omission in the testator’s will of consideration, which gives him the right to
one, some or all of the compulsory heirs in buy certain merchandise or specified
direct line, whether living at the time of property, from another person, at anytime
execution of the will or born after the death within the agreed period, at a fixed price.
of the testator. What principle is being What contract is being referred to?
referred to? a) Option Contract
a) reserva troncal b) Contract to Sell
b) preterition c) Contract of Sale
c) fideicommissary d) Lease
d) disposicion captatoria
97. Any disposition made upon the 100. Which of the following contracts of
condition that the heir shall make some sale is void?
provision in his will in favor of the testator a) Sale of EGM’s car by KRP, EGM’s
or of any other person shall be void. Here, agent, whose authority is not
both the condition and the disposition are reduced into writing.
void. What principle is being referred to? b) Sale of EGM’s piece of land by
a) reserva troncal KRP, EGM’s agent, whose
b) preterition authority is not reduced into
c) fideicommissary writing.
d) disposicion captatoria c) Sale of EGM’s car by KRP, a
person stranger to EGM, without
98. Which phrase most accurately EGM’s consent or authority.
completes the statement – If at the time the d) Sale of EGM’s piece of land by
contract of sale is perfected, the thing KRP, a person stranger to EGM,
which is the object of the contract has been without EGM’s consent or authority.
entirely lost:
a) the buyer bears the risk of loss.
b) the contract shall be without 2011 Taxation Law Exam
any effect.
MCQ (November 13, 2011)
c) the seller bears the risk of loss.
d) the buyer may withdraw from the
(1)When does a declaration of absence of a
contract.
missing person take effect?
(A) Immediately from the issuance of
99. A contract granting a privilege to a
the declaration of absence.
person, for which he has paid a
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 149 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(B) 3 months after the publication of accepted the substitution. Later, however,
the declaration of absence. the new debtor became insolvent and
(C) 6 months after the publication defaulted in his obligation. What is the
of the declaration of absence. effect of the new debtor’s default upon the
(D) 15 days from the issuance of the original debtor?
declaration of absence. (A) The original debtor is freed of
liability since novation took place
(2) The authority that school administrators and this relieved him of his
exercise over school children under their obligation.
supervision, instruction, or custody is (B) The original debtor shall pay or
called perform the obligation with recourse
(A) legal parental authority. to the new debtor.
(B) substitute parental authority. (C) The original debtor remains
(C) ordinary parental authority. liable since he gave no consent to
(D) special parental authority. the substitution.
(D) The original debtor shall pay or
(3) Can future inheritance be the subject of perform 50% of the obligation to
a contract of sale? avoid unjust enrichment on his
(A) No, since it will put the part.
predecessor at the risk of harm from
a tempted buyer, contrary to public (5) Lennie bought a business class ticket
policy. from Alta Airlines. As she checked in, the
(B) Yes, since the death of the manager downgraded her to economy on
decedent is certain to occur. the ground that a Congressman had to be
(C) No, since the seller owns no accommodated in the business class.
inheritance while his predecessor Lennie suffered the discomfort and
lives. embarrassment of the downgrade. She sued
(D) Yes, but on the condition that the airlines for quasi-delict but Alta Airlines
the amount of the inheritance can countered that, since her travel was
only be ascertained after the governed by a contract between them, no
obligations of the estate have been quasi-delict could arise. Is the airline
paid. correct?
(4) Upon the proposal of a third person, a (A) No, the breach of contract may
new debtor substituted the original debtor in fact be tortious as when it is
without the latter’s consent. The creditor tainted as in this case with
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 150 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
arbitrariness, gross bad faith, and (A) No, since the marriage did not
malice. take place.
(B) No, denying Lennie the comfort (B) Yes, since all the requisites of a
and amenities of the business class donation of an immovable are
as provided in the ticket is a tortious present.
act. (C) No, since the donation and its
(C) Yes, since the facts show a acceptance are not in a public
breach of contract, not a quasi- instrument.
delict. (D) Yes, since X freely donated the
(D) Yes, since quasi-delict property to Y who became its owner.
presupposes the absence of a pre-
existing contractual relation (8) Rene and Lily got married after a brief
between the parties. courtship. After one month, Lily discovered
that while Rene presented himself as a
(6) Which of the following is an macho man he was actually gay. He would
indispensable requirement in an action for not go to bed with her. He kept obscene
"quieting of title" involving real property? magazines of nude men and always sought
The plaintiff must the company of handsome boys. What legal
(A) be in actual possession of the remedy does Lily have?
property. (A) She can file an action for
(B) be the registered owner of the annulment of marriage on ground
property. of fraud.
(C) have legal or equitable title to (B) She can seek a declaration of
the property. nullity of the marriage based on
(D) be the beneficial owner of the Rene’s psychological incapacity.
property. (C) She can go abroad and file for
divorce in a country that can grant
(7) X and Y were to marry in 3 months. it.
Meantime, to express his affection, X (D) She has none since she had the
donated a house and lot to Y, which opportunity to examine the goods
donation X wrote in a letter to Y. Y wrote and freely entered into the marriage.
back, accepting the donation and took
possession of the property. Before the (9) Lucio executed a simple deed of
wedding, however, Y suddenly died of heart donation of P50 million on time deposit
attack. Can Y’s heirs get the property? with a bank in favor of A, B, C, D, and E,
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 151 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
without indicating the share of each donee. (D) No, since there was no
All the donees accepted the donation in impediment to Raul selling his
writing. A, one of the donees, died. Will B, inheritance to a stranger.
C, D, and E get A’s share in the money?
(A) Yes, accretion will automatically (11) When one exercises a right recognized
apply to the joint-donees in equal by law, knowing that he thereby causes an
shares. injustice to another, the latter is entitled to
(B) Yes, since the donor’s intention recover damages. This is known as the
is to give the whole of P50 million to principle of
the jointdonees in equal shares. (A) res ipsa loquitur.
(C) No, A"s share will revert to the (B) damnum absque injuria.
donor because accretion applies (C) vicarious liability.
only if the joint-donees are spouses. (D) abuse of rights.
(D) No, A’s share goes to his heirs
since the donation did not (12) Which of the following is NOT a basis
provide for reversion to donor. for rendering a disinheritance defective or
imperfect?
(10) Raul, Ester, and Rufus inherited a 10- (A) Its cause comes from the guilt
hectare land from their father. Before the of a spouse in a legal separation
land could be partitioned, however, Raul case, the innocent-spouse having
sold his hereditary right to Raffy, a stranger died.
to the family, for P5 million. Do Ester and (B) The truth of its cause is denied
Rufus have a remedy for keeping the land and not sufficiently proved by
within their family? evidence.
(A) Yes, they may be subrogated (C) Its cause is not authorized by the
to Raffy’s right by reimbursing to law.
him within the required time (D) Its cause is not specified.
what he paid Raul.
(B) Yes, they may be subrogated to (13) Manuel came to Manila and married
Raffy’s right provided they buy him Marianne. Unknown to Marianne, Manuel
out before he registers the sale. had been previously convicted in Palawan
(C) No, they can be subrogated to of theft and served time for it. After
Raffy’s right only with his Marianne learned of his previous
conformity. conviction, she stopped living with him.
Can Marianne seek the annulment of the
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 152 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 153 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(C) 10 years from the receipt of the principal two days after the principal died,
last news about him. an event that neither the agent nor the
(D) 5 years from the receipt of the buyer knew at the time of the sale. What is
last news about him. the standing of the sale?
(A) Voidable.
(18) Which of the following claims against (B) Valid.
the debtor enjoys preference over the others (C) Void.
with respect to his specific immovable (D) Unenforceable.
property and real rights?
(A) Unpaid price of real property (21) Spouses A and B leased a piece of land
sold, upon the immovable property. belonging to B's parents for 25 years. The
(B) Mortgage credits recorded in the spouses built their house on it worth
registry of property, upon the P300,000.00. Subsequently, in a case that
mortgaged real estate. C filed against A and B, the court found the
(C) Taxes due, upon the land or latter liable to C for P200,000.00. When the
building. sheriff was attaching their house for the
(D) Expenses for the preservation satisfaction of the judgment, A and B
and improvement of property, when claimed that it was exempt from execution,
the law authorizes reimbursement, being a family home. Is this claim correct?
upon the preserved or improved (A) Yes, because while B’s parents
immovable. own the land, they agreed to have
their daughter build her family
(19) When bilateral contracts are vitiated home on it.
with vices of consent, they are rendered (B) No, because there is no judicial
(A) rescissible. declaration that it is a family home.
(B) void. (C) No, since the land does not
(C) unenforceable. belong to A and B, it cannot
(D) voidable. qualify as a family home.
(D) Yes, because the A and B’s
(20) An agent, authorized by a special family actually lives in that house.
power of attorney to sell a land belonging to
the principal succeeded in selling the same (22) Solomon sold his coconut plantation to
to a buyer according to the instructions Aragon, Inc. for P100 million, payable in
given the agent. The agent executed the installments of P10 million per month with
deed of absolute sale on behalf of his 6% interest per annum. Solomon married
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 154 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Lorna after 5 months and they chose (24) When A and B married, they chose
conjugal partnership of gains to govern conjugal partnership of gains to govern
their property relations. When they their property relations. After 3 years, B
married, Aragon had an unpaid balance of succeeded in getting her marriage to A
P50 million plus interest in Solomon’s annulled on ground of the latter’s
favor. To whom will Aragon’s monthly psychological incapacity. What liquidation
payments go after the marriage? procedure will they follow in disposing of
(A) The principal shall go to the their assets?
conjugal partnership but the (A) They will follow the rule
interests to Solomon. governing the liquidation of a
(B) Both principal and interests conjugal partnership of gains where
shall go to Solomon since they are the party who acted in bad faith
his exclusive properties. forfeits his share in the net profits.
(C) Both principal and interests (B) Since the marriage has been
shall go to the conjugal partnership declared void, the rule for
since these become due after the liquidation of absolute community of
marriage. property shall be followed.
(D) The principal shall go to (C) The liquidation of a co-
Solomon but the interests to the ownership applies since the
conjugal partnership. annulment brought their property
relation under the chapter on
(23) X and Y, although not suffering from property regimes without
any impediment, cohabited as husband and marriage.
wife without the benefit of marriage. (D) The law on liquidation of
Following the birth of their child, the couple partnerships applies.
got married. A year after, however, the (25) X and Y agreed verbally before their
court annulled the marriage and issued a marriage (a) on the paternity of the
decree of annulment. What is the present illegitimate child of Y and (b) on the
status of the child? economic regime that will govern X and Y’s
(A) Legitimated. property relations. Is the verbal agreement
(B) Illegitimate. valid?
(C) Natural child. (A) No, because a marriage
(D) Legitimate. settlement to be valid should be
in writing.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 155 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 156 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
subsequently died, Is Y entitled to the (C) Marlon gets 1/2 and Cecilia
insurance benefits? gets 1/2.
(A) Yes, since the insurance was not (D) Marlon gets 3/4 and Cecilia 1/4.
dependent on the marriage.
(B) Yes, since her designation as (33) Contracts take effect only between the
beneficiary was irrevocable. parties or their assigns and heirs, except
(C) No, X’s designation of Y is where the rights and obligations arising
revoked by operation of law upon from the contract are not transmissible by
the annulment of their marriage their nature, by stipulation, or by provision
based on Y’s fault. of law. In the latter case, the assigns or the
(D) Yes, since without judicial heirs are not bound by the contracts. This
revocation, X’s designation of Y is known as the principle of
remains valid and binding. (A) Relativity of contracts.
(31) May a spouse freely donate communal (B) Freedom to stipulate.
or conjugal property without the consent of (C) Mutuality of contracts.
the other? (D) Obligatory force of contracts.
(A) Absolutely not, since the spouses
co-own such property. (34) A buyer ordered 5,000 apples from the
(B) Yes, for properties that the seller at P20 per apple. The seller delivered
family may spare, regardless of 6,000 apples. What are the rights and
value. obligations of the buyer?
(C) Yes, provided the donation is (A) He can accept all 6,000 apples
moderate and intended for and pay the seller at P20 per
charity or family rejoicing. apple.
(D) Yes, in a donation mortis causa (B) He can accept all 6,000 apples
that the donor may still revoke in and pay a lesser price for the 1,000
his lifetime. excess apples.
(C) He can keep the 6,000 apples
(32) The decedent died intestate leaving an without paying for the 1,000 excess
estate of P10 million. He left the following since the seller delivered them
heirs: a) Marlon, a legitimate child and b) anyway.
Cecilia, the legal spouse. Divide the estate. (D) He can cancel the whole
(A) Marlon gets 1/4 and Cecilia gets transaction since the seller violated
3/4. the terms of their agreement.
(B) Marlon gets 2/3 and Cecilia 1/3.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 157 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(35) Lino entered into a contract to sell with suffered from poisoning caused by a
Ramon, undertaking to convey to the latter noxious substance found in the sardines.
one of the five lots he owns, without Mylene filed a case for damages against
specifying which lot it was, for the price of Acme. Which of the following defenses will
P1 million. Later, the parties could not hold?
agree which of five lots he owned Lino (A) The expiry date of the "Sards"
undertook to sell to Ramon. What is the was clearly printed on its can,
standing of the contract? still the store sold and Mylene
(A) Unenforceable. bought it.
(B) Voidable. (B) Mylene must have detected the
(C) Rescissible. noxious substance in the sardines
(D) Void. by smell, yet she still ate it.
(C) Acme had no transaction with
(36) Knowing that the car had a hidden Mylene; she bought the "Sards" from
crack in the engine, X sold it to Y without a store, not directly from Acme.
informing the latter about it. In any event, (D) Acme enjoys the presumption of
the deed of sale expressly stipulated that X safeness of its canning procedure
was not liable for hidden defects. Does Y and Mylene has not overcome such
have the right to demand from X a presumption.
reimbursement of what he spent to repair
the engine plus damages? (38) Fernando executed a will, prohibiting
(A) Yes. X is liable whether or not he his wife Marina from remarrying after his
was aware of the hidden defect. death, at the pain of the legacy of P100
(B) Yes, since the defect was not Million in her favor becoming a nullity. But
hidden; X knew of it but he acted a year after Fernando’s death, Marina was
in bad faith in not disclosing the so overwhelmed with love that she married
fact to Y. another man. Is she entitled to the legacy,
(C) No, because Y is in estoppel, the amount of which is well within the
having changed engine without prior capacity of the disposable free portion of
demand. Fernando’s estate?
(D) No, because Y waived the (A) Yes, since the prohibition against
warranty against hidden defects. remarrying is absolute, it is deemed
(37) Acme Cannery produced sardines in not written.
cans known as "Sards." Mylene bought a (B) Yes, because the prohibition is
can of Sards from a store, ate it, and inhuman and oppressive and
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 158 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(40) In gratitude, the groom’s parents made (42) Birth determines personality. Death
a donation of a property in writing to the extinguishes it. Under what circumstances
bride’s parents shortly before their may the personality of a deceased person
children’s wedding. The donation was continue to exist?
accepted. What is the nature of the (A) In case of re-appearance of a
donation? missing person presumed dead.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 159 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 160 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(46) The term of a 5-year lease contract (D) Yes, the donation is not deemed
between X the lessor and Y the lessee, made until the suspensive condition
where rents were paid from month to has been fulfilled.
month, came to an end. Still, Y continued
using the property with X’s consent. In (48) Illegitimate children, those not
such a case, it is understood that they recognized by their biological fathers, shall
impliedly renewed the lease use the surname of their
(A) from month to month under (A) biological father subject to no
the same conditions as to the condition.
rest. (B) mother or biological father, at
(B) under the same terms and the mother’s discretion.
conditions as before. (C) mother.
(C) under the same terms except the (D) biological father unless he
rent which they or the court must judicially opposes it.
fix.
(D) for only a year, with the rent (49) Asiong borrowed P1 million from a
raised by 10% pursuant to the bank, secured by a mortgage on his land.
rental control law. Without his consent, his friend Boyong paid
the whole loan. Since Asiong benefited from
(47) Rex, a philanthropist, donated a the payment, can Boyong compel the bank
valuable lot to the municipality on the to subrogate him in its right as mortgagee
condition that it will build a public school of Asiong's land?
on such lot within 2 years from its (A) No, but the bank can foreclose
acceptance of the donation. The and pay Boyong back.
municipality properly accepted the donation (B) No, since Boyong paid for
but did not yet build the public school after Asiong’s loan without his
2 years. Can Rex revoke the donation? approval.
(A) Yes, since the donation is (C) Yes, since a change of creditor
subject to a resolutory condition took place by novation with the
which was not fulfilled. bank’s consent.
(B) No, but Rex is entitled to recover (D) Yes, since it is but right that
the value of the land from the Boyong be able to get back his
municipality. money and, if not, to foreclose the
(C) No, the transfer of ownership has mortgage in the manner of the bank.
been completed.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 161 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(50) Congress passed a law imposing taxes (D) Yes, since Fernando was a
on income earned out of a particular solidary creditor, payment to him
activity that was not previously taxed. The extinguished the obligation.
law, however, taxed incomes already earned
within the fiscal year when the law took (52) What happens to the property regimes
effect. Is the law valid? that were subsisting under the New Civil
(A) No, because laws are intended to Code when the Family Code took effect?
be prospective, not retroactive. (A) The original property regimes
(B) No, the law is arbitrary in that it are immutable and remain
taxes income that has already been effective.
spent. (B) Those enjoying specific regimes
(C) Yes, since tax laws are the under the New Civil Code may adopt
lifeblood of the nation. the regime of absolute community of
(D) Yes, tax laws are an exception; property under the Family Code.
they can be given retroactive (C) Those that married under the
effect. New Civil Code but did not choose
any of its regimes shall now be
(51) Rudolf borrowed P1 million from governed by the regime of absolute
Rodrigo and Fernando who acted as community of property.
solidary creditors. When the loan matured, (D) They are superseded by the
Rodrigo wrote a letter to Rudolf, demanding Family Code which has retroactive
payment of the loan directly to him. Before effect.
Rudolf could comply, Fernando went to see (53) The testator executed a will following
him personally to collect and he paid him. the formalities required by the law on
Did Rudolf make a valid payment? succession without designating any heir.
(A) No, since Rudolf should have The only testamentary disposition in the
split the payment between Rodrigo will is the recognition of the testator's
and Fernando. illegitimate child with a popular actress. Is
(B) No, since Rodrigo, the other the will valid?
solidary creditor, already made a (A) Yes, since in recognizing his
prior demand for payment from illegitimate child, the testator has
Rudolf. made him his heir.
(C) Yes, since the payment covers (B) No, because the non-designation
the whole obligation. of heirs defeats the purpose of a will.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 162 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(C) No, the will comes to life only (C) Voidable, because the Judge
when the proper heirs are acted beyond his territorial
instituted. jurisdiction and is administratively
(D) Yes, the recognition of an liable for the same.
illegitimate heir is an ample (D) Void, because the Judge did not
reason for a will. solemnize the marriage within the
premises of his court.
