You are on page 1of 118

CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)

ANSWERS TO BAR
EXAMINATION QUESTIONS
IN
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)

FORWARD

This work is not intended for sale or commerce. This work is freeware. It may be freely copied and

distributed, nevertheless, PERMISSION TO COPY from the editors is ADVISABLE to protect the

interest of the ORIGINAL SOURCES/REFERENCES of this material. It is primarily intended for

all those who desire to have a deeper understanding of the issues touched by the Philippine Bar

Examinations and its trend. It is specially intended for law students from the provinces who, very

CIVIL LAW
often, are recipients of deliberately distorted notes from other unscrupulous law schools and

students. Share to others this work and you will be richly rewarded by God in heaven. It is also

very good karma.

ARRANGED BY TOPIC
We would like to seek the indulgence of the reader for some Bar Questions which are improperly

(1990
classified under a topic and for some topics whichare
2006)
improperly or ignorantly phrased, for the

authors are just Bar Reviewees who have prepared this work while reviewing for the Bar Exams

under time constraints and within their


First limited
Edition knowledge
- Edited of the law.
and Arranged by:We would like to seek the
July 26, 2005
Atty. Janetteerrors
readers indulgence for a lot of typographical Laggui-Icao and
in this work.
Atty. Alex Andrew P. Icao
(Silliman University College of
Law)
Latest Edition Edited and Arranged by:
ROMUALDO L. SEERIS II
The Authors Silliman University College of
Law

From the ANSWERS TO BAR EXAMINATION QUESTIONS


by the UP LAW COMPLEX & Philippine Association of Law
Schools
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)

Table of Contents
GENERAL PRINCIPLES ....................................................................................................................................... 10
Civil law vs. Common Law (1997)
................................................................................................................................ 10 Effect of Obiter & Dissenting
Opinion; SC Decisions (1994)......................................................................................... 10 Effectivity of Laws (1990)
............................................................................................................................................ 10 Equity follows the Law
(2003)...................................................................................................................................... 10 Ignorance of the Law
vs. Mistake of Fact (1996)........................................................................................................... 11 Inferior Courts
Decisions (1994) .................................................................................................................................. 11 Prejudicial
Questions (1997)........................................................................................................................................ 11
PERSONS................................................................................................................................................................... 11
Change of Name; Under RA 9048 (2006)
...................................................................................................................... 11 Death; Effects; Simultaneous Death
(1998).................................................................................................................. 12 Death; Effects; Simultaneous
Death (1999).................................................................................................................. 12 Death; Effects;
Simultaneous Death (2000).................................................................................................................. 12 Juridical
Capacity vs. Capacity to Act (1996) ............................................................................................................... 12
Juridical Capacity; Natural Persons (1999) ..................................................................................................................
13
CONFLICT Waiver of Rights (2004)
OF LAWS............................................................................................................................................. 13
...............................................................................................................................................
Appilicable Laws; laws governing 13
contracts (1992)
..................................................................................................... 13 Applicable Laws; Arts 15, 16 & 17 (1998)
..................................................................................................................... 13 Applicable Laws; Arts 15, 16, 17
(2002)........................................................................................................................ 14 Applicable Laws; Capacity to Act
(1998)...................................................................................................................... 14 Applicable Laws; Capacity to Buy
Land (1995) ............................................................................................................ 15 Applicable Laws; Capacity to
Contract (1995).............................................................................................................. 15 Applicable Laws; capacity to
succeed (1991)............................................................................................................... 15 Applicable Laws; contracts
contrary to public policy (1996) ........................................................................................ 15 Applicable Laws; Contracts of
Carriage (1995) ............................................................................................................ 16 Applicable Laws; Labor Contracts
(1991) .................................................................................................................... 16 Applicable Laws; laws governing
marriages (1992) ..................................................................................................... 17 Applicable Laws; laws governing
marriages (2003) ..................................................................................................... 17 Applicable Laws; Sale of Real
Property (1995)............................................................................................................. 17 Applicable Laws; Succession;
Intestate & Testamentary (2001)................................................................................... 18 Applicable Laws; Sucession of
Aliens (1995)............................................................................................................... 18 Applicable Laws; Wills executed
abroad (1993) ........................................................................................................... 18 Definition; Cognovit; Borrowing
Statute; Characterization (1994) ................................................................................ 18 Definition; forum non-conveniens;
long-arm statute (1994) ......................................................................................... 19 Divorce; effect of divorce granted to
former Filipinos; Renvoi Doctrine (1997)............................................................. 19 Domiciliary theory vs. Nationality Theory
(2004).......................................................................................................... 19 Forum Non Conveniens & Lex Loci
Contractus (2002)................................................................................................. 19 Nationality Theory
(2004)............................................................................................................................................. 20 Naturalization
(2003) ................................................................................................................................................... 20 Theory;
significant relationships theory (1994)............................................................................................................ 20 Torts;
Prescriptive Period (2004) ................................................................................................................................. 21
ADOPTION................................................................................................................................................................. 21
Adoption; Use of Surname of her Natural Mother (2006)
.............................................................................................. 21 Inter-Country Adoption; Formalities
(2005).................................................................................................................. 21 Parental Authority; Rescission of
Adoption (1994) ...................................................................................................... 21 Qualification of Adopter
(2005).................................................................................................................................... 22 Qualification of
Adopter; Applicable Law (2001) .......................................................................................................... 22 Qualifications
of Adopter (2000) .................................................................................................................................. 22
Qualifications of Adopter (2003) ..................................................................................................................................
23
FAMILY Successional Rights of Adopted Child
CODE.......................................................................................................................................................... (2004)
23
..............................................................................................................
Emancipation 23
(1993).................................................................................................................................................... 23 Family
Code; Retroactive Application; Vested Rights (2000)........................................................................................ 24
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006) Family Home; Dwelling House (1994)
.......................................................................................................................... 24 Family; Constitutional Mandates; Divorce
(1991) ......................................................................................................... 24 Marriage; Annulment; Effects; Requisites Before
Remarriage (1990) ........................................................................... 24 Marriage; Annulment; Grounds
(1991)......................................................................................................................... 25 Marriage; Annulment; Judicial
Declaration (1993)........................................................................................................ 25 Marriage; Annulment; Legal Separation;
Prescription of Actions (1996) ...................................................................... 25 Marriage; Annulment; Proper Party
(1990)................................................................................................................... 26 Marriage; Annulment; Proper Party
(1995)................................................................................................................... 26 Marriage; Divorce Decree; Void Marriages
(1992) ........................................................................................................ 26 Marriage; Divorce Decrees; Filiation of Children
(2005) ............................................................................................... 26 Marriage; Divorce Decrees; Filipino Spouses becoming
Alien (1996)........................................................................... 27 Marriage; Divorce Decrees; Filipino Spouses becoming Alien
(1999)........................................................................... 27 Marriage; Donations by Reason of Marriage; Effect of Declaration of
Nullity (1996) ..................................................... 28 Marriage; Grounds; Declaration of Nullity: Annulment: Legal Separation:
Separation of Property (2003) ..................... 28 Marriage; Grounds; Nullity; Annulment; Legal Separation
(1997)................................................................................. 29 Marriage; Legal Separation; Declaration of Nullity
(2002)............................................................................................. 29 Marriage; Legal Separation; Grounds; Prescriptive Period
(1994) ................................................................................ 29 Marriage; Legal Separation; Mutual guilt (2006)
........................................................................................................... 29 Marriage; Non-Bigamous Marriages (2006)
.................................................................................................................. 30 Marriage; Property Relations; Void Marriages (1991)
................................................................................................... 30 Marriage; Psychological Incapacity
(1996)................................................................................................................... 30 Marriage; Psychological Incapacity
(2006)................................................................................................................... 31 Marriage; Psychological Incapacity
(2006)................................................................................................................... 31 Marriage; Requisites (1995)
......................................................................................................................................... 31 Marriage; Requisites (1999)
......................................................................................................................................... 32 Marriage; Requisites; Marriage
License (1996) ............................................................................................................ 32 Marriage; Requisites; Marriage License
(2002) ............................................................................................................ 33 Marriage; Requisites; Solemnizing Officers
(1994)....................................................................................................... 33 Marriage; Requisites; Void Marriage (1993)
................................................................................................................. 33 Marriage; Void Marriages (2004)
.................................................................................................................................. 34 Marriage; Void Marriages (2006)
.................................................................................................................................. 34 Marriage; Void Marriages; Psychological
Incapacity (2002) ......................................................................................... 35 Parental Authority; Child under 7 years of age
(2006) .................................................................................................. 35 Parental Authority; Special Parental Authority; Liability
of Teachers (2003)................................................................. 35 Parental Authority; Substitute vs. Special (2004)
......................................................................................................... 35 Paternity & Filiation (1999)
.......................................................................................................................................... 36 Paternity & Filiation; Artificial
Insemination; Formalities (2006) ................................................................................... 36 Paternity & Filiation; Common-Law
Union (2004)......................................................................................................... 36 Paternity & Filiation; Proofs; Limitations;
Adopted Child (1995)................................................................................... 36 Paternity & Filiation; Recognition of illegitimate
Child (2005)....................................................................................... 37 Paternity & Filiation; Rights of Legitimate Children (1990)
........................................................................................... 37 Presumptive Legitime (1999)
....................................................................................................................................... 38 Property Relations; Absolute
Community (1994) ......................................................................................................... 38 Property Relations; Ante Nuptial
Agreement (1995) ..................................................................................................... 39 Property Relations; Conjugal Partnership
of Gains (1998) ........................................................................................... 39 Property Relations; Marriage Settlement; Conjugal
Partnership of Gains (2005) .......................................................... 39 Property Relations; Marriage Settlements (1991)
......................................................................................................... 40 Property Relations; Marriage Settlements (1995)
......................................................................................................... 40 Property Relations; Obligations; Benefit of the Family
(2000) ...................................................................................... 41 Property Relations; Unions without Marriage (1992)
.................................................................................................... 41 Property Relations; Unions without Marriage (1997)
.................................................................................................... 41 Property Relations; Unions without Marriage (2000)
.................................................................................................... 42
SUCCESSION........................................................................................................................................................... 42
Amount of Successional Rights (2004)
........................................................................................................................ 42 Barrier between illegitimate &
legitimate relatives (1993) ............................................................................................. 42 Barrier between
illegitimate & legitimate relatives (1996) ............................................................................................. 43 Collation
(1993) ........................................................................................................................................................... 43
Disinheritance vs. Preterition (1993) ............................................................................................................................
43 Disinheritance; Ineffective (1999)
................................................................................................................................ 43 Disinheritance; Ineffective;
Preterition (2000) .............................................................................................................. 44
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006) Heirs; Intestate Heirs; Reserva Troncal (1995)
............................................................................................................. 44 Heirs; Intestate Heirs; Shares
(2003)............................................................................................................................ 45 Intestate Succession
(1992)......................................................................................................................................... 45 Intestate Succession
(1997)......................................................................................................................................... 45 Intestate Succession
(1998)......................................................................................................................................... 46 Intestate Succession
(1998)......................................................................................................................................... 46 Intestate Succession
(1999)......................................................................................................................................... 46 Intestate Succession
(2000)......................................................................................................................................... 46 Intestate Succession; Reserva
Troncal (1999) ............................................................................................................. 47 Legitime
(1997)............................................................................................................................................................ 47 Legitime;
Compulsory Heirs (2003).............................................................................................................................. 47 Legitime;
Compulsory Heirs vs. Secondary Compulsory Heirs (2005).......................................................................... 48 Preterition
(2001)......................................................................................................................................................... 48 Preterition;
Compulsory Heir (1999) ............................................................................................................................ 48 Proceedings;
Intestate Proceedings; Jurisdiction (2004) ............................................................................................. 48 Succession; Death;
Presumptive Legitime (1991) ........................................................................................................ 49 Wills; Codicil; Institution of
Heirs; Substitution of Heirs (2002).................................................................................... 49 Wills; Formalities (1990)
.............................................................................................................................................. 50 Wills; Holographic Wills;
Insertions & Cancellations (1996) ......................................................................................... 50 Wills; Holographic Wills; Witnesses
(1994).................................................................................................................. 50 Wills; Joint Wills (2000)
............................................................................................................................................... 50 Wills; Probate; Intrinsic Validity
(1990) ........................................................................................................................ 51 Wills; Probate; Notarial and Holographic
Wills (1997) .................................................................................................. 51 Wills; Revocation of Wills; Dependent Relative
Revocation (2003)............................................................................... 51 Wills; Testamentary Disposition
(2006)........................................................................................................................ 52 Wills; Testamentary Intent (1996)
................................................................................................................................ 52
DONATION ................................................................................................................................................................ 52
Donation vs. Sale
(2003).............................................................................................................................................. 52 Donations;
Condition; Capacity to Sue (1996) ............................................................................................................. 52 Donations;
Conditions; Revocation (1991)................................................................................................................... 53 Donations;
Effect; illegal & immoral conditions (1997)................................................................................................. 53 Donations;
Formalities; Mortis Causa (1990) ............................................................................................................... 54 Donations;
Formalities; Mortis Causa (1998) ............................................................................................................... 54 Donations;
Inter Vivos; Acceptance (1993) .................................................................................................................. 54 Donations;
Perfection (1998) ....................................................................................................................................... 54 Donations;
Requisites; Immovable Property................................................................................................................ 55 Donations;
Unregistered; Effects; Non-Compliance; Resolutory Condition (2006) ....................................................... 55 Donations;
Validity; Effectivity; for Unborn Child (1999) .............................................................................................. 55 Donations;
with Resolutory Condition (2003)............................................................................................................... 56
PROPERTY................................................................................................................................................................ 56
Accretion; Alluvion (2001)
........................................................................................................................................... 56 Accretion; Avulsion
(2003) .......................................................................................................................................... 56 Builder; Good
Faith (1992)........................................................................................................................................... 57 Builder;
Good Faith vs. Bad Faith (1999) ..................................................................................................................... 57
Builder; Good Faith vs. Bad Faith (2000)
..................................................................................................................... 57 Builder; Good Faith vs. Bad Faith;
Accession (2000) ................................................................................................... 58 Builder; Good Faith vs. Bad
Faith; Presumption (2001)................................................................................................ 58 Chattel Mortgage vs.
Pledge (1999) ............................................................................................................................. 58 Chattel Mortgage;
Immovables (1994).......................................................................................................................... 59 Chattel
Mortgage; Immovables (2003).......................................................................................................................... 59
Chattel Mortgage; Possession (1993) ..........................................................................................................................
60 Chattel Mortgage; Preference of Creditors (1995)
........................................................................................................ 60 Easement vs. Usufruct
(1995)...................................................................................................................................... 60 Easement; Effects;
Discontinuous Easements; Permissive Use (2005) ........................................................................ 61 Easement;
Nuisance; Abatement (2002) ...................................................................................................................... 61
Easements; Classification (1998).................................................................................................................................
62 Easements; Right of Way
Page 5Right
(1993).................................................................................................................................. 62 Easements; of of119
Way (2000).................................................................................................................................. 62 Easements; Right
of Way; Inseparability (2001) ........................................................................................................... 62
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006) Easements; Right of Way; Requisites (1996)
............................................................................................................... 63 Ejectment Suit vs. Cancellation of Title (2005)
............................................................................................................. 63 Ejectment Suit; Commodatum (2006)
.......................................................................................................................... 63 Extra-Judicial Partition; Fraud
(1990)........................................................................................................................... 63 Hidden Treasure (1995)
............................................................................................................................................... 64 Hidden Treasures (1997)
............................................................................................................................................. 64 Mortgage; Pactum
Commissorium (1999) .................................................................................................................... 64 Mortgage; Pactum
Commissorium (2001) .................................................................................................................... 65 Mortgage; Right of
Redemption vs. Equity of Redemption (1999) ................................................................................ 65 Nuisance; Family House; Not
Nuisance per se (2006) .................................................................................................. 65 Nuisance; Public Nuisance vs. Private
Nuisance (2005)............................................................................................... 65 Ownership; Co-Ownership (1992)
................................................................................................................................ 66 Ownership; Co-Ownership; Prescription
(2000) ........................................................................................................... 66 Ownership; Co-Ownership; Prescription (2002)
........................................................................................................... 67 Ownership; Co-Ownership; Redemption (1993)
........................................................................................................... 67 Ownership; Co-Ownership; Redemption (2000)
........................................................................................................... 67 Ownership; Co-Ownership; Redemption (2002)
........................................................................................................... 67 Possession
(1998)....................................................................................................................................................... 68 Property; Real vs.
Personal Property (1995) ................................................................................................................ 68 Property; Real vs. Personal
Property (1997) ................................................................................................................ 68 Sower; Good Faith/ Bad Faith (2000)
........................................................................................................................... 69 Usufruct
(1997)............................................................................................................................................................ 69
LAND TRANSFER & DEEDS............................................................................................................................... 69
Acquisition of Lands; Citizenship Requirement
(2003)................................................................................................. 69 Adverse Claims; Notice of Levy (1998)
........................................................................................................................ 69 Annotation of Lis Pendens; When Proper
(2001).......................................................................................................... 70 Foreshore Lands
(2000)............................................................................................................................................... 70 Forgery; Innocent
Purchaser; Holder in Bad Faith (2005)............................................................................................. 70 Forgery; Innocent
Purchaser; Mirror Principle (1991) .................................................................................................. 71 Fraud; Procurement
of Patent; Effect (2000) ................................................................................................................ 71 Homestead Patents;
Void Sale (1999) .......................................................................................................................... 71 Innocent Purchaser for
Value (2001)............................................................................................................................ 72 Mirror Principle (1990)
................................................................................................................................................. 72 Mirror Principle;
Forgery; Innocent Purchaser (1999) .................................................................................................. 73 Notice of Lis
Pendens (1995) ....................................................................................................................................... 73 Notice of Lis
Pendens; Transferee Pendente Lite (2002) .............................................................................................. 73 Prescription &
Laches; Elements of Laches (2000) ...................................................................................................... 74 Prescription &
Laches; Indefeasibility Rule of Torrens Title (2002) .............................................................................. 74 Prescription (1990)
...................................................................................................................................................... 75 Prescription; Real
Rights (1992) .................................................................................................................................. 75 Primary Entry Book;
Acquisitive Prescription; Laches (1998) ...................................................................................... 76 Reclamation of Foreshore
Lands; Limitations (2000) ................................................................................................... 76 Registration; Deed of
Mortgage (1994)......................................................................................................................... 77 Remedies; Judicial
Confirmation; Imperfect Title (1993) .............................................................................................. 77 Remedies; Judicial
Reconstitution of Title (1996) ........................................................................................................ 77 Remedies; Procedure;
Consulta (1994)........................................................................................................................ 77 Remedies; Reconveyance
vs. Reopening of a Decree; Prescriptive Period (2003)........................................................ 78 Remedies; Reconveyance;
Elements (1995) ................................................................................................................ 78 Remedies; Reconveyance;
Prescriptive Period (1997) ................................................................................................. 79 Remedies; Reopening of a
Decree; Elements (1992).................................................................................................... 79 Torrens System vs. Recording
of Evidence of Title (1994) ........................................................................................... 80 Unregistered Land (1991)
............................................................................................................................................
CONTRACTS 80
............................................................................................................................................................ 80
Consensual vs. Real Contracts; Kinds of Real Contracts (1998)
.................................................................................. 80 Consideration; Validity
(2000)...................................................................................................................................... 80 Contract of Option;
Elements (2005)............................................................................................................................ 81 Inexistent
Contracts vs. Annullable Contracts (2004)................................................................................................... 81
Nature of Contracts; Obligatoriness (1991)..................................................................................................................
81 Nature of Contracts; Privity of Contract (1996)
............................................................................................................ 82
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006) Nature of Contracts; Relativity of
Contracts (2002) ...................................................................................................... 82 Rescission of Contracts;
Proper Party (1996) .............................................................................................................. 82
OBLIGATIONS ......................................................................................................................................................... 83
Aleatory Contracts; Gambling
(2004)........................................................................................................................... 83 Conditional Obligations (2000)
.................................................................................................................................... 83 Conditional Obligations (2003)
.................................................................................................................................... 83 Conditional Obligations; Promise
(1997) ..................................................................................................................... 84 Conditional Obligations; Resolutory
Condition (1999) ................................................................................................. 84 Extinguishment; Assignment of Rights
(2001) ............................................................................................................. 84 Extinguishment; Cause of Action
(2004)...................................................................................................................... 85 Extinguishment; Compensation
(2002) ........................................................................................................................ 85 Extinguishment; Compensation vs.
Payment (1998) .................................................................................................... 85 Extinguishment; Compensation/Set-
Off; Banks (1998) ................................................................................................ 85 Extinguishment; Condonation (2000)
.......................................................................................................................... 85 Extinguishment; Extraordinary
Inflation or Deflation (2001)......................................................................................... 86 Extinguishment; Loss (1994)
....................................................................................................................................... 86 Extinguishment; Loss;
Impossible Service (1993) ....................................................................................................... 86 Extinguishment; Novation
(1994)................................................................................................................................. 87 Extinguishment; Payment
(1995) ................................................................................................................................. 87 Liability; Lease; Joint
Liability (2001) .......................................................................................................................... 87 Liability; Solidary
Liability (1998)................................................................................................................................. 87 Liability; Solidary
Obligation (1992)............................................................................................................................. 88 Liability; Solidary
Obligation; Mutual Guaranty (2003) ................................................................................................. 88 Loss of the thing
due; Force Majeure (2000) ................................................................................................................ 88 Non-Payment of
Amortizations; Subdivision Buyer; When justified (2005)................................................................... 89 Period; Suspensive
Period (1991)................................................................................................................................ 89
TRUST......................................................................................................................................................................... 89
Express Trust; Prescription (1997)
.............................................................................................................................. 89 Implied Trust
(1998)..................................................................................................................................................... 90 Trust;
Implied Resulting Trust (1995)........................................................................................................................... 91
SALES.......................................................................................................................................................................... 91
Assignment of Credit vs. Subrogation
(1993)............................................................................................................... 91 Conditional Sale vs. Absolute Sale
(1997).................................................................................................................... 91 Contract of Sale vs. Agency to Sell
(1999) ................................................................................................................... 91 Contract of Sale; Marital Community
Property; Formalities (2006) ............................................................................... 91 Contract to Sell
(2001)................................................................................................................................................. 92 Contract to Sell
vs. Contract of Sale (1997).................................................................................................................. 92 Contract to Sell;
Acceptance; Right of First Refusal (1991).......................................................................................... 92 Double Sales
(2001)..................................................................................................................................................... 92 Double Sales
(2004)..................................................................................................................................................... 93 Equitable
Mortgage (1991).......................................................................................................................................... 93 Equitable
Mortgage vs. Sale (2005).............................................................................................................................. 93 Immovable
Property; Rescission of Contract (2003) .................................................................................................... 94 Maceda Law
(2000)...................................................................................................................................................... 94 Maceda Law;
Recto Law (1999).................................................................................................................................... 95 Option Contract
(2002) ................................................................................................................................................ 95 Option Contract;
Earnest Money (1993) ....................................................................................................................... 95 Perfected Sale;
Acceptance of Earnest Money (2002) .................................................................................................. 95 Redemption; Legal;
Formalities (2001) ........................................................................................................................ 96 Redemption; Legal;
Formalities (2002) ........................................................................................................................ 96 Right of First Refusal;
Lessee; Effect (1996) ................................................................................................................ 96 Right of First Refusal;
Lessee; Effect (1998) ................................................................................................................ 97 Right of Repurchase
(1993) ......................................................................................................................................... 97 Transfer of
Ownership; Non-Payment of the Price (1991)............................................................................................. 97 Transfer of
Ownership; Risk of Loss (1990) ................................................................................................................. 97
LEASE.......................................................................................................................................................................... 97
Extinguishment; Total Distruction; Leased Property (1993)
......................................................................................... 97 Implied New Lease
(1999)............................................................................................................................................ 98 Lease of Rural
Lands (2000) ........................................................................................................................................ 98 7 of 119
Page
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006) Leasee & Lessor; Rights and Obligations
(1990) ......................................................................................................... 98 Leasee; Death Thereof; Effects (1997)
......................................................................................................................... 98 Option to Buy; Expired
(2001)...................................................................................................................................... 98 Sublease vs. Assignment of
Lease; Rescission of Contract (2005) .............................................................................. 99 Sublease; Delay in Payment of
Rentals (1994) ............................................................................................................. 99 Sublease; Sublessee; Liability
(1999) ........................................................................................................................ 100 Sublease; Sublessee; Liability
(2000) ........................................................................................................................ 100 Sublease; Validity; Assignment of
Sublease (1990) ................................................................................................... 100
COMMON CARRIERS.......................................................................................................................................... 100
Extraordinary Diligence (2000)
.................................................................................................................................. 100
AGENCY ................................................................................................................................................................... 101
Agency (2003)
........................................................................................................................................................... 101 Agency vs.
Sale (2000) .............................................................................................................................................. 101 Agency;
coupled with an interest (2001) .................................................................................................................... 101
Agency; Guarantee Commission (2004).....................................................................................................................
101 Agency; Real Estate Mortgage (2004)
........................................................................................................................ 101 Appointment of Sub-Agent
(1999).............................................................................................................................. 102 General Agency vs.
Special Agency (1992)................................................................................................................ 102 Powers of the
Agent (1994)........................................................................................................................................
PARTNERSHIP 102 Termination; 103
......................................................................................................................................................
Effect of Death of Agent (1997)
Composition of .............................................................................................................
Partnerships; Spouses; Corporations 103 (1994)
.................................................................................... 103 Conveyance of a Partners Share Dissolution
(1998).................................................................................................. 103 Dissolution of Partnership (1995)
.............................................................................................................................. 103 Dissolution of Partnership;
Termination (1993).......................................................................................................... 104 Effect of Death of
Partner (1997)................................................................................................................................ 104 Obligations of a
Partner (1992) .................................................................................................................................. 104 Obligations of
aC Partner;
OMMODATUM Industrial&Partner MUTUUM (2001) ..................................................................................................... 104
.................................................................................................................................... 104
Commodatum (1993)
................................................................................................................................................. 104 Commodatum
(2005) ................................................................................................................................................. 105
Commodatum vs. Usufruct (1998) .............................................................................................................................
105 Mutuum vs. Commodatum (2004)
.............................................................................................................................. 106 Mutuum; Interests
(2001)........................................................................................................................................... 106 Mutuum;
Interests (2002) ...........................................................................................................................................
DEPOSIT................................................................................................................................................................... 106 107
Mutuum;
Compensation; Interests (2004) ...........................................................................................................................................
Bank Loan
106
(1997).............................................................................................................................. 107 Deposit; Exchange
(1992).......................................................................................................................................... 107
SURETY.................................................................................................................................................................... 107
Recovery of Deficiency (1997)
................................................................................................................................... 107
ANTICHRESIS........................................................................................................................................................ 107
Antichresis (1995)
..................................................................................................................................................... 107
PLEDGE .................................................................................................................................................................... 108
Pledge (1994)
............................................................................................................................................................ 108 Pledge
(2004) ............................................................................................................................................................ 108
Pledge; Mortgage; Antichresis (1996) ........................................................................................................................ 108
QUASI-CONTRACT..............................................................................................................................................
108
Quasi-Contracts; Negotiorium Gestio (1992)
............................................................................................................. 109 Quasi-Contracts; Negotiorium Gestio
(1993) ............................................................................................................. 109 Quasi-Contracts; Negotiorium
Gestio (1995) ............................................................................................................. 109 Quasi-Contracts; Solutio
Indebiti
TORTS (2004) ....................................................................................................................
& DAMAGES 110
........................................................................................................................................... 110
Collapse of Structures; Last Clear Chance
(1990)...................................................................................................... 110 Damages
(1994)......................................................................................................................................................... 111
Damages arising from Death of Unborn Child (1991)
................................................................................................. 111 Damages arising from Death of Unborn Child
(2003) ................................................................................................. 111 DeathPage 8 Indemnity of 119
(1994).............................................................................................................................................. 111
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006) Defense; Due Diligence in Selection
(2003)................................................................................................................ 112 Filing of Separate Civil Action; Need for
Reservation (2003) ...................................................................................... 112 Fortuitous Event; Mechanical Defects (2002)
............................................................................................................. 112 Liability; Airline Company; Non-Performance of an
Obligation (2004)........................................................................ 112 Liability; Airline Company; Non-Performance of an Obligation
(2005)........................................................................ 113 Liability; Employer; Damage caused by Employees (1997)
........................................................................................ 113 Liability; owner who was in the vehicle (1996)
........................................................................................................... 114 Liability; owner who was in the vehicle (1998)
........................................................................................................... 114 Liability; owner who was in the vehicle (2002)
........................................................................................................... 114 Moral Damages & Atty Fees (2002)
............................................................................................................................ 114 Moral Damages; Non-Recovery Thereof
(2006) .......................................................................................................... 115 Quasi-Delict (1992)
.................................................................................................................................................... 115 Quasi-Delict (2005)
.................................................................................................................................................... 115 Quasi-Delict; Acts contrary
to morals (1996) ............................................................................................................. 115 Quasi-Delict; Mismanagement of
Depositors Account (2006).................................................................................... 116 Vicarious Liability (1991)
........................................................................................................................................... 116 Vicarious Liability (2001)
........................................................................................................................................... 117 Vicarious Liability (2002)
........................................................................................................................................... 117 Vicarious Liability (2004)
........................................................................................................................................... 117 Vicarious Liability (2006)
........................................................................................................................................... 117 Vicarious Liability; Public Utility
(2000) ..................................................................................................................... 118
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ........................................................................................................................... 118
Intellectual Creation
(2004)........................................................................................................................................ 118
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)

cannot have the force of official precedents. It is as if the Court


GENERAL PRINCIPLES were turning aside from the main topic of the case to collateral
subjects: a dissenting opinion affirms or overrules a claim, right or
Civil law vs. Common obligation. It neither disposes nor awards anything it merely
Law would
How (1997)you compare the Civil Law system expresses the view of the dissenter. (Civil Code, Paras]
in its governance and trend with that of the
Common Law system?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
As regards "governance": Governance in Civil 3) A decision of a division of the Supreme
Law is codal, statutory and written law. It is Court maybe set aside by the Supreme Court
additionally derived from case law. Common sitting en banc, a Supreme Court decision may
law is basically derived from case law. be set aside by a contrary ruling of the
Supreme Court itself or by a corrective
As regards "trend": Civil law is now tending to legislative act of Congress, although said laws
rely more and more on decisions of the courts cannot adversely affect those favored prior to
explaining the laws. Common law is now the Supreme Court decision. [Civil Code,
codifying laws more and more. So they are Effectivity
Paras). of
now merging towards similar systems. Laws a(1990)
After devastating storm causing widespread
destruction in four Central Luzon provinces, the
Additional Answers: executive and legislative branches of the
1. COMMON LAW refers to the traditional
government agreed to enact a special law
part of the law as distinct from legislation; it
appropriating P1 billion for purposes of relief
refers to the universal part of law as distinct
and rehabilitation for the provinces. In view of
from particular local customs (Encyclopedia
the urgent nature of the legislative enactment,
Americana, Vol. 7). On the other hand, CIVIL
it is provided in its effectivity clause that it shall
LAW is understood to be that branch of law
take effect upon approval and after completion
governing the relationship of persons in respect
of publication in the Official Gazette and a
of their personal and private interests as
newspaper of general circulation in the
distinguished from both public and international
Philippines. The law was passed by the
laws.
In common law countries, the traditional Congress on July 1, 1990. signed into law by the
responsibility has for the most part been President on July 3, 1990, and published in such
(a) As to the publication of said legislative
with the judges; in civil law countries, the newspaper of general circulation on July 7,
enactment, is there sufficient observance or
task is primarily reposed on the lawmakers. 1990 and in the Official Gazette on July 10,
compliance with the requirements for a valid
Contemporary practices, however, so 1990.
(b) WhenExplain
did the your
law take effect?
publication? answer.
indicate a trend towards centralizing that (c)
ExplainCanyourthe executive branch start
answer.
function to professional groups that may releasing and disbursing funds appropriated
indeed, see the gradual assimilation in time by the said law the day following its approval?
of both systems. [Vitug, Civil. Law and SUGGESTED
Explain yourANSWER:
answer.
2. Jurisprudence,
In Civil Law,p.the statutes theoretically
XX) (a) Yes, there is sufficient compliance. The law
take precedence over court decisions itself prescribes the requisites of publication
interpreting them; while in Common Law, the for its effectivity, and all requisites have been
court decisions resolving specific cases are complied with. (Article 2, Civil Code)
regarded as law rather than the statutes (b) The law takes effect upon compliance with
themselves which are, at the start, merely all the conditions for effectivity, and the last
embodiments of case law. Civil Law is code law condition was complied with on July 10, 1990.
or written law, while Common Law is case law. Hence, the" law became effective on that date.
Civil Law adopts the deductive method - from (c) No. It was not yet effective when it was
the general to the particular, while the approved by Congress on July 1, 1990 and
Common Law uses the inductive approach from approved by the President on July 3, 1990. The
the particular to the general. Common Law other requisites for its effectivity were not yet
relies on equity. Civil Law anchors itself on the complete at the time.
letter of the law. The civilists are for the judge-
proof law even as the Common Law Is judge-
made
Effectlaw. Civil Law
of Obiter & judges are merely
Dissenting Opinion;
supposed
SCWhat to
Decisions apply laws and not interpret them.
2) are the(1994)
binding effects of an obiter
dictum and a dissenting opinion? 3) How can
a decision of the Supreme Court be set aside?
ALTERNATIVE ANSWERS:
2) None. Obiter dictum and opinions are not necessary to the
determination of a case. They are not binding and
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
but never against statutory law. (Toyota Motor Phil. 1. The
V civil action involves an issue similar or
CA SCRA 236 [1992]).
216 related
intimatelyto the issue raised in the criminal
2. the and
action, resolution of such issue determines
Ignorance of the Law vs. whether or not the criminal action may
Mistake
Is there anyof Fact (1996)
difference in their legal effect proceed.
between ignorance of the law and ignorance or (c) Consequences The criminal case must be
mistake ofANSWER:
SUGGESTED fact? suspended. Thus, in a criminal case for
Yes, there is a difference. While ignorance of damages to one's property, a civil action that
the law is not an excuse for not complying with involves the ownership of said property should
it, ignorance of fact eliminates criminal intent first be resolved (De Leon vs. Mabanag. 38 Phil.
as long as there is no negligence (Art, NCC). In 202)
addition, mistake on a doubtful or difficult
question of law may be the basis of good faith PERSONS
(Art. 526. NCC). Mistake of fact may,
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: Change of Name; Under RA
furthermore, vitiate consent in a contract and
Yes. ignorance of the law differs in legal effect
make it voidable (Art. 1390. NCC). 9048 (2006) delos Santos filed a petition for
Zirxthoussous
from Ignorance or mistake of fact. The former
change of name with the Office of the Civil
does not excuse a party from the legal
Registrar of Mandaluyong City under the
consequences of his conduct while the latter
administrative proceeding provided in Republic
does constitute an excuse and is a legal
Inferior Act No. 9048. He alleged that his first name
defense. Courts
Decisions
Are (1994)
decisions of the Court of Appeals considered sounds ridiculous and is extremely difficult to
laws?
ALTERNATIVE ANSWERS: spell and pronounce. After complying with the
1) a) No, but decisions of the Court of requirements of the law, the Civil Registrar
Appeals may serve as precedents for inferior granted his petition and changed his first name
courts on points of law not covered by any Zirxthoussous to "Jesus." His full name now
Jesus
readsdelos Santos
"Jesus delosmoved to General Santos City to
Santos."
Supreme Court decision, and a ruling of the
work in a multi-national company. There, he fell in
Court of Appeals may become a doctrine.
love and married Mary Grace delos Santos. She
(Miranda vs.. Imperial 77 Phil. 1066).
b) No. Decisions of the Court of Appeals merely requested him to have his first name changed
have persuasive, and therefore no mandatory because his new name "Jesus delos Santos" is the
effect. However, a conclusion or same name as that of her father who abandoned her
pronouncement which covers a point of law still family and became a notorious drug lord. She
undecided may still serve as judicial guide and wanted to forget him. Hence, Jesus filed another
it is possible that the same maybe raised to the petition with the Office of the Local Civil Registrar to
status of doctrine. If after it has been subjected change his first name to "Roberto." He claimed that
to test in the crucible of analysis, the Supreme the change is warranted because it will eradicate all
Will the ofpetition
vestiges forofchange
the infamy of name
Mary Grace's of Jesus
father.
Court should find that it has merits and delos Santos to Roberto delos Santos under
qualities sufficient for its consideration as a Republic Act No. 9048 prosper? Explain. (10%)
Prejudicial
rule of jurisprudence (Civil Code, Paras). SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, under the law, Jesus
Questions
In (1997)
the context that the term is used in Civil Law, state
may only change his name once. In addition,
(a)
the concept, (b) requisites and (c) the petition for change of name may be denied
consequences of a prejudicial question. (1) Jesus is neither ridiculous, nor tainted
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
on the following grounds:
(a) Concept A prejudicial question is one which with dishonor nor extremely difficult to write or
must be decided first before a criminal action (2) There
pronounce. is no confusion to be avoided or
may be instituted or may proceed because a created with the use of the registered first
decision therein is vital to the judgment in the name or nickname of the petitioner.
(3) The petition involves the same entry in
criminal case. In the case of People vs. Adelo
the same document, which was previously
Aragon (L5930, Feb. 17, 1954), the Supreme
corrected or changed under this Order [Rules
Court defined it as one which arises in a case,
and Regulations Implementing RA 9048].
the resolution of which question is a logical
antecedent of the issues involved in said case
and the cognizance of which pertains to Equity follows the
another tribunal (Paras, Vol. 1, Civil. Code Law
It (2003)
is said that equity follows the law What do
(b)
Annotation, 1989 ed. p, 194). you understand by this phrase, and what are its
1The prejudicial question must be determinative ofbasic implications? 5%
Requisites
the case before the court. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
2Jurisdiction to try said question must be lodged inEquity Follows the law means that courts
another tribunal. exercising equity jurisdiction are bound by
ADDITIONAL ANSWER: rules of law and have no arbitrary discretion to
disregard them. (Arsenal v IAC, 143 SCRA 40
[1986]). Equity is applied only in the absence
Page 10 of 119
of
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
spelling, visible to the eyes or obvious to absolute
the community amounting to 1 Million Pesos. His
and can be corrected or changed only by
understanding,
reference to other existing records. Provided,
however, that no correction must involve the
change of nationality, age, status or sex of the
petitioner.

