CIVIL LAW

BAR
Q&A
Researched and Compiled by:

CIVIL LAW SUBJECT

Bar Operations

Subject Head:
Sajonia, Louie

Vice Subject Head:

Salvador, Lea Diana

Members:
Cayabyab, Kris Dian
Darayon, Climark D.
Esguerra, Manilyn N.
Marquez, April Gwen T.
Vinluan, Veronica A.
Wooden, Anthony Jr. A.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
but never against statutory law. (Toyota Motor Phil. 1. VThe civil action involves an issue similar or
CA SCRA 236 [1992]).
216 intimately
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
Ignorance
Civil law ofvs.theCommon Law vs. Law Mistake of Fact subjects: a dissenting opinion affirms or overrules a claim, right or
obligation. It neither disposes nor awards anything it merely
(1996)
Is there
(1997) any difference
How would you compare the Civil Law system in their legal effect expresses the view of the dissenter. (Civil Code, Paras]
between ignoranceand
in its governance of the trendlaw andwithignorance
that of the or
mistake
SUGGESTED
Common ofLaw
fact?
ANSWER:
Yes, there
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
is asystem?
difference. While ignorance of
the law is not
As regards "governance": an excuseGovernance for not complyingin Civil 3) A decision of a division of the Supreme
with it, ignorance of fact
Law is codal, statutory and written law. eliminates criminal
It is Court maybe set aside by the Supreme Court
intent as long
additionally as there
derived from is no case negligence
law. Common (Art, sitting en banc, a Supreme Court decision may
NCC). In addition,
law is basically derivedmistake
from case on alaw. doubtful or be set aside by a contrary ruling of the
difficult question of law may be the basis of Supreme Court itself or by a corrective
good
As regardsfaith "trend":
(Art. 526. CivilNCC).
law isMistake
now tending of fact to legislative act of Congress, although said laws
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
may, furthermore,
rely more and more vitiate consent of
on decisions in the
a contract
courts cannot adversely affect those favored prior to
Yes. ignorance of the law differs in legal effect
and make it the
explaining voidable
laws.(Art. Common1390. NCC).law is now the Supreme Court decision. [Civil Code,
from Ignorance or mistake of fact. The former
codifying laws more and more. So they are Effectivity
Paras). of Laws
does not excuse a party from the legal
now merging towards similar systems. (1990)
After a devastating storm causing widespread
consequences of his conduct while the latter
does constitute an excuse and is a legal destruction in four Central Luzon provinces,
Additional Answers:
Inferior
defense. Courts Decisions the executive and legislative branches of the
1. COMMON LAW refers to the traditional
(1994)
Are government agreed to enact a special law
part decisions
of the law of asthedistinct
Court of fromAppeals considered
legislation; it
laws?
ALTERNATIVE ANSWERS: appropriating P1 billion for purposes of relief
refers to the universal part of law as distinct
1) a) No, but decisions of the Court of and rehabilitation for the provinces. In view of
from particular local customs (Encyclopedia
Appeals may serve as precedents for inferior the urgent nature of the legislative enactment,
Americana, Vol. 7). of Onlawthe notother hand,byCIVIL
courts on points covered any it is provided in its effectivity clause that it
LAW is understood to be that branch of law
Supreme Court decision, and a ruling of the shall take effect upon approval and after
governing the relationship of apersons in
Court of Appeals may become doctrine. completion of publication in the Official
respect of their personal and private interests
(Miranda vs.. Imperial 77 Phil. 1066). Gazette and a newspaper of general circulation
as No.
b) distinguished
Decisions of from the bothCourt public
of Appeals and
in the Philippines. The law was passed by the
international
merely have laws. persuasive, and therefore no
In common law countries, the traditional Congress on July 1, 1990. signed into law by
mandatory effect. However, a conclusion or
responsibility has for the most part been the (a)
President on July 3, 1990, and published in
As to the publication of said legislative
pronouncement which covers a point of law such newspaper of general circulation on July
with the judges; in civil law countries, the enactment, is there sufficient observance or
still undecided may still serve as judicial guide
task is primarily reposed on the lawmakers. 7, 1990 and in the Official Gazette on July 10,
compliance with the requirements for a valid
and it is possible that the same maybe raised
Contemporary practices, however, so 1990.
(b) When Explain
publication? did the yourlaw answer.take effect?
to the status of doctrine. If after it has been
indicate a trend towards centralizing that (c) Explain Can
your the
answer. executive branch start
subjected to test in the crucible of analysis,
function to professional groups that may releasing and disbursing funds appropriated
the Supreme Court should find that it has
indeed, see the gradual assimilation in time by the said law the day following its approval?
merits and qualities sufficient for its
of both systems.
Prejudicial Questions [Vitug, Civil. Law and SUGGESTED Explain your ANSWER:
answer.
consideration
2. In Civil asLaw,
a rule the ofstatutes
jurisprudence (Civil
theoretically (a) Yes, there is sufficient compliance. The
(1997)
In Jurisprudence,
the context that p.
the XX)term is used in Civil Law, state
Code,
take Paras).
precedence over court decisions law itself prescribes the requisites of
(a)
the concept, (b) requisites and (c)
interpreting them;
consequences while in Common
of a prejudicial question.Law, the publication for its effectivity, and all requisites
court
SUGGESTED decisions
ANSWER:resolving specific cases are have been complied with. (Article 2, Civil
regarded
(a) Concept as law rather than
A prejudicial the statutes
question is one (b)
Code)The law takes effect upon compliance with
themselves
which must be whichdecidedare, first
at the beforestart, merely all the conditions for effectivity, and the last
a criminal
embodiments
action may be of case law. Civil
instituted or Law
mayis codeproceed law condition was complied with on July 10, 1990.
or writtena law,
because while Common
decision therein is Law is case
vital to law.
the Hence, the" law became effective on that date.
Civil Law in
judgment adopts the deductive
the criminal case. In method
the case - fromof (c) No. It was not yet effective when it was
the general
People vs. Adelo to the Aragon particular,
(L5930, while Feb. 17, the approved by Congress on July 1, 1990 and
Common
1954) , theLaw uses the
Supreme Court inductive it as one- approved by the President on July 3, 1990.
definedapproach
from the particular to
which arises in a case, the resolution ofthe general. Common
which The other requisites for its effectivity were not
Law relies
question is on equity.antecedent
a logical Civil Law anchors of the issues itself yet complete at the time.
on the letter
involved of the
in said law.and
case The the civilists are for the
cognizance of Equity follows the Law
judge-proof
which pertains lawtoevenanotheras the Common
tribunal (Paras,Law Vol.Is (2003)
It is said that “equity follows the law” What do
(b)
judge-made
1, Civil.
Effect Obiterlaw.
of Code Civil Law
Annotation,
& Dissenting 1989 judges
Opinion;ed.SCp,are merely you understand by this phrase, and what are
194).
Decisions
Requisites
supposed to apply laws and not interpret them. its basic implications? 5%
(1994)
2) What are the binding effects of an obiter SUGGESTED ANSWER:
dictum and a dissenting opinion? 3) How can “Equity Follows the law” means that courts
a decision of the Supreme Court be set aside? exercising equity jurisdiction are bound by
ALTERNATIVE ANSWERS: rules of law and have no arbitrary discretion to
2) None. Obiter dictum and opinions are not necessary to the
determination of a case. They are not binding and
disregard them. (Arsenal v IAC, 143 SCRA 40
[1986]). Equity is applied only in the absence
of
 related to the issue raised in the criminal
2. the and
action, resolution of such issue determines
whether or not the criminal action may
proceed.
(c) Consequences The criminal case must be
suspended. Thus, in a criminal case for
damages to one's property, a civil action that
involves the ownership of said property should
first be resolved (De Leon vs. Mabanag. 38
Phil. 202)
PERSONS
Change of Name; Under RA 9048
(2006)
Zirxthoussous delos Santos filed a petition for
change of name with the Office of the Civil
Registrar of Mandaluyong City under the
administrative proceeding provided in
Republic Act No. 9048. He alleged that his first
name sounds ridiculous and is extremely
difficult to spell and pronounce. After
complying with the requirements of the law,
the Civil Registrar granted his petition and
changed his first name Zirxthoussous to
Jesus delos
"Jesus." Santos
His moved now
full name to General
reads Santos
"JesusCity to
delos
work in
Santos." a multi-national company. There, he fell in
love and married Mary Grace delos Santos. She
requested him to have his first name changed
because his new name "Jesus delos Santos" is the
same name as that of her father who abandoned her
family and became a notorious drug lord. She
wanted to forget him. Hence, Jesus filed another
petition with the Office of the Local Civil Registrar
to change his first name to "Roberto." He claimed
that the change is warranted because it will
Will the petition
eradicate forofchange
all vestiges of name
the infamy of MaryofGrace's
Jesus
delos
father. Santos to Roberto delos Santos under
Republic Act No. 9048 prosper? Explain. (10%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, under the law, Jesus
may only change his name once. In addition,
the petition for change of name may be denied
(1) the following
on Jesus is neither ridiculous, nor tainted
grounds:
with dishonor nor extremely difficult to write
(2) There is no confusion to be avoided or
or pronounce.
created with the use of the registered first
name or nickname of the petitioner.
(3) The petition involves the same entry in
the same document, which was previously
corrected or changed under this Order [Rules
and Regulations Implementing RA 9048].

1 The prejudicial question must be

determinative of the case before the court.
2 Jurisdiction to try said question must be
lodged in another tribunal.
ADDITIONAL ANSWER:
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Juridical capacity,
spelling, visible to as thedistinguished
eyes or from obvious capacityto conditions
absolute
the
to community
detrimentalamounting to the moral towell-being
1 Million ofPesos.their
and
the former
can be
understanding,
act: (a) is passive
corrected whileor the changed
latter isonly active, by wife,
children
His will,acting
therefore,
in theinherit
movies O.25
is inMillion
violation
Pesos
of the
and
Family
his parents
Code and will
inherit laws.
Labor 0.25Thus,
Million
the waiver
Pesos.is Wheninvalid and
Mrs.not Cruz
binding.
died, she was
reference
(b) the former to other is inherent
existing in records.
a person Provided,
while succeeded by her parents as her intestate heirs. They will inherit all
however,
the latter that is merely
no correction
acquired, must (c) the involve
formerthe is of her estate consisting of her 0.5 Million half share in the absolute
change
lost onlyofthrough
nationality, death age, while
status theorlatter
sex ofmay the community and her 0.25 Million inheritance from her husband, or a
petitioner.
be lost through death or restricted by causes Theof 0.750
total ChildMillionLaborPesos. Law is a mandatory and
other than death, and Id) the former can exist prohibitory law and the rights of the child
Death; Effects;
without capacity Simultaneous
to act while Death
the latter cannot cannot be waived as it is contrary to law and
Juridical
(1998)
Jaime,without
exist who Capacity; Natural
is juridical
65, and his Persons
son,
capacity. Willy, who is 25, public policy.
(1999)
Elated
died in that a plane her crash.
sister There
who had is no beenproof married
as to In sum, the parents of Mr. Cruz will inherit
for five years was pregnant
who died first. Jaime's only surviving heir is for the first time, CONFLICT OF LAWS
250,000 Pesos while the parents of Mrs. Cruz
Alma donated P100,000.00
his wife, Julia, who is also Willy's mother. to the unborn will inherit 750,000 Pesos.
child.
Willy'sUnfortunately,
surviving heirs theare baby hisdied one hour
mother, Julia (b) This being a case of succession, in the
1.
andIn
after histhe settlement
delivery.
wife, Wilma. May ofAlma Jaime'srecover estate, the can Appilicable
absence ofLaws; prooflaws as to governing
the time contracts
of death of
Wilma successfully
P100.000.00 that she claim had donated that her to said late (1992)
X
eachandofY the enteredspouses, into ita iscontract
presumed in Australia,
they died
husband,
baby before Willy it had
was aborn hereditary
considering share that sincethe he whereby
at the same it wastime agreed
and no that X wouldofbuild
transmission rights a
SUGGESTED
was died?much ANSWER:
younger than his father and, commercial
from one to the building
other for Y in thetoPhilippines,
is deemed have taken
baby Stated otherwise, is the donation
The donationshould
therefore, is valid be and binding,
presumed being to anhave act and
place. in Therefore,
payment for each theofconstruction,
them is deemed Y will to
valid and binding? Explain. (5%)
favorable
2. Suppose
survived to
longer?the unborn
Jaime[3%] child, but
had a life insurance policy only if the transfer
have an and estate convey
valued hisatcattle ranch located
P500,000,00, or one- in
baby
with his hadwife, an intra-uterine
Julia, and his lifeson,
of not Willy,less asthan
the the
half United
of their States conjugal in property
favor of of X. P1What law
million.
seven months and pro-vided
beneficiaries. Can Wilma successfully claim there was due would govern: a) parents
Their respective The validity will thusof theinherit
contract? the
acceptance
that one-halfof the proceeds
of the donation should by the belongproper to b)
entireThe performance
P1 Million ofintheequal contract? c) The
shares, of
person
SUGGESTED representing
Willy's estate? ANSWER: |2%J said child. If the child had Death;
consideration
P500,000.00 Effects;per ofSimultaneous
the
set contract?
of parents. Death
1.
lessNo,than Wilma sevencannotmonthssuccessfully
of intra-uterine claimlife, that it (2000)
b) Cristy and
SUGGESTED ANSWER: her late husband Luis had two
Willy had a hereditary share
is not deemed born since it died less than 24 in his father's (a)
children,The Rose validity and of Patrick,the contract
One summer, will her be
estate. Under Art. 43, Civil
hours following its delivery, in which ease the Code, two persons governed by Australian
mother-in-law, aged 70, took the two children, law, because the
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: validity refers to the
"who
donation are nevercalled to succeed
became each other"
effective since are the then aged 10 and 12, element
with her of onthe making
a boat trip to of
Even
presumed if thetobaby have haddied anatintra-uterine
the same life in
time, of the (Optional
contract in Addendum:"...
this case. 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 andwhichthe 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. In
question of water.
(b) The On the settlement
performance will beofgoverned her mother-in-
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 fileswherea 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 that one-half her estate
(c) performed.
be on the ground
The consideration will be governed by that the same was
pesos
son. should be writing. (Article 748, of par.the 3)
Waiver
proceedsof should Rights belong to Willy's estate, inherited
United
the law States
of theby where her children the ranch from their
is located.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(2004)
B.
underDON, Sec. an 3American
(jj) par. 5businessman,
Rule 131, Rules secured of grandmother
(Optional
No, her action Addendum: in representation
will Innot theprosper. of
foregoingSincetheir father,
cases,there
when
parental
Court, as consent for the employment
the dispute does not involve of five the andforeign
was sheproof
no inherited
lawas would
to who the
apply, same
died fromallthem.
thefirst,
absence of proof
the Will
three of
minors to play certain
succession. Under this presumption, the roles in two movies he her
that action
foreign prosper?
law (2%)
would
are deemed to have died at the same time and render Philippine law
was
person producing
between the at ageshome of 15 in and Makati.
60 years They is applicable under the "eclectic theory".)
there was no transmission of rights from one
worked at odd hours of
deemed to have survived one whose age was the day and night, but ALTERNATIVE
to another,
Applicable
ANSWER:
Laws; applying
Arts Article& 1743 Under of the New
always accompanied by
over 60 at the time of their deaths. The estate parents or other No, her
Civil Code. action will 15,not16prosper. Article
(1998)
Juan is a Filipino citizen residing in there
Tokyo,
adults.
of Willy The producer
endowed with paid the children
juridical personalitytalent 43 Japan.
of the New Civil Code, inasmuch as
State what laws govern:
is
Death;
But
fees
stands a Effects;
atsocial
rates
in place Simultaneous
worker,
better than
andDEB, adult
steadDeath
reported
wages. to OSWD
of Willy, as no proof as to who died first, all the three are
(1999)
Mr.
that andtheseMrs.children
Cruz, who often
are childless,
missed going met with to 1 His capacity to contract marriage in
beneficiary. presumed to have died at the same time and
a seriousThey
school. motorsometimes
vehicle accident drankwith wine, Mr. aside
Cruz Japan, [ 1%]
there could be no transmission of rights among
at thebeing
from wheelexposedand Mrs. to Cruz
drugs. seatedIn some beside scenes,
him, 2 His successional rights as regards his
them. Her children not having inherited from
resulting
they were in thefilmed
instant naked
death or of Mr. in Cruz.
revealing Mrs. deceased Filipino father's property in Texas,
their grandmother. Cristy has no right to share
Cruz was still
costumes. In hisalivedefense,
when help DON came contended but she all U.S.A. [1%]
in her mother-inlaw's estate. She cannot share
also died
these were on partthe way of artistic
to the freedom hospital. The and 3 The extrinsic validity of the last will
in her own right as she is not a legal heir of her
couple acquired
cultural creativity. propertiesNoneworth of the One parents
Million and testament which Juan executed while
mother-in-law. The survivorship provision of
(P1 ,000,000.00)
complained, saidPesosDON.during He theiralso said marriage, they sojourning in Switzerland. [2%]
Rule 131 of the Rules of Court does not apply
which are
signed a contract
being claimedcontaining by the a parents
waiver of of their
both 4 The intrinsic validity of said will. (1%)
to the problem. It applies only to those cases
(b) Suppose in the preceding inquestion, of both Juridical
What Capacity vs. Capacity toRegistry
Act
spouses
right to in fileequal
any shares.
complaint Is the any
claimoffice bothor where entriesthe issueininvolved the Civil is not succession. may be
Is the
Mr. and
sets
tribunal waiver
Mrs. Cruz
of parents
concerningvalid and
valid andwere binding?
the working
why?already(3%) Why or
dead when
conditions why (1996)
Distinguish juridical
of changed or corrected without a judicial capacity from capacity to act,
order?
not?
help Explain.
came, so (5%)
that no-body could say who died SUGGESTED
(2.5%) ANSWER:
ANSWER: Only clerical or
their children acting in the movies. JURIDICAL CAPACITY is the fitness to be the
SUGGESTED
ahead of the ANSWER:
other, would your answer be the typographical errors and first or nick names
The waiver is not valid. Although the contracting parties may subject
may be changed of legal relations
or corrected while CAPACITY
without TO
a judicial
same
establishtosuchthestipulations,
question as toterms
clauses, whoand are entitled
conditions as to
they
SUGGESTED
the deem
may properties ANSWER:
convenient, of they
themay deceased
not do socouple?
if such are(2%) contrary to
ACT
order is the
under power
RA 9048. or to do acts with legal
(a) No, the claim of both parents is not valid. When Mr. Cruz died,
law, morals, good customs, public order, or public policy (Article ClericalTheorformer
effect. typographical
is inherent errors in everyrefer natural to
he was succeeded by his wife and his parents as his intestate heirs
1306, Civil Code). The parents' waiver to file a complaint concerning mistakes
person and committed
is lost only in the
through performance
death while of
who will share his estate equally. His estate was 0.5 Million pesos
the working
which is his half share in the clerical
the latter work in writing,
is merely acquired copying, and maytranscribing
be lost
ALTERNATIVE
or typing
even beforean ANSWER;entry
death (Art.in 37, the NCC).
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)
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 of their marriage. However, in DOJ Opinion
the second paragraph of Article 16, both of the No. 134 series of 1993, Felisa is allowed to
Civil Code. Article 1039, Civil Code, provides remarry because the injustice sought to be
that capacity to succeed shall be governed by corrected by Article 26 also obtains in her
the "law of the nation" of the decedent, i.e.. his SUGGESTED
case. 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 Law
described in: of the country of which he is a
testamentary succession shall be governed by citizen under Article 817 of the New Civil
the "national law" of the decedent who is 2. the
Code, law
or of the Philippines being the law of
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
identified the place of execution under Article 17 of the
3. The as a Filipino
extrinsic in the of
validity present problem.
Juan's will is New Civil Code.
governed by (a) Swiss law, it being the law SUGGESTED ANSWER:
where the will was made (Art. 17. 1st par. C. Philippine law will not govern the intrinsic
Civil Code), or (b) Philippine law, by validity of the will. Article 16 of the New Civil
implication from the provisions of Art. 816, Code provides that intrinsic validity of
Civil Code, which allows even an alien who is testamentary provisions shall be governed by
abroad to make a will in conformity with our the National Law of the person whose
SUGGESTED
Civil Code.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. Applicable Laws; Capacity to Act
(Art. 16, Civil Code) (1998)
Francis Albert, a citizen and resident of New
Jersey, U.S.A., under whose law he was still a
Applicable Laws; Arts 15, 16, 17 minor, being only 20 years of age, was hired by
(2002)
Felipe and Felisa, both Filipino citizens, were ABC Corporation of Manila to serve for two
married in Malolos, Bulacan on June 1, 1950. years as its chief computer programmer. But
In 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
Sagundina. He left a will which he left his 1 Will the suit prosper? [3%]
in the Philippines under whose law the age of
estate to Sagundina and his two children and 2 Suppose XYZ Corporation
majority is 18 years, he was no longer a minor
is
nothing to Felisa. Sagundina files a petition for impleaded as a codefendant, what would be
at the time of perfection of the contract.
the probate of Felipe’s will. Felisa questions the basis of its liability, if any? [2%]
the intrinsic validity of the will, arguing that
her
A. Is marriage to Felipe
the divorce subsisted
secured by despite
Felipe thein
divorce
California recognizable and valid in said
obtained by Felipe because the
divorce is notHow
Philippines? recognized
does in it the Philippines.
affect Felipe’s
For
B. this
What reason,
law she
governsclaims
the that the properties
formalities
marriage to Felisa? Explain. (2%). of the
and
will?that 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 others, legal capacity of persons are binding
Filipino at that time he secured it, Aliens may upon citizens of the Philippines even though
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
living abroad.
obtain divorces abroad which may be 2. By way of exception to the general rule of
recognized in the Philippines provided that lex rei sitae prescribed by the first paragraph
they are valid according to their national law of Art. 16. Civil Code, a person's successional
(Van Dorn V. Romillo, Jr., 139 SCRA 139 rights are governed by the national law of the
[1985]; Quita v. Court of Appeals, 300 SCRA decedent (2nd par.. Art. Page 13 of Juan's
16). Since 119
406 [1998]; Llorente v. Court of Appeals, 345 deceased
SCRA 595 [2000] ).
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
that
"Prohibitive
public policy,
lawstheconcerning
applicationpersons,
shall be disregarded
their Court
persons is governed
of Appeals by 104235,
(G.R No. the law Nov.
of his
10, nationality,
1993) the
our
Plaintiffs
byacts Courts. argument
(Cadalinand
or property, v.
does POEA.
those not 238
which hold SCRA
have true,for Supreme
concerning
capacity Court transactions appliedinvolving Philippine propertylaw is in
762)
because
their object
ALTERNATIVE status
ANSWERS; or capacity
public order, ispublic not determined
policy and recovery an exception. of damages
Under Article for breach 16 ofof the contract
NCC the of
a) Their
bygood
lex lociclaim
contractus
customs is not but
shallcorrect.
bynotlex Assuming
patriae.
be rendered that carriage
capacity for of persons
the reason in that
transactions
it is the law involving
of the
theineffective
ANOTHER second
ANSWER:contract by laws is binding
or under
judgments place title towhere
property the contract
is governed wasby executed.
the law of the
1. promulgated,
Hongkong Articlelaw, 17 such of orthesecond
Civil Code
contract
by determinations providesis invalidthator ALTERNATIVE
country where ANSWER: the property is situated. Since
theconventions
under forms and solemnities
Philippine law which of contracts,
recognizes
agreed upon in a foreign as wills
valid If
the the violation
property is ofin the the contract
Philippines, wasPhilippine
attended
and
only other public
the first acontract.
Accordingly,
country." instruments
state's own Since shall
the case
conflict be governed
of lawsis being rule law governs the capacity of the seller. recover
with bad faith, there is a ground to
by the
litigated
may, laws of the
in the Philippines,
exceptionally country
be inapplicable, in which
the given they
Philippinepublic moral
are Applicabledamages.
Laws; capacityBut since to there
succeed was a federal
executed.
Court as
policy the forum will
considerations bynot theenforce
law of the anyforum.foreign regulation
(1991)
Jacob, a which
Swiss was
national, the basis
married of the acta
Lourdes,
Since obnoxious
claim the contract to the of employment
forum's public policy. was complained
Filipina, in of, Berne, the Switzerland.
airline cannotThree be inyears bad
executed
Going
There ainstrong
isinto Manila,
the specific
public Philippine
provisions
policy law of
enshrined should the
in faith.
later, theHence, couple only decidedactual damages to reside can in the be
govern.
contract
our Being overon
in question,
Constitution 18 years
I the
would old
ruleand
protection no of longer
as follows: labor. recovered.
Philippines. The same subsequently
Jacob is true with regards acquired to
a
1 minorThe
Therefore, according
duration
the second toof Philippine
the contract Law,isshallFrancis
not opposed
be Applicable
to
exemplary
several Laws;
damages.
properties Laborin the Contracts
Philippines with the
b) No, can
Albert
Philippine
disregarded theirlaw be claim
and sued.
and theis itnot
Thus,can
first correct.
the
contract Theof
suit
therefore second
beABC
will valid (1991)
be A.as The he
money JapaninheritedAir Lines from (JAL),his parents. a foreigner Forty
contract
SUGGESTED
Corporation
stipulated;
enforced. executed
ANSWER:against
(Cadalin in
v. Hongkong,
him
POEA, for
238 partakes
damages
SCRA 762) of
. the
will corporation
years later. licensed
Jacob to
died do business
intestate, in the
and is
2. XYZofCorporation,
nature a waiver having enticed Francis
prosper.
2 The secondthat is contrary
provision to tothe Philippine
effect that Philippines,
survived by executed
several in Manila achildren
legitimate contractand of
Albert
law and to the
break his contract
public policyJapan with the plaintiff,
governing Filipino employment withillegitimate
Maritess Guapa under which
notwithstanding duration, Air Lines (JAL) may duly recognized daughter Jane, all
may be held
overseas workers. liable for damages
Art. 17, provides under thatArt. our being
the
(a) latter
Suppose was thathired Swiss as alawstewardess
does not on the
allow
terminate
ALTERNATIVE her
ANSWER: employment is invalid, residing in the Philippines.
1314,
prohibitiveCivil Code.
laws concerning persons, their acts, aircraft illegitimate flying the Manila-Japan-Manila
children to inherit, can Jane, route.
who
inconsistent
2. The basis of with our Labor
liability of XYZ laws;Corporation would be
or
3 their property
That the or which
contract
Article 28 of the Civil Code which states that: have
shall for betheir object
construed The
isasa contrast
recognized specifically
illegitimate provides
child, that
inherit (1) the
part
public
governed order,under publicand policy
by the and
laws good
of customs
Japan and (b)
duration
of
only the Assuming
of the
properties that
contract of Jacob
shall executed
be
undertwo (2) ayears,
Philippine will
"Unfair competition in agricultural,
shall
the not be
courts of or rendered
Tokyo, Japan ineffective
shall have by jurisdiction,
laws leaving
or (2) certain properties
is notwithstanding
law? the above to duration,
Jane as her JAL
commercial, industrial enterprises or in
conventions
invalid agreed
as clearly upon in a foreign country. legitime
may terminatein accordance
the agreement with at the
any law
time of
by
labor through the opposed
use of force, to the aforecited third
intimidation,
Besides,
paragraph Alma's consent
of Arts. 17 or to
andany the second
1700other contract
of theunjust, Civil Code, succession
giving her in
notice the in Philippines,
writing ten (10) will days such in
deceit, machination SUGGESTED ANSWER:
was
which vitiated
provides: by undue influence, being virtually testamentary
advance, and disposition
(3) the be valid?
contract shall be
oppressive or highhanded method shall give A. Yes. As stated in the problem. Swiss law
helpless
rise to a and rightunder of action financial
by thedistress person in whoa construed as governed under and by the laws
foreign country, as indicated by the given fact does
of not allow
Japan and illegitimate
only the court children
in Tokyo, to inherit
Japan
ANOTHER ANSWER:
thereby suffers damage." JAL
Hence,dismissed
Jane Maritess
cannot on thethe
inherit fourth month of
property of
thatNoshe
2. signedarises.
liability because Theshe had no of
statement choice.
the shall have the jurisdiction to consider any
her employment without giving her due notice.
Therefore,
problem does thenotdefendants
in any way claim suggestthat intent, the Jacob
matter under
arising Philippine
from or relating law. to the contract.
Maritess then
SUGGESTED ANSWER: filed a complaint with the Labor
contract
malice, oriseven validknowledge,
under Hongkong on the part law ofshouldXYZ B. The testamentary disposition will not and be
Arbiter for reinstatement, backwages
be rejected since
Corporation as to under the DOCTRINE
the contractual relations OF valid if it would contravene Swill law;
damages. The lawyer of JAL contends that
PROCESSUAL
between Albert
Applicable Laws; PRESUMPTION
and ABC Corporation.
Contracts of Carriage a foreign law is otherwise, the disposition would be valid.
Applicable Laws; Capacity to Buy Land neither the Labor Arbiter nor any other agency
deemed
(1995)
On 8 December similar or
1991identical
Vanessa to Philippine
purchased law
from in Unless the Swiss law is proved, it would be
(1995) or court in the Philippines has jurisdiction over
3.
the What
the absence law of governs
proof to the the contrary,
capacity ofticket
and the
such presumed
Manila
Filipino
office
to buyNo. the
of Euro-Aire
land? Explain
an airline the case intoview be the of same
the above as that of Philippine
provision (3) of
is
fornot itsmentioned
Flight in710 the from
problem Dallas asyourhaving answer
to Chicago been law under the Doctrine of Processual
the contract which Maritess voluntarily signed.
and
adduced.
on 16 give
SUGGESTED its legal
January
ANSWER: basis. Applicable
Presumption. Laws; contracts contrary to public policy
Philippine law1992. governs Her flight reservation
the capacity of wasthe The contract is the law between her and JAL.
(1996)
Alma was hired as a domestic helper in
confirmed.
Filipino to buy On the herland. scheduled
In addition departure
to the Decide the issue.
Vanessa Hongkong
B. Where by
under the Dragon
a State's ownServices,
conflicts Ltd., rule
principle checkedof lex reiinsitae on giventime above. at the Article Dallas
through its local agent. She executed a
airport. However, that domestic law of another State should
15 of the NCC at the check-in
specifically counterthat
provides she
standard employment contract designed by
discovered that she was waitlisted with some apply, may the courts of the former
Philippine laws relating to legal capacity of the Philippine Overseas Workers
other passengers because of intentional nevertheless refuse to apply the latter? If so,
persons are binding upon citizens of the Administration
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (POEA) for overseas Filipino
overbooking, under what circumstance?
Philippines noamatter Euro-Aire where policy
they and are. practice. SUGGESTEDIt ANSWER:
Euro-Alre
Applicable Laws; admitted Capacitythat Vanessa was not workers.
to Contract 1. The suit
provided for her employment for
will not prosper under intended
Article 15,
A, Labor
one year Legislations
at a salary of are generally
US$1,000.00 a month. as
advised
(1995) of such policy
2. What law governs the capacity of the when she purchased her Civil Code, New Jersey law governs Francis
Vanessa sued Euro-Aire in Manila for breach of expressions
It was submitted of public to and policy
approvedon employer- by the
plane
Japanese ticket.
to sell Vanessa
the land? wasExplainonly able your toanswer
fly two Albert's capacity to act, being his personal law
contract and damages. Euro-Aire claimed that employee
POEA. However, relations. when The contract she arrived therefore, in
days
and give
SUGGESTEDlaterits bylegal
ANSWER:taking basis.another airline. from the standpoint of both(JAL)his nationality and
it cannot be held liable
Japanese law governs the capacity of the for damages because between
Hongkong, Japanshe Air
was Lines
asked to and
sign Maritess
another
its practice of overbooking passengers was his domicile.
may apply by onlyHetowas, the therefore,
extent thata itsminor at the
provisions
Japanese to sell the land being his personal contract
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:Dragon Services, Ltd. which
allowed time
are he
not entered
inconsistent into the
with contract.
Philippine labor laws
law on thebybasis theof U.S. Code of Federal
an interpretation of Art. reduced her salary
1. The suit will not prosper. Being a U.S. to only US$600.00 a
Regulations.
ALTERNATIVE
15, NCC. ANSWERS; Vanessa on the other hand intended
month. particularly
Having no other to protect
choice, employees.
Alma into signed
national, Albert's capacity
Under the circumstances, the dismissal of to enter a
a) Since capacity
contended that assuming to contract that the is governed
U.S. Codeby of the contract
contract is but whenbyshe
determined the returned
law of the toStatethe
the personal
Federal law of an individual,
Regulations allowed theIntentional Japanese Maritess without complying with Philippine
Philippines,
of which she demandedunder payment ofhethe
seller's capacity
overbooking, theshould airlinebe governed
companyeither cannot by Labor
SUGGESTED lawhe is a be
would
ANSWER: national,
invalid and any which
stipulation to
salary
still
Their a differential
minor.
claim is This
not of
is US$400.00
in
correct. connection
A a month.
contract with is Both
Article
the law
his national
invoke the U.S. law Code (Japanese on the law) or by that
ground the law the in the contract to the contrary is considered
Dragon
15 theServices,
of Since
between theCivil Code
parties Ltd.which andembodies
itscan local the agent
said
of his was
ticket domicile, purchased depending in Manila,upon whether hence, void. the law ofbut thethe law
forum in this disregard
case is
claimed
nationality
the contractthat the
principle
if itsecond
is of contract
lex
contrary patriae.
to is valid
publicWhile under
this
policy.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Japan follows
Philippine the nationality orunderdomiciliary the Philippine law the issues should-be
Vanessa canlaw recover should damages apply,under which
Philippine the
The laws
principle of Hongkong,
intended
provisions
resolved in of the
accordance to 1987 and to
apply therefore
Filipino law.
withConstitution
Philippine
binding
citizens
on the
theory of can
Vanessa personal recover law damages
for its citizens. for breach of on
underAlma. that Is their
provision,claim correct?
the SupremeExplain. Court in
law
b) for
Philippine breach law governsof contract
the of
capacity carriage,
of the protection
B. The third of labor
paragraph and on
of social
Art. 17 justice
of the (Sec.
Civil
contract
Philippine oflaw
carriage.
should Decide.
govern Discuss
as the fully.
law of the Recto
10.
Code Artv. Harden
II)
provides embody
that:is of the
a view
public that
policy the ofstatus
the
Japanese owner in selling the land. While as a
place
general where the planeoftickets were bought and
rule capacity or capacity Since
Philippines. of foreignersthe application is to beofdetermined
Hongkong
the contract of carriage was executed. In on the
law basis
in this of the
case is insame violationprovisionof or principle,
Zalamea v. i.e., by U.S. law in the present problem.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Definition;
Under Art. forum
16 par. non-conveniens;
1, NCC, real long-arm
property statute
is subjectMaris
3.toThethen
nationality distribution
theory, returned
and the issue toof the thePhilippines
involved is personal
which of the laws and
properties
ofinthea in
(1994)
law of theis country whereofit Forum is situated. two countries should apply to bydetermine the law.
order of succession,
1)
theWhat the doctrine non Since shall
Germany
civil be governed
ceremony celebrated French in The
Cebu legal
City
the amount of successional rights, or, the intrinsic validity of
the property 2)
conveniens? is What
situated is ain "long the Philippines,
arm basis
according is Art.
testamentary to16, theNCC).
provisions. formalities
Such issue is not of Philippine
involved in this case.law,
Philippine ANSWER:
statute"?
SUGGESTED law applies. The rule of lex rei sitae she married her former classmate Vincent
1) a) FORUM
in Article 16 prevails NON overCONVENIENS
lex loci contractu is ina Applicable
likewise aLaws; Filipino Wills executed
citizen. a) Was abroad the marriage
principle
ALTERNATIVE in Private
ANSWER:
Article 17 of the NCC. International Law that (1993)
A, a Filipino,
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:executed
of Maris and Johnson valid when a will in celebrated?
Kuwait while Is
Afghanistan
where the ends lawof justice governsstrongly the indicate formal Yes.
their"Renvoi"
there as a contract
marriage - which still means
worker. validly "referring
Assume existing that back"under
now? is
requirements of the
that the controversy may be more suitably contract since the relevant
SUGGESTED
the
Reasons. because
laws ANSWER: here,
of Kuwait, it is enough that thewe are applying U.S.
execution
tried elsewhere, is in Afghanistan.
then jurisdiction Art. 17 of the Civil
should be (a)
law The
testator marriage
to affixMario, of Mans
being
his signature and
already
to theJohnson
its citizen,
presence was of
Code provides
declined and the that the forms
parties relegated and solemnities
to relief to valid
although when thecelebrated
formalities
two witnesses and that the will need not be because of allthe marriages
second
of
be contracts,
sought in wills, anotherandforum. other(Moreno. public solemnized
marriage
acknowledged will outside
be
before the
governed Philippines
a notary by public. (Tokyo)
Philippine May law in
the
b) Where in
instruments
Philippine Law a broad
shall be sense
Dictionary, governed p.the254, ends
by1982 the of laws
justice
ed.). of accordance
under
SUGGESTED the with
principle
ANSWER:
will be probated in the Philippines? the
of lex lawsloci in force
celebrationis. in the
strongly
the country indicate in that
which the theycontroversy are executed. may be Domiciliary
Yes.
country Under theory
where Articles vs. Nationality
they 815
are and solemnizedTheory
17 of the (Japan),Civil
more suitably tried
However, if the contract was executed before elsewhere, then (2004)
Distinguish
Code, the briefly
formality of
and valid there as such, are also valid in the but
the clearly
execution between:
of a will is
jurisdiction should be declined
the diplomatic or consular officials of the and the parties Their
Domiciliary
governed
Philippines.marriage
by theory
the no
law and
of longer
the placevalidly
nationality of subsists,
theory
execution. of
Applicable
Republic Laws;
relegated to the
of Succession;
relief to beIntestate
Philippines sought in &Afghanistan,
Testamentary
in another because
personal
SUGGESTED
If the will it
law. has
ANSWER:
was (5%)been
executed dissolved with by thethe absolute
formalities
(2001)
forum. (Handbook on Private International DOMICILIARY
divorce
prescribed validly by the THEORY
obtained
laws of byposits
Kuwait Johnson thatwhich
and the
valid
Philippine law shall apply.
c)
Law,FORUM
Alex was NON CONVENIENS
born a Filipino but was a naturalized
Aruego). means simply personal
capacitated
there as such,statusMaris and
thetowill rights
remarry is valid of (Art.a person
and26.may Family are
be
that
Canadiana court citizen mayatresist the time impositionof his death upon its on governed
Definition;
Code).
probated inbythe the
Cognovit; law of Borrowing
Philippines. his domicile Statute; or the
jurisdiction
December 25, even 1998. He when left behindjurisdiction a last will is place
Applicable ofLaws;
Characterization(1994) his lawshabitual governing residence. marriages The
authorized
and testament by in thewhichletterheofbequeathed a general venue all his NATIONALITY
(2003)
Gene
In and Jane,
Private THEORY,met
Filipino,
International on and
Law the got other
(Conflict married hand,
of in
statute.
properties, (Salonga. real Private and International
personal, in Law.the p, postulates
Englandwhat
Laws) thatis:itboth
while is 1} thewere law taking
Cognovit? of the2) person's
up Apost-
d)
51. Forum
1967
Philippines ed.)tononhisconveniens
acknowledged is aillegitimate
doctrine nationality
graduate courses
borrowing that governs
statute? there. such
A few
3) Characterization? status
yearsand after rights
their
whereby Forum Non Conveniens & Lex Locito Contractus
Fillpina a court of law
daughter andhaving nothing full to Jurisdiction
his two graduation, they decided annul their
over a case brought in Thea proper venue the or (2002)
Felipe
SUGGESTED
marriage. is aANSWER: Filipino
Jane filedcitizen. an action Whentoheannul went her to
legitimate Filipino sons. sons sought
district declines
"Art. 1700. to determine
The the
relations case on
between its 1)
Sydney a) COGNOVIT
marriage for to vacation,
Gene is he
in a confession
England met a former
on of judgment
the business
ground of
annulment of the last will and testament on
merits because
capital Justice
and would
labor be
are better
not served
merely whereby
associate,
latter’s a
who
sterility, portion
proposed
a ground of to thehim
for complaint
a transaction
annulment isof
the ground that it deprived them of their
SUGGESTED
by the ANSWER:
trial
contractual. over Theythe case
are so in another
impressed confessed
which
marriage took by
in him the to
England. defendant
Moscow. The who
Felipe denies
brokered
English thea
court
legitimes but the daughter was able to prove
The daughter
SUGGESTED
jurisdiction.
with ANSWER: should
(Webster's
publicno prevail because
Dictionary)
interest thatArticle labor 16 contract
rest thereof between (Philippine
Sydney law
Coals Dictionary,
Corp. (Coals),3rdto
that decreed the marriage annulled. Returning
(2}the
of a) there
LONG
New
were
ARMCode
Civil STATUTE compulsory
provides is a legislative
that
heirs
intestate
or
act Ed.)
an (Ocampo
Australian v.
firm, Florenciano,
and Moscow L-M
Energy 13553,
Corp.
legitimes contracts
under for must
Canadian yield to the Whocommon the Philippines, Gene asked you whether or not
which provides
and testamentary personallaw.
succession jurisdiction,
shall
should
be governed via b) COGNOVIT
2/23/50).
(Energy),
SUGGESTED a Russian
ANSWER: is a "statement
firm, his for former
Coalsof confession"
to supply
prevail? good.
Why? Therefore,
(5%) such contracts are he would be free to marry girlfriend.
substituted
by thesubject servicelaw
national or process,of the over
person persons whose or No,
coal Gene
Oftentimes,
to Energy isit not free
isonreferred
a to to
monthly marry as ahis
basis "power
for former
threeof
to the special laws on labor What would your legal advice be? 5%
corporations
succession is which
under are nonresidents
consideration. of the girlfriend.
attorney"
years. Both or His
simply
these marriage
firms as a
were to
"power",
not Jane is
it
doing, isvalid
and the
Applicable unions, collective ofbargaining, strikes
state and Laws;whichSucession
voluntarily Aliens
go into the state, according
written to
authority the of forms
the debtorand andsolemnities
his direction of
(1995)
Michelle, andthelockouts, closed shop, wages,a still do not do, business in the Philippines.
directly
ALTERNATIVE byFrench
orANSWER; agent daughter or communicate of Penreich, with British
to law, is valid
Felipe shuttled between Sydney and Moscowof
the clerk of the here
district (Article
court, 17,
or 1st
justice par.,
German working
national, conditions,
died hours
inforeign
Spain of labor and
leaving real
A. When a
persons incontract
the state has a for limited elementpurposes, such NCC).
the peace
to close However,to enter
the since
contract. judgment Gene
He also and Jane
against the
executed are still
debtor in
properties similar in subjects."
the Philippines
as in the factual
inactions which setting
concern stated
claims in asthe well
problem
relating as as
to Filipinos
stated although
therein. living
(Words
Sydney a commission contract with Coals and andin England,
Phrases, vol. the 7,
valuable
where one
performance personal properties
of execution
or the parties ofin those
Germany.
is apurposes foreign c) pp. COGNOVIT
dissolution
115-166). of is
their a plea
marriage
in Moscow with Energy, under which contracts in an
is action
still which
governed
b)
1. Long
What arm
law statute5th
thedetermines refers
who shall simply
succeed to
as acknowledges
by wasPhilippine law that (Article the 15,defendant NCC). did
corporation,
(Black's Law contract
Dictionary, canEd.be sustained
1979). he guaranteed commissions by both Since, firms
authorized
the deceased? substituted
Explain service.
your
valid particularly the stipulation expressing based answer and give undertake
sterilityonisa not and promise
one of the as the plaintiff
grounds for in
for the its
the
percentage of deliveries
2.
its What
legal law
basis. regulates the distribution of the declaration
annulment period, has
of a marriagealleged, and that it cannot
that the contract is governed by the laws of the three-year
Divorce; effect of divorce payableunder in Sydney Articleand 45 in of
real
foreign properties
country. in thegranted
Given this to formeraccepted
Philippines?
generally Filipinos;
Explain ALTERNATIVE
deny
the Family
ANSWER:
that itrespectively,
owes
Code,and the unjustly
annulment detains offrom Gene’sthe
Renvoi Doctrine (1997) Moscow,
Yes, Gene is sum free claimed through
to marryby his deposits
girlfriend in
your answer
principle of and give its legal
international law,basis. the contract plaintiff marriage the
to Jane on that in ground ishim
not validinBoth hisin
3.
In What
1977, law Mariogoverns and theClara,distribution
both Filipino
of the accounts
because that
his he opened
marriage was the
validly two cities.
annulled in
between Maritess and JAL is valid and it the declaration,
firms Philippines
paid The and
Felipe consents
(Article 17, that
NCC)
his ofcommission judgment
fornot four be
personal
citizens,
Applicable properties
were laws
Laws; marriedingoverning
Germany?
in the Explain
marriagesPhilippines. your England.
entered against issue
the they defendant whether for or
a certain a
should therefore be enforced. months,
marriage after
is which
voidable, stopped
including paying
the grounds him.
answer
Three
(1992)
In 1989, years
andMaris,givelater,
aitsFilipino
legal
they basis. went
citizen, to married
the United her A.
d)
sum. Define
COGNOVIT
[Words oris
andfrom explain
a note
Phrases, the
vol. principle
authorizing a
7, pp. 115-166). of “lex
lawyer
SUGGESTED
States ofANSWER:
America and citizen,established their Felipe
therefore,
loci learned
contractus”.
for confession is governed
of (2%)
judgment his
by the contacts,
by law of the
defendant. whoplace are
boss Johnson, an American in Tokyo in
Assuming
residence that the estate of the decedent is residents
where
B. the
Define of Sydney
marriage
or and
explain was Moscow,
solemnized
the rule that
of the
(lex
“forum two
loci
a wedding in San Francisco,
ceremony celebratedCalifornia. according In to
being
1987, settled
the laws. in theOne
couple Philippines)
applied firms
2)
non talked to Hence,
celebrationis).
"BORROWING
conveniens” each
(3%)other evenand
STATUTE" decided
if sterility
-Laws isof to
not cut
the a
Japanese year for, later,andJohnson were
1. The
granted, national
U.S. law of the decedent (French him
C.
ground
state off.
or He
Should
to now
annul
jurisdiction the files suit
Philippine
the
used in
marriage
by Manila
court
another under against
assume
state the in
returned to his citizenship.
native Nevada, In and 1989, he Mario,
validly
law)
claiming shallto govern
have beenin determining whoClara, will both
jurisdiction
Philippine
deciding Coals overand
law,
conflicts thequestioned
the case? Energy
marriage Explain. is for (5%)specific
nevertheless
involved in the
obtained in that state an abandoned
absolute divorce by from
succeed
In
was 1990,
able to
Mariohis
to estate.
returned The to legal
the
secure a decree of divorce in basis
Philippines is Art. and16 performance.
SUGGESTED
voidable
choice of ANSWER:
because
law (Black'ssterility Law makes
Dictionary, the marriage
5th ed.
his wife
ALTERNATIVE Maris.ANSWER: A. LEX under LOCI CONTRACTUS may be
par.
married
After
Reno, 2, Nevada,
NCC.
MarisJuana who knew
received
U.S.A. the well final Mario'sjudgment past of voidable
1979). English law. Therefore,
French
(a) law shall govern the Mariodistribution of his understood
Applicable Laws; in the Salemarriage
two of Realasin
senses, Property
follows:
life. Is the
divorce, shemarriage
marriedbetween her childhood and
sweetheart 3) a) "CHARACTERIZATION"
annulment of Englandis otherwise
is valid
real
(b)
Juana properties
Would
valid? the in the
renvoi Philippines
doctrine except
have when
any (1995)
While
called in Afghanistan,
"classification" a orJapanese
"qualification."by the name It is
Pedro, also a Filipino citizen, in a religious in the Philippines.
the real to
relevance property
the case? is land which may be of the (1)
Sato
process It
sold isto
of the
Ramoncito,
assigning law aof a the
Filipino,
disputed place a
question where
parcel to
ceremony in Cebu City, celebrated according
transmitted
SUGGESTED to a foreigner only by hereditary of
ANSWER: its land
contracts,
correct situated
legal in
wills,the
category Philippines
and
(Private otherwhich
International public
Sato
to the formalities
SUGGESTED ANSWER: of Phil Philippine law. Pedro later
succession.
(a) Yes, because law recognizes the 1. What
instruments
inherited
Law, Salonga). law his
from governs
areFilipino
executed the formality
mother.and governs in their
the
left
2. for distribution
The the United of and States
the and became
real properties
divorce between Mario Clara as valid. in b) (2)
execution
“formsIt isofthe and
"CHARACTERIZATION" theproper
contract
solemnities”, lawofofsale? the
is contract;
pursuant
a Explain
process to e.i.,
yourthe
in
naturalized
the Philippines as shallan Americanbe governed citizen.
by French Maris
SUGGESTED ANSWER: answerthe system
first
determining and give
paragraph, underofitslaw legal
Article
what intended
basis.
17
category of tothe
a govern
New
certain the
Civil
set
followed
law.
(b) No,The Pedro
legal
The renvoi to the
basis
doctrine United
isisrelevant
Art. 16, States,
NCC).
in cases whereand after
one country
entire
SUGGESTED
Code;
of facts oror contract,
ANSWER:
rules including
fall. (Paras, Conflict its essential
of Laws,
a serious
applies quarrel,
the domiciliary
SUGGESTED ANSWER: theory and Maristhe other filed
the a suit and
p. requisites,
94. 1984 ed.) indicating the law of the place
obtained a divorce decree issued by the court
with which the contract has its closest
in the state of Maryland.
connection or
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Sometime
protection
where ANSWER:
SUGGESTED in
ofthe 1990,
the mainrights
Sarah, of
elements
Filipino
born a Filipino laborers,
of the but the
contract
court
country
naturalThus,
sister. mother
of whichunder as her the
theymiddle
above-cited
are name. citizens. provision,
TheSince Courttheir has
1)
by a) It adepends
disregard
canillustrated
converge.
then choice
naturalized
As onforum
by Zalamea
of whether
Americanv.and or choice
Court not ofBing
citizen, of was
Appeals law. that
and valid there
under
marriage
ruled
Eva is isis Kong
Hong
qualified no to law
law, itprohibiting
adopt shallVicky.
be valid and anrespected
illegitimate in the
at least 18 years old at Tom,
the Philippines.
Therefore
her American
(228 SCRA thehusband
23 Philippine
[1993]) , ittime
Court
is the
filed Carol lawasserts
a should
petition of thenot
in child adopted by her natural father to use, as
the
apply
the prerogative
place the where
Regional stipulation to
Trial take
the Court
in custody
airline
question.ofticket of
Makati, Bing.
was for If she
issued,
the middle
b) Would name, yourher answermother's be the surname. same What if they is
was
adoption at least
ALTERNATIVE
where ANSWER:
ofthe the18 years child
passengers
minor old,arethen hershe
of nationals is and
sister, no a Naturalization
not
sought prohibited to isadopt allowed.Eva's After all, the use of
illegitimate
b) No,
longer
SUGGESTED lex
residents
Filipina. under
Can fori
ANSWER: should
parental
of,
the and be
petition where
beapplied
authority thebecause
granted? and neither
defendant
(5%) the (2003)
Missmaternal
SUGGESTED
the
daughter? Universe,
ANSWER: name
Explain. from as(2%) Finland,
the middle came name to isthe in
(per
suit
Carol isdondee)
filed
nor
airline Normain It
company depends.
Philippine
can assert
maintained Rules
courtstheits and on
prerogative
office. Adoption
Eric wasto My answer
Philippines
accord with on will astill
Filipino tourist be the
culture visa. same.
andWhile Paragraph
customs in thisand
effective
hired
take custody.
ALTERNATIVE in AugusttheHowever,
ANSWER: 22, if 2002
Philippines. she was The provides
less than the
Philippine 18 3(a)
country,
adoptionof Article
she 184in
fell
is intended of love
the forFamily
with
the and Codemarried
benefit does of not the a
A. Under
following;
Constitution the SEC. doctrine
affords 4. Who of
full
years old, then Norma has a better right since lex loci
protection
may contractus,
adopt. to labor
– as
The make any
Filipino doctor.
adopted distinction.
[In re: Her Adoption The provision
touristof visa states
having Nathy
Stephanie that
been
a general
following
and
the the may
adoption rule, by the
adopt:
stipulation NormaAnylaw ofofBing
as Filipino
to the Citizen
summary placedismissal
terminates where thea Astorga
an
expiredalien Garcia,
who after
and is G.R.
a former
the No. maximum Filipino March
148311, citizen
extension is
31,
b) 1
The
contract natural
is ofmade
legal age,
mother,
or enteredCarol, should
into governs have the
with
runs
parental counter authority to our fundamental
of Carol over and
Bing. statutory qualified
allowed
2005; to adopt
therefore,
Rabuya, The thea relative
Law Bureau by
on Persons consanguinity.
of Immigration
and Family
2 right
to inits
Torts;
better Prescriptivepossession
in lightPeriod ofthe
ofand full civil
principle capacity thatand thelegal Inter-Country Adoption; Formalities
respect
laws. nature validity, obligation c)
andSupposing
Relations,
Deportation p. 613]. that (BID) they is filed
presently the petition
demanding to
(2004)rights, (2005)
In
and a interpretation.
child's classwelfare suit for is the damages,
This paramount
has plaintiffs
been claimed
consideration
said to be the Hans Berber,
adopt Vicky ina the German year national,
2000, willandyour his
3 of good moral character, that she immediately leave the country but she
they
in custody
rule suffered
4even though rights. injuries
notthe Obviously,
place from where torture
Bing's during
thecontinued
ofcontract
Filipino
answer wife,
be the Rhoda,
same? are permanent
Explain. (2%) residents
has been convicted any crime refuses to do so, claiming that she is already a
martial
stay in
wasinvolving law.
her
made ismoral The
adoptingsuit
different from the place where it Filipino Citizen by her marriage to atoFilipino
was
turpitude; filed
parents' uponhouse, President
where of Canada.
SUGGESTED They
ANSWER: desire so much adopt
EM’s
interaction
is to5 be arrival on isexile
with
performed, the and in
call HI,girls a U.S.
particularly is state.so, if The
inevitable, the Yes,
Magno,
SUGGESTEDmy answer
an 8-year
ANSWER: will old still be
orphaned the same.
boy and a Under
who emotionally and psychologically citizen. Can the
court
would
place inof
capable beHIof awarded
detrimental
the caring for plaintiffs
making to
children,and her the
the moralequivalent
place and of Yes,Sec. 7(b),
the
baptismal BIDArt. canIIIBID
godson of the
order
still
oftheNeworder the deportation
Domestic
deportation
Rhoda. Since Adoption
of Miss the
of
Act,Missan Universe?
alien Explain.
who 5%
possesses all2004,
of P100
spiritual
6
performance billion under
development.
at least
are the
sixteen
the same U.S.
This
(16) lawcould
years
(United on alien
be
older
Airline tort
the
than v. Universe.
accidental
the The
death marriage
of Magno's of an alien parents woman in tothe a
SUGGESTED ANSWER: qualifications ofstaying
aautomatically
Filipino national who
reason
CA, adoptee,
claims.G.R. for On
No. Bing'sappeal,
124110, expressedEM’s
April 20,Estate
desire
2001). raised
to return the to Filipino
he has does
been not with his makeaunt her
who, ais
B. FORUM NON CONVENIENS means that a qualified to adopt may already adopt provided
issue
her 7 ofhas
natural and
prescription.who is
mother. It Itin a position
argued should to
that to support
since
be and
said
noted, Filipino
care Citizen. She
however, could hardly afford to feed her own must first prove in an
court forlaw histhat
discretionary
children in keeping
authority
with the
decline
means of thethat hisUnfortunately,
country has diplomatic relations with
U.S.
however, is silent
Bing on
is no thelonger matter, a the
minor, court
being appropriate
family. proceeding that and
Hans she does Rhoda not have
cannot
jurisdiction
family. over a cause of action when it is of the Philippines, that he has been living in the
should
19 years apply:
ofthatage(1) now. HI’s It islaw setting
doubtfu1 ajustly
two-year Is
any there a
disqualification possibility
come to the Philippines to adopt Magno for for
Philippine them to adopt
citizenship.
the view
SUGGESTED ANSWER: the action may be that a court
and Philippines for at least three (3) continuous
limitation
cana)still on tort claims; or (2)ofBing
the Philippine Magno?
(Yung
although Uan How Chu
they should
v.
possessRepublic they
all thego
of about
the
qualifications it?
Philippines, (5%) as
effectively
2) On resolveadjudicated
the the
assumption question
elsewhere.that custody is still over a SUGGESTED
years
158 SCRAprior ANSWER:
593to the
[1988]) filing . of
Since theMiss application
Universe for
is
law
one who which
SUGGESTED appears
is sui juris
ANSWER: to require that
and not Carol claims
otherwise for adoptive parents.
Yes, it is possible for Hanssuch and Rhoda to adopt
minor
Plaintiffs or countered
otherwise incapacitated,
that provisions of the may
most adoption
still a and
foreigner, maintains
despite her residence
marriage tountil a
C. No,
personal
incapacitated. the injuryPhilippine
arising courts
from cannot
martial acquire
law be
petition
analogous the federalproper courtthe
statute, for resolution or Magno. Republic Act is No. 8043 orthat the Inter-
case of Torture Felipe. Victims
ANOTHER
the SUGGESTED
adoption decree ANSWER:
jurisdiction
brought within over one the
year. Firstly, Filipino doctor, she canentered,be deported he upon has
rescission
Protection
under the rule
of
Act,the decree
should
of forum benon of adoption
applied.
conveniens, It sets on the ten No,
the beenthe
Country
expiry
Bureau
Adoption
certified
of her allowable byof his Immigration
Act, allowscannot
diplomatic
stay oraliens
in the Philippines.
order
consular or
ground
years as the that periodthe adopting
for prescription. parents have her deportation.
Filipinos permanently An alien
residing woman abroad marrying
to apply a
Philippine court is not a convenient Moreover, forum as Filipino, office or any appropriate government agency
exposed,
they argued or are exposing,
that equity the child to corrupt for native-born
inter-country adoption or naturalized,
of a Filipino becomes
child.
all the incidents of the could toll the statute
case occurred outside of that he has the legal capacity to adopt in his
Qualification
influence,
limitations. tantamount
For it to giving her
appeared that corrupting
EM had ipso
The
country, facto
law and a ofFilipino
however Adopter;
that his if she
requires Applicable
government thatLaw
is not disqualified
only allows legally to
the
the Philippines. Neither are both Coals and be (2001)
A German couple filed a petition for adoption
orders
procured or examples.
Constitutional She can
amendments also ask for the free a citizen
child, or of
one
granting adoptee to enter his country as his adoptedthe who Philippines
has been voluntarily
(Mo Ya Lim or v
Energy doing business inside the Philippines. of a minor Filipino child with the Regional
revesting
himself and in her of parental authority over involuntarily
Commission committed
of Immigration, to the DSWD
41 or
SCRA any of
292
Secondly, thethosecontracts acting were under not his direction
perfected child.
in [1971]),
Trial Court(Sec of 4, Makati
Naturalizationunder thebe provisions
Law). All that of
Bing.
immunity If However,
from suit Bing
during is hisalready
tenure. 19 years of its accredited agencies, may subject of
the
In Philippines.
this case, has Under the
prescription principleset inof lex
or loci
not? the
she Child and
has to doadoption. Youth
is prove The Welfare
in thelaw Code which
deportation
age and therefore no longer a minor, it is not intercountry further
contractus,
Considering the law
the herself of the in
differences place wherelaws,
thepetition
cited the proceeding
ANOTHER
allowed SUGGESTED
alienstheasideto ANSWER: Before the petition
factadopt.of her possessing
marriage and that
Carol but Bing who can the requires
It depends. that If she from is disqualified toallbethe a
contract
which is
prescriptive made shall
period should apply. Lastly,
beadoption,
applied: the could
she is be not heard,
disqualified the Family to parents
become Code, which
a Filipino
court for judicial rescission of the qualifications, the adoptive
Filipino citizen, she may be deported. must If shecome is
Philippine
b)
one Carol
year under maycourt file hasan no power
action to to determine
deprive Norma the repealed the Child and YouthPhilippines Welfare Code,
provided she Philippine
can show law, a twogroundyears under for Citizen.
from a country
not disqualified towherebe a the Filipino citizen, she has
facts
of
HI’sparental
law,surrounding
ten authority
years the
underexecution
under Article
U.S. federal 231oflaw, of said
theor came into effect. Consequently, the Solicitor
disinheritance of an ascendant. diplomatic relations
may not be deported. An alien woman who and that the government
contracts.
Family
SUGGESTED
none ofCodethe And or even
ANSWER:
above? file an if action
a proper
Explain. for decision
(5%) the rescission could General filed a motion accredited to dismiss the petition,
maintains a similarly citizen becomesagency and
Thethe
be
of USadoption
reached, Court suchwill applyArticle
would
under US
have law,no
191 the inlaw
biding of the marries
effect
relation on the
a Filipino
ground is that the Family Code
one. The
prohibits
that adoption
marriage ANSWER: allowed
of Miss Universe to the Filipino under the national
Jorum,
on
to Coals and
Article
Nationality in Energy
231 determining
(2)
Theory of the as Family
the court the
Code. wasapplicable
not able SUGGESTED
aliens from adopting. If youit were the judge,
law ofandthe alien. Moreover, must beadoption
further
Qualification
prescriptive
to
(2004)
PH and acquire LV are
of
period. Adopter
jurisdiction
HK Chinese.While US over
Theirlaw parents
isthe silent said
areon how will youtorule
The
doctor
Hans motion did Rhodanotdismiss
on
the file
automatically
have thetomotion?
petitionan for
make
application
(5%)
her a to
(2005)
In 1984, Eva, a Filipina, went to work as a shown
should
Filipino
adopt that
be
citizen.
Magno, all
denied. Shepossibilities
either The still law
withhas that
to
the forprove a
should
Regional domestic
that governshe
Trial
this matter, citizens
corporations.
now Filipino the US
(Manila Court
Hotel
who live inwill
Corp. not While
v. NLRC.
Manila. apply
343
nurse in1314[2000])
the USA. There, she the and fell in the
met prescriptive adoption
Theory;
is not
Court action have
significant
is the
disqualified
having been to
jurisdiction exhausted
relationships
law in force
become over andthe
a theory
at
citizen.
Magno thetime
orinter-
withof
Philippine
SCRA 1, law in determining
still students in MNS State, they got married
love with Paul, an American citizen, and they country
(1994)
Able,
filing
the a adoption
corporation
of the petition.
Inter-Country is best
domiciled for
At thatBoard
Adoption the ininterest
State
time, in it was of but,
A,
Canada. the
the
period. It is generally affirmed
although they are first cousins. It appears that as a principle in
child.
doing
Hans business in the Philippines, hired was Eric, a
got
privatemarried in 1985.law
both in international
HK and in MNS
Eva that acquired
procedural
State
American
first cousins law is Child and Youth Rhoda Welfare
will then Code undergothat a trial in
citizenship
one the inexceptions
1987. During to their
the sojourn in the Filipino
of effect,
custodynot engineer,
forthe six Family for
(6) months its project
Code. from in
PetitionersState
the time B.
have In
of
couldofmarry legally. application
the
already contract acquired of employment
a vested executed
right on bytheirthe
Philippines
foreign law in
by 1990,
the they
forum.
They plan to reside and set up business in the filed
Since a joint
prescription petition is placement. It is only after the lapse of the trial
for the adoption parties
custody inthat
daughter qualification Statetothe B,decree
adopt it was which stipulated
cannot
adoptionbe that takenthe
a matter
Philippines. Butofthey
of procedural Vicky,have lawa 7-year beenold
even in informed,
Philippine
205 SCRA 356)
of can be
of Eva's sister.
jurisprudence, Themarriage
government, through contract
Parental
away
the ALTERNATIVE
issued. by could
Authority;
the be
Family terminated
Rescission
Code. of at
(Republic the
Adoption company's
v. Miller
however, that (Codaltn
the v. POEA/ JVLRC/Broum
of first cousins ANSWER:
will,
(1994)
In which stipulation is allowed in State B.
Office
and
hereRoot is of the Solicitor
International,
considered void from General,
238 SCRA opposed
721 [1994]),
the beginning the
by The1975,
G.R. No.Carol
motion hasbegot
125932, to be a granted.
April daughter 21, The Bing,
1999, new out
citing
lawof
a) Is
petition
the the
US ofCourt government's
on the ground opposition
that the tenable?
petitioners, When
wedlock.
Republic Eric When
v. was
Court summarily
Bing
of was
Appeals, tendismissed
years old,by Able,
Carol
reason publicwill apply
policy. They eitherare in HIa or Federal shall govern their qualification to adopt and
dilemma.
Explain.
being
law
They in both (2%)foreigners,
determining
don’t want to the
break are disqualified
applicable
Philippine law, adopt he
to much
prescriptive gave sued Able
underher
SUGGESTED theconsent
for for
new law,
ANSWER:
damages Bing's
the German
in the adoption
legal Philippines.
couple by is
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Vicky.
period and not Philippine law. The Restatement Will
Norma the Philippine
and Manuel, court
which apply
was the
granted contractual
by the
less their marriage
The government's position is untenable. vow. They seek your disqualified
a) Using thefrom adopting.
"SIGNIFICANT They cannot
RELATIONSHIPS claim
stipulation?
court in have1990. In
ADOPTION
of American
advice
Under on whether
paragraph law affirms 3, their
Articlethis principle.
civil
184 status
of the will Family be THEORY",
that they there are1991,
already contacts Carolsignificant
acquired alearned
vested right that
to the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Norma
because and Manuel
adoption is were
not a engaged
right but in a a call-
mere
adversely
Code,
Adoption; an affected
alien, as a by Philippine
general rule domestic
cannot law?
adopt. Philippines. Among these are that the place of
My advise isUse of Surname
as follows: The civil of statusherof'Natural
PH and Mother LV will not be girl-ring
[Note: If that
the catered to tourists. Some ofon the
What
However,
(2006)
adversely is your an
affected advice?
alien
by Philippine (5%)
who law is a
because former
they are Filipino
nationals of business
privilege. is examinee
No onethe acquires based
Philippines, a his answer
vested theright on the
employee a
May an illegitimate child, upon adoption by her girls livedlaw,with Norma
8552, and and Manuel.
current Carol got
Hong
citizen Kongand and not who Filipino
seekscitizens.Being
to adopt foreigners,
a relative their status,
by privilege.
concerned is RAa Filipino his answer
the suitshould was filed be in
natural father, use the surname of her natural Bing
considered back, who
correct. in the
This first
question place
is basedwanted on theto
conditions and legal capacity in the Philippines are governed by the
consanguinity is qualified to(2.5%)
adopt, (par. 3[a], the Philippines,
repealed provision
thereby of mother.
justifying theCode
the Family
application ona
mother
law of Hongas thethe
Kong, middle name? return to her natural 1) Who has
In
Art.the 184,given
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Family Yes, an
problem,
Code) Eva, illegitimate
a naturalized child, of Philippine law.
Qualifications
Adoption.] In the American Airlines case
of theAdopter
upon adoption bywouldher natural better rightheld to custody
when of Bing, is Carol or is
American citizen like to father, adopt Vicky, can use a the
(2000) Court that what involved
the surname of her of her Norma? 2) Aside from taking physical
7-year old daughter PARAMOUNT STATE INTEREST such as the
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: Family; Sec.
under Constitutional
7(b) of RA8552. Mandates; TheDivorce
Supreme Court
1) No, the Motion to Dismiss should not be (1991)
A. heldHow
has in severaldoes casesthe 1987 that when Constitution
husband
granted. Article 236 of the Family Code as strengthen
and wife arethe family as
required an Institution?
to adopt jointly, each one
amended by Republic Act 6809, provides in B. them
of Do the must Constitutional
be qualified to policy
adopt oninthehis family
or her
the third paragraph that "nothing in this Code and right
own the (Republic
provision v.that marriage
Toledano, 233 SCRAis the9
shall be construed to derogate from the duty foundation
(1994). of the family
However, and shallhusband
the American be protected must
or responsibility of parents and guardians for comply with the requirements of thea law
by the State bar Congress from enacting law
children and wards below twenty-one years of SUGGESTED
allowing divorce
including ANSWER: in the Philippines?
the residency requirement of three
A. years.
Sec, 2, Article II the of
age mentioned in the second and third the Constitution
(3) Otherwise, adoption will not be
paragraphs of Article 2180 of the Civil Code". provides
Successional that:
Rights The
of State
Adopted recognizes the
Child
allowed.
2) The liability of Julio's parents to Jake's sanctity
(2004)
A Filipino of family
couple,life Mr.and and shallMrs. protect
BM, and Jr.,
parents arises from quasi-delict (Arts. 2176 strengthen
decided to the
adoptfamily YV, as an a basic
orphan autonomous
from St.
anda) P50,000.00
2180 Civil forCode) the death and of the cover
shall social
Claire’sinstitution.
orphanageIt in shall
New equally
York City.protectThey the
b) such amount
son;
specifically as would correspond to lost earning
the following: life
loved of and
the treated
mother and the life
her like of the unborn
a legitimate child
capacity; and from
for they conception.
have none The natural
of theirand very primary
own.
c) moral damages. right and duty
However, BM, of Jr.,parents
died ininanthe rearingat
accident of sea,
the
youth
followed for tocivictheefficiency
grave a year and thelaterdevelopment
by his sick
Family Code; Retroactive Application; Vested Rights Section I,character
Article
of moralBM,
father, Sr. XV, further
shall
Each left provides
receive that:
the support
a sizable The
estateof
(2000)
On April 15, 1980, Rene and Angelina were State
the recognizes
Government. the Filipino family as the
• Thetorequirement
consisting of bank deposits, lands and
married each otherof without a 16-year difference
a marriage foundation
between In the1985,
age of the acquired
adopter and adoptee buildings inofManila. the nation. May Accordingly,
the adoptedit child, shall
settlement. they a parcel of strengthen
SUGGESTED its
ANSWER: solidarity and actively promote
YV, inherit from BM, Jr.? May she also inherit
landmay be waived
in Quezon City.whenOn June the 1, adopter
1990, iswhen the YV total
its can(Note:
inherit The
development. from BM, Jr. recommends
Committee The succession that toa
from BM,
citationSr.? Is
of eitherthere aofdifference? Why?
biological
Angelina wasparentaway in of Baguio,
the adoptee Rene orsold is thethe the estate of BM, Jr. is one
governed the by provisions
Philippine be
spouse of the adoptee’sIs parent; Explain.
SUGGESTED (5%)
ANSWER:
credited as was
a complete answer).
SUGGESTED
said Any
ANSWER:
lotAlien
to Marcelo.
possessing the qualifications
the same sale void or as law because he a Filipino when he died
The sale is void. Since the sale was executed B, No, the Constitutional policy, as well as the
voidable? (2%) for Filipino nationals: Provided,
above-stated (Article 16, Civil Code). Under Article 1039 of
in 1990, the Family Code is the law applicable. supporting provision, does not amount to a
a) That his country has diplomatic relations the Civil Code, the capacity of the heir to
Under Republic
Article 124 of the of the
Philippines,FC, the sale of a prohibition to Congress to enact a law on
with the succeed is governed by the national law of the
conjugal
b) property by a spouse
that he has been living in the without the divorce. The Constitution only meant to help
decedent and not by the national law of the
ALTERNATIVE
consent
Philippines ANSWER:
of the other
for at isleast
void.three (3) continuous the marriage endure, to "strengthen its
Theyearssale prior
is voidable. The of provisions of the heir. Hence, whether or not YV can inherit
ALTERNATIVE
to the filing the petition for solidarity ANSWER:and actively promote its total
Family Codeand may apply retroactively but only if from
B. BM,
Yes. Jr. is determined
Congress is barred from by Philippine
enacting alaw. law
adoption maintains such residence until the development."
suchc) that hewill Under
allowing Philippine
divorce, law,
since the
Section adopted
2 of inherits
Article XV
application
adoption decree ishas notbeen
entered, impair certified
vested by his
rights. YV, however, cannot inherit, in hischild own of right,
diplomatic or consular office or any appropriate from
When Rene and Angelina got married in 1980, from the father of the adopter, BM, Sr., the
provides: adopter
"Sec. 2. as a legitimate
Marriage, as an the
inviolable
the government
law that governed agency totheir haveproperty
the legal relations
capacity adopter.
social institution, is the foundation of the
d)
to adopt and
in histhat his government allows the
country, because he is not a legal heir of BM, Sr. The
wasadoptee
the New Civil Code. Under the NCC, as legal family and shall be protected by the State."
to enter his country as his adopted fiction of adoption exists only between
interpreted by the Supreme Court in Heirs of the Since marriage is "Inviolable", it cannot be
child. adopted and the adopter. (Teotico v. Del Val
Felipe v. Aldon,
Provided, 100 SCRA
further, That 628 the and reiteratedon
requirements in dissolved by an absolute divorce.
13 SCRAAnnulment;
Marriage; 406 [1965]). Effects;Neither
Requisitesmay heRemarriage
Before inherit
Heirs of Ayuste v. Malabonga,
residency and certification of the alien’s G.R No, 118784, from BM, Sr. by representing BM, Jr. because
(1990)
2 September
qualification1999 , the in
to adopt sale hisexecuted
country may by the be in representation,
The marriage of Hthe andrepresentative
W was annulled must by bethea
husband
waivedwithout the consent
for the following: a) a of the Filipino
former wife is legal heir not only of the person he is
within the fourth (4th) degree of consanguinity competent court. Upon finality of the
voidable.
citizen Thewho seekshusband to adopthas aalready
relative acquired a representing but also
or affinity; or b) one who seeks to adopt the judgment of nullity. H of beganthe looking
decedent forfrom
his
vested rightchild
legitimate onof histheFilipino
voidablespouse; nature
or of whom the represented was supposed to inherit
prospective second mate. He fell in love with a
dispositions made without the consent of the (Article 973, Civil Code).