(54) A left B, his wife, in the Philippines to
work in Egypt but died in that country after (56) X and Y, Filipinos, got married in Los
a year’s continuous stay. Two months after Angeles, USA, using a marriage license
A’s death, B gave birth to a child, claiming issued by the Philippine consul in Los
it is A’s child. Who can assail the legitimacy Angeles, acting as Civil Registrar. X and Y
of the child? did not know that they were first cousins
(A) A’s other heirs apart from B. because their mothers, who were sisters,
(B) The State which has interest in were separated when they were quite
the welfare of overseas contract young. Since X did not want to continue
workers. with the relation when he heard of it, he left
(C) Any one who is outraged by B’s Y, came to the Philippines and married Z.
claim. Can X be held liable for bigamy?
(D) No one since A died. (A) No since X’s marriage to Y is void
ab initio or did not exist.
(55) QR and TS who had a marriage license (B) No since X acted in good faith,
requested a newly appointed Judge in conscious that public policy did not
Manila to marry them on the beach of approve of marriage between first
Boracay. Since the Judge maintained cousins.
Boracay as his residence, he agreed. The (C) Yes since he married Z without
sponsors were all public officials. What is first securing a judicial
the status of the marriage. declaration of nullity of his
(A) Valid, since the improper marriage to Y.
venue is merely an irregularity; (D) Yes since his first marriage to Y
all the elements of a valid in Los Angeles is valid.
marriage are present.
(B) Void, because the couple did not (57) Allan bought Billy’s property through
get local permit for a beach wedding. Carlos, an agent empowered with a special
power of attorney (SPA) to sell the same.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 163 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
When Allan was ready to pay as scheduled, (B) No, the buyer is entitled to a
Billy called, directing Allan to pay directly customary 30-day extension of his
to him. On learning of this, Carlos, Billy's obligation to take delivery of the
agent, told Allan to pay through him as his goods.
SPA provided and to protect his (C) No, since there was no express
commission. Faced with two claimants, agreement regarding automatic
Allan consigned the payment in court. Billy rescission.
protested, contending that the consignation (D) No, the seller should first
is ineffective since no tender of payment determine that Y was not justified in
was made to him. Is he correct? failing to appear.
(A) No, since consignation without (59) The wife filed a case of legal separation
tender of payment is allowed in against her husband on the ground of
the face of the conflicting claims sexual infidelity
on the plaintiff. without previously exerting earnest efforts
(B) Yes, as owner of the property to come to a compromise with him. The
sold, Billy can demand payment judge dismissed the case for having been
directly to himself. filed without complying with a condition
(C) Yes, since Allan made no precedent. Is the dismissal proper?
announcement of the tender. (A) No, efforts at a compromise will
(D) Yes, a tender of payment is only deepen the wife’s anguish.
required for a valid consignation. (B) No, since legal separation like
validity of marriage is not subject
(58) X sold Y 100 sacks of rice that Y was to to compromise agreement for
pick up from X’s rice mill on a particular purposes of filing.
date. Y did not, however, appear on the (C) Yes, to avoid a family feud that is
agreed date to take delivery of the rice. After hurtful to everyone.
one week, X automatically rescinded the (D) Yes, since the dispute could have
sale without notarial notice to Y. Is the been settled with the parties
rescission valid? agreeing to legal separation.
(A) Yes, automatic rescission is
allowed since, having the (60) An Australian living in the Philippines
character of movables and acquired shares of stock worth P10 million
consumables, rice can easily in food manufacturing companies. He died
deteriorate. in Manila, leaving a legal wife and a child in
Australia and a live-in partner with whom
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 164 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
he had two children in Manila. He also left (D) Yes, after full payment, the
a will, done according to Philippine laws, action became imprescriptible.
leaving all his properties to his live-in
partner and their children. What law will (62) A court declared Ricardo, an old
govern the validity of the disposition in the bachelor, an absentee and appointed Cicero
will? administrator of his property. After a year,
(A) Australia law since his legal wife it was discovered that Ricardo had died
and legitimate child are Australians abroad. What is the effect of the fact of his
and domiciled in Australia. death on the administration of his
(B) Australian law since the property?
intrinsic validity of the provisions (A) With Ricardo no longer an
of a will is governed by the absentee but a deceased person,
decedent’s national law. Cicero will cease to be administrator
(C) Philippine law since the decedent of his properties.
died in Manila and he executed his (B) The administration shall be
will according to such law. given by the court having
(D) Philippine law since the jurisdiction over the intestate
decedent’s properties are in the proceedings to a new
Philippines. administrator whom it will
appoint.
(61) X bought a land from Y, paying him (C) Cicero automatically becomes
cash. Since they were friends, they did not administrator of Ricardo’s estate
execute any document of sale. After 7 years, until judicially relieved.
the heirs of X asked Y to execute a deed of (D) Cicero’s alienations of Ricardo's
absolute sale to formalize the verbal sale to property will be set aside.
their father. Unwilling to do so, X’s heirs
filed an action for specific performance (63) Baldo, a rejected suitor, intimidated
against Y. Will their action prosper? Judy into marrying him. While she wanted
(A) No, after more than 6 years, to question the validity of their marriage
the action to enforce the verbal two years after the intimidation ceased,
agreement has already elapsed. Judy decided in the meantime to freely
(B) No, since the sale cannot under cohabit with Baldo. After more than 5 years
the Statute of Frauds be enforced. following their wedding, Judy wants to file a
(C) Yes, since X bought the land and case for annulment of marriage against
paid Y for it.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 165 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Baldo on ground of lack of consent. Will her all heirs in the higher level are disqualified
action prosper? or unable to inherit?
(A) Yes, the action for annulment is (A) Nephews and nieces.
imprescriptible. (B) Brothers and sisters.
(B) No, since the marriage was (C) State.
merely voidable and Judy ratified (D) Other collateral relatives up to
it by freely cohabiting with Baldo the 5th degree of consanguinity.
after the force and intimidation
had ceased. (66) Roy and Carlos both undertook a
(C) No, since the action prescribed 5 contract to deliver to Sam in Manila a boat
years from the date of the docked in Subic. Before they could deliver
celebration of the marriage. it, however, the boat sank in a storm. The
(D) Yes, because the marriage was contract provides that fortuitous event shall
celebrated without Judy's consent not exempt Roy and Carlos from their
freely given. obligation. Owing to the loss of the motor
boat, such obligation is deemed converted
(64) Is the wife who leaves her husband into one of indemnity for damages. Is the
without just cause entitled to support? liability of Roy and Carlos joint or solidary?
(A) No, because the wife must (A) Neither solidary nor joint since
always be submissive and respectful they cannot waive the defense of
to the husband. fortuitous event to which they are
(B) Yes. The marriage not having entitled.
been dissolved, the husband (B) Solidary or joint upon the
continues to have an obligation to discretion of Sam.
support his wife. (C) Solidary since Roy and Carlos
(C) No, because in leaving the failed to perform their obligation to
conjugal home without just cause, deliver the motor boat.
she forfeits her right to support. (D) Joint since the conversion of
(D) Yes, since the right to receive their liability to one of indemnity
support is not subject to any for damages made it joint.
condition.
(67) Joanne married James, a person with
(65) In the order of intestate succession no known relatives. Through James' hard
where the decedent is legitimate, who is the work, he and his wife Joane prospered.
last intestate heirs or heir who will inherit if When James died, his estate alone
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 166 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
amounted to P100 million. If, in his will, (70) Ric and Josie, Filipinos, have been
James designates Joanne as his only heir, sweethearts for 5 years. While working in a
what will be the free portion of his estate. European country where the execution of
(A) Joanne gets all; estate has no joint wills are allowed, the two of them
free portion left. executed a joint holographic will where they
(B) Joanne gets 1/2; the other named each other as sole heir of the other
half is free portion. in case either of them dies. Unfortunately,
(C) Joanne gets 1/3; the remaining Ric died a year later. Can Josie have the
2/3 is free portion. joint will successfully probated in the
(D) Joanne gets 1/4; the remaining Philippines?
3/4 is free portion. (A) Yes, in the highest interest of
comity of nations and to honor the
(68) A warranty inherent in a contract of wishes of the deceased.
sale, whether or not mentioned in it, is (B) No, since Philippine law
known as the prohibits the execution of joint
(A) warranty on quality. wills and such law is binding on
(B) warranty against hidden defects. Ric and Josie even abroad.
(C) warranty against eviction. (C) Yes, since they executed their
(D) warranty in merchantability. joint will out of mutual love and
care, values that the generally
(69) The doctrine of stare decisis prescribes accepted principles of international
adherence to precedents in order to law accepts.
promote the stability of the law. But the (D) Yes, since it is valid in the
doctrine can be abandoned country where it was executed,
(A) When adherence to it would applying the principle of "lex loci
result in the Government’s loss of its celebrationis."
case.
(B) When the application of the (71) ML inherited from his father P5 million
doctrine would cause great in legitime but he waived it in a public
prejudice to a foreign national. instrument in favor of his sister QY who
(C) When necessary to promote the accepted the waiver in writing. But as it
passage of a new law. happened, ML borrowed P6 million from PF
(D) When the precedent has before the waiver. PF objected to the waiver
ceased to be beneficial and useful. and filed an action for its rescission on the
ground that he had the right to ML’s P5
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 167 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 168 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(74) T died intestate, leaving an estate of (76) X, who was abroad, phoned his
P9,000,000. He left as heirs three legitimate brother, Y, authorizing him to sell X’s
children, namely, A, B, and C. A has two parcel of land in Pasay. X sent the title to Y
children, D and E. Before he died, A by courier service. Acting for his brother, Y
irrevocably repudiated his inheritance from executed a notarized deed of absolute sale
T in a public instrument filed with the of the land to Z after receiving payment.
court. How much, if any, will D and E, as What is the status of the sale?
A’s children, get from T’s estate? (A) Valid, since a notarized deed of
(A) Each of D and E will get absolute sale covered the
P1,500,000 by right of transaction and full payment was
representation since their father made.
repudiated his inheritance. (B) Void, since X should have
(B) Each of D and E will get authorized agent Y in writing to
P2,225,000 because they will inherit sell the land.
from the estate equally with B and (C) Valid, since Y was truly his
C. brother X’s agent and entrusted
(C) D and E will get none because with the title needed to effect the
of the repudiation; "B" and "C" sale.
will get A’s share by right of (D) Valid, since the buyer could file
accretion. an action to compel X to execute a
(D) Each of D and E will get deed of sale.
P2,000,000 because the law gives
them some advantage due to the (77) In a true pacto de retro sale, the title
demise of "A". and ownership of the property sold are
immediately vested in the vendee a retro
(75) No decree of legal separation can be subject only to the resolutory condition of
issued repurchase by the vendor a retro within the
(A) unless the children’s welfare is stipulated period. This is known as
attended to first. (A) equitable mortgage.
(B) without prior efforts at (B) conventional redemption.
reconciliation shown to be futile. (C) legal redemption.
(C) unless the court first directs (D) equity of redemption.
mediation of the parties. (78) A natural obligation under the New
(D) without prior investigation Civil Code of the Philippines is one which
conducted by a public prosecutor.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 169 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(A) the obligor has a moral (80) When the donor gives donations
obligation to do, otherwise entitling without reserving sufficient funds for his
the obligee to damages. support or for the support of his
(B) refers to an obligation in writing dependents, his donations are
to do or not to do. (A) Rescissible, since it results in
(C) the obligee may enforce through economic lesion of more than 25% of
the court if violated by the obligor. the value of his properties.
(D) cannot be judicially enforced (B) Voidable, since his consent to
but authorizes the obligee to the donation is vitiated by mindless
retain the obligor’s payment or kindness.
performance. (C) Void, since it amounts to wanton
expenditure beyond his means.
(79) The husband assumed sole (D) Reducible to the extent that
administration of the family’s mango the donations impaired the
plantation since his wife worked abroad. support due to himself and his
Subsequently, without his wife’s knowledge, dependents.
the husband entered into an antichretic
transaction with a company, giving it (81) Anne owed Bessy P1 million due on
possession and management of the October 1, 2011 but failed to pay her on
plantation with power to harvest and sell due date. Bessy sent a demand letter to
the fruits and to apply the proceeds to the Anne giving her 5 days from receipt within
payment of a loan he got. What is the which to pay. Two days after receipt of the
standing of the contract? letter, Anne personally offered to pay Bessy
(A) It is void in the absence of the in manager's check but the latter refused to
wife’s consent. accept the same. The 5 days lapsed. May
(B) It is void absent an authorization Anne’s obligation be considered
from the court. extinguished?
(C) The transaction is void and can (A) Yes, since Bessy’s refusal of the
neither be ratified by the wife nor manager’s check, which is
authorized by the court. presumed funded, amounts to a
(D) It is considered a continuing satisfaction of the obligation.
offer by the parties, perfected (B) No, since tender of payment
only upon the wife’s acceptance even in cash, if refused, will not
or the court’s authorization. discharge the obligation without
proper consignation in court.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 170 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(C) Yes, since Anne tendered (83) The owner of a thing cannot use it in a
payment of the full amount due. way that will injure the right of a third
(D) No, since a manager’s check is person. Thus, every building or land is
not considered legal tender in the subject to the easement which prohibits its
Philippines. proprietor or possessor from committing
nuisance like noise, jarring, offensive odor,
(82) The residents of a subdivision have and smoke. This principle is known as
been using an open strip of land as passage (A) Jus vindicandi.
to the highway for over 30 years. The owner (B) Sic utere tuo ut alienum non
of that land decided, however, to close it in laedas.
preparation for building his house on it. (C) Jus dispondendi.
The residents protested, claiming that they (D) Jus abutendi.
became owners of the land through
acquisitive prescription, having been in (84) Janice and Jennifer are sisters. Janice
possession of the same in the concept of sued Jennifer and Laura, Jennifer’s
owners, publicly, peacefully, and business partner for recovery of property
continuously for more than 30 years. Is this with damages. The complaint did not allege
claim correct? that Janice exerted earnest efforts to come
(A) No, the residents have not to a compromise with the defendants and
been in continuous possession of that such efforts failed. The judge
the land since they merely passed dismissed the complaint outright for failure
through it in going to the to comply with a condition precedent. Is the
highway. dismissal in order?
(B) No, the owner did not abandon (A) No, since Laura is a stranger to
his right to the property; he merely the sisters, Janice has no moral
tolerated his neighbors’ use of it for obligation to settle with her.
passage. (B) Yes, since court should promote
(C) Yes, residents of the subdivision amicable settlement among
have become owners by acquisitive relatives.
prescription. (C) Yes, since members of the same
(D) Yes, community ownership by family, as parties to the suit, are
prescription prevails over private required to exert earnest efforts to
claims. settle their disputes before coming
to court.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 171 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(D) No, the family council, which (87) When does the regime of conjugal
would ordinarily mediate the partnership of gains begin to exist?
dispute, has been eliminated under (A) At the moment the parties
the Family Code. take and declare each other as
husband and wife before
(85) X borrowed money from a bank, officiating officer.
secured by a mortgage on the land of Y, his (B) At the time the spouses acquire
close friend. When the loan matured, Y properties through joint efforts.
offered to pay the bank but it refused since (C) On the date the future spouses
Y was not the borrower. Is the bank’s action executed their marriage settlements
correct? because this is the starting point of
(A) Yes, since X, the true borrower, their marital relationship.
did not give his consent to Y’s offer (D) On the date agreed upon by the
to pay. future spouses in their marriage
(B) No, since anybody can discharge settlements since their agreement is
X’s obligation to his benefit. the law between them.
(C) No, since Y, the owner of the
collateral, has an interest in the (88) Josie, 18, married Dante, 25, without
payment of the obligation. her parents’ knowledge and consent, and
(D) Yes, since it was X who has an lived with him. After a year, Josie returned
obligation to the bank. to her parents’ home, complained of the
unbearable battering she was getting from
(86) The right of a mortgagor in a judicial Dante, and expressed a desire to have her
foreclosure to redeem the mortgaged marriage with him annulled. Who may
property after his default in the bring the action?
performance of the conditions of the (A) Dante.
mortgage but before the sale of the (B) Her parents.
mortgaged property or confirmation of the (C) Josie herself.
sale by the court, is known as (D) The State.
(A) accion publiciana.
(B) equity of redemption. (89) X, a married man, cohabited with Y, an
(C) pacto de retro. unmarried woman. Their relation bore them
(D) right of redemption. BB, a baby boy. Subsequently, after X
became a widower, he married Y. Was BB
legitimated by that marriage?
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 172 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(A) Yes, since his parents are now (D) Yes, as long as they leave
lawfully married. sufficient property for themselves
(B) Yes, since he is an innocent and for their dependents.
party and the marriage rectified the
wrong done him. (92) X owed Y P1.5 million. In his will, X
(C) No, since once illegitimate, a gave Y legacy of P1 million but the will
child shall always remain provided that this legacy is to be set off
illegitimate. against the P1.5 million X owed Y. After the
(D) No, since his parents were not set off, X still owed Y P500,000. Can Y still
qualified to marry each other collect this amount?
when he was conceived. (A) Yes, because the designation
of Y as legatee created a new and
(90) The presence of a vice of consent separate juridical relationship
vitiates the consent of a party in a contract between them, that of testator-
and this renders the contract legatee.
(A) Rescissible. (B) It depends upon the discretion of
(B) Unenforceable. the probate court if a claim is filed
(C) Voidable. in the testate proceedings.
(D) Void. (C) No, because the intention of the
testator in giving the legacy is to
(91) Can common-law spouses donate abrogate his entire obligation to Y.
properties of substantial value to one (D) No, because X had no
another? instruction in his will to deliver
(A) No, they are only allowed to more than the legacy of P1 million to
give moderate gifts to each other Y.
during family rejoicing.
(B) No, they cannot give anything of (93) Josie owned a lot worth P5 million
value to each other to prevent prior to her marriage to Rey. Subsequently,
placing their legitimate relatives at a their conjugal partnership spent P3 million
disadvantage. for the construction of a house on the lot.
(C) Yes, unlike the case of legally The construction resulted in an increase in
married spouses, such donations the value of the house and lot to P9 million.
are not prohibited. Who owns the house and the lot?
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 173 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 174 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
Notary Public notarized the will in his law (B) Separate since their property
office where all signatories to the will relations with their legal spouses
acknowledged that the testator signed the are still subsisting.
will in the presence of the witnesses and (C) Co-ownership since they agreed
that the latter themselves signed the will in to work for their mutual benefit.
the presence of the testator and of one (D) Communal since they earned the
another. Was the will validly notarized? same as common-law spouses.
(A) No, since it was not notarized on
the occasion when the signatories (98) What is the prescriptive period for filing
affixed their signatures on the will. an action for revocation of a donation based
(B) Yes, since the Notary Public on acts of ingratitude of the donee?
has to be present only when the (A) 5 years from the perfection of the
signatories acknowledged the acts donation.
required of them in relation to (B) 1 year from the perfection of
the will. the donation.
