UNIVERSITY OF CEBU SCHOOL OF LAW

Guidelines for Answering Law/Bar Exam Questions1

GENERAL GUIDELINES
➢ Structure: TRA Method, or Thesis, Rule, and Analysis.

➢ Language: Use simple English.

➢ Primary Basis of Answers: Read and know by heart the Codal Provisions.

SPECIFIC GUIDELINES

• Objective-Type Questions

a. Definition –
✓ Keep your answer to a maximum of 2 sentences.
✓ If the question also requires you to explain, keep your answer to a maximum of 5 sentences,
inclusive of the definition.

EXAMPLE 1

Question: What is a tender of excluded evidence?

Suggested Answer:

A tender of excluded evidence is a remedy which allows a party to attach or

make part of the record, documents or things offered in evidence which are excluded
by the court. If the evidence excluded is oral, the offeror may state for the record the
name and other personal circumstances of the witness and the substance of the
proposed testimony. This remedy is useful in case of subsequent appeal or review
of the case by a higher tribunal especially when the exclusion of the evidence is
contested.

EXAMPLE 2

Question: According to Sec. 3, Art. VIII of the Constitution, the Judiciary shall enjoy fiscal autonomy. What
does the term fiscal autonomy signify? Explain your answer.

1
These guidelines are to be used by the UC Law Students and UC Bar Candidates as reference and do
not apply when the question requires, or the professor prefers, a lengthy answer. But it is highly
recommended that the Guidelines be observed for purposes of the Bar Examinations.

1
Suggested Answer:

Fiscal autonomy, as granted by the Constitution to the Judiciary, has been

defined in jurisprudence as the full flexibility by the Judiciary to allocate and utilize
resources with the wisdom and dispatch that its needs require. The grant of fiscal
autonomy is more extensive than the mere automatic and regular release of its approved
annual appropriations but covers the grant to the Judiciary of the authority to use and
dispose of its funds and properties at will, free from any outside control or interference.

EXAMPLE 3

Question: What is the principle of limited liability under corporation law?

Suggested Answer:

The principle of limited liability under corporation law states that a corporation
has a personality separate and distinct from that of its stockholders and from that of
other corporations to which it may be connected. Consequently, the corporate debt or
credit of the corporation is not the debt or credit of the stockholder.

b. Enumeration –
✓ Start your answer with an introductory sentence before enumerating or listing down the
answers.
✓ Enumerate using numbers or letters for each item and properly use punctuations—semicolon
(;) every after item and use “and” before the last item.

EXAMPLE

Question: What are the grounds for validly terminating the services of an employee based on a just cause?

Suggested Answer:

The following are the grounds for a valid termination of employment based
on just cause:
a) serious misconduct;
b) willful disobedience;
c) gross and habitual neglect of duty;
d) fraud or breach of trust;
e) commission of a crime or offense against the employer, his family or
representative; and
f) other similar causes.

c. Open ended –
✓ Start your answer with an introductory sentence by stating what is being asked.
✓ Keep your statement or explanation to a maximum of 3 sentences.

2
EXAMPLE 1

Question: What is the mode of appeal applicable to the decision or final order of the National Labor
Relations Commission and what issues may be raised before the reviewing court/tribunal?

Suggested Answer:

The decision or final order of the National Labor Relations Commission is

considered as final and non-appealable, as such, the mode of review applicable is
only by a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 to be filed with the Court of Appeals.
In such petition, the only issue which can be raised is whether or not the decision
or final order was rendered in grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess
of jurisdiction.

EXAMPLE 2

Question: If Rose, a Filipino residing in the United States, files a petition for nullity of her marriage to Donald,
also a Filipino, in the courts in the US, what law shall apply?

Suggested Answer:

If Rose files a petition for nullity of marriage in the US, Philippine law will
apply. Under the Nationality principle, Status, conditions, family rights and duties
are governed by Philippine laws as to Filipinos even though sojourning abroad.

d. Distinctions –
✓ Start your answer with an introductory sentence before providing or listing down the
distinctions.
✓ If there are 2 or more distinctions, list the distinctions using numbers or letters for each
distinction.
✓ Do not distinguish using definitions. Instead, create points of distinction.

EXAMPLE 1

Question: Distinguish between justifying and exempting circumstances.