Family Home; Dwelling House
wife.c) Hence,
(1994)
In 1991, one Article
Victor
124 of tothe
whoestablished
is married Familycitizen
a Filipino
judicially
Code FAMILY CODE
sexy woman S who wanted to be married as
out of soon as possible, i.e., after a few months of
whichandmakesseeks the sale void
to adopt does
jointly nothis
with apply.
conjugal property, a family home inspouse
Manila a (a) How soon can H be joined in lawful
courtship.
Emancipation As a young lawyer, you were
relative within the fourth (4th) degree of
worth P200.000.00 and extrajudicially a wedlock consulted to his
Julio and byLea,
(1993) H, girlfriend S? Under existing
both 18 years old, were
consanguinity or affinity of the Filipino spouse.
second family home in Tagaytay worth laws, are there certain requisites that must be
sweethearts. At a party at the house of a
P50.000.00.
Qualifications Victor of leased the family home in complied
Adopter mutual
with before he can remarry? What
friend. Lea met Jake, also 18 years old,
Manila
Lina, ato former
(2003) a foreigner. Filipina Victor whoand his family
became an (b) Suppose
advice would that
you children
give H? were born from the
who showed interest
union of H and W, what would be in her. Lea theseemed
status of to
transferred
American citizen to another
shortlyhouse after her of his in Pasig.
marriage to entertain Jake because she danced with him
Can the two husband,
an American family homes wouldbelike thetosubject
adopt in of said children? Explain your answer.
manyIftimes.
(c) In a fit of jealousy,
the subsequent marriage JulioofshotH Jaketo S
execution on a judgment against
the Philippines, jointly with her husband, one Victor's wife with contracted
his father'sbefore 38 caliber revolver which,
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
for
of non-payment of theAssuming
purchase in 1992 of before going to the party he was able to the
was compliance with
Theher twominor brothers.
(2) so-called family homesthat can allbe thethe statutory condition for its validity, what are get
household
required appliances?
consents have been obtained, could from the unlocked drawer inside his father's
subject
SUGGESTED
of ANSWER:
execution. Neither of the abodes are the rights of the children of the first marriage
the contemplated jointbecause
adoption ina minor
the bedroom.
considered
Yes, Lina and her family homes
American husband foradopt
can jointly purposes (i.e., of H Jake and W) died and as ofa the
result of theof lone
children the
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,can asonly a former
be one Filipino
(1) citizen,
familycan adoptwhich
home her minor 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 "dwelling house" where
1998), or under Art. 184 (3)(1) of the Family Code. The alien the 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
"reside" and the land on which it is situated. parents moved to dismiss the complaint
(Arts. 152 and 161, Family Code) against them claiming that Page since23 Julio
of 119 was
already of 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
drug
ALTERNATIVE
a) addict.
Discuss presumptive
Efforts
ANSWER: the to have
effect legitimes
him
of rehabilitated
thewhich divorce shouldwerethe
sexually-transmissible
In
Flor
be 1989,
and Virgillo
marriage, Maris,
the conclusion were
a Filipino married
disease,
is that citizen,
Digna's to found
each
father married
may other
to be
revoke her
in serious
the boss
Eva
in
recorded
obtainedmayappropriate
unsuccessful.
the filebyan Can
SonnyactionBabycivil forask
and legalfor separation
registry
Lulu annulment
inand Canada. on
registriesof andonation
appears
Johnson,
and
Roxas and get back
ofAmerican
incurable.
City in 198O. Two the(2)car.
citizen, years inafter
In 1984, Tokyo
their
Flor in
marriage,
was a offered
wedding
which tooka
the
should grounds
property.
marriage,
SUGGESTED
(2%) beH or of
so
ANSWER: sexual
advised.
legal infidelityExplain.
separation? of her husband ceremony
place on 10 October
teaching Jobcelebrated
in1988,Canada,Bethelaccording
discovered
which she to her
that Japanese
husband
accepted.
The
and divorce
the
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: for (a) is
contracting not valid. by Philippine
her husband law of does a Marriage;
James
laws.
In has
1989, OneGrounds; Declaration
a sexually-transmissible
yearapplied
she later, Johnson ofdisease
for Nullity: Annulment:
which
andreturned
was toLegal
he contracted
granted his
not
bigamous
The provide
SUGGESTED following ANSWER:for
marriage areabsoluteabroad.
the divorce.prescribed
requisites Philippineby native Separation:
law
even priorNevada,
Canadian Separation
to citizenship.
their marriage of Property
and healthough validly
The (2003)
James
obtained
following did year,
not in knowthat
she it
No,
She Imay
courts
advice
and Baby toremarry.
cannot cannot
H isgrant toWhile
ask it.for
comply aA strict
annulment
withinterpretation
marriage them, of her
between Which
himself
sued until
state forofabsolute
an he the
divorce following
was examined divorce
from two [2)remedies,
from
Virgilio yearshisinlater when
awife i.e.,
Canadian (a)
a child
Maris.
marriage
of Article
two
1)
namely: oreither
(2)If Filipinos 26
for legalof cannotthe separation
spouse Family because
be contractedCode would
dissolved both
by the a declaration
was
After
court.alreadyMaris
After ofthem.nullity
bornVirgilio
toreceived Bethelthe
was sues
servedoffinal
Jamesmarriage,
with annulment(b)
for summons,
judgment of
of
these
capacitate
divorce
marriage actions ina bad
obtained had
Filipino already
abroad.
faith, spouse
hisprescribed.
or her
(Garcia to remarry
share
v. Redo, ofonlythe divorce,
G.R. annulment
their marriage. she of
James marriage,
marriedopposes the
her
the Canadian court tried the case and decreed (c)
annulment
childhoodlegal on separation,
the ground
sweetheart that
While
when
net
No. concealment
the other
profits
138322, of
Octoberthe of drug
spouse 2, was
community addiction
2001) existing at
a . foreigner
Philippine
property atlawsthe
: theor Pedro,
and/or
he diddivorce. (d) know
not also
even separation
that hethereafter,
a Filipino of
suchproperty,
hadcitizen, a disease
in amarried can
soreligious
that there an
the Shortly Flor a
time
timeofof
apply
conjugal marriage
to the
Sonny constitutes
marriage,
partnership and Lulu. fraud
the DOJ
Under
property underhas Art.
Article 46 15
issued
shall of thean
of
be SUGGESTED
was no fraud orANSWER:
aggrieved spouse
bad avail
faithVirgilio
on himself/herself
his part. Decide. again of-in the
ceremony
Canadian. in CanCebu City, celebrated
marry according to
FC
the which
opinion New(Opinion
forfeited makes
inCivilfavor the
Code,ofmarriage
134 thes.laws
of
common voidable
1993)
relating that under
children Art.
thefamily
to or,45
same if No,(i) Virgilio
the If cannot
formalities
Philippines? the ofwife
Explain.
validly
Philippine
remarry. His
discovers law. Pedro after casethe
later
is
of the
injustice
rights FC, and the
sought action
duties, tomust,be however,
status,cured by
and be brought
Article
capacity
there are none, the children of the guilty left for the United States and became within
26 is
of not
B.(ii) covered
Suppose
marriage If the
that by
that Article
wife
her both
goes
husband 26(to)of
parties the
abroad
has at Family
the
“AIDS”. to time
work Code, of
as
5 years from
present
persons
spouse byinare the
athe discovery
case ofmarriage
binding
previous thereof
upon under
spouses who
citizens
or, inArticle
were of47(3),
default both
theof Fortheir said
a nurse
naturalized
Article
marriage
andasrefuses to beto
were
an American
applicable,
similarly
come home the
afflicted
citizen. afterspouse
with
the
Maris
FC,
2) Since
Filipino
Philippines
children, atthethe
Donations
the drug
wherever time
innocent addiction
by reason
ofthey the
spouse; ofmay
Bert
marriage was Thus,
of marriage
be. discovered
butshall one
the who filed for
sexually-transmissible
expiration of divorce
her must
three-yeardiseases, be a serious
contract foreignerthere. and at
followed Pedro to the United States, and after
b)
by Baby
remain an Explain in
valid June the status
1989,
except the of the
action
that isSaid ifstill had
the marriagealready
donee the
(iii)time of
If and thethe marriage.
husband Since
discovers both of
after them
became
marriage ofalienSonny subsequently.
and Lulu injustice
valid and is a incurable,
serious both
quarrel, knew
Marts offiled
theirarespective suit the and
between
prescribed
contracted
the anomaly
subsisting. Sonny
in June
theof Eva and
of 1994.
marriage Auring.
Although
remaining in bad (2%)drugfaith,
married addictiontosuch
her is were
marriage Filipinos
infirmities, thatcan athis the wife
Bethel time has of been
or the
James marriage,
a prostitute
sue court the
for
SUGGESTED ANSWER: obtained a divorce decree issued by the
a ground forwho
donations
husband legal is
made separation
tono said undermarried
donee
longer Art.
are 55(5)revoked andher.
to Art.
by divorce
(iv)
SUGGESTED
before
annulment obtained
If
they the
ANSWER:
of got husband
their by
married. Florhas
marriage? dida not serious capacitate affair
Since the decree ofthatdivorce obtained in the
Thestate of Maryland. be Maris then becausereturned
3)
57 of the
operation
Hence, TheFC said spouse
ofrequires
law; Opinion who
the makes
action contracted
must beby
Article
Lulu
broughtthe
26 A.
Virgilio
with marriage
to remarry.
his secretary canThe and annulled,
fact that Flor
refuses to stop was
and Sony in Canada is not recognized here in to
good the faithPhilippines
is not a and inwhen
defense a civilthe ceremony
ground is
subsequent
within
applicable 5 years marriage
from
to her the in bad
occurrence
case andbetween faithof shall
the
the divorce cause.be already an
notwithstanding alien at the
advice timefrom she obtained
relatives the
and
the Philippines, the marriage Sonny celebrated
based
ALTERNATIVE
(v) upon
If in Cebu
sexually-transmissible
ANSWERS:
the not husband City according
beats upthe disease
hiscapacity to
wife every the
on
disqualified
Since
obtained Bert had to inherit
been
abroad a drug
by addict herfromfrom the
former the time innocentof the
Filipino divorce
friends. does give Virgilio to
a) Yes, heVirgilio
and Auring formalities can
of Philippine validly law, remarry.
she married Art. 26her of
4)
spouse
celebration
husband If
bywould ofis the
both
testate void.spouses
and (Art.
marriage,
capacitate
35,
intestateofherFamily
the the
succession;
action
to
Code)
subsequent
remarry.
Any
for legal To
SUGGESTED
the
time
remarrypart of ANSWER:
either
comes
under party.
home
Philippine drunk. Law.5%
marriage
marriage subsequently
acted in bad contracted
faith allnot during
donations the
by B.
the
formerYes,
FC, the
merely
classmate marriage
States the
Vincent can alienstill
likewise be
spouse aannulled
without
Filipino
separation
contract amust have
subsequent beenmarriage,
brought alllater than
sheEffect needs 23
Marriage;
lifetime
reason Donations
of of the marriage
first by spouse
Reason of Marriage;
shall
and be illegal
testamentary and of because
taking
citizen. b)the
into fact thethat
consideration
Was both
his
marriage or herof
of Maris them
nationality are
and
December
to dosubject 1993.
is ofpresent Hence, Baby
tothethe cannot, now,
civil registrar bring the
the at
Declaration
void,
dispositions Nullity
only
made (1996)
to
bywhen exception
one inshe favor in the
of the for cases afflicted
Pedrothe
othera Alternative Answer: time
valid with of
when sexually-transmissible
the marriage.
celebrated? While
Is their his diseases
case
marriage is
action
decree for oflegaldivorceseparation. applies
v. Bayadog,
Marriage;
1)
of On
absence
5) revoked the
The by G.R.
Annulment;
occasion
or No.
where
judgment 133778,
Proper
of
the March
Party
Digna's
prior
ofof annulment 14,
marriage
marriage 2000)was to does
not
still not
covered
valid efface by
existing or
the nullity
letter
now? the
of ground.
Article
Reasons. 26
c) FC,
Was it is,
the
are operation law.13 of the of the
B. No, the marriage
marriage
The
(1990)
D and
George,
dissolved
marriage,marriage
G,her license
age
or
the 20
father
annulled. under
of and Sonny
partition gave19, Article
andadistribution
Auring
respectively,
her
(Ninal
and donation does
and Family
not
ofboth
propter the however,
marriage covered
of Marts by and the can spirit
Vincent noof said longer
valid Article,
when be
Code.
fall within
single, eloped the exception.
andspouses,got married to annulled,
the injustice to
celebrated? because
Is the their the
Filipino fact that
spouse sought
marriage both
still validly were
to be
nuptias
properties of of a car.the Subsequently, and the theeach marriage
delivery other of
c) afflicted and Reasons. that both knew in of in their
the Explain
without
was children'sparental
annulled the statusofin
consent
because
presumptive of the
the the
legitimes case marriage
psychological of G, be
shall a cured
existing
SUGGESTED bynow? said
ANSWER: Article isd)present
At this point this case.
time,
between Lulu respective infirmities constitutes a 134 waiver of
teenaged
immaturity
recorded theand
student
in of ofTirso.
George.
appropriate (2%)
an exclusive
May civilDigna's college
registry fatherfor
and (b)
whoThe
(Department
Marriage;
is themarriage
lawful
Annulment;
of Maris
of Justice
husband
Judicial the
and
Opinion
of Pedro
Marts? No.
Declaration
wasSeries
Reasons. valid
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
girls.44.Three Family yearsCode). later,and her parents wanted to that
b)
when ground.
Although
of 1993). celebrated the marriage
because originally
divorce involved
validly
revoke
registers
The marriagethe donation
of property, of Lulu(Articles and get 53.
Tirso back 52,
is also the void.
43. car? (1993)
Maria andcitizens,
SUGGESTED
seek
Explain. judicial ANSWER: annulment on that ground. You Filipino
obtained byLuis, Johnson both it Filipinos,
in Manilawere
eventually became married
capacitated a
Mere
No, absence
Digna's of
fatherthe spouse
may does
not not
revoke give rise
the by
Maris to marry Pedro. The marriage ofQuezon
a
marriage Catholic between priest anin Lourdes
alien and Church,
a Filipino after
Maris
were
SUGGESTED consulted ANSWER: and asked to prepare the
to aThe
donation
(b)
SUGGESTED right childrenof theborn
because
ANSWER: present
Digna from was spouse
thenot union intobad ofremarry.
Hfaith,
and City
Flor
and Pedroin 1976,
became Luis
a Canadian
is still was drunk
validly on the
citizen.
existing, day ofthe
Thus,
because his
the
proper complaint. What advice would you give
Article
G himself
applying
W would 41 Art. of the
should
86(3)
be legitimate Family
file
of the theCode
Family
children provides
complaint
Code.
if conceived or for
under a wedding.
divorce In
decree fact, was he slumped
one
marriage has not been validly dissolved by the obtained at the by altar
an soon
alien
G's parents? Explain your answer.
valid
Articlebigamous
ALTERNATIVE
born 45 of
before ANSWER:the
the marriage
Family of
decree only
Code, where
and no
annulment a spouse
longer
of the after
spouse
Maryland the ceremony.
married
divorce a After
to[Art. 26,marriage,
Filipino. FamilyAlthough Code).Luis never
nothing
a)
theYes,
has been
parents
marriage the (underdonation
absent
because forG45
Art. is isrevocable.
four consecutive
already
of the Family 22Since yearsCode)the
years of hadThe
(c)
is a steady
said marriage
about job because
of Marisheand
whether wasVincent
such drunk
divorce most
is voiddid of
ground
before
age. become
has for second
the thefinal annulmentmarriage
and executory of andthe marriage
the (Art.present 54, is the time. Finally,
ab initio
capacitate Flor toheitremarry,
because could
is a not bigamous
thatget factemployed
marriage
may as at
G.R.
the
spouse No. had 94053,
psychological
Marriage; Annulment; a March immaturity
Proper
well-founded 17, 1993) of George,
Partybelief that the the all because
contracted byofMaris drunkenness.
during theHence,
subsistence it that
was of
Family Code}. well be assumed since the problem states
judgment
(1995)
Yvette was
absent
SUGGESTED was
spouse found
ANSWER: inisthe to nature
be positive
already of a declaration
dead. for HIV virus,
(Republic ofv. Maria
her married
she who
marriage had to
with Pedro
a Canadian earn a
shortly living
(Artafter to
25 obtaining support
and 41,
d)
(c) TheExplain
nullity
considered
Nolasco, under
children Art.the
sexually of36the respective
of the
firstFC
transmissible, marriage
and, filiation
therefore,
serious shalland of
be herself
Family
the and
Code).
divorce. her
Hence,ThechildVirgillo
begotten
marriage canofwith Maris
marry Luis. and
again In
James,
considered
the donation
incurable. John Her and
legitimate
may Verna.
be
boyfriend revoked (2%)
children
Joseph underif was
conceived
Art.aware 86( 1) or
of 1986, Maria
VincentPhilippine
under does not law,filed a
validly petition
exist because
pursuant in the
to Art. 26. church
Article FC
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
born
of
herthe before
FC forthe
condition the
and Judgment
reason
yet married thatof theannulment
marriage
her. After the Marriage;
of has
two matrimonial
26
which does Divorce
not
applies court
apply. Decrees;
because in Quezon
Pedro Filipino
was
Flor
Spouses
City
not
was a to becoming
annul
foreigner
already herat
an
James,
ALTERNATIVE John ANSWER: and Verna are illegitimate
marriage
been
(2) years judicially of
of Hdeclared
and W with
cohabiting void
has ab becomeinitio.and
Yvette, finalin and his Alien
marriage
the (1999) ofwith
alientime at the time ofLuis
his marriage onwith
the divorce. themarts ground and the of
children
b) No, the since donation their cannot parents be arerevoked.
not validly The
executory.
belief that she Children would conceivedprobably never or born be able of the to Ben andabroad
psychological
divorce Eva were both
incapacity
(in Maryland) Filipino
to citizens
comply
was initiated with at the his
and
married.
law provides Under thatArticle a donation 165 ofbythe reason Family of
subsequent
bear him a healthy marriage child, Josephshall now likewise wants be to time
marital
obtained of obligation.
their
not by marriage
the Her in spouse,
petition
alien 1967, wasWhen granted
but bytheirtheby
Code, children
marriage may conceivedbe revoked andbyborn the outside donor a if
legitimate
have his marriage even if the withmarriageYvette annulled. of H andYvette S be marriage
the
Filipinochurch turned
spouse. matrimonial sour,
Hence, Bencourt.
the went
Maryland1) toCan a small
Maria
divorce
valid marriage
among other cases,are illegitimate,
the marriage unless
is judicially
null
opposes and the void suit for failure
contending to comply that Joseph with the is country
nownot
did in Europe,
getcapacitate
married legally
Marts gottohimself
another
marry naturalized
man under
Vincent.
otherwisevoid
declared provided ab initio in this [par. Code.
(1) Art. 86. Family there,
(d) At and
this then
point divorced
in time, Eva
Pedro in accordance
is still
requisites
estopped
e)
Code],Who are
of Article
from the seeking
heirs
52 of
of
the Family
annulment
Sonny? of Code
Explain.their Philippine laws after her marriage to Luis the was
a) or 53,
(Article
marriage
when
To
since bear thethe
Familyhe
marriage
knewsurnames
Code). even
is annulled
As of
beforethe
legitimate
and
father
their
SUGGESTED
lawful
with the
ANSWER:
husband law of Maris
that because
country, their
Later, valid he
(2%)
the and Suggested
donee acted answer:
in bad faith [par. with (3), Id.]. annulled
1) No, by
Maria the church
cannot matrimonial
validly contract court? a
children,
marriage the
they
that mother
have
she the
was inafflicted
conformity
following rights;
with HIV the
virus. returned
marriage to
has the not Philippines
been with
dissolved his
by new
any wife.
valid
Sonny's
Since heirs
the ANSWER:problem include James,
states John,
thatonthe and
marriage Lulu. Explain.
subsequent 2) What
marriage must Maria
without do to enable
a court her
provisions
SUGGESTED ofof the Civil Code Surnames; cause
Eva now (Art.wants 26. Family
to know
Can
Article
No,
was b)
the887
Joseph
annulled
action
To of and
knew the Joseph
Civil
that
receivethere Code
Yvette for was
issupport
annulment
no provides HIV
intimation from that of the
positive
oftheir
bad
his to get
declaration
Marriage;
married
Divorce
lawfully
of nullity
Decrees; ofCode)
what
to another
the first
Filiation
action
marriage.
of
or actions
man
Children
under
The
marriage
compulsory
ALTERNATIVE with heirs
ANSWER: Yvette of prosper?
the deceased Discuss are fully.
among she
law can
Philippine
does file
laws?
not against
recognize Ben.the She
church also wants
declaration to
at
faiththe
parents,time
on the of
theirthe
part marriage.
of the
ascendants, He
donee andis, therefore,
Digna,
in proper the SUGGESTED
(2005)
In 1985, ANSWER:
Sonny and Lulu, both Filipino
c) Yes, the donation can be revoked. The ground used in dissolving
others, his widow and hisimmaturity
illegitimate children. know
of if
nullity were she can
of a marriage. likewise marry again. What
not an injured
conclusion
cases,
the marriage was istheir
the party.
that the The
brothers
psychological donor FC gives
cannot the
andof George, revokeright
sisters, which to
the in
is Considering
citizens, that
married Art.
in the 26(2nd
Philippines. par.) In
The widow referred to in Article 887 isCodethe advice
2) can youMaria
To enable give her?
to get {5%) married lawfully to
annul
donation.
not ground theformarriage
aconformity with ofthe
annulment only to Ifan
provisions
marriage. injured
this term ofis this party.
equated with contemplates
1987, they a divorce
separated, between
and Sonny a foreigner
went to
legal
ALTERNATIVE
psychological
[Art. c) wife of
ANSWER:
incapacity the as deceased.
used in Art. to 36 Lulu
of the is still
Family Code, a another
and man. shewho
a Filipino, must hadobtain such arespective
judicial
on47 (5),
Support; To FC] be and entitled the legitime and Canada, where he obtained a divorce in the
Theother
then actionsuccessional
it
compulsory is a for
groundheir annulment
for declaration
of Sonny rightscan
of prosper
nullity
because granted of the because
the marriage.
divorce
to them declaration of
nationalities nullity
at then
the time ofofthe their prior
marriage, marriage the
Consequently,
the by prescriptive par. (1) of Art. 86, of
period FC,five
is the(5)applicable
years law.
has Since
not same
SUGGESTED
under year.
Article He
ANSWER: 36 Family married
Code. another Filipina,
obtained by
theFC Civil Sonny Code in Canada
(Article cannot
174, Family be divorce in Europe will not capacitate the
Art. 86 of the
yet lapsed.
makes no
[Art. 45
qualification
(6), FC].
as to who furnished the Auring,
(a) H, orin
Marriage; Canada
either
Annulment; spouseon Separation;
Legal January
for that1,1988. matter,They
Prescription can of
recognized
groundCode).
or who was in inthe
bad Philippines.
faith in connection The
with the legitime
nullification of
of Filipino wife to remarry. The advice we can
had
marry
Actions two sons, James
again
(1996) after and John. In 1990,
complying with after
the
each
Marriage; illegitimateAnnulment; child Groundsshall consist of one-half give her hear is either to file aLulu petition for Tirso, legal
Marriage; Divorce
Divorceforof Decrees;
Decree; Filipino
Void Spouses
Marriages becoming failing
2) Berttoand
provisions ofBaby from
Article Sonny,
were of the married
52married Family
to each Code,
other
of
Onethe
(1991)of thelegitime
grounds a legitimate
annulment of marriage child.
is that(Art.either 176,
party, separation, on the ground of sexual infidelity
Alien
(1992) (1996) by
on whom
namely,
December she had
there 23,must a daughter,
1988. be monthsa Verna.
partition In 1991, and
Family
at the time Code)
of their marriage was afflicted with a and
Sonny of visited
contracting the a Six bigamous where
Philippines
later,
marriage she
he
distribution,
discovered thatof the
he properties
was a of the spouses,
abroad,
succumbed or to to heart
file aattack.. petition to dissolve the
and the delivery of 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)
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 husband’s behavior constitute
psychological incapacity existing at the time of
the celebration of marriage.
Marriage; Grounds; 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 SUGGESTED ANSWER:
married before August 3, 1998, it must be (i) Since AIDS is a serious and incurable
filed before August 1, 1998. sexually-transmissible disease, the wife may
(b) Annulment of the Marriage Contract: 1) file an action for annulment of the marriage on this
The drug addiction must be concealed; 2) It ground whether such fact was concealed or
must exist at the time of marriage; 3) There not from the wife, provided that the disease
should be no cohabitation with full was present at the time of the marriage. The
knowledge of the drug addiction; 4) The marriage is voidable even though the husband
case is filed within five (5) years from was not aware that he had the disease at the
discovery. (ii)
timeIfof
the wife refuses to come home for three
marriage.
(3) months from the expiration of her contract,
(c) Legal Separation; 1) There should be no she is presumed to have abandoned the
condonation or consent to the drug addiction; husband and he may file an action for judicial
2) The action must be filed within five (5) separation of property . If the refusal continues for
years from the occurrence of the cause. more than one year from the expiration of her
contract, the husband may file the action for legal
separation under Art. 55 (10) of the Family Code
on the ground of abandonment of petitioner by
respondent without justifiable cause for more
than one year. The wife is deemed to have
abandoned the husband when she leaves the
conjugal dwelling without any intention of
returning (Article 101, FC). The intention not
(iii) If thecannot
to return husband discovers during
be presumed after the
the
marriage that his wife was
30year period of her contract. a prostitute before
they got married, he has no remedy. No
misrepresentation or deceit as to character,
health, rank, fortune or chastity shall
constitute fraud as legal ground for an action
for the annulment of marriage (Article 46 FC).

(iv) The wife may file an action for legal separation .

The husband’s sexual infidelity is a ground for
legal separation 9Article 55, FC). She may also
file an action for judicial separation of property for
failure of her husband to comply with his
martial duty of fidelity (Article 135 (4), 101,
(v) The wife may file an action for legal separation
FC).
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)
Marriage;
court Psychological
the Failure
(d) shall
of theuphold Incapacity
solemnizing
the validity
officer to
and
file sanctity
the the
of preceding
Saudi Article,
Arabia toANSWER:
ALTERNATIVE work. onlybeing
There, after the properties
converted into acquired
Islam, by
(2006)
Gemma
marriage
affidavit
(Brown v.filed a petition
ofYambao,
marriage for
didNo.
G.R. the declaration
notL-10699,
affect theOctober of18, None
validity of
both of them
Arielthemarried
parties throughare
Mystica, their necessarily
Rosa actual joint
learned of the psychologically
contribution
second of money,
marriage of
property, or
incapacitated. industry shall
Being be
a owned
nagger, by them
etc. in
are common in
at best
nullity
1957).
of of her marriage
the marriage. with an
It is merely Arnell on the Ariel on January 1, 1992 when Ariel returned to the Philippines
irregularity proportion to their respective contributions. In theindicative
absence, of proof
Marriage; Non-Bigamous Marriages only physical
withtheMystica. manifestations of
groundmay
which of psychological
subject the incapacity.solemnizing She alleged
officer to to contrary, Rosa filed
their contributionsan action for legal separation
and corresponding shares are on
(2006)
Marvin,
ALTERNATIVE a Filipino,
ANSWER: and
that after 2 months of their marriage, Arnell
sanctions. Shelley, an American, psychological
February 5,to 1994,
presumed be equal.incapacity.
1) Does
The sameRosaruleMore
have than
andlegal just showing
grounds shall
presumption to ask for
apply
Considering
both
showed residents
signs that ofofthe solemnizing
California,
disinterest officer
in decided
her, has
to get
neglected no the to manifestations
jointseparation?
legal deposits of2) money
Has the ofaction
and incapacity,
evidences the petitioner
of credit.
prescribed?
authority
married
her and inwent totheirperform the
local parish.
abroad. Hemarriage Two years
returned because the must show that the respondent is incapacitated
to after
under Art.
their marriage,
Philippines 7 the
afterShelley law
3 yearsobtained authorizes
but did not only
a divorce
even get thein to comply ANSWER:
SUGGESTED with the essential marital obligations
airplane
California. chief, While the marriage is void, hence, a, 1)
of a) Yes,
marriage the
andabandonment
that it is alsoofessential Rosa bythat Ariel he
in touch with her. inWorse, Boracay, they Marvinmet several met
c, and d
Manel,ina socialare immaterial.
Filipina, who was for
must more
(Republic
SUGGESTED be than
shown v.
ANSWER: toone be (1)
incapable
Quintero-Hamano, year is
of a
doing ground
so
G.R. due for
No.to
times functions butvacationing
he snubbed there.
her.
Marriage;
Marvinshe fell Requisites C.
some
legal
149498, It should
psychological,
separation
May 20, be not
unless
2004). distinguished
physical
upon illness
returning when to the
the
When gotinsick, lovehewith did not her.visit After
her aeven brief if
(1999)
What
courtship is the status of the following marriages and ALTERNATIVE
property
Philippines, was ANSWER:
acquired.
Rosa agrees to cohabit with Ariel
he knew of and complying
her confinement with
in all the
the hospital. A congenital sexual pervert may be
(a)
why?
requirements,A marriage they between
got married two in 19-year
Hongkong olds to which• is allowed If it was under acquired
the Muslim beforeCode. Mary's In
Meanwhile, Arnell met an accident which psychologically incapacitated if his perversion
without
SUGGESTED
avoid parental
ANSWER:consent,
publicity, it being (2%) Marvin's second this case,death,there the estate of Mary isb)entitled
is condonation. Yes. The to
disabled
Yes.
(b)
No, The
Gemma's himsuit
A marriage
marriage from will reporting
between
will notnotprosper.
falltwo for
under Evenwork
Art.
21-year and incapacitates him from discharging his marital
if 35(4)
olds
taken
marriage. Isliving
his marriage to himself.
Manel valid? 1/2 of theofshare
contracting a ofsubsequent
James. bigamous
earning
of
as the Family
true,
without the a Code
grounds,
parental to
singly
advice. support
on (2%)bigamous
or collectively, marriages, Will
do not obligations. For instance, if his perversion is
Explain. (5%) marriage • If
whether it was
in the acquired
Philippines after Mary's
or abroad
Gemma's
provided
(c)
constitute suit
thatprosper?
A marriage Shelley
"psychological Explain.
between obtained two(5%)
incapacity." anIn absolute
FilipinoSantos first v. of such a nature as to preclude any normal
death, for
is a ground there legal willseparation
be no share under at Article
all for
divorce,
cousins
CA, G.R.in capacitating
Spain
No. where
112019, hersuch to remarry
January marriage 4, under
1995 , her
is valid.the sexual
Marriage; activity with his spouse.
Psychological Incapacity
55(7) the
of estate
the Family of Mary.
Code. Whether the second
(d)
Supreme
national
(2%) A marriage
law.Court between
clearly
Consequently, two theFilipinos
explained marriage thatin Marriage;
SUGGESTED
(1996)
On
marriage April
Requisites
ANSWER:
15,
is 1983,
valid Jose,not,
or an engineer,
Ariel havingand
"psychological incapacity must be (2%)characterized (1995)
Isidro and
2) No. Under Article Irma, Filipinos, 57 ofboth 18 years
the Family Code, of
HongkongMarvin
between before a notary
and Manel public.
may be valid as Marina,
converted a nurse,
into Islam,were ismarried
immaterial. to each other in
(e) (a) as
by A v.marriage
gravity, solemnized
(b) juridical antecedence, by validaJulytown
and (c) age,
the were
aggrieved passengersspouse ofmust Flight file No.
the 317
action of
long
(Ferraris it Ferraris,
was solemnized
G.R. No. and
162368, in
17, a civil ceremony in Boac. Marinduque. Six
mayorChoa
incurability"threev.with towns away from his jurisdiction, Oriental
within five Airlines.
(5) years The from plane thethey boardedofwas
occurrence the
accordance
2006; Choa, the G.R.laws No. of143376,
Hongkong November [Art. months after their marriage, Jose was
Marriage;
(2%)paragraphs Property
2002). The1 and Relations;
illness Void
must Code].Marriages
be shown as of
cause.Philippine
The registry.
subsequent While
marriage en of route
Ariel from
could
26,
26, 2, Family employed inGreece
an oil refinery in Saudi Arabia for
(1991)
In June incapacity
downright 1985, James or inabilitymarried to performMary.one's In Manila
not havetooccurred some passengers
earlier than 1990, the hijackedtime
a
the period
plane, of three
held the years. When
chiefHence, he
pilot hostage returned atuntil
theto
September
marital 1988, not
obligations, he a alsomere married
refusal, Ophelianeglect, he went to Saudi Arabia. Rosa has
the
cockpitPhilippines,
and ordered Marina him wasto noinstead
fly longer to living
Libya. in
with whom
difficulty he begot
or much less,two (2) children,
ill will. Moreover,Aas and B.
ruled 1995 to bring the action under the Family
their
Marriage;
During house, but
Legalhijacking in Zamboanga
Separation; Mutual City,
guilt working in
In Republic
in July 1989, Mary died.
v. Molina, GR No.In108763, July 1990, February he Code. the Isidro suffered a heart
a hospital.
(2006)
Saul,
attack a
and He
married
was asked
on man,
the her to come
had
verge an
of home,Since
adulterous
death. but
married
13, 1997, Shirley it is essentialand abandoned that the husband Ophelia,is
(Antonio v. meeting
Reyes, G.R. she
relation
Irma refused
was with to
already do
Tessie.eightso, unless
In one he agreed
of the trysts,
months pregnant not
Saul's to
by
During of
capable their union. his No. James
marital155800, and March Ophelia
responsibilities 10, 2006;
v. Quintero-Hamano,
Ophelia
Republic sues Jamesand G.R.
for No.
bigamy 149498,
andillness May that
prays 20, work
Isidro, overseas
wife, Cecile, she pleaded anymore
caught them because
to theinhijackers she
flagrante.toArmed cannot
allow
acquired
due a residential
to psychological lot
not worth
physicalP300,000.00.
2004) . Furthermore,
his marriage with Shirley the condition
be declared complained
null and stand
the a living
withassistant gun, Cecile alone.
pilot shot Hesolemnize
to couldinnot
Saul a fit
heragree
ofmarriage as in
extreme
of did James,
void. not exist onatthe theothertime of hand, claims that fact,
the celebration jealousy,
with he nearly
Isidro. had Soon signed
killing
after him. another Fourthree
the marriage, (4) Isidroyear
years
of marriage.
since his marriage to Ophelia was contracted contract.
after the incident,
expired. When
As the plane he returned
Saul filed landed in 1989,
an action
in Libya he could
for legal
Irma
Marriage;
during thePsychological existence of Incapacity
his marriage with (1) not locate
separation
gave youMarina
If birth. were
against
However, anymore.
Saul's
Cecile onIn
thecounsel,baby 1992,
the Josea filed
how
ground
died will
that
few
(2006)
Article 36 of the Family Code provides that a marriage
Mary, the former is not binding upon him, the minutes after complete delivery. Back in the an
you
she action
argue
attempted served
his case?
to by
kill publication
(2.5%)
him. in a newspaper
contracted
same being by void
any partyab initio who, he at thefurthertime claims
of the of generalANSWER:
SUGGESTED
Philippines circulation.
Irma immediately Marina filed did not a claim file any for
As the counsel of Saul, I will argue that the an
that his marriage to Shirley is valid and answer,
celebration, was psychologically incapacitated to
inheritance. a possible
The parents collusion
of Isidro between
opposed her
attemptwas
parties by ruledthe wife by against the Prosecutor.
life of the
comply with the essential marital obligations of
binding
3) asDrug he was already arises
addiction legally duringcapacitated the claim contending
SUGGESTED ANSWER: out that the the marriage
Public between
marriage, shall be void. Choose the spouse listed below husband
Trial
As judge, was is one of
conducted
I will not the grounds
grant and the enumerated
Marina
annulment. neither by
The
at the time heand
marriage married
not ather. the a) time Is the contention
of marriage. her and Isidro was void ab initio on the
and
who isOphelia?
psychologically c) Is the estate
incapacitated. of Mary
Explain. entitled
(2.5%) a) the Family
appeared
facts do grounds: Code
nor for
presented
not show(a)any legal separation
evidence in and
her there
favor.
of James correct? b) What property Relations following theytaint had not of personality
given their
Nagger
to a share
Marriage; b) Legal
Gayin orthe Lesbian c) Declaration
Separation; Congenital sexual of Nullity pervert is
If no need
you
disorder were
onthe thefor
thepart criminal
judge,
of the conviction
will
wife you
Marina grantfor
sothere
asthe
theto
governed the union of James consent
1. Resolve to each marriage
of the (Art. of their
contentions son;([a] (b) to [d])
d)
(2002)
If residential
Gambler
drug e) lot
Alcoholic
addiction, acquired
SUGGESTED
habitual by James
ANSWER: The and
alcoholism, wasbest ground
annulment.
lend to
substance be invoked
Explain. to her husband's 55, par. 9,
averment Family of
raised
(2) no
If you marriage
by the wereparents license;
the of (c)
Isidro.of
lawyer the
Discusssolemnizing
Cecile, fully.
what
Ophelia?
answers
SUGGESTED areANSWER:
B and C. To be sure, the existence and
lesbianism or homosexuality should occur only SUGGESTED Code).
psychological incapacity within the meaning of
A. Yes. His marriage
concealment to Ophelia
of these conditions atisthevoid ab initio
inception of
officer
will be your hadANSWER: no authority
defense? (2.5%)In to perform the
during the marriage, would this constitute Art 1.
marriage;
SUGGESTED36
(a) The of the Family
fact(d)
and,
ANSWER: that the Code.
thesolemnizing Santos
parents of Isidro vs.
officerand CA
did
because renders
marriage of his the subsisting
marriage contract prior marriagevoidable (Art. to
grounds for a declaration of nullity or for legal (240 As
of
not the
Irma
file SCRA
ancounsel
did 20)
not
affidavit , ofthisCecile,
give
of particular
their
marriage I will
consent
with ground
invoke
the to for
the
proper
Mary.
46, FamilyHis Code).
marriage Theytomay Shirley,serve after Mary's
as indicia of
separation,
ALTERNATIVE or
ANSWER:would they render the marriage nullity
adultery
marriage
civil of marriage
of
registrar. did Saul.not Mutual was
make the held
guilt to be limited
is a ground
marriage only
void for ab
death,
psychological
SUGGESTED is valid and binding.
incapacity,
ANSWER: depending on the degree and
voidable?
A. No. of The (1%).
contention of James is not correct. to
the the
initio. dismissal
The most ofserious
marriage an action cases
is merely for legal of personality
voidable separation
under
severity the disorder
In accordance with law, if drug addiction, disorders (clearly demonstrative of utter
(Santos v. CA, G.R. No. 112019,
Art.4, 40,
Jan. 1995).FamilyHence, ifCode,
the condition provides that the Art
of homosexuality, (Art.4556, of thepar.FC. 4, Family Code). The rule is
habitual alcoholism, lesbianism or (b)
sensitivity
Absence orof inability
marriage tolicensegive principle
meaning
did not make and
"absolute
lesbianism nullity
or sexual of a previous marriage may be anchored on a well-established that
homosexuality shouldperversion,
occur only existing
during at thethe
significance
the marriage to thevoid marriage.
ab Marina's
initio. Since refusal
the
invoked
inception for
of they: purposes
the marriage, of
is of remarriage
such a degree on the
as to one must come to court with clean hands.
marriage, a) Will not constitute as ground to come
marriage
(3) If you home
was wereto her
solemnized the husband unless
in articulo
judge, how he agreed
mortis,
will you it
basis
prevent
(Art. 36,solely
any
Family of Code);
form aoffinal
sexualb)judgment
intimacy,
Will declaring
constituteany of
as them such
grounds may
for declaration of nullity not
was
decide to work
exempt
the overseas,
case?from (5%) thefar from
license being indicative
requirement
previous
qualify
for legal marriage
as separation
a ground for (Art.void."
psychological
56, FC) andIt can be
incapacity.
c) will not said,
The
SUGGESTED
under Art.ANSWER:
of an insensitivity 31 of the toFC.the meaning of marriage,
therefore,
law provides
constitute as thatthatthethe
grounds husband marriage
to render and
the wife ofareJames
marriage obliged
voidable to
to If
(c)
or I of
were
On a theassumption
the
personalityjudge, Idisorder, willthatdismiss the the action
assistant
actually shows on
pilot a
Shirley
live together,
(Art.45and is void
46, observe
FC) since his
mutual previous
love, respect marriage
and fidelityto
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: the
was ground
sensitive acting of
for
awareness mutual
and in
on guilt
behalf
her of
part the
ofof parties.
the
the airplaneThe
marital
Ophelia,
(Art. although
68, Family Code).itselfThevoid, mandate had is notactually
yet been the
A. No. The contention of James is not correct. Philippine Constitution protects marriage as an
judicially declared
spontaneous, void, between the spouses. In chief
mutual affection duty who to live wastogether
under disability, as husband and and by reason wife.
He cannot set up as a defense his own criminal inviolable
of
Mere therefusal social
extraordinaryinstitution
totorejoin her does (Art.
and
husband XV, Sec.
exceptional
when 2,
he
Marriage;
the natural Legal
act or wrongdoing-
order Separation;
it is sexual Grounds;
intimacy Prescriptive
which brings Periodthe Mere
1987 intention
Constitution). live apartAn action notfor fall under
legal
spouses circumstances
did not accept of condition
the the caseimposed [ie. hostage by thather
(1994) wholeness and oneness (Chi Ming Tsoi Art. 36, FC.
separation Furthermore,
involves public there
interest is noand proof
noby such
situation),
does not the
furnish marriage
any basis was for solemnized
concluding an
that
Rosa and ArielANSWER:
SUGGESTED were married in the Catholic Church of Tarlac, the
decree alleged should psychological
be underissued Art. ifincapacity
any legal existed at
B. The provisions of Art 148 of the Family Code, shall govern: Art. authorized
she was officer
suffering from 7 (3) andobstacle
Art. 31.
psychological
Tarlac on January 5. 1988. In 1990, Ariel went to the
theretotimeappears
of the marriage. on record.
148. CA,
v. In casesG.R. of cohabitation not falling under
No. 119190, January of the FC.
incapacity to discharge theThis is in line
essential with
marital
16,1997). the policy
obligations. that in case of doubt,Page 30 of 119
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
[Art. college,
under
from 35(1),
Article Family
A35and (2),Code].
B FC.
decided In
Thethat to
fact break
case,
thattheirthe
Ric party
was
relation
Under
This
Philippine
not
in is Article
ALTERNATIVE different
Law,
ANSWER:213 hisfrom
ofmarriage
the the Family
case to Anne
Code,
of Nināl isnovoid child because
V. Bayadog, under
is
parted
of
good
and acting
herfaith
aware realways.
under
age isaBoth immaterial.
mistake went of fact,
homenottoa mistake their If the
years
prior
7
of
(328
SCRA two
of
a existing Filipinos
age
122marriage[2000]shall
which).believed
be In separated
was the
not in said
goodbyfrom
dissolved faith
case, that
the
the divorce the
decreed
the in Oslo.Public
Notary Divorce obtained
is court
authorizedabroad by to a Filipino
solemnize is not
of law,
respective towns to live and work. 1) Was the situation
mother unless
occurred theduring the findsRelationscompelling of the
recognized.
2) Would
marriage
(3) Suppose your
of A and answer
Ric be the same
B solemnized
himself on if
procured it should
August 30,
the (1) marriage,
new
reasons Civil then
toCode
Explain the
orderwhere marriage
otherwise.
the Article 76
rationale is valid.
of thereof clearly
this provision.
turn
1988 by
falsified outthe birththattown the mayor
certificate marriage inlicense
oftoXpersuade his office was
Juliet a SUGGESTEDthat
provides
(2.5%) ANSWER: during the five-year cohabitation,
spurious?
SUGGESTED
valid
to marrymarriage? Explain.
ANSWER:
him Explain despiteyour heranswer. minority 2) Can and the The rationale
SUGGESTED
If partiesANSWER:
Boni was of the
no
must be2nd
longer paragraph
a FilipinoThis
unmarried. ofcitizen,
Article
is notthe 213 so
No, the answer would not be the same. with The (e)
of the Under
divorce Family
is valid. the
Code Local
Hence, is to hisGovernment
avoidmarriagetheChange Code,
tragedy
to Anne ofthe aa
is
either or both of them contract marriage
assured her that everything is in order. He town mayor may validly solemnize a marriage anymore in the Family Code. The in
marriage
another would be void because bigamy? of the mother
valid if who seesisher
celebrated inbabyaccordancetorn away If with from the her. law It
did not persondivulgewithout to her committing his prior marriage Family
but said
Code
law is silent
significant.
as to the territorial
the second
limits
absence
Explain of
yourWhat a formal
answer. requisite. In such a case, is said
of the placethat the maternal
where it affection
was celebrated. and care
Since during
of the
with Gigi. action, if any, can Juliet marriage for
occurred
the exercise
before
by child a town
the effectivity
mayor ofneeded
such
the
there
SUGGESTED was ANSWER:
actually
ANSWER: no Juliet valid can marriage
file an license.for
action the early
marriage years
was of the
celebrated are
aboard generally a vessel of
take against him? Explain. (2.5%) Family Code, the answer would that be that the
Marriage;
1)
theThe Requisites;
marriage of A Marriage
and Bof isLicense
voidmarriage
because the authority.
by the child However, by analogy, with the
is more
declaration of nullity the on B. Does
(Hontiveros
Norwegian Sotero v. IAC,
registry, than
have G.R. paternal
the
Norwegian care
No.personality
64982, lawOctober to seek
applies. 23, If
marriage void.
(2002)
On
the May
solemnizing
ground 1, 1978officer
that he Facundo
had no married
willfully legal caused Petra,
authority loss or by
to authority
1984;
the
the Ship declaration of members
Tolentino,
Captain ofhas nullity of of thethe
Commentaries
authority Judiciary
to marriage,
solemnize andto
whom
solemnize
injury to he her had
thein amarriage.
son
a mannerSotero. But Petra
that is died
if either contrary onboth
or July
to solemnize
Jurisprudence
especially
the marriage a now
marriage,
on the
aboard thathis itFacundo
Civil would
ship,Code, theseemVolume
is that
already
marriage the
One, is
1, 1996,
parties while
believed Facundo
in
morals, good customs and public policy [Art. good died on
faith January
that the1, mayor
pp. did
718-719).
SUGGESTED
deceased?
valid not
ANSWER:
andExplain. have
The general
shall the
(3%) requisite
be recognized rule is that inauthority a child to
the
2002.
solemnizing
21, New Before his Code].
officer
Civil demise,had the Facundo
She mayhad
legal authority
also married,
bring to B.
As
belowAtovoid
solemnize the
7 marriage
asecond
years marriage
old shall may
question, be be
outside
not questioned
ifofseparated
Boni byfrom
his territorial
is still any a
Philippines.
on
do July
so, 1,
the 2002,
marriage Quercia.
criminal actions for seduction, falsification, is Having
voidable lived
because together the interested
jurisdiction.
Filipino,
his mother party
Anne
due Hence,
to incan
his any the
basic proceeding
file marriage
needan for where
action
heris void, the
for
loving
as
illegalhusband
marriage marriagebetween and andthe wife
bigamy since
parties, against July Ric.
both 1, 1990,
below 21 resolution
unless
declaration
care it was
(Espiritu of the
contracted
of nullity
v. C.A., issue
ofG.R. her iswith material.
marriage
No. either
115640, toBeing
orhim.botha
March
thea (2) Givebelieving
atANSWER:
leastSoterro 3 good
examples of "compelling
ALTERNATIVE
Facundo
years
(4) If you of age, and
werewas Quercia
the solemnized
counsel did for notwithout secure
Gigi, what compulsory
parties
15,1995). heir, in has
faith the thatpersonality
the mayor to
The marriage
reasons" which is justify
valid. the Under taking the Local away
marriageofwill
consent
action/s license
the parents.
you buttake executed
(Art.to35,enforce thepar.requisite
(2) andand question
Marriage;
had the the
Void
legal validity
Marriages
authority of tothesolemnize marriage this of
Government Code, the custody authority of of aher mayor to
2) Either
affidavit
Art.
protect 45 par. or (1),
for
her both
theFamily
interests?of the Code)
purpose. parties cannot
To ensure
Explain. (2.5%) that his from
contract (2006)
Facundo
Gigi and
particular
solemnize
the
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Ric, mother's
and Catholics,
marriage
marriages
Quercia.
is(Art got
not 35, Otherwise,
married
restrictedpar when
2 child
Family
within
theyhis
his
marriage inrights the are IPhilippines
would file with an action another to under
participation
were 7 years in of theage. estate (2.5%)on Facundo wouldwas be
inheritance
SUGGESTED ANSWER: not adversely affected Code). a. 18 The
municipality
years mother
implying
old.
thatisTheir
insane marriage
he has (Sempio-Diy,
the authority
person
declare without
the marriage committing between
by his father second marriage, Sotero now evenHandbook bigamy,
Juliet andunlessRic affected.
solemnized on
(NinãlAugust V.
onterritory
the 2, 1989
Bayadog,
Family by Ric's
328
Code SCRA uncle,
of the 122 a
SUGGESTED
there is ANSWER:
compliance with the requirements of Marriage; outside the
Requisites; Solemnizing thereof. Officers Hence, the
null
brings and void
a marriage
suit to seek ab initio and
avoidable.
declaration for Ric's
ofconsentshare
the nullity in Baptist
[2000] •1 ). Minister,
The in Calamba, Laguna. He
(a) The
Article 52 Family Code, isof namely: Thethere must of (1994)
1} Philippines,
marriage
The complete he mother
pp.solemnized
296-297) is sick
publication ; with ofoutsidea disease
the Family his
the the
of co-ownership
marriage of that
Facundo marriageand to be
Quercia, overlooked
that is the fact
communicable that
and his
might license
endanger to
the
a parties
judgment ofto the
annulment marriage was
orofabsolute defective.
nullity of municipality
Code was is
made valid. on And August even assuming
4, 1987. that
On
forfeited
grounded inon favor
the and considered
absence a valid part of the
marriage solemnize
the health marriage expired the month before
Being
the below
marriage,
absolute community21 yearsinold,
partition the the
and consent
distribution
marriage of
of the
between the his
September
and •2
authority
that the 4, and 1987, islifeJunior
parties
of
do
the Cruz
restricted
not
child;and
belong
within Gemma
to his
his
license.
parties is not Quercia contends
full without that
the there
consent was
of their no municipality, The mother
such marriage has been maltreating
will nevertheless,
properties
Gigi and of the spouses and the delivery of Reyes were married before a municipal mayor.
need for Ric [Arts. 148license
a marriage & 147,in Familyview Code]. for herI congregation.
the After 5 years of married life and
parents.
their
wouldchildren's
also The file consent
anpresumptive
action of for thedamagesparents
legitimes, of the
which
against
be
Was
blessed thechild;
valid
with
becausevalid?
marriage 2 children,
solemnizing2)
theSuppose
spouses
thethemarriage
couple
developed
having
parties
A. Is lived
theto the continuously
marriage
marriage of is with Facundo
indispensable
Facundo and for
for
Quercia five
its outside•3 said The mother
municipality is is
a mere engagedirregularity in
shall
Ric be
on before recorded
theANSWER:grounds in
that the appropriate
his actsand constitute Civil
an got married
irreconcilable on September
differences, so they parted ways. 1, 1994 at the
years
SUGGESTED their marriage that has prostitution;
applyingHotel by analogy the
validity.
valid,
Registry
(b)
abuse Between despite
of and
right 21-year the they
Registry
and absence
olds,of the Property,
are of a otherwise
marriage
contrary marriage
is lawa Manila
tovalid While before theincase Philippine of Navarro Consulav
Sotero
ALTERNATIVE
license?
SUGGESTED has no
ANSWER:
Explain.
ANSWER: legal
(2%) personality to seek •4 separated,
Domagtoy,
General to The
259
Hongkong,
Ric fell
mother
Scra 129
who .
loveengaged
isIn with Juliet,
this case, in
the
the
despite
and same
morals,
declaration
2) The
A. Yes, shall
the
they
marriage not
absence
causing
ofcan. nullity affect
damages
The
with third
ofQuercia
subsequent persons
oftheparental
to Gigi
marriage
is void. (Seeand
advice,
marriage the
Arts
since
The 16 year-old
adulterous sophomore
relationship; in a local college andina
was on vacation
subsequent marriage shall be is null and Supreme
Manila. Court
The held
couple that the
executed celebration
an affidavitby a
because
19, 20, 21,
Facundo
contracted
exemption
Marriage; is such
Void
New
now
by
from Civil
deceased.
onethe
Marriages; of absence
Code).
the
requirement parties
Psychological
merely
ofwill not void.
aIncapacity
marriage givean Seventh-Day
•5 of aANSWER:
SUGGESTED
judge
consenting The Adventist.
marriage
to mother
the is a
outside
celebration
Theydrug theof
decided
addict;
jurisdiction
the
to get
marriage of
(Arts. to52
irregularity andaffecting
53. Family inathe Code)
formal requisite i.e., married
1) •6 a) Yes, with Thethe the consent
marriage
mother is ais of Juliet's
valid.
habitual The parents.
Family
drunk
rise
license
(2002)
A. Give bigamy
under
a brieflicense even
Art,
definition34, Family absence
ordoes Code,
explanation ofrequires
aofcourt
the his
at thecourt
Manila is aHotel.
mere irregularity
Ishim the marriage thatvalid? did or not
the marriage
declaration
that the man of nullity
and ofand
woman the first
must not
marriage. affect
have the
The
lived She
Code an presented
took
alcoholic;effect to
on August a birth
3, 1988. certificate
At the
term “psychological incapacity” as a ground affect the validity of the marriage
validity ofasthe of marriage itself. This is without showing
time•7of the she is 18
marriage years onold. Ric never doubted
subsistence
together
for the declaration husband a prior ofand valid
wife for
nullity marriage
aatmarriage.
ofcriminal, least isfivean (1) notwithstanding
What
Marriage;
The
is less
Requisites;
mother
the Articlestatus
Marriage 7September
is in
of
of jail
thetheFamily
License
4,serving
ormarriage 1987,
Code
prejudice
indispensable
years and to element
without the any of civil,
the
legal crime
impediment of bigamy. or
to her age
municipal
sentence.much mayors the authenticity
were empowered of her birth toof
B.
(2%) If existing at the inception of marriage, which
between
(1996) provides
Gigi that
and an
Ric incumbent
— valid, member
voidable or
administrative
The prior
marry each court liability
otherof declaration
during of the party
offive responsible
nullity of Thethe On Valentine's
certificate.
solemnize They
marriage Day got 1996,
under marriedEllas
the and
in
Civil aFely, both
Catholic
Code of
would
SUGGESTED the ANSWER:
state being those of unsound years.mind or the
void?
SUGGESTED judiciary
Explain.
ANSWER:(2.5%) Even
is if the Minister's
authorized to license
solemnize
therefor. single
2)
church a) TheandManila.25 years
marriage isof notage, valid.went togave
Consuls the birth
city
and
firstBy
the marriage
cohabitation
(c) reasonofis
concealment required
ofFacundo
public
of drugpolicy, by
and the
Quercia
addiction, theFamily forCode
marriage
habitual six expired,inthe
1950.
marriages onlymarriage
within
A year after,
is valid
the court’s
Juliet
if either
jurisdiction.or both
only for
years
between from the 1990
Filipino purpose to July
first of 1,
cousins the 1996isvalidity
void when of
[Art. the
Petra
38, hall where
vice-consuls
to twins, Aissathey are sought
and empowered
Aretha. out a fixer toto help
solemnizethem
alcoholism, homosexuality or lesbianism be Gigi and Ric believed in good faith that he had
subsequent
died
par. was Family
(1), one marriage,
with Code], not
a legal and as an element
impediment
the fact that ofitthe
hence, is obtain
marriages a quickie
the legal authority between marriage.
toPhilippine
For marriage.
solemnize citizens
a fee, the fixer
abroad
While
considered
Marriage; Void indicia
Marriages of psychological
crime
not in of
considered
SUGGESTED bigamy.
compliance a valid
ANSWER: with the requirement
marriage in a foreign of law. produced
the authority of the solemnizing officer isfor
in the consular an ante-dated
office of marriage
the foreign license
country to a
incapacity?
(2004) Explain. (2%).
A.
A.”
On
country BONI
PSYCHOLOGICAL
other in this and
hand, case, ANNE
theSpain— met
INCAPACITY”
cohabitation while
does not working
thereafter
validate them,
which Issued
they wereby the Civil
assigned
is a formal requisite of marriage, and at least one of Registrar
and have ofno a small
power
overseas.
ALTERNATIVE
mental
until
it, being thedisorder They
ANSWER:
marriage
an exceptionbecame
ofonthe July sweethearts
toand most
1,Quercia
the 2000, serious
general and
although
rule got
typein remote
to
thesolemnize municipality.
parties marriage
must He
belong onthen to brought
Philippine soil.
the solemnizing them to
The
engaged
showing marriage theto beof Facundo
married
incapability on
of one New ornot Year’s
both is VALID.
Eve
spouses b)
a A Philippine
licensed minister consul in a is authorized
restaurant by
behind lawthe to
free from
Art. second
96 of legal
said impediment,
Code which did
accords meet
validity theto officer's church, the law provides that the good
The
aboard
to a marriage
cruise ship was
in thesolemnized
Caribbean. on July
They 1, solemnize
city hall, marriages
and the abroad
latter between
solemnized Filipino
their
all comply
ALTERNATIVE
5-year
2000,marriage the
ANSWER
cohabitation
when
essential
solemnized
the
marital the
requirement.
Family outside
code
obligations
was Philippine
already
of (Art.
faith
SUGGESTEDof
35the par. parties
2, Family
ANSWER: cures Code;the defectSempio-Diy, in the lack p. 34; of
The marriage
took
love, the proper
respect, itcohabitation,
void.
license Under
to marry Article
mutual in 96
Newhelp ofYork
and citizens.
the Rabuya,
marriage
authority He
of right
The thehas no on
there
solemnizing
Law authority
and then.to1)and
officer
Persons solemnize theira
IsFamily
x x x and
affective. valid
The there
family as
code such. took consulate.
effect The marriage is valid. The irregularity in the
Family
City,
support, where Code,
trust there and ais a marriage
Filipino
commitment. It on
valid mustAugust
where
But marriage valid,
be Relations,
issuance
in
of p.athe
208). Philippines.
void
valid license
or voidable?
does
Consequently,
Explain. the
not adversely
3, 1988.
celebrated
as Under
plannedis by
characterized valid
the the Family Code,
in theantecedence,
wedding
Juridical Philippines no
ceremonygravity marriage
except
was marriage in question
The absence of parental consent despite is void, unless either their or
license is required if the parties have been affect
both of the the validity
contracting of the parties marriage.believed The in
those
officiated
and marriages
incurability by theand enumerated
captainits root of the in
causes said
Norwegian- Article
must be having married at the age of 18 is deemed
Back
cohabitingin Manila,for the Anne period discovered
of five that
years Boni
and had
there marriage
good faith license that is valid
the because
consul it was in fact
general had
which marriages
registeredidentified
clinically vessel in will remain void
a private (Santos
or examined. even
suite among though
v. CA, cured
ALTERNATIVE by their continued cohabitation beyond
been
is no married
legal in Santos
impediment. Bacolod City
There 5of years
must no earlier
legal issued
authority by aANSWER:
Civil Registrar (Arts. 3 and in 4. which
FC).
B. In
valid
selected
240 the
where
SCRA case
friends. of
20solemnized.
[1995]) . v. The Court marriage Appeals,between 240 the It age ofto21.
depends. solemnize
If At this
both or their
point,
one ofmarriage
theirparties
the marriage was is a
but
first divorced
impediment in is
ONLY ,Oslo AT only oflast
THE year.
TIME His
OF firstTHE Marriage;
case the Requisites; Void Marriage
SCRA 20 (1995)
cousins the one Supreme thoseCourtmarriages held that valid
member (Seemarriage
Art.
of 45,
the is valid.
Family religious Code). sect of the
wife was also a mind,
Filipina but (1993)
A and B, both 18
theyears old, of were sweethearts
SOLEMNIZATION
being
enumerated of unsound therein, OF THE drug
hence, MARRIAGEit now
addiction,
is void based
, habitual
and even in (2)
not What
solemnizing isofficer, status
theAugust marriage the ismarriage
valid. If
By
the reason
Sweden.
though whole
alcoholism, valid of
Boni
five Art.
in years 15
himself in
Spain period.
lesbianism relation
is a resident
itThis
or homosexuality
where to Article
of
wasiscelebrated. 38
Norway
clearly maythe of studying
be between in
Ric Manila.
and On
Juliet — valid, 3, 1988,
voidable while or
none of
in first(2.5%) the
year parties
college, is a member of the sect and
the Civil
where
intent
indicia he
ofoftheandCode, Annewhich
code
psychological plan to
framers applies
live
(seepermanently.
incapacity, to depending
Minutes Filipinos
of the void? SUGGESTED
both ofhouse ANSWER:
them were Thethey aware
eloped.between
marriage of the
They stayed
fact, Juliet
the
Anne
wherever
150th retains
joint they your
are,
Civil services
the
Code marriageof to the advise
is void.
Family her
on the degree of severity of the disorder. marriage is void. They cannot claim good faith on
Law in
and the
Ric is void. of a
First mutualof all, friend
the in
marriage town isX,a
whether her
SUGGESTED
Committees
However, ANSWER:
theheldmarriage on August
concealment to Boni of is
9, drug
1986 valid underin bigamous
).addiction,
Also, where they were able
marriage to obtain
notsolemnizing
falling under a marriage
Articlewas 41
(d)
PhilippineIt depends. If the marriage before the in believing that the theirofficer
Manzano
habitual V.law? Sanchez,
alcoholism, Is there AM anything
NO.
lesbianismMT else she
–00-129, license.
or [Art. On August
35(4)Family Code],30, 1988, A subsisting marriage
marriage
notary public authorized because thetown scope of the ofauthority
SUGGESTED
should 8,
March
homosexuality do ANSWER:
under
2001 ,is isthe
the valid
aSupreme
underCourt
circumstances?
ground
Hongkong (5%)
said
of annulment that,Law,
of was
as solemnized
constitutes a legal by the impediment mayor X in his
to remarriage.
If
theBoni
Parental
is still
marriage a
Authority;
Filipino is citizen,
Child valid his
under
legal
in7
capacity
the
years
is governed
Philippines.
of age
by of the
office. solemnizing
Thereafter, officer
they is
returned a matter
to of law.
Manila and If,
one of the
marriage.
Philippine Law (Art.requisites
15 Civil Code). for Under
the exception to apply, Secondly, Julietofisthe below eighteen yearsinofgood age.
Otherwise,
(2006) thenomarriage that is at invalid in however,
continued one
to live parties believed
there must be legal impediment the time The
faith marriage
that the is separately
other void was even in
a member
their respective
if consented of thetheirtosect, by
Hongkong will be invalid
of the marriage. The Supreme Court did not say her in the Philippines. boarding
parents houses, concealing from
then the marriage is valid
that the legal impediment must exist all parents, who were living in the province what
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)
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 pregnant and 9 months
authority. ANSWER:
SUGGESTED later, gave birth to a baby boy, named Alvin.
In substitute parental authority, the parents (1) Who is the 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
in their custody or supervision. authorized or ratified the insemination in a
Substitute parental authority displaces written instrument executed and signed by
parental authority while special parental both of them before the birth of the child (Art.
authority concurs with parental authority. (2)
164,WhatFamilyare Code).the requirements, if any, in
order for Ed to establish his paternity over
Paternity & Filiation SUGGESTED
Alvin. (2.5%)ANSWER:
(1999)
(a) Two (2) 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 •1 The artificial insemination has been
married her childhood boyfriend, and seven authorized or ratified by the spouses in a
(7) months after said marriage, she delivered written instrument executed and signed by
a baby. In the absence of any evidence from them before the birth of the child; and
Rose as to who is her child's father, what •2 The written instrument is recorded in
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
status does the law give to said child? Explain. the civil registry together with the birth
(a) The child is legitimate of the second certificate of the child (Art. 164, 2nd
(2%)
marriage under Article 168(2) of the Family paragraph, Family Code).
Code which provides that a "child born after Paternity & Filiation; Common-Law Union
one hundred eighty days following the (2004)
A. RN and 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
Parental Authority; Special Parental Authority; Liability of
three hundred days after the termination of ZMN. Two years later, they got married in a
Paternity & Filiation; Proofs Teachers (2003)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:Could ZMN be legitimated?
the former marriage." civil ceremony.
(1999)
(b) Nestor is the illegitimate son of Dr. Perez. If during
ZMN was class hours, while
legitimated by the teacher
subsequent was
Reason. (5%)
When Dr. Perez died, Nestor intervened in the chatting with
marriage of RNother and DM teachers
because in atthetheschool
time
settlement of his father's estate, claiming that corridor,
he a 7 year oldRN
was conceived, male and pupil
DMstabscould thehaveeye
he is the illegitimate son of said deceased, but of another
validly boy with
married each aother.
ball penUnderduringthe aFamily
fight,
the legitimate family of Dr. Perez is denying causing
Code children permanent conceivedblindness
and bornto the victim,
outside of
Nestor's claim. What evidence or evidences who
wedlock of parents who, at the time ofboy’s
could be liable for damages for the 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
the school,
guilty boy’s itsparents?
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
Filiation; parental authority and
legitimated by theProofs;
subsequentLimitations; AdoptedofChild
marriage the
filiation of Nestor must have been admitted by responsibility over the minor child while under
(1995)
parents.
his father in any of the following: their supervision,
Abraham died intestate instruction
on 7 Januaryor custody 1994
(1) the record of birth appearing in the (Article 218,
survived by his FC).
son They
Braulio. are Abraham's
principallyolder and
(2) a
civil register, final solidarily
son Carlosliable
diedfor on the
14 damages
February caused by the
1990. Danilo
(3) a public document signed by the
judgment, acts or omissions
who claims to be an of adulterous
the unemancipated minor
child of Carlos
(4) a private
father, or handwritten document signed unless they exercised
intervenes in the proceedings for the the proper diligence
by the lather (Article 17S in relation to required
settlement under of the the circumstances
estate of Abraham (Article 219, in
Article 172 of the Family Code). FC).
representation of Carlos. Danilo was and
In the problem, the TEACHER the
legally
SCHOOL
adopted onAUTHORITIES
17 March 1970are liable with
by Carlos for thethe
Paternity & Filiation; Artificial Insemination; 1. Under
blindness ofthe the Family
victim, Code,
because how the may
studentan
consent of the " latter's wife.
Formalities(2006) illegitimate
who cause it filiation
was under be proved? Explain.parental
their special
Ed and Beth have been married for 20 years without children. 2. As lawyer
authority andfor theyDanilo,
were do you haveThey
negligent. to prove
were
Desirous to have a baby, they consulted Dr. Jun Canlas, a , Danilo's illegitimate filiation?
negligent because they were chatting in the Explain.
prominent medical specialist on human fertility. He advised Beth 3. Can Danilo
corridor during the inherit classfromperiodAbraham
when the in
to undergo artificial insemination. It was found that Ed’s sperm representation of his father Carlos?
stabbing incident occurred. The incident could Explain.
count was inadequate to induce pregnancy Hence, the couple have
looked for a willing donor. Andy the brother of Ed, readily Parentalbeen prevented
Authority; Substitute hadvs.the teacher been
Special
inside
(2004) the classroom at that time. The guilty
consented to donate his boy’s PARENTS are subsidiarily liable under
Article 219 of the Family Code.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
c) No.
in
beforethe Rafael
the
same deathiswayanofinnocent
andC. Bringing
by purchaser
the his same family
inevidence
good later
faith
1.
recognition
Paulita
to
asSince leftBobofand the
an Sofia
illegitimate
conjugalgot marriedhome
child can Inbecause
1970,
be broughtthen
of the
the
at
children.
finally
upon
legitimate
Manila,
who, married
relying
B Art. 172 G.
on provides
Recently.
the correctness
that
G died.the filiation
Whatof are theof drinking
time
anyduring the
law
excessive oflifetime
her of husband, Alberto.
the child. However, if thePaulita,
action is basedout
on "open and continuous possession of the status of an illegitimate
legitimate
the
certificate
rights children
of title,
B's four acquires
is established
children: rights X bywhich
and anyY areof the
his
to of her own endeavor, was able to buy a parcel
child, the same can be filed during the lifetime of the putative
following:
first
be protected
marriage; (1)by theand
the record
E
courts.
andofF,birth his children
appearing with in of land which she was able to register under
father."
Under
G? civil the
theExplain register
yourestablished
or a final principles
answer. Judgment; or of (2) landan her name with the addendum "widow." She
registration
SUGGESTED
admission ANSWER: oflaw, the presumption
legitimate filiation in is athat publicthe also acquired stocks in a listed corporation
Under
transferee
document the or facts stated,handwritten
of aregistered
private X land
and Y is are legitimate
notinstrument
aware of In the present
registered in her case,name. the Paulita
action soldfor compulsory
the parcel
children
any defect
and signed of in B the
by and parent C. Eof concerned.
title isthe theproperty
legitimate
In the he recognition
of land to was filed by
Rafael, who Joey's
firstmother,
examined Dina,the on
children
absence ofofB
purchased. (Seeand G.foregoing
theTojonera E is the legitimated
v. Court of Appeals,
evidence, child
the May
original 16,1994,
of the after transfer the certificate
death of of Steve,
title. the1)
C.
of AsSCRA
B&G. legitimate
F is children ofthe
the illegitimate B and
child ofC, Xdealing
B and and Y putative father.
103
legitimate 467).
filiation Moreover,
shall be proved person by: (1) the Has Alberto the Therightactionto share willinprosper
the shares if Joeyof
have registered
the following land rights: 1) Torely bear the can present his birth certificate
with
open and continuous may safely
possession of theon the
status stock acquired by Paulita? 2) thatCanbears Alberto the
surnames
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
correctness of of theits father and theof
certificate mother,
title in the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
signature oflandhis from
putative father. However, the
of a legitimate child; or (2) any otherand means recover the Rafael?
2. conformity
No. Since Danilo with the has provisions
already been of adopted
the Civil Code 1. a) clearly
facts Yes. The Family
state that Codethe birth provides that all
certificate of
law
allowedwill in by nothe wayRules obligeofhim Courtto goand behind specialthe
Surnames;
by Carlos, 2)
on he To receive
ceased to support from their
be an illegitimate property
Joey did not acquired
indicate during
the father's the name. marriage,
A birth
certificate
laws. to determine the condition of the
parents,
child. Antheir adopted ascendants,
child acquires all the rights whether thenot
certificate acquisition
signed by appears to havefather
the alleged been
property. [Director of Lands v. Abache, et al. 73
of aand in proper
legitimate child cases,
undertheir Art, 189 brothersof theand FC.sisters, made, contracted or registered
cannot be taken as a record of birth to prove in the name of
Phil. 606).ANSWER:
conformity No with strong theconsiderations
provisions of the of public
Family Code
in
SUGGESTED one or both spouses, is presumed to be
policy recognition of the child, nor can said birth
3. No,on have
Support; he been and presented
cannot. Danilo which cannotwould represent lead
absolute be community property unless the
the
Carlos
3) Court asbe
To to thereverselatter's
entitled the established
to theadopted
legitime childand
andin sound
otherthe certificate
b) Yes. is
contrary The taken
proved.shares as aare recognition
presumed in ato publicbe
doctrine
inheritance
successional that the
ofrights
Abraham buyer
granted in good
because to them faith
adoption by ofthe did a instrument.
absolute (Reyes v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
community property having been
registered b) Are the defenses 19, 1985)set up by Tintin
Consequently, the
not Code.parcel
Civil make Danilo
(Article ofa174,
land does not
legitimate
Family have to look
grandchild
Code). 39537,
acquiredMarch
of tenable? during
Explain. the(2%) marriage despite the fact
beyond
Abraham.
d) The parcel the Torrens
Adoption of land Title
is personal and
is absolute search
between for
community Carlosany action filed
that thoseANSWER:
SUGGESTED
by Joey's mother
shares were registered only in her has already
hidden
and
E
propertythedefect
is Danilo. legitimated
having or been
He cannot inchoatealso
child of
acquiredright
B andwhich
represent Carlos
G.
during may
Under theas Yes,prescribed.
name.the defenses
Alberto's right of to Tintin
claimare his tenable.
share will In
later
the
Art. invalidate
latter's
177 of or
illegitimate
the
marriage and through Paulita's industrydiminish
Family child
Code, his right
because
only to
children
in what
such Tayag v. Court of Appeals
only arise, however, at dissolution. (G.R. No. 95229, June
he
case purchased.
despite and(Lopez
he isregistration
conceived barred by Art.
born v. Court
992inofof
outside
only of Appeals.
the
the NCC
namefrom
wedlock 189 of c) The ,presumption
9,1992) a complaint is to still
compel that recognition
the shares of of
ALTERNATIVE
SCRA 271) ANSWER: stock are owned in common. Hence, they will
inheriting
parents
Paulita. who, from
The child's at the
his
land being time
illegitimate
of the
community conception
grandfather
property, of an illegitimate child was brought before
An adopted successional rights do not form part of the absolute community or the
Abraham.
the sale
its former, to were not
Rafael without disqualified
the consent by any of effectivity of the Family Code by the mother of
include
Property the
Relations; right to represent
Ante Nuptial his deceased
impediment
Alberto is void. to marry each Agreement
other may be conjugal
a minor child partnership
based on depending
"open and oncontinuous
what the
adopter
(1995)
Suppose in the
Tirso inheritance ofmarried
the latter's
legitimated. E andwill Tessie
have the were same rights on as X 2 property Relations
possession of the is.status of an illegitimate
legitimate
F is the parent, in view ofand Art.G.973 which
August
and Y. illegitimate
1988 without child of B
executing F has
any the
ante d) Since
child." The Paulita
Supreme acquiredCourtthe held shares
that the of stock
right
provides
right to use
nuptial that in order
the surnameOne
agreement. that representation
of G,year her mother,
after their may by onerous title during the marriage, these are
and of action of the minor child has been vested by
take place,Tirso
is entitled
marriage, tothesupport
representative as well as
while supervising must the
the himself
legitime
clearing be part of the conjugal or absolute community
the filing of the complaint in court under the
capable
consisting of succeeding
Tessie'sofinherited 1/2 of thatland the decedent.
of each of the Adoption
X, Y latter's
and E. property,of asthe theCivilcaseCode maybe
of upon regime and(depending
prior to the on
by itself176,
(Article did Family
not render Code) Danilo an heir not of the whether the
request, accidentally found the treasure in effectivity of marriage
the Family wasCode.celebratedThe ruling prior to. in
adopter's
Presumptive legitimateLegitime parent. on Neither does his or after, the effectivity
the new river bed but the property of Tayag v. Court of Appealsoffinds the no Family Code).
application
being
Tessie.ado
(1999)
What
SUGGESTED grandchild
To you
ANSWER:
whom of Abraham
understand
shall by render
the treasure "presumptive him an Her physical separation from her husband did
belong? in the instant case. Although the child was
Since
heir of
legitime", Tirso
the in and
latter
what Tessie
because
case were
or as married
an
cases before
illegitimate
must the not dissolve
Explain. born before the the community
effectivity of oftheproperty.