(C) Yes, but the defect in the mere (C) 4 years from the perfection of the
notarization of the will is not fatal to donation.
its execution. (D) Such action does not prescribe.
(D) No, since the notary public did
not require the signatories to sign (99) Before Karen married Karl, she
their respective attestations again. inherited P5 million from her deceased
mother which amount she brought into the
(97) Venecio and Ester lived as common-law marriage. She later used part of the money
spouses since both have been married to to buy a new Mercedes Benz in her name,
other persons from whom they had been which Karen and her husband used as a
separated in fact for several years. family car. Is the car a conjugal or Karen’s
Hardworking and bright, each earned exclusive property?
incomes from their respective professions (A) It is conjugal property since the
and enterprises. What is the nature of their spouses use it as a family car.
incomes? (B) It is Karen’s exclusive property
(A) Conjugal since they earned the since it is in her name.
same while living as husband and (C) It is conjugal property having
wife. been bought during the marriage.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 175 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(D) It is Karen’s exclusive should the lessees sue for damages? (1%)
property since she bought it with (1). A, the owner
her own money.
(2). B, the engineer
(A). A had a 4-storey building which was plans and specifications, or due to the
constructed by Engineer B. After five years, defects in the ground. This liability
the building developed cracks and its maybe enforced against the architect or
stairway eventually gave way and collapsed, engineer even by a third party who has
resulting to injuries to some lessees. Who no privity of contract with the architect
or engineer under Article 2192, NCC.
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 176 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
The lessee can sue only the lessor for Lot B belonging to spouses X & Y,
breach of contract under Article 1659 in excavated in Lot B where she succeeded in
relation to Article 1654, NCC. The lessee unearthing gold and precious stones. How
cannot sue the architect or the engineer will the treasures found by O be divided?
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 177 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
share because the finding was not “by or mother alone, even in a public
chance.” document, is not sufficient because the
father and mother did not have a special
power of attorney for the purpose. Under
Article 745 (NCC), the donee must accept
(C) A executed a Deed of Donation in favor
the donation personally, or through an
of B, a bachelor, covering a parcel of land
authorized person with a special power
valued at P1 million. B was, however, out of
of attorney for the purpose; otherwise,
the country at the time. For the donation to
the donation shall be void.
be valid, (1%)
No.3 is also false. B cannot accept the
(1). B may e-mail A accepting the donation. donation anytime at his convenience.
Under Article 749 NCC, the donee may
(2). The donation may be accepted by B’s
accept the donation only during the
father with whom he lives.
lifetime of the donor.
No. 5 None of the above is sufficient to (2). The will is valid and effective
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 178 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(C) comodatario;
(C). Involves the payment of interests, if
owing;
(D). all the above;
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(E). letters a and b
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 179 of 180
Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com
(D). All of the above; (D). 1/3 of the total debts must be
represented by the approving creditors;
(4). An, assignee in a proceeding under the
Insolvency Law does not have the duty of: (E). Letters a and b
(C). ensuring that a debtor corporation [Note: Items 4&5 on Insolvency Law are
operate the business efficiently and not included within the coverage of Civil
effectively while the proceedings are Law but Commercial Law. It is therefore
pending; suggested that the examinees be given
full credit for the two items regardless of
(D). collecting and discharging debts owed their answers.]
to the insolvent debtor.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
References:
(C). ensuring that a debtor corporation
operate the business efficiently and Answers to Bar Examination
effectively while the proceedings are Questions by the UP LAW COMPLEX
pending; (2007, 2009, 2010)
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel Paige
Page 180 of 180
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
SUGGESTED ANSWERS IN CIVIL LAW
BAR EXAMINATIONS 2013
By: Assoc. Dean Viviana M. Paguirigan
QUESTION NO. I.
You are a Family Court judge and before you is a Petition for the Declaration of Nullity of
Marriage (under Article 36 of the Family Code) filed by Maria against Neil. Maria claims that Neil
is psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential obligations of marriage because Neil
is a drunkard, a womanizer, a gambler, and a mama's boy- traits that she never knew or saw
when Neil was courting her. Although summoned, Neil did not answer Maria's petition and never
appeared in court.
To support her petition, Maria presented three witnesses- herself, Dr. Elsie Chan, and Ambrosia.
Dr. Chan testified on the psychological report on Neil that she prepared. Since Neil never
acknowledged n9r responded to her invitation for interviews, her report is solely based on her
interviews with Maria and the spouses' minor children. Dr. Chan concluded that Neil is suffering
from Narcissistic Personality Disorder, an ailment that she found to be already present since
Neil's early adulthood and one that is grave and incurable. Maria testified on the specific
instances when she found Neil drunk, with another woman, or squandering the family's
resources in a casino. Ambrosia, the spouses' current household help, corroborated Maria's
testimony.
On the basis of the evidence presented, will you grant the petition? (8%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
If I were the judge, I will not grant the petition. Although psychological incapacity has not been
defined by the Family Code, the Supreme Court in several cases (Republic vs. San Jose -
February 28, 2007; Zamora v. CA an Zamora G.R. No. 141917 February 7, 2007; Benjamin Ting
v. Carmen Ting G.R. No. 166562; March 31, 2009) has ruled that the intendment of the law is
to confine psychological incapacity to the most serious cases of personality disorders clearly
demonstrative of an utter insensitivity or inability to give meaning and significance to the
marriage. What the law requires is downright incapacity and not refusal or neglect or difficulty
but a failure to perform essential marital obligations due to causes psychological in nature.
Further, the presentation of expert proof presupposes a thorough and in-depth assessment of
the parties by the psychologist or expert for a conclusive diagnosis of grave, severe, and
incurable presence of psychological incapacity. (Paz vs. Paz – February 18, 2010) In this case,
the report of Dr. Chan is solely based on her interviews with Maria and the children. She did not
actually hear, see and evaluate Neil. Hence, the report cannot constitute a reasonable basis to
reach a conclusion as to Neil’s psychological incapacity.
QUESTION II.
A collision occurred at an intersection involving a bicycle and a taxicab. Both the bicycle rider (a
businessman then doing his morning exercise) and the taxi driver claimed that the other was at
fault. Based on the police report, the bicycle crossed the intersection first but the taxicab,
crossing at a fast clip from the bicycle's left, could not brake in time and hit the bicycle's rear
wheel, toppling it and throwing the bicycle rider into the sidewalk 5 meters away.
1
The bicycle rider suffered a fractured right knee, sustained when he fell on his right side on the
concrete side walk. He was hospitalized and was subsequently operated on, rendering him
immobile for 3 weeks and requiring physical rehabilitation for another 3 months. In his complaint
for damages, the rider prayed for the award ofP1,000,000 actual damages,P200,000 moral
damages, P200,000 exemplary damages, P1 00,000 nominal damages and P50,000 attorney's
fees.
Assuming the police report to be correct and as the lawyer for the bicycle rider, what evidence
(documentary and testimonial) and legal arguments will you present in court to justify the
damages that your client claims? (8%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
As lawyer for the bicycle rider, I will present in addition to the police report, the medical abstract
as to the injuries sustained by my client as well as copies of receipts of expenses incurred in
connection with the treatment of his injuries. I will also present the testimony of my client and
perhaps a bystander who witnessed the incident as to the circumstances surrounding the
accident.
As for the legal argument, I will rebut the claim of negligence on my client’s part by presenting
evidence that my client has actually crossed the intersection ahead of the taxicab and it was the
taxicab driver who rapidly cut the path of the bicycle which caused the collision. Also, even
assuming that there was contributory negligence on the part of my client, I will argue that it will
not preclude the recovery of damages but may only mitigate the damages to which he is entitled.
QUESTION III.
Sergio is the registered owner of a 500-square meter land. His friend, Marcelo, who has long
been interested in the property, succeeded in persuading Sergio to sell it to him. On June 2,
2012, they agreed on the purchase price of P600,000 and that Sergio would give Marcelo up to
June30, 2012 within which to raise the amount. Marcelo, in a light tone usual between them,
said that they should seal their agreement through a case of Jack Daniels Black and P5,000
"pulutan" money which he immediately handed to Sergio and which the latter accepted. The
friends then sat down and drank the first bottle from the case of bourbon.
On June 15, 2013, Sergio learned of another buyer, Roberto, who was offering P800,000 in
ready cash for the land. When Roberto confirmed that he could pay in cash as soon as Sergio
could get the documentation ready, Sergio decided to withdraw his offer to Marcelo, hoping to
just explain matters to his friend. Marcelo, however, objected when the withdrawal was
communicated to him, taking the position that they have a firm and binding agreement that
Sergio cannot simply walk away from because he has an option to buy that is duly supported
by a duly accepted valuable consideration.
(B) Can Sergio claim that whatever they might have agreed upon cannot be enforced because
any agreement relating to the sale of real property must be supported by evidence in writing
and they never reduced their agreement to writing? (3%)
2
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A) Yes, Marcelo has a cause of action against Sergio. As a rule, an offer can be withdrawn at any
time before acceptance by communicating such withdrawal (Art. 1324) except when the option
is founded upon a consideration as something paid or promised. In this case, although there
was no separate consideration for the option, the offer had already been accepted and thus, it
resulted into a perfected contract of sale between Marcelo and Sergio. Sale being a consensual
contract is perfected by mere consent.
B) No, Sergio cannot claim that the agreement cannot be enforced because it was not reduced into
writing. Contracts shall be obligatory, in whatever form they may have been entered into,
provided all the essential requisites for their validity are present. (Art. 1356) In fact when the
law requires a document or other special form, as in the acts and enumerated by law, the
contracting parties may compel each other to observe that form, once the contract has been
perfected, and this right may be exercised simultaneously with the action upon the contract.
(Art. 1357) Even an oral sale of a parcel of land is valid between the parties (Campillo vs. CA
129 SCRA 513; Zaide v. CA 163 SCRA 71)
QUESTION IV.
Anselmo is the registered owner of a land and a house that his friend Boboy occupied for a
nominal rental and on the condition that Boboy would vacate the property on demand. With
Anselmo's knowledge, Boboy introduced renovations consisting of an additional bedroom, a
covered veranda, and a concrete block fence, at his own expense.
Subsequently, Anselmo needed the property as his residence and thus asked Boboy to vacate
and turn it over to him. Boboy, despite an extension, failed to vacate the property, forcing
Anselmo to send him a written demand to vacate.
In his own written reply, Boboy signified that he was ready to leave but Anselmo must first
reimburse him the value of the improvements he introduced on the property as he is a builder
in good faith. Anselmo refused, insisting that Boboy cannot ask for reimbursement as he is a
mere lessee. Boboy responded by removing the improvements and leaving the building in its
original state.
(A) Resolve Boboy's claim that as a builder in good faith, he should be reimbursed the value of
the improvements he introduced. (4%)
(B) Can Boboy be held liable for damages for removing the improvements over Anselmo's
objection? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A) Boboy’s claim that he is a builder in good faith is without merit. The contract between the
parties remains to be a lease despite the nominal rentals paid by Boboy. As such, Boboy’s right
with regard to the improvements he introduced on the property should not be resolved on the
basis of the provisions of the Civil Code on builder in good faith under Article 448 but by the
provision on lease, particularly Article 1678. A lessee who makes improvements on the property
cannot be considered a builder in good faith for he knows that he does not own the property
and his possession is merely temporary. Boboy may only claim one-half of the value of the
improvements from Anselmo but if the latter refuses to reimburse him, Boboy may remove the
improvements even if it may cause damage to the property.
3
B) No, Boboy cannot be held liable for damages except if he caused unnecessary impairment to
the property leased. Since Anselmo refused to appropriate the improvements and to reimburse
Boboy, the latter may exercise his right to remove the improvements provided he shall not cause
any more impairment to the property leased than is necessary.
QUESTION V.
Josefa executed a deed of donation covering a one-hectare rice land in favor of her daughter,
Jennifer. The deed specifically provides that:
"For and in consideration of he love and service Jennifer has shown and given to
me, I hereby freely, voluntarily and irrevocably donate to her my one-hectare rice
land covered by TCT No. 11550, located in San Fernando, Pampanga. This
donation shall take effect upon my death."
The deed also contained Jennifer's signed acceptance, and an attached notarized declaration by
Josefa and Jennifer that the land will remain in Josefa's possession and cannot be alienated,
encumbered, sold or disposed of while Josefa is still alive.
Advise Jennifer on whether the deed is a donation inter vivos or mortis causa and explain the
reasons supporting your advice. (8%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will advise Jennifer that the deed of donation executed in her favor by Josefa is a donation
inter vivos. An inter vivos donation is generally irrevocable once accepted, and the law requires
that if it involves immovable property, it must be in a public document and there must be a deed
of acceptance which must be in the same deed of donation. If the acceptance is in a separate
instrument, it has to be noted in both instruments. (Art. 749) In this case, the deed of
acceptance clearly signifies that it is a donation inter vivos because a donation mortis causa
need not be accepted by the donee during the lifetime of the donor although the donee in the
case of mortis causa donation is free to accept or repudiate it after the death of the donor.
Also, the prohibition on alienation during Josefa’s lifetime all the more indicates that the donation
is inter vivos because the fact that Josefa reserved the lifetime usufruct of the land shows that
her intent is to transfer the ownership of the donated property to Jennifer or else there would
have been no need for her to reserve the lifetime usufruct thereof if it were a donation mortis
causa. (Gestopa v. CA 342 SCRA 105 citing Reyes vs. Mosqueda, 187 SCRA 661, 671 (1990);
Concepcion vs. Concepcion, 91 Phil. 823, 827 (1952).)
QUESTION VI.
Lito obtained a loan of P1,000,000 from Ferdie, payable within one year. To secure payment,
Lito executed a chattel mortgage on a Toyota Avanza and a real estate mortgage on a 200-
square meter piece of property.
(A) Would it be legally significant - from the point of view of validity and enforceability - if the
loan and the mortgages were in public or private instruments? (6%)
(B) Lito's failure to pay led to the extra-judicial foreclosure of the mortgaged real property.
Within a year from foreclosure, Lito tendered a manager's check to Ferdie to redeem the
property. Ferdie refused to accept payment on the ground that he wanted payment in cash: the
4
check does not qualify as legal tender and does not include the interest payment. Is Ferdie's
refusal justified? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A) With respect to the loan, the same is both valid and enforceable regardless of whether it is in a
private or public document because as a rule, contracts shall be obligatory in whatever form
they may have been entered into provided all the essential requisites for their validity are
present. A loan is a contract which the law does not require to be in a particular form in order
that it may be valid or enforceable.
However, with regard to the chattel mortgage, since the law (Act 1508) requires an affidavit of
good faith stating that the chattel mortgage is supposed to stand as security for the loan, it is
submitted that for validity of the chattel mortgage, it must be in a public document. A real
estate mortgage under the provisions of Article 2125 requires that in order that a mortgage may
be validly constituted that the document in which it appears must be recorded. If it is not
recorded, the mortgage is nevertheless valid and binding between the parties. Hence, for
validity both chattel and real estate mortgages must be in a public document. But for purposes
of enforceability, it is submitted that the form of the contract whether in a public or private
document would be immaterial. (Mobil Oil vs. Diocares 29 SCRA 656).
B) Ferdie’s refusal to accept the check on the ground that it does not qualify as legal tender is
correct because a check, whether a manager's check or ordinary check, is not legal tender, and
an offer of a check in payment of a debt is not a valid tender of payment and may be refused
receipt by the obligee or creditor. (Philippine Airlines vs. CA and Amelia Tan – January 30, 1990)
Mere delivery of checks does not discharge the obligation under a judgment. The obligation is
not extinguished and remains suspended until the payment by commercial document is actually
realized (Art. 1249, Civil Code, par. 3). Also, redemption within the period allowed by law is
not a matter of intent but a question of payment or valid tender of full redemption price within
the said period. Whether the redemption is being made under Act 3135 or under the General
Banking Law, the mortgagor or his assignee is required to tender payment to make said
redemption valid. (Heirs of Quisumbing vs. PNB aand SLDC –G.R. No. 178242 January 20, 2009)
QUESTION VII.
In 2005, Andres built a residential house on a lot whose only access to the national highway
was a pathway crossing Brando's property. Andres and others have been using this pathway
(pathway A) since 1980.
In 2006, Brand0 fenced off his property, thereby blocking Andres' access to the national
highway. Andres demanded that part of the fence be removed to maintain his old access route
to the highway (pathway A), but Brando refused, claiming that there was another available
pathway (pathway B) for ingress and egress to the highway. Andres countered that pathway B
has defects, is circuitous, and is extremely inconvenient to use.
To settle their dispute, Andres and Brando hired Damian, a geodetic and civil engineer, to survey
and examine the two pathways and the surrounding areas, and to determine the shortest and
the least prejudicial way through the servient estates. After the survey, the engineer concluded
that pathway B is the longer route and will need improvements and repairs, but will not
significantly affect the use of Brando's property. On the other hand, pathway A that had long
been in place, is the shorter route but would significantly affect the use of Brando's property.
5
In light of the engineer's findings and the circumstances of the case, resolve the parties' right
of way dispute. (6%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will rule in favor of Brando. The easement of right of way should be established at a point
least prejudicial to the servient estate where the distance from the dominant estate to the public
highway may be the shortest. (Art. 650) If these two conditions do not concur in one estate,
the criterion of least prejudice prevails over shortest distance. (Anastacia Quimen vs. CA and
Yolanda Oliveros May 29, 1996) In this case, to establish the easement on the property of
Brando would significantly affect his use of his property whereas while Pathway B may prove to
be the longer route, it will cause least prejudice to Brando. Andres’ argument that Pathway B
is circuitous and inconvenient to use should not be given weight because the true test of the
establishment of an easement is adequacy. Convenience of the dominant estate has never been
the gauge for the establishment of the easement. (Costabella Corporation v. CA 193 SCRA 333;
Cristobal vs. Ledesma 291 SCRA 122)
QUESTION VIII.
Ciriaco Realty Corporation (CRC) sold to the spouses Del a Cruz a500-square meter land (Lot A)
in Paranaque. The land now has a fair market value of Pl,200,000. CRC likewise sold to the
spouses Rodriguez, a 700-square meter land (Lot B) which is adjacent to Lot A. Lot B has a
present fair market value of P1,500,000.
The spouses Dela Cruz constructed a house on Lot B, relying on there presentation of the CRC
sales agent that it is the property they purchased. Only upon the completion of their house did
the spouses Dela Cruz discover that they had built on Lot B owned by the spouses Rodriguez,
not on Lot A that they purchased. They spent P 1 000,000 for the house.