Death; Effects; Simultaneous


Death who
Jaime, (1998)
is 65, and his son, Willy, who is 25,
died in a plane crash. There is no proof as to
who died first. Jaime's only surviving heir is his
wife, Julia, who is also Willy's mother. Willy's
surviving heirs are his mother, Julia and his
1. In the
wife, settlement of Jaime's estate, can
Wilma.
Wilma successfully claim that her late husband,
Willy had a hereditary share since he was much
younger than his father and, therefore, should
be presumed to have survived longer? [3%]
2. Suppose Jaime had a life insurance policy
with his wife, Julia, and his son, Willy, as the
beneficiaries. Can Wilma successfully claim
that one-half of the proceeds should belong to
Willy's estate? |2%J

What entries in the Civil Registry may be


changed or corrected without a judicial order?
SUGGESTED
(2.5%) ANSWER: Only clerical or
typographical errors and first or nick names
may be changed or corrected without a judicial
order under RA 9048.
Clerical or typographical errors refer to
mistakes committed in the performance of
clerical work in writing, copying, transcribing or
typing an entry in the civil register. The
mistake is harmless and innocuous, such as
errors in
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Juridical capacity, as distinguished from capacityconditions to detrimental to the moral well-being of their
the
act: former
(a) is passive while the latter is active, wife, will,acting
children therefore,
in theinherit
moviesO.25
is inMillion
violation
Pesos
of the
andFamily
his parents
Code will
and
inherit laws.
Labor 0.25 Million
Thus, thePesos.
waiver
Whenis invalid
Mrs. Cruz
and not
died,binding.
she was
(b) the former is inherent in a person while the succeeded by her parents as her intestate heirs. They will inherit all
latter is merely acquired, (c) the former is lost of her estate consisting of her 0.5 Million half share in the absolute
only through death while the latter may be lost community and her 0.25 Million inheritance from her husband, or a
through death or restricted by causes other TheofChild
total LaborPesos.
0.750 Million Law is a mandatory and
than death, and Id) the former can exist prohibitory law and the rights of the child
without capacity to act while the latter cannot cannot be waived as it is contrary to law and
Juridical
exist without Capacity;
juridical capacity. Natural public policy.
Persons
Elated that(1999)
her sister who had been married In sum, the parents of Mr. Cruz will inherit
for five years was pregnant for the first time, CONFLICT OF LAWS
250,000 Pesos while the parents of Mrs. Cruz
Alma donated P100,000.00 to the unborn child. will inherit 750,000 Pesos.
Unfortunately, the baby died one hour after (b) This being a case of succession, in the
delivery. May Alma recover the P100.000.00 Appilicable
absence of proof Laws;aslaws to the governing
time of death of
that she had donated to said baby before it contracts
X andof
each the(1992)
Y entered into aitcontract
spouses, is presumed in Australia,
they died
was born considering that the baby died? whereby
at the same it was time agreed
and no that X would build
transmission a
of rights
SUGGESTED ANSWER: is the donation valid and commercial
from one to building the otherfor is Ydeemed
in the Philippines,
to have taken
Stated otherwise,
The donation is valid and binding, being an act and
place. in payment
Therefore, foreach
the construction,
of them is deemed Y will to
binding? Explain. (5%)
favorable to the unborn child, but only if the transfer
have an and estate convey
valued hisat cattle ranch located
P500,000,00, or one- in
baby had an intra-uterine life of not less than the
half United
of their States in favor
conjugal of X. What
property of P1lawmillion.
seven months and pro-vided there was due would govern: a) parents
Their respective The validity will ofthusthe inherit
contract? the
acceptance of the donation by the proper b) The performance
entire P1 Million of in the contract?
equal shares, c) The of
person representing
SUGGESTED ANSWER: said child. If the child had Death;
consideration
P500,000.00 Effects; of the
per Simultaneous
set contract?
of parents.
1.
lessNo,than Wilma
sevencannotmonths successfully
of intra-uterine claimlife, thatit Death
b) Cristy
SUGGESTED (2000)
and
ANSWER: her late husband Luis had two
Willy
is not had deemed a hereditary
born sinceshare it died in less
his than
father's 24 (a) The validity
children, Rose of andthePatrick,
contract will summer,
One be governed her
estate. Under Art. 43, Civil
hours following its delivery, in which ease the Code, two persons by Australian law, because
mother-in-law, aged 70, took the two children, the validity refers to
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: the
"who
donation are nevercalled to succeed
became each other"
effective since are the thenelement
aged 10ofand the12,makingwith of herthe oncontract
a boat trip in to
Even
presumed if the to baby
have had
died an at intra-uterine
the same life of
time, in this case.(Optional Addendum:"... unless the parties
donee never became a person, birth being Cebu. Unfortunately, the vessel sank en route,
more
the than seven
absence months
ofofproof as to and whichthe donation
of them died was agreed to be bound by another law".}
determinative personality. and the bodies of the three were never found.
properly accepted, it would
first. This presumption of simultaneous death be void for not
None of the survivors ever saw them on the
having
applies conformed
in cases involving with the the proper form. of
question In
water.
(b) The On the settlement
performance of her mother-in-
will be governed by the
order
SUGGESTED
successionto beANSWER:
valid,
as the donation
between the twoand whoacceptance
died, who
2. Yet, Wilma can invoke the presumption of law's
law of estate,
the Cristy
Philippines files
where a claim
the for a share
contract is toof
of personal
in this case are property
mutual exceeding
heirs, being fivefather
thousand and
survivorship andin claim her estate
(c) performed.
be on the ground
The consideration will be governed bythat the same was
pesos
son. should be writing.that (Articleone-half of the
748, par. 3)
Waiver
proceeds shouldof belong to Willy's estate, under inherited
United
the lawStates by her children
the where the ranch is located.
of ANSWER: from their
SUGGESTED
Rights
B.
Sec.DON,3 (jj)(2004)
an
par.American
5 Rule 131, businessman,
Rules of Court, secured as grandmother
(Optional
No, her action Addendum: in
willrepresentation
In the
not foregoing
prosper. of cases,
Since their father,
when
there was
parental
the dispute consent
does not forinvolve
the employment
succession. of Under and
the she
foreign inherited
law would the same
apply,
five no proof as to who died first, all the three arethe from
absencethem. of Will
proof her
of
minors to play certain roles
this presumption, the person between the ages in two movies he action
that prosper?
foreign law (2%)
would render
deemed to have died at the same time and Philippine law
was
of 15producing
and 60 years at home
is deemedin Makati. to have worked applicable
Theysurvived there wasunder the "eclectic theory".)
no transmission of rights from one
at odd hours of the day and
one whose age was over 60 at the time of their night, but always ALTERNATIVE
to another, applying
Applicable
ANSWER:
Laws; ArtsArticle15, 43 of the New Civil
accompanied
deaths. The by estateparents or other
of Willy endowedadults. with The No,
Code.
16
Juan
her action will not prosper. Under Article 43
&is17 (1998) citizen residing in Tokyo,
a Filipino
producer paid the children
juridical personality stands talentin place feesand rates of
atstead the
Japan.
New Civil Code, inasmuch as there is no
Death;
But
better a than
of Willy, Effects;
social worker,
adult
as beneficiary. Simultaneous
wages. DEB, reported to OSWD proof as to what
State who laws died govern:
first, all the three are
Death
Mr.
that and (1999)
these Mrs. children
Cruz, whooften are childless,
missed going met with to 1His capacity to contract marriage in Japan,
presumed to have died at the same time and
a serious
school. They motorsometimes
vehicle drank accident wine,withaside
Mr. from
Cruz [ 1%]
there could be no transmission of rights among
at the exposed
being wheel and to Mrs.
drugs. Cruz In seated
some scenes, beside him, they 2His successional rights as regards his
them. Her children not having inherited from
resulting
were filmed in the
naked instant
or in death
revealing of Mr.costumes.
Cruz. Mrs. In deceased Filipino father's property in Texas,
their grandmother. Cristy has no right to share
Cruzdefense,
his was still DON alive contended
when help all came thesebutwere she U.S.A. [1%]
in her mother-inlaw's estate. She cannot share
also of
part diedartistic
on the freedom way and to the cultural hospital.
creativity.The 3The extrinsic validity of the last will and
in her own right as she is not a legal heir of her
coupleofacquired
None the parents properties
complained, worth saidOneDON. Million
He testament which Juan executed while
mother-in-law. The survivorship provision of
(P1 ,000,000.00)
also said they signed Pesosa duringcontract their containing
marriage, a sojourning in Switzerland. [2%]
Rule 131 of the Rules of Court does not apply to
which are
waiver of their
beingright claimed
to filebyany thecomplaint
parents ofinboth any 4The intrinsic validity of said will. (1%)
the problem. It applies only to those cases
(b) Suppose
spouses
office in the
orin tribunal
equal preceding
shares. Is thequestion,
concerning claim of both
the working both Juridical Capacity vs. Capacity
where the issue involved is not succession.
Is
Mr. theand waiver
sets of parents
conditions Mrs. valid
Cruz
of valid and
were
their and binding?
already
children
why? (3%) Why
dead or
acting in the why
when to Act (1996)
Distinguish juridical capacity from capacity to act,
not?
help
movies. Explain.
came, so (5%)
that no-body could say who died SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED
ahead of the ANSWER:
other, would your answer be the JURIDICAL CAPACITY is the fitness to be the
The waiver is not valid. Although the contracting parties may subject of legal relations while CAPACITY TO
same
establishtosuch the question
stipulations, as to
clauses, termswhoand are entitled
conditions as theyto
SUGGESTED
the deem
may properties ANSWER:
convenient, ofthey
themay deceased
not do so if couple? (2%)to
such are contrary
ACT is the power or to do acts with legal
(a) No, the claim of both parents is not valid. When Mr. Cruz died, effect. The former is inherent in every natural
law, morals, good customs, public order, or public policy (Article
he was succeeded by his wife and his parents as his intestate heirs
1306, Civil Code). The parents' waiver to file a complaint concerning
who will share his estate equally. His estate was 0.5 Million pesos
person and is lost only through death while the
the working latter is merely acquired and may be lost even
which is his half share in the
ALTERNATIVE
before death ANSWER;
(Art. 37, NCC).
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
father was a Filipino citizen, Philippine law governs
successional rights.
Juan's (2). With respect to Felipe the divorce is valid,
but with respect to Felisa it is not. The divorce
ANOTHER ANSWER: will not capacitate Felisa to remarry because
2. Juan's successional rights are governed by she and Felipe were both Filipinos at the time
Philippine law, pursuant to Article 1039 and the of their marriage. However, in DOJ Opinion No.
second paragraph of Article 16, both of the Civil 134 series of 1993, Felisa is allowed to remarry
Code. Article 1039, Civil Code, provides that because the injustice sought to be corrected by
capacity to succeed shall be governed by the Article 26 also obtains in her case.
"law of the nation" of the decedent, i.e.. his SUGGESTED ANSWER:
national law. Article 16 provides in paragraph B. The foreigner who executes his will in the
two that the amount of successional rights, Philippines may observed the formalities
order of succession, and intrinsic validity of 1. The Lawin:
described of the country of which he is a
testamentary succession shall be governed by citizen under Article 817 of the New Civil Code,
the "national law" of the decedent who is 2.
or the law of the Philippines being the law of
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
identified as a Filipino in of
the present the place of execution under Article 17 of the
3. The extrinsic validity Juan's will problem.
is New Civil Code.
governed by (a) Swiss law, it being the law SUGGESTED ANSWER:
where the will was made (Art. 17. 1st par. Civil C. Philippine law will not govern the intrinsic
Code), or (b) Philippine law, by implication validity of the will. Article 16 of the New Civil
from the provisions of Art. 816, Civil Code, Code provides that intrinsic validity of
which allows even an alien who is abroad to testamentary provisions shall be governed by
make a will in conformity with our Civil Code. the National Law of the person whose
SUGGESTED ANSWER: succession is under consideration. California
4. The intrinsic validity of his will is governed law will govern the intrinsic validity of the will.
by Philippine law, it being his national law. (Art. Applicable Laws; Capacity
16, Civil Code) to Act (1998)
Francis Albert, a citizen and resident of New
Jersey, U.S.A., under whose law he was still a
Applicable Laws; Arts 15, minor, being only 20 years of age, was hired by
16, 17and
Felipe (2002)
Felisa, both Filipino citizens, were ABC Corporation of Manila to serve for two
married in Malolos, Bulacan on June 1, 1950. In years as its chief computer programmer. But
1960 Felipe went to the United States, after serving for only four months, he resigned
becoming a U.S. citizen in 1975. In 1980 they to join XYZ Corporation, which enticed him by
obtained a divorce from Felisa, who was duly offering more advantageous terms. His first
notified of the proceedings. The divorce decree employer sues him in Manila for damages
became final under California Law. Coming arising from the breach of his contract of
back to the Philippines in 1982, Felipe married employment. He sets up his minority as a
Sagundina, a Filipino Citizen. In 2001, Filipe, defense and asks for annulment of the contract
then domiciled in Los Angeles, California, died, on that ground. The plaintiff disputes this by
leaving one child by Felisa, and another one by alleging that since the contract was executed in
Sagundina. He left a will which he left his estate 1Will the suit prosper? [3%]
the Philippines under whose law the age of
to Sagundina and his two children and nothing 2 Suppose XYZ Corporation is impleaded as a
majority is 18 years, he was no longer a minor
to Felisa. Sagundina files a petition for the codefendant, what would be the basis of its
at the time of perfection of the contract.
probate of Felipes will. Felisa questions the liability, if any? [2%]
intrinsic validity of the will, arguing that her
marriage
A. Is thetodivorce
Felipe subsisted
secured by despite
Felipe the
in
divorce obtained by Felipe because
California recognizable and valid in the said divorce
is not recognized
Philippines? in theitPhilippines.
How does For marriage
affect Felipes this
reason,
B. What she
law claims
governs that
to Felisa? Explain. (2%).the the properties
formalities of and
the that
will?
Sagundina
Explain. (1%)has no successional rights.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
C. Will Philippine law govern the intrinsic 1. Juan's capacity to contract marriage
validity of the will? Explain. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
is governed by Philippine law -i.e., the Family
A. (1.) The divorce secured by Felipe in Code -pursuant to Art. 15, Civil Code, which
California is recognizable and valid in the provides that our laws relating to, among
Philippines because he was no longer a Filipino others, legal capacity of persons are binding
at that time he secured it, Aliens may obtain upon citizens of the Philippines even though
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
living abroad.
divorces abroad which may be recognized in 2. By way of exception to the general rule of
the Philippines provided that they are valid lex rei sitae prescribed by the first paragraph
according to their national law (Van Dorn V. of Art. 16. Civil Code, a person's successional
Romillo, Jr., 139 SCRA 139 [1985]; Quita v. rights are governed by the national law of the
Court of Appeals, 300 SCRA 406 [1998]; Since13
decedent (2nd par.. Art. 16).Page of 119
Juan's
Llorente v. Court of Appeals, 345 SCRA 595 deceased
[2000] ).
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
persons is governed by the law of his nationality,
Plaintiffs argument does not hold true, because concerning
capacity transactions involving property is
status or capacity is not determined by lex loci an exception. Under Article 16 of the NCC the
contractus but by lex patriae. capacity of persons in transactions involving
ANOTHER ANSWER: title to property is governed by the law of the
1. Article 17 of the Civil Code provides that country where the property is situated. Since
the forms and solemnities of contracts, wills the property is in the Philippines, Philippine law
and other public instruments shall be governed governs the capacity of the seller.
by the laws of the country in which they are Applicable Laws; capacity to
executed. succeed
Jacob, (1991)
a Swiss national, married Lourdes, a
Since the contract of employment was Filipina, in Berne, Switzerland. Three years
executed in Manila, Philippine law should later, the couple decided to reside in the
govern. Being over 18 years old and no longer Philippines. Jacob subsequently acquired
a minor according to Philippine Law, Francis several properties in the Philippines with the
Albert can be sued. Thus, the suit of ABC money he inherited from his parents. Forty
SUGGESTED
Corporation ANSWER:
against him for damages will
2. XYZ Corporation, having enticed Francis years later. Jacob died intestate, and is
prosper. survived by several legitimate children and
Albert to break his contract with the plaintiff,
may be held liable for damages under Art. duly recognized illegitimate daughter Jane, all
(a) Suppose
residing that
in the Swiss law does not allow
Philippines.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
1314, Civil Code.
2. The basis of liability of XYZ Corporation would illegitimate
be children to inherit, can Jane, who is
Article 28 of the Civil Code which states that: a recognized illegitimate child, inherit part of
(b) Assuming that
the properties Jacob
of Jacob executed
under a willlaw?
Philippine
"Unfair competition in agricultural, commercial,
leaving certain properties to Jane as her
or industrial enterprises or in labor through the
legitime in accordance with the law of
use of force, intimidation, deceit, machination
succession in the Philippines, will such
or any other unjust, oppressive or highhanded
testamentary disposition be valid?
method shall give rise to a right of action by
the person who thereby suffers damage."
ANOTHER ANSWER:
2. No liability arises. The statement of the
problem does not in any way suggest intent,
malice, or even knowledge, on the part of XYZ
Corporation as to the contractual relations
between Albert and ABC Corporation.
Applicable Laws; Capacity to
BuyWhat
3. Land law(1995)governs the capacity of the
Filipino to buy the land? Explain your answer
and give its
SUGGESTED legal basis.
ANSWER:
Philippine law governs the capacity of the
Filipino to buy the land. In addition to the
principle of lex rei sitae given above. Article 15
of the NCC specifically provides that Philippine
laws relating to legal capacity of persons are
binding upon citizens of the Philippines no
matter where they are. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Applicable Laws; Capacity to 1. The suit will not prosper under Article 15,
Contract
2. What (1995)
law governs the capacity of the Civil Code, New Jersey law governs Francis
Japanese to sell the land? Explain your answer Albert's capacity to act, being his personal law
and give its
SUGGESTED legal basis.
ANSWER: from the standpoint of both his nationality and
Japanese law governs the capacity of the
his domicile. He was, therefore, a minor at the
Japanese to sell the land being his personal ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
time he entered into the contract.
law on the basis of an interpretation of Art. 15, 1. The suit will not prosper. Being a U.S.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWERS;
NCC. national, Albert's capacity to enter into a
a) Since capacity to contract is governed by contract is determined by the law of the State
the personal law of an individual, the Japanese of which he is a national, under which he to still
seller's capacity should be governed either by a minor. This is in connection with Article 15 of
his national law (Japanese law) or by the law of the Civil Code which embodies the said
his domicile, depending upon whether Japan nationality principle of lex patriae. While this
follows the nationality or domiciliary theory of principle intended to apply to Filipino citizens
personal law for its citizens. under that provision, the Supreme Court in
b) Philippine law governs the capacity of the
Japanese owner in selling the land. While as a Recto v. Harden is of the view that the status
general rule capacity of or capacity of foreigners is to be determined on
the basis of the same provision or principle,
i.e., by U.S. law in the present problem.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
that public policy, the application shall be disregarded Court of Appeals (G.R No. 104235, Nov. 10, 1993) the
our
by Courts. (Cadalin v. POEA. 238 SCRA Supreme Court applied Philippine law in
762)
ALTERNATIVE ANSWERS; recovery of damages for breach of contract of
a) Their claim is not correct. Assuming that the carriage for the reason that it is the law of the
second contract is binding under Hongkong place where the contract was executed.
law, such second contract is invalid under ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Philippine law which recognizes as valid only If the violation of the contract was attended
the first contract. Since the case is being with bad faith, there is a ground to recover
litigated in the Philippines, the Philippine Court moral damages. But since there was a federal
as the forum will not enforce any foreign claim regulation which was the basis of the act
obnoxious to the forum's public policy. There is complained of, the airline cannot be in bad
a strong public policy enshrined in our faith. Hence, only actual damages can be
Constitution on the protection of labor. recovered. The same is true with regards to
Therefore, the second contract shall be Applicable
exemplary damages. Laws; Labor
b) No, their claim
disregarded and theis not
firstcorrect.
contractThe
willsecond
be Contracts
A. The Japan (1991) Air Lines (JAL), a foreigner
contract executed in Hongkong,
enforced. (Cadalin v. POEA, 238 SCRA 762) partakes of. the corporation licensed to do business in the
nature of a waiver that is contrary to Philippine Philippines, executed in Manila a contract of
law and the public policy governing Filipino employment with Maritess Guapa under which
overseas workers. Art. 17, provides that our the latter was hired as a stewardess on the
prohibitive laws concerning persons, their acts, aircraft flying the Manila-Japan-Manila route.
or their property or which have for their object The contrast specifically provides that (1) the
public order, public policy and good customs duration of the contract shall be two (2) years,
shall not be rendered ineffective by laws or (2) notwithstanding the above duration, JAL
conventions agreed upon in a foreign country. may terminate the agreement at any time by
Besides, Alma's consent to the second contract giving her notice in writing ten (10) days in
was vitiated by undue influence, being virtually SUGGESTED
advance, ANSWER:and (3) the contract shall be
helpless and under financial distress in a foreign A. Yes. As stated
construed as governed in the problem.
under and Swiss law laws
by the
country, as indicated by the given fact that she does not allow illegitimate children
of Japan and only the court in Tokyo, Japan to inherit
JAL dismissed
Hence, Jane cannotMaritess on the
inherit thefourth
property monthof of
signed because she had no choice. Therefore, shall have the jurisdiction to consider any
her
Jacobemployment
under Philippinewithout giving
law. her due notice.
the defendants claim that the contract is valid matter
SUGGESTED arising
ANSWER: from or relating to the contract.
Maritess then filed a complaint with the Labor
under Hongkong law should be rejected since B. The testamentary disposition will not be
Arbiter for reinstatement, backwages and
under the DOCTRINE OF PROCESSUAL valid if it would contravene Swill law;
damages. The lawyer of JAL contends that
PRESUMPTION a foreign law is deemed similar otherwise,
Applicable Laws; Contracts of neither thethe Labor disposition
Arbiter nor wouldanybe valid.
other agency
or identical
Carriage
On to
(1995)
8 December Philippine law in the absence
1991 Vanessa purchased from of Unless the Swiss law is proved, it would beover
or court in the Philippines has jurisdiction
proof to the contrary, and such is not
the Manila office of Euro-Aire an airline ticket presumed to be the same as that of Philippine
the case in view of the above provision (3) of
mentioned
for its FlightinNo.
the710
problem as having
from Dallas been on
to Chicago law under thewhich Doctrine of Processual
the contract Maritess voluntarily signed.
adduced.
16 January 1992. Her flight reservation was Applicable
Presumption. Laws; contracts contrary to
The contract is the law between her and JAL.
confirmed. On her scheduled departure public
Alma policy
was hired(1996)as a domestic helper in
Decide the issue.
Vanessa checked in on time at the Dallas Hongkong
B. Where by underthe Dragon
a State's Services, Ltd.,
own conflicts rule
airport. However, at the check-in counter she through
that its local law
domestic agent. of She executed
another State a should
discovered that she was waitlisted with some standardmay
apply, employment the courts contractofdesigned by the
the former
other passengers because of intentional Philippine Overseas
nevertheless refuse Workers
to applyAdministration
the latter? If so,
overbooking, a Euro-Aire policy and practice. (POEA)what
SUGGESTED
under for ANSWER:
overseas
circumstance? Filipino workers. It
Euro-Alre admitted that Vanessa was not provided for her employment for one year at a
A, Labor
salary Legislations are
of US$1,000.00 generally
a month. It wasintended as
advised of such policy when she purchased her
Vanessa suedVanessa
Euro-Aire in only
Manila forto
breach expressions of public policy
by theon employer-
plane ticket. was able fly twoof submitted to and approved POEA.
contract and damages. Euro-Aire claimed that employee
However, when relations.
she arrivedThe in contract
Hongkong, therefore,
she
days later by taking another airline.
it cannot be held liable for damages because between
was asked Japan
to sign Air another
Lines (JAL) and Maritess
contract by Dragon may
its practice of overbooking passengers was apply only to the extent that
Services, Ltd. which reduced her salary to only its provisions are
allowed by the U.S. Code of Federal not inconsistent with Philippine
US$600.00 a month. Having no other choice, labor laws
Regulations. Vanessa on the other hand intended
Alma signed particularly
the contract to protect
but when employees.
she
contended that assuming that the U.S. Code of Under the circumstances, the dismissal of
returned to the Philippines, she demanded
Federal Regulations allowed Intentional Maritess without complying with Philippine
payment of the salary differential of US$400.00
overbooking, the airline company cannot Labor
SUGGESTEDlaw ANSWER:
would be invalid and any stipulation
a month.
Their claim Both
is notDragoncorrect.Services,
A contractLtd. and
is theitslaw
invoke the U.S. Code on the ground that the in the contract to the contrary is considered
local agent
between the claimed
parties that
but the law
the secondcan contract
disregard is
ticket was purchased in Manila, hence, void. Since the law of the forum in this case is
valid
the under the
contract if itlaws
is of Hongkong,
contrary to public and policy.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Philippine lawrecover
should damages
apply, under which the Philippine law the issues should-be
therefore
The binding
provisions on Alma.
of the 1987 Is their claimon the
Vanessa can
Vanessa can recover damages
under
for
Philippine
breach of resolved in accordance withConstitution
Philippine law.
law for breach of contract of carriage, correct?
protection
B. The thirdExplain.
of paragraph
labor and on ofsocial
Art. 17 justice
of the (Sec.
Civil
contract of carriage. Decide. Discuss fully.
Philippine law should govern as the law of the 10. Art
Code II) embody
provides that:a public policy of the
place where the plane tickets were bought and Philippines. Since the application of Hongkong
the contract of carriage was executed. In law in this case is in violation of
Zalamea v.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
"Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their
acts or property, and those which have for
their object public order, public policy and
good customs shall not be rendered
ineffective by laws or judgments
promulgated, or by determinations or
conventions agreed upon in a foreign
Accordingly,
country." a state's own conflict of laws rule
may, exceptionally be inapplicable, given public
policy considerations by the law of the forum.