FamilyHence, Code,
the
child effectivity
parent ofdeliver
Carlos,such of the
who was Family
legitime a legitimate
to the Code, child
children,their of c) the Supposing
husband that
haswas a right Joeytoafterdiedits
share induring
the sharesthe
Paternity & Filiation; Recognition of illegitimate Child the complaint filed effectivity.
property
Abraham,
and what are relation
Danilo the legalisis incapable
governed
effects inofby each conjugal
succeeding
case if SUGGESTED ANSWER:
pendency
of stock. of the action, should the action
(2005)
Steve wasANSWER: married to Linda, with Hence, Article 175 of the of Family Codewhether should
partnership
Abrahamparentunder
SUGGESTED
the of gains.
fails Art.
to do992 Under
so? of Art.Code.
the
(5%) 54 ofwhom the Civil he 2) a)
be Under
dismissed? a community
Explain. (2%) property,
had a
PRESUMPTIVEdaughter, Tintin. Steve fathered a son apply and not Article 285 of the Civil Code.
Code, the shareLEGITIME of the hidden is not defined which
treasure in the SUGGESTED
absolute orANSWER: relative, the disposition of property
withlaw
law.
the Dina,
Its his secretary
definition
awards to must
the finder haveof or 20
been years,
the taken whom
proprietor from If Joey diedtoduring
belonging the pendency
such community is voidof the action,
if done by
Dina
Act named
2710, the Joey,
Old born
Divorce
belongs to the conjugal partnership of gains. on
Law, September
which required 20, the action should still
just one spouse without the consent of the be dismissed because
1981.
the
The Joey's to
delivery
one-half birththe certificate
share legitimate
pertaining did tonotTessie
children indicate
of "the as the right
other or of authority
Joey or hisofheirs theto proper
file the action court.
the father's
equivalent of name.
what Steve
owner of the land, and the one-half share would died
have on August
been due 13, to has
However, already the prescribed.
land was (Art.
registered 175,
in the Family
name
1993,
them while
as their Linda
legal diedportion
pertaining to Tirso as finder of the treasure, on December
if said 3,
spouse 1993,had Code)
of Paulita as "widow". Hence, the buyer has
Property
leaving
died Relations;
their
intestate Conjugal
legitimate
immediately Partnership
daughter,
after the of Gains
Tintin,
dissolution as Paternity
the right & toFiliation;
rely Rights
upon of
whatLegitimate
appears Children
in the
belong to the conjugal partnership of gains.
(1998)
sole
In
of heir.
1970,
the On
BobMay
community andof 16, Issa 1994,got Dina
property." As filed
married aincase
usedwithout the (1990)
B and Gof(college
record the Registerstudents, of both
Deeds single
and and should,not
executing
on behalfCode,
Family aofmarriage
Joey, presumptive
praying
settlement.that the In 1975,
latterBob
legitime beis disqualified
consequently,tobemarry protected. each Alberto
other) had cannot a
declared
inherited an
from acknowledged
his father a illegitimate
residential lot sonupon
understood as the equivalent of the legitimate recover the land from Rafael but would haveof romantic affair, G was seven months in the
which,
Steve and
children's in legitimes
1981,
that Joey heassuming
constructed
be given thathis a
thetwo-room
share
spouses in b)
theThe
familyright parcel
way as of
of recourseof land is absolute
theagainst
graduation his wife community
of B. Right
Steve's
bungalow estate,with which
savings
had died immediately after the dissolution ofis now
from being
his own solely
earnings. held property
after having
graduation B been
went acquired
home to during
Cebu the
City.
Presumptive
At
by that
Tintin. time, Tintin
the community of property. legitime
the put
lot up
was is
the required
worth defense P800.000.00to
that be
an marriage
Unknown toand G, B through
had a Paulita's
commitment industry
to C (his
delivered
action for
while the to house,
the common
recognition shall
when only children
be filed of
finished during the
cost despite
childhood the sweetheart)
registration being to marryonly inher the nameafter
spouses
P600,000.00. when
the lifetime ofInthe the
1989 marriage
presumed Bob died, is
parents annulled
survived and that or of Paulita. The land
only getting his college degree. Two weeks being community property,
after B
declared
the exceptions
by his wife, void ab initio
under
Issa andhis
Article
and possibly,
285 of when
mother, the Sofia. the
Civil its sale to
marriage in CebuRafael City, without
G gave the birthconsent
to a son of E
a)
1. Doeswhether
State
conjugal Joey Sofia
partnership have or can a rightfully
causecommunity
absolute ofclaim actionthat is Alberto is void. However, since the land is
Assuming
Code do notthat apply theto him relativesincevaluesthe saidofarticle both in Metro Manila. After ten years of married
against
the house Tintin
and for recognition and
dissolved
has been
assets
SUGGESTED
as
repealed
remainedANSWER:
in the atlotbycase
the are
the
same of not
Familylegal conjugal
separation.
Code.
proportion: In anybut registered
life in Cebu, in the name ofa Paulita
B became widower as by widow, the
partition?
exclusive
Failure of Explain.
property the of (2%)
her
parents deceasedto son.
deliver [3%] the there
sudden is nothing
death of in
C the
in a title
plane which
crash. would
Out ofraise
the
case,
No, Joey according
does not have atocause Tintin,
of action Joey's
against Tintin birth for SUGGESTED ANSWER:
2. Will
presumptive andyour answer
legitime be the will same
of themake if Bob died
their a
recognition
certificate
Property
partition.
does
Relations;
Under show
not
Absolute
Article 175that Family
Steve Code,
is as a
his 1. suspicion
union Underof B Art.
and for C, Rafael
172 two to
inchildren, makeXto
relation inquiry.
and Y were
Art. He,
173
before
subsequent
father. August
general rule, an action 3,for1988?
marriage compulsory null Community
[2%] and void under therefore,
born. Unknown is an innocent
to C while
andArt. 175 of the FC, the filiation of purchaser
on weekend for value
trips to
(1994)
Article 53 of the Family Code. from whom the land may no longer be
Manila during the
illegitimate children may be establishedlast 5 years of their
recovered.
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)
This is
Thereafter,
who
(b)
legitimate according
Whata caserelatives
Gabby
would of
to acquired
ineffective
law
of
your C may(i.e.
answer
athecontract
mansion
disinheritance
children
be (to in
marriage
of
Baguio
the
Dbecause
asabove
C's
City,
may
a)
Bar
together,
How
1028 Who Candidates
will
forwill you
Rico
being
berule entitled
was Patricio
inonconsideration
aJorge's
to
salaried
the
Mahigugmaon
opposition
house employeeof
and herto
lot?
andthe
and
adulterous
(3%) Rowena
probate
Mabel
5-hectare
into
Luis
legitimate
a
andman
also
question)
marrying marriage
and
aenterthathadRizza
the
nephews
agricultural
father
settlements
been did inheriting
living not
land
but approve
together
they
as
in collateral
shall
of
Oriental
allis thenot
be that
decided
house
Maria's
with
Amor
kept the
relation
of
SUGGESTED governs
for to
will.
testator. Rico
marry
ANSWER: is Ifthe
She and
is, you
each
New did
therefore, were
other
Civil
full-timeCode
the
before
disqualified household
to(Persons),
the last
receive the
Mindoro,
valid
time,
relatives)
a ground only
ie., sincewhich
can
if
forthe disinheriting
inherit
twenty
person
he registered
years
inwho intestacy.
D.
ago,
may Therefore,
exclusively
under
give(Arts. consent
a valid
992,
thein Tony
in
day
chores
Judge? ofand
legacy. Ernie
which
SUGGESTED thefor Susan
will
1991 receiveare
case,
him.
ANSWER: BarDuring
the entitled
the legacy
Examinations.
property in histo
their favorthe
cohabitation,
relations
Theyhouse
because it isand
agreed not
that a
inofficious.
As Judge, The institution
I shall of Baldo,
rule which
as applies
follows: only to the free
Jorge's
his the
to
marriage?
1001,
institution
name. 1OO5marriage
In
ofand the
D-l975, and
year
areCivil D-2
made
2000, Code)
shall Mila's
parties
be annulled
business
to the lot
should as
to execute
parcel coowners in equal shares. Under Article
willof
be becoconut
applied
a Marriage land
assum, regards
was
theSettlement.
acquired
the property by
Rowena Rico of
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
portion, respected. In estate of Lamberto shall be
a) Art. 147
ALTERNATIVE
venture
agreement.
insofar as of
ANSWER:
failed,
it (Karlathe
prejudices
and Family
washerstill theCode
creditors
alegitime
minorprovides
suedatofthe intime
her
D, part
and
for opposition
147
the
herself
from of
distributedhis the
spouses
prepared
as should
savings. Family
follows: is the be
thesustained
Code, documentwhen ain
system man
in
of part
her and
relativeand
own a
The
that action
when
P10,000,000.00.
the institution
marriage of of
a A
man will
settlement
After
D-l and andnot a prosper.
obtaining
D-2 was woman
shall Being
executed
a only who
favorableapply an
are
in denied
woman
After
community in
living
handwriting.orThey who part. are
together Jorge's
conjugalcapacitated
for omission
one
agreedpartnership (1) to as
year,
on the following: marryspouse
Rico
of gains each
andof
(1)
illegitimate,
capacitated
judgment,
September
on the free the heto
1988 is barred
creditors
portionmarrysought
because by
in the Article
each thelaw, 992 of
other,
to amount
execute
R.A. 6809, the
live
on
of Maria
other
Mabel
(Article
a conjugal is
lived not
separated.
119, preterition
exclusively
partnership Rico then
Civil of
Code).ofa met
with compulsory
each
gains; Byandother (2)married
conjugal heir
each as
Civil
exclusivelyCodethe
the spouses'
reducing
P500,000.00. from
with
house
age inheriting
each
Therefore,
of and other
majority D, ab
lot and
D-l
toasintestato
18husband
condominium
and yearsD-2from and Heir
took
will in theLegitime
husband
Letty,
partnership
donates adirecttoand
single ofline.
the wife,
Legacy
woman
gains, Hence,
other the the
Institution
fifty Art.
twenty-six
husband 854
property
TOTAL
percent of the
(26)
and theCivil
acquired
years
(50%) wife ofof
the
wife
a)
unit,
get legitimate
without
Discuss
effect their on
as legitimes
18 the
the
well relatives
benefit
Decemberstatus of
asof P500.000.00 of
Gabby'sofhis
1989).the father.
marriage first
mansion
The or
divided andunder
marriage thea Code
into
and during
age.
place
his/her does
intheir
During a not
present the
common apply,
cohabitation
marriage
property, fundand the the
areRico
of
(3) institution
presumed
fruits
Rowena and of Letty,
theirof
shall to
Barriermarriage,
void
amended between marriage illegitimate
their wages & legitimate
settlements. andD-2 relativesshall Baldo
salaries
(2%) Miguela
have
Letty 500,000
been
boughtas heir 200.000
obtained
a mangois valid, by 700,000 but
their
orchard Elvira
only
joint out to 250,000
the
efforts,
of her extent
work
own
agricultural
settlement
three equal being
land.
parts void,
and D-l
the and property will
Relationsget a separate
administer
250,000 property
Ernie the conjugal
50,000 and the
50,000 partnership
income
TOTAL 750,000 from
property; their
(1996)
Cristina
be owned
SUGGESTED D the by illegitimate
P166,666.66
ANSWER: them in daughter
equal shares of Jose and andthe of
or the
industry
personal free portion
and may
earnings. shall of
a) one-half.
be Who owned would Jorge
byCode).
own is
them still
the in
governing the
reduced testamentary
marriage is, therefore, disposition absolute of work
and
50,000 (4)or neither
Industry
200,000 1,000,000 (Article bring 142, an Civil
action for the
In
The
Maria,
2. All
property marriage
died
the
D-l acquired settlement
intestate,
properties
P166,666.66 by without
which+
bothbetween of any
P250.000.00
Kevin them Gabby
descendant
and through and
Karla ALTERNATIVE
entitled
equal
riceland, to
shares.
and
ANSWERS:
one-half
This
what is
property oftrue the even estate
Relations though as
governs his
the
community ofeach.
P250,000.00 property, Hence,under the shares Art. 75 willofbe: the this
annulment
a) instance,
As Judge, or the declaration
I shall lot inherited
rule of by
nullity
as follows: Bob of
in 1975
their
Jorge's
Mila
or
owned
their adopting
ascendant.
D-2at or the Her
P166,666.66 thevaluable
time regime
of be estate
+ P250,000.00
marriage of is conjugal
being
became A. As to form, isCivil
the Marriage Settlement
FC. work industry shall governed by the legitime.
efforts
the
is
b)
ownership?
marriage.
his
opposition
Would
(Art.
ofown one
it Both
should
make
1001,
ofExplain.
separatethem
signed
any be theCode)
consisted
b) Who
property,
sustained
difference agreement merely
would
ifin hepart
Tony
own in the
having
in his
the
and
could
partnership
claimed
community
rules of coownership.of
by property gains
Ana, the which still
legitimate subsists.
In the shall absence It
daughter
be of is
divided not
proof of valid?
or her
coconut May
care land, it
and be registered
maintenance
and what in of
property the
the registry
family
Relations andof
acquired
presence
ANOTHER
denied
not marry the
ofpart.
ALTERNATIVE
in two
Susan same (2)
This by
ANSWER:
because witnesses.
is lucrative
a casehe was They
title
of did
(par.not,
ineffective
previously 2,
dissolved
Disinheritance;
Jose,the and
equally
to by
between
contrary, Eduardo,the
Ineffective;
themmere
properties agreement
theatPreterition
legitimate
dissolution.
acquired while ofSince
son theof
they property?
Same
of the
governs answer If
household.
the not, as what
ownership? the steps
first must
Alternative
Explain. be c) takenAnswerWho to
Art.
however, 148,
disinheritance acknowledge
Civil Code). However,
it before thea notary
house
spouses
(2000)
Maria.
In Is
histogether during
last either,
will the
and marriage.
both,
betestament, or neither It is toclear
Lamberto from
ofMillion,
them 1) married
B.
make Are to theunder
to Alice from Art,
stipulations whom 918 he of isthelegally Civil
Kevin
lived
SUGGESTED
owned
ANSWER:
50 shall Million and
presumed Karla. 2
have been public.itbecause
except
would
constructed
Code,
SUGGESTED
separated?
asregisterable?
own distribution.
ANSWER:
(2%)
the
from the mango
his own
omission
Justice
orchard,
ofsavings
the
Jurado and in solved
compulsory what
1981
Article
entitled
disinherits
at the time
obtained 134
to his
by theirof
inherit? the
daughter
of Joint Family
Explain.
the efforts, Wilma
marriage, Code because
worker that in
"she
52 Industry,
Million the is C.
valid?
ANOTHER
SUGGESTED
this If
problem the
ANSWER:
ANSWER: Marriage
differently. Settlement is valid as
Neither Ana nor Eduardo is entitled to in inherit property
during
Yes,
heir
1.
(a) it
Rico theand
would
Jorge
Sofia, Relations
subsistence
beingmakeby
Cora her governs
aMaria
aredeceased ofInhis
difference.
the was
his
the
co-owners
son's
opinion,
marriageownership?
Underintentional.
legal of
the
with
Articleheir
the
absence
disrespectful
constituted
and of
be their
shallintestato an
towards express
ownedcommunity me
by them declaration
and raises
inproperty.
equalBoth her
shares. the
voice
UponA legitime to
Explain.form and
of Family
the heir the above
who when was stipulations
disinherited are is
of ab from Cristina. are Issa
148 is the
of
Consequently,
concurring
riceland. conjugal
Thewith the
Relations property
his Code,
institution and ofofthenot Miguelaexclusive
parties to
as
marriage
talking
the death
party who to did settlement,
me",ofnot 2)participate
Kevin, omits the
the entirely separation
community
in the his spouse
acquisition was of likewise
distributed valid,among does the itsurviving
isnow
other
that follow spouse
co-ownership
compulsory that (Arts.
said
heirs
legitimate relatives of Cristina's illegitimate property
the
heir
985,
(Art. cohabitation
is147,
986 void in
and accordance
only
Family 997, could
insofar
Code, Civil as with
not the marrythe
legitime principle
each other
of Jorge of
property
Elvira,
the 3)
dissolved
by otherbetween
leaves
and party a legacy
half the
of
of the spouses
of P100,000.00
any 52 during
Million
property or
shall to thehis
26be in
SUGGESTED
Marriage
proportion
ANSWER:
Settlement to theiris first Code),
valid paragraph).
and
respective
may rightfully
enforceable?
legitimes,
parents
b)
3. Discuss
Karla and
and therefore
the
Luis effects
are they
the fall
of
Intestate under
the the
said "reverse
because
A.
is
claim Yes,
prejudiced.
that itaccession"
(Optionalof
is
the an
valid Addendum:
Accordingly,
house as provided
impediment,
to
and formHowever,
Jorge
lot for
because
are in
isonly
notafterArt.
entitledit 158,
those
is
Rico's
conjugal in
to
marriage
mistress
Million is to
deemed shall
Rosa
his share
have and not in take
P50,000.00 place
the community.
contributed to except
jointly hisThis driver
in by
26
the while his share in the intestate portion. If any,
prohibition
settlements
heirs of Kevin. prescribed
on the by
properties Art. 992,
acquired NCC by b)
Civil
his
but As
properties
writing. Judge,
Code.
marriage
legitime
belong No, acquired
to I
it
of
the toshallLetty,
cannot
one-half by
hereditary rulethe
both
be ofas
half of follows:
interest
registered
the
estate themestate,
of Bob. Jorge's
of
through
in Rico
the
and
The
judicial
Ernie and
Million
acquisition order.
therefore4)thereof
institutes
is hisifestate. his
the son Baldo as
former's effortshis is distributed among the then other legal
427).
(Manuel
SUGGESTED
4.
the
soleThey
spouses.
SUGGESTED
heir.
v.ANSWER:
are Ferrer,
entitled
ANSWER:
How (2%)
will
242 SCRA
to share
you distribute
477;
the Diaz v.
estate
his
Court
equally
estate of
opposition
their
registry
Miguela
value of inof
actualthe
gets
the should
riceland
property
the
land joint bebecause
other
being sustained.
will
contribution
moreitthan
half. isThis
become not the aheirs
ofisabsolute
apublic
cost case
money, by
of
consisted
The
The
of regime in
disinheritance
Appeals, 182 the
of 1001 care
conjugal
SCRA and
ofof Wilma maintenance
partnership was Therefore. of
of gains of
ineffective the accretion community
preterition
property, under under
orToIndustry Article
property
Article
shall 1018
of 854
be of
RicoownedCivil the
and Letty.) Code,NCC
by them the in
under
P1,000,000.00? Article (5%) the NCC. document.
the improvement make (Art. it registerable,
120, Family it
Code). must be
Collation
family
governs and the of the
propertieshousehold. acquired Thus: 1)
by the in the (b) Rico
proportion
result is
of the the
to exclusive
their
omission respective owner of
intestate the coconut
shares.
because
Karla gets the 13groundMillion relied
and Luis upon getsby the testator
13 Million. common
SUGGESTED
reformed in
ANSWER:
and has to be of
proportion Jorge
notarized.to their as compulsory
respective
(1993)
Joaquin
wages
spouses. and Reyes the bought
Allsalaries of Luis
properties from in Julio
the
acquired Cruz
amount by the a Hei
of land.
In
2. sum
Yes,
SUGGESTED
heir The
the
Legiti
having the answer
ANSWER:the Relations
distribution same would shall isstill
Distribution
right be a be
as
equivalent sole/single
follows:
the parties
same.
to a
does not constitute maltreatment under Article contributions.
rproprietorship me The efforts of one of the
residential
P200,000.00
spouses of lot
after of
shall the300 be square
divided
marriage meters
equally
belong in Quezon
between B.
Since Stipulations
Bob and (1)
(Art.
Issa and 148.
contracted (3) are
Family valid
their Code, because
marriage first
919(6)
Property the New
Relations; Obligations;Civil Code. Benefit Hence,
of thetoFamily the legitimate
the in maintaining child the "in
of the family direct
Legacy and line" is that
household TOTAL total
are
City
Luis
conjugal for
and which
Rizza.
partnership. Joaquin
2) the paid
house
Under Julioand
Article the
lot amount
116valued of theof
at they
paragraph
Since
way
intestacy are
back not
Susan in iscontrary
1970,
will Wilma’s applicable,
did
arise, then to
not
and law.
the and Stipulation
contribute
Jorge property not
will inherit Art. to
relations (4)
147
the
the is
testamentary
(2000) provisions in the will shall be not considered adequate Institution contribution in the
P300,000.00,
P500.000.00
Family Code, When
having
even the
been
if deed
Gabbyacquired was about
by
registered both to be
the of void
c)
Family As
acquisition
that will (Optional
because Judge,
Code).
govern of it theAddendum:
is
I is contrary
shall
house
still rule
the However,
and to as law.
lot,
relative follows:
sheafterhas
Stipulation
community Rico's
the
no
annulled
As financebutofficer only of to Ktheand extentCo., that Victorino her entire
acquisition estate. Legitim
of the properties.
prepared
them through Joaquin work told Julio that
or Million
industry it bebe
shall drawn in (2) is valid marriage up toIf to
e1/5 Letty,
of
betheir the coconut
respective landpresentof itRico
mansion
legitime
arranged wasaandloanimpaired.5-hectare
of P5 agricultural
from PNB dividedforland the opposition
share
or conjugal
Bal
therein.
will
250,00
should
partnership
then125,000
Tony
become 200,000
denied
cohabited
of gains
absolute
since
with
(Article
575,000community
Susan119, is
the
between
The name
exclusively total ofinJoaquina
them in
omission
his proportion
name, Roxas,
of
still histheir
to
Elvira
they acknowledged
are respective
does
presumed not properties
predicated
after
Civil his
Code).legal but
upon It voidcauses
separation
will as not to
notfromthe
matter excess
recognized
Alice, if the
Bob (Art
byhouse 84,
law
died
corporation. However, he was required by the do property
00 of Rico and Letty.)
natural
contribution, child. Thus, thebecause
deed was so is prepared Family 1 lot Code). that the will 3.was made wll,without his
constitute
to
bank be to ain
signpreterition
conjugal consonance
properties,
Continuing with
unless
Surety she the
the
Agreement rulesnot on
contrary a
to as
and
Wil grounds
before
(c) Rico
SUGGESTED
or
(250.0 is
and
forhis
after
ANSWER:
disallowance
August
Letty exclusive
are
of a(effectivity
the property.
1988 co-owners.
to wit: If The
datehe
and
c)
SUGGESTED
compulsory
is executed
proved.What
co-ownership. ANSWER: heirby
properties
Hence, Julio.
in Luis
the Joaquinamay
gets
direct 2\5 then be
while
line. built held
Rizza
Only a of
ma knowledge;
cohabited
the Family
00) withCode], Susan what before
matters his
is the legal
date
secure the repayment of the loan. The Relations
C. No. on that is 125.00
September the Absolute 15, 1991, Community
the marriage of
(b)
house The
answerable
gets
compulsory 3\5onproperty
the
of for
heirslotMila's relations
where
P500.000.00.
in thepay she, between
obligations?
direct 3) her the
line husband
may Luis
carExplain.
be and
worthand Elv
the 2 250,00
separation
when the(Arts, from
marriage theAlice, willwas was the madehouse
contracted. without
375.000 andAs Bob his
lot
corporation failed to the loan, and the Property
settlement is 75,90and9l,
not yet valid Family
and Code).
enforceable
Rizza,
ALTERNATIVE their marriage
ANSWER: behaving Notbeen celebrated ira consent; 0 and 0
SUCCESSION
children
P100,000.00
(2%) resided. shall Upon Joaquin's
exclusively death,
owned his
by belongs
and Issa tocontracted
his community their or partnership with
subject
bank all
Since
20 years
of
obtained
the
ago
preterition.
a judgment
properties
(under the are Civilconjugal,
having
against
Code) theyit been
shall
and
canbe until
Ern
ANOTHER theANSWER:
celebration of themarriage
50,000 marriage, way back
50.000to take
legitimate
Rizza,
preterited, the same children
she will having be sought
been donated
entitledToonly to to recover
her
to her by Alice.
in 3
1970.
Property that
the the
Relations; it
property has
Unions therelationeffect
without of
that1991
Marriage depriving
governs
Victorino, jointly andfor severally. enforce if the place before lastAugust day of isthe
be held answerable 2. If Bob died be fore 3, 1988. which bar is
governed
The
possession
her legacy
parents.
legitime. by and theownership
in conjugal
favor ofMila's
partnership
Rosaof the obligation
is lot,
void of gains,
under
claiming the
them
(1997)
Luis him is
and of
still his the
Rizza, legitime,
conjugal
both which
26 partnership
years a ground
of of
age that
gains.and
judgment,
obligation
SUGGESTED the
redounded
ANSWER: sheriff levied
to the on a farm
benefit owned
of the Examinations.
the
Amount date of the Family
Successional Code
Rights took effect, the
under
Article
that which
1028
Joaquina the
for
Roxas husband
being anda wife
inpresumed
consideration place in
ofoftheir her a goes into the intrinsic validity of other the will
SUGGESTED
Yes,
by the
family. because
(Art.
ANSWER:
conjugal there
121 [3],iswas
partnership aFamily but
of
trustee
Code) donation
VictorinoHowever, andin Property
(Art.
single,
answer
(2004)
Mr.
158, Relations;
live
will
XT September
and
Civil
not
Mrs.
Code)
exclusively
be
Marriage with
YT1988 the
have same.
Settlements
been each Art.
married 158.for Civil20as
common
adulterous
father.
The levyWill isfund
notrelation
the the
action
proper proceeds,
with
there the
againstbeing products,
testator.
Joaquina
no showing She fruits
Roxas is,
that (1995)
On and
10 need not be resolved
Kevin, a during
26-year the
old
favor
his
the wife of
burden Joaquina
Elsa. Is
of proofthe under
levy Art.
proper
lies 1448
withby or of
not?
the the(3%) Civil
creditor husband
Code,
years. would
Supposeand then wife
the apply. without
wife,The YT,land the
diedwould benefit
childless, then of
and
the
prosper?income
therefore,
surety from
disqualified
agreement their executed
separate
to receive properties
thethelegacy husband and of. probate
businessman, proceedings.
married Karla,employed, However,
a winsome lassthe of
Code
v. Reyes,
claiming (De 27
los January
Santos 1992, 206 SCRA 437) marriage,
be deemed Luis is
conjugal, gainfully along with the Rizza
house, is
those
redounded toagainst
acquired by legacythe
either properties.
or50,000both (Ayala
spouses survived
18. opposition only the bymay her husband,
behome, entertained XT. What for,would the
thethe
100,000 pesos. benefit
The of the offamily. An obligation
pesos in Without knowledge ofand their parents or
However,
Homeowners
Investment v. donation
SavingsCourt & of should
Loan Bank
Appeals, be collated
v. Dailo,
G.R. to
G.R.
No. not
since employed,
be purpose
the share conjugal stays at
funds
of XT from were takes
herhusband used charge
estate his in
as
through of their by efforts notor bythe chance, and ofupon
contracted
favor Ernie the is husband alone
inofficious isnot chargeable
having legal of securing to the
the
No.
118305,hereditary
153802, February March estate 11,
12,1998, and
2005) reiterated legitime inshall the of theguardians,
constructing
SUGGESTED
inheritance? household
ANSWER:it.
Why? The
Kevin
chores.
husband's
Explain.
and Karla
After
(5%) estate
entered
living together
would
into
be
dissolution
against
exceeded
ALTERNATIVE the the of
conjugal
ANSWER: free the portion. marriage
partnership Hence, only orwhen
he of it the
was
be an right
ante-nuptial to the legitime
contract on the the daytheory that the
ALTERNATIVE
other
The heirs ANSWER:
institution should of be preserved.
Baldo, which applies only to for
Under
d) As a little
entitled the
Judge, aover
to Civil I shalltwenty
Code,
reimbursement the
rule years,widow
as of Luis
follows:
the orbefore
was
widower
value able
Jorge their
of the to
is
is
Except
contracted
entitled
Yes, thefor
partnership, toactionthe
for the
receive the residential
net it. gainsof
benefit
against house
orthe
Joaquina benefits which
family. RoxasWhen is will
obtained the
the willfrom
marriage constitutes
stipulating that an
conjugal ineffective
partnership
Property
save
a legal
entitled
land from toRelations;
and his
compulsory
receive
conjugal salary Marriage
his earnings
heir
legitime
partnership Settlement;
of fromthe
funds. duringdeceased
the Conjugal
that
estate
the
family free
obligation
by either
prosper, home,portion,
was
but all
oronly both shall
other
contractedto spouse
the be
properties
on respected.
extentbehalf
shall ofofof Gabby
be
the In
the sum,
divided
aliquot and
family of disinheritance
gains shall govern under Art. 918 of presently
theAtheir, Civil
the
Partnership
period
spouse.
of his Ifof
the
wife. theGains
amount
He widow
was(2005) notis their
of P200,000.00
the only
disinherited marriage.
surviving in the the
will
Milaestate
business
equally
hereditary may theof
between beLamberto
law
rights presumes
held
them
of the will
that be
answerable
(Art.
legitimate such
142. distributed
obligation
for Code).
Civil
children Mila's as
will
as there
time Code, of their marriage Kevin's estate was
Gabby
deposited and
being in Mila
a
even assuming that he gave ground for bank.
no got A married
house
legitimate and at lot Lourdes
ascendants, worth
follows:
redound
obligation.
Thus:
heirs. 1) toThe
Joaquina the benefit
Since willthe
salary of
ofthe
be Luis family.
said
entitled However,
properties
deposited
to retain inwhen are
the
her worth 50inMillion while Karla's was valued atthe 2
Baldo----------------- Church
P500,000.00
descendants,
disinheritance, Quezon was
brothers,
hence, Cityhe
recently onand isJuly 10,
purchased
sisters,
still 1990.
entitled for
nephews Prior
to his
the
bank
own obligation
conjugal in the
share in as was
nature,
amount to guarantee
they
an illegitimate of can be
P200.000.00the
child, debt
held of
liable
(Arts. a
and1440 third
for
the Million.
thereto,
same
and nieces, A
they
amount month
she executed
gets
legitime. Jorge, however, cannot receive byafter
the a
the their
marriage
entire marriage
couple.
estate. settlement
Of Kevin the
450,000
party,
debts
house
and as
1453. andin Civil
the
lot problem,
obligations
valued
Code; Art. atthe obligation
contracted
P500,000.00
176, is presumed
F. C.)during shall the be Barrier
died
whereby
P500.000.00
anything inbetween
a freakthey
from usedillegitimate
helicopter
agreed
the byfree the& on legitimate
accident.
common-law
portion. the He relatives
Hespouses
regime left no
cannot of
Wilma---------------
Disinheritance
for the
marriage benefit
to vs.
theof thePreterition
extent
divided equally between Luis and Rizza. 2) third party,
that the not the
family family.
was (1993)
A
to is
will,
conjugal
claim the
no
purchase acknowledged
debts,
partnership
preterition theno as obligations.
property,
he of natural
is gains.
not a child
Surviving
The
P200.000.00
compulsory of B
marriage who
Kevin, had
heir
250,000
Hence,
Maria, toforor
(1993)
benefited
However, spite
the the
where
car her obligation
husband
the
worth debts under
Jorge,
P100.000,00 the
whom
were contracted donatedsurety
she died asidethewhen
settlement from A Karla,
was was already
are
registered hisbeing
22 only
in years relatives:
old. When his
2) the
come from Register of
Elvira-----------------
agreement
suspected
by
to both
Rizza by towas
spouses,
her 1,000,000
be chargeable
having
or
parents by an
one against
shall affair
of be the
with
them, partnership
considered another
with theto in
Kevin and the
direct line.
Karla? sale of palay
There
Explain. harvested no
Determine from
preterition, the
the
Property
A family
(Ayala Relations;
home
Investment is Unions
a v.dwelling
Ching, without place
286 Marriage
of
SCRA a person B's
brother
Deeds
hacienda
the full of
institution blood
Luis
Manila,
owned andofbrother,
by first
where
the Luis sister C,
cousin
Mila
and diedis Lilia.
a
P300,000.00
was he
valid (C)
1)
resident. and was
What
from In
the
250,000
it must
woman,
consent
her ownofbe proven
executed
the
paraphernal that
other. the
a will, family
property, was
unknown benefited
having to been and value of the estate of Kevin, 3) Who are
him, survived
(2000)
For five years since 1989, Tony,result a bank property
Disinheritance; by
Relations
his widow governed
toand
Ineffective four
athe children
marriage of ofhis
ALTERNATIVE
272)
and his
the family.
Ernie-----------------
that
bequeathing
acquired
ANSWER:
benefit
by all Itthe
lucrative wasconfers atitle
properties upon
direct(par. a
she
2, family of Vice-
inherited
Art. the 1992,
such
148,
the
only
Kevin's they
rentals
right ofjointly
heirs? of a4)
Jorge acquired
building
is
How belonging
claim
much residential
his is toeach
legitime. Rizza. house In
of
The disinheritance
president,
Property
right to and
Relations;
enjoy
of Wilma
Susan,
Unions
such
was effective
an
without
property,
because
entertainer,
Marriage
which
disrespect lived
must
of, other
(1999)
Mr.
and
fine, brother
Palma,
lot,
the as
sum D.
widower,
well
of Claiming
as has
P500.000.00 a that
three
condominium he
had is
daughtersbeenentitled unitD,
part to
D-in
of
50,000
agreement,
from
Civil
and herofparents,
Code).
raising voice to, her to father
her sisterconstituteMiguela.
maltreatment Uponunder Kevin's heirs entitled to
together
(1992)
In 1989,
remain withas
Rico, husband
then
the aCode.
person and
widower wife
constitutingforty without
(40) it years
as the a inherit
l and
Makati.
the from
D-2.
fruits
inherit? In He hisexecutes
1995,
received father's
they decided abrother
during to
the C.
Will disinheritingchangeAperiod
brought their D of
her death, the will was presented for probate. suit
Article 919(6) of the New Civil She is, therefore, not entitled to
because to obtain
she his
married share a in man the estate
he did of
not C. Will
like,
benefit
of age,
family home of
cohabited marriage
and probate with although
his heirs.ofIt theCora, a
cannot they
widow were
thirty property
cohabitation relations from to
their the regime
separate of complete
property, a
inherit
Jorge anything.
opposed Her inheritance will go to the
willbe
other legal
onseized
heirs. The
the SUGGESTED
SUGGESTED
his
and action
instituting
ANSWER:
ANSWER:
prosper? daughters D-1 and D-2 as his
capacitated
(30) years
total omission
by creditors of
of toElvira
except many
age. noteach
is While other.
living
preterition becauseSince
together, she Tony's
isthey
not a separation
1.
car Sinceworth the of property.
marriage
P100.000.00. Mila
settlementbeingconsented, was
used entered
by she
the
ground
compulsory that inthe
heirfrom willin
the direct was
line.
special
Sheexecuted
cases.only
will receive by (Taneo,
hislegitime.
her wife Jr. No, the action of A will not prosper. On the
heirsHow, to his entire estate ofshould
P 1,000,000.00,
salary
acquired was more than
their enough
combined for their
earnings needs, a was
into then
without engaged the in awas
consent lucrative business. The
v. Court
without
The legacy in offavor
his Appeals,
of Rosa isG.R.
knowledge, voidmuch No. Article
under 108532,
less consent, March and 9, common-law
(a)
premise under
that spouses,
B, the C law
and Dand
donated are without
Justthemonths
legitimate bankthe
Property
Susan
parcel
1999) of Relations;
stopped
riceland. Marriage
working Settlements
and merely "kept Upon
spouses
participation
ago to Mr, RizzaPalma's
then ofby death,
signed
the her parents how
a
parents. should
private
(they Luis did his estate
document
not
and sign
Rizza
that deposit ofANSWER:
all, brothers, asP200,000.00
an illegitimate the child house ofand B, lot A
Afterit Rico
(1991)
house".
deprived
During and that him
Cora of separated,
period,
his legitime.
Tony was Rico After
able lived to SUGGESTED
be divided?
dissolving
the
now document),
decide Explain.
their the
to interminate (5%)
conjugalmarriage partnership
their settlement
cohabitation, and is
he had given her no cause for disinheritance, valued
cannot at
inherit P500.000.00 intestacy and from the C carwho worth
is a
together
SUGGESTED
buy a lotwith and Mabel,
ANSWER: house in a maiden
a plush sixteen subdivision. (16) agreeing
invalid
and they onbrother
applying
ask abe complete
you Art.
toof give 78, separation
F.C.
them which
your of
legalproperty.
provides
advice
added Jorge in his opposition. P100.000.00
legitimate allocated B. toPage
Only them?the 41wife of of C
119 in
years of age.
However, after While five livingyears, Tony and Susan on that a minor
herthe own following:
right and the
decided to separate.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
died,
Eugenio
c) Since
spouse
he the
washas
(Delatotal
succeeded
inlegitime
the succession
Merced by
of the
v. Delahis compulsory
surviving
the same
Merced, wife
Gr No.heirs
sharebe
legitime
5M
isasXset
(c)
126707, inherited
aside
= 1/2of by
the by
as
legitimate
Mrs.
Mario's
representation Luna
children
conjugal
of BfromC=l/2
and
Mr.
share
Yit
Luna
=follows
from
1/4 willthat
the
be
25 P750,000.00,
each
Irma, of
that
Februaryand the
his children,
of1999). the balance
legitimate c)unborn
Cof has
P250,000.00
no share
child. Theyis by representation
legitime
property.
from her by
community
the
inherited Theofother
her one of
parents.
half, C
legitimate
amounting to child is P100,000.
one million pesos, is her
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: conjugal share (net estate), and should be distributed to her
because
the free
divided his
the portion.
father
estate is
equally still alive
between them, hence the The legitime, therefore, of the ofoldest son and is
It depends. If Antero was not acknowledged intestate
(d) X -heirs. Applying
1/3ifHowever,
inthe his theown aboveright provision
Y- 1/3 law,
in Michelle
hisgiven
own
succession
child excluding by representation
the parents shall of Isidro. not apply An However,
P100,000.
Jorelle, Tessie's nieces,child had
since
are entitled intra-uterine
the
to donation
one-half of her lifeconjugal of
by
(Art.
unbornAntonio,
Legitime;
d) DCompulsory
975). inherits
child the ismotion Heirs
P30.000
considered to which
vs. dismiss
Secondary is should
born Compulsory
the forshare be
all right
less was
him
share 2 - 1/3
than
worth one in
7 million hispesos,
months,
P100,000, ownhehalf right
has
or ofalready
500,000 thepesos,estate
received
while theof other
Mr. in
granted
Heirs
of his (2005)
father because E who Antero
purposes favorable to it provided it is born predeceased is not a T legal
by heir
virtue of
of Luna,
one-half or 5M,
amounting will
to be
P500,000
full his legitime and he will not receive inherited
will go to Mario,by the
Tessie's widow
surviving
Antonio.
Emil,
Art.
later.981 Thethe on Ifchild
theAntero
testator,
right was
of
was considered has acknowledged,
three
representation. bornlegitimate
because, the Article
spouse.
(Mrs. Michelle
anything 977
Luna), anymoreof
andwhile the the
Jorelle Civil
are then
from other Code
entitled
the half, provides
to P250,000
decedent.or 5M, pesos that
will
The
motion should be denied because Article 992 each
heirs as their
who hereditary
repudiate share. their share cannot be
e)
having F
children, anhas Tom, no Henry
intra-uterine share life because
andof more Warlito;histhan father
a sevenwife G be inherited
remaining by the parents
P900,000, therefore, of Mr. shall Luna.go to Uponthe
is
namednot applicable.
repudiated
months, Adette; the parents
it lived for This
inheritance. is because
a named
few minutes Under
Pepe Antero
and Article
after Pilar; is
its represented.
ALTERNATIVE
the death
four younger ANSWER:
of Mrs.childrenLuna, by herinstitution
estate of 5M in willthe
Intestate
Assuming that Succession
claiming
977
an
complete heirshis
illegitimate who
delivery. inheritance
repudiate
child, ItReserva
wasRamon;from
their his
legitimate share
brother, illegitimate
may
because Mark;not it be inherited
will, to be divided by the her donation
own parents.
equally
is valid as to form
among them. Each
Intestate
father,
be not
represented. Succession;
from Eugenio. Troncal (1997)
"T"
and
Legitimedied
substance, intestate Juan on 1
cannot September
invoke preterition 1997.He
and
was aborn
sister, withinNanette. the Since valid his
marriagewife Adette of the is will receive P225,000.
(1999)
Mr. Luna
Intestate died, leaving
Succession an estate of Ten Million was
because
Intestate
(1997)
"X", survived
the he by
actually
Succession
decedent, M had
was (his mother),
received
survived a
by W (his
donation (his
well-off,
parents. he wants to isleave
Succession favorableto his to illegitimate
it. When
(P1
(1998)
Enrique 0,000,000.00)
died, leaving Pesos. a His hereditary
net widow gave birth
estate widow),
inter
(1999)
Mr.
widow).and vivos A
Mrs.
A and
(his from
Cruz, B
son), (his
the
whoB (a legitimate
testatrix
are childless,
granddaughter, children),
(III Tolentino
met with
being C
child
the as much
child died, of hisinherited estate asthe heshare can legally
to
of a
P1.2 child four Irma
million. months
He is after Mr, by
survived Luna's his
of the
death,
widow, (his
188,1992
a
the grandson,
serious
daughter ed.). of
motor being
He would
vehicle
A) the
and legitimate
only
accident
C have
and withD ason right
Mr.
(the of to
CruzB),
two a
do.
child. His estate has an aggregate net amount of
but theHowever,
ALTERNATIVE
three child
legitimateANSWER: died thefive share
children, hours of the after
two
child
birth. in Two
legitimate
the
D
at (his
completion
the
acknowledged other of
wheel grandson,
and his Mrs.legitime
illegitimate beingseated
Cruz the son
under
children Art.
besideofof E him,
906 who
the of
Pl,200,000.00,
hands of marriage
Irma and all the above-named
If
days the after
grandchildren the is sired
subject
child's is
bydeath,
to reserva
avoid. the
legitimate Irmawidow troncal
has
child ofwho for
no
Mr. was
the a legitimate
Civil
resulting
decedent). Code.
in the died
"X" sonthis
The
instant of,
estate and
yearshould
death who
of Mr.
(1997) predeceased,
be
Cruz. divided
leaving Mrs. a
relatives
the benefit are of still
the living.
relatives Emil
of thenow child comes within to
successional
Luna
SUGGESTED
predeceased also died
ANSWER: rightsbecause
him, with and respect
she had
two to
suffered Isidro
recognized but
from "T"),
equally
Cruz
net and
was
estate F
among (his
still
of grandson,
the
alive
P180,000.00. five
when being
childrenhelp
All the
werewho
came son willofeach
but
willing G,
sheto a
you
the for
third advice degree in making
of a
consanguinitywill. How will you
P600,000.00
she
difficult
SUGGESTED would
illegitimate childbirth.
ANSWER: — legitime
have
children. successional
The to be divided
estate
Distribute ofthe Mr.and
rights equally
Luna
estate
who
with is
in legitimate
receive
also died son
P225,000.00
on who
the
succeed, except A who repudiated the repudiated
way because
to the the inheritance
the
hospital. total
The
distribute
belong to his estate according to the his shares
wishes
Under
between
respect
now
intestacy. being tothe
the theory
Tom,
the
[5%]
line
child.
claimed of
of Isidro.
Henry Concurrence,
by his and parents, Warlito and as the from
hereditary
couple
inheritance "T").
acquired His properties
estate,
from distributable
hisafterfather, collatingworth
and net
they the
One estate
donation
seek Million
your is
without
Heirs; violating
asIntestate the law on testamentary
SUGGESTED
are
legitimate
parents his Heirs;
ANSWER:
offollows:
children. widow. A EachShares
(legitimate
Whowill child)
be entitled
is entitled to Mr. =to to P120.000.00.
Juan
(P1,000,000.00)
legal (Art.
advice 1061,
on How Pesos
how CC), should
much would
during each this
be
their P1
can amount
million.
marriage,
expect beIn
to
succession?
Half
(2003)
Luis
P200,000 of
was the (5%)
B estate
survived
(legitimate of
by Mr. two Luna
child)legitimate=willP200,000 gochildren,
to the
C SUGGESTED ANSWER: ANSWER:
P200,000.00.
Luna'a estate and(Art. why? 888,
(5%) Civil Code) SUGGESTED
shared
the
which
receiveactual inas
are intestacy
distribution
being their among
claimed
respectiveofby thethe surviving
net
parents
shares estate, heirs?
of
in Juan
both
the
parents
two illegitimate
(legitimate
P100,000.00 of Mrs.
child) Luna
-- sharechildren,
= of as their
P200,000
Ramon inheritance
his parents, D (legitimate
the illegitimate from
and two The legal
Preterition;
The heirs
SUGGESTED areheirs
Compulsory
ANSWER: B,while
W,are C and A, Heir B, D,
D.siblings
A and
inherits W. C
nothing is
Mrs. Luna, while the other half will be gets
spouses
distribution
excluded nothing
inby equal
of B the
who shares.
estate.
is his
still Is
Give the
alive.your claim
D will
answer. of
inherits bothgetin
brothers.
child)
child. = OHe
Equivalent left an
(predeceased] to 1/2 estate ofE ofthe P1
(legitimatesharemillion. of each
child Luis
of (1999)
(a) No, the
because of claim his of both parentsBis inherits
renunciation. not valid.a
inherited bychild. the parents of Mr. Luna as the P225,000.00
sets of parents
representation each.valid Eand
ofwidower, who why? (3%)
predeceased.
died= intestate.
legitimate
D) P100,000 Who
- by are
(Art.right his ofintestate
176, Family
representation heirs, Code) and
F (a)
When
legitime Mr,
Mr. Cruz,
ofCruzP90.000.00 died, he aswas has
the three legitimate
succeeded
nearest and byFonlyhis is
reservatarios
how much child
(legitimate
P200,000.00 is the — of ofshare
Adette the
D) =ofthe reserved
each
P100,000 wife. in his -Her by property
estate?
right
shareofis excluded
children,
wife and
legitimate because
hisA, B
parents
descendant, and of the
as C. his repudiation
He executed
intestate
inheriting in of
heirshisG,
a whothe
Will
own
inherited
SUGGESTEDby
representation ANSWER:Mrs. Luna from
G (illegitimate her
child) child.
= P100,000 - T.
will
right The
predecessor.
instituting
sharenotanswer asM
his
by his ismay
estate excluded
heirs beto premised
equally.
representation bybecause
his theestate
estate
His on
legitimate
ofofwastwo
One A's
equivalent
When Mr. Luna to the share
died, of
his one
heirs legitimate
were hischild.wife
The
1/2 intestate
share of the heirs are
legitimate the two
child H(2) legitimate
(illegitimate theories:
children
Million
0.5 Million
renunciation. of the
(P1,000,000.00)
pesos WTheorywhich
gets a ofPesos
is Exclusion
his
legitime his
half two
share and
equivalentchildren
in the
the to
(Art. 892,
and the par.
unborn 2, Civil Code)The unborn child
child.
children
Pepe
child) and
= and
Pilar,
P100,000 the the two
- 1/2 (2)share
parents illegitimate
are of only
the children.
secondary
legitimate Theory
A and
absolute
one-half B,of(1 Concurrence.
and
community
/ 2)his thatfriendof F.
amounting
B Upon
amounting histo death,
to 1 Million
P45.000. how
ANOTHER ANSWER:
inherited
In intestacy
compulsory because
heirs the = andestate the of
they inheritance
cannotthe decedent
inherit if was
theis Under
(b)
should In Dthe Mr.the Theory
preceding
Cruz's ofbe Exclusion
question, suppose the
Mr.
child
Under Wthe (Widow)
theory of P200.000
Exclusion - the
same free shareportion as Pesos.
C and His
each wife,gets aestate
will, therefore,
legitime divided?
equivalent inherit Explain.
toO.25
one-
favorable
divided
primary among to
compulsory it theand it
legitimate
heirs was born
and
(legitimate alive
illegitimate
children) later legitimes
Cruz
(3%)
Million institutedof
Pesos the hisheirstwo are accorded
children A andthem B and
as his
legitimate
(P300,000)child is distributed only among the half (1/2) thatand of his parents willtoinherit
B amounting P45.000.00 0.25
-half
though
children
are the
alive. it share
lived
such
(Art. only
887, ofpar.
that each
for five
the
2, legitimate
Civilhours.
share Code) Mrs.
of Luna
each the
When
heirs free Mrs.
in portion
his Cruz Will, will
died, butbe shegiven
gave was a exclusively
succeeded
legacy of toby P
legitimate children and is given to them in MillionBut
each. Pesos. since the total exceeds the entire
Their
child.
inherited
illegitimateshare half are
child of :isFor
the 10
one each
Million legitimate
estate while the the
her legitimate
parents
100,000.00 toas descendants.
her
his intestate
friend F. Hence
heirs.
How under
They
should the
will
the
addition to their legitime. All other Intestate estate, their legitimes would have to be
child
unborn –child P333,333.33
inherited the For other eachareWhen
Brother
heirs are Mark entitled and only sister toNanettetheir half. respective not Exclusion
inherit
ALTERNATIVE
estate
reduced of Theory:
allcorresponding
Mr, of Cruz
ANSWER: her estateAbewill dividedget
to P20.000.00.
consisting upon his
P22.500.00 of her and 0.5
death?
eachP
illegitimate
the child
compulsory died,child
heirs it – P166,666.66
was
since survived
they are bynot its mother,
included INTESTATE
13.333.33
SUGGESTED
Million
Explain, half (1/3
ANSWER:
(2%) of
share the in free
the portion)
absolute B will
community get P
legitimes. The distribution is as
Legitime Free Portion Total follows: Heirs;
(Art. Intestate
895. CC).that Heirs;
Thethe Reserva
total Troncal
of all of these amounts
Mrs.(Article
the Luna.
in[legitimate
A 983,
enumeration
child) AsNew theCivil
P150.000 under +Code;
only heir,
P Article
75,000 Article Mrs.176,
887
- P225.000 ofLuna Family
the (a) Assuming
SUCCESSION
20,000.00.
and her and P13.
0.25 ESTATE:
Million institution
333.33 inheritance(1/3 of of A,from B
the and
freeher F
(1995)
Isidro
to
W- and
P180.000.00.
(widow Irma,
gets 1/2 Filipinos,
share) P90.000.00both 18 years
(Art. 998)of
B Code)
inherited,
Civil Code.by child)
{legitimate operation P150.000of law,+ the estate of
P150.000 - the were
P180,000.00
portion)
husband, to the
D entire
will
or passengers
a totalget estate,
P20.000.00.
of 0.750 there and
Millionwas preterition
P13.
Pesos. 333.33
age,
W, the were widow of to Flight No. 317 of
Intestate
P225.000
The remaining
child Succession
C (legitimate
consisting ofchild)
balance its P150.000
of P300,000.00
5 Million + P inheritance
75.000is- the A-
In (son
of
(1/3C ofsince
sum, who
the the C
freerepudiated
is aiscompulsory
parents
portion)
limited
his
of inheritance)
Mr. Cruz
the in
heir legitime
willNone
theinherit Art.
direct of
Oriental
P20.000.00
C. B 977) Airlines.
B -preterition Under The plane the they boarded
Theory wasof
(1992)
F
free
fromhad portion
P225.000 three
Mr. Luna.(3)which
D (legitimate legitimate
In+ the
child) 0children:
can hands
0 0 E (legitimate
be - of given A, B,toand
Mrs. Luna, the has The
line.
250,000 Pesos(Granddaughter)
while the willparentsresult of None
inMrs. the CCruztotal -
child
(1)
one of D) P 75,000
legitimate child X. P35.500
C has two P112,500
(2) legitimateF of Philippine registry.
Concurrence.
(Acknowledged In theaddition
illegitimate While en P45.000.00
to their
child) route
legitimes, from
illegitimate
what
(legitimateshe child child
inherited of D)Ramon from
P 75.000 as an
her + child instituted
P was37.500 -heir.
subject annulment
will inherit 750,000 of institution
Pesos. illegitimate child) of heirs.
children: Y and Z.Code)Fchild)
and Athe rode together inthe a Manila
the heirstoD
(Art.998)
Intestate Greece
ofthe Succession D some
-A,(Acknowledged
B, and Wof passengers
will beand given hijacked
equal
(Art.
to 914,
reserva
P112,500 Civil
troncal
G (illegitimate for If so75.000
P given
benefit 0 by -P the
of Therefore, institution A, B F will be
car and perished together at the same time in A:
shares P20.000.00
P45,000.00
the plane, in the held(Art.
free plus
the 998)P10.000.00
chief
portions: The
pilot (1
hostage /4
acknowledged of at thethefree
decedent,of Ramon
75,500
relatives H the childwould
(illegitimate child) withinreceive
P 75.000 the thirda degree
0 - P total of
75,500 of (2000)
Eugenio
set aside
illegitimate died
and child Mr.
without
Cuz's
gets him 1/2 toissue,
estate
of fly leaving
will
the share be divided,
several
of Libya.
each free
B: P20,000.00
portion)
cockpit and ordered plus P10.000.00 (l/4 of the
He instead
When
a Mrs. P150,000
vehicular Luna
accident, died, she
Fbelong
and wasAsurvived by her to
Preterition
W (Widow)
P400,000.00.
consanguinity and who 0 -P150.000 todied,
the family each of
of parcels
as
legitimate
C:
portlon)
ofchild.
inP20,000.00
intestacy, land in Bataan.
equally
plus among
P10.000.00 wasA,(1/4 survived
B and of C by
the asfree
parents
them
(2001)
Because leaving asher her only heirs.
substantial
eldest estates
son Her
Juan in parents
intestacy.
had beenwill During
Legitime;
Antonio,
follows:
the
A
hijacking Heirs
Compulsory
his
- P333,333.33;
legitimate
Isidro suffered a heart
brother;
B - P333.333.33;
Martina, and
the
Mr. Luna, the line where the property came portion)
W:
attackP20,000.00
and same wasplus on P10,000.00
the verge (l/4 of (a),theSincefree
a) Who
inherit
pestering her are
her the
estate forintestate
consisting
capital heirs
to of of
start the F? 5What
a business,Million are their
(b)
(2003)
only
Luis
C On the
daughter
P333,333.33.
was survived assumption
of byhis twoShares as of
predeceased
legitimate
death.
letter there
sister
children,
from.
Intestaterespective Succession
fractional portion)
Irmapreterition Alternative
was already Answer:
eight monthsthe in Intestacy
pregnant Tby-
she
Josefa inherited
gave survived him from P100,000.Mr. shares?Luna. Five Theyears otherlater,5 was Mercedes;
two illegitimate and of C.
children,
five Therefore,
legitimate
his parents, institution
children and two of-
(1998)
Tessie
b) Who died are the intestate by her
heirs husband
of A? Mario,
What are decedent
their
Isidro, she Estate:
pleaded P120.000.00
to the but Survived
hijackers by:
toShortly
allowM
Million
Josefa she leaving
died, inheriteda last fromwill herand child will be
testament of A and
Joaquin,
brothers. another
He B is predeceased
left annulled
an estate of the
brother.
P1 legacy
million. Who of
and two
deliveredrespective nieces,
to the Michelle
fractionalparents andofJorelle,
shares? Mr. who are
Luna as Mother............................None
the assistant pilot to solemnize W marriage-
her
in which she instituted only her four younger P100.000.00 to F shall be respected for not
thec) legitimate
If B and
beneficiaries ofchildren
C
the both
reserved of anproperty.
predeceased elder sister
F, who whoare are after theEugenio's
compulsory
Widow.............................P
F’s Isidro.
with
death,
Soon Therefore,
heirs 30,000.00
after
of
Antonio
the the
Luis, how
marriage,
alsomuch died,
A Isidro is-
children as her sole heirs. At theproperty
time of she her being
leaving
the inofficious.
legitime three
of each, andlegitimate
how much remainder
is children.
the free of
had predeceased
In intestate
sum,
heirs? 5 Million What Pesos her. The
are their only
of Mr. respectiveLuna's estate Son.................................P
fractional
expired. As the be plane 30,000.00
landed in Libya B Irma -
death, her only properly left was P900,000.00 P900.000.00
SUGGESTED
Subsequently,
portion of ANSWER:
his will
estate,
Martina, divided
if any?
the equally
children among
of Joaquin A, B
left
will go behind
they
shares?to the was
inherit
Do parents a house
inof their and
Mrs. Luna, lot worth
own while two
rightthe or The Son.................................P30.000.00
by C.
gave birth.
compulsory However, heirs the C -
babytwo Grandson
died (son
a few of
in a bank.
million Juan opposed the will on thehusband
ground and
and the children of are Antonio the executedlegitimate an
other 5 pesos,
Explain
representation?
Million your which
Pesosanswer. Tessie
will go and to the her parents of B).............None
minutes
children after
and D - Grandson
thecomplete
two (son of E who
delivery.
illegitimate Back predeceased
children. in the
The
of
had preterition.
acquired
d)LunaIf B and
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: How
Cwithboththe should Josefa's
use of Mario's
repudiated their sharesestate
savings bein extrajudicial settlement
T)................P 30,000.00 F - Grandson (son of G who of the estate of
Mr.
SUGGESTED as reservatarios.
ANSWER: Philippines
parents are Irmaexcluded Immediately filed
the a legitimate
by themselves. claimThe for
divided
If the
from child
thehis estate among
had
income an her
intra-uterine
FasIn
of preterition
who heirs?
life
a doctor.
are F'sof State
notHow less thanbriefly
much of
intestate 7 months,
heirs? the
the it Eugenio, dividing it among
repudiated the Inheritance from"T").......................None
There was theno ofthe theestateoldest son inheritance.while
children, The parents of Isidro opposed are her
inherited
reason(s)
SUGGESTED
property
What
because
from for
or
are ANSWER:
the
father.
itsyour
their value,
testatrix
which case,
answer.
respectiveif any,
donated
(5%) may
fractional Michelle
100,000
of 10M will
shares? and
pesos
be succeeding year, athepetition brothers to annul not
the
divided 1001
Article equally of between
the Civilthe Code childprovides,
and the "Shouldwidow asbrothers legal heirs.and claim
compulsory contending heirs thatat the
all. marriage
Their between
respective
Jorelle
Do claim
or they as child,
ofinherit their inhereditary
their 5Mown shares?
right [5%]
or latter
by extrajudicial
Explanation: settlement was filed by Antero, an
to
Upon him.
sisters the This
death
their donation
the
children survive its is
share
with considered
theof widow shallor go an
widower, advance
by operation
the of her and Isidro
legitimate are: a) was void ab of initiothe on the
SUGGESTED
law to the mother,
onrepresentation?
shall be
the entitled ANSWER:
son's which
to one-half shall
Explainbe subject your
of the inheritance
inheritance. to reserva
There answer,
and thebeingtroncal. Under
brothers and no illegitimate
a) The
half (1/2) son
mother
of the of TheAntonio,
(M)they
estate
legitime
cannot who
(P500,000.00) claims
inherit
two
tohe
from
(2)
beis Tdivided
following
legitimate grounds:
children (a)
is one had not given their
(a) 891,
Art.
sisters Bor =the
theirreserva
childrenistointhe favor
other of half."
relatives belonging
Tessie's gross to the
estate entitled
because
between tounder
them share in
Art.
equally, the
985 estate
the
orsuccessional of Eugenio.
ascendants
P250,000.00 each. The
shall b)
preterition,
paternal
1/2
consists line
of andthe
a house who institutions
and are within 3 during
lot acquired
in the
degrees herfrom
will the shall
marriage, child.
making
beit
The
SUGGESTED
consent
2. Does to ANSWER:
Irma thehave marriage any of their son; rights (b) there at
respected but the legitime of the oldest son defendants
inherit
The motionin
legitimate filed
defaultto of a of
each motion
dismiss legitimate to dismiss
should
illegitimate children
be
child on
granted.
is the
and
one-
parents of Mr, Luna are entitled
(b) B = 1/2 Z = 1/4 by representation of C C= 1/2
part of the community property. to the
Thus, reserved
one-half portion
of the which
said is
property5M was
all? no
Discuss marriage fully. license; (c) the solemnizing
ground
b)
descendants
Article that
The992 Antero
widow's
of
does isofbarred
theauthority
deceased.
not share
apply. byisArticle P30.000.00 992not of
has
as they
would
Article to
havebe
are completed
2todegrees
982 the if
of related from
Civilhechild.
received
CodeThe less.
provides that half(1/2)
officer
SUGGESTED the
had ANSWER:legitime
no each to Antero
legitimateperform is
child theor
After collating the donation of P100.000 to the claiming the
because Civilunder
P125,000.00. any Code Art, from
inheritance 996 inheriting
it states
from Eugenio. fromif
that He the is
grandchildren inherit by right of 2. Irma
marriage; succeeded
and, (d) the to the
solemnizingestate of Isidro
officer as
did
remaining property of P900,000, the estate of claiming legitimate
widow or his brother
widower share ofand his father.
legitimate How will
children you or
representation. his
not filesurviving
an affidavit spouse ofinmarriage
the
to inheritance
the estate
with theof of her
proper his
the testatrix is P1,000,000. Of this amount, resolve descendants
father
legitimate
civil registrar.
the motion?
consisting are left,
child. When Isidroof (5%)
the surviving
his father's share in the
one-half or P500,000, is the inheritance of
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
A. A MODAL
objected, arguing
INSTITUTION
that it should is the beinstitution
in Jolo of before
mother,
a in favor of another sister, with their mother
court
an heir
Shari’a since
made hisforlands
a certain
are in purpose
Sulu. But or Adil’s
cause onlynot giving her authority thereto but even
sisters871
(Arts. in Pakistan
and 882,want NCC). theSUBSTITUTION
proceedings held is signing said deeds, there is a valid partition
in Lahore
the appointment before of another
a Pakistani heir socourt.
that he Which
may inter vivos between the mother and her
court into
enter has jurisdiction
the inheritance and in is default
the proper of thevenue
heir children which cannot be revoked by the
for the intestate
originality instituted. proceedings?
(Art. 857, NCC). The law of mother. Said deeds of sale are not contracts
B. In acountry
which SIMPLEshall SUBSTITUTION
govern succession of heirs, the entered
to his into with respect to future
testator
SUGGESTED
estate? (5%) designates
ANSWER: one or more persons to inheritance. "It would be unjust for the mother to revoke
In so far the
substitute as the heirsproperties
instituted of the decedent
in case such heir the sales to a son and to execute a simulated
located
or heirs should die before him, or shouldthey
in the Philippines are concerned, not sale in favor of a daughter who already
are
wishgoverned
or shouldby be Philippine
incapacitated law to (Article
accept 16,the benefited by the partition."
Civil Code). Under SUGGESTED ANSWER:
inheritance. In Philippine
a law, the proper
FIDEICOMMISSARY
venue for the settlement of the estate is the C. Yes, under Arts. 51 and 52 of the New
SUBSTITUTION, the testator institutes a first
domicile of the decedent at the and timetransmit
of his Family Code. In case of legal separation,
heir and charges him to preserve
death. Since annulment of marriage, declaration of nullity
the whole or the
partdecedent last resided
of the inheritance to ainsecond
Cebu
City, that is the proper venue for the intestate of marriage and the automatic termination of a
heir. In a simple substitution, only one heir
However,
settlement the
of successional
his estate. rights to the estate subsequent marriage by the reappearance of
inherits. In a fideicommissary substitution, both
of ADIL are governed by Pakistani law, his the absent spouse, the common or community
the first and second heirs inherit. (Art. 859 and
national
C. Betina law, under Article 16 of the Civil property of the spouses shall be dissolved and
869, NCC)has a cause of action against Divino. Art, 51. In said partition, the value of the
Code.
This is a case of a testamentary disposition liquidated.
Succession; Death; Presumptive
subject to a mode and the will itself provides Legitime presumptive legitimes of all common children,
(1991)
a) For
for thepurposes
consequence of succession,
if the when modeis death
is notdeemed computed as of the date of the final judgment
occur or with.
to
complied take place?
To enforce b) May succession
the mode, be
the will of the trial court, shall be delivered in cash,
conferred by contracts or acts
itself gives Betina the right to compel the inter property or sound securities, unless the
vivos? Illustrate. c) Is
return of the property to the heirs of there any law which parties, by mutual agreement, judicially
allows the delivery to
Theodore. (Rabadilla v. Conscoluella, 334 approved, had already provided for such
compulsory
Wills; heirs
Formalities of their presumptive The
legitimes children of their guardian, or the trustee
matters.
SCRA 522 [2000] GR 113725, 29 June 2000). of their property, may ask for the enforcement
the
(1) during
(1990) lifetime
If a will of theirbyparents?
is executed a testator If who
so, isin awhat
instances?
SUGGESTED
Filipino ANSWER:
citizen, what law will govern if the will of the judgment.
A. Death asina the
is executed fact Philippines?
is deemed toWhat occurlaw when it
will The delivery of the presumptive legitimes
actually takes place. Death
govern if the will is executed in another is presumed to take herein prescribed shall in no way prejudice
place
country? in Explain
the circumstances
your answers. under Arts. 390- the ultimate successional rights of the
391 of the Civil Code. The
(2) If a will is executed by a foreigner, for time of death is children accruing upon the death of either or
presumed to be at the expiration
instance, a Japanese, residing in the of the 10year both of the parents; but the value of the
period as prescribed by Article
Philippines, what law will govern if the will is 390 and at the properties already received under the decree
moment of disappearance under
executed in the Philippines? And what law will Article 391. of annulment or absolute nullity shall be
B. Under Art. 84 of the Family
govern if the will is executed in Japan, or some Code amending Art. 52. The
considered judgmentonoftheir
as advances annulment
legitime. or of
Art 130 of the Civil Code,
other country, for instance, the U.S.A.? Explain contractual absolute nullity of the marriage, the partition
succession
your answers. 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 ANSWER:
testamentary 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;
third Codicil;
persons. Institution of Heirs; Substitution of Heirs
will without its being probated, but may under (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 Betina’s
prohibits contracts upon future inheritance, lifetime. Proceedings; It isIntestate
also statedProceedings; Jurisdiction
in the Codicil that in
the partition by the parent, as provided in Art. the (2004)
In hisevent lifetime, a Pakistani
the obligation citizen, Betina
is not fulfilled, ADIL,
1080 is a case expressly authorized by law. A should marriedimmediately
three timesseize under
the Pakistani
property from law.
person has two options in making a partition of When Divino he or died an old
latter’s widower,
heirs he left
and turn behind
it over to
his estate: either by an act inter vivos or by six children,compulsory
Theodore’s two sisters,heirs.three Divino
homes,failed
and an to
will. If the partition is by will, it is imperative estate fulfill the worth at leastunder
obligation 30 million pesos Betina
the Codicil. in the
that such partition must be executed in Philippines. of heirs.
brings suit(3%) Heb)was
against Distinguish
born for
Divino between
in the
Lahore but
reversion simple
last
of
accordance with the provisions of the law on resided and fideicommissary
in
the tract of land.Cebu City, where he had a mansion
a) Distinguish between
wills; if by an act inter vivos, such partition and substitution
where of heirs.
two his(2%)
ofand c) Doeschildren
youngest Betina have now
modal institution substation
may even be oral or written, and need not be in live a causeand of action
work. against
Two of Divino?
his oldest children are
"Where
the formseveral
of a will, sisters
providedexecute deeds ofissale
the legitime not farmersExplain (5%)
over their 1 /6 undivided share of the SUGGESTED ANSWER: in Sulu, while the two middle-aged
prejudiced. children are employees in Zamboanga City.
paraphernal property of their
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)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, the will may be probated in the
Philippines insofar as the estate of Eleanor is
concerned. While the Civil Code prohibits the
execution of Joint wills here and abroad, such
prohibition applies only to Filipinos. Hence,
the joint will which is valid where executed is
valid in the Philippines but only with respect
to Eleanor. Under Article 819, it is void with
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
respect to Manuel whose joint will remains
The will cannot be probated in the Philippines,
void in the Philippines despite being valid
even though valid where executed, because it
where executed.
is prohibited under Article 818 of the Civil
Code and declared void under Article 819, The
prohibition should apply even to the American
wife because the Joint will is offensive to public
policy. Moreover, it is a single juridical act
which cannot be valid as to one testator and
Wills;
void asProbate; Intrinsic Validity
to the other.
(1990)
H died leaving a last will and testament
wherein it is stated that he was legally
married to W by whom he had two legitimate
children A and B. H devised to his said forced
heirs the entire estate except the free portion
which he gave to X who was living with him at
In
the said
time will
of hishedeath.
explained that he had been
estranged from his wife W for more than 20
years and he has been living with X as man
and wife since his separation from his
legitimate family.
In the probate proceedings, X asked for the
issuance of letters testamentary in accordance
with the will wherein she is named sole
executor. This was opposed by W and her
(a) Should the will be admitted in said
children.
(b) Is the
probate said devise to
proceedings?
(c) Was it proper for the trial court to consider
X valid?
the intrinsic
SUGGESTED validity of the provisions of said
ANSWER:
(1)
will?a.Explain
If the testator
your answers,
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).
POSSIBLE ADDITIONAL ANSWERS:
a. In the case of a Filipino citizen, Philippine
law shall govern substantive validity whether
he executes his will in the Philippines or in a
foreign country.
b. In the case of a foreigner, his national law
shall govern substantive validity whether he
executes his will in the Philippines or in a
foreign country.
Wills; Holographic Wills; Insertions & Cancellations
(1996)
Vanessa died on April 14, 1980, leaving behind
a holographic will which is entirely written,
dated and signed in her own handwriting.
However, it contains insertions and
cancellations which are not authenticated by
her signature. For this reason, the probate of
Vanessa's will was opposed by her relatives
SUGGESTED
who stoodANSWER:
to inherit by her intestacy. May
Yes, the will as originally written may be
Vanessa's holographic will be probated?
probated. The insertions and alterations were
Explain.
void since they were not authenticated by the
full signature of Vanessa, under Art. 814, NCC.
The original will, however, remains valid
because a holographic will is not invalidated by
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
the unauthenticated insertions or alterations
It depends. As a rule, a holographic will is not
(Ajero v. CA, 236 SCRA 468].
adversely affected by Insertions or
cancellations which were not authenticated by
the full signature of the testator (Ajero v. CA,
236 SCRA 468). However, when the insertion
or cancellation amounts to revocation of the
will, Art.814 of the NCC does not apply but
Art. 830. NCC. Art. 830 of the NCC does not
require the testator to authenticate his
cancellation for the effectivity of a revocation
effected through such cancellation (Kalaw v.
Relova, 132 SCRA 237). In the Kalaw case, the
original holographic will designated only one
heir as the only substantial provision which
was altered by substituting the original heir
with another Wills;
Wills; Holographic heir. Witnesses
Hence, if the
unauthenticated
(1994) cancellation amounted to a
On his deathbed, Vicente was executing a will.
revocation of the will, the will may not be
In the room were Carissa, Carmela, Comelio
probated because it had already been revoked.
and Atty. Cimpo, a notary public. Suddenly,
there was a street brawl which caught
Comelio's attention, prompting him to look out
the window. Cornelio did not see Vicente sign a
SUGGESTED
will. Is theANSWERS:
will valid?
a) Yes, The will is valid. The law does not
require a witness to actually see the testator
sign the will. It is sufficient if the witness
could have seen the act of signing had he
chosen to do so by casting his eyes to the
b) Yes, direction.
proper the will is valid. Applying the "test of
position", although Comelio did not actually
see Vicente sign the will, Cornelio was in the
proper position to see Vicente sign if Cornelio
so wished.