As their lawyer, advise the spouses Dela Cruz on their rights and obligations under the given
circumstances, and the recourses and options open to them to protect their interests. (8%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will advise Spouses Dela Cruz that they have the right to retain possession of the premises
until Rodriguez exercises any of the options under Article 448 of the Civil Code. (Tecnogas
Manufacturing vs. CA February 10, 1997) Spouses Dela Cruz are builders in good faith because
before constructing the house, they exercised due diligence by asking the agent of CRC the
location of Lot A and they relied on the information given by the agent who is presumed to know
the identity of the lot purchased by the Dela Cruz. (Pleasantville vs. CA 253 SCRA 10) The owner
of the land on which anything has been built in good faith by another has the right to appropriate
as his own the works, sowing or planting after payment of the indemnity or to oblige the builder
to pay the price of the land if its value is not considerably higher than the building or trees, or
to ask the sower to pay proper rent. I will also advise my clients that Rodriguez may not compel
them to remove the improvements because it is not one of the options granted to the landowner
if the builder is in good faith.
6
QUESTION IX.
Rica petitioned for the annulment of her ten-year old marriage to Richard. Richard hired Atty.
Cruz to represent him in the proceedings. In payment for Atty. Cruz's acceptance and legal fees,
Richard conveyed to Atty. Cruz a parcel of land in Taguig that he recently purchased with his
lotto winnings. The transfer documents were duly signed and Atty. Cruz immediately took
possession by fencing off the property's entire perimeter.
Desperately needing money to pay for his mounting legal fees and his other needs and despite
the transfer to Atty. Cruz, Richard offered the same parcel of land for sale to the spouses Garcia.
After inspection of the land, the spouses considered it a good investment and purchased it from
Richard. Immediately after the sale, the spouses Garcia commenced the construction of a three-
story building over the land, but they were prevented from doing this by Atty. Cruz who claimed
he has a better right in light of the prior conveyance in his favor.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, Atty. Cruz is not correct. At first glance, it may appear that Atty. Cruz is the one who has a
better right because he first took possession of the property. However, as a lawyer of Richard
he is prohibited under Article 1491 from acquiring the property and rights which may the object
of any litigation in which they may take part by virtue of their profession. While the suit is for
annulment of marriage and it may be argued that the land itself is not the object of the litigation,
the annulment of marriage if granted, will carry with it the liquidation of the absolute community
or conjugal partnership of the spouses as the case may be (Article 50 in relation to Article 43 of
the Family Code). Richard purchased the land with his lotto winnings during the pendency of
the suit for annulment and on the assumption that the parties are governed by the regime of
absolute community or conjugal partnership, winnings from gambling or betting will form part
thereof. Also, since the land is part of the absolute community or conjugal partnership of the
Richard and Rica it may not be sold or alienated without the consent of the latter and any
disposition or encumbrance of the property of the community or conjugal property without the
consent of the other spouse is void. (Article 96 and Article 124, Family Code).
QUESTION X.
Manuel was born on 12 March 1940 in a 1 000-square meter property where he grew up helping
his father, Michael, cultivate the land. Michael has lived on the property since the land was
opened for settlement at about the time of the Commonwealth government in 193 5, but for
some reason never secured any title to the property other than a tax declaration in his name.
He has held the property through the years in the concept of an owner and his stay was
uncontested by others. He has also conscientiously and continuously paid the realty taxes on
the land.
Michael died in 2000 and Manuel - as Michael’s only son and heir -now wants to secure and
register title to the land in his own name. He consults you for legal advice as he wants to perfect
his title to the land and secure its registration in his name.
(A) What are the laws that you need to consider in advising Manuel on how he can perfect his
title and register the land in his name? Explain the relevance of these laws to your projected
course of action. (4%)
7
(B) What do you have to prove to secure Manuel's objectives and what documentation are
necessary? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A) For purposes of confirmation of imperfect title, I will have to consider the provisions of
Commonwealth Act No. 141 as well as the Property Registration Decree or P.D. 1529 in giving
my advice to Manuel. C.A. No. 141 which amended the second Public Land Act (Act 2874)
provides that there are two requisites for judicial confirmation of imperfect title namely:1) open
and continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and occupation of the land by himself or
through his predecessor in interest under bona fide claim of ownership since June 12, 1945; and
2) the classification of the land as alienable and disposable land of the public domain. (Secretary
of DENR v. Yap -G.R. NO. 167707, October 8, 2008) The Property Registration Decree or P.D.
1529 provides who may file an application for registration of title to the land under Section 14 1
thereof which provides that those who by themselves or their predecessors-in-interest have
been in open, continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and occupation of alienable and
disposable lands for the public domain under a bona fide claim of ownership since June 12, 1945
or earlier. Since Manuel’s father Michael had been in open, continuous, exclusive and notorious
possession of the land since 1935, and that the land was declared alienable in the same year,
his possession has ripened into ownership which entitles him or his successor Manuel to file an
application for judicial confirmation of imperfect title.
B) I have to prove that the land was already declared alienable at the time that Manuel or his
father Michael took possession of the land and that their possession was open, continuous,
exclusive and notorious which started prior to or on June 12, 1945 as required by C.A. No. 141.
To prove the first requisite, the original classification of the land as approved by the DENR
Secretary (Republic v. T.A. N. Properties 555 SCRA 4777 (2008) or in lieu thereof, a Certification
by the DENR Regional office attesting to the alienable and disposable character of the land
(Republic v. Serrano G.R. No. 183063 – February 24, 2010) must have to be submitted. I also
have to file together with the application for registration all original muniments of title or copies
thereof and a survey plan of the land approved by the Bureau of Lands in accordance with
Section 17 of P.D. 1529.2 Manuel may also submit the tax declarations and tax payment receipts
which have been ruled to be good indications of possession in the concept of owner (Republic
vs. Candy Maker, Inc. G.R. No. 163766, June 22, 2006).
1Section 14. Who may apply. The following persons may file in the proper Court of First Instance an application for registration
of title to land, whether personally or through their duly authorized representatives:
(1) Those who by themselves or through their predecessors-in-interest have been in open, continuous, exclusive and
notorious possession and occupation of alienable and disposable lands of the public domain under a bona fide claim of
ownership since June 12, 1945, or earlier.
(2) Those who have acquired ownership of private lands by prescription under the provision of existing laws.
(3) Those who have acquired ownership of private lands or abandoned river beds by right of accession or accretion
under the existing laws.
(4) Those who have acquired ownership of land in any other manner provided for by law.
2Section 17. What and where to file. The application for land registration shall be filed with the Court of First Instance of the
province or city where the land is situated. The applicant shall file together with the application all original muniments of titles
or copies thereof and a survey plan of the land approved by the Bureau of Lands.
The clerk of court shall not accept any application unless it is shown that the applicant has furnished the Director of Lands
with a copy of the application and all annexes.
8
2014 BAR EXAMINATIONS
UNIVERSITY of the PHILIPPINES LAW CENTER
SUGGESTED ANSWERS IN CIVIL LAW
Assoc. Dean Viviana M. Paguirigan
I.
Ariz and Paz were officemates at Perlas ng Silangan Bank (PSB). They fell in love with each other and
had a civil and church wedding. Meanwhile, Paz rapidly climbed the corporate ladder of PSB and
eventually became its Vice President, while Ariz remained one of its bank supervisors, although he was
short of 12 units to finish his Masters of Business Administration (MBA) degree.
Ariz became envious of the success of his wife. He started to drink alcohol until he became a drunkard.
He preferred to join his "barkadas"; became a wifebeater; would hurt his children without any reason;
and failed to contribute to the needs of the family. Despite rehabilitation and consultation with a
psychiatrist, his ways did not change.
After 19 years of marriage, Paz, a devout Catholic, decided to have their marriage annulled by the church.
Through the testimony of Paz and a psychiatrist, it was found that Ariz was a spoiled brat in his youth
and was sometimes involved in brawls. In his teens, he was once referred to a psychiatrist for t reatment
due to his violent tendencies. In due time, the National Appellate Matrimonial Tribunal (NAMT) annulled
the union of Ariz and Paz due to the failure of Ariz to perform and fulfill his duties as a husband and as
a father to their children. The NAMT concluded that it is for the best interest of Paz, Ariz and their children
to have the marriage annulled.
In view of the NAMT decision, Paz decided to file a Petition for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage of their
civil wedding before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Makati City using the NAMT decision and the same
evidence adduced in the church annulment proceedings as basis.
If you are the judge, will you grant the petition? Explain. (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
If I were the judge, I will not grant the petition. While the decision of the church tribunal annulling the
marriage of the parties may be persuasive, it is not however, binding upon the civil courts. For
psychological incapacity to be a ground for nullity, it must be shown that it was rooted in the history of
the party alleged to be suffering from it, must be grave and serious, and incurable such that it renders
the person incapacitated to perform the essential marital obligations due to causes psychological in
nature. In the case presented, it appears that Ariz fulfilled his marital obligations at the beginning and it
was only after feeling envious about the success of Paz that he started exhibiting violent tendencies and
refused to comply with marital obligations. Psychological incapacity is not mere refusal but outright
incapacity to perform marital obligations which does not appear to be present in the case of Ariz. (Marcos
v. Marcos G.R. No. 136490- October 19, 2000)
II.
Crispin died testate and was survived by Alex and Josine, his children from his first wife; Rene and Ruby,
his children from his second wife; and Allan, Bea, and Cheska, his children from his third wife.
"Ang lupa at bahay sa Lungsod ng Maynila ay ililipat at ilalagay sa pangalan nila Alex at Rene hindi bilang
pamana ko sa kanila kundi upang pamahalaan at pangalagaan lamang nila at nang ang sinuman sa aking
mga anak, sampu ng aking mga apo at kaapuapuhan ko sa habang panahon, ay may tutuluyan kung
magnanais na mag-aral sa Maynila o sa kalapit na mga lungsod."
9
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the provision is not valid. At first glance, the provision may appear valid as it provides for the transfer
of title in favor of Alex and Rene over the parcel of land. A legacy or devise is to be construed as a
donation effective mortis causa, and it is intended to transfer ownership to the legatee or devisee. Since
the ownership is legally transferred to the Alex and Rene, they cannot be prohibited by the testator from
alienating or partitioning the same perpetually. The dispositions of the testator declaring all or part of
the estate inalienable for more than twenty years are void. (Article 870)
III.
The Roman Catholic Church accepted a donation of a real property located in Lipa City. A deed of donation
was executed, signed by the donor, Don Mariano, and the donee, the Church, as represented by Fr.
Damian. Before the deed could be notarized, Don Mariano died. Is the donation valid? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The donation is void. The donation of an immovable property must be in a public instrument in order
for it to be valid. In this case, the donor died even before the notarization of the deed of donation.
Hence, it does not satisfy the requirement of being in a public instrument for the donation to be valid.
IV.
Nante, a registered owner of a parcel of land in Quezon City, sold the property to Monica under a deed
of sale which reads as follows:
"That for and in consideration of the sum of P500,000.00, value to be paid and delivered to me, and
receipt of which shall be acknowledged by me to the full satisfaction of Monica, referred to as Vendee, I
hereby sell, transfer, cede, convey, and assign, as by these presents, I do have sold, transferred, ceded,
conveyed and assigned a parcel of land covered by TCT No. 2468 in favor of the Vendee."
After delivery of the initial payment of P100,000.00, Monica immediately took possession of the property.
Five (5) months after, Monica failed to pay the remaining balance of the purchase price. Nante filed an
action for the recovery of possession of the property. Nante alleged that the agreement was one to
sell,which was not consummated as the full contract price was not paid. Is the contention of Nante
tenable?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The contention of Nante is not tenable. The deed itself states that for consideration received, he sells,
transfers, and conveys the land to Monica and there was delivery of the property to the latter. The
contract is clearly one of sale as there was no reservation of ownership on the part of the seller Nante.
The non-payment of the price in a contract of sale would only entitle the seller to rescind the contract
but it does not thereby prevent the transfer of ownership particularly so as in this case, where there was
already delivery to the buyer.
V.
10
Answer is letter B (preterition annuls the institution of heirs)
VI.
Miko and Dinah started to live together as husband and wife without the benefit of marriage in 1984.
Ten (10) years after, they separated. In 1996, they decided to live together again, and in 1998, they got
married.
On February 17, 2001, Dinah filed a complaint for declaration of nullity of her marriage with Miko on the
ground of psychological incapacity under Article 36 of the Family Code. The court rendered the following
decision:
3. Declaring that a decree of absolute nullity of marriage shall only be issued after liquidation, partition
and distribution of the parties’ properties under Article 147 of the Family Code."
Dinah filed a motion for partial reconsideration questioning the portion of the decision on the issuance
of a decree of nullity of marriage only after the liquidation, partition and distribution of properties under
Article 147 of the Code.
If you are the judge, how will you decide petitioner’s motion for partial reconsideration? Why? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will grant partial reconsideration. If the marriage is declared void under Article 36, the provisions of
the Family Code on liquidation, partition, and distribution of the properties on absolute community or
conjugal partnership will not apply but rather Article 147 or Article 148 depending on the presence or
absence of a legal impediment between them. In Dino v. Dino,3 the SC ruled that Art. 50 of the Family
Code and Section 19 of the Rules on Declaration of Nullity applies only to marriages which are declared
void ab initio or annulled by final judgment under Articles 40 and 45 of the Family. In short, Art. 50 of
the Family Code does not apply to marriages which are declared void ab initio under Art. 36 of the FC
which should be declared void without waiting for the liquidation of the properties of the parties.
VII.
Due to the continuous heavy rainfall, the major streets in Manila became flooded. This compelled Cris to
check-in at Square One Hotel. As soon as Crisgot off from his Toyota Altis, the Hotel’s parking attendant
got the key of his car and gave him a valet parking customer’s claim stub. The attendant parked his car
at the basement of the hotel. Early in the morning, Cris was informed by the hotel manager that his car
was carnapped. (4%)
(A) What contract, if any, was perfected between Cris and the Hotel when Cris surrendered the key of
his car to the Hotel’s parking attendant?
(B) What is the liability, if any, of the Hotel for the loss of Cris’ car?
3
Alain Dino vs. Ma. Caridad Dino G.R. No. 178044, January 19, 2011
11
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a) The contract between Cris and Square One Hotel is one of necessary deposit. Deposit of effects
made by travelers or guests in hotels or inns is considered a necessary deposit. 4 This includes
not only the personal effects brought inside the hotel premises but also vehicles or animals and
articles which have been introduced or placed in the annexes of the hotel.
b) In the case of Durban Apartments vs. Pioneer Insurance,5 the Supreme Court held the hotel liable
for the loss of the vehicle of the guest after its valet parking attendant parked the vehicle in front
of a bank near the hotel premises. The court ruled that the bank’s parking area became an annex
of the hotel when the management of the bank allowed the hotel to park vehicles there on the
night in question. The contract of deposit was perfected when the guest surrendered the keys to
his vehicle to the parking attendant and the hotel is under obligation of safely keeping and
returning it. Ultimately, Square One Hotel is liable for the loss of the vehicle.
VIII.
Tess leased her 1,500 sq. m. lot in Antipolo City to Ruth for a period of three (3) years, from January
2010 to February 2013.
On March 19, 2011, Tess sent a letter to Ruth, part of which reads as follows:
"I am offering you to buy the property you are presently leasing at P5,000.00 per sq. m. or for a total
of P7,500,000.00. You can pay the contract price by installment for two (2) years without interest.
I will give you a period of one (1) year from receipt of this letter to decide whether you will buy the
property."
After the expiration of the lease contract, Tess sold the property to her niece for a total consideration
of P4 million.
Ruth filed a complaint for the annulment of the sale, reconveyance and damages against Tess and
her niece. Ruth alleged that the sale of the leased property violated her right to buy under the
principle of right of first refusal.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the allegation of Ruth is not tenable. The letter written by Tess did not grant a right of first
refusal to Ruth. At most, it is to be construed as an option contract whereby Ruth was given the
right to buy or not to buy the leased property. An option is itself not a purchase but it merely secures
the privilege to buy. However, the option is not valid because it was not supported by a cause or
consideration distinct from the price of the property. (Article 1479) Also, Ruth does not appear to
have exercised her option before the offer was withdrawn by the subsequent sale of the property to
the niece of Tess.
IX.
4
Article 1998, Civil Code
5
G.R. No. 179419 January 12, 2011
12
Spouses Macario and Bonifacia Dakila entered into a contract to sell with Honorio Cruz over a parcel
of industrial land in Valenzuela, Bulacan for a price of Three Million Five Hundred Thousand Pesos
(P3,500,000.00). The spouses would give a downpayment of Five Hundred Thousand Pesos
(P500,000.00) upon the signing of the contract, while the balance would be paid for the next three
(3) consecutive months in the amount of One Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00) per month. The spouses
paid the first two (2) installments but not the last installment. After one (1) year, the spouses offered
to pay the unpaid balance which Honorio refused to accept.
The spouses filed a complaint for specific performance against Honorio invoking the application of
the Maceda Law. If you are the judge, how will you decide the case? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will rule in favor of Honorio. The invocation of the Maceda Law is misplaced. The law applies only
to sale or financing of realty on installment payments including residential units or residential
condominium apartments and does not apply to sales of industrial units or industrial lands like in the
case presented. Another reason why the Maceda law will not apply is that, the sale in the case at
bar is not the sale on installment as contemplated by the law. The sale on installment covered by
the Maceda Law is one where the price is paid or amortized over a certain period in equal installments.
The sale to the Spouses Dakila is not a sale on installment but more of a straight sale where a down
payment is to be made and the balance to be paid in a relatively short period of three months.
X.
Dorotea leased portions of her 2,000 sq. m. lot to Monet, Kathy, Celia, and Ruth for five (5) years.
Two (2) years before the expiration of the lease contract, Dorotea sold the property to PM Realty and
Development Corporation. The following month, Dorotea and PM Realty stopped accepting rental
payments from all the lessees because they wanted to terminate the lease contracts.
Due to the refusal of Dorotea to accept rental payments, the lessees , Ruth, et al., filed a complaint
for consignation of the rentals before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila without notifying
Dorotea.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the consignation is not valid. For consignation of the thing or sum due to be proper, there must
be prior notice to the creditor that the debtor is going to consign the payment in court. This notice
is intended to give the creditor the opportunity to accept payment and thus avoid liability for costs in
case it is found that the act of consignation was properly made. Even on the assumption that Dorotea
was no longer the creditor as she had already sold the property to DM Realty, the facts do not state
that the realty corporation was also given notice before filing the case for consignation.
XI.
Correct answer – letter D – only continuous and apparent easements may be acquired
by prescription
13
XII.
J.C. Construction (J.C.) bought steel bars from Matibay Steel Industries (MSI) which is owned by
Buddy Batungbacal. J.C. failed to pay the purchased materials worth P500,000.00 on due date. J.C.
persuaded its client Amoroso with whom it had receivables to pay its obligation to MSI. Amoroso
agreed and paid MSI the amount of P50,000.00. After two (2) other payments, Amoroso stopped
making further payments.
Buddy filed a complaint for collection of the balance of the obligation and damages against J.C. J.C.
denied any liability claiming that its obligation was extinguished by reason of novation which took
place when MSI accepted partial payments from Amoroso on its behalf.
