URDANETA CITY UNIVERSITY

Urdaneta City, Pangasinan

Final Examination
SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS
ATTY. MARY GRACE M. NGO

NAME: SANTIAGO MARTIN I. PEREGRINO

INSTRUCTIONS:

When the question requires an explanation, STATE YOUR DEFINITION/ANSWER

ACCOMPANIED BY YOUR BRIEF AND CLEAR EXPLANATION OF YOUR LEGAL BASIS/
JUSTIFICATION. A MERE YES OR NO/ DEFINITION, WILL NOT BE COUNTED. A MERE COPY
AND PASTE FROM THE INTERNET OR JURISPRUDENCE WITHOUT YOUR OWN EXPLANATION
WILL NOT BE COUNTED. Insert your Answers in this questionnaire every after each
question.

1. Dr. Raquel, a 70 year old widower, and his son Roberto both died in a fire
that gutted their home while they were sleeping in their air-conditioned
rooms, Roberto’s wife, Marilyn and their two children were spared
because they were in the province at the time. Dr. Raquel left an estate
worth 50 M and a life insurance policy in the amount of P1M with his three
children.-one of whom is Roberto as beneficiaries. Marilyn now is claiming
for herself and her children from the estate of Dr. Raquel. Marilyn now
comes to you for legal advice on what she would do in the settlement of
estate of Dr. Raquel and Roberto. What would your advice be? (20 pts)

Answer: AS A LEGAL COUNSEL OF MARILYN, I WOULD ADVICE THAT

MARILYN AND THE OTHER SURVIVING HEIRS MAY EXECUTE AN EXTRA-
JUDICIAL SETTLEMENT OF ESTATE OF DR. RAQUEL OR SPECIAL PROCEEDING
ON SETTLEMENT OF ESTATE OF DECEASED PERSON IN ORDER TO CLAIM THE
INSURANCE POLICY OF ROBERTO IN THE AMOUNT OF 1M, WHICH WILL BE
DIVIDED AMONG BENEFICIARIES. ALSO ROBERTO MAY BE REPRESENTED BY
HIS SURVIVING HEIRS IN ORDER TO CLAIM FROM THE 50M WHICH WAS LEFT
BY DECEDENT, DR. RAQUEL.

2. On January 10, 2009, Dr Edgar Clemente executed a holographic will,

wherein he gave nothing to his recognized illegitimate son, Edmond. Dr
Clemente left for the United States, passed the New York medical
licensure examinations and resided therein. He died in New York in
 January 10, 2019. He left personal and real properties in the Philippines
worth P60M. The laws of New York do not recognize holographic wills or
compulsory heirs. Edmond now comes to you who wants to acquire your
services and explain to him the possible remedy that he can do in order to
claim what is rightfully his. Explain and discuss your legal advice as if the
one reading your answer is your client Mr. Edmond. ( 20 pts)

Answer: AS YOUR LAWYER, I WILL ADVICE YOU THAT, UNDER SEC. 1, RULE 75
OF ROC, NO WILL SHALL PASS EITHER REAL OR PERSONAL UNLESS
PROBATED, PROVED OR ALLOWED IN PROPER COURT. SO, IN YOUR CASE,
THE HOLOGRAPHIC WILL EXECUTED BY YOUR FATHER, IT IS NOT YET
PROBATED HERE IN PHILIPPINES WHEN HE LEFT FOR THE U.S., AND ALSO HIS
WILL IS NOT RECOGNIZED THEREIN, SO IT WILL HAVE NO FORCE AND
EFFECT, NOW, IN ORDER FOR YOU TO ACQUIRE YOUR CLAIM OR
INHERITANCE, YOU MAY EXECUTE AN AFFIDAVIT OF SELF-ADJUDICATION,
STATING THAT YOU ARE TH SOLE HEIR OF DR. EDGAR CLEMENTE,AND WILL
BE FILED WITH THE REGISTRY OF DEEDS. BUT IF YOU HAVE OTHER SIBLINGS,
YOU AND YOUR SIBLINGS MEY SETTLE OF AGREE BY EXECUTING AN EXTRA-
JUDICIAL SETTLEMENT OF ESTATE, WHICH SHALL BE FILED IN THE REGISTRY OF
DEEDS, AND SHALL BE POSTED PUBLICLY IN A NEWSPAPER OF GENERAL
CIRCULATION IN THE PROVNCE WHICH THE DECEDENT, YOUR FATHER, HAD
ESTATE, FOR THREE CONSECUTIVE WEEKS.