Wills; Joint Wills
(2000)
Manuel, a Filipino, and his American wife
Eleanor, executed a Joint Will in Boston,
Massachusetts when they were residing in
said city. The law of Massachusetts allows the
execution of joint wills. Shortly thereafter,
Eleanor died. Can the said Will be probated in
the Philippines for the settlement of her
estate? (3%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(a) Yes, the will may be probated if executed
according to the formalities prescribed by law.
(b) The institution giving X the free portion is
not valid, because the prohibitions under Art.
739 of the Civil Code on donations also apply
to testamentary dispositions (Article 1028,
Civil Code), Among donations which are
considered void are those made between
persons who were guilty of adultery or
concubinage at the time of the donation.
(c) As a general rule, the will should be
admitted in probate proceedings if all the
necessary requirements for its extrinsic validity
have been met and the court should not
consider the intrinsic validity of the provisions
of said will. However, the exception arises when
the will in effect contains only one testamentary
disposition. In effect, the only testamentary
disposition under the will is the giving of the
free portion to X, since legitimes are provided
by law. Hence, the trial court may consider the
9 October 1985. 139 SCRA
intrinsic validity of the provisions of said will.
206).
(Nuguid v. Nuguid, etal.. No. L23445, June 23,
1966, 17 SCRA; Nepomuceno v. CA, L-62952,
Wills; Probate; Notarial and Holographic Wills
(1997)
Johnny, with no known living relatives,
executed a notarial will giving all his estate to
his sweetheart. One day, he had a serious
altercation with his sweetheart. A few days
later, he was introduced to a charming lady
who later became a dear friend. Soon after, he
executed a holographic will expressly revoking
the notarial will and so designating his new
friend as sole heir. One day when he was
clearing up his desk, Johnny mistakenly
burned, along with other papers, the only copy
of his holographic will. His business associate,
Eduardo knew well the contents of the will
which was shown to him by Johnny the day it
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
was probate
The executed.of Athe
few days after
notarial the prosper.
will will burning
incident, Johnny died.
The holographic Both wills
will cannot be were sought
admitted to
to
probate because a holographic will can onlyWill
be probated in two separate petitions. be
either
probatedor both
uponpetitions
evidenceprosper?
of the will itself unless
there is a photographic copy. But since the
holographic will was lost and there was no
other copy, it cannot be probated and therefore
ADDITIONAL ANSWERS:
the notarial will will be admitted to probate
1. In the case of Gan vs. Yap (104 Phil 509),
because there is no revoking will.
the execution and the contents of a lost or
destroyed holographic will may not be
proved by the bare testimony of witnesses
who have seen or read such will. The will
itself must be presented otherwise it shall
produce no effect. The law regards the
document itself as material proof of
authenticity. Moreover, in order that a will
may be revoked by a subsequent will, it is
necessary that the latter will be valid and
executed with the formalities required for
the making of a will. The latter should
possess all the requisites of a valid will
whether it be ordinary or a holographic
will, and should be probated in order that
the revocatory clause thereof may produce
effect. In the case at bar, since the
holographic will itself cannot be presented,
it cannot therefore be probated. Since it
cannot be probated, it cannot revoke the
notarial will previously written by the
decedent.
2. On the basis of the Rules of Court, Rule
76, Sec. 6, provides that no will shall be
proved as a lost or destroyed will unless its
provisions are clearly and distinctly proved
by at least two (2) credible witnesses.
Hence, if we abide strictly by the two-
witness rule to prove a lost or destroyed
will, the holographic will which Johnny
allegedly mistakenly burned, cannot be
probated, since there is only one witness,
Eduardo, who can be called to testify as to
the existence of the will. If the holographic
will, which purportedly, revoked the earlier
notarial will cannot be proved because of
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 excluded the by a legitimate son of the decedent [Art.
is
firstavailable,
will may it now be admitted to Civil Code]. This follows the principle that the
887, New
probate 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 Intent
will, he was under the mistaken belief that the (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 may be possessed at the time of my death" to
revocation by destruction therefore is his favorite brother Manuel. At the time he
dependent on the validity of the second will. wrote the will, he owned only one parcel of
Since it turned out that the second will was land. But by the time he died, he owned twenty
invalid, the tearing of the first will did not parcels of land. His other brothers and sisters
ALTERNATIVE ANSWERS:
produce the effect of revocation. This is known insist that his will should pass only the parcel
No, the first will cannot be admitted to probate.
as the doctrine of dependent relative
While it is true that the first will was successfully of land he owned at the time it was written,
revocation (Molo v. Molo, 90 Phil 37.)
revoked by the second will because the second and did not cover his properties acquired,
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
will was later denied probate, the first will was, which
Manuel should be because
is correct by intestate
undersuccession.
Art. 793,
nevertheless, revoked when the testator Manuel claims otherwise. Who is correct?
NCC, property acquired after the making of a
destroyed
(Diaz it after
v. De executing
Leon, 43 Phil the413
second invalid Explain.
will shall only pass thereby, as if the testator
[1922]).
will. had possessed it at the time of making the
Wills; Testamentary Disposition
will, should it expressly appear by the will that
(2006)
Don died after executing a Last Will and
such was his intention. Since Alfonso's
Testament leaving his estate valued at P12
intention to devise all properties he owned at
Million to his common-law wife Roshelle. He is
the time of his death expressly appears on the
survived by his brother Ronie and his half-
will, then all the 20 parcels of land are
(1) Was
sister Don's testamentary disposition of his
Michelle.
estate in accordance with the law on DONATION
included in the devise.
succession? Whether you agree or not, explain Donation vs. Sale
SUGGESTED
your Explain.Yes, Don's testamentary
answer.ANSWER: (2003)
disposition of his estate is in accordance with a) May a person sell something that does not belong
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 sale. (Article 1434, NCC). If the seller cannot
(2) If Don failed to execute a will during his
anyone. 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 shallrule,
be a liable
personfor
cannot donate
breach of
full-blood brother of Don, 2/3 of the net estate, something
contact. 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 Explain. Jayson
estate? ANSWER: (2.5%) will be entitled to
the 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 Relative Revocation
(4) Assuming further he died intestate,
farther." (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
(2.5%) will, which he tore his first will to pieces. Upon
to 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)
No. In simple
SUGGESTED or pure donation, only the illegal or
ANSWER: property to the
irrevocable, Ferdinand
latter is who revocable.then In sued the to problem
As judge, Icondition
impossible will grant is the motion not
considered to dismiss.
written the
given,
recoverclauses
allthe land or conditions
from the mentioned city government. in the
Armando
but the donation remains valid andthe
has no personality to bring action
becomes deed
Will the of suit
donation,
prosper? except one, are consistent
for annulment of the sale
free from conditions. The condition or mode to Conrado. Only an with the rule
SUGGESTED of irrevocability and would have
ANSWER:
aggrieved party to the contract
being a mere accessory disposition. Its nullity may bring the Ferdinand the
sustained has view
no right that to the
recoverdonationthe land. It is
is inter
action
does not for affect
annulment thereof (Art.
the donation unless 1397. NCC).
it clearly true that the donation was
vivos and therefore valid. The lone exception is revocable because
While
appearsArmando that the donor is heir would andnotsuccessor-in-
have made of breach
the clause which of thereservesconditions. But until
the donor's rightand to
interest
the donation of hiswithout motherthe (Art. mode 1311, NCC), he
or condition. unless
sell thethe propertydonation at any wastime revoked,beforeit his remained
death.
[standing
On the other in place hand, of onerous
his mother) donation has no is valid. aHence,
Such reservation Spouses has been Michael heldand Linda had
to render the
personality
governed by to annul
the rules the contract.
on contracts. Both are Undernot no right to sell the land
donation revocable and, therefore, becomes to Ferdinand. One a
aggrieved
Article 1183, parties
Impossible on account or illegal of their
conditionsown cannot give
donation mortis what he does
causa (Puignot vs. have. What the
Penqflorida, 15
violation
shall annul of the
the obligation
condition of, which or restriction
depends upon on, donors276,
SCRA should at p.have286). done That firstthewas rightto have
was notthe
Donations;
their
them.ownership Formalities;
In these imposed
cases, Mortis
bothby the Causa
the donation.
obligationOnly and donation
exercised annulled or revoked. And after that
(1990)
B ALTERNATIVEisANSWER: immaterial; its reservation was an
thedonated
the donor toor
condition M his
are a parcel
void. heirs ofwould land inhave 1980.the B was done,
implied
A. Until recognition
they couldofvalidly
the contract thedonation
of
have disposed
donor's power
has been
of
to
made the deed
personality to of bring donation,
an action entitled to “Donation
revoke a the land
nullify in favor
theordonation of Ferdinand.
anytime
Inter Vivos,” in a public instrument and or M resolved rescinded under he wished
Article 1191to do of
donation for violation of a condition thereof so.
the Consequently,
Civil Code or revoked it should
under Art.have764 ofbeen
the
accepted
a restriction the donation
thereon. in(Garrido the sameu.document. CA, 236 Donations; Inter Vivos; Acceptance
embodied
Civil Code,in the a last will and testament. The suit
It was450).
SCRA provided in the deed
Consequently, whilethat the land
the donor or (1993)
On January 21, donation
1986, A stands executed effective
a deedand of
for nullity
valid. will thus prosper.
his heirs were not parties to the sale, to
donated shall be immediately delivered they M donation inter vivos of a parcel of land todonor
Accordingly, the sale made by the Dr. B
and that M shall have the right to enjoy the to
who Ferdinand
had earlier cannot be said thereon
constructed to have aconveyedbuilding
have the right
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: to annul the contract of sale title to Ferdinand, who, thereby, has nodisease
cause
fruits fully. in which researches on the dreaded
because
As judge, I The
their will deed
rightsgrant also
are the provided
motion that
prejudiced B was
tobydismiss.
one of of action for recovery of the land acting for
reserving
the contracting the right
parties to dispose
thereof [DBP of said
v. CA, land 96a AIDS were being conducted. The deed,
Compliance with a condition imposed by B.
and The
in his donation
behalf. is onerous, And being
during 342; his (B’s) acknowledged before a notary public, was
SCRA
donor gives riselifetime,
Teves tovs.an PHHC.and that
action M
23to SCRA shall
revoke not
114].the onerous, what applies is the law on contracts,
handed over by A to Dr. B who received it. A
donation under Art. 764, NCC. However, B’s
register
Since the
Armando deed is of
neither donation
the until
donor norafter
heir of
the and not the law on donation (De Luna us.
death.
the donor,Upon he B’s
has death,
no W, B’s
personality widowto and
bring sole
the few days after, A flew to Davao City.
right of action belongs to the donor. Is Abrigo, 81 SCRA 150). Accordingly, the
heir, filed an action Unfortunately, the airplane he was riding
action for annulment.
transmissible
SUGGESTED ANSWER: to hisforheirs, the recoveryand may of the be prescriptive period for the filing of such an
donated land, contending that the donation crashed on landing killing him. Two days after
Yes, the action
exercised against will prosper.
the donee's The donation
heirs. Since is a action would be the ordinary prescriptive
made by mortis Bisisan a donation mortis causa the unfortunate accident. Dr. B, upon advice of
donation
Armando causaofbecause
heir the the
donee, notand of not
reservation the period for contacts which may either be six or
a to donation inter vivos. Will donated
said action a lawyer, executed a deed acknowledged
is
donor, dispose
he has of all the
no legal property
capacity to sue and, for ten depending
SUGGESTED ANSWER: upon whether it is verbal or
prosper? Explain your answer. before
No, theaAnswer:
Alternative notary
donation public
is the accepting
not effective. the The
donation.
law
therefore,
revocation the
of the donation
donation. is Although
revocablehe atiswill.
not written. The filing of case five years later
The
Is the
requireslaw
donationon
thatthe donation
effective?
the separate lays
Explaindown
acceptanceyour a special
answer.
Accordingly,
seeking the donation
such revocation but anrequires annulmentthe of is within prescriptive period of and, the
prescriptive
donee of an period in themust case of breach of
execution
the sale which of a valid his mother,will, either notarial had
the donee, or therefore, the immovable
action can prosper,be done in a
condition,
public document which duringis fourthe years
lifetimefromof non- the
holographic
executed in (Arts
violation 755,of728 theNCC).condition imposed
Donations; Formalities; MortisforCausa compliance thereof
donor (Art. 746 & 749, Civil Code) In(Article 764 Civil Code).
this
by the donor, an action annulment of a
(1998)
Ernesto may donated in a only public instrument a Since
case, the action has prescribed,
B executed the suit will
contract be brought by those who are Donations;
not prosper, Effect; illegalthe& deed immoral ofconditions
acceptance
parcel of land to Demetrio, who accepted it in before a notary public after the
principally or subsidiarily obliged thereby (Art. (1997)
Are the
Donations; effects
Perfectionof illegal anddonor had
immoral
the same
1397, NCC). document.
As an exception It is there to thedeclared
rule, itthat has already died.
conditions
On July 27,on1997,
(1998) simple Pedro donations
mailed the same as
in Manila a
the donation shall take
been held that a person not so obliged may effect immediately,
those effects that would
letter to his brother, Jose, a resident of Ilollo follow when such
with the donee
nevertheless ask having for annulment the right ifto hetake is conditions
City, offering are to imposed
donateonadonations vintage sports con causa car
possession in
prejudiced of histhe rights
land and regardingreceiveone its offruits
the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Such detriment or prejudice cannot be shown onerosa?
which the latter had long been wanting to buy
but not to dispose
contracting parties of(DBPthe landus. CA. while Ernesto
96Armando's
SCRA 342 is No, they don't have the same effect. Illegal or
by Armando. As for a forced heir,following from the former. On August
alive
and as well
other
interestMoreover, cases)as
in the property and ten
can years
show
was, at the detriment
best, a in mere
his impossible conditions in 5, 1997, Jose
simple and
death.
which wouldThe result Ernesto
toofhim also
from reserved
the contract thein called Pedro by cellular
remuneratory donations shall be considered phone to thank him for as
expectancy. sale the land by his mother his
same
which
diddecide
deed
he had
not impair
his noright to sell
intervention,
any ofvested
the property
(Teves
right. vs. should
PHHC, not generosity
imposed. Hence and tothe inform
donation him is that he The
valid. was
he
23 SCRA that to dispose
1141). it at any timeThe fact
- a right sending
donation by mail
Donations; will be his
Condition;
letter of as
considered
Capacity to
acceptance.
simple
Sue or Pedro
pure.
which he did not exercise at all. After his
remains the premature sale made by his never
The
(1996)
received
condition that
or mode letter because
is merely it was
anaaccessorynever
mother Ernesto's
(premature because only half of the Sometime in 1955, Tomas donated parcel of
death, heirs seasonably brought an mailed.
disposition, On Augustand itsa 14, nullity1997, does Pedronot received
affect a
period to
SUGGESTED of ANSWER:
the ban had elapsed) was that not land
1. to Ishis there
stepdaughter perfectedIrene, subject to the
the
action recover the property, alleging telegram
donation, from
unless Iloilo informing him that Jose
Yes, the suit will prosper as vices
the donation did condition
2. Will your that sheit may
answer clearly notappears if that
sell, transfer the
or
voidable
the donation at all,wasnone void of it
as the did not of consent
comply with
donation?
had
donor been would
[2%]
killednotin aberoad
have
the
made
same
accident
the
Jose
the day
donation
did
not
under comply with
Art. 139of of the formalities
the WillNCCthe of
beinga will. In
present. this cede his
mail the same
acceptance for twenty
letter but years.
it was Shortly
received
the formalities
Donations; Conditions; a will. Revocation suitnot prosper? before
Donations
without (August
thein con
mode 13,
causa
or1997) onerosa is governed by
condition.
instance, the fact that the donor did intend thereafter,
by he died. In 1965, because she
Hence,
[5%]
(1991)
Spouses
the
Michael
motion
and or
to dismiss
Linda
should
donated ofa the
be
3- law Pedro
on obligations Manila and days after Jose's
contracts, underdeath?
which
to transfer
granted. ownership possession needed money for medical expenses, Irene
[3%]
hectare residential land to the City of Baguio an impossible or Illicit condition annuls the
donated property to the donee until the donor's sold the land to Conrado. The following year,
on thewould condition obligation dependent upon the condition
death, resultthat the city mortis
in a donation government causa Irene died, leaving as her sole heir a son by
would buildkind thereon a public the park with a where the condition is positive and suspensive.
and in this of disposition, formalities the name of Armando. When Armando learned
boxing arena, thebeconstruction of which shall If the impossible or illicit condition is negative,
of a will should complied with, otherwise, that the land which he expected to inherit had
commence within six In (6)this
months from donation
the date it is simply considered as not written, and the
the donation is void. Instance, been sold by Irene to Conrado, he filed an
the parties obligation is converted into a pure and simple
mortis causaratify embodiedthe donation. only inThe a donee
public action against the latter for annulment of the
ALTERNATIVE
accepted ANSWER:
the donation and the title to the one. However, in order that an illegal condition
instrument without the formalities
One of the essential distinctions between a donation inter of a vivos
will sale, on the ground that it violated the
property may annul a contract, the impossibility must
could
and notwas
a donation have
mortis transferred
is that whilein
causatransferred itsownership
the former name.
is Five of restrictionANSWER:
ADDITIONAL imposed by Tomas. Conrado filed a
years elapsed buttothe public park with the exist at the time of the creation of the
disputed property another. motion to dismiss, on the ground that
boxing arena was never started. Considering obligation; a supervening impossibility does
Armando did not have the legal capacity to
the failure of the donee to comply with the not affect the existence of the obligation.
sue. If you were the Judge, how will you rule
condition of the donation, the donor-spouses on this motion to dismiss? Explain.
sold the
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
had donated
hand, assumingtothat said thebaby sportsbefore car costs it wasless than
born
Code
not been
which fixed
requires
in thethe Deeddonation
of Donation,
and thethe acceptance
donee is
then
that the
P5,000.00the baby
considering donation died?maybe Statedoral, otherwise,
but still, is the
the yet
thereof
not default
to be inin his a public
obligation instrument
until the in period
order to is
simultaneous
donation validdelivery
and binding? of theExplain.
car is needed (5%) and fixed
be valid.
by order
The acceptance
of the court notunder
beingArticle
in a public
1197
there being
SUGGESTED ANSWER:none, the donation was never of
instrument,
the New the Civilpart Code. which
Since is not
the onerous
period has is
The donation is valid and binding, being an act
perfected. not
void been
and Rosafixedmay as recover
yet, theit donee
from Amanda.
is not yet
favorable
SUGGESTED ANSWER:to the unborn child, but only if the default, and therefore the donor has no cause
2. Yes,
baby had theananswer
intra-uterine is the life same. If Jose's
of not less thanmail Donations;
of action toUnregistered;
revoke the donation. Effects; Non-Compliance;
(Dissenting
containing his acceptance
seven months and provided there was due of the donation was Resolutory Condition (2006) CJ, Central Philippine
opinion of Davide,
received by of
acceptance Pedro the afterdonation the former's
by the proper death, Spouses Alfredo
University v. Court and Racquel246
of Appeals, wereSCRA active
511
then the donation issaid stillchild.
void Ifbecause under
person
Article
less than
representing
734 of the
seven monthsCivil of Code,
the child
the donation
intra-uterine
had
is
life, it
PROPERTY
members of a religious congregation. They
[1995])
donated a parcel of land in favor of that
perfected
is not deemed the moment born since the itdonordied knows
less than of the
24 congregation in a duly notarized Deed of
acceptance
hours following by the donee. The
its delivery, in whichdeathease of Jose
the Accretion; Alluvion
Donation, subject to the condition that the
before
ALTERNATIVE PedroANSWER: could receive the acceptance (2001)
For many years, the Rio Grande river
donation never became effective since the Minister shall construct thereon a place of
Even
indicates if thethat baby the had an intra-uterine was life of deposited soil along its bank, beside the titled
donee never became adonation
person, birth never
being worship within 1 year from the acceptance of
more than
perfected. Under seven months and the
Article 746 acceptance must donation was land of Jose. In time, such deposit reached an
determinative
Donations; of personality.
Requisites; Immovable the donation. In an affidavit he executed on
properly
be made during accepted, the itlifetime
would ofbeboth voidthe fordonor
not area of one thousand square meters. With the
Property
Anastacia
having purchased
conformed with a house
the proper and lot
form. on
In behalf of the congregation, the Minister
and the donee. permission of Jose, Vicente cultivated the said
installments
order to be valid, at athe housing
donation project in Quezon
and acceptance accepted the donation. The Deed of Donation
area. Teninstead
However, yearsoflater, a big flood
constructing a place occurred
of Deeds. in
worship,
City.
of Subsequently,
personal property exceeding she was five employed
thousand in was not registered with the Registry of
the river and transferred
the Minister constructed a bungalow on the the 1000 square
California
pesos should and be ain year writing. later, she 748,
(Article executedpar. 3)a meters tohethe
property usedoppositeas hisbank, besideDisappointed
residence. the land of
Donations;
deed of donation, with Resolutory Condition
duly authenticated by the Agustin. The landthe transferred is nowthe contested
with the Minister, spouses revoked donation
(2003)
In
Philippine Consulate in Los a
1950, Dr. Alba donated parcel of
Angeles, land to
California, by Jose
and and Agustin
demanded that asheriparianvacateowners and by
the premises
Central
donatingUniversitythe house on condition
and lot that to her the friend
latter SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Vicente who But
immediately. claims theownership by prescription.
Minister refused to leave,
must
Amanda. establishThe a latter medicalbrought college on thethedeed land to of Jose should prevail. The disputed area, which is
Who should
claiming that prevail,?
aside fromWhy? using(5%)
the bungalow as his
be namedtoafter
donation the him. owner In of the the yearproject2000, the and an alluvion, belongs by right of accretion to
residence, he is also using it as a place for worship
heirs
discoveredof Dr. Alba that filed an action left
Anastacia to annul the
unpaid Jose, the riparian owner (Art. 457 CC). When,
on special occasions. Under the circumstances, can
donation
installments andand for real the estate
reconveyance taxes. Amanda of the as given in the problem, the very same area"
Alfredo and Racquel evict the Minister and
property
paid thesedonated so that to thethemdonation for the failure,
in her favor after
can was "transferred"
recover possession ofby theflood
property? watersIf youto were
the
50 years, of the
be registered in the University
project owner's to established
office. Two on opposite bank, it became
the couple's counsel, what action you take to an avulsion and
the property a medical
months later, Anastacia died, leaving her school named after ownership
ALTERNATIVE
protect thereof
interest is
the ANSWER: ofretained
your clients?by Jose(5%) who has
their
mother father.
RosaThe as University
her sole heir. opposed Rosa thefiled
actionan two years
Yes, Alfredotoand remove Racquel it (Art.
can 459,
bringCC). Vicente's
an action for
on the ground of prescription
action to annul the donation on the ground that and also because claim based
ejectment on prescription
against the Ministeris for baseless
recovery since
of
it had not
Amanda didused
not the giveproperty
her consent for somein thepurpose
deed of his possession
possession of thewas by mere
property evicttolerance
the Minister of Jose
and
SUGGESTED ANSWER: and, therefore,
recover possession didof not the adversely
property. An affect Jose's
action for
other
donation than
Rosadonation
The or
is correctthatin stated
a
may because separate
be revoked. in the
theThe donation.
public
donation Should
instrument.
is
non-established void.
the opposition of the possession ofand
annulment the ownership (Art. 537, CC).
donation, reconveyance and
Amanda
The
of theproperty replied
medical donated
college thatonUniversity
thedonated
was
the andonationtoproperty
thewas
immovable. actionan
For
was damages
of Dr.
onerous Alba’s
one heirs
because be sustained?
she had Explain.
to pay unpaid Inasmuchshould as hisbepossession
filed to protect the interests
is merely that ofofa
such
a donation
resolutory to be imposed
condition valid, Articleon the 749 donationof theby Accretion;
my client. Avulsion is an onerous donation and
installments andrequires
taxes; hence her acceptance holder, heThe donation
cannot acquire the disputed area by
New
the CivilAlthough
donor. Code the Deed both the
of Donation donation
did not and
fix (2003)
Andres
therefore is shall
a riparian
be governed owner by of the
a parcel
rules of on
maytime be implied. Who prescription.
the
the acceptance to beisin
for the established correct?
of public
a (2%)
the medical college,
instrument. registered Because
contracts. land. His there land,
was no however,
fulfillmenthas or
the failure of the donee
There being no showing that Amanda's to establish the medical gradually with
compliance diminished
the condition in area
which is due to thein
resolutory
college
acceptance after fifty
was (50) made yearsin from
a public the making
instrument, of the current ofthe
character, thedonation
river, while may now the beregistered
revoked and land all
donation
the donation shouldisbevoid. considered as occurrence
The contention thatof the
the of Mario
rights
(Central whichonthe thedonee
Philippine opposite bankacquired
may have
University, has No.
G.R. gradually
under
112127, it July
resolutory
donation is condition,
onerousand and,the therefore,
donation may neednownot be increased
ALTERNATIVE
17,1995).
shall be deemedin area
ANSWER: lostby and 200square
extinguished meters.
revoked.
comply with WhileArticlethe general 749 for rulevalidity
is that in is case
without the No, an action
(a) Who has the for ejectment
better right willovernot prosper.
the 200-I
period
merit. is Thenotdonation
fixed in the agreement
is not onerous of because
the parties, it would
square advice
meter Alfredo area that and hasRacquel
been added that theto
the
did period must be on
not impose fixed first by the
Amanda thecourt before the
obligation to (b) Mayregistered
Minister,
Mario’s a
by third person
constructing
land, acquire
Marioa structure said which
or Andres? 200-
obligation
pay the balance may be demanded,
on the purchase the period of fifty
price or (50)
the square
also meter
serves asland
a place by prescription?
of worship, has pursued
years
arrears in real estate taxes. Amanda took to
was more than enough time for the donee it the objective of the donation. His taking up
comply with thetocondition.
upon herself pay those Hence,
amounts in thisvoluntarily.
case, there residence in the bungalow may be regarded as
is
For noa more
donation needtofor be theonerous,court the to fix the period
burden must a casual breach and will not warrant
ALTERNATIVE
because such ANSWER:
procedure with the condition.
be imposed by the donor on the donee. (Central
In the revocation of the donation. Similarily,
Neither
ANOTHER Rosa
SUGGESTED nor Amanda
ANSWER: is correct. The
Philippine University v. CA. 246 SCRA 511).
problem,
The donationthere is nonot
may such asasburden
yet imposed
revoked. by
The therefore,
SUGGESTED ANSWER:an action for revocation of the
donation is onerous only to the portion of 1. None.will There is no(C.perfected donation.
the donor oncorrespondingthe
of adonee. medicalThe donation donation be denied J. Yulo & Sons, Inc.
establishment
the property tocollege
the value of not
is not thea 2004).
Under Article 748 of the Civil Code, the
being
resolutory onerous,or it must comply with butthe v. Roman Catholic Bishop, G.R. No. 133705,
installments andsuspensive
taxes paid by condition
Amanda. a
donation of a movable may be made orally or
formalities of Article 749.
“charge”, obligation”, or a “mode”. The non- March 31, 2005; Heirs ofRozendo Sevilla v. De
in writing.
Leon, G.R. No. If149570,
the value March of12,the personal
The portion
compliance with in excess the charge thereof orismodenot onerous.
will give Donations; Validity; Effectivity; for Unborn Child
property donated exceeds five thousand pesos,
The donor
the onerousthe portionright istogovernedrevoke the by the rules
donation (1999)
Elated that her sister who had been married
the donation and the acceptance shall be
on contracts
within four (4) years whichfrom do the nottime require
the charge the for five years was pregnant for the first time,
(10) years from the time the cause ofwith,
action made in writing. Assuming that the value of
acceptance
was supposed by to the havedonee been to complied
be in any form.or Alma donated P100,000.00 to the unborn
accrued. Inasmuch as thespecific
time is toperformance
established the thing donated, a vintage sports car,
Theenforce
to onerous the part,
charge therefore,
by valid. The child. Unfortunately, the baby died one hour
the medical college exceeds P5,000.00 then the donation and the
portion
within which
ten is not has onerous must comply with after delivery. May Alma recover the
acceptance must be in writing. In this
Article 749 of the New Civil P100.000.00 that she
instance, the acceptance of Jose 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 lost it by operation of law. That portion of reasonable
the rent, if the owner of the land does not
become
land haspart 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 Faith
in area, because it is not included in the (1999)
Torrens Title of the riparian owner. Hence, (a) Because of confusion as to the boundaries
P.D. No.
this does1529.
notThe fact that
involve the the riparian land is of the adjoining lots that they bought from the
imprescriptibility
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 Faith belief that it is the land that he bought from
607 (1991).
(1992)
A owns a parcel of residential land worth the subdivision company. What are the
(b) Suppose
respective X was
rights in and
of X goodYfaith
withbut Y knew
respect to
P500,000.00 unknown to A, a residential house
that
X's X was(3%)
house? 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
respective rights of the parties over X's house
the premise that B is a builder in good faith
in this case? (2%)
and A is a landowner in good faith. a) May A
acquire the house built by B? If so, how? b) If
the of
landtheincreased
building of in the house
value thereon, what
to P500,000.00 by
amount
reason 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)
requireIfB to B buy
voluntarily
the land? buys the land as
desired 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
(b)
CivilA Code.
should pay B the sum of P50,000. Article
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 accretion which they gradually received from
oblige the one who built to pay the price of Andres cannot
the effects of the claim
currentthat the
of the increase in
waters”.
(d)
the If B agrees
land to buy
if its value is land but fails to pay,
not considerably moreA Mario’s land is his own, because such is an
can haveofthe
than that 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 Mario’s land, a process
the builder cannot be obliged to buy the land called “avulsion”. He can no longer claim
if its value is considerably more than that of ownership of the portion of his registered land
the building. In such case, he shall pay which was 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)
Chattel
The caseMortgage;
standing there
of Pecson before Immovables
X
v. acquired
CA, 244 the SCRA title407 to the, island.
square
was
not then
foreclosure meters.
valuedsale, Jose only claimsat P1that
foreclosed Million.
Mike mortgage
the Lawrence
is a builderwas in
and
(1994)
the
bank
Vini
The problem.
cannot
constructed
applicable to be In considered
the
a buildingPecsonon as case,
a parcel
mortgagee
the builder
of land in insolve
because
house
bad
declared
acquiredfaithhe
and should
X’slot. know the boundaries
Learning of of the his lot, and demands
proceedings
was
good
he the
leased faith.
owner
from Onof this
the land
Andrea. ground,
He who chattel later
Z’smortgaged
demand
lost the that
nt. the portion of
conducted bythethehouse which encroached
bank, Z is nowondemanding his land should
property
against
the landthe at
toBank
aFelicia.
public
is valid sale
When and
due sustainable.
he tocouldnon-paymentnot pay that Assuming
be destroyed
the bank orthat
removed. theMikeaircraft
reconvey repliesto that
himwas
he isX’sasold
builder
house for
in good
orPl
of taxes. TheFelicia
Felicia. Court ruled that Articleforeclosure
initiated 448 does Million,
faith
pay and
X’s give
offersloanto buythe
tothehimorder
land occupiedof preference
plus by the buildingIs
interests. of the
instead.
Z’s
Chattel
not applyMortgage;
proceedings. to the Vinicase Possession
claimed where that thethe ownerbuilding of the creditors
he SUGGESTED
1) Is Mike a builder
demand of Lawrence
ANSWER:
against in goodthe faith orandbank distribute
bad faith? Why? (3%)
valid the
and 2)
(1993)
A,
land about
is the to leave
builder butthe whocountrylater
had constructed on the leased land cannot be sustainable? Why? 5% on
lost athe foreign
land; No,
SUGGESTED
amount
Whose Z’s ofdemand
preference ANSWER:
P1 Million.
should is
be not
followed? valid.
Why? A
(2%) building is
assignment,
not
validly beingforeclosed entrusted
applicable,because to theBthe hisindemnity
brand new
building was, car
thatby Assuming
immovable that
or the
real aircraft
property was sold
whether for it P1 is
and its
SUGGESTED
should
law, certificate
be paid to of
ANSWERS:
an immovable. Isregistration.
the buyer
Vini correct?mustFalsifying
be the fair A's Million,
erected
SUGGESTED there
by the
ANSWER: is noownerorder ofof preference.
the land, byThe a
a) The
signature. Chattel B sold Mortgage
A's building is
car to C andvoid and cannot
for P200,000.00. be 1)
P1 Yes,
Million
usufructuary, Mike willisor aallbuilder
by goa to
lessee.in
the good
bank
It faith.
may as be aThere
chattel
treated is
market value of the not just the
foreclosed
C then becausethe
registered thecar The building
in his name.is an To as no showing
mortgagee
a movable that by
because when a the he parties
chattel built his to
mortgage house, under
chattel he
cost of construction thereof. Court opined
immovable
ALTERNATIVE
complete and
ANSWER:
the that cannot
needed be an object of a knew
Art.
mortgage 2241that (4)
buta portion
NCC
such defeats
is thereof
binding Art. encroached
2244
only (12)
between and on
in that case to amount,
do otherwise C borrowed would
Pedro
chattel
P100.000.00 is correct.
mortgage. In Pecson vs. CA, it was held Jose's
(14}.
them lot.
Art.
and Unless
2241
not on (3)one and
third is versed
(5)
parties are in
not the science
applicable
(Evangelista v.
unjustly enrichfrom the new the owner savings of the and land. loan
b)
that It
association depends.
Article in546 hisIf the
the building
ofoffice, New Civil
constituting was Codeintendeddoes
a chattel of surveying,
because
Alto Surety theCol, he cannot
aircraft
inc. 103 isdetermine
no 401
Phil. longer the precise
in the
[1958]). In
and
not is built
specifically ofstate
lightFor howmaterials,
the value the chattel
of pay
useful Easement vs.
ofortheUsufruct
mortgage on the car. failure of C to the boundaries
possession
this case, since location
the bank of
creditor. is not his a property
party to the by
mortgage
improvements may be
should considered
be determined as valid
in fixing as (1995)
1.
merelyWhat is
examiningeasement? his Distinguish
title. In the easement
absence of
amount owed, the savings and loan association chattel mortgage, it is not bound by it, as far
between
the amount the ofparties
indemnity and it
that may the be considered
owner of the 2.
from Can
contrary there
usufruct. proof, be the (a) law an easement
presumes over
that the a
filed in the RTC a complaint for collection with as the Bank is concerned, the chattel
in
landrespect
should to them
pay to asthe movable
builder property,
in good since
faith. usufruct?
encroachment (b) a usufruct
was over
done anin easement?
good (c)
faith
application for issuance of a writ of replevin to mortgage, 2} None of
does not exist. Moreover, the chattel
the preferences shall be Explain. followed.
it can the
Since be removed
objective of from
of thetheone law place
is toso to another.
adjust the an easement
[SUGGESTED
Technogas over
ANSWER:
Phils,notanotherv. CA, easement?
268 SCRA 5, 15
obtain possession vehicle that the mortgage
The
(a) preference
The
does
rights of of Y,
exist.
Mike
as
Moreover,
cannot
owner of prevail
the
the chattel
lot, because
and of
But
rights if the
of building
the parties is ofin
chattel mortgage could be foreclosed. The RTC understrong
such material
manner and
as "tois (1997)].
mortgage is void because it was not registered.
X, as builder Articleof448 of the Civil Code,governed it is the
not
issued capable
administer the complete
writof being
of replevin. removed
justice to
The orcar
both transferred
ofwasthem thenin Assuming that ita is housevalid, thereon,
it does are not bind the
owner
by Art. of
448 the
of the land Civil who has the option or
without
such
seizeda If being
way
from C destroyed,
as neither
and sold bythe
one nor
the chattel
the other
sheriff mortgage may
atchattel
public Bank because it was not annotated on the to
Code which grants title Y
c)
is void
enrich and it cannot
himself was of thebe
that land
foreclosed.
which which does Vini
not belong choice,
ANOTHER
the right not to the
SUGGESTEDchoose builder.
ANSWER:
between On the two other hand, the
remedies: (a)
auction at which the savings of theZ’sland mortgaged to the bank. Z cannot
mortgaged,
SUGGESTED
to him", the such
ANSWER:
Court mortgage ruled wouldthe
that beand void,loan
basis or
of
No,
option
appropriate demand
belongs the toagainst
Jose, he
house by the bank
cannot
indemnifying is not
demand valid.
X that
for
association
2) iswas
Pablounenforceable, the lone
entitled tosincebidder.
the rentalsAccordingly,
of the the demand
His demand that thatthe theBank bank pay him
reconvey the
to loan
him X’s Z
at least
reimbursement should be thehe was
fair not
market the
its portion
value plusof the
whatever house encroaching
necessary on
expenses his
the car
building.
If what was
As
was sold
the to
owner it. A
of few
the
mortgaged as a chattel is the house days
land, later,
Pablo A
is extended to
presupposesX, because that the he Bankhas was
a real not privy
right
owner
value ofofthe thebuilding.
land. land
thesuch be
latterdestroyed may or have removed incurred because forthis the is
arrived
also
building,
SUGGESTED the from owner
the
ANSWER: his foreign
of the
chattel assignment.
buildingis being
mortgage Learning
valid an as to over
not the
one
preservation
loan
of
transaction.
house.
theof the All land,
options that given Zorhas (b)by iscompel
a
law personal
toX the to
of whatthehappened
accession
Under
between thereto.
the prevailing
parties torulings
However,his car,
only, ofPedro
on Agrounds
the sought
who of
Supreme to
is right
owner
buy the against
ofland theXifland.for
thedamages The owner
price offor the breach
may of
is the
land choose not
recover
entitled
Court,
estoppel possession
to
A canwhichretain
recover the
wouldthe and ownership
building
car from
preclude is also
thethe of it from
entitled
Savings
mortgagor contract
between
considerably of loan.
the more appropriation
than the value of what of the was built
house.
theretain
to
and
from savings
Loan
assailingthe and
rentals.
Association loan
the contract He, association.
however,
providedon thehe shall
pays
ground Canapplythe
that A Theafter
If it is,
treatment of a house, even if built on
payment
then X of indemnity,
cannot be obliged or to compel to buy the the
recover
the
price rentals
at his
which tocar the from indemnitythe
Association
its subject-matter is an immovable. Therefore builder savings
payable
bought and to
the loan
him
car rented land, as movable property is void
land but to he pay shallfor the
pay land
reasonable if the value
rent, of
and thein
ALTERNATIVE
association?
after
at deducting
a public
Vini's defense
ANSWER:
Explain
auction. isreasonableyour answer.
Under
untenable, cost
that and of Felicia
doctrine,repairthere and
can insofar
ALTERNATIVE
SUGGESTED as ANSWER:
third
ANSWER: persons, such as the bank, are
Pablo is entitled to the rentals. Pedro became land
case
1) Since is
of not
Mikethe considerably
disagreement,
cannot be other themore
considered court than that
shall
a builder of
fix the
the
in
maintenance.
has been an
foreclose theunlawful deprivationthe by B (b)
of A of concerned. On lot the owner Y is hand, deemed theto be Bank
a possessor in mortgage
bad faith over from the time building, he building.
terms
good
bad
already
of the
faith
faith had
Otherwise,
(Art lease.
because
a 453),
real he
X
right
the
as
builder
built
the
over his
party
the
shall pay
house
in
house goodwithout
and
rent
faith
lot
his car and,
observing, therefore,
however, Aprocedure
thebelongs can recover it from for the portion of the land encroached.
learned that the land to prescribed
Pablo. As first
may determining removethe
(a) mortgage the corners
houseand and boundaries
demand
anythe
for personexecution in possession
of sale of thereof.
a judgment since it when
But debtor's the was annotated at the back
such, he loses his right to the building, of
of his Torrens
the lot to make
indemnification for
title. sure
damages
The that later
bank his construction
suffered became by him,
the
was bought at a public
immovable Ruleauction in good faith by
including theunder fruits thereof, 39,exceptRules theofright Court, of was
or
owner (b)within
indemand
the the perimeter
payment
foreclosure of the
of
sale. his
Z property.
value
cannot of
ask He
the
the
Builder;Savings
specifically, Good and vs.
that
Faith Loan
the Bad Association,
noticeFaith; ofAccession
auction he must sale ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
retention.
d) The be
ALTERNATIVE problemANSWER: that in Vini mortgaged the land could
houseto have
plus done
payreparation this with
forplus damages the help
(ArtThere of
447, in a
reimburse
should
(2000)
a) Demetrio the knew
published Association acar
that newspaper
a at piece
the of price
general
of landfor bankThe answer
for X’s loan
hinges on whether
interest.
or not the bank
is
Yes,
by wayA can recover his from the Savings geodetic
relation engineer
privitytoofArt as
454). betweenan ordinary
Y continues prudent
as theowner and of
which
circulation.theofcar a chattel
thewas bought. mortgage is untenable. no
is
contract Z and bank.
bordering
and Loan
Land can only Association.
be beach
the subjectInbelonged
a Chattelmatter toMortgage,
Ernesto.
of a real thean lotinnocent
reasonable and becomes, man mortgagee under in
would the dogood under
second faith or
option,thea
However,
the mortgagor
estate mortgage sincemust the
andbe latter
onlythean was
absolute
absolutestudying
ownerowner in
of mortgagee
2)
ownerJose's
circumstances.of the in bad faith.
preference
house In theafter
as should
well, former
be followed.
he payscase, the Z’s
He
Europe
thereal
of and
thingproperty no
mortgaged. one was
mayFurthermore, taking
mortgage a the care of
person
parcel the
of demand
may
Builder; have
sums demanded. is
Good the notFaith valid.
building vs. In
removed
Bad the
Faith latter
at the case,
expense Z’s
land,
constituting
land. Demetrio
(Articlethe2085 occupied
mortgage (2) Civil the
mustCode). same
have the Hence, and
free demand
of Mike,
(2000)
In good against
appropriate
faith, Pedro the the bank
building
constructed is asavalid
his
five-door and
own,
constructed
disposal
But
there canof
on the
be thereon
the
no property,
assumption
foreclosure. nipaand sheds
thatin the with
what tables
absence was sustainable.
oblige
commercial Mikebuilding to buy onthe theland land and of Pablo ask who for
and
thereof, benches must which
be
mortgaged by way of chattel mortgage was he
legally rented
authorized out to people
for the Under
damages
was also the in Torrens
in good addition system
faith. to
When ofany land
Pablo of registration,
the three
discovered
who building
purpose.
the want In to havethe a picnic
case
on leased at by the
bar,
land, these
then beach. When
theessential
parties every
options. person
the construction,(Articles dealing he with
449, 450,registered
opted 451, CC) land may
to appropriate the
Ernesto
requisites returned,
did he demanded theAreturn of Chattel
rely Mortgage vs.
building by paying Pedro the certificate
on the correctness Pledge of the cost thereof. of
are treating thenot apply
building to chattel.
as the mortgagor building B,
Chattel
the land. Mortgage; Preference of Creditors (1999)
Distinguish
title and the a law contract
will not ofin chattel
any way mortgage
oblige to
hence
that not Demetrio
is the Chattel agreed was
Mortgage
merely superimposed to do not
on so after
valid.
the ground he However, Pedro insists that he should be paid
(1995)
Lawrence,
has an
is removed a retired
immovable the nipa airsheds.
propertyforce captain,
Ernesto
and a decided
refused
chattel from
him
the to a look
contract
current behind of pledge.
market or beyond
value(2%) thethe
of certificate
building, in
SUGGESTED
to go into ANSWER:the air transport business. He order
SUGGESTED to determine
ANSWER: the condition of the title.
let Demetrio
mortgage
Ernesto is oncorrect,said remove
building
Demetrio the is nipa
is legally sheds
a builder voidon
in bad the
but which was much higher because of inflation. 1)
purchased an aircraft in cash except for an In
He a not
is contract
boundPedro by ofanything
CHATTEL MORTGAGE
not annotated or
ground
the parties that these
cannot already
be
faith because he knew beforehand that the allowed belongedto disavow to him their by Who is correct or Pablo?(1%) 2) In in the
possession
reflected belongs to the creditor, while a
outstanding
right
contract of
land belonged accession.
on accountbalance Who
to Ernesto,
of
is P500,000.00.
correct?
of under
estoppel (3%)
Article by 449 deed. He
of meantime that Pedro is not yet paid, who to
in the certificate. If he proceeds is
contract
buy the land of PLEDGE
orrentals
accept of possession
it as belongs to the
theabuilding,
collateralPedro relying
incurred an SUGGESTED ANSWER:
However,
the NewMortgage; if indebtedness
Civil third
Code, parties one who
of
areP300,000.00
involved
builds onsuch
for
the entitled
debtor.
Pablo
to the
iscertificate,
correct. Under Article 448 of the New
or
Chattel
repairs
chattel with an Immovables
aircraft repair company. He on
Pablo?the (1%) he is considered a buyer or
land
(2003)
X ofmortgage
constructed another house is void what
loses and has no
iswhichbuilteffect.without A chattel
Civil
a mortgageeCode mortgage
in
in goodrelationisfaith.
a formal
toOnArticle contract
this 546,
ground, whilethe
the
also borroweda P1 Millionon a lot from a bank he was forleasing
right to indemnity. Ernesto becomes the owner a pledge
However,
builder
Bank in is
acquires a a
good real
bank a contract.
is
faith
clean not is an ordinary
entitled
title to the to a
landmortgagee.
refund
and the of
Y.
fromLater, X executed
additional capital and constituted a chattel a chattel mortgage over
of thehouse
While nipa
on ashedstest byflightright ofsecurity
the accession.
aircraft Hence,
crashed Unlike
the private individuals,
necessary and useful a bank is incurred
expenses expected by to
said in favor of
mortgage on the aircraft to secure the loan. Z as for a loan house.
Ernesto
causing physical isfrom
wellthe within
injuries his torightalater,
thirdin X refusing
party who to A
him, contract
exercise or the greaterof chattel
increase carein and mortgage
value whichmust
prudence theinland be
its
obtained
Builder; Good Faith vs. latter. BadnipaStill
Faith;sheds. Presumption acquired
allow
was awardedthe removal of the recorded
dealings.
may have in
The a public
ascertainment
acquired instrument
by of the
reason to bind
condition of third
ofthe a
ownership
(2001)
Mike built a house of damages
thehisland
on
ofwhere
lot in Pasay
P200,000.00.
City.hisTwohouseyears later,wasa
persons
property
improvement, while
offered a
at contract
asthe collateral
option of pledge
for
of a loan
the must must
landowner.be in be
constructed,
survey disclosedinsuranceafter
that which
a portion of thehebuilding
mortgagedactually stood both on
Lawrence's claim foradamage to the a
The public
standard
builder instrumentand
is entitled containing
indispensable to a refund description
part of of the of
its
house
the and
neighboring land
land of in
Jose, favor
to the of
extent of 40 bank, which
aircraft waswas denied thus leaving him nothing the thing
operation. pledged
The bankand
expenses he incurred, and not to the market the
should date thereof
have to
conductedbind
mortgage annotated on the Torrens
else but the aircraft which third
value persons.
further ofinquiry regarding thePage
the improvement house59 of 119on
standing
Certificate of Title. When X failed to pay his the land 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)
The(a)
2. claim
Therefor can
damagesbe nomay easement
also be over
premised a usufruct.
in to
there
Art.
time.is a
Asdegree
Tomas'ofbusinessregularity grows,
to indicate
the need continuity
for use of
of
easement
(4)
Since
2191 NCC.an may be constituted only on a possession and that if coupled with an apparent sign, such
corporeal
ANOTHER immovable property, no easement easement of way may be acquired by prescription.
ANSWER:
Hernando is
may be constituted not correct. Articlewhich
on a usufruct 637 is ofnotthea ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
New
(b) Civil
There Code
corporeal right can provides
be no that the
usufruct owner
over of the
an Yes, Ernie could close the pathway on his land.
higher
easement. estate cannot
While make works
a usufruct maybewhich will
created Don has not acquired an easement of right of
increase
over a right,the such
burdenrighton mustthehaveservient estate.
an existence way either by agreement or by judicial grant.
(Remman
of its ownEnterprises,
independent Inc.of v.the
CA,property.
330 SCRA A Neither did the buyers. Thus, establishment of
145 [2000])
servitude . The be
cannot ownerthe of the higher
object estate
of a usufruct a road or unlawful use of the land of Ernie
may be compelled to pay
because it has no existence independent of damages to the would constitute an invasion of possessory
Easements;
owner of
ALTERNATIVE the Classification
lower
ANSWERS: estate.
property to which It attaches. rights of the owner, which under Article 429 of
(1998)
There cannot
Distinguish be a usufruct over an easement
between: the Civil Code may be repelled or prevented.
1.
since an Continuous
easementand discontinuous
presupposes two (2) Ernie has the right to exclude any person from
2.
tenementsApparent
easements; |2%]
belonging and non-apparent
to different persons and ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
the enjoyment and disposal of the land. This is
3.
the rightPositive
easements; and [2%]
attaches and
to thenegative
tenement and not to Yes, Ernie may close the pathway, subject
an attribute of ownership that Ernie enjoys.
easements.
the owner.[1%] While a usufruct gives the however, to the rights of the lot buyers. Since
usufructuary a right to use, right to enjoy, there is no access to the public road, this
right to the fruits, and right to possess, an results in the creation of a legal easement. The
However, a usufruct can be
easement gives only a limited use of the constituted over a lot buyers have the right to demand that Ernie
property that
servient estate. has in its favor an easement or grant them
SUGGESTED a right of way. In turn, they have
ANSWER:
one burdened with servitude. The 1. An EASEMENT
the obligation to pay the or value
servitude is an
of the portion
usufructuary will exercise the easement encumbrance imposed
used as a right of way, plus damages. upon an immovable for
during the period of usufruct. the
c) benefit
What are of another
the rights immovable
of the belonging
lot 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 USUFRUCT
SUGGESTED gives a right to enjoy the property
ANSWER:
easement, although it is a real right over an Prior to the
of another with grant theofobligation
an easement, the buyersitsof
of preserving
the
form dominant
and estate
substance, have no other
unless right
the than titleto
immovable, is not a corporeal right. There is a
Roman maxim which says that: There can be compel grant
constituting of
it oreasement
the law of right
otherwise of way. Since
provides.
the
(Art.properties
562, NCC). of the buyers are surrounded by
no servitude over another servitude.
Easement; Effects; Discontinuous Easements; Permissive other immovables
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: and has no adequate outlet
Use (2005) Easement
to a publicishighway
an encumbrance imposedisupon
and the isolation not duean
Don was the owner of an agricultural land with immovable
to their acts, for
buyers themay benefit
demand of
an another
easement
no access to a public road. He had been of immovable
a right ofbelonging
way provided to a proper
different owner in
indemnity is
passing through the land of Ernie with the which
paid and casethe it is
right called
of way real
demanded or predial
is the
latter's acquiescence for over 20 years. shortest easement, and or for least
the benefit of a community
prejudicial to Ernie. or
Subsequently, Don subdivided his property into Easement; group of
(Villanueva personsv. in which
Velasco, case
G.R. it is
No.known as
130845, a
The Nuisance;
distinctions Abatement usufruct
20 residential lots and sold them to different November personal 27, 2000). between
easement. and
(2002) owns
Lauro
a)
easement an agricultural
Usufruct
are: includes land all planted
uses ofmostly the
persons. Ernie blocked the pathway and property with fruitand trees. Hernando owns
for all purposes, including an adjacent jus
a) Did Don
refused to letacquire
the buyers an easement
pass through of his
rightland.of
land devoted
fruendi. Easement to hisispiggery
limited to business,
a specific which
use. is
way? Explain. (2%) b) (2)Usufruct
two meters higher may inbeelevation. constituted Although on
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
No, Don did not acquire an easement of right immovable
Hernando has
or constructed
movable property.
a waste Easement
disposal
of way. An easement of right of way is lagoon may be for constituted
his piggery, onlyit on is aninadequate
immovable to
discontinuous in nature — it is exercised only if contain c)
property. Easement
the waste is not extinguished
water containing by thepig
a man passes over somebody's land. Under death manure, of and
the itowner of the dominant
often overflows and inundates estate
while usufruct
Article 622 of the Civil Code, discontinuous Lauro’s plantation. This has increased the is extinguished by the death of
the usufructuary
easements, whether apparent or not, may only acidity of the soil in the plantation, causing the unless a contrary intention
be acquired by virtue of a title. The Supreme appears. d)
trees to An wither
easement and contemplates
die. Lauro sues two for (2)
Court, in Abellana, Sr. v. Court of Appeals (G.R. estates
damages belonging
caused to
to two
his (2) different
plantation. owners;
Hernando a
No. 97039, April 24, 1992), ruled that an
usufruct
invokes contemplates
his right to theonly one
benefit property
of a (real
natural
easement of right of way being discontinuous SUGGESTED or personal)
easement whereby
in favor of histhe usufructuary
higher estate, which uses
ANSWER:
Further, possession of the easement
in nature is not acquirable by prescription. by Don is and enjoys
imposes upon the property
the lower as well
estate ofas its
Lauro fruits,
the
Hernando is wrong. It is true that Lauro’s land
only permissive, tolerated or with the while another
obligation to owns the
receive thenaked
waters titledescending
during the
is
e) burdened
A usufruct withmay the benatural
alienated easement
separately to
acquiescence of Ernie. It is settled in the case period
from the of the
higherusufruct.
estate. Is Hernando correct?
accept or receive the water which naturally
of Cuaycong v. Benedicto (G.R. No. 9989, from the property to which it attaches, while
(5%) without interruption of man descends
and
an easement cannot be alienated separately
March 13, 1918) that a permissive use of a
from
from the a property
higher estate to which toit attaches.
a lower estate.
road over the land of another, no matter how
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: However, Hernando NOTE: It hasis constructed
recommendeda by waste
the
long continued, will not create an easement of
Yes, Don acquired an easement of right of way. An easement that is disposal lagoon for his piggery
Committee that any and it two is this
(2)
way by prescription.
continuous and apparent can be acquired by prescription and title. waste water that flows downward
distinctions should be to Lauro’s
given full
According to Professor Tolentino, an easement of right of way may SUGGESTED ANSWER:
have a continuous nature if land. Hernando has,. thus, interrupted the flow
credit
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)
a duplication
extinguished
After
(a) the X borrowed
death byof of
the Y,money
nature
registration
X married from— Zthus, Yofand and
thethey gave
servient
could begot
a piece
notestate.
asAre
consistent
share
be
(b)of the allotted
Theright
with bythis
mortgage oflaw redemption
rule,
shall tonot the
where
bindfinder
theand
the 1/3since
distance
the the
right equity
and phrase
to the
of
interest
However,
children,
land as security
considered
nuisance. D,
this
asE aand provision
byF.way After has
ofthe mortgage.
been death suppressed
of It X, wasthe given
modern
highway
chance" by
streetconveyances
redemption
"by is
means law"bytoaccident",
orshortest. a mortgagor
requires widening
meaningofan the same? discovery.
theunexpected
easement. Explain.
The liberal view, however, would sustain Tim's right to the allocated
in Section
children expressly of44, the agreed
PDfirst No. between
and
1529. second Inthe other marriages
parties words, in (2%)
ALTERNATIVE
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
ANSWER:
share interpreting
The equity
facts show
oftheredemption
phrase
that inthe question is as meaning "by a stroke of
the registration
executed
c) the A an mortgage
house extrajudicial
of of theprostitution
contract
servient partition estatethat did of upon the
not 2) Isfortune",
good Davidwhich entitleddoes not to rule aneedright different
for ofaway
out deliberate
wider from
or in
right
the
this
intentional
Irrespective
operate
aforestated
(1%) nonpayment to property of of
cut-off itsortheon location
extinguish
debt
May 1, on1970. and
time the by how
D,right X,
E and theits
of of
right
case?way
search. ItWhyisarose
of or why
submitted from
redemption.
thatnot? the
the increased
liberal EQUITY
view should production
prevail since OFin
business
way.
F weremortgaged is
Therefore, conducted,
given aland one the it
would is
thousand a
complaint nuisance
already square belong since
formeter theto it owing
REDEMPTION
SUGGESTED
practical to
reality, the
ANSWER:
hidden is
acquisition
the
treasure right is by
of
hardly the
Tomas
ever mortgagor
found of an
without
defies, Y. Ifshocks
cancellation
portion ofXthe defaulted and
ofproperty.
the right disregards
in They
paying,
of way were decency
would should
minors Y now and
be
at No, David
additional
after
conscious judgment is
effortarea. notit,in
to find entitled
Under
andathejudicialArt.
stricttoviewthe
626 right
foreclosure
would of tendthe of way
to Civil
renderto
the codalclaimed.
being provision in question
The isolation illusory. of histo subdivision
Easements;
morality.
dismissed.
the time
become ItRight
of is
the
the of
a execution
public
owner Way;nuisance
ofRequisites
the
of the mortgagedbecause
document. of its
land? D Code,
redeem the the easement
property can by be paying
used only thefor courtthe
(1996)
(b)
David
injury
was 17
Why? Suppose
is
to the
the
years (3%) owner
public.
old, in Ethe of preceding
was the and Fquestion,
14 subdivision was 12; in and the
Sta. was
immovable
the due to his
amount of ownthe act
originally judgmentor omission
contemplated. debt because before Hence, he
the
agreement
Rosa,
d)
they A were Laguna,
noisy between
made without
or dangerous
to X and
believe anbyY was
access
factory
A, B and that
into C aif the
that X
private did not
the increase
sale develop
or confirmation in widthinto an
of is the access
justified
sale. On road and the
theshould rice
other
If the(1%) noise injuriously affects forthe a health Easements;
field which Righthe
OF was of Way supposed istothe purchase
failed
highway.
land
unless to theypay
When the he
sign mortgage
theapplied document debt on
they will and
time,
license the
not to hand,have been RIGHT granted. REDEMPTION right of
comfort ofshare.
ordinary people (2000)
The
Hidden
accordingcoconut to farm
Treasures
his toown of Federico the isproperty
representation surrounded when sold he by
debt
establish
get any shall be
the paid Z with
subdivision, was notin
the land
David themortgaged
present vicinity
represented
then. to by an
In the mortgagor redeem at
(a)
X
thatto Can
unreasonable
Y.
he the
Wouldwill minority
extent,
your
purchase ofit
answer D,
isa Ea be and
ricenuisance.
the F be
same
field a Itbasis
as
located is in a the
(1997)
applied
an lands for
Marcelino,
extra-judicial ofaRomulo.
treasure
a licenseFederico
foreclosure hunter to by seeks
as establish
just
paying a aright
hobby,
to theof
January 1974, D, E and F filed an action in Ejectment Suit vs.portionCancellation ofthe Title
to
the nullify
SUGGESTED
public
between the
nuisance
preceding hisANSWER:partition?
land because
question?
andthe the Explain
there
Explain.
highway, isyour a and
(3%) answer.
tendency develop to way
has found
buyer through
subdivision in the a
a (Floro
map which
foreclosure us. Llenado, ofsale
appears the land
244 toamountof Romulo
indicate
SCRA713). the
paid
court
(a) No, to
Y nullify
would not become suit the allegingowner oftheythe Nuisance;
(2005)
In an Family
ejectment House; case Not Nuisance
filed by per
Don se
against
(b)
annoy
it How
into the
an about
public.
access fraud?
(Velasco
road. But.Explain v. whenManila the Electric
license to
by bring
location
the of
buyer his coconut
hidden
within one products
treasure. year He
from tohas the
such an market.
idea
sale. of
discovered the fraud only in 1973. (2006)
A
land.
SUGGESTED
your
SUGGESTED
Co.,
was TheNo.
answer.
G.R.
already stipulation
ANSWER:
ANSWER:L-18390,is
granted, indid
August
he the nature
6,
not 1971)
bother of pactumto buy thedrug
Cesar,
He hascan
land lord the
chosen
where and the ahis
latter pointfamily
ask where
treasure forresidethehe
might inwill
possiblya small
cancellation pass be
1.
(a) CONTINUOUS
Yes,Uncollected
commissorium minority EASEMENTS
can be a basis are to by those
nullify the
The bungalow a where they sellthatshabu and other
e)
the rice
use of whichfield,iswhich which
or may
is prohibited
garbage
remains
be incessant, unutilized law.until
without
of Don's
through
found. Upontitle considering
housing
inquiry, project
Marcelino helearns
of (Cesar)
Romulo. that is the
The
the
partition
It
(1%) will
property become because
should abe D,
nuisance
sold Eat and if
public it Fsubstantially
were not
auction and prohibited
SUGGESTED
rightful
latter
owner wants
ofowner drugs.
ANSWER:
the him of
land, the
to When lot?
pass
Leopoldo, the
Explain.
another police
is (2%)
way
a found
which
permanent the is
the
the present.
intervention Instead, of he
any chose to connect his Cesar cannot ask for the cancellation of Don's
properly
impairs
the the
proceeds represented
comfort thereof andby act their
enjoyment
appliedof man, parents to of whiletheor
the SUGGESTED
illegal
one
resident trade,
kilometer ANSWER:
of they
Canada, immediately
longer. Who
Nobody, demolished
should
however, prevail? the
could
subdivision with the EASEMENTS neighboring subdivision of Romulo will
if heprevail. Underto Article of650 of
lot.the
DISCONTINUOUS
guardians
adjacent
indebtedness.
Nestor, which
at Any
occupants. the excess
has
time
an The they
access annoyance
shall contracted
to bethe areand
given highway.
those
tothe the title house
(5%)
give
even
him because
Leopoldo's
is according
the rightful
exact
owner
address. them, the
it was
Ultimately,
In
a
which
SUGGESTED
extrajudicial
smell
mortgagor. are
must used
ANSWER: atsubstantial
partition.
be intervals (Articles and as depend
1327.
to interfere upon
1391, New
an action
nuisance Civilfor Code,
per ejectment,
se the
that easement
the only
should be of abated.
issue right of Can
involved way is
Nestor
(d) No, allowed
the answer him would to Civil donotwhen this,
be the pendingsame. anyway,
one of he
possession enters de the land and conducts a
(b)
the
Civil
sensibly In
acts
Code). the
of man.
with case (Art.
the ofuse615,fraud, and Code)
enjoyment through by shall
SUGGESTED
Leopoldo
this
search.
be learning
demolition
He
established
ANSWER:
succeeds.be offacto, atthethe
Marcelino's
sustained? purpose
Explain. point
"find", of which
(5%) least
seeks
negotiations
SUGGESTED ANSWER: on or thestipulation
compensation toone be party paid.
not No, the demolition cannot
This
insidious
persons is ofa words valid
ordinary machinations
sensibilities. and of isdoes is
to merely
prejudicial
recover totheprotect
to the
the servient
treasure frombe
owner from
estate sustained.
Marcelino any
andphysical
butwhere The
the
2. APPARENT
When
constitute
the other they is failed
pactum
induced
EASEMENTStocommissorium.
to arrive
enter at are
into anIt those
the In
a public
agreement, which house
pactum
contract encroachment
the is
distance not a nuisance
from without.
the per
dominantse
The or at
title law
of
estate theas it
land
to isa
nuisance
are made because
known of
and its injury
are the to
continually the public. kept in not latter is not willing to part with it. Failing to
Nestor
commissorium,
Ownership;
without built
which a Co-Ownership
wall
he the across
would acquisitionnot road
have connecting
is agreed
automatic to, or
public an
its act,
ownership
highway occupation,
is isnot the or
involved, structure
shortest. for ifIn which
a person
case is of a
is
view byDavid's external signs that reveal the use and reach an agreement, Leopoldo sues Marcelino
with subdivision. David filed a nuisance
in at criterion
all ofthereof,
times and under toany
without
(1992)
the
enjoyment
and need
A, B action C arestill
of court,
of
the any
prosper
theanothersame,
co-ownersfurther
because
while
in action.
equal
NONAPPARENT under In Art,
shares the foractual
conflict,
the recoverypossession
the the of he
property. is entitled
least prejudice
Marcelino be
complaint
instant
of a residential
1391 of problem
the in Civil house forand
Code, the act
in establishment
lot. case isDuring
required
of theirto
fraud, ofthe
co-an v.
be Anas, G.R.
maintained
circumstances,
prevails andNo.
over the L-20617,
respected
regardless in itMay
criterion ofeven of31,against
location shortest the
or
EASEMENTS are those which show the no 1965) contests the action. How would you decide the
easement
performed,
ownership,
action
SUGGESTED for ofnamely,
annulment
ANSWER: the right following
the of conveyance
may way
be broughtthrough
acts of were
within the owner
surroundings.
distance.
SUGGESTED himself.Since
ANSWER: A nuisance
(Garcia
the route per
chosen se is by a nuisance
Federico
external indication of their existence. (Art. case? the case filed by Don against Cesar is an
Mortgage;
subdivision
Art,
property 649,
respectively
four
SUGGESTEDyears as Pactum
NCC. of Nestor
payment
from
ANSWER: done The Commissorium
by
the discovery which
owner, the or
(dacion he en claims
ofany theperson
pago).
co-owners: to be
fraud. 1)who the
A ISince
in would
will and decide
prejudice of the in favor
itself,housing of
withoutMarcelino
project regard of since
Romulo, heto
615,
(2001)
To
most
Hidden
by Civil
secure
virtue
then adequate Code)
a
of loan
Treasure
tilting a real
to obtained
and
one right practical
side, may from
to a
outlet
cultivate
prevent rural the bank,
to
or the
use
house ejectment
Easements;
is considered
circumstances
from case,
Right a the
of
finder latter
Way;
[Tolentino, by cannot
Inseparability
chance p. of ask
695,the for
hidden
citingthe
undertook
3. POSITIVE the EASEMENTS
repair of the foundation are those of whichthe Romulo has the right to demand that Federico
Purita
highway.
(1995)
Tim
any came assigned
immovable 1)2) What
into B whichher are
possessionleasehold
Cisthe requisites rights
ofservientan the old over
for mapthe a Nuisance;bought
cancellation
(2001)
Emma Public ofaNuisance
Don's
parcel vs.land
title.
of Private
He has
from Nuisance
toAla. file(1/2)
Equitable- the
collapsing.
house,
impose upon the and
owner ofsurrounded
mortgaged
the by other
house
estate treasure,
Wheeler
pass another
(2005)
State
v.hence,
with
River way
reason
he
Falls isevenentitled
Power
whether
Co.,
though to one-half
215
each
it will
of
655,be
the
stall in
lotthe
establishment
showing
immovables
and to public
where ofofaamarket
pertaining
secure compulsory
purported
a loan. toinother favor
3) cache B of
easement the
persons
engaged of to bank.of
gold
and aa 111 proper
PCI
of the
longer. Bank,
So.hidden action which where the
acquired
907]. treasure. While Marcelino may issue the of ownership
same from
the obligation allowing something be following isoriginal
aintention
nuisance, and if
The
rightdeed
bullion
without
contractor
done of
or way?was of assignment
adequate
of to hidden.
build
doing outlet
ita himself,
concrete provides
Without
to a public fence
while any thatall in caseis over
authority
highway,
NEGATIVE
Felisa,
have the
had property
the the canowner.betoraised. look forso,
Thereafter, thegive Emma
hidden its
Ejectment
classification,
discovered Suit; Commodatum
whether public or private:
of
from default
aroundthe
entitled
EASEMENTS the in
to demand the
lot. payment
are4) those
government aCright of
built the
of away
Tim
which
loan,
beautiful
conducted the
through the
prohibit
bank the a treasure, still he is a finder by chance since of
that Felisa had granted a right it
shall
grotto
relentless havein thethesearch right
garden. to 5)
and sell
A Purita's
and
finally C sold rights
foundthe over
the (2006)
Alberto
Article
way over and
694 ofJanine
the the
land Civil migrated
in Code
favor ofto the
defines thenuisanceUnited
land of
neighboring estates,
owner of the servient estate from doing after payment of the is enough that he tried to look for it. By
Should this easement be established bed in such a States
as any act,
Georgina, of whichAmerica,
omission, leaving
establishment, behind business,a their 4
the
landmarket
treasure
property
something to X stall
forwhich
buried a very
indemnity. as
inhe her
good
a could
newattorney-in-fact,
price.river
lawfully
and to
formerly
do if the chance in the lawhad does nonot outlet
meantosheer public
luck
children,
condition one
or of whom is Manny. They own a
manner
apply
part of
easement
thethat
a proceeds its use
parcel
did not exist. oftomay the be
land payment
(Art.owned
continuous
615. Civil
of the
by for
spouses
Code)
loan.all highway,
such thatbut theproperty,
the
finder easement or anything
should was
havenot noelse
annotated which
intention
cession? Why? (3%) duplex
injures apartment
orservient
endangers and allowed Manny to live in
the
1)
Tirso needs
Was(a)
Easements; and theof Is the A'sdominant
assignment
Right
Tessie. of
Thesole Wayolddecisionestate,
ofriver leasehold toestablishing
which repairused the
rights a
to when
at all the to look forestate thethetreasure.
was health
registered orBysafety under
chance of
2) permanent
a
mortgage
(1993) Assuming
foundation or athe passage,
oflandthe
the house assignment
the indemnity
binding to
on meter Bbe
shall
and a one
others,
the of
Torrensthe
or units.
annoys system. While
or in the the
offends
Emma United
then senses, States,
filed ora
cut
Tomas through Encarnacion's of3,000spouses square Ursula and means good luck, implying that one who
mortgage,
SUGGESTED
consist C?ofof does
ANSWER:
the Avalue the provision giving the bank Alberto
shocks, died. defies Hisorwidow disregards and all right
his children
decency or
parcel
Urbito May
changed
land, where its ofhe
require the
course B
has andland Coccupied
athrough
plant to nursery,
contribute
natural and is complaint
intentionally for cancellation
looks for ofthethe treasure of way, is
The treasure
the power towas sell found Purita's in expense?
a property
rights ofto
constitutepublic SUGGESTED
executed
morality ANSWER:
or an that Extrajudicial Settlement of
the
causes.
located
dominion,
amount
their To 2/3
just
the
whomof
share
behind
new
the of
shall damage
river
the the treasure
Aniceta
bed.
caused
Magsino's
Since
Reasons.
belong?
Tim
the
two
did
on the ground
embraced
The complaint in obstructs
the for
it had
provision. or interferes
cancellation
been
Theofreason easement
with
extinguished is that the
of
pactum
In case
servient (b) commissorium
the What right is of theor
estate. land. To enable Tomas to haveway not?
legal is Why?
limited
effect (2%) to
of the
the Alberto's
free
byissuchpassage estateof any
failuredifficult whereinpublic
to annotate. the
highway2door
How orapartment
wouldstreet youor
hectare
Explain. parcel it is extremely
right of way must toit find hidden treasure
not have
SUGGESTED
necessary
access mortgage
to
authority
ANSWER:
thepassage contract
highway,
from
forAniceta the cultivation
the
executed government
agreed by B to and and,
ofgrantthe
C? It
was
any
decide
a
body public
assigned
the of waterby fail.
nuisance
controversy? all The
ifhinders
the
ordeliberately.
(5%)
failure
affects
children to
oraMarcelino
impairsannotate
community
to their the
1)
therefore, The assignment
was a trespasser, was ahemortgage,
isand notbuild entitled not without
a ALTERNATIVE
the
or easement
neighborhoodlooking for
upon it
or any the considerable
title of she the sold servient
number is
estate
him (c)
Reasons.
a road surroundedIs
right B's of sole by
way a meter others
decision to
wideA through for the
the mother,
use of Janine.
property. ANSWERS: Subsequently, the
cession, of the leasehold rights. cession not
estate
1. a
of persons. trespasser
Marcelino isto George.
not
It since
is aamong
did not
direct there the is no prohibition
grounds for
to the
gathering
which fence one-half
he of itsshare
binding
could crops upon
pass.
allotted
throughA and
Through
tothe aC?finder
the servient
May years
ofB property Thefind encroachment
latter the requiredtreasure upon
Manny by
would
hidden have
treasure. transferred All of ownership
it will go to to thethe bank.
State. for
public
chance him because
extinguishing to enter
rights an orhe the
easement premises,
property
had a under
map, hence,
which
he Art.knew 631hethe
results is
of
estate
Tomas' require without
business A and aC to
flourished permanent
contribute
whichtoenabled way,
their 2/ the3
him to sign a prepared Lease Contract so that he
However,
In addition, the grant
under of authority
Art.in438 the bank to entitled
the Civil
location
injuriously to half
Code. of
of tothecould the
Under
thehidden treasure.
Article
public. It617,
treasure is easements
a and private he
indemnity
to buyshare shall
of the
another consist
expense?
portion the of
Reasons.
which payment the NCC of the in and his family continue occupying the
sell
orderthe
This (d) leasehold
easement
that theby
Is C's rights
issole
finder not be in caseenlarged
compulsory
entitled
decision to oftobuild
default
the if 1/2 the
the is If are you
intentionally
unit. were
inseparable
nuisance, Manny George's
if itlooked from for
affects
refused theonly
tocounsel,
estate
the a treasure,
sign personto what
the which or legal
they
small
hence,
contract
damage
area of cause
hisnoplant such nursery.encumbrance. But he was
proof
isolation
share, that
grottotheof suchimmovable
the
treasure
binding ownership
must
uponbeAfound was
is
and due
by
B? to still
transferred
chance,
May the C a) steps
he isAnot
actively
number
alleging squatter's
will or
ofyou
that passively
entitled histake?
persons. tohut any
parents (1%)
belong.
Explain.
It partviolatesof
allowed Once (5%)
the it attaches,
only
treasure.
him private
and his
landlocked.
and that
proprietor's a He
mere
own could
encumbrance
acts. not bring was in and
constituted.out of If
it constructed
SUGGESTED
2. Marcelino
can
rights. only ANSWER:
be on
appears public
extinguished to streets
be a
under or riverbeds,
trespasser
Art. 631, and and it
that require
is by sheer A and luck. B (564a). this The
In contribute
to case,easement since
their Tim 2/ of 3 family
If I public
wereto continue
George's occupying counsel, the premises.
