Civil Law Phil. Bar Exams Q - A 2007 2013

Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.
com
A Compilation of the
Questions and Suggested Answers
In the
PHILIPPINE BAR EXAMINATIONS 2007-
2013 In
CIVIL LAW
Compiled and Arranged By:
Baratbate-Ladot, Delight
Salise, Hector Christopher “Jay-Arh” Jr. M.
(University of San Jose-Recoletos School of Law)
ANSWERS TO BAR EXAMINATION QUESTIONS by the

UP LAW COMPLEX (2007-2013)
&
PHILIPPINE ASSOCIATION OF LAW SCHOOLS (2008)
“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 were inspired by the work of Silliman University’s

College of Law and its students of producing a very good
material to everyone involved in the legal field particularly the
students and the reviewees for free. Hence, this work is a
freeware.
Everyone is free to distribute and mass produce copies of this

work, however, the author accepts no liability for the content of
this reviewer, or for the consequences of the usage, abuse, or
any actions taken by the user on the basis of the information
given.
The answers (views or opinions) presented in this reviewer are

solely those of the authors in the given references and do not
necessarily represent those of the authors of this work.
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
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Titles are based on Silliman’s Compilation [Arranged by Topic])
Persons
Capacity: Juridical Capacity (2008)...............................................................................12
Capacity; Juridical Capacity of Donee; Requisites for Acceptance (2012).......................12
Capacity: Legal Capacity; Lex Rei Sitae (2007)...............................................................13
Correction of Entries; Clerical Error Act (2008).............................................................14
Nationality Principle (2009)...........................................................................................14
Nationality Principle; Change of Name not Covered (2009).............................................15
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
Adoption; Illegitimate Child (2010)................................................................................18
Adoption; Illegitimate Child; Use of Mother’s Surname as Middle Name (2012)..............19
Consent; Consent of the Adopter’s Heirs (2008).............................................................19
Qualifications of Adopter (2010)....................................................................................20
180
Family Code
Marriage; Annulment; Grounds (2009)...........................................................................20
Marriage; Annulment; Grounds (2007)...........................................................................21
Marriage; Annulment; Parties (2012)..............................................................................22
Marriage; Annulment; Support Pendente Lite (2010)......................................................22
Marriage; Divorce Decrees; Filipino Spouse Becoming Alien (2009)................................23
Marriage; Divorce Decrees; Foreign Spouse Divorces Filipino Spouse (2012)..................24
Marriage; Divorce Decrees; Foreign Spouse Divorces Filipino Spouse (2010)..................25
Marriage; Legal Separation; Prescription (2012).............................................................25
Marriage; Legal Separation; Prescription (2007).............................................................26
Marriage; Psychological Incapacity (2013).....................................................................26
Marriage; Psychological Incapacity (2012).....................................................................28
Marriage; Requisites (2008)...........................................................................................28
Marriage; Subsequent Marriage (2008)...........................................................................29
Marriage; Void Marriages; By Reason of Public Policy (2008)..........................................30
Marriage; Void Marriages; By Reason of Public Policy (2007)..........................................30
Marriage; Void Marriages; Property Relations (2009)......................................................30
Marriage; Void Marriages; Status of Children (2009).......................................................31
Parental Authority; Illegitimate Minor Child (2009).......................................................32
Parental Authority; In Vitro Fertilization (2010)............................................................32

180
Paternity & Filiation; Child Born Under a Void Marriage (2010)....................................33
Paternity & Filiation; Impugning Legitimacy (2010).......................................................34
Paternity & Filiation; In Vitro Fertilization;
Surrogate Mother’s Remedy to Regain Custody (2010)...................34
Paternity & Filiation; Legitimacy; Presumption (2008)..................................................35
Paternity & Filiation; Legitimation of a Child from a Previous Valid Marriage (2008).....36
Paternity & Filiation; Legitimation of a Dead Child (2009).............................................37
Paternity & Filiation; Support: Ascendants & Descendants;
Collateral Blood Relatives (2008)...................................................37
Paternity & Filiation; Use of Surname; Illegitimate Child (2009)....................................38
Paternity & Filiation; Who May Impugn Legitimacy (2009)............................................39
Property Relations; Adulterous Relationship (2009).......................................................39
Property Relations; Accession (2012).............................................................................40
Property Relations; Ante-Nuptial Debt (2007)................................................................40
Property Relations; Unions Without Marriage (2012)......................................................41
Property Relations; Unions Without Marriage (2012)......................................................42
Property Relations; Void Marriages (2010).....................................................................43
Property Relations; Void Marriages (2010).....................................................................45

180
Succession
Disposition; Mortis Causa vs. Intervivos; Corpse (2009).................................................46
Heirs; Fideicommissary Substitution (2008)..................................................................46
Heirs; Intestate Succession; Legitime; Computation (2010)...........................................47
Heirs; Representation; Iron-Curtain Rule (2012)............................................................49
Heirs; Reserva Troncal (2009)........................................................................................49
Intestate Succession (2008)...........................................................................................50
Intestate Succession (2008)...........................................................................................51
Intestate Succession; Rights of Representation:
Illegitimate, Adopted Child; Iron Curtain Rule (2007)....................51
Legitimes; Compulsory Heirs (2012)..............................................................................53
Legitime; Compulsory Heirs (2008)................................................................................53
Preterition; Disinheritance (2008).................................................................................54
Succession; Proof of Death between persons called to succeed each other (2008)..........55
Succession; Rule on Survivorship (2009).......................................................................56
Wills; Holographic Wills; Insertions & Cancellations (2012)............................................57
Wills; Holographic Wills; Probate (2009).........................................................................57
Wills; Joint Wills (2008).................................................................................................59
Wills; Joint Wills; Probate (2012)...................................................................................59

180
Wills; Prohibition to Partition of a Co-Owned Property (2010)........................................60
Wills; Notarial Wills; Blind Testator; Requisites (2008)...................................................61
Wills; Testamentary Disposition; Period to Prohibit Partition (2008)..............................61
Wills; Witnesses to a Will, Presence required; Thumbmark as Signature (2007)..............62
Donation
Donations; Formalities; In Writing (2007)......................................................................63
Donations; Illegal & Impossible Conditions (2007).........................................................64
Donation; Inter Vivos (2013)..........................................................................................64
Property
Accretion; Alluvium (2008)............................................................................................65
Accretion; Rights of the Riparian Owner (2009).............................................................67
Builder; Good Faith; Requisites (2013)...........................................................................68
Easement; Prescription; Acquisitive Prescription (2009)................................................70
Easement; Right of Way (2013)......................................................................................70
Easement; Right of Way (2010)......................................................................................72
Hidden Treasure (2008).................................................................................................73
Mortgage; Public or Private Instrument (2013)...............................................................74
Occupation vs. Possession (2007)..................................................................................76
Ownership; Co-Ownership (2009)...................................................................................76

Ownership; Co-Ownership (2008)...................................................................................77
Page 7 of 180
Property; Movable or Immovable (2007).........................................................................78
Land Titles and Deeds

Acquisition of Lands; Sale of Real Property to an Alien (2009).......................................79
Non-Registrable Properties (2007)..................................................................................80
Prescription; Acquisitive Prescription (2008).................................................................81
Prescription; Judicially Foreclosed Real Property Mortgage (2012)................................82
Purchaser in Good Faith; Mortgaged Property (2008).....................................................83
Registration; Governing Law (2007)...............................................................................84
Registration; Party Who First took Possession (2013)....................................................85
Registration; Requisites; Proof (2013)............................................................................86
Remedies; Fraud; Rights of Innocent Purchaser (2009)..................................................89
Contracts
Contract to Sell vs. Conditional Contract of Sale (2012)................................................90
Rescission of Contract; Fortuitous Event (2008)............................................................90
Stipulation; Arbitration Clause (2009)............................................................................91
Obligations
Extinguishment; Compensation (2009)..........................................................................91

Extinguishment; Compensation (2008)..........................................................................92
Extinguishment; Novation (2008)..................................................................................93
Extinguishment; Payment of Check (2013)....................................................................94
Page 8 of 180
Extinguishment; Payment of Check; Legal Tender (2008)..............................................95
Liability; Solidary Liability (2008)..................................................................................96
Obligations; Without Agreement (2007).........................................................................97
Trust
Trust De Son Tort (2007)...............................................................................................98
Sales
Condominium Act; Partition of a Condominium (2009)..................................................99
Mortgage; Equitable Mortgage (2012).............................................................................99
Option Contract; Liquor & “Pulutan” as Consideration (2013)......................................100
Right of First Refusal; Lessee; Effect (2008).................................................................101
Lease
Builder; Good Faith; Useful Improvements (2013)........................................................103
Lease; Caveat Emptor (2009).......................................................................................104
Agency
Agency; Sale of a Real Property through an Agent (2010).............................................104
Partnership
Liability; Liability of a Partner (2010)..........................................................................105 Oral
Partnership (2009)...............................................................................................106 Share;
Demand during the Existence of Partnership (2012)..........................................107
Page 9 of 180
Commodatum & Mutuum

Mutuum; Interest; Solutio Indebiti (2012)....................................................................107
Guaranty
Guaranty (2009)...........................................................................................................108
Surety
Surety (2010)...............................................................................................................108
Pledge
Pledge; Pactum Commissorium (2009).........................................................................109
Torts and Damages
Damages (2012)...........................................................................................................109
Damages; Moral & Exemplary (2009)............................................................................110

Damages; Public Officers acting in the Performance of their Duties (2012)..................111
Death Indemnity (2009)...............................................................................................112
Doctrine of Discovered Peril (Last Clear Chance) (2007)...............................................112
Liability; Owner of a Pet; Fortuitous Event (2010).......................................................113
Liability; Special Parental Authority (2010).................................................................115
Quasi-Delict; Claims; Requisites (2013)........................................................................115
Quasi Tort (2010).........................................................................................................116
“Never Let The Odds Keep You From Pursuing What You Know In Your Heart You Were Meant To Do.”-Leroy Satchel PaigePage 10 of
180
MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS
2013 Civil Law Exam MCQ (October 13, 2013)...….………………………………………..........118
2012 Civil Law Exam MCQ (October 14, 2012).….……………………………………...............130
2011 Civil Law Exam MCQ (November 13, 2011).………………………………….……............149
2010 Civil Law Exam MCQ (September 12, 2010).………………………………….……...........176
2007 Civil Law Exam MCQ (September 09, 2007).………………………………….……...........179

180
Persons mother's womb. However, if the fetus had

an intra-uterine life of less than seven
months, it is not deemed born if it dies
Capacity: Juridical Capacity (2008)
within twenty-four (24) hours after its
No. II. At age 18, Marian found out that she complete delivery from the maternal womb.
was pregnant. She insured her own life and The act of naming the unborn child as sole
named her unborn child as her sole beneficiary in the insurance is favorable to
beneficiary. When she was already due to give the conceived child and therefore the fetus
birth, she and her boyfriend Pietro, the father acquires presumptive or provisional
of her unboarn child, were kidnapped in a personality. However, said presumptive
resort in Bataan where they were vacationing. personality only becomes conclusive if the
The military gave chase and after one week, child is born alive. The child need not
they were found in an abandoned hut in survive for twenty-four (24) hours as
Cavite. Marian and Pietro were hacked with required under Art. 41 of the Code because
bolos. Marian and the baby delivered were "Marian was already due to give birth,"
both found dead, with the baby's umbilical indicating that the child was more than
cord already cut. Pietro survived. seven months old.
(A). Can Marian's baby be the beneficiary of

the insurance taken on the life of the mother?
Capacity; Juridical Capacity of Donee;
(2%)
Requisites for Acceptance (2012)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No.I. b) Ricky donated P 1 Million to the
unborn child of his pregnant girlfriend, which
Yes, the baby can be the beneficiary of the
she accepted. After six (6) months of
life insurance of Marian. Art. 40 NCC
pregnancy, the fetus was born and baptized as
provides that "birth determines personality;
Angela. However, Angela died 20 hours after
but the conceived child shall be considered
birth. Ricky sought to recover the P 1 Million.
born for all purposes that are favorable to
Is Ricky entitled to recover? Explain. (5%)
it, provided that it be born later with the
conditions specified in Art. 41. Article 41
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
states that "for civil purposes, the fetus
shall be considered born if it is alive at the Yes, Ricky is entitled to recover the
time it is completely delivered from the P1,000,000.00. The NCC considers a
180
fetus a person for purposes favorable to it (1). Roberta, a Filipino, 17 years of age,
provided it is born later in accordance with without the knowledge of his parents, can
the provision of the NCC. While the acquire a house in Australia because
donation is favorable to the fetus, the Australian Laws allow aliens to acquire
donation did not take effect because the property from the age of 16.
fetus was not born in accordance with the
NCC. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
To be considered born, the fetus that had TRUE. Since Australian Law allows alien to
an intrauterine life of less than seven (7) acquire property from the age of 16,
months should live for 24 hours from its Roberta may validly own a house in
complete delivery from the mother’s womb. Australia, following the principle of lex rei
Since Angela had an intrauterine life of less sitae enshrined in Art. 16, NCC, which
than seven (7) months but did not live for states "Real property as well as personal
24 hours, she was not considered born and, property is subject to the law of the
therefore, did not become a person. Not country where it is situated." Moreover,
being a person, she has no juridical even assuming that legal capacity of
capacity to be a donee, hence, the donation Roberta in entering the contract in
to her did not take effect. The donation not Australia is governed by Philippine Law, she
being effective, the amount donated may be will acquire ownership over the property
recovered. To retain it will be unjust bought until the contract is annulled.
enrichment.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
FALSE. Laws relating to family rights and

Capacity: Legal Capacity; Lex Rei Sitae duties, or to the status, condition or legal
(2007) capacity of persons are binding upon the
citizens of the Philippines, even though
No.VII. Write "TRUE" if the statement is true or living abroad (Art. 15, NCC). The age of
"FALSE" if the statement is false. If the majority under Philippine law is 18 years
statement is FALSE, state the reason. (2% (R.A. No. 6809); hence, Roberta, being only
each). 17 years old, has no legal capacity to
acquire and own land.
180
Correction of Entries; Clerical Error Act with Rule 108 of

(2008) the Rules of Court because said changes are
substantive corrections.
No. IV. Gianna was born to Andy and Aimee,
who at the time Gianna's birth were not (B). Instead of a judicial action, can
married to each other. While Andy was single administrative proceedings be brought for the
at the time, Aimee was still in the process of purpose of making the above corrections? (2%)
securing a judicial declaration of nullity on her
marriage to her ex-husband. Gianna's birth SUGGESTED ANSWER:
certificate, which was signed by both Andy
and Aimee, registered the status of Gianna as No. An administrative proceeding cannot be
"legitimate", her surname carrying that of brought for the purpose of making the
Andy's and that her parents were married to above corrections. R.A. 9048, otherwise
each other. known as the Clerical Error Act, which
authorizes the city or municipal civil
(A). Can a judicial action for correction of registrar or the consul general to correct a
entries in Gianna's birth certificate be clerical or typographical error in an entry
successfully maintained to: and/or change the first name or nickname
in the civil register without need of a
a). Change her status from "legitimate" to judicial order. Errors that involve the
"illegitimate" (1%); change of nationality, age, status, surname
or sex of petitioner are not included from
and the coverage of the said Act (Silverio v.
Republic, G.R. No. 174689, 22 Oct., 2007).
b). Change her surname from that of Andy's to
Aimee's maiden surname? (1%)
Nationality Principle (2009)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No.XII. Emmanuel and Margarita, American