Was the obligation of J.C. Construction to MSI extinguished by novation? Why? (4%)
SUGEGSTED ANSWER:
No, the obligation of JC was not extinguished by novation. Novation may either be objective or
subjective. Subjective novation takes place by the substitution of debtor or subrogation of a third person
to the rights of the creditor. Novation by substituting a new debtor may take place even without the
knowledge or against the will of the original debtor but not without the consent of the creditor. Moreover,
novation must be expressed and it cannot be implied and there must be an agreement that the old
obligation is extinguished. In the case of JC, it does not appear that MSI had agreed to release JC from
the obligation. Hence, the obligation of JC was not extinguished.
XIII.
Esteban and Martha had four (4) children: Rolando, Jun, Mark, and Hector. Rolando had a daughter,
Edith, while Mark had a son, Philip. After the death of Esteban and Martha, their three (3) parcels of
land were adjudicated to Jun. After the death of Jun, the properties passed to his surviving spouse
Anita, and son Cesar. When Anita died, her share went to her son Cesar. Ten (10) years after, Cesar
died intestate without any issue. Peachy, Anita’s sister, adjudicated to herself the properties as the
only surviving heir of Anita and Cesar. Edith and Philip would like to recover the properties claiming
that they should have been reserved by Peachy in their behalf and must now revert back to them.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the contention is not valid. The property adjudicated to Jun from the estate of his parents which he
in turn left to Anita and Cesar is not subject to reservation in favor of Edith and Philip. In Mendoza et.
al. vs.Policarpio, et. al. 6 the court ruled that lineal character of the reservable property is reckoned from
the ascendant from whom the propositus received the property by gratuitous title. The ownership should
be reckoned only from Jun, as he is the ascendant from where the first transmission occurred or from
whom Cesar inherited the properties. Moreover, Article 891 provides that the person obliged to reserve
the property should be an ascendant. Peachy is not Cesar’s ascendant but a mere collateral relative. On
the assumption that the property is reservable, Edith and Philip being first cousins of Cesar who is the
propositus are disqualified to be reservatarios as they are not third degree relatives of Cesar.
XIV.
6
G.R. NO. 176422 -March 20, 2013
14
A pedestrian, who was four (4) months pregnant, was hit by a bus driver while crossing the street.
Although the pedestrian survived, the fetus inside her womb was aborted. Can the pedestrian recover
damages on account of the death of the fetus? (1%)
(A) Yes, because of Article 2206 of the Civil Code which allows the surviving heirs to demand damages
for mental anguish by reason of the death of the deceased.
(B) Yes, for as long as the pedestrian can prove that she was not at fault and the bus driver was the
one negligent.
(D) No, if the fetus did not comply with the requirements under Article 41 of the Civil Code.
Correct Answer is letter D – Article 41 of the Civil Code requires that to be considered a person, a
fetus with an intrauterine life of less than seven months must survive for the full twenty-four hours from
complete separation from the mother’s womb.
XV.
Mr. Bong owns several properties in Pasig City. He decided to build a condominium named Flores de
Manila in one of his lots. To fund the project, he obtained a loan from the National Bank (NB) secured by
a real estate mortgage over the adjoining property which he also owned.
During construction, he built three (3) pumps on the mortgaged property to supply water to the
condominium. After one (1) year, the project was completed and the condominium was turned over to
the buyers. However, Mr. Bong failed to pay his loan obligation to NB. Thus, NB foreclosed the mortgaged
property where the pumps were installed. During the sale on public auction of the mortgaged property,
Mr. Simon won in the bidding. When Mr. Simon attempted to take possession of the property, the
condominium owners, who in the meantime constituted themselves into Flores de Manila Inc. (FMI),
claimed that they have earlier filed a case for the declaration of the existence of an easement before the
Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Pasig City and prayed that the easement be annotated in the title of the
property foreclosed by NB. FMI further claimed that when Mr. Bong installed the pumps in his adjoining
property, a voluntary easement was constituted in favor of FMI.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the action will not prosper. The essence of a mortgage is that it immediately subjects the property
upon which it is imposed, and whoever the possessor may be, to the fulfillment of the obligation for whose
security it was constituted.7 There was no voluntary easement in this case because at the time the water
pumps were constructed, the subject lot where the water pumps were constructed and the condominium
belong to the same person. No one can have an easement over his own property. (Bogo- Medellin vs.
CA G.R. 124699, July 31, 2003.) Even of the assumption that an easement was created in favor of FMI
that alone will not defeat the right of the mortgagee to enforce the security if the debtor defaults.
XVI.
A congregation for religious women, by way of commodatum, is using the real property owned and
registered in the name of Spouses Manuel as a retreat house.
Maria, a helper of the congregation discovered a chest in the backyard. When she opened the chest, it
contained several pieces of jewelry and money. (4%)
7
Article 2126
15
(A) Can the chest containing the pieces of jewelry and money be considered as hidden treasure?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a) No, for property to be considered hidden treasure it must consist of money, jewelry or other
precious objects, the lawful ownership of which does not appear. In the case at bar, the chest
was just lay in the backyard and the real property where it was found belongs to the Spouses
Manuel. They are thus presumed the owner of the chest where the jewelry was found.
b) Since it does not come within the purview of hidden treasure, the spouses Manuel have the right
to claim ownership over the chest as well as its contents.
XVII.
On March 30, 2000, Mariano died intestate and was survived by his wife, Leonora, and children, Danilo
and Carlito. One of the properties he left was a piece of land in Alabang where he built his residential
house.
After his burial, Leonora and Mariano’s children extrajudicially settled his estate. Thereafter, Leonora and
Danilo advised Carlito of their intention to partition the property. Carlito opposed invoking Article 159 of
the Family Code. Carlito alleged that since his minor child Lucas still resides in the premises, the family
home continues until that minor beneficiary becomes of age.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the contention of Carlito is not tenable. In the case of Patricio v. Dario,8 with similar facts to the case
at bar, the court ruled that to qualify as beneficiary of the family home the person must be among those
mentioned in Article 154, he/she must be actually living in the family home and must be dependent for
legal support upon the head of the family. While Lucas, the son of Carlito satisfies the first and second
requisites, he cannot however, directly claim legal support from his grandmother, Leonora because the
person primarily obliged to give support to Lucas is his father, Carlito. Thus, partition may be successfully
claimed by Leonora and Danilo.
XVIII.
Spouses Magtanggol managed and operated a gasoline station on a 1,000 sq.m. lot which they leased
from Francisco Bigla-awa. The contract was for a period of three (3) years. When the contract expired,
Francisco asked the spouses to peacefully vacate the premises. The spouses ignored the demand and
continued with the operation of the gasoline station.
One month after, Francisco, with the aid of a group of armed men, caused the closure of the gasoline
station by constructing fences around it.
Was the act of Francisco and his men lawful? Why? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the act was not lawful. Even if the lessee’s right to occupy the premises has expired, the lessor cannot
physically oust the lessee from the leased premises if the latter refuses to vacate. The lessor must go
through the proper channels by filing an appropriate case for unlawful detainer or recovery of possession.
Every possessor has a right to be respected in his possession (Article 539) and in no case my possession
be acquired through force or intimidation as long as there is a possessor who objects thereto. (Article
8
G.R. No. 170829 November 20, 2006
16
536) The act of Francisco is an abuse of rights because even if he has the right to recover possession of
his property, he must act with justice and give the lessees their day in court and observe honesty and
good faith.
XIX.
(A) Depositary until full payment of what may be due him in deposit.
(B) Lessee if he advances the expenses for the repair of the leased premises.
(D) Builder in bad faith for the recovery of necessary and useful expenses.
XX.
Mabuhay Elementary School organized a field trip for its Grade VI students in Fort Santiago,
Manila Zoo, and Star City. To be able to join, the parents of the students had to sign a piece of
paper that reads as follows:
"I allow my child (name of student), Grade – Section, to join the school’s field trip on February
14, 2014.
I will not file any claim against the school, administrator or teacher in case something happens
to my child during the trip."
Joey, a 7-year-old student of Mabuhay Elementary School was bitten by a snake while the group
was touring Manila Zoo. The parents of Joey sued the school for damages. The school, as a
defense, presented the waiver signed by Joey’s parents.
Was there a valid waiver of right to sue the school? Why? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, there was no valid waiver of the right to sue the school. A waiver to be valid must have three
requisites 1) existence of the right; 2) legal capacity of the person waiving the right and 3) the waiver
must not be contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order or public policy or prejudicial to a third
person with a right recognized by law. In the case presented, the waiver may be considered contrary to
public policy as it exonerates the school from liability for future negligence. The waiver in effect allows
the school to not exercise even ordinary diligence.
XXI.
(B) avulsion
(C) alluvium
17
(D) change in the course of the riverbed
XXII.
On March 27, 1980, Cornelio filed an application for land registration involving a parcel of
agricultural land that he had bought from Isaac identified as Lot No. 2716 with an area of one
(1) hectare. During the trial, Cornelio claimed that he and his predecessors-in-interest had been
in open, continuous, uninterrupted, public and adverse possession and occupation of the land
for more than thirty (30) years. He likewise introduced in evidence a certification dated February
12, 1981 citing a presidential declaration to the effect that on June 14, 1980, agricultural lands
of the public domain, including the subject matter of the application, were declared alienable
and disposable agricultural land. (4%)
(A) If you are the judge, will you grant the application for land registration of Cornelio?
(B) Can Cornelio acquire said agricultural land through acquisitive prescription, whether
ordinary or extraordinary?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a) No, I will not grant the application. To be entitled to registration of the parcel of land, the applicant
must show that the land being applied for is alienable land. At the time of the filing of the
application, the land has not yet been declared alienable by the state. (Republic v. CA, G.R. No.
144057, January 17, 2005)
b) Cornelio can acquire the land by acquisitive prescription only after it was declared part of alienable
land by the state by possession for the required number of years for ordinary prescription, ten
years possession in good faith with just title or extraordinary prescription by possession for thirty
years without need of any other condition. (Article 1134, Civil Code)
XXIII.
After undergoing sex reassignment in a foreign country, Jose, who is now using the name of
"Josie," married his partner Ador. Is the marriage valid? (1%)
(A) Yes, the marriage is valid for as long as it is valid in the place where it is celebrated
following Article 17 of the Civil Code.
(B) Yes, the marriage is valid if all the essential and formal elements of marriage under
the Family Code are present.
(C) No, the marriage is not valid because one essential element of marriage is absent.
(D) No, the marriage is not valid but is voidable because "Josie" concealed her real
identity.
Correct answer is letter C – not valid for lack of one essential requirement (Silverio v.
Republic G.R. No. 174689, October 22, 2007)
XXIV.
18
Ted, married to Annie, went to Canada to work. Five (5) years later, Ted became a naturalized
Canadian citizen. He returned to the Philippines to convince Annie to settle in Canada.
Unfortunately, Ted discovered that Annie and his friend Louie were having an affair. Deeply
hurt, Ted returned to Canada and filed a petition for divorce which was granted. In December
2013, Ted decided to marry his childhood friend Corazon in the Philippines. In preparation for
the wedding, Ted went to the Local Civil Registry of Quezon City where his marriage contract
with Annie was registered. He asked the Civil Register to annotate the decree of divorce on his
marriage contract with Annie. However, he was advised by the National Statistics Office (NSO)
to file a petition for judicial recognition of the decree of divorce in the Philippines.
Is it necessary for Ted to file a petition for judicial recognition of the decree of divorce he
obtained in Canada before he can contract a second marriage in the Philippines? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, a divorce decree even if validly obtained abroad cannot have effect in the Philippines unless it is
judicially recognized through an appropriate petition filed before Philippine courts. In Corpuz v. Sto.
Tomas,9 the SC ruled that the foreigner must file a petition under Rule 108 and prove therein the fact of
divorce by presenting an official copy attested by the officer having custody of the original. He must also
prove that the court which issued the divorce has jurisdiction to issue it and the law of the foreign country
on divorce.
XXV.
Mario executed his last will and testament where he acknowledges the child being conceived by
his live-in partner Josie as his own child; and that his house and lot in Baguio City be given to his
unborn conceived child. Are the acknowledgment and the donation mortis causa valid? Why?
(4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, the acknowledgment is considered valid because a will (although not required to be filed by the
notary public) may still constitute a document which contains an admission of illegitimate filiation. Article
834 also provides that the recognition of an illegitimate child does not lose its legal effect even though
the will wherein it was made should be revoked. This provision by itself warrants a conclusion that a will
may be considered as proof of filiation. The donation mortis causa may be considered valid because
although unborn, a fetus has a presumptive personality for all purposes favorable to it provided it be born
under the conditions specified in Article 41.
XXVI.
Isaac leased the apartment of Dorotea for two (2) years. Six (6) months after, Isaac subleased
a portion of the apartment due to financial difficulty. Is the sublease contract valid? (1%)
(A) Yes, it is valid for as long as all the elements of a valid sublease contract are present.
(B) Yes, it is valid if there is no express prohibition for subleasing in the lease contract.
(C) No, it is void if there is no written consent on the part of the lessor.
9
Gerbert Corpuz vs. Daisylyn Sto. Tomas G.R. No. 186571; August 11, 2010
19
(D) No, it is void because of breach of the lease contract.
XXVII.
Fe, Esperanza, and Caridad inherited from their parents a 500 sq. m. lot which they leased to
Maria for three (3) years. One year after, Fe, claiming to have the authority to represent her
siblings Esperanza and Caridad, offered to sell the leased property to Maria which the latter
accepted. The sale was not reduced into writing, but Maria started to make partial payments to
Fe, which the latter received and acknowledged. After giving the full payment, Maria demanded
for the execution of a deed of absolute sale which Esperanza and Caridad refused to do. Worst,
Maria learned that the siblings sold the same property to Manuel. This compelled Maria to file a
complaint for the annulment of the sale with specific performance and damages.
If you are the judge, how will you decide the case? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will dismiss the case for annulment of the sale and specific performance filed by Maria with respect to
the shares pertaining to Esperanza and Caridad. Since the object of the sale is a co-owned property, a
co-owner may sell his undivided share or interest in the property owned in common but the sale will be
subject to the result of the partition among the co-owners. In a co-ownership there is no mutual agency
except as provided under Article 487. Thus, Fe cannot sell the shares of Esperanza and Caridad without
a special power of attorney from them and the sale with respect to the shares of the latter without their
written authority is void under Article 1874. Hence, the sale of the property to Manuel is not valid with
respect to the shares of Esperanza and Caridad. Maria can only assail the portion pertaining to Fe as the
same has been validly sold to her by Fe.
XXVIII.
Spouses Esteban and Maria decided to raise their two (2) nieces, Faith and Hope, both minors,
as their own children after the parents of the minors died in a vehicular accident.
Ten (10) years after, Esteban died. Maria later on married her boss Daniel, a British national
who had been living in the Philippines for two (2) years.
With the permission of Daniel, Maria filed a petition for the adoption of Faith and Hope. She did
not include Daniel as her co-petitioner because for Maria, it was her former husband Esteban
who raised the kids.
If you are the judge, how will you resolve the petition? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will dismiss the petition for adoption. The rule is that the husband and wife must jointly adopt and there
are only three recognized exceptions to joint adoption by the husband and wife: 1) if one spouse seeks
to adopt the legitimate child of the other; 2) if one spouse seeks to adopt his or her own illegitimate child;
3) if the spouses are legally separated. The case of Maria and Daniel does not appear to fall under any
of the recognized exceptions, accordingly the petition filed by the wife alone should be dismissed.
XXIX
20
Timothy executed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with Kristopher setting up a business
venture covering three (3) fastfood stores known as "Hungry Toppings" that will be established
at Mall Uno, Mall Dos, and Mall Tres.
1. Timothy shall be considered a partner with thirty percent (30%) share in all of the
stores to be set up by Kristopher;
2. The proceeds of the business, after deducting expenses, shall be used to pay the
principal amount of P500,000.00 and the interest therein which is to be computed based
on the bank rate, representing the bank loan secured by Timothy;
3. The net profits, if any, after deducting the expenses and payments of the principal and
interest shall be divided as follows: seventy percent (70%) for Kristopher and thirty
percent (30%) for Timothy;
4. Kristopher shall have a free hand in running the business without any interference from
Timothy, his agents, representatives, or assigns , and should such interference happen,
Kristopher has the right to buy back the share of Timothy less the amounts already paid
on the principal and to dissolve the MOA; and
5. Kristopher shall submit his monthly sales report in connection with the business to
Timothy.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The contractual relationship between Timothy and Kristopher is a contract of partnership as defined
under Article 1767 of the Civil Code, since they have bound themselves to contribute money, property or
industry to a common fund, with the intention of dividing the profits of the partnership between them.
With a seed money of P500, 000.00 obtained by Timothy through a bank loan, they agreed to divide the
profits, 70% for Kristopher and 30% for Timothy.
However, to be more specific, theirs is a limited partnership as defined under Article 1843 of the Civil
Code because Timothy does not take part in the control of the business pursuant to Article 1848, Civil
Code. Nevertheless, Timothy is entitled to monthly sales reports in connection with the business, a right
enshrined in Article 1851 of the Civil Code.
XXX.
Joe Miguel, a well-known treasure hunter in Mindanao, executed a Special Power of Attorney
(SPA) appointing his nephew, John Paul, as his attorney-infact. John Paul was given the power
to deal with treasure-hunting activities on Joe Miguel’s land and to file charges against those
who may enter it without the latter’s authority. Joe Miguel agreed to give John Paul forty percent
(40%) of the treasure that may be found on the land.
Thereafter, John Paul filed a case for damages and injunction against Lilo for illegally entering
Joe Miguel’s land. Subsequently, he hired the legal services of Atty. Audrey agreeing to give the
latter thirty percent (30%) of Joe Miguel’s share in whatever treasure that may be found in the
land.
Dissatified however with the strategies implemented by John Paul, Joe Miguel unilaterally
revoked the SPA granted to John Paul.
21
Is the revocation proper? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the revocation was not proper. As a rule, a contract of agency may be revoked by the principal at
will.10 However, an agency ceases to be revocable at will if it is coupled with an interest or if it is a means
of fulfilling an obligation already contracted. (Article 1922). In the case at bar, the agency may be deemed
an agency coupled with an interest not only because of the fact that John Paul expects to receive 40%
of whatever treasure may be found but also because he also contracted the services of a lawyer pursuant
to his mandate under the contract of agency and he therefore stands to be liable to the lawyer whose
services he has contracted. (Sevilla v. Tourist World Service, G.R. No. L-41182-3 April 16, 1988)
I.
Alden and Stela were both former Filipino citizens. They were married in the Philippines
but they later migrated to the United States where they were naturalized as American citizens.