I obstructs
would first
his
There plant
ALTERNATIVE
right of would
way nursery
ANSWER: have
shall bea jeep
been
established or
no delivery
need at for
the panel
such
point is
theya
although exist therenuisance
even may if be because
they a question
are it not of whether
stated the
or
found sharethe treasure
ofa the not
expense?shareby to chance
a finder ofbut
Reasons. because demand
The law
SUGGESTED
much
authority
least (e)
grants
less ANSWER:
aWhat
had
prejudicial
one-half
truck
there that
are
to been the
the he atheneeded
cession.
legal to
effects
hidden
transport treasure
of the he founduse that
ALTERNATIVE
free
annotated by
itasby Manny
ANSWER:
thean public
chance vacate
encumbrance orof not,said the apartment.
asplaces.
onhe the (City
hasTorrensfound If
of
he No,
2)
providedrelentlessly
hethe is notclause searched
a trespasser in and servient
question for is
finding it, isestate,
not he is
by achance.
pactum and
notIt is Under
Manny Section
refuses, I 44,
will PD
file No.
an 1529,
ejectment every
suit.
his
insofarseedlings.
contractas Timof He salenow asked
executed Aniceta
by A. to
C not grant
andgetting X? Manila
the
title hidden v. Garcia,
of the servient G.R.
treasure estate. No.
by means L-26053, of a treasure
(II Tolentino February 326,
entitled
submitted
commissorium. to consistent
that any share
is not a in
It isofwiththethis
trespasser
pactum hidden rule,
despite where
treasure.
his
commissorium the registered owner receiving aby certificate of
him
authority
distance a wider
from
Reasons. portion
the government,
from the her property,
because
dominant the new river
estate to the
beda price
where
public he When
21,1967)
map,
1987 he
ed.)Manny Ifwill was
not allowed
constructed be entitled on private his parents
to land,a finder's it title
istoa
when
of
found the default
which he
treasure was is in the forpayment
willing
property to
public pay, use to ofenable
(Art. theNCC),
420 loan
him to pursuant
occupy
private theto apremises,
nuisance decree because of without
registration,
it hinders and
compensation,
or every
impairs
ALTERNATIVE
highway may ANSWER: belegitimate
the shortest (Art. 650, NCC: share. The hidden treasure shall belong to the
automatically
which the public
Theconstruct
to requisites for has vests
aa compulsory
road to have ownership
access.
easement The
access question,
of right toof}hisoftherefore,
way are:the
plant (a) subsequent
the use
3.
the contract
The of the innocent
main of rule
property purchaser
commodatum
isbythat for
hidden
the owner. was value, created.
treasure shall
Vda.
SUGGESTED
boils de
down Baltazar
to ANSWER:
whether v.
or CA.
not the 245
finding SCRA was by 333 chance in view of owner.
encumbered
the dominant estateproperty
nursery.
Art. 651an Aniceta
of adequate
the
is surrounded
refused in by the
claiming other bank. immovables
that
of theshe In and
hadthe is hold
Upon theto
belongs
b) the same
Adeath
the free
of the of
owner
swimming from
father,the
poolall encumbrances
the contract
land, buildingwas or
the fact
without that TimCivil Code
"conducted
outlet provides
toaarelentless
publicthatstreet
the width
search" before
or highway; easement
finding
(b) proper the
problem
already given,
allowed the him bank a does
previous not automatically except
This
otherisproperty
extinguished
(1%) those
not a nuisancenoted
ason itwhich on isinsaid theis
ait certificate.
absence
purely found.personal This
Ifof it any is
must be sufficient
treasure.
indemnity The
must strict to
or meet
be paid; literal
(c) the
view
the needs
holds
isolation of
that the
must notroad
dominant
deliberate be due right
orestate,
to the and
intentional of
acts
become
may
of theaccordingly
way.
search Is owner
Tomas
precludes
owner change of
theentitled
of entitlement the
from
dominant property
to time
to
the to time.
the
one-half
estate; upon
easement
and thedefault
It(d)is the need of
he
right of way
now of unusual
the rule,
foundhowever,
contract. by condition
As
chancetheadmits byoraof
new ownerexceptions.
artificial
third of the
person feature and other
apartment he is
dominant
the isestate
claimedmortgagor. a which determines
The the width
bank of servient
has the to passage.sellThese the Hidalgo Under
Extra-Judicial
than Act 496, as amended
Partition; Fraud by Act No.No. 2011,
demands
needs may
at from
vary
pointAniceta?
from
least
time
prejudicial to the estate and, George
not athe mere
is
Enterprises
trespasser, water.
entitled hetoInis
v. exercise
entitled his
Balandan to right
(G.R. one-half of
L-
Mortgage; Right of Redemption
property and apply the proceeds to the 3422,
insofar as is vs. Equity of Redemption and
(1990)
X was Section the 4,
owner Act of 3621,a 10,000an easement
square if
meter not
possession
(1/2). June over
If 13, the
he1952), is same.athetrespasser,
Supreme Court he ruled loses
(1999)
indebtedness. registered
property.
Mortgage; shall
XPactum
married remain Yisand
Commissorium and outshall of their be held union. to
that a swimming
everything. pool but
pass
A, B and
(1999) withCthe were land born.until cutoff Page or 64 of 119
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
his name, ANSWER:
ALTERNATIVE the deed of sale was made to referSalvador, thereof
to and
a timberofferingconcessionaire,
to reimburse built on B hisfor lot a
Ramon
interest
undivided has
in the acquired
propertythe of thelandsellerby acquisitive
(Antonio), of warehouse
A and shall
whatever where
he be he
had deemed
processes
paid intopurchasing
cover
and stores only the the
his
prescription,
with the metes and and because bounds of laches of the on lotthe sold
part rights
timber
property and
forfrom shipment.
interests
the bank. of
Adjoining
BInand brief,Cthe in warehouse
how the will house
you
of Rosario.
being stated. Ramon's Bart possession
and Carlos of the land was
reacted by and
is a furniture
answer lot. theThecomplaint
mortgage
factory owned ofshall
C and by
be D,NARRAMIX
limited
if youto the
were of
adverse because he asserted
signifying their exercise of their right of SUGGESTED sole ownership portion
which
engagedSalvador
(2/3)
byANSWER:
Dwhich
as his ismay a majority
counsel?be allottedstockholder.
to B and C
thereof
redemption and as co never
owners. shared
Antoniothe behalf As
in hisharvest in counsel
NARRAMIX
the partition ofleased
B,(Art.
I shall 493, answer
space Civil the
the complaint
in Code). warehouse as
therefrom.
and in behalf Hisof adverse
his buyer, possession
contends having
that been follows:
1.
they SUGGESTED
where How When would
ANSWER:
it B bought
placed you classify the property,
its it was not
the furniture-
furniture-making
continuous
are no longer and uninterrupted
coowners, although for morethe thantitle (c)
30 by
makingaB'sright
machinery. sole of
machinery decision
redemption to build
as property since thethe
under concrete
the period
Civil
years, Ramon
covering the property has acquired has remained the land in their fence
therefore
by 2.
Code? is
Supposenot binding
had alreadyupon
Explain. the lease contract between A and
expired. C. Expenses
Hence, toB
prescription.
names as such. Rosario May is also
Bartguilty and of lachesstill
Carlos improve
bought the
the thing
propertyowned
not Salvador and NARRAMIX stipulates that at the in
in common
an must
independent be
SUGGESTED
having asserted
redeem the ANSWER:her right to the harvest for
lot sold by Antonio? Explain. (5%) decided
unconditional
end of the upon leaseby the
sale. aC majority
and D are
machinery of the not
shall co-owners
co-owners
become
Ownership;
No, they may
more than 40 years.Co-Ownership;
not redeem Prescription
because there was who
with
the represent
B of
property the property.
of the controlling
lessor,Therefore,
will interest
your the suit
answer (Arts.
ofbeC
(2002)
Senen
no and Peter are
Coownership amongbrothers. Antonio,SenenBart, migrated and ALTERNATIVE
489
and and
D
the same? 492.
cannot ANSWER:
Civil
prosper.
Explain. Code).
to Canada
Carlos to startearly with.while Theirstill a parents
teenager. Peter As
already counselANSWER:
SUGGESTED of B, I shall answer the complaint as
stayed in Bulacan
partitioned the landto in take care separate
selling (d) C's sole
of their follows: From decision
the facts to build the grotto
described, it is not
would
widowed
v. Court to
portions mother
ofthem. and
Appeals,Thecontinued
(342 SCRA
situation to the
is work
653 sameon the as binding
appear upon
that theA and B
Certificate who cannot
of sale be
has required
not been
[2000]).
Family
in farmSieven after her death. Returning to registered.
the case to contribute to the period
The one-year expenses for the
of redemption
Possession
the country some thirty years after he had left, embellishment
begins to run of
from the thing
registration. owned In in
this common
case, it
(1998)
Using a falsified manager's
Senen seeks a partition of the farm to get his check, Justine, as if
hasnot notdecided
yet even upon by
commenced. the majority
Under of
the the co-
Rules
the buyer, was able
share as the only co-heir of Peter. to take delivery of
Peter a owners
of Court, whothe represent
property the
may controlling
be released interest
by the
second hand car which
interposes his opposition, contending she had just bought
that (Arts.
Judgment 489 and
debtor 492, or Civil
his Code).
successor in interest.
from United Car Saleshas Inc. The set salein was SUGGESTED ANSWER:
acquisitive prescription already and (Sec. 29, Rule 27). It has been held that this
(e) The sale to X shall not bind the 1/3 share
registered with the
that estoppel lies to bar the action for Land Transportation includes a joint owner. (Ref. Magno vs.Ciola, 61
Office. A week later, of B and shall
Ownership; be deemed to
Co-Ownership; cover only the 2/3
Redemption
partition, citing his the seller learned
continuous possession that the of Phil.
(2000)
share
Ambrosio
80).
of A and
died, C in
leaving the land
his (Art. daughters,
three 493, Civil
check had been
the property fordishonored,
at least 10 but years, by forthatalmost
time,
Justine Code).
Belen, B shall
Rosario have
and the
Sylvia righta to redeem
hacienda the
which
30 yearswas
SUGGESTED
nowhere
inANSWER:
fact. to be seen.that
It is undisputed It turned
Peter has out
2/3
was share
mortgaged sold to
to X
the by A and
Philippine C since
National X is
Bank a
that
neverJustine
openly had sold the
claimed sole car to Jerico,
ownership of the
the
Senen’s
present action
possessor will prosper.
who Article 494 of the third
due toperson
the (Art.
failure 1620,
of the Civil Code).
daughters to pay the
property.
New Civil IfCode
he ever hadknew
provides the
that
nothing about
intention to do the
“no prescription so, Ownership;
bank, the latter Co-Ownership;
foreclosed Prescription
the mortgage and
falsified
Senen check.
was In
completelya suit by United
ignorant Car
of Sales,
it. Will (2000)
In 1955, Ramon and hisit as sister
shall
Inc. run
against in favor
Jerico of a co-owner
for Explain.
recovery(5%). or co-heir
of the car, the hacienda was sold to the Rosario
highest
Senen’s
against action
his prosper?
co-owners or co-heirs so long as he inherited
bidder. Six a parcel
months of land
later, in
Sylvia Albay
won from
the their
grand
plaintiff alleges it had been unlawfully parents. Since Rosario was gainfully employed
expressly
deprived ofor itsimpliedly
property recognizes
through fraud the and co- prize at the lotto and used part of it to redeem
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
ownership nor notified Senen of his having in
theManila,
hacienda she from
left Ramon the bank. aloneThereafter,
to possess and she
should,
The suit
ALTERNATIVEconsequently,
should
ANSWER: prosper be asallowed
to the torecovery
recover of it cultivate the land. However, Ramon never
repudiated
without havingthe same. took possession of the hacienda and refused to
Senen’s
the action to
car. However, willreimburse
since Jericothe
prosper. wasdefendant
This is case for
nota guilty of
of shared
share thefruits
its harvest with with her Rosario
sisters, andcontending
was even
the
any price
impliedfraud the
trust. and latter
(Art had NCC)
1441,
appears paid.
to be Should
For purposes
an the suit
innocent of SUGGESTED
able to was ANSWER:
sell one-halfexclusivelyof the land
prosper? [5%] that it
Sylvia is not owned
correct. The heir3 daughtersby in her, 1985having
are
by
the
prescription
purchaser forunder
value,the conceptbeofreimbursed
he should an owner claiming
bought it to be
from thethe bank sole with her ofownhis money.parents. Is
(Art.the540,
for priceNCC). he paid. ThereThisisis no suchprejudice
without concept co-ownersreached
Having of the hacienda retirement beingage the only in heirs1990
she
of correct
Ambrosio. or not? (3%)
here.
to Peter was
United Car aSales,co-owner, Inc. he neverofclaimed
right action Rosario returnedWhen to thethe provinceproperty and upon was
sole ownership
against Justine.of the As property.
between He two is therefore
innocent foreclosed, the right of
learning what had transpired, demanded that redemption belongs
estoppedthe
parties, under partyArt.causing
1431, NCC. the injury should also to the half
the remaining 3 of daughters.
the land be When
given Sylvia to her
Ownership;
ALTERNATIVE Co-Ownership;
ANSWER:
suffer the loss. Therefore, United Car Sales,Redemption redeemed the entire property before the lapse
as her share. Ramon opposed, asserting that
Yes,
(1993)the suit
In 1937, will prosper
A obtained loanbecause the criminal
Inc. should suffer thealoss. of P20,000.00 from of
he the
has redemption
already acquiredperiod, she alsoofexercised
ownership the land
act
the ofNational
estafa should City be Bank deemed of New to come York, withinan SUGGESTED
the right of ANSWER:
redemption of her co-owners
by
Ramonprescription,
is wrong andon that
both Rosario
counts: is barred on
prescription by
the meaning of unlawful
American-owned bank doing business in the deprivation under Art. their behalf. As such she is holding the shares
laches
and laches. from demanding
His possession partition
as co-owner did and
not
559, Civil Code,
Philippines. as without payment
To guarantee it plaintiff ofwould his of her two sisters in the property, and claims.all the
reconveyance.
give rise to Decide
acquisitive the conflicting
prescription. Possession
not have parted
obligation, A with the possession
constituted a real of itsestate
car. fruits corresponding thereto, in trust for them.
(5%)
by a co-owner by isone deemed not adverse to the
the
ANOTHER ANSWER:
mortgage on his 30hectare parcel of Redemption co-owner inures to
No, the suit will not prosper. The sale is valid other co-owners but is, on the contrary,
agricultural land. In 1939, before he could pay benefit of all (Adille v. CA.157 SCRA 455).
and Jerico is a buyer in good faith. Ownership;beneficial
deemed Co-Ownership; themRedemption
his obligation.
ANOTHER ANSWER:A died intestate leaving three Sylvia, however, isto entitled (Pongon v. GA, 166
to be reimbursed
children. (2002)
Antonio,
SCRA 375). Bart, and
Ramon's Carlos
possessionare brothers.
will They
become
Under theB, law a son by a when
on Sales, first marriage,
the thing and sold C is the
purchased
shares of her two sisters in
from their parents specific portions
the
and D, daughters by a second marriage. In adverse
redemption only when
price. he has repudiated the co-
delivered by the seller to the buyer without of a parcel of land as evidenced by three
1940, the bank foreclosed the ownership and such repudiation was made
reservation of ownership, the mortgage
ownershipfor is separates deeds of sale, each deed referring to
non-payment known to Rosario. Assuming that the sale in
SUGGESTED
transferred to of
ANSWER: thethe principal
buyer. Therefore obligation.
in the suit As
a particular
(a) Yes.
theUnited
only bidder A's sole decision
at theInc. extrajudicial to repair
foreclosure the 1985 wherelot in meter
Ramon and bounds.
claimed he wasWhen the sole the
of Car Sales, against Jerico for the deeds were presented for registration, the
foundation
sale, the of bankis binding upon B and C. B and C heir of his parents amounted to a repudiation
recovery the bought
car, the the property
plaintiff should and notwas be Register of Deeds could not issue separate
must
later contribute
issued 2/3
a certificateofcarthewithout
expense.
of sale. Eachwar
The co- of the co-ownership, the prescriptive period
allowed to recover the reimbursing certificates of Title
owner
supervenedhas the
in right
1941 to compel
without the the
bank otherhavingco- began to run only had fromto that be issued,
time. therefore,
Not more
the
S. defendant for the
Government, and price that the
utilized the latter
same paid.in in the names of three brothers as coowners of
owners
been able to to contribute
obtain actual to the
possession expense of of
the than 30 years having lapsed since then, the
(EDCA Publishing
agribusiness. In and
1960, Distributing
as B's Corp.
business vs.
Property; 184
preservation
property Realwhich vs.thePersonal
of thing
remained Property
(the house)
with A'sowned three in the entire property. The
claim of Rosario has not as yet prescribed. The situation has not
Santos,
flourished, SCRA
and 614, April B26, 1990)
(1995)
common
children whoinC proportion D sued
appropriated to for
for
their partition
respective
themselves
and
the changed
claim up to now,
of laches is not butalso each of the brothers
meritorious. Until
accounting
SUGGESTED
interests of
ANSWER:
(Arts. 485 the income
and 1948,
488, Civilof the property, has
the been
repudiationreceiving of rentals
the exclusively
co-ownership wasfrom madethe
income from it. In B Code).
bought the
claiming that as heirs of their father they were lot
knownactuallyto purchased
the other by him.
co-owners, Antonio
no sells
right his
has
property from the bank using the money he
co-owners lot
been to a
violatedthird person,
for the with
said notice
co-owners to his
to
received as back pay from the U.
brothers. To
vindicate. Mereenable delay theinbuyer to secure
vindicating the aright,
new
title in alone, does not constitute laches.
standing
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
to consulted,
If the seller-owner what would the agreed
your legal purchaseadviceprice in residential,
latter
full vacate the commercial,
premises andindustrial, deliver the same or similar
to the
registers
be?
and
SUGGESTED the corresponding deed of sale.
ANSWER: purposes,
former.
productive Petronila
and only refused
by lease to when
vacatenot theneeded
place
The
Because warehouse
the annotation whichof is the anotice construction
of levy is on the
by the government
ground thatfor the public
usufructservice. in her favor
adhered to the soil is an
carried over to the new title in his name, immovable by nature the would expire only on 1 June 1998 when
under
BUYERArt.brings 415 (1)an and action
the proper against venue the of (2) If the
Manuel wouldland have is suited
reached or actually
his 30th used birthday for
any case to recover
JUDGMENT CREDITOR to cancel such ownership of the same, fishpond or aquaculture
and that the death of Manuel before his 30th purposes, it comes
which
annotation, is what butthe thepurpose
latter claims of thethat complaint
his liento is under
birthdaythedidJurisdiction not extinguish of thetheBureau usufruct. of
annul
superior thebecause
amendedit Deed was of Sale amounts
annotated after the to, SUGGESTED
Fisheries
Whose contention ANSWER:
and Aquatic
should Resources
be accepted? (BFAR) and
ADDITIONAL
should
SUGGESTED
adverse be ANSWERS:
the of
ANSWER:
claim placethe where
BUYER thehad property
ipso facto is Petronila's
can only becontention
acquired by is lease.
correct. (P.D.Under705)Article
1. Buildings
The suit will are always
prosper. immovable
While an property,
adverse and
claim 606
(3) of
Free the
PatentCivil is Code,
a mode a usufruct
of concession granted under for
located,
ceased or be theeffective.
RTC of Bulacan.
duly in to
even annotated the instances at the where
Will the
back of theasuit prosper?
parties
title under to a the time
Section that
41, may
Chapter elapse VII before
of the a third
Public person
Land
[5%]
contract 7O seem
Section oftoP.D.
have 1529dealtiswith good it separate
only for and 30 reaches
Act, which a certain
is applicable age shall only for subsist for the
agricultural
apart from the land on which
days, cancellation thereof is still necessary it stood in no wise to number
SUGGESTED ofANSWER:
years specified even if the third
lands.
does itit change
render ineffective, its otherwise,
character the as inscription
immovable 1.
(4)The
Thefurniture-making
person should
certificate die of themachinery
unless there isforester
district is movable
an expressthat
property.will
thereof A building is an immovable
remain annotated as a lien even onif the
not property
stipulation because
the land is already it
in the"alienable was not installed
contractandthat by
disposable" the
states
erected by
property. Whilethe the owner life ofof adverse
the land. claim Theis only
3O owner
otherwise. of the In tenement.
the case
simply means that the land is no longer Toat become
bar, immovable
there is no
criterion
O.G.
days 4374)
under is union P.D. or
(Reyes incorporation
1529, andit Puno,continuous with
Outlinetheto soil.
of
be under
neededArt.
express 415
stipulation
for forest (5)purposes,
of
thatthethe NCC, the
the machinery
consideration
but Bureaufor of
Philippine
(Ladera vs.
effective Civil
Hodges
until itLaw,
is (CA)Vol.
canceled482. p.7) by formal petition ALTERNATIVE
must
the
Lands be
usufruct
could ANSWER:
installed
isno thelonger by dispose
existence theof owner
Petronila's
of it by of son.the
free
The cancellation of of the notice of levy is This is a usufruct
ALTERNATIVE
tenement. ANSWER:which is clearly intended for
filed
2. The with the Register
warehouse builtDeeds.by Pedro Thus,
patentthe general
because it isrule
already and covered
not the by exception
a lease
justified under Section 108 of P.D.on1529 the It depends
the
should
benefit on
contract apply in
between
the circumstances
of Manuel
this case.
BFAR
until he reaches
and
of the 30
Regina.
case. yrs.
That
If
mortgaged property
considering that the is real
levy onproperty
execution within
can not the the
of machinery
age with was attached
Petronila serving in
only a fixed manner,
as a irregular
conduit,
(5) The free patent
contract must be respected. of Jorge is highly
context of Article 415 ofbuyer
the New Civil Code, in such
be enforced against the whose adverse holding
and voidathe way
ab that not
property
initio, it cannot
in trust
only be for
because separated
his
thebenefit. from
Bureau
although it was built
claim against the registered owner was by Pedro after the the
The tenement
death of without
Manuel breaking
at thethe agematerialof 26or
has no statutory authority to issue a free
foreclosure sale without
recorded ahead of the notice of levy on the knowledge and causing
therefore, deterioration
terminated thereof,
the usufruct. it is immovable
patent over a foreshore area, but also because
consent ofofthe Lis new ownerWhen which makes him a
LAND TRANSFER &
Annotation
execution. Pendens; Proper property
of the false [Art.statements
415 (3), NCC]. madeHowever, in his sworn if the
buildersold
(2001)
Mario in hisbadhouse faith, and thislot does not alter
to Carmen for the
P1 machinery can be transported from place to
application that he has occupied and cultivated
characterpayable of the warehouse as aequalreal property
million
by incorporation.
installments.
in five (5)
The saleItwas is registered
a structure
annual
and which
title
place
which DEEDS
without
they were
impairment
the land since July 4, 1945, as required by the
fixed,
of
then
the
it
tenement
is movable
to
free patentANSWER:
SUGGESTED law. Under Section 91 of the Public
cannot
was issuedbe removed
in Carmen's withoutname. causing
Carmen injuryfailedto property. [Art. 416 (4), NCC]
thepay
to land. (Note: If the examinee does not mention
the So, lastmythreeadvice to Pedro isand
installments to fileMariothe Acquisition of any
Land
2. It is Act,
immovable Lands;patent
property.
Citizenshipconcession
When
Requirementthereor is titlea
that the structure was built by a builder in obtained
provision
(2003) thru
in thefalse leaserepresentation
In 1970, the spouses Juan and Juana de la contract is
making void theab
case with
filed an. the
badaction
RTCshould
faith, itfor
of collection,
Bulacan,
be given full
the situs
damages of the
credit). and initio. then
lessor,
Cruz, In the
at cases end of
Filipinos, of thethis nature,
lease,
bought owner
the it is
parcel of thethe
of
property,
attorneys fees
Sower; Good Faith/ Bad Faith against her. Upon filing of the government
machinery
unregistered that
installed
land shall
in by
the institute
the lessee, on
Philippines annulment
thewhichsaid
complaint,
(2000)
Felix cultivated he caused a parcel a notice
of land of and
lis pendens
planted to it proceedings considering
SUGGESTED ANSWER: machinery
they builtis a considered
house which tothat
have thebeen
became suitinstalled
carries
their
be
to annotated
sugar cane, on Carmen's
believing ittitle.
to Is
be the
his notice
own. with it a prayer for the reversion of the land to
The notice of lis pendens is not proper for the by the lessor
residence. In through
1986, they the lessee who
migrated to acted
Canada
of
Whenlis pendens
the crop proper
was or not? months
eight Why? (5%) old, and the state. However, Regina is a party in
reason that the case filed by Mario against merely
and became as his Canadian
agent. Having citizens. been installed by
Thereafter, in
harvestable after two more months, a interest
the owner and the case
of the tenement, will prosper because she
Carmen is only for collection, damages, and 1990, they applied, opposed bythe themachinery
Republic,
resurvey of
attorney's fees. the land showed that it really has the
becamea lease contract for
immovable the
.under same
Art. land
415 with
of the the
SUGGESTED for
Property; registration of
Real vs. Personal Property the aforesaid land in
belonged ANSWER:
Annotation toof Fred.
a lis What are
pendens can the be
only options
done government.
NCC. (Davao Sawmill v. Castillo 61 Phil. 709)
As to the pending crops planted by Felix in their
(1997)
Pedro names.
is the Should the application
registered owner of a parcel of of the
available
in cases to Fred? (2%)
involving recovery of possession of SUGGESTED ANSWER:
good faith, Fred has the option of allowing spouses
land situatedde la Cruz beBulacan.
in Malolos, grantedIn over 1973, the
real Yes, the application should be granted. Ashe a
Felix property,
to continue or theto cultivation
quiet title and or to to remove
harvest Republic’s
mortgaged
rule, the
opposition?
the land
Constitution to Why?
the 5%
Philippine
prohibits aliens National
from
cloud
the crops, thereon, or toorcontinuefor partition or any other
the cultivation and
proceeding affecting title to the land option,
or the Bank (PNB)
owning private to secure
lands in a loan of P100.000.00.
the Philippines. This
harvest the crops himself. In the latter For
rule, Pedro's
however, failure
does tonot payapplythe loan,
to the the PNB
spouses
use or occupation
however, Felix shallthereof. have the The rightactionto afiled
part by of
Mario does not fall on anyone of these. foreclosed
Juan and Juana on the de mortgage
la Cruz because in 1980, at theandtime the
the expenses
Foreshore of cultivation
Lands and to a part of the land
they was
acquired sold at public
ownership auction
over the to
land, PNB for
albeit
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
net harvest,
(2000)
Regina has been both leasing
in proportion foreshore to the landtime fromof being
imperfect, the theyhighest werebidder. PNB secured
still Filipino citizens. title The
Since sugarcane is not a perennial crop. Felix
possession.
the Bureau of (Art. 545 NCC), Aquatic Resources In the in
thereto meanwhile,
1987. Pedro, who is was a still in
is considered aFisheries
sower inand good faith. Being so, application for registration mere
for the past 15 years. Recently, she learned possession
confirmation of
of the imperfect
the land, constructed
title which thea
Art. 448 applies. The options available to Fred
that Jorge was able tothe obtain warehouse on the property. In 1988, the PNB
are: (a) to appropriate crop aafter free paying
patent spouses have already acquired before they
from Adverse
sold theClaims;
land toNotice
Pablo, of theLevyDeed of Salev. was
Felix the indemnity under Art. 546, or (b) the
the Bureau of Agriculture, covering to became
(1998)
Canadian citizens. (Republic CA,
same land, on the basis of a certification by the Section
amended
235 SCRA 70in
567 of
1989 Presidential
to
[1994]). include Decree
the No. 1529,
warehouse.
require Felix to pay rent. Pedro, claiming ownership of the warehouse,
Usufruct Forester that the same is already concerning adverse claims on registered land,
District
files a complaint
provides a 30-day to annul
periodthe of amended
effectivityDeed of an of
(1997)
On 1 January
"alienable and1980, Minerva, Moreover,
disposable". the owner Jorge of a
Sale
adverse before claim,the Regional
counted Trial Court
from the of Quezon
date of its
building,
had already granted Petronila
registered the a usufruct
patent with over the the
City, where heSuppose
registration. resides, aagainst noticeboth of the adversePNB
property of
Register untilDeeds 01 June
of the1998 province,when and Manuel,
he was a
and Pablo. The PNB filed a motion to dismiss
son of Petronila,
issued an Original would have reached
Certificate of Titlehis the claim based upon a contract to sell was
for30th
the complaint for improper venue contending
of registered on March 1, 1997 at the instance of
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
birthday.
same. Regina Manuel, filed however,
action died
an annulment on Jorge's
for annulment 1 June
An action for the of that the warehouse
the BUYER, but on June is 1, real 1997,property
or after under
the
1990
Jorge's
Original when title heonwas
Certificate the only
ground
of 26 years
Title that
will itold.
was obtained
prosper on the
Minerva notified Petronila that the (2%) usufruct Article
lapse of415(1)
the of
30-day the Civil
period, Code
a noticeand of therefore
levy on
fraudulently.
(1) Undergrounds:
following Will the action
Chapter IX of C .A, No. 141, prosper?
had been extinguished by the death of Manuel the action
execution in should
favor ofhavea instead
JUDGMENT beenCREDITORfiled in
otherwise known as the Public Land Act, Malolos,
was also Bulacan.
registered Pedro claims
to otherwise.
enforce a The
final
and demanded that the
foreshore lands are disposable for question arose
judgment for money as to whether
against the the warehouse
registered
should Then,
owner. be consideredon June 15, as real1997orthere as personal
having
property.
been no formal cancellation of his notice of
adverse claim, the BUYER pays
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
It is a well-known
homestead
occupant thereof
from him rule
andin anymore
for
thisthis
jurisdiction
because
reason that his
their transfer
persons
action
Cesar bought
required to explore a residential
beyond condominium
what the record unitinfrom
the
dealing
prescribed
of
hastitle may
certificate with andberegistered
that
vulnerable,
furthermore,
land
the havetransfer
A was the inoflegal
pari
the The mortgage
Rise
High
registry Co. and paid to Desiderio
the price should
in full. be He cancelled
moved
right
delicto.
same land
toDecide.
rely
and the on
(5%)issuance
the faceof of new theTCTs Torrens
to X into
without the prejudice
unit, but somehow to his right he was to not go after given
Certificate
and Y whoANSWER:
SUGGESTED of
areTitleinnocentand to purchasers
dispense for with valuethe theCatalino
Condominium and/or Certificate the government
of Title covering for
The
need
render sale
tothe oflatter's
inquire the further,
landtitlesby except
A to Bwhen
indefeasible. 3 years A
the after
person
party the property. Unknown
compensation from the assurance to him, High fund.Rise Co.
issuance
concerned
dealing with ofhas the homestead
registered
actual knowledge
land may patent, of being
safely facts
relyand in
on Fraud; Procurement mortgaged
subsequently of Patent; Effect the entire
violation
circumstances
the correctness of Section that
of the 118
would ofimpel
the Public
certificate titleLand
aofreasonably and (2000)
In 1979, Nestor building
condominium applied fortoandMetrobank was granted as a
Act, is void
cautious
the law will
man from
not toits
in
makeinception.
any suchway oblige
inquiry.him to go
(Naawan Free Patent
security for overa loan a parcel
of P500of million. agricultural High land Rise
The
behind action
Community
filed
theRural by
certificatethe heirs
Bank v. Court to of B to declare
determine
of Appeals, G.R. the with an
Co. areato
failed of 30 payhectares,
the loan located and inthe General bank
the
In nullity
the
condition
No. 128573, givenor inexistence
ofJanuary problem,
the property 13, 2003) of in search for and
the the contract
property was
any Santos City.the
foreclosed He mortgage.
presented the At the Freeforeclosure
Patent to
to recover
already
hidden defect theorland
registered in the
inchoateshould
name of
rightbeRod given
whichwhendue mayhe the Register
sale, the bankofacquired Deeds, the andbuilding,
he was being issuedthe a
course.
bought the same from
later invalidate or diminish the right to thethe latter. Thus, Don corresponding
highest bidder. When Original Cesar Certificate
learned about of Title this,
B's
1. defense of prescription is untenable
land.The
could be action
This is the to
considered annul
mirror athe
asprinciple
buyersaleof inwas good
the instituted
faith
Torrens in
(OCT)
he filedNo. an 375,action Subsequently,
to annul the Nestor foreclosure sold the sale
because
and 1977
for an
or
value.action
more which
than
However, (10)seeksyears
since toRod declare
from didthe the
date
not of
land to asEddie. Thewas deed of sale was submitted
System of land registration. insofar his unit concerned. The bank put
nullity
actually orsell
execution inexistence
thereof
any property of 1957,
in Atocontract
him, hence,
Don does it has
has not
no longto
up the theRegisterdefenseof Deeds that itandrelied on theonbasis the
prescribe.
rightprescribed. (Article 1410;
to retain ownership over the property.Banaga vs. Soler, 2 SUGGESTED ANSWER:
thereof, OCT No, 375 was cancelled and
condominium certificates of title presented by
8CRA
2.
He has 765)
Under only Sec the right45 ofto Act recover496,the “the entry of Metrobank's
purchase a
Transfer
High Rise
defense is untenable. As a rule,
Certificate
Co., which of
were Title clean.(TCT) Hence,No. it 4576was
On the
Forgery; other
Innocent hand, B's defense of pari delicto an innocent purchaser for value acquires a
pricecertificate
plus damages. ofPurchaser;
title shall Mirrorbe Principle
regarded as an was issued in and
a mortgagee the name buyer ofinEddie.
good In 1986,
faith. Is the
this
is equally
(1991)
Bruce is the untenable.
registered While
owner, as aofrule, a parcelparties of good and a clean title to the property.
agreement running with the land, and binding Director
defense of
tenable Lands
or not? filed
Why? a complaint
(5%.) for
who
landupon are ainbuilding
with pari delicto thereon have
and noin recourse
is peaceful However, it is settled that one who closes his
the applicant and all his successors in title annulment of OCT No, 375 and TCT No. 4576
against
possession each other He
thereof. on paysthe principle
the real that
estate a eyes to facts that should put a reasonable man
that the land shall be and always remain on the ground that Nestor obtained the Free
transgressor cannot profit from his Later, own
taxes and collects
registered land.the rentals under Act 496 on
A title therefrom. is guard
Patent through
is not an innocent purchaser for
fraud. Eddie filed a motion to
wrongdoing,
Catalino, the such
only rule does
brother of not apply
Bruce, filed to
a value.
SUGGESTED In the
ANSWER: present problem the bank is
indefeasible and to preserve that character, the dismiss on the ground that he wasthe an complaint
innocent
violations
petition of Section
where 118 of the Public
he, misrepresenting beLand
to transfer the for The
expected, as a mattertoofdismiss
motion of Nestor standard operating
title is cleansed anew with every purchaser for value and in good faith and No. as
Act because of the
attorney-in-fact underlying
of Bruce public
falsely policy in for annulment of O.C.T.
procedure, to have conducted an ocular No. 375 and T.C.T.
value (De Jesus v Cityand of Manila; alleging
29 Phil. 73; such, he has acquired a title to thethe property
the said Act "to conserve the land which a 4576 should be denied for following
thatLaperal
the certificate
v City ofofManila, title was 62 lost, 313; Penullarinspection,
Phil succeeded v
which is valid,
of the promises before granting
unassailable and indefeasible.
homesteader
in obtaining has acquired by gratuitous
duplicate grant reasons:
any loan.1) Eddie
Apparently, cannot claim
Metrobank protection
did not follow as an
PNB 120 Sa second
111 ). owner's copy
Decide the motion. (5%)
from the government for
of the title and then had the same transferred himself and his purchaser
innocent for value
this procedure. Otherwise, it should have nor can he interpose
family".
in his name In keepingthrough with this policy,deed
a simulated it has ofbeensale the defense
discovered that ofthe indefeasibility
condominium of his unittitle, in
held that one who purchases
in his favor. Catalino then mortgaged the a homestead because
question was his TCT
occupied is rooted
by Cesar on a
and void
that title.
fact
Mirror
Under Principle
Section
within
property theto five-year
Desiderio prohibitory
who hadperiod can only
the mortgage should have led it 91 to make of CAfurther No. 141, inquiry. as
recover theon price (1990)
In 1950's,
amended, the Government
otherwise known acquired
as the a big
Public
annotated thewhichtitle. he Upon has learning
paid by filing of the a Under the circumstances, Metrobank cannot
landed
Landestate in Central Luzon
Act, statements from the
claim
fraudulentagainst the estateBruce
transaction, of thefiled deceased
a complaint seller be considered a mortgageeofand material
buyer facts in good in
(Labrador vs. Delos Santos 66 Phil.to579) under registered
the owner
applications for for subdivision
public land into must small be
against Catalino and Desiderio have the faith.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the principle that no one shall enrich himself farmsunderand oath. redistribution
Section 91 of of the same bonafide act
title of Catalino and the
The complaint for the annulment of Catalino's mortgage in favor of
at the expense ofInanother. Applying the pari Forgery;
occupants,
provides InnocentF was
thatPurchaser;
a former
such Holderlessee
statements in Bad
of aFaith
parcel
shall be
Desiderio
Title
FIRST will declared
prosper.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: nullfirst
the and void.theWill
place, second the
delicto rule to violation of Section 118 of the (2005)
of land,
Rod, thefive
considered hectares
owner as in area.
of essential
an FX taxi, After completion
found
conditions in andhis
The action
complaint
owner's copy to declare
prosper,
of theortitle the nullity
willsecured
the title ofby the
ofhim salefrom
Catalino did
Public Land Act, the Court of Appeals has of the
vehicle
parts resurvey
anof theand
envelope subdivision,
containing
concession, TCT
title,F applied
No.
or 65432permit to
not
and prescribe
the mortgage (Art. to1410},
Desiderio
the Land Registration Court is void ab initio, such besale being
sustained? one
ruled that prohibited
"the homesteader suffersnever the by loss of buy
over the
a lot said land
registered inin
issued, any false statement therein, or accordance
Cesar's name. with Posing the
expressly
the owner's copy and declared
thereof having void the
been
the fruits realized by the vendee who in turn guidelines
as Cesar,
omission of of
Rod the implementing
forged
facts Cesar's
shall agency.
ipsosignature
facto produce Upon
on a
Publiclet
lost, LandsaloneActthe [Art. fact1409, that par. said(7)]. second The
forfeits theof of improvement thatfraudulently
he full
Deed the payment
of Sale in
cancellation of
Rod's the favor.
of price
the Rod in 1957,
registered
concession. the
The
prohibition
owner's copy thethelaw titleis wasclearly for has the
introduced corresponding
said document
patent issued deed
with to the of
Nestor absolute
Registerin thisof sale
Deeds,
case is was
and
void
protection and
procured of into
the the ofland."
heirs
improvidently A suchissued (Obot
that by their vs.
the 2) The government can seek annulment of
SandadiUas, 69 OG, April 35, }
1966enhance executed
obtained
ab initio ainnewhis
notfavoronlyinand
title his
because was
name. registered,
Afterobtained
it was and
a year,
recovering the property
Court. In the second place, the Transfer would the the original and transfer certificates of title
in
he 1961,
sold
by fraud a new
the lot title
but to Don, was because
issued
a buyerinin hisgoodname. faithIn
public policy
Certificate of regarding
Title procured ownership by Catalino of lands is In
and
a) 1977, the
Did C filed
reversion
Rod an also
acquire action
of the
titleto land
annul it
tothe
covers
the deedsstate.
30
of
1963,
andhectares
forF sold
value, the
whichwho saidis land
also
far toto X;the
registered
beyond and
the land?
in
the 1965
maximum Explain.
lot X
in
acquired by homestead patent (Art. 1416). The sale
Eddie's to F, X and Y and their titles, on the
equally null and void, it having been issued on SUGGESTED
(2%)
sold todefense
it 24
his name.
of Y,ANSWER:
new titles
hectares
is untenable.
were successively
provided
The protection issued
defense
the basis of of pari a delicto
simulated is not or applicable
forged either,
Deed of No,
ground Rod
afforded did
that
by not(C)
he
the acquire
had been
Torrens titleby
System intothethe
actual
to
free
anland.
patent
physical
innocent The
SECOND ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: in the
law. names of the said purchasers.
since
Sale. the law
A forgeddoes itself
deednot allows
is an the
absolutehomesteader to inscription
possession
purchaser in
of
for the
the registry,
value land, can and to
be be
that effective,
availed the sale
of must
only to F
if
Prescription arise with nullity
respectand to
reacquire
conveys the
nodeclareland
title. The even if it has
mortgage been sold.
in afavor of be
and
the made
the
land in
subsequent
has good been faith.
sales The
should
titled defense
be
thru set aside
judicial of
actions to a void contract nullity
Desiderio is likewise nullisand indefeasibility
on the ground
proceedings of ofathe
where Torrens
fraud.
issue Upon ofTitle
fraudmotiondoes
becomes notof
(Article 1410). Neither thevoiddoctrinebecause of parithe
mortgagor is not the owner extend
defendants,
academic to after athe transferee
the trial
lapse court
of who
one (1) takes
dismissed year the
the
from
delicto applicable because of of the mortgaged
public policy. The
property. While it may be true that under certificate
complaint,
the issuance of oftitle
upholding the with their
decree noticedefenses
of of a of
registration. flaw. their A
In
law is designed for the protection of the the (a) Is the faith said appeal meritorious?
"Mirror Principle" of the Torrens System of holder
being
public inland
bad
innocent grants,ofpurchasers
a certificate
the actionoffortitle of is not
value,
the
plaintiff so as to enhance the public policy of (b) Suppose the
Land
the PublicRegistration,
Land Act a buyer to give or mortgagee
land to has the
Explain
entitled
prescription
government your
to the answer
and annul government
to protection
laches. a oftitle
Plaintiff theappealed.
law, agency
for
fraudulently the
concerned
law cannot joined
be used C in
obtained does not prescribe such action and as filing
a the
shield said
for action
frauds.
If
thetheright
landless. heirs to arerely not allowed
on what to appears
recover, iton could
the In the case at bar,Void Rodwould onlyG.R. forged Cesar's
Homestead
against Patents; Sale
be on the ground
Certificate of Title,of and laches in inasmuch
the absence as 40 of will not the
(Samonte bev. defendants,
Court of
barred by Appeals,
the transfer that of change
No. titlethe
the104223, to
signature
(1999)
In 1950,
SUGGESTED
result
July 12, of the
2001) on
the
ANSWER: the
Bureau
litigation? -Deed of of
Lands
Explain. Sale. issued It isa very
Homestead
years
anything had to elapsed
excite and the
suspicion,
simulated sale; b) The fact that it was derived owneris had
under not
no an
(a) innocent
The appeal purchaseris not for value.
meritorious. The trial
apparent
A. Three
patent that there
to years later,was A sold badthe faith on the part
homestead to
brought
obligation any
from a fraudulentlyto action
look beyondagainst the B especially
certificateif and the court
of Rod
B. A died ruled
from correctly
the
in 1990, veryand in
hisgranting
beginning. heirs filed As defendant's
such,
an action he is
latter
investigatehad the
procured improved
ormortgagor's the land.
improvidently title, It would
this
issued rule
second beowner's
does motion
b) to dismiss
Discuss
not recover
to entitled the
to the
the for
rights the
homestead following
of Don,
protection from ofreasons:
ifB any,
the onLand over
the
detrimental
not thefind
copy, to B if copy
realapplication
owner's theinplaintiff
the still
being is allowed
case at hand
intact and to in the
1.
the While
property.
Registration
ground that there
Act.(2%)
its is
sale the by possibility
their father thatto F,thea
Innocent
recover.
because Purchaser
here. of fortheValue
Catalino's title
truesuffers from two former
possession
(2001)
owner, latter islessee
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
void of the land
under Section was118 aware of theof the fact
Public
fatalBruce.
infirmities, namely: a) The fact that it that C was the bona fide
Land Law. B contends, however, that the heirs
Page 71 of 119
emanated from a forged deed of a of A cannot recover the
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
prescription
property based and onlaches.
the factMore that the than sale 52included
years have
the
(a)
his The obligation.
mortgageHowever, contract executed the action by was
O, if at brought
all, is
half
elapsed
one- pro-indiviso
already from hershare. discoveryPacifico of hadthe sale a notice in of indicates
ten-year
voidable
within
only a theprescriptive
contract
on its face since in
period
it
questinvolves
provided
for any a conjugal
by
hidden
law
lis pendensANSWER:
1950.
ALTERNATIVE annotated on the title covering the defect
wherein or
partnership actionsproperty.
inchoatebased The on right
action
written which
to annul
contracts may
the
B. Winda’s
property and claim orderedthat her Torrensof Title
the cancellation the subsequently
can be
same instituted
instituted.
defeat
in 1977, his
a) right
orWilleleventhereto.
theyears defense
This
after is
covering
notice of lis thependens.property The is notice indefeasible
of lis pendens and the
prosper?execution
"mirror Reason. of the
principle' (3%) sheriff's
of b) the What final sale,
Torrens are the
has
system
imprescriptible
could not be cancelled [does notimmediately hold water]because is not SUGGESTED
essential
obviously
which makes ANSWER:
elements
prescribed
it possibleof laches?
because:for (2%)
a 1) An action
forged deed to to
tenable.
the title over The the rule of indefeasibility
property was with a bank of toa No,annul the
must a
be the root of defense
be
contractbrought will
a goodon the not
within prosper.
ground
title. fourof(4) The
fraud problem
years from
Torrens
which the Titlepropertymeanshad thatbeen after mortgaged
one year from by did not date
Besides,
the give facts
it appears
of from
that which
discovery spouses
of the laches
X and
fraud. may YSincebe
are
the
Bart.date of issue
Pacifico of the decree
appealed the case. of registration
While the inferred.
guilty Mere
thisofiscontributory delay
in essence negligence in filing
an action when an action,
to recover they
or if the
appeal was land has fallen
pending and with into the hands of
the notice of lisan standing
delivered
ownership, alone,
this OCT itdoes to the
must not constitutefrom
bemortgagee
reckoned laches
without the
SUGGESTED
(Agra v. PNB. ANSWER:
309mortgage
SCRAof509).
innocent
pendens purchaser still uncancelled, for value, the Bart titlesoldbecomes the annotating
date of the
execution the thereon.
contract Between
or from
IMPRESCRIPTIBILITY,
incontestable and incontrovertible.on the other hand, b) them
The four basic elements of laches are; (1)
theand the
property to Carlos, who immediately caused
means that no title to the land in derogation of conduct
ALTERNATIVE the innocent
registration
onANSWER: part of of thethepurchaser
alleged for
defendant or value,
fraudulent
of one
the cancellation of the notice of lis pendens, as they
under should
document bear
whom B,hewhowith the theloss.
claims, assessor's
giving office
rise for
to A'sthe
the
that of the registered owner may be acquired If thepurposebuyer of transferring relied theon the
tax teller
declaration,
well as the issuance of a new title in his name. situation
title, was of
not which
aware complainant
of the adverse seeks a remedy;
possession
by adverse possession or acquisitive this being unregistered land, (Bael u.
Is Carlos (a) a purchaser in good faith, or (b) a (2)
2) If
of delay
the the land in by
action asserting bethe
is tospouses
the complainant's
treated X and as an Y,R.action
then rights,
theto
prescription
SUGGESTED ANSWER: or that the registered owner does Intermediate Appellate Court G. L-74423
transferee
A. Carlos ispendente
a buyer in lite?
badIf faith.
your answerThe is (a), the B complainant having hadit knowledge or
not lose by extinctive prescription hisnotice
right of to B.
recover
latter has
cannot
Jan.30,
in his
ownership
1989
favor
recover
169 SCRA
of
theland,presumption
property
617). fromof good
would have
how can
lis pendens the right
was still of Pacifico
annotated asat ofco-owner
the back be
of notice
faith
prescribed of the
whichjustcan defendant's
the onlysame be conduct
because overthrownand
more thanhaving by
recover ownership and possession the land.
protected?
The
the action
title at Explain.
in
the thistime (5%)
case he isbought
for annulmentthe land of from the been
adequate
10 years afforded
proofan
have of opportunity
already bad faith.
elapsed tosince
However, institute
thenobodysuit;
date
sale
Bart.executed
The uncancelled by the husband notice over of lisa pendensconjugal SECOND(3)
buys
of the lack of
ALTERNATIVE
land knowledge
without
execution ofANSWER:
seeing
the sale. on
the the property,part hence,of the
partnership
operates as constructive property covered notice of byitsacontents Torrens (a) The action
defendant
B could not tothe
thathave recover been has
complainant been
unaware barred
would of assert
suchby
Title.
as well Action on contracts
as interests, legal are or subject
equitable, acquisitive
to the
adverse rightpossession. prescription
on which he If after in
baseslearning favor
his suit; ofand of such M(4)
prescription.
included therein. All persons are charged with considering
injury
possession, that
or prejudice
B simply to M has possessed
the his
closed defendant
eyes andthe land
in did the
Prescription
under & Laches;
a claim Indefeasibilityfor Rule of (10)
Torrens Title
Prescription
the knowledge of what it contains. In an event
nothing relief is of
about ownership
accorded it, then to the the ten suit years
complainant, foror
(1990)
In 1960, an unregistered parcel of landof was (2002)
with a just title.
earlier case, it was held that a notice an the suit
reconveyance is not held to be barred.
will prosper as the buyer's bad
mortgaged by owner O toeffective
M, a family Way
as (b)
Notice Ifback
M had
of have in 1948,
Lis PendensWinda’s
secured a Torrens husband Title soldto the in
SUGGESTED
adverse ANSWER:
claim remains andfriend,
binding faith will become evident.
(b) Even iffor
collateral theagovernment
loan. O ofacted joins C,days
throughthisfrom favor
Rommel was issued a certificate of title over aa
land,
his (1995)
will of
all Verde
the more Sports S andCenterP couldCorp. not (Verde)
recover
notwithstanding the lapse the 30
Carlos
not alteris athe
attorney-in-fact, transferee
outcome son pendente
of
S, the who lite was
case insofar
so much
dulyas 10-hectare
because
parcel ofif land property
at allintheir belonging
Quezon remedies City.to would
Onetheir yearconjugal
be: later
its inscription in the registry. This ruling is
Sancho’s
because
authorized ofshare
estoppel
by inwaythe as co-ownership
of an a express
special in the
provision
power land in
of partnership.
Rachelle, the The
legitimate sale was
owner madeof the without
land,
even more applicable in a lis pendens.
is
Sec concerned
45 of wherein
attorney, Actbecause
496 and the
Secland
O declared 31 of was
thatPDtransferred
he1529wasthat the Winda’s
discovered knowledge,
the fraudulent much less consent.
registration obtained In
to
a him
decree during of the pendency
registration
absolute owner of the land, that the tax and of the
the appeal.
certificate of 1950,
by Winda
Rommel. learned
She filed of a the sale,
complaint whenagainst she
B.
titlePacifico
issuedcan
declarations/receipts in protect
pursuance his right
were all as
thereof issueda “shall
co-owner
in be his discovered
Rommel for the deed of sale
reconveyance and caused among the the
by pursuing
conclusive
name, and upon his
thatappeal;
and
he againstasking
has been the
all in Court
persons,
open, of documents
annotation of in aher noticehusband’s
of lis pendens vault after on the his
As O was
Appeals
including
continuous totheunable
order
andnational to pay
the
adverse back
re-annotation
government
possessionthe of loan in plus
the
and lis
all
the demise.
certificateSoon of title after,issued sheto noticed
Rommel. that Rommel the
interest
pendens
branches
concept of for
on the title
the
thereof,
owner. past offive
whether Carlos;[5) years,
and byM
mentioned byhad
invoking
name to construction
now invokesofthe the sports complex of
indefeasibility hadhis started.
title
Mirror
foreclose
his rightPrinciple;
ofthe Forgery;
mortgage.
redemption
in the application or not.” Innocent
of At
Bart’s Purchaser
the foreclosure
share under Upon
considering completion that of
one the
year construction
has already in 1952,
elapsed
(1999)
The
sale, spouses
ALTERNATIVE
M was ANSWER:
the X theand
highest Y mortgaged
bidder. Upon a piece
issuance of Winda
she triednow files a suit against freeVerde for the
Articles 1620 of New Civil Code. from
annulment its but failed
issuance.
of the sale
toHe
on
get also
the ground
membership
seeksthat the
she
A. Carlos
registered
of the sheriff’s is a purchaser
land to final A, delivering in good
deed ofas sale faith.
well and the A privileges in Verde.
cancellation
did not consent of the notice of Lis pendens. May
possessor
OCT to the
registration in in good
latter, faith
January, but has they
1966, been defined
continued
the mortgage as SUGGESTED
to ANSWER:to the sale. In answer, Verde
the
A court that,
Notice
contends cancel
of Lis inthe notice ofmay
Pendens
accordance lis pendens
with be
thecanceled even
Spanish
“one
possess who
property and is unaware
wascultivate
turned over that
the land, there
to M's exists
giving a flaw
1/2 of
possession
which invalidates before
even Code
Civil final
before judgment
which final is
wasJudgment rendered?
then in force, uponExplain.
the proper
sale in
each harvest
and control M A his
to has acquisition
insince
partial then payment of the
developed ofthing”
their
the
(Art.
In
loan 526,
1977,
to the NCC).
after
latter, Good
the
A,
said property. In 1967, O died, survived by faith
tenth
however, consists
(10th)
without in
death the
the showing
1948 of thatthe the notice
property is for
did the
not purpose
need of
her
possessor’s
anniversary
knowledge
sons S and P. belief
ofof Xhisand that
father
Y, theO.
forged person
son a Pdeed from
filed of a whom
suit
sale to
of molesting
concurrence. or harassing
Verde contends the adverse
that in party
any caseor
he
annul
the received
the mortgage
aforesaid theland thingindeed was
favor andthe owner of
ofsubsequent
himself, got the
sale a that the
the action notice hasofprescribed
lis pendensor is not necessary
is barred by
same and A.
P
to Define
.D.protect
laches. No. Winda
1529)or explain
the right
rejoins of the
the
that term
partyherwho “laches”.
Torrenscaused it
title
of the
TCT in hiscould
property,name, convey
etc.,
and on histhe
then title.
sold In the
ground
the ofcase
land to [at
fraud. B,
bar],
He assertedin question, while Carlos bought the B.
(2%)
to Decide
be
covering registered.the
the case,(Section
property stating 77,
is your reasons
indefeasible, for
and
who bought that the land the property
relying on in A'squestion
title, andwas
subject property from Bart while your
In this decision.
case, it
imprescriptible. (3%) is given that Rachelle is the
conjugal
who thereafterin nature also actually
got a TCT inahis
belonging, notice atofthe
name. lis
It SUGGESTED ANSWER:
pendens
time of was
the still
mortgage,annotated to O thereon,
and his there
wife, wasW, legitimate owner of the land in question. It can
was only then that the spouses X and Y A. LACHES means failure or neglect, forher an
(a) Is
SUGGESTED
also
whose an the
conjugalANSWER:
existing suit
share filed
court went by
order
tobeen Pcanceling
their barred
sons (S by
the
and be said, therefore, that when she filed
learned
The that
action Explain their
of land
X and had Y be against titled in
B for B's unreasonable and unexplained length of time,
prescription?
same.
P)
name.and Hence,
to
May O. said Carlos your
cannot
spouses answer.
file considered
an action foras notice
to do what,
of lis pendens her purpose was to
by exercising
reconveyance
(b)
being After
“aware ofthe of the
issuance
athe
flawland land
of
which will
the not
sheriff's
invalidates prosper
final protect
[their] or should her interest in the due land diligence,
and not just could to
reconveyance
because B has of acquired a in question
clean title against
to the have been done earlier. Itthe is
deed
the of sale
acquisition in 1966 in this case, assuming molest Rommel.
of the thing” since the alleged negligence or omission to assert a right within It is necessary to record
b? Reason.
property (5%)
being an innocent purchaser for
that M
flaw, the applied
notice forlis
of registration
pendens, under
was the
already Lis pendens to protect her interest because if
A forged
value. deedand is was an issued
absolute nullity Title and a reasonable
did not dotime. (De isVera v. CA, 305 thatSCRA
Torrens
being
B. To
System
ordered
protect cancelled
his right atover a
the theTorrens of the she
time subject B. While
624 [1999])
it, there a possibility
Article 1413 of the Spanish Civil Code
the
conveys
to the no
said title.
property The fact
in that
question, the forged
would deed
that land will fall into the hands of an innocent
purchase.
property, On thisshould
Pacifico ground have alone,timely Carlosfiledwas can
an did not require the consent of the wife for the
was
SUGGESTED
added registered
fact ANSWER:
have and a certificate
any significant effectof titleon your purchaser for value and in that event, the
already
action
Under be
for considered
reconveyance a buyer
andCode, in good
reinstated faith.
the validity of the sale, an alienation by the
issued
(a)
conclusion? in Art.
hisState173
name, of the
your did Civil
reason.not operate the to action
vest court loses control over the land making any
(Po
notice
is Lam
barred of v.
lis Court
pendens.
by prescription of Appeals,
because 347 SCRA
the wife 86, husband in fraud of the wife is void as held in
upon an ownership over the property of Xhad and favorable judgment thereon moot and
[2000]).
Prescription & Laches; Elements of Laches Uy Coque
Notice of Lis v. Navas,
Pendens; 45 Phil.
Transferee 430 Lite
Pendente (1923).
only ten (10) years from the
Y. The registration of the forged deed will not academic. transaction and For these reasons, the notice of lis
(2000)
In an the
action brought to tocollect aa sum offormoney Assuming that
to (2002)
Sancho the alienation in 1948 of a was in
pendensand mayPacifico
during
cure the marriage
infirmity. However, file once suit the titlethe are co-owners parcel
not be canceled.
based
annulment on a surety
of the agreement,
mortgage
the land is registered in the name of the forger the
deed. defense
Alternative of fraud
of land.of Winda
Sancho and, sold therefore,
the propertymakes the
to sale
Bart.
laches
and
Answers was
to
title toraised
(a) first
the land as the
Alternative claim
thereafter was
Answer: fallsfiledinto more to Verde sued
the Pacifico void, Sancho
the action andtoBart set for aside the sale,
annulment
than seven
hands of anyears innocent from purchaser
the maturity forofvalue, the of nonetheless,
the sale and is reconveyance
already barredofby the
latter acquires a clean title thereto. A buyer of
a registered land is not
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
1)
Decide
alienation. Theon The Register
these contractclaims,
of Deedsin question
givingshall yournotify
merelythe callsanswer
The
for right or show
to recover up on the possession
date of initial of registered
hearing, does land
reclamation
reasons. ANSWER:
the
interested
SUGGESTED of 300
party inhectares
writing, ofsetting land withinforth the does
the guarantee
not
likewise not theprescribe
success of thebecause application.possession
It is still incumbent is just
upon
At this point
coastal
defects waters
of the in instrument
time,
of theX city. cannot Perthe
or claim itthe
se,legal does right
ground notof the a applicant to prove with well nigh incontrovertible evidence that
necessary incident of ownership.
he has acquired a title to the land that is fit for registration. Absent
vested ownership
vest, alienate
relied upon forordenying over the
transferthe Pangasinan
ownership
registration, parcel
of land by
and such registrable title, it is the clear duty of the Land Registration
acquisitive
under thethat
advising prescription.
sea. if Thehe is citynot Inagreeable
merely addition
engaged totosuch thethe SUGGESTED
Court to dismiss ANSWER:
the application and declare the land as public
requisites
services he
ruling, common
of Fil-Estate
may, without to
to reclaim ordinary
the land for
withdrawing and
the b)
land. Mikaelo's defense of laches, however,
extraordinary
the city. acquisitive
documents from the Registry, elevate the prescription appears to be more sustainable. Renren
Registration;
consisting
matter Deed
of
by Consulta of toMortgage
uninterrupted, peaceful, public,
the Administrator of the bought the land and had the sale registered
(1994)
2)
How do
adverse
Land Within
you actual
and
Registration fiveAuthority
register {5)now
possessiondays
a deed from
(LRA).in the conceptofof way
of receipt
mortgage back in 1965.
An application forFrom landtheregistration
facts, it appears is a
notice
of a parcel
owner, of denial,
ordinary of land the party-in-interest
originally
acquisitive registered
prescription shall forfile
under that it was only
ten proceeding in rem. Its main objective in 1998 or afteris an to
his Consulta
the Spanish
SUGGESTED
(10) yearsANSWER: with (1)
Mortgage
requires theLaw? Register inofgood
possession Deeds inexplicable
faith establish thedelaystatusofof33 the years that he took
res whether the
it is still
a)
3) After
(2)After
concerned
and the
just andtitle.Spanish
receipt
pay the
"Just of Mortgage
the means
consulta
title" Consulta
fee. Law that was
and first step
the part of our asserting
public domain his rightastopresumed the land. It was
under
abrogated
adverse ofby
payment claimant theP.D. 892 oninto
corresponding
came February fee the
possession 16, 1976,
Register
of the the not evenRegalian an action doctrine to recoveror has ownership
acquired but the
all lands through
of Deeds
property covered
makes an byannotation
one Spanish
of the modes titles
of the that were
pending
recognized only possession
character of a private of property.
the land.It is Bytheordinary
duty of
not
by brought
consulta
law forat thetheunderbackthe of the
acquisition Torrens
certificate
of system
ownership of within
title.
but the the standards,
applicant 33 to years of neglect
overcome thatorpresumption
inaction is
six
4) 16] months
The Register from
grantor was not the owner or could notelevates
of theDeedsdate thereof
then have
transmit Remedies;
too long
with Judicial
and
sufficient maybe Reconstitution
evidence. considered of unreasonable.
Title
been
the right
any considered
case to the
(Art. 1129. asLRA "unregistered
Civil Administrator
Code). In this private case, (1996)
with In
As 1989,
often the heldheirs by the of Gavino,
Supremewho Court,died the on
Thus,
lands."
certified a records
deed of mortgage
thereof and a affectingof land
summary the August 10, 1987, filed a petition for
there is no "just title" and no "mode" that can principle of imprescriptibility sometimes has
originally
5) The registered
LRA Administrator under then Spanish Mikaelo's
the conducts claim of hislaches, however, is weak
factsinvoked
be and issues by involved.
X for the acquisition of the reconstitution
to yield to theof equitable lost orprinciple
destroyed ofTorrens
laches
Mortgage
hearings after Law is now
due notice governed by the system insofar as the element of equity is concerned,
Pangasinan parcel. There or was may nojust require
constructive Title
whichto can a parcel convertof land even in Ermita,
a registered Manila. land This
of registration
parties to submit oftheir
transactions
memoranda. or instruments there was
owner's
being
opposed
claim
no showing
into by a Marilou
stale
in the who
demand.
facts how claimed he
delivery
Primary of Book;
Entry the Acquisitive
Pangasinan parcelLaches
Prescription; because it
affecting
6) unregistered
After hearing, the land Section(1998)
underAdministrator
LRA 194 entered into the ownership and possession of
was not the subject-matter of the deed of sale. ownership of the said land by a series of sales.
of
issues thean Revisedorder prescribing Administrative the step Code to be as the land.
She claimed that Gavino had sold the property
Hence,
In 1965, B retainsbought ownership of the a Pangasinan of Reclamation of Foreshore Lands; Limitations
amended
taken orRenren
by
theAct No. 3344.
memorandum from UnderRobyn
to bethis parcel
made.law, His the to Bernardo way back in 1941 and as evidence
parcel
registered of land.
land evidenced by a duly executed (2000)
Republic Act 1899 authorizes municipalities
instrument
resolution in consulta or transaction
shall be conclusive affecting and thereof, she presented a Tax Declaration in
deed of
unregistered sale.
binding upon land The owner presented
is entered
all Registers of Deeds the deed
in a unless of and chartered
book 1948 in the name of Bernardo, cities to reclaim foreshore lands
which cancelled
sale
provided
reversedand the owner's
for appeal
on the purpose bycertificate
the butCourt the of title to the
ofregistration
Appeals or bordering them and to construct thereon
the previous Tax Declaration in the name of
b)
by By
thereofthe recording
Register is
Supreme purely and
of Deeds. The registering
entry
voluntary
Court. was
(Section andmade with
doesin the
117, .D. adequate
Pthe
not docking and harbor facilities.
Gavino. Then she presented two deeds of sale
Register
daybook
•adversely
1529). Theof
and Deeds
procedure of
corresponding the ofplace fees
consulta
affect third persons who have a duly wherewere the
is paid
a land as
mode Pursuant
of thereto, the City of Cavite entered
1. registered with the Register the ofDecreeDeeds, the
is located,
evidenced
appeal
better fromby
right. in
denial accordance
officialby the receipt. withHowever,
Register Act
of Deeds3344. noof theinto AanPetitionagreement to with Review the Fil-Estate Realty of
first one
Registration. executed This by
can Bernardo
be availed inof 1954
within selling
one
However,
transfer
registration P .D. 892
of certificate required
of the instrument holders
of title towas of Spanish
the issued
Commissioner to Company, authorizing the latter to reclaim 300
the year
same propertyentry to Carlos, and the onlysecond
title
Renren
of Land to because
bring the
Registration. the same
original under the Torrens
certificate of title (1) hectares from-the
one executed
of land from the
by Carlos
thereof,
in
sea but
1963,
bordering
selling
uponthe
the
Remedies;
System
in Judicial
within 6 Confirmation;
months from Imperfect
its Title
effectivity on the
city, basis
with 30% of of"actual
the land fraud."
to be There
reclaimed isto no be
• Robyn's Within namefive dayswas from temporarilyreceipt of misplaced
the notice same of property to committed
her. She also claimed that
(1993)
On June
February
after 30,
16, 1986,
1976. A filed in the RTC of Abra an showing
SUGGESTED
owned by that
ANSWER: M
Fil-Estate as actual
compensation fraudfor in
its
denial,fire partly gutted
the interested partythe mayOffice elevateofthethe matter
2. IAn
she and action
her in personam
predecessors against
ingive
interest Mhave for beenthe
application
Register for
of Deeds. registration
Meanwhile, of title to a
the land of parcel had Land securing
If were his
the title
judge, to theI
services. The Solicitor General questioned the land;
will or due course to
by consulta to the Commissioner reconveyance
in possession of the titleof inGavino
their
sincefavor. Again,
P
of. land
beenD. No. under 1529, claiming
possessed by Robyn's that distantsince June cousin, 12, the petition
validity of the ofof thethe
agreement
property
heirs on the ground
1948.
despite If the
that
you
it
Registration who shall enter an order prescribing this
wereremedy the judge, is availablehow within will four
you years
decide fromthe
1945,
Mikaelo, he has
openly, been
adversely in andopen, continuous,
continuously in opposition
will mean of
reclaiming Marilou land for
under thethe following
sea which
the step to be taken or memorandum to be made. the date of
petition? theJudicial
Explain. discoveryreconstitution
of the fraud but not
exclusive
concept and notorious possession and
in reasons:
is a)the commerce of man. Theof City a
the
Resolution of owner
in consulta since 1960.
shall be Itbinding
was onlyupon all beyond
later than
No. 26ofpartakes
SUGGESTED ten
ANSWER: (10) years
ofRA. a from
land the date of
registration
occupation
April 1998 of said parcel of land of the public certificate
to replies that this title under
is authorized by RA. 1899
Registers
SUGGESTED of that
ANSWER: Deeds Renren provided suedthat Mikaelo
the party in proceeding
The Solicitor
registration ofGeneral
the
andtitle isincorrect.
is perforce the name The of authority
a proceeding M. in
domain
recover which
possession. was alienable Mikaelo andinvoked
disposable, a) because it authorizes the construction of docks
interest
a) Renren'smay appeal
action to the
recoverCourt of Appeals
possession of within
Prescription;
of the
rem. City It of Real
Cavite
denotes Rights
under
restoration RA 1899
of anto reclaim
existing
under
acquisitive a bona fide claim
prescription and of b) ownership.
laches, After and harbors. Who is correct? (3%)
asking
the period prescribed (Sec. 117, P.D.buying
1529). (1992)
land will
issuance
that he be of prosper.
the
declared notice In
owner
1965,
of initial
of
after
the hearing
land. Decide and A
the owned
land instrument a parcel
is limited of unregistered
towhich
foreshore haslands. been land
Thelostlocated
Act did or
land from
publication, Robyn,
as required he submitted
bydefenses, the
law, the [5%] Deed
petition of on
not the
destroyedTarlac
authorize side
it into of
reclaim
its the boundary
land
original from formbetween
the sea.
and
the case
Sale to the by evaluating
Registry these Tarlac and Pangasinan. Hisofbrother Bthe owned
was heard on July 29,of1987. Deeds On forthe registration
day of the "The reclamation
condition. The being
purpose unauthorized,
reconstitution Cityof
together with the owner's
hearing nobody but the applicant appeared. duplicate copy of the
of adjoining
Cavite did parcel
not acquireof
title or any document is to have the same unregistered
ownership land
over on
the
the
Neither title,
was and therepaid anyone thewho corresponding
opposed the reclaimed the Pangasinan
b) reproduced,
If the land. Courtside.
Notgoes
after being beyond
the owner,
proceedings. that purpose,
In the it same
could
registration fees. Under Section 56 of PD No. A
notsold
ALTERNATIVE
it acts
have the Tarlac
ANSWER:
without
conveyed orparcel
in
any to X in of
excess
portion athereof
deed oftosale
jurisdiction. the
application. Thereupon, on motion of the executed It form they
depends. were when of the lossfrom or
1529, the Deed of Sale to Renren is Thus,
contractor. where asIfathe public
the reclamation
Torrens instrumentTitle the
by land
sought A and to X.
be
applicant, the RTC issued an order of general After the destruction
sea occurred.
considered registered from the time the sale X is
reconstituted necessary
paid in
is full
in the in
the, thenameconstruction
price of Gavino,
of the sale, of thethe X
default
For all and
legal allowed
intents the and applicant
purposes, to present
Renren hisis docks
took and
possession the harbors,
of the the City
Pangasinan of Cavite
parcel is
in
was entered
evidence. That in he thedid.Day OnBook
September (now called the court cannot receive evidence proving that
considered
The
Primary appellant
Entry theBook).registered
urged that ownerthe RTC of 30,the 1989,
erred land.in correct.
the beliefOtherwise,
Marilou isthat was it
theit owner the is not.
the Since
ofTarlac RA
parcelMarilou's
land. 1899
covered
the
AfterRTC dismissed A'sfaultapplication the for lack of of authorized
dominical claim to the land should and
dismissingall, it was not his
his application forthat registrationRegistry and by the deed the
of city
sale to
executed construct
by A and docks
X.
sufficient evidence. A appealed to the Court of be
Deeds
in could not
not ordering issue the
registration of his corresponding
title to the After
harbors, twelveallinworks(12) years,
that are a necessary
controversy for arose
such
Appeals. ventilated a separate civil action before the
between
construction BTrial
and CourtXareon Heirs
the
in deemed
transferofcertificate of title. despite the fact that REFERENCES: issue
of Pedroof the authorized.
Pinate ownership
parcel land in question Regional its capacity asvs.a Dulay.
court
Mikaelo's defense of prescription
there was no opposition filed by anybody to his can not be of the
Including Pangasinan
187 the
SCRA 12-20parcel,
reclamation B
of
(1990); Bunagan claims
land a
vs.from
CF1 vested the
Cebu
of general Branch jurisdiction.
VI. 97 SCRA 72 (1980); Republic vs. IAC.
sustained. A Torrens
application. Did the RTC commit the error title is imprescriptible. right
sea. The
of ownership
reclamation over being
the Pangasinan
authorized, parcelthe
ANOTHER157
No title toANSWER:
SUGGESTED
attributed registered
to it? land in derogation of the because
city is the B SCRA
ALTERNATIVE
never
owner 62,66
sold
of (1988); Margolles vs. CA, 230
ANSWER:
the that parcel land
reclaimed to148X andor to
it
No, the RTC did not commit the error attributed to it. In an On the SCRA assumption
709; Republicthat the reclamation
us, Feliciano, SCRA
title of the registered owner shall be acquired anyone
may
Remedies;convey
else.
924. a portion
Procedure; thereof
Consulta as payment for
application for Judicial confirmation of imperfect or incomplete title contract
On was entered X into before RA 1899 rightwas
P
by.D. prescription
to public
No,
agricultural land under or Sectionadverse48 of the possession.
Public Land Act, the the
(1994)
What isother
services the hand,
ofprocedure
the contractor. claims a vested
of consulta when an of
1529) repealed
ownership by over PD 3-A,
the the
PangasinanCity of Cavite
parcel by is
(Section
the 47,
lack of opposition and the consequent order of default against instrument is denied registration?
those who did not
correct.
acquisitive Lands under the sea
prescription, because X possessed are "beyond the
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
commerce
this parcel of forman" over ten in the (10]sense
yearsthat under they claim are
not susceptible
of ownership. of private appropriation,
ownership or
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Yes. The property
purchaser {Rublicoregistered is deemed
vs. Orellana 30 SCRAto be Ubudan
511; held(a)
This
inAnaction
action for
Administrative doesreconveyance
Code not prescribe.
of 1987 against
which WithHuey
prohibits respect
isofficers
to
for
trustthe real
vs. SCRA
45 Gil 17). owner by the person in whose employees
not forofproper
Percival's
and the
action the government from
remedy,
reconveyance, it purchasing
because
would havedirectly
Huey or indirectly
is an
prescribed,
OPTIONAL
name it is EXTENDED
registered. ANSWER: The Torrens system was any property
innocent
having been sold by themore
purchaser
filed government
for forten
thanvalue. nonpayment
(10)Theyears ofproper
anyafter
tax,
Petition for
not designed to shield one review ofwho the hadDecree
committed of registration
fee or other public
recourse isand charge.
for Louie of
issuance to angoO.C.T. afterin Deweythe name forof
Registration.
fraud A remedy expressly
or misrepresentation and thus provided
holds the in Melvin,
(a) Is the
damages were sale
by toreason
it not Juan
for the valid?of Ifthe
inherent so,infirmity
what isofthe
fraudulent the
Section
title in bad 32 of faith.P. D.(Walstrom
No. 1529 v. (formerly
Mapa Jr., Section
(G .R effect of
latter's theUnder
title.
registration Issuance
and the facts,
subsequent of the theCertificate
statute
sale of the of TitleIf
of limitations
land.