Yes, a judicial action for correction of
citizens and employees of the U.S. State
entries in Gianna's birth certificate can be
Department, got married in the African state of
successfully maintained to change (a) her
Kenya where sterility is a ground for
status from "legitimate" to "illegitimate,"
annulment of marriage. Thereafter, the
and (b) her surname from that of Andy's to
spouses were assigned to the U.S. Embassy in
Aimee's maiden surname in accordance
Manila. On the first year of the spouses’
180
tour of duty in the Philippines, Margarita filed ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:

an annulment case against Emmanuel before The forum has jurisdiction over an action
a Philippine court on the ground of her for the annulment of marriage solemnized
husband’s sterility at the time of the elsewhere but only when the party bringing
celebration of the marriage. the actions is domiciled in the forum. In
this case, none of the parties to the
(A). Will the suit prosper? Explain your marriage is domiciled in the Philippines.
answer. (3%) They are here as officials of the US Embassy
whose stay in the country is merely
SUGGESTED ANSWER: temporary, lasting only during their fixed
No, the suits will not prosper. As applied to tour of duty. Hence, the Philippine courts
foreign nationals with the respect to family have no jurisdiction over the action.
relations and status of persons, the
nationality principle set forth in Article 15
of the Civil Code will govern the relations
Nationality Principle; Change of Name not
of Emmanuel and Margarita. Since they are
Covered (2009)
American citizens, the governing law as to
the ground for annulment is not Kenyan
No.XX. (A). If Ligaya, a Filipino citizen residing
Law which Magarita invokes in support of
in the United States, files a petition for change
sterility as such ground; but should be U.S.
of name before the District Court of New York,
Law, which is the national Law of both
what law shall apply? Explain. (2%)
Emmanuel and Margarita as recognized
under Philippine Law. Hence, the Philippine SUGGESTED ANSWER:
court will not give due course to the case New York law shall apply. The petition of
based on Kenyan Law. The nationality change of name file din New York does not
principle as expressed in the application of concern the legal capacity or status of the
national law of foreign nationals by petitioner. Moreover, it does nto affect the
Philippine courts is established by registry of any other country including the
precedents (Pilapil v. Ibay-Somera, 174 country of birth of the petitioner. Whatever
SCRA 653[1989], Garcia v. Recio, 366 SCRA judgment is rendered in that petition will
437 [2001], Llorente v. Court of Appeals have effect only in New York. The New York
345 SCRA 92 [2000], and Bayot v. Court of court
Appeals 570 SCRA 472 [2008]).
180
cannot, for instance, order the Civil Philippines. The Philippine court can never
Registrar in the Philippines to change its acquire jurisdiction over the custodian in
records. The judgment of the New York the US of the records of the petitioner.
court allowing a change in the name of the Moreover, change of name has nothing to
petitioner will be limited to the records of do with the legal capacity or status of the
the petitioner in New York and the use of alien. Since Philippine records and
her new name in all transactions in New transactions are the only ones affected, the
York. Since the records and processes in Philippine court may effect the change only
New York are the only ones affected, the in accordance with the laws governing
New York court will apply New YorK law in those records and transactions that law
resolving the petition. cannot be but Philippine law.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Philippine law shall apply (Art 15, NCC). U.S. law shall apply as it is his national law.
Status, conditions, family rights and duties This is pursuant to the application of lex
are governed by Philippine laws as to patriae or the nationality principle, by
Filipinos even though sojourning abroad. which his legal status is governed by
ALTENATIVE ANSWER: national law, the matter of change of name
If Ligaya, a Filipino, files a petition for being included in the legal status. The
change of name with the District Court of Supreme Court has reiterate in several
New YoRk, the laws of New York will govern cases, that the lex patriae as provided in
since change of name is not one of those Article 15 of the Civil Code is applicable to
covered by the principles of nationality. foreign nationals in determining their legal
status (supra).
(B). If Henry, an American citizen residing in
the Philippines, files a petition for change of
Conflict of Laws
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 for
statement is true, or FALSE if the statement is
change of name in the Philippines will
false. Explain your answer in not more than
affect only the records of the
two (2) sentences.
petitioner and his transactions in the
180
(A). The doctrine of "processual presumption" (1) Public Order. To maintain peace and
allows the court of the forum to presume that order, disputes that disturb the peace of
the foreign law applicable to the case is the the forum should be settled by the court of
same as the local or domestic law. (1%) the forum even though the application of
the foreign law is necessary for the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: purpose.
TRUE. If the foreign law necessary to the
(2) Humanitarian Principle. An aggrieved
resolve an issue is not proven as a fact, the
party should not be left without remedy in
court of the forum may presume that the
a forum even though the application of the
foreign law is the same as the law of the
foreign law by the courts of the forum is
forum.
unavoidable in order to extend relief.
Adoption
Jurisdiction; Courts may Assume
Jurisdiction over Conflict of Laws Cases
Adoption; Termination; Death of Adopter
(2010)
(2009)
No.III. Define, Enumerate or Explain. (2%

No.XIII. Rafael, a wealthy bachelor, filed a
each)
petition for the adoption of Dolly, a one year old
foundling who had a severe heart ailment.
(C) Give at least two reasons why a court may
During the pendency of the adoption
assume jurisdiction over a conflict of laws
proceedings, Rafael died of natural causes.
case.
The Office of the Solicitor General files a
motion to dismiss the petition on the ground
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
that the case can no longer proceed because of
(1) Statute theory. There is a domestic law the petitioner’s death.
authorizing the local court to assume
jurisdiction. (A). Should the case be dismissed? Explain.
(2%)
(2) Comity theory. The local court assumes
jurisdiction based on the principle of SUGGESTED ANSWER:
comity or courtesy. It depends on the stage of the proceedings
when Rafael died. If he died after all the
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
requirements under the law
180
have been complied with and the case is No.VIII. Spouses Rex and Lea bore two
already submitted for resolution, the court children now aged 14 and 8. During the
may grant the petition and issue a decree subsistence of their marriage, Rex begot a
of adoption despite the death of the child by another woman. He is now 10 years of
adopter (Section 13, RA 8552). Otherwise, age.
the death of the petitioner shall have the
effect terminating the proceedings. On Lea’s discovery of Rex’s fathering a child by
another woman, she filed a petition for legal
(B). Will your answer be the same if it was separation which was granted.
Dolly who died during the pendency of the
adoption proceedings? Explain. (2%) Rex now wants to adopt his illegitimate child.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (A) Whose consent is needed for Rex’s

No, if it was Dolly who died, the case adoption of his illegitimate child? (2.5%)
should be dismissed. Her death terminates
the proceedings (Art. 13, Domestic SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Adoption Law).
The consent of the 14-year-old legitimate
child, of the 10- year -old illegitimate child
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
and of the biological mother of the
It depends. If all the requirements under illegitimate child are needed for the
the law have already been complied with adoption (Section 7 and 9, RA 8552). The
and the case is already submitted for consent of Lea is no longer required
resolution, the death of the adoptee should because there was already a final decree of
not abate the proceedings. The court legal separation.
should issue the decree of adoption if will
be for the best interest of the adoptee. (B) If there was no legal separation, can Rex
While RA8552 provides only for the case still adopt his illegitimate child? Explain.
where it is the petitioner who dies before (2.5%)
the decree is issued, it is with more
compelling reason that the decree should SUGGESTED ANSWER:
be allowed in case it is the adoptee who
dies because adoption is primarily for his Yes, he can still adopt his illegitimate child
benefit. but with the consent of his spouse,
Adoption; Illegitimate Child (2010)

180
of his 14-year-old legitimate child, of the Adoption of Stephanie Nathy Astorga

illegitimate child, and of the biological Garcia, G.R. No. 148311, March 31, 2005,
mother of the illegitimate child (Section 7 the Supreme Court ruled that the adopted
and 9, RA 8552). child may use the surname of the natural
mother as his middle name because there is
no prohibition in the law against it.
Moreover, it will also be for the benefit of
Adoption; Illegitimate Child; Use of the adopted child who shall preserve his
Mother’s Surname as Middle Name (2012) lineage on his mother’s side and reinforce
his right to inherit from his mother and her
No.IV.b) Honorato filed a petition to adopt his family. Lastly, it will make the adopted
minor illegitimate child Stephanie, alleging child conform with the time-honored
that Stephanie’s mother is Gemma Astorga Filipino tradition of carrying the mother’s
Garcia; that Stephanie has been using her surname as the person’s middle name.
mother’s middle name and surname; and that
he is now a widower and qualified to be her
adopting parent. He prayed that Stephanie’s
middle name be changed from "Astorga" to Consent; Consent of the Adopter’s Heirs
"Garcia," which is her mother’s surname and (2008)
that her surname "Garcia" be changed to
"Catindig," which is his surname. This the trial No.V. Despite several relationships with
court denied. Was the trial court correct in different women, Andrew remained unmarried.
denying Hororato’s request for Stephanie’s use His first relationship with Brenda produced a
of her mother’s surname as her middle name? daughter, Amy, now 30 years old. His second,
Explain. (5%) with Carla, produced two sons: Jon and Ryan.
His third, with Donna, bore him no children
SUGGESTED ANSWER: although Elena has a daughter Jane, from a
previous relationship. His last, with Fe,
No, the trial court was not correct. There is produced no biological children but they
no law prohibiting an illegitimate child informally adopted without court proceedings,
adopted by his natural father to use as Sandy's now 13 years old, whom they consider
middle name his mother’s surname. The as their own. Sandy was orphaned as a baby
law is silent as to what middle name an and was entrusted to them by the midwife who
adoptee may use. In case of In re: attended to Sandy's birth. All the
180
children, including Amy, now live with andrew No.IX. Eighteen-year old Filipina Patrice had a
in his house. daughter out of wedlock whom she named
Laurie. At 26, Patrice married American citizen
(A). Is there any legal obstacle to the legal John who brought her to live with him in the
adoption of Amy by Andrew? To the legal United States of America. John at once
adoption of Sandy by Andrew and Elena? (2%) signified his willingness to adopt Laurie.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Can John file the petition for adoption? If yes,
what are the requirements? If no, why? (5%)
Yes, there is a legal obstacle to the legal
adoption of Amy by Andrew. Under Sec. 9(d) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
of RA 8552, the New Domestic Adoption
Act of 1998, the written consent of the No, John cannot file the petition to adopt
illegitimate sons/daughters, ten (10) years alone. Philippine law requires husband and
of age or over, of the adopter, if living with wife to adopt jointly except on certain
said adopter and the latter's spouse, if any, situations enumerated in the law. The case
is necessary to the adoption. All the of John does not fall in any of the
children of Andrew are living with him. exceptions (R.A. 8552).
Andrew needs to get the written consent of Family Code

Jon, Ryan, Vina and Wilma, who are all ten
(10) years old or more. Sandy's consent to
Marriage; Annulment; Grounds (2009)
Amy's adoption is not necessary because
she was not legally adopted by Andrew.
No.XII. Emmanuel and Margarita, American
Jane's consent is likewise not necessary
citizens and employees of the U.S. State
because she is not a child of Andrew.
Department, got married in the African state of
Sandy, an orphan since birth, is eligible for
Kenya where sterility is a ground for
adoption under Sec. 8(f) of RA 8552,
annulment of marriage. Thereafter, the
provided that Andrew obtains the written
spouses were assigned to the U.S. Embassy in
consent of the other children mentioned
Manila. On the first year of the spouses’ tour
above, including Amy and Elena obtains the
of duty in the Philippines, Margarita filed an
written consent of Jane, if she is over ten
annulment case against Emmanuel before a
years old (Sec. 9(d), RA 8552).
Philippine court on the ground of
Qualifications of Adopter (2010)
180
her husband’s sterility at the time of the validity of that marriage

celebration of the marriage. shall be determined by applying Kenyan
law and not Philippine law.
(B). Assume Emmanuel and Margarita are
both Filipinos. After their wedding in Kenya, However, while Kenyan law governs the
they come back and take up residence in the formal validity of the marriage, the legal
Philippines. Can their marriage be annulled capacity of the Filipino parties to the
on the ground of Emmanuel’s sterility? marriage is governed not by Kenyan law
Explain. (3%) but by Philippine law (Article 15, NCC).
Sterility of a party as a ground for the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: annulment of the marriage is not a matter
No, the marriage cannot be annulled under of form but a matter of legal capacity.
the Philippine law. Sterility is not a ground Hence, the Philippine court must apply
for annulment of marriage under Article 45 Phillippine law in determining the status of
of the Family Code. the marriage on the ground of absence or
defect in the legal capacity of the Filipino
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: parties. Since sterility does not constitute
No, the marriage cannot be annulled in the absence or defect in the legal capacity of
Philippines. the parties under Philippine law, there is
no ground to avoid or annul the marriage.
The Philippine court shall have jurisdiction Hence, the Philippine court has to deny the
over the action to annul the marriage not petition.
only because the parties are residents of
the Philippines but because they are
Filipino citizens. The Philippine court,
however, shall apply the law of the place Marriage; Annulment; Grounds (2007)
where the marriage was celebrated in
determining its formal validity (Article 26, No. VII. Write "TRUE" if the statement is true
FC; Article 17, NCC). or "FALSE" if the statement is false. If the
statement is FALSE, state the reason. (2%
Since the marriage was celebrated in Kenya each).
in accordance with Kenyan law, the formal
validity of such marriage is governed by (4). The day after John and Marsha got
Kenyan law and any issue as to the formal married, John told her that he was impotent.
Marsha continued to live with
180
John for 2 years. Marsha is now estopped ALTERNATIVE SUGGESTED ANSWER:

No, I do not agree. There are others who
from filing an annulment case against John.
may file a petition for declaration of nullity
SUGGESTED ANSWER: such as the other spouse in bigamous

marriages.
FALSE. Marsha is not estopped from filing
an annulment case against John on the
ground of his impotence, because she
Marriage; Annulment; Support Pendente
learned of his impotence after the
Lite (2010)
celebration of the marriage and not before.
Physical incapacity to consummate is a
No.V. G filed on July 8, 2000 a petition for
valid ground for the annulment of marriage
declaration of nullity of her marriage to B.
if such incapacity was existing at the time
During the pendency of the case, the couple
of the marriage, continues and appears to
entered into a compromise agreement to
be incurable. The marriage may be annulled
dissolve their absolute community of property.
on this ground within five years from its
B ceded his right to their house and lot and all
celebration.
his shares in two business firms to G and
their two children, aged 18 and 19.
B also opened a bank account in the amount

Marriage; Annulment; Parties (2012)
of P3 million in the name of the two children
to answer for their educational expenses until
No.IX.b) A petition for declaration of nullity of
they finish their college degrees.
a void marriage can only be filed by either the
husband or the wife? Do you agree? Explain
For her part, G undertook to shoulder the day-
your answer. (5%)
to-day living expenses and upkeep of the
children. The Court approved the spouses’
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
agreement on September 8, 2000.
Yes, I agree. Under the rules promulgated
by the Supreme Court, a direct action for (A) Suppose the business firms suffered
declaration of nullity may only be filed by reverses, rendering G unable to support
any of the spouses. herself and the children. Can G still ask for
support pendente lite from B? Explain. (3%)
180
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Becoming Alien (2009)
If B acquiesces and does not file the action No.IV. Harry married Wilma, a very wealthy
to impugn the legitimacy of the child woman. Barely five (5) years into the marriage,
within the prescriptive period for doing so Wilma fell in love with Joseph. Thus, Wilma
in Article 170 of the Family Code, G's went to a small country in Europe, became a
daughter by another man shall be naturalized citizen of that country, divorced
conclusively presumed as the legitimate Harry, and married Joseph. A year thereafter,
daughter of B by G. Wilma and Joseph returned and established
permanent residence in the Philippines.
(B) Suppose in late 2004 the two children had
squandered the P3 million fund for their (A). Is the divorce obtained by Wilma from
education before they could obtain their Harry recognized in the Philippines? Explain
college degrees, can they ask for more support your answer. (3%)
from B? Explain. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSRWER :
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, the two children can still ask for As to Wilma, the divorced obtained by her
support for schooling or training for some is recognized as valid in the Philippines
professions, trade or vocation, even beyond because she is now a foreigner. Philippine
the age of majority until they shall have personal laws do not apply to a foreigner.
finished or completed their education However, recognition of the divorce as
(Article 194, Paragraph 2, Family Code; regards Harry will depend on the
Javier v. Lucero, 94 Phil. 634 {1954}].Their applicability to his case of the second
having squandered the money given to paragraph of Article 26 of the Family Code.
them for their education will not deprive If it is applicable, divorce is recognized as
them of their right to complete an to him and, therefore, he can remarry.
education, or to extinguish the obligation However, if it is not applicable, divorce is
of the parents to ensure the future of their not recognized as to him and,
children. consequently, he cannot remarry.
Marriage; Divorce Decrees; Filipino Spouse

ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
180
Yes , the divorce obtained by Wilma is Yes, he can validly marry Elizabeth,
recognized as valid in the Philippines. At applying the doctrine laid down by the
the time she got the divorce, she was Supreme Court in Republic v. Obrecido (427
already a foreign national having been SCRA 114 [2005]). Under the second
naturalized as a citizen of that “small paragraph of Article 26 of the Family Code,
country in Europe.” Based on precedents for the Filipino spouse to have capacity to
established by the Supreme Court ( Bayot v. remarry, the law expressly requires the
CA, 570 SCRA 472 [2008]), divorce obtained spouse who obtained the divorce to be a
by a foreigner is recognized in the foreigner at the time of the marriage.
Philippines if validly obtained in Applying this requirement to the case of
accordance with his or her national law . Harry it would seem that he is not given
the capacity to remarry. This is because
(B). If Harry hires you as his lawyer, what Wilma was a Filipino at the time of her
legal recourse would you advise him to take? marriage to Harry.
Why? (2%)
In Republic v. Obrecido, however, the

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Supreme Court ruled that a Filipino spouse
is given the capacity to remarry even
I will advice Harry to: though the spouse who obtained the
divorce was a Filipino at the time of the
(1) Dissolve and liquidate his property marriage, if the latter was already a
relations with Wilma ; and foreigner when the divorce was already
obtained abroad. According to the court, to
(2) If he will remarry, file a petition for the rule otherwise will violate the equal
recognition and enforcement of the foreign protection clause of the Constitution.
judgment of divorced (Rule 39,Rules of
Court ).
Marriage; Divorce Decrees; Foreign Spouse
(C). Harry tells you that he has fallen in love Divorces Filipino Spouse (2012)
with another woman, Elizabeth, and wants to
marry her because, after all, Wilma is already (b) Cipriano and Lady Miros married each
married to Joseph. Can Harry legally marry other. Lady Miros then left for the US and
Elizabeth? Explain. (2%) there, she obtained American citizenship.
SUGGESTED ANSWER :
180
Cipriano later learned all about this including proving only that the foreign spouse has
the fact that Lady Miros has divorced him in obtained a divorce against her or him abroad.
America and that she had remarried there. He (1%)
then filed a petition for authority to remarry,
invoking Par. 2, Art. 26 of the Family Code. Is SUGGESTED ANSWER :
Cipriano capacitated to re-marry by virtue of
FALSE, In Garcia v. Recio , 366 SCRA 437
the divorce decree obtained by his Filipino
(2001) , the SC held that for a Filipino
spouse who was later naturalized as an
spouse to have capacity to contract a
American citizen? Explain. (5%)
subsequent marriage, it must also be
proven that the foreign divorced obtained
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
abroad by the foreigner spouse give such
Yes, he is capacitated to remarry. While the foreigner spouse capacity to remarry.
second paragraph of Art 26 of the Family
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Code is applicable only to a Filipino who
married a foreigner at the time of marriage,
TRUE, Art 26 (2) (FC), clearly provides that
the Supreme Court ruled in the case of
the decree of divorce obtained abroad by
Republic v. Orbecido, G.R. No. 154380, 5
the foreigner spouse is sufficient to
Oct, 2005, that the said provision equally
capacitate the Filipino spouse to remarry.
applies to a Filipino who married another
Filipino at the time of the marriage, but
who was already a foreigner when the
divorce was obtained.
Marriage; Legal Separation; Prescription
(2012)
No.IV.a) After they got married, Nikki