In their union they were able to accumulate several real properties both in the US and in the
Philippines. Unfortunately, they were not blessed with children. In the US, they executed a joint
will instituting as their common heirs to divide their combined estate in equal shares, the five
siblingsand of Alden the seven siblings of Stela. Alden passed away in 2013 and a year later,
Stela also died. The siblings of Alden who were all citizens of the US instituted probate
proceedings in a US court impleading the siblings of Stela who were all in the Philippines.
a) Was the joint will executed by Alden and Stela who were both former
Filipinos valid? Explain with legal basis. (3%)
b) Can the joint will produce legal effect in the Philippines with respect to the
propertiesand of Alden Stela found here? If so, how? (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a) Yes, the joint will of Alden and Stela is considered valid. Being no longer Filipino citizens at
the time they executed their joint will, the prohibition under our Civil Code on joint wills will no
longer apply to Alden and Stela. For as long as their will was executed in accordance with the
law of the place where they reside, or the law of the country of which they are citizens or even
in accordance with the Civil Code, a will executed by an alien is considered valid in the
Philippines. (Article 816)
b) Yes, the joint will of Alden and Stela can take effect even with respect to the properties
located in the Philippines because what governs the distribution of their estate is no longer
Philippine law but their national law at the time of their demise. Hence, the joint will produces
legal effect even with respect to the properties situated in the Philippines.
10
Article 1920
22
c) No, because depecage is a process of applying rules of different states on the basis of the
precise issue involved. It is a conflict of laws where different issues within a case may be
governed by the laws of different states. In the situation in letter (a) no conflict of laws will
arise because Alden and Stela are no longer Filipino citizens at the time of the execution of their
joint will and the place of execution is not the Philippines.
II.
Marco and Gina were married in 1989. Ten years later, or in 1999, Gina left Marco and
lived with another man, leaving their two children of school age with Marco. When Marco needed
money for their children's education he sold a parcel of land registered in his name, without
Gina's consent, which he purchased before his marriage. Is the sale by Marco valid, void or
voidable? Explain with legal basis. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The sale made by Marco is considered void. The parties were married in 1989 and no mention
was made whether they executed a marriage settlement. In the absence of a marriage
settlement, the parties shall be governed by absolute community of property whereby all the
properties owned by the spouses at the time of the celebration of the marriage as well as
whatever they may acquire during the marriage shall form part of the absolute community. In
ACP, neither spouse can sell or encumber property belonging to the ACP without the consent of
the other. Any sale or encumbrance made by one spouse without the consent of the other shall
be void although it is considered as a continuing offer on the part of the consenting spouse upon
authority of the court or written consent of the other spouse. (Article 96 FC)
III.
Julie had a relationship with a married man who had legitimate children. A son was born out of
that illicit relationship in 1981. Although the putative father did not recognize the child in his
certificate of birth, he nevertheless provided the with child all the support he needed and spent
time regularly with the child and his mother. When the man died in 2000, the child was already
18 years old so he filed a petition to be recognized as an illegitimate child of the putative father
and sought to be given a share in his putative father's estate. The legitimate family opposed,
saying that under the Family Code his action cannot prosper because he did not bring the action
for recognition during the lifetime of his putative father.
a) If you were the judge in this case, would how you rule? (4%)
b) Wishing to keep the peace, the child during the pendency of the case decides to
compromise with his putative father's family by abandoning his petition in exchange for Yi
of what he would have received as inheritance if he were recognized as an illegitimate
child. As the judge, would you approve such a compromise? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
23
a) If I were the judge, I will not allow the action for recognition filed after the death of the
putative father. Under the Family Code, an illegitimate child who has not been recognized
by the father in the record of birth, or in a private handwritten instrument, or in a public
document and may prove his filiation based on open and continuous possession of the status
of an illegitimate child but pursuant to Article 175, he or she must file the action for
recognition during the lifetime of the putative father. The provision of Article 285 of the Civil
Code allowing the child to file the action for recognition even after the death of the father
will not apply because in the case presented, the child was no longer a minor at the time of
death of the putative father.
b) No, I will not approve the compromise agreement because filiation is a matter to be decided
by law. It is not for the parties to stipulate whether a person is a legitimate or illegitimate
child of another. (De Jesus v. Estate of Dizon 366 SCRA 499) In all cases of illegitimate
children, their filiation must be duly proved. (Article 887, Civil Code)
IV.
Bert and Joe, both male and single, lived together as common law spouses and agreed to raise
a son of Bert's living brother as their child without legally adopting him. Bert worked while Joe
took care of their home and the boy. In their 20 years of cohabitation they were able to acquire
real estate assets registered in their names as co-owners. Unfortunately, Bert died of cardiac
arrest, leaving no will. Bert was survived by his biological siblings, Joe, and the boy.
a) Can Article 147 on co-ownership apply to Bert and Joe, whereby all properties they
acquired will be presumed to have been acquired by their joint industry and shall be owned
by them in equal shares? (2%)
b) What are the successional rights of the boy Bert Joe and raised as their son? (2%)
c) If Bert and Joe had decided in the early years of their cohabitation to jointly adopt the
boy, would they have been legally allowed to do so? Explain with legal basis. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a) No, Article 147 cannot apply to Bert and Joe because the law only applies to a man and a
woman who are capacitated to marry each other who live together as husband and wife
without the benefit of marriage or under a void marriage. In the case of Bert and Joe, they
are both men so the law does not apply.
b) Neither of the two will inherit from Bert. Joe cannot inherit because the law does not
recognize the right of a stranger to inherit from the decedent in the absence of a will. Their
cohabitation will not vest Joe with the right to inherit from Bert. The child will likewise not
inherit from Bert because of the lack of formal adoption of the child. A mere ward or “ampon”
has no right to inherit from the adopting parents. (Manuel v. Ferrer, 247 SCRA 476)
24
c) No, because joint adoption is allowed between husband and wife. Even if Bert and Joe are
cohabiting with each other, they are not vested with the right to jointly adopt under the
Family Code or even under the Domestic Adoption Act. (Section 7, R.A. 8552)
V.
Mrs. L was married to a ship captain who worked for an international maritime vessel. For her
and her family's support, she would claim monthly allotments from her husband's company. One
day, while en route from Hong Kong to Manila, the vessel manned by Captain L encountered a
severe typhoon at sea. The captain was able to send radio messages of distress to the head
office until all communications were lost. In the weeks that followed, the search operations
yielded debris of the lost ship but the bodies of the crew and the passengers were not recovered.
The insurance company thereafter paid out the death benefits to all the heirs of the passengers
and crew. Mrs. L filed a complaint demanding that her monthly allotments continue for the next
four years until her husband may be legally presumed dead because of his absence. If you were
the magistrate would how you rule? (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I would rule against Mrs. L. There is no merit in her contention that the monthly allotments to
her should continue despite the presumptive death of the husband. In case of disappearance
where there is danger of death, the person shall be presumed to have died at the beginning of
the four (4) year period although his succession will be opened only at the end of the four year
period. (Article 391, Civil Code) Since the husband of Mrs. L is presumed to have died at about
the time of disappearance, he is no longer entitled to receive his salary from the day the
presumption of death arises.
VI.
Kardo met Glenda as a young lieutenant and after a whirlwind courtship, they were
married. In the early part of his military career, Kardo was assigned to different places all over
the country but Glenda refused to accompany him as she preferred to live in her hometown.
They did not live together until the 12th year of their marriage when Kardo had risen up the
ranks and was given his own command. They moved to living quarters in Fort Gregorio. One
day, while Kardo was away on official business, one of his military aides caught Glenda having
sex with the corporal assigned as Kardo's driver. The aide immediately reported the matter to
Kardo who rushed home to confront his wife. Glenda readily admitted the affair and Kardo
sentawayher in anger. Kardo would later come to know the true extent of Glenda's unfaithfulness
from his aides, his household staff, and former neighbors who informed him that Glenda has
had intimate relations with various men throughout their marriage whenever Kardo was away
on assignment.
Kardo filed a petition for declaration of nullity of marriage under Article 36. Based on
interviews from Kardo, his aide, and the housekeeper, a psychologist testified that Glenda's
habitual infidelity was due to her affliction with Histrionic Personality Disorder, an illness
characterized by excessive emotionalism and uncontrollable attention-seeking behavior rooted
in Glenda's abandonment as a child by her father. Kardo himself, his aide, and his housekeeper
also testified in court. The RTC granted the petition, relying on the liberality espoused by Te v.
Te and Azcueta v. Republic. However, the OSG filed an appeal, arguing that sexual infidelity
was only a ground for legal separation and that the RTC failed to abide by the guidelines laid
down in the Molina case. How would you decide the appeal? (5%)
25
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will resolve the appeal in favor of the Republic. In the case of Dedel v. Dedel, (G.R. No. 151867
January 29, 2004) the Supreme Court refused to declare the marriage of the parties void on the
ground of sexual infidelity of the wife Sharon. In case mentioned, the wife committed infidelity
with several men up to the extent of siring two illegitimate children with a foreigner. The court,
however, said that it was not shown that the sexual infidelity was a product of a disordered
personality and that it was rooted in the history of the party alleged to be psychologically
incapacitated. Also, the finding of psychological incapacity cannot be based on the interviews
conducted by the clinical psychologist on the husband or his witnesses and the person alleged
to be psychologically incapacitated must be personally examined to arrive at such declaration.
(Marcos v. Marcos, 343 SCRA 755; Agraviador v. Agraviador, G.R. No. 170729- December 8,
2010)
VII.
Mr. and Mrs. X migrated to the US with all their children. As they had no intention of coming
back, they offered their house and lot for sale to their neighbors, Mr. and Mrs. A (the buyers)
who agreed to buy the property for 128 Million. Because Mr. and Mrs. A needed to obtain a loan
from a bank first, and since the sellers were in a hurry to migrate, the latter told the buyers that
they could already occupy the house, renovate it as it was already in a state of disrepair, and
pay only when their loan is approved and released. While waiting for the loan approval, the
buyers spent .Pl Million in repairing the house. A month later, a person carrying an authenticated
special power of attorney from the sellers demanded that the buyers either immediately pay for
the property in full now or vacate it and pay damages for having made improvements on the
property without a sale having been perfected.
a) What are the buyers' options or legal rights with respect to the they expenses
incurred in improving the property under circumstances? (3%)
b) Can the buyers be made to immediately vacate on the ground that the sale was
not perfected? Explain briefly. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a) The buyers here may be deemed possessors or builders in good faith because they were made
to believe that they were allowed to make repairs or renovation by the sellers themselves. As
builders in good faith, they have the right to seek reimbursement for the value of the
improvements in case the owner decides to appropriate them. They cannot be asked to remove
the improvements because that is not one of the options given by law to the landowner in case
the builder is in good faith.
b) No, the buyers cannot be made to vacate on the ground that the sale was not perfected for the
fact of the matter is that a contract of sale is consensual and is perfected by mere consent.
(Article 1315, Civil Code) In this case, there was an agreement to deliver a determinate thing
for a price certain in money. When the owners made an offer to sell their property to Mr. and
Mrs. A and the latter accepted the offer, there was already a meeting of the minds between the
parties resulting in the perfection of the contract of sale.
26
VIII.
X, Y, Z are siblings who inherited a IO-storey building from their parents. They agreed in writing
to maintain it as a co-owned property for leasing out and to divide the net profits among
themselves equally for a period of 20 years. On the gth year, X wanted to get out of the co-
ownership so he could get his 1/3 share in the property. Y and Z refused, saying X is bound by
their agreement to keep the co-ownership for 20 years. Are Y and Z correct? Explain. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Y and Z are partly correct. The law provides that none of the co-owners shall be obliged to
remain in the co-ownership and it is the right of a co-owner to ask for partition of the co-
ownership anytime. One exception to the rule is if the co-owners agree to keep the thing
undivided which period shall not exceed ten years. In this case, the agreement to keep the
thing undivided shall be valid at the most for ten years. (Article 494, Civil Code)
IX.
Jose, single, donated a house and lot to his only niece, Maria, who was of legal age and who
accepted the donation. The donation and Maria's acceptance thereof were evidenced by a Deed
of Donation. Maria then lived in the house and lot donated to her, religiously paying real estate
taxes thereon. Twelve years later, when Jose had already passed away, a woman claiming to
be an illegitimate daughter of Jose filed a complaint against Maria. Claiming rights as an heir,
the woman prayed that Maria be ordered to reconvey the house and lot to Jose's estate. In her
complaint she alleged that the notary public who notarized the Deed of Donation had an expired
notarial commission when the Deed of Donation was executed by Jose. Can Maria be made to
reconvey the property? What can she put up as a defense? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No. Maria cannot be compelled to reconvey the property. The Deed of Donation was void
because it was not considered a public document. However, a void donation can trigger
acquisitive prescription. (Solis v. CA 176 SCRA 678; Doliendo v. Biarnesa 7 Phil. 232) The void
donation has a quality of titulo colorado enough for acquisitive prescription especially since 12
years had lapsed from the deed of donation.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: Yes, Maria can be made to reconvey the property. The law provides
that no person may give or receive by way of donation more than what he may give or receive
by will. On the assumption that the property donated to Maria is the only property of Jose, the
legitime of his illegitimate child would be impaired if Maria would be allowed to keep the entire
property. After taking into account the value of the property, Maria can be made to reconvey
the property to the extent necessary to satisfy the legitime of Jose’s illegitimate daughter
provided that the woman claiming to be Jose’s child can prove her filiation to the deceased.
Maria can set up the defense that the action has prescribed. An action for revocation of the
donation on the ground that it impaired the legitime of a compulsory heir may only be filed
within ten (10) years from the time the cause of action accrues which is at the time of the death
of Jose. The facts are not clear as to when Jose died but on the assumption that he died ten
years prior to the filing of the action, the same has clearly prescribed.
X.
X, a dressmaker, accepted clothing materials from Karla to make two dresses for her.
dayOn the X was supposed to deliver Karla's dresses, X called up Karla to say that she had an
27
urgent matter to attend to and will deliver them the next day. That night, however, a robber
broke into her shop and took everything including Karla's two dresses. X claims she is not liable
to deliver Karla's dresses or to pay for the clothing materials considering she herself was a victim
of the robbery which was a fortuitous event and over which she had no control. Do you agree?
Why? (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, I do not agree with the contention of X. The law provides that except when it is otherwise
declared by stipulation or when the law provides or the nature of the obligation requires the
assumption of risk, no person shall be liable for those events which could not be foreseen or
which though foreseen were inevitable. (Article 1174, Civil Code) In the case presented, X cannot
invoke fortuitous event as a defense because she had already incurred in delay at the time of
the occurrence of the loss. (Article 1165, Civil Code)
XI.
Jackie, 16, inherited a townhouse. Because she wanted to study in an exclusive school, she sold
her townhouse by signing a Deed of Sale and turning over possession of the same to the buyer.
Whenthatthe buyer discovered she was still a minor, she promised to execute another Deed of
Sale when she turns 18. When Jackie turned 25 and was already working, she wanted to annul
the sale and return the buyer's money to recover her townhouse. Was the sale contract void,
voidable or valid? Can Jackie still recover the property? Explain. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The contract of sale was voidable on the ground that Jackie is incapable of giving consent at the
time of the execution of the sale. (Article 1390 and Article 1327) Jackie can no longer recover
the townhouse unit because if a contract is voidable on the ground of minority, the action to
annul it must be filed within four (4) years from attainment of the age of majority. Since Jackie
was already 25 years old, the action has clearly prescribed because she should have filed it
before she reached the age of 22. (Article 1391, Civil Code)
XII.
A. Iya and Betty owed Jun P500,000.00 for advancing their equity in a corporation they
joined as incorporators. Iya and Betty bound themselves solidarily liable for the debt. Later, Iya
and Jun became sweethearts so Jun condoned the debt of P500,000.00. May lya demand from
Betty ~250,000.00 as her share in the debt? Explainlegal with basis. (2%)
B. Juancho, Don and Pedro borrowed ~150,000.00 from their friend Cita to put up an
internet cafe orally promising to pay her the full amount after one year. Because of their lack of
business know-how, their business collapsed. Juancho and Don ended up penniless but Pedro
was able to borrow money and put up a restaurant which did well. Can Cita demand that Pedro
pay the entire obligation since he, together with the two others, promised to pay the amount in
full after one year? Defend your answer. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a) No, Iya may not demand the 250,000 from Betty because the entire obligation has been
condoned by the creditor Jun. In a solidary obligation the remission of the whole obligation
obtained by one of the solidary debtors does not entitle him to reimbursement from his co-
debtors. (Article 1220, Civil Code)
28
b) No, Cita cannot demand that Pedro pay the entire obligation because the obligation in this case
is presumed to be joint. The concurrence of two or more creditors or of two or more debtors in
one and the same obligation does not imply that each one of the former has a right to demand,
or that each one of the latter is bound to render, entire compliance with the prestation. (Article
1207) In a joint obligation, there is no mutual agency among the joint debtors such that if one
of them is insolvent the others shall not be liable for his share.
XIII.
A. X and Y are partners in a shop offering portrait painting. Y provided the capital and
the marketing while X was the portrait artist. They accepted the PS0,000.00 payment of Kyla to
do her portrait but X passed away without being able to do it. Can Kyla demand that Y deliver
the portrait she had paid for because she was dealing the with business establishment and not
with the artist personally? Why or why not? (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a) No Kyla cannot demand that Y deliver the portrait. The death of X has the effect of dissolving
the partnership. (Article 1830, Civil Code) Also, while the obligation was contracted by the
partnership, it was X who was supposed to create the portrait for Kyla. Since X died before
creating the portrait, the obligation can no longer be complied because of impossibility of
performance. (Article 1266) In obligations to do, the debtor shall be released when the
prestation becomes legally or physically impossible without the debtor’s fault.
b) Yes, under Philippine law, a joint venture is understood to mean an organization formed for
some temporary purpose and is hardly distinguishable form a partnership since its elements are
similar which are: community of interest in business, sharing of profits, and losses, and a mutual
right of control. (Primelink Properties v. Lazatin June 27, 2006 citing Blackner v. Mcdermott,
176 F. 2d 498[1949])
XIV.
A driver of a bus owned by company Z ran over a boy who died instantly. A criminal case for
reckless imprudence resulting in homicide was filed against the driver. He was convicted and
was ordered to pay P2 Million in actual and moral damages to the parents of the boy who was
an honor student and had a bright future. Without even trying to find out if the driver had assets
or means to pay the award of damages, the parents of the boy filed a civil action against the
bus company to make it directly liable for the damages.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
29
a) Yes, the action will prosper. The liability of the employer in this case may be based on quasi-
delict and is included within the coverage of independent civil action. It is not necessary to
enforce the civil liability based on culpa aquiliana that the driver or employee be proven to be
insolvent since the liability of the employer for the quasi-delicts committed by their employees
is direct and primary subject to the defense of due diligence on their part. (Article 2176; Article
2180)
b) Yes, the parents of the boy can enforce the subsidiary liability of the employer in the criminal
case against the driver. The conviction of the driver is a condition sine qua non for the subsidiary
liability of the employer to attach. Proof must be shown that the driver is insolvent. (Article 103,
Revised Penal Code)
XV.