38. Act29
38387, 496),Jan. this 1990) remedy
as cited has in the following
Martinez, D., (b)
to
will If
Maria?
not the
apply sale
to is void,
Percival
Dewey is insolvent, Louie may file a claim may
because Juan
Melvin recover
knew the a
that
elements: of
Summary a) The petition must
SC Decisions, January be filed to June,by a part Eduarte
P10,000.00?
of thethe
against v.
land CA,
Ifcovered
not,
Assurance323 whybyPhil.not?
his
Fund 462,
title actually
(Heirs 467belonged
of Pedro to
dominical
Remedies;
person or other real
Reconveyance; rights to
Prescriptive the land
Period
1990, p.claiming
359], [1996]).
(c) If the
Percival.
Lopez v. So,
De saleinstead
Castro is void,324 did
of nullifying
SCRA it not nevertheless,
in toto
591 [2000]the citing
title of
On registered
(1997) 10 September in the1965, nameMelvin of respondent. applied for a (b) Yes,the
operate
Melvin, thedivert
to remedy
court, in will
Maria theofprosper
her ownership?
exercise because
of equity If theit
and
Sps.
b)
free patent The registration
covering twooflots the- land Lot Ainand theLot name B action
did, who prescribes
jurisdiction, thenmayisgrant thein owner
ten (10)
prayer of the
for years,
the property?not withinof
reconveyance
of respondentin was
- situated procuredIsabela.
Santiago, by means Uponof Lot oneB(1) to year
Percival when whoahas petition
actually for the reopening
possessed the land
actual,
certification by the Public Land Inspectorwhich
(not just constructive) fraud, that of thea registration
under claim of ownership decreesince may1947. be filed.
After all, Theif
must
Melvinbehad extrinsic.
been in actual, Fraud is actual open,
continuous, if the Melvin's
action for title reconveyance
is declared void is ab distinct
initio and from the land theis
registration
notorious, exclusive was made and through
adverse possession deceit or any of petition totothe
reverted reopen the decree
public domain, Percival of would
registrationjust the
other
the lots intentional
since 1925, act of downright
the Director dishonesty
of Landto same (GreybeAlba entitled v. De la Cruz, 17
to preference right Phil. 49 [1910}).
to acquire the land
enrich
approved oneself Melvin's at theapplication
expense of on another.
04 June It is from
There theisgovernment.
no need to reopen
Besides, wellthe settledregistration
is the rule
extrinsic
1967. Onwhen 26 it Decemberis something 1967, that Original
was not that proceedings,
once publicbut land the hasproperty
been in open, shouldcontinuous,
just be
c)
On
raised,
Certificate The
7 September
litigatedpetition
of Title 1971,
and must
passed
(OCT) be No.
Percival filed
upon filedwithin
in athe
P-2277 one
protest
main
was The action
reconveyed
exclusive and for
to reconveyance
the realpossession
notorious owner. is basedunderon a implied
bonafide
(1) year
alleging
proceedings.
issued in fromthatname
the theLotdateofBMelvln.of the issuance
which he had ofbeen the or constructive
claim of acquisition trust, of which prescribes
ownership for in the tenperiod
(10)
d)
decree.
occupying Title and to the land has since
cultivating not passed 1947 towas an prescribed
years frombythe date of issuance
Section 48 of the Public Land Act, the of the original
Innocent
included in purchaser
the Free for Patentvalue (Libudan
issued in thevs. name Gil, samecertificate
ipso jure of ceases
title. to This rule and
be public assumes that the
in contemplation
45_ SCRA 27,
of Melvin. The1972), Director Rublico
of Lands vs. Orrelana.
ordered the 30 of defendant
law acquired is in possession
the character of the land. Where
of private land. Thus, it is
SCRA 511, 1969); RP
investigation of Percival's protest. The Special vs. CA, 57 G. R No. the plaintiff who is in possession
reconveyance of the land from Melvin to Percival would of the land, the
40402. March 16, 1987).
Investigator who conducted the investigation action
ALTERNATIVEfor reconveyance
ANSWER: would
be the better procedure, (Vitale vs. Anore, 90 Phil. 855; be in the nature of
Torrens System vs. Recording
found that Percival had been in actual of Evidence of Title The
a
v. suit action
Malay,for of
quieting
318 the for
SCRA Solicitor
the title
711 General
which should
action is
Pena, Land Titles and Deeds, 1982, Page 427)
(1994)
Distinguish
On 28 November the
cultivation of Lot B since 1947. Torrens
1986, the system
Solicitor of land
General prosper,
imprescriptible
[1999]). considering(David that the doctrine of
registration
filed in behalf from the of systemthe Republic of recording of the of Remedies; Reconveyance;
indefeasibility of title does Elementsnot apply to free
evidence
SUGGESTED of title.
ANSWER:
Philippines a complaint for cancellation of the (1995)
Rommel
patent was
secured issuedthrough a certificate
fraud. A of title overof
certificate a
a) The
free patent TORRENS
and the OCT SYSTEM issued in the OF name LAND parcel
of title of land
cannot beinused Quezon as shieldCity. One year later
to perpetuate
REGISTRATION
Melvin and the reversion is a system of the for landthe registration
to public fraud. Rachelle, The the State legitimate
is not bound owner by the of the period land, of
of title to the
domain on the ground of fraudland. Thus, under this systemand what prescription
discovered the fraudulent
stated in Sec. registration
38 of Act obtained496.
is entered in the Registry
misrepresentation in obtaining of Deeds, the freeis a record
patent.of (Director
by Rommel. of Lands She vs. filed a complaint
Abanilla, 124 SCRA against
358)
the The action for reconveyance filed by Percival may
On the same date, Percival sued Martin forunlike
owner's estate or interest in the land, the Rommel for reconveyance and caused the
the
Melvin system
reconveyance filedunder hisof Lot the
answers B.Spanish interposing Mortgage the Law sole or still prosper of
annotation provided
a notice that of the property has
lis pendens on the not
the
defense system in both under casesSection that 194 of the Revised
the Certificate of passed
certificate to anofinnocent
title issued third to party for value
Rommel. (Dablo
Rommel
Act 3344 us. of Appeals. 226 SCRA 618) , and provided
Administrative
Title issued Code in ashisamended name by became nowCourt invokes the indefeasibility of his title
where only the evidence
incontrovertible of such title upon
and indefeasible is recorded. the that the action is filed within the prescriptive period
considering that one year has already elapsed
In
lapsetheof latter
one system,
year from what theisissuance
recorded ofis thethefree deed of ten years (Tale vs. Court of Appeals. 208 SCRA
from its issuance. He also seeks the
Given
of
patent. the circumstances,
conveyance from hence can the theaction owner's of the title 266). Since ANSWER:
SUGGESTED the action was filed by Percival 19 years
cancellation
Yes, the Rachelle's of the notice of Lis pendens. Will
Solicitor
emanated—and General not theand title itself.the case for after issuancesuit will prosper
of Melvin's title, itbecause
is submitted all
b) Torrens system of land registration is that Rachelle's
elements for suitan for
action reconveyance
for reconveyance prosper? are
reconveyance filed by Percival possibly that the same is already barred by prescription.
which is prescribed in Act 496 (now PD 1529), Explain.
present, ANSWER namely: a) Rachelle is claiming
SUGGESTED
prosper? ANSWER: ALTERNATIVE (to second part of question) The
Remedies;
which
"If Reconveyance
fraudisbe either discovered vs.
Judicial Reopening
in theor of a
quasi-judicial.
application Decree;
which action land. b)for
dominical Rommel
rights procured
over
reconveyance the same his title
filed to the land
by Percival will
Prescriptive
led
System to theorPeriod
issuance (2003)
recording of the of patent
evidence and of Certificate
title is by fraud.because
prosper, c) The the action landwas hasbroughtceased to within
be publicthe
Louie,
of Title,before
merely the Title
this leaving
registration
becomesthe country of facto
ipso to train
evidence null as of
and a land
statutory and periodhas become of private land by open,
chef
void. in
acquisitions a
Thus, in five-star
of aland hotel
case with in
where New York,
thea Register
person who U.S.A., of four (4) public,
continuous, years from exclusivediscovery possession of the under fraud and a not
entrusted
Deeds, who
obtained to
a free his
annotates first-degree
patent,the cousin
same onmade
knowingly Dewey
the existinga false an bona than
later
fide ten
claim (10} of years
ownership from for themore date than of registration
thirty
application
statement
title, cancels offortheregistration,
material old one andand essentialunder facts
issues athenewin Land
title Rommel's
his years, of and title. Percival d) is Title stilltointhe land hasof not
possession the
Registration
Unregistered
based on Act,
the Landof a parcel
document
application for the same, by stating therein of land
presented located in
for passed
property into
at the
present. hands
His of an
action for reconveyance can
Bacolod
(1991)
Maria
that Enriquez
registration.
the lot City. in Aquestion
failed toyear
pay thelater,
realty
was taxes Louie
partonof returned
herthe unregistered
public to innocent
(Olviga
be considered v. CA. purchaser
asGR 1048013.
an action for
to value.
quietOctober 21, does
title, which
the Philippines
agricultural land located and
in discovered
Magdugo, Toledo that
City. In Dewey
1989, to
domain not occupied or claimed by any other not prescribe if the plaintiff is in possession of the 1993)
registered Remedies;
Rommel can Reopeninginvoke of thea Decree; Elements of his
indefeasibility
satisfy
person, his the
the taxes due,land
title the and
City
becomes soldobtained
itipso
at public
factoan
auction Original
to Juan property.
canceled
Certificate
Miranda, an of
employee Title at over
the the
Treasurer's property
Office of in
said his
City, (1992)
What
title if are
Rachellethe essential
had filed requisites
a petition or elements
to reopen or
and consequently rendered null and void." "It
Dewey’s
whose bid at name.
P10,000.00 Compounding
was the highest. In duethetime, matter,
a final bill for the allowance
review the decree ofofthe reopening But
registration. or review
Rachelle of
is to the public interest that one who succeeds
Dewey wassold theinacquiring
land favor.toMaria Huey, a decreefiled
instead of registration?
an ordinary action in personam for
of
In
(a)
sale
fraudulentlyexecuted
Is theof action
his
pursued bytitleLouie to an
refused public
the
innocent
to turn-over
proper landthe
SUGGESTED ANSWER: In
purchaser
possession
should
(b)
remedy?
for
the
not be allowed
Assuming
value.
property to
thatareconveyance
Louie
Juan alleging promptly
that
to benefit therefrom (1) she
is basis
the of
filed
had
proper and The essential elementstheare: latter
an
been, reconveyance.
(1) because,
action,
that the
action
in
thethe for
meantime,
State, reconveyance
granted
through free of
patent
the prosper the
and on parcel
the
Solicitorif General, land
thereof an indefeasibility is not
may petitioner has a real or dominical right; (2) a valid defense in
remedy,
Original
against will
Certificate
Huey. theof action
Title was issued to her, the(2)case
and the was
sale in filing such action, Rachelle is not seeking to
file
filedthe
Lands
corresponding
beyond
us. is Hon. onePedro year, action
but in
Samson
for
within
Animas,
annulment
tenprovision
years,
L-37682,
of 3-that he has been deprived thereof through
favor
the ofpatent
Juan voidand from the beginning
the reversion view of of the the land in nullify nor to impugn the indefeasibility of
from
29-74.)
the the entry of the decree of registration? fraud;
Rommel's (3) title.
that the Shepetition
is only asking is filed the within court one to
involved
SUGGESTED
5% to
ANSWER:the public domain" (Dinero us. ALTERNATIVE (1) year from the
ANSWER: issuance of the decree; and
Director of Lands; Kayaban vs. Republic L- compel Rommel to reconvey the title to her as
(4) that the owner
the legitimate property of thehas land.not yet been
33307,8-20-73; Director of transferred to an innocent
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
not depend
then
constitutes
Salvador executed consigned
an
solelyanundue affidavit
on the interference
theP willof100,000.00
desistance
of the with
debtor
inwhich
thecourt,but
right
led
also
any
property
condition
and
of
to payment of
of Eva ZY,atpassing
hisall.wife Printado
themay 1998 alsohas Bar suealso
Examinations.
to arecover standing
it
withdrawal
to
action
other
the enter
Roland
filed
on anfor factors
into
rescission
ofcontracts
theoutside information
of theand thedeed
thedebtor’s
impairment
of
against
conditional Lolitaof Article
with
My publisher
answer
contract
under 2016 Publico
will of not the
for the
be Civilthe Code
printing of 10,000
same if she
asvolumes and
to damages. the
of school
andfreedom
his
sale,
control.herplus release
damages.
to play from and Will
jail.enjoyThe
the basketball.
action
parentsprosper? failed to family textbooks.
Marvinneeded Suplico
will be the was
liable aware
money for ofdamages
forsaidsupport.
printing forcontract.
breachAfter of
comply with
Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: their promissory note and the ALTERNATIVE contract
printing 1,000ofvolumes,option.
ANSWER (2):Withalso
Printado thefailspayment
to perform of under the its
No,
(d)
Can The
finance the
Rolandobligation
action
company bewill isnot
bound valid.
sued prosper.
byThethemthe death
Thefor ofaction
contract the he
specific son
for A. (2).contract
consideration
printing Mrs.with ZY cannot
forPublico.
the option
Suplico filesues a Printado
given, suitand tofor recover
with the
the value
rescission
of cancerinto
entered
SUGGESTED
performance. within
may
ANSWER: with
Will one
bethe year
Ladybrought
action is
Love made only
prosper or a can negative
by not?
or hethe what consent
of her
the unpaid husband
of deliveries
the parties under lost.their Art
and the 2014
order object
agreement. of
of the theCivil
contract
At same
The
(3%) actionthe
aggrieved
suspensive
disregard will
party same?prosper.
condition to the Is he The
contract.
to promissory
his
liable making
Since
at all? itHow note
was
the (San Code
being
time provides
present,
Publico
Miguel, sues Printadoathat perfected
Inc. forany v. loser
damages forin
contract
Huang, breacha G.R.
ofgame
of option
contract
No. of
executed
Salvador
payment.
SUGGESTED
about Sweet by
The
who
ANSWER: Lolita's
obligation
Taste? failedIs it parents
tois demandable
liable comply
to Ladyis valid with
Love? ifandthe
his 137290,
chance
wasrespect
with created.may to their
July recover
own 2000)
31, his agreement.
printing loss
Under from thesuit
In the
Article winner,
filed by
1170 of
Roland
binding,doesisnot
conditional
son bound
the
obligation,
die within by the
considerationheonecontract
is year
not the heaggrieved
being
(Article entered the
1185, with
Suplico,
the legal
Civil Printado
Code, interest thosefrom
counters that: the
who (a)
in the time
Suplico he
cannot
performance paid demandthe of
into
party
NCC). with
whoLady
extinguishment may file Love
of Lolita's
the and he
actioncivilcannotliability
for disregard
rescission and not but their amount forlost.
payment obligation Thismade
deliveries aremeans under
guilty that
their of only
order he can file
agreement
contravention until
Conditional
ALTERNATIVE
the same,
stifling
Star Obligations;
ANSWER:
of the undercriminal
Semiconductor Promise
theprosecution.principles The
Company. of thereof,
the
Suplico suit.
has Mrs.
completed ZY cannot
performance recover
under as
said a spouse
contract; (b)
Thetwo action will not prosper because the as in this case, when Marvin did not
(1997)
In
obligatoriness
company, separate
however, documents
of contracts.
is not signed
Obligations
opting to byarising
rescind him, the give who
SUGGESTED
Suplico has
should interest
ANSWER:
pay damages in for the breachabsolute
of contract; community
and (c) with
consideration for the promissory Carlos the agreed period of ten days, are
Juan
SUGGESTED
from
contract Valentino
contracts ANSWER:
but has have"obligated"
chosenthe force of note
to himself
waive was the
each
lawSalvador's
between to A. The
ALTERNATIVE
property
Publico
liable
sale
should or
for damages. be of
ANSWER: the
conjugal
liable landpartnership
for Printado’s to breach
Juan ofishisnot of
contractvalid,
gains, with
Yes, Roland
non-prosecution
ALTERNATIVE
Maria and is
ANSWER:
to liable
Perla, of the under
thus criminal
the parties. with the condition which it can do because - the
'To contract
case
Maria, formy as
estafa.far
true My
being answercontrary will not
to be
law. the same
Therefore, if Carlos
no transfer paid
compliance Publico under
because the Art.
order 117(7}agreement of the between Family Suplico Code, and
The
as
ThisLady
love, action
Icannot
obligate for
Lovebeis rescission
concerned.
done will
give He
toanymore not prosper.
is
myliable
you because The
for
the Marvin
of ownership P10,000.00 of the because
land wasan option
effected contract
from the
under Art. 1545,myself NCC. one and losses
Printado wasare for borne
the benefit exclusively
of Publico. Are bythe the loser-
contentions of
buyer
damages
information
only hasunder
horse nothas
when committed
Article
already
I feel like 1170any
been It."of breach,
filed theinCivil
- and letPerla,
court
-'To alone
Code
and was perfected.
delinquent taxpayer Thus, ifto Marvinhim. withdrew
The original the
spouse.
Printado Therefore,
tenable? Explain these
your answers cannot as to be charged
each contention.
a
to substantial
since
my do trueit he or That
contravened
issweetheart,
illegal. serious Ithe one,
the to
consideration
obligate tenor
myselfwarrant of
forpay
to the
his offer
certificatesprior to title
of the obtained
expirationbyofMaria the 10-day
thru or a
against absolute community property
rescission/resolution
obligation.
promissory
you the P500.00 Not
note Iisowe being sought
theyou a
stifling by the
contracting
whenofI the vendor.
feel criminalparty,
like it." On (5%) period,
free patent he breached
grant from the
the option
Bureau contract.
of Lands
conjugal partnership of gains. This being so,
the
Sweet
Months contrary,
prosecution Tastepassed isitnot is
evident
but theJuan
bound vendor
frombyneverthe
thewhocontract appears
execution
bothered butto to
byit Conditional
(Article
under
SUGGESTED 1324,
Chapter ANSWER: Obligations
Civil
VII, Code)
CA 141inis law validtobut in view
Mrs. ZY has no interest prosecute
have
can
the be failed
held
finance to
liable
company comply
under with
Art.
of 1314.
the the condition
The
affidavit basis of (2000)
No,
Pedro
c)
of the
Supposingcontentions
promised to
that of Printado
give his grandson
Carlos are
accepted untenable.
a carthe if
make good his promises. Maria and Perla and recover as she has no legal standing to
her delinquency, the said title is subject in
imposed
of its
desistance liabilityby the
is
immediatelynot contract
prescribedafter the theby fulfillment
contract
execution but
byof Printado
the
offer
the rightlatter
before havingwill
Marvin failed
pass to
the
could paybar for
communicate the
examinations.printing his
came to consult you on whether or not they court to doofso. the City Government to sell the
which
is founded
Lolita's
could would
parents
recover have
on onof rendered
quasi-delict,
thethebasis promissory the
of obligation
assuming
the note. that
foregoing The to withdrawal
paper
land atcovered
When his
publicthereof? by the delivery
grandson
auction. passed
Discuss
The issuance invoices
the oflegal
the saidon
the
SUGGESTED
pay
Sweet the
considerationTaste ANSWER:
balance
knew being of of
the the
contract.
illegal, purchase
the Article
promissory price
1314 SUGGESTED
time, Suplico
examinations, ANSWER: has
Pedro the right
refused to
to cease
give the making
car on
settings. What would your legal advice be? consequences.
OCT did not (2%)
exempt the land from the tax
Contract
Iof would
demandable. of
advise Option;
Further,Maria Elements
farnot from to be bother
being running
unable to A contract
further tothat
delivery. construct
And the house of Carlos is
note
(2005)
the is Civil
invalid Code and provides
may not that any
enforced thirdby the
sales. ground
Section 44 theof the P .O.latter
condition No. 1529 did
was not a violate
purely
provides
Marvin
after
ALTERNATIVE
comply
person
court Juan offered
with for
ANSWER:
who what the
induces to construct
latter
is incumbentanother to the
make
upon
toknew house
good
it, ie., pay
violate of
his
his the perfected.
SUGGESTED Contracts
ANSWER:
order agreement
potestative one. Is he correct are perfected
(Integrated or not? by
(2%)
Packaging mere
It is action.
Carlos assumed
for that Lady aLove of the that
No, heeveryismanifested
not v. registered
correct. byFirst
owner
of all,he receiving
the condition a
promise.
the balance
contract [This
shall ofa the
is
be very
pricereasonable
because
liable the
for promise
buyer
damages price
hasis offered
not
to of
an
the consent
B. Juan
Corporation
Certificate
may
of
recover
Court
Title shall
theAppeals,
because
of meeting
hold the
of
was
(333
same
thenot offer
SCRA
free
a
contract. Neither
P900,000.00, giving Roland
the latter nor Sweet Taste is not purely potestative, because it doesand not
actionable
to pay
other it even
contracting wrong that
without
party. the 10
allows vendoradays party within
having to and Suplico
party
170,
from
the
to
G.R.
an
acceptance
cannot
theNo. be held
violation
115117,
encumbrances,
upon
ofJune liable
the the
law.
8, forthing
[2000]).
subject
damages,
to parties.
certain
the
for
would
which
recover beespecially
to liable, or
accept because
reject
when the offer.
the
she restriction
has On
not the infifth
suffered the cause depend
breach on
which
of the
contract, aresole to
as will of
constitute
it was one
not of
he the the
who contract.
violated
complied with the suspensive condition exemptions.
contract
day, before isresulting
violativecould of Article 1306 as mind,being Secondly,
the order even
theagreement, if notit but were, Printado. itMaria
wouldSuplico be valid
hercannot
damages
attached to Carlos
the payment from makesuch
of the uppromise.
his
price, thus A (Gomez
C. No, v.
sale Courtdid ofdivest Appeals, ofG.R. No.
title
contrary
a) What
Marvin
promise to
is
withdrew
does law
the not morals,
effect
his
createoffer. ofgood
an the customs,
withdrawal
obligation public
on of
the Under
be held Article
because
precisely
120747, it
liable
because for1315
depends
September Printado’s
the ofonsale
21, the the Civil
breach
is
2000) sole
void. ofCode,
will
contract
It is asCarlos
of good the
with
waiving such condition as well as the 60-day
orderoforJuan
Marvin's
part public
offer? policy.
because (2%) it is not something which and
Publico.
creditor
as if Marvin
no He(the
sale isarenot
donee)
ever bound
a took
party and to
tonot
place. fulfill
theof In what
agreement
thetax has
debtor
sales, been
entered
(the
the
term
Nature in its
of Contracts; favor Privity The ofstipulation Contract that the Conditional Obligations
SUGGESTED
arises from ANSWER:
adowncontract, law, quasi-contracts or expressly
into
donor).
owner by and stipulated
between
is divested of and
Printado his land andall Publico.
consequences
initially Theirs
upon is
P100,000.00
(1996)
The
Baldomero
withdrawal leased payment
of Marvin's
his houseoffer shall
withwill be returned
a telephone
cause the not (2003)
quasidelicts (Art, 1157)]. Under Art. 1182, Are
thereof.
award the
a following
andUnder
stipulationissuance obligations
Article
pour of 1167,
atrui.
a valid,
if Marvin
[Aforesaid]
Certificate why, of and
would
Such
Sale, if
by
offer the to
to Jose. vendor
The cease
lease to the in
contract vendee
law. provided if the squatters
Hence, evenJose
that if contracts
Juan's
are not promise
removed towithin
Mariasixis months, void because is express
also aa they
refuse
and finally are todoaftervalid,
construct
could thenot when
lapse the
affect ofishouse,
the the
third 1 year obligation
Carlos
persons period is
like
subsequently
shall
As regards pay for
Perla,accepted,
all
the electricity,
there
document could
is water
an be andno demandable
entitled
Suplico to
because have in each
the
of the case?
construction
basic a)
civil If
lawbe the
done debtor
principle by a
of
conditional
covenant for obligation
the benefit depends
of and the upon thewhich
vendee, sole from date of registration, to redeem, upon
concurrence
telephone
acknowledgment of
servicestheof offer
a indebt,and
the the
leased acceptance.
the premises
promise In to means to pay; b) If the debtor promises to pay
OBLIGATIONS
will promises
relativity
third person ofto pay
contracts
at as
the
execution by the treasurer of an instrumentsoon
which
expense as he
provides
of has
Marvin. the
that contracts
Marvin
the of
the
during
pay what
the obligor.
latter
absencethehe has ofvalidly
period
owes concurrence
of the
her waived
when heby
lease. offeelsimplication
Sixoffer months
like and
it is can when only hecase likes;
bind c)parties
If and
the debtor promises it,to pay
when itJose offered to
in
the sufficient
that in thewill
form be liable who
effects entered
for to into
damages convey and
under theit
acceptance,
later.
equivalent tothere canpay
a surreptitiously
promise beto no the
pay balance
consent. vacated
when hisof
(Laudico the
means Inexistent
when
cannot
Article he
favor Contracts
becomes
1170. or a
prejudice vs. Annullable
a third Contracts
person, even if he
purchase
Aleatory
premises.
v. Arias him
permits price
Contracts;
Heto
Rodriguez,leftupon
dobehindso, the
Gambling
G.R.
and execution
unpaid
No.
is deemed of atodeed
telephone
16530, bebills
March oneof property.
(2004)
Distinguish
lawyer;
is awared)ofIf such
Maria remained owner of the land
briefly
the debtor
contract but promises
and clearlyhasto acted between
pay if with
his
absolute sale by the vendor. until another tax sale is to be performed in
(2004)
A.
for Mr.
31,
with overseas
1922)
an ZY lost P100,000
telephone
Without
indefinite period in a(Art.
calls
consent, card1545,
amounting
under game
there Art.NCC)
tocalled
over
is1180.no v. Inexistent
son,
CA, who
knowledge supra.) contracts
is thereof.
sick with and(Integrated
annullable
cancer, does contracts.
not die
Packaging
Russian
P20,000.00.
perfected
Hence poker,
the but he
Baldomero
contract
amount forishad no
refused
the more to pay
construction
recoverable cash the
after to pay
said
ofPerla
favor
the SUGGESTED
Corporation
of
within oneANSWER: CONTRACTS
a qualified
year. 5%
buyer.
in
billsfull
house
asks on
the ofthe the winner
Carlos.
court ground
to set at
(Salonga the the
that period time
Jose
v. ashadthe
Farrales, session
providedalready
G.R. INEXISTENT
Rescission
by SUGGESTED ANSWER: CONTRACTS
of Contracts; Properare Party considered as
Conditional
ended.
substituted
No. L-47088, He Obligations;
promised
himJulyas10,to Resolutory
the pay
1981) PX,
customer Condition
Article the 1318winner,
of the (a)
(1996)
not The
having obligation
been
of Consensual vs. Real Contracts; Kinds ofand
In December 1985, is
entered valid.
Salvador It
into isand,an Real obligation
therefore,
the
Contracts Star
Art. 1197, par. 2.
(1999)
In
two 1997,
weeks
telephone
the Civil Code Manuel
thereafter.
company. bound
provides The latterhimself
But he
that there to
failed
maintained sell
to Eva
can bethatdo soa
no (1998)subject
void ob
Semiconductor to an
initio. indefinite
They
Company do period not
(SSC) because
create
executed thea
any
house
despite
Baldomero
contract and
the
unless lot
lapse
remained which
of two
the following is
months,
as his customerbeing so rented
PX
requisitesasconcur: filed
far asbyin debtor
obligation
Deed
Distinguish of binds and
Conditional himself
cannot
consensual to
be
Sale pay
ratified
from when
wherein real or his means
validated,
the former
contracts
Marvin
SUGGESTED
another
court a will
person,
suit notcollect
ANSWER:
to be Eva
if liable
the passes to pay
amount the Carlos
of1998
P50,000 any
bar permit
as there
agreed him to
tois sell
noatdo hisso 2,000
agreement (Article
four to 1180,
squareratify NCC). ofWhen
or validate.
meter lot in
their
(1) consent
The telephone
damages
service
for
of the contract
parties;
company isthe
withdrawing
was
(2)
correct
offer
object concerned,
because
before
certain
the as and the
On
Cainta,
name
creditor
the Rizal, knows
other
least
to that
hand,
the the
latter
(4)
debtor
ANNULLABLE
for
kinds
already
the price
real
has or of
examinations.
that he
notwithstanding
which won
is theissubject Luckily
but theremainedfor
lease
matter the Eva, she
unpaid.
contract
of the passed
contract; Will
between said
the
and contracts under the present law. [3%]
far
lapse
(a) as ofitthe
Suppose concerned,
period
Manuel granted.
had sold In only
the this
same person
case, house no it the
VOIDABLEmeansANSWER:
P1,000,000.00, toCONTRACTS
pay,
payable he must P100,000.00 file an
are validaction
down, until
andin
examinations.
collection
Baldomero
(3) cause ofsuittheandagainst Jose.
obligation. ZY prosper?Who isCould Mrs.
correct, SUGGESTED
contracted
consideration
and lot
SUGGESTED to with
another
ANSWER: was was beforeBaldomero.
given Eva by passed The
Carlos telephone
the for 1998the CONSENSUAL
court
invalidated
the to
balance fix bythe
60 the CONTRACTS
period,
days court after and
but the when
may are be
squatters those
theratified. inwhich
definite In
the
ZY file in has
Baldomero
company turn
or no a suit
the against
telephone
contract with PXJose.
company? to recover Explain.
Baldomero the
A.
bar 1.examinations,
option The given,suit by thus PX is to
there
suchcollect is
sale the
no balance
valid? perfected
Why? of are
period perfected
inexistent
property as set by
contracts,
have beenmere
by the
one consent
removed. or court
more (Art.
If 1315.
arrives,
requisites
the squatters Civil
the of
P100,000
cannot that her Jose husband lost? Reason. (5%)
what
contract
(b)
(2%) hesubstitute
Assuming wonof from option
that itZYisfor in
will
Eva his not
lack stead
who is without
prosper.
of cause
entitled Under the
of
to Code).
obligation
a
are validnotREAL contract
removed CONTRACTS
to pay arewithin becomes
absent. aresixthose In which the
demandable
months,anullable are
consent
Article
obligation.
buy said of
2014housetheof the
Marvin telephone
andCivil cannot iscompany
lot, Code, shebeno action
held
entitled (Art. to1293,
tocan have
thebe SUGGESTED ANSWER:
perfected
9Article
contracts,
P100,000.00 1197,by the
all downNCC).
the delivery
elements
payment ofof the
shall object
a contract ofare the
hebelikes” returned
NCC).
maintained
breached Baldomero by the
the contract. is, therefore,
winner for
Thus,before liable
the
he cannot under
collection the
of (b) The obligation “to pay when is a
rentals collected by Manuel she be passedheld obligation.
present
by the except
vendor (Art. 1316,
that
to the
the Civil
consent
vendee, Code) of Examples
Salvadorone of the
filed of
Nature
contract.
b) of your
Contracts; wonRelativity ofgameContracts Carlos suspensive Nature condition Obligatoriness
ofcontracts
Contracts; the fulfillment of which is
theWill
what
liable 1998 he
for damages.
bar answer
hasexaminations? inbeathe Why? same (3%)ofif chance. real
contracting
ejectment parties
suits againstwas are vitiated
the deposit,or
squatters, one of pledge,
them
but in
(2002)
Printado
paid
Although is engaged
Marvin inmay
pokerP10,000.00 the depend
printing business.
as Suplico
in consideration
part supplies (1991)
on ability, subject
Roland, to basketball
a the sole star, will of wasthe under debtor contract and,
commodatum
has
spite noofcapacity
the decisions and to simple
giveinconsent.hisloan (mutuum).
favor, the squatters
printing
for
it isthat paper to Printado
option? Explain.
fundamentally pursuant
a game of to an
(2%) order
chance. agreement under therefore
for one
Consideration; yearthe conditional
to play-for-play
Validity obligationexclusively is void.
for
which
2) If Suplico
the money
ALTERNATIVE binds
ANSWER: himself
paid tobydeliver ZY to the PXsamewas volume of paper still
conjugal (Article
Lady
(2000)
Lolita
would 1182,
Love,
notNCC).
Inc.
leave. In August, 1986, Salvador
However, even before the
My community
answer for a will beof 18the offered was to employed
return the in aP100,000.00finance company. down
every
or month period
property, the same
months, wife with of asZYtocould
Printado inthe
turn SUGGESTED
basketball
Because
ANSWER:
sheseason could could not open,
account he was for offered
the funds a
perfection
agreeing of
to pay within the contract for the construction payment
(c) The to the
obligation vendee, is on
valid. the
It isgroundsubject that to he a
sue to recover it 60 days afterArticle
because each delivery.
117(7) Suplico
of the has more entrusted attractive pay plus fringes benefits by
of the
been house
faithfully of Carlos.
delivering under the No perfected
orderlosses
agreement contract is unable totocondition,
10 months suspensive
her, removeshe was i.e.charged
the squatters
the future withon estafa the
and
Family Code provides that in for
gambling Sweet
and Taste, arrested.
ordered Inc. Roland In accepted
order to the offer
secure her
arises
but thereafterbecause
stopped of
doing lack
so, of
because consent.
Printado hasWith
not the
made property.
uncertain SSC
event refused
of his to accept
becoming the
a money
lawyer. and
The
or betting are borne exclusively by the loser- and
release transferred
from to her Sweet Taste. executed Lady Lovea
withdrawal
spouse. Hence, of the conjugaloffer, or there community could be fundsno demanded
performance thatof jail, Salvador
this obligation parents
executedoes a deed of
sues
promissory Rolandnote and toSweet Taste for breach of
concurrence of offer and for acceptance. absolute sale of the property in its company pay the finance favor, at
may not be used to pay such losses. If the contract.
the amount Defendants
allegedly claim that the restriction
misappropriated by their
which time it will pay the balance of the price.
money were exclusive to play for
daughter. The Ladyfinance Love alone is void, hence,
Incidentally, the valuecompany of the land had doubled
unenforceable, as it
by that time.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
1) 1971,
concerned,
condoned
In How byAblemuch,
may
his father
Construction,
annul
if any, assuch evidenced
may Joey Inc.
assignmentbe
by
entered
compelled
a notationfor
into
has
promissory
Even
The
not
at
toa been
action
[if] assuming
extinguished
will
notenot as prosper.
that
a resultby theretheThe
of wasnovation
the existence
foreclosure
a perfect or of extinction
inflation
right
of the
of
their
back
with
[2%]
having
the
contract
pay? Tropical
consent
2)given
ofTo what his thereto.
Home extent,
check Developers,
ifpayment
at all,Inc. canfor whereby
Jojo thebe refusal,
deflation
principal
Hence,
of theupon
chattel
first
or compensation
requires
obligation
Eva'sinsofar
passing an
as the official
third Bar,didthedeclaration
parties not
are
rights oftake
concerned.the other byplace
the
buyer
terminated and Eva acquired ownership of the property.
P300,000.00
the
compelledformerANSWER:
ALTERNATIVE by would
reading:
Joey build to
"In contribute
full
for payment
the latter to ofsuchthe
the because
Bangko Sentral
the claim ngis Pilipinas.
unliquidated.
The
payment? assignment
loan". Will
houses within
[3%]
thisits is valid
besubdivision.
a valid defense because
The in cost there
anof action
each is Extinguishment;
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:Payment
absolute
SUGGESTED
for collection?
house, freedom
ANSWER:
labor and tomaterials
(3%) transfer the credit was
included, and The
In unlawful
Extinguishment;
(1995)
1983
SECOND PHILCREDIT
ALTERNATIVE detainer
Compensation
ANSWER: actionvs.will
extended prosper.
Payment
loans to Rivett-It is
It
1.
the depends.
Joey
creditor can If bethe
need compelled
notation
not
P100,000.00. Four hundred units were to be get "in
the to full
pay
consent payment
only of the
the of The
a
(1998)
Define
Strom sale
given to
fact another
in
compensation
Machineries, the person
problem,
Inc. as beforethat
a
(RIVETTT-STROM), Eva
there
mode could
was of
the
remaining
debtor.loan"
constructed Hewas balance
only written
withinneeds offive
P200.000,
tobynotify
Arturo's
years. in father,
him.
In view
1973,ofAble there
the buy it from
inflation,
extinguishing
consisting ofManuel
which an
US$10 caused isMillion
obligation, valid,
the and as
exchange the thecontract
fordistinguish rate
cost to it
of
Extinguishment;
was
remission
found anthat implied
ofit could Cause
Jojo'scondonation
share
no of
longer Action
by the
of thecreditor.
continue balancewith (Art.
that between
the double.
from payment.
SUGGESTED
machineries Manuel
SinceANSWER: the
[2%]
importedand
contractEvaand isitself
a directly
mere promise
authorizes paid the to
by
(2004)
TX
job filed
discharges
1219, due Civiltoa thesuit
Code) for
theincrease ejectment
obligation. in the against
In price
such ofcase, BD
oil andfor
the COMPENSATION
sell and Eva
increase
PHTLCREDIT, in rentalhas and notis5a
in mode
acquired
the
Million event ofinaofextinguishing
real right
an inflation
cash payable over to
orin
2. Jojo can
non-payment
notation is be an compelled
of
act of theby father
condominium Joey to from contribute
rentals
which the concurrent
land
devaluation assuming
of amount,
the
installments over a period of ten (10) years on that the
Philippinethere obligations
is peso, a pricetheof
its derivatives and the concomitant worldwide
P50.000
amounting
condonation Art. tomay1217. bepar.
P150,000. 3,During
inferred. Civil Code the provides.
pendency those persons who inthereof
their own rightatand are
spiraling of prices of allThe condonation
commodities, stipulated
doubling
the basis ofinthe
of thethe contract
monthly
value rent foriscomputed
the contract
reasonable to
the
"When
of
beingthe one BD
case,
implied, of the offered
it solidary
need and
not debtors
TX
comply accepted cannot,
with thethe reciprocally
be
is
rate considered
therefore
of exchange a debtors
a
valid sale act and and there
under creditors
thewas
of the U.S. dollar vis-à-vis the very of
delivery
terms eachorof
including basic raw materials required for the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
because
full amount
formalities of his due
of insolvency,
a as rentals
donation reimburse
from
to be BD, his share
who
effective. thenThe other
tradition
the (Tolentino,
contract.
Philippine of the thing
Brian's
pesoisatnot 1991 sold. ed.,
refusal
the entitled
time of payment. p.
to 365,
pay is citing
thus 2
a
construction of the houses. The cost of (b) No, 560 she toonthe
to thea debtor
filed
defense motion
of full paying
to dismiss
payment thewill,obligation,
the ejectment
therefore, such be share
suit on
valid. Extinguishment;
RIVETT-STROM
Castan
ground for andmade
ejectment. Loss payments
Francia vs. IAC. 162rentals
both loans
SCRA
development
When, however, had the risen to unanticipated
notation levels collected
(1994) by Manuel because at the time they
shall
the be
ground borne that by the all actionhis was iswritten
co-debtors, already by
in Dino
whichsued
753). Ben
Itif involves
based for
on the damages
the rate of because
simultaneous exchange the
balancing in latter
1983 of
and
Arturo to
SUGGESTED such
himself.
ANSWER:a degree
It merely that the
proves conditions
his intentionand accrued
had failed and to weredeliver collected,
the Eva
antique was not
Marcedes yet
proportion
extinguished. to theIs debtBD’s of each."
contention correct? two
would obligations
have fully in order
settled to
the extinguish
loans. them to
factors
BD's
in making
SUGGESTED
which
contention that
ANSWER:
formed is not
payment thebut original
correct. in noTX basis
waycan of still
does the it FIRST
the
Benz ALTERNATIVE
owner
car Dino ofin thehadANSWER:
property.
purchased from Ben, which
Why
contract or why had not? Reason.
been (5%)
totally changed. Able the
Assumingextent that Eva which is the the one amount entitled of one to buy is
maintain
Yes, the Able the suit
Construction.
bind his father (Yam v. CA, G.R No. 104726. 11 for ejectment.
Inc. is entitled The to was—by byagreement—due
PHILCREDIT contends that for
the delivery
payments on
brought covered
the house and that of
lot,not the
sheonly other.
is not (De
entitled Leon, to1992the
the
Februaryreliefsuit
acceptance 1999) byagainst
sought the
. In lessor Tropical
under
such of Article
case, thethe Homes
payment 1267,
notation praying
byCivil
the
was PAYMENT
December
both
ed., p.loans
221,
means
31,
should
citing 1993. be Ben,
8 Manresa based delivery
in on
401). his the ofrate
answer money to
of
that the Court relieve it of its obligation. Is rentals
but collected
alsocomplaint,
performance by Manuel before she passed
lessee
Code.the
not of the
The actrentals
law provides:
of his in arrears fathereven
"When the from during
service whichthe
has Dino's
exchange existing said at of the antime
Dino's obligation
claim
of payment, (Article
has no
Able Construction entitled to the relief the
1232, barCivil examinations. InWhether it iscapacity
a contract
pendency
become
condonation so of maythe beejectment
difficult asinferred.
to be manifestly case
There does beyond
being not
no basis for
which ratethe ofCode).suit, because
exchange payment,
has as the
been car was
consistently to
sought?
constitute
ALTERNATIVE
the contemplation a at
ANSWER:waiver of or the abandonment
parties, of the
thepayment
obligor of
disposesale ofor thea contract
thing paid to sell,
and reciprocal
capacity to
condonation all the defense of full being driven to be
increasing, and for which reason there would delivered to Dino on
If thealso notation was written by Arturo's father, prestations
receive are deemed imposed A for the
ejectment
may
will not bebe
Extinguishment;
case.released
valid. (Spouses therefrom,
Compensation
Clutario v. CA,
in whole 216
or in still be apayment
January 1, 1994, are
considerable a reckless required
balancetruck on foreach debtor
driver loan. and
had Is
it amounted
Extinguishment;
SCRA
part." 341 to
[1992]). an express
Novation condonation of the seller
creditor,
SUGGESTED to deliver
respectively:
ANSWER: the object
in sold
compensation, and for the
such
(2002)
Stockton is a stockholder of Core Corp. He rammed
the into
contention the of Mercedes PHILCREDIT Benz. The correct?trial
balance
(1994)
In 1978, Bobby which borrowed must comply Pl,000,000.00 with from the As buyer regards
capacity to pay isthe thenotloanprice. Before the
consisting
necessary, ofbecausehappening
dollars, the
the
desires to sell court
Discuss dismissed
fully. Dino's complaint, saying Ben's
formalities
Chito payable of ahis in shares
donation
two in be
to
years. Core valid
The Corp. under
loan, In view
whichthe contention
of the condition,
compensation
SUGGESTED of
ANSWER: the fruits
PHILCREDIT
operates by ofis
law the
correct.
andthing not Itandhas
by theto
the
of a paragraph
court suit that Core Corp. has filed against obligation
SECOND
a) No. Article had1262,
ALTERNATIVE indeed,
ANSWER:New been extinguished
Civildeemed Code provides, by
2nd
was evidenced ofby Article 1270 of
a promissory the New
note, Civil
was be interests
act paid
of the inon the money
Philippine
parties. In are
currency
payment, the computed
performanceto have on
him forSincedamages in the amount ofproperty.
P 10 is million, Under
force
"An majeure.
Art. 1164,
obligation Is the there trial is court
no obligationcorrect? on the
Code.
secured by a themortgage
amount ofonthe realbalance more No the been
must
part basis
be
of of thewhich
mutually
complete;
Manuel toexchange
while
deliver
consists
compensated in rate
the
inat
compensation
fruits
the
under
the delivery
TIME
(rentals)
ArticleOF
there of
of
plus
than attorney’s
5,000 pesos, fees theof P 1 million,
acceptance
action was filed by Chito to collect the loan or PAYMENT as
by a result
Arturo of
of Extinguishment;
a determinate
1187.
may be partial of each Compensation/Set-Off;
thing shall
extinguishment be
installment, extinguished
of as Banks held the if init
statements published by Stockton which are the
(1998)
X, who
should thing behas until
lost a or the
savings obligation
destroyed deposit without to an
with Y
the
obligation
deliver Bank
fault in
of
the condonation must also
to foreclose the mortgage. But in 1991, Bobby, Kalalo be in writing under (Tolentino, v. Luz, supra) 34 the SCRA 337. As regards thehas P5
allegedly748. defamatory because thing arises.
sum of As P1,000,000.00 suspensive condition
incurs ina delay.
loan
Article
without receiving There any being amount noit acceptance
was from calculated
Chito, the debtor,
in Million loan and in before
Philippine he has pesos, incurred PHILCREDIT
not been
obligation fulfilled,
with ofthe obligation in to sell does
to injure
writing
executed byanother and damage
Arturo, the condonation
promissory the notecorporation’s
is void was
which and is b)
not
The
wrong.
arise.
judgment The the payment said
the trialBank court
thereof the
is sum
incorrect.
cannot beof
reputation
the
worded obligationexactly and toas paygoodwill.
the the1978 balance The articles
subsists.
promissory The
note, P800.000.00
of measured
Loss of the by which
thingthe due has by
peso-dollar become
fortuitous due.
exchange When
events rate. orX
Extinguishment; Assignment of Rights
incorporation
defense
except for fullof
of the Core
payment
date Corp.
thereof, provide
is, therefore,
which was for
not
theavalid.
right
date That tries
force to
will withdraw
majeurebecane isplanters
violative his
a valid deposit,
of the defenseUniform Y Bank
for Currency allows
aentered
debtor
(2001)
The sugar of Batangas
of itsfirst refusal in Can favor of demand
the corporation. only(RA, P200.000.00 to be withdrawn, less service
In
of case
execution.
Extinguishment;
the notation 1)
Extraordinary
was
Chito Inflation
not written
payment
or Deflation
by Act into a long-term milling contract withdelay.
when 529] the debtor
which has
prohibits not incurred
the payment the of
Accordingly,
Arturo's
on the father,
1991 Stockton
the answer
promissory gave
note iswritten
the
in same
1994? notice
2)as Canthe to ancharges,
Extinguishment
obligation claiming of
which, that
liabilityalthough compensation
for fortuitous
to be paideventhasin
(2001)
On
the July 1, 1998,of
corporation Brianhis realleased
offer to an selloffice
his space of
shares in Central
extinguished
requires
Azucarera de Don Pedro Inc. Ten
that its
the obligation
debtor hasunder not by yetthe savings
incurred
answers
Chito above. the
foreclose estate mortgage if Philippine
years later, currency,
the Central isLiability
measured
assigned its a foreign
rights to
a
P building
10 million. for Thea period
response of five
of years
Core at
corp. a rental
was an Liability;
account
any delay. Lease;
to Inthe the Joint
concurrent
present amount
case, the of
debtor X's debt.
was
Bobby
rate fails
of P1,000.00 to make good
a month. his obligation under currency.
the
of (2001) said (Palanca
milling v. CA, 238
contract to a SCRA
Taiwanese 593). group
SUGGESTED
acceptance
the 1991
ANSWER:
of the offer
promissory note? in theThe contract
exercise of its Four
X contends
in
which delay foreign
would when thatmedical
takethe
compensation
over car students
the wasoperations
rented
is
destroyed improper the
ofyear.
theon
1) Yes,
lease Chito
contained can demand
the proviso payment that on "in thecase1991 of apartment
when one of
of Thelma
the since for
debts,itaswas a period
here, of
arises one from a
rights of first refusal, offering for the purpose January 1, 1993 due for delivery
promissory
inflation
payment or
note in 1994.
in devaluation
form of compensation of Although
the Philippine the 1978 peso, sugar
or set-off
c)
After
contract
on one
December
mill.
It depends The
semester,
of 31, whether planters
deposit.
1993. three (Art. offiled
orAssuming
not them
1262
Ben anreturned
Civil
action
thethat seller,
Code)
to
to
the
promissory
the monthly noterental for P1will million payable two
automatically be annul
was
SUGGESTED
their the
already
home said
ANSWER: in
country assignment
default
and theat on thethe
fourth ground
timetransferredof that
the
against the amount of damages it is claiming promissory Y bank
the isbecausenote signed
correct. An. by X Civil
1287, to evidence Code, the
does
years
increased
against him,
lateroror decreased in 1980 became
exclusive of depending
the claim
a natural
on the for to loan aTaiwanese
accident boarding
does
(Note: not
group
house.
The
aprovide was
demandThelma not
question
forregistered
for him
discovered to deliver
compensation
presupposes
with
that
obligation
devaluation after the lapseofof the
or Stockton
inflation ten (10) years, not due
the
on apply.
Board date All the
ofwas requisites
Investments.
notrequires
complied of WillArt. 1279,
inthe
with byaction Civil
him.
attorney’s ANSWERS:
SUGGESTED fees. rejected peso the offer to the of they
between
Code
prosper
left
are or
unpaid
said
knowledge
present.
not?
loanand telephone
and
In
Explain the his savings
case
briefly.
bills
theGullas
of (5%)
deposit,the
application vs.
total
who
PNB of
such
dollar." natural
Starting obligation
March 1, can 2001, be the a valid
lessor That
amount
is correct?fact
the of not having
P80,000.00.
provisions
[3%] of the been
TheOmnibus given
lease in
contract
Investment the
the corporation,
Stockton is correct. arguing There that is compensation
no right of [62 the court Supreme Court held:
consideration
increased
between the
compensation
the rentalof a novated
value toofhis
between
P2,000
the price
promissory
a month,
sharesof P10and
onnote
million
the problem,
the
Phil. 519),
provided
SUGGESTED Code, the
that
ANSWER: trial
the
which lessees erred
properly shall inpay
belongs for "The
dismissing the
to
dated
ground inof1991 inflationand payable
proven twothe
by years
fact later,
that or
the Civil
The
Dino's
telephone Code
actioncomplaint. contains
will prosper
services
Commercial law) Reason:
in provisions
the notleased
Thereon the isregarding
ground
default
premises.
amount of damages
and Core Corp.’s unliquidated claim for compensation demanded by the
in 1993. All
exchange rate theofelements of an implied toreal invoked demanded
making him on(set
but responsible thethat off)
ground and
forfourth deposit.
that
fortuitous the These
farmers
events
corporation
damages. In order cannotthe that
Philippine
legally
compensation takepeso effect.
may be
theIs Thelma
If on
portions the other
of hand
Philippine Ben
the
was law not in
student
provide default
pay
as
novation
dollar had are present: from
increased a) P25.00=$1.00 an old valid to SUGGESTED
haveentire
including
the notthe ANSWER:given
assumption
amount their
of theof riskconsent
unpaid or loss. to that
telephone the
Stockton
proper, the
SUGGESTED correct?
ANSWER: Give reason
two debts must be liquidated and The for your answer. no fourth
demand
compensation student
has been
shall is correct.
sent
take to him
place His priorliability
when to the
two is
obligation;
P50.00=$1.00. b) aBrian new refused valid obligation; assignment.
c) bills, but the The latter milling contract imposes
(5%)
The unlawful detainer
demandable. The caseaction for the will to pay
not10million
P prosper. the
only
accident,
persons joint, are hence,
then we
reciprocally pro
is willing
must rata.
to pay only
There
distinguish
creditor and is solidary
whether
debtor
one
of
capacity
increased of rate
the parties;and d) action animusfor novandi or reciprocal of it. obligations on Why? the parties. The
Extraordinary
damages being still an
inflation or deflation
pending in court,is unlawful
definedthe fourth
liability
the
each price
other. only
has
Who is correct?
In when
been
this the
paid
connection,
sugar central has the obligation to mill the obligation
or not. it If
(5%)
expressly
has it has
been been
heldso
intention
detainer
ANOTHER to ANSWER:
was
MAIN novate;
filed against and e) him. TheWill oldthe andaction
the
as the sharp
corporation decrease
has as yetinno the claimpurchasing
which is power
due statespaid, the orrelation
when
suit the lawwhile
for existing
damages or nature
should of havethe
new
The
prosper? obligation
right of
Why? first should
(5%)refusal be
was incompatible
not perfected with
as a that
sugarthe cane of the farmers between theprosper
alatter
depositor but
of
and the peso. It does
demandable againstnot necessarily
Stockton. refer to the obligation requires solidarity (Art. 1207, CC).
each
right other
for ANSWER: theon all reason material that points there (Articlea only and atobank
the obligation enable is that thedeliver
to ofbuyer
creditor to
their recover
and sugardebtor,the cane price
x xtox
exchange
SUGGESTED rate of the peso to the was dollar. The paid.
As a contract
It
general should of
rule, lease
be anoted in
bank thethat
has problem
aBen,right thedoes
of not,
seller,
set off
1292).Yes,The
conditional two promissory notes cannot stand the sugar central. As to the obligation to mill
(a)
Whether theoracceptance
sale
not to the other
there equivalent
exists person toisa valid
an extraordinary counter- as in
must
of any
the way,
bear
deposits stipulate
the loss
in on
its solidarity.
the
hands principle
for the of res
payment perit of
together,
offer
a saleconsisting
withhence, the
in the
a resolutory period
amount of
condition prescription
of damages because of the sugar
as Liability; cane,
Solidary the sugar
Liability central is a debtor of
inflation
SUGGESTED orANSWER:
deflation is for the courts to decide. domino.
any He
indebtedness cannot to be it heldon answerable
the part of for a
ten
2) No.
what (10)
being operates
The years
credited
mortgage has
being not yet
onsuspensive
an lapsed.
thethatpurchase
accessory contract prescribedprice.
with the farmers.
Extinguishment;
(1998) In assigning
Condonation its rights under the
There being noasshowinga thecondition
purchasing for Joey,
damages Jovy and
depositor." as Jojo
the
Hence, are
loss solidary
of
compensation the debtors
car took under
was not
place a
the loan.
Therefore, The novation of the loan, however, did not expressly contract, the sugar central will also transfer to
Eva
power operatesof compensation
the a hence,
resolutory
peso did
had not
condition
isbeen
result for since
the
reduced (2000)
Arturoobligation
loan
imputable
borrowed of
to his
P500,000.00
P300,000.00 fromwhich his father. has
include
ANOTHER
there
the MAIN
was
FIRST ALTERNATIVE
buyer.
mortgage,
no ANSWER:
valid
ANS WER:
the mortgage
right of first
extinguished
refusal (Art.
under between
the
AfterTaiwanese
fallen hedue.
the
had paid itsfault
mutual
The
or
obligation
P300,000.00,
creditor
fraud.
obligations In
tohas, mill
his
any
of the
father
Xcase,and
however,sugar
died.
heY
tremendously,
Article 1296 of the NCC.there could
The contract be no inflation that can
bank. recover the value of the car from the party
Yes, the
1475 &justify
ALTERNATIVE
would
sale
1319, to the
ANSWER: NCC)increase in the amount of cane
other person is valid. However, the buyer
When of
condoned thethe farmers.
administrator
Jojo's entire This
share of his will
in the amount
father's
debt. estate to a
Since
acquired the propertythe subject to a resolutory whose
novation negligence
of the caused
contract the
by accident.
substituting If the
no
rental to be paid. Hence, Brian could refuse to Jovy requested
Extinguishment;
has become payment
Loss; of the
Impossible
insolvent, theService balance
creditor makes of
price
debtor has with been aJoey paid
third at
party.all, the
Under trial court
Article acted
1293
pay the increased rate. P200,000.00.
(1993)
a demand on Arturo to replied
pay the Page
that the
debt. 86 of 119
same had
correctly
of the Civil in dismissing
Code, such the complaint.
substitution cannot
been
take effect without the consent of the creditor.
The formers, who are creditors as far as the
obligation to mill their sugar cane is

Since the insolvent debtor's share which Joey
paid was P100,000, and there are only two
remaining debtors - namely Joey and Jojo -
these two shall share equally the burden of
reimbursement. Jojo may thus be compelled by
Joey to contribute P50.000.00.
Liability; Solidary Obligation
(1992)
In June 1988, X obtained a loan from A and
executed with Y as solidary co-maker a
promissory note in favor of A for the sum of
P200,000.00. The loan was payable at
P20,000.00 with interest monthly within the
first week of each month beginning July 1988
until maturity in April 1989. To secure the
payment of the loan. X put up as security a
chattel mortgage on his car, a Toyota Corolla
sedan. Because of failure of X and Y to pay the
principal amount of the loan, the car was
extrajudicially foreclosed. A acquired the car at
After
A's highestseveralbidfruitless letters ofduring
of P120,000.00 demand
the
against X and Y, A sued Y alone for the
auction sale.
recovery of P80.000.00 constituting the
deficiency. Y resisted the suit raising the
sued together
following defenses: with
a) Y.
That Y should not be
b)
liable at all because X was not has been paid
That the obligation
completely by A's acquisition of the car
through "dacion en pago" or payment by
c) That Y should not be held liable for the
cession.
deficiency of P80,000.00 because he was not a
co-mortgagor in the chattel mortgage of the
car which contract was executed by X alone as
d) Thatand
owner assuming
mortgagor.that Y is liable, he should
only pay the proportionate sum of P40,000.00.
Decide each defense with reasons.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(a) This first defense of Y is untenable. Y is
still liable as solidary debtor. The creditor may
proceed against any one of the solidary
debtors. The demand against one does not
preclude further demand against the others so
long as the debt is not fully paid.
(b) The second defense of Y is untenable. Y is
still liable. The chattel mortgage is only given
as a security and not as payment for the debt
in case of failure to pay. Y as a solidary co-
maker is not relieved of further liability on the
mortgage.
(c) The third defense of Y is untenable. Y is a
surety of X and the extrajudicial demand
against the principal debtor is not
inconsistent with a judicial demand against
(d)
the The fourth
surety. defense of may
A suretyship Y is co-exist
untenable. Y is
with a
liable for the entire prestation since Y
mortgage.
X.
incurred a solidary obligation with
(Arts. 1207, 1216. 1252 and 2047 Civil Code; Bicol
Savings and Loan Associates vs. Guinhawa 188 SCRA
642)
Liability; Solidary Obligation; Mutual Guaranty
(2003)
A,B,C,D, and E made themselves solidarity
indebted to X for the amount of P50,000.00.
When X demanded payment from A, the latter
refused to pay on the following grounds. a) B
is only 16 years old. b) C has already been
condoned by X c) D is insolvent. d) E was
given by X an extension of 6 months without
the consent of the other four co-debtors. State
the effect of each of the above defenses put up
by A on his obligation to pay X, if such
defenses are found to be true.
SUGGESTED ANSWERS:
(a) A may avail the minority of B as a defense,
but only for B’s share of P 10,000.00. A
solidary debtor may avail himself of any
defense which personally belongs to a solidary
co-debtor, but only as to the share of that co-
debtor.
(b) A may avail of the condonation by X of C’s
share of P 10, 000.00. A solidary debtor may,
in actions filed by the creditor, avail himself of
all defenses which are derived from the nature
of the obligation and of those which are
personal to him or pertain to his own share.
With respect to those which personally belong
to others, he may avail himself thereof only as
regards that part of the debt for which the
(c)
latterA are
may not interpose
responsible. (Articlethe defense
1222, NCC). of
insolvency of D as a defense. Applying the
principle of mutual guaranty among solidary
debtors, A guaranteed the payment of D’s
share and of all the other co-debtors. Hence,
A cannot avail of the defense of D’s insolvency.
(d) The extension of six (6) months given by X
to E may be availed of by A as a partial
defense but only for the share of E, there is no
novation of the obligation but only an act of
liberality granted to E alone.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
for damages
The matter shouldagainstbethe decided
jewelryinshop favorwhich
of Remigio
put1.
Bernie
up
Juana50% hasofthetheright
totalofpayments
action to made.
recover (a) her
(Rillo one-
v. Court
because
defense
the
(trustee) the
of force
actionmajeure.
has not Will prescribed.
the actionThe Appeals,
half
of G.R. No. 125347, June
case
prosper at or
barnot?involves
(5%) an express trust which 19,1997)
does
SUGGESTEDnot prescribe
ANSWER: as long as they have not
The action
been will prosper.
repudiated by theSince trusteethe defendant
(Diaz vs. Period; Suspensive Period
was already in
Gorricho. 103 Phil, 261).default not having delivered (1991)
In a deed of sale of a realty, it was stipulated
Impliedring when
the Trust delivery was demanded by that the buyer would construct a commercial
(1998)
plaintiff
Juan andathis duesister
date,Juana
the defendant
inheritedisfrom liabletheir
for building on the lot while the seller would
the
mother loss two
of theparcels
thing of andfarmland
even when withthe exactly
loss construct a private passageway bordering the
was
the same
due toareas.
force majeure.
For convenience, the Torrens lot. The building was eventually finished but
Non-Payment
certificates ofofAmortizations;
title coveringSubdivision
both Buyer;
lots When
were the seller failed to complete the passageway
justified
placed (2005)
in Juan's name alone. In 1996, Juan sold as some of the squatters, who were already
Bernie bought on
to an innocent installment
purchaser a residential
one parcel in its known to be there at the time they entered
subdivision
entirety without lot from DEVLAND.
the knowledge andAfter having
consent of into the contract, refused to vacate the
1. What
faithfully rights
paid the of action,
installments
Juana, and wrongfully kept for himself theif any,
for does
48 Juana
months, premises. In fact, prior to its execution, the
have
entireagainst
Bernie and/orthat
discovered
price paid. the DEVLAND
buyer? |3%] had failed to seller filed ejectment cases against the
2.
develop Sincethethe two lots inhave
subdivision the same
accordance area,
with the squatters. The buyer now sues the seller for
suppose Juana
approved plansfliesand a complaint
specificationsto have herself
within the specific performance with damages. The
declared
time frame sole owner
in the plan.of He
thethus
entire remaining
wrote a letter defense is that the obligation to construct the
second
to DEVLAND lot, contending
informing itthat thather brother
he was had
stopping passageway should be with a period which,
forfeited his
payment. share thereof
Consequently, DEVLAND cancelled SUGGESTED
by wrongfully incidentally,
ANSWER:
had not beenperformance
fixed by them,
that hence, the needforfor
disposing of her undivided share in the No. the action specific filed
the sale and wrote Bernie, informing himfirst fixingunder
a judicial period.
a) Wasthe
lot. payments
his Will thesuitaction
are prosper? of [2%]
forfeited DEVLAND
in its favor. proper? by the buyer is premature Art. 1197 of
Will
the the action
Civil Code. for
If aspecific
period performance
has not been of the
fixed
Explain. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: buyer
althoughagainst the seller prosper?
contemplated by the parties, the
No, the action of DEVLAND is not proper. Under parties themselves should fix that period,
Section 23 of Presidential Decree No. 957, failing in which, the Court maybe asked to fix
otherwise known as the Subdivision and it taking into consideration the probable
Condominium Buyer's Protection Decree, non- ALTERNATIVE contemplation ANSWER:of the parties. Before the
payment of amortizations by the buyer is justified It has been held in Borromeo vs. CA (47 SCRA
period is fixed, an action for specific
if non-payment is due to the failure of the 69 ), that the Supreme Court allowed the
performance is premature.
subdivision owner to develop the subdivision simultaneous filing of action to fix the probable
project according
(Eugenio v. Drilon, to G.R.the
No.approved plans and
109404, January 22, contemplated period of the parties where none
1996)
within the limit for complying. is fixed in the agreement if this would avoid
b) Discuss the rights of Bernie under the multiplicity of suits. In addition, technicalities
circumstances. (2%) ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
must be subordinated to substantial justice.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: The action for specific performance will not
Under P.D. No. 957, a cancellation option is prosper. The filing of the ejectment suit by the
available to Bernie. If Bernie opts to cancel the seller was precisely in compliance with his
contract, DEVLAND must reimburse Bernie obligations and should not, therefore, be
the total amount paid and the amortizations faulted if no decision has yet been reached by
interest, excluding delinquency interest, plus the Court on the matter.
interest at legal rate. (Eugenio v. Drilon, G.R.
No. 109404, January 22, 1996) TRUST
c) Supposing DEVLAND had fully developed
the subdivision but Bernie failed to pay Express Trust; Prescription
further installments after 4 years due to (1997)
On 01 January 1980, Redentor and Remedies
business reverses. Discuss the rights and entered into an agreement by virtue of which
SUGGESTED ANSWER: the former was to register a parcel of land in
obligations of the parties. (2%)
In this case, pursuant to Section 24 of P.D. No. the name of Remedies under the explicit
957, R.A. No. 6552 otherwise known as the covenant to reconvey the land to Remigio, son
Realty Installment Buyer Protection Act, shall of Redentor, upon the son's graduation from
govern. Under Section 3 thereof, Bernie is college. In 1981, the land was registered in
entitled: 1) to pay without additional interest Redentor
Loss name
the died
of theofthing adue;year
Remedies. Forcelater or in 1982. In
Majeure
the unpaid installments due within a grace March
Kristina1983,
(2000) broughtRemigio graduated
her diamond ringfrom
to a college.
jewelry
period of four (4) months or one month for In
shopFebruary 1992, The
for cleaning. Remigio
jewelryaccidentally found
shop undertook
every year of installment paid; 2) if the a copy the
to return of ring
the by document
February so constituting
1, 1999." When
contract is cancelled, Bernie is entitled to the Remedies
the said as datethe arrived,
trustee ofthe the jewelry
land. In shop
May
refund of the cash surrender value equal to 1994,
informed Remigio filedthat
Kristina a case
the against
Job wasRemedies
not yet
DEVLAND
50% of the on the
total other hand
payments has the right to
made. for the reconveyance
finished. They asked her of tothe land five
return to days
him.
cancel the contract after 30 days from receipt
Remedies, in her answer,
later. On February 6, 1999, averred
Kristina that
wenttheto
by Bernie of notice of cancellation. DEVLAND SUGGESTED ANSWER:
action
the shop already
to claimprescribed.
the ring, How butshould
she wasthe
is however obliged to refund to
matter
informed be that
decided?
the same was stolen by a thief
who entered the shop the night before.
Kristina filed an action
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Trust;
No,
b)
6245.theImplied
The It
first
suit Resulting
appears
will
buyernotis Trust
inprosper.
still
the to
Deed
The
be preferred,
contract
of Sale of that
where
salePedro
was
In
(2)
Xthe
sold
(Art.ayears,
CONTRACT
a parcel
1624; or until
1475. of
OF
CC;3land
SALE,
Juneto1973.
Rodriguezownership
Y on
v. It01
CA, is et
January
further
isal,
transferred
G. stated
2002,
(1995)
from
perfected
sale isJuan
In 1960,
second
received registered
when
P120,000.00
MaureenLinda
ahead andof
as
purchasedRay
the
purchase
agreed
first lots
two sale
on
price.
but
thea share
in Rthe
that
toNo.buyer
should
payment
therein in the
84220,upon
the
proceeds
Vendor
delivery
March (Juliet)
ofofthe
25. 1992 thesale
fail
207 object
SCRA towith
exercise
to legal
553).him
However,
object
with ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
plushknowledge
of Pedro
the sale
subdivision retained
of the
and latter.
registering the
the price
owner's
LotThis 1 in [Art.
isduplicate
herbecause
1475,
name interestwhile
her in thereof,
right atoCONTRACT
redeem andwithin (b) TO suchSELL,
the damages
said ownership
period, as the sheis
No, the defense of Peter Co will not prosper.
of
New
the
andsaid second
Civil
Lot title.
2 in Code].
Thereafter,
buyer,
the Thewho
name consent
ofJuan, at brother
her as
the
of lessor,
Linda
time and
Walterhashe may
retained
conveyance
be able by the shall
to prove
seller be until
asdeemedhaving
the purchase absolute
been suffered price
and
Hadji Butu validly acquired his right by an
Pedro,
already
registered
with the as beenlessee,
his sale
latter's given,
executed
knew that
consent. as a The contract
the
shown property
idea by ofwas lease
had
her to byis fully her,paid.
irrevocable. whichIn a contract
Romeo may
did not include
to
take sell, delivery
actual of
possession or
assignment of credit under Article 1624 of the
over
agreement
already the been
circumvent property
to
a sold
the for
price
to asomeone
subdivision period
of policy
the ofsale.
else,
one There
againstacted
(1) year in
is
the compensatory
the property.
object does He damages
not
didconfernot pay asownership
well
the taxes as moral upon
thereon. and
the
Civil Code. However, the provisions on the
with
therefore
bad faith.
a monthly
acquisition (Article
consent
of more rental
1544,
on thanherof
C.C.)Pl,000.00.
partlotasbythe
one Pedro,
one consent
buyer. as exemplary
buyer. In adamages contract due of sale, to the therebreach is only of trustone
Double Sales contract
Juliet died of sale (Article 1475
in (Imperial
January I973 Civil
without Code) havingwill
lessee,
need
Maureen notwas be given
also obligated
constructed in any a housespecific
toon pay form.
Lotthe Hence,
1 with realty an andcontract bad executed
faith between vs. theCA, seller 259and SCRA the
(2004)
JV, owner apply, and the transaction is covered by the
taxes
her
extension on of
consent theaLot
on parcel
may
property
2 tobe of given
serve land, as sold
during aby the
guest itimplication,
to PP. But
period
house. of repurchased
buyer,Ofwhile
In 65). course, inthe a ifproperty.
contract
the buyer toHer sell,knewonly
there ofsurviving
are
the two co-
Subsequently,
the deedWalter of since
sale Pedro
was filed
not a complaint
registered. against Statute herof first Frauds. (Art. 1403 par. (2) Civil
lease.
especially
1987, who she was
had aware One
suffered of, year
and
serious heir,
contracts,
ownership
Conditional
son
over X,
the
the failed
contract
Sale vs. Absolute Salelot he towas
to repurchase
sell (which
buying, the
is
Juana a
Juan
later, for
JV sold the reformation
the parcel ofproperty
again theto RR, Deed who of Code)
property on orpreparatory
before 3 June 1973. In 1975,
participated
business in the
losses sale
demanded of the that Maureen
(Pelayo conditional
can
(1997) seek or
(c) reconvenyance
Distinguish between a conditional sale, on the sale) of andher a second,
one-half
Absolute
succeeded Sale,
toNo. alleging
register the that
deed the8, transaction
and to obtainlotHer a Romeo
the final sold
deed the of property to implead
Y for P50,000.00.
remove
v. CA, G.R.
ALTERNATIVE
covered
the
by
extension
ANSWER:the
141323,
deed
house Junesince
was an
the
2005).
equitable
on share
one
Contract
instead
hand, to andbut
Sell; ansaleshe or
absolute
Acceptance;
must the
Right
principal
sale, of on First
the
thecontract
Refusal
buyer
other
transfer
action
which for
the certificate
moral
extension and of wastitle
exemplary over
built the
was property
damages
his property. in
will Upon
which
as learning
is
co-defendant executed of the
and sale,
afterallege X
full filed
payment
his an
bad action of
faith for
the in
The
mortgage.suitname. will
In prosper.
his verified Sale of
answer community
to hand.
SUGGESTED
(1991)
A is the
ANSWER:
lessee of an apartment owned by Y. A
his
also
In ownnot
1992, prosper
Maureen Who because
suedhas a
for better
thethe case right
does
reconveyance over
not the
fall
to the
purchase
purchasing
A nullification
CONDITIONAL price.the of
entire SALE thelot. sale
is Finally,
one and for
consistent
where the
the
property
complaint,
parcel of requires
Juan
land, alleged
RR written
or that
PP? consent
the
Why? property
Explain of both was
the allowed
recovery hisof married
the propertybut employed
on the daughter
ground thatB,
under
her
spouses. any
of Lot 2ofasserting
The those
failure mentioned
orthat refusal in
a resulting Art.
ofAbsolute
Linda 2219
trust
toSale,and
was with
affix vendor
ADDITIONAL
the isruling granted
ANSWER:
in Imperial
the right us. CA. Juana may
to unilaterally
SUGGESTED
sold
legal
2232
created toof him
basisthe
ANSWER:
when forunder
Civilyour
she Code.the
answer.
had Deed the of
(5%)lot registered in whose
the
seek
rescind husband
so-called
instead the deed
(d) works
a of in Kuwait,
absolute
declaration
contract predicated sale
that to occupy
executed
she on is now it.
by
the
It
her
and depends
signature
interposed on
on the whether deed oforsale,
counterclaims notcoupled
to RR recoveris withan 1. Juana
The can file anbetween
relationship action forY damages and A against
soured.
Walter's name even iffor she paid the purchase his
the mother was merely an equitable mortgage,
innocent
her express purchaser
declaration ofvalue.
opposing Under
to the the
sale Juansole
fulfillment
Since for
he
owner
has
offraudulently
noJuan
the entire remaining
or non-fulfillment,
having reason
as theone
all sold
case lotmay
of on
the
possession
price. Walter of the property
opposed the andarguing
suit compel that taking
the
be, theory
of theinto thataccount
prescribed theatforfeited
has
condition. toAn
inadequacy eject
his
ABSOLUTE A,of Y,the
one-half in
Torrens
negates
SUGGESTED
Pedro System,
any
to theANSWER:
turn valid a
consent
over to deed on or her instrument
part. The two parcels
connivance which
with thehe partly
City held
Engineer, in trust
secured for
assuming
The complaint
This is aofcase existence
ofasPedro
an
byaimplied of ahim
against resulting
Juan
resulting
the trust owner's
should
trust. the
be price
If share
SALE
Juana's isand one the
therein. where failure
the title of to Romeo
the property to take is
operated
consent
duplicate
action of
only
Biong
of
Maureen title. has
contract
himself
Resolve
already
isthe between
insufficient
prescribed case since the
with to from
possession
not thebenefit.
reserved latter
of the
to an Juana
order
property
the vendor
may
forandor
claim
theto
if pay
the
actual or
demolition the
vendor taxes ofis
dismissed.