Suggested Answer:

Justifying circumstances may be distinguished from exempting

circumstances as follows:

1. in the former, there is neither a crime committed nor a criminal

because the acts therein are legally justified, while in the latter, there is a crime
committed but there is no criminal because the law excuses the offender from
liability therefor; and

2. there is no crime nor a criminal in the former, civil liability does not
also attach to the offender, except in case of a state of necessity where the party
benefited should indemnify the person injured, while in the latter, although criminal
liability is excused, civil liability attaches to the offender because of the fact that a
wrong has been committed.

3
EXAMPLE 2

Question: Distinguish between void and voidable marriages.

Suggested Answer:

Void and voidable marriages may be distinguished from each other in the
following ways:

As to nature, a void marriage is inexistent from the time of celebration, while

a voidable marriage is valid until annulled by judicial decree.

As to susceptibility of ratification, a void marriage is not capable of being

ratified, while a voidable marriage is capable of being ratified either by prescription
or by cohabitation.

As to who may impugn the validity of the marriage, a void marriage can be
impugned by anyone directly affected and interested, while a voidable marriage may,
as a general rule, be impugned only by one of the contracting parties.

e. True or False –
✓ If it is a traditional True or False question, just write True or False without providing any
explanation.
✓ If it is a modified True of False, start your answer by writing True of False and then provide
your explanation, keeping it to a maximum of 3 sentences.

EXAMPLE 1

Statement: All rights are considered as property.

Suggested Answer:

False, because only rights which are capable of appropriation can be

considered as property. Rights which are patrimonial or purely personal in character
such as right to life, right to liberty, or family rights, cannot be considered as
property.

EXAMPLE 2

Statement: The doctrine of "processual presumption" allows the court of the forum to presume that the
foreign law applicable to the case is the same as the local or domestic law.

Suggested Answer:

True, because courts cannot take judicial notice of foreign laws. The doctrine
of processual presumption is a rule which allows the court to presume that the
foreign law applicable is the same as the local or domestic law unless the foreign
law is properly pleaded and proved according to the rules on evidence.

4
• Hypothetical
✓ Provide an answer using the TRA method.
✓ Start your answer with a 1-sentence Thesis Statement, which is pretty much your conclusion.
➢ If the problem requires a Yes or No answer, then start your Thesis Statement with a Yes or No
and either use comma to complete your Thesis Statement.

✓ Then, support your Thesis Statement with the Rule (law or jurisprudence), and keep it to a
maximum of 2 sentences.
✓ Thereafter, provide your Analysis by applying the Rule to the facts given, and keep your Analysis
to a maximum of 2 sentences.
✓ Use separate paragraphs for your Thesis Statement, Rule, and Analysis, make sure to put spaces
in between.
✓ Even if the answer to the question depends on missing facts or seemingly requires an “It Depends”
answer, do not answer “It Depends”.
i. Instead, start your Thesis Statement with a Yes or No and complete it with your conclusion.
ii. Then, discuss your major premise by providing the Rule and Analysis. If possible, keep
each item to 1 sentence. (Note: Your major premise must be aligned with your Thesis
Statement.)
iii. Thereafter, discuss your minor premise by providing the alternative Rule and Analysis. If
possible, keep each item to 1 sentence.
iv. You may add 1 more sentence just to emphasize alignment of your Thesis Statement and
major premise.

EXAMPLE 1

Problem:

In payment for his purchase of 20 sacks of rice, Mr. Johnny Johnson paid P5,000.00 in cash and
executed the following promissory note payable to UCL Commodities for the balance:

May 15, 2016

I promise to pay the sum of P15,000.00 to UCL Commodities on July 25, 2016.

Sgd. Johnny Johnson

On June 20, 2016, UCL Commodities used the said note to pay its supplier Rice Pa Co., to which
it owed the exact amount of P15,000.00. On July 10, 2016, the latter then used the same note to pay
Magsasa Ka Co. for its loan from the latter of the same amount.

The agreement was for UCL to fully serve the order on or before the note’s due date (July 25).
However, due to poor inventory management, UCL was only able to deliver 10 sacks to Mr. Johnson as of
said date.

On July 25, 2016, Magsasa Ka Co., presented the note to Mr. Johnson for collection.

Can Magsasa Ka Co. fully collect on the said note? Why or why not?

Suggested Answer:

No, Magsasa Ka Co. cannot fully collect on the said note.

One of the requisites of negotiability is that the instrument must be payable

to “order” or “bearer”.

5
 Being rendered non-negotiable due to the absence of the aforementioned
“words of negotiability”, the note in the case at bar can thus only be assigned (not
negotiated), subject to all defenses against the original payee, such as partial failure
of consideration for having delivered only 10 sacks out of the agreed 20 sacks of
rice.