A. Sara borrowed PS0,000.00 from Julia and orally promised to pay it within six
months. When Sara tried to pay her debt on the gth month, Julia demanded the payment of
interest of 12o/o per annum because of Sara's delay in payment. Sara paid her debt and the
interest claimed by Julia. After rethinking, Sara demanded back from Julia the amount she had
paid as interest. Julia claims she has no obligation to return the interest paid by Sara because
it was a natural obligation which Sara voluntarily performed and can no longer recover. Do you
agree? Explain. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a) No, the case is not one of a natural obligation because even if the contract of loan is verbal, the
delay of Julia made her liable for interest upon demand by Sara. This is not a case of a natural
obligation but a civil obligation to pay interest by way of damages by reason of delay. (Article
1956; Article 1169; Article 2209 Civil Code)
b) A civil obligation is based on positive law which gives a right of action to compel their
performance in case of breach. A natural obligation is based on equity and natural law and
cannot be enforced by court action but after voluntary fulfilment by the obligor, they authorize
the retention of what may have been delivered or rendered by reason thereof. (Article 1423,
Civil Code)
XVI.
Donna pledged a set of diamond ring and earrings to Jane for P200,000.00 She was
made to sign an agreement that if she cannot pay her debt within six months, Jane could
immediately appropriate the jewelry for herself. After six months, Donna failed to pay. Jane
then displayed the earrings and ring set in her jewelry shop located in a mall. A buyer, Juana,
bought the jewelry set for P300,000.00.
a) Was the agreement which Donna signed with Jane valid? Explain with legal
basis. (2%)
b) Can Donna redeem the jewelry set from Juana by paying the amount she
owed Jane to Juana? Explain with legal basis. (2%)
c) Give an example of a pledge created by operation of law. (2%)
30
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a) appropriate the jewelry upon default of Donna is considered pactum commissorium and it is
considered void by law. ( Article 2088)
b) No, Donna cannot redeem it from Juana because the pledge contract is between her and Jane.
Juana is not a party to the pledge contract. (Article 1311, Civil Code)
c) One example of a pledge created by operation of law is the right of the depositary to retain the
thing deposited until the depositor shall have paid him whatever may be due to the depositary
by reason of the deposit. (1994) Another is the right of the agent to retain the thing which is
the object of the agency until the principal reimburses him the expenses incurred in the
execution of the agency. (Article 1914, Civil Code)
XVII.
Z, a gambler, wagered and lost P2 Million in baccarat, a card game. He was pressured into
signing a Deed of Absolute Sale in favor of the winner covering a parcel ·of land with
improvements worth P20 Million. One month later, the supposed vendee of the property
demanded that he and his family vacate the property subject of the deed of sale. Was the deed
of sale valid? What can Z do? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The sale is valid. Being pressured to sign the deed of sale is not equivalent to vitiation of
consent. Z however, can recover his losses from the winner because the law provides that no
action can be maintained by the winner for the collection of what he has won in any game of
chance. But any loser in a game of chance may recover his loss from the winner, with legal
interests from the time he paid the amount lost. (Article 2014)
XVIII.
A lawyer was given an authority by means of a Special Power of Attorney by his client to sell a
parcel of land for the amount of P3 Million. Since the client owed the lawyer Pl Million in
attorney's fees in a prior case he handled, the client agreed that if the property is sold, the
lawyer was entitled to get 5% agent's fee plus Pl Million as payment for his unpaid attorney's
fees. The client, however, subsequently found a buyer of his own who was willing to buy the
property for a higher amount. Can the client unilaterallythe rescind authority he gave in favor
of his lawyer? Why or why not? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the agency in the case presented is one which is coupled with an interest. As a rule, agency
is revocable at will except if it was established for the common benefit of the agent and the
principal. In this case, the interest of the lawyer is not merely limited to his commission for the
sale of the property but extends to his right to collect his unpaid professional fees. Hence, it is
not revocable at will. (Article 1927)
XIX.
31
Mr. A, a businessman, put several real estate properties under the name of his eldest son X
because at that time, X was the only one of legal age among his four children. He told his son
he was to hold those assets for his siblings until they become adults themselves. X then got
married. After 5 years, Mr. A asked X to transfer the titles over three properties to his three
siblings, leaving two properties for himself. To A’s surprise, X said that he can no longer be
made to transfer the properties to his siblings because more than 5 years have passed since the
titles were registered in his name. Do you agree? Explain. ( 4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the transfer of the properties in the name of X was without cause or consideration and it
was made for the purpose of holding these properties in trust for the siblings of X. If the transfer
was by virtue of a sale, the same is void for lack of cause or consideration. Hence, the action
to declare the sale void is imprescriptible. (Article Heirs of Ureta vs. Ureta September 14,
2011- G.R. No. 165748 September 14, 2011
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
No, I do not agree. A trust was created in favor of the siblings of X when their father A
transferred the titles in his name. The facts are clear that X was to hold these assets for his
siblings until they reach the age of majority. An action to recover property based on an implied
trust prescribes in ten years from the time the title was issued in favor of the trustee. In the
case presented, only five years had lapsed from the issuance of the title hence, the action has
not yet prescribed.
XX.
A. Mr. and Mrs. Roman and Mr. and Mrs. Cruz filed an application for registration of a parcel
of land which after due proceedings was granted by the RTC acting registration as land court.
However, before the decree of registration could be issued, the spouses Roman and the spouses
Cruz sold the lot to Juan. In the notarized deed of sale, the sellers expressly undertook to submit
the deed of sale to the land registration court so that the title to the property would be directly
issued in Juan's name. Is such a stipulation valid? (2%)
C. If the title in Item XX.A is issued in the names of the original sellers, would a motion filed
by Juan in the same case to correct or amend the title in order to reflect his name as owner
considered be collateral attack? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a) Yes, because when one who is not the owner of the property sells or alienates it and later the
seller or grantor acquires title, such title passes by operation of law to the buyer or grantee.
(Article 1434, Civil Code)
b) A direct attack on a title is one where the action filed is precisely for the purpose of pointing out
the defects in the title with a prayer that it be declared void. A collateral attack is one where
the action is not instituted for the purpose of attacking the title but the nullity of the title is
raised as a defense in a different action.
32
c) No, because Juan is not attacking the title but merely invoking his right as transferee. Hence, it
does not involve a collateral attack on the title.
33
I.
State whether the following marital unions are valid, void, or voidable, and give the
corresponding justifications for your answer:
a. Ador and Becky’s marriage wherein Ador was afflicted with AIDS prior to the
marriage. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Voidable. Under the Family Code, a marriage is voidable if either of
the party was afflicted with a sexually transmissible disease which is serious and incurable,
such as AIDS. Here, Ador was afflicted with AIDS at the time of the celebration of the
marriage, a sexually transmissible disease considered to be serious and incurable. [Basis:
Article 45(6), Family Code; discussed in p. 122, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s Civ Reviewer Book]
b. Carlos’ marriage to Dina which took place after Dina had poisoned her previous
husband Edu in order to free herself from any impediment in order to live with
Carlos. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Void. Under the Family Code, a marriage is declared void by reason
of public policy when one, with the intention to marry the other, killed that other spouse or
his or her own spouse. Here, the wife killed her previous husband for the purpose of
marrying the second husband. [Basis: Article 38 (9), Family Code; discussed in p. 94, Vol. 1,
Rabuya’s Civ Reviewer Book]
c. Eli and Fely’s marriage solemnized seven years after the disappearance of Chona,
Eli’s previous spouse, after the plane she had boarded crashed in the West Philippine
Sea. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: If the marriage took place during the effectivity of the Family Code
and Chona is in fact alive, the subsequent marriage is void for being bigamous because Eli
failed to obtain a judicial declaration of presumptive death of the absentee spouse prior to
contracting the subsequent marriage. Under the Family Code, a judicial declaration of
presumptive death of the absentee is required to be obtained by the spouse present to
make the subsequent marriage valid. However, had Chona really died when the plane
crashed, the subsequent marriage of Eli is valid because the prior marriage was already
terminated. [Basis: Article 41, Family Code; Armas v. Calisterio, 330 SCRA 201 (2000);
discussed in pp. 99-100, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s Civ Reviewer Book]
But if the subsequent marriage took place during the effectivity of the Civil Code, the
marriage is valid until annulled (voidable) because no judicial declaration of presumptive
death was required under the Civil Code.
d. David who married Lina immediately the day after obtaining a judicial decree
annulling his prior marriage to Elisa. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Void. Under the Family Code, David is required to record the
judgment of annullment and the partition and distribution of the properties of the spouses,
as well as the delivery of the presumptive legitimes of their children, in the appropriate
civil registry and registries of property prior to contracting the second marriage;
otherwise, the subsequent marriage is void. [Basis: Article 35(6), in relation to Artcicles 53
and 52, Family Code; discussed in p. 83, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s Civ Reviewer Book]
e. Marriage of Zoren and Carmina who did not secure a marriage license prior to
their wedding, but lived together as husband and wife for 10 years without any legal
impediment to marry. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Valid because their marriage is exceptional and exempt from the
requirement of a marriage license. Under the Family Code, the marriage of a man and
woman who lived exclusively as husband and wife for at least five years and without
impediment is exempt from the requirement of a marriage license. [Basis: Article 34,
Family Code; discussed in pp. 57-58, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s Civ Reviewer Book]
II.
In 1960, Rigor and Mike occupied two separate but adjacent tracts of land in
Mindoro. Rigor’s tract was classified as timber land while Mike’s was classified as
agricultural land. Each of them fenced and cultivated his own tract continuously for
30 years. In 1991, the Government declared the land occupied by Mike as alienable
and disposable, and the one cultivated by Rigor as no longer intended for public use
or public service.
Rigor and Mike now come to you today for legal advice in asserting their right of
ownership of their respective lands based on their long possession and occupation
since 1960.
a. What are the legal consequences of the 1991 declarations of the Government
respecting the lands? Explain your answer. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
As to the land occupied Mike, the same remains property of the public dominion. According
to jurisprudence, the classification of the property as alienable and disposable land of the
public domain does not change its status as property of the public dominion. There must be
an express declaration by the State that the public dominion property is no longer intended
for public service or the development of the national wealth or that the property has been
converted into patrimonial. Without such express declaration, the property, even if
classified as alienable or disposable, remains property of the public dominion. [Basis: Heirs
of Mario Malabanan v. Republic, 587 SCRA 172 (2009); Heirs of Mario Malabanan v.
Republic, 704 SCRA 561 (2013); discussed in my FB wall on October 15 and 16, 2017 and
pp. 338-344, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer]
As to the land occupied by Rigor, the declaration that it is no longer intended for public use
or public service converted the same into patrimonial property provided that such express
declaration was in the form of a law duly enacted by Congress or in a Presidential
Proclamation in cases where the President was duly authorized by law. According to
jurisprudence, when public land is no longer intended for public use, public service or for
the development of the national wealth it is thereby effectively removed from the ambit of
public dominion and converted into patrimonnial provided that the declaration of such
conversion must be made in the form of a law duly enacted by Congress or by a
Presidential proclamation in cases where the President is duly authorized by law to that
effect. [Basis: Heirs of Mario Malabanan v. Republic, 587 SCRA 172 (2009); Heirs of Mario
Malabanan v. Republic, 704 SCRA 561 (2013); discussed in my FB wall on October 15 and
16, 2017 and pp. 338-344, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer]
b. Given that, according to Section 48(b) of Commonwealth Act No. 141, in relation to
Section 14(1) of Presidential Decree No. 1529, the open, continuous, exclusive, and
notorious possession and occupation of alienable and disposable lands of the public
domain as basis for judicial confirmation of imperfect title must be from June 12,
1945, or earlier, may Mike nevertheless validly base his assertion of the right of
ownership on prescription under the Civil Code? Explain your answer. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, because the land remains property of public dominion and, therefore, not susceptible to
acquisition by prescription.
c. Does Rigor have legal basis for his application for judicial confirmation of
imperfect title based on prescription as defined by the Civil Code given that, like
Mike, his open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession and occupation was
not since June 12, 1945, or earlier, and his tract of land was timber land until the
declaration in 1991? Explain your answer. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
None, because Rigor’s possession was short of the period required by the Civil Code for
purposes of acquisitive prescription which requires ten (10) years of continuous
possession, if possession was in good faith and with a just title, or thirty years, in any event.
While the property may be considered converted into patrimomial because of the 1991
declaration that it is no longer intended for public use or public service (provided that the
declaration be in the form of a law of a law duly enacted by Congress or by a Presidential
proclamation in cases where the President is duly authorized by law to that effect), Rigor
failed to complete the 30-year period required by law in case of extra-ordinary
prescription. Since the property was converted into patrimonial only in 1991, the period of
presciption commenced to run beginning that year only. Rigor’s possession prior to the
conversion of the property into patrimonial cannot be counted for the purpose of
completing the prescriptive period because prescription did not operate against the State
at that time, the property then being public dominion property.
Rigor may not likewise acquire ownership by virtue of the shorter 10-year ordinary
prescription because his possession was not in good faith and without a just title.
[Basis: Heirs of Mario Malabanan v. Republic, 587 SCRA 172 (2009); Heirs of Mario
Malabanan v. Republic, 704 SCRA 561 (2013); discussed in my FB wall on October 15 and
16, 2017 and pp. 338-344, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer]
III.
Josef owns a piece of land in Pampanga. The National Housing Authority (NHA)
sought to expropriate the property for its socialized housing project. The trial court
fixed the just compensation for the property at P50 million. The NHA immediately
deposited the same at the authorized depository bank and filed a motion for the
issuance of a writ of possession with the trial court. Unfortunately, there was delay in
the resolution of the motion. Meanwhile, the amount deposited earned interest.
When Josef sought the release of the amount deposited, NHA argued that Josef should
only be entitled to P50 million.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The interest earned belongs to Josef because bank interest partakes of the nature of civil
fruits under Article 442 of the Civil Code and shall belong to the owner of the principal
thing.
When the National Housing Authority deposited the P50 Million as payment for the just
compensation with an authorized depositary bank for the purpose of obtaining a writ of
possession, it is deemed to be a constructive delivery of the said amount to Josef. Since
Josef is entitled to the P50 Million and undisputably the owner of the said principal amount,
the interest yield, as accession, in a bank deposit should likewise pertain to the owner of
the money deposited. Being an attribute of ownership (jus fruendi), Josef’s right over the
fruits, that is the bank interests, must be respected. [Basis: Republic v. Holy Trinity Realty
Development Corp., G.R. No. 172410, April 14, 2008]
IV.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(1) Antichresis is always a contract while usufruct need not arise from a contract because it
may also be constituted by law or by other acts inter vivos, such as donation, or in a last
will and testament, or by prescription.
(2) The subject matter of antichresis is always a real property while the subject matter of
usufruct may either be real property or personal property.
(3) Antichresis is an accessory contract or contract of security while usufruct is a real right.
(4) While in both, the fruits do not pertain to the owner, the usufructuary is entitled to
enjoy the fruits while the antichretic creditor has the obligation to apply the fruits to the
payment of the interest, if owing, and therefatre to the principal of the credit.
V.
Jacob has owned a farm land in Ramos, Tarlac. In 2012, Liz surreptitiously entered
and cultivated the property. In 2014, Jacob discovered Liz’s presence in and
cultivation of the property. Due to his being busy attending to his business in Cebu,
he tolerated Liz’s cultivation of the property. Subsequently, in December 2016, Jacob
wanted to regain possession of the property; hence, he sent a letter to Liz demanding
that she vacate the property. Liz did not vacate despite the demand.
Jacob comes to enlist your legal assistance to bring an action against Liz to recover
the possession of the property.
What remedies are available to Jacob to recover possession of his property under the
circumstances? Explain your answer. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The remedy available to Jacob is accion publiciana, or an action for the recovery of the
better right of possession. It also refers to an ejectment suit filed after the expiration of one
year from accrual of the cause of action or from the unalwful withholding of possession of
the realty.
Since the entry made by Liz is through stealth, Jacob could have filed an action for forcible
entry. Ordinarily, the one-year period within which to bring an action for forcible entry is
generally counted from the date of actual entry on the land, except that when the entry is
through stealth, the one-year period is counted from the time the plaintiff learned thereof.
Here, since more than one year had elapsed since Jacob learned of the entry made by Liz
through stealth, the action that may be filed by Jacob is no longer forcible entry, but an
accion publiciana. [Basis: Canlas v. Tubil, 601 SCRA 147 (2009); Valdez v. CA, 489 SCRA 369
(2006); discussed in pp. 353-354, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer]
VI.
Tyler owns a lot that is enclosed by the lots of Riley to the North and East, of Dylan to
the South, and of Reece to the West. The current route to the public highway is a
kilometer’s walk through the northern lot of Riley, but the route is a rough road that
gets muddy during the rainy season, and is inconvenient because it is only 2.5 meters
wide. Tyler’s nearest access to the public highway would be through the southern lot
of Dylan.
May Dylan be legally required to afford to Tyler a right of way through his property?
Explain your answer. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, Dylan is not entitled to a grant of compulsory right of way because he has an adequate
outlet going to the public highway.
One of the requisites for a compulsory grant of right of way is that the estate of the claimant
of a right of way must be isolated and without adequate outlet to a public highway. The
true standard for the grant of compulsory right of way is “adequacy” of outlet going to a
public highway and not the convenience of the dominant estate.
In the case at bar, there is already an existing adquate outlet from the dominant estate to a
public highway. Even if said outlet be incovenient, the need to open up another servitude is
entirely unjustified. [Basis: Article 649, Civil Code; Dichoso, Jr. v. Marcos, 647 SCRA 495
(2011); Costabella Corp. v. CA, 193 SCRA 333 (1991); discussed in pp. 559-561, Vol. 1,
Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer]
VII.
Alice agreed to sell a parcel of land with an area of 500 square meters registered in
her name and covered by TCT No. 12345 in favor of Bernadette for the amount of
P900,000. Their agreement dated October 15, 2015, reads as follows:
I, Bernadette, agree to buy the lot owned by Alice covered by TCT No. 12345 for the
amount of P900,000 subject to the following schedule of payment:
Title to the property shall be transferred upon full payment of P900,000 on or before
February 15, 2016.
After making the initial payment of P100,000 on October 15, 2015, and the second
installment of P200,000 on November 15, 2015, Bernadette defaulted despite
repeated demands from Alice.
In December 2016, Bernadette offered to pay her balance but Alice refused and told
her that the land was no longer for sale. Due to the refusal, Bernadette caused the
annotation of her adverse claim upon TCT No. 12345 on December 19, 2016. Later
on, Bernadette discovered that Alice had sold the property to Chona on February 5,
2016, and that TCT No. 12345 had been cancelled and another one issued (TCT No.
67891) in favor of Chona as the new owner.