Going into the specific provisions of the


contract in question, I would rule as follows:
1The duration of the contract is not opposed to
Philippine law and it can therefore be valid as
stipulated;
2The second provision to the effect that
notwithstanding duration, Japan Air Lines (JAL) may
terminate her employment is invalid, being
inconsistent with our Labor laws;
3That the contract shall be construed as governed
under and by the laws of Japan and only the courts of
Tokyo, Japan shall have jurisdiction, is invalid as
clearly opposed to the aforecited third paragraph of
Arts. 17 and 1700 of the Civil Code, which provides:
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Under Art. 16 par. 1, NCC, real property is subject 3. to
Thethen
Maris distribution
returnedofto the personal
the properties
Philippines in
and in a
law
the of the country where it is situated. Since civil ceremony celebrated in Cebu City
Germany
the property is situated in the Philippines, according to the formalities of Philippine law,
Philippine law applies. The rule of lex rei sitae she married her former classmate Vincent
in Article 16 prevails over lex loci contractu in likewise a Filipino citizen. a) Was the marriage
ALTERNATIVE
Article 17 ofANSWER:
the NCC. of Maris and Johnson valid when celebrated? Is
Afghanistan law governs the formal their marriage still validly existing now?
requirements of the contract since the SUGGESTED
Reasons. ANSWER:
execution is in Afghanistan. Art. 17 of the Civil (a) The marriage of Mans and Johnson was
Code provides that the forms and solemnities valid when celebrated because all marriages
of contracts, wills, and other public instruments solemnized outside the Philippines (Tokyo) in
shall be governed by the laws of the country in accordance with the laws in force in the
which they are executed. However, if the country where they are solemnized (Japan),
contract was executed before the diplomatic or and valid there as such, are also valid in the
consular officials of the Republic of the Their marriage no longer validly subsists,
Philippines.
Applicable Laws; Succession;
Philippines in Afghanistan, Philippine law shallIntestate & because it has been dissolved by the absolute
Testamentary
apply. (2001) divorce validly obtained by Johnson which
Alex was born a Filipino but was a naturalized capacitated Maris to remarry (Art. 26. Family
Canadian citizen at the time of his death on Code).
December 25, 1998. He left behind a last will Applicable Laws; laws governing
and testament in which he bequeathed all his marriages
Gene (2003)
and Jane, Filipino, met and got married in
properties, real and personal, in the Philippines England while both were taking up post-
to his acknowledged illegitimate Fillpina graduate courses there. A few years after their
daughter and nothing to his two legitimate graduation, they decided to annul their
Filipino sons. The sons sought the annulment of marriage. Jane filed an action to annul her
the last"Art.
will and1700. The relations
testament on the ground betweenthat marriage to Gene in England on the ground of
capital and labor are
it deprived them of their legitimes but the not merely latters sterility, a ground for annulment of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: They are so impressed with
contractual. marriage in England. The English court decreed
daughter was able to prove that there were no
The daughter
public should prevail
interest that because
labor Article
contracts 16
must
compulsory heirs or legitimes under Canadian the marriage annulled. Returning to the
of the yield
New Civil
to the Code provides
common that intestate Philippines, Gene asked you whether or not he
law. Who should prevail? Why?good.
(5%) Therefore,
and testamentary
such contracts succession
are shall be governed
subject to the
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
would be free to marry his former girlfriend.
by thespecial
national law of the person whose No, Gene is not free to marry his former
laws on labor unions, collective What would your legal advice be? 5%
succession is understrikes
consideration. girlfriend. His marriage to Jane is valid
bargaining,
Applicable Laws; Sucession of and lockouts, closed
according to the forms and solemnities of
Aliens shop,
Michelle,(1995)
ALTERNATIVE the wages,
Frenchworking
ANSWER; daughter conditions,
of Penreich,hoursa
British law, is valid here (Article 17, 1st par.,
German of labor
national,and similar subjects."
A. When a contract diedhas ainforeign
Spain element
leaving such
real NCC). However, since Gene and Jane are still
properties in the Philippines
as in the factual setting stated as well as valuable
in the problem Filipinos although living in England, the
personal
where one properties
of the in Germany.
parties is a foreign dissolution of their marriage is still governed by
1. What law the
corporation, determines
contractwho canshall succeed as Philippine law (Article 15, NCC). Since, sterility
be sustained
the deceased? Explain your answer
valid particularly the stipulation expressing and givethat is not one of the grounds for the annulment of a
2.
the contract is governed by the lawsofof
its What
legal law
basis. regulates the distribution thethe marriage under Article 45 of the Family Code,
real properties in the Philippines? Explain your ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
foreign country. Given this generally accepted the annulment of Genes marriage to Jane on
Yes, Gene is free to marry his girlfriend
answer
principleand ofgive its legal basis.
international law, the contract that ground is not valid in the Philippines
3. What law governs the distribution of it
the because his marriage was validly annulled in
between Maritess and JAL is valid and should (Article
England.
17, NCC)
The issue of whether or not a
personal
thereforeproperties
Applicable Laws; inlaws
be enforced. Germany? Explain your
governing
answer
1989,and
marriages
In give aitsFilipino
(1992)
Maris, legal basis.
citizen, married her marriage is voidable, including the grounds
boss Johnson, an American citizen, in Tokyo in therefore, is governed by the law of the place
a wedding ceremony celebrated according to where the marriage was solemnized (lex loci
Japanese laws. One year later, Johnson celebrationis). Hence, even if sterility is not a
returned to his native Nevada, and he validly ground to annul the marriage under the
obtained in that state an absolute divorce from Philippine law, the marriage is nevertheless
his wife Maris. voidable because sterility makes the marriage
After Maris received the final judgment of voidable under English law. Therefore,
Applicable
annulment ofLaws; Sale ofin Real
the marriage England is valid
divorce, she married her childhood sweetheart
Property
While (1995)
in Afghanistan,
in the Philippines. a Japanese by the name
Pedro, also a Filipino citizen, in a religious
ceremony in Cebu City, celebrated according to of Sato sold to Ramoncito, a Filipino, a parcel
the formalities of Philippine law. Pedro later left of land situated in the Philippines which Sato
1. What from
inherited law his
governs
Filipinothe formality in the
mother.
for the United States and became naturalized
execution of the contract of sale? Explain your
as an American citizen. Maris followed Pedro to
answer and give its legal basis.
the United States, and after a serious quarrel, SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Maris filed a suit and obtained a divorce decree
issued by the court in the state of Maryland.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Definition; forum non-conveniens; long- nationality theory, and the issue involved is which of the laws of the
arm statute (1994) two countries
shall should apply toby
be governed determine
Frenchthe order
law.of succession,
The legal
1) What is the doctrine of Forum non
the amount of successional rights, or, the intrinsic validity of
conveniens? 2) What is a "long arm basis is Art. 16, NCC).
testamentary provisions. Such issue is not involved in this case.
statute"? ANSWER:
SUGGESTED
1) a) FORUM NON CONVENIENS is a principle in Applicable Laws; Wills executed
Private International Law that where the ends abroad
A, a Filipino,
ALTERNATIVE (1993) executed a will in Kuwait while
ANSWER:
of justice strongly indicate that the controversy Yes.
there"Renvoi"
as a contract - which means
worker. "referring
Assume thatback"
underis
may be more suitably tried elsewhere, then relevant because here, we
the laws of Kuwait, it is enough that the testator are applying U.S.
jurisdiction should be declined and the parties law to Mario, being already
affix his signature to the presence of two its citizen, although
relegated to relief to be sought in another the formalities
witnesses and that of thethe second
will need marriage
not be will be
forum. (Moreno. Philippine Law Dictionary, p. governed by Philippine
acknowledged before a notary public. law under theMayprinciple
the
b)
254,Where
1982 in a broad sense the ends of justice
ed.). of lex
SUGGESTED loci celebrationis.
ANSWER:
will be probated in the Philippines?
strongly indicate that the controversy may be Domiciliary
Yes. Under Articlestheory 815 and 17vs. of the Civil
more suitably tried elsewhere, then jurisdiction Nationality
Distinguish
Code, the formality Theory
briefly of(2004) but clearly of
the execution between:
a will is
should be declined and the parties relegated to Domiciliary
governed bytheory the lawand of the nationality theory of
place of execution.
relief to be sought in another forum. personal
SUGGESTED
If the will law. (5%)
ANSWER:
was executed with the formalities
(Handbook on Private International Law, DOMICILIARY
prescribed byTHEORY the laws posits that theand
of Kuwait personal
valid
c) FORUM NON CONVENIENS means simply
Aruego). status and rights of a person
there as such, the will is valid and may be are governed by
that a court may resist imposition upon its the law
Definition; of his
Cognovit;
probated in the Philippines. domicile or
Borrowingthe place of
Statute; his
jurisdiction even when jurisdiction is authorized habitual residence. The NATIONALITY THEORY,
Characterization(1994)
by the letter of a general venue statute. on the other
In Private hand, postulates
International that itofis the law
Law (Conflict
(Salonga. Private International Law. p, 51. of
Laws)thewhatperson'sis: 1}nationality
Cognovit? that 2) A governs such
d)
1967Forum
ed.) non conveniens is a doctrine status
borrowing and statute?
rights 3) Characterization?
whereby a court of law having full Jurisdiction Forum Non Conveniens & Lex Loci
over a case brought in a proper venue or Contractus
Felipe
SUGGESTED is aANSWER:(2002) citizen. When he went to
Filipino
district declines to determine the case on its 1) a) COGNOVIT
Sydney for vacation, is aheconfession
met a former of judgment
business
merits because Justice would be better served whereby
associate, a whoportionproposed of tothe him complaint
a transaction is
by the trial over the case in another confessed
which took by him the to defendant
Moscow. Felipe who denies
brokered thea
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
jurisdiction. (Webster's Dictionary) rest thereof
contract (Philippine
between Sydney law Coals
Dictionary,
Corp. 3rd Ed.)
(Coals),
(2} a) LONG ARM STATUTE is a legislative act (Ocampo
an Australianv. Florenciano,
firm, and L-M 13553,
Moscow 2/23/50).
Energy Corp.
which provides for personal jurisdiction, via b) COGNOVIT
(Energy), a Russian is a "statement
firm, for Coals of confession"
to supply
substituted service or process, over persons or Oftentimes,
coal to Energy it isonreferred
a monthly to as basisa "power
for threeof
corporations which are nonresidents of the attorney"
years. Bothor these simply firmsas werea "power",
not doing, it isand the
state and which voluntarily go into the state, written authority of the debtor
still do not do, business in the Philippines. and his direction
directly or by agent or communicate with to the shuttled
Felipe clerk of the betweendistrictSydney
court, andor justice
Moscow of the
to
persons in the state for limited purposes, peace to enter judgment
close the contract. He also executed in Sydney against the debtor as
inactions which concern claims relating to stated therein. (Words
a commission contract with Coals and in and Phrases, vol. 7, pp.
performance or execution of those purposes c) COGNOVIT
115-166). is a under
plea inwhich an action which
Moscow with Energy, contracts he
b) LongLawarm
(Black's statute5th refers
Dictionary, simply to
Ed. 1979). acknowledges that the defendant did
was guaranteed commissions by both firms
authorized substituted service. undertake
based on aand promise as of the plaintiffforin theits
percentage deliveries
declaration has alleged,
three-year period, payable in Sydney and in and that it cannot
Divorce; effect of divorce granted to deny that it owes and unjustly detains from the
former Filipinos; Renvoi Doctrine (1997) Moscow, respectively, through deposits in
plaintiff the sum claimed
accounts that he opened in the two cities. by him inBothhis
In 1977, Mario and Clara, both Filipino citizens, declaration, and consents that judgment be
were married in the Philippines. Three years firms paid Felipe his commission for four
entered
months, against
after is which the defendant
they stopped for a
paying certain
him.
later, they went to the United States of A.
d)
sum. Define
COGNOVIT
[Words and oraPhrases,
explain
note the
authorizing
vol. principle of lex
7, pp.a 115-166).
lawyer for
SUGGESTED
America and ANSWER:
established their residence in San Felipe
loci learned
contractus.
confession of judgment from his contacts,
(2%) by defendant. who are
Assuming
Francisco, that the estate
California. In of the decedent
1987, the couple is residents
B. Defineof Sydney
or explain and the Moscow,
rule ofthat forumthe non
two
being settled in the Philippines)
applied for, and were granted, U.S. citizenship. firms talked (3%)
2) "BORROWING
conveniens to each other and
STATUTE" -Laws decided
of thetostate
cut
1.
In The1989, national
Mario,lawclaiming
of the decedent
to have(French been him
C. off.Should
He now
or jurisdiction used filesby
the suit in Manila
Philippine
another against
court
state both
assume
in deciding
law) shall govern in
abandoned by Clara, was able to securedetermining who will a Coals andquestioned
jurisdiction
conflicts Energy
over the forcase?
specific
involved performance.
Explain.
in the (5%)choice of
succeed
In 1990,ofto
decree his estate.
Mario
divorce returned
in The
Reno, legal
toNevada, basis is Art.and
the Philippines
U.S.A. 16 SUGGESTED
law (Black's ANSWER:
Law Dictionary, 5th ed. 1979).
ALTERNATIVE
par.
married2, NCC. ANSWER:
Juana who knew well Mario's past life. A. LEX LOCI CONTRACTUS may be understood
French
(a) Is the lawmarriage
shall governbetween the Mario
distribution
and of his in
3) two senses, as follows:
a) "CHARACTERIZATION" is otherwise called
real
(b)
Juana properties
Would in the Philippines
the renvoi doctrine have any
valid? except when "classification" or "qualification." It is the
the real property
relevance to the case? is land which may be (1) It of
process is the law of the
assigning place where
a disputed questioncontracts,
to its
transmitted
SUGGESTED to a foreigner only by hereditary
ANSWER: wills, and other public
correct legal category (Private International instruments are
SUGGESTED
Yes, ANSWER:
succession.
(a) because Phil law recognizes the
2. Law,executed
Salonga). and governs their forms and
divorce distribution
The between Mario of theandreal properties
Clara as valid.in the b) (2) It is the proper
solemnities,
"CHARACTERIZATION" pursuantlaw of the
toistheacontract;
firstprocess e.i.,in
PhilippinesANSWER:shall be governed by French law. the system of law intended
SUGGESTED paragraph,
determining underArticle what of the to
17 category Newgovern
a Civil
certainthe
Code;
set
The
(b) No,legal basis
The renvoi is Art.
doctrine 16, NCC).
is relevant in cases where one country
entire
applies the domiciliary
SUGGESTED ANSWER: theory and the other the or orcontract,
of facts rules fall.including its essential
(Paras, Conflict of Laws, p.
94. requisites,
1984 ed.) indicating the law of the place
with which the contract has its closest
connection or
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
where the main elements of the contract country of which they are citizens. Since their
illustrated
converge. As by Zalamea v. Court of Appeals valid under Hong
marriage is Kong law, it shall be valid and respected in the
Philippines.
(228 SCRA 23 [1993]), it is the law of the
place where the airline ticket was issued,
where the passengers are nationals and Naturalization
residents of, and where the defendant (2003)
Miss Universe, from Finland, came to the
airline company maintained its office. Philippines on a tourist visa. While in this
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: country, she fell in love with and married a
A. Under the doctrine of lex loci contractus, as Filipino doctor. Her tourist visa having been
a general rule, the law of the place where a expired and after the maximum extension
contract is made or entered into governs with allowed therefore, the Bureau of Immigration
respect to its nature and validity, obligation and and Deportation (BID) is presently demanding
interpretation. This has been said to be the rule that she immediately leave the country but she
even though the place where the contract was refuses to do so, claiming that she is already a
made is different from the place where it is to Filipino Citizen by her marriage to a Filipino
be performed, and particularly so, if the place SUGGESTED ANSWER:
citizen. Can the BID still order the deportation
of the making and the place of performance are Yes, the BID can order the deportation of Miss
of Miss Universe? Explain. 5%
the same ANSWER:
(United Airline v. CA, G.R. No. Universe. The marriage of an alien woman to a
SUGGESTED
124110,
B. FORUM April
NON CONVENIENS means that a Filipino does not automatically make her a
20, 2001).
court has discretionary authority to decline Filipino Citizen. She must first prove in an
jurisdiction over a cause of action when it is of appropriate proceeding that she does not have
the view that the action may be justly and any disqualification for Philippine citizenship.
(Yung Uan Chu v. Republic of the Philippines,
effectively adjudicated elsewhere.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: 158 SCRA 593 [1988]). Since Miss Universe is
C. No, the Philippine courts cannot acquire still a foreigner, despite her marriage to a
ANOTHER SUGGESTED ANSWER:
jurisdiction over the case of Felipe. Firstly, Filipino doctor, she can be deported upon
No, the Bureau of Immigration cannot order her
under the rule of forum non conveniens, the expiry of her allowable stay in the Philippines.
deportation. An alien woman marrying a
Philippine court is not a convenient forum as all Filipino, native-born or naturalized, becomes
the incidents of the case occurred outside the ipso facto a Filipino if she is not disqualified to
Philippines. Neither are both Coals and Energy be a citizen of the Philippines (Mo Ya Lim v
doing business inside the Philippines. Secondly, Commission of Immigration, 41 SCRA 292
the contracts were not perfected in the [1971]), (Sec 4, Naturalization Law). All that
Philippines. Under the principle of lex loci she has to do is prove in the deportation
contractus, the law of the place where the ANOTHER SUGGESTED ANSWER:
proceeding the fact of her marriage and that
contract is made shall apply. Lastly, the It depends. If she is disqualified to be a
she is not disqualified to become a Filipino
Philippine court has no power to determine the Filipino citizen, she may be deported. If she is
Citizen.
facts surrounding the execution of said not disqualified to be a Filipino citizen, she
contracts. And even if a proper decision could may not be deported. An alien woman who
be reached, such would have no biding effect marries a Filipino citizen becomes one. The
on Coals and Energy as the court was not able marriage of Miss Universe to the Filipino doctor
Nationality
to acquire did not automatically make her a Filipino
Theory
PH and LV are jurisdiction
(2004) over parents
HK Chinese. Their the said
are
corporations. (Manila Hotel Corp. v. NLRC. 343 citizen. She still has to prove that she is not
now Filipino citizens who live in Manila. While Theory;
SCRA 1, 1314[2000]) disqualified to become asignificant
citizen.
still students in MNS State, they got married relationships
Able, theory
a corporation (1994)in State A, but,
domiciled
although they are first cousins. It appears that doing business in the Philippines, hired Eric, a
both in HK and in MNS State first cousins could Filipino engineer, for its project in State B. In
marry legally. the contract of employment executed by the
They plan to reside and set up business in the
parties in State B, it was stipulated that the
Philippines. But they have been informed, contract could be terminated at the company's
however, that the marriage of first cousins
will, which stipulation is allowed in State B.
here is considered void from the beginning by When Eric was summarily dismissed by Able,
reason of public policy. They are in a dilemma.
he sued Able for damages in the Philippines.
They dont want to break Philippine law, much SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Will the Philippine court apply the contractual
less their marriage vow. They seek your advice a) Using the "SIGNIFICANT RELATIONSHIPS
stipulation?
on whether their civil status will be adversely THEORY", there are contacts significant to the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Philippines. Among these are that the place of
affected by Philippine domestic law? What is
My advise is as follows: The civil status of' PH and LV will not be
your advice?
adversely affected (5%)
by Philippine law because they are nationals of business is the Philippines, the employee
Hong Kong and not Filipino citizens.Being foreigners, their status, concerned is a Filipino and the suit was filed in
conditions and legal capacity in the Philippines are governed by the the Philippines, thereby justifying the application
law of Hong Kong, the
of Philippine law. In the American Airlines case
the Court held that when what is involved is
PARAMOUNT STATE INTEREST such as the
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
protection of the rights of Filipino laborers, the court
natural mother as her middle name. The Court has
disregard
can choice of forum and choice of law. that
ruledthere is no law prohibiting an illegitimate
Therefore the Philippine Court should not apply child adopted by her natural father to use, as
the stipulation in question. middle name, her mother's surname. What is
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: not prohibited is allowed. After all, the use of
b) No, lex fori should be applied because the the maternal name as the middle name is in
suit is filed in Philippine courts and Eric was accord with Filipino culture and customs and
hired in the Philippines. The Philippine adoption is intended for the benefit of the
Constitution affords full protection to labor and adopted [In re: Adoption of Stephanie Nathy
the stipulation as to summary dismissal runs Astorga Garcia, G.R. No. 148311, March 31,
counter to our fundamental and statutory 2005; Rabuya, The Law on Persons and Family
Torts;
laws. Prescriptive Inter-Country
Relations, Adoption;
p. 613].
Period
In (2004)
a class suit for damages, plaintiffs claimed Formalities
Hans Berber, (2005)
a German national, and his
they suffered injuries from torture during Filipino wife, Rhoda, are permanent residents of
martial law. The suit was filed upon President Canada. They desire so much to adopt Magno,
EMs arrival on exile in HI, a U.S. state. The an 8-year old orphaned boy and a baptismal
court in HI awarded plaintiffs the equivalent of godson of Rhoda. Since the accidental death of
P100 billion under the U.S. law on alien tort Magno's parents in 2004, he has been staying
claims. On appeal, EMs Estate raised the with his aunt who, however, could hardly afford
issue of prescription. It argued that since said to feed her own family. Unfortunately, Hans
U.S. law is silent on the matter, the court and Rhoda cannot come to the Philippines to
should apply: (1) HIs law setting a two-year Is there
adopt a possibility
Magno for them
although they to all
possess adopt
the
limitation on tort claims; or (2) the Philippine Magno? Howas
qualifications should they
adoptive go about it?
parents.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(5%)
law which appears to require that claims for Yes, it is possible for Hans and Rhoda to adopt
Plaintiffs
personal countered that provisions
injury arising of the
from martial lawmost
be
analogous federal statute, the Torture Victims Magno. Republic Act No. 8043 or the Inter-
brought within one year. Country Adoption Act, allows aliens or Filipinos
Protection Act, should be applied. It sets ten
years as the period for prescription. Moreover, permanently residing abroad to apply for inter-
they argued that equity could toll the statute of country adoption of a Filipino child. The law
limitations. For it appeared that EM had however requires that only legally free child, or
procured Constitutional amendments granting one who has been voluntarily or involuntarily
himself and those acting under his direction committed to the DSWD or any of its
immunity from suit during his tenure. accredited agencies, may be subject of inter-
In this case, has prescription set in or not? country adoption. The law further requires that
Considering the differences in the cited laws, aside from possessing all the qualifications, the
which prescriptive period should be applied: adoptive parents must come from a country
one year under Philippine law, two years under where the Philippines has diplomatic relations
HIs law, ten years under U.S. federal law, or and that the government maintains a similarly
SUGGESTED
none of theANSWER:
above? Explain. (5%) accredited agency and that adoption is allowed
The US Court will apply US law, the law of the
under the national law of the alien. Moreover, it
Jorum, in determining the applicable
must be further
Hans and Rhodashown that
have to fileall
anpossibilities
application for
to
prescriptive period. While US law is silent on
a domestic adoption have been
adopt Magno, either with the RegionalexhaustedTrialand
this matter, the US Court will not apply
the
Courtinter-country adoption
having jurisdiction is best
over for or
Magno thewith the
Philippine law in determining the prescriptive
interest of the child.
Inter-Country Adoption Board in Canada. Hans
period. It is generally affirmed as a principle in
private international law that procedural law is and Rhoda will then undergo a trial custody for
one of the exceptions to the application of six (6) months from the time of placement. It is
foreign law by the forum. Since prescription is a only after the lapse of the trial custody that the
matter of procedural law even in Philippine decree of adoption can be issued.
jurisprudence, (Codaltn v. POEA/ JVLRC/Broum Parental Authority; Rescission of
and Root International, 238 SCRA 721 [1994]), Adoption
In (1994)
1975, Carol begot a daughter Bing, out of
the US Court will apply either HI or Federal law wedlock. When Bing was ten years old, Carol
in determining the applicable prescriptive gave her consent for Bing's legal adoption by
period and not Philippine law. The Restatement Norma and Manuel, which was granted by the
court in 1990. In 1991, Carol learned that
ADOPTION
of American law affirms this principle.
Norma and Manuel were engaged in a call-girl-
Adoption; Use of Surname of her ring that catered to tourists. Some of the girls
Natural
May Mother (2006)
an illegitimate child, upon adoption by her lived with Norma and Manuel. Carol got Bing
natural father, use the surname of her natural back, who in the first place wanted to return to
mother as the middle name? (2.5%) her natural mother. 1) Who has a better right
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes,an illegitimate child,
upon adoption by her natural father, can use to the custody of Bing, Carol or Norma? 2)
the surname of her Aside from taking physical custody of Bing,
what legal actions can Carol take to protect
Bing?
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: sister. Thus, under the above-cited provision,
1) a) It depends on whether or not Bing was Eva is qualified to adopt Vicky.
at least 18 years old at the time Carol asserts
the prerogative to take custody of Bing. If she b) Would your answer be the same if they
was at least 18 years old, then she is no longer sought to adopt Eva's illegitimate
under parental authority and neither Carol nor SUGGESTED ANSWER:
daughter? Explain. (2%)
Norma can assert the prerogative to take My answer will still be the same. Paragraph
custody. However, if she was less than 18 3(a) of Article 184 of the Family Code does not
years old, then Norma has a better right since make any distinction. The provision states that
the adoption by Norma of Bing terminates the an alien who is a former Filipino citizen is
b) The natural
parental mother,
authority Carol,
of Carol overshould
Bing. have the qualified to adopt a relative by consanguinity.
better right in light of the principle that the c) Supposing that they filed the petition to
child's welfare is the paramount consideration adopt Vicky in the year 2000, will your
in custody rights. Obviously, Bing's continued answer be the same? Explain. (2%)
stay in her adopting parents' house, where SUGGESTED ANSWER:
interaction with the call girls is inevitable, Yes, my answer will still be the same. Under
would be detrimental to her moral and spiritual Sec. 7(b), Art. III of the New Domestic Adoption
development. This could be the reason for Act, an alien who possesses all the qualifications
Bing's expressed desire to return to her natural of a Filipino national who is qualified to adopt
mother. It should be noted, however, that Bing may already adopt provided that his country
is no longer a minor, being 19 years of age has diplomatic relations with the Philippines,
now. It is doubtfu1 that a court can still resolve that he has been living in the Philippines for at
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the least three (3) continuous years prior to the
2) a)question
On the of custody over
assumption that one
Bingwho is sui
is still a filing of the application for adoption and
juris and not otherwise incapacitated.
minor or otherwise incapacitated, Carol may maintains such residence until the adoption
petition the proper court for resolution or decree is entered, that he has been certified by
rescission of the decree of adoption on the his diplomatic or consular office or any
ground that the adopting parents have appropriate government agency that he has the
exposed, or are exposing, the child to corrupt legal capacity to adopt in his country, and that
influence, tantamount to giving her corrupting Qualification of Adopter;
his government allows the adoptee to enter his
orders or examples. She can also ask for the Applicable
A German coupleLaw (2001)
filed a petition for adoption of
country as his adopted child.
revesting in her of parental authority over a minor Filipino child with the Regional Trial
Bing. If However, Bing is already 19 years of Court of Makati under the provisions of the
age and therefore no longer a minor, it is not Child and Youth Welfare Code which allowed
Carol but Bing herself who can petition the aliens to adopt. Before the petition could be
court for judicial rescission of the adoption, heard, the Family Code, which repealed the
b) Carol may file an action to deprive Norma of Child and Youth Welfare Code, came into
provided she can show a ground for
parental authority under Article 231 of the effect. Consequently, the Solicitor General filed
disinheritance of an ascendant.
Family Code or file an action for the rescission a motion to dismiss the petition, on the ground
of the adoption under Article 191 in relation to that the Family Code prohibits aliens from
Article 231 (2) of the Family Code. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
adopting. If you were the judge, how will you
Qualification of The motion to dismiss the petition for adoption
rule on the motion? (5%)
Adopter
In (2005)
1984, Eva, a Filipina, went to work as a nurse should be denied. The law that should govern
in the USA. There, she met and fell in love with the action is the law in force at the time of filing
Paul, an American citizen, and they got married of the petition. At that time, it was the Child
in 1985. Eva acquired American citizenship in and Youth Welfare Code that was in effect, not
1987. During their sojourn in the Philippines in the Family Code. Petitioners have already
1990, they filed a joint petition for the adoption acquired a vested right on their qualification to
of Vicky, a 7-year old daughter of Eva's sister. adopt which cannot be taken away by the
205 SCRA
Family 356) (Republic v. Miller G.R. No.
Code.
The government, through the Office of the ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Solicitor General, opposed the petition on the 125932,
The motion Aprilhas
21, to
1999,
be citing Republic
granted. The newv. Court
law
a)
groundIs that
the the government's opposition
petitioners, being both of Appeals,
shall govern their qualification to adopt and
tenable?
foreigners,Explain. (2%) to adopt Vicky.
are disqualified under the new law, the German couple is
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The government's position is untenable. Under disqualified from adopting. They cannot claim
paragraph 3, Article 184 of the Family Code, that they have already acquired a vested right
an alien, as a general rule cannot adopt. because adoption is not a right but a mere
[Note: If the
privilege. No examinee baseda his
one acquires answer
vested onon
right thea
However, an alien who is a former Filipino current
citizen and who seeks to adopt a relative by privilege.law, RA 8552, his answer should be
considered correct. This question is based on the
consanguinity is qualified to adopt, (par. 3[a], repealed provision of the Family Code on Adoption.]
In the
Art. given
184, problem,
Family Code)Eva, a naturalized Qualifications of
American citizen would like to adopt Vicky, a 7- Adopter (2000)
year old daughter of her
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Sometime in 1990, Sarah, born a Filipino but
by then a naturalized American citizen, and her
American husband Tom, filed a petition in the
Regional Trial Court of Makati, for the adoption
of the minor child of her sister, a Filipina. Can
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the petition be granted? (5%)
(per dondee) It depends. Rules on Adoption
effective August 22, 2002 provides the
following; SEC. 4. Who may adopt. The
following may adopt: Any Filipino Citizen
of legal age,
in possession of full civil capacity and legal rights,
of good moral character,
has not been convicted of any crime involving moral
turpitude;
who is emotionally and psychologically capable of
caring for children,
at least sixteen (16) years older than the adoptee,
and who is in a position to support and care for his
children in keeping with the means of the family.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Family;
under Sec. Constitutional
7(b) of RA8552.Mandates; The Supreme Court
1) No, the Motion to Dismiss should not be Divorce
A.
has held How (1991)
in several doescases thethat 1987 whenConstitution
husband
granted. Article 236 of the Family Code as strengthen
and wife arethe family to
required asadopt
an Institution?
jointly, each one
amended by Republic Act 6809, provides in the B. them
of Do the must Constitutional
be qualified to policy
adoptoninthe his orfamily
her
third paragraph that "nothing in this Code shall and right
own the (Republic
provisionv. Toledano, that marriage 233 SCRA is 9the
be construed to derogate from the duty or foundation
(1994). of the the
However, family and shall
American be protected
husband must
responsibility of parents and guardians for comply with the requirements of the law a law
by the State bar Congress from enacting
children and wards below twenty-one years of SUGGESTED
allowing divorce
including ANSWER:
the in the Philippines?
residency requirement of three (3)
A. Sec,Otherwise,
2, Article IIthe of adoption
the Constitution
age mentioned in the second and third years. will not provides
be
paragraphs of Article 2180 of the Civil Code". that: The
Successional State Rightsrecognizes
of the sanctity of
allowed.
2) The liability of Julio's parents to Jake's family
Adopted
A Filipino lifecouple,
and shall
Child Mr.protect
(2004) and Mrs. and BM, strengthen
Jr., decided the
parents arises from quasi-delict (Arts. 2176 and family
to adopt as a
YV, basic
an autonomous
orphan from St.social
Claires institution.
a) P50,000.00
2180 Civil Code) for andthe shalldeath
cover of specifically
the It shall equally
orphanage in New protect
York City. the life They of loved
the mother
and
b)
son; such
the following: amount as would correspond to lost earning
and
treatedthe her life like
of the unborn from
a legitimate child conception.
for they have The
capacity; and natural
none of and theirprimary
very own. right and duty
However, BM, ofJr.,
parents
died
c) moral damages. in an
theaccident
rearing at of sea,
the followed
youth fortocivic efficiency
the grave a
and
year thelaterdevelopment
by his sick father, of moral BM, character
Sr. Each left shall
a
Family Code; Retroactive Application; Section
receive I, Article
the support XV,offurther provides
theofGovernment. that: The
sizable estate consisting bank deposits,
Vested
On April Rights
15, 1980, (2000)
Rene and Angelina were State recognizes
The requirement of a 16-year difference
lands and buildingsthe Filipino
in Manila. May family as the
the adopted
married to each other without a marriage foundation of the nation. Accordingly, it shall
between In the1985,
age of theacquired
adopter aand adoptee child, YV, inherit from BM, Jr.? May she also
settlement. they parcel of strengthen
SUGGESTED its
ANSWER: solidarity and actively promote
inherit from BM, Sr.? Is thererecommends
a difference?
landmay be waived
in Quezon City. On when Junethe adopter
1, 1990, when is the YV total
its can (Note:
inherit from
The
development. BM, Jr. The
Committee successionthat to a
Why? Explain.
citation (5%)
of either one of the
biological
Angelina wasparent
away of inthe adoptee
Baguio, Rene or is the the
sold spouse the estate of BM, Jr. is governed byprovisions
Philippinebe
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
credited
saidof
SUGGESTEDthe
lot
Any to adoptees
ANSWER:
Marcelo.
Alien
parent;
possessingIs the thesale
samevoid or voidable?
qualifications as law because heas a complete
was a Filipino answer).
when he died
The sale is void. Since the sale was executed B, No, the Constitutional policy, as well as the
(2%) above-stated for Filipino nationals: Provided, a) (Article 16, Civil Code). Under Article 1039 of
in 1990, the Family Code is the law applicable. supporting provision, does not amount to a
That his country has diplomatic relations with the Civil Code, the capacity of the heir to
Under Article
Republic 124of of the
the FC, the sale of a
Philippines, prohibition to Congress to enact a law on
the succeed is governed by the national law of the
conjugal
b) property
that he has by abeenspouselivingwithout the
in the Philippines divorce. The Constitution only meant to help
decedent and not by the national law of the
ALTERNATIVE
consent
for atofleast ANSWER:
the other (3)
three is void.
continuous years prior to the marriage endure, to "strengthen its
Thethesalefiling
is voidable. heir. Hence,ANSWER: whether or not YV can inherit from
of the The provisions
petition of the and
for adoption ALTERNATIVE
solidarity and
BM, Jr. is determined
actively promote its total
by Philippine law. Under
Family Code may
maintains suchapplyresidenceretroactively
until the butadoption
only if B. Yes.
development." Congress is barred from enacting a law
suchc) that
application he
will has been certified
not impair vested rights. by his Philippine
allowing law,
divorce, the adopted
since inherits
Section 2 offrom the
Article XV
decree is entered, YV, however, cannot inherit, in his own right,
diplomatic or consular office
When Rene and Angelina got married in 1980, or any appropriate adopter
provides: as a
"Sec.legitimate
2. child
Marriage, of the
as adopter.
an inviolable
from the father of the adopter, BM, Sr., because
the government
law that governed agency theirto have the legal
property capacity
relations social institution, is the foundation of the family
d)
to adopt and
in histhat his
country, government allows the he is not a legal heir of BM, Sr. The legal fiction
wasadoptee
the NewtoCivil Code. Under the NCC, as and shall be protected by the State." Since
enter his country as his adopted of adoption exists only between the adopted
interpreted by the Supreme Court in Heirs of marriage is "Inviolable", it cannot be dissolved
child. and the adopter. (Teotico v. Del Val 13 SCRA
Felipe v. Aldon,
Provided, 100That
further, SCRA the628 and reiterated
requirements on by an absolute divorce.
406 Neither may he
[1965]). Annulment;
Marriage; inherit from
Effects; BM,
Requisites
in Heirs of Ayuste v. Malabonga,
residency and certification of the aliens G.R No, Sr. by representing BM, Jr. because in
Before Remarriage (1990)
118784, 2 September
qualification to adopt1999 in his, the salemay
country executed
be representation,
The marriage ofthe representative
H and W was annulled must be by athe
by the
waivedhusband
for thewithout
following: the a)consent
a former of the wife
Filipino legal heir not only of the person he is
within the fourth (4th) degree of consanguinity competent court. Upon finality of the judgment
is voidable.
citizen who The husband
seeks to adopt hasa already
relative acquired representing but also of the decedent from
or affinity; or b) one who seeks to adopt the of nullity. H began looking for his prospective
a vested rightchild
on the voidable nature of whom
legitimate of his Filipino spouse; or second mate. He fell in love with ainherit
the represented was supposed to sexy
dispositions made without the consent of the
Family Home; Dwelling
wife.c)Hence,
House
In 1991,(1994) one
Victor
Article
who 124
is of thetoFamily
married
established judicially
Code
a Filipino
out of citizen FAMILY CODE
(Article
woman 973, S who Civil Code).
wanted to be married as soon as
possible, i.e., after a few months of courtship.
whichandmakes
seeks the sale void
to adopt does
jointly nothis
with apply.
spouse a (a)
conjugal property, a family home in Manila As aHow
young
Emancipation
soon can H you
lawyer, be joined in lawful wedlock
were consulted by H,
relative within the fourth (4th) degree of to his girlfriend S? Under existing laws, are
worth P200.000.00 and extrajudicially a second (1993)
Julio and Lea, both 18 years old, were
consanguinity or affinity of the Filipino spouse.
family home in Tagaytay worth P50.000.00. there certain requisites that must be complied
sweethearts. At a party at the house of a
Victor leased the familyofhome in Manila to a
Qualifications with before he can remarry? What advice
mutual
(b) Suppose friend. thatLea met Jake, also 18 years old,
foreigner.
Adopter
Lina, Victor
formerand
a (2003) his family
Filipina who transferred
became toan would you give H?children were born from the
who showed
union of H and W, what interest in her.
would Lea beseemed
the status to of
another
American house
citizen of his in Pasig.
shortly afterCan herthe two
marriage to entertain Jake because she danced with him
family
an Americanhomes husband,
be the subject would of like
execution
to adopt on ain said children? Explain your answer.
many
(c) If times.
the subsequentIn a fit of jealousy, marriage Julioof shot
H Jake
to S
judgment against Victor's wife
the Philippines, jointly with her husband, one of for non-payment with contracted
his father'sbefore 38 caliber revolverwith which,
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
of theminor
purchase in 1992Assumingof household was compliance the
her brothers. family homesthat all the
the before going to the for party
The two
appliances?
(2) so-called can be statutory condition its he was able
validity, what toaregetthe
required
subject consents
of execution. have been obtained,
Neither of the abodes are could from the unlocked drawer inside his father's
SUGGESTED ANSWER: rights of the children of the first marriage (i.e.,
the contemplated joint adoption in the bedroom. Jake died as achildren
result of
considered
Yes, Lina and her family
American homes
husbandbecause for purposes
can jointly adopt a minor of H and W) and of the ofthe
thelone
Philippine
brother of Lina prosper?
because she Explain.
of availing the benefits under the Family Code,
and her husband are both qualified to gunshot wound he sustained. His parents sued
subsequent marriage (of H and S)?
adopt.
thereLina,
canasonly
a former
beFilipino
one (1) citizen, can adopt
family homeher minor
which is Julio's parents for damages arising from quasi-
brother under Sec. 7(b)(i) of RA 8552 (Domestic Adoption Act of
defined as the
1998), or under "dwelling
Art. 184 (3)(1) of thehouse" where
Family Code. The the
alien
delict. At the time of the incident, Julio was 18
husband
husband can and the wife and their family actually
now adopt years old living with his parents. Julio's parents
"reside" and the land on which it is situated. moved to dismiss the complaint against them
(Arts. 152 and 161, Family Code) claiming that since Julio wasPage already 23ofof 119
majority age, they were no longer liable for his
acts. 1) Should the motion to dismiss be
granted? Why? 2) What is the liability of Julio's
parents to Jake's parents? Explain your answer.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
children's presumptive legitimes which should sexually-transmissible
be disease, found to be serious and
in the appropriate civil registry and registriesappears
recorded of incurable. Two (2) years after their
should
property. be Hso advised. marriage, which took place on 10 October
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: for (a) 1988, Bethel discovered that her husband
The following are the requisites prescribed by law Jamesand has a sexually-transmissible disease
Iadvice to H is to comply with them, which he contracted even prior to their
1)
namely: If either spouse contracted the marriage marriage although James did not know it
in bad faith, his or her share of the net profits himself until he was examined two [2) years
of the community property : or conjugal later when a child was already born to them.
partnership property shall be forfeited in favor Bethel sues James for annulment of their
of the common children or, if there are none, marriage. James opposes the annulment on
the children of the guilty spouse by a previous B. theSuppose that he
ground that both
didparties at the
not even time
know of he
that
marriage or, in default of children, the innocent their marriage were similarly afflicted
had such a disease so that there was no fraud with
2)
spouse; Donations by reason of marriage shall sexually-transmissible
or bad faith on his part.diseases,
Decide. serious and
remain valid except that if the donee incurable, and both knew of their respective
contracted the marriage in bad faith, such infirmities, can Bethel or James sue for
donations made to said donee are revoked by SUGGESTED
annulmentANSWER:
of their marriage?
3)
operationTheof law;
spouse who contracted the A. The marriage can be annulled, because
subsequent marriage in bad faith shall be good faith is not a defense when the ground is
disqualified to inherit from the innocent spouse based upon sexually-transmissible disease on
4) If both spouses of the subsequent SUGGESTED
the part ofANSWER:
either party.
by testate and intestate succession;
marriage acted in bad faith all donations by B. Yes, the marriage can still be annulled
reason of marriage and testamentary because the fact that both of them are
dispositions made by one in favor of the other afflicted with sexually-transmissible diseases
Alternative
not Answer:
5) The by
are revoked judgment
operationofof annulment
law. of the does efface or nullity the ground.
B. No, the marriage can no longer be annulled,
marriage, the partition and distribution of the
because the fact that both were afflicted and
properties of the spouses, and the delivery of that both knew of their respective infirmities
the children's presumptive legitimes shall be
constitutes a waiver of that ground.
recorded in the appropriate civil registry and Marriage; Annulment; Judicial
44. Family
registers Code). (Articles 53. 52, 43.
of property, Declaration (1993)
Maria and Luis, both Filipinos, were married by
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a Catholic priest in Lourdes Church, Quezon
(b) The children born from the union of H and City in 1976, Luis was drunk on the day of his
W would be legitimate children if conceived or wedding. In fact, he slumped at the altar soon
born before the decree of annulment of the after the ceremony. After marriage, Luis never
marriage (under Art. 45 of the Family Code) had a steady job because he was drunk most of
has become final and executory (Art. 54, the time. Finally, he could not get employed at
Family Code}. all because of drunkenness. Hence, it was Maria
SUGGESTED ANSWER: who had to earn a living to support herself and
(c) The children of the first marriage shall be her child begotten with Luis. In 1986, Maria
considered legitimate children if conceived or filed a petition in the church matrimonial court
born before the Judgment of annulment of the in Quezon City to annul her marriage with Luis
marriage of H and W has become final and on the ground of psychological incapacity to
executory. Children conceived or born of the comply with his marital obligation. Her petition
subsequent marriage shall likewise be was granted by the church matrimonial court.
legitimate even if the marriage of H and S be 1) Can Maria now get married legally to another
null and void for failure to comply with the man under Philippine laws after her marriage to
requisites of Article 52 of the Family Code Luis was annulled
a) 53,To bear Code).
the surnames of the father SUGGESTED ANSWER: by the church matrimonial
(Article Family As legitimate court?
1) No, Explain.
Maria 2) What
cannot validlymust Mariaa do to
contract
and the
children, they mother
have theinfollowing
conformity with the
rights; enable her to get married
subsequent marriage without a courtlawfully to another
provisions of the Civil Code on Surnames;
man under Philippine laws?
b) To receive support from their declaration of nullity of the first marriage. The
parents, their ascendants, and in proper law does not recognize the church declaration
cases, their brothers and sisters, in of nullity of a marriage.
2) To enable Maria to get married lawfully to
conformity with the provisions of this Code
c) To be
on Support; andentitled to the legitime and another man. she must obtain a judicial
other successional rights granted to them declaration of nullity of the prior marriage
SUGGESTED
under Article ANSWER:
36 Family Code.
by the Civil Code (Article 174, Family Code). (a) H, or either spouse Legalfor that matter, can
Marriage; Annulment; Separation;
Marriage; Annulment; marry
Prescriptionagain of after
Actions complying
(1996) with the
provisions
2) Bert and of
BabyArticle
were 52 of
marriedtheto Family
each Code,
other
Grounds
One of the(1991)
grounds for annulment of marriage
namely,
on December there23, must
1988. be months
Six a partition
later, sheand
is that either party, at the time of their
distribution,
discovered of the
that he properties
was a of the spouses,
marriage was afflicted with a
and the delivery of the
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
drug addict. Efforts to have him rehabilitated were In 1989, Maris, a Filipino citizen, married her boss
unsuccessful. Can Baby ask for annulment of an American citizen, in Tokyo in a wedding
Johnson,
marriage, or legal separation? Explain. ceremony celebrated according to Japanese
laws. One year later, Johnson returned to his
SUGGESTED ANSWER: native Nevada, and he validly obtained in that
No, Baby cannot ask for annulment of her state an absolute divorce from his wife Maris.
marriage or for legal separation because both After Maris received the final judgment of
these actions had already prescribed. divorce, she married her childhood sweetheart
While concealment of drug addiction existing at the Pedro, also a Filipino citizen, in a religious
time of marriage constitutes fraud under Art. 46 of the ceremony in Cebu City, celebrated according to
FC which makes the marriage voidable under Art. 45
the formalities of Philippine law. Pedro later left
of the FC, the action must, however, be brought within
for the United States and became naturalized
5 years from the discovery thereof under Article 47(3),
as an American citizen. Maris followed Pedro to
FC, Since the drug addiction of Bert was discovered
the United States, and after a serious quarrel,
by Baby in June 1989, the action had already
Marts filed a suit and obtained a divorce decree
prescribed in June of 1994. Although drug addiction is
issued by the court in the state of Maryland.
a ground for legal separation under Art. 55(5) and Art.
Maris then returned to the Philippines and in a
57 of the FC requires that the action must be brought
civil ceremony celebrated in Cebu City
within 5 years from the occurrence of the cause.
according to the formalities of Philippine law,
Since Bert had been a drug addict from the time of the
she married her former classmate Vincent
celebration of the marriage, the action for legal
separation must have been brought not later than 23 likewise a Filipino citizen. b) Was the marriage
December 1993. Hence, Baby cannot, now, bring the of Maris and Pedro valid when celebrated? Is
action for legal separation. their marriage still valid existing now? Reasons.
Marriage; Annulment; c) Was the marriage of Marts and Vincent valid
Proper
D and G,Party
age 20(1990)
and 19, respectively, and both when celebrated? Is their marriage still validly
single, eloped and got married to each other existing now? Reasons. d) At this point in time,
without parental consent in the case of G, a who is the ANSWER:
SUGGESTED lawful husband of Marts? Reasons.
teenaged student of an exclusive college for (b) The marriage of Maris and Pedro was valid
girls. Three years later, her parents wanted to when celebrated because the divorce validly
seek judicial annulment on that ground. You obtained by Johnson in Manila capacitated
were consulted and asked to prepare the Maris to marry Pedro. The marriage of Maris
SUGGESTED ANSWER: and Pedro is still validly existing, because the
proper complaint. What advice would you give
G himself should file the complaint under marriage has not been validly dissolved by the
G's parents? Explain your answer.
Article 45 of the Family Code, and no longer Maryland divorce [Art. 26, Family Code).
the parents because G is already 22 years of (c) The marriage of Maris and Vincent is void ab
age. initio because it is a bigamous marriage
Marriage; Annulment; contracted by Maris during the subsistence of
Properwas
Yvette Party (1995)
found to be positive for HIV virus, her marriage with Pedro (Art 25 and 41, Family
considered sexually transmissible, serious and Code). The marriage of Maris and Vincent does
incurable. Her boyfriend Joseph was aware of not validly exist because Article 26 does not
her condition and yet married her. After two (2) apply. Pedro was not a foreigner at the time of
years of cohabiting with Yvette, and in his his marriage with marts and the divorce abroad
belief that she would probably never be able to (in Maryland) was initiated and obtained not by
bear him a healthy child, Joseph now wants to the alien spouse, but by the Filipino spouse.
have his marriage with Yvette annulled. Yvette Hence, the Maryland divorce did not capacitate
opposes the suit contending that Joseph is Marts to marry Vincent.
estopped from seeking annulment of their (d) At this point in time, Pedro is still the lawful
marriage since he knew even before their husband of Maris because their valid marriage
marriage that she was afflicted with HIV virus. has not been dissolved by any valid cause
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Can the action of Joseph for annulment of his (Art. 26. Family Code)
No, Joseph knew that Yvette was HIV positive
marriage with Yvette prosper? Discuss
at the time of the marriage. He is, therefore, fully.
not an injured party. The FC gives the right to
annul the marriage only to an injured party.
ALTERNATIVE
[Art. 47 (5),ANSWER:
FC]
The action for annulment can prosper because
the prescriptive period of five (5) years has not
yet lapsed. [Art. 45 (6), FC].

Marriage; Divorce Decree; Void


Marriages (1992)
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
a) Discuss the effect of the divorce Flor and Virgillo were married to each other in
obtained by Sonny and Lulu in Canada. Roxas City in 198O. In 1984, Flor was offered a
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(2%) teaching Job in Canada, which she accepted. In
The divorce is not valid. Philippine law does not 1989, she applied for and was granted
provide for absolute divorce. Philippine courts Canadian citizenship. The following year, she
cannot grant it. A marriage between two (2) sued for divorce from Virgilio in a Canadian
Filipinos cannot be dissolved by a divorce court. After Virgilio was served with summons,
obtained abroad. (Garcia v. Redo, G.R. No. the Canadian court tried the case and decreed
138322, October 2, 2001). Philippine laws apply the divorce. Shortly thereafter, Flor married a
to Sonny and Lulu. Under Article 15 of the New SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Canadian. Can Virgilio marry again in the
Civil Code, laws relating to family rights and No, Virgilio cannot validly remarry. His case is
Philippines? Explain.
duties, status, and capacity of persons are not covered by Article 26 of the Family Code,
binding upon citizens of the Philippines For said Article to be applicable, the spouse
wherever they may be. Thus, the marriage of who filed for divorce must be a foreigner at the
b)
SonnyExplain
and Luluthe status
is still of subsisting.
valid and the marriage time of the marriage. Since both of them were
between Sonny and Auring. (2%) Filipinos at the time of the marriage, the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: divorce obtained by Flor did not capacitate
Since the decree of divorce obtained by Lulu Virgilio to remarry. The fact that Flor was
and Sony in Canada is not recognized here in already an alien at the time she obtained the
the Philippines, the marriage between Sonny ALTERNATIVE ANSWERS:
divorce does not give Virgilio the capacity to
and Auring is void. (Art. 35, Family Code) Any a) Yes, Virgilio can validly remarry. Art. 26 of
remarry under Philippine Law.
marriage subsequently contracted during the the FC, merely States the alien spouse without
lifetime of the first spouse shall be illegal and taking into consideration his or her nationality
void, subject only to the exception in the cases at the time of the marriage. While his case is
v.
of Bayadog,
absence G.R. No. 133778,
or where March
the prior 14, 2000)
marriage was not covered by the letter of Article 26 FC, it is,
The marriage
dissolved of Sonny(Ninal
or annulled. and Auring does not fall however, covered by the spirit of said Article,
within the exception. the injustice to the Filipino spouse sought to be
c) Explain the status of the marriage cured by said Article is present in this case.
between Lulu and Tirso. (2%) (Department of Justice Opinion No. 134 Series
SUGGESTED ANSWER: b) Although the marriage originally involved
of 1993).
The marriage of Lulu and Tirso is also void. Filipino citizens, it eventually became a
Mere absence of the spouse does not give rise marriage between an alien and a Filipino after
to a right of the present spouse to remarry. Flor became a Canadian citizen. Thus, the
Article 41 of the Family Code provides for a divorce decree was one obtained by an alien
valid bigamous marriage only where a spouse spouse married to a Filipino. Although nothing
has been absent for four consecutive years is said about whether such divorce did
before the second marriage and the present capacitate Flor to remarry, that fact may as
G.R. No. had
spouse 94053,
a March 17, 1993)belief that the
well-founded well be assumed since the problem states that
absent spouse is already dead. (Republic v. she married a Canadian shortly after obtaining
d) Explain the respective filiation of
Nolasco, the divorce. Hence, Virgillo can marry again
James, John and Verna. (2%) under Philippine law, pursuant to Art. 26. FC
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Marriage; Divorce Decrees; Filipino
James, John and Verna are illegitimate children which applies because Flor was already an
Spouses becoming Alien (1999)
since their parents are not validly married. alien at the time of the divorce.
Ben and Eva were both Filipino citizens at the
Under Article 165 of the Family Code, children time of their marriage in 1967, When their
conceived and born outside a valid marriage marriage turned sour, Ben went to a small
are illegitimate, unless otherwise provided in country in Europe, got himself naturalized
this Code. there, and then divorced Eva in accordance
e) Who are the heirs of Sonny? Explain.
with the law of that country, Later, he returned
(2%) Suggested answer:
Sonny's heirs include James, John, and Lulu. to the Philippines with his new wife. Eva now
Article 887 of the Civil Code provides that the wants to know what action or actions she can
Marriage;
file against Divorce
Ben. She Decrees;
also wantsFiliation
to know if she
compulsory heirs of the deceased are among SUGGESTED ANSWER:
of 1985,
In
can ChildrenSonny
likewise (2005)
marryandagain.
Lulu, both
WhatFilipino
advicecitizens,
can you
others, his widow and his illegitimate children. Considering that Art.Philippines.
26(2nd par.)
wereher?
give married
{5%) in the In 1987, they
The widow referred to in Article 887 is the legal contemplates
separated, anda Sonnydivorcewent between a foreigner
to Canada, where
wife of the deceased. Lulu is still a compulsory and a Filipino, who had such respective
he obtained a divorce in the same year. He
heir of Sonny because the divorce obtained by nationalities
then marriedat the time
another of their
Filipina, marriage,
Auring, in the
Sonny in Canada cannot be recognized in the divorce in Europe will not capacitate the
Canada on January 1,1988. They had two sons,
Philippines. The legitime of each illegitimate Filipino wifeJohn.
to remarry.
James and In 1990,The advice
after we
failing tocan
heargive
child shall consist of one-half of the legitime of her is either to file a petition for legal
Marriage; Divorce Decrees; Filipino from Sonny, Lulu married Tirso, by whom she
a legitimate child. (Art. 176, Family Code) separation, on the ground of sexual infidelity
Spouses becoming Alien (1996) had a daughter, Verna. In 1991, Sonny visited
and of contracting a bigamous marriage
the Philippines where he succumbed to heart
abroad,
attack.. or to file a petition to dissolve the
conjugal partnership or absolute community of
property as the case maybe.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: the marriage, the conclusion is that Digna's father may revoke the
Eva may file an action for legal separation on donation and get back the car.
the grounds of sexual infidelity of her husband
and the contracting by her husband of a Marriage; Grounds; Declaration of Nullity:
bigamous marriage abroad. Annulment: Legal Separation: Separation
She may remarry. While a strict interpretation of Property
Which of the (2003)
following remedies, i.e., (a)
of Article 26 of the Family Code would declaration of nullity of marriage, (b)
capacitate a Filipino spouse to remarry only annulment of marriage, (c) legal separation,
when the other spouse was a foreigner at the and/or (d) separation of property, can an
time of the marriage, the DOJ has issued an aggrieved spouse avail himself/herself of-
opinion (Opinion 134 s. of 1993) that the same (i) If the wife discovers after the marriage
injustice sought to be cured by Article 26 is (ii)
that herIf husband
the wife goes (to) abroad to work as
has AIDS.
present in the case of spouses who were both a nurse and refuses to come home after the
Filipino at the time of the marriage but one expiration of her three-year contract there.
became an alien subsequently. Said injustice is (iii) If the husband discovers after the
the anomaly of Eva remaining married to her marriage that his wife has been a prostitute
husband who is no longer married to her. (iv) If thegot
before they husband has a serious affair with
married.
Hence, said Opinion makes Article 26 his secretary and refuses to stop
applicable to her case and the divorce obtained notwithstanding advice from relatives and
abroad by her former Filipino husband would (v)
friends.If the husband beats up his wife every
capacitate her to remarry. To contract a time he comes home drunk. 5%
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
subsequent
Marriage; marriage,
Donations all she
by needs
Reasonto do ofis
(i) Since AIDS is a serious and incurable
present to the civil registrar the decree
Marriage; Effect of Declaration of Nullity of
sexually-transmissible disease, the wife may
divorce
(1996)
1) On thewhen she applies
occasion for amarriage
of Digna's marriagetolicense
file an action for annulment of the marriage
under Article 13 of the Family Code.
George, her father gave her a donation propter on this ground whether such fact was
nuptias of a car. Subsequently, the marriage concealed or not from the wife, provided that
was annulled because of the psychological the disease was present at the time of the
immaturity of George. May Digna's father marriage. The marriage is voidable even
revoke the donation and get back the car? though the husband was not aware that he had
SUGGESTED
Explain. ANSWER: (ii)
theIfdisease
the wife
atrefuses
the timetoof
come home for three
marriage.
No, Digna's father may not revoke the donation (3) months from the expiration of her contract,
because Digna was not in bad faith, applying she is presumed to have abandoned the
Art. 86(3) of the Family Code. husband and he may file an action for
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
a) Yes, the donation is revocable. Since the judicial separation of property. If the
ground for the annulment of the marriage is refusal continues for more than one year from
the psychological immaturity of George, the the expiration of her contract, the husband may
judgment was in the nature of a declaration of file the action for legal separation under Art.
nullity under Art. 36 of the FC and, therefore, 55 (10) of the Family Code on the ground of
the donation may be revoked under Art. 86( 1) abandonment of petitioner by respondent
of the FC for the reason that the marriage has without justifiable cause for more than one
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
been judicially declared void ab initio. year. The wife is deemed to have abandoned
b) No, the donation cannot be revoked. The law the husband when she leaves the conjugal
provides that a donation by reason of marriage dwelling without any intention of returning
may be revoked by the donor if among other (iii) If the
(Article husband
101, discovers
FC). The after
intention notthe marriage
to return
cases, the marriage is judicially declared void that
cannot be presumed during the 30yearthey
his wife was a prostitute before got
period
ab initio [par. (1) Art. 86. Family Code], or married,
of her contract.he has no remedy. No
when the marriage is annulled and the donee misrepresentation or deceit as to character,
acted in bad faith [par. (3), Id.]. Since the health, rank, fortune or chastity shall constitute
problem states that the marriage was annulled fraud as legal ground for an action for the
and there is no intimation of bad faith on the annulment of marriage (Article 46 FC).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
part
c) Yes,of
thethe donee
donation can beDigna,
revoked.the conclusion
The ground is that
used in dissolving (iv) The wife may file an action for legal
the donor cannot revoke the donation.
the marriage was the psychological immaturity of George, which is
not a ground for annulment of marriage. If this term is equated with
separation. The husbands sexual infidelity is
psychological incapacity as used in Art. 36 of the Family Code, a ground for legal separation 9Article 55, FC).
then it is a ground for declaration of nullity of the marriage. She may also file an action for judicial
Consequently, par. (1) of Art. 86, FC, is the applicable law. Since separation of property for failure of her
Art. 86 of the FC makes no qualification as to who furnished the
ground or who was in bad faith in connection with the nullification of husband to comply with his martial duty of
(v) The (Article
fidelity wife may file(4),
135 an 101,
action
FC).for legal
separation on the ground of repeated
physical violence on her person (Article 55 (1),
FC). She may also file an action for judicial
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
separation of property for failure of the
husband to comply with his marital duty of
mutual respect (Article 135 (4), Article 101,
FC). She may also file an action for
declaration of nullity of the marriage if the
husbands behavior constitute psychological
incapacity existing at the time of the
Marriage;
celebration Grounds;
of marriage.Nullity; Annulment;
Legal Separation (1997)
Under what conditions, respectively, may drug
addiction be a ground, if at all, (a) for a
(b) for an annulment
declaration the marriage contract,
of nullity of marriage,
and (c) for legal separation between the
spouses? ANSWER:
SUGGESTED
(a) Declaration of nullity of
1)
marriage: The drug addiction must amount to
psychological incapacity to comply with the
essential obligations of marriage;
2) It must be antecedent (existing at
the time of marriage), grave and incurable:
3) The case must be filed before
August 1, 1998. Because if they got
married before August 3, 1998, it must be
filed before August 1, 1998.
(b) Annulment of the Marriage Contract: 1)
The drug addiction must be concealed; 2) It
must exist at the time of marriage; 3) There
should be no cohabitation with full
knowledge of the drug addiction; 4) The
case is filed within five (5) years from
discovery.