EXAMPLE 2

Problem:

Juan and Smith entered into a sale transaction whereby Juan purchased certain goods from Smith
who is in California, USA. Thereafter, Juan applied for a letter of credit with Manila Bank (in Manila) which
was later on approved. Under the said letter of credit, Smith is required to tender the bill of lading with the
consular and commercial invoices and the packing list, among others. Upon approval of the letter of credit,
Manila Bank informed California Bank (in the US) concerning the letter of credit.

Subsequently, Smith shipped the goods to Manila and named Manila Bank as the consignee in the
bill of lading. Afterwards, Smith delivered the bill of lading with the consular and commercial invoices sans
the packing list. After receiving and accepting the documents submitted by Smith, California Bank paid
Smith and thereafter transmitted the documents to, and sought reimbursement from, Manila Bank. After
receiving and inspecting the documents, Manila Bank refused to reimburse California Bank on the ground
that the documents tendered by Smith do not conform to the terms of the letter of credit.

Suggested Answer:

Yes, the refusal of Manila Bank to reimburse California Bank is justifiable

because it is a settled rule in commercial transactions involving letters of credit that
the documents tendered must strictly conform to the terms of the letter of credit.

The tender documents by the beneficiary-seller must include all documents

under the letters of credit, as when it accepts a faulty tender, acts on its own risk
and it may not thereafter be able to recover from the buyer or the issuing bank, as
the case may be, the money thus paid to the beneficiary seller.

In the case at bar, the non-inclusion of the packing list violates the rule of
strict compliance, and thus, negates the right of California to seek reimbursement
from Manila Bank.

• Issue-Spotting
✓ Go right away to the question/s to immediately identify what is being asked and ensure proper time
management.
✓ Read fast, but carefully and thoroughly.
✓ Underline the relevant facts.
✓ If there are 2 or more issues, separately answer each issue using letters or numbers (as if you are
enumerating).
✓ Apply TRA method to each issue/item.

6
EXAMPLE 1

Problem:

On January 11, 2018, Johanna purchased Benny’s slightly used sedan for P900,000.00, payable
on March 10, 2018. On February 10, 2018, Benny purchased several construction materials worth
P200,000.00 from Build Me Up Corp., Johanna’s family business. Due to his friendship with Johanna (the
company’s president), Benny was able to get a credit line for his purchase and was only obligated to pay 2
months after the purchase.

On February 15, 2018, Build Me Up Corporation assigned the P200,000.00 credit to Dawata, Co.
without the knowledge of Benny.

On March 10, 2018, Dawata Co. sent a collection letter to Benny for the P200,000.00. Benny
refused to pay, claiming that the assignment was made without his consent and was therefore invalid.
Furthermore, he said that had he known about the intended assignment, he would have reserved his right
to compensation because after all, Johanna still owed him P900,000.00 for the car she purchased from
him. Dawata Co. sued Benny. Decide.

Suggested Answer:

On the issue of the assignment of Build Me Up’s credit to Dawata Co., the
law does not require prior notification and consent of the debtor (Benny) for the
assignment to be valid. However, Dawata Co. cannot yet successfully collect from
Benny on March 10, 2018, since the obligation is not yet due at the time of collection.

On the issue of compensation, there is no right to legal compensation to

speak of. One of the requisites of legal compensation is that each obligor is bound
principally and at the same time a principal creditor of the other. In the case at bar,
Benny is not indebted to Johanna, but to Build Me Up Corporation, an entity with a
separate and distinct personality from Johanna, regardless of the latter’s position in
the Company.

EXAMPLE 2

Question:

On November 9, 2002, X Korea Corporation shipped to Ginebra Corporation one hundred eighty-
five (185) packages of electrolytic tin free steel, complete and in good order condition. The shipment was
insured with Ace Insurance Company of North America (AICNA) against all risks. The shipment arrived at
Manila on November 19, 2002, but when discharged therefrom it was discovered that seven (7) packages
thereof were damaged and in bad order. The shipment was then turned over to the custody of DEC
Terminals Inc. (DTI), an arrastre operator, for storage and safekeeping.

On November 29, 2002, prior to the last withdrawal of the shipment, a joint inspection of the said
cargo was conducted and the examination report showed that an additional five (5) packages were found
to be damaged and in bad order.

AICNA, as insurer of the cargo, paid the consignee for the damage caused to the shipment as
evidenced by the subrogation receipt. Thereafter, AICNA formally demanded reparation against DTI but
failed to satisfy the same. AICNA then filed an action for damages with the RTC of Makati City. DTI set up
the defense of prescription.