3. Raffy, a wealthy bachelor, filed a petition for the adoption of Christine, a

one-year foundling who had a severe heart ailment. During the pendency
of the adoption proceedings, Raffy died of natural causes. The Office of
the Solicitor General files a motion to dismiss the petition on the ground
that the case can no longer proceed because of the petitioner’s death.
a. If you are the Judge, will the petition for adoption be dismissed?
(10pts)
b. If you are the lawyer of Raffy, what would your comment or argument
be with the motion to dismiss filed by the Office of the Solicitor
General? (10pts)

Answer: A: IF I AM THE JUDGE, I WILL NOT DISMISS THE ADOPTION CASE

BECAUSE AS A RULE, ADOPTION TAKES EFFECT ONES THE ADOPTION DECREE
WAS FILED ON ITS ORIGINAL DATE, EVEN IF THE PETITION FOR ADOPTION HAS
NOT BEEN DECIDED, OR EVEN IF THE PETITIONER DIED IN THIS CASE, STILL THE
PETITION FOR ADOPTION WILL PROSPER, IN ORDER TO PROTECT THE INTERESTS
OF THE ADOPTEE.

B: MY COMMENT/ARGUMENT WOULD BE THAT THE SOL. GEN. SHOULD BE THE

ONE WHO WILL BE DISMISSED FROM HIS POSITION, BECAUSE OF IGNORANCE
OF LAW FOR FILING A MOTION TO DISMISS THE ADOPTION, WHICH AS A RULE
TAKES EFFECT UPON FILING OF THE PETITION FOR ADOPTION. THE MOTION TO
DISMISS BY THE SOL, GEN. MAY BE HIS LEEWAY TO ACQUIRE THE ESTATE OF THE
DECEDENT, RAFFY, BY WAY OF FILING AN ESCHEAT PROCEEDING. THEREFORE,
THE MOTION TO DISMISS BY THE SOL. GEN. WILL NOT PROSPER AND THE CHILD
SOUGHT TO BE ADOPTED SHALL BE THE ONE WHO WILL SUCCEED THE ESTATE
OF THE ADOPTEE, RAFFY.

4. In 2001, Mr. Sy sold to Mr Chan, a Chinese Citizen, a parcel of land in

Binondo. Mr. Chan died on 2018 leaving behind his wife and three
children, one of whom Julie, a naturalized Filipino citizen. A year after Mr.
Chan’s death, the heirs executed an extrajudicial settlement of estate,
and the parcel of land was allocated to Julian. In 2019, MrSy filed suit to
recover the land he sold to Mr Chan alleging that the sale was void
because it contravened the Constitution which prohibits the sale of
private lands to aliens. Julie moved to dismiss the suits on the grounds of
pari delicto, laches and acquisitive prescription. Decide the case with
reasons? (10pts)

Answer: IN THIS CASE, JULIE IS CORRECT IN HER DEFENSE THAT THE SAME IS
PARI DELICTO OR IN EQUAL FAULT. CONSIDERING THAT MR. SY KNEW THAT
THE CONSTITUTION PROHIBITS TO SELL PRIVATE LANDS TO NON-RESIDENTS
OR ALIENS, WHY HE WOULD DO THE SAME, IT MEANS THAT HE ACTED IN
BAD FAITH WHEN THEY ENTERED INTO CONTRACT OF SALE THAT MR. CHAN
WILL BUY THE SAID LAND. AND ALSO MR. SY IS IN LACHES, OR SITTING IN HIS
OWN RIGHTS, BECAUSE IN THE LAPSE OF TIME, HE DID NOT ACT OR MADE A
NY LEGAL CLAIM AGAINST THE SUBJECT LAND BOUGHT BY MR. CHAN
THEREFORE, THE SAME IS IN EQUAL FAULT, SO THE SUIT MUST BE DISMISSED.

a. Would your answer be the same if Julie is a US citizen? (10 pts)

 Answer: NO. CONSIDERING THAT ALL OF THEM ARE NOT FILIPINO CITIZENS,
THEY DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO BUY LAND HERE IN THE PHILIPPINES FOR IT
IS AGAINST THE CONSTITUTION.

5. 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 Gracia against Rex. Maria Gracia claims that Rex is
psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential obligations of
marriage because Rex is drunkard, a womanizer, a gambler and a
mama’s boy traits that she never knew or saw when Rex was courting her.
Although summoned, Rex did not answer Maria Gracia’s petition and
never appeared in Court. Maria Gracia presented the Psychologist whose
testimony was merely based on the narration of Maria Gracia since Rex
never appeared despite numerous invitations. In addition to the
Psychologist, Maria Gracia likewise presented their children and their
Nanny who corroborated Maria Gracia’s testimony that she found Rex
drunk with another woman and squandering their family’s resources in a
Casino. On the basis of the testimonies of the witnesses presented, Will
you grant the petition? Why? Explain your grounds (20pts)

Answer: YES. BASED ON THE TESTIMONY OF HIS WIFE, THEIR CHILDREN AND
NANNY, AND THE PSYCHOLOGIST, REX, CLEARLY HAS A PSYCHOLOGICAL
INCAPACITY, FOR BEING A DRUNKARD, GAMBLER, AND A WOMANIZER.
FROM THESE SIGNS, REX CANNOT PERFORM DUTIES AND OBLIGATIONS,
WHICH IS A GOOD INDICATOR OF PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY TO
PERFROM ESSENTIAL MARITAL OBLIGATIONS BEING A HUSBAND AND A
FATHER OF THEIR CHILD.