(c) Legal Separation; 1) There should be no


condonation or consent to the drug addiction;
2) The action must be filed within five (5)
years from the occurrence of the cause.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
the court shall uphold the validity and sanctitySaudi
the
ofpreceding
Arabia toArticle, only the
work. There, properties
after being acquired by
v. Yambao, G.R. No. L-10699, October 18, of
marriage
(Brown the parties through
converted
both their actual
into Islam, joint married
Ariel contributionMystica,
of money,
property,
1957). Rosa learned of the second marriage of in
or industry shall be owned by them in common
Ariel
proportion to their respective contributions. In the absence, of proof
Marriage; Non-Bigamous on January
to the 1, 1992
contrary, their whenand
contributions Ariel returned
corresponding to the
shares are
Marriages
Marvin, (2006)
a Filipino, and Shelley, an American, presumed to be with
Philippines equal. Mystica.
The same ruleRosa filed an action
and presumption shall apply
both residents of California, decided to get to
forjoint deposits
legal of money and
separation onevidences
February of credit.
5, 1994, 1)
married in their local parish. Two years after Does Rosa have legal grounds to ask for legal
their marriage, Shelley obtained a divorce in SUGGESTED
separation? ANSWER:
2) Has the action prescribed?
California. While in Boracay, Marvin met Manel, 1) a) Yes, the abandonment of Rosa by Ariel for
a Filipina, who was vacationing there. Marvin more than ANSWER:
SUGGESTED one (1) year is a ground for legal
fell in love with her. After a brief courtship and C. It should
separation be distinguished
unless upon returning whento the
complying with all the requirements, they got property
Philippines, was acquired.
Rosa agrees to cohabit with Ariel
married in Hongkong to avoid publicity, it being whichIfisitallowed
was acquired
under before Mary's
the Muslim death,
Code. In this
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Marvin's second marriage. Is his marriage to case, the
thereestate of Mary is entitled
is condonation. b) Yes. to
The1/2 of the
Yes. The marriage will not fall under Art. 35(4) share of
contracting of James.
a subsequent bigamous
Manel valid? Explain. (5%)
of the Family Code on bigamous marriages, If it was
marriage acquired
whether in theafter Mary's death,
Philippines or abroad
provided that Shelley obtained an absolute there will
is a ground be noseparation
for legal share at allunder
for the estate
Article
divorce, capacitating her to remarry under her 55(7)of ofMary.
the Family Code. Whether the second
national law. Consequently, the marriage SUGGESTED ANSWER:
marriage is valid or not, Ariel having converted
between Marvin and Manel may be valid as 2) No. Under Article 57 of the Family Code, the
into Islam, is immaterial.
long as it was solemnized and valid in aggrieved spouse must file the action within
accordance with the laws of Hongkong [Art. 26, five (5) years from the occurrence of the cause.
Marriage;
paragraphs Property
1 and 2, Family Relations;Code].Void The subsequent marriage of Ariel could not
Marriages
In June 1985, (1991)
James married Mary. In have occurred earlier than 1990, the time he
September 1988, he also married Ophelia with went to Saudi Arabia. Hence, Rosa has until
whom he begot two (2) children, A and B. In 1995 to bring the action under the Family
July 1989, Mary died. In July 1990, he married Marriage;
Code. Legal Separation;
Shirley and abandoned Ophelia, During their Mutual
Saul, guilt (2006)
a married man, had an adulterous
union. James and Ophelia acquired a relation with Tessie. In one of the trysts, Saul's
Ophelia
residential sueslotJames
worth for bigamy and prays that
P300,000.00. wife, Cecile, caught them in flagrante. Armed
his marriage with Shirley be declared null and with a gun, Cecile shot Saul in a fit of extreme
void. James, on the other hand, claims that jealousy, nearly killing him. Four (4) years after
since his marriage to Ophelia was contracted the incident, Saul filed an action for legal
during the existence of his marriage with Mary, (1) If you were
separation against Saul's
Cecilecounsel, how will
on the ground that
the former is not binding upon him, the same you argue his to
she attempted case? (2.5%)
kill him.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
being void ab initio he further claims that his
As the counsel of Saul, I will argue that an
marriage to Shirley is valid and binding as he
attempt by the wife against the life of the
was3) already legally
Drug capacitated
addiction arises at the time
during the he
husband is one of the grounds enumerated by
married her. a)
marriage and Is not
the at contention
the time of James marriage.
and Ophelia? c) Isproperty
the estate of Marygoverned
entitled to the Family Code for legal separation and there
correct? b) What Relations
a share
Marriage; in the is no need for criminal conviction for the
the union ofLegal
JamesSeparation;
If residential
Declaration
drug of
addiction, lotNullity
acquired
habitual by James and
(2002)
alcoholism, ground to be invoked (Art. 55, par. 9, Family
Ophelia?
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (2) If you were the lawyer of Cecile, what
Code).
lesbianism or homosexuality should occur only
A. Yes. His marriage to Ophelia is void ab initio will be your defense? (2.5%)
during the marriage, would this constitute SUGGESTED ANSWER:
because of his subsisting prior marriage to
grounds for a declaration of nullity or for legal As the counsel of Cecile, I will invoke the
Mary. His marriage to Shirley, after Mary's
separation, ANSWER:
ALTERNATIVE or would they render the marriage adultery of Saul. Mutual guilt is a ground for
death, is valid
SUGGESTED and binding.
ANSWER:
voidable? (1%).
A. No. The contention of James is not correct. the dismissal of an action for legal separation
In accordance with law, if drug addiction,
Art. 40, Family Code, provides that the (Art. 56, par. 4, Family Code). The rule is
habitual alcoholism, lesbianism or
"absolute nullity of a previous marriage may be anchored on a well-established principle that
homosexuality should occur only during the
invoked for purposes of remarriage on the basis one must come to court with clean hands.
marriage, they: a) Will not constitute as ground (3) If you were the judge, how will you
solely
(Art. 36,ofFamily
a final judgment
Code); b) Willdeclaring
constitute assuch
grounds
for declaration of nullity decide the case? (5%)
previous marriage void." It can be
for legal separation (Art. 56, FC) and c) will not said,
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
therefore,
constitute asthat the marriage
grounds to render the of marriage
James tovoidable
Shirley
If I were the judge, I will dismiss the action on
is void
(Art.45andsince
46, his
FC) previous marriage to Ophelia,
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: the ground of mutual guilt of the parties. The
although itself void, had not yet been judicially
A. No. The contention of James is not correct. Philippine Constitution protects marriage as an
declared void,
He cannot set up as a defense his own criminal inviolable social institution (Art. XV, Sec. 2,
Marriage; Legal Separation; Grounds;
act or wrongdoing- 1987 Constitution). An action for legal
Prescriptive Period (1994) separation involves public interest and no such
Rosa and Ariel
SUGGESTED ANSWER:were married in the Catholic decree should be issued if any legal obstacle
B. The provisions
Church of Art 148
of Tarlac, of the on
Tarlac Family Code, shall
January 5. govern:
1988.Art.
In
148. In cases of cohabitation not falling under thereto appears on record. This is in line with
1990, Ariel went to the policy that in case of doubt,
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Marriage; Psychological ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Incapacity
Gemma filed(2006)
a petition for the declaration of None of them are necessarily psychologically
nullity of her marriage with Arnell on the incapacitated. Being a nagger, etc. are at best
ground of psychological incapacity. She alleged only physical manifestations indicative of
that after 2 months of their marriage, Arnell psychological incapacity. More than just showing
showed signs of disinterest in her, neglected the manifestations of incapacity, the petitioner
her and went abroad. He returned to the must show that the respondent is incapacitated to
Philippines after 3 years but did not even get in comply with the essential marital obligations of
marriage and that it is also essential that he must
touch with her. Worse, they met several times
be shown to
(Republic v. be incapable of doingG.R.
Quintero-Hamano, so due
No. to some
in social functions but he snubbed her. When
psychological,
149498, not 2004).
May 20, physical illness
she got sick, he did not visit her even if he ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
knew of her confinement in the hospital. A congenital sexual pervert may be
Meanwhile, Arnell met an accident which psychologically incapacitated if his perversion
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
disabled
No, Gemma'shim suit
fromwill
reporting for work
not prosper. Evenand
if taken incapacitates him from discharging his marital
earning a living to support himself. Will do not
as true, the grounds, singly or collectively, obligations. For instance, if his perversion is of
Gemma's "psychological
constitute suit prosper? Explain. (5%)In Santos v.
incapacity." such a nature as to preclude any normal
CA, G.R. No. 112019, January 4, 1995, the sexual
Marriage; activity with his spouse.
Supreme Court clearly explained that
Marriage; Psychological
Incapacity
On April
Requisites
Isidro and15, (1996)
Irma,1983,
(1995) Jose, anboth
Filipinos, engineer,
18 years andof age,
"psychological incapacity must be characterized Marina, a nurse, were married to each other in
by (a) gravity, (b) juridical antecedence, and were passengers of Flight No. 317 of Oriental
(Ferraris v. Ferraris, G.R. No. 162368, July 17,(c) a civil ceremony in Boac. Marinduque. Six
incurability" Airlines. The plane they boarded was of
2006; Choa v. Choa, G.R. No. 143376, November months after their marriage, Jose was
26, 2002). The illness must be shown as
Philippine registry. While en route from Manila
employed
to Greece in
some an oil refinery
passengers in Saudi Arabia
hijacked the plane,for a
downright incapacity or inability to perform one's period of three years. When he returned to the
marital obligations, not a mere refusal, neglect, held the chief pilot hostage at the cockpit and
Philippines,
ordered him Marina
to fly was no to
instead longer
Libya. living
During in their
the
difficulty or much less, ill will. Moreover, as ruled house, but in Zamboanga
in Republic v. Molina, GR No. 108763, February hijacking Isidro suffered a City, heartworking
attack and in awas
hospital. He asked her to come
on the verge of death. Since Irma was already home, but she
13, 1997, it is essential that the husband is
(Antonio refused to do so, unless he
eight months pregnant by Isidro, she pleaded agreed not to work
capable ofv.meeting
Reyes, his
G.R. No. 155800,
marital March 10,
responsibilities due2006;
v. Quintero-Hamano,
Republic G.R. No. 149498, May 20, overseas anymore
to the hijackers because
to allow the she cannot
assistant stand
pilot to
to psychological and not physical illness
2004). Furthermore, the condition complained living alone. He could not agree
solemnize her marriage with Isidro. Soon after as in fact, he
of did not exist at the time of the celebration of had signed another
the marriage, Isidro three
expired. year Ascontract.
the planeWhen
marriage. he returned in 1989, he
landed in Libya Irma gave birth. However, could not locate Marina the
Marriage; Psychological anymore. In 1992, Jose
baby died a few minutes after complete filed an action served
Incapacity
Article (2006)
36 of the Family Code provides that a marriage by publication
delivery. Back in in the
a newspaper
Philippines ofIrma
general
contracted by any party who, at the time of the circulation. Marina did not
immediately filed a claim for inheritance. file any answer,The a
celebration, was psychologically incapacitated to comply possible collusion between
parents of Isidro opposed her claim contending the parties was
with the essential marital obligations of marriage, shall ruled
that the
SUGGESTEDoutmarriage
by the Public
ANSWER: betweenProsecutor.
her andTrial Isidro waswas
be void. Choose the spouse listed below who is conducted
As judge,
void ab initio and
I willonnot Marina
thegrant neither appeared
the annulment.
following grounds: (a) nor
The they
psychologically incapacitated. Explain. (2.5%) a) Nagger presented evidence in taint
her favor.
factsnot
had do given
not show
theirany consent of theIf marriage
you were of
to personality
b) Gay or Lesbian c) Congenital sexual pervert d) the judge,
disorder will youpartgrant the annulment.
their
1. son;on
Resolve (b) the
each there of the
of the
was no wife
marriage
contentions
Marina so as to
license;
([a] to [d])(c)
Gambler e) Alcoholic SUGGESTED ANSWER: The best answers Explain.
lend substance to her husband's averment
the solemnizing officer had
raised by the parents of Isidro. Discuss fully. no authority to of
are B and C. To be sure, the existence and concealment psychological incapacity within the meaning of
of these conditions at the inception of marriage renders
perform the
SUGGESTED marriage; and, (d) the solemnizing
ANSWER:
Art
1. 36 of
(a) did
officer the
Thenot Family
factfile that Code.
anthe In
parents
affidavit Santos vs.
of Isidro and
of marriage CAwith
the marriage contract voidable (Art. 46, Family Code).
(240
of
the IrmaSCRA
properdid 20)
not
civil , give
this particular
their
registrar. consent ground
to for nullity
the
They may serve as indicia of psychological incapacity,
of marriage
marriage didwas not heldmake tothe
be marriage
limited only void to ab
the
depending on the degree and severity of the disorder
most serious cases of personality
initio. The marriage is merely voidable under disorders
(Santos v. CA, G.R. No. 112019, Jan. 4, 1995). Hence, if
(clearly
Art 45 ofdemonstrative
the FC. of utter sensitivity or
the condition of homosexuality, lesbianism or sexual
inability
(b) Absenceto give of meaning and
marriage license significance
did not make to
perversion, existing at the inception of the marriage, is
of such a degree as to prevent any form of sexual
the marriage.
marriage Marina's
void ab refusal
initio. to
Since come
the home
marriage to
intimacy, any of them may qualify as a ground for
her
was husband
solemnized unlessin he agreed
articulo mortis,not to
it work
was
psychological incapacity. The law provides that the overseas,
exempt from far thefromlicense
being requirement
indicative of an under
husband and wife are obliged to live together, observe insensitivity
Art. 31 of thetoFC. the meaning of marriage, or of a
(c) On the assumption
personality disorder, actually that the assistant
shows pilot
a sensitive
mutual love, respect and fidelity (Art. 68, Family Code).
was acting
awareness for
on and
her in
part behalf
of the of the
marital airplane
duty to
The mandate is actually the spontaneous, mutual
affection between the spouses. In the natural order it is
chief
live who
together was asunder
husband disability,
and and
wife. by
Mere reason
refusal
sexual intimacy which brings the spouses wholeness
of
to the
rejoinextraordinary
her husband and
whenexceptional
he did not accept
Mere intention to live apart does not fall under
and oneness (Chi Ming Tsoi circumstances
the condition of
imposed the case
by [ie.
her hostage
does not furnish
Art. 36, FC. Furthermore, there is no proof that
situation),
any basis for theconcluding
marriage was solemnized by an
the alleged psychologicalthat she wasexisted
incapacity suffering at
authorized
from officer under
psychological Art. 7 to
incapacity (3)discharge
and Art. 31. the
the time of the marriage.
v. CA, G.R. No. 119190, January of the FC.marital obligations.
essential
16,1997). Page 30 of 119
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
(d) Failure of the solemnizing officer to file the
affidavit of marriage did not affect the validity
of the marriage. It is merely an irregularity
which may subject the solemnizing officer to
ALTERNATIVE
sanctions. ANSWER:
Considering that the solemnizing officer has no
authority to perform the marriage because
under Art. 7 the law authorizes only the
airplane chief, the marriage is void, hence, a, c,
and d are immaterial.
Marriage;
Requisites
What (1999)of the following marriages and
is the status
(a)
why? A marriage between two 19-year olds
without parental consent, (2%)
(b) A marriage between two 21-year olds
without parental advice. (2%)
(c) A marriage between two Filipino first
cousins in Spain where such marriage is valid.
(d)
(2%) A marriage between two Filipinos in
Hongkong before a notary public. (2%)
(e) A marriage solemnized by a town
mayor three towns away from his jurisdiction,
(2%)
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
under Article 35 (2), FC. In that case, the partyThis in is different
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:from the case of Ninl V. Bayadog,
is
goodacting
faithunder a mistake of fact, not a mistake If
(328
SCRAthe 122
two [2000]
Filipinos ). Inbelieved
the said in good
case, thefaith that
situation
of law, the Notary Public is authorized
occurred during the Relations of the new Civil to solemnize
2) Would your answer be the same if it should marriage,
Code where then the marriage
Article 76 thereof is valid.
clearly provides
turn out that the marriage license was that during the five-year cohabitation, the
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
spurious? Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: parties must be unmarried. This is not so
No, the answer would not be the same. The (e) Under the Local Government Code, a town
anymore in the Family Code. The Change in the
marriage would be void because of the mayor may validly solemnize a marriage but
Family Code is significant. If the second
absence of a formal requisite. In such a case, said law is silent as to the territorial limits for
marriage occurred before the effectivity of the
there was actually no valid marriage license. the exercise by a town mayor of such
Family Code, the answer would that be that the
Marriage; Requisites; Marriage authority.
B. Does Sotero However, by analogy, with the
marriage is void. have the personality to seek
License
On May 1,(2002)1978 Facundo married Petra, by authority
the declarationof members of nullity of of thetheJudiciarymarriage, to
whom he had a son Sotero. Petra died on July 1, solemnize especially anow marriage, that itFacundowould seem is thatalready the
1996, while Facundo died on January 1, 2002. mayor
SUGGESTED
deceased? didANSWER:
not have(3%)
Explain. the requisite authority to
Before his demise, Facundo had married, on B. A void marriage
solemnize a marriage may be questioned
outside of his territorial by any
July 1, 2002, Quercia. Having lived together as interested
jurisdiction.party Hence, in theanymarriage
proceeding is void, where unlessthe
husband and wife since July 1, 1990, Facundo resolution
it was contracted of the with issue either is material.
or both Being partiesa
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
and Quercia did not secure a marriage license compulsory
believing in heir,
goodis Soterro
faith thathasthe themayor
personalityhadLocaltheto
The marriage valid. Under the
but executed the requisite affidavit for the question
legal the validity
authority to of the marriage
solemnize this of Facundo
particular
Government Code, the authority of a mayor to
purpose. To ensure that his inheritance rights and Quercia.
marriage (Art Otherwise,
35, par is his participation
2 Family Code). within in the
solemnize marriages not restricted his
are not adversely affected by his father second estate on Facundo would be affected. (Ninl
municipality implying that he has the authority
marriage, Sotero now brings a suit to seek a V. Bayadog, 328 SCRA 122 [2000] ).
SUGGESTED ANSWER: even
Marriage;outside the territory
Requisites; thereof. Hence, the
Solemnizing
declaration
(a) The marriage of the nullity
is voidable.of the marriage
The consent of of marriage he solemnized outside hisFamily
municipality
Officers
1} (1994)
The complete publication of the
Facundo
the parties and to Quercia, grounded was
the marriage on the absence is valid. And even assuming that his authority is
defective. Code was made on August 4, 1987. On
of a valid marriage license.old, Quercia contends restricted
Being below 21 years the consent of the Septemberwithin 4, 1987, his Junior
municipality,
Cruz and such Gemma marriage
that
parties is not full without the consentlicense
there was no need for a marriage of their will nevertheless, bebefore
valid because solemnizing
Reyes were married a municipal mayor.
in view forThe her consent
having lived continuously with the
parents. of the parents of the Wasmarriage
the marriage outside said2)municipality
valid? Suppose theiscouple a mere
Facundo
parties
A. for
Is thetomarriage
the five years
marriage before
of Facundo their
is indispensable marriage
and Quercia for its irregularity applying by analogy the case of
got married on September 1, 1994 at the
and that
SUGGESTED
validity.
valid, has
despite Sotero
ANSWER:
the has noof
absence legal
a personality to
marriage Navarro v Domagtoy, 259 Scra 129 . In this case,
(b)
seek Between
a declaration 21-year of olds,
nullitythe marriage
of the marriage is valid Manila Hotel before the Philippine Consul
SUGGESTED
license? ANSWER:
Explain. (2%) the Supreme
General Court held
to Hongkong, who that was the
oncelebration
vacation in by
despite
since
A. TheFacundo the
marriage absence
is with
now Quercia of
deceased. parental
is void. The advice,
a judge
Manila. of
The a marriage
couple outside
executed anthe jurisdiction of
affidavit
because
exemptionsuch absence isof a
from the requirement merely
marriage an SUGGESTED
his court ANSWER:
consenting isto athemere irregularity
celebration of the that
marriagedid not
irregularity
license under affecting
Art, 34,aFamily formalCode, requisite i.e., the
requires 1) a) Yes, thevalidity
marriage of is valid. Themarriage
Family
affect
at the the
Manila Hotel. Is the marriage the valid?
marriage license and does not affect
lived the notwithstanding
Code took effectArticle on August
that the man and woman must have 7 of 3, the1988.Family At Code
the
validity of the marriage
together as husband and wife for at least itself. This is without
five time of the marriage on September 4, 1987,
which
Marriage; provides that an incumbent
Requisites; Marriage member of
prejudice
years and without to the
any legal civil, criminal,
impediment to or the municipal mayors were empowered to
License
On judiciary
(1996)
Valentine's Dayis authorized
1996, Ellas and to Fely, solemnize
both
administrative
marry eachANSWER: liability of the party
other during those five years. The responsible solemnize marriage under the Civil Code of
SUGGESTED marriages
single
2) a) and
The only
25 within
years
marriage of the
isage,
not courts
went
valid. jurisdiction.
to the
Consuls city hall
and
therefor.
cohabitation
(c) By reason of Facundo
of publicand Quercia
policy, thefor six
marriage 1950.
years
between from 1990 to
Filipino firstJuly 1, 1996iswhen
cousins void Petra
[Art. 38, where they sought
vice-consuls are out a fixer to help
empowered to them solemnize
died
par. was(1), one
Family withCode],
a legaland impediment
the fact hence,that it is obtain
marriages a quickie
between marriage.
Philippine For a fee,
citizens the fixer in
abroad
not in compliance
considered a valid with marriage
the requirement in a of law.
foreign produced
the consular an ante-dated
office of marriage
the foreign license
country for to
On otherinhand,
country the cohabitation
this case, Spain does thereafter
not validate them,
which Issued
they by
were the Civil
assigned Registrar
and haveof ano small
power
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
until the marriage on July 1, 2000, although remote
to municipality.
solemnize marriage He onthen brought
Philippine them to
soil.
The marriage of Facundo and Querciarule
it, being an exception to the general in Art.
is VALID. b)
a A Philippine
licensed minister consulin a is authorized
restaurant behind by law the to
free
96 of
The fromsaidlegal
second Code impediment,
marriage which wasaccords did not
solemnized meet
validity
on Julythe
to 1,
all
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER solemnize
city hall, and marriages
the latter abroad
solemnized between their Filipino
5-year
marriage
2000, cohabitation
when solemnized
theitFamily requirement.
outsidewas thealready
Philippine x x
The marriage void. code Under Article SUGGESTEDHe
96 of the citizens.
marriage right ANSWER:
has
there no and authority
then. 1)to Is solemnize
their a
x and
affective.validThe there
familyas such.
code took effect on August The marriage is Philippines.
valid. The irregularity in the
Family Code, a marriage valid where celebrated marriage in the
valid, void or voidable? Explain. Consequently, the
3, issuance of a valid license does not adversely
is 1988.
valid Underin the the Family
PhilippinesCode, no marriage
except those marriage in question is void, unless either or
license
marriages is required
enumerated if the parties
in saidhave beenwhich affect
Article both of the the contracting
validity ofparties the believed
marriage. The
in good
cohabiting marriage license is valid because it was in fact
marriages for willthe periodvoid
remain of five
even years and there
though valid faith that the
ALTERNATIVE
consul general had authority to
ANSWER:
is no legal
where impediment.
solemnized. The Theremarriage no legal first issued
mustbetween solemnize
It
by a their
Civil Registrar
depends. IfRequisites;
both marriage
or one of
(Arts.
in the 3 and case
which 4. FC).the
parties was a
impediment
cousins is one ONLY AT THE
of those TIME OF THE
marriages enumerated marriageMarriage; is the
valid. Void
member
Marriage of (1993) religious sect of the solemnizing
SOLEMNIZATION
therein, hence, itOF is THE
voidMARRIAGE
even though , andvalidnot in A and B, both
officer, the
18 years old, were sweethearts
marriage is valid.3, If1988, nonewhile of the
By
the reason
whole of
five Art.
years
Spain where it was celebrated.15 in relation
period. This to
is Article
clearly 38
the of studying in Manila. On August in
parties is a member of the
first year college, they eloped. They stayed in sect and both of
the Civil
intent of theCode, which applies
code framers (see Minutes to Filipinos
of the them
the house of a mutual friend in town X, whereis
were aware of the fact, the marriage
wherever
150th jointtheyCivilare,Code theofmarriage
the Family is void.
Law
SUGGESTED ANSWER: void. They cannot
they were able to claim obtaingood faith in believing
a marriage license.
Committees held on August 9, 1986). Also, in
(d) It depends. If the marriage before the that
On August 30, 1988, their was
the solemnizing officer marriage authorized was
Manzano V. Sanchez, AM NO. MT 00-129,
notary 8, public because thebyscope of the authority
of X of the
March 2001is valid
, the under Hongkong
Supreme Court saidLaw, that,theas solemnized the town mayor in his
marriage solemnizing officer is a matter of law. If,
one of theisrequisites
valid in the for thePhilippines.
exception Otherwise,
to apply, office. Thereafter, they returned to Manila and
the marriage however, one of the parties believed in good
there must bethat is invalid
no legal in Hongkong
impediment at thewill timebe continued to live separately in their respective
invalid in the Philippines. faith
boardingthat the other was
houses, a memberfrom
concealing of the theirsect,
of the marriage. The Supreme Court did not say
then the marriage is valid
parents, who were living in the province what
that the legal impediment must exist all
throughout the five-year period. they had done. In 1992, after graduation
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
from college, A and B decided to break their relation Philippine Law, his marriage to Anne is void because
parted
and ways. Both went home to their prior
of aexisting marriage which was not dissolved by the divorce
decreed in Oslo. Divorce obtained abroad by a Filipino is not
respective towns to live and work. 1) Was the recognized.
marriage of A and B solemnized on August 30,
1988 by the town mayor of X in his office a
valid marriage? Explain your answer. 2) Can If Boni was no longer a Filipino citizen, the
either or both of them contract marriage with divorce is valid. Hence, his marriage to Anne is
another person without committing bigamy? valid if celebrated in accordance with the law of
Explain your answer. the place where it was celebrated. Since the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: marriage was celebrated aboard a vessel of
1) The marriage of A and B is void because the Norwegian registry, Norwegian law applies. If
solemnizing officer had no legal authority to the Ship Captain has authority to solemnize the
solemnize the marriage. But if either or both marriage aboard his ship, the marriage is valid
parties believed in good faith that the and shall be recognized in the Philippines.
solemnizing officer had the legal authority to As to the second question, if Boni is still a
do so, the marriage is voidable because the Filipino, Anne can file an action for declaration
marriage between the parties, both below 21 of nullity of her marriage to him.
years of age, was solemnized without the
consent of the parents. (Art. 35, par. (2) and Marriage; Void
2)
Art.Either
45 par. or (1),
bothFamily
of theCode)parties cannot contract Marriages
Gigi and Ric,(2006)
Catholics, got married when they
marriage in the Philippines with another person were 18 years old. Their marriage was
without committing bigamy, unless there is solemnized on August 2, 1989 by Ric's uncle, a
compliance with the requirements of Article 52 Baptist Minister, in Calamba, Laguna. He
Family Code, namely: there must be a overlooked the fact that his license to
judgment of annulment or absolute nullity of solemnize marriage expired the month before
the marriage, partition and distribution of the and that the parties do not belong to his
properties of the spouses and the delivery of congregation. After 5 years of married life and
their children's presumptive legitimes, which blessed with 2 children, the spouses developed
shall be recorded in the appropriate Civil irreconcilable differences, so they parted ways.
Registry and Registry of Property, otherwise While separated, Ric fell in love with Juliet, a 16
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
the samethey
2) Yes, shall can.
not affect third personsmarriage
The subsequent and the year-old sophomore in a local college and a
subsequent
contracted by marriage
one of the shallparties
be null willand
not void.
give Seventh-Day Adventist. They decided to get
(Arts.
rise to52 and 53.even
bigamy Family Code)
in the absence of a court married with the consent of Juliet's parents.
declaration of nullity of the first marriage. The She presented to him a birth certificate
subsistence of a prior valid marriage is an (1) showing she is 18 years old. Ric never doubted
her What is the status of the marriage
indispensable element of the crime of bigamy. between age much less the authenticity of her birth
Gigi and Ric valid, voidable or
The prior court declaration of nullity of the first void? certificate. They got married in a Catholic
Even if the Minister's license
SUGGESTEDExplain.
ANSWER: (2.5%)
marriage is required by the Family Code only church
expired,intheManila.
marriageA year after,
is valid Juliet gave
if either or both birth
Gigi
for the purpose of the validity of the to twins, Aissa and Aretha.
and Ric believed in good faith that he had the
subsequent marriage, not as an element of the legal authority to solemnize marriage. While the
Marriage;
crime of bigamy. Void authority of the solemnizing officer is a formal
Marriages
A. BONI (2004) and ANNE met while working requisite of marriage, and at least one of the
overseas. They became sweethearts and got parties must belong to the solemnizing officer's
engaged to be married on New Years Eve church, the law provides that the good faith of the
aboard a cruise ship in the Caribbean. They parties
(Art. 35cures
par. 2,theFamily
defect Code;
in the Sempio-Diy,
lack of authority p. of
took the proper license to marry in New York 34;
the Rabuya,
solemnizingTheofficer
Law on Persons and Family
City, where there is a Filipino consulate. But Relations, p. 208).
as planned the wedding ceremony was The absence of parental consent despite their
officiated by the captain of the Norwegian- having married at the age of 18 is deemed
Back in Manila,
registered vessel Anne in discovered
a private that suiteBoni had
among cured by their continued cohabitation beyond
been
selected married
friends. in Bacolod City 5 years earlier the age of 21. At this point, their marriage is
but divorced in Oslo only last year. His first valid (See Art. 45, Family Code).
wife was also a Filipina but now based in (2) What is the status of the marriage
Sweden. Boni himself is a resident of Norway between Ric and Juliet valid, voidable or
where he and Anne plan to live permanently. SUGGESTED
void? ANSWER: The marriage between Juliet
(2.5%)
Anne retains your services to advise her on and Ric is void. First of all, the marriage is a
whether her marriage to Boni is valid under bigamous marriage not falling under Article 41
Philippine law? Is there anything else she [Art. 35(4)Family Code], A subsisting marriage
SUGGESTED
should do under ANSWER: the circumstances? (5%)
If Boni is still a Filipino citizen, his legal capacity is governed by constitutes a legal impediment to remarriage.
Philippine Law (Art. 15 Civil Code). Under Secondly, Juliet is below eighteen years of age.
The marriage is void even if consented to by
her parents
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
[Art. 35(1), Family Code]. The fact that Ric was Under not Article 213 of the Family Code, no child under 7
of her real age is immaterial.
aware years of age shall be separated from the
mother unless the court finds compelling
(3) Suppose Ric himself procured the (1) reasonsExplain
to orderthe
otherwise.
rationale of this provision.
falsified birth certificate to persuade Juliet (2.5%) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
to marry him despite her minority and The rationale of the 2nd paragraph of Article 213
assured her that everything is in order. He of the Family Code is to avoid the tragedy of a
did not divulge to her his prior marriage mother who sees her baby torn away from her. It
is said that the maternal affection and care during
with Gigi. What action, if any, can Juliet
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Juliet can file an action for the early years of the child are generally needed
take against him? Explain. (2.5%)
the declaration of nullity of the marriage on the by the child more
(Hontiveros than
v. IAC, paternal
G.R. care October 23,
No. 64982,
ground that he willfully caused loss or injury to 1984; Tolentino, Commentaries and
her in a manner that is contrary to morals, Jurisprudence on the Civil Code, Volume One,
good customs and public policy [Art. 21, New pp. 718-719). The general rule is that a child
Civil Code]. She may also bring criminal actions below 7 years old shall not be separated from
for seduction, falsification, illegal marriage and his mother due to his basic need for her loving
bigamy against Ric. care (Espiritu v. C.A., G.R. No. 115640, March
(2) Give at least 3 examples of "compelling
(4) If you were the counsel for Gigi, what 15,1995).
reasons" which justify the taking away
action/s will you take to enforce and
from the mother's custody of her child
protect her interests? Explain. (2.5%) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER: I would file an action to under 7 years of age. (2.5%)
a. The mother is insane (Sempio-Diy,
declare the marriage between Juliet and Ric Handbook on the Family Code of the
null and void ab initio and for Ric's share in the The mother is
Philippines, sick
pp. with a ;disease that is
296-297)
co-ownership of that marriage to be forfeited in communicable and might endanger the
favor and considered part of the absolute health and life of the child;
community in the marriage between Gigi and The mother has been maltreating the
Ric [Arts. 148 & 147, Family Code]. I would also child;
file an action for damages against Ric on the The mother is engaged in prostitution;
grounds that his acts constitute an abuse of The mother is engaged in adulterous
right and they are contrary to law and morals, relationship;
causing damages to Gigi (See Arts 19, 20, 21, The mother is a drug addict;
New Civil Code). The mother is a habitual drunk or an
Marriage; Void Marriages; Psychological
Incapacity
A. (2002)
Give a brief definition or explanation of the alcoholic;
term psychological incapacity as a ground The mother is in jail or serving sentence.
for the declaration of nullity of a marriage.
B.
(2%) If existing at the inception of marriage,
would the state of being of unsound mind or
the concealment of drug addiction, habitual
alcoholism, homosexuality or lesbianism be
considered indicia of psychological incapacity?
SUGGESTED
Explain. (2%).ANSWER:
A. PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY is a mental
disorder of the most serious type showing the
incapability of one or both spouses to comply
the essential marital obligations of love,
respect, cohabitation, mutual help and support,
trust and commitment. It must be characterized
by Juridical antecedence, gravity and
incurability and its root causes must be
clinically identified or examined. (Santos v. CA,
B.
240 InSCRA
the case of Santos
20 [1995]) . v. Court of Appeals, 240
SCRA 20 (1995), the Supreme Court held that
being of unsound mind, drug addiction, habitual
alcoholism, lesbianism or homosexuality may be
indicia of psychological incapacity, depending
on the degree of severity of the disorder.
However, the concealment of drug addiction,
habitual alcoholism, lesbianism or
homosexuality is a ground of annulment of
Parental Authority; Child under 7
marriage.
years of age (2006)
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Distinguish briefly but clearly between: Substitute sperm. After a series of test, Andy's sperm was
authority
parental and special parental introduced
medically into Beth's ovary. She became
authority. ANSWER:
SUGGESTED pregnant and 9 months later, gave birth to a
In substitute parental authority, the parents (1) babyWhoboy, named
is the Alvin. Father of Alvin? Explain.
lose their parental authority in favor of the (2.5%) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
substitute who acquires it to the exclusion of Andy is the biological father of Alvin being the
the parents. source of the sperm. Andy is the legal father of
In special parental authority, the parents or Alvin because there was neither consent nor
anyone exercising parental authority does not ratification to the artificial insemination. Under
lose parental authority. Those who are charged the law, children conceived by artificial
with special parental authority exercise such insemination are legitimate children of the
authority only during the time that the child is spouses, provided, that both of them authorized
in their custody or supervision. or ratified the insemination in a written
Substitute parental authority displaces parental instrument executed and signed by both of
authority while special parental authority them before the birth of the child (Art. 164,
concurs with parental authority. (2) What
Family Code).are the requirements, if any, in
order for Ed to establish his paternity
Paternity & SUGGESTED
over Alvin. ANSWER:
(2.5%)
Filiation
(a) Two (2)(1999)
months after the death of her The following are the requirements for Ed to
husband who was shot by unknown criminal establish his paternity over Alvin:
elements on his way home from office, Rose The artificial insemination has been authorized
married her childhood boyfriend, and seven (7) or ratified by the spouses in a written
months after said marriage, she delivered a instrument executed and signed by them
baby. In the absence of any evidence from before the birth of the child; and
Rose as to who is her child's father, what The written instrument is recorded in the civil
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
status does the law give to said child? Explain. registry together with the birth certificate of
(a) The child is legitimate of the second the child (Art. 164, 2nd paragraph, Family
(2%)
marriage under Article 168(2) of the Family Code).
Code which provides that a "child born after Paternity & Filiation; Common-
one hundred eighty days following the LawRN
A. Union
and (2004)
DM, without any impediment to
celebration of the subsequent marriage is marry each other, had been living together
considered to have been conceived during without benefit of church blessings. Their
such marriage, even though it be born within common-law union resulted in the birth of ZMN.
Parental Authority; Special Parental
three hundred days after the termination of the Two years later, they got married in a civil
Paternity & Filiation; Authority;ANSWER:
SUGGESTED Liability of Teachers (2003)
former marriage." ceremony. Could ZMN be legitimated? Reason.
Proofs
(b) Nestor(1999)
is the illegitimate son of Dr. Perez. If during
ZMN was class hours, while
legitimated by the teacher
subsequent was
(5%)
When Dr. Perez died, Nestor intervened in the chatting of
marriage withRN other
and DMteachersbecause in the time
at the school
he
settlement of his father's estate, claiming that corridor,
was a 7 year
conceived, RNold andmaleDMpupil
couldstabs
havethe eye
validly
he is the illegitimate son of said deceased, but of another
married eachboyother.
with a Under ball pen theduring
Familya Code
fight,
the legitimate family of Dr. Perez is denying causing
children permanent
conceived blindness and bornto outside
the victim, of
Nestor's claim. What evidence or evidences who couldofbe
wedlock liable for
parents who,damages
at the fortime theofboys
the
SUGGESTED
injury: ANSWER:
should Nestor present so that he may receive former'sthe teacher, the
conception, were school authorities, by
not disqualified or
SUGGESTED ANSWER: The school,
the guilty boysitsparents?
administrators,
Explain. and teachers
his rightful share in his father's estate? (3%) any impediment to marry each other are
(b) To be able to inherit, the illegitimate have
Paternity special parental authority and
legitimated & byFiliation;
the subsequent Proofs; Limitations;
marriage of the
filiation of Nestor must have been admitted by responsibility
Adopted Child over(1995)the minor child while under
parents.
his father in any of the following: their supervision,
Abraham died intestateinstruction or custody
on 7 January 1994(Article
(1) the record of birth appearing in the 218, FC).byThey
survived his son are principally
Braulio. and solidarily
Abraham's older
(2)
civilaregister,
final liable
son for the
Carlos dieddamages
on 14 February caused1990.by the acts or
Danilo
(3) a public document signed by the
judgment, omissions
who claimsof to the
be an unemancipated
adulterous child minor unless
of Carlos
(4) a private
father, or handwritten document signed by they exercised the proper
intervenes in the proceedings for the diligence required
the lather (Article 17S in relation to Article under
settlementthe of circumstances
the estate of (ArticleAbraham219, in FC). In
172 of the Family Code). the problem, the TEACHER
representation of Carlos. Danilo was legally and the SCHOOL
AUTHORITIES
adopted on 17 March 1970 by Carlos with of
are liable for the blindness thethe
Paternity & Filiation; Artificial 1. Under
victim, the
because Family the Code,
studenthow may
who an
cause it was
consent of the " latter's wife.
Insemination; Formalities(2006) illegitimate
under their filiation
special be proved?
parental Explain.and they
authority
Ed and Beth have been married for 20 years 2.
wereAs lawyer
negligent. for Danilo,
They were do you have to prove
negligent because
without children. Desirous to have a baby, they Danilo's illegitimate filiation?
they were chatting in the corridor during theExplain.
consulted Dr. Jun Canlas, a , prominent medical 3. Can Danilo
class period inheritwhenfrom theAbraham
stabbing in incident
specialist on human fertility. He advised Beth representation of his father
occurred. The incident could have been Carlos? Explain.
to undergo artificial insemination. It was found prevented
that Eds sperm count was inadequate to Parental had the teacher
Authority; been inside the
Substitute
classroom
vs. Special (2004)at that time. The guilty boys
induce pregnancy Hence, the couple looked for PARENTS are subsidiarily liable under Article
a willing donor. Andy the brother of Ed, readily 219 of the Family Code.
consented to donate his
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
in the same way and by the same evidencerecognition as of an illegitimate child can be brought at
children.
legitimateArt. 172 provides that the filiation of time
anyduring the lifetime of the child. However, if the action is based
on "open and continuous possession of the status of an illegitimate
legitimate children is established by any of the child, the same can be filed during the lifetime of the putative
following: (1) the record of birth appearing in father."
the civil register or a final Judgment; or (2) an
admission of legitimate filiation in a public
document or a private handwritten instrument In the present case, the action for compulsory
and signed by the parent concerned. In the recognition was filed by Joey's mother, Dina, on
absence of the foregoing evidence, the May 16,1994, after the death of Steve, the
legitimate filiation shall be proved by: (1) the putative father. The action will prosper if Joey
open and continuous possession of the status can present his birth certificate that bears the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: signature of his putative father. However, the
of a legitimate child; or (2) any other means
2. No. Since Danilo has already been adopted facts clearly state that the birth certificate of
allowed by the Rules of Court and special laws.
by Carlos, he ceased to be an illegitimate child. Joey did not indicate the father's name. A birth
An adopted child acquires all the rights of a certificate not signed by the alleged father
legitimate child under Art, 189 of the FC. cannot be taken as a record of birth to prove
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
3. No, he cannot. Danilo cannot represent recognition of the child, nor can said birth
Carlos as the latter's adopted child in the certificate be taken as a recognition in a public
inheritance of Abraham because adoption did b) instrument. (Reyes v. Court of Appeals, G.R.
not make Danilo a legitimate grandchild of tenable? No.Are39537,the March
defenses set up
19, 1985) by Tintin
Consequently, the
action filedExplain.
by Joey's (2%)
mother has already
Abraham. Adoption is personal between Carlos SUGGESTED ANSWER:
and Danilo. He cannot also represent Carlos as Yes, prescribed.
the defenses of Tintin are tenable. In
the latter's illegitimate child because in such Tayag v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 95229,
case he is barred by Art. 992 of the NCC from June 9,1992), a complaint to compel
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
inheriting from his illegitimate grandfather recognition of an illegitimate child was brought
An adopted child's successional rights do not
Abraham. before effectivity of the Family Code by the
include the right to represent his deceased
mother of a minor child based on "open and
adopter in the inheritance of the latter's
continuous possession of the status of an
legitimate parent, in view of Art. 973 which
illegitimate child." The Supreme Court held that
provides that in order that representation may
the right of action of the minor child has been
take place, the representative must himself be
vested by the filing of the complaint in court
capable of succeeding the decedent. Adoption
under the regime of the Civil Code and prior to
by itself did not render Danilo an heir of the
the effectivity of the Family Code. The ruling in
adopter's legitimate parent. Neither does his
Tayag v. Court of Appeals finds no application
being a grandchild of Abraham render him an
in the instant case. Although the child was born
heir of the latter because as an illegitimate
before the effectivity of the Family Code, the
child of Carlos, who was a legitimate child of c) Supposing that Joey died during the
Paternity & Filiation; Recognition of complaint was filed after its effectivity. Hence,
Abraham, Danilo is incapable of succeeding pendency of the action, should the action
illegitimate
Steve was Child to
married (2005)
Linda, with whom he had Article 175 of the Family Code should apply and
Abraham under Art. 992 of the Code. be dismissed?
a daughter, Tintin. Steve fathered a son with not 285 ofExplain.
Article ANSWER:
SUGGESTED the Civil (2%)
Code.
Dina, his secretary of 20 years, whom Dina If Joey died during the pendency of the action,
named Joey, born on September 20, 1981. the action should still be dismissed because
Joey's birth certificate did not indicate the the right of Joey or his heirs to file the action
father's name. Steve died on August 13, 1993, has already prescribed. (Art. 175, Family Code)
while Linda died on December 3, 1993, leaving
their legitimate daughter, Tintin, as sole heir. Paternity & Filiation; Rights of
On May 16, 1994, Dina filed a case on behalf of Legitimate
B and G (college Children
students,(1990)
both single and not
Joey, praying that the latter be declared an disqualified to marry each other) had a
acknowledged illegitimate son of Steve and romantic affair, G was seven months in the
that Joey be given his share in Steve's estate, family way as of the graduation of B. Right
which is now being solely held by Tintin. Tintin after graduation B went home to Cebu City.
put up the defense that an action for Unknown to G, B had a commitment to C (his
recognition shall only be filed during the childhood sweetheart) to marry her after
lifetime of the presumed parents and that the getting his college degree. Two weeks after B
exceptions under Article 285 of the Civil Code marriage in Cebu City, G gave birth to a son E
a) Does Joey have a cause of action in Metro Manila. After ten years of married life
do not apply to him since the said article has
against Tintin for recognition and in Cebu, B became a widower by the sudden
been repealed
SUGGESTED ANSWER: by the Family Code. In any case,
partition? Explain. (2%) death of C in a plane crash. Out of the union of
according
No, Joey does to
not Tintin, Joey's
have a cause birth
of action certificate
against Tintin for does SUGGESTED ANSWER:
recognition and partition. Under
not show that Steve is his father.Article 175 of the Family Code, as a B and
1. Under C, two
Art. children, X and to
172 in relation Y were
Art. 173born.andArt.
general rule, an action for compulsory Unknown to C while on weekend
175 of the FC, the filiation of illegitimate trips to Manila
during
childrenthe maylastbe5 established
years of their marriage, B
invariably visited G and lived at her residence
and as a result of which, they renewed their
relationship. A baby girl F was born to B and G
two years
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
before the death of C. Bringing his family laterPaulita to left the conjugal home because of the
finally
Manila,married
B G. Recently. G died. What are drinking
excessiveof her husband, Alberto. Paulita, out of
the rights of B's four children: X and Y of his her own endeavor, was able to buy a parcel of
first marriage; and E and F, his children with land which she was able to register under her
G? Explain your answer. name with the addendum "widow." She also
SUGGESTED ANSWER: acquired stocks in a listed corporation
Under the facts stated, X and Y are legitimate registered in her name. Paulita sold the parcel
children of B and C. E is the legitimate children of land to Rafael, who first examined the
of B and G. E is the legitimated child of B&G. F original of the transfer certificate of title. 1) Has
C. As legitimate
is the illegitimatechildren
child ofof
BB and C, X and Y
and Alberto the right to share in the shares of stock
have the following rights: 1) To bear the
acquired by Paulita? 2) Can Alberto recover the
surnames of the father and the mother, in SUGGESTED ANSWER:
land from Rafael?
conformity with the provisions of the Civil Code1. ona) Yes. The Family Code provides that all
Surnames; 2) To receive support from their property acquired during the marriage, whether
parents, their ascendants, the acquisition appears to have been made,
and in proper cases, their brothers and sisters, contracted or registered in the name of one or
conformity with the provisions of the Family Code
in both spouses, is presumed to be absolute
Support;
on and community property unless the contrary is
3) To be entitled to the legitime and other b) Yes. The shares are presumed to be
proved.
successional rights granted to them by the absolute community property having been
Civil Code. (Article 174, Family Code). acquired during the marriage despite the fact
that those shares were registered only in her
E is the legitimated child of B and G. Under Art. name. Alberto's right to claim his share will
177 of the Family Code, only children only arise, however, at dissolution.
conceived and born outside of wedlock of c) The presumption is still that the shares of
parents who, at the time of the conception of stock are owned in common. Hence, they will
the former, were not disqualified by any form part of the absolute community or the
impediment to marry each other may be conjugal partnership depending on what the
legitimated. E will have the same rights as X property Relations is.
F
andis the
Y. illegitimate child of B and G. F has the d) Since Paulita acquired the shares of stock by
right to use the surname of G, her mother, and onerous title during the marriage, these are
is entitled to support as well as the legitime part of the conjugal or absolute community
consisting of 1/2 of that of each of X, Y and E. property, as the case maybe (depending on
(Article 176, Family Code) whether the marriage was celebrated prior to.
Presumptive or after, the effectivity of the Family Code). Her
Legitime
What do (1999)
you understand by "presumptive physical separation from her husband did not
legitime", in what case or cases must the dissolve the community of property. Hence, the
parent deliver such legitime to the children, husband has a right to share in the shares of
and what are the legal effects in each case if SUGGESTED ANSWER:
stock.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the parent fails to do so? (5%) 2) a) Under a community of property, whether
PRESUMPTIVE LEGITIME is not defined in the absolute or relative, the disposition of property
law. Its definition must have been taken from belonging to such community is void if done by
Act 2710, the Old Divorce Law, which required just one spouse without the consent of the
the delivery to the legitimate children of "the other or authority of the proper court. However,
equivalent of what would have been due to the land was registered in the name of Paulita
them as their legal portion if said spouse had as "widow". Hence, the buyer has the right to
died intestate immediately after the dissolution rely upon what appears in the record of the
of the community of property." As used in the Register of Deeds and should, consequently, be
Family Code, presumptive legitime is protected. Alberto cannot recover the land
understood as the equivalent of the legitimate from Rafael but would have the right of
children's legitimes assuming that the spouses b) The parcel
recourse ofhis
against land
wifeis absolute community
had died immediately after the dissolution of property having been acquired during the
Presumptive legitime
the community of property. is required to be marriage and through Paulita's industry despite
delivered to the common children of the the registration being only in the name of
spouses when the marriage is annulled or Paulita. The land being community property, its
declared void ab initio and possibly, when the sale to Rafael without the consent of Alberto is
conjugal partnership or absolute community is void. However, since the land is registered in
dissolved as in the case of legal separation. the name of Paulita as widow, there is nothing
Failure of the parents to deliver the in the title which would raise a suspicion for
presumptive legitime will make their Rafael to make inquiry. He, therefore, is an
Property
subsequent Relations;
marriage nullAbsolute
and void under innocent purchaser for value from whom the
Community
Article 53 of the(1994)
Family Code. land may no longer be recovered.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
c) No. Rafael is an innocent purchaser in good faith 1. Since Bob and Sofia got married In 1970, then the
upon
who, relying on the correctness of the law
certificate of title, acquires rights which are to
be protected by the courts.
Under the established principles of land
registration law, the presumption is that the
transferee of registered land is not aware of
any defect in the title of the property he
purchased. (See Tojonera v. Court of Appeals,
103 SCRA 467). Moreover, the person dealing
with registered land may safely rely on the
correctness of its certificate of title and the law
will in no way oblige him to go behind the
certificate to determine the condition of the
property. [Director of Lands v. Abache, et al.
73 Phil. 606). No strong considerations of
public policy have been presented which would
lead the Court to reverse the established and
sound doctrine that the buyer in good faith of a
registered parcel of land does not have to look
beyond the Torrens
d) The parcel Title
of land and search
is absolute for any
community
hidden
property having been acquired during later
defect or inchoate right which may the
invalidate
marriage and or through
diminishPaulita's
his right to what
industry he
despite
purchased. (Lopez v. Court of Appeals.
registration only in the name of Paulita. The 189
SCRA 271) community property, its sale to
land being
Rafael without the consent of Alberto is void.
Property Relations; Ante Nuptial
Agreement
Suppose (1995)
Tirso and Tessie were married on 2
August 1988 without executing any ante
nuptial agreement. One year after their
marriage, Tirso while supervising the clearing
of Tessie's inherited land upon the latter's
request, accidentally found the treasure not in
the new river bed but on the property of
SUGGESTED
Tessie. ToANSWER:
whom shall the treasure belong?
Since Tirso and Tessie were married before the
Explain.
effectivity of the Family Code, their property
relation is governed by conjugal partnership of
gains. Under Art. 54 of the Civil Code, the
share of the hidden treasure which the law
awards to the finder or the proprietor belongs
to the conjugal partnership of gains. The one-
half share pertaining to Tessie as owner of the
land, and the one-half share pertaining to Tirso
as finder of the treasure, belong to the
Property Relations;
conjugal partnership of gains. Conjugal
Partnership
In 1970, Bobofand Gains (1998)
Issa got married without
executing a marriage settlement. In 1975, Bob
inherited from his father a residential lot upon
which, in 1981, he constructed a two-room
bungalow with savings from his own earnings.
At that time, the lot was worth P800.000.00
while the house, when finished cost
P600,000.00. In 1989 Bob died, survived only
by his wife, Issa and his mother, Sofia.
1. State whether
Assuming that Sofia can rightfully
the relative valuesclaim
of that
both
the house and lot are not conjugal
assets remained at the same proportion:but
exclusive property of her deceased son. [3%]
2. Will your answer be the same if Bob died
before August 3, 1988? [2%]
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Thereafter, Gabby acquired a mansion in Baguio City,
Bar Candidates Patricio Mahigugmaon and Rowena
5-hectare
and a agricultural land in Oriental Mindoro, that governs
decided
Amor to marry is the eachNewotherCivil before
Code (Persons),
the last day in
which he registered exclusively in his name. In which
of the 1991
case, Bar theExaminations.
property relations They thatagreed should
to
the year 2000, Mila's business venture failed, be applied
execute a Marriageas regards Settlement.the property
Rowena herself of the
and her creditors sued her for P10,000,000.00. spouses isthe
prepared thedocument
system ofinrelative her owncommunity
handwriting. or
After obtaining a favorable judgment, the conjugal
They agreed partnership
on the following:
of gains (1) (Article
a conjugal
119, Civil
creditors sought to execute on the spouses' Code). By conjugal
partnership of gains; (2) partnership
each donates of gains,
to thethe
house and lot and condominium unit, as well husband
other fiftyand percentthe wife (50%) place
of his/her
in a common
present fund
a) Discussmansion
as Gabby's the status of the firstland.
and agricultural and the the fruits (3)
property, of Rowena
their separate
shall administer
propertythe and the
amended marriage settlements. (2%) income from
conjugal partnership
their work property;
or Industryand (4)(Article
neither142,
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Civil Code).
may bring an Inaction
this instance,
for the annulment
the lot inherited or by
The marriage settlement between Gabby and
Bob in 1975ofisnullity
declaration his own of their
separate
marriage.property,
Both he
Mila adopting the regime of conjugal A.
having As
signed the to
acquired form, the
agreement is the in Marriage
same
the presence Settlement
by lucrative of two title
partnership of gains still subsists. It is not valid? May it be registered in the registry of the
(par.
(2) witnesses.
2, Art. 148, They did Civilnot,Code).
however,However,
dissolved by the mere agreement of the property? If not, whatfrom steps must be taken to in
house constructed
acknowledge it before a notary
his own
public. savings
spouses during the marriage. It is clear from B.
make itAre the stipulations
registerable?
1981 during the subsistence of his marriage
Article 134 of the Family Code that in the ANOTHERIfANSWER:
C.
valid? the Marriage Settlement is valid as to
with Issa
1. is conjugal property and not legal
exclusive
absence of an express declaration in the form and thebeing
Sofia, above her deceased
stipulations son's
are likewiseheir
property inwith
concurring accordance withspouse
the principle of
marriage settlement, the separation of valid, does it now follow that said Marriage 985,
his surviving (Arts.
"reverse
986 and
SUGGESTED accession"
997,
ANSWER: Civil provided
Code), may for in Art. claim
rightfully 158,
property between the spouses during the Settlement is valid and enforceable?
b) Discuss thetakeeffects of the said Civil
A. Code.
thatYes,theit house
is valid and as tolot formarebecause
not conjugalit is in but
marriage shall not place except by judicial
settlements
order. on the properties acquired by writing.
belong No,
to it
the cannot
hereditarybe registered
estate in
of the
Bob. The
SUGGESTED
the ANSWER:
spouses. (2%) registry
value ofof the property
land being because more it is not the
than a public
cost of
The regime of conjugal partnership of gains document. the improvement To make it registerable,
(Art. 120, Family Code). it must be
governs the properties acquired by the SUGGESTED reformed and ANSWER: has to be notarized.
spouses. All the properties acquired by the SUGGESTED 2. Yes, the answer would still be the same.
ANSWER:
spouses after the marriage belong to the B. Stipulations
Since Bob and(1) Issaandcontracted
(3) are valid because
their marriage
conjugal partnership. Under Article 116 of the they way backare not in contrary
1970, then to law. Stipulation
the property (4) is
relations
Family Code, even if Gabby registered the void that because
will govern it isiscontrary
still thetorelative
law. Stipulation
community
mansion and 5-hectare agricultural land (2) is valid uppartnership
or conjugal to 1/5 of their of respective
gains (Article present
119,
exclusively in his name, still they are presumed Civil Code). It will not matter if Bob died 84,
properties but void as to the excess (Art before
to be conjugal properties, unless the contrary is Family
or afterCode).
August 3. 1988 (effectivity date of the
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c) What properties may be held Family Code], what 15, matters
proved. C. No. on September 1991,isthe themarriage
date when
answerable for Mila's obligations? Explain. the marriage was contracted. As Bob and Issa
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: settlement is not yet valid and enforceable
(2%) contracted their marriage way backtointake 1970.
Since all the properties are conjugal, they can ANOTHERuntil theANSWER:
celebration of the marriage,
the
place property
before relation
the that governs them is still
be held answerable for Mila's obligation if the 2. If Bob died belast
foreday of the3,1991
August 1988. barwhich is
the conjugal partnership of gains. (Art. 158,
obligation redounded to the benefit of the Examinations.
the date the Family Code took effect, the
Property
Civil Code)Relations; Marriage
family. (Art. 121 [3], Family Code) However, the answer will not be the same. Art. 158. Civil
Settlements
On 10 September (1995)1988 Kevin, a 26-year old
burden of proof lies with the creditor claiming Code, would then apply. The land would then
businessman, married Karla, a winsome lass of
against the properties. (Ayala Investment v. be deemed conjugal, along with the house,
Homeowners Savings
Court of Appeals, & Loan
G.R. Bank v. Dailo,
No. 118305, G.R. 18.
February
Without the knowledge of their parents or
since conjugal funds were used in constructing
No. 153802, March 11, 2005) legal guardians, Kevin and Karla entered into
12,1998, reiterated in
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
it. The husband's estate would be entitled to a
an ante-nuptial contract the day before their
Except for the residential house which is the reimbursement of the value of the land from
marriage
Property stipulating
Relations; thatMarriage
conjugal partnership
Settlement;
family home, all other properties of Gabby and conjugal partnership funds.
of gains shall
Conjugal govern their
Partnership ofmarriage.
Gains (2005) At the
Mila may be held answerable for Mila's time of and
theirMila marriage Kevin'satestate wasChurch
worth
Gabby got married Lourdes
obligation. Since the said properties are 50 Million while Karla's
in Quezon City on July was valuedPrior
10, 1990. at 2 Million.
thereto,
conjugal in nature, they can be held liable for A month after their marriage Kevin diedwhereby in a
they executed a marriage settlement
debts and obligations contracted during the freak helicopter accident. He left no will, no
they agreed on the regime of conjugal
marriage to the extent that the family was debts, no obligations. Surviving Kevin, aside
partnership of gains. The marriage settlement
benefited or where the debts were contracted from Karla, are his only
was
Kevinregistered
and Karla? in the relatives:
Explain. Register
2) Determine
his
of brother
Deeds
the of
by both spouses, or by one of them, with the Luis and first cousin Lilia. 1) What property
A family home is a dwelling place of a person Manila, where Mila is a resident. In 1992, they
consent of the other. value of the estate of Kevin, 3) Who are Kevin's
and his family. It confers upon a family the right Relations
jointly governed
acquired a the marriage
residential
heirs? 4) How much is each of Kevin's houseof and lot, as
to enjoy such property, which must remain with well heirsas a condominium
entitled to unit in Makati. In 1995,
the person constituting it as a family home and they decided
inherit? to change their property relations
to
his heirs. It cannot be seized by creditors SUGGESTED ANSWER:the regime of complete separation of
except in special cases. (Taneo, Jr. v. Court of property.
1. Since the Mila
marriageconsented,settlement as she
was was entered then
Appeals, G.R. No. 108532, March 9, 1999) engaged
into without in a
the lucrative
consent business.
and without The the spouses
Property Relations; Marriage then signed aofprivate
participation document
the parents (theydissolving
did not sign their
Settlements (1991) conjugal
the document), partnership
the marriage and settlement
agreeing ison a
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
complete
invalid separation
applying Art. 78,of property.
F.C. which provides
that a minor
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
who according to law may contract marriage may also together, Rico was a salaried employee and Mabel
into
entermarriage settlements but they shall be kept
valid only if the person who may give consent
to the marriage are made parties to the
agreement. (Karla was still a minor at the time
the marriage settlement was executed in
September 1988 because the law, R.A. 6809,
reducing the age of majority to 18 years took
effect on 18 December 1989). The marriage
settlement being void, the property Relations
governing the marriage is, therefore, absolute
2. All the properties
community whichunder
of property, Kevin Art.
and Karla
75 of the
owned
FC. at the time of marriage became
community property which shall be divided
equally between them at dissolution. Since
Kevin owned 50 Million and Karla. 2 Million, at
the time of the marriage, 52 Million constituted
their community property. Upon the death of
Kevin, the community was dissolved and half
of the 52 Million or 26 Million is his share in the
3. Karla and This
community. Luis 26
areMillion
the Intestate heirs
therefore is his
of Kevin.
estate.
4. They are entitled to share the estate equally
under Article 1001 of the NCC. Therefore. Karla
gets 13 Million and Luis gets 13 Million.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
(b) What would your answer be (to the above a) Who will be entitled to the house and lot? (3%)
Luis and Rizza
question) had been living together all the house for Rico
SUGGESTED ANSWER:and did full-time household
time, ie., since twenty years ago, under a valid Tony
choresand for Susan
him. During are entitled to the house
their cohabitation, a and
marriage?
SUGGESTED ANSWER: lot as coowners in equal
parcel of coconut land was acquired by Rico shares. Under Article
a) Art. 147 of the Family Code provides in part 147
from of histhe Family Code, when a man and a
savings.
that when a man and a woman who are woman
After living who are capacitated
together for one (1) year, to marry Rico and each
capacitated to marry each other, live other lived exclusively
Mabel separated. Rico then with
met each
and marriedother as
exclusively with each other as husband and husband
Letty, a single and wife,woman the twenty-six
property acquired (26) years during
of
wife without the benefit of marriage or under a their cohabitation
age. During the marriageare presumed of Rico and to have
Letty,been
void marriage, their wages and salaries shall be obtained
Letty bought by their
a mango joint orchard
efforts, out work oforher industry
own
owned by them in equal shares and the and
personalshallearnings.
be owned a) byWho themwould in own
equalthe shares.
property acquired by both of them through their This is true
riceland, andevenwhat though
property the efforts governs
Relations of one of
work or industry shall be governed by the rules them consisted merely
the ownership? Explain. b) Who would own in his or her care the and
of coownership. In the absence of proof to the b) Would it make
maintenance of whatany
the difference if Tonyofcould
family Relations
and the
coconut land, and property
contrary, properties acquired while they lived not marry Susan because he was previously
household.
governs the ownership? Explain. c) Who
together shall be presumed to have been married to Alice from whom he is legally
would
SUGGESTED own the mango orchard, and what
obtained by their Joint efforts, worker Industry, separated?ANSWER:
SUGGESTED (2%)
ANSWER:
property
Yes,Rico
(a) it wouldRelations
and make
Cora governs
are a the the ownership?
difference.
co-owners Under
of the Article
and shall be owned by them in equal shares. A Explain.
148 of the Family Code,iswhen the parties to the
riceland. The Relations that of co-ownership
party who did not participate in the acquisition cohabitation could
(Art. 147, Family Code,not first marry
paragraph). each other
by the other party of any property shall be because of an
(Optional impediment,
Addendum: However, only after Rico'sthose
deemed to have contributed jointly in the properties marriage to Letty,
acquired by the both halfofinterest
themofthroughRico
acquisition thereof if the former's efforts in the riceland
their actual joint will then become of
contribution absolute
money,
consisted in the care and maintenance of the property, community
or Industry property
shallof beRico
ownedand Letty.)
by them in
family and of the household. Thus: 1) the (b)
commonRico is the in exclusive
proportionowner of the coconut
to their respective
wages and salaries of Luis in the amount of land. The Relations is a sole/single
contributions. The efforts of one of the parties
P200,000.00
Property Relations;shall be divided equally between
Obligations; Benefit proprietorship
in maintaining (Art. 148. Family
the family Code, first
and household are not
Luis and Rizza.
of the Family (2000) 2) the house and lot valued at paragraph
Since Susan is applicable,
did
considered adequate contribution not and not Art. 147
contribute to
in the the
P500.000.00 having been (Optional Addendum: However, after hasRico's
As finance officer of Kacquired
and Co., by both of
Victorino Family
acquisition
acquisition Code). of the
of
marriage to
the house and
properties.
Letty, the
lot, she
coconut land of Susan
Rico
no
them through work or industry
arranged a loan of P5 Million from PNB for the shall be divided share therein. If Tony cohabited with
between themHowever,
in proportion to their respective will then become absolute community
corporation. he was required by the after his legal separation from Alice, the house
property of Rico and Letty.)
contribution, in consonance with the rules on and lot is Letty
his are exclusive property.
bank to sign a Continuing Surety Agreement to (c) Rico and the co-owners. The If he
co-ownership.
SUGGESTED
secure
ANSWER: Hence,
the repayment Luis gets 2\5
of the Luis while
loan. Rizza cohabited with Susan before his legal
(b) The
gets 3\5 property
of P500.000.00.relations3)betweenthe car worth and The Relations is the Absolute Community of
separation from Alice, the house and lot
corporation failed to pay the loan, and the bank Property (Arts, 75,90and9l, Family Code).
Rizza, their marriage having beenowned celebrated
P100,000.00
obtained
20 years
Rizza,
shall
a judgment
ago (under
be exclusively
theagainst it and
Civil donated
Code)
by
Victorino,
shall be by SUCCESSION
belongs to his community or partnership with
jointly the
andsameseverally. having Tobeen
enforce the judgment, to her Alice.
Property Relations; Unions without
governed
her parents. by the conjugal partnership of gains,
the sheriff levied on a farm owned by the Marriage
Luis
Amount and Rizza, (1997)
of both 26 years of age and single,
Successional
under which
SUGGESTED the husband and wife place in a
ANSWER:
conjugal partnership of Victorino and his wife live
Rights exclusively
(2004) Mrs. YT each
with have other been as husband forand
common
The levy is fund
not theproper proceeds,
there beingproducts, fruits that Mr.
no showing XT and married 20
Elsa. Is the levy proper or not? (3%) wife without the benefit of
years. Suppose the wife, YT, died childless, marriage, Luis is
and income
the from their executed
surety agreement separate properties
by the husband and
gainfully employed, Rizza is not employed,
those acquired
redounded to theby eitherofor
benefit theboth An obligation survived only by her husband, XT. What would
spouses
family.
stays
be the at home,
share and of takes
XT from chargeher of the estate as
through their
contracted by efforts
the husband or by chance,
alone and upon
is chargeable
household
SUGGESTED chores.
ANSWER: After living together for a
dissolution
against the of the marriage
conjugal partnershipor ofonlythe when it was inheritance? Why? Explain. (5%)
little
Under over
the twenty
Civil years,
Code, theLuis was able
widow or to save is
widower
contracted forthe
partnership, thenet gainsoforthe
benefit benefits
family.obtained
When the
from
a legalhisandsalary earnings during
compulsory heir ofthat theperiod
deceased the
obligation
by either or was both contracted
spouse shall on behalf of the family
be divided
business between
the law presumes that such obligation
amount
spouse. of
If P200,000.00
the widow is presently
the only deposited
surviving in a
heir,
equally them (Art. 142. Civil Code). will
redound bank.
there A house
being and no lot worth
legitimate P500,000.00 ascendants, was
Thus: 1) to Thethesalary
benefit ofofLuis
the deposited
family. However,in the when
the recently purchased
a third descendants, brothers,for the and same amount
sisters, by the
nephews
bank in the amount of P200.000.00 andofthe
obligation was to guarantee the debt
party, couple.
and Of
nieces, the
she P500.000.00
gets the used
entire by
estate. the
house as andin lot
thevalued
problem, at the obligation is
P500,000.00 presumed
shall be Barrier between illegitimate &
for the benefit
divided equallyof the third
between Luisparty,
and notRizza.the2)family. common-law spouses to purchase the property,
legitimate
A is the relatives
acknowledged (1993)
natural child of B who
Hence, for the
However, the obligation
car worthunder agreement P200.000.00 had come from the sale of palay
the suretydonated
P100.000,00 died when from
harvested A wasthe already
hacienda 22 years
owned old.
byWhenLuis and
to be
to Rizzachargeable
byRelations;
her parentsagainst shall
the partnership
bewithout
considered it mustto be B's full blood brother, C, died he (C) was
Property
(Ayala Investment Unions
v. was
Ching, 286 SCRA P300,000.00 from the rentals of a building
proven
her that
own years the
paraphernal family benefited
property, having and that the
Marriage
For
272) five
benefit was
(2000) since
a lucrative
direct 1989,
result a bankbeen
Tony,agreement,
of (par.
such Vice- survived
belongingby tohis widow
Rizza. and four
In fine, the sumchildrenof of his
acquired
president,
Property and by Susan, an
Relations; title 2,
entertainer,
Unions Art. lived
without 148, Civil other brother D. Claiming that he is entitled to
P500.000.00 had been part of the fruits
Code).
together
1989, as
Marriage
In husband
(1992)
Rico, then aand wife without
widower forty (40) the years inherit from his father's brother C. A brought
received during the period of cohabitation from
benefit
of age, ofcohabited
marriage although with Cora, they a were
widow thirty suit
theirtoseparate
obtain his share ina the
property, car estate
worth of C. Will
SUGGESTED
his ANSWER:
action prosper?
capacitated
(30) years of to age.
manyWhile each living
other. together,
Since Tony's they P100.000.00. being
No, the action of Aused will by not the common-law
prosper. On the
salary
acquired was more
from theirthan enough for
combined their needs,
earnings a parcel spouses,
(a) How, under was donated Just months ago to Rizza
premise that the B, law C and should D thearebank deposit
legitimate
Susan stopped working and merely "kept
of riceland. by her parents.
of P200,000.00 Luis and Rizza now decide atto
After Rico and Cora brothers, as an the house and
illegitimate lotof
child valued
B, A cannot
house". During that separated,
period, Tony Ricowaslived
able to terminate
P500.000.00 their cohabitation,
and thefrom car worth and they ask you
together inherit in intestacy C whoP100.000.00
is a legitimate be
buy a lot with
and houseMabel,ina amaiden sixteen (16)
plush subdivision. to give
allocated themto your
them? legal advice on the following:
years of age. While living Tony and Susan brother of B. Only the wife of C
Page in her
41 own
of right
119
However, after five years,
and the
decided to separate.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
legitimate relatives of C (i.e. the children of D as C's
How will you rule on Jorge's opposition to the probate
legitimate nephews inheriting as collateral Maria's
of will. If you were the Judge?
relatives) can inherit in intestacy. (Arts. 992, SUGGESTED ANSWER:
1001, 1OO5 and 975, Civil Code) As Judge, I shall rule as follows: Jorge's
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: opposition should be sustained in part and
The action of A will not prosper. Being an denied in part. Jorge's omission as spouse of
illegitimate, he is barred by Article 992 of the Maria is not preterition of a compulsory heir in
Civil Code from inheriting ab intestato from the the direct line. Hence, Art. 854 of the Civil
legitimate relatives of his father. Code does not apply, and the institution of
Barrier between illegitimate & Miguela as heir is valid, but only to the extent
legitimate
Cristina relatives (1996)
the illegitimate daughter of Jose and of the free portion of one-half. Jorge is still
Maria, died intestate, without any descendant ALTERNATIVE ANSWERS:
entitled to one-half of the estate as his
or ascendant. Her valuable estate is being a) As Judge, I shall rule as follows: Jorge's
legitime. (Art. 1001, Civil Code)
claimed by Ana, the legitimate daughter of opposition should be sustained in part and
Jose, and Eduardo, the legitimate son of Maria. denied in part. This is a case of ineffective
Is either, both, or neither of them entitled to disinheritance under Art, 918 of the Civil Code,
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
inherit? Explain. because the omission of the compulsory heir
Neither Ana nor Eduardo is entitled to inherit of Jorge by Maria was intentional. Consequently,
ab intestato from Cristina. Both are legitimate the institution of Miguela as heir is void only
relatives of Cristina's illegitimate parents and insofar as the legitime of Jorge is prejudiced.
therefore they fall under the prohibition Accordingly, Jorge is entitled to his legitime of
prescribed by Art. 992, NCC (Manuel v. Ferrer, b) As Judge,
one-half of theI shall
estate,rule
andasMiguela
follows:gets
Jorge's
the
427).
242 SCRA 477; Diaz v. Court of Appeals, 182 opposition
other half. should be sustained. This is a case
SCRA of preterition under Article 854 Civil Code, the
Collation result of the omission of Jorge as compulsory
(1993)
Joaquin Reyes bought from Julio Cruz a heir having the same right equivalent to a
residential lot of 300 square meters in Quezon legitimate child "in the direct line" is that total
City for which Joaquin paid Julio the amount of intestacy will arise, and Jorge will inherit the
P300,000.00, When the deed was about to be c)
entireAsestate.
Judge, I shall rule as follows: the
prepared Joaquin told Julio that it be drawn in opposition should be denied since it is
the name of Joaquina Roxas, his acknowledged predicated upon causes not recognized by law
natural child. Thus, the deed was so prepared 1that the
as grounds forwill was made without
disallowance of a wll,his
to wit:
and executed by Julio. Joaquina then built a knowledge;
house on the lot where she, her husband and 2that the will was made without his
children resided. Upon Joaquin's death, his consent; and
legitimate children sought to recover 3that it has the effect of depriving him of
possession and ownership of the lot, claiming his legitime, which is a ground that goes
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
that Joaquina Roxas was but a trustee of
Yes, because there is a presumed donation in their into the intrinsic validity of the will and
father. Will the action against Joaquina Roxas need not be resolved during the probate
favor of Joaquina under Art. 1448 of the Civil
prosper?
Code
v. Reyes,
(De 27 Santos 1992, 206 SCRA 437).
losJanuary
proceedings. However, the opposition may
However, the donation should be collated to be entertained for, the purpose of securing
the hereditary estate and the legitime of the to the husband his right to the legitime on
ALTERNATIVE
other ANSWER:be preserved.
heirs should the theory that the will constitutes an
Yes, the action against Joaquina Roxas will ineffective disinheritance under Art. 918 of
prosper, but only to the extent of the aliquot the Civil Code,
hereditary rights of the legitimate children as
heirs. Joaquina will be entitled to retain her own
share as an illegitimate child, (Arts. 1440 and
1453. Civil Code; Art. 176, F. C.)
Disinheritance vs.
Preterition
Maria, to spite(1993)
her husband Jorge, whom she
suspected was having an affair with another
woman, executed a will, unknown to him,
bequeathing all the properties she inherited
from her parents, to her sister Miguela. Upon
her death, the will was presented for probate.
Jorge opposed probate of the will on the ground
that the will was executed by his wife without
his knowledge, much less consent, and that it
deprived him of his legitime. After all, he had
given her no cause for disinheritance, added
Jorge in his opposition.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
This is a case of ineffective disinheritance because
1028 for being in consideration of her adulterous
a man that the father did not approve of is not
marrying with the testator. She is, therefore, disqualified to receive the
relation
legacy. Ernie will receive the legacy in his favor because it is not
a ground for disinheriting D. Therefore, the inofficious. The institution of Baldo, which applies only to the free
institution of D-l and D-2 shall be annulled portion, will be respected. In sum, the estate of Lamberto shall be
insofar as it prejudices the legitime of D, and distributed as follows:
the institution of D-l and D-2 shall only apply
on the free portion in the amount of
P500,000.00. Therefore, D, D-l and D-2 will get Heir Legitime Legacy Institution TOTAL
their legitimes of P500.000.00 divided into
Baldo 500,000 200.000 700,000 Elvira 250,000
three equal parts and D-l and D-2 will get a 250,000 Ernie 50,000 50,000 TOTAL 750,000
reduced D P166,666.66
testamentary disposition of Heir
50,000 200,000 1,000,000 Legitime
D-l P166,666.66
P250,000.00 + the
each. Hence, P250.000.00
shares will be:
D-2 P166,666.66 + P250,000.00 Distribution

ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:


Disinheritance; Ineffective; Same answer as the first Alternative Answer
Preterition
In his last will (2000) and testament, Lamberto 1) except as to distribution.
of Justice
Wilmas Jurado solved
disinherits his daughter Wilma because "she is Legacy
this problem differently. In Institution
his opinion, the
disrespectful towards me and raises her voice TOTAL
legitime of the heir who was disinherited is
talking to me", 2) omits entirely his spouse distributed among the other compulsory heirs
Elvira, 3) leaves a legacy of P100,000.00 to his in proportion to their respective legitimes, while
mistress Rosa and P50,000.00 to his driver Legitime
his share in the intestate portion. If any, is
Ernie and 4) institutes his son Baldo as his sole distributed among the other legal heirs by
SUGGESTED
heir. HowANSWER: will you distribute his estate of accretion under Article 1018 of the NCC in
The disinheritance of Wilma was ineffective
P1,000,000.00? (5%) proportion to their respective
Baldo intestate shares.
because the ground relied upon by the testator
does not constitute maltreatment under Article In sum the distribution 250,0000
shall be as follows:
125,000
919(6) of the New Civil Code. Hence, the 200,000
testamentary provisions in the will shall be 575,000
Wilma
annulled but only to the extent that her (250.000)
legitime was impaired.
The total omission of Elvira does not constitute
preterition because she is not a compulsory
heir in the direct line. Only compulsory heirs in
the direct line may be the subject of Elvira
preterition. Not having been preterited, she 250,000
125.000
will be entitled only to her legitime.
The legacy in favor of Rosa is void under Article
1028 for being in consideration of her 375.000
Ernie
adulterous relation with the testator. She is,
therefore, disqualified to receive the legacy of
100,000 pesos. The legacy of 50,000 pesos in
favor of Ernie is not inofficious not having 50,000
50.000
exceeded the free portion. Hence, he shall be
The institution of Baldo, which applies only to d) As Judge, I shallTOTAL
rule as follows: Jorge is
entitled to receive it. 500,000 from the estate
the free portion, shall be respected. In sum, entitled to receive his legitime
250,000
the estate of Lamberto will be distributed as of his wife. He was50,000
not disinherited in the will
follows: even assuming that he gave ground for
200,000
Baldo----------------- disinheritance, hence, he is still entitled to his
1,000,000
450,000 legitime. Jorge, however, cannot receive
Wilma--------------- anything from the free portion. He cannot claim
250,000 preterition as he is not a compulsory heir in the
Elvira-----------------1,000,000 direct line. There being no preterition, the
250,000 institution of the sister was valid and the only
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: Disinheritance;
right of Jorge is to claim his legitime.
Ernie-----------------
The disinheritance of Wilma was effective because disrespect of, Ineffective
Mr. (1999) has three daughters D, D-l
Palma, widower,
50,000
and raising of voice to, her father constitute maltreatment under
Article 919(6) of the New Civil Code. She is, therefore, not entitled to
and D-2. He executes a Will disinheriting D
inherit anything. Her inheritance will go to the other legal heirs. The because she married a man he did not like,
total omission of Elvira is not preterition because she is not a and instituting daughters D-1 and D-2 as his
compulsory heir in the direct line. She will receive only her legitime. heirs to his entire estate of P 1,000,000.00,
The legacy in favor of Rosa is void under Article
Upon Mr, Palma's death, how should his estate
SUGGESTED
be divided? ANSWER:
Explain. (5%)
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
died, he was succeeded by his surviving wife (c) X = 1/2 by representation of B C=l/2 Y = 1/4
Irma, and his legitimate unborn child. They by representation of C
divided the estate equally between them, the
child excluding the parents of Isidro. An unborn (d) X - 1/3 in his own right Y- 1/3 in his own
child is considered born for all purposes right 2 - 1/3 in his own right
favorable to it provided it is born later. The
child was considered born because, having an
intra-uterine life of more than seven months, it
lived for a few minutes after its complete
delivery. It was legitimate because it was born
within the valid marriage of the parents.
Succession is favorable to it. When the child
died, Irma inherited the share of the child.
However, the share of the child in the hands of
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Irma
If the marriageto isreserva
is subject void. troncal
Irma hasfor the
no
benefit of the relatives of the child within
successional rights with respect to Isidro but the
third
she degree
would of consanguinity
have and rights
successional who belong
with
to the line of Isidro.
respect to the child.
Heirs; Intestate Heirs;
Shares
Luis was(2003)
survived by two legitimate children,
two illegitimate children, his parents, and two
brothers. He left an estate of P1 million. Luis
died intestate. Who are his intestate heirs, and
how much is the share of each in his estate?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The intestate heirs are the two (2) legitimate
children and the two (2) illegitimate children.
In intestacy the estate of the decedent is
divided among the legitimate and illegitimate
-half
childrenthe such
share that
of each
the legitimate
share of each
Their
child. share child
illegitimate are : For each legitimate
is one
child P333,333.33 For each
illegitimate child P166,666.66
Heirs; Intestate Heirs; Reserva
(Article 983, New Civil Code; Article 176, Family
Code)
Troncal
Isidro and(1995)
Irma, Filipinos, both 18 years of age,
Intestate were passengers of Flight No. 317 of Oriental
Succession
F legitimate children: A, B, and C. B Airlines.
(1992)
had three (3) has The plane they boarded was of
(1) legitimate child X. C has two (2) legitimate
one Philippine registry. While en route from Manila
children: Y and Z. F and A rode together in a to Greece some passengers hijacked the plane,
car and perished together at the same time in held the chief pilot hostage at the cockpit and
a vehicular accident, F and A died, each of ordered him to fly instead to Libya. During the
them leaving substantial estates in intestacy. hijacking Isidro suffered a heart attack and was
on the verge of death. Since Irma was already
a) Who are the intestate heirs of F? What are their
respective fractional shares? eight months pregnant by Isidro, she pleaded
b) Who are the intestate heirs of A? What are their
to the hijackers to allow the assistant pilot to
respective fractional shares? solemnize her marriage with Isidro. Soon after
c) If B and C both predeceased F, who are the Fs marriage, Isidro expired. As the plane
heirs? What are their respective fractional
intestate landed in Libya Irma gave birth. However, the
they
shares?inherit
Do in their own right or baby by died a few minutes after complete
Explain your answer.
representation? delivery. Back in the Philippines Irma
d) If B and C both repudiated their shares in Immediately filed a claim for inheritance. The
the estate of F who are F's intestate heirs? parents of Isidro opposed her claim contending
What are their respective fractional shares? that the marriage between her and Isidro was
Do they inherit in their own right or by void ab initio on the following grounds: (a) they
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Explain your answer,
representation?
(a) B = had not given their consent to the marriage of
1/2 their
2. son;
Does (b) have
Irma thereany
wassuccessional
no marriage rights
license;
at (c)
(b) B = 1/2 Z = 1/4 by representation of C C= 1/2 the
all? solemnizing
Discuss fully.officer had no authority to
Article 982 of the Civil Code provides that perform
SUGGESTED the marriage; and, (d) the solemnizing
ANSWER:
grandchildren inherit by right of 2. Irma
officer didsucceeded
not file an to the estate
affidavit of Isidrowith
of marriage as
representation. his
the surviving spouse
proper civil to the estate of her
registrar.
legitimate child. When Isidro
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
spouse has in the succession the same sharebeasset aside as Mario's conjugal share from the
each of the
that of children, c) C has no share property.
community The other half, amounting to one million pesos, is her
conjugal share (net estate), and should be distributed to her
because his father is still alive hence intestate heirs. Applying the above provision of law, Michelle and
succession by representation shall not apply Jorelle, Tessie's nieces, are entitled to one-half of her conjugal
d)
(Art. 975). D inherits P30.000 which is the share of share worth one million pesos, or 500,000 pesos, while the other
his father E who predeceased T by virtue of one-half amounting to P500,000 will go to Mario, Tessie's surviving
Art. 981 on the right of representation. ArticleMichelle
spouse. 977 of andthe Civil
Jorelle areCode provides
then entitled thatpesos
to P250,000 heirs
each
who as their hereditary
repudiate share.
their share cannot be
e) F has no share because his father G
repudiated the inheritance. Under Article 977 represented.
heirs who repudiate their share may not be Intestate
represented. Succession
"T" died intestate (1997) on 1 September 1997.He was
Intestate survived by M (his mother), W (his widow), A
Intestate
Succession
Enrique died,(1998)
leaving a net hereditary estate of and and
Mr. B (his
Succession Mrs.legitimate
(1999)
Cruz, who children),
are childless,C (his grandson,
met with
P1.2 million. He is survived by his widow, three being
a serious the motor
legitimate vehicle son accident
of B), D (his with other
Mr. Cruz
legitimate children, two legitimate grandson,
at the wheel beingandthe Mrs. son Cruz of Eseated
who was a
beside him,
grandchildren sired by a legitimate child who legitimate
resulting inson theof,instant
and who death predeceased,
of Mr. Cruz. "T"),
Mrs.
predeceased him, and two recognized and
CruzF was (his grandson,
still alive being when the helpson of G,but
came a she
SUGGESTED
illegitimateANSWER:children. Distribute the estate in legitimate
also died son on who the repudiated
way to the thehospital.
inheritance The
Under
intestacy. the [5%]
theory of Concurrence, the shares from "T").
couple His distributable
acquired propertiesnet estate
worth One is Million
are as follows: A (legitimate child) = P200,000 P120.000.00. HowPesos
(P1,000,000.00) should this amount
during be
their marriage,
B (legitimate child) = P200,000 C (legitimate SUGGESTED ANSWER:
sharedare
which in intestacy
being among the surviving heirs?
child) = P200,000 D (legitimate child) = O The legal heirs
SUGGESTED ANSWER: are A, B, D, and W. C is of both
claimed by the parents
spouses
excluded in equal
by claim shares.
B whoofis both Is
still alive. the claim
D inherits of both
(predeceased] E (legitimate child of D) = (a) No, the parents is not in valid.
sets of parents
representation valid and why? (3%)
P100,000 - by right of representation F (legitimate When Mr. Cruz of E who
died, he predeceased.
was succeeded F isby his
child of D) = P100,000 - by right of representation excluded
wife and because
his parents of the
as repudiation
his intestate of G, the
heirs who
G (illegitimate child) = P100,000 - 1/2 share of the T. The
predecessor.
will shareanswer may
hisMestate beequally.
is excluded premised by the onlegitimate
His two
estate was
legitimate child H (illegitimate child) = P100,000 - theories:
children
0.5 Million ofthe Theory
pesos which of Exclusion
is his halfand the in the
share
1/2 shareANSWER:
of the legitimate child W (Widow) = Theory of Concurrence.
absolute community amounting to 1 Million
ANOTHER
P200.000 Under
Pesos. the His Theory
wife, will, of Exclusion
therefore,the legitimes
inherit O.25
Under the- theory
same share as legitimate
of Exclusion child
the free portion
of the heirs are accorded
Million Pesos and his parents will inherit them and the free0.25
(P300,000) is distributed only among the
legitimate children and is given to them in
portion
When
Million Mrs. will be
Pesos. Cruz given died, exclusively
she was tosucceeded the by
addition to their legitime. All other Intestate heirs legitimate
her parents descendants.
as her Hence
intestate under
heirs. the
They will
are entitled only to their respective legitimes. The Exclusion
inherit all Theory: of her Aestate will getconsisting
P20.000.00.ofand herP 0.5
distribution is as follows:Legitime Free Portion Total 13.333.33 (1/3 of the free
Million half share in the absolute community portion) B will get P
A [legitimate child) P150.000 + P 75,000 - P225.000 20,000.00.
and her and 0.25P13. 333.33 inheritance
Million (1/3 of the free from her
B {legitimate child) P150.000 + P150.000 - portion)
husband, D will get
or a is total P20.000.00.
of 0.750 and P13.
Million 333.33
Pesos.
P225.000 C (legitimate child) P150.000 + P 75.000 - W, the widow limited to the legitime of
In sum,
(1/3 of thethe free parents
portion) of Mr. Cruz will inherit
P225.000 D (legitimate child) 0 0 0 E (legitimate child P20.000.00 Under the Theory of
250,000 Pesos while the parents of Mrs. Cruz
of D) P 75,000 + P35.500 - P112,500 F (legitimate Concurrence. In addition to their legitimes,
child of D) P 75.000 + P 37.500 - P112,500 G will inherit 750,000 Pesos.
the heirs of A, B, D and W will be given equal
Intestate
(illegitimate child) P 75.000 0 -P 75,500 H A: P20.000.00 plus P10.000.00 (1 /4 of the free
(illegitimate child) P 75.000 0 - P 75,500 W
shares
Succession
Eugenio in died
the (2000)
free portions:
without issue, leaving several
(Widow) P150,000 0 -P150.000
B: P20,000.00
portion) plus P10.000.00 (l/4 of the free
parcels of land
C: P20,000.00 plus P10.000.00 in Bataan. He was (1/4survived
of the free by
portlon)
Antonio,
portion) his legitimate
W: P20,000.00 plus P10,000.00 (l/4 of the free brother; Martina, the
Intestate only
portion)daughter
Alternative of Answer: his Shares predeceased
in IntestacysisterT-
Succession
Tessie (1998) by her husband Mario,
died survived Mercedes;
decedent Estate: P120.000.00 Survivedchildren
and five legitimate by: M - of
and two nieces, Michelle and Jorelle, who are Joaquin, another predeceased
Mother............................None W - brother. Shortly
the legitimate children of an elder sister who after Eugenio's death,
Widow.............................P 30,000.00 Antonio
A- also died,
had predeceased her. The only property she leaving three
Son.................................P legitimate
30,000.00 B- children.
left behind was a house and lot worth two Subsequently, Martina, the children
Son.................................P30.000.00 C - Grandson of (son
Joaquin
of
million pesos, which Tessie and her husband and the children
B).............None D - Grandson of (sonAntonioof E whoexecuted
predeceasedan
had acquired with the use of Mario's savings extrajudicial settlement
T)................P 30,000.00 F - Grandson of (sontheof Gestate
who of
from his income as a doctor. How much of the Eugenio, dividing it among themselves.
repudiated the Inheritance from"T").......................None The
SUGGESTED
property orANSWER:
its value, if any, may Michelle and succeeding year, a petition to annul the
Article 1001 of the Civil Code provides, "Should brothers and
Jorelle
sisters or claim as their
their children survivehereditary
with the widowshares?
or widower,[5%]
the latter
extrajudicial
Explanation: settlement was filed by Antero, an
shall be entitled to one-half of the inheritance and the brothers and illegitimate
a) The son
mother of (M)
Antonio,
cannotwho inheritclaims
from he T is
sisters or their children to the other half." Tessie's gross estate entitled
because to
SUGGESTED ANSWER:undershare Art. in the
985 estate
the of
ascendants Eugenio. shall The
consists of a house and lot acquired during her marriage, making it defendants filed a legitimate
motionshould tochildren
dismiss on the
part of the community property. Thus, one-half of the said property
inherit
The in
motion default to of
dismiss be and
granted.
would have to
ground
b)
descendants
Article that
The Antero
992widow'sof
does is barred
share
the deceased.
not byAntero
is P30.000.00
apply. Article is 992not of
the
because
claiming Civilunder
any Code Art, from
996 it states
inheritance inheriting that iffrom
from Eugenio. theHethe is
legitimate
widow or widower
claiming brother
his share ofinhis
and thefather.
legitimate How will
children
inheritance oryou
of his
resolve
descendants
father the motion?
consisting are left, of(5%)the surviving
his father's share in the
inheritance of
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Eugenio (Dela Merced v. Dela Merced, Gr No. 126707, 5M inherited by Mrs. Luna from Mr. Luna will be
25
February 1999). from her by her parents.
inherited
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
It depends. If Antero was not acknowledged by However, if the child had intra-uterine life of
Antonio, the motion to dismiss should be less than 7 months, half of the estate of Mr.
granted because Antero is not a legal heir of Luna, or 5M, will be inherited by the widow
Antonio. If Antero was acknowledged, the (Mrs. Luna), while the other half, or 5M, will be
motion should be denied because Article 992 is inherited by the parents of Mr. Luna. Upon the
not applicable. This is because Antero is death of Mrs. Luna, her estate of 5M will be
claiming his inheritance from his illegitimate inherited by her own parents.
Intestate Succession;
father, not from Eugenio. Reserva Legitime
Troncal
Mr. Luna (1999)
died, leaving an estate of Ten Million (1997)
"X", the decedent, was survived by W (his
(P1 0,000,000.00) Pesos. His widow gave birth widow). A (his son), B (a granddaughter, being
to a child four months after Mr, Luna's death, the daughter of A) and C and D (the two
but the child died five hours after birth. Two acknowledged illegitimate children of the
days after the child's death, the widow of Mr. decedent). "X" died this year (1997) leaving a
Luna also died because she had suffered from net estate of P180,000.00. All were willing to
difficult childbirth. The estate of Mr. Luna is succeed, except A who repudiated the
now being claimed by his parents, and the inheritance from his father, and they seek your
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
parents of his widow. Who is entitled to Mr. legal advice on how much each can expect to
Half of the estate of Mr. Luna will go to the
Luna'a estate and why? (5%) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
receive as their respective shares in the
parents of Mrs. Luna as their inheritance from The heirs are B, W, C and D. A inherits nothing
Mrs. Luna, while the other half will be inherited distribution of the estate. Give your answer.
because of his renunciation. B inherits a
by the parents of Mr. Luna as the reservatarios legitime of P90.000.00 as the nearest and only
of the reserved property inherited by Mrs. Luna legitimate descendant, inheriting in his own
from her child. right not by representation because of A's
When Mr. Luna died, his heirs were his wife and
renunciation. W gets a legitime equivalent to
the unborn child. The unborn child inherited
one-half (1 / 2) that of B amounting to P45.000.
because the inheritance was favorable to it and
C and D each gets a legitime equivalent to one-
it was born alive later though it lived only for
half (1/2) that of B amounting to P45.000.00
five hours. Mrs. Luna inherited half of the 10
each. But since the total exceeds the entire
Million estate while the unborn child inherited
estate, their legitimes would have to be
the other half. When the child died, it was ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
reduced corresponding to P22.500.00 each
survived by its mother, Mrs. Luna. As the only INTESTATE
(Art. 895. CC). The total of all of these amounts
heir, Mrs. Luna inherited, by operation of law, SUCCESSION ESTATE:
to P180.000.00.
W- (widow gets 1/2 share) P90.000.00 (Art. 998) A-
the estate of the child consisting of its 5 Million P180,000.00
(son who repudiated his inheritance) None Art.
inheritance from Mr. Luna. In the hands of Mrs.
977) B - (Granddaughter) None C - (Acknowledged
Luna, what she inherited from her child was illegitimate child) P45.000.00 (Art.998) D -
subject to reserva troncal for the benefit of the (Acknowledged illegitimate child) P45,000.00 (Art.
relatives of the child within the third degree of 998) The acknowledged illegitimate child gets 1/2
consanguinity and who belong to the family of of the share of each legitimate child.
When Mrs. Luna died, she was survived by her
Mr. Luna, the line where the property came
parents as her only heirs. Her parents will Legitime; Compulsory
from.
inherit her estate consisting of the 5 Million she Heirs
Luis (2003)
was survived by two legitimate children,
inherited from Mr. Luna. The other 5 Million she two illegitimate children, his parents, and two
inherited from her child will be delivered to the brothers. He left an estate of P1 million. Who
parents of Mr. Luna as beneficiaries of the are the compulsory heirs of Luis, how much is
reserved property. the legitime of each, and how much is the free
In sum, 5 Million Pesos of Mr. Luna's estate will SUGGESTED ANSWER:
portion of his estate, if any?
go to the parents of Mrs. Luna, while the other The compulsory heirs are the two legitimate
5 Million Pesos will go to the parents of Mr. children and the two illegitimate children. The
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Luna as reservatarios.
If the child had an intra-uterine life of not less than 7 months, it parents are excluded by the legitimate children,
inherited from the father. In which case, the estate of 10M will be while the brothers are not compulsory heirs at
divided equally between the child and the widow as legal heirs. all. Their respective legitimate are: a) The
Upon the death of the child, its share of 5M shall go by operation of legitime of the two (2) legitimate children is one
law to the mother, which shall be subject to reserva troncal. Under half (1/2) of the estate (P500,000.00) to be divided
Art. 891, the reserva is in favor of relatives belonging to the
paternal line and who are within 3 degrees from the child. The between them equally, or P250,000.00 each. b)
parents of Mr, Luna are entitled to the reserved portion which is 5M The legitimate of each illegitimate child is one-
as they are 2 degrees related from child. The half(1/2) the legitime of each legitimate child or
P125,000.00.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
c) Since the total legitime of the compulsory heirs is
legitime of the legitimate children and it follows that
P750,000.00, the balance of P250,000.00 is legitime
the of one legitimate child is P100,000.
the free portion. The legitime, therefore, of the oldest son is
P100,000. However, since the donation given
Legitime; Compulsory Heirs vs. Secondary him was P100,000, he has already received in
Compulsory Heirs (2005) full his legitime and he will not receive
Emil, the testator, has three legitimate anything anymore from the decedent. The
children, Tom, Henry and Warlito; a wife remaining P900,000, therefore, shall go to the
named Adette; parents named Pepe and Pilar; ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
four younger children by institution in the will,
an illegitimate child, Ramon; brother, Mark; Assuming that the donation is valid as to form
to be divided equally among them. Each will
and a sister, Nanette. Since his wife Adette is and substance, Juan cannot invoke preterition
receive P225,000.
well-off, he wants to leave to his illegitimate because he actually had received a donation
child as much of his estate as he can legally inter vivos from the testatrix (III Tolentino
do. His estate has an aggregate net amount of 188,1992 ed.). He would only have a right to a
Pl,200,000.00, and all the above-named completion of his legitime under Art. 906 of the
relatives are still living. Emil now comes to you Civil Code. The estate should be divided equally
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
for advice in making a will. How will you among the five children who will each receive
P600,000.00 legitime to be divided equally P225,000.00 because the total hereditary
distribute his estate according to his wishes
between Tom, Henry and Warlito as the estate, after collating the donation to Juan (Art.
without violating the law on testamentary
legitimate children. Each will be entitled to 1061, CC), would be P1 million. In the actual
succession? (5%)
P200,000.00. (Art. 888, Civil Code) P100,000.00 distribution of the net estate, Juan gets nothing
-- share of Ramon the illegitimate child. Preterition; Compulsory
while his siblings will get P225,000.00 each.
Equivalent to 1/2 of the share of each Heir (1999)
legitimate child. (Art. 176, Family Code) (a) Mr, Cruz, widower, has three legitimate
P200,000.00 Adette the wife. Her share is children, A, B and C. He executed a Will
equivalent to the share of one legitimate child. instituting as his heirs to his estate of One
(Art. 892, par. 2, Civil Code) Million (P1,000,000.00) Pesos his two children A
Pepe and Pilar, the parents are only secondary and B, and his friend F. Upon his death, how
compulsory heirs and they cannot inherit if the (b) In the
should Mr.preceding question,
Cruz's estate suppose
be divided? Mr. Cruz
Explain.
primary compulsory heirs (legitimate children) instituted
(3%) his two children A and B as his heirs
are alive. (Art. 887, par. 2, Civil Code) in his Will, but gave a legacy of P 100,000.00 to
his friend F. How should the estate of Mr, Cruz
Brother Mark and sister Nanette are not be divided upon his death? Explain, (2%)
compulsory heirs since they are not included SUGGESTED ANSWER:
in the enumeration under Article 887 of the (a) Assuming that the institution of A, B and F
Civil Code. were to the entire estate, there was preterition
The remaining balance of P300,000.00 is the of C since C is a compulsory heir in the direct
free portion which can be given to the line. The preterition will result in the total
illegitimate child Ramon as an instituted heir. annulment of the institution of heirs. Therefore,
(Art. 914, Civil Code) If so given by the the institution of A, B and F will be set aside
decedent, Ramon would receive a total of and Mr. Cuz's estate will be divided, as in
Preterition
P400,000.00. intestacy, equally among A, B and C as follows:
(2001)
Because her eldest son Juan had been A - P333,333.33; B - P333.333.33; and C -
pestering her for capital to start a business, (b) On the same assumption as letter (a), there
P333,333.33.
Josefa gave him P100,000. Five years later, was preterition of C. Therefore, the institution of
Josefa died, leaving a last will and testament in A and B is annulled but the legacy of
which she instituted only her four younger P100.000.00 to F shall be respected for not
children as her sole heirs. At the time of her being inofficious. Therefore, the remainder of
death, her only properly left was P900,000.00 P900.000.00 will be divided equally among A, B
in a bank. Juan opposed the will on the ground and C.
of preterition. How should Josefa's estate be
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
divided among her heirs? State briefly the
There was no preterition of the oldest son
reason(s) for your answer. (5%)
because the testatrix donated 100,000 pesos
to him. This donation is considered an advance
on the son's inheritance. There being no
preterition, the institutions in the will shall be
respected but the legitime of the oldest son
has to be completed if he received less.
After collating the donation of P100.000 to the
remaining property of P900,000, the estate of
the testatrix is P1,000,000. Of this amount,
one-half or P500,000, is the
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
objected, arguing that it should be in Jolo before a
mother, in favor of another sister, with their mother
court
Shariasince his lands are in Sulu. But Adils only
not giving her authority thereto but even
sisters in Pakistan want the proceedings held in signing said deeds, there is a valid partition
Lahore before a Pakistani court. Which court inter vivos between the mother and her
has jurisdiction and is the proper venue for the children which cannot be revoked by the
intestate proceedings? The law of which mother. Said deeds of sale are not contracts
country shall govern succession to his estate? entered into with respect to future inheritance.
SUGGESTED
(5%) ANSWER: "It would be unjust for the mother to revoke
In so far as the properties of the decedent the sales to a son and to execute a simulated
located in the Philippines are concerned, they sale in favor of a daughter who already
are governed by Philippine law (Article 16, Civil benefited by the partition."
Code). Under Philippine law, the proper venue SUGGESTED ANSWER:
for the settlement of the estate is the domicile C. Yes, under Arts. 51 and 52 of the New
of the decedent at the time of his death. Since Family Code. In case of legal separation,
the decedent last resided in Cebu City, that is annulment of marriage, declaration of nullity of
the proper venue for the intestate settlement marriage and the automatic termination of a
However,
of the successional rights to the estate
his estate. subsequent marriage by the reappearance of
of ADIL are governed by Pakistani law, his the absent spouse, the common or community
national law, under Article 16 of the Civil Code. property of the spouses shall be dissolved and
Art, 51. In said partition, the value of the
liquidated.
Succession; Death; Presumptive presumptive legitimes of all common children,
Legitime
a) (1991)
For purposes of succession, when is death deemedcomputed as of the date of the final judgment
occur or take place? b) May succession be
to of the trial court, shall be delivered in cash,
conferred by contracts or acts inter property or sound securities, unless the
vivos? Illustrate. c) Is there any law which parties, by mutual agreement, judicially
allows the delivery to approved, had already provided for such
compulsory heirs of their presumptive legitimesThe children of their guardian, or the trustee of
matters.
the lifetime of their parents? If so, in what
during their property, may ask for the enforcement of
instances?
SUGGESTED ANSWER: the judgment.
A. Death as a fact is deemed to occur when it The delivery of the presumptive legitimes
actually takes place. Death is presumed to take herein prescribed shall in no way prejudice the
place in the circumstances under Arts. 390-391 ultimate successional rights of the children
of the Civil Code. The time of death is accruing upon the death of either or both of
presumed to be at the expiration of the 10year the parents; but the value of the properties
period as prescribed by Article 390 and at the already received under the decree of
moment of disappearance under Article 391. annulment or absolute nullity shall be
B. Under Art. 84 of the Family Code amending Art. 52. Theas
considered judgment
advances of on
annulment or of
their legitime.
Art 130 of the Civil Code, contractual absolute nullity of the marriage, the partition
succession is no longer possible since the law and distribution of the properties of the
now requires that donations of future property spouses, and the delivery of the children's
be governed by the provisions on the presumptive legitimes shall be recorded in the
ALTERNATIVE
testamentary ANSWER:
succession and formalities of appropriate civil registry and registries of
B. In the case of Coronado vs.CA(l91 SCRA81),
wills. property; otherwise, the same shall not affect
it was ruled that no property passes under a Wills; Codicil; Institution of Heirs;
third persons.
will without its being probated, but may under Substitution of Heirs (2002)
Article 1058 of the Civil Code of 1898, be By virtue of a Codicil appended to his will,
[Many-Oy
sustained vs.
as aCA 144SCRA33).
partition by an act inter vivos Theodore devised to Divino a tract of sugar
land, with the obligation on the part of Divino
And in the case of Chavez vs, IAC 1191 or his heirs to deliver to Betina a specified
SCRA211), it was ruled that while the law
volume of sugar per harvest during Betinas
prohibits contracts upon future inheritance, the Proceedings;
lifetime. It is alsoIntestate
stated in the Proceedings;
Codicil that in
partition by the parent, as provided in Art. 1080 theJurisdiction
In his the(2004)
eventlifetime, a Pakistani
obligation citizen,
is not fulfilled, ADIL,
Betina
is a case expressly authorized by law. A person marriedimmediately
should three times seizeunder Pakistani
the property fromlaw.
has two options in making a partition of his When
Divino he died anheirs
or latters old and
widower,
turn ithe lefttobehind
over
estate: either by an act inter vivos or by will. If six children, two sisters, three
Theodores compulsory heirs. Divino failed homes, andtoan
the partition is by will, it is imperative that such estate worth at least 30 million pesos
fulfill the obligation under the Codicil. Betina in the
partition must be executed in accordance with of heirs.
Philippines.(3%) b)
He Distinguish
was born between
in Lahore
brings suit against Divino for the reversion of simple
but last
the provisions of the law on wills; if by an act and fideicommissary
resided in Cebu City, where he had
the tract of land. a) Distinguish between modal a mansion
inter vivos, such partition may even be oral or substitution
and whereand of heirs.
two of his(2%) c) Does children
youngest Betina havenow
institution substation
written, and need not be in the form of a will, a cause
live and of action
work. against
Two of Divino?
his oldest children are
"Where
providedseveral sistersisexecute
the legitime deeds of sale
not prejudiced. Explain (5%)
over their 1 /6 undivided share of the farmers in Sulu, while the two middle-aged
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
paraphernal property of their children are employees in Zamboanga City.
Finding that the deceased left no will, the
youngest son wanted to file intestate
proceedings before the Regional Trial Court of
Cebu City. Two other siblings
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
A. A MODAL INSTITUTION is the institution of
an heir made for a certain purpose or cause
(Arts. 871 and 882, NCC). SUBSTITUTION is the
appointment of another heir so that he may
enter into the inheritance in default of the heir
originality instituted. (Art. 857, NCC).
B. In a SIMPLE SUBSTITUTION of heirs, the
testator designates one or more persons to
substitute the heirs instituted in case such heir
or heirs should die before him, or should not
wish or should be incapacitated to accept the
inheritance. In a FIDEICOMMISSARY
SUBSTITUTION, the testator institutes a first heir
and charges him to preserve and transmit the
whole or part of the inheritance to a second
heir. In a simple substitution, only one heir
inherits. In a fideicommissary substitution, both
the first and second heirs inherit. (Art. 859 and
C. Betina
869, NCC)has a cause of action against Divino.
This is a case of a testamentary disposition
subject to a mode and the will itself provides
for the consequence if the mode is not
complied with. To enforce the mode, the will
itself gives Betina the right to compel the
return of the property to the heirs of Theodore.
(Rabadilla v. Conscoluella, 334 SCRA 522
Wills; GR 113725, 29 June 2000).
[2000]
Formalities
(1) If a will is executed by a testator who is a
(1990) citizen, what law will govern if the will
Filipino
is executed in the Philippines? What law will
govern if the will is executed in another
country? Explain your answers.
(2) If a will is executed by a foreigner, for
instance, a Japanese, residing in the
Philippines, what law will govern if the will is
executed in the Philippines? And what law will
govern if the will is executed in Japan, or some
SUGGESTED
other country,ANSWER:
for instance, the U.S.A.? Explain
(1)
your a.answers.
If the testator who is a Filipino citizen
executes his will in the Philippines, Philippine
law will govern the formalities.
b. If said Filipino testator executes his will in
another country, the law of the country where
he maybe or Philippine law will govern the
formalities. (Article 815, Civil Code}

