1.

a. The partition is not valid and may be rescinded by Napoleon since Don, King and Lord is in bad
faith as they intentionally disregarded Napoleon, pursuant to Article 1104 of the Civil Code.
Under the said law, a partition made with preterition of any compulsory heirs shall not be
rescinded, unless it be proved that there was bad faith or fraud on the part of the other persons
interest; but the latter shall be proportionately obliged to pay to the person omitted the share
which belongs to him. In this case, considering that Napolean was omitted in the partition in bad
faith by Don, King and Lord, then the partition is not valid.
b. According to Article 1104 of the Civil Code, Napoleon may file an action for rescission of the
partition on the ground of fraud and bad faith. Napoleon may also compel Don, King and Lord to
proportionately pay him the share which belongs to him.

3. Juna is not correct in arguing that the educational support given to Earl by their father is subject to
collation considering that under Article 1067 states that expenses for support, education and medical
attendance, even in extraordinary illness, apprenticeship, ordinary equipment, or customary gifts are
not subject to collation. In this case, the Php 5,000,000.00 spent by Earl’s father in his favor is
considered as expenses for support and education. Hence, pursuant to Article 1067, the same is not
subject to collation.

4.