Marriage; Divorce Decrees; Foreign Spouse
discovered that Christian was having an affair
Divorces Filipino Spouse (2010)
with another woman. But Nikki decided to give
it a try and lived with him for two (2) years.
No.I. True or False.
After two (2) years, Nikki filed an action for
legal separation on the ground of Christian’s
(A). Under Article 26 of the Family Code, when
sexual infidelity. Will
a foreign spouse divorces his/her Filipino
spouse, the latter may re-marry by the action prosper? Explain. (5%)
180
SUGGESTED ANSWER: the sexual infidelity committed in 2003,

the prescriptive period runs from 2003 and
Although the action for legal separation has
so on. The action for legal separation for
not yet prescribed, the prescriptive period
the last act of sexual infidelity in 2005 will
being 5 years, if Obecido’s affair with
prescribe in 2010.
another woman was ended when Nikki
decided to live with him again, Nikki’s
action will not prosper on account of
condonation. However, if such affair is still Marriage; Psychological Incapacity (2013)
continuing, Nikki’s action would prosper
because the action will surely be within five No.I. You are a Family Court judge and before
(5) years from the commission of the latest you is a Petition for the Declaration of Nullity
act of sexual infidelity. Every act of sexual of Marriage (under Article 36 of the Family
liaison is a ground for legal separation. 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
Marriage; Legal Separation; Prescription
womanizer, a gambler, and a mama's boy-
(2007)
traits that she never knew or saw when Neil
was courting her. Although summoned, Neil
No.VII. Write "TRUE" if the statement is true
did not answer Maria's petition and never
or "FALSE" if the statement is false. If the
appeared in court.
each).
To support her petition, Maria presented three
witnesses- herself, Dr. Elsie Chan, and
(2). If a man commits several acts of sexual
Ambrosia. Dr. Chan testified on the
infidelity, particularly in 2002, 2003, 2004,
psychological report on Neil that she prepared.
2005, the prescriptive period to file for legal
Since Neil never acknowledged n9r responded
separation runs from 2002.
to her invitation for interviews, her report is
solely based on her interviews with Maria and
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the spouses' minor children. Dr. Chan
FALSE. The five-year prescriptive period for concluded that Neil is suffering from
filing legal separation runs from the Narcissistic Personality Disorder, an ailment
occurrence of sexual infidelity committed that she found to be already present since
in 2002 runs from 2002, for Neil's

180
early adulthood and one that is grave and enough to prevent Neil from performing his
incurable. Maria testified on the specific essential marital obligations. Dr. Chan’s
instances when she found Neil drunk, with report contains
another woman, or squandering the family's mere conclusions. Being a drunkard, a
resources in a casino. Ambrosia, the spouses' womanizer, a gambler and a mama’s boy,
current household help, corroborated Maria's merely shows Neil’s failure to perform his
testimony. marital obligations. In a number of cases,
the Supreme Court did not find the
On the basis of the evidence presented, will existence of psychological incapacity in
you grant the petition? (8%) cases where the respondent showed
habitual drunkenness (Republic v. Melgar,
SUGGESTED ANSWER: G.R. No. 139676, 2006), blatant display of
infidelity and irresponsibility (Dedel v. CA,
No. The petition should be denied. 2004) or being hooked to gambling and
drugs (Republic v. Tanyag
The psychological incapacity under Art. 36
San Jose, G.R. No. 168328, 2007).
of the Family Code must be characterized
by (a) gravity, (b) juridical antecedence, and ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
(c) incurability. It is not enough to prove
that the parties failed to meet their Yes. The petition should be granted.
responsibilities and duties as married
persons; it is essential that they must be The personal medical or psychological
shown to be incapable of doing so, due to examination of respondent is not a
some physiological (not physical) illness requirement for declaration of
(Republic v. CA and Molina, G.R. No. psychological incapacity. It is the totality
108763, Feb 13, 1997). of the evidence presented which shall
determine the existence of psychological
In this case, the pieces of evidence incapacity (Marcos v. Marcos, G.R. No.
presented are not sufficient to conclude 136490, Oct 19, 2000). Dr. Chan’s report
that indeed Neil is suffering from corroborated by Maria’s and Ambrosia’s
psychological incapacity [Narcissistic testimonies, therefore, sufficiently prove
Personality Disorder] existing already Neil’s psychological incapacity to assume
before the marriage, incurable and serious his marital obligations.
180
Marriage; Psychological Incapacity (2012) Marriage; Requisites (2008)
No.II.b) The petitioner filed a petition for No. III. Roderick and Faye were high school
declaration of nullity of marriage based sweethearts. When Roderick was 18 and Faye,
allegedly on the psychological incapacity of the 16 years old, they started to live together as
respondent, but the psychologist was not able husband and wife without the benefit of
to personally examine the respondent and the marriage. When Faye reached 18 years of age,
psychological report was based only on the her parents forcibly took her back and
narration of petitioner. Should the annulment arranged for her marriage to Brad. Although
be granted? Explain. (5%) Faye lived with Brad after the marriage,
Roderick continued to regularly visit Faye
SUGGESTED ANSWER: while Brad was away at work. During their
marriage, Faye gave birth to a baby girl, Laica.
The annulment cannot be guaranteed solely
When Faye was 25 years old, Brad discovered
on the basis of the psychological report.
her continued liason with Roderick and in one
For the report to prove the psychological
of their heated arguments, Faye shot Brad to
incapacity of the respondent, it is required
death. She lost no time in marrying her true
that the psychologist should personally
love Roderick, without a marriage license,
examine the respondent and the
claiming that they have been continuously
psychological report should be based on the
cohabiting for more than 5 years.
psychologist’s independent assessment of
the facts as to whether or not the
(A). Was the marriage of Roderick and Faye
respondent is psychologically
valid? (2%)
incapacitated.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Since, the psychologist did not personally
examine the respondent, and his report is No. The marriage of Roderick and Faye is
based solely on the story of the petitioner not valid. Art. 4, FC provides that the
who has an interest in the outcome of the absence of any of the essential or formal
petition, the marriage cannot be annulled requisites renders the marriage void ab
on the ground of respondent’s initio. However, no license shall be
psychological incapacity if
the said report is the only evidence of
respondent’s psychological incapacity.
180
necessary for the marriage of a man and a reqiured to submit the required certificate of
woman who have lived together as husband capacity to marry from the German Embassy
and wife for at least 5 years and without in Manila, Adolf stated in the application for
any legal impediment to marry each other. marriage license that he was a Filipino citizen.
In Republic v. Dayot, G.R. No. 175581, 28 With the marriage license stating that Adolf
March 2008, reiterating the doctrine in was a Filipino, the couple got married in a
Niñal v. Bayadog, G.R. No. 133778, 14 ceremony officiated by the Parish Priest of
March 2000, this five Calamba, Laguna in a beach in Nasugbu,
year period is characterized by exclusivity Batangas, as the local parish priest refused to
and continuity. In the present case, the solemnize marriages except in his church. Is
marriage of Roderick and Faye cannot be the marriage valid? Explain fully. (5%)
considered as a marriage of exceptional
character, because there were 2 legal SUGGESTED ANSWER:
impediments during their cohabitation:
minority on the part of Faye, during the No. The marriage is not valid. Art. 41 FC
first two years of cohabitation; and, lack of allows the present spouse to contract a
legal capacity, since Faye married Brad at subsequent marriage during the subsistence
the age of 18. The absence of a marriage of his previous marriage provided that: (a)
license made the marriage of Faye and his prior spouse in the first marriage had
Roderick void ab initio. been absent for four

consecutive years; (b) that the spouse
present has a well-founded belief that the
Marriage; Subsequent Marriage (2008) 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 (10) null and void. In the instant case, the
years earlier and had never been heard of ever husband of Ana was among the passengers
since. Believing that her husband had died, on board a commercial jet plane which
Ana married Adolf Cruz Staedtler, a divorced crashed in the Atlantic Ocean. The body of
German national born of a German father and the deceased husband was not recovered to
a Filipino mother residing in Stuttgart. To confirm his death. Thus, following Art. 41,
avoid being Ana
180
should have first secured a judicial while Jane is a child of Elena from a
declaration of his presumptive death before previous relationship. Thus, their marriage
she married Adolf. The absence of the said is not one of the prohibited marriages
judicial declaration incapacitated Ana from enumerated under Art. 38 of the FC.
contracting her second marriage, making it
void ab initio.
Marriage; Void Marriages; By Reason of

Marriage; Void Marriages; By Reason of Public Policy (2007)
Public Policy (2008) No. VII. Write "TRUE" if the statement is true
No.V. Despite several relationships with statement is FALSE, state the reason. (2%
different women, Andrew remained unmarried. each).
His first relationship with Brenda produced a
daughter, Amy, now 30 years old. His second, (5). Amor gave birth to Thelma when she was
with Carla, produced two sons: Jon and Ryan. 15 years old. Thereafter, Amor met David and
His third, with Donna, bore him no children they got married when she was 20 years old.
although Elena has a daughter Jane, from a David had a son, Julian, with his ex-girlfriend
previous relationship. His last, with Fe, Sandra. Julian and Thelma can get married.
produced no biological children but they
informally adopted without court proceedings, SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Sandy's now 13 years old, whom they consider
as their own. Sandy was orphaned as a baby TRUE. Julian and Thelma can get married.
and was entrusted to them by the midwife who Marriage between stepbrothers and
attended to Sandy's birth. All the children, stepsisters are not among the marriages
including Amy, now live with andrew in his prohibited under the Family Code.
house.
(D). Can Jon and Jane legally marry? (1%) Marriage; Void Marriages; Property
Relations (2009)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No. III. In December 2000, Michael and Anna,

Yes. Jon and Jane can marry each other; after obtaining a valid marriage
Jon is an illegitimate child of Andrew
180
license, went to the Office of the Mayor of impediment for them to validity marry
Urbano, Bulacan, to get married. The Mayor each other.
was not there, but the Mayor’s secretary asked
Michael and Anna and their witnesses to fill
up and sign the required marriage contract Marriage; Void Marriages; Status of
forms. The secretary then told them to wait, Children (2009)
and went out to look for the Mayor who was
attending a wedding in a neighboring No. III. In December 2000, Michael and Anna,
municipality. after obtaining a valid marriage license, went
to the Office of the Mayor of Urbano, Bulacan,
When the secretary caught up with the Mayor to get married. The Mayor was not there, but
at the wedding reception, she showed him the the Mayor’s secretary asked Michael and Anna
marriage contract forms and told him that the and their witnesses to fill up and sign the
couple and their witnesses were waiting in his required marriage contract forms. The
office. The Mayor forthwith signed all the secretary then told them to wait, and went out
copies of the marriage contract, gave them to to look for the Mayor who was attending a
the secretary who returned to the Mayor’s wedding in a neighboring municipality.
office. She then gave copies of the marriage
contract to the parties, and told Michael and When the secretary caught up with the Mayor
Anna that they were already married. at the wedding reception, she showed him the
Thereafter, the couple lived together as marriage contract forms and told him that the
husband and wife, and had three sons. couple and their witnesses were waiting in his
office. The Mayor forthwith signed all the
(C). What property regime governs the copies of the marriage contract, gave them to
properties acquired by the couple? Explain. the secretary who returned to the Mayor’s
(2%) office. She then gave copies of the marriage
contract to the parties, and told Michael and
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Anna that they were already married.
Thereafter, the couple lived together as
The marriage being void, the property husband and wife, and had three sons.
relationship that governed their union is
special co-ownership under Article 147 of (A). Is the marriage of Michael and Anna valid,
the Family Code. This is on the assumption voidable, or void? Explain your answer. (3%)
that there was no
180
SUGGESTED ANSWER : (C). When Rona reaches seven (7) years old,
she tells Rodolfo that she prefers to live with
The marriage is void because the formal him, because he is better off financially than
requisite of marriage ceremony was absent Nanette. If Rodolfo files an action for the
( Art.3, F.C. 209, Family Code). custody of Rona, alleging that he is Rona’s
choice as custodial parent, will the court grant
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: Rodolfo’s petition? Why or why not? (2%)
The marriage is void because an essential

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
requisite was absent: consent of the parties
No, because Rodolfo has no parental
freely given in the presence of the
authority over Rona. He who has the
solemnizing officer (Art .2, FC).
parental authority has the right to custody.
(B). What is the status of the three children of Under the Family Code, the mother alone
Michael and Anna? Explain your answer. (2%) has parental authority over the illegitimate
child. This is true even if illegitimate father
SUGGESTED ANSWER: recognized the child and even though he is
The children are illegitimate, having been giving support for the child. To acquire
born outside a valid marriage. custody over Rona, Rodolfo should first
deprive Nanette of parental authority if
there is ground under the law, and in a
proper court proceedings. In the same
Parental Authority; Illegitimate Minor Child
action, the court may award custody of
(2009)
Rona to Rodolfo if it is for her best interest.
No.XIV. Rodolfo, married to Sharon, had an

illicit affair with his secretary, Nanette, a 19-
year old girl, and begot a baby girl, Rona. Parental Authority; In Vitro Fertilization
Nanette sued Rodolfo for damages: actual, for (2010)
hospital and other medical expenses in

delivering the child by caesarean section; No.VI. Gigolo entered into an agreement with
moral, claiming that Rodolfo promised to Majorette for her to carry in her womb his
marry her, representing that he was single baby via in vitro fertilization. Gigolo undertook
when, in fact, he was not; and exemplary, to to underwrite Majorette’s pre
teach a lesson to like-minded Lotharios. natal expenses as well as those attendant

180
to her delivery. Gigolo would thereafter pay relationship produced one offspring, Venus.
Majorette P2 million and, in return, she would The couple acquired a residential lot
give custody of the baby to him. in Parañaque. After four (4) years or in 2001,
G having completed her 4-year college degree
After Majorette gives birth and delivers the as a fulltime student, she and B contracted
baby to Gigolo following her receipt of P2 marriage without a license.
million, she engages your services as her
lawyer to regain custody of the baby. The marriage of B and G was, two years later,
declared null and void due to the absence of a
(C) Who of the two can exercise parental marriage license.
authority over the child? Explain. (2.5%)
(B). Is Venus legitimate, illegitimate, or
SUGGESTED ANSWER: legitimated? Explain briefly. (3%)
Majorette, the mother, can exercise

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
parental authority. Since the child was
born out of wedlock, the child is Venus is illegitimate. She was conceived
illegitimate and the mother has the and born outside a valid marriage. Thus,
exclusive parental authority and custody she is considered illegitimate (Art 165,
over the child. Family Code). While Venus was legitimated
by the subsequent marriage of her parents,
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
such legitimation was rendered ineffective
when the said marriage was later on
Gigolo can exercise parental authority over
declared null and void due to absence of a
the child. Majorette has no blood relation
marriage license.
to the child. She is just a “carrier” of the
child.
Under Article 178 of the Family Code,
“legitimation shall take place by a
subsequent valid marriage between parents.
The annulment of a voidable marriage shall
Paternity & Filiation; Child Born Under a
not affect the legitimation.” The inclusion
Void Marriage (2010)
of the underscored portion in the Article
necessarily implies that the Article's
No.X. In 1997, B and G started living together
application is limited to voidable marriages.
without the benefit of marriage. The
It follows that when the
180
subsequent marriage is null or void, the correction of the status of the said
legitimation must also be null and void. In daughter in her record of birth.
the present problem, the marriage between
B and G was not voidable but void. Hence, (B). If B acquiesces to the use of his surname
Venus has remained an illegitimate child. by G’s daughter by another man, what is/are
the consequence/s? Explain. (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Paternity & Filiation; Impugning
If B acquiesces and does not file the action
Legitimacy (2010)
to impugn the legitimacy of the child
No.IV. Spouses B and G begot two offsprings. within the prescriptive period for doing so
Albeit they had serious personality differences, in Article 170 of the Family Code, G's
the spouses continued to live under one roof. daughter by another man shall be
B begot a son by another woman. G also begot conclusively presumed as the legitimate
a daughter by another man. daughter of B by G.
(A). If G gives the surname of B to her

daughter by another man, what can B do to
Paternity & Filiation; In Vitro Fertilization;
protect their legitimate children's interests?
Surrogate Mother’s Remedy to Regain
Explain. (5%)
Custody (2010)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No.VI. Gigolo entered into an agreement with
B can impugn the status of G's daughter by Majorette for her to carry in her womb his
another man as his legitimate daughter on baby via in vitro fertilization. Gigolo undertook
the ground that for biological reason he to underwrite Majorette’s pre
could not have been the father of the child, natal expenses as well as those attendant to
a fact that may be proven by the DNA test. her delivery. Gigolo would thereafter pay
Having been born during the marriage Majorette P2 million and, in return, she would
between B and G, G's daughter by another give custody of the baby to him.
man is presumed as the child of B under
Article 164 of the Family Code. In the same After Majorette gives birth and delivers the
action to impugn, B can pray for the baby to Gigolo following her receipt of P2
180
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 of trafficking. Being in pari delicto, the
Majorette? Explain. (2.5%) partners shall be left where they are and
Gigolo cannot demand the return of what
SUGGESTED ANSWER: he paid.
As her lawyer, I can file a petition for ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:

habeas corpus on behalf Majorette to
recover custody of her child. Since she is Yes. The agreement between Gigolo and
the mother of the child that was born out Majorette is a valid agreement.
of wedlock, she has exclusive parental

authority and custody over the child. (D) Is the child entitled to support and
Gigolo, therefore, has no right to have inheritance from Gigolo? Explain. (2.5%)
custody of the child and his refusal to give