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(2) a. If the testator is a foreigner residing in
the Philippines and he executes his will in the
Philippines, the law of the country of which he
is a citizen or Philippine law will govern the
formalities.
b. If the testator is a foreigner and executes his
will in a foreign country, the law of his place of
residence or the law of the country of which he
is a citizen or the law of the place of execution,
or Philippine law will govern the formalities
(Articles 17. 816. 817. Civil Code).
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, the will may be probated in the Philippines Wills;
b. In the Probate;
case ofNotarial a foreigner, and his national law
insofar as the estate of Eleanor is concerned. Holographic
Johnny,
shall govern with no Wills
known
substantive(1997)
living relatives,
validity whether he
While the Civil Code prohibits the execution of executed
executes ahis notarial
will in willthe
giving all his estate
Philippines or in to a
Joint wills here and abroad, such prohibition his sweetheart.
foreign country.One day, he had a serious
applies only to Filipinos. Hence, the joint will Wills;
altercation Holographic
with his sweetheart. Wills; Insertions
A few days &
which is valid where executed is valid in the Cancellations
Vanessa
later, he was on(1996)
died introducedApril 14,to1980, leavinglady
a charming behind
Philippines but only with respect to Eleanor. a holographic
who later became will which
a dearisfriend.
entirely Soonwritten,
after, he
Under Article 819, it is void with respect to dated andasigned
executed holographic in her willownexpressly
handwriting. revoking
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Manuel whose joint will remains void in the However,
the notarial it contains
will and so insertions
designating and his new
The will cannot be probated in the Philippines,
Philippines despite being valid where cancellations
friend as sole which heir. One are daynot authenticated
when he was by
even though valid where executed, because it
executed. her signature.
clearing up hisFor desk, thisJohnny
reason, the probate
mistakenly of
burned,
is prohibited under Article 818 of the Civil Code
Vanessa's
along with will
other was opposed
papers, theby hercopy
only relatives
of his
and declared void under Article 819, The SUGGESTED
who stood ANSWER:
holographic towill.
inherit by her intestacy.
Hisoriginally
business associate, May
prohibition should apply even to the American Yes, the will as written may be
Vanessa's
Eduardo holographic will be probated?
wife because the Joint will is offensive to public probated.knew The well the contents
insertions of the will were
and alterations
Explain.
which was shown to him by Johnny the day
policy. Moreover, it is a single juridical act void since ANSWER:
SUGGESTED they were not authenticated byitthe
which cannot be valid as to one testator and was
The executed.
probate of A
thefew days
notarial after
full signature of Vanessa, under Art. 814, NCC.will the
will burning
prosper. The
Wills;
void as toProbate;
the other. Intrinsic incident,
holographic Johnny
will died.
cannot Both
The original will, however, remains validbe wills
admitted were to sought
probate to
Validity
H died (1990)
leaving a last will and testament be probated
because a holographicin two
holographic willseparate
will can petitions.
is notonly be Will
invalidated by
wherein it is stated that he was legally married either
probated or both
ALTERNATIVE upon
the unauthenticated petitions
ANSWER:evidence prosper?
of the willoritself
insertions unless
alterations
to W by whom he had two legitimate children A It depends.
there
(Ajeroisv.aCA,
As a rule, acopy.
photographic
236 SCRA 468].
holographic
But since will
theis not
and B. H devised to his said forced heirs the adversely affected
holographic will was lost and there was no by Insertions or
entire estate except the free portion which he cancellations which were not
other copy, it cannot be probated and therefore authenticated by
gave to X who was living with him at the time the full signature
ADDITIONAL
the notarial ANSWERS:of the testator (Ajero v. CA,
will will be admitted to probate
In said will he explained that he had been 1.
of his death. 236In the
SCRA
because there case
468). isHowever,
of Gan vs. Yap
no revoking when will.the
(104 insertion
Phil 509), or
estranged from his wife W for more than 20 cancellation
the execution amounts and the to revocation
contents ofofa the lost will,
or
years and he has been living with X as man Art.814 of the holographic
destroyed NCC does not willapply
may but not Art.be 830.
and wife since his separation from his NCC. Art. 830
proved by the of thebareNCC does not
testimony require the
of witnesses
legitimate family. testator
who haveto authenticate
seen or read hissuch
cancellation
will. The for will the
In the probate proceedings, X asked for the effectivity of a revocation
itself must be presented otherwise it shall effected through
issuance of letters testamentary in accordance suchproduce
cancellation
no effect. (Kalaw The v. lawRelova,
regards132 the SCRA
with the will wherein she is named sole 237). In the
document itself Kalaw
as materialcase,proof theof original
executor. This was opposed by W and her holographic
authenticity. will designated
Moreover, in only
orderonethat heiraas the
will
(a) Should the will be admitted in said probate
children. onlymaysubstantial
be revoked provision which was will,
by a subsequent altered it isby
(b) Is the said devise to X
proceedings?
substituting
necessary thethat original
the latterheirwillwith beanother
valid and heir.
(c) Was it proper for the trial court to consider
valid?
Hence,
executed
Wills; if thewith
Holographic unauthenticated
the formalities
Wills; cancellation
required for
the intrinsic validity of the provisions of said
amounted
the
Witnesses making to(1994)
a ofrevocation
aVicente
will. The of the should
latter will, the will
will? Explain
SUGGESTED your answers,
ANSWER: On his deathbed, was executing a will.
maypossess
not beall probated because itvalid
had already
(a) Yes, the will may be probated if executed In the room were Carissa, Carmela, will
the requisites of a Comelio
according to the formalities prescribed by law. been revoked.
whether it be ordinary or a holographic will,
and Atty. Cimpo, a notary public. Suddenly,
and should be probated
there was a street brawl which caught in order that the
(b) The institution giving X the free portion is revocatory
Comelio's clauseprompting
attention, thereof may him produce
to look out
not valid, because the prohibitions under Art. effect. In the case at
the window. Cornelio did not see Vicente bar, since the sign a
739 of the Civil Code on donations also apply to will.holographic
SUGGESTED
Is the ANSWERS:
will valid?will itself cannot be presented,
testamentary dispositions (Article 1028, Civil a) Yes,
it cannotThe therefore
will is valid. The lawSince
be probated. doesit not
Code), Among donations which are considered require
cannot a witness
be probated, to actually
it cannot seerevoke
the testator
the
void are those made between persons who signnotarial
the will. It is sufficient
will previously writtenifby the thewitness
were guilty of adultery or concubinage at the could have seen the act of signing had he
decedent.
time of the donation. chosen
2. On thetobasis do so of theby Rules
casting his eyes
of Court, Ruleto76, the
(c) As a general rule, the will should be admitted b) Yes,
proper the
Sec.direction. will is valid.
6, provides that no Applying
will shall the be "test
proved of
in probate proceedings if all the necessary position", although Comelio
as a lost or destroyed will unless its did not actually
requirements for its extrinsic validity have been see provisions
Vicente sign are the will,and
clearly Cornelio
distinctly wasprovedin the
met and the court should not consider the proper position to see Vicente
by at least two (2) credible witnesses. sign if Cornelio
intrinsic validity of the provisions of said will. so wished.
Hence, if we abide strictly by the two-
However, the exception arises when the will in Wills; Jointrule
witness Wills to prove a lost or destroyed
effect contains only one testamentary (2000)
Manuel, a Filipino,
will, the holographic and will his
which American
Johnny wife
disposition. In effect, the only testamentary Eleanor, executed a
allegedly mistakenly burned, cannot Joint Will in Boston,
be
POSSIBLE ADDITIONAL ANSWERS: Massachusetts when they were residing in said
disposition underofthe
a. In the case a will is the
Filipino giving Philippine
citizen, of the probated, since there is only one witness,
free portion to X, since legitimes are provided city.Eduardo,
The law of Massachusetts
who can be called to testify as to allows the
law shall govern substantive validity whether execution of joint wills. Shortly thereafter,
by
he law. Hence,his
executes the trial
will in court
the may consider
Philippines or the
in a the existence of the will. If the holographic
9 October 1985. 139 SCRA Eleanor died. Can the said revoked
Will be probated
intrinsic validity
foreign country.
206).
of the provisions of said will. will, which purportedly, the earlierin
(Nuguid v. Nuguid, etal.. No. L23445, June 23, the notarial
Philippines for the
will cannot be proved becausesettlement of ofher
1966, 17 SCRA; Nepomuceno v. CA, L-62952, estate? (3%)
the absence of the required witness, then
the petition for the probate of the notarial
will should prosper.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
due to formal defects. Assuming that a copy of excludedthe by a legitimate son of the decedent [Art.
is available,
first will may it now be admitted to probate Civil Code].
887, New This follows the principle that the
and given effect? Why? descendants exclude the ascendants from
SUGGESTED ANSWER: inheritance.
Yes, the first will may be admitted to probate
and given effect. When the testator tore first Wills; Testamentary
will, he was under the mistaken belief that the Intent (1996)
Alfonso, a bachelor without any descendant or
second will was perfectly valid and he would ascendant, wrote a last will and testament in
not have destroyed the first will had he known which he devised." all the properties of which I
that the second will is not valid. The revocation may be possessed at the time of my death" to
by destruction therefore is dependent on the his favorite brother Manuel. At the time he
validity of the second will. Since it turned out wrote the will, he owned only one parcel of
that the second will was invalid, the tearing of land. But by the time he died, he owned twenty
the first will did not produce the effect of parcels of land. His other brothers and sisters
ALTERNATIVE ANSWERS:
revocation. This is known as the doctrine of insist that his will should pass only the parcel of
No, the first will cannot be admitted to probate.
dependent relative revocation (Molo v. Molo, land he owned at the time it was written, and
While it is true that the first will was successfully
90 Phil 37.) did not cover his properties acquired, which
revoked by the second will because the second SUGGESTED ANSWER:
will was later denied probate, the first will was, should
Manuelbe by intestate
is correct succession.
because Manuel
under Art. 793, NCC,
nevertheless, revoked when the testator claims otherwise. Who is correct? Explain.
property acquired after the making of a will
destroyed
(Diaz it after
v. De executing
Leon, 43 Philthe413
second invalid shall only pass thereby, as if the testator had
[1922]).
will. possessed it at the time of making the will,
Wills; Testamentary
should it expressly appear by the will that such
Disposition
Don died after(2006)
executing a Last Will and
was his intention. Since Alfonso's intention to
Testament leaving his estate valued at P12
devise all properties he owned at the time of
Million to his common-law wife Roshelle. He is
his death expressly appears on the will, then
survived by his brother Ronie and his half-
all the 20 parcels of land are included in the
(1) Was
sister Don's testamentary disposition of his
Michelle.
estate in accordance with the law on DONATION
devise.
succession? Whether you agree or not, explain Donation vs.
SUGGESTED
your Explain.Yes, Don's testamentary
ANSWER:
answer.
Sale
a) May(2003)
a person sell something that does not belong
disposition of his estate is in accordance with
him? Explain. b) May a person donate
to
the law on succession. Don has no compulsory
something that does not belong
heirs not having ascendants, descendants nor
to him? Explain. 5%
a spouse [Art. 887, New Civil Code]. Brothers SUGGESTED ANSWER:
and sisters are not compulsory heirs. Thus, he (a) Yes, a person may sell something which
can bequeath his entire estate to anyone who does not belong to him. For the sale to be
is not otherwise incapacitated to inherit from valid, the law does not require the seller to be
him. A common-law wife is not incapacitated the owner of the property at the time of the
under the law, as Don is not married to anyone. sale. (Article 1434, NCC). If the seller cannot
(2) If Don failed to execute a will during his
transfer ownership over the thing sold at the
lifetime, as his lawyer, how will you distribute
SUGGESTED After paying the legal
ANSWER: (2.5%) time of delivery because he was not the owner
his estate? Explain. (b) As a general
obligations of the estate, I will give Ronie, as thereof, he shall rule, a person
be liable cannotofdonate
for breach contact.
full-blood brother of Don, 2/3 of the net estate, something which he cannot dispose of at the
twice the share of Michelle, the half-sister who time of the donation (Article 751, New Civil
shall receive 1/3. Roshelle will not receive Code).
anything as she is not a legal heir [Art. 1006
New Civil Code].
(3) Assuming he died intestate survived by his
brother Ronie, his half-sister Michelle, and his
legitimate son Jayson, how will you distribute
SUGGESTED
his estate?ANSWER: Jayson
Explain. will be entitled to the
(2.5%)
entire P12 Million as the brother and sister will
be excluded by a legitimate son of the
decedent. This follows the principle of
proximity, where "the nearer excludes the Wills; Revocation of Wills; Dependent
(4) Assuming further he died intestate,
farther." Relative Revocation (2003)
survived by his father Juan, his brother Ronie, Mr. Reyes executed a will completely valid as
his half-sister Michelle, and his legitimate son to form. A week later, however, he executed
Jayson, how will you distribute his estate? another will which expressly revoked his first
SUGGESTED
Explain. ANSWER: Jayson will still be entitled to
(2.5%) will, which he tore his first will to pieces. Upon
the entire P12 Million as the father, brother
the death of Mr. Reyes, his second will was
and sister will be
presented for probate by his heirs, but it was
denied probate
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: property to Ferdinand who then sued to
As judge, I will grant the motion to dismiss. recover the land from the city government.
Armando has no personality to bring the action Will the suit prosper?
for annulment of the sale to Conrado. Only an SUGGESTED ANSWER:
aggrieved party to the contract may bring the Ferdinand has no right to recover the land. It is
action for annulment thereof (Art. 1397. NCC). true that the donation was revocable because
While Armando is heir and successor-in-interest of breach of the conditions. But until and unless
of his mother (Art. 1311, NCC), he [standing in the donation was revoked, it remained valid.
place of his mother) has no personality to annul Hence, Spouses Michael and Linda had no right
the contract. Both are not aggrieved parties on to sell the land to Ferdinand. One cannot give
account of their own violation of the condition what he does not have. What the donors should
of, or restriction on, their ownership imposed have done first was to have the donation
by the donation. Only the donor or his heirs annulled or revoked. And after that was done,
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
would have the personality to bring an action they could validly have disposed of the land in
A. Until the contract of donation has been
to revoke a donation for violation of a condition favor of Ferdinand.
resolved or rescinded under Article 1191 of the
thereof or a restriction thereon. (Garrido u. CA, Civil Code or revoked under Art. 764 of the Civil
236 SCRA 450). Consequently, while the donor Code, the donation stands effective and valid.
or his heirs were not parties to the sale, they Accordingly, the sale made by the donor to
have the right to annul the contract of sale Ferdinand cannot be said to have conveyed
because
ALTERNATIVEtheir rights are prejudiced by one of
ANSWER: title to Ferdinand, who, thereby, has no cause
the judge,
As contracting
I will parties
grant thethereof [DBPtov.dismiss.
motion CA, 96 of action for recovery of the land acting for and
SCRA 342; Teves
Compliance with avs.condition
PHHC. 23 SCRA 114].
imposed by a B. Thebehalf.
in his donation is onerous, And being onerous,
Since Armando
donor gives riseis neither the donor
to an action nor heirthe
to revoke of what applies is the law on contracts, and not
the donor,under
donation he has no764,
Art. personality to bring the
NCC. However, the the law on donation (De Luna us. Abrigo, 81
action
right offor annulment.
action belongs to the donor. Is SCRA 150). Accordingly, the prescriptive
transmissible to his heirs, and may be period for the filing of such an action would be
exercised against the donee's heirs. Since the ordinary prescriptive period for contacts
Armando is an heir of the donee, not of the which may either be six or ten depending upon
donor, he has no legal capacity to sue for whether it is verbal or written. The filing of the
Alternative Answer:
revocation of the donation. Although he is not case five years later is within the prescriptive
The law on donation lays down a special
seeking such revocation but an annulment of period and, therefore, the action can prosper,
prescriptive period in the case of breach of
the sale which his mother, the donee, had
condition, which is four years from non-
executed in violation of the condition imposed
compliance thereof (Article 764 Civil Code).
by the donor, an action for annulment of a
Since the action has prescribed, the suit will
contract may be brought only by those who are Donations;
not prosper, Effect; illegal & immoral
principally or subsidiarily obliged thereby (Art. conditions
Are (1997) of illegal and immoral
the effects
1397, NCC). As an exception to the rule, it has conditions on simple donations the same as
been held that a person not so obliged may those effects that would follow when such
nevertheless ask for annulment if he is conditions are imposed on donations con causa
prejudiced
Such detrimentin hisor rights regarding
prejudice cannot one of the
be shown SUGGESTED ANSWER:
onerosa?
contracting parties (DBP us. CA.
by Armando. As a forced heir, Armando's 96 SCRA 342 No, they don't have the same effect. Illegal or
and other cases) and can show the
interest in the property was, at best, a mere detriment impossible conditions in simple and
which would The
expectancy. result
saletoof
himthefrom
land the contract
by his mother in remuneratory donations shall be considered as
which he had no intervention, (Teves
did not impair any vested right. The fact vs. PHHC, not imposed. Hence the donation is valid. The
23 SCRA 1141).
remains that the premature sale made by his donation
Donations; willCondition;
be considered as simple or pure.
Capacity
mother (premature because only half of the The
to Suecondition
Sometime (1996) or mode
in 1955, Tomasis merely
donatedan accessory
a parcel of
period of the ban had elapsed) was not disposition, and its nullity
land to his stepdaughter doessubject
Irene, not affect
to thethe
voidable at all, none of the vices of consent donation,
condition thatunless
she it
mayclearly appears
not sell, that
transfer or the
under Art. 139 of the NCC being present. donor
cede the would
same not have years.
for twenty made Shortly
the donation
Donations; Donations thecon causa onerosa is governed by
Hence, the motionConditions;
to dismiss should be without
thereafter, mode
he orIncondition.
died. 1965, because she
law on obligations and contracts, under which
Revocation
Spouses (1991)and Linda donated a 3-
granted. Michael needed money for medical expenses, Irene
hectare residential land to the City of Baguio an impossible or Illicit condition annuls the
sold the land to Conrado. The following year,
on the condition that the city government obligation dependent upon the condition where
Irene died, leaving as her sole heir a son by the
would build thereon a public park with a boxing the condition is positive and suspensive. If the
name of Armando. When Armando learned that
arena, the construction of which shall impossible or illicit condition is negative, it is
the land which he expected to inherit had been
commence within six (6) months from the date simply considered as not written, and the
sold by Irene to Conrado, he filed an action
the parties ratify the donation. The donee obligation is converted into a pure and simple
against the latter for annulment of the sale, on
accepted the donation and the title to the one. However, in order that an illegal condition
the ground that it violated the restriction
property was transferred in its name. Five may annul a contract, the impossibility must
imposed by
ADDITIONAL Tomas. Conrado filed a motion to
ANSWER:
years elapsed but the public park with the exist at the time of the creation of the
dismiss, on the ground that Armando did not
boxing arena was never started. Considering obligation; a supervening impossibility does not
have the legal capacity to sue. If you were the
the failure of the donee to comply with the affect the existence of the obligation.
Judge, how will you rule on this motion to
condition of the donation, the donor-spouses dismiss? Explain.
sold the
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
No. In simple or pure donation, only the illegal or irrevocable, the latter is revocable. In the problem
impossible condition is considered not written the clauses
given, all or conditions mentioned in the deed
but the donation remains valid and becomes of donation, except one, are consistent with the
free from conditions. The condition or mode rule of irrevocability and would have sustained
being a mere accessory disposition. Its nullity the view that the donation is inter vivos and
does not affect the donation unless it clearly therefore valid. The lone exception is the clause
appears that the donor would not have made which reserves the donor's right to sell the
the donation without the mode or condition. On property at any time before his death. Such a
the other hand, onerous donation is governed reservation has been held to render the
by the rules on contracts. Under Article 1183, donation revocable and, therefore, becomes a
Impossible or illegal conditions shall annul the donation mortis causa (Puig vs. Penqflorida, 15
obligation which depends upon them. In these SCRA 276, at p. 286). That the right was not
Donations;
cases, both Formalities;
the obligationMortis
and the condition exercised is immaterial; its reservation was an
Causa
B
are void.(1990)
donated to M a parcel of land in 1980. B implied recognition of the donor's power to
made the deed of donation, entitled Donation nullify the donation anytime he wished to do so.
Inter Vivos, in a public instrument and M Consequently, it should have been embodied in
accepted the donation in the same document. Donations; Inter Vivos;
a last will and testament. The suit for nullity will
It was provided in the deed that the land Acceptance
On January 21,(1993)
1986, A executed a deed of
thus prosper.
donated shall be immediately delivered to M donation inter vivos of a parcel of land to Dr. B
and that M shall have the right to enjoy the who had earlier constructed thereon a building
fruits fully. The deed also provided that B was in which researches on the dreaded disease
reserving the right to dispose of said land AIDS were being conducted. The deed,
during his (Bs) lifetime, and that M shall not acknowledged before a notary public, was
register the deed of donation until after Bs handed over by A to Dr. B who received it. A
death. Upon Bs death, W, Bs widow and sole few days after, A flew to Davao City.
heir, filed an action for the recovery of the Unfortunately, the airplane he was riding
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
donated land, contending crashed on landing killing him. Two days after
Yes, the action will prosper. that the donation
The donation is a
made by B is a donation mortis causa and not a the unfortunate accident. Dr. B, upon advice of
donation mortis causa because the reservation
donation interofvivos. Will said action prosper? a lawyer, executed a deed acknowledged
is to dispose all the property donated and, SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Explain your answer. before
No, theadonation
notary public
is notaccepting
effective. the
Thedonation.
law
therefore, the donation is revocable at will.
Is the donation effective? Explain
requires that the separate acceptance your of
answer.
the
Accordingly, the donation requires the
execution of a valid will, either notarial or donee of an immovable must be done in a
holographic (Arts 755, 728 NCC). public document during the lifetime of the
Donations; Formalities; Mortis donor (Art. 746 & 749, Civil Code) In this case,
Causa (1998)
Ernesto donated in a public instrument a parcel B executed the deed of acceptance before a
of land to Demetrio, who accepted it in the notary public after the donor had already died.
same document. It is there declared that the Donations;
donation shall take effect immediately, with Perfection
On (1998)
July 27, 1997, Pedro mailed in Manila a
the donee having the right to take possession letter to his brother, Jose, a resident of Ilollo
of the land and receive its fruits but not to City, offering to donate a vintage sports car
dispose of the land while Ernesto is alive as which the latter had long been wanting to buy
well as for ten years following his death. from the former. On August 5, 1997, Jose called
Moreover, Ernesto also reserved in the same Pedro by cellular phone to thank him for his
deed his right to sell the property should he generosity and to inform him that he was
decide to dispose of it at any time - a right sending by mail his letter of acceptance. Pedro
which he did not exercise at all. After his death, never received that letter because it was never
Ernesto's heirs seasonably brought an action to mailed. On August 14, 1997, Pedro received a
SUGGESTED ANSWER: 1. Is there
telegram a perfected
from Iloilo informing him that Jose
recover the will
Yes, the suit property,
prosper as alleging that the
the donation did 2.
had been killed in a be
Will
donation?your answer
[2%] theaccident
road same if the
Joseday
did mail
donation was void as it did not comply
not comply with the formalities of a will. with the
In this his acceptance letter
before (August 13, 1997) but it was received by
formalities of a
instance, the will.
fact Willthe
that thedonor
suit prosper? [5%]
did not intend Pedro in Manila days after Jose's death? [3%]
to transfer ownership or possession of the
donated property to the donee until the donor's
death, would result in a donation mortis causa
and in this kind of disposition, the formalities of
a will should be complied with, otherwise, the
donation is void. In this Instance, donation
mortis causa embodied only in a public
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
instrument without
One of the essential distinctionsthe formalities
between of vivos
a donation inter a will
could
and not mortis
a donation have causa transferred ownership
is that while the former is of
disputed property to another.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
hand, assuming that the sports car costs less than
Code which requires the donation and the acceptance
then the donation maybe oral, but still, the
P5,000.00 thereof to be in a public instrument in order to
simultaneous delivery of the car is needed and be valid. The acceptance not being in a public
there being none, the donation was never instrument, the part which is not onerous is
perfected. void and Rosa may recover it from Amanda.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
2. Yes, the answer is the same. If Jose's mail Donations; Unregistered; Effects; Non-
containing his acceptance of the donation was Compliance; Resolutory Condition (2006)
received by Pedro after the former's death, Spouses Alfredo and Racquel were active
then the donation is still void because under members of a religious congregation. They
Article 734 of the Civil Code, the donation is donated a parcel of land in favor of that
perfected the moment the donor knows of the congregation in a duly notarized Deed of
acceptance by the donee. The death of Jose Donation, subject to the condition that the
before Pedro could receive the acceptance Minister shall construct thereon a place of
indicates that the donation was never worship within 1 year from the acceptance of
perfected. Under Article 746 acceptance must the donation. In an affidavit he executed on
Donations; Requisites;
be made during the lifetime of both the donor
Immovable
Anastacia Property
purchased a house and lot on behalf of the congregation, the Minister
and the donee. accepted the donation. The Deed of Donation
installments at a housing project in Quezon However, instead of constructing a place of
of Deeds.
worship,
City. Subsequently, she was employed in was not registered with the Registry
the Minister constructed a bungalow on the property
California and a year later, she executed a deed he used as his residence. Disappointed with the
of donation, duly authenticated by the Minister, the spouses revoked the donation and
Philippine Consulate in Los Angeles, California, demanded that he vacate the premises immediately.
donating the house and lot to her friend But the Minister refused to leave, claiming that aside
Amanda. The latter brought the deed of from using the bungalow as his residence, he is also
donation to the owner of the project and using it as a place for worship on special occasions.
discovered that Anastacia left unpaid Under the circumstances, can Alfredo and Racquel
installments and real estate taxes. Amanda evict the Minister and recover possession of
paid these so that the donation in her favor can the property? If you were the couple's counsel,
be registered in the project owner's office. Two what action you take to protect the interest of
months later, Anastacia died, leaving her ALTERNATIVE
your clients?ANSWER:
(5%)
mother Rosa as her sole heir. Rosa filed an Yes, Alfredo and Racquel can bring an action for
action to annul the donation on the ground that ejectment against the Minister for recovery of
Amanda did not give her consent in the deed of possession of the property evict the Minister and
SUGGESTED ANSWER: recover possession of the property. An action for
donation or in a
Rosa is correct separate
because thepublic
donation instrument.
is void. annulment of the donation, reconveyance and
Amanda replied that the donation
The property donated was an immovable. was Foran
damages should be filed to protect the interests of
onerous one because she had to
such donation to be valid, Article 749 of thepay unpaid
my client. The donation is an onerous donation and
installments
New Civil Codeandrequires
taxes; both
hencetheher acceptance
donation and therefore shall be governed by the rules on
may be implied. Who is correct? (2%)
the acceptance to be in a public instrument. contracts. Because there was no fulfillment or
There being no showing that Amanda's compliance with the condition which is resolutory in
acceptance was made in a public instrument, character, the donation may now be revoked and all
the donation is void. The contention that the rights which
(Central the donee
Philippine may have acquired
University, G.R. No.under it July
112127,
donation is onerous and, therefore, need not ALTERNATIVE
17,1995). ANSWER:
shall be deemed lost and extinguished
comply with Article 749 for validity is without No, an action for ejectment will not prosper. I
merit. The donation is not onerous because it would advice Alfredo and Racquel that the
did not impose on Amanda the obligation to Minister, by constructing a structure which also
pay the balance on the purchase price or the serves as a place of worship, has pursued the
arrears in real estate taxes. Amanda took it objective of the donation. His taking up
upon herself to pay those amounts voluntarily. residence in the bungalow may be regarded as
For a donation to be onerous, the burden must a casual breach and will not warrant revocation
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
be imposed by the of the donation. Similarily, therefore, an action
Neither Rosa nor donor
Amanda on the
is donee.
correct.In the
The
problem, isthere is noonly
such for revocation
SUGGESTED of the donation will be denied (C.
ANSWER:
donation onerous as burden imposed
to the portion by
of the 1.Yulo
None.
the donorcorresponding
on the donee. J. & There is nov.perfected
Sons, Inc. donation.
Roman Catholic Under
Bishop,
property to The
the donation
value of not the 2004).
Article 748 of the Civil Code, the donation of a
being onerous, it must comply with the G.R. No. 133705, March 31, 2005; Heirs
installments and taxes paid by Amanda. movable may be made
formalities of Article 749. ofRozendo Sevilla v. Deorally
Leon,or in writing.
G.R. If
No. 149570,
the value
March 12, of the personal property donated
The portion in excess thereof is not onerous. Donations; Validity; Effectivity; for
exceeds five thousand pesos, the donation and
The onerous portion is governed by the rules Unborn
Elated Child
that her (1999)
sister who had been married
the acceptance shall be made in writing.
on contracts which do not require the for five years was pregnant for the first time,
Assuming that the value of the thing donated,
acceptance by the donee to be in any form. Alma donated P100,000.00 to the unborn
a vintage sports car, exceeds P5,000.00 then
The onerous part, therefore, is valid. The child. Unfortunately, the baby died one hour
the donation and the acceptance must be in
portion which is not onerous must comply with after delivery. May Alma recover the
writing. In this instance, the acceptance of Jose
Article 749 of the New Civil P100.000.00 that she
was not in writing, therefore, the donation is
void. Upon the other
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
had donated to said baby before it was born not been fixed in the Deed of Donation, the donee is
that the baby died? Stated otherwise, is the
considering yet
not default in his obligation until the period is
donation valid and binding? Explain. (5%) fixed by order of the court under Article 1197
SUGGESTED ANSWER: of the New Civil Code. Since the period has not
The donation is valid and binding, being an act been fixed as yet, the donee is not yet default,
favorable to the unborn child, but only if the and therefore the donor has no cause of action
baby had an intra-uterine life of not less than to revoke the donation. (Dissenting opinion of
seven months and provided there was due Davide, CJ, Central Philippine University v.
acceptance of the donation by the proper Court of Appeals, 246 SCRA 511 [1995])
person representing said child. If the child had
less than seven months of intra-uterine life, it
PROPERTY
is not deemed born since it died less than 24
hours following its delivery, in which ease the Accretion;
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
donation never became effective since the Alluvion
For many (2001)
years, the Rio Grande river deposited
Even if the baby had an intra-uterine life of soil along its bank, beside the titled land of
donee never became a person, birth being
more than seven months and the donation was Jose. In time, such deposit reached an area of
determinative of personality.
properly accepted, it would be void for not one thousand square meters. With the
having conformed with the proper form. In permission of Jose, Vicente cultivated the said
order to be valid, the donation and acceptance area. Ten years later, a big flood occurred in
of personal property exceeding five thousand the river and transferred the 1000 square
pesos should be in writing. (Article 748, par. 3) meters to the opposite bank, beside the land of
Donations; with Resolutory Agustin. The land transferred is now contested
Condition
In 1950, Dr.(2003)
Alba donated a parcel of land to by Jose and Agustin as riparian owners and by
Central University on condition that the latter SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Vicente who claims ownership by prescription.
must establish a medical college on the land to Jose should prevail. The disputed area, which is
Who should prevail,? Why? (5%)
be named after him. In the year 2000, the heirs an alluvion, belongs by right of accretion to
of Dr. Alba filed an action to annul the donation Jose, the riparian owner (Art. 457 CC). When, as
and for the reconveyance of the property given in the problem, the very same area" was
donated to them for the failure, after 50 years, "transferred" by flood waters to the opposite
of the University to established on the property bank, it became an avulsion and ownership
a medical school named after their father. The thereof is retained by Jose who has two years to
University opposed the action on the ground of remove it (Art. 459, CC). Vicente's claim based
prescription and also because it had not used on prescription is baseless since his possession
the property for some purpose other than that was by mere tolerance of Jose and, therefore,
SUGGESTED ANSWER: did not adversely affect Jose's possession and
stated in the donation. Should the opposition
The donation may be revoked. The non-established of
thethe
University to theon
action of Dr. Albas ownership (Art. 537, CC). Inasmuch as his
of medical college the donated propertyheirs
was
beresolutory
sustained? Explain. possession is merely that of a holder, he cannot
a condition imposed on the donation by Accretion;
acquire the disputed area by prescription.
the donor. Although the Deed of Donation did not fix Avulsion
Andres is (2003)
a riparian owner of a parcel of
the time for the established of the medical college, registered land. His land, however, has
the failure of the donee to establish the medical gradually diminished in area due to the current
college after fifty (50) years from the making of the of the river, while the registered land of Mario
donation should be considered as occurrence of the on the opposite bank has gradually increased
resolutory condition, and the donation may now be in area by 200square meters.
revoked. While the general rule is that in case the (a) Who has the better right over the 200-
period is not fixed in the agreement of the parties, square meter area that has been added to
the period must be fixed first by the court before the (b) May registered
Marios a third person
land,acquire said
Mario or 200-square
Andres?
obligation may be demanded, the period of fifty (50) meter land by prescription?
years was more than enough time for the donee to
comply with the condition. Hence, in this case, there
is no more need for the court to fix the period
because such procedure with the condition. (Central
ANOTHER SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Philippine University v. CA. 246 SCRA 511).
The donation may not as yet revoked. The
establishment of a medical college is not a
resolutory or suspensive condition but a
charge, obligation, or a mode. The non-
compliance with the charge or mode will give
the donor the right to revoke the donation
within four (4) years from the time the charge
(10)
was years fromto
supposed the timebeen
have the cause of action
complied with, or
accrued. Inasmuch
to enforce as the
the charge by time to established
specific performance
the medical
within ten college has
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
had lost it by operation of law. That portion of the land
reasonable rent, if the owner of the land does not
become
has part of the public domain. appropriate
choose to the building after proper
indemnity. The parties shall agree upon the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: terms of the lease and in case of
b. Yes, a third party may acquire by
disagreement, the court fix the terms thereof.
prescription the 200 square meters, increase Builder; Good Faith vs. Bad
in area, because it is not included in the Faith (1999)
Torrens Title of the riparian owner. Hence, this (a) Because of confusion as to the boundaries
P.D.
doesNo.not1529.involve
The fact that
the the riparian land is
imprescriptibility of the adjoining lots that they bought from the
registered
conferred by does not 47,
Section automatically make the
same subdivision company, X constructed a
accretion thereto a registered land. (Grande v.
house on the adjoining lot of Y in the honest
CA, 115 521 (1962); Jagualing v. CA, 194 SCRA
Builder; Good belief that it is the land that he bought from
607 (1991).
Faith
A owns(1992)
a parcel of residential land worth the subdivision company. What are the
(b) Suppose
respective X was
rights of Xinand
good faithrespect
Y with but Y knew
to X's
P500,000.00 unknown to A, a residential house
that X was
house? (3%)constructing on his (Y's) land but
costing P 100,000.00 is built on the entire
simply kept quiet about it, thinking perhaps
parcel by B who claims ownership of the land.
that he could get X's house later. What are the
Answer all the following questions based on the
respective rights of the parties over X's house
premise that B is a builder in good faith and A
in this case? (2%)
is a landowner in good faith. a) May A acquire
the house built by B? If so, how? b) If the land
of the in
increased building
value toof P500,000.00
the house thereon,
by reasonwhat
amount should be paid by A in order to
acquire the house from B?
c) Assuming that the cost of the house
was P90,000.00 and not P100,000.00, may A
d)
requireIfBBtovoluntarily buys the land as desired
buy the land?
by A, under what circumstances may A
nevertheless be entitled to have the house
e)
removed?In what situation may a "forced lease"
arise between A and B. and what terms and
conditions would govern the lease?
Give reasons for your answers.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(a) Yes, A may acquire the house build by B by
paying indemnity to B. Article 448 of the Civil
Code provides that the owner of the land on
which anything has been built, sown or planted
in good faith, shall have the right to
appropriate as his own the works, sowing or
planting, after payment of the indemnity
provided for in Articles 546 and 546 of the Civil
(b) A should pay B the sum of P50,000. Article
Code.
548 of the Civil Code provides that useful
expenses shall be refunded to the possessor in
good faith with the right of retention, the
person who has defeated him in the possession
having the option of refunding the amount of
the expenses or of paying the increase in value SUGGESTED ANSWER:
which the thing may have acquired by reason a. Mario has a better right over the 200 square
thereof. The increase in value amounts to meters increase in area by reason of accretion,
(c) Yes, A may require B to buy the land.
P50,000.00. applying Article 457 of the New Civil Code,
Article 448 of the Civil Code provides that the which provides that to the owners of lands
owner of the land on which anything has been adjoining the banks of rivers belong the
built in good faith shall have the right to oblige accretion which they gradually received from
the one who built to pay the price of the land if Andres cannot
the effects of the claim
currentthat
of thethe increase in
waters.
(d) If B agrees
its value is not to buy land but
considerably failsthan
more to pay,
thatAof Marios land is his own, because such is an
can have the house removed ( Depra vs.
the building, accretion and not result of the sudden
Dumlao, 136 SCRA 475). detachment of a known portion of his land and
(e) Article 448 of the Civil Code provides that its attachment to Marios land, a process called
the builder cannot be obliged to buy the land if avulsion. He can no longer claim ownership
its value is considerably more than that of the of the portion of his registered land which was
building. In such case, he shall pay gradually and naturally eroded due to the
current of the river, because he
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
The case of Pecson v. CA, 244 SCRA 407, is square not meters. Jose claims that Mike is a builder in
the problem.
applicable to In the Pecson case, the builder because
bad faith he should know the boundaries of his
was the owner of the land who later lost the lot, and demands that the portion of the house
property at a public sale due to non-payment which encroached on his land should be
of taxes. The Court ruled that Article 448 does destroyed or removed. Mike replies that he is a
not apply to the case where the owner of the builder in good faith and offers to buy the land
land is the builder but who later lost the land; occupied by the building instead. 1) Is Mike a
not being applicable, the indemnity that should builder in good faith or bad faith? Why? (3%) 2)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
be paid to the buyer must be the fair market Whose preference should be followed? Why?
1) Yes, Mike is a builder in good faith. There is
value of the building and not just the cost of (2%)
no showing that when he built his house, he
construction thereof. The Court opined in that
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: knew that a portion thereof encroached on
case that to do otherwise would unjustly enrich
Pedro is correct. In Pecson vs. CA, it was held Jose's lot. Unless one is versed in the science of
the new owner of the land.
that Article 546 of the New Civil Code does not surveying, he cannot determine the precise
specifically state how the value of useful boundaries or location of his property by
improvements should be determined in fixing merely examining his title. In the absence of
the amount of indemnity that the owner of the contrary proof, the law presumes that the
land should pay to the builder in good faith. encroachment was done in good faith
Since the objective of the law is to adjust the 2} None of
[SUGGESTED
Technogas
the
ANSWER: preferences shall be followed.
Phils, v. CA, 268 SCRA 5, 15
rights of the parties in such manner as "to The
(a) preference
The
(1997)]. rights of ofY,Mike cannotofprevail
as owner the lot,becauseand of
administer complete justice to both of them in under Article of448
X, as builder of thethereon,
a house Civil Code, it is the
are governed
such a way as neither one nor the other may owner
by Art.of 448theofland the who
CivilhasCode thewhich
option or choice,
grants to Y
enrich himself of that which does not belong to not the builder.
the right to choose On between
the othertwo hand, the option
remedies: (a)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: belongs
appropriate to Jose,
the house he cannot demand that
by indemnifying X for theits
him",
2) Pablothe isCourt ruled
entitled to that the basis
the rentals of
of the
reimbursement should be the fair market value portion
value plus of the house encroaching
whatever on his landthe
necessary expenses be
building. As the owner of the land, Pablo is also destroyed or removed because
latter may have incurred for the preservation this is not one
of
thethe building.
owner of the building being an accession of the options
land, orgiven by lawXtotothe
(b) compel buy owner
the landof the if
thereto. However, Pedro who is entitled to land.
the price Theofowner the land may is notchoose betweenmore
considerably the
retain the building is also entitled to retain the appropriation
than the value of ofwhat
thewas builtIfafter
house. it is,payment
then X
rentals. He, however, shall apply the rentals to of indemnity,
cannot be obliged or totocompel
buy thethe landbuilder
but hetoshall pay
the indemnity payable to him after deducting for
pay thereasonable
land if therent, value and of thein land case is not of
ALTERNATIVE
reasonable ANSWER:
cost of repair and maintenance. ALTERNATIVE
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
considerably
disagreement,
ANSWER:
more
the than
court that
shall of
fix the building.
terms of
Pablo is entitled to the rentals. Pedro became 1) Since
(b) Mikethe cannot be considered
lot owner Y is deemed a builder
to be in
Otherwise,
the the builder shall his
pay rent without
for the
a possessor in bad faith from the time he bad lease.
good faith(Art
faith because
453), Xheasbuilt the party house
in good faith
learned that the land belongs to Pablo. As portion
first of the land encroached.
may determining
(a) remove thethe
corners houseand and
boundariesdemand of
such, he loses his right to the building, his lot to make for
indemnification suredamages
that his construction
suffered by him, was
including the fruits thereof, except the right of within
or (b) the demand perimeter paymentof hisofproperty.
the value Heofcould the
Builder; Good Faith vs. Bad Faith;
retention. have done this with
house plus reparation for damages (Art the help of a geodetic
447, in
Accession
a) Demetrio (2000)
knew that a piece of land engineer
relation to as Art 454).an ordinary
Y continuesprudent as ownerand of
bordering the beach belonged to Ernesto. reasonable man would
the lot and becomes, under the second do underoption, the
However, since the latter was studying in 2)
ownerJose'sof thepreference
circumstances. house as should be followed.
well, after he pays the He
Europe and no one was taking care of the land, may
Builder; have
sums demanded. Good the building
Faith vs. removed
Bad at the
Demetrio occupied the same and constructed expense
Faith
In good(2000) of Mike,
faith, Pedroappropriate
constructedthe building as
a five-door
thereon nipa sheds with tables and benches his own, oblige
commercial building Mikeon tothebuyland
theoflandPablo andwho ask
which he rented out to people who want to for
wasdamages
also in good in addition
faith. When to Pablo
any ofdiscovered
the three
have a picnic by the beach. When Ernesto options. (Articles 449,
the construction, 450, to
he opted 451, CC)
appropriate the
returned, he demanded the return of the land. Chattel
building byMortgagepaying Pedrovs. the cost thereof.
Demetrio agreed to do so after he has Pledge
Distinguish
However, (1999) a contract
Pedro insists that of he
chattel
shouldmortgage
be paid
removed the nipa sheds. Ernesto refused to let from a contract of pledge. (2%)
the current market value of the building, which
SUGGESTED ANSWER: SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Demetrio
Ernesto isremove
correct,the nipa sheds
is a on the ground was
In much
Demetrio builder in bad higher because of inflation. 1) Who
a contract of CHATTEL MORTGAGE
that
faith because he knew beforehandbythat
these already belonged to him rightthe
of is correct Pedro or Pablo?(1%) 2) In the
possession belongs to the creditor, while in a
accession. Who is correct? (3%)
land belonged to Ernesto, under Article 449 of meantime that Pedropossession
is not yet paid, who to is the
contract ofANSWER:
SUGGESTED PLEDGE belongs
the New Civil Code, one who builds on the land entitled to the rentals of the building, Pedro or
debtor.
Pablo is correct. Under Article 448 of the New
Pablo?
A chattel (1%)
of another loses what is built without right to Civil Codemortgage
in relation is to
a formal
Article contract
546, the while builder a
indemnity. Ernesto becomes the owner of the pledge is a real contract.
in good faith is entitled to a refund of the
nipa sheds by right of accession. Hence, necessary and useful expenses incurred by
Ernesto is well within his right in refusing to A
him, contract
or the increaseof chattel mortgage
in value whichmust the land be
Builder; Good Faith
allow the removal vs. sheds.
of the nipa Bad Faith; recorded
may have in a acquired
public instrumentby reason to bind of third
the
Presumption
Mike (2001)
built a house on his lot in Pasay City. Two persons
improvement, while aatcontractthe option of pledge
of the must be in
landowner.
years later, a survey disclosed that a portion of a public instrument containing
The builder is entitled to a refund of the description of
the building actually stood on the neighboring the thing pledged and the
expenses he incurred, and not to the market date thereof to bind
land of Jose, to the extent of 40 third
valuepersons.
of the improvement
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Chattel Mortgage; foreclosure sale, foreclosed the mortgage and
Immovables
Vini constructed (1994)
a building on a parcel of land house
acquiredand lot. Learning of the proceedings
Xs
he leased from Andrea. He chattel mortgaged conducted by the bank, Z is now demanding
the land to Felicia. When he could not pay that the bank reconvey to him Xs house or
Felicia. Felicia initiated foreclosure proceedings. pay Xs loan to him plus interests. Is Zs
Vini claimed that the building he had SUGGESTED ANSWER:
demand against the bank valid and
constructed on the leased land cannot be No,
sustainable? Why? is
Zs demand 5%not valid. A building is
validly foreclosed because the building was, by immovable or real property whether it is
SUGGESTED ANSWERS:
law, an immovable. Is Vini correct? erected by the owner of the land, by a
a) The Chattel Mortgage is void and cannot be usufructuary, or by a lessee. It may be treated
foreclosed because the building is an as a movable by the parties to chattel
immovable and cannot be an object of a mortgage but such is binding only between
chattel mortgage. them and not on third parties (Evangelista v.
b) It depends. If the building was intended Alto Surety Col, inc. 103 Phil. 401 [1958]). In
and is built of light materials, the chattel this case, since the bank is not a party to the
mortgage may be considered as valid as chattel mortgage, it is not bound by it, as far as
between the parties and it may be considered the Bank is concerned, the chattel mortgage,
in respect to them as movable property, since does not exist. Moreover, the chattel mortgage
it can be removed from one place to another. does not exist. Moreover, the chattel mortgage
But if the building is of strong material and is is void because it was not registered. Assuming
not capable of being removed or transferred that it is valid, it does not bind the Bank
without being destroyed, the chattel mortgage because it was not annotated on the title of the
c) If it cannot
is void and was the land which Vini chattel
be foreclosed.
ANOTHER SUGGESTED ANSWER:
land mortgaged
No, Zs demand to the bank.
against Z cannot
the bank demand
is not valid.
mortgaged, such mortgage would be void, or
that the Bank pay him the loan Z
His demand that the bank reconvey to him Xs extended to
at least unenforceable, since he was not the
If whatof was X, because the Bank was not
mortgaged as a chattel is the house presupposes that he has a real right privy to such loan
owner the land.
building, the chattel mortgage is valid as transaction.
over the house. All that Z has is a personal
between the parties only, on grounds of right against X for damages for breach of the
estoppel which would preclude the mortgagor contract of loan.
from assailing the contract on the ground that The treatment of a house, even if built on
its subject-matter is an immovable. Therefore rented land, as movable property is void
Vini's defense is untenable, and Felicia can insofar as third persons, such as the bank, are
foreclose the mortgage over the building, concerned. On the other hand, the Bank
observing, however, the procedure prescribed already had a real right over the house and lot
for the execution of sale of a judgment debtor's when the mortgage was annotated at the back
immovable under Rule 39, Rules of Court, of the Torrens title. The bank later became the
specifically, that the notice of auction sale owner in the foreclosure sale. Z cannot ask the
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
d) The problem that Vini mortgaged the land bank
should be published in a newspaper of general The answer to pay for Xs loan plus interest. There is
by way of a chattel mortgage is untenable. hinges on whether or not the bank
circulation. no privity of contract between Z and the bank.
Land can only be the subject matter of a real is an innocent mortgagee in good faith or a
estate mortgage and only an absolute owner of mortgagee in bad faith. In the former case, Zs
real property may mortgage a parcel of land. demand is not valid. In the latter case, Zs
(Article 2085 (2) Civil Code). Hence, there can demand against the bank is valid and
But
be no on the assumption that what was
foreclosure. sustainable.
mortgaged by way of chattel mortgage was Under the Torrens system of land registration,
the building on leased land, then the parties every person dealing with registered land may
are treating the building as chattel. A building rely on the correctness of the certificate of title
that is not merely superimposed on the ground and the law will not in any way oblige to him to
is an immovable property and a chattel look behind or beyond the certificate in order
mortgage on said building is legally void but to determine the condition of the title. He is
the parties cannot be allowed to disavow their not bound by anything not annotated or
contract on account of estoppel by deed. reflected in the certificate. If he proceeds to
However, if third parties are involved such buy the land or accept it as a collateral relying
Chattel Mortgage;
chattel mortgage is void and has no effect. on the certificate, he is considered a buyer or a
Immovables
X constructed (2003) mortgagee in good faith. On this ground, the
a house on a lot which he was leasing
However,
Bank acquiresa bank is nottitle
a clean an ordinary
to the landmortgagee.
and the
Y. Later,
from X executed a chattel mortgage over
Unlike private individuals, a bank is expected to
said house in favor of Z as security for a loan house.
exercise greater care and prudence in its
obtained from the latter. Still later, X acquired
dealings. The ascertainment of the condition of a
ownership of the land where his house was
property offered as collateral for a loan must be a
constructed, after which he mortgaged both
standard and indispensable part of its operation.
house and land in favor of a bank, which
The bank should have conducted further inquiry
mortgage was annotated on the Torrens
regarding the house standing Page on 59 of
the 119
land
Certificate of Title. When X failed to pay his considering that it was already
loan to the bank, the latter, being the highest
bidder at the
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
standing there before X acquired the title to the land.
was then valued only at P1 Million. Lawrence was
bank
The cannot be considered as a mortgagee in insolve
declared
good faith. On this ground, Zs demand against nt.
the Bank is valid and sustainable. Assuming that the aircraft was sold for Pl
Million, give the order of preference of the
Chattel Mortgage; creditors of Lawrence and distribute the
Possession
A, (1993)
about to leave the country on a foreign SUGGESTED
amount of ANSWER:
P1 Million.
assignment, entrusted to B his brand new car Assuming that the aircraft was sold for P1
and its certificate of registration. Falsifying A's Million, there is no order of preference. The P1
signature. B sold A's car to C for P200,000.00. C Million will all go to the bank as a chattel
then registered the car in his name. To mortgagee because a chattel mortgage under
complete the needed amount, C borrowed Art. 2241 (4) NCC defeats Art. 2244 (12) and
P100.000.00 from the savings and loan (14}. Art. 2241 (3) and (5) are not applicable
association in his office, constituting a chattel because the aircraft is no longer in the
Easement vs.
possession of the creditor.
mortgage on the car. For failure of C to pay the
Usufruct
1. What is (1995)
easement? Distinguish easement
amount owed, the savings and loan association
2. Can
from there be (a) an easement over a
usufruct.
filed in the RTC a complaint for collection with
usufruct? (b) a usufruct over an easement? (c)
application for issuance of a writ of replevin to
an easement over another easement? Explain.
obtain possession of the vehicle so that the
chattel mortgage could be foreclosed. The RTC
issued the writ of replevin. The car was then
seized from C and sold by the sheriff at public
auction at which the savings and loan
association was the lone bidder. Accordingly,
the car was sold to it. A few days later, A
arrived
SUGGESTEDfrom his foreign assignment. Learning
ANSWER:
of what happened
Under the prevailing to rulings
his car,of
A the
sought to
Supreme
recover possession and ownership of
Court, A can recover the car from the Savingsit from the
savings
and Loan and loan association.
Association providedCan A recover
he pays the his
car from
price the savings
at which and loan association?
the Association bought the car at
Explain
a public your answer.
auction. Under that doctrine, there has
been an unlawful deprivation by B of A of his
car and, therefore, A can recover it from any
person in possession thereof. But since it was
bought at a public auction in good faith by the
Savings and Loan Association, he must
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
reimburse the Association at the price for which
Yes, A can recover his car from the Savings
the car was bought.
and Loan Association. In a Chattel Mortgage,
the mortgagor must be the absolute owner of
the thing mortgaged. Furthermore, the person
constituting the mortgage must have the free
disposal of the property, and in the absence
thereof, must be legally authorized for the
purpose. In the case at bar, these essential
requisites did not apply to the mortgagor B,
Chattel
hence the Mortgage; Preference
Chattel Mortgage of valid.
was not
Creditors a(1995)
Lawrence, retired air force captain, decided
to go into the air transport business. He
purchased an aircraft in cash except for an
outstanding balance of P500,000.00. He
incurred an indebtedness of P300,000.00 for
repairs with an aircraft repair company. He also
borrowed P1 Million from a bank for additional
capital and constituted a chattel mortgage on
While on a test
the aircraft flight the
to secure the aircraft
loan. crashed
causing physical injuries to a third party who
was awarded damages of P200,000.00.