The trial court, however, dismissed the complaint on the ground that AICNA’s claim was already
barred by the statute of limitations. It held that COGSA applies to this case since the goods were shipped
from a foreign port to the Philippines.

7
 Decide.

Suggested Answer:

The trial court’s ruling that COGSA is applicable is erroneous because it is

settled that “carriage of goods” as defined under COGSA covers the period from the
time when the goods are loaded to the time when they are discharged from the ship;
thus, it can be inferred that the period of time when the goods have been discharged
from the ship and given to the custody of the arrastre operator, DTI, is not covered
by COGSA.

Under the COGSA, the carrier and the ship may put up the defense of
prescription if the action for damages is not brought within one year after the
delivery of the goods or the date when the goods should have been delivered. It is
also settled that not only the shipper, but also the consignee or legal holder of the
bill may invoke the prescriptive period.

However, the COGSA does not mention that an arrastre operator may invoke
the prescriptive period of one year; hence it does not cover DTI.

• Role Playing
✓ Start with your final answer in mind.
✓ Use TRA method for each side/party.
✓ Provide the strongest arguments to the question which solicits for the ideal answer.
✓ Your argument for your answer to the other question must not overthrow your arguments in the
other question. Keep it subtle.
✓ If you are required to decide as a judge, arbiter, or in equivalent capacity, your resolution must be
aligned with your arguments to the question which solicits for the ideal answer.

EXAMPLE

Problem:

Transfield Philippines (“Transfield”), as turnkey contractor, and Luzon Hydro Corporation (“LHC”)
entered into a turnkey contract whereby Transfield, will construct, on a turnkey basis, a seventy (70)-
megawatt hydro-electric power station (“Project”). The turnkey contract does not provide for settlement of
dispute through arbitration. Two standby letters of credit (“SBLCs”) were opened by Transfield in favor of
LHC to secure performance of the obligation on or before the target completion date.

Unable to complete the project within the agreed period, Transfield sought various extension of
time to complete the Project but was denied by LHC. Foreseeing that LHC would call on the SBLCs,
Transfield advised the banks which issued the SBLCs of the arbitration proceedings already pending in
connection with its alleged default in the performance of its obligations and warned the said banks that any
transfer, release, or disposition of the securities in favor of LHC or any person claiming under it would make
the banks liable for liquidated damages. However, Transfield was informed by the banks that they would
pay on the SBLCs if and when LHC calls on them.

(a) If you were the counsel for the banks, what will be your advice?
(b) If you were the counsel for Transfield, what will be your opposing argument to the advice
in question (a)?
(c) If you were the judge, how will you decide the case?

8
Suggested Answer:

(a) If I were the counsel for the banks, I will advise the bank to pay on the SBLCs
if LHC calls on them because the resort to arbitration by the parties to determine if
Transfield is guilty of delay is a matter independent of the obligations of the banks
to pay under the SBLCs.

The independence principle governing letters of credit states that contracts

involved in a letter of credit transaction are distinct and independent of each other
and thus, are to be maintained in perpetual separation.

In the instant case, the obligations of the banks under the SBLCs are distinct
and independent of the respective obligations of Transfield and LHC under the
turnkey contract and thus, the undertaking of the banks to pay under the SBLCs is
not subject to claims or defenses by Transfield resulting from his relationship with
LHC, the beneficiary.

(b) If I were the counsel for Transfield, I will raise the defense of fraud exception
which bars the applicability of the independence rule.

It is settled that fraud continues to be an exception to the independence

principle and fraud exception exists when the beneficiary, for the purpose of
drawing on the credit, fraudulently presents to the confirming bank, documents that
contain, expressly or by implication, material representations of fact that to his
knowledge are untrue.

Here, LHC is guilty of fraud in misrepresenting to the banks that there is

already a breach in the turnkey contract knowing fully well that such issue is yet to
be determined by the arbitral tribunals and LHC’s call on the SBLCs is largely
intertwined with the fact of default which is the same issue pending resolution
before the arbitral tribunals, thus, negates the applicability of the independence
principle.

(c) If I were the judge, I will decide the case in favor of LHC applying the
independence principle governing letter credits.

The fraud exception rule does not apply to the instant case since the turnkey
contract neither provides for arbitration as a mode of settling any future disputes
between the parties nor contains any provision that all disputes regarding delay
should first be settled through arbitration before LHC would be allowed to call on
the SBLCs.

Consequently, Transfield cannot prevent the banks from paying on the

SBLCs if LHC calls on them in accordance with the independence principle.