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
up custody will constitute illegal detention
for which habeas corpus is the proper
If Gigolo voluntarily recognized the child as
remedy.
his illegitimate child in accordance with
Article 175 in relation to Article 172 of the
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Family Code, the child is entitled to
The action to regain custody will not support and inheritance from Gigolo.
prosper. In the first place Majorette cannot
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
regain custody of the baby. As surrogate
mother she merely carries the child in her
Yes, because Gigolo is the natural and
womb for its development. The child is the
biological parent of the baby.
child of the natural parents- Gigolo and his
partner. The agreement between Gigolo and
Majorette is a valid agreement.
Paternity & Filiation; Legitimacy;

(B) Can Gigolo demand from Majorette the Presumption (2008)
return of the P2 million if he returns the baby?
No. III. Roderick and Faye were high school
Explain. (2.5%)
sweethearts. When Roderick was 18 and Faye,
16 years old, they started to live together as
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
husband and wife without the
180
benefit of marriage. When Faye reached 18 impugning the legitimacy of the child is a
years of age, her parents forcibly took her back strictly personal right of husband, except:
and arranged for her marriage to Brad. (a) when the husband died before the
Although Faye lived with Brad after the expiration of the period fixed for bringing
marriage, Roderick continued to regularly visit the action; (b) if he should die after the
Faye while Brad was away at work. During filing of the complaint, without having
their marriage, Faye gave birth to a baby girl, desisted therefrom, or (c) if the child was
Laica. When Faye was 25 years old, Brad born after the death of the husband. Laica's
discovered her continued liason with Roderick case does not fall under any of the
and in one of their heated arguments, Faye exceptions.
shot Brad to death. She lost no time in
marrying her true love Roderick, without a (D). Can Laica be legitimated by the marriage
marriage license, claiming that they have been of her biological parents? (1%)
continuosly cohabiting for more than 5 years.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(B). What is the filiation status of Laica? (2%)
No. Laica cannot be legitimated by the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: marriage of her biological parents because
only children conceived and born outside of
Laica is legitimate because children wedlock of parents who at the time of the
conceived or born during the marriage of conception of the former were not
the parents are presumed to be legitimate disqualified by any impediment to marry
(Art. 164, FC). each other may be legitimated (Art. 177,
FC).
(C).Can Laica bring an action to impugn her
own status on the ground that based on DNA
results, Roderick is her biological father? (2%)
Paternity & Filiation; Legitimation of a
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Child from a Previous Valid Marriage (2008)
No. IV. Gianna was born to Andy and Aimee,
No. Laica cannot bring an action to impugn
who at the time Gianna's birth were not
her own status. In Liyao Jr. v. Tanhoti-
married to each other. While Andy was single
Liyao, G.R. No. 138961, 07
at the time, Aimee was still in the
March 2002, the Supreme Court ruled that
180
process of securing a judicial declaration of statement is false. Explain your answer in not
nullity on her marriage to her ex-husband. more than two (2) sentences.
Gianna's birth certificate, which was signed by
both Andy and Aimee, registered the status of (E). A dead child can be legitimated. (1%)
Gianna as "legitimate", her surname carrying
that of Andy's and that her parents were SUGGESTED ANSWER:
married to each other.

TRUE To be legitimated, the law does not
(C). Assuming that Aimee is successful in require a child to be alive at the same time
declaring her former marriage void, and Andy of the marriage of his / her parents ( Article
and Aimee subsequently married each other, 177, FC ). Furthermore, Art. 181 of the
would Gianna be legitimated? (1%) Family Code which states that “[Th]e
llegitimation of children who died before
SUGGESTED ANSWER: the celebration of marriage will benefit
their descendants,” does not preclude
Gianna cannot be legitimated by the instances where such legitimation will
subsequent marriage of Andy and Aimee. benefit no one but the child's
Art. 177 of the FC provides that "only ascendants ,or other relatives .
children conceived and born outside of
wedlock of parents who, at the time of the
conception of the former, were not Paternity & Filiation; Support: Ascendants
disqualified by any impediment to marry & Descendants; Collateral Blood Relatives
each other may be legitimated." In the (2008)
present case, a legal impediment was
existing at the time of the conception of No.V. Despite several relationships with
Gianna. Her mother, Aimee, was still alive different women, Andrew remained unmarried.
in the process of securing judicial His first relationship with Brenda produced a
declaration of nullity on her marriage to daughter, Amy, now 30 years old. His second,
her ex-husband. with Carla, produced two sons: Jon and Ryan.
His third, with Donna, bore him no children
although Elena has a daughter Jane, from a
Paternity & Filiation; Legitimation of a previous relationship. His last, with Fe,
Dead Child (2009) produced no biological children but they
informally adopted without court proceedings,
No. I. TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the Sandy's now 13 years old, whom they consider
statement is true, or FALSE if the as
180
their own. Sandy was orphaned as a baby and No.XIV. Rodolfo, married to Sharon, had an
was entrusted to them by the midwife who illicit affair with his secretary, Nanette, a 19-
attended to Sandy's birth. All the children, year old girl, and begot a baby girl, Rona.
including Amy, now live with andrew in his Nanette sued Rodolfo for damages: actual, for
house. hospital and other medical
expenses in delivering the child by caesarean
(B). In his old age, can Andrew be legally section; moral, claiming that Rodolfo promised
entitled to claim support from Amy, Jon, to marry her, representing that he was single
Ryan, Vina, Wilma, and Sandy assuming that when, in fact, he was not; and exemplary, to
all of them have the means to support him? teach a lesson to like-minded Lotharios.
(1%)
(B). Suppose Rodolfo later on acknowledges
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Rona and gives her regular support, can he
compel her to use his surname? Why or why
Andrew, in his old age, cannot be legally not? (2%)
entitled to claim support because Art. 195,
par 2 of the FC limits the giving of support SUGGESTED ANSWER:
to "legitimate ascendants and No. he has no right to compel Rona to use
descendants." his surname. The law does not give him the
right simply because he gave her support
(C). Can Amy, Jon, Ryan, Vina, Wilma, and
(RA 9255).
Sandy legally claim support from each other?
(2%)
Under the Family Code, an illegitimate
child was required to use only the surname
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
of the mother. Under RA 9255, otherwise
known as the Revilla law, however, the
Amy, Jon, Ryan, Vina, Wilma and Sandy
illegitimate child is given the option to use
cannot legally claim support from each
the surname of the illegitimate father when
other because Art. 195, par 5 limits the
the latter has recognized the former in
giving of support to "legitimate brothers
accordance with law. Since the choice
and sisters, whether full or half blood."
belongs to the illegitimate child, Rodolfo
Paternity & Filiation; Use of Surname;
cannot
Illegitimate Child (2009)
180
compel Rona, if already of age, to use the They were born during the marriage of
surname against her will. If Rona is still a Conrado and Clarita, hence, are considered
minor, to use the surname of Rodolfo will legitimate children of the said spouses.
require the consent of Rona's mother who This status is conferred on them at birth by
has sole parental authority over her. law.
Under Philippine law, a person cannot have

Paternity & Filiation; Who May Impugn more than one natural filiation. The
Legitimacy (2009) legitimate filiation of a person can be
changed only if the legitimate father will
No.V. Four children, namely: Alberto, successfully impugn such status.
Baldomero, Caridad, and Dioscoro, were born
to the spouses Conrado and Clarita de la In the problem, therefore, the filiation of
Costa. The children’s birth certificates were Alberto and Baldomero as legitimate
duly signed by Conrado, showing them to be children of Condrado cannot be changed by
the couple’s legitimate children. their recognition by Edilberto as his
illegitimate children. Before they can be
Later, one Edilberto de la Cruz executed a conferred the status of Edilberto’s
notarial document acknowledging Alberto and illegitimate children, Condrado must first
Baldomero as his illegitimate children >with impugn their legitimacy. Since Condrado
Clarita. Edilberto died leaving substantial has not initiated any action to impugn
properties. In the settlement of his estate, their legitimacy, they continue to be the
Alberto and Baldomero intervened claiming legitimate of Condrado. They cannot be the
shares as the deceased’s illegitimate children. illegitimate children of Edilberto at the
The legitimate family of Edilberto opposed the same time. Not being the illegitimate
claim. children of Edilberto, they have no right to
inherit from him.
Are Alberto and Baldomero entitled to share in
the estate of Edilberto? Explain. (4%)
Property Relations; Adulterous

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Relationship (2009)
No, Alberto and Baldomero are not entitled

No. XI. TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the
to share in Edilberto’s estate.
statement is true, or FALSE if the
They are not related at all to Edilberto.
180
statement is false. Explain your answer in not It depends. If the value of the building is
more than two (2) sentences. more than the value of the land, the
building is conjugal and the land becomes
(B). If there is no marriage settlement, the conjugal property under Art. 120 of the
salary of a "spouse" in an adulterous marriage Family Code. This is a case of reverse
belongs to the conjugal partnership of gains. accession, where the building is considered
(1%) as the principal and the land, the
accessory. If, on the other hand, the value
SUGGESTED ANSWER: of the land is more than the value of the
False. In adulterous relationship, the salary building, then the ordinary rule of
of a married partner belongs to the absolute accession applies where the land is the
community, or conjugal partnership, of principal and the building, the accessory. In
such married partner with his or her lawful such case, the land remains paraphernal
spouse. Under Articles 148 of the Family property and the building becomes
Code, the property relations between paraphernal propery.
married partner and his/her paramour is
governed by ordinary co-ownership where Note: The rule on reverse accession is
the partners become co-owners only when applicable only to the regime of conjugal
they contributed to the acquisition of the partnership of gains in both the Family Code
property. The paramour is deemed to have and the New Civil Code. The foregoing answer
not contributed in the earning of the salary assumes that CPG is the regime of the
of the married partner. property relations of the spouses.
Property Relations; Ante-Nuptial Debt

Property Relations; Accession (2012)
(2007)
No.III.(a) Maria, wife of Pedro, withdrew P 5

No. VII. Write "TRUE" if the statement is true
Million from their conjugal funds. With this
money, she constructed a building on a lot
which she inherited from her father. Is the
each).
building conjugal or paraphernal? Reasons.
(5%)
(3). An individual, While single, purchases a
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
house and lot in 1990 and borrows money
180
in 1992 to repair it. In 1995, such individual Marriage (2012)

gets married while the debt is still being paid.
After the marriage, the debt is still the No.V. a) Spouses Primo and Monina Lim,
responsibility of such individual. childless, were entrusted with the custody of
two (2) minor children, the parents of whom
SUGGESTED ANSWER: were unknown. Eager of having children of
their own, the spouses made it appear that
FALSE. The absolute Community of they were the children’s parents by naming
property is liable for the ante-nuptial debts them Michelle P. Lim and Michael Jude Lim.
of either spouse in so far as the same Subsequently, Monina married Angel Olario
redounded to the benefit of the family (Art. after Primo’s death.
94 par.7, FC).
She decided to adopt the children by availing
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: the amnesty given under R.A. 8552 to those
individuals who simulated the birth of a child.
FALSE. The debt is already the She filed separate petitions for the adoption of
responsibility of the community property, Michelle, then 25 years old and Michael, 18.
because the property already constitutes Both Michelle and Michael gave consent to the
absolute community property under Art. 91 adoption.
of FC which took effect in 1988 while the
house and lot here involved was purchased The trial court dismissed the petition and
in 1990. There is no indication that the ruled that Monina should have filed the
spouse who bought the property had petition jointly with her new husband. Monina,
legitimate descendants by a former in a Motion for Reconsideration argues that
marriage, which would exclude the house mere consent of her husband would suffice
and lot from the community property, Art. and that joint adoption is not needed, for the
92 par 3, FC). If the spouses established a adoptees are already emancipated.
conjugal partnership, the property belongs
to the individual spouse if full ownership Is the trial court correct in dismissing the
was vested before marriage (Art. 118, FC). petitions for adoption? Explain. (5%)
Property Relations; Unions Without
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
180
Yes, the trial court was correct. At the time Borromeo discovered that titles to the three (3)
the petitions for adoptions were filed, lots have been transfereed in the name of
petitioner had already remarried. Under the Descallar. Who is the rightful owner of the
law, husband and wife shall adopt jointly, properties? Explain. (5%)
except in the cases enumerated in the law.
The adoption cases of Michelle and James SUGGESTED ANSWER:
do not fall in any of the exceptions
It depends. On the assumption that the
provided in the law where a spouse is
Family Code is the applicable law, the
permitted to adopt alone. Hence, Monina
ownership of the properties depends on
should adopt jointly with her husband
whether or not, Jambrich and Descallar are
Angel (Adoption of Michelle P. Lim, G.R.
capacitated to marry each other during
Nos. 168992-93, May 21, 2009).
their cohabitation, and whether or not both
have contributed funds for the acquisition
of the properties.
Property Relations; Unions Without
If both of them are capacitated to marry
Marriage (2012)
each other, Art 147- co-ownership will
No.V. b) Jambrich, an Austrian, fell in-love apply to their property relations and the
and lived together with Descallar and bought properties in question are owned by them
their houses and lots at Agro-Macro in equal shares even though all the funds
Subdivision. In the Contracts to Sell, used in acquiring the properties came only
Jambrich and Descallar were referred to as from the salaries or wages, or the income of
the buyers. When the Deed of Absolute Sale Jambrich from his business or profession.
was presented for registration before the In such case, while Jambrich is disqualified
Register of Deeds, it was refused because to own any part of the properties, his
Jambrich was an alien and could not acquire subsequent transfer of all his interest
alienable lands of the public domain. After therein to Borromeo, a Filipino, was valid
Jambrich and Descallar separated, Jambrich as it removed the disqualification. In such
purchased an engine and some accessories for case, the properties are owned by Borromeo
his boat from Borromeo. To pay for his debt, and Descallar in equal shares.
he sold his rights and interests in the Agro-

If, on the other hand, Jambrich and
Macro properties to Borromeo.
Descallar were not capacitated to marry
180
each other Art. 148-co-ownership governs

∙ a house and lot acquired by B on August
their property relations. Under this regime,
3, 1988, one third (1/3) of the
Jambrich and Descallar are co-owners of
purchase price (representing
the properties but only if both of them
downpayment) of which he paid; one
contributed in their acquisition. If all the
third (1/3) was paid by G on February
funds used in acquiring the properties in
14, 1990 out of a cash gift given to her
question came from Jambrich, the entire
by her parents on her graduation on
property is his even though he is
April 6, 1989; and the balance was
disqualified from owning it. His subsequent
paid out of the spouses’ joint income;
transfer to Borromeo, however, is valid as it
and
removed the disqualification. In such case,
all the properties are owned by Borromeo. ∙ an apartment unit donated to B by an
If, on the other hand Descallar contributed uncle on June 19, 1987.
to their acquisition, the properties are co-
owned by Descallar and Borromeo in (A) Who owns the foregoing properties?
proportion to the respective contributions Explain. (5%)
of the Descallar and Jambrich.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Note: The facts of the problem are not
exactly the same as in the case of Since the marriage was declared void ab
Borromeo v. Descallar, G.R. NO. 159310, initio in 2001, no Absolute Community or
Feb 24, 2009, hence, the difference in the Conjugal Partnership was ever established
resulting answer. between B and G. Their property relation is
governed by a “special co-ownership” under
Article 147 of the Family Code because
Property Relations; Void Marriages (2010) they were capacitated to marry each other.
No.VII. G and B were married on July 3, 1989. Under that Article 147, wages and salaries
On March 4, 2001, the marriage, which bore of the “former spouses” earned during their
no offspring, was declared void ab initio under cohabitation shall be owned by them in
Article 36 of the Family Code. At the time of equal shares while properties acquired thru
the dissolution of the their work for industry shall be owned by
marriage, the couple possessed the following them in proportion to
properties:
180
their respective contributions. Care and acquisition when she paid 1/3 of the
maintenance of the family is recognized as purchase price using the gift from her
a valuable contribution. In the absence of parents. Although the gift was acquired by
proof as to the value of their respective G during her cohabitation with B, it is her
contributions, they shall share equally. exclusive property. It did not consist of
wage or salary or fruit of her work or
If ownership of the house and lot was
industry.
acquired by B on August 3, 1988 at the
time he bought it on installment before he
(3) 1/3 of the house is co-owned by B and G
got married, he shall remain owner of the
because the payment came from their co-
house and lot but he must reimburse G for
owned funds, i.e., their joint income during
all the amounts she advanced to pay the
their cohabitation which is shared by them
purchase price and for one-half share in the
equally in the absence of any proof to the
last payment from their joint income. In
contrary.
such case, the house and lot were not
acquired during their cohabitation, hence,
After summing up their prospective shares,
are not co-owned by B and G.
B and G are undivided co-owners of the
But if the ownership of the house and lot house and lot in equal shares.
was acquired during the cohabitation, the
As to the apartment, it is owned exclusive
house and lot will be owned as follows:
by B because he acquired it before their
(1) 1/3 of the house and lot is owned by B. cohabitation. Even if he acquired it during
He is an undivided co-owner to that extent their cohabitation, it will still be his
for his contributions in its acquisition in exclusive property because it did not come
the form of the down payment he made from his wage or salary, or from his work or
before the celebration of the marriage. The industry. It was acquired gratuitously from
money he used to pay the down payment his uncle.
was not earned during the cohabitation,
hence, it is his exclusive property. (B) If G and B had married on July 3, 1987
and their marriage was dissolved in 2007, who
owns the properties? Explain. (5%)
(2) 1/3 of the house and lot is owned by
G. She is an undivided co-owner to the
extent for her contribution in its SUGGESTED ANSWER:
180
The answer is the same as in letter A. Since in Parañaque. After four (4) years or in 2001,
the parties to the marriage which was later G having completed her 4-year college degree
declared void ab initio were capacitated to as a fulltime student, she and B contracted
marry each other, the applicable law under marriage without a license.
the New Civil Code was Article 144.This
Article is substantially the same as Article The marriage of B and G was, two years later,
147 of the Family Code. 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. And even (A). If you were the judge who declared the
assuming that the two provisions are not nullity of the marriage, to whom would you
the same, Article 147 of the Family Code is award the lot? Explain briefly. (3%)
still the law that will govern the property
relations of B and G because under Article SUGGESTED ANSWER:
256, the Family Code has retroactive effect
insofar as it does not prejudice or impair Since the marriage was null and void, no
vested or acquired rights under the new Absolute Community or Conjugal
Civil Code or other laws. Applying Article Partnership was established between B and
147 retroactively to the case of G and B will G. Their properties are governed by the
not impair any vested right. Until the “special co-ownership” provision of Article
declaration of nullity of the marriage under 147 of the Family Code because both B and
the Family Code, B and G have not as yet G were capacitated to marry each other.
acquired any vested right over the The said Article provides that when a man
properties acquired during their and a woman who are capacitated to marry
cohabitation. each other, live exclusively with each other