Lawrence's insurance claim for damage to the


aircraft was denied thus leaving him nothing
else but the aircraft which
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
2. (a) There can be no easement over a usufruct. there is a degree of regularity to indicate continuity of
easement
Since an may be constituted only on a possession and that if coupled with an apparent sign, such
corporeal immovable property, no easement easement of way may be acquired by prescription.
may be constituted on a usufruct which is not a ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
(b) There can
corporeal rightbe no usufruct over an easement. Yes, Ernie could close the pathway on his land.
While a usufruct maybe created over a right, Don has not acquired an easement of right of
such right must have an existence of its own way either by agreement or by judicial grant.
independent of the property. A servitude Neither did the buyers. Thus, establishment of
cannot be the object of a usufruct because it a road or unlawful use of the land of Ernie
has no existence independent of the property would constitute an invasion of possessory
ALTERNATIVE ANSWERS:
to which It attaches. rights of the owner, which under Article 429 of
There cannot be a usufruct over an easement the Civil Code may be repelled or prevented.
since an easement presupposes two (2) Ernie has the right to exclude any person from
tenements belonging to different persons and ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
the enjoyment and disposal of the land. This is
the right attaches to the tenement and not to Yes, Ernie may close the pathway, subject
an attribute of ownership that Ernie enjoys.
the owner. While a usufruct gives the however, to the rights of the lot buyers. Since
usufructuary a right to use, right to enjoy, right there is no access to the public road, this
to the fruits, and right to possess, an easement results in the creation of a legal easement. The
However, a usufruct can be constituted
gives only a limited use of the servient estate. over a lot buyers have the right to demand that Ernie
property that has in its favor an easement or grant them
SUGGESTED a right of way. In turn, they have
ANSWER:
one burdened with servitude. The usufructuary 1. An EASEMENT
the obligation to pay the or valueservitude is an
of the portion
will exercise the easement during the period of encumbrance imposed
used as a right of way, plus damages. upon an immovable for
usufruct. the
c) benefit
What are of another
the rights immovable
of the lotbelonging
buyers, to
if
(c) There can be no easement over another a different
any? Explain. owner. (2%) (Art. 613, NCC)
easement for the same reason as in (a). An USUFRUCTANSWER:
SUGGESTED gives a right to enjoy the property
Prior to the with
of another grantthe of an easement,
obligation the buyersits
of preserving of
easement, although it is a real right over an
immovable, is not a corporeal right. There is a the
form dominant
and estate
substance, have no other
unless right
the than to
title
compel grant
constituting of
it oreasement
the law of right
otherwise of way. Since
provides.
Roman maxim which says that: There can be
no servitude over another servitude. the
(Art.properties
562, NCC). of the buyers are surrounded by
Easement; Effects; Discontinuous other immovables
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:and has no adequate outlet
Easements; Permissive Use (2005) Easement
to a public is an encumbrance
highway and the isolation imposed upon
is not duean
Don was the owner of an agricultural land with immovable
to their acts, for
buyers the
may benefit
demand anof another
easement
no access to a public road. He had been of immovable
a right of way belongingprovided to proper
a differentindemnityowneris in
passing through the land of Ernie with the which
paid andcase the it is
right called
of wayreal or predial
demanded easement,
is the
latter's acquiescence for over 20 years. or for
shortest the andbenefit
least of a community
prejudicial to Ernie.or group of
Subsequently, Don subdivided his property into Easement; persons
(Villanueva in which
v. case
Velasco, it is
G.R. known
No. as
130845, a personal
The distinctions Nuisance; usufruct
20 residential lots and sold them to different November easement. 27, 2000). between and
Abatement
Lauro
a)
easement owns
Usufruct an
are: (2002)agricultural
includes land all planted
uses ofmostly the
persons. Ernie blocked the pathway and refused with fruit and
property trees. for Hernando
all purposes, ownsincluding
an adjacent jus
a)
to letDidtheDon acquire
buyers passan easement
through of right of
his land. land
fruendi. Easement is limited to a specificwhich
devoted to his piggery business, use. is
way? Explain. (2%)
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: b) (2)Usufruct
two meters higher may in beelevation.
constituted Although on
No, Don did not acquire an easement of right of Hernando immovable has or constructed
movable property. a wasteEasement disposal
way. An easement of right of way is lagoon may befor constituted
his piggery, onlyit on is an
inadequate
immovable to
discontinuous in nature it is exercised only if contain c)
property. Easement
the waste water is notcontaining
extinguished by the
pig manure,
a man passes over somebody's land. Under death and it of often the overflows
owner ofand the inundates
dominant Lauros estate
while usufruct
Article 622 of the Civil Code, discontinuous plantation. This has increased the acidity of the is extinguished by the death of
the usufructuary
easements, whether apparent or not, may only soil in the plantation, causing the trees to unless a contrary intention
be acquired by virtue of a title. The Supreme appears. d)
wither andAn die. easementLauro sues contemplates
for damagestwo caused (2)
Court, in Abellana, Sr. v. Court of Appeals (G.R. estates
to his belonging
plantation. to two
Hernando (2) different
invokes hisowners;
right toa
No. 97039, April 24, 1992), ruled that an
usufruct
the benefit contemplates
of a natural only
easement one property
in favor of(real
his
easement of right of way being discontinuous in higher or personal)
estate, whereby
which the usufructuary
imposes upon the uses and
lower
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Further, possession of the
nature is not acquirable by prescription.easement by Don is enjoys
estate the
of property
Lauro the as well
obligation as its
to fruits,
receive while
the
Hernando is wrong. It is true that Lauros land
only permissive, tolerated or with the another waters owns the naked
descending title
from natural during the
the higher period
estate. Is
is burdened
e) the A usufruct withmay the be alienated easement
separately to
acquiescence of Ernie. It is settled in the case of Hernando usufruct.
correct? (5%)
accept or receive the water which naturally
of Cuaycong v. Benedicto (G.R. No. 9989, from the property to which it attaches, while an
and without
easement interruption
cannot of manseparately
be alienated descends from from
March 13, 1918) that a permissive use of a
a
thehigher
property estateto to aitlower
which attaches. estate. However,
road over the land of another, no matter how
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: Hernando hasNOTE: constructed a waste disposal
It is recommended by the
long continued, will not create an easement of
Yes, Don acquired an easement of right of way. An easement that lagoon for his piggery Committee and thatit is thisany waste twowater (2)
way by prescription.
is continuous and apparent can be acquired by prescription and that flows downward distinctionsto Lauros
shouldland. Hernando
be given full
title. According to Professor Tolentino, an easement of right of way SUGGESTED ANSWER:
may have a continuous nature if has, thus, interrupted credit. the flow of water and has
created and is maintaining a nuisance. Under
Act. 697 NCC, abatement of a nuisance does
not preclude recovery of damages by Lauro
even for the past existence of a nuisance.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
The claim for damages may also be premised in to
Art.
time. As Tomas' business grows, the need for use of
(4)
2191NCC.
ANOTHER ANSWER:
Hernando is not correct. Article 637 of the New
Civil Code provides that the owner of the higher
estate cannot make works which will increase
the burden on the servient estate. (Remman
Enterprises, Inc. v. CA, 330 SCRA 145 [2000]).
The owner of the higher estate may be
compelled to pay damages to the owner of the
Easements;
lower estate.
Classification
Distinguish (1998)
between:
1. Continuous and discontinuous
2. Apparent|2%]
easements; and non-apparent
3. Positive and negative
easements; [2%]
easements. [1%]
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
extinguished by the registration of the servient estate. consistent with this rule, where the distance to the
However, this provision has been suppressed in modern
highway
streetconveyances
is
orshortest. requires widening of the easement.
Section 44, PD No. 1529. In other words, the ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
registration of the servient estate did not The facts show
2) Is David entitled that to theaneed rightfor of away wider in right
this
operate to cut-off or extinguish the right of of
case?way Why arose or whyfrom not?the increased production
way. Therefore, the complaint for the owing to ANSWER:
SUGGESTED the acquisition by Tomas of an
cancellation of the right of way should be No, David area.
additional is not Under entitledArt. to 626
the rightof the of Civil
way
Easements; Right of Way;
dismissed. being claimed. The isolation
Code, the easement can be used only for the of his subdivision
Requisites
David is the (1996)owner of the subdivision in Sta. was due to his
immovable own act
originally or omission because
contemplated. Hence, the he
Rosa, Laguna, without an access to the did not develop into an
increase in width is justified and should have access road the rice
highway. When he applied for a license to Easements;
field which he
been granted. Right was of supposed to purchase
establish the subdivision, David represented Waycoconut
The (2000)
according to farm
his own of Federico
representationis surrounded when he by
that he will purchase a rice field located the lands for
applied of Romulo.
a license Federico to seeks
establish a rightthe of
between his land and the highway, and develop Ejectment
way through(Floro
subdivision Suit
a portionvs.
us. Cancellation
of the land
Llenado, 244ofSCRA713).
Romulo to
it into an access road. But. when the license of
In
bringTitle
an his (2005)
ejectment
coconut case products filedtoby theDon market. against He
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
was already granted, he did not Cesar,
has can
chosen the
a latter
point ask
where forhe the
willcancellation
pass through of
1. CONTINUOUS EASEMENTS arebotherthose the to buyuse Don's
a housing title considering
project of that
Romulo. heThe (Cesar)
latter is
wants the
the rice field,
of which is or which
may be remains
incessant, unutilized
withoutuntil the the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
present. Instead, he chose to connect his rightful
him toowner pass ofanother
the lot? Explain. way which (2%) is one
intervention of any act of man, while Cesar
SUGGESTED cannot ANSWER:ask for the cancellation of Don's
subdivision with the neighboring kilometer longer. Who should prevail? (5%)
DISCONTINUOUS EASEMENTS aresubdivision
those which of Romulo
title evenwill if he prevail. Under Article
is the rightful owner of 650 theof lot.the In
Nestor,
are usedwhich has an and
at intervals access depend to the uponhighway.
the acts New
an Civilfor
action Code, the easement
ejectment, the only issue of right of way
involved is
Nestor allowed
of man. (Art. 615, Civil Code)him to do this, pending one
shall of possession
be established de facto, at the purpose
the point of which
least
negotiations
SUGGESTED on the compensation to be paid.
ANSWER: is merely totoprotect
prejudicial the servientthe owner estate from and any wherephysicalthe
2. APPARENT
When they failed EASEMENTS
to arrive are at an those which are
agreement, encroachment
distance from from without. The
the dominant title to
estate of a the land
public
made known
Nestor built aand wallare acrosscontinually
the roadkept in view
connecting or its ownership is not involved,
highway is the shortest. In casefor of ifconflict,
a person the is
by external
with David'ssigns that reveal
subdivision. David thefiled useaand in actual possession thereof, he is entitled
criterion of least prejudice prevails overtothe be
enjoymentin
complaint ofcourt,
the same, for the while NONAPPARENT
establishment of an v. Anas, of
maintained G.R. and No. L-20617,
respected in itMayeven 31, against the
criterion shortest distance. Since the route
EASEMENTS
easement of are
right those
of way whichthrough showthe no external 1965)
owner himself. (Garcia
SUGGESTED ANSWER: chosen by Federico will prejudice the housing
indication ofoftheirTheexistence. (Art. 615,to Civil Since
subdivision
Art, 649, NCC.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Nestor whichorhe
owner, any claimsperson be
who the projectthe ofcase filed by
Romulo, Don against
Romulo has the Cesar right is an to
Code)
most
by adequate
virtue of a realand practical
right may outlet
cultivate to the
or use ejectment
Easements; case, the
Right latter of cannot
Way; ask for the
3. POSITIVE EASEMENTS are those which demand that Federico pass another way even
highway.
any immovable 1) What are the requisites for the cancellation
though boughtit will of
Inseparability
Emma Don's
parceltitle.
bea(2001) of land He from
has to file the
Equitable-
impose upon thewhich
owner is of
surrounded
the servient by estate
other longer.
establishment
immovables of allowing
a compulsory
pertaining othereasement
to something persons of a
and proper
PCI Bank, action
which where
acquired the the issue
same of fromownership
Felisa,
the obligation of to be
right over
the the property
original can
owner. be raised.
Thereafter, Emma
done of
without or way?
adequate
of doing itoutlet himself, to a public
while highway, is
NEGATIVE Ejectment that Felisa Suit;
entitled to demand a right of prohibit
way through the discovered had granted a right of
EASEMENTS are those which the owner Commodatum
Alberto and (2006)
Janine migrated to the the land United
neighboring estates, way over the land in favor of of
of the servient estateafter frompayment doing something of the
States of whichAmerica,
Should
property this easement be established in such a Georgina, had leaving
no outlet behindto a their public4
which he indemnity.
could lawfully do if the easement did children, one of whom is Manny. They own a
manner that its use may be continuous for all highway, but the easement was not annotated
not exist. (Art. 615. Civil Code) duplex apartment and allowed Manny to live in
the needs of the
Easements; Right dominant
of estate, establishing when the servient estate was registered under
a
Waypermanent
Tomas (1993)
Encarnacion'spassage,3,000 the indemnity
square meter shall one of the units. While
the Torrens system. Emma then filed a in the United States,
consist
parcel of ofland,
the valuewhereofhe the has land occupied
a plant nursery,and is Alberto
complaint died. His widow and
for cancellation of the all right
his children
of way,
SUGGESTED
executed ANSWER:
an Extrajudicial Settlement of
the
locatedamount just of behindthe damage
Aniceta caused Magsino's to thetwo on the ground that it had been extinguished by
In case the right of way is limited to the The complaint
Alberto's estate for cancellation
wherein the of easement
2door apartment of
servient
hectare parcel estate.land. To enable Tomas to have such failure to annotate. How would you decide
necessary passage for the cultivation right
was of way must
assigned by fail.
all The the failure
children to annotate
to their
access to the highway, Aniceta agreedoftothe grant the controversy?
the easement
(5%)
upon the title of the servient
estate surrounded by others
him a road right of way a meter wide through and for the mother, Janine. Subsequently, she sold the
gathering of its crops through the servient estate
property is
to not
George. among
The latterthe grounds
required Manny for
which he could pass. Through the years Tomas' extinguishing an easement under Art. 631 of
estate
business without
flourished a permanent
which enabled way, the him to buy to sign a prepared Lease Contract so that he
indemnity shall consist in the payment ofofthe the
and Civil
his Code.
family Under
could Article
continue 617, easements
occupying the
another portion iswhich enlarged the area his If
are you were George's
inseparable from the counsel,
estate what legal
This easement
damage
plant cause
nursery. by
But
not
such
he
compulsory
was encumbrance.
still
if the
landlocked.
isolation
He unit. Manny refused to sign to the which they
contract
of the immovable is due to the proprietor's own steps
actively
alleging willor
that you take?
passively Explain.
belong.
his parents allowed him and hisOnce(5%) it attaches,
could not bring
acts. (564a). The ineasement
and out ofof his rightplant of nursery
way shall a SUGGESTED
it can only ANSWER:
be extinguished under Art. 631, and
jeep or delivery panel much less a truck that family
If I were to continue
George's occupying
counsel, the premises.
I are
would first demand
be established at the point least prejudicial to they exist even if they not stated or
he needed to transport his seedlings. He now that Manny
ALTERNATIVE vacate
ANSWER: the
annotated as an encumbrance on the Torrens apartment. If Manny
the servient estate, and insofar as consistent Under Section 44,an PD No. 1529, every
asked Aniceta to grant him a widerfrom portion refuses, I will file ejectment suit. When
with this rule, where the distance the of title of the
registered
servient
owner
estate.
receiving a
(II Tolentino
certificate of
326,
title
her property, theto price of which he was willing Manny
1987 ed.) was allowed by his parents to occupy
dominant estate a public highway may be pursuant to a decree of registration, and every
to pay, to enable the premises, without compensation, the
ALTERNATIVE
the shortest (Art. him
ANSWER: to
650, easement
constructde
NCC: Vda.
a road to
Baltazar v. subsequent
The
have requisites
access for atocompulsory
his plant nursery. of right of way are: (a)
Aniceta contract of innocent commodatum purchaser was for value, Upon
created. shall
CA. 245 SCRA
SUGGESTED
the dominant ANSWER:
estate 333 }
is surrounded by other immovables and is hold the same free from all encumbrances
refused
Art. 651an claiming
of adequate
the Civil Code that shethat had already of theallowed the death of the father, the contract was
without outletprovides
to a public the width
street or highway; easement
(b) proper
him a previous
must be sufficient to road
meet the right
needs of way.
of the dominantIsbeTomas
estate, and except
extinguished those asnoted
it is a on
purely said certificate.
personal contract. This
indemnity must be paid; (c) the isolation must not due to the acts
maytheaccordingly
entitled
of ownerto change
of the
the fromestate;
easement
dominant time toand
he time.(d)It the
now is the need
demands
right of the
of way rule,
As thehowever,
new owner admits of of theexceptions.
apartment George is
dominant
claimed isestate
at a which
point determines
least prejudicial the
to width
the of the passage.
servient estate These
and, Under
entitled Act
Extra-Judicialto 496, asPartition;
exercise amended
his right ofby Act No. 2011,
possession over
from may
needs Aniceta?
insofar as isvary from time and
Fraud
X wasSection
the same. (1990)
the 4,
owner Act of 3621,
a 10,000an easement
square if not
meter
registeredX shall
property. married remainY andand out shall
of their beunion.
held A, to
pass
B andwithC were the born.
land until cutoff or
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
After the death of Y, X married Z and they begot asshare allotted by law to the finder since the phrase "by
children, D, E and F. After the death of X, the chance" means "by accident", meaning an unexpected discovery.
The liberal view, however, would sustain Tim's right to the allocated
children of the first and second marriages share interpreting the phrase in question as meaning "by a stroke of
executed an extrajudicial partition of the good fortune", which does not rule out deliberate or intentional
aforestated property on May 1, 1970. D, E and search. It is submitted that the liberal view should prevail since in
F were given a one thousand square meter practical reality, hidden treasure is hardly ever found without
conscious effort to find it, and the strict view would tend to render
portion of the property. They were minors at the codal provision in question illusory.
the time of the execution of the document. D
was 17 years old, E was 14 and F was 12; and
they were made to believe by A, B and C that
unless they sign the document they will not get
any share. Z was not present then. In January Hidden
(a) Can the minority of D, E
1974, D, E and F filed an action in court to and F be a basis to Treasuresa(1997)
Marcelino, treasure hunter as just a hobby,
nullify the partition? Explain
nullify the suit alleging they discovered the your answer. has found a map which appears to indicate the
(b) How about fraud? Explain location of hidden treasure. He has an idea of
fraud only ANSWER:
in 1973.
your answer.
SUGGESTED the land where the treasure might possibly be
(a) Yes, minority can be a basis to nullify the found. Upon inquiry, Marcelino learns that the
partition because D, E and F were not properly owner of the land, Leopoldo, is a permanent
represented by their parents or guardians at resident of Canada, Nobody, however, could
the time they contracted the extrajudicial give him Leopoldo's exact address. Ultimately,
partition. (Articles 1327. 1391, Civil Code). anyway, he enters the land and conducts a
(b) In the case of fraud, when through insidious Leopoldo
search. Helearningsucceeds. of Marcelino's "find", seeks
words or machinations of one party the other to recover the treasure from Marcelino but the
is induced to enter into the contract without latter is not willing to part with it. Failing to
which he would not have agreed to, the action reach an agreement, Leopoldo sues Marcelino
still prosper because under Art, 1391 of the for the recovery of the property. Marcelino
Civil Code, in case of fraud, the action for contests the action. How would you decide the
annulment may be brought within four years SUGGESTED
case? ANSWER:
from the discovery of the fraud. I would decide in favor of Marcelino since he is
Hidden considered a finder by chance of the hidden
Treasure
Tim came into (1995) possession of an old map treasure, hence, he is entitled to one-half (1/2)
showing where a purported cache of gold of the hidden treasure. While Marcelino may
bullion was hidden. Without any authority from have had the intention to look for the hidden
the government Tim conducted a relentless treasure, still he is a finder by chance since it is
search and finally found the treasure buried in enough that he tried to look for it. By chance in
a new river bed formerly part of a parcel of the law does not mean sheer luck such that the
land owned by spouses Tirso and Tessie. The finder should have no intention at all to look for
old river which used to cut through the land of the treasure. By chance means good luck,
spouses Ursula and Urbito changed its course implying that one who intentionally looks for
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
through natural causes. To whom shall the the treasure is embraced in the provision. The
The treasure was found in a property of public
treasure belong? Explain. reason is that it is extremely difficult to find
dominion, the new river bed. Since Tim did
not have authority from the government and, hidden treasure without looking for it
therefore, was a trespasser, he is not entitled deliberately.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWERS:
Marcelino is not a trespasser since
to the one-half share allotted to a finder of there is no prohibition
1. Marcelino did not find forthe
him to enterby
treasure the
hidden treasure. All of it will go to the State. In premises, hence, he is entitled
chance because he had a map, he knew the to half of the
addition, under Art. 438 of the NCC in order treasure.
location of the hidden treasure and he
that the finder be entitled to the 1/2 share, the intentionally looked for the treasure, hence, he
treasure must be found by chance, that is by is not entitled to any part of the treasure.
sheer luck. In this case, since Tim found the 2. Marcelino appears to be a trespasser and
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
treasure although there may be a question of whether
The law grantsnot by share
a one-half chance
to a finderbut because
of hidden treasure he
relentlessly
provided he is notsearched
a trespasser for
and it,
the he is is
finding not entitled
by chance. It isto
he found it by chance or not, as he has found
any share in the hidden treasure.
submitted that Tim is not a trespasser despite his not getting the hidden treasure by means of a treasure
authority from the government, because the new river bed where he map, he will not be entitled to a finder's share.
found the treasure is property for public use (Art. 420 NCC), to The hidden treasure shall belong to the owner.
which the public has legitimate access. The question, therefore, 3. The main rule is that hidden treasure
boils down to whether or not the finding was by chance in view of
the fact that Tim "conducted a relentless search" before finding the belongs to the owner of the land, building or
treasure. The strict or literal view holds that deliberate or intentional other property on which it is found. If it is found
search precludes entitlement to the one-half by chance by a third person and he is not a
trespasser, he is entitled to one-half (1/2). If
he is a trespasser, he loses everything.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
(a) X borrowed money from Y and gave a piece Areof the right of redemption and the equity of
land as security by way of mortgage. It was given by law to a mortgagor the same? Explain.
redemption
expressly agreed between the parties in (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the mortgage contract that upon The equity of redemption is different from the
nonpayment of the debt on time by X, the right of redemption. EQUITY OF REDEMPTION is
mortgaged land would already belong to the right of the mortgagor after judgment in a
Y. If X defaulted in paying, would Y now judicial foreclosure to redeem the property by
become the owner of the mortgaged land? paying to the court the amount of the
(b) Why? Suppose
(3%) in the preceding question, the judgment debt before the sale or confirmation
agreement between X and Y was that if X failed of the sale. On the other hand, RIGHT OF
to pay the mortgage debt on time, the debt REDEMPTION is the right of the mortgagor to
shall be paid with the land mortgaged by X to redeem the property sold at an extra-judicial
Y. Would your answer be the same as in the foreclosure by paying to the buyer in the
SUGGESTED
preceding ANSWER:
question? Explain. (3%) foreclosure sale the amount paid by the buyer
(a) No, Y would not become the owner of the Nuisance; within one yearFamilyfrom suchHouse; sale. Not
land. The stipulation is in the nature of pactum A Nuisance
drug lord per se his
and (2006)
family reside in a small
commissorium which is prohibited by law. The bungalow where they sell shabu and other
property should be sold at public auction and prohibited drugs. When the police found the
the proceeds thereof applied to the illegal trade, they immediately demolished the
indebtedness. Any excess shall be given to the house because according to them, it was a
SUGGESTED
mortgagor.ANSWER: nuisance per se that should be abated. Can
(d) No, the answer would not be the same. This SUGGESTED ANSWER:
this demolition be sustained? Explain. (5%)
is a valid stipulation and does not constitute No, the demolition cannot be sustained. The
pactum commissorium. In pactum house is not a nuisance per se or at law as it is
commissorium, the acquisition is automatic not an act, occupation, or structure which is a
without need of any further action. In the nuisance at all times and under any
instant problem another act is required to be circumstances, regardless of location or
performed, namely, the conveyance of the surroundings. A nuisance per se is a nuisance
Mortgage;
property as payment (dacionPactum
en pago). in and of itself, without regard to
Commissorium
To (2001) from a rural bank,
secure a loan obtained circumstances [Tolentino, p. 695, citing
Purita assigned her leasehold rights over a Nuisance; Public Nuisance vs. Private
Wheeler v. River Falls Power Co., 215 Ala. 655,
stall in the public market in favor of the bank. Nuisance
State
111 with
So. (2005)whether each of the following
reason
907].
The deed of assignment provides that in case is a nuisance, and if so, give its classification,
of default in the payment of the loan, the bank whether public or private: Article 694 of the
shall have the right to sell Purita's rights over Civil Code defines nuisance as any act,
the market stall as her attorney-in-fact, and to omission, establishment, business, condition or
apply the proceeds to the payment of the loan. property, or anything else which injures or
cession?
1) Was Why? (3%) of leasehold rights a
the assignment endangers the health or safety of others, or
2)
mortgage Assuming
or a the assignment to be a annoys or offends the senses, or shocks, defies
mortgage, does the provision giving the bank or disregards decency or morality or obstructs
the power to sell Purita's rights constitute or interferes with the free passage of any
pactum commissorium or not? Why? (2%) public highway or street or any body of water
SUGGESTED ANSWER: It
or is a public
hinders or nuisance
impairs the if it affects
use a community
of property.
1) The assignment was a mortgage, not a or neighborhood or any considerable number of
cession, of the leasehold rights. A cession would persons. It is a direct encroachment upon
have transferred ownership to the bank. public rights or property which results
However, the grant of authority to the bank to injuriously to the public. It is a private
sell the leasehold rights in case of default is nuisance, if it affects only a person or small
proof that no such ownership was transferred a) numberA squatter's
of persons. hut It (1%)violates only private
and that a mere encumbrance was constituted. If constructed on public streets or riverbeds, it
rights.
There would have been no need for such is a public nuisance because it obstructs the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: free use by the public of said places. (City of
authority had there been a cession.
2) No, the clause in question is not a pactum Manila v. Garcia, G.R. No. L-26053, February
commissorium. It is pactum commissorium 21,1967) If constructed on private land, it is a
when default in the payment of the loan private nuisance because it hinders or impairs
automatically vests ownership of the the use of the property by the owner.
encumbered property in the bank. In the b) A swimming pool
problem given, the bank does not automatically (1%) This is not a nuisance in the absence of any
become owner of the property upon default of unusual condition or artificial feature other
the mortgagor. The bank has to sell the Hidalgo
than the Enterprises
mere water. v. In Balandan (G.R. No. L-
Mortgage;
property and Right of Redemption
apply the proceeds vs. Equity
to the 3422, June 13, 1952), the Supreme Court ruled
of Redemption (1999)
indebtedness. Mortgage; Pactum
that a swimming pool is but
Commissorium (1999) Page 64 of 119
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
a duplication of nature thus, could not (b)
be The mortgage shall not bind the 1/3 right and interest
nuisance.
considered as a