Walter
parties
effect claims
and
a valid Theas to instances
have
evidence when
acquired
of
sale of community property (Art. a
authority contract
ownership to the —
of compensatory
the building. damage
A immediately for the loss
filed of
anthereher
action share in
reasons. (6%)
ten
Register
96,
years
regardless
the land
Family of have
of
byDeeds
Code;
already
its Abalos
prescription to nomenclature
makeor elapsed
v.the Macatangay, — from
if registration.
he anchors mayG.R. be thereon.
the
his
It not
in
X? the
the b)granted
Ifland;
Regional
Romeo
you the moral
decide
Trial
and
right
Court
Y maintain
to
damages
in favor
to
rescind
annuloffor
that
Romeo
the
the
the contract
order mental
andand
was
Y,
registration
Does
presumed
defense
SUGGESTED
is
No. the Ray
155043, on have
to ofbe
extinctive
ANSWER:
registration the
Septemberany antitlecause
of30, inthe
equitable
prescription, hisaction
of
2004). name.
deed the against
mortgage Decide.
ten
or are a
year
the
validon
based
anguish,
would
to enjoin you
absolute
the fulfillment
anxiety,
its enforcement.
sale andorthat
moral shock
Y and
the document
nonfulfillment,
Aand were wounded
able
as
to
1. When,
Discuss for
fully. convenience, the Torrens title to Contract
signed
the case ofmay
by Sale
the be, vs.
former
of Agency
the on to
prescribed 3SellJune 1973
condition. was
Biong
enumerated
period and that
must Linda?
in
be Article
reckoned Can
1602 he
from of thealso
1987 Civilrecover
when Code: he feelings uphold shethe validity of the promisewhich to A
instrument is the operative act that forge
(1999)
A grantedaa Bhad
compromise thesuffered;agreement
exclusive
sell. a) right
exemplary
If under
youtowere
damage
sell the his
the
"Art.two
damages
demanded
conveys 1602. parcels
or thatfrom
The
affects of the
Maureen land
theland.
contract were
spouses?
shall
remove placed
(Sec.bethe presumed
51, in Joan's
Explain.
extension
P.D. No. to merely
by
agreed sell?
SUGGESTED
way of
to
promise
ANSWER:
example
a twenty
to
for
percentthe common
(20%) good,
increase and in
Considering
name that the contract has already brand
Judge, of
wouldMaong you pants
uphold in Isabela,
the theory theof price for
1
In
(2.5%)
house
1529). an alone,
be cases When
on ofLot
equitable there
the
double No.price 2was
sale
mortgage, of created
of
because a in
titled sale anwith
land,
such any implied
of isright
it
demand thea to
A. I will not
attorney's
the monthly fees. uphold
Juana
rentals.
the
haswithin
They
theory
no cause
further
of Xoffor
agreed actionthe
that
been (a
trust
repurchaseperfected
resultingis andtrust)
unusually taken theout
for the
inadequate: of theof
benefit operation
of Juana his merchandise payable 60 days from
well-settled
following
amounts cases:
to anruleexpress that repudiation buyer who the trust nullification
first against the of
buyerthe sale who and for thethe recovery of
of
2 the
with statute of frauds, Ray can
faithcompel Linda the lease
delivery, andwill expire
promising twoBacquired
a(2) years
commission land
later of 20% for
and
and itJuan
registers When
was as the
the
made trustee
saleknown in ofgood
vendor toone-half
remains
Maureen. undivided
in possession
acquires
The action or
a as
the
value
that
property
and in on the
goodAfter faith,ground relying that onthe the so-called
theproperty,
transfer
and Biong to observe the form required on in all the event
only that
sales. Y would
the sell
delivery of the
ideal
lessee
better
for portion
or
reconveyanceotherwise;
right to ofthefiled eachland.
in 1992 of(Art.
isthenot 1544,yet by
two law
lots.
Civil
barred sale
certificate
either
was
A or showing
his
an that
daughter
equitableJuan
B shall is mortgage.
the
have registered
the right
An
Persons
in order
Therefore, dealing
for
WhenJuana the with
property
canafter property
to
file be covered
registered
an expiration
action by
in merchandise
SUGGESTED ANSWER: to B but before he could sell any
3 prescription.
Code).
by upon or
(Spouses the
Huang v. Courtfor of the
of equitable
B.
ownerB then
2. Juana's
of first of mortgage
filed
the
refusal. land.
suitstore an
to Thehave
may arise
action herselfto rescindonly if,
declared the insaletruth,
as sole in
them, B’s in Compromise
Isabela was Agreement
completely
SALES
Torrens
the name
damages
right
Appeals, to title of Ray
against
repurchase
Sept. are
13, Joan notanother
which
1994). required
for can be
having to
filed
instrument go together
beyond
fraudulently extending the
favor sale of was
the one with
corporation the rightto
and ofcompel
repurchase. Y to
owner
was
burned of the entire
approved by the remaining
court. Six area (6) will
months not
what
sold
(Orquiola
the appears
withperiod
the
one action
ofof
v. theon
CA its
for
two
redemption face.
the
386, recovery
parcels SCRA which
or granting of house
301, he a[2002];
new [Art.
partly period
The
sell
prosper
SUGGESTED thewithout
facts of the
property
because
ANSWER:
hiscase
while
fault,
to hertogether
state
Juan's
that
since
act in
the with
under
selling
right allthe
the
toof
1357
Domingo
held
is New
in
executed; v.Civil
trust forCode].
Races 401 In
Juana's SCRAthe alternative,
benefit. 197, Juana [2003]). may he before
A's pants.
repurchase the expiration
Must
was B pay
granted of A the for
after lease,
his the A
lost died.
pants?
absolute Y
Compromise
The
other contract
lot was Agreement,
between
wrongful. A and Itshe did was
B isnot aRealtygiven
sale have not the
an
the
Assignment
Thus,
can recover
claim
4 absent
When the
actual of orCredit
theany amount vs.
showing
compensatory
purchaser Subrogation
of Two that
retainsmillion
damage RRforfor knew
pesosthe
himself sold
Why?
deed
a the
(5%)
of to property
sale to the Visorro Corp.
(1993)
Peter
right
agency
legal effect
without
firstsellwas
notifying
refusal
ofbecause
executed.
which,
forfeiting the price Following
she
his maintains
is payable
share
the is
in the
rule
by a
about,
part of Co,
or
herought
(P2,000,000.00)
loss the asharetrader
purchase to inhave
that from
theheknown
price; Manila,
paid.
land; the has
prior
Otherwise,
moral damages dealt
saleit in
stipulation
B Cruzo
upon 60 lot. vs. pour
Carriaga atrui
daysHowever, under
(174
from delivery SCRA Article 330) ,
1311a deed of
Ray
of the can
business landrecover
with to theAllied
PP moral
or damages
Commodities
that he on
actedhimselfinthe
in ground
Hongkong
bad faith, remaining Juana even can file if B an is
would
for
5 the result
mental
When in solutio
anguish,
vendor indebiti
anxiety,
binds moral or unjust
shock
to pay the SUGGESTED
of
the repurchase
unable CiviltoCode. ANSWER:
resell executed
Isit.she
If B correct?
were independently
an agent, he of
is the
not
Juana
that
for five hasaction
the no cause filed of action
by Linda against the
is clearly buyer an action against Juan for partition or
and onyears.
being
enrichment.
taxes the first
wounded thingAllfeelings
through
to
sold; register the
she years,
the
had sale, Peter
suffered; RR Co B is not
deed
bound ofto salecorrect.
payofthe where Herthe
price
action
ifthattwois cannot
he stipulations
unable
prosper.
toprayer are
resell
who acquired
unfounded
accumulated
acquired anthe
civil land
suit
indebtedness for value
which of and
falls in
P500,000.00 good
under termination
Article 1311 the
requires co-ownership the with
third a person
exemplary
6 In a any good
damage other and
bycase waya cleanof example
where title
it may to
for be the
thefairlyfound
As
it.
ANOTHER a in
buyer,
ANSWER:twoownership
instruments passed instead to B of uponone
Equitable
faith,
malicious relying Mortgage
on thePP transfer certificate ofby title that the lot sold be adjudicated to Juan, and
with
property
common
inferred Allied asprosecution
good,
that Commodities.
against
the and real . {Ponce
attorney's
intention Upon v.demand
fees.
Legaspi,
of the parties
G.R.its intended
2. The suit
is that
document,
delivery towill
and, beunder
the benefited
prosper,
right Art. of must
applyingrepurchase
1504 communicate
the
of the ruling would
Civilin
(1991)
On
showing
No.
agent 20
79184, December
thatMay
in Manila, Juan 6,1992).is 1970,
the
Peter the Juliet,
registered
Co payment aowner
paid Allied widow, of the
his remaining
acceptance lot
to the be adjudicated
obligor before and
the
the transaction
Contract to Sellshall secure of a Imperial
debt
amount
Code, the vs.
only
thing CAto cited
one
perishes above.
option
for the Both
granted
owner. law by
Hence, and
the
borrowed
ANOTHER
the land.ANSWER:
Commodities from by check Romeo P4,000.00
the otheramount owed. and,Upon as reconveyed
revocation. toThere
her. is no showing that B
or
1. the
Under
(2001)
Arturo performance
Article 476 of ofany the Civil obligation.
Code, Juana equity
buyer
B musttostill authorize
thepay the such
seller. Sincea the
price. result,
contract said cannotthe
deposit gave
security theRichard
intherefore, payee's sheaaccountreceipt
executed inwhich a deed
Manila, of
the manifested
Contract
Supreme
be upheld of Sale;
Court.
as her acceptance
Marital
a contract Community of to
sale Ywith
Property; at Formalities
any
the time
right
can
states:file
Receiptwas
mortgage an action
Received
over for
one of quieting
from herfor of
Richard
two title as
as down
(2) registered there
check dishonored insufficiency of tobefore
Strictly
(2006) the
repurchase, speaking,death of1602
Art.Juana's A and of before
contention
the Civil the that
Code sale.
her
on
is a which
payment cloud in athe title to the of subject real
lots
funds. Forfor has
and myin 1995
market Toyota
consideration value Corolla
of P1.00, withAllied
P15,000.00. plate Hence,
brother
Spouses
equitable Bhad cannot
Biong forfeited
mortgage and enforce
Lindahis
will any
share
wanted
not rightin
apply. the
to under
sell
The second the
their
rule
property.
No.
The XYZ-1
document Second, andJuana
23.............. can also file
the P50.000.00
certificate of titlean action Double Sales
Commodities assigned the credit to HadjiofButu the alleged
house.
could stipulation
lot is incorrect.
They
have beenfound Even pour
different atrui.
a ifprospective
the two bothlots buyer,havewere the
Ray.
for damages
property
who brought weresuitagainst
delivered Juan,
againsttoPeter
because
Romeo. the settled
Co in the RTC executed (2001)
On June 15, 1995, Jesus ifsold adeedsparcel of
rule2 isJune
On that1971, the proper Juliet recoursean
obtained of additional
the true same
Linda area,
negotiated
on it does
the with
samenot Ray follow for
occasion that
the or they
sale date,of havethein
of Manila for recovery of the amount owed. which registered land to Jaime. On June 30, 1995, he
Balance
ownerofof P3,000
sum payable:
the property who 12/30/01........ was prejudiced P50 and the same
property. case, value.
They underSince
agreed the
the on sale
a
ruling fairof the
price
in firstof
spouses lot
P2
Peter Co movedfrom Romeo.
to dismiss On this
the complaint date, B. If the
sold
on
I were
the Torrens
Million.
same
Ray
to decide
sent
land toinJose.
title
Linda in
favor
the
a letter
Who
name
of Romeohas a better
of
confirming
the Juan
and Y,
contract was his
000.00
fraudulently
however, Romeo dispossessed
caused the the same isoftoa Claravall
of preparation I would
right if: not
a) v.the CA
uphold (190
first the
saleSCRA validity
is 439),
registered of the promise
ahead of
against
September him15, on 2001.
the ground that Hadji Butu was may valid,
intention all
still that
to be Juana
buy the may
sustained recover
property. as is
Later,
an the value
another
equitable of
bring
deed an
of action
absolute for saledamagesof the against
above those
property, who to with
to
the knowledge
sell,
second so as
sale, to of the
enforce latter. it Why?
by an (3%)
action b) the
for
not a real party in interest and, therefore, her
couple, undivided
mortgage, Berniegiven interest
and therein,
Elena,
the circumstances offeredplus damages.
a similar
SUGGESTED
causedJuliet
which
without
orANSWER:
legal
employed
affixed
capacity her the same. Third,
tosignature
sue and without
that
since
he first
had second
specific sale is registered
performance. Theahead promise of expressed
the to first sell
No,
Juana Co's
reading had defense
(Sgd.)
the will
rightnottoprosper.
Arturo
thedocument. Does
her
The this
shareThis is
in not
receipt
consideration thea in In
house
sale,
would addition,
Art.
with at
1602.aknowledge
only lower sheprice
The
amount canof
reserved of
to ask
Pa1.5
the rightfor
latter?
mere topartition
Million. Butand,
repurchase
Why?
offer Rayor
not agreed
case
evidence of a to a subrogation
subrogation,
contract to but
sell? an
Why?ofassignment
creditor.
(5%) Willof reconveyance
insisted
is then on
deemed of
buying her undivided
the house interest
of Biong in the
and
property is
indicated
Peter
by P7,000.00.
Co'sANSWER:
way of inheritance,
defense of absence She thought of agreement
she
that can this (5%)
SUGGESTED
therefore,
to (a) it is an
ANSWER: notoriginal
enforceable intention. unless it was
credit.
demand ASSIGNMENT
SUGGESTED
document thewas partition
similar of
to OF the CREDIT
thingshe
first owned is the
signed. in second
Linda
sought The forto lot,
sentimental
first
be buyerwithout
exercised hasreasons.
the
before prejudice
betteraRay right
withdrawal to if any
prepared hisora
a subrogation
It is a contract
However,
process since
of ofof creditor
the
transferring sale farmland prosper?
because the wasthe
right seller
sold of todid
thean ALTERNATIVE
agreement
deed
sale
Even of
was sale
assuming
ANSWER:
between
first to tobe
the be them
signed
registered,
facts bythat
given the in lieu
couple
even
at the ofand
though
end the ofa
common,
When sheunder reached Article home, 494 of her theson Civil Code,
X,paid.after 2. denialThethereof. suit will not prosper, since Juan's
not reserve
innocent
assignor to ownership
purchaser
the for until
assignee. value, The he was
then
assignment fully
Juana has may no the
payment
manager's
first
case, of the
check
buyer
there value
for
knew
would P2 ofof Juana's
Million.
havethe second
been Aftershare
no in
receiving
sale.
separate the
The
and ask the
reading thatduplicatethe title copy to the of the remaining deed, wrongful act of pocketing the entire proceeds
cause
be done of action
either against
gratuitously the buyer or consistent
onerously, with factfirst lot and damages, the second lot be
property
informed
Contract to be
her
Selldeclared
that
vs. what as
Contract exclusively
sheof signed
Sale hers.
was not in a the
of theP2
that
consideration Million,
sale he ofknewtheBiong
for of signed
such
first the second
lotpromise
is the
not adeed
sale
toground of
sell. at sale.
the
The
for
the
whichestablished
case, rule
the that
assignment the rights has of an
an innocent
effect reconveyed
However,
time
contract of his wouldto
Linda her.
was
registration
at not
most able
does
amount to
not sign
make
to it
an because
himoption as
mortgage but avalue
deed of absolute sale. On the
(1997)
State the
purchaser
similar basic
to day, for of
that difference
a sale must (Nyco(only
be Salesin their
respected Corp.v.BAlegal and divesting
she
acting
which was in
again
him of his rights as a co-owner of the
abroad.
bad may On
faithnotsuchher
because
be the return, theshe
basis sale
for refused
an toaction
him to
following
effects) Between
protected
3 June
notwithstanding
1971,
a No.71694.
contract Juliet,
thetoAug.16,
accompanied
sell, employed
fraud on1991 the one second
by Will lot.
theMortgage Indeed,
suit prosper? wrongdoingExplain. by Juan
Finance
by X, went Corp. G.R 200 Equitable
sign
was
for the
ahead
specific document
in time,
performance. vs. Sale
saying
hence, she
has achanged
priority her
in
hand,
the and
seller a back
in contract
securing
As
to Romeo
aRomeo
result ofhissale,
of title.
the
and demanded
onassignment,
the
(Eduarte other.vs. the the
does not constitute,
ALTERNATIVE
CA, (2.5%)
(2005)
On July
mind.
ANSWER:
14, 2004,
Linda filed suit Pedro
for the benefit of Juana,
executed in favor of
SCRA
reformation
ADDITIONAL
SUGGESTED
637).
253 SCRAacquired
it,
ANSWER:
ANSWER:
391)
prepared and signed a right.
any of What the creates
modes of for
bad faithnullification
acquiring in the case
ownership of the
plaintiff all the
document wherein, as vendee in the deed of double rights of the assignor Juan
deed a ofDeed sale
sale712, of Absolute
and
of land for Sale
moral over
and a parcel
exemplary of
under Art. CivilisCode. knowledge of a previous
Page 93 of 119
including
sale abovethe right to sue
mentioned, in his own
he obligated and name bound as land covered
damages
sale. against by TCT Ray.No.
the legaltoassignee.
himself resell theInland assignment,
to Juliet the or her debtor's
heirs
consent is not essential
and successors for the same consideration for the validity of the as
assignment
reflected in the deed of sale (P7,000) within a
period of two
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
a) Article 1592 of the Civil Code does not apply to a
conditional sale. In Valarao v. CA, 304 SCRA and delivery to be made on 01 February 2002.
155, the Supreme Court held that Article 1592 It was stipulated that if payment were not to be
applies only to a contract of sale and not to a made by Y on 01 February 2002, the sale
Deed of Conditional Sale where the seller has between the parties would automatically be
reserved title to the property until full rescinded. Y failed to pay on 01 February 2002,
payment of the purchase price. The law but offered to pay three days later, which
SUGGESTED
applicableANSWER:
is the Maceda Law. payment X refused to accept, claiming that
b) No, the vendor cannot rescind the contract SUGGESTED ANSWER:of sale had already been
their contract
under the circumstances. Under the Maceda No, X is not correct. In the sale of immovable
rescinded. Is X’s contention correct? Why? 5%
Law, which is the law applicable, the seller on property, even though it may have been
installment may not rescind the contract till stipulated, as in this case, that upon failure to
after the lapse of the mandatory grace period pay the price at the time agreed upon the
of 30 days for every one year of installment rescission of the contract shall of right take
payments, and only after 30 days from notice place, the vendee may pay, even after the
of cancellation or demand for rescission by a expiration of the period, as long as no demand
notarial act. In this case, the refusal of the for rescission of the contract has been made
seller to accept payment from the buyer on the upon him either judicially or by a notarial act
49th month was not justified because the (Article 1592, New Civil code). Since no
buyer was entitled to 60 days grace period demand for rescission was made on Y, either
ANOTHER SUGGESTED ANSWER:
and the payment was tendered within that judicially or by a notarial
This is a contract act, not
to sell and X cannot refuse
a contract of
period. Moreover, the notice of rescission to
absolute sale, since as there has been (3)
accept the payment offered by Y three no
served by the seller on the buyer was not days afterofthe
delivery theexpiration of the
land. Article period.
1592 of the New
effective because the notice was not by a Civil code is not applicable. Instead, Article
notarial act. Besides, the seller may still pay 1595 of the New Civil Code applies. The seller
within
Maceda 30 Law; days
Rectofrom Law such notarial notice has two alternative remedies: (1) specific
before
(1999)
What are rescission
the so-called may be effected.
"Maceda" andAll"Recto"
these performance, or (2) rescission or resolution
requirements
laws in connection for a withvalidsales
rescission were not
on installments? ALTERNATIVE
under Article ANSWER:
1191 of the New Civil code. In
complied withimportant
by the featuresseller. Hence, the Yes, the contract was automatically rescinded
Give the most of each law. both remedies, damages are due because of
rescission is invalid.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: upon Y’s failure to pay on 01 February 2002.
(5%) default.
The MACEDA LAW (R.A. 655) is applicable to By the express terms of the contract, there is
sales of immovable property on installments. no need for X to make a demand in order for
The most important features are (Rillo v. CA, rescission to take place. (Article 1191, New
(1) After
247 SCRAhaving
461): paid installments for at least Angeles
Civil Code, 35 SuriaSCRA 102SCRA 661 [1987];
v. IAC 151
two years, the buyer is entitled to a mandatory [1970]).
U.P. v. de los
Maceda Law
grace period of one month for every year of
(2000)
Priscilla purchased a condominium unit in
installment payments made, to pay the unpaid
Makati City from the Citiland Corporation for a
installments without interest.
If the contract is cancelled, the seller shall price of P10 Million, payable P3 Million down
refund to the buyer the cash surrender value and the balance with interest thereon at 14%
equivalent
"In any of to thefifty percent cases,
foregoing (50%) any of the total
money, per annum payable in sixty (60) equal monthly
payments
fruits, or other made, and to
benefit after five years
be received by theof installments of P198,333.33. They executed a
installments, an additional
vendee as rent or otherwise shall be five percent (5%) Deed of Conditional Sale in which it is
every year but not to exceed
considered as interest which shall be subject ninety percent stipulated that should the vendee fail to pay
(90%) of the
to the usury laws."total payments made. three (3) successive installments, the sale shall
(2) In case
Article 1604 the installments
states that "thepaid were less
provisions of be deemed automatically rescinded without the
than 2 years, the seller shall
article 1602 shall also apply to a contract give the buyer a necessity of judicial action and all payments
grace period of not less
purporting to be an absolute sale." than 60 days. If the made by the vendee shall be forfeited in favor
buyer fails to 1602
For Articles pay the and installments
1604 to due apply, two of the vendor by way of rental for the use and
at the
expiration
requisites must of theconcur:
grace period, the seller
1) the parties may
entered occupancy of the unit and as liquidated
cancel the contract
into a contract after 30 days
denominated as afrom receipt
contract of damages. For 46 months, Priscilla paid the
by theand
sale; buyer of the
2) their notice of
intention was cancellation
to secure or an monthly installments religiously, but on the
demand
G.R. for
No.debt
existing rescission
152168,by way ofbymortgage.
December notarial
10, act.
(Heirs The
of 47th and 48th months, she failed to pay. On the
2004)
RECTO
Balite LAW (Art. 1484} refers to sale of
v. Lim, 49th month, she tried to pay the installments
In the given
movables payable case,in although
installments Pedro
and retained
limiting due but the vendor refused to receive the
possession
the right ofofseller,the property
in case as of lessee
defaultafter
by the
the payments tendered by her. The following
execution of the Deed of
buyer, to one of three remedies: a) exact Sale, there is no month, the vendor sent her a notice that it was
showing that the intention of
fulfillment; b) cancel the sale if two or more the parties was rescinding the Deed of Conditional Sale
to secure an have
installments existingnotdebt by way of mortgage. pursuant to the stipulation for automatic
Hence, the complaint of Pedro should be rescission,ANSWER:
SUGGESTED and demanded that she vacate the
Immovable Property; Rescission of Contract
dismissed. premises. She replied that the contract cannot
(2003) Page 94 of 119
be rescinded without judicial demand or
notarial act pursuant to Article 1592 of the
Civil Code. a) Is Article 1592 applicable? (3%)
b) Can the vendor rescind the contract? (2%)
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
and absolute
for
his
contributed
Nestor property.
fundamental
filed P5,000,000.00
an
sale,
Upon action
breach
Simeon
the for facts
tosuddenly
specific
provided
warrant
given,performance.that
the
has resolution
lessor
athe change
building
May
phenomenon
sublessee
Will
A, ofandAdela
SUGGESTED can
thatANSWER: hestill
invoke
are
hasexercise still
not nobeen right
unpredictable
her superior
remiss rightin of to redemption?
the despite
that
payment of his
the
of
claiming
whole
action
contract
heart,
had
as
the prosper
would
a sufficiently ofthat lease
be the
orcomplied
leased
not?
specially
dealWhy? to
is with
disadvantageous
him
so(5%) when
(B) commitment
his for the a period
delay to 1)
Option
(5%)
Will A action
the
science,
sublessor,
Explain.
rent.
advances can
the the exercise
Contract
prosper?
phenomenon
in moment (3%)
the his right
is considered
sublessor unforeseen.
is duly of ousted
repurchase from the
premises,
him
of
was
to ten as
due
give
SUGGESTED years
he toANSWER:
the has
thefrom
lessee found
heavy January out
a rightpaperworkthat
1.
of 1985 the in
first property
toprocessing
refusal December can
when Explainthe
within
(2002)
SUGGESTED four
the sublessee
ANSWER:(4) years
nature has no leg
of an from to stand
option theon.contract.
The sublessee's
date of the
No, the action will not prosper. The implied right, ifthe
Yes, any, action
Adela is mayto demand will
still reparation
prosper.
exercise forUnderdamages
her rightfrom his
Article of
fetch
31,
the
he checks.
1995
offeredthree attoa time rental
sell theof
the agreed
P100,000.00
property purchase
to the alessee year.
price. contract
Leasee
To sublessor,
for SUGGESTED & (Art.
Lessor;
ANSWER: 1606,
(2%) should the latter be at fault. Rights Civil and Code).Obligations
renewal
SUGGESTED
Bert
such
P5 seeks of
condition,
Million, ANSWER:the
specific
which lease
Awas agreed. on
performance
the same a month-to-month
On price December
but he Simeongot20, in An
1651
SUGGESTED
(1990)
A OPTION
redemption
vacant of the Civil
ANSWER:
lot CONTRACT
notwithstanding
several Code, blocksthe is from one
sublessee
the lapse
the grantingis of
centerbound
more a
of
2)
basis a) did No.
not Sublease
have the effectis ofdifferent
extending from the 2}
than
to
the theItown
privilege 30would
lessor to
days
was buyadvise
forfrom or
all
leased actsBbywithin
sell
notice toitsof
which file the
owner an ansale
refer action
agreedto
to given
athe timefor
use
young to
contends
1990,
selling the
it to that
building
Santos. he has wasmerely
He totallygiven
certainly burned.
had the Bertright Soonan (Heirs ofSevilla v. Court of Appeals G.R. No.
assignment of lease. Sublease, not consolidation offortitle and obtain a(15) judicial
life
option of the
thereafter,
to treat tothe option
buy A's and tonothing
workers
lessee's purchase cleared
more,
counter-offer which theand debris
of a being
expired
offers lesser andat
to her
and
businessman
49823, atFebruary
because
preservation a determined
BArticle26, of the
1623
a1992).
term price.
thing
ofof the
fifteen It New
leased must inyears be
Civil
the
prohibited
the endthe of by the contract of lease is therefore order
supported of consolidation
by aagreementconsideration which must
distinct be recorded
from
B.
return
started
amount Will as the
Bert’s
construction
option original
action
a rejection money lease
offor
of period.
specific
awhich
new
his offerbuilding.
Bert toThe
performance
refuses
sellB lessor
atthen P5 manner
to Code
renewal requiresstipulated
upon that between
the notice ofthe theinlessor
writing
parties. and ofAfter
the
the
allowed
is correct and cannot
in refusing be to invoked
sell as findaground
ground to in
price.the
Sublease; Registry
(Art. Validity;
1479from of
and Property
Assignment
1482, of(Art.
NCC) Sublease 1607. Civil
prosper?
accept.
served
Million. Explain.
notice
Thus, upon he(4%) A
was that heonwould
free the
to occupy another that
the sale
lessee.
taking must come
possession of the
theprospective
lot, the lessee vendor built or
cancel
C.
the May
option theSimeon lease,
had receipt justify
expired. his refusal to proceed Sublease;
Code).
(1990)
Option
A leased Delay
Contract;
a parcel in Payment
Earnest
of land of
Money
to Rentals
B for a period of
building
buyer uponbeing constructed of such uponunacceptable completion, vendor thereon
Transfer
as a the
building
of Ownership;
case of may mixed
Non-Payment
be. In this case,
materials
of a the Priceand the a
Sublease
b)
with No,
SUGGESTED the vs.the Assignment
sale
ANSWER: lessor
by theof cannot
Lease;
fact Rescission
that havethethe of deal
Contractlease is (1994)
In
(1993)
LT
two
notice January
applied
years.
of the with
The 1993,
sale BPI
lease
was Four-Gives
to purchase
contract
given by did
the Corporation
not house
vendee contain and
and
for the unexpired
counter-offer (Art. portion
1319. NCC). of the lease term, ALTERNATIVE store.
(1991)
Pablo As
sold the his years
car passed,
to Alfonso he expanded
who issued his a
(2005)
Yes,
cancelled the answer
financially for alleged will be the to
violation same. of the The action any
provision leased
lot in theearning
Quezon
express entire
ANSWER:
ofCity, twelve
one
prohibition of floors
its acquiredofofthe
against the GQS
30assets. the
explaining disadvantageous that he had spent him?
partlyExplain. for the Adela the
business,
postdated
Register
can no
check
Deeds.
longer more
in
Theprofits.
exercise
full
period
payment By
her right
therefor.
days
tenth of
will
Under
against
SUGGESTED
(4%) not a prosper
written
assignment.
ANSWER: contract
because dated
an optionDecember
The lessee did not assign assignment must be
1, Towers
The
never amount Complex,
tolled. offered
ofShe the for
can astill
was
leasehold period
Pl,000,000.00
avail or of
of ten
the that years payable,
subleasing
right. at to a
construction of the building that was burned. (10th) year of his possession, he was able
B.
Yes.
1989,
the Bert’s
supportedAlease,was
Victor action
correct
byorleased aanyfor in specific
rejecting
consideration
his land
portion performance
the
to demand
separate
thereof, Joel to forwill ofaA redemption.
and
the Before
monthly
as
of follows:
the the
leased rental As
maturity co-owner,
of
P200,000.00
premises. of the
P3,000,000.00. she check,
down
During had the only
Alfonso
There
payment, third 30 days
sold
is
yearthea
rejected B's demand. Did destruction
A has aa right in build a three (3)-story building worth at itleast
prosper
B. As aoffrom
distinct
period
subsidiaries. result
because
five Itthe of years
(5)
merely the
purchasethere
totalat a price.
subleased was
monthly someIn rental binding
this of case
floors theofto from
thethecar
provision
balance
of
P300,000.00.
the
lease, oftotime
in the
P800,000.00shecontract
BGregorio
subleased
Before
received
the
who thethat
payable
end
written
later
land
of the
within
the toterm C.notice
sold monthly
90of
In days
turn,
the
of
to
rejecting B's demand?
agreement
building
there
Pl,000.00,
its is no
subsidiaries. byto of fortuitous
sale,
separate
be Since notconsideration.
increased just
event,
the an tooption
problem the
Pl,200.00 leasecontract.
doeswas
Therefore, andnot the Gabriel.
rentals
from
C, sale
without
lease, June which
should
B the
When 1,
A's
negotiated beinpresented
1985. this BPI
paid
consent, with
case
withinthe
took
for the
accepted
assigned landowner
the
payment,
first
the form
five
the
sublease ofthe
days
offer,
forthe its
a
The
extinguished.
the option
Pl,500.00
state sale thatwas may
on
the (Art.
perfected
bethe 1655,
withdrawn
contract third Civil
upon
of and Code.)
by
lease acceptance
Ubaldo fifth
contains at year, bya copy
any check
of the
whereupon
to D. Aofissued
month.
then LT deed
bydrew
filed ForAlfonso
an of
thea sale was
month
check
action being
for dishonored
for of
the given
March,
P200,000.00
rescission to
by her
May, in
of
Implied New Lease renewal,
drawee but despite their attempts .toAlfonso,
The do law so,
Simeon
time. (Art.
respectively.
prohibition of1324, 10%
against On NCC)ofJanuarythe agreed
sublease, 1,the 1991, price.
sublease Joelis (Conejero
This June,
favor
the
they ofbank
October
contract
could
v.BPI
not offor
CA, and 16 the
which
lease
agree
SCRA
Decemberreason
on
on the
the
775 that
[1966])
1993,
latter
ground
new
he, the
that
conditions rentals
thereafter B has for
Right
(1999)
Under
amount
subleased
lawful, of what
theFirst
is the in
rule Refusal;
circumstances
really
land
being toLessee;
earnest
Conrad
that Effect
inwould
the money
for aanperiod
absence implied
which,of of an doeshad
were notthe
already
not paidprescribe
inclosedon
its time hisany account particular
On even form
before of
he
(1998)
In
On
new a 20-year
December
lease or lease31,
a contract
1992,
tacita Joel over
assigned
reconduccion a building, the the
lease
arise?
deposited
violated
the
(a)
written
issued renewal.
B's hissublease
notice,check.
terms
Upon nor to
Pablo thewith
account.
and
any
conditionssome
expiration
distinctive
sued to
rentals
September
recover
of
ofmethod
the
the the
being
lease
termfor
car
5,
under
two (2)Art.
express years 1482,
prohibition at a “shall monthly a lesseeberental
considered
may of Pl,500.00.
sublet as part the agreement.
delayed
1985, LT up wroteto
If ten
you BPI days.
were The
requestingthe delay
judge, was
extensionhow due until
would to
lessee
to is
his leased,
SUGGESTED
(2%) expressly
compadre,
ANSWER: granted
Ernie, who a actedright of
on first
the of
(b)
C? the
Four-Gives
and C's lease, the
Corporation
assignment landowner ofalso asked
the subleased B v. toCA, vacate
five of
of
thingthe price and in aswhole proof orof the
in perfection
part, without of notifying
from
the
October
you Gabriel
heavy
decide the
10, paper
theredemptioner
alleging
1985 case,work that
within he
involved
particularly which(Pablo)
(Etcuban in with had
processing
to pay been
respect 148
the
An
belief implied
Sublease;
refusal should
that new
Sublessee;
Joel the lease
was lessor theor
Liability tacita
decide
rightful reconduccion
to ownersell both
and the
SUGGESTED
the
sublease
unlawfully
SCRA premises
twelve to
507 ANSWER:
floors
D?
deprived and to
[1987]). remove
wholly-owned
of it bySo his
reason long building
subsidiaries.
of as
Alfonso's and
the
the contract.” (Topacio
prejudice to his/its responsibility to the lessor to v. CA, 211 SCRA 291 the
balance,
No. thechecks.
validityto whichof: not BPIBprosper
agreed. On October 5,
arises
C. Simeon
(1999)
May
the
possessor
[1992];
for the landaifperformance
atand
lessee the the
cannot
of
Villongco
endjustify
sublease
building. of thehis
of theHowever,
said
Realty thecontract
lot. refusal
v. property
contract. Joel the
Bormaheco,
the
to lessee
hasproceed
leased
lessor
been 65 The The
other lease
redemptioner
deception.
1985, due
suitcontract
improvements. Will to
will
wasthe the informed
suit refused
expressly
prosper?
expected
because
unless
in writing,prohibits
delay
he
he
in
Pablo
was
the
has
the
should
with the
without the continue
the saleconsent byenjoying
the
of factthe thing
that leased
the deal for is nowas
reimbursed not unlawfully
forof necessary deprived
andcontractuseful of the
expenses. car
sold
faithfully
SCRA 352 property
paying
[1975]). tothe a thethird lessor,
stipulated person and who what
rentals knew areto assignment
cause to complain
remittance of the needed
the lease
(Distrito v. CA, 197
amount orby SCRAanyhis
15 days
financially
the respective with the
disadvantageous acquiescence
liabilities of the to of
lessee him. the and lessor,
Having sub- although
B claimed
portion hethat
thereof. was he unlawfully
was
The a possessor
rental deprived
value and ofof the
builder the
about the
Victor. When lease Victor and learned in fact agreed on Mayto18, respect1992 SUGGESTED
606,
financier 609 ANSWER:
[1991])
from the . In fact,
United in Distrito,
States, LT a
wrote written BPI
and
made
lessee unlessathe
tobad the a bargain
notice
lessor to is the
not contrary
aof legal
such ground by either price.
in good
for notice
a) B has The
faith,
the held perfection
withunnecessary
right right
to remove of the
of retention. the sale
building Thisand the
issue
and
it.
about Consequently, sublease thein and case
lessee brings
assignment, sublease?
an heaction sued building
requesting was has increased by 50% since
where itsthelease co-
parties
pulling
SUGGESTED
(3%)
a) Will has
outthe previously
a
ANSWER: biding
action been
contract
prosper? given of
If (Art.
sale,
so, 1670).
in
against the Right
delivery
is
other
to now
Four-Gives of a the
of improvements
First
before last
Refusal;
the extension
car
Corporation. Lessee;
court was for
unless 1)
until
Effect
enough
Canthe
October
resolution
the to
landowner allow
building in 30,a
against both the lessor-seller
Joel, Conrad and Ernie for rescission of the and the buyer (a) owner
1985, had actual
within which knowledge
to pay the of
balance. the sale, BPI
Yes,
v.
In Villa, provided
short,Explain.35 Phil that
769 there
[1916]) , is and no no express
such (1996)
Alfonso
Ubaldo
pending to
is have
the
litigation. a
owner right
a) of
What ofa ownership
building
are the which
rights over of the
has
B?
absence
whom?
to rescind
contract ofin
of some
the
leaseordersale (2%)
and that
actionable
and for (b) there
damages.wrong
to maybybe
compel the tacita
specific other having decides
owner to
actedeject retain
as the
Four-Gives
middleman building at
Corporation
and being the time
present of
on
prohibition
wrong hasANSWER: against
been committed subleasing. by Bert.Under the law, denied
been
car,
b) What which
leased LTs the by
canrequest
Remigio
be ofbecause
the lawfully for the another
transferred
past 20 years.hadto
reconduccion there must of be expiration
refusal of in the theare rights thedeed landowner?
SUGGESTED
party (Vales the termination of lease and pay the lessee
performance of his right first the grounds
when
offered of the
vendor
to buy repeated
signed the delays
the same in the
of sale.
property payment for
when
Yes,
contract;the in the
action contract
of for of lease
rescission ofof things
the there
contract ofis Gregorio.
Ubaldo
SUGGESTED has Art.
repeatedly
ANSWERS: 559 applies
assured only to
Remigio a person
that if
sense that there the lessor must should be continuation be ordered to of one-half
of the rent?
P1,500,000.00.
of the 2} Can value
BPI the ofbuilding
cancelled
the improvements owner
its agreementask for at
Redemption;
no
lease express
possession and forfor Legal;
prohibition,
damages 15 Formalities
days willthe or lessee
prosper.
more; Undermay Article
and sublet 1)
there he
who
that a) The
should
is in "repeated
time. The lessee
the cancellation decide
possession to
of themay
delays"
sell in the
contract
in
good
remove the
building, payment
faith
forthe violation he
of
building will
theof
of
execute a deed ofLands
absolute sale in favor of the with LTwould, and offered to return to
Lease
(2001)
Bettything
1659
the
must of
be ofthe
and Rural
noLydia Civil
leased
prior were
Code,
demand co-owners
"if the
without lessor
to vacate.prejudiceofor a parcel
the to lessee of
his rentals
property,
give
even Remigio
though and the
the atnot best,
right toof
principal be the
first athingslight
owner
refusal. may orhim casual
thereof.
On June
suffer
the
lessee at the same price. The defendants the provision
Non-payment
amount of against
of problem,
P200,000.00 theinformedassignment?
price in aLT contract of to sale
(2000)
In
land.1995,
should
responsibility
SUGGESTED notMark
Last January
comply
ANSWER: leased
forwith 31,
the the2001, rice land
obligations
performance whenofset Narding
she of paid
forth thein breach
30, 1994,
Alfonso,
damage which
in
but Ubaldo
the Bdoes should not that furnish
was
not Remigio
the
cause
had
a owner, paid
ground
anythat and,
more for
heit.
contend
The
in action
Nueva that filed
Ecija the1657, plaintiff
by
for the
an can
lessee,
annual neither for
rental seek
both of does
On not
October render 20, ineffective
1985, upon the obligation
receipt of to
the
Articles
her real 1654
estate and tax, Betty
contract toward the lessor. [Art, 1650) In case impairment the aggrieved
discovered party
that Lydia may ejectment
hence,
was willing Gabriel especially
to
upon acquired
sell because
the property
the the titleleased
building the delays
to the
for P5 car. were
Million.
than is is
rescission of the the offending
saleofInnor compel specific deliver. The obligation to deliver
rescission
P1,000.00
ask
had sold
there foris her of
aper
rescission
sharehectare.
sublease to Emma of the 1998,
thesale
onpremises andtospecific
due
contract
November the being El
and
10, amount
only
The
SUGGESTED
necessary.due
followingofto P800,000.00
heavy
ANSWER:
The day, paper
claim Remigio from
work.
of B
his
Note
sent
that
US aahethatthing
financier,
letter
wasthere to
a
performance offor a "mere" right of first refusal. different from the
performance
Nino
2000.phenomenon,
indemnification
leased, The
the sublessee of
followingthe right
the isrice
damages, day, of
bound first
harvest
or to
Betty refusal
onlythe fellthe
offered to
lessorwhich only
latter, to
for BPI
LT offered
was
Ubaldo
possessor
is
notnot even
offering
and
correct
to apay toobligation
demand
builder
thein
buycanceling
amount
in for
thegood
toby
payment pay
building the
faith
its
tendering atprice.
contract
obviously
with P4.5
the
a
Decide of the case. [5%] EDCA Publishing Co. v. Santos (1990)
was
40%
allowing
redeem
all violated,
Equatorial
the the
the
her
acts should
average
contract
Realty
share which fromprosper.
harvest
to
Development, remain
Emma,
refer The
for
to in
Inc. ruling
the
butforce."
the vs.
the use in
previous
Article
Mayfair
latter and with cashier's
because
SUGGESTED
Million.
right
LT. In check
the Lina
ANSWER:
Ubaldo
of ofretention delay therefor
Topacio
did lasted
not
is Risk
not of
but
vreply.
Court
for which
tenable. only
One aBPI
of Appeals
week
B few refused
is not to
and
days
later, a
years.
1649 ofMark the asked
same Narding
Code provides for ain a case
reduction with of Transfer
b)
to
BPI The
accept.
Investment LTOwnership;
landowner/lessor
then (G. filed
Ra No. a letter
complaint
102606, Loss
may July refuse
against 3.end 1993,BPI
Theater,
replied
preservation Inc.
that (264
ofBetty's
the SCRA
thing right 483),
leased to that redeem "the
the lessee
manner has (10
Remigio
builder days in being
received
good the
faith longest),
because as atfrom
lessee the he Santos
does of
SUGGESTED
similar
cannot
the rental ANSWER:
facts,
assign to the sustains
P500.00 lease both
without rights
the consent oforlessee.
action
of the (1990)
D sold
reimburse
in
211 the
SCRA a RTCsecond-hand
291) 1/2 for theof car
Supreme
specific the to presumably
E for P150,000.00
value
Court
performance heldof made the
that
and
already
stipulated prescribed.
between Isper
the Emma hectare
lessor correct
and forthe that year
not? which
informing
not claim time him payments
ownership that the
over were
building
the propertyhas been leased. sold
Emma,
SUGGESTED
because
lessor,
but the thethe
unless
latter buyer,
ANSWER:
buyer
there
refused. is
isin anot
the correct.
subsequent
stipulation
Is Mark toBetty
the sale
legally entitled can knew
contrary." still The
deposited agreement
improvements
the earnest in money
court between
and the isrequireD
part
amount and of E
the
of was
the lessee that
purchase
P800,000.00. half
to
Why?
(Art.
No, Mark
(5%)
1651} isv. The
not sublessee
entitled isa subsidiarily
toredemption
reduction. liable and
Under to him were by accepted.
Ubaldo forThere P5 Million, was, therefore, and that no he
enforce
(Bangayan
Consent
the existence
such her
is right
Court
necessary
reduction? of of
right of
(2%) legal
Appeals,
because
of first G.R.
assignment
refusal, No. as a
123581,
hence would co-in of
Is the
remove
priceBPI
default. purchase
and the
legally is
Note also price,
improvements.
proof
correct of inor
that there the P75,000.00,
[Article
perfection
canceling 1678,
its shall
of
contractCivil
thebe
to the lessor
Article 1680 forthe
of any rentCode,
Civil due from the the lessee.
lessee of a will not renew Remigio's lease was whennoit demand expires.
owner.
ANOTHER
August
cause
bad faith. Article
ANSWER:
29,the
novation 1997) 1623
by However, of the
the substitution Civil
the ruleCode gives
is different
of responsible
one of the a paid
Leasee;
Code),
contract.
with
made upon
LT?
upon Death deliveryThereof;
Secondly,
thean lessee of the
Effects
notarial
to vacatecar to or E and
judicial the
However,
The
rural action
land sublessee
istoentitled
rescind tothe shall sale
awritten notand
reduction be to the
of compel rent Remigio filed action against the Ubaldo premises and
co-owner
in the
parties. case 30 ofdays from
subleasing. When notice there ofis the no balance
(1997)
ALTERNATIVE
Stating
rescission
for non-payment ofunder
briefly P75,000.00
ANSWER: the
of Art.the thesis
1592 shalland
monthly toberent. paidThere
support
1991 in
of your five
the
is,
beyond
the
only right
in theto
case amount
firstof refusal
loss of of the
will
more rent
not thandue
prosper. from
1/2 of him.
(Ang the Santos
BPI is for
correct cancellation
in canceling of its thecontractsale, and
with to
LT
sale
express by the vendor
prohibition toin exercise
the Contract his rightof of
Lease, legal the b)
equal
CivilThe
answer Code building
monthly
to each
is necessary owner
of installments
the cannot
following
(Taguba eject
ofcases,
v. de Four-Gives
P15,000.00
Leon, will the
132
(Art.
Yu 1652)
Asuncion As vs. to CA,the lessee,
238 SCRA the 602).latter The shall Court still therefore,
compel
but BPI Ubaldo no
must cause
todo executeof
so action
by a deed
way for of
of ejectment
absolute
judicial
fruits
redemption.
lessee through
may sublet In extraordinary
thethe present
thing for and unforeseen
problem,
leased. (Art. the1650, 30- SCRA death building
Corporation
each. The a) car
- from
722.) ofinstead
onthe wasthelesseeof
grounda right
delivered ofof
extinguish first
torepeated
E, and refusal,
theEdelays paid
lease will your
be
ruled responsible
in a unanimous to the lessor
en banc the rents;
decision that bring
the arising
saleanswer
rescission in hisANSWER:
underthe
favor, "repeated
based Explain.
Article on
1191delays".
hisCivil right Code. of firstThe
fortuitous
day
Civil period
Code) events.
for the While
exercise the drought
by Betty brought
of her in
the the
amount
SUGGESTED
agreement? payment be of the ofsame?
P75.000.00 rentals. to The
D. Lessdelay than in onethe
to
In the knowledge of the lessor every usurpation be No. refusal. a)
Thethereafter,
death Will a of the the action prosper? Explain. b)
right
about
righttheof ofgiven
by first
thecase,
redemption "Elrefusalwhen had is
Nino" Joel not assigned
phenomenon
not even founded
begun the toupon
may lease
run law
payment
month requires of the judicial thelessee
rentals action,
car is was will
minimal and notmere
stolen extinguish
and from notice
cannot E's
or untoward
contract
ALTERNATIVE
to Ernie,
classified but the act
on
ANSWER: a
same
as extraordinary, which
quasi-delictual
was any done
it isthird not person
relationship
without may
the If
the
of Ubaldo
SUGGESTED lease
rescission had
agreement,
ANSWER:is given
insufficient Remigio
since
if it is an
lease
resisted. option is not
The to
because
Yes, Mark no
is entitled notice
to ora reduction in writing
of the rent. His of considered
thewassale
loss more
be
garage made with thenobasis fault of on an E's ejectment
part and was suit. neverThe
have committed may be openly preparing to purchase
No, the the
Redemption;
covered
consent
as
thanunforeseen.
appears1/2 of the
by
tooffruits
haveLegal;
the
Victor.
and
principles
beenthe The
Formalities
given
loss was
of
to human
assignment
due her
to anby
relations
is void.
Lydia.
extraordinary and
personal
SUGGESTED
law
delay also
recovered. wasaction in
ANSWER:
provides
dueIs Eto to
character
the compel
that
legally heavy slight
bound Ubaldo
andpaperworktothe
breach pay to right execute
is not
involved
the said is
a
carry
(2002)
Adela
and unjustout
and upon
Beth
enrichment the
are thing
co-owners
(Art. leased; ofetthat advise
aphenomenon
parcel the Yes, deed
the
ofis transmissible
ground E isfor legally
of absolute
to
rescission bound the saleto heirs.
paywill thenot balance
prosper. of
However,
unforeseen there
fortuitous is
event. no The "El 19,
indication Nino" seq. inCivil the in processing
unpaid balance theof checks. (Song
P75.000.00? It wouldExplain Fo (Heirs
&
be otherwise Co, your of
vs,
owner
land.
writtenBeth the need
sold theitfor her all repairs;
undivided to
share return of and the
the P75,000.00.
with According to The vs.ownership
Ang Yu v.Phils.
Court of the393).
of car sold was
Code).
extraordinary Hence
contract
because only
of is lease action
uncommon; between that
it does will Victor
not prosper
occur Dimaculangan
Hawaiian
if the lease
answer. Phil Co.,
contract IAC,
47stated 170 SCRA821),
that inAppeals
Delay
the payment in(238the
thing
regularity.
property
according
Joel, that leased
And to upon
neither
to the Xandro, the
could
Supreme
subleasing termination
the
who Court parties
thepromptly have of
premises the
foreseen
is an notified "action lease its Option
acquired
SCRA
is fulfillment to
602) Buy;
by
,
of the E Expired
from
right
the obligation of the first momentrefusal
(Art. days 1169,ofCivil it
is was
not
Right of Repurchase of rentals within the first five the
occurrence.
just
Adela
for as
damages
prohibited. he
of Thereceived
the event should
Hence,sale
in it,
and
a the
besaveforeseeable
furnished
propersubleasewhat byhas
forum
the parties
the
of been
latter
for
Joel
solost
the
with a (2001)
On January
that delivered
based
Code) on
is a to
groundhim.
contract 1, 1980, Having
to butrescind,is Nestor
acquired
predicated
only leased
if ownership,
time on isthe
the of
the lessee
(1993)
On January can change 2, deed 1980,the time A for and his B planting,
entered or refraininto from
a themonth, time is of the essence or that the lessee
or
copy impaired
purpose."
Conrad of
or is the
valid.by the
Inavoid lapse
view of
theof ofthe
absolutetime orsale.
To foregoing, by ordinary fishpond
E
the time provisions
When
Victor bears
essence. ofofMario
the risk
human offor
Otherwise, the a loss
period
relationsthe of court of three
the
and, thing
may therefore, years
under
refuse
planting, take steps to loss. be foreseeable, will
Perfected be in delay
Sale; Acceptance if he falls to pay within the
contract
wear
Sublease;
Xandro
canthefile
and and
place whereby
tear
Sublessee;
presented
the of thecase orAof the
occurrence, sold
from asto
Liability
deed
rescissionan
wellB inevitable
a the
for
as parcel
andregistration, ofcause;
damages
magnitude land
of the its at aviolation
the
the
agreed
monthly
doctrine
rescission
period ifrental
of
is res of
predicated
there
without isof P1,000.00,
perit
need a Earnest
domino.
ofon
just demand.
Money with
quasi-delict.
cause [Articles
forIn the
an
the
this
for
A
b)
theleased
In and
responsible
(2000)
adverse effects
registerhis
case in
house for
of
ofofconsideration
the
to the
B
deeds with
rescission, deterioration
fortuitousa event
condition
also of
must
that
discuss
notified P10.000.00.
be
the or loss
capable
leased
the
Adela of
of
premises
rights
of the
being
the A (2002)
Bert
option
1496.
Secondly,
fixing offers
ofto
1497, a theto
purchase
period. buy
Civil
right Simeon’s
the
Code).
of same
first property
during
refusal the
implies under period
that
only against Joel and Ernie but he cannot case he can judicially eject the tenant on the
LEASE
reserving
predicted.
thing
shall
and
sale, be Since
leased,
used
obligations
enclosing toforthe himself
unless exact place,
residential
aof copyhethe
the the
proves
purposes right
parties.
of
exact
the that
only. to Bitrepurchase
time,
(2%)
deed
and
took the exact
withplace
subleased the
the following
of the
the offerlease terms
of for
thethe andprice
person conditions:
of
in P500,000.00.
whose P1
favor million
After
that
include
magnitude Conrad.
of the adverse effects of the "El Nino" ground of lack of payment of the price
the
SUGGESTED
without
house
notice. same. his Because
ANSWER:
who fault.
to CHowever, used it asAdela they
a warehouse ignored were
for fabrics.the friends,
Upon
notices. learning no A purchase
the
c)
right expiration
No. was price,
Resolution
given of 10%the
must of option
three-year
a
conform money,
contract with the
period,
will the balance
Mario
not same be
Rescissionwas
period of theagreed
lease necessarily upon requires
for the therepurchase
return of the thing of stipulated
payable
ALTERNATIVE in after
cash
ANSWER: a upondemand the toclearance
vacate, (Article of the
this,
year been
A demanded paid;
later,Hence, that Cthestop
Xandro using the
filed a house
petition as a warehouse,
forof the allowed
permitted
terms and Nestor
for a
conditions to
slight remain
or casual in
as those given to the the
breach, leased but
to the
the
lessor. judgment granting rescission the 1673(2),
Extinguishment;
No,
property the New
action
of allCivil
Totalwill Code),
illegal Distruction;
not prosper.
occupants. Leased The The Property
lessee's
option
c)
but Cproperty.
partition
contract ignoredforeclose
should ofthe
also1)
demand,
the Until
the
order when
Achattel
property.
the then
lessee must
filedtomortgage
an
Upon A exercise
action
vacate on
for return
receipt
and ejectment his
the of only
the premises
offeree. for In atsuch the
this same
substantial
case, rental
however, rate.
and On
fundamental
Remigio June 15,
was
right
things of repurchase?
sold, also in 2)
case If A
of fails
default to redeem
of two the
or (1993)
right
A
money
1983, is of the
is first
Nestor refusal
owner
promptly of
paid
tendered does aand not
lot Simeon
the goon so
amount far
which
clears asthe to
he
of
against
leased C,
premises who toraised
the the
lessor.
summons, Adela immediately tendered the offering defense
However, that
since there
the is no privity of breach as would defeat
only P4.5 Million instead of P5 the very object of
property
more within
installments, the allowable
with no period,
further actionwhat give
property him
constructed
P500,000.00
parties in the
of power
a
illegal
to
making building
Mario to
the dictate
occupantsand in the on
in
demanded
agreement. the
nototal lessor
time cost
that at the of
all.
the
contract between him and
requisite amount for the redemption. Xandro Million. (Zepeda v.
would
against you
the advise
purchaser. B to do for his better price
However,
latter
CA, 216
at
P10,000,000.00. which
execute
SCRA when the
a
293]
Of
Bert
deedlatter
. that
The of should
amount
tenders absolute
delay of sell
B
payment
ten sale (10)) of
of the
the
days
contends that Adela lost her right of
protection?
redemption after the expiration of 30 days is balance
fishpond
not such andina ask his Simeon
favor. Mario
substantial for therefused, deed on the
from her receipt of the notice of the sale given ground that Nestor no longer had an option to
by him. buy the fishpond.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
ratify ifthe
failure
And ofthe the
sale proceeds
airline
contract, to takeof thenthe
extra Jesus
foreclosure
precautions
shall be are
despite
liable
negate
All
allowing
notthosesale contracts
the because other were general
theyexecutedindicate
partner
by Bthat while
to ownership
bind
A wasthe
police
pay
1898.
a the
sufficient
(Article Civil
warning
loantoCode).
in full,that the an bank attempt cannot to hijackrun after the confined
will
units
overwas violate
the
corporation neverdue the tocorporation
intended illness
to transferinto the
thelaw Makati
principle
distributor. Medical that
plane
CX forwould
the deficiency.
be made, was negligence on the Center.
only theRule board on the of validity
directors andmay binding bindeffect the
Termination;
part of the ANSWER:
ALTERNATIVE Effect
airline. of Being
Death negligent,
of Agent it is liable Agency;
of each coupled
corporation. of the with above an contracts
interest upon A the
While
for theas
(1997)
Stating deatha general
briefly rule
of the passenger.thesis thetoprincipal
support
The defenseisyournotof (2001)
Richard sold
SUGGESTED
principal. ANSWER:
Explain a large your parcel
answers, of land in Cebu to
liable
answer for
to the
each contract
of the
force majeure is not tenable since the shooting entered
following cases,into by
will his
the The
3)
Leo No, agency
for for P100 the couched
same
million reasons
in
payable general
given in in terms
annual the
agent
death
incident -in(c)case
wouldof theannot agent
agent have acted
end anin
happened his own
agency? had namethe comprised
Answer
installments to Numberonlyoveracts a2 period
above.
of administration
of ten years,(Art. but
without
SUGGESTED
airline taken disclosing
ANSWER: stepshis that principal,
could have suchprevented
rule does 1877,
title will Civil remainCode). The withlease Richard contract until on thethe
Yes.
not The
apply
ALTERNATIVE death
if
ANSWER: the of an
contractagent extinguishes
involves a the
thing Conveyance
Manila parcel of ais Partner’s
not valid,
purchase price is fully paid. To enable Leo to Share
not Dissolution
enforceable and
the hijacker from boarding the plane.
Under Article
agency,
belonging bytoexpressthe 1763 of theIn Civil
provision
principal. of par.
such Code,3, Art
case, the (1998)
the Dielle,
not
pay the Karlo
bindingprice, andupon UnaA.are
Richard For
gavegeneralB him topartners
a lease
power-of- in a
the
common
1919
principal of the carrier
is Civil
liable isunder
Code. not required
Article 1883 to observe
of the merchandising
property to C, firm.
for more
attorney authorizing him to subdivide the Having than contributed
one (1) year,equal A
extraordinary
ALTERNATIVE
Code.ANSWER: diligence
contractinispreventing injuryon to amounts to the capital, they also agree on
Civil
CX would not be
its passengers
his PARTNERSHIP
behalf (Sy-juco
The
onliable
account for of
v. Sy-juco
deemed made
thethe bank willful
40
loan.acts
Phil. 634
CX's or The
must
equal
attorney
proceeds
provide
distribution
(Art.
B
1878.
to Richard,
with
land, sell the individual lots, and deliver the
lease of the Caloocan
of
Civil
a special
City property
whatever
toCode).
be applied
power
net profit to D is
to theis
of
property would also not
negligence of other passengers or of strangers. realized be liable on the valid and binding upon A. Since the lease
years isof
[1920]).
mortgage. purchaseper price.fiscalFive period. years After two Richard
later,
Composition
The common ofSince
Partnerships;
carrier, DY in didthat not
Spouses; specify
case,Corporations that
is required heto SUGGESTED
(1994) without
operation, a fixed term, it is understood to be
revoked thehowever, power ofUna conveys and her took whole
ANSWER:
was acting forthe CXdiligence
in the transaction with the attorney over
exercise only of a good father The revocation
from
of a interest month
in the is
topartnershipnot valid.
month, sinceto The
the power
Justine, rental
without of
is
bank, DY in effect acted in his own name. In the sale
1. knowledge of the
Is the subdivision
partnership lots himself. Is the
1)
family; Can hence, a husbandthe failure andofwife theformairline a limited
to take the attorney
payable given
monthly andto
(Art. the1687,
consent buyer Civil
of isCode).
Dielle irrevocable
and Karlo.
the caseprecautions
of Rural revocation
The
2. Whatsaleare of valid
the or not?ofWhy?
Quezon
thecoupled
rights City (5%)
parcel
Justine, to Eshould is not
partnership
EXTRA to engage Bank in in ofreal
friskingBombon the v.
estate CA, 212
business,
passengers dissolved?
because it12%] is with an ifinterest:
any, the
SCRA,
with
and the (1992)
by wife leaving , the
being Supreme
thata limited Court,
matterpartner? under the valid
she and
desire not
to
to the security agency is the means of fulfilling the obligation binding
participate uponin theA. B needed
management a
same
2) Can facts,two ruled
corporations that
personnel of the airport, does not constitute a "in organize
order to abind
general the special
of the power
partnership of attorney
and
the buyer to pay the price of the land in theto validly
distribution sell the
of a
principal
partnership
breach of by that under
a duty mortgagetheasCivil
so toonmake real
Codethe property
ofairline
the land
net (Arts.
profit
(Article 1927, of1877 CC).and
P360.000.00 1878,
In other which Civilwas
words, Code). realized
a bilateral The
executed
Philippines? by an
3) agent,
Can a it corporation
must upon its
and face
an SUGGESTED
sale
after
contract of
herthe ANSWER:
land
purchase
(contract at a
of
to very
Una's
buy good
andinterest?price
sell the does
[3%]land) not is
liable. Besides, the use of irresistible force by (a) B's sublease to C is valid. Although the
purport
individual to form
be made,
a general signed partnership?
and sealed in the Agency;
cure
dependent the Guarantee
defect
on the of Commission
the
agency. contract arising from
the hijackers was farce majeure that could not original period of two years for the lease
it will bindof Powers (2004)
As
lack an of
agent, the AL Agentwas given a guarantee
AGENCY
SUGGESTED
name of the ANSWER:principal, otherwise, of authority
have
1) a) been
Yes. prevented
The Civil even
Code by the observance
prohibits a husband contract has expired, the lease
the agent only.diligence. It is not enough merely that the (1994)
Prime
commission, Realty Corporation
in addition to continued
appointed his regular Nestorwith
extraordinary
and
Agency wife from constituting a universal acquiescence of the lessor during the third
agent was in fact authorized to make the the exclusive
commission, agent
after in
he the soldsale of
20 lots
units of its
of
partnership.
(2003)
Jo-Ann asked Since
her close
mortgage, if he, has not acted in the name ofa limited
friend, partnership
Aissa, to buy is year.
newly Hence,
refrigeratorsdeveloped to there
a has
subdivision.
customer, been HT Primean
Hotel. implied
Realty
The
not
some
the a groceries
universal
principal. Neither partnership,
for her a supermarket.
is itinordinarily
the husband sufficientand renewal
told Nestor
customer, ofhowever,
the he
that contract
could
failednot ofto lease.
pay forUnder
collect orthe receive Art.
units
wife
Was there
that maythevalidly
in a mortgage
nominate formcontract one.agent
the b)entered
Yes. While
describes into 1650
sold. of
payments AL’s thefrom Civil
principal, theCode,buyers.
DRBI, thedemanded
lesseewas
Nestor may sublet
able
from to
AL
spouses
between as
himself cannot
Jo-Ann acting andenter
by Aissa?
virtue into
In theof aaaffirmative,
universal
power of the
sell
paymentthing
ten lots leased,
for to Jesus
the in whole
customer’sand to oraccountability.
in part,the
collect when down the
AL
partnership,
SUGGESTED
what was ifit?
attorney,
ANSWER:
inof they
Explain.
fact can
the 5% enter has
agent intoacted a limited
in the
his contract
objected,of
payments onforlease said
the does
lots.not
ground He
thatcontain
did hisnot jobany turn
wasexpress
over
only
Appointment
Yes, there was
partnership or abe Sub-Agent
nominate
members contract.
thereof On
(CIR u. SUGGESTED
prohibition. ANSWER: [Articles 1650, 1670 Civil Code).
own name and has set his own hand and seal the
to collections
sell and not toto Primecollect Realty.payment Who shall for bear
units
(1999)
X appoints
assumption
SUGGESTED
Suter, Ythat
etal.ANSWER:
27 as
SCRA his
Aissa agentaccepted
152). to sellthe hisrequest
products of a) The
SUGGESTED
A's actiongeneral
ANSWER: rule is that a person dealing
to the
2) Cebu a)mortgage.
No, A There
corporation is but
nois principle
managed ofbylaw its the
bought
(b) C's byfor
lossassignment
for the rescission
Nestor's ofinquire
should
defalcation,
customer.the sublease Is AL not
Prime
’stoprosper
DRealty
objection
is not
on
in
her close City.
friend Can Y appoint
Jo-Ann to a sub-agent
some groceries and if with
SUGGESTED
this an
ground.agent
ANSWER: must into the authority
by or Jesus?
valid? Can Art. DRBI1649, collect fromCivil himCode, or not?
for which
board
he does,
her atheperson
ofindirectors.
what can
are
supermarket, If become
the
thecorporation liable
effects
what theyon of asuch
were
enteredreal to valid.
No,that
of Under
AL's objection
agent. In theispresent notofvalidthe case, andif DRBI Jesus can the
did
estate
become mortgage
a partner, which she
co-partners never would executed
have in
the Reason.
lessee (5%) assign the lease without the
cannot
SUGGESTED
appointment?
into was a nominateANSWER: (5%) contract of Agency. collect
not inquire from intoAL. Since ALhe accepted
that authority, is liable for a
person
Yes,
power
Article the or
1868 bymake
toagent attorney
of may thethe in corporation
New fact".
appoint Civila Code substituteparty
provides orto consent loss of
guarantee
the due the
commission, lessor, in
to Nestor's unless addition
defalcation thereto ishisa
unless
sub-agent
that by theifcontract
transactions theanprincipal
in irregular
of agency has not
manner
a personprohibited
since the
binds stipulation
regular 1900,
Article to the
commission, Civilcontrary. he agreed
Code Theretoisin
governs, nowhich
bear such
the
him from
partners doing
are not so, but
agents
himself to render some service or to do he shall
subject beto responsible
the control stipulation
risk of in
collection the contract.
and to
case the developer corporation bears the loss. pay If the
the law
principal prohibits the
(1)
for when
the
ALTERNATIVE
of the acts
Boardhe ofwas
ANSWER: the
of not given the
substitute:
Directors. But power to Art. 1900 of
assignment Civilof
thethe Code leaseprovides:
without "So the far as
consent third of
something in representation or aoncorporation
behalf of proceeds sale on the same terms agreed
(2)
Yes,
may when
appoint they
enter he
one; was
entered
into given
a into
joint such
a power,
nominate
venture withbut without
contract
another of persons
the
upon lessor,
with are all
theconcerned,
the more
purchaser an
would act
(Article theis deemed
assignment
1907, Civilto
another, with the consent or authority of the
designating
lease to service
corporation asthein longthe
person, absence
as the andof athe
nature relation
person
of theof Agency;
have
of a been
Code) Realperformed
sublease Estate Mortgage
within the without
be prohibited scope of such the
latter.
appointed
principal andwas agentnotoriously
venture is in line with the business authorized between incompetent
them (Article or (2004)
CX
agent's executed
consent. authority, a
This is a violation special
if suchpower actthe
of ofwithin
is contract attorney the
and
b) As charter.
insolvent.
1644, a general
New Civil rule &
Code). a Co.,corporation may not
by its
General
Agency
form 106).
Phil. aAgency
vs.
general
(Tuason
vs. Special
Sale partnership
Inc. v. Bolano,
Agency with another even
95 terms
COMMON CARRIERS
authorizing
is a valid of ground
and toif mortgage
the DYpower
the agenthishas
toforsecure a loanby
of attorney,
rescission
property
in factcovered
fromA.asany
exceeded
bank
written,
by the
(1992)
(2000)
A foreign
as principal
manufacturer
corporation or an individual appointed of computers
B as because his and agenta owner’sofcertificate
limits his authority of title. according
In securing to a loan an
granting
Philippine distributor
corporation him
may not general boundand
beentered into
by aunlimited
persons contractwho Extraordinary
However,
from MBank,
understanding if Jesus DY Diligence
made
did not
between due
the inquiry
specify
principal thatandand hehewas was
the
management
whereby
are neither the distributor
over
directors A's properties,
agreed
nor officers to stating
orderof1,000 that
the not (2000)
Despite
acting informed
fora warning
CXbyinthe the from
principal the Prime
transaction police that
Realty
with said an
of
agent.
However,
A withholds
units of the
corporation. a corporation
no power from
manufacturer's may computers
Bformanda that general the
every attempt
the limits to of hijack
Nestor's a PAL
bank. Is CX liable for the bank loan? Why or plane
authority. will be
Prime made
Realty in
partnership
agent
month and may towith execute
resell another
themsuchincorporation
acts as heormay
the Philippines an
at the
shall following
SUGGESTED bear the
ANSWER: week,
loss.
why not? Justify your answer. (5%) the airline did not take
Accordingly,
individual
consider B leased
provided
appropriate.
the manufacturer's theA'sfollowing
suggested parcel
pricesof land
conditions
plus 10%. in CX
extrais liable
b) precautions, for the such
Considering bank that loan
as Prime because
frisking Realty he
of
Manila
are 1)
met: to The
C for Articles
four (4)
All unsold units at the end of the year shall be of Incorporation
years at P60,000.00 of the authorized
passengers, only
Corporation the mortgage
for "told"fear of on his
beingthat
Nestor property
accused
he could to
of
per
boughtcorporation
year,back payable by the expressly
annually
manufacturer in advance. allows
at the same the secure
violating
not receive thehuman loan
or contracted
collect rights.payments,Two by DY. days If later,
it appears DY later thatan
corporation to enter
price they were ordered. The manufacturer into partnerships; defaults
armed and
hijacker fails didto pay
attempt
the limitation does not appear in his written the loan,
to CX
hijack is aliable
PAL
B
shallleased
2) hold The another
the Articles parcel
distributor of
of free land
Partnership of A
and harmless must in to pay.toHowever,
flight
authority Cebu.
or power hisofliability
Although he was
attorney. issubdued
limited
In this to by the
the
case,
Caloocan
from provide
SUGGESTED
any City
thatto
ANSWER:
claim forallDdefects
without
partners in a
will
the fixedmanage
units. termIs the
theat extent
other
insofar of
passengers,
as the
Jesus, valuehe
who ofis the
managed a said
to
third fireproperty.
person a shotis
The contract is one of agency, not sale. The notion of sale is
P3,000.00
partnership,
agreement per
one month
forand sale payable
theyor shall
agency?monthly.
negated by the following indicia: (1) the price is fixed by the
be jointly
(5%) and ALTERNATIVE
which
concerned, hit and ANSWER:
killed
Nestor's a CX
female
acts is not
passenger.
of personally
collecting The
3)
severally In liable;
case 10%of and a foreign corporation, it SUGGESTED ANSWER:
liable
victim'stoparents
payments the bank
sued the loan because
airline forperformedit was
breach of
The airlineis is deemed
liable. toInhave casebeen
manufacturer with the mark-up constituting the commission;
B sold
(2) must
the to E bea third
manufacturer licensed parcel
reacquires to theof
do land
unsold belonging
business
units in the
at exactly to
the of death of a
contracted
contract,
within the and byscopeDY in
the his his
airline
of personal
raised
authority capacity.
the defense Only
{Article of
A located
same Philippines.
price; and in (3) Quezon warrantyCity for the forunitsthreewas (3) bornetimesby the passenger,
However, if common
Jesus was carriers
aware are
of the presumed
limitation to
the
force
1900. property
majeure.
Civil of Is
Code). CXthe is liable.
airline
Hence, Hence,
liable
the or while
not?
principal (2%)CXis
manufacturer.
c) No.
the price The
A that foregoing
corporation
was listed indiciamay in the notinventory
be a general by A have
of been at power
Nestor's fault oras to have
an agent, acted negligently,
andpropertyPrime
has
liable. authorized the mortgage on his
partner
to B. because the principle of mutual unless
Realty they
Corporation prove does that they observed
to secure the loan of DY,not the bank cannot sue
agency in general partnership extraordinary diligence (Article 1756, Civil
CX to collect the loan in case DY defaults
Code). The
thereon. The bank can only foreclose the
property of CX.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Quasi-Contracts;
another
Distinguish
rate
1. A contract
in the
ALTERNATIVE theANSWER:
absence
remaining
usufructNegotiorium
of antichresis of frompartners
suchwas Gestio
law
commodatum
entered
may
violates not intodissolve
theand between
principle
state
the
Tito
A should
payment mustof be also
the hired pay
loan. as forHowever,
Secretary.
the ordinary theTheloan expenses
decision
was not forpaid
the
No,
(1992)
In because
partnership,
these
mutuality
Oliviafear
whether
of mayand ofofbe an obligation
Peter.
contracts.
the
constituted
reprisals dissolution
Under from over which
Article by
consumable
lawless consists
Patricia
2132 of and
elements in
goods.
the Mutuum;
of
time.
To
for whom
hiring
on Athe A prevails
month
useshouldInterests
andafter
because
a preservation
deliver
4 years, the
it may is
bag ofan
the
ofthe money?
shares
actthing of
the delivery
Priscilla
[2%]
New
besieging
SUGGESTED Civilwithout
ALTERNATIVE Code,
his
ANSWER: of barangay,
ANSWER: a by determinate
the a consent
contract thing
of
X abandonedof Pauline shall be
antichresis or
his of (2001)
Samuel
administration
Decide
stockwith
loaned. borrowed
pledged
He reasons. mustwhich
be pay P300,000.00
canfor
deemed beowned
performed
the housing
by ABC
gasoline, byloan the
or
oil,
1.
