Questions in Civil Law for Issue Spotting Next Session

Q1: Emma gave birth to a child who died one (1) minute immediately after its
complete delivery. Did the child acquire civil personality?

- Yes.

Art. 40 of the Civil Code provides that Birth determines personality; but the
conceived child shall be considered born for all purposes that are favorable to it,
provided it be born later with the conditions specified in the following article.

Art. 41. further provides that for civil purposes, the foetus is considered born if it is
alive at the time it is completely delivered from the mother’s womb. However, if the
foetus had an intra-uterine life of less than seven months, it is not deemed born
if it dies within twenty-four hours after its complete delivery from the maternal
womb.

Here, the child is considered born even if the problem states that the child only lived
for one minute. The 24 hour qualification does not apply since under the facts given,
the child was completely delivered and did not have an intra-uterine life of less than 7
months.

Hence, premises considered, the child acquired civil personality.

Tutorial Advise: Qualify your answer.

The child acquired civil personality unless the child had an intra-uterine life of less
than seven months.

Provide rule on the formal requisites only (Art. 41). Never mind discussing Art. 40.
Art. 40 is more on successional rights. It discusses what is favorable on the child.

Q2: A marriage took place with the presence of only three (3) persons: the
contracting parties and the solemnizing officer. What is the status of the
marriage?

The marriage is valid. Under the Family Code, the essential and formal requisites
must be present for a valid marriage to exist.

Under the law, the essential requisites of marriage are consent and legal capacity of
the contracting parties.

On the other hand, the formal requisites of marriage are: authority of the solemnizing
officer, a valid marriage license and a marriage ceremony which takes place with the
appearance of the contracting parties before the solemnizing officer and their personal
declaration that they take each other as husband and wife in the presence of not less
than two witnesses of legal age.
The law further states that an irregularity in the formal requisites shall not affect the
validity of the marriage but the party or parties responsible for the irregularity shall be
civilly, criminally and administratively liable.

Here, the absence of witnesses to the marriage is a mere irregularity and does not
affect the validity of the marriage.

Q3: Two (2) vehicles, a van and a tricycle, figured in an accident along Sumulong
Highway, Antipolo City. The Mitsubishi L-300 van was owned and registered
under Imperial's name, and was driven by Laraga. The tricycle was driven by
Mercado. On board the tricycle were the Bayaban Spouses, who sustained
injuries. The Bayaban Spouses demanded compensation from Imperial, Laraga,
and Mercado for the hospital bills and loss of income that they sustained while
undergoing therapy and post-medical treatment. When their demand was
unheeded, the Bayaban Spouses filed a Complaint for damages before the
Regional Trial Court. Imperial denied liability, contending that the van was
under the custody of one Pascua. Is the burden of proof shifted to Imperial to
prove that his employee Laraga, acting within the scope of his task?

- No. Under the registered owner rule, the name of the person who appears in
the registration documents of the vehicle is presumed to be the one who is
liable for the injury.

The rule is considered as a strict liability tort since it presumes that the
registered owner is the one liable. However, the registered owner in this case
may file a counter-claim against the driver.

Hence, Imperial cannot shift to Laraga the burden of proof.

Tutor comment: Answer is unresponsive. The registered owner rule is not asked in
this question.

Discuss vicarious liability since the call used the phrase acting within the scope of his
task.

Here, the burden of proof shifted to the employer since he has the duty to prove that
he exercised the due diligence required in the selection of his employees.

Q4:Spouses Tan and Cornelio executed a deed of sale covering two lots. On the
face of the deed, the sum of P400,000 appears as consideration of Cornelio’s
purported purchase of properties. The deed was also undated. After the
execution of the deeds, the TCTs of the lots were delivered to Cornelio although
none of the parties are in actual physical possession of the properties. It appears
that the Tans executed the deed merely to show to their neighbors that they are
the true owners of the property because a certain Juan was illegally conveying
portions of these lands to unsuspecting buyers. Spouses Tan later tried to recover
the TCTs from Cornelio but the latter refused to return them despite repeated
demands. Spouses Tan filed a complaint for annulment of the deed of sale
alleging that the subject deed was simulated and hence null and void. Is the
subject deed void?

- Yes. the subject deed is void.

The general rule is that a contract like a sale in this case is valid provided that
the requisites are present. There must be consent of the contracting parties,
object and cause or consideration.

Here, the elements of consent was present since under the facts, the parties had
a meeting of the minds when they entered into the contract.

However, the second element which is a valid object is wanting in this case.
As the facts of the case state, the Sps. Tan were not in actual physical
possession of the properties. Therefore, at the time of the delivery, there was
no object to speak of. Nemo dat quod, non habet- One cannot give one does
not have.

Hence, the elements of the contract being incomplete would not give rise to a
better right on the part of the buyer. The buyer may institute an action for
damages against the seller in this case.

Tutor’s comment: Discuss simulated contracts and fictitious contract.

The real issue here is the validity of the deed. Here, the parties do not intend to be
bound by the contract as stated by the facts. The word merely used indicates lack of
intention to be bound. Note also that the phrase the parties are not in actual possession
of the properties while making delivery/ executing the deed of sale for the transfer is
immaterial and a mere distractor. In sale of real property, it is the execution of the
deed of sale which transfers ownership not the physical delivery of the thing.

Distinguish possession and ownership…

Q5: A, B, C and D are co-owners of a parcel of land. They had their land
surveyed and the result showed that the adjoining lot of E encroached their land
by 500 square meters. They filed a suit for unlawful detainer against E. The
MTC dismissed the case saying that an ejectment suit is not the proper remedy
to recover the portion encroached. Is the MTC correct?

Encroachment refers to possession while Recovery refers to ownership- clarify

this.

- Yes. The MTC is correct.

Under the law, unlawful detainer is not the proper remedy when a property
owner seeks to recover a portion of his property.
 Unlawful detainer as a remedy covers situation wherein the entry is legal at
the beginning and it becomes illegal after the period that was stipulated under
the terms to occupy the property has expired.

Here, the encroachment was discovered after the survey and that there is no
way of knowing beforehand that a portion of E’s property had encroached into
the land of A,B,C and D.

The action of unlawful detainer therefore clearly has no application in the case
at bar and the proper remedy is for recovery of possession/reconveyance.

Hence, premises considered, the MTC is correct.

- Accion reivindicatoria- keywords..

NOTE: TAKE NOTE OF PHRASES ACTUALLY USED BY THE SC ESP.

DEFINITIONS OF CONCEPTS FOR IMPRESSIVE ANSWERS.