as husband and wife without the benefit of
marriage, or under a void marriage: (1) their
wages and salaries shall be owned by them
Property Relations; Void Marriages (2010)
in equal shares; and (2) property acquired
by both of them through their work or
No.X. In 1997, B and G started living together
industry shall be governed by the rules on
without the benefit of marriage. The
co-ownership. In co-ownership, the parties
relationship produced one offspring, Venus.
are co-owners if they contributed
The couple acquired a residential lot
something of value in the acquisition of
180
the property. Their share is in proportion Disposition; Mortis Causa vs. Intervivos;
to their respective contributions. In an Corpse (2009)
ordinary co ownership the care and
maintenance of the family is not No. XI. TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the
recognized as a valuable contribution for statement is true, or FALSE if the statement is
the acquisition of a property. In the Article false. Explain your answer in not more than
147 “special co-ownership” however, care two (2) sentences.
and maintenance is recognized as a
valuable contribution which will entitle the (E). A person can dispose of his corpse
contributor to half of the property acquired. through an act intervivos. (1%)
Having been acquired during their SUGGESTED ANSWER:

cohabitation, the residential lot is False. A persons cannot dispose of his
presumed acquired through their joint work corpse through an act inter vivos, i.e., an
and industr under Article 147, hence, B and act to take effect during his lifetime. Before
G are co-owners of the said property in his death there is no corpse to dispose. But
equal shares. he is allowed to do so through an act mortis
causa, i.e., an act to take effect upon his
Article 147 also provides that when a party
death.
to the void marriage was in bad faith, he
forfeits his share in the co ownership in
favor of the common children or
descendants, the default of children or
Heirs; Fideicommissary Substitution (2008)
descendants, the forfeited share shall
belong to the innocent party. In the No. XIII. Raymond, single, named his sister
foregoing problem, there is no showing that Ruffa in his will as a devisee of a parcel of land
one party was in bad faith. Hence, both which he owned. The will imposed upon Ruffa
shall be presumed in good faith and no the obligation of preseving the land and
forfeiture shall take place. transferring it, upon her death, to her
Succession illegitimate daughter Scarlet who was then
only one year old. Raymond later died, leaving
behind his widowed mother, Ruffa and Scarlet.
180
(A). Is the condition imposed upon Ruffa, to Ruffa (Art. 992, Civil Code). Moreover,
preserve the property and to transmit it upon Scarlet is not a compulsory heir of
her death to Scarlet, valid? (1%) Raymond, hence she can inherit only by
testamentary succession. Since Raymond
SUGGESTED ANSWER: 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 fideicommissary Heirs; Intestate Succession; Legitime;
substitution under Art. 863 of the Civil Computation (2010)
Code.
No.XI. The spouses Peter and Paula had three
(B). If Scarlet predeceases Ruffa, who inherits (3) children. Paula later obtained a judgment of
the property? (2%) nullity of marriage. Their absolute community
of property having been dissolved, they
SUGGESTED ANSWER: delivered P1 million to each of their 3 children
as their presumptive legitimes.
Ruffa will inherit the property as Scarlet's
heir. Scarlet acquires a right to the Peter later re-married and had two (2) children
succession from the time of Raymond's by his second wife Marie. Peter and Marie,
death, even though she should predecease having successfully engaged in business,
Ruffa (Art. 866, Civil Code). acquired real properties. Peter later died
intestate.
(C). If Ruffa predeceases Raymond, can Scarlet
inherit the property directly from Raymond? (A). Who are Peter’s legal heirs and how will
(2%) his estate be divided among them? (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: SUGGESTED ANSWER:
If Ruffa predeceases Raymond, Raymond's The legal heirs of Peter are his children by
widowed mother will be entitled to the the first and second marriages and his
inheritance. Scarlet, an illegitimate child, surviving second wife.
cannot inherit the property by intestate
Their shares in the estate of Peter will
succession from
depend, however, on the cause of the
Raymond who is a legitimate relative of
180
nullity of the first marriage. If the nullity of

the first marriage was psychological
incapacity of one or both spouses, the
three children of that void marriage are
legitimate and all of the legal heirs shall
share the estate of Peter in equal shares. If
the judgment of nullity was for other
causes, the three children are illegitimate
and the estate shall be distributed such
that an illegitimate child of the first
Note: The legitime of an illegitimate child
marriage shall receive half of the share of a
is supposed to be ½ the legitime of a
legitimate child of the second marriage,
legitimate child or 1/8 of the estate. But
and the second wife will inherit a share
the estate will not be sufficient to pay the
equal to that of a legitimate child. In no
said legitime of the 3 illegitimate children,
case may the two legitimate children of the
because only ¼ of the estate is left after
second marriage receive a share less than
paying the legitime of the surviving spouse
one-half of the estate which is their
which is preferred.
legitime. When the estate is not sufficient
to pay all the legitimes of the compulsory
Hence, the remaining ¼ of the estate
heirs, the legitime of the spouse is
children suffer the reduction.
preferred and the illegitimate
(B) If the ground of nullity is not Computation:
psychological capacity:
(A) If the ground of nullity is psychological
2 legitimate ¼ of the estate for incapacity:
children each of second
3 children by first 1/6 of the estate
marriage
marriage for each
Surviving ¼ of the estate
2 children by second 1/6 of the estate
second spouse
marriage for each
3 illegitimate 1/12 of estate for
children each of first marriage Surviving second 1/6 of the estate
spouse
following Peter’s death? (5%)
shall be divided among the 3 illegitimate
children. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(B). What is the effect of the receipt by Peter’s In the distribution of Peter’s estate, ½ of
3 children by his first marriage of their the presumptive received by the 3 children
presumptive legitimes on their right to inherit of the first marriage shall be collated to
Peter’s estate and shall be
180
imputed as an advance of their respective not only be a legal heir of the person he is
inheritance from Peter. Only half of the representing, he must also be a legal heir of
presumptive legitime is collated to the the decedent he seeks to inherit from.
estate of Peter because the other half shall
While Arnel is a legal heir of Franco, he is
be collated to the estate of his first wife.
not a legal heir of Ricky because under
Art 992 of the NCC, an illegitimate child
has no right to inherit ab intestato from
Heirs; Representation; Iron-Curtain Rule the legitimate children and relatives of his
(2012) father or mother. Arnel is disqualified to
inherit from Ricky because Arnel is an
No.VIII.a) Ricky and Arlene are married. They illegitimate child of Franco and Ricky is a
begot Franco during their marriage. Franco legitimate relative of Franco.
had an illicit relationship with Audrey and out
of which, they begot Arnel. Frnaco
predeceased Ricky, Arlene and Arnel. Before
Ricky died, he executed a will which when Heirs; Reserva Troncal (2009)
submitted to probate was opposed by Arnel on

No. I. TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the
the ground that he should be given the share
statement is true, or FALSE if the statement is
of his father, Franco. Is the opposition of Arnel
false. Explain your answer in not more than
correct? Why? (5%)
two (2) sentences.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(B).In reservatroncal, all reservatarios (reser
No, his opposition is not correct. Arnel vees) inherit as a class and in equal shares
cannot inherit from Ricky in the regardless of their proximity in degree to the
representation of his father Franco. In prepositus. (1%)
representation, the representative must
SUGGESTED ANSWER: inherit as reservatarios and what shares
FALSE. Not all the relatives within the they will tak, i.e., the direct line excludes
third degree will inherit as reservatario , the collateral, the descending direct line
and not all those who are entitled to inherit excludes the
will inherit in the equal shares . The ascending ,the nearer excludes the more
applicable laws of intestate succession will remote, the nephews and nieces exclude
determine who among the relatives will
180
the uncles and the aunts, and half blood the siblings or their respective
relatives inherit half the share of full- representatives, will inherit the other half
blooded relatives. to be divided among them equally. If some
siblings are of the full-blood and the other
of the half blood, a half blood sibling will
receive half the share of a full-blood sibling.
Intestate Succession (2008) (1). The wife of Ramon will, therefore,
receive one half (½) of the estate or the
No. VII. Ramon Mayaman died intestate, amount of P5,000,000.00.
leaving a net estate of P10,000,000.00.
(2). The three (3) full-blood brothers, will,
Determine how much each heir will receive
therefore, receive P1,000,000.00 each. (3).
from the estate:
The nephew will receive P1,000,000.00 by
right of representation.
(A). If Ramon is survived by his wife, three
(4). The two (2) half-brothers will receive
full-blood brothers, two half-brothers, and one
P500,000.00 each.
nephew (the son of a deceased full blood
brother)? Explain. (3%)
(B). If Ramon is survived by his wife, a half
sister, and three nephews (sons of a deceased
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
full-blood brother)? Explain. (3%)
Having died intestate, the estate of Ramon
shall be inherited by his wife and his full
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
and half blood siblings or their respective
The wife will receive one half (1/2) of the
representatives. In intestacy, if the wife
estate or P5,000,000.00. The other half
concurs with no one but the siblings of the
shall be inherited by (1) the full-blood
husband, all of them are the intestate heirs
brother, represented by his three children,
of the deceased husband. The wife will
and (2) the half-sister. They will divide the
receive half of the intestate estate, while
other half between them such that the
share of the half-sister is just half the share Therefore, the three (3) nephews will
of the full-blood brother. The share of the receive P1,111,111.10 each the half sister
full-blood brother shall in turn be inherited will receive the sum of P1,666,666.60.
by the three nephews in equal shares by
right of presentation.
180
Intestate Succession (2008) notarized the will. There are no marginal

signatures or pagination appearing on any of
No.X. Arthur executed a will which contained the 3 pages. Upon his death, it was discovered
only: (i) a provision disinheriting his daughter that apart from the house and lot, he had a P
Bernica for running off with a married man, 1 million account deposited with ABC bank.
and (ii) a provision disposing of his share in (D). How should the house and lot, and the
the family house and lot in favor of his other cash be distributed? (1%)
children Connie and Dora. He did not make
any provisions in favor of his wife Erica, SUGGESTED ANSWER:
because as the will stated, she would anyway
get ½ of the house and lot as her conjugal Since the probate of the will cannot be
share. The will was very brief and allowed, the rules on intestate succession
straightforward and both the above provisions apply. Under Art. 996 of the Civil Code, if a
were contained in page 1, which Arthur and widow or widower and legitimate children
his instrumental witness, signed at the or descendants are left, the surviving
bottom. Page 2 contained the attestation spouse has the same share as of the
clause and the signatures, at the bottom children. Thus, ownership over the house
thereof, of the 3 instrumental witnesses which and lot will be created among wife Erica
included Lambert, the driver of Arthur; Yoly, and her children Bernice, Connie and Dora.
the family cook, and Attorney Zorba, the Similarly, the amount of P 1 million will be
lawyer who prepared the will. There was a 3rd equally divided among them.
page, but this only contained the notarial
acknowledgement. The attestation clause
stated the will was signed on the same
occasion by Arthur and his instrumental Intestate Succession; Rights of
witnesses who all signed in the presence of Representation: Illegitimate, Adopted
each other, and the notary public who Child; Iron Curtain Rule (2007)
No. X. For purpose of this question, assume 1971 and 1972, Ramon and Dessa legally
all formalities and procedural requirements adopted Cherry and Michelle respectively. In
have been complied with. 1973, Dessa died while giving birth to Larry
Anna had a child, Lia. Anna never married.
In 1970, Ramon and Dessa got married. Prior Cherry, on the other hand, legally adopted
to their marriage, Ramon had a child, Anna. In Shelly. Larry had
180
twins, Hans and Gretel, with his girlfriend, adoption creates a personal legal relation
Fiona. In 2005, Anna, Larry and Cherry died only between the adopter and the adopted.
in a car accident. In 2007, Ramon died. Who The law on representation requires the
may inherit from Ramon and who may not? representative to be a legal heir of the
Give your reason briefly. person he is representing and
(10%) also of the person from whom the person
being represented was supposed to inherit.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: While Shelly is a legal heir of Cherry, Shelly
is not a legal heir of Ramon. Adoption
The following may inherit from Ramon: created a purely personal legal relation only
between Cherry and Shelly.
(1). Michelle, as an adopted child of Ramon,
will inherit as a legitimate child of Ramon. (2). Hans and Gretel are barred from
As an adopted child, Michelle has all the inheriting from Ramon under Art. 992,
rights of a legitimate child (Sec 18, NCC. Being illegitimate children, they
Domestic Adoption Law). cannot inherit ab intestao from Ramon.
(2). Lia will inherit in representation of ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:

Anna. Although Lia is an illegitimate child,
she is not barred by Articles 992, because The problem expressly mentioned the dates
her mother Anna is an illegitimate herself. of the adoption of Cherry and Michelle as
She will represent Anna as regards Anna's 1971 and 1972. During that time, adoption
legitime under Art. 902, NCC and as regards was governed by the New Civil Code. Under
Anna's intestate share under Art. 990, NCC. the New Civil Code, husband and wife were
allowed to adopt separately or not jointly
The following may not inherit from Ramon: with the other spouse. And since the
problem does not specifically and
(1). Shelly, being an adopted child, she categorically state, it is possible to
cannot represent Cherry. This is because
construe the use of the word "respectively" problem will be as follows: Only Lia will
in the problem as indicative of the inherit from Ramon in representation of
situation that Cherry was adopted by Ramon's illegitimate daughter Anna.
Ramon alone and Michelle was adopted by Although Lia is an illegitimate child, she is
Dessa alone. In such case of separate not barred from inheriting from Ramon
adoption the alternative answer to the because her
180
mother is herself illegitimate. Shelly No.VIII.b) How can RJP distribute his estate by
cannot inherit in representation of Cherry will, if his heirs are JCP, his wife; HBR and
because Shelly is just an adopted child of RVC, his parents; and an illegitimate child,
Cherry. In representation, the SGO?
representative must not only be a legal heir SUGGESTED ANSWER:
of the person he is representing but also of
A testator may dispose of by will the free
the decedent from whom the represented
portion of his estate. Since the legitime of
person is supposed to inherit. In the case of
JCP is 1/8 of the estate, SGO is ¼ of the
Shelly, while she is a legal heir of Cherry by
estate and that of HBR and RVC is ½ of the
virtue of adoption, she is not a legal heir of
hereditary estate under Art 889 of the NCC,
Ramon. Adoption creates a personal legal
the remaining 1/8 of the estate is the free
relation only between the adopting parent
portion which the testator may dispose of
and the adopted child (Teotico v. Del Val,
by will.
13 SCRA 406, 1965. Michelle cannot
inherit from Ramon, because she was
adopted not by Ramon but by Dessa. In the
eyes of the law, she is not related to Ramon
Legitime; Compulsory Heirs (2008)
at all. Hence, she is not a legal heir of
Ramon. Hans and Gretel are not entitled to
No. XII. Ernesto, an overseas Filipino worker,
inherit from Ramon, because they are
was coming home to the Philippines after
barred by Art. 992 NCC. Being illegitimate
working for so many years in the Middle East.
children of Larry, they cannot inherit from
He had saved P100.000 in his saving account
the legitimate relatives of their father
in Manila which intended to use to start a
Larry. Ramon is a legitimate relative of
business in his home country. On his flight
Larry who is the legitimate father.
home, Ernesto had a fatal heart attack. He left
behind his widowed mother, his common-law
wife and their twins sons. He left no will, no
debts, no other relatives and no other
Legitimes; Compulsory Heirs (2012)
properties except the money in his saving SUGGESTED ANSWER:
account. Who are the heirs entitled to inherint
from him and how much should each receive? The mother and twin sons are entitled to
(3%) inherit from Ernesto. Art. 991 of the Civil
Code, provides that if legitimate
180
ascendants are left, the twin sons shall clause and the signatures, at the bottom
divide the inheritance with them taking thereof, of the 3 instrumental witnesses which
one-half of the estate. Thus, the widowed included Lambert, the driver of Arthur; Yoly,
mother gets P50,000.00 while the twin the family cook, and Attorney Zorba, the
sons shall receive P25,000.00 each. The lawyer who prepared the will. There was a 3rd
common-law wife cannot inherit from him page, but this only contained the notarial
because when the law speaks "widow or acknowledgement.
widower" as a compulsory heir, the law The attestation clause stated the will was
refers to a legitimate spouse (Art. 887, par signed on the same occasion by Arthur and
3, Civil Code). his instrumental witnesses who all signed in
the presence of each other, and the notary
public who notarized the will. There are no
marginal signatures or pagination appearing
Preterition; Disinheritance (2008) on any of the 3 pages. Upon his death, it was
discovered that apart from the house and lot,
No.X. Arthur executed a will which contained he had a P 1 million account deposited with
only: (i) a provision disinheriting his daughter ABC bank.
Bernica for running off with a married man,
and (ii) a provision disposing of his share in (A). Was Erica preterited? (1%)
the family house and lot in favor of his other
children Connie and Dora. He did not make SUGGESTED ANSWER:
any provisions in favor of his wife Erica,
because as the will stated, she would anyway Erica cannot be preterited. Art. 854 of the
get ½ of the house and lot as her conjugal Civil Code provides that only compulsory
share. The will was very brief and heirs in the direct line can be preterited.
straightforward and both the above provisions
were contained in page 1, which Arthur and (B). What other defects of the will, if any, can
his instrumental witness, signed at the cause denial of probate? (2%)
bottom. Page 2 contained the attestation
SUGGESTED ANSWER: the last page; (c ) the attestation did not
state the number of pages upon which the
The other defects of the will that can cause will is written; and, (d) no pagination
its denial are as follows: (a) Atty. Zorba, the appearing correlatively in letters on the
one who prepared the will was one of the upper part of the three pages (Azuela v.
three witnesses, violating the three- C.A., G.R.
witnesses rule; (b) no marginal signature at
180
No. 122880, 12 Apr 2006 and cited cases Cavite. Marian and Pietro were hacked with
therein, Art 805 and 806, Civil Code). bolos. Marian and the baby delivered were
both found dead, with the baby's umbilical
(C). Was the disinheritance valid? (1%) cord already cut. Pietro survived.
(B). Between Marian and the baby, who is
SUGGESTED ANSWER: presumed to have died ahead? (1%)
Yes, the disinheritance was valid. Art. 919, SUGGESTED ANSWER:

par 7, Civil Code provides that "when a
child or descendant leads a dishonorable or Marian is presumed to have died ahead of
disgraceful life, like running off with a the baby. Art. 43 applies to persons who are
married man, there is sufficient cause for called to succeed each other. The proof of
disinheritance." death must be established by positive or
circumstantial evidence derived from facts.
It can never be established from mere
inference. In the present case, it is very
Succession; Proof of Death between persons clear that only Marian and Pietro were
called to succeed each other (2008) hacked with bolos. There was no showing
that the baby was also hacked to death. The
No. II. At age 18, Marian found out that she
baby's death could have been due to lack of
was pregnant. She insured her own life and
nutrition.
named her unborn child as her sole
beneficiary. When she was already due to give ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
birth, she and her boyfriend Pietro, the father
of her unboarn child, were kidnapped in a The baby is presumed to have died ahead of
resort in Bataan where they were vacationing. Marian. Under Par. 5, rule 131, Sec. 5 (KK)
The military gave chase and after one week, of the Rules of Court, if one is under 15 or
they were found in an abandoned hut in above 60 and the age of the other is in
between 15 and 60, the latter is presumed same age or maybe 19 years of age when
to have survived. In the instant case, she gave birth.
Marian was already 18 when she found out
that she was pregnant. She could be of the (C). Will Pietro, as surviving biological father of
the baby, be entitled to claim the
180
proceeds of the life insurance on the life of Rule on the validity of Marilyn’s claims with
Marian? (2%) reasons. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: SUGGESTED ANSWER :
Pietro, as the biological father of the baby, As to the Estate of Dr. Lopez:
shall be entitled to claim the proceeds of
life insurance of the Marian because he is a Marilyn is not entitled to a share in the
compulsory heir of his child. estate of Dr. Lopez. For purpose of
succession, Dr. Lopez and his son Roberto
are presumed to have died at the same
time, there being no evidence to prove
Succession; Rule on Survivorship (2009) otherwise, and there shall be no
transmission of rights from one to the
No. II. Dr. Lopez, a 70-year old widower, and other (Article 43, NCC). Hence, Roberto,
his son Roberto both died in a fire that gutted inherited nothing from his father that
their home while they were sleeping in their Marilyn would in turn inherit from
air-conditioned rooms. Roberto’s wife, Marilyn, Roberto .The children of Roberto, however,
and their two children were spared because will succeed their grandfather, Dr. Lopez ,in
they were in the province at the time. Dr. representation of their father Roberto and
Lopez left an estate worth P20M and a life together Roberto will receive 1/3 of the
insurance policy in the amount of P1M with estate of Dr. Lopez since their father
his three children --- one of whom is Roberto Roberto was one of the three children of Dr.
--- as beneficiaries. Lopez . Marilyn cannot represent her
husband Roberto because the right is not
Marilyn is now claiming for herself and her given by the law to a surviving spouse.
children her husband’s share in the estate left
by Dr. Lopez, and her husband’s share in the
As to the proceeds of the insurance on the
proceeds of Dr. Lopez’s life insurance policy.
life of Dr. Lopez: [5] ) on survivorship shall apply. Under the
Rules, Dr. Lopez, who was 70 years old, is
Since succession is not involved as regards presumed to have died ahead of Roberto
the insurance contract, the provisions of who is presumably between the ages 15 and
the Rules of Court (Rule 131, Sec. 3 , [jj] 60. Having survived the insured, Roberto's
right as a beneficiary became vested
180
upon the death of Dr. Lopez. When Roberto It depends. If the cancellation of Rosa’s
died after Dr. Lopez, his right to receive the name in the will was done by the testator
insurance became part of his hereditary himself, Rosa’s claimed that the
estate, which in turn was inherited in equal holographic will in its original tenor
shares by his legal heirs, namely, his should be given effect must be denied. The
spouse and children. Therefore, Roberto's said cancellation has revoked the entire
children and his spouse are entitled to will as nothing remains of the will after the
Roberto's one-third share in the insurance name of Rosa was cancelled. Such
proceeds. cancellation is valid revocation of the will
and does not require authentication by the
full signature of the testator to be effective.
Wills; Holographic Wills; Insertions & However, if the cancellation of Rosa’s name
Cancellations (2012) was not done by the testator himself, such

cancellation shall not be effective and the
No.VII.a) Natividad’s holographic will, which will in its original tenor shall remain valid.
had only one (1) substantial provision, as first The effectively of the holographic will
written, named Rosa as her sole heir. cannot be left to the mercy of unscrupulous
However, when Gregorio presented it for third parties.
probate, it already contained an alteration,
The writing of Gregorio’s name as sole heir
naming Gregorio, instead of Rosa, as sole heir,
was ineffective, even though written by the
but without authentication by Natividad’s
testator himself, because such is an
signature. Rosa opposes the probate alleging
alteration that requires authentication by
such lack of proper authentication. She claims
the full signature of the testator to be valid
that the unaltered form of the will should be
and effective. Not having an authenticated,
given effect. Whose claim should be granted?
the designation of Gregorio as an heir was
Explain. (5%)
ineffective, (Kalaw v. Relova, G.R. No. L-
40207, Sept 28, 1984).
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Wills; Holographic Wills; Probate (2009) Fuentes executed a holographic will, wherein
he gave nothing to his recognized illegitimate
No.VI. On December 1, 2000, Dr. Juanito son, Jay. Dr. Fuentes left for the
180
United States, passed the New York medical (Art. 816, NCC). Since Dr. Fuentes executed
licensure examinations, resided therein, and his will in accordance with the Philippine
became a naturalized American citizen. He law, the Philippine
died in New York in 2007. The laws of New court shall apply the New Civil Code in
York do not recognize holographic wills or determining the formal validity of the
compulsory heirs. holographic will. The subsequent change in
the citizenship of Dr. Fuentes did not affect
(A). Can the holographic will of Dr. Fuentes be the law governing the validity of his will.
admitted to probate in the Philippines? Why or Under the new Civil Code, which was the
why not? (3%) law used by Dr. Fuentes, the law enforced
at the time of execution of the will shall
SUGGESTED ANSWER: govern the formal validity of the will (Art.
Yes, the holographic will of Dr. Fuentes 795, NCC).
may be admitted to probate in the
Philippines because there is no public (B). Assuming that the will is probated in the
policy violated by such probate. The only Philippines, can Jay validly insist that he be
issue at probate is the due execution of the given his legitime? Why or why not? (3%)
will which includes the formal validity of
the will. As regards formal validity, the only SUGGESTED ANSWER:
issue the court will resolve at probate is No, Jay cannot insist because under New
whether or not the will was executed in York law he is not a compulsory heir
accordance with the form prescribed by the entitled to a legitime.
law observed by the testator in the
execution of his will. For purposes of The national law of the testator determines
probate in the Philippines, an alien testator who his heirs are, the order that they
may observe the law of the place where the succeed, how much their successional
will was executed (Art 17, NCC), or the rights are, and whether or not a
formalities of the law of the place where he testamentary disposition in his will is valid
resides, or according to the formalities of (Art 16, NCC). Since, Dr. Fuentes was a US
the law of his own country, or in citizen, the laws of the New York
accordance with the Philippine Civil Code determines who his heirs are. And since the
New York law does not recognize the compulsory heir of Dr. Fuentes entitled to a
concept of compulsory heirs, Jay is not a legitime.
180
Wills; Joint Wills (2008) (B). Are the testamentary dispositions valid?
(2%)
No. XI. John and Paula, British citizens at SUGGESTED ANSWER:
birth, acquired Philippine citizenship by
naturalization after their marriage. During No. The testamentary dispositions are not
their marriage the couple acquired substanial valid because (a) omission of Mary, a
landholdings in London and in Makati. Paula legitimate child, is tantamount to
bore John three children, Peter, Paul and preterition which shall annul the
Mary. In one of their trips to London, the institution of Peter and Paul as heirs (Art.
couple executed a joint will appointing each 854, Civil Code); and, (b) the disposition
other as their heirs and providing that upon that Peter and Paul could not dispose of
the death of the survivor between them the nor divide the London estate for more than
entire estate would go to Peter and Paul only 20 years is void (Art. 870, Civil Code).
but the two could not dispose of nor divide the
London estate as long as they live. John and
Paul died tragically in the London Subway
terrorist attack in 2005. Peter and Paul filed a Wills; Joint Wills; Probate (2012)
petition for probate of their parent's will before
a Makati Regional Trial Court. No.VII.b) John Sagun and Maria Carla Camua,
British citizens at birth, acquired Philippine
(A). Should the will be admitted to probate? citizenship by naturalization after their
(2%) marriage. During their marriage, the couple

acquired substantial landholdings in London
SUGGESTED ANSWER: and in Makati. Maria begot three (3) children,
Jorge, Luisito, and Joshur. In one of their trips
No. The will cannot be admitted to probate to London, the couple executed a joint will
because a joint will is expressly prohibited appointing each other as their heirs and
under Art. 818 of the Civil Code. This providing that upon the death of the survivor
provision applies John and Paula became between them, the entire estate would go to
Filipino citizens after their marriage. Jorge and Luisito only but the two (2) could
not dispose of nor divide the London estate as attack in 2005. Jorge and Luisito filed a
long as they live. John and Maria died petition for probate of their parents’ will before
tragically in the London subway terrorist a Makati Regional Trial
180
Court. Joshur vehemently objected because he (3) Is the testamentary prohibition against the
was preterited. division of the London estate valid? Explain.
(1%)
(1) Should the will be admitted to probate? SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Explain. (2%)
Assuming the will of John and Maria was
SUGGESTED ANSWER: valid, the testamentary prohibition on the

division of the London estate shall be valid but
No, the will should not be admitted to only for 20 years. Under Arts 1083 and 494 of
probate. Since the couples are both Filipino the NCC, a testamentary disposition of the
citizens, Art 818 and 819 of the NCC shall testator cannot forbid the partition of all or
apply. Said articles prohibits the execution part of the estate for a period longer than
of joint wills and make them void, even twenty (20) years.
though authorized of the country where
they were executed.
(2) Are the testamentary dispositions valid? Wills; Prohibition to Partition of a Co

Explain. (2%) Owned Property (2010)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: No.I. True or False.
Since the joint will is void, all the

(B) X, a widower, died leaving a will stating
testamentary disposition written therein
that the house and lot where he lived cannot
are also void. However, if the will is valid,
be partitioned for as long as the youngest of
the institutions of the heirs shall be
his four children desires to stay there. As
annulled because Joshur was preterited. He
coheirs and co-owners, the other three may
was preterited because he will receive
demand partition anytime. (1%)
nothing from the will, will receive nothing
in testacy, and the facts do not show that SUGGESTED ANSWER:
he received anything as an advance on his
inheritance. He was totally excluded from FALSE, The other three co – heirs may not
the inheritance of his parents. anytime demand the partition of the house
and lot since it was expressly provided by
the decedent in his will that the same prohibit, by will, the partition of a property
cannot be partitioned while his youngest and his estate for a period not longer than
child desires to stay there. Article 1083 of 20 years no
the New Civil Code allows a decedent to
180
matter what his reason maybe. Hence, the the "two-reading rule" (Art. 808, Civil Code)
three co-heir cannot demand its partition and the provisions of Arts. 804, 805 and
at anytime but only after 20 years from the 806 of the Civil Code.
death of their father. Even if the deceased (B). Act as a witness to a will? (1%)
parent did not leave a will, if the house and
lot SUGGESTED ANSWER:
constituted their family home, Article 159

of the Family Code prohibits its partition Stevie cannot be a witness to a will. Art.
for a period of ten (10) years, or for as long 820 of the Civil Code provides that "any
as there is a minor beneficiary living in the person of sound mind and of the age of
family home. eighteen years or more, and not blind, deaf

or dumb, and able to read and write, may be
a witness to the execution of a will.
Wills; Notarial Wills; Blind Testator; (C). In either of the above instances, must the
Requisites (2008) will be read to him? (1%)
No. XIV. Stevie was born blind. He went to SUGGESTED ANSWER:
school for the blind, and learned to read in

Baille Language. He Speaks English fluently. If Stevie makes a will, the will must be read
Can he: to him twice, once by one of the

subscribing witnesses, and again, by the
(A). Make a will? (1%) notary public before whom the will is
acknowledged (Art. 808, Civil Code).
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Assuming that he is of legal age (Art. 797,

Civil Code) and of sound mind at the time Wills; Testamentary Disposition; Period to
of execution of the will (Art. 798, Civil Prohibit Partition (2008)
Code), Stevie, a blind person, can make a
notarial will, subject to compliance with No. XI. John and Paula, British citizens at
birth, acquired Philippine citizenship by bore John three children, Peter, Paul and
naturalization after their marriage. During Mary. In one of their trips to London, the
their marriage the couple acquired substanial couple executed a joint will appointing each
landholdings in London and in Makati. Paula other as their heirs and
180
providing that upon the death of the survivor and broke her arms. Coming from the
between them the entire estate would go to hospital, Clara insisted on signing her will by
Peter and Paul only but the two could not thumb mark and said
dispose of nor divide the London estate as long that she can sign her full name later. While
as they live. John and Paul died tragically in the will was being signed, Roberta experienced
the London Subway terrorist attack in 2005. a stomach ache and kept going to the
Peter and Paul filed a petition for probate of restroom for long periods of time. Hannah,
their parent's will before a Makati Regional while waiting for her turn to sign the will, was
Trial Court. reading the 7th Harry Potter book on the
couch, beside the table on which everyone was
(C). Is the testamentary prohibition against signing. Benjamin, aside from witnessing the
the division of the London estate valid? (2%) will, also offered to notarize it. A week after,
Clara was run over by a drunk driver while
SUGGESTED ANSWER: crossing the street in Greenbelt.
No. the testamentary prohibition against May the will of Clara be admitted to probate?
the division of the London estate is void Give your reasons briefly. (10%)
(Art. 870, Civil Code). A testator, however,
may prohibit partition for a period which SUGGESTED ANSWER:
shall not exceed twenty (20) years (Art. 870
in relation to Art. 494, par 3, Civil Code). Probate should be denied. The requirement
that the testator and at least three (3)
witnesses must sign all in the "presence" of
one another was not complied with.
Wills; Witnesses to a Will, Presence Benjamin who notarized the will is
required; Thumbmark as Signature (2007) disqualified as a witness, hence he cannot
be counted as one of the three witnesses
No.VI. Clara, thinking of her mortality, drafted
(Cruz v. Villasor, 54 SCRA 31, 1973). The
a will and asked Roberta, Hannah, Luisa and
testatrix and the other witnesses signed
Benjamin to be witnesses. During the day of
the will not in the presence of Roberta
signing of her will, Clara fell down the stairs
because she was in the restroom for
extended periods of time. Inside the sign the will by merely casting her eyes in
restroom, Roberta could not have possibly the proper direction (Jaboneta v. Gustilo, 5
seen the testatrix and the other witnesses Phil 541, 1906; Nera v. Rimando, 18 Phil
180
451, 1914). Therefore, the testatrix signed up. While Brad was mending his broken heart,
the will in the presence of only two he met Angie and fell in love.
witnesses, and only two witnesses signed Because the Picasso painting reminded Angie
the will in the presence of the testatrix and of him, Brad in his will bequeathed the
of one another. painting to Angie. Brad died in 1995.
Saddened by Brad's death, Jennifer asked for
It is to be noted, however, that the thumb the Picasso painting as a remembrance of him.
mark intended by the testator to be his Angie refused and claimed that Brad, in his
signature in executing his last will and will, bequeathed the painting to her. Is Angie
testament is valid (Payad v. Tolentino, 62 correct? Why or why not?
Phil 848, 1936; Matias v. Salud, L-104 Phil (10%)
1046, 23 June, 1958). The problem,
however, states that Clara "said that she SUGGESTED ANSWER:
can sign her full name later;" Hence, she
did not consider her thumb mark as her NO. Angie is not correct. The Picasso
"complete" signature, and intended further painting is not given or donated by Jennifer
action on her part. The testatrix and the to Brad. She merely "placed it in his
other witness signed the will in the bedroom." Hence, she is still the owner of
presence of Hannah, because she was aware the painting. Not being the owner of the
of her function and role as witness and was Picasso painting, Brad cannot validly
in a position to see the testatrix and the bequeath the same to Angie (Art. 930, NCC).
other witnesses sign by merely casting her Even assuming that the painting was
eyes in the proper direction. impliedly given or donated by Jennifer to
Brad, the donation is nevertheless void for
Donation
not being in writing. The Picasso painting
must be worth more than 5,000 pesos.
Donations; Formalities; In Writing (2007)
Under Art. 748, NCC, the donation and
acceptance of a movable worth more than
No. VIII. In 1986, Jennifer and Brad were
5,000 pesos must be in writing, otherwise
madly in love. In 1989, because a certain
the donation is void. The donation being
Picasso painting reminded Brad of her,
void, Jennifer remained the owner of the
Jennifer acquired it and placed it in his
Picasso painting and Brad could not have
bedroom. In 1990, Brad and Jennifer broke
validly disposed of said painting in favor of ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Angie in his will.
180
YES. Angie is correct. Even assuming that written. Such conditions, shall therefore,
there was void donation because the same be disregarded but the donation remains
was not in writing, Brad was in valid (Art. 727, NCC). On the other hand,
uninterrupted possession of the Picasso illegal and impossible donations imposed in
painting from 1989 to 1995, lasting for six an onerous donation shall annul the
(6) years prior to his death. Brad has donation (Art. 1183, NCC). This is so,
already acquired ownership of the painting because onerous donations are governed by
through acquisitive prescription. Under Art. the law on contracts (Art. 733, NCC).
1132, NCC, ownership of movables
prescribes through continuous possession
for four (4) years in good faith and for eight
(8) years without need of other conditions. Donation; Inter Vivos (2013)
A void donation may be the basis of
possession in the concept of owner and of No.V. Josefa executed a deed of donation
just title for purposes of acquisitive covering a one-hectare rice land in favor of her
prescription. daughter, Jennifer. The deed specifically