Even USUFRUCT
extinguished
Philip
the if
creditor
fishpond, is not there
fled if
valid. is
it
acquireswas
to Manila a
should right
a
the and law
be given
lost
rightleft authorizing
or to
to for a
receive person
destroyed
Europe. the SUGGESTED
the from appointed
duly
not?
greasing the ANSWER:
Reason. bank
and (5%) at 18% per
managing
spraying. He annum
partners, cannot W and interest.
ask X.for
(usufructuary)
increase
SUGGESTED
without
fruits of the
Seeking in
an
that interest
ANSWER:
fault to enjoy
immovable
the offishrate,
thethe the
debtor,
of
in property
his
the stipulation
and of
debtor,
fishpond another
before
with iswere
still
he
the B would have
SUGGESTED
However,
reimbursement ANSWER: no
the promissory
because right he to note claim
has the the
contained money.a
obligation
2.
with
void
has No,
thebecause
incurred Philip
obligationin has
there
delay. of no right
preserving
(Art. is no
1262. tocorresponding
petition
its
Civil form
Code) for
and The
Article
B cannotshares 1990
be of stock
hired,of cannot
the
because Civil be
in deemed
Code
case of aowned
is tienot in
obligation
ready to apply Y,
for harvest, them whotoisthe in payment
the business of the of to proviso
return that thetheidentical bank "reserves thing tothe theright bailor. to
dissolution
Commodatum
substance.
stipulation because
(Art.
to decrease
562. hethe
Civil does
Code)interest not due havewhen the by
the ABC
applicable.
decision upon The default
of law
the of
refersMNO.
managing to They
another have
partners, to
thing be
the
interest, and thereafter to the principal
managing fishponds on a commission basis, Under Article 1941 of the Civil Code, the of his increase interest within the limits allowed by
standing
(2005)
On
Before the heof
otheraleftpartnerhand, (Art. of1813
COMMODATUM toNCC). is the aa
the law
SUGGESTED
credit.
took reduces
possession ANSWER: offor
the rate
the Riyadh
property, interest. work as
harvested foreclosed.
received
deadlock
law," By
bailee is must inUnder
virtue
obliged be ofArticle
substitution
todecided
such 2088
pay proviso,forof the
by of
theover
the the
partners
ordinaryCivil
object the
2. Peter must
contract
mechanic, by Pedro pay left
which taxes
one his and
of the charges
Adventure parties upon
van(bailor) the
with Code, the creditor cannot appropriate the
DEPOSIT
fish and sold the entire harvest to Z. deposited
owning
c) Does
objections
expenses the and
Pedro
of
for is
controlling
Samuel,
the predicated
haveand
use the interest.
the bank upon
right
preservation In something
tothis
increased retrieve
ofcase,
the
Dissolution
land
delivers
Tito, andtoof
with bear
the Partnership;
another the necessary
understanding (bailee) Termination expenses
something
that theWlatter for
not The
things Mayor given of
by Manila
way cannot invoke. Article
Thereafter, Y borrowed money from and exchanged.
the
the
interest
thing opposition
van loaned.even
rate of
before
periodicallyX of and pledge.
the Yuntil
prevails
lapse And
it of even
because
one
reached if48%
year? theY
(1993)
A, B use
preservation
consumable and itCso and formed
that repair
the alatterpartnership
which he may
may use for forthe
deduct 719 of the Civil Code which requires the
could for one yearnewfor his of it
personal ora parties have stipulated that ABC becomes the
ALTERNATIVE
owns
Explain. the (2%)ANSWER:
controlling Interest (Art. 1801, Civil
used the
purpose money
of contracting to buy with supplies
the Government fish fry
in ownerper annum. Finally, Samuel filed an action
Compensation;
from
certain
family the time
use fruits.
whileand Bank
(Art,
return
Pedro Loan
2135, it.
works NCC) in Riyadh. He did No,
finder Pedro
Obligations
Code). to
of does
deposit
of
the a not
Partner;
shares the have
in thing the
Industrial
case MNOright
with Partner to
the
defaults retrieve
Mayor on
and
the to prepare
construction theofthe fishpond
one ofa itsbank for the
bridges. next On crop.June questioning the right of the bank to increase
(1997)
In
not usufruct
order
SUGGESTED
tell Tito the
tothat
ANSWER: usufructuary
secure brakes gets
of the the
loan,
vanright XYZ
were to the
only
(2001)
Joe
the van
when
and
loan, Rudybefore
the
such the a
previous
formed
stipulation lapse
possessor
partnership
is ofvoid one isfor year.
unknown.
to operate
being The a
a) The What istothe Juridical relation between thethisinterest rate upAntichresis
to 48%.the Thebag bank raised
3.
30,
the 1992,
use
Corporation
faulty. amount
and
Tito after theofthe
surrendered
had thevan
completion
fruits principal
of of
the
itstuned the
depositsame,and
upproject,interest
while
certificate,
and inX Pledge;
the
the In
parties
a car
SUGGESTED
pactum case
are
repair Mortgage;,shop
a must
mutually
ANSWER:
commissorium. in return
bound
Quezon byCity.theJoe terms of money
providedof the
and Y be
must
bridge during
was specified X's
turned absence?
inof
over writing,
by b)
the Uponotherwise
partners thethe returnthe
to usethe the the defense that the Central Bank of that the
commodatum,
with
brakes a maturity
repaired. the datebailee
He spent 01 only a acquires
September
total amount 1997 to (1996)
of The
In
to
contract.
the action
capital province,
bank Underwill
whileas prosper.
the aRudy
the farmer
previous
Civil While
Code,couple
contributed it
thereis borrowed
possessor true
arelabor
his and
only
of X to
antichresis
Government. the barangay,
will be
On but void.
Augustwhat(Art. are2134, the obligations
NCC) Philippines had already suspended the Usury
of
the the
bank.
P15,000.00. thing The loanedcorporation
After using its30,
notdefaulted fruits. 1992,on for the D,two
due a money
the
known
3 interest
instances from ceilings
owner the
when(Arts.localthe set
719 merchant.
by the
and
bailor 1990.
could Usury
ToCivilguarantee
Law
validly Code.) are
ask
of Y to Xof
Usufruct
supplier may as regards
be
materials constituted the the
used contract
in on
vehicle
the the with
whole
project Z? or
sued c) a
and
Law.
no
payment,
industry.
longerWill they theforce,Onaction one side
prosper of their
or not?shop, Why? Joe
repayment
weeks,
Upon X's Tito of
return,
the
discovered loan, prompting
that the
itobligations
consumed of bank tooto for
X opened
the
(5%) 1684 and operated a coffee shop, while PD
return in ofleft the the
it has
thing Torrens been
loaned Title
heldeven of
that their
before on
SUGGESTED
Two
part
A forof months
the
collectionANSWER:
fruits ofwhat
later, the are
Pedro
ofcertificate.
the the
thing.
indebtedness returned
(Art. to to
564. him. the
Civil A No.
land with side, the
andmerchant,
CB theCircular for him
No. to905 hold
aremerely until
encash
much
4.
as No.
regards
Philippines
Code).
moved
questioned
the
fuel.
Art.
toItto
deposit
To
2136
Y's
and
may
dismiss
the
make
asked
above even
the
up
specifically
contract Tito
action
for
with
be to
complaint
XYZ
the
provides
W? return
constituted
taken against
Corporation
expenses,
d) What
by the
that
the him van.
he
the
legal
over
the
on SUGGESTED
allow
they
expiration
other
a pay contracting
the SURETY
of
Rudy
loan. parties
period.
put
Is there
up
to a
a These
car
stipulate
- entered
a)
accessories
contract
freely
when:
on
of
ofbank (1) precarium contract was (Article
leased it ANSWER:
debtor
effects
Unfortunately,
consumables
the ground will Annabelle.
cannot re-acquire
result
while
like
that ifwas
money
it being the
X expressly
the driven
(Alunan
enjoyment
ABC by
v. ratifies
Tito,
partnership
Veloso,
the
Y's
the52
store.
Joe, the
any adjustment
pledge,
May
capitalist
b) ifcontract
they
in[5%]
engage
partner,
theof urgently
mortgage,
interest
in
mayneeds
such
engage
rate c) on
separate
ain
contract loanthe
as being
immovable a case
without of pactum
first commissorium.
having totally The
paid 1947);
businesses? (2) the
Why? bailor the thing
management
SUGGESTED
van was ANSWER:
accidentally and what would abecargo the Recovery
restaurant ofbusiness Deficiency because itdois not the same
that
bankis
Phil.
SUGGESTED
what
545)
disagrees.
he
.ANSWER:
liable On
owes
the
for What
the
other
the is damaged
debt. hand,
your
creditor.
D opinion?
replied by
in commodatum,
However,
that ABC
it
or forbearance
of
is (Article
antichresis, 1946); of
or money
and d) (3) ifnone butthe ofnot
bailee theauthorize
above?
commits
We
obligations
(a)
a)
truck The
Who
consumable
partnershipsubmit
without shallof
juridical X that
in
hisbear
goods
was favor
relation
maythe
fault.
dissolved there of Y?
beissubject isExplain
P15,000.00
upon no
that completion
ofthereof pactum
all
the spent your
quasi-
only of v. (1997)
AB
kind
a CA, sold
SUGGESTED
Explain. of 238 to
business SCRA
ANSWER:CD a
the
2O motor
partnership
[1994]]) vehicle
. To say
is for otherwise
engaged and in
in.
potestative on"negotiorum
the part of the creditor to acts of ingratitude (Article 1948). Not one by
unilateral increase of the interest rate of
commissorium
answers.
contract
for
when
the the the
project of
repair for of
purpose here.
whichthe of van? Deposits
the
purpose gestio".
Explain.
contract the of partnership
money
Y
is(2%) isdothe
not so
in 1.
The
will
On
one
the
No, fact
the
party
a other
violate
consideration
situations
conveyance
that
without Tito
the
of
hand,
is had
the
present
by
principle
P120,000.00
Rudy a partner
leased
other's
in may
this the
of to
consentnot
case.
ofbeengage
thing hispaid
mutuality (PNB
whole
loaned inof
in
in
banksorder
SUGGESTED
"gestor"
ALTERNATIVE
consumption and orto exempt
similar
ANSWER:
"officious
ANSWER:
of the him
institutions
object, manager" from
as arethe
when his
and it obligation
governed X merely
is is the by interest
to
anyAnnabelle
contracts
twelve
SUGGESTEDother in awould
monthly
under
ANSWER: partnership
business Article not
equal justify
1308
unless doesofthe not
installments
their the demand of Code.
Civil
partnership itselffor
of
was
As formed. Will you dismiss complaint
TitoJudge,
under
the must Art.
provisions
ANOTHER
"owner" ANSWER:
(Art.
I2135,
bear would
onthesimple
2144,
not dismiss
P15,000.00
NCC,
Civil The
loans
Code). debtor the 1980.
expenses
(Art. complaint
cannot for the
re- To
Civil None
dissolve
the of
bereturn
P10,000,00,
expressly the
valid,the above.
partnership
of the
therefore,
permitseach There
installment
him thing
any
to inis the
do no
change pledge
absence
loaned
sobeingbecause ofduebecause
of
before
interest
asand an
an
for exhibition.
against
against A
A. Ifbecause
you (Art.
were 1936,
A thestill
is Civil
Judge?liableCode) as adepositor
general
1.
(b) There
van.Y Generally,
acquire
Code). mustThe the are
render several
extraordinary
enjoyment
relationship an account points
unless
between of of
expenses
Peter distinction
theoperations
his for the must
compels only
agreement.
expiration
payable movable
be of
mutually
on (Art.
theproperty
the 1813.
period.
15th
agreed
industrial partner he has to devote his full time may
Civil
Under
day upon be
Code)
of pledged
Article
byeach the 1942
month (Art.
parties of
partner
between
preservation for
usufruct his
ofisXthe pro and
thing rata share
commodatum.
loaned are of 1/3
paid Usufruct
by(Art.
the (Dizon2094. NCC). If at all, there was a pledge CDof .the
Olivia
and a to
deliver bank enter
to again
one
the of
price thecreditor
he enjoyment
received and of
debtor.
for the
the SUGGESTED
To secure ANSWER: the promissory note, (a)
thethe
to Civil
starting Code,
v,January
business
Magsaysay, leasing
1997.
of the 57 of the
partnership
SCRA thing25O loaned
[Art.
[1974]) to
1789, a
In
1816, C.the C.J. isDissolution ofof a contract,
partnership 2. Justine or cannot interfere or participate in the
is
bailor,
sale
caused
constituted
property.
Basically
ADDITIONAL
ofhe
testamentary
In the
all
Code). by
this elements
being
this
case
PLEDGE
harvested
thehowever,
ANSWER:
abymatter
the owner
termination
succession,
law,
of compensation
fishof
Tito
by the
orofshould
by
thing
compensation
(Art,
theare
2145, loaned.
particular
prescription
bear
Civil
present
by the
as
the given
paper
executed
Commodatum & Mutuum
third
CC).
management
Title,
motor
person
present
as
adocument
a consent
vehicle,
chattel
movable
not member
problem,
or (b)
and
constituting
mortgage
theofdebtor
byadministration
itself,
furnished
the
butbailornot
the
onhousehold
a suretyof to of
Torrens
not subject
having
thebond
of
the
land
the bailee, his will only
to the entitleincrease in hold
interest,
Where
undertaking the security
specified for the debt is also money partnership business or affairs. She may,
(Art.
in X1933.
expenses
(c) this casebecause
must Civil
pay
(BPI Code).
the
vs. loanCA,in
he theSCRA
Usufruct
incurred
obtained
232 agreement
creates
the
by
302).Y expenses
from adoes
real
W Mutuum;
which
ALTERNATIVE
issued
bailee
the increasethe
by title
liable Interests
ANSWER:
Philam
for represents.
thelife,
is void. lossCD of the failed thing to loaned.
pay more
Pledge
deposited
not
right
without
because extinguish
to first
the Xin fruits
a bank,
obligations,
informing
must itPedro
of answer
another'sis notwhich illegal
property,
about
for must
it. for the
while
Neither
obligations be however,
As
There a two
Commodatum
(2002)
Carlos
than rule,
issues receive
no
(2) Pedro mortgage
Dino the
does
installments, netnot
for profits
because
(a) ABhave tothe
collection
went nowhich right
deed
after onUnathe to
or a
(1994)
In 1982,
creditor
liquidated
commodatum to Steve
encash
during borrowed
creates the time
thepersons "winding
only P400.000.00
deposit
a purely certificates
up" interest from
ofUnder
personal the would
retrieve
contract
(1993)
A, uponbut have
the
was
request, otherwise
van
executedbefore
loaned in been
the
his the lapseentitled.
manner
passenger of one In
required
Jeepney this
year.
was the repair
contracted with shown
third to be inurgent.
the promissory
surety note
he was for a loan,
only able with to no agreement
obtain three-
Danny,
to
(Chupayus.
partnership
right to thecollateralized
CA,
use debtor's
et al., overdue
affairs
another's G.R by
(Articles a pledge
78519,
property, obligation.
1829 and ofand
September shares
requires 26,of
1830. a by case,
Article
to B law P120.000
to 1946
for
enable aon of (Art.
the
mortgage
B 1813,
tototalCode
bring Civil
(Arts.provides
his Code)
2085
sick that
to "the
2092,
Article
of the
Effect
1989).
1949
owner
of of Death
of the2150,
(Art. Civil
of Partner by
Code,
Civil bailor
Code), generally on interest,
fourths
Dissolution (3/4) of of
which
the
Partnership
Dino defaulted,
amount stillwife and
due from
and(b)
stock
par.
(d) 1-a,
Express
stipulation
bears theCivil toConcepcion
Code).
ratification
enable
extraordinary the Corporation
bailee X
expenses provides
to "make for worth
the
use"
the bailor
NCC;
Paniqui.
damages cannot
2124 to
Tarlac
caused demand
2131, to by NCC).
the the
Dino return
Philippine
on of
his the thing
General
(Carlos’)
Deposit;
(1997)
Stating briefly Exchange the thesis to owing
(1995) from CD. AB seeks your advice on how
P800,000,00. In 1983, because ofsupport
the economic your Pauline,
There
loaned istillno Patricia
contract
after and
of Priscilla
antichresis formed
because noa
effects
of the of
preservation
(1992)
X and
answer
fruitsan of
Y each
to staged
express
(Arts.
the
of athing
the
agency
1939&
daring
following
and1940, and
should
bank
X
cases,
isrefund
Civil liable
robberywill
Code).
the
to
the
in
SUGGESTED
Hospital
priceless
he might,
business if at all,the
inANSWER:
Manila
Michaelangelo
partnership
for
recoverexpiration
treatment.
for
painting
thethe ofOn
deficiency.the
onthe
purpose
period
whichway
How of
crisis,
pay
Usufruct the the value
commissions of the shares
habitually pledged
received fell by to Yes,
back he
right
stipulated,to can
the or recover
fruits
after ofthe theleavingdeficiency.
property
accomplishment hiswas The givenaction
of and to
the
said
Manila
death
only
expensesatmaybe
-
P100,000.00. 10:30
of
if onerous
a
made AMpartner
Can inwhile
by the
Danny
commodatum
thebailee; morning
terminate
demand
Provided, of
the
that
is
a Dino
would
engaging
of AB
tois
you Paniqui,
liable
in
todamages
go
counsel
neon
after
onafterAB?the
advertising
the
promissory
suretyfor for
bond a
wife
term
note at
of
the
five
the
always
The gestor
regular bailee or as manager
essentially
businessbrings (Art. 2149,
the gratuitous
same to the Civil
(Arts. Code).
1933
attention &of usethe creditor
hospital,
awards for which (Art.
people 2132
the to NCC).
commodatum
stopped
Carlos thethe cannot has
passenger
damaged been be
SUGGESTED
partnership?
Steve
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:day,
ANSWER:
surrender the and otherescaped shares with their
worth (5)
taken years.
constituted. to mean Pauline a
However, waiver subsequently
if of inhis the right assigned
to
meantime, demand to
he
1935,
the
a)
TheNo.
Yes.
loot bailorCivil
of Bilateral
The
P15,000.00 death
two Code).
before (2)of contracts
a
spent The
incurring
partner
bags, foreach contract
them,
cannot
the willrepair
bag constituting
except
be
terminateofchanged
the
containing only Jeepney.
painting,
vanif SUGGESTED
the B stopped
with interests for them
for and
both allowed
awards. them
What
P700,000.00? Philip
A contract
payment
should her interest
for of simple
the in
whole the
loan partnership.
was
debt, entered
The When
amount into
usufruct
the repair
unilaterally.
partnership,
should
P50,000,00. beis borne
consensual,
is
Aby urgent
During pledge
express
by their while
Pedro. that
isprovision
onlycommodatum
reply
Where
flight a
to of cannot
subsidiary
the
elude par.bailoris
5,
thebe a rates
to ride ofhave on ANSWER:
interest urgent
board, may need theofcourt
accepting thepaymentthing,
impose he frommay
with
Patricia
With
with
received
demand respect
security from
its and to
returnthe Priscilla
the
arrangement surety
or collection
temporary learned
isagreed
only (5%) ofupon
payment
use." ofby
money In the
the
proor
the
real
awaited.contract
contract,
Art. 1830
delivers
police, X toand
ofand the(perfected
theSteve
YCivil
baileeis
enteredCode. only
still by
indebted
a the delivery
non-consummable
nearby to lockedof
Danny the them
respect just to asboth in the
awards? case of ordinary
Explain. passenger
promissory
assignment,
parties
tanto,
given and which
problem, an note,
they
is
action notit decided
being
one
may of
be a to
thoseforbearance
maintaineddissolve
mentioned for theofa
subject
Obligations
for
thing
house theso of matter
A,of then
amount
that theathereof).
Partner
oflatter
P400,000.00
working may However,
inuse hisdespite
it forboth
Quezon involve
the
a certain fall money,
City Jeepneys plying Pedro their route. allowed As Tito B was to crossing
use the
partnership
above. thedebt. before
legal Thus, the expiration
rate of interest of its
for term
having as
the
time X,enjoyment
(1992)
W,
in the
office. Yvalue
and and return
From ZA's
of byhouse,
organized
the a the
stocksperson of the
aidentical
X general
pledged.
and property
Y partnership
thing,a box
stole the
deficiency
van
of Bamban, for
ALTERNATIVE
defaulted
theyAsaid
the and
one
had ANTICHRESIS
there year.
ANSWER:
on
B
agreement the
with an payment
respect
and
he
was an onrush of Lahar from
unproductive
heto
should
of
be
12%passenger
the
cannot
bound
will
ask business
apply.
for
by
the Jeepney
another,
b)
with No. W
contract cash anddiffering
Danny's X as
perfected right only
industrial as as
pledgee to
partners the is extent
to
and sell Y and
the
and Mt
There Pinatubo,iswas aby the
contract Jeep ofthat mortgagewas loanedconstitutedto him
containing totalingisP50,000.00 a Contractwhich box of relationship
With
return respect
loaned
that of the with
toA
car the
to Philip
B damages
beforeto in the
transport
the to the
expirationpast.
the On
painting,
latter'sof the
the it wife
sick
scope
pledged
Z
A hadas been
Commodatum. ofcapitalist
such
shares keeping enjoyment
at apartners.
(Art. inpublic
1933,
deposit [jus
sale Yfruendi
Civil
for and
his keep
contributed
Code)friend in The one
the
B. was
over wrecked.
Antichresis the land. 1) There
What do is you
no call the contract
particular form
is
other
6%
Manila?
one toyear from
hand, 2) the
Is
period. unaware
B time
obliged
However, ofof the
tothe final
pay
if move
A demand
Pedro for hasof
thePatricia
up
use
urgent to
of
and
proceeds
In Jus
their
P50,000.00 utendi
as
hurry, and in
collateral
X and
Z the Y other);
for
left
contributed
bailor shall refund the extraordinary expenses the
in both
loan.
A's may
There
bedroom
P20,000.00 have isonenoas
to that
1.
required
(1995)
Olivia was
Is ownstheentered
for dissolution
the
a vast into
validity
mango by done
of a by
mortgage
plantation Patricia
which of and
real
she
d)
and
the
need Who
time Priscilla
passenger
of the ofshallfinality
van, bear
but of
he covered
may the
sensing
judgment demand expensestheir
until for
negative
judgment
forPauline
its return the
subject
showing
(1)
the of the
common matter
that
bags fund.the
whicheither
By fallthey
a the anhad
in
unanimous theimmovable
value
taken votefrom of ofor
of thea accidental
the
the Priscilla
property. Ithis without
is not the consent of or
during the contract for preservation can
jeepney?
credit
reaction
or
nois to
temporary
longer
3)
fully damage
Isuse.B properly
liable
acquisition
paid. The caused
to Aby
manage
court
of forby the
Pauline's thethe
considersstatute
due tothe
cargo
interest, of a
movable;
pledged
bank.
partners, Wand,
property and both
X was
were maybe appointed constituted
attributable to
managing over
the frauds
2211, Philip
lingering CC) in valid?
Art.
illness. Explain.
1403, Since NCC and even assuming
thing loaned provided the bailee brings the truck,
loss of as
Philip
latter granting
the aJeepney?
simultaneously
forbearancethat she the istruck
indebted
petitioned
of money. driver to Peter
for
(Eastern and
the
With
same Xtoand
consumable
pledger's
partners, fault
the Ygoods
without now
knowledge at
or fraud.any large
(Arts. On and
of574 thenowhere
specification
the &bailor1936,
contrary, to
ofbeforetheirbe
Civil
the 2.
that
in the Does
itowner
amount Philip
is covered, ofhave theany
P500.000.00 deliveryright to
of petition
she the
asks title
Peter for
to
A applied for the position of Secretary and B truck
SUGGESTED
dissolution
Shipping of are
ANSWER:
Lines, the insolvent?
partnership.
Inc. v. CA, Explain.
234 SCRA (2%) 78
found,
Code).
economic
respective Athe bag
consumable
crisis
powers containing
was
and
incurring the same, except when they are so thingthe
duties. P50.000.00
may
culprit.be the Had is now
subject- the Mutuum;
1)
the the
Thecreditor
SUGGESTED
to manage dissolution
contract Interests
ANSWER: has
the is taken of
called
plantationtheit partnership
"commodatum".
out of
and the before
coverage
apply [Art.
the
applied [1994]; ArtANSWER:
2210 and
In
claimed
the given
matter
pledgee
Mutuum
urgent offor
by anB,
been
thatvs. the
problem,
the by position
abnormal the to
deceived
Commodatum
reply Mayor
Pedro
as of Accountant
usufruct left
of
thetonotification
the Manila,
his
but Adventure
in
substance of
a and
normal
cannot
theby
or Generally,
(2004)
The
SUGGESTED
1933. the
thereof.
harvest parties Aextraordinary
expiration
Civil
to the inCode).
a contract
contract
payment ofCOMMODATUM
ofits expenses
of
ofmortgage
her loan
specified arising
ofofmoney
obligation term?
isreal ona
to
partnership.
the
van bank.
with
usufruct,
quality
(2004)
Distinguish ofTito
the the so that
subject-matter
pledged
briefly danger. the latter
shares
but (Art. may could
clearly ofbe use
used
stock, it
between for
only
he 1,
the Under
agreed occasion
Explain. that Art.
the of1830the
yearly (1)
actual
interest(c) of
use ratetheof is NCC,
the
12% thing the
and
be awaited without 1949 of the contract
property
him, by
is consensual
principal which and one of and theis parties
interest, binding until (bailor)
on her the
The
B hiring
claims of
that AAwas the decided
depository. upon by
aA, Wby and force X, dissolution
loaned by byanother
Patricia andofPriscilla law is valid and
one
for
would
Mutuum
Civil year
exhibition.
Code)haveandwhile had he
commodatum. thewas
commodatum in Riyadh.
right to ofclaim There
consumable
another was it can be
delivers
parties
indebtedness tothe
increased
despite bailee,
shallabsencehave even
if there
(bailee)
been if incurred
iswriting.
afully
something that without
would
However,
paid. Peternot
but
majeurewas
no mention
thing
SUGGESTED in opposed
may hadtheir
ANSWER: of
be by
obtained
aonly
place Y and the
consideration.
or Z.
for tobag the theofpurposemoneythe
Thus,
immediate inof did fault not
authorize
and of violate
the
Peter? bailee,
the the contract
shall
increase
Explain. be 2) of partnership
shouldered
of interest
What equallyeven
rates.
specific
Pledge consumable
third
agrees. parties
1) What soare that not
kind theboundoflattercontractmay
because use itoffor
is entered the a
In
placeMUTUUM,
contract
exhibiting,
payment of the of boxthe
perfected
not
the of money
consumingobject
obligation. was borrowed deposited
commodatum.
it.
This is not by
must B. case
the Thea though
be by the
Suppose
obligations
certain
absence
into between
Pauline
bailor
OB,
timeof are and
the
and
a and
lender,
imposed
return
written
Olivia
Philip
the bailee. would
by
it. law
instrument did
(Art. not
increase
on 1949
Peter consent
evidencing of the
by 5%
(2004)
ABC
The
consumable
amount
here. loaned
hiring of of Btowas
thing
P15,000.00 MNO decided
the P40,000
was upon
ownership spent forby byW
of which
whichand Z,
Tito the
tois thereto.
Civil
the
2)
as No, Code).
rate
amortgage B isof
consequence The notHowever,consent
interest
obliged iftoPedro
to
oftherefore
their of
bepay Pauline
paidAhad
contract? forby an
the 3) is
urgent
TY,use
Does not
the of
the and, the absence of
latter
but
The was
transferred pledged
Mayor opposed of
to 400theby shares
Manila, X and
borrower
tune up the van and to repair its brakes. Such of
onY. stock
thewho in
other XYZ
incurs Inc.
hand, the It necessary
need
borrower, for the
the passenger
law because
vehicle,
without
require Jeepney any she
aTito lawhadwould
because
specific alreadybe
authorizing in
commodatum
form assigned
delay
for such for
the
registration. But this does not affect the
was
claims
expensesagreed
obligation thatare tothat the
return if bag
thethe
extra-ordinary pledgor
ofsame money failed
expenses to
should
consumable paybe
because the her
to failure interest
of essentially
their
increase,
is
validity to contract? to
immediately
would Philip.
OB’s
gratuitous. Explain The
return
action (Art. consent
4)
be May
the
1933.justsame,of Philip
Olivia
and
Civil re-is
then
valid?
Code]
Who of the applicants should be hired by the validity of the mortgage between the parties
loan
deposited
the with
lender 10%with
in an yearly
the
equal
they are necessary for the preservation of the interest
Office
amount, of within
the
and of four
Mayor
the years,
same as not
acquirealso
SUGGESTED
Tito would
Why? necessary
the
Has TY ANSWER:
plantation
be aheldremedy because
liable before the
for the
against her assignment
theentire
extraordinary
imposition to
(Art. 2125, NCC), The creditor may compel the
partnership?
the
required
b) Whopledgee ofthe
andshall theExplain
is bear
authorized
finder and
the give
byCOMMODATUM,
the tobe
costs your
foreclose
provisions
for reasons.
theby ofonthe
van's the OB'sALTERNATIVE
him ofactionPauline's is notinterest
ANSWER: just and did valid.
not The
make debtor
him a
kind
van Thus,
SUGGESTED
shares
Civil Code.
fuel,
object
bailor, oil ofand
quality.
ANSWER:
borrowed
Pedro. stock.
same
other
In
Asusually
is
should
required,
materials
borne
MNO
while delivered
a non-consumable it was
the
the 3)
of Yes,
the rate
debtor
Interpreting
cannot
Commodatum
partner,
purpose
Explain.
SUGGESTED QUASI-CONTRACT
indebtedness
expenses. to
be
because
under
increase?
execute
Art.
required
different
ANSWER: vs.
Art,
B
shall
1830 thedevoted
Usufruct
1813
from
have
Explain.
to(1) mortgage
pay
of
that
(c) the
the for
the
been
(5%)
to mean
NCC.
thingfully
in a that
increase
which it
to paid?
public
has in
a
if
The document
one
interest of the there in
partnersorder
being to
had
no par. allow
assigned
law its registration
authorizing his interest it, as
thingbank
possession
SUGGESTED
with Tito? resists
the ownership of the
ANSWER:
Explain. theof claims
(2%) whichof
shares is B
to ABC
not and the
withMayor
transferred the of (1998)
been
(Art. loaned
1357.NCC (Art. in 1942,
relation to 2, Civil
Art. 1358.Code) NCC).
Manila.
understanding that the shares would be on the
stipulated partnership
in the to
contract. Increasing the
to the borrower who incurs the obligation to
returned
return thetovery MNO thingupon tothe the lender.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
The courts may, however, increase or moderate thehouse (2) When the
under the contract
principle refersgestio.
of negotiorum to things
He was notpertaining
liable to
indemnity according to the circumstances of as thethe burning of the house is a fortuitous event. Is B liable to A for
each case. damages under the foregoing circumstances?
Art. 2146. If the officious manager delegates to
another person all or some of his duties, he SUGGESTED ANSWER:
shall be liable for the acts of the delegate, No. B is not liable for damages, because he is
without prejudice to the direct obligation of a gestor in negotiorum gestio (Art. 2144, Civil
the latter toward the owner of the business. Code) Furthermore, B is not liable to A
The responsibility of two or more officious because Article 2147 of the Civil Code is not
managers shall be solidary, unless applicable.
management was assumed to save the thing B did not undertake risky operations which the
or business from imminent danger. owner was not accustomed to embark upon: a)
Art. 2147. The officious manager shall be he has not preferred his own interest to that of
liable for any fortuitous event: the owner; b) he has not failed to return the
(1) If he undertakes risky operations which property or business after demand by the
the owner was not accustomed to embark owner; and c) he has not assumed the
(2) If he has preferred his own interest to that
upon; management in bad faith.
of the owner; ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
(3) If he fails to return the property or He would be liable under Art. 2147 (1) of the
business after demand by the owner, Civil Code, because he used the property for
(4) If he assumed the management an operation which the operator is not
in bad faith. accustomed to, and in so doing, he exposed
Art. 2148. Except when the management was the house to increased risk, namely the
assumed to save the property or business operation of a pension house on the second
from imminent danger, the officious manager floor and stores on the first floor
(1) If he is manifestly unfit to carry on the Quasi-Contracts; Negotiorium Gestio
shall be liable for fortuitous events
(2) If by his Intervention h e prevented a more
management; (1995)
Armando owns a row of residential apartments
competent person from taking up the in San Juan, Metro Manila, which he rents out
management. to tenants. On 1 April 1991 he left for the
Art. 2149. The ratification of the management United States without appointing any
by the owner of the business produces the administrator to manage his apartments such
effects of an express agency, even if the that uncollected rentals accumulated for three
business may not have been successful. (3) years. Amparo, a niece of Armando,
Art. 2150, Although the officious management concerned with the interest of her uncle, took it
may not have been expressly ratified, the upon herself to administer the property. As a
owner of the property or business who enjoys consequence, she incurred expenses in
the advantages of the same shall be liable for collecting the rents and in some instances even
1. Whatfor
spent Juridical
necessary relation between
repairs Amparo and
to preserve the
obligations incurred in his interest, and shall
Quasi-Contracts; Negotiorium Gestio Armando,
property. if any, has resulted from Amparo's
reimburse the officious manager for the
(1993)
In September, and
necessary 1972, useful
upon declaration
expenses of martial
and rule for inthe the unilateral act of assuming the administration
Philippines. A, together with his wife and children. disappeared 2. Armando's
of What rights and obligations,
apartments? Explain.if any, does
damages which the latter may have suffered in Amparo have under the circumstances?
from
The his
same residence along
obligation
the performance of his duties. A. Mabini
shall Street.
be Ermita,
incumbent Manila. B,
upon his
immediate
him when neighbor, noticing that mysterious
the management had for disappearance
its purpose of A Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
1. Negotiorum gestio existed between
and
the his family, closedofthean
prevention doors and windows
imminent and of his house to
manifest Amparo and Armando, She voluntarily took
prevent
loss, italthough
from being burglarized.
no benefit Years passed
may withouthaveB hearing
been charge of the agency or management of the
from A and his family, B continued taking care of A's house, even
derived.
Art. 2151.
causing Evento be
minor repairs though
done at thehis houseowner did not
to preserve it. In business or property of her uncle without any
derive
1976, whenany benefit
business began toand perk upthere hasanbeen
in the area, no
enterprising power from her uncle whose property was
man. C, approached
imminent B and proposed
and manifest dangerthat they
to build
the stores
property at the neglected. She is called the gestor negotiorum
ground floor of the
or business, the house
ownerand convert
is liable its second
as under thea or
floor into officious manager, (Art. 2144, NCC)
2. It is recommended by the Committee that an
(1) The
pension
first officious
house.
paragraph B agreed of manager
to Csthe proposal has acted they
and together
preceding in spent
article, enumeration of any two (2) obligations and two
(2)
good
for The
the
provided: property
faith, and oforstores
construction business at theisground
intact,floorready and to the (2) rights as enumerated in Arts. 2145 to 2152,
be returned
conversion of theto second
the owner.floor into a pension house. While NCC, would entitle the examinee to full credit.
construction was going on, fire occurred at a nearby house. The
Art. 2152.
houses at the Theentire officious manager
block, including A's wereisburned.
personally
After the Art. 2145. The officious manager shall
liablerevolution
EDSA for contracts
in Februarywhich1986, A heand has entered
his family returnedintofrom perform his duties with all the diligence of a
with
the third
United persons,
States where theyeven though
took refuge heUpon
in 1972. acted in
learning good father of a family, and pay the damages
the
of whatname
happened of theto hisowner, and Bthere
house. A sued shallBbe
for damages, no
pleaded which through his fault or negligence may be
right
as of action
a defense between
that he merely the ofowner
took charge his and third
(1) If the owner has expressly or tacitly suffered by the owner of the property or
persons. These provisions shall not apply:
ratified the management, or business under management.
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Further,
is
may
(b)
A. no
There
Therecover
finality
defense
in
is Phoenix
noin
moral
legal
the
of diligence
damages
amount
basis toin
of
Ortillo’s
ifthe
Construction, indemnity
the selection
cause
Inc. claimbecause
offor
and
action
v. IntermediateAthe
The
thevan
is action
vehicle
Availing owned may
of thatat
by Orlando
the
or may
time
portion not
and
of ofprosper.
driven
the accident,
Section byMoral
12 Diego,
of damages
be
while
Article held
II of
liability
on
supervision
civil Article
based
moral
Appellate arising
damages.21
of (G.R.
Court the
ofIt
fromthe
employee
the
does Civil
notcrime
L-65295, Code
under
fall
March and
for
Article
under
10, the
1987. physical
negotiating
1987
owner
liable
include
the suffering,
abusiness,
Constitution
with
solidarily of
histhe
driver, downhill
John? mental
which
(5%) slope
reads;anguish,
of a city fright,
road,
judgment
humiliation
2180
coverage
148 of the
SCRA on
of and
Civil
theembarrassment
Article
353) the crime
Code has
2219is of
Supreme available
notthey
the
Courtyetfelt
Newbecome
only
heldwhen to
Civil
that The State
serious
suddenly
SUGGESTED xItxxisspeed,
gained
anxiety,
(NOTE:
ANSWER: shall equally
besmirched protect
obviously
recommended by the the
beyond
the life of the
reputation,
Committee
finalrole
those
Code.
the stewardess
primarily
of the common threatened
liable thereunder,law "last to offload clearbutchance"
them
not to if Yes.and
mother
wounded Artthe
authorized thatmay an
life
limit be ofin
feelings, held
enumeration thesolidary
the unborn
area,of any
moral and liable
two
fromshock,
bumped with
(2)conception,
obligationsaJohn,
car "xxx"
social
if it was and proven
any two (2) that rights
the asformer
enumerated could la Arts.
have
c)
B. Yes.
Ortillo
ALTERNATIVE
they did
those
doctrine Since is entitled
the
ANSWER:
subsidiarily
not civil
avail ofliable
in relation to indemnity
attorney’s
theArticle
to upgrade.
under2179 isfees
Articlean award
of thebecause
103Civil in
of he
which claims
humiliation,
in front2145 of it, confers
and
causing a civil
similarsevered personality
injury.
damage on
Although
to the
the unborn
If it can be proved that DT's pain in his arm to 2152, NCC would entitle the examinee
the
Fabricato’s
civil
CodeRevised
is merely action
complaint
Penal arising is
Code (Yumul
to mitigate a from
case
damages of
the malicious
vs. Juliano, criminal
within the 72 prevented
the
from
incapable
care and moment the
serious misfortune
of
ofcredit.) conception.
pecuniary injuries with
computation, the
to its passengers. use of
moraldue
Quasi-Contracts;
to full Solutio Indebiti
and
Liability;
offense,
Phil.
context wrist
prosecution
94). owner
of the occasioned
who
orruleawas
contributory that
clearly by
innegligence.
the
a party the
vehicle
unfounded transfer
cannotcivil of
be diligence.
damages
Orlando was Article
may not be 2184
in theofcar
recovered theatCivil ifthe Code
theytime are states:
of the
the
(2004)
DPO went to a store to buy a pack of
Damages
luggage
(1996)
Marcial,
granted(Art.
action. was
who caused
affirmativedoes[4]
2208 not by fault
know
relief
and [11], orNCC).
how
unless negligence
tohe drive,himself on
has "In
Boy motor
proximate
incident. filed mishaps,
a
The
result casecar of the
for
the
owner owner
damages
defendant's
and is solidary
against
the wrongful liable
injured the
(1994) cigarettes worth P225.00 only. He gave the
On
has January
the
Moral
always part
Damages;
been
appealed of 5,the 1992,
driven Non-Recovery
should Nonoy
airline's
by Ben,
apply. obtained
stewardess,
Thereof
his driver
Therefore, a loan
actual
of was
it ten of act
with hisomission.
abortionist,
passengers
or driver, praying
sued if Moral
the former,
therein
Orlando damagesthat
andwho the was
Diego latter
predicated in forthe
be
vendor, RRA, a P500-peso bill. The vendor
Pl,000,000.00
damages
(2006)
Under
years
error whom may
Article
for the be
he had from
2219 recovered.
Court of his
chosen the friend
of AppealsCivil
carefully to Raffy.
Code, moral
andhave The
has uponvehicle,
ordered
damages a could
to
breach
caused pay have,
of by him:
contract by(a)the
Diego’s of use of are
P30,000.00
negligence.
carriage due
Inas
The airline may be liable formishap.
moral damages gave him the
ALTERNATIVE pack plus P375.00 change. Was
ANSWER:
promissory
damages
never
expanded figured may
the note in be did not
recovered
a vehicular
indemnity stipulate
since the any
injudgment
the payment
One cases
day, diligence,
indemnity
on recoverable
their defense, prevented
for
only the
Diego in the
death
instances
claims misfortune,
of
that
where the the xfetus,
the x carrier
x" (b)
downhill
pursuant to Art. 2219 (10)due ifof the cause there
of5, 1. a discount,
It depends. Thean oversight,
Supreme Court or in an Chapman
error in
d)
for No. liability
Interest.
specified
Marcial
the civil was Courts The
thereinridinghadcan
note review
at
become was
several the matters
back
final. onseat notofassigned
January
which are
his is as
P100.000.00
slope
guilty caused of given?as
fraud
the moral
van
or damages
bad
to gainfaith speedfor
or DPO’sthe
andmental
where that,
the
action
errors. is based on Article 21SCRA or EDSA an act the
vs, amount
Underwood (27 What
Phil would
374), be
held: "An duty,
owner
1993 but
(Hydro
enumerated
Mercedes Resourcebefore
Benz below. beingthis
vs. CA
Choose date
driven. 204 the
the along two
case became
wherein anguish
by mishap
as he and
stepped
resulted anxiety onin he
the suffered,
death
brakes of (c)
toa P50,000.00
check
passenger. the
contrary toenemies.
morals inmoralviewa of the if any,
who sitsinincase of an excess
his automobile, or in other the vehicle,
amountand of
309).
political
you
Ben. cannot
Absorbed recover in reading Nonoy, damages.
book, out humiliation
ofExplain.
Marcial spite, as
did (Cathay exemplary
acceleration, Pacific the damages,
brakes
Airways, (d)
locked,
Ltd.in P20,000.00
causing
v. Court the as
of
Defense;
suffered Dueby Diligence
DT and in MT Selection
when they were change
permits given
his driver by the
to vendor?
continue How
a violationis this of
deliberately
(2.5%)
not notice a) A defaulted
that they in
criminal were paying
offense the
approaching note, thus
resulting thein Appeals,
nominal
van by to go damages,
even faster and
and (e)
eventually P25,000.00 as
(2003)
As a
separatedresult of
from a collision
their between
guests the
and taxicab
were
SUGGESTED
situational
law the G.R.
ANSWER: No. 60501,
relationship
performance between
of March
negligent DPOto 5,
and
acts, hit1993)the
RRA
after
forcing of
physical
corner Raffy
injuries
Quezon to sue b)
Avenue, him. when
Quasi-delicts 1) What thecausing actual Where
traffic There in was
attorney's
carhas there
front error
fees. it.in
May
isExplain.
no the amount
actual
showing of
damages
that changethe be given
airlinealso
Liability;
owned
threatened
damages byAirline
Ajust
can toand be
RaffyCompany;
another
offloaded. Non-Performance
taxicab owned byof ask denominated?
B,an he
SUGGESTED had a of
ANSWER:reasonable Orlando (5%) and
opportunity Diego tocontend
observe
physical
light had injuries c) recover?
turned Immorality
yellow. 2) Ben Can
or Raffy
dishonesty
suddenly by
acted RRA.
recovered? This
fraudulently
that Mechanical
the sudden If isso,a case
what
or
malfunction of
in solutio
facts
bad should
faith,indebiti be
liability in
allegedthat
for
Obligation
X, a
for Illegal
moral (2005)
passenger of the firstthe taxicab, was Yes,
No.
them provided
and to that defects
direct the pecuniary of a of
that motor
the theloss van’s
vehicle
driver brake
suffered do
cease
d)
stepped ondamages
search
the gas e)from
to Nonoy?
Malicious
cross 3) Can Raffy
prosecution
intersection DPO
and
damages
system received
proved? is ais limitedsomething
fortuitous to the
even that
natural
and is
that, not
and due
probable
therefore, him.
Dr.
ask and
seriously
for the Mrs. Almeda
injured.
nominal X are later prominent
filed citizens
adishonesty,
criminal of therefrom,
should
not
In constitute
the be substantiated
becomes
instant fortuitous
case, and
himself if event,
duly
the proved.
responsiblesince
involuntary the for
before
SUGGESTED trafficdamages?
ANSWER: Immorality
light could 4) turnCan andred.Raffy But,asktoo for He has
consequences
they arethe obligation
exempt of the from toany
breach return
ofliability.
the the P100.00;
contract Isdriver,
thisof
the country
SUGGESTED
action
temperate against and
ANSWER: both
damages? are frequent
drivers. 5) Can travelers
Raffy abroad.
ask for presence
such
upgradingacts, of
x x such
x ofOn defects
the the other would
hand,
Almedas' have
if the been
seat
per
late.
1) se,
Raffy are
Midway not
maybooked inamong the
recover those
intersection,
the cases
amount enumerated
the traffic
of classthe otherwise,
carriage
contention
Damages whichhe
tenable?
arising willthe unjustly
parties
Explain. enrich
had
(2%) himself
foreseen at
or
May
In boththey
1996,
attorney's taxicab
fees? owners round-tripraise the defense
business of readily
by a sudden
accommodation
ALTERNATIVE detected actfrom
ANSWER: was Death
by notdiligent
of negligence, of Unborn
attended and Child
maintenance
by without
fraud the or
in
lightArticle
changed,
promissory 2219note and which
ofa P1 can
Jeepneymillion, befull the of basis
togetherpassengers of
with an could
the a expense
(2003)
If have
pregnant ofwoman
RRA.
reasonably (Art. 2154, Civil
foreseen.
passenger In
of such
atheCode)
bushas awerecase
due
tickets diligence
for the in the
Manila-Hong selection and
Kong-Manila supervision route check.
owner
bad
DPO faith,
has The
havingthe
the failure
award
duty a to toof maintain
reasonable
returnmoral to the vehicle
opportunity
damages
RRA excess into
no
action
suddenly foratcrossed
moral damages.
the rate car's The path. law specifically
A collision
interest
of their
the Pinoy drivers the tolegal
Airlines, where from
be absolved they from the
are date for
liability
holders of the
of to
safe
prevent
P100 liability
leg suffer
torunning
stand
as the anon.
trustee does
abortion
condition
act or its
under not include
following
constitutes
continuance,
Article amoral
ofvehicular
1456negligence. injures
the Civil anda
mentions
betweenorthe
judicial adulterytwo vehicles
extrajudicial or concubinage,was inevitable.
demand. Inetc. butAsnot
addition, a exemplary
Liability;
Thus, which
accident spouses damages.
Airline Company;
towould not Non-Performance
also be entitled of toan
SUGGESTED
damages
Gold Mabalos ANSWER:
to X? Class Reason. 5%
Frequent Flier cards. On person Code ordue violates
provides: the thegross criminal
If negligence
property law,is the ofowner
acquired the
any
result,
It and every
depends.
however, several If
inasmuch immoral
the jeepney
civil
as act.
action
the passengers
debtor is based
is in were
onbad a Obligation
exemplary
bus driver, (2004) damages.
may she It
and is a
her requisite
husband inclaimthe
their return flight, Pinoy Airlines upgraded of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: the automobile,
through mistake or although fraud, thepresent person obtaining therein at
seriously
quasi-delict
Marcial hemay injured.
the
not A
taxicab
be suit allfor
liable owners damages
because may based
raise
under on
the
Art. DT
faith,
their tickets is liable
to first for class damages
without which
their may
consent the
it is,and
grant
damages offorce
time
by MT
exemplary
from thewere
ofthe act
law, prominent
damages
bus was company
considered members
that
committed the
afortrustee act of
the ofofthe
death
is not
an
culpareasonably
defense
2184,
be aquiliana
NCC,
Quasi-Delict of diligence
the was
owner filed
of
attributed who aagainst
good
is in
to theMarcial
father
the vehicle ofand
non- a
is frequent
SUGGESTED
offender
of their travelers’
ANSWER:
must
unborn bechild? club
accompanied
Explain. of FX
5% by Airlines.
bad faith In
or
and, inspite of their protestations to be allowed responsible, implied trust foreitherthe civilly
benefit of the or person criminally,from
Ben,the
2)
family
not seeking
Yes,
liable
performance
(1992)
As in under
the
resultwith to
ofof hold
selection
the
theaArticlethem
driver and
obligation.
collision jointly
2220,
if supervision
by
betweenthe and
(Art.NCC severally
exercise
2201(2).
a moral
of
public theof No,
Hongkong,
done
(Morris the
in v. spouses
the
wanton,
Court couple
of cannot
were
fraudulent
Appeals, recover
assigned
G.R.or actual
seats
malevolent
No. 127957, in
to remain in the business class so that they therefor. whom
Liability; the owner Theproperty
who actwascomplained
comes. There of is,must in lossthis be
liablediligence
damages
driver; for are such injuries.
recoverable Mayinthey Marcial
case ofis breachbe held of damages in the form ofin indemnity
the they vehicle for the
could beifpassenger
due
NCC).
service the
with action
he
their against
could
bus
friends, have
and them aprevented
cargo
were based
toldtruck on
the
that Business
manner.
February
continued
case,
(2002) an Class
21,
in
implied the2001) for
presence
or which
Moreover,
constructive of the to had
owner
trust be bought
entitled
for
in such
favor
liable?contractual
contract
culpa
injury. Explain.
The where
law does orwas the
civil
not already defendant
liability
require arising
the owner acted
from to ofDoeslife the
tickets. of the the
On presence
unborn of
child. thehowever,owner
This inside
is because the
the
owned by D, Xclasssustained physical injuries and thereto, of checking
claimant in,
must first theyby
establish were his
the business
fraudulently
a crime,
supervise
Y
and died.
that they
Both orcannot
the Xdriver
they werein bad
and given faith.
raise
Yevery
were theminute defense.
passengers
priority
fully
inthat
booked,
he
upgradingof was
a
of RRA.
vehicle
unborn
told they
right
the acquiescence, TORTS & DAMAGES
length causing
child
to were moral,
time
is damage
not
upgraded
makes
that
yet
temperate,
his
to the
a third
considered
by computer
driver's
owner,
or act party a
compensatory
his to affect
person
own."First
his
Filing
3)
driving. of Separate
Nominal Only damages
when Civilthrough
Action;
may notNeed
hisbe for Reservation
recoverable
negligence, his the
in and liability
forlaw for
allows his
indemnity driver’s only negligence?
for lossthe of
bus.
because Both drivers
they are were elite at fault, and
members/holders so X andthe Z, Class
of damages. the
(Art. flight
2234, toCivil Manila Code) because Since the
(2003)
As
this
owner a result
case
has of
lost a
because collision
an Raffy
opportunity between may to the
already
prevent taxicab be
the
SUGGESTED
Explain
life
Both
Collapse
Business of (2%)
refusedof
ANSWER:
person.
Section to
Structures; The
transfer
was Last mother,
despite
Clear
overbooked. however
Chance better may
seats,
the
Gold only Mabalos heir Class and legitimatecards. Since child theyofby the Almedas
were In motor are notmishaps,
vehicle entitledthe to owner any of is these
owned
indemnified
accident
deceased
bywouldA and
Y, suedof he another
his thebe losses
liable
owners
taxicab
with
( Caedo
of with
owned
the
both award
v.the Yttflight
vehicles.
B,of recover
Khe food,
(1990)
Mr andbeverage
damages, damages
Mrs the R award
own and for the exemplary
other
a burned-out
for bodily
services injury
building, in made
damages she
First
the
embarrassed
X, a passenger at the discussions
of410 the citing first taxicab, solidarily
wasv. suffered liable with his driver if he (the
actual and compensatory damages. NOMINAL Class. Theyfrom saidthe loss
they of
had the
guests fetus in which
Business is
Thai,
a) 26
May the they
attendants,
seriously
SCRA
owner
injured. wereof the
X
bus raise
forced
later to take
filed
Chapman
thethe
a flight owner) was in the vehicle and could have, the
defense
criminal
firewall
has no of
legal which
basis. collapsed
Where the and awards destroyed for moralby
DAMAGES
Underwood are
and adjudicated
Manlangit only
v. Mauler, in order
250 that a considered
Class
shop they
occupied part should of
bydamages
the her attend
familyareinternal to.
of prevented
Mr organ.
They
and Mrsthe The
felt
S,
of
at having
theagainstfirst exercised
class the diligence
section apart from of a SCRAtheir and
good the exemplary
use ofembarrassed
due diligence, eliminated, so
action
right
560). of
In the
this boththe
plaintiff,
case, drivers.
whichfact has
that been
the violated
owner was or parents
humiliated,
which
must may
resulted
the also
award in recover
injuries
for damages
and to vexed,
said
attorney's forhowever,
couple injuries
fees and be
father
friends of a
whoANSWER:family?
were forinXtheb) May D
businesshis raise the
class. same
Upon mishap.
Is it necessary
ALTERNATIVE
invaded
absorbed by the
in defendant to reserve
maybook be right
vindicated toor that
when arethe(Caedoinflicted
stewardess v. Yu Khe Thai,
v.directlyallegedly upon 26them, SCRA e.g.,
threatened 410
to
defense?
their Marcial
Yes,
institute
ALTERNATIVEreturn c)
a Maytoreading
should
civil
ANSWER: X claim
Manila,
action be heldamoral
for theyliable.
damages damages does
demanded
Art. from
2164.
against
not the
Moraldeath
a eliminated.
[1968]). Damages of their
(Orosa & Atty daughter.
Court
Fees Mr
of and
Appeals, Mrs S had
G.R. No.
recognized,
conclusively and
show not
that he for lost the
Zthe purpose
opportunity of moral
offload
been damages
them if for
they mental
did not anguish
avail of that
the
both
written
NCC
Yes,
both thedefendants?
makes
taxicabapology
action anwill
owners from d)
owner
prosper.
before May
Pinoy of Airlines.
a
Article
he claim
motor
can fileWhen
2201 moral
vehicle
aof the
civil Ortillowarned
it 111080,
(2002) April by5,Fabricato,
contracts Mr 2000; & Mrs Morris
Inc. R to vacate
to v.supply Courtand the of
indemnifying
SUGGESTED
to prevent ANSWER:
the the
accident plaintiff throughfor any his loss suffered
negligence. attended
upgrade.
shop in the
view Thus loss
of its of
they the
gave
proximity unbornin,tobuilding
but
thechild.
during
weakened Since the
damages
went
solidarily
Civil
4) Raffy
SUGGESTED
(a)
actionNo. unheeded,
Code
for may
The from
liable
ANSWER: both
entitles
ask2231.
owner
damages the
withfor,
of defendants?
couple
the
thedriver
but
the
against bus sued
person
wouldthem? if,
most
cannot Give
Pinoy
being
Why tolikelyreasons
raiseAirlines
in the
recover the
not Appeals,
Death
install G.R.
tile Indemnity No.
materials 127957, in February
a 21, he 2001) is
by him. (Article Civil Code) there
transfer is gross
of negligence, exemplary damages
for
It all
vehicle
damages
be
defense your
depends.
breach
awarded at answers,
the
which
because If temperate
of the
contract
time may
the separate
of be the
carrier's claimingcivil
mishap,
attributed
damages,
liability action
moral
hefor
is is
could
tobased and
non-
the wall
to The
(1994)
donating
Johnny but
most toluggage
the
that
Maton's former
his can be DT
province.failed
conviction suffered
adjudged to doinpain
Ortillo
for so.their
pays
homicide in
Mr his
& Mrs
favor
50% arm
was for
of
can
and
S
Pinoy also
filed wrist. be
against
Airlines' recovered.
After Mr
breach arrival
and of (Gelus
Mrs in
contract R v. Manila,
an CA,
is 2
action
an SCRAthey
award for
recover
exemplary
have
performance
reason
on breach damages
prevented
thatofhisdamages,ofactual
contract arising
it as
by
an damages from
well
the
obligation. as the criminal
attorney's
exercise
mayIn alreadyof act,
fees.
Alitaliadue
be the contract
affirmed by price
the as
Court per agreement.
of Appeals It is
and also in
reservation is necessary. If the civil action demanded
801
recovery
for
agreed
[1961])
nominal
However,
addition, of
that ifan apology
damages
spouses
althoughthe balance thefrom
under
Almeda
the former FX’s
Article
could
would
prosecution management
suffered
be2221
prove of
payable
had as
thatthe
not a
Will
(b) the
diligence.
compensated action
Yes. D can upon
Airways v. The
Court prosper?
traffic
raise proof
of Give
conditions
the defense
Appeals reasons.
thereof
(G.R. alongbecause
No. (5%)
EDSA
with the
77011, at
his as well
result as
of indemnity
the collapse payment. of the When none
firewall. wasIn
against
any time
promissory
liability
July 24, is the
ofbased
1990) taxicab
day , when
note. oronnightaowners
an are such
airline
TEMPERATE
quasi-delict. is based toon
asDAMAGES
issues culpa
require
ticket to Civil
there
appealed Code.
periodically wasat bad (Cathay
after
all. faith
Theevery on
Pacific
10%
appellate the part increased
Airways
performance
court of v.Pinoy Sps.
until
forthcoming,
defense,
Airlines & Mr when they
and itMrs sued R the
breached rely airline
on the the for a 150843,
doctrine
contract million of
of
contractual,
the
a
may observance
passenger
be awarded or ononly
confirmed quasi-delict,
of utmost
when on athe there
care
courtand
particular is no total
flight,
finds need
that a Daniel
completed.
the indemnity
SUGGESTED Maria After
ANSWER: Luisa
for performing
deathVasquez, from G.R.
about No.
93%
P30,000.00 of the to
ALTERNATIVE
for reservation. ANSWER: pesos
last
March
FX clear
carriage,
contract,
P50,000.00. in
14,
Airlines damages.
chance
it
2003)
forOn could
committed
which Is
alleging
his appeal be the
it breach that airline
liable
has tobeen Mr forandliable
of Supreme
the Mrs
moral,
contract
paid an forS
alertness
(c) Because
contract
some ofincarriage
pecuniary X view
suffered
loss ofarises
has the
physical
been large
and thenumber
injuries,
suffered passenger
butX can of
its
No, such reservation is not necessary. Under actual
had
when the
exemplary
additional
Court, among and
it last asmoral
clear
upgraded
40%thewell damages?
chance
as
as other attorney's
DT to
and
per agreement, Why
avoidMT,
things Johnny fees. or
theover why
accident
Fabricato, not?
their
Maton
vehicles
claim
expects
amount moral running
that
cannot, damages
he would from at great against onspeed.
fly nature
the thatD, of but Marcial
day.the as
When against
case, was
the
be
Section 1 of Rule 111 of the 2000 Rules on Explain
Liability;
if only didtheybriefly.
Employer; toheeded (5%)Damage thethe caused
former’s by Employees
warning to
negligent
the
airline
proved owner in of
deliberately
with that theheoverbooked,
certainty. rendered
bus. (ArticleX can himself claim
it took
2224, oblivious
the risk objections,
moral
Civil Inc.
brought notthe
to First
complete
high Class
court's because
project
attention, they
due was tohad its
the
Criminal
5) Yes, under Procedure,
paragraph what
2, Article is 2208 “deemedof the (1997)
a)
vacateWhen
contracted
sudden
increase of the would
shop,
cessationfor an
and employer's
therefore
Business
indemnityofimposed operations. Mr
Class liability
and
by the Court Mrs
passage.for
Instead, R’sdamage,
of
to having
of
Code) the traffic
damages only
to deprive ifhazards
X proves somebyreckless reading
passengers aof book
negligence their
instituted”
Civil Code, with the criminal
considering that action
Nonoy's is only act the
or caused
prior bynegligence
However,
Fabricato,
Appeals andespite
employee
although
Inc. should
demands
the inclear
thebe
there performance
disregarded.
is
payment
fact a
that breach
of
the ofPeople
the Ifhis you
of
lastassigned
instead
of
seatthe of focusing
incarrier
case allamounting
of them his would attention
to fraud. showon up. the Forroad the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
action
omission
(d) to recover
has civil
compelled liability Raffy arising
to from
litigate the tasks,
SUGGESTED
Iwere
to contract, ofthe be
DT primary
ANSWER:
judge, and inhow MT and would
are when
of entitled would
you decideit be
to court's
actual subsidiary
the
and Zsupervising
indignity canand claim moral
the
inconvenience manner damages in which
of against
being hisboth
refused car would
10%
had
a) In
not thedecide contract
appealed favor
despite
from the Mr
its & Mrs
non-completion
appellate
,due
the diligence
Supreme
S. The
crime
In the
protect
defendants or ex interests.
given
his delicto.
problem,
because All therules
spouses
Furthermore.
the other Almeda
oncivil actions
had
attorneys'
damages a case?
damagesinAbejam
nature?
proprietor
of the
judgment. State b) Is
project. Would
your
onlyof
v. Court
Johnny a the
reasons.
for
Ortillo
of Appeals
defense
such
building
Matonrefuses of
pecuniary
orto
correct? structure
pay, losses
invoking is
was confirmed
the being driven. seat, Thus saidhepassenger
failed to prevent is entitled his Court said that and even if the issue of damages
under
booked
fees
arising Articles
may roundtrip
from be 32, 33,
awarded
death due 34
business by and
tothe a 2176
class
court
quasi-delictofwhen
ticketthe New with
it
are is in the
suffered
responsible selection
by them
for the as a
damages result of
resulting such breach.
from its
driver
to from
moralowner damages.attempting to beat the traffic light the stipulation that payment of the last amount
Liability;
Civil
Pinoy Code arewho
Airlines. no was
longer
When in ofthe
“deemed
their vehicle instituted”,
tickets were were not raisedofby
supervision the the appellant
employee bein the Court
available to the
just
also
at the and
applicable equitable.
junction to
of death
Quezon (Article aAvenue 2208(110)
passenger and causedCivil There
EDSA, total
10% shall orseemspartial
be upon to be
collapse, no if showing
completion. it should Fabricato,that
be due they
Inc.to
(1998)
A
andGallant
Damages
upgradedmay driven be
arising
to by John
filed
firstfrom and owned
separately
Death
class of
withoutby Art,and
Unborn and
their a Corolla
prosecuted
Child consent, driven of Appeals
employer butin the Court
both of Appeals in its
Code).
by
which breachMarcial, of contractwithout by a common
being a driver carrier
himself incurred
the
brings lack suit ofsuchfor pecuniary
necessary
the entire repairs loss.(Art
10%. There
Plus 2190
damages,isCivilno
by itsher
owner,
independently
(1991)
On v. Gina,
third collided
even1764,
month somewhere
without
of pregnancy, along
any Adriatico
reservation Street. As As
in A.8,Does
findings
instances? Ortillo
increased have
SUGGESTED the a legal
damages, basisclear for his
the Supreme claim
asinRosemarie,
Zulueta
Pinoy
(Arts. Airlines
1755. Pan American
1756,breached (G.R.
the
2206 No.
contract.
and L-28589,
2219. As January
ruled
Civil regards
showing
Code)
Ortillo that
counters thethe defensepain
with inof “last
DT's
claims arm
for and chance,”
(a) wrist
moral
could
in
a case
result ofhave
of
the easily
overbooking,
accident, Gina perceived
had airline
a is
concussion. a badreckless
faith.
Subsequently. (a)
for
Court The
moral will
: employer's
damages?
not disturb liability
(2%)
the for
findings damageof the based
Court
the
1973),
Code).criminal
married
in toconduct.action
Boy, (Section known
for reasons 3, Ruleonly 111,toIbid). her, ANSWER:
the
resulted
damagessame for is not
directly tenable
Fabricato, from because
the
Inc.’s according
carrier's
unfounded acts to
suit
course
Therefore, of an spouses Almeda are b)
on No,
B. Appeals.
How
culpa theabout contention
aquiliana his underclaim of for the attorney’s
Art, accused
2176 andis2180 not
fees,
Gina
The
and brought
failure
without action
to make
informing for damages a against
Boy, reservation
went Johntoentitled
and
theArt. to
There
inclinicthe of
the SC
complained
which in
has one of. case
Hence, (De Roy
they v
are CA not L-80718,
entitled Jan
as toa
correct
having
of the because
hired
Civil adamaged
Code lawyerupon to
is primary; his
appeal
defend reputation
tohim?
while thethat Appellate
(3%)
damages.
is
of noX,doubt
criminal a that
action
known the collision is due
isabortionist,
not to John's
a waiver who negligence.
of the
for right aCan fee,Art,
to 29,
actual 1988,
philanthropist 157
damages. Sand 757) the doctrine
Moreover,
respect DT of
businessman could lastunder clear
inhavehis
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
who was
file a in
separate and independent civil action Court,
SUGGESTED
Art. 103 the court
ANSWER:
of applicableacquired
the Revised jurisdiction
Penal Code over theis
removed and expelled
Fortuitous Event; Mechanical Defects the fetus from her chance
avoided
community, isthe not alleged
and (b) injury
attorney’s to instances
by requesting
fees. covered the
based
womb, on these articles of the New Civil Code entire
subsidiary. case, criminal as well as civil. Since the
(2002) Boy learned of the abortion six (6) by Art 2190
airline
conviction staffof oftothe do Civil
homicide the Code. luggage
had been transfer appealed, as a
months later.v. Laroya GR No. 145391, August
(Casupanan matter of duty on their part. There is also no
26, 2002). there
basis to award moral damages for such breach
of contract because the facts of the problem
do not show bad faith or fraud on the part of
the airline. (Cathay Pacific v. Vazquez, 399
SCRA 207 [2003]). However, they
CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
Yes,
C.
by In
man's
based
SUGGESTEDthe case invention
on quasi-delict
ANSWER: of Peter,
No,or Benjamin
industry
if he under
were are
cannot
the
tosusceptible
be
human considered
raiserelations
the a)
for
called
The
an Whendoctrine
quasi-delict
“oncomouse” a of7-year
VICARIOUS
may in oldManila?
nonetheless
LIABILITY
boy injures Whatisprosper.will
thathis bewhich
your
The
provisions
employee,
defense
to exclusivethat the
ofownership
the
theexercise
New Civil
vehicle of due
is the
by Code
not diligence
(Articles
registered
inventor. inin the
19,
his Court
renders
him? has
Supreme
advice
playmate toa person
consistently
while playing liableruled forwith the
thatnegligence
the father's
his act that of
20 and His
selection
name.
ALTERNATIVE 21)andbecause
supervision
liability,
ANSWER: the actofcommitted
vicarious Peter would
in character, by not
theis breaks
others
(5%) Explain.
SUGGESTED
rifle. the
forANSWER:contract
whose (2%)acts may or also omission
be a tort. theThere law
The
baseda oncomouse
lessor
be onis Article
material
contrary is toabecause
2180
issue higherthe
since
morals. life
he is
Moral form which
thedamages
father
conviction of
of The
(1) parents
The
is a fiduciary
makes reciprocity
of relationship
him responsible the 7-year onprinciple
old
the boy who
between
theory inthe
that caused
private
bank
they
does
(10)
a minor
are
Peter not
in fall caused
relation
who
recoverable
would within the
to damage
result
under definition
Article
inArticle 21.
due
a subsidiary
2219 toof the
Although term
negligence.the
liability injury
international
and under
are the to depositor,
hishisplaymate
law imposing
control mayandaresupervision.
be
liable applied
utmost under in
Article
diligence our
"invention".
action
While theis based
suit Neither
will on
prosper may it
quasi-delict
against
where the defense would not be available by fall within
and
the not
registeredthe
on 219
jurisdiction.
of
Vicarious the Family
Section
Liability Code,
in managing the accounts of the depositor. The 3 in
of relation
R.A. 8293,
to Article the
ambit
In the
contract,
owner,
the ofitcase
employer.the
is term
actualthe "manufacture"
of damages
Paul,
actual since
may he
owner bewhich
of the usually
was in
recovered the
private if 2180
Intellectual
OJ wasofemployed
(2004)
dishonor the
of the Property
Civil as Code
check Code,
since they
professional
adversely provides
driver
affected exercise
of MM for
the
implies
performance
the lessee
vehicle a non-living
who of histo
is ultimately
is able mechanistic
work
liableat(See
prove the product.
the timev.The
losses
Duavit the
and
CA, parental
reciprocity,
Transit
G.R.
creditNo. busauthority
standing as follows:
owned
L-24932, over
by
of Tony, JuneMr.the
"AnyBT.
27,
hence, person
person
In
1968;
he is of
the who
the boy.
course
American
entitled isof
toa
oncomouse
incident
ALTERNATIVE
expenses
G.R. is suffered.
better
occurred,
ANSWERS:
she
No. L-29759, Maytheregarded
18, school
1989). asThea "discovery"
may be held
purpose of national,
(Tamargo
Express
his
damages work, orv. whoCourt
International,
OJ
(Singson is v.
hit domiciled,
of BPI, Inc. v.or
aAppeals,
pedestrian G.R.hasNo.
IAC, a G.R.
who real
85044, and
wasNo.
a) Yes,
which based
ALTERNATIVE
subsidiarily
car registration
(Villanueva v.on
is theANSWER:
commonbreach
liable
Domingo, not
to ofreduce
is patrimony contract.
ofNo.
because
G.R. The
man. of
difficultylessor
144274,the
in 72383,
effective
June
seriously 3, November
industrial
1992;
injured Elcano and9,establishment
1988;
v.
laterHill, Consolidated
diedG.R. in No. in aL-24803,
the hospital Bank
country
The
has "oncomouse"
the obligation toisbut a
undertake non-patentable
repairs to b)
and
May
whichWhenTrust
26, is a
1977)
a v.domestic
CA,
party G.R.
to any helper,
No. while
L-70766
convention, haggling
November
treaty or
conviction
identifying
September theofparty
14, Peter,
2004). liable because
in case of the
of accidents as a result of the accident. The victim’s heirs
invention.
make the Hence, cannot
apartment habitable be owned and exclusively
to maintain for a
9,1998).
agreement lower price
relating with to a fish
intellectual vendor in
property the
negligence of Paul under Art. 2180. sued
Vicarious the driver and the owner of the bus for
Liability
by
the its
Vicarious
lessee
Vicarious inventor.
Liability;
in the
Liability It peaceful
Public is Utility
a method and adequate for the course
rights or of
the buying
repression foodstuffs
of unfair in for case
competition, her
damages.
(1991)
Romano wasIs there
bumped a presumption
by a minivan this
owned by
treatment
(2000)
Silvestre
enjoyment
(2001)
After working of
leased the a
of the overtime human
car from
lease for the or animal
Avis-Rent-A-Car
up entire body
duration
to midnight, by
Co. employer's
to which the family,
Philippines slaps is thealso fish vendor,
a party, If or
that
the Mr. BT,
Solomon the owner,
School of had been
Practical negligent?
Arts (SSPA).
surgery
at
of the
the Mactan or
contract therapy
International
(Articleand
Alberto, an executive of an insurance company extends diagnostic
Airport.
1654. NCC). No methods
sooner
Since causing
SUGGESTED her
ANSWER:
reciprocal to fallrightsand to sustain
nationals injuries.
of the
so,
The is
minivan the presumption absolute or not?
practiced
had
drovehe
there awas on
driven
company willfulsaid the bodies
breach
vehicle car to are
outside not the
ofa contract
favorite patentable
airport
by the
Videoke
SUGGESTED
Yes,
Explain. there
Philippines (2%) isbyawas
ANSWER:
law,
driven by ofPeter,
presumption
shall behelper negligence
entitled
a student
to slapped
benefits on
Explain.
Employer
assistant (5%)of
whose the domestic
assignment was who
to cleansuch the
under
when,
lessor,
bar Sec.
due
wherethe to 22his
lessee
he of the
had IPC.drinks
negligence,
issome
entitled hemoral
to bumped
and damages
sang an
someFX the
to part
thevendor. of
extent Under the
necessary employer. to 2180, However,
give effect to any
a fish Article par. 5 of of the
the
taxi
underowned
songs Article
with and
3220,
friends driven
toNCC. by
She Victor,
"unwind". is At also 2:00 a.m., school
causing
entitled presumption
provision
Civil
passageways
Code, of is rebuttable. daily
such convention,
"employers
one
shall
Thehour
be
liability
liable
before
treaty for
and
the or
damage
to drove
he actualhome, todamages,thebut latter
ine.doing in loss
g. the heamount
so, ofbumped income, ofa one
employerhour after regular
reciprocal shall law, cease in by
classes,
when to
addition
in exchange
they theprove rights thatfor
to
b) Yes, based on contract and/or on tort. The damages
free tuition. Petercaused was able oftheir employees
to adrive and
P100,000.00.
medical
tricycle, expenses,
resulting Victor etc.,
in the filed
which death an of
she action
can itsprove for
driver. at they
whichobserved any helpersowner the diligence
of an intellectual goodthe fatherschool
property of
lessor willfully breached his obligations under household
vehicle after persuading acting
damage the within the
regular scopedriver, of
damages
the trial.
May the against
insurance both
company Silvestre
be heldand liable Avis,for a family
right
their isthe to prevent
otherwise
assigned tasks, entitled
even
(Article
by
thoughthis Act. 2180,(n)"
the
Civil
former To
Article
SUGGESTED
based on 1654.
ANSWER: NCC,
quasi-delict. hence,Avis he
filed isa liable
motion for
to When
Paul,
Code). to turnemployee over causes
the wheel damageto him due to his
(Peter).
the negligent act of Alberto? Why? illustrate:
are not engaged the Philippines
in any business may or refrain
industry." from
The insurance
SUGGESTED
breach
dismiss of
the ANSWER:
contract. company
complaint Foragainst
suchis not it liable
breach, on the the because
lessee
ground own
Romano negligence
suffered serious while physicalperforming injuries. his The own
not c)imposing
A carpenter a requirement in ofthe
aatconstructionlocal juris incorporation
The
when
may
of
motion
the to
recover
failure
tomoral
accident dismiss
state aoccurred,
should be
damages
cause ofunder
granted,
Alberto
action. Art.was AVIS
2220
Resolve duties,