Bernadette sued Alice and Chona for specific performance, annulment of sale and
cancellation of TCT No. 67891. Bernadette insisted that she had entered into a
contract of sale with Alice; and that because Alice had engaged in double sale, TCT
No. 67891 should be cancelled and another title be issued in Bernadette’s favor.
a. Did Alice and Bernadette enter into a contract of sale of the lot covered by TCT No.
12345? Explain your answer. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, because in the agreement between Alice and Bernadette the ownership is reserved in
the vendor and is not to pass to the vendee until full payment of the purchase price, which
makes the contract one of contract to sell and not a contract of sale.
In the case at bar, the contract entered between the parties is a contract to sell because
ownership is retained by the vendor and is not to pass to the vendee until full payment of
the purchase price.
b. Did Alice engage in double sale of the property? Explain your answer. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
NO, because there was no previous sale of the same property prior to its sale to Chona.
Despite the earlier transaction of Alice with Bernadette, the former is not guilty of double
sale because the previous transaction with Bernadette is charactrerized as a contract to
sell. In a contract to sell, there being no previous sale of the property, a third person buying
such property despite the fulfillment of the suspensive condition such as the full payment
of the purchase price, for instance, cannot be deemed a buyer in bad faith and the
prospective buyer cannot seek the relief of reconveyance of the property. There is no
double sale in such case. Title to the property will transfer to the buyer after registration
because there is no defect in the owner-sellers title per se, but the latter, of course, may be
sued for damages by the intending buyer. [Basis: Coronel v. CA, 263 SCRA 15 (1996);
discussed in pp. 363-366, Vol. 2, Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer]
VIII.
Pedro had worked for 15 years in Saudi Arabia when he finally decided to engage in
farming in his home province where his 10-hectare farmland valued at P2,000,000
was located. He had already P3,000,000 savings from his long stint in Saudi Arabia.
Eagerly awaiting Pedro’s arrival at the NAIA were his aging parents Modesto and
Jacinta, his common-law spouse Veneranda, their three children, and Alex, his child
by Carol, his departed legal wife. Sadly for all of them, Pedro suffered a stroke
because of his over-excitement just as the plane was about to land, and died without
seeing any of them.
The farmland and the savings were all the properties he left.
(a) State who are Pedro’s legal heirs, and the shares of each legal heir to the estate?
Explain your answer. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Pedro’s legal heirs are his legitimate child, Alex, and his three illegitimate chidlren with
Veneranda. Pedro’s chidlren with Veneranda are illegitimate because they were conceived
and born outside of a valid marriage. Alex, on the other hand, is a legitimate child because
she was conceived or born inside a valid marriage.
Pedro’s surviving parents are not legal heirs because they are excluded by Alex. In intestate
succession, the legitimate ascendants do not become legal heirs if there is a surviving
legitimate descendant, such as Alex in the problem. Veneranda is not a legal heir of Pedro
because she and Pedro were not married.
Ordinarily, the share of an illegitimate child in intestate succession is one-half of the share
of the legitimate child. Considering, however, that the three illegitimate chidlren will impair
the legitime of Alex if the foregoing formula is followed, Alex is entitled instead to get his
legitime, which is ½ of the estate, or P2.5 Million, while the remaining P2.5 Million is to be
divided equally among the three illegitimate children of Pedro. Their legitimes in this case
will likewise be their shares in intestate succession. [Discussed in pp. 944, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s
Civil Law Reviewer]
(b) Assuming that Pedro’s will is discovered soon after his funeral. In the will, he
disposed of half of his estate in favor of Veneranda, and the other half in favor of his
children and his parents in equal shares. Assuming also that the will is admitted to
probate by the proper court. Are the testamentary dispositions valid and effective
under the law on succession? Explain your answer. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, because the testamentary dispositions impair the legitimes of Pedro’s compulsory
heirs.
Following the provisions of the Civil Code, only Alex and Pedro’s three illegitimate children
are Pedro’s compulsory heirs. Since Alex is Pedro’s legitimate descendant and a primary
compulsory heir, she excludes Pedro’s parents as compulsory heirs, the latter being merely
secondary compulsory heirs. However, the three illegitimate chidlren are considered
concurring compulsory heirs who are also entitled to a share of the legitime.
Under the law, the legitime of Alex, being a legitimate descendant, is ½ of Pedro’s estate, or
P2.5 Million. The legitime of each of the illegitimate children is supposed to be ½ of the
share of Alex, or P1.25 Million each. Considering, however, that the remaining portion of
the estate is no longer sufficient to cover the supposed legitimes of the three illegitimate
children, they will simply share equally in the remaining P2.5 Million. Consequently, there
is no disposable free portion that Pedro may validly give to Veneranda or to his parents.
Hence, the will is intrinsically invalid. [Discussed in pp. 859, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s Civil Law
Reviewer]
IX.
Danny and Elsa were married in 2002. In 2012, Elsa left the conjugal home and her
two minor children with Danny to live with her paramour. In 2015. Danny sold
without EIsa’s consent a parcel of land registered in his name that he had purchased
prior to the marriage. Danny used the proceeds of the sale to pay for his children’s
tuition fees.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The sale is void because the subject property is a community property which was sold
without the consent of one of the spouses.
Since the marriage of Danny and Elsa was celebrated during the effectivity of the Family
Code without a marriage settlement, their property regime is absolute community of
property, which is the property regime that applies by default under the Family Code in the
absence of a marriage settlement. Under the regime of absolute community, properties
acquired by the future spouses prior to the celebration of the marriage shall become
community property after the marriage. Hence the subject property is a community
property.
Under the regime of absolute community, the disposition or encumbrance of community
property must have the written consent of the other spouse or the authority of the court
without which the disposition or encumbrance is void Here, the sale of the absolute
community property by the husband without the consent of the wife or the authority of the
court renders the sale void, whatever may be the reason for such sale. The husband should
have obtained court authorization in selling the community property for the purpose of
using the proceeds thereof to pay his children’s tuition fees. [[Basis: Articles 75, 91 and 96,
Family Code; discussed in pp. 145, 147 and 153, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer].
X.
Briefly explain whether the following contracts are valid, rescissible, unenforceable,
or void:
(a) A contract of sale between Lana and Andy wherein 16-year old Lana agreed to sell
her grand piano for 25,000.00. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Voidable. Under the Civil Code, a contract where one of the parties
is incapable of giving consent to a contract is voidable. A minor, like Andy in this case, is
incapable of giving consent to a contract. Hence, the contract is voidable. [Basis: Articles
1390(1) and 1327, Civil Code; discussed in p. 278, Vol. 2, Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer]
(b) A contract of lease of the Philippine Sea entered by and between Mitoy and Elsa.
(2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Void. Under the Civil Code, a contract whose cause, object or
purpose is contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order or public policy is void. The
Philippine Sea is either a property of public dominion (if within Philippine territory) or a
common thing (if outside of Philippine territory) and, therefore, outside the commerce of
men. Hence, it cannot be made the object of a contract. [Basis: Articles 1409(1) and 1347,
Civil Code; discussed in pp. 217-218, Vol. 2, Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer]
(c) A barter of toys executed by 12-year old Clarence and 10-year old Czar (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Unenforceable. Under the Civil Code, a contract where both parties
are incapable of giving consent to a contract is unenforceable. Here, both parties to the
contract are minors and, therefore, incapable of giving consent to a contract. [Basis:
Articles 1403(3) and 1327, Civil Code; discussed in p. 278, Vol. 2, Rabuya’s Civil Law
Reviewer]
(d)A sale entered by Barri and Garri, both minors, which their parents later ratified.
(2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Valid. Under the Civil Code, while both parties to the contract are
minors and, therefore, incapable of giving consent, the ratification made by the parents of
both the contracting parties shall nonetheless validate the contract from the inception.
[Basis: Article 1407, Civil Code; discussed in p. 297, Vol. 2, Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer]
(e) Jenny’s sale of her car to Celestine in order to evade attachment by Jenny’s
creditors. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Rescissible. Under the Civil Code, a contract undertaken in fraud of
creditors is rescissible when the latter cannot in any other manner collect the claims due
them. [Basis: Article 1381 (3), Civil Code; discussed in p. 256, Vol. 2, Rabuya’s Civil Law
Reviewer]
XI.
Zeny and Nolan were best friends for a long time already. Zeny borrowed 310,000.00
from Nolan, evidenced by a promissory note whereby Zeny promised to pay the loan
“once his means permit.” Two months later, they had a quarrel that broke their long-
standing friendship.
Nolan seeks your advice on how to collect from Zeny despite the tenor of the
promissory note. what will your advice be? Explain your answer. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will advice Nolan to file first an action to fix the term or period because the fulfillment of
the obligation itself cannot be demanded unti after the court has fixed the period for
compliance therewith, and such period has arrived. Any action to compel performance
brought before that would be premature.
Under the Civil Code, when the debtor binds himself when his means permit to do so, the
obligation shall be deemed to be one with a period, but which period shall be fixed by the
court. In such a situation, the court is authorized to fix the period because the duration of
the period depends exclusively upon the will of the debtor. Any action filed prior to the
expiration of the period to be fixed by the court would be premature. [Basis: Articles 1180
and 1197, Civil Code; Concepcion v. People, 74 Phil. 63; Gonzales v. Jose, 66 Phil. 369;
dicussed in pp. 70-72, Vol. 2, Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer]
XII.
Krystal owns a parcel of land covered by TCT No. 12345 in Angeles City, Due to
severe financial constraints, Krystal was lorc based in the property to RBP
Corporation, a foreign corporation based in South Korea. Subsequently, RBP
Corporation sold the property to Gloria, one of its most valued clients.
Wanting her property back, Krystal, learning of the transfer of the property from
RBP Corporation to Gloria, sued both of them in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) for
annulment of sale and for reconveyance. She alleged that the sale by RBP
Corporation to Gloria was void because RBP Corporation was a foreign corporation
prohibited by the Constitution from acquiring and owning lands in the Philippines.
Will KrystaI’s suit for annulment of sale and reconveyance prosper? Explain your
answer. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, because the flaw in the original transaction is considered cured by the subsequent
transfer of the property to a Filipino citizen who is constitutionally qualified to own land in
the Philippines.
While the Constitutuion prohibits an alien from acquiring or holding title to private lands
or to lands of the public domain in the Philippines, except only by way of hereditary
succession, jurisprudence is consistent that if land is invalidly transferred to an alien who
subsequently becomes a citizen or transfers it to a citizen, the flaw in the original
transaction is considered cured and the title of the transferee is rendered valid.
In the case at bar, the subsequent transfer of the property to Gloria, a Filipino citizen, has
the effect of curing the defect of the original transaction in favor of RBP Corporation
because the land has since become the property of a Filipino citizen who is constitutionally
qualified to own land. As such, the prior invalid transfer can no longer be assailed because
the objective of the constitutional provision -- to keep our land in Filipino hands -- has been
served. [Basis: United Church Board of World Ministries vs. Sebastian, 159 SCRA 446, 451-
452, March 30, 1988; per Cruz, J. See also Tejido vs. Zamacoma, 138 SCRA 78, August 7,
1985; Sarsosa vda. de Barsobiavs. Cuenco, 113 SCRA 547, April 16, 1982; Godinez vs. Fong
Pak Luen, 120 SCRA 223, January 27, 1983; Yap vs. Maravillas, 121 SCRA 244, March 28,
1983; De Castro vs. Tan, 129 SCRA 85, April 30, 1984]
XIII.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: False, because rights which are not patrimonial in nature, such as
the right to liberty, the right to honor, family rights, etc., cannot be considered as property.
[Basis: II Tolentino, Civil Code of the Philippines, 1992 ed., pp. 4-5]
(b) A lessee cannot bring a case for quieting of title respecting the property that he
leases. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: False, because the action may be filed by anyone who has legal or
equitable title to, or interest in, the property which is the subject matter of the action.
Hence, any holder of interest to the property or right to possession of the land, including
the interest of a lessee, may bring an action for quieting of title. [Basis: Article 477, Civil
Code]
(c) Only the city or municipal mayor can file a civil action to abate a public nuisance.
(2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: False, because under the law it is the district health officer and not
the chief executive of the local government who has been authorized to file a civil action to
abate a public nuisance. [Basis: Article 700, in relation to Article 699, Civil Code; Cruz v.
Pandacan Hiker’s Club, Inc., 778 SCRA 385 (2016), discussed in p. 601, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s Civil
Law Reviewer].
(d) Possession of a movable property is lost when the location of the said movable is
unknown to the owner. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: False, because possession of movables is not deemed lost so long as
they remain under the control of the possessor, even though for the time being he may not
know their whereabouts. [Basis: Article 556, Civil Code; discussed in pp. 485-486, Vol. 1,
Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer]
SUGGESTED ANSWER: False, because only continuous and apparent easements can be
acquired either by virtue of a title or by prescription. [Basis: Article 620, Civil Code;
discussed in p. 533, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s Civil Law Reviewer]
XIV.
Plutarco owned land that borders on a river. After several years the action of the
water of the river caused the deposit of soil, and increased the area of Plutarco’s
property by 200 square meters.
a. If Plutarco wants to own the increase in area, what will be his legal basis for doing
so? Explain your answer. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Plutarco acquires ownership over the increased area by virtue of accession. According to
the Civil Code, the accretion gradually receive from the effects of the current of the waters
shall belong to the owner of the lands adjoining the banks of rivers.
In order for the above rule to apply, however, the following requisites must be present: (1)
that the deposit of soil be gradual and imperceptible; (2) that it be made through the effects
of the current of the waters; and (3) that the land where accretion takes place is adjacent to
the banks of the rivers. All foregoing requirements are present in this case. Hence, Plutarco
aquires ownership over the increased area by operation of law. [Basis: Article 457, Civil
Code; Republic v. CA, 132 SCRA 514 (1984); discussed in pp. 402-405, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s Civil
Law Reviewer]
b. On the other hand, if the river dries up, may Plutarco validly claim a right of
ownership of the dried-up river bed? Explain your answer. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, because the dried-up river bed shall continue to belong to the State as its property of
public dominion. As such, it is not susceptible to private appropriation and acquisitive
prescription. Therefore, Plutarco may not validly claim a right of ownership of the dried-up
river bed. [Republic v. Santos III, 685 SCRA 51 (2012); Celestial v. Cachopero, 431 SCRA
469 (2003); 657 SCRA 499 (2011); discussed in p. 409, Vol. 1, Rabuya’s Civil Law
Reviewer]
XV.
Kevin signed a loan agreement with ABC Bank. To secure payment, Kevin requested
his girlfriend Rosella to execute a document entitled “Continuing Guaranty
Agreement” whereby she expressly agreed to be solidarily liable for the obligation of
Kevin.
Can ABC Bank proceed directly against Rosella upon Kevin’s default even without
proceeding against Kevin first? Explain your answer. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, ABC Bank may proceed directly against Rosella upon Kevin’s default even without
proceeding against Kevin first because Rosella is a surety after she bound herself solidarily
with the principal debtor.
Notwithstanding the use of the word “guaranty” circumstances may be shown which
convert the contract into one of suretyship. Under the Civil Code, when the guarantor binds
himself solidarily with the principal debtor, the contract becomes one of suretyship and not
of guaranty proper. In a contract of suretyship, the liability of the surety is direct, primary
and absolute. He is directly and equally bound with the principal debtor. Such being the
case, a creditor can go directly against the surety although the principal debtor is solvent
and is able to pay or no prior demand is made on the principal debtor. [Basis: Article 2047,
Civil Code; Ong v. PCIB, 448 SCRA 705; discussed in pp. 810-812, Vol. 2, Rabuya’s Civil Law
Reviewer]
In this case, since Rosella is a surety, ABC Bank can go directly against her even without
proceeding against the principal debtor because the surety insures the debt, regardless of
whether or not the principal debtor is financially capable to fulfil his obligation.
XVI.
Jovencio operated a school bus to ferry his two sons and five of their schoolmates
from their houses to their school, and back. The parents of the five schoolmates paid
for the service. One morning, Porfirio, the driver, took a short cut on the way to
school because he was running late, and drove across an unmanned railway crossing.
At the time, Porfirio was wearing earphones because he loved to hear loud music
while driving. As he crossed the railway tracks, a speeding PNR train loudly blared
its horn to warn Porfirio, but the latter did not hear the horn because of the loud
music. The train inevitably rammed into the school bus. The strong impact of the
collision between the school bus and the train resulted in the instant death of one of
the classmates of Jovencio’s younger son.
The parents of the fatality sued Jovencio for damages based on culpa contractual
alleging that Jovencio was a common carrier; Porfirio for being negligent; and the
PNR for damages based on culpa aquiliana.
Jovencio denied being a common carrier. He insisted that he had exercised the
diligence of a good father of a family in supervising Porfirio, claiming that the latter
had had no history of negligence or recklessness before the fatal accident.
(a) Did his operation of the school bus service for a limited clientele render Jovencio
a common carrier? Explain your answer. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, because a common carrier is one who is engaged in the business of carrying or
transporting passengers or goods or both, or one who holds himself or itself out to the
public as being engaged in said business.
In Perena v. Zarate [679 SCRA 208 (2012)], the Court definitively ruled that the operators
of a school bus service are common carriers even if they are catering to a limited clientele
because of the following reasons: (1) they are engaged in transporting passengers
generally as a business, not just as a casual occupation; (2) they are undertaking to carry
passengers over established roads by the method by which the business was conducted;
and (3) they are transporting students for a fee.
The Court additionally explained that despite catering to a limited clientè le, they operate as
common carriers because they held themselves out as a ready transportation
indiscriminately to the students of a particular school living within or near where they
operated the service and for a fee. [Discussed and posted on my FB wall as early as October
23, 2017]
(b) In accordance with your answer to the preceding question, state the degree of
diligence to be observed by Jovencio, and the consequences thereof. Explain your
answer. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
In this case, Jovencio is liable for the death of the student because, acting as a common
carrier, he is already presumed to be negligent at the time of the accident because death
had occurred to the passenger. Here, Jovencio failed to fend off liability because he failed to
prove that he observed extraordinary diligence in ensuring the safety of the passengers.
[Basis: Perena v. Zarate, 679 SCRA 208 (2012); discussed and posted on my FB wall as
early as October 23, 2017]
(c) Assuming that the fatality was a minor of only 15 years of age who had no earning
capacity at the time of his death because he was still a student in high school, and the
trial court is minded to award indemnity, what may possibly be the legal and factual
justifications for the award of loss of earning capacity? Explain your answer. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The basis for the computation of the deceased’s earning capacity should be the minimum
wage in effect at the time of his death, pursuant to the ruling of the Court in Perena v.
Zarate [679 SCRA 208 (2012)]. In the same case, the Court also ruled that the computation
of the victim’s life expectancy rate should not be reckoned from his age of 15 years at the
time of his death, but on 21 years, his age when he would have graduated from college.
In the same case, the Court justified the indemnification of the victim’s loss of earning
capacity despite him having been unemployed because compensation of this nature is
awarded not for loss of time or earnings but for loss of the deceased’s power or ability to
earn money.