provides that:
"For and in consideration of her love
Donations; Illegal & Impossible Conditions and service Jennifer has shown and
(2007) given to me, I hereby freely, voluntarily

and irrevocably donate to her my one-
No.I. Distinguish the following concepts: hectare rice land covered by TCT No.
11550, located in San Fernando,
(B). Illegal and impossible conditions in a Pampanga. This donation shall take
simple donation v. illegal and impossible effect upon my death."
conditions in an onerous donation. (5%)
The deed also contained Jennifer's signed
SUGGESTED ANSWER: acceptance, and an attached notarized
declaration by Josefa and Jennifer that the
Illegal and impossible conditions in a land will remain in Josefa's possession and
simple donation are considered as not cannot be alienated, encumbered, sold or
disposed of while Josefa is still alive. donation inter vivos or mortis causa and
explain the reasons supporting your advice.
Advise Jennifer on whether the deed is a (8%)
180
SUGGESTED ANSWER: the deed of donation which state that the

same will only take effect upon the death of
The donation is a donation inter vivos. the donor and that there is a prohibition to
alienate, encumber, dispose, or sell the
When the donor intends that the donation same should be harmonized with its
shall take effect during the lifetime of the express irrevocability (Austria-Magat v. CA,
donor, though the property shall not be G.R. No. 106755, Feb 1, 2002).
delivered till after the donor’s death, this
shall be a donation inter vivos (Art. 729, ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Civil Code).
The donation is donation mortis causa.
The Civil Code prefers inter vivos
transmissions. Moreover, mortis causa The deed clearly states that the donation
donations should follow the formalities of a shall take effect upon the death of the
will (Art. 728, Civil Code). Here there is no donor, Josefa. The donor, moreover,
showing that such formalities were retained ownership of the subject property
followed. Thus, it is favorable to Jennifer as it was declared that the property cannot
that the deed is a donation inter vivos. be alienated, encumbered, sold or disposed
of while the donor is still alive.
Furthermore, what is most significant in
determining the type of donation is the As the donation is in the nature of a mortis
absence of stipulation that the donor could causa disposition, the formalities of a will
revoke the donation; on the contrary, the should have been complied with under Art.
deeds expressly declare them to be 728 of the Civil Code, otherwise, the
“irrevocable,” a quality absolutely donation is void and would produce no
incompatible with the idea of conveyances effect (The National Treasure of the
mortis causa where revocability is the Philippines v. Vda. de Meimban, G.R. No. L-
essence of the act, to the extent that a 61023, Aug 22, 1984).
testator cannot lawfully waive or restrict
his right of revocation. The provisions of Property
Accretion; Alluvium (2008) Marikina River. At certain times of the year,
the river would swell and as the water recedes,
No. IX. The properties of Jessica and Jenny, soil, rocks and other materials are
who are neighbors, lie along the banks of the
180
deposited on Jessica's and Jenny's properties. water." Where the land is not formed solely
This pattern of the river swelling, receding and by the natural effect of the water current of
depositing soil and other materials being the river bordering
deposited on the neighbors' properties have land but is also the consequences of the
gone on for many years. Knowing his pattern, direct and deliberate intervention of man,
Jessica constructed a concrete barrier about 2 it is man-made accretion and a part of the
meters from her property line and extending public domain (Tiongco v. Director of
towards the river, so that when the water Lands, 16 C.A. Rep 211, cited in Nazareno
recedes, soil and other materials are trapped v. C.A., G.R. No. 98045, 26 June 1996).
within this barrier. After several years, the Thus, Jessica cannot legally claim
area between Jessica's property line to the ownership of the additional 2 meters of
concrete barrier was completely filled with soil, land along her property because she
effectively increasing Jessica's property by 2 constructed a concrete barrier about 2
meters. Jenny's property, where no barrier meters from her property causing deposits
was constructed, also increased by one meter of soil and other materials when the water
along the side of the river. recedes. In other words, the increase in her
property was not caused by nature but was
(A). Can Jessica and Jenny legally claim man made.
ownership over the additional 2 meters and
one meter, respectively, of land deposited (B). If Jessica's and Jenny's properties are
along their properties?(2%) registered, will the benefit of such registration
extend to the increased area of their
SUGGESTED ANSWER: properties? (2%)
Only Jenny can claim ownership over the SUGGESTED ANSWER:

additional one meter of land deposited
along her property. Art. 457 of the Civil If the properties of Jessica and Jenny are
Code provides that "to the owners of lands registered, the benefit of such registration
adjoining the banks of river belong the does not extend to the increased area of
accretion which they gradually receive their properties. Accretion does not
from the effects of the current of the automatically become registered land
because there is a specific technical registration of the alluvial deposits under
description of the lot in its Torrens title. the Torrens System (Grande v. CA, G.R. No.
There must be a separate application for L-17652, 30 June, 1962).
180
(C). Assume the two properties are on a cliff sediment from its sources up in the mountains
adjoining the shore of Laguna Lake. Jessica and forests so that gradually the land owned
and Jenny had a hotel built on the properties. by Marciano increased in area by three
They had the erath and rocks excavated from hectares.
the properties dumped on the adjoining shore, Ulpiano built three huts on this additional
giving rise to a new patch of dry land. Can area, where he and his two married children
they validly lay claim to the patch of land? live. On this same area, Ulpiano and his family
(2%) planted peanuts, monggo beans and
vegetables. Ulpiano also regularly paid taxes
SUGGESTED ANSWER: on the land, as shown by tax declarations, for
over thirty years.
No. Jessica and Jenny cannot validly lay
claim to the patch of land because in order When Marciano learned of the increase in the
to acquire land by accretion, there should size of the land, he ordered Ulpiano to
be a natural and actual continuity of the demolish the huts, and demanded that he be
accretion to the land of the riparian owner paid his share in the proceeds of the harvest.
caused by natural ebb and flow of the Marciano claims that under the Civil Code, the
current of the river (Delgado v. Samonte, alluvium belongs to him as a registered
CA-G.R. No. 34979- riparian owner to whose land the accretion
R, 10 Aug 1966). attaches, and that his right is enforceable
against the whole world.
(A). Is Marciano correct? Explain. (3%)

Accretion; Rights of the Riparian Owner
(2009) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Marciano’s contention is correct. Since
No.XVI. Marciano is the owner of a parcel of that accretion was deposited on his land by
land through which a river runs out into the the action of the waters of the river and he
sea. The land had been brought under the did not construct any structure to increase
Torrens System, and is cultivated by Ulpiano the deposition of soil and
and his family as farmworkers therein. Over silt, Marciano automatically owns the
the years, the river has brought silt and accretion. His real right of ownership is
enforceable against the whole world deposited through accretion was not
including Ulpiano and his two married automatically registered. As an
children. Although Marciano’s land is unregistered land, it is subject to
registered, the three (3) hectares land acquisitive prescription by third persons.
180
Although Ulpiano and his children live in deduct from the value of the fruits the
the three (3) hectare unregistered land expenses for
owned by Marciano, they are farm workers; production, gathering and preservation of
therefore, they are possessors not in the the fruits (Art 443, NCC).
concept of owners but in the concept of
mere holders. Even if they possess the land He may also ask for reimbursement of the
for more than 30 years, they cannot taxes he has paid, as these are charges on
become the owners thereof through the land owned by Marciano. This
extraordinary acquisitive prescription, obligation is based on a quasi
because the law requires possession in the contract (Art 2175, NCC).
concept of the owner. Payment of taxes and
tax declaration are not enough to make
their possession one in the concept of
owner. They must repudiate the possession Builder; Good Faith; Requisites (2013)
in the concept of holder by executing
unequivocal acts of repudiation amounting No.VIII. Ciriaco Realty Corporation (CRC) sold
to ouster of Marciano, known to Marciano to the spouses Del a Cruz a500-square meter
and must be proven by clear and land (Lot A) in Paranaque. The land now has a
convincing evidence. Only then would his fair market value of Pl,200,000. CRC likewise
possession become adverse. sold to the spouses Rodriguez, a 700-square
meter land (Lot B) which is adjacent to Lot A.
(B). What rights, if any, does Ulpiano have Lot B has a present fair market value of
against Marciano? Explain. (3%) P1,500,000.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: The spouses Dela Cruz constructed a house on

Although Ulpiano is a possessor in bad Lot B, relying on their presentation of the CRC
faith, because he knew he does not own the sales agent that it is the property they
land, he will lose the three huts he built in purchased. Only upon the completion of their
bad faith and make an accounting of the house did the spouses Dela Cruz discovered
fruits he has gathered, he has the right to that they had built on Lot B owned by the
spouses Rodriguez, not on Lot A that they As their lawyer, advise the spouses Dela Cruz
purchased. They spent P 1 000,000 for the on their rights and obligations under the given
house. circumstances, and the recourses
180
and options open to them to protect their for in Art 546 and 548, or
interests. (8%)
(2) to oblige the one who built to pay the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: price of the land.
However, the builder cannot be obliged to
Based on the fact as stated, the spouses buy the land if its value is considerable
Dela Cruz as builders and the spouses more than that of the building.. In such
Rodriguez as land owners, are both in good case, he shall pay reasonable rent of the
faith. The spouses Dela Cruz are builder in owner of the land does not choose to
good faith because before constructing the appropriate the building or trees after
house they exercised due diligence by proper indemnity (Art 448, Civil Code).
asking the Agent of CRC the location of the
lot A, and they relied on the information The house constructed by the spouses Dela
given by the agent who is presumed to Cruz is considered as a useful expense,
know the identity of the lot purchased by since it increased the value of the lot. As
the Dela Cruz spouses (Pleasantville v. CA, such, should the spouses Rodriguez decides
253 SCRA 10, 1996). On the other hand, to appropriate the house, the spouses Dela
there is no showing that the land owners, Cruz are entitled to the right of retention
spouse Rodriguez acted in bad faith. The pending reimbursement of the expenses
facts do not show that the building was they incurred or the increase in value
done with their knowledge and without which the thing may have acquired by
opposition on their part (Art 453, Civil reason of the improvement (Art 546, Civil
Code). The good faith is always presumed Code). Thus, the spouses Dela Cruz may
(Art. 527, Civil Code). demand P1,000,000.00 as payment of the
expenses in building the house or increase
The owner of the land on which anything in value of the land because of the house as
has been built, sown, or planted in good a useful improvement, as may be
faith shall have the right: determined by the court form the evidence
presented during the trial (Depra v.
(1) to appropriate as his own the works Dumlao, 136 SCRA 475, 1985; Technogas
after payment of the indemnity provided Phils v. CA, 268 SCRA 5, 1997).
180
Easement; Prescription; Acquisitive been using this pathway (pathway A) since

Prescription (2009) 1980.
In 2006, Brand0 fenced off his property,
No. XI. TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the thereby blocking Andres' access to the
statement is true, or FALSE if the statement is national highway. Andres demanded that part
false. Explain your answer in not more than of the fence be removed to maintain his old
two (2) sentences. access route to the highway (pathway A), but
Brando refused, claiming that there was
(C). Acquisitive prescription of a negative another available pathway (pathway B) for
easement runs from the time the owner of the ingress and egress to the highway. Andres
dominant estate forbids, in a notarized countered that pathway B has defects, is
document, the owner of the servient estate circuitous, and is extremely inconvenient to
from executing an act which would be lawful use.
without the easement. (1%)
To settle their dispute, Andres and Brando
SUGGESTED ANSWER: hired Damian, a geodetic and civil engineer, to
True. In negative easements, acquisitive survey and examine the two pathways and the
prescription runs from the moment the surrounding areas, and to determine the
owner of the dominant estate forbade, by shortest and the least prejudicial way through
an instrument acknowledged before notary the servient estates. After the survey, the
public, the owner of the servient estate engineer concluded that pathway B is the
from executing an act which would be longer route and will need improvements and
lawful without the easement (Art. 621, repairs, but will not significantly affect the use
NCC). 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.
Easement; Right of Way (2013)
In light of the engineer's findings and the

No.VII.In 2005, Andres built a residential circumstances of the case, resolve the parties'
house on a lot whose only access to the right of way dispute. (6%)
national highway was a pathway crossing
Brando's property. Andres and others have SUGGESTED ANSWER:
180
Andres is not entitled to the easement of available outlet to the national highway
right of way for Pathway A. Pathway B must (Pathway B). Second, the right of way
be used. obtained (Pathway A) is not the least
prejudicial to Brando’s property, as
The owner of a dominant estate may validly evidence by the reports of the geodetic and
obtain a compulsory right of way only after civil engineer.
he has established the existence of four
requisites, to wit: When there is already an existing adequate
outlet from the dominant estate to the
(1) The (dominant) estate is surrounded by public highway, even if the said outlet, for
other immovables and is without adequate one reason or another, be inconvenient, the
outlet to a public highway; need to open up another servitude is
entirely unjustified (Costabella Corporation
(2) After payment of the proper indemnity; v. CA, G.R. No. 80511, Jan 25, 1991). The
rule that the easement of right of way shall
(3) The isolation was not due to the be established at the point least prejudicial
proprietor’s own acts; and to the servient estate is controlling
(Quimen v. Quimen and CA, G.R. No.
(4) The right of way claimed is at a point 112331, May 29, 1996).
least prejudicial to the servient estate, and
insofar as consistent with this rule, where (Note: It is not clear from the problem if there
the distance from the dominant estate to exists an easement in favor of the lot belonging
the public highway maybe the shortest (Art to Andres and if Brando’s lot is burdened as a
650, civil Code). servient estate by a right of way as a servient
estate. If there is such an easement burdening
However, the Supreme Court has Brando’s lot, was it created as legal easement
consistently ruled that in case both criteria or as a voluntary easement. If the used
cannot be complied with, the right of way pathway was only a tolerance, then Brando
shall be established at the point least may close it. Andres must ask for the
prejudicial to the servient estate. constitution of a legal easement through
Brando’s lot by proving the four requisites
The first and fourth requisites are not
required by Art 649 and 65, Civil Code).
complied with. First, there is another
180
Easement; Right of Way (2010) (2) The sale of the property includes the
easement or servitude, even if the deed of
No.XIII. Franz was the owner of Lot E which sale is silent on the matter.
was surrounded by four (4) lots one of which –

Lot C – he also owned. He promised Ava that if (3) The vendee of the property in which a
she bought Lot E, he would give her a right of servitude or easement exists cannot close
way in Lot C. or put obstructions thereon to prevent the
dominant estate from using it.
Convinced, Ava bought Lot E and, as
promised, Franz gave her a right of way in Lot (4) Ava’s working abroad for more than ten
C. (10) years should not be construed as non-
user, because it cannot be implied from the
Ava cultivated Lot E and used the right of way fact that she or those she left behind to
granted by Franz. cultivate the lot no longer use the right of
way.
Ava later found gainful employment abroad.
On her return after more than 10 years, the
Note: Since a right of way is a
right of way was no longer available to her
discontinuous easement, the period of ten
because Franz had in the meantime sold Lot C
years of non-user, shall be computed from
to Julia who had it fenced.
the day it ceased to be used under Act 6341
(2) CC.
(A). Does Ava have a right to demand from
Julia the activation of her right of way? (5) Renunciation or waiver of an easement
Explain. (2.5%) must be specific, clear, express and made
in a public instrument in accordance of Art
SUGGESTED ANSWER: 1358 of the New Civil Code.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Yes. Ava has the right to demand from
Julia the activation of the right of way, for
Yes. Ava has the right to demand from Julia
the following reasons:
the activation of the right of way. A
voluntary easement of right of way, like
(1) The easement of the right of way is a
any other contract, could be extinguished
real right which attaches to, and is
only by mutual agreement or by
inseperable from, the estate to which it
renunciation of the owner of the dominant
belongs.
estate. Also, like any other
180
contract, an easement is generally effective a right of way shall be granted to

between parties, their heirs and assignees, her in lot C if Ava purchase lot E. The
except in case where the rights and promise was not reduced to writing (Obra v.
obligations arising from the contract are Baldria, 529 SCRA 621 [2007]). Hence, it
not transmissible by their nature, or by was not or could not have been registered
stipulations or by provision of law as to warn buyers of lot C about the
(Unisource Commercial v. Chung, 593 SCRA existence of the easement on the property.
530 [2009]). Not having been annotated on the TCT to
lot C, the buyer acquired lot C free from
(B). Assuming Ava opts to demand a right of such right of way granted to Ava.
way from any of the owners of Lots A, B, and
D, can she do that? Explain. (2.5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Hidden Treasure (2008)
Yes. Ava has the option to demand a right No. VIII. Adam, a building contractor, was
of way on any of the remaining lots of engaged by Blas to construct a house on a lot
Franz more so after Franz sold lot C to which he (Blas) owns. While digging on the lot
Julia. The essential elements of a legal in order to lay down the foudation of the
right of way under Art 649 and 650 of the house, Adam hit a very hard object. It turned
New Civil Code are complied with. out to be the vault of the old Banco de las
Islas Filipinas. Using a detonation device,
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Adam was able to open the vault containing
Yes. Ava has the option to demand a right old notes and coins which were in circulation
of way from the other lots. The law during the Spanish era. While the notes and
provides that whenever a piece of land coins are no longer legal tender, they were
acquired by sale, exchange or partition is valued at P100 million because of their
surrounded by other estates of the vendor, historical value and the coins silver nickel
exchanger, or co-owner, he shall be obliged content. The following filed legal claims over
to grant a right of way without indemnity the notes and coins:
(Art 652, NCC).