c) A house of prostitution
Irrespective of its location and how its business
(1%)
is conducted, it is a nuisance since it defies,
shocks and disregards decency and morality. It
is a public nuisance because of its injury to the
public.
d) A noisy or dangerous factory in a private
If the (1%)
land noise injuriously affects the health and
comfort of ordinary people in the vicinity to an
unreasonable extent, it is a nuisance. It is a
public nuisance because there is a tendency to
annoy the public. (Velasco v. Manila Electric
Co., G.R. No. L-18390, August 6, 1971)
e) Uncollected garbage
It will become a nuisance if it substantially
(1%)
impairs the comfort and enjoyment of the
adjacent occupants. The annoyance and the
smell must be substantial as to interfere
sensibly with the use and enjoyment by
persons of ordinary sensibilities. It is a public
nuisance because of its injury to the public.
Ownership; Co-
Ownership
A, B and C are (1992)
the co-owners in equal shares
of a residential house and lot. During their co-
ownership, the following acts were
respectively done by the co-owners: 1) A
then tilting
undertook to oneof
the repair side,
the to prevent the
foundation house from
of the
collapsing.
house, 2) B and C mortgaged the house
and lot to secure a loan. 3) B engaged a
contractor to build a concrete fence all
around the lot. 4) C built a beautiful
grotto in the garden. 5) A and C sold the
land to X for a very good price.

(a) Is A's sole decision to repair the


foundation of the house binding on B and
C? May A require B and C to contribute
their 2/3 share of the expense? Reasons.
(b) What is the legal effect of the
mortgage contract executed by B and C?
(c)
Reasons.Is B's sole decision to build the
fence binding upon A and C? May B
require A and C to contribute their 2/ 3
share of the expense? Reasons.
(d) Is C's sole decision to build the
grotto binding upon A and B? May C
require A and B to contribute their 2/ 3
share of the expense? Reasons.
(e) What are the legal effects of the
contract of sale executed by A. C and X?
Reasons.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: thereof and offering to reimburse B for
Ramon has acquired the land by acquisitive of A and he
whatever shallhadbe paid deemed
in purchasingto cover theonly the
prescription, and because of laches on the part rights and
property frominterests
the bank. of B In and
brief,Chow in thewill youhouse
of Rosario. Ramon's possession of the land was and lot.the
answer Thecomplaint
mortgage of shall
C andbe D,limited
if you were to the
adverse because he asserted sole ownership SUGGESTED
portion (2/3)
engaged byANSWER:
Dwhich
as hismay counsel?be allotted to B and C
thereof and never shared the harvest As counsel
in the partition of B,(Art.I shall 493, answer the complaint as
Civil Code).
therefrom. His adverse possession having been follows: When
SUGGESTED ANSWER: B bought the property, it was not
continuous and uninterrupted for more than 30 (c) B's
by a sole
rightdecision
of redemption to build the concrete
since the periodfence
years, Ramon has acquired the land by is not binding
therefore had already upon expired.A and C. Hence,ExpensesB bought to
prescription. Rosario is also guilty of laches not improve
the propertythe thingin anowned independentin common must be
unconditional
having asserted her right to the harvest for decided
sale. C and upon D by are anot majority
co-owners of the with co-owners
B of the
Ownership;
more than 40 years.Co-Ownership; who represent
property. Therefore, the the controlling
suit of Cinterest
and D cannot (Arts.
Prescription
Senen (2002)
and Peter are brothers. Senen migrated ALTERNATIVE
489 and 492.
prosper. ANSWER:
Civil Code).
to Canada early while still a teenager. Peter As counselANSWER:
SUGGESTED of B, I shall answer the complaint as
stayed in Bulacan to take care of their widowed (d) C's sole
follows: From decision
the facts to build the grotto
described, it is not
would
mother and continued to work on the Family binding that
appear uponthe A Certificate
and B who of cannot
sale has be not requiredbeen
farm even after her death. Returning to the to contribute
registered. The one-yearto the period expenses for the
of redemption
country some thirty years after he had left, embellishment
begins to run from of the thing owned
registration. in common
In this case, it
Senen seeks a partition of the farm to get his if not
has notdecided
yet even upon by the majority
commenced. Underof the the co-
Rules
share as the only co-heir of Peter. Peter owners
of Court,who the represent
property may the controlling
be releasedinterest by the
interposes his opposition, contending that (Arts. 489 and
Judgment debtor 492,orCivil his Code).
successor in interest.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
acquisitive prescription has already set in and (Sec. 29, Rule 27). It has been held that this
(e) The sale to X shall not bind the 1/3 share
that estoppel lies to bar the action for partition, includes a joint owner. (Ref. Magno vs.Ciola, 61
of B and shall be deemed
Ownership; Co-Ownership;
to cover only the 2/3
citing his continuous possession of the property Phil. 80).
share of Adied,
Redemption
Ambrosio and (2000)Cleaving
in the his landthree
(Art. daughters,
493, Civil
for at least 10 years, for almost 30 years in Code). Rosario
Belen, B shall have and Sylviathe right to redeem
a hacienda whichthe 2/3was
fact. It is undisputed that Peter has never
SUGGESTED ANSWER: share sold to
mortgaged to X the byPhilippine
A and C National since X isBank a third
due
openly
Senensclaimed soleprosper.
action will ownership of the
Article 494property.
of the person
to (Art. 1620,
the failure of theCivil Code). to pay the bank,
daughters
If he ever had the intention to do so,
New Civil Code provides that no prescription Senen Ownership;
the latter foreclosed Co-Ownership;
the mortgage and the
was completely ignorant of it. Will
shall run in favor of a co-owner or co-heir Senens Prescription
In
hacienda was sold tohis
1955, Ramon (2000)
and it sister
as theRosario
highest inherited
bidder.
action
againstprosper? Explain.
his co-owners or(5%).
co-heirs so long as he a
Six months later, Sylvia won the grandparents.
parcel of land in Albay from their prize at
expressly or impliedly recognizes the co- Since
the lotto Rosario
and used was part gainfully
of it toemployed
redeem the in
ownership nor notified Senen of his having Manila, she left Ramon
hacienda from the bank. Thereafter, she took alone to possess and
ALTERNATIVE
repudiated theANSWER:
same. cultivate
possessionthe of land.
the haciendaHowever,and Ramon refused never to
Senens action will prosper. This is a case of shareditsthe
share harvest
fruits with with Rosariocontending
her sisters, and was even that
implied trust. (Art 1441, NCC) For purposes of SUGGESTED
able
it wastoowned
ANSWER:
sell one-half
exclusively of theher, land in 1985 by
prescription under the concept of an owner Sylvia
claiming is not
to bankcorrect.
be the Theby
sole 3
heir
having
daughters
ofmoney.
bought
are
his parents. the
it from
co-owners the with
of theretirement her
hacienda being own Is she
(Art. 540, NCC). There is no such concept here. Having
correct reached
or not? (3%) age inthe 1990 only heirs
Rosario
Peter was a co-owner, he never claimed sole of Ambrosio.
returned to the When provincethe and property
upon learning was
ownership of the property. He is therefore foreclosed, the right
what had transpired, demanded that the of redemption belongs
estopped under Art. 1431, NCC. also
remainingto the half of 3 the daughters.
land be given Whento her Sylviaas
Ownership; Co-Ownership; redeemed the entire property before the lapse
her share. Ramon opposed, asserting that he
Redemption
In (1993)a loan of P20,000.00 from
1937, A obtained of the redemption period, she also exercised
has already acquired ownership of the land by
the National City Bank of New York, an SUGGESTED
the right ANSWER:
of redemption of her co-owners on
prescription,
Ramon is wrong and that
on she Rosario
bothiscounts: is barred
prescription by
American-owned bank doing business in the their behalf. As such holding the shares
laches
and laches. from demanding
His possession partition
as co-owner did and
not
Philippines. To guarantee payment of his of her two sisters in thethe property, and claims.
all the
reconveyance.
give rise to Decide
acquisitive conflicting
prescription. Possession
obligation, A constituted a real estate fruits corresponding thereto, in trust for them.
(5%)
by a co-owner
mortgage on his 30hectare parcel of Redemption by isone deemed co-owner not adverse
inures to to the
the
agricultural land. In 1939, before he could pay other co-owners but
benefit of all (Adille v. CA.157 SCRA 455). is, on the contrary,
his obligation. A died intestate leaving three Ownership;
deemed beneficialisto Co-Ownership;
them (Pongon v. GA, 166
Sylvia, however, entitled to be reimbursed
children. B, a son by a first marriage, and C Redemption
Antonio,
SCRA 375). Bart, (2002)
and Carlos
Ramon's are brothers.
possession will becomeThey
the shares of her two sisters in the redemption
and D, daughters by a second marriage. In purchased
adverse onlyfrom when their he parents
has specific portions
repudiated the co-
price.
1940, the bank foreclosed the mortgage for of a parceland
ownership of landsuch as evidencedwas
repudiation by made three
non-payment
SUGGESTED of the principal obligation. As the
ANSWER: separates
known to deeds Rosario. of sale,
Assuming each deedthat the referringsale to in
(a)
onlyYes. A's sole
bidder at decision to repair the
the extrajudicial foreclosure a particular
1985 wherelot in meter
Ramon claimedand bounds.
he wasWhen the sole the
foundation
sale, the bank bought theB property
is binding upon and C. B and
and Cwas deeds
heir of hiswere parentspresentedamounted for toregistration,
a repudiationthe of
must
later issued a certificate of sale. Theco-
contribute 2/3 of the expense. Each war Register of Deedsthecould
the co-ownership, not issue
prescriptive period separate
began
owner has the
supervened in right
1941towithout
compel the the other
bank co-
having certificates
to run only of fromTitlethat hadtime. to beNot issued,
moretherefore,
than 30
S. Government,
owners to contribute and the utilized the ofsame in in the names of three
years having lapsed since then, the brothers as coownersclaim of
been able to obtain to actualexpense
possession of the
agribusiness.
preservation In thing (theashouse)
1960,
of theremained B's owned
business
in the
Rosarioentire
has not property. The situation
as yet prescribed. The has claimnot of
property which with A's three
flourished,
common who C and
in proportionD sued B
to their for partition
respective and changed
laches isup not to now, also but each of theUntil
meritorious. brothers the
children appropriated for themselves the
accounting
SUGGESTED
interestsfrom of 485
ANSWER:
(Arts. the and
income
488, of the
Civil property,
Code). has been receiving
repudiation of therentals exclusively
co-ownership was from madethe
income it. In 1948, B bought the property
claiming that as heirs of their father they were lot
knownactually
to the purchased by him. Antonio
other co-owners, no right sells has his
from the bank using the money he received as
co-owners lot
been to aviolated
third person, for withthe notice said to his brothers.
co-owners to
back pay from the U.
To enable the
vindicate. Mere buyerdelay to secure a new title
in vindicating the inright,
standing alone, does not constitute laches.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
his name, the deed of sale was made to referSalvador, to a timber concessionaire, built on his lot a
interest
undividedin the property of the seller (Antonio), warehouse where he processes and stores his
with the metes and bounds of the lot sold being timber for shipment. Adjoining the warehouse
stated. Bart and Carlos reacted by signifying is a furniture factory owned by NARRAMIX of
their exercise of their right of redemption as co which Salvador is a majority stockholder.
owners. Antonio in his behalf and in behalf of NARRAMIX leased space in the warehouse
his buyer, contends that they are no longer co- 1. How would
where it you classifyitsthe furniture-making
placed furniture-making
owners, although the title covering the property machinery
machinery.as property under the Civil Code?
has remained in their names as such. May Bart 2. Suppose the lease contract between
Explain.
and Carlos still redeem the lot sold by Antonio? Salvador and NARRAMIX stipulates that at the
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Explain. (5%) end of the lease the machinery shall become
No, they may not redeem because there was the property of the lessor, will your answer be
no Coownership among Antonio, Bart, and the same? Explain.
Carlos to start with. Their parents already
partitioned the land in selling separate portions
v. Court The
to them. of Appeals,
situation (342
is theSCRA
same653as in the
[2000]).
case Si
Possession
(1998)
Using a falsified manager's check, Justine, as
the buyer, was able to take delivery of a
second hand car which she had just bought
from United Car Sales Inc. The sale was
registered with the Land Transportation Office.
A week later, the seller learned that the check
had been dishonored, but by that time, Justine
was nowhere to be seen. It turned out that
Justine had sold the car to Jerico, the present
possessor who knew nothing about the falsified
check. In a suit by United Car Sales, Inc.
against Jerico for recovery of the car, plaintiff
alleges it had been unlawfully deprived of its
property through
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
fraud and should,
consequently, be allowed to recover it
The suit should prosper as to the recovery of without
having
the car.toHowever,
reimburse the Jerico
since defendant for the
was not price
guilty of
the latter
any fraud had
andpaid. Should
appears to the
be suit prosper?
an innocent
[5%]
purchaser for value, he should be reimbursed
for the price he paid. This is without prejudice
to United Car Sales, Inc. right of action against
Justine. As between two innocent parties, the
party causing the injury should suffer the loss.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Therefore, United Car Sales, Inc. should suffer
Yes, the suit will prosper because the criminal
the loss.
act of estafa should be deemed to come within
the meaning of unlawful deprivation under Art.
559, Civil Code, as without it plaintiff would not
have parted with the possession of its car.
ANOTHER ANSWER:
No, the suit will not prosper. The sale is valid
and Jerico is a buyer in good faith.
ANOTHER ANSWER:
Under the law on Sales, when the thing sold is
delivered by the seller to the buyer without
reservation of ownership, the ownership is
transferred to the buyer. Therefore in the suit
of United Car Sales, Inc. against Jerico for the
recovery of the car, the plaintiff should not be
allowed to recover the car without reimbursing
the defendant for the price that the latter paid.
(EDCA Publishing and Distributing Corp. vs.
Property; Real vs. Personal
Santos, 184 SCRA 614, April 26, 1990)
Property (1995)
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
If consulted, what would your legal advice latter vacate the premises and deliver the same to the
be?
SUGGESTED ANSWER: former. Petronila refused to vacate the place
The warehouse which is a construction on the ground that the usufruct in her favor
adhered to the soil is an immovable by nature would expire only on 1 June 1998 when Manuel
under Art. 415 (1) and the proper venue of any would have reached his 30th birthday and that
case to recover ownership of the same, which the death of Manuel before his 30th birthday
is what the purpose of the complaint to annul did not extinguish the usufruct. Whose
the amended Deed of Sale amounts to, should SUGGESTED
contentionANSWER: should be accepted?
ADDITIONAL ANSWERS:
be the place where the property is located, or Petronila's contention is correct. Under Article
1. Buildings are always immovable property, and 606 of the Civil Code, a usufruct granted for
the RTC of Bulacan.
even in the instances where the parties to a the time that may elapse before a third person
contract seem to have dealt with it separate and reaches a certain age shall subsist for the
apart from the land on which it stood in no wise number of ANSWER:
SUGGESTED years specified even if the third
does it change its character as immovable 1. The should
person furniture-making
die unless machinery
there is an expressis movable
property. A building is an immovable even if not property because it was
stipulation in the contract that states not installed by the
erected by the owner of the land. The only owner of the
otherwise. tenement.
In the case at To bar,become
there isimmovable
no
criterion
O.G. is union
4374) or incorporation
(Reyes and Puno, with the soil.
Outline of under Art.
express 415 (5) that
stipulation of the theNCC, the machinery
consideration for
Philippine
(Ladera vs.Civil Law,
Hodges Vol.
(CA) 482. p.7) ALTERNATIVE
must
the be ANSWER:
usufruct installed
is the existence by theof Petronila's
owner of son. the
This is a usufruct
ALTERNATIVE
tenement. ANSWER: which is clearly intended for
2. The warehouse built by Pedro on the Thus, the general rule and not the exception
It depends
the benefit on the circumstances
of Manuel until he reaches of the 30case.
yrs. If
mortgaged property is real property within the should apply in this case.
the
of agemachinery
with Petronila was attached
serving only in a fixed manner,
as a conduit,
context of Article 415 of the New Civil Code, in such a
holding theway that it in
property cannot
trust for be hisseparated
benefit.from
although it was built by Pedro after the the tenement
The death of Manuel without atbreaking
the age of the 26material or
foreclosure sale without the knowledge and causing deterioration
therefore, terminated the thereof,
usufruct.it is immovable
consent of the new owner which makes him a
builder in bad faith, this does not alter the LAND TRANSFER &
property [Art. 415 (3), NCC]. However, if the
machinery can be transported from place to
character of the warehouse as a real property
by incorporation. It is a structure which cannot DEEDS
place without impairment of the tenement to
which they were fixed, then it is movable
be removed without causing injury to the land. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
property. [Art. 416 (4), NCC]
So, my (Note:
adviceIf tothe examinee does not mention
Pedro is to file the case with 2. It is immovable
Acquisition of Lands; property.
CitizenshipWhen there is a
that the structure was built by a builder in provision
In 1970, the spouses Juan and Juanamaking
Requirement in the lease
(2003) contract de la Cruz,the
the RTCbad
of Bulacan, the situs of the property,
faith, it should be given full credit). lessor, at the bought
then Filipinos, end of the the parcel
lease,ofowner of the
Sower; Good Faith/ Bad machinery
unregisteredinstalled land in the by Philippines
the lessee, on thewhich said
Faithcultivated
Felix (2000) a parcel of land and planted it machinery
they built aishouse considered
which becameto have been their installed
to sugar cane, believing it to be his own. When by the lessor through
residence. In 1986, they the lesseeto who
migrated Canada acted
the crop was eight months old, and merely as hisCanadian
agent. Having been installedinby
and became citizens. Thereafter,
harvestable after two more months, a resurvey the owner of the opposed tenement, the Republic,
machinery
1990, they applied, by the
of the land showed that it really belonged to became immovableof .under Art. 415 land of the
SUGGESTED for the registration
Property; Real vs. Personal the aforesaid in NCC.
Fred. WhatANSWER:
are the options available to Fred? (Davao Sawmill v. Castillo 61 Phil. 709)
As to the pending crops planted by Felix in their
Property
Pedro names.
is the Should
(1997) registered the application
owner of of the
a parcel of
(2%) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
good faith, Fred has the option of allowing Felix spouses
land the de
situated la Cruz be
in Malolos, granted over the
Yes, application shouldBulacan.
be granted. In 1973,
As a he
to continue the cultivation and to harvest the Republics
mortgaged opposition?
the land to Why? 5%
the Philippine National
rule, the Constitution prohibits aliens from
crops, or to continue the cultivation and Bank (PNB)
owning private to lands
secure in atheloan of P100.000.00.
Philippines. This
harvest the crops himself. In the latter option, For Pedro's
rule, however, failure
does not to payapply the loan,
to the the PNB
spouses
however, Felix shall have the right to a part of foreclosed
Juan and Juana on the de la mortgage
Cruz because in 1980, at the andtimethe
the expenses of cultivation and to a part of the land
they wasacquiredsold at public auction
ownership over the to PNB
land,for being
albeit
ALTERNATIVE
net harvest,ANSWER:
both in proportion to the time of
Since sugarcane is not a perennial crop. Felix the highestthey
imperfect, bidder.werePNB stillsecured title thereto
Filipino citizens. The in
possession. (Art. 545 NCC), In
1987.the meanwhile, Pedro,
application for registration is a mere who was still in
is considered a sower in good faith. Being so,
possession
confirmation of of the the land, title
imperfect constructed
which the a
Art. 448 applies. The options available to Fred
warehouse
spouses have onalready
the property.
acquired In before
1988, they the PNB
are: (a) to appropriate the crop after paying Adverse
sold Claims;
land to Notice
became Canadian citizens. (Republic v. CA,was
the Pablo, the of Deed of Sale 235
Felix the indemnity under Art. 546, or (b) to
Levy
SCRA (1998)
Section
amended 567 70in of1989Presidential
[1994]). to include Decree No. 1529,
the warehouse.
require Felix to pay rent. Pedro, claiming ownership
Usufruct concerning adverse claims onofregisteredthe warehouse, land,
files a complaint
provides a 30-daytoperiod annul of the amendedofDeed
effectivity an of
(1997)
On 1 January 1980, Minerva, the owner of a
Sale
adverse beforeclaim, thecounted
Regional fromTrialtheCourt
dateof of Quezon
its
building, granted Petronila a usufruct over the
City, where Suppose
registration. he resides, against
a notice both the
of adverse PNB
claim
property until 01 June 1998 when Manuel, a
and Pablo. The PNB filed
based upon a contract to sell was registered ona motion to dismiss
son of Petronila, would have reached his 30th
the
March complaint
1, 1997 at fortheimproper
instancevenue of the contending
BUYER,
birthday. Manuel, however, died on 1 June
that
but on June 1, 1997, or after theproperty
the warehouse is real lapse of the under
1990 when he was only 26 years old.
Minerva notified Petronila that the usufruct had Article 415(1)
30-day period, of the Civil
a notice of levyCode on and therefore
execution in
been extinguished by the death of Manuel and the action
favor should have
of a JUDGMENT CREDITORinsteadwas beenalsofiled in
demanded that the Malolos, Bulacan.
registered to enforce Pedroa final claims
judgmentotherwise.for The
question
money arose the
against as registered
to whether the warehouse
owner. Then, on
should
June 15,be 1997considered
there having as realbeenor noas personal
formal
property.
cancellation of his notice of adverse claim, the
BUYER pays
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
to the seller-owner the agreed purchase price inresidential,
full commercial, industrial, or similar
registers
and the corresponding deed of sale. purposes, productiveand only by lease when not needed
Because the annotation of the notice of levy is by the government for public service.
carried over to the new title in his name, the
BUYER brings an action against the JUDGMENT (2) If the land is suited or actually used for
CREDITOR to cancel such annotation, but the fishpond or aquaculture purposes, it comes
latter claims that his lien is superior because it under the Jurisdiction of the Bureau of
was annotated after the adverse claim of the Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) and
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
BUYER had ipso facto ceased to be effective. can only be acquired by lease. (P.D. 705)
The suit will prosper. While an adverse claim (3) Free Patent is a mode of concession under
Will the suit prosper? [5%]
duly annotated at the back of a title under Section 41, Chapter VII of the Public Land Act,
Section 7O of P.D. 1529 is good only for 30 which is applicable only for agricultural lands.
days, cancellation thereof is still necessary to
render it ineffective, otherwise, the inscription (4) The certificate of the district forester that
thereof will remain annotated as a lien on the the land is already "alienable and disposable"
property. While the life of adverse claim is 3O simply means that the land is no longer
days under P.D. 1529, it continuous to be needed for forest purposes, but the Bureau of
effective until it is canceled by formal petition Lands could no longer dispose of it by free
The cancellation
filed with the Register of of
the notice of levy is
Deeds. patent because it is already covered by a lease
justified under Section 108 of P.D. 1529 contract between BFAR and Regina. That
considering that the levy on execution can not (5) The free
contract mustpatent of Jorge is highly irregular
be respected.
be enforced against the buyer whose adverse and void ab initio, not only because the Bureau
claim against the registered owner was has no statutory authority to issue a free
recorded ahead of the notice of levy on patent over a foreshore area, but also because
Annotation
execution. of Lis Pendens; When of the false statements made in his sworn
Proper
Mario (2001)
sold his house and lot to Carmen for P1 application that he has occupied and cultivated
million payable in five (5) equal annual the land since July 4, 1945, as required by the
installments. The sale was registered and title free patent law. Under Section 91 of the Public
was issued in Carmen's name. Carmen failed Land Act, any patent concession or title
to pay the last three installments and Mario obtained thru false representation is void ab
filed an. action for collection, damages and initio. In cases of this nature, it is the
attorneys fees against her. Upon filing of the government that shall institute annulment
complaint, he caused a notice of lis pendens to proceedings considering that the suit carries
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
be annotated on Carmen's title. Is the notice of with it a prayer for the reversion of the land to
The notice of lis pendens is not proper for the
lis pendens proper or not? Why? (5%) the state. However, Regina is a party in interest
reason that the case filed by Mario against
Carmen is only for collection, damages, and and the case will prosper because she has a
attorney's fees. lease contract for the same land with the
Annotation of a lis pendens can only be done in government.
cases involving recovery of possession of real
property, or to quiet title or to remove cloud
thereon, or for partition or any other
proceeding affecting title to the land or the use
or occupation thereof. The action filed by Mario
does not fall on anyone of these.
Foreshore Lands
(2000)
Regina has been leasing foreshore land from
the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources
for the past 15 years. Recently, she learned
that Jorge was able to obtain a free patent from
the Bureau of Agriculture, covering the same
land, on the basis of a certification by the
District Forester that the same is already
"alienable and disposable". Moreover, Jorge had
already registered the patent with the Register
of Deeds of the province, and he was issued an
Original Certificate of Title for the same. Regina
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
filed an action
An action forannulment
for the annulmentofofJorge's
Jorge'sOriginal
title on
the ground that it was obtained fraudulently.
Certificate of Title will prosper on the following
Will
(1) the action
Under
grounds: prosper?
Chapter IX of C(2%)
.A, No. 141,
otherwise known as the Public Land Act,
foreshore lands are disposable for
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
It is a well-known rule in this jurisdiction that persons
dealing with registered land have the legal right The mortgage to Desiderio should be cancelled
to rely on the face of the Torrens Certificate of without prejudice to his right to go after
Title and to dispense with the need to inquire Catalino and/or the government for
further, except when the party concerned has compensation from the assurance fund.
actual knowledge of facts and circumstances Fraud; Procurement of
that would impel a reasonably cautious man to Patent;
In 1979, Effect
Nestor (2000)
applied for and was granted a
make such inquiry. (Naawan Community Rural Free Patent over a parcel of agricultural land
Bank v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 128573, with an area of 30 hectares, located in General
In the given
January problem, the property was already
13, 2003) Santos City. He presented the Free Patent to
registered in the name of Rod when he bought the Register of Deeds, and he was issued a
the same from the latter. Thus, Don could be corresponding Original Certificate of Title (OCT)
considered as a buyer in good faith and for No. 375, Subsequently, Nestor sold the land to
value. However, since Rod did not actually sell Eddie. The deed of sale was submitted to the
any property to him, Don has no right to retain Register of Deeds and on the basis thereof,
ownership over the property. He has only the OCT No, 375 was cancelled and Transfer
right to recover the purchase price plus Certificate of Title (TCT) No. 4576 was issued in
Forgery; Innocent Purchaser; Mirror
damages. the name of Eddie. In 1986, the Director of
Principle
Bruce (1991)
is the registered owner, of a parcel of
Lands filed a complaint for annulment of OCT
land with a building thereon and is in peaceful
No, 375 and TCT No. 4576 on the ground that
possession thereof. He pays the real estate
Nestor obtained the Free Patent through fraud.
taxes and collects the rentals therefrom. Later,
Eddie filedANSWER:
a motion to dismiss on the ground
Catalino, the only brother of Bruce, filed a SUGGESTED
that motion
The he wasofan innocent
Nestor to dismisspurchaser for value
the complaint
petition where he, misrepresenting to be the
andannulment
for in good faith of and asNo.
O.C.T. such,375 heand has acquired
T.C.T. No.
attorney-in-fact of Bruce and falsely alleging
a
4576 title
should to be the property
denied for the which
following is valid,
that the certificate of title was lost, succeeded
unassailable
reasons: 1) Eddie andcannotindefeasible.
claim protection Decideasthe an
in obtaining a second owner's duplicate copy of
motion.
innocent (5%)
purchaser for value nor can he interpose the
the title and then had the same transferred in
his name through a simulated deed of sale in defense of indefeasibility of his title,
his favor. Catalino then mortgaged the because his TCT is rooted on a void title.
property to Desiderio who had the mortgage Under Section 91 of CA No. 141, as
annotated on the title. Upon learning of the amended, otherwise known as the Public
fraudulent transaction, Bruce filed a complaint Land Act, statements of material facts in the
against Catalino and Desiderio to have the title applications for public land must be under
SUGGESTED ANSWER: oath. Section 91 of the same act provides
of
The Catalino
complaintandfor
thethe
mortgage
annulment in favor of
of Catalino's Forgery;
that such Innocent
statements Purchaser;
shall be Holder considered in as
Desiderio declaredInnull
Title will prosper. the and
firstvoid.
place,Will
thethe
second Badessential
Rod, Faith
the owner(2005)
conditions and parts of his
of an FX taxi, found in the
complaint
owner's copy prosper,
of theor willsecured
title the titleby
ofhim
Catalino
from vehicle an
concession, envelope
title, containing
or permit TCT No.
issued, any 65432
false
and the mortgage
the Land Registrationto Desiderio be sustained?
Court is void ab initio, overstatement
a lot registered
therein, in or Cesar's
omissionname. of facts Posing
shall
the owner's copy thereof having never been as Cesar, Rod forged Cesar's
ipso facto produce the cancellation of signature onthe a
lost, let alone the fact that said second owner's Deed of Sale in Rod's
concession. favor. issued
The patent Rod registered
to Nestor the in
copy of the title was fraudulently procured and saidthis
document
case is voidwith ab theinitio
Registernot only of Deeds,
because andit
improvidently issued by the Court. In the 2)
obtained The a government
new title canname.
seek annulment of
was obtained by in his
fraud but also After a year,
because it
second place, the Transfer Certificate of Title the original
he sold and
the30lot transfer
to Don,which certificates
a buyer of
in beyond title
good faith and
covers hectares is far the
procured by Catalino is equally null and void, it the
a) reversion
Didvalue,
andmaximum
for of
Rod acquire
who the land title to tothethe state. lotEddie's
land? inExplain.
of 24also registered
hectares the
provided by his
the
having been issued on the basis of a simulated defense
SUGGESTED
(2%)
name. is untenable.
ANSWER: The protection afforded
No, free patent law.
or forged Deed of Sale. A forged deed is an by Rod the did not acquire
Torrens System title to to thean land. innocent The
absolute nullity and conveys no title. The inscription
purchaser in
for the
valueregistry,
can be to be
availed effective,
of only must
if the
mortgage in favor of Desiderio is likewise null be
land made
has beenin good
titled faith.
thru The
judicial defense
proceedings of
and void because the mortgagor is not the indefeasibility
where the issueof ofa Torrens
fraud becomesTitle does
academic not
owner of the mortgaged property. While it may extend
after the to a lapse
transfereeof one who (1) takes the certificate
year from the
be true that under the "Mirror Principle" of the of title with
issuance of thenotice
decreeof aofflaw. A holderInin
registration. bad
public
Torrens System of Land Registration, a buyer faith
land of a certificate
grants, the actionof titleof isthenotgovernment
entitled to the to
or mortgagee has the right to rely on what protection
annul a title of the law, for the
fraudulently obtainedlaw cannot does not be
appears on the Certificate of Title, and in the used as a such
prescribe shield for frauds.
action and will (Samonte
not be barred v. Court by
In Appeals,
the caseG.R.
Homestead
of
at bar,
Patents;
No.
Rod Void
104223,
only July
forged
12,
Cesar's
2001)
absence of anything to excite suspicion, is the transfer of the title to an innocent
signature
Sale
In (1999)
1950, on Bureau
the the -Deed of Sale.
of Lands issued It isa veryHomestead
under
simulatedno obligation
sale; b) The to look beyond
fact that thederived
it was purchaser for value.
apparent
A. Three
patent that there
to years later,wasA soldbadthe faith on the part
homestead to
certificate and investigate the mortgagor's
from a fraudulently of Rod
B. A died from the very
in 1990, andbeginning.
his heirs filed As such, he is
an action
title,procured
this ruleor
does not find application
improvidently in the owner's
issued second b) Discuss
not recover
to entitled the the
to therights of Don,
protection
homestead from ofif Bthe
any,onLandover
the
casecopy,
theat real
handowner's
because copyhere. Catalino's
being titleand in the
still intact the property.
Registration
ground that itsAct.(2%)
sale by their father to the latter
suffers from two
possession offatal infirmities,
the true owner, namely: a) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
is void under Section 118 of the Public Land
TheBruce.
fact that it emanated from a forged deed Law. B contends, however, Page that the 71 heirs
of 119 of A
of a cannot recover the
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
homestead from him anymore because their action Cesar bought a residential condominium unit from
prescribed
has and that furthermore, A was in pari Rise
High Co. and paid the price in full. He moved
delicto. Decide. (5%) into the unit, but somehow he was not given the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Condominium Certificate of Title covering the
The sale of the land by A to B 3 years after property. Unknown to him, High Rise Co.
issuance of the homestead patent, being in subsequently mortgaged the entire
violation of Section 118 of the Public Land Act, condominium building to Metrobank as security
is void from its inception. for a loan of P500 million. High Rise Co. failed to
The action filed by the heirs of B to declare the pay the loan and the bank foreclosed the
nullity or inexistence of the contract and to mortgage. At the foreclosure sale, the bank
recover the land should be given due course. acquired the building, being the highest bidder.
When Cesar learned about this, he filed an
B's defense of prescription is untenable
action to annul the foreclosure sale insofar as
because an action which seeks to declare the
his unit was concerned. The bank put up the
nullity or inexistence of A contract does not
defense that it relied on the condominium
prescribe. (Article 1410; Banaga vs. Soler, 2 SUGGESTED ANSWER:
certificates
Metrobank'sofdefense
title presented by High
is untenable. As aRise
rule,Co.,
an
8CRA 765)
On the other hand, B's defense of pari delicto is which were
innocent clean. Hence,
purchaser for valueit was a mortgagee
acquires a good
equally untenable. While as a rule, parties who and a
and buyer
cleanintitle
good to faith. Is this defense
the property. tenable
However, it is
are in pari delicto have no recourse against or not? Why?
settled (5%.)
that one who closes his eyes to facts
each other on the principle that a transgressor that should put a reasonable man on guard is
cannot profit from his own wrongdoing, such not an innocent purchaser for value. In the
rule does not apply to violations of Section 118 present problem the bank is expected, as a
of the Public Land Act because of the matter of standard operating procedure, to
underlying public policy in the said Act "to have conducted an ocular inspection, of the
conserve the land which a homesteader has promises before granting any loan. Apparently,
acquired by gratuitous grant from the Metrobank did not follow this procedure.
government for himself and his family". In Otherwise, it should have discovered that the
keeping with this policy, it has been held that condominium unit in question was occupied by
one who purchases a homestead within the Cesar and that fact should have led it to make
five-year prohibitory period can only recover Mirror Principle
further inquiry. Under the circumstances,
the price which he has paid by filing a claim (1990)
In 1950's, the Government acquired a big
Metrobank cannot be considered a mortgagee
against the estate of the deceased seller landed estate in Central Luzon from the
and buyer in good faith.
(Labrador vs. Delos Santos 66 Phil. 579) under registered owner for subdivision into small
the principle that no one shall enrich himself at farms and redistribution of bonafide occupants,
the F was a former lessee of a parcel of land, five
FIRST expense
ALTERNATIVEofANSWER:
another. Applying the pari
delicto ruletotodeclare
violation hectares in area. After completion of the
The action theofnullity
Section 118sale
of the of the
did
Public Land Act, the1410},
Court of Appeals has ruled resurvey and subdivision, F applied to buy the
not prescribe (Art. such sale being one
that "the homesteader said land in accordance with the guidelines of
expressly prohibited andsuffers the void
declared loss by
of the
fruits the implementing agency. Upon full payment
Public realized
Lands Act by [Art.
the vendee
1409, par. who(7)].
in turn
The
forfeits theof improvement that he of the price in 1957, the corresponding deed of
prohibition the law is clearly for has
the
introduced absolute sale was executed in his favor and
protection of into the ofland."
the heirs A such(Obot vs.
that their
SandadiUas, 69 OG, April 35, }
1966enhance was registered, and in 1961, a new title was
recovering the property would the
issued in his name. In 1963, F sold the said
public policy regarding ownership of lands In 1977, C filed an action to annul the deeds of
land to X; and in 1965 X sold it to Y, new titles
acquired by homestead patent (Art. 1416). The sale to F, X and Y and their titles, on the ground
were successively issued in the names of the
defense of pari delicto is not applicable either, that he (C) had been in actual physical
SECOND ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: said purchasers.
since the law itself allows the homesteader to possession of the land, and that the sale to F
Prescription does not arise with respect to
reacquire the land even if it has been sold. and the subsequent sales should be set aside
actions to declare a void contract a nullity
(Article 1410). Neither is the doctrine of pari on the ground of fraud. Upon motion of
delicto applicable because of public policy. The defendants, the trial court dismissed the
law is designed for the protection of the complaint, upholding their defenses of their
(a)
beingIs theinnocent
said appealpurchasers
meritorious? Explain
for value,
plaintiff so as to enhance the public policy of (b)
yourSuppose
answer the government agency
the Public Land Act to give land to the landless. prescription and laches. Plaintiff appealed.
concerned joined C in filing the said action
If the heirs are not allowed to recover, it could
against the defendants, would that change the
be on the ground of laches inasmuch as 40
result of the litigation? Explain.
years had elapsed and the owner had not
brought any action against B especially if the
latter had improved the land. It would be
detrimental to B if the plaintiff is allowed to
Innocent Purchaser for
recover.
Value (2001)
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
occupant thereof and for this reason his transfer required to explore beyond what the record in the
of title may be vulnerable, the transfer of the
certificate registry
same land and the issuance of new TCTs to X
and Y who are innocent purchasers for value
render the latter's titles indefeasible. A person
dealing with registered land may safely rely on
the correctness of the certificate of title and
the law will not in any way oblige him to go
behind the certificate to determine the
condition of the property in search for any
hidden defect or inchoate right which may later
invalidate or diminish the right to the land. This
1. The mirror
is the action principle
to annul the saleTorrens
of the was instituted
System in
of
1977 or more
land registration. than (10) years from the date of
execution thereof in 1957, hence, it has long
prescribed.
2. Under Sec 45 of Act 496, the entry of a
certificate of title shall be regarded as an
agreement running with the land, and binding
upon the applicant and all his successors in title
that the land shall be and always remain
registered land. A title under Act 496 is
indefeasible and to preserve that character, the
title is cleansed anew with every transfer for
value (De Jesus v City of Manila; 29 Phil. 73;
Laperal v City of Manila, 62 Phil 313; Penullar v
PNB 120 S 111).

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(a) The appeal is not meritorious. The trial
court ruled correctly in granting defendant's
motion to dismiss for the following reasons:
1. While there is the possibility that F, a former
lessee of the land was aware of the fact that C
was the bona fide
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
property based on the fact that the sale included the his obligation. However, the action was brought
half
one-pro-indiviso share. Pacifico had a notice of indicates
ten-year
within theprescriptive
on its face inperiod questprovided
for any hidden by law
lis pendens annotated on the title covering the defect oractions
wherein inchoate basedrighton which