(i). Adam, as finder;
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
(ii). Blas, as owner of the property where they
No. There was merely a promise to Ava that were found;
180
(iii). Bank of the Philippine Islands, as the

successor-in-interest of the owner of the vault; present case, Adam, as finder, and Blas, as
and owner of the land, are entitled to share 50-
50 in the treasure. The government can
(iv). The Philippine Government because of only claim if it can establish that the notes
their historical value. and coins are of interest to science or the
arts, then it must pay just price of the
(A). Who owns the notes and coins? (4%) things found, to be divided equally between
Adam and Blas (Art. 438, Civil Code).
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(B). Assuming that either or both Adam and

The notes and coins are no longer owned by Blas are adjudged as owners, will the notes
the Bank of the Philippine Islands, which and coins be deemed part of their absolute
has either lost or abandoned the vault and community or conjugal partnership of gains
its contents, and it has not taken any effort with their respective spouses? (2%)
to search, locate or recover the vault. In
any case, since the vault is in actual SUGGESTED ANSWER:
possession of Adam, BPI may attempt, in a
judicial action to recover, to rebut the If either or both Adam and Blas are
presumption of ownership in favor of Adam adjudged as owners, the notes and coins
and Blas (Art. 433, Civil Code). Hidden shall be deemed part of their absolute
treasure is any hidden and unknown community or conjugal partnership of gains
deposit of money, jewelry, or other with their respective spouses (Art. 117, par
precious objects, the lawful ownership of 4, FC).
which does not appear. Given the age and
importance of the items found, it would be
safe to consider the vault, notes and coins
abandoned by BPI and its predecessor (Art. Mortgage; Public or Private Instrument
439, Civil Code). It belongs to the owner of (2013)
the land on which it is found. When the
discovery is made on the property of No.VI. Lito obtained a loan of P1,000,000 from
another, or of the State and by chance, one- Ferdie, payable within one year. To secure
half of it shall belong to the finder who is payment, Lito executed a chattel mortgage on
not a trespasser (Art. 438, Civil Code). In a Toyota Avanza and a real estate mortgage on
a 200-square meter piece of property.
180
(A) Would it be legally significant - from the exceeds Five Hundred pesos (P500.00) must
point of view of validity and enforceability - if appear in writing, even in private one.
the loan and the mortgages were in public or However, the requirement is not for validity
private instruments? (6%) 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, requires
enforceability, there would be legal an affidavit of good faith stating that the
significance if the mortgage was in a public chattel mortgage is supposed to stand as
or private instrument. As for the loan, security of the loan; thus, for the validity of
there is no legal significance except of the chattel mortgage, it must be in a public
interest were charged on the loan, in which document and recorded in the Chattel
case, the charging of interest must be in Mortgage Register in the Register of Deeds.
writing. A real estate mortgage, under the
provisions of Art. 2125 of the Civil Code,
A contract of loan is a real contract and is requires that in order that a mortgage may
perfected upon delivery of the object of the be validly constituted the document in
obligation (Art 1934, Civil Code). Thus, a which it appears be recorded. If the
contract of loan is valid and enforceable instrument is not recorded, the mortgage is
even if it is neither in a private nor in a nevertheless valid and binding between the
public document. parties. Hence, for validity of both chattel
and real estate mortgages, they must
As a rule, contracts shall be obligatory in appear in a public instrument. But the
whatever form they may have been entered purpose of enforceability, it is submitted
into provided all the essential requisites for that the form of the contract, whether in a
their validity are present. With regards to public or private document, would be
its enforceability, a contact of loan is not immaterial (Mobil Oil v. Diocaresa, 29 SCRA
among those enumerated under Art. 1403 656, 1969).
(2) of the Civil Code, which are covered by
the Statute of Frauds. Also, under Art 1358, acts and contracts
which have for their object the creation or
It is important to note that under Art. 1358 transmission of real rights over immovable
of the Civil Code, all the other contracts property must be in a public
where the amount involved
180
document for greater efficacy and a real a

estate mortgage is a real right over right. Possession may be the real right of
immovable property. possession or jus possessiones or it can be
merely the right to possess or jus
possedendi, which are among the basic
rights of ownership. If the real right of
Occupation vs. Possession (2007) No.I. possession is possession in the concept of
owner, but subject to certain limitations, it
Distinguish the following concepts: (A).
may ripen into full ownership of the thing
or property right through acquisitive
Occupation v. possession. (5%)
prescription depending on whether it is a
SUGGESTED ANSWER: case of ordinary or extraordinary

prescription and whether the property is
Occupation is an original mode of acquiring movable or immovable.
ownership (Art. 712, NCC). Things

appropriable by nature which are without
an owner, such as animals that are the Ownership; Co-Ownership (2009)
object of hunting and fishing, hidden
treasure and abandoned movables, are No. XI. TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the
acquired by occupation (Art. 713, NCC). statement is true, or FALSE if the statement is
However, ownership of a piece of land false. Explain your answer in not more than
cannot be acquired by occupation (Art. 714, two (2) sentences.
NCC).
(D). The renunciation by a co-owner of his
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: undivided share in the co-owned property in
lieu of the performance of his obligation to
Occupation is a mode of acquiring dominion contribute to taxes and expenses for the
by the seizure of corporeal things which preservation of the property constitutes dacion
have no owner, with the intention of en pago. (1%)
acquiring the ownership thereof. It is an
original mode of acquiring ownership upon SUGGESTED ANSWER:
seizure of a res nullius by the occupant who True, Under the Civil Code, a co-owner may
has the intention to become the owner renounce his share in the co-owned
thereof. Possession, on the other hand, is property in lieu of paying for his share in
the holding of the thing or an enjoyment of the taxes and expenses for the preservation
of the co-owned property.
180
In effect, there is dacion en pago because Bobby's house? (3%)

the co-owner is discharging his monetary SUGGESTED ANSWER:
obligation by paying it with his non-
monetary interest in the co Yes, Cathy can lawfully ask for the
owned property. The fact that he is giving demolition of Bobby's house. Where there
up his entire interest simply means that he are two or more heirs, the whole estate of
is accepting the value of his interest as the decedent, is, before partition, owned in
equivalent to his share in the taxes and common by such heirs, subject to the
expenses of preservation. payment of debts of the deceased (Art.

1078, Civil Code), Under the rules on co-
ownership, "none of the co-owners shall,
without the consent of the others make
Ownership; Co-Ownership (2008)
alterations in the thing owned in common,
even though benefits for all would results
No. VI. Alex died without a will, leaving only
therefrom." In Cruz v. Catapang, G.R. No.
an undeveloped and untitled lot in Tagiug
164110, 12 Feb., 2008, the Court held that
City. He is survived by his wife and 4 children.
"alterations include any act of strict
His wife told the children that she is waiving
dominion or ownership such as
her share in the property, and allowed Bobby,
construction of a house." In the present
the eldest son who was about to get married,
case, of Alex is the real owner of the
to construct his house on ¼ of the lot, without
undeveloped and untitled lot in Taguig, co-
however obtaining the consent of his siblings.
ownership is created among his wife and
After settlement of Alex's estate and partition
four children over said property upon his
among the heirs, it was discovered that
death. Since the construction of the house
Bobby's house was constructed on the portion
by Bobby was done without obtaining the
allocated to his sister, Cathy asked Bobby to
consent of his siblings, the alteration
demolish his house and vacate the portion
effected is illegal. Bobby is considered to be
alloted to her. In leiu of demolition, Bobby
in bad faith and as a sanction for his
offered to purchase from Cathy the lot portion
conduct, he can be compelled by Cathy to
on which his house was constructed. At that
demolish or remove the structure at his
time, the house constructed was valued at
own expense.
P350.000.
(B). Can Bobby legally insist on purchasing

(A). Can Cathy lawfully ask for demolition of
the land? (2%)
180
SUGGESTED ANSWER: nature and object to remain at a fixed place

on a river, lake or coast." Since the floating
No. Bobby cannot legally insist on platform is a petroleum operation facility,
purchasing the land. Being in bad faith, he it is intended to remain permanently where
has no option to pay for the price of the lot it is situated, even if it is tethered to a ship
(Art. 450, Civil Code). which is anchored to the seabed.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Property; Movable or Immovable (2007) The platform is a movable property because

it is attached to a movable property, i.e.
No.II. Manila Petroleum Co. owned and the vessel which was merely anchored to
operated a petroleum operation facility off the the seabed. The fact that the vessel is
coast of Manila. The facility was located on a merely anchored to the sea bed only shows
floating platform made of wood and metal, that it is not intended to remain at a fixed
upon which was permanently attached the place; hence, it remains a movable
heavy equipment for the petroleum operations property. If the intention was to make the
and living quarters of the crew. The floating platform stay permanent where it was
platform likewise contained a garden area, moored, it would not have been simply
where trees, plants and flowers were planted. tethered to a vessel but itself anchored to
The platform was tethered to a ship, the MV the seabed.
101, which was anchored to the seabed.
(B). Are the equipment and living quarters
Please briefly give the reason for your answers. movable or immovable property?
(10%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(A).Is the platform movable or immovable
property? The thing and living quarters of the crew
are immovable property under Art. 415 (3)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: NCC, classifies as an immovable "everything
attached to an immovable in a fixed
The platform is an immovable property manner, in such a way that it cannot be
under Art. 415 (9) NCC, which provides that separated therefrom without breaking the
"docks and structures which, though material or deterioration of
floating, are intended by their
180
the object." Both the equipment and the garden area of the platform are immovable
living quarters are permanently attached to property under Art. 415 (2) NCC which
the platform which is also an immovable. classifies as an immovable property "trees,
The equipment can also be classified as an plants and growing fruits, while they are
immovable property under Art. 415 (5) NCC attached to the land or form an integral
because such equipment are "machinery, part of an immovable, the petroleum
receptacles, instruments or implements operation facility.
intended by the owner of the tenement for
an industry or works which may be carried ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
on in a building or on a piece of land and
which tend directly to meet the needs of The trees, plants and flowers planted in the
the industry or works." It is logically garden area of the platform are movable
assumed that the petroleum industry may property because they are not permanently
be carried on in a building or on a piece of attached t the land and do not form an
land and the platform is analogous to a integral part of an immovable. The platform
building. is not an immovable property for the same
reason already given in the Alternative
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: Answer to Item (a) above.
The equipment and living quarters of the Land Titles and Deeds
crew are movable properties since they are
attached to a platform which is also a
Acquisition of Lands; Sale of Real Property
movable property, because it is simply
to an Alien (2009)
attached to a vessel is likewise a movable
property since it was merely anchored on No.XIX. In 1972, Luciano de la Cruz sold to
the seabed only shows that it is not Chua Chung Chun, a Chinese citizen, a parcel
intended to remain at a fixed place; hence, of land in Binondo. Chua died in 1990, leaving
it remains a movable property. behind his wife and three children, one of
whom, Julian, is a naturalized Filipino citizen.
(C). Are the trees, plants and flowers
Six years after Chua’s death, the heirs
immovable or movable property?
executed an extrajudicial settlement of estate,
and the parcel of land was allocated to Julian.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
In
The trees, plants and flowers planted in the
180
2007, Luciano filed suit to recover the land he (5%)

sold to Chua, alleging that the sale was void
because it contravened the Constitution which Supply this information.
prohibits the sale of private lands to aliens.
Julian moved to dismiss the suit on grounds SUGGESTED ANSWER:
of pari delicto, laches and acquisitive

prescription. Decide the case with reasons. The following properties are not registrable:
(4%)
(1.) Properties of the Public dominion;
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(2.) Properties for public use or public
The case must be dismissed. Julian, who is service;
a naturialized Filipino citizen and to whom

(3.) Inalienable lands of the public domain;
the property was allocated in a n extra-
judicial partition of the estate, is now the
(4.) Military installations, civil and quasi
owner of the property. The defect in
public lands; and
ownership of the property of Julian’s alien
father has already been cured by its
(5.) All lands not classified as alienable and
transfer to Julian. It has been validated by
disposable.
the transfer of the property to a Filipino
citizen. Hence, there is no more violation
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
of the Constitution because the subject real
property is now owned by a Filipino citizen
(1). Properties of public dominium intended
(Halili v. CA, 287 SCRA 465, [1998]).
for public use, like roads, canals, rivers,
Further, after the lapse of 35 year, laches
torrents, ports and bridges constructed by
has set in and the motion to dismiss may
the State, banks, shores, roadsteads, and
be granted, for the failure of Luciano to
the like, are incapable of private
question the ownership of Chua before its
appropriation, much less registration (Art.
transfer of ownership to Julian.
420 NCC). This includes public markets,
Non-Registrable Properties (2007)
public plazas, municipal streets and public
buildings
No.IV. (B). What properties are not registrable?
180

Civil Law Phil. Bar Exams Q - A 2007 2013

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Civil Law Phil. Bar Exams Q - A 2007 2013

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Civil Law Phil. Bar Exams Q - A 2007 2013

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.

Questions and Suggested Answers

PHILIPPINE BAR EXAMINATIONS 2007-

Salise, Hector Christopher “Jay-Arh” Jr. M.

(University of San Jose-Recoletos School of Law)

ANSWERS TO BAR EXAMINATION QUESTIONS by the

PHILIPPINE ASSOCIATION OF LAW SCHOOLS (2008)

The authors were inspired by the work of Silliman University’s

Everyone is free to distribute and mass produce copies of this

The answers (views or opinions) presented in this reviewer are

Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com

Capacity; Juridical Capacity of Donee; Requisites for Acceptance (2012).......................12

Capacity: Legal Capacity; Lex Rei Sitae (2007)...............................................................13

Correction of Entries; Clerical Error Act (2008).............................................................14

Nationality Principle (2009)...........................................................................................14

Nationality Principle; Change of Name not Covered (2009).............................................15

Adoption; Termination; Death of Adopter (2009)............................................................17

Adoption; Illegitimate Child (2010)................................................................................18

Adoption; Illegitimate Child; Use of Mother’s Surname as Middle Name (2012)..............19

Consent; Consent of the Adopter’s Heirs (2008).............................................................19

Qualifications of Adopter (2010)....................................................................................20

Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com

Marriage; Annulment; Grounds (2007)...........................................................................21

Marriage; Annulment; Parties (2012)..............................................................................22

Marriage; Annulment; Support Pendente Lite (2010)......................................................22

Marriage; Divorce Decrees; Filipino Spouse Becoming Alien (2009)................................23

Marriage; Divorce Decrees; Foreign Spouse Divorces Filipino Spouse (2012)..................24

Marriage; Divorce Decrees; Foreign Spouse Divorces Filipino Spouse (2010)..................25

Marriage; Legal Separation; Prescription (2012).............................................................25

Marriage; Legal Separation; Prescription (2007).............................................................26

Marriage; Psychological Incapacity (2013).....................................................................26

Marriage; Psychological Incapacity (2012).....................................................................28

Marriage; Requisites (2008)...........................................................................................28

Marriage; Subsequent Marriage (2008)...........................................................................29

Marriage; Void Marriages; By Reason of Public Policy (2008)..........................................30

Marriage; Void Marriages; By Reason of Public Policy (2007)..........................................30

Marriage; Void Marriages; Property Relations (2009)......................................................30

Marriage; Void Marriages; Status of Children (2009).......................................................31

Parental Authority; Illegitimate Minor Child (2009).......................................................32

Parental Authority; In Vitro Fertilization (2010)............................................................32

Civil Law Q&As (2007-2013) hectorchristopher@yahoo.com dbaratbateladot@gmail.com

Paternity & Filiation; Child Born Under a Void Marriage (2010)....................................33

Paternity & Filiation; Impugning Legitimacy (2010).......................................................34

Paternity & Filiation; In Vitro Fertilization;

Surrogate Mother’s Remedy to Regain Custody (2010)...................34

Paternity & Filiation; Legitimacy; Presumption (2008)..................................................35

Paternity & Filiation; Legitimation of a Dead Child (2009).............................................37

Paternity & Filiation; Support: Ascendants & Descendants;

Collateral Blood Relatives (2008)...................................................37

Paternity & Filiation; Use of Surname; Illegitimate Child (2009)....................................38

Paternity & Filiation; Who May Impugn Legitimacy (2009)............................................39

Property Relations; Adulterous Relationship (2009).......................................................39

Property Relations; Accession (2012).............................................................................40

Property Relations; Ante-Nuptial Debt (2007)................................................................40

Property Relations; Unions Without Marriage (2012)......................................................41

Property Relations; Unions Without Marriage (2012)......................................................42

Property Relations; Void Marriages (2010).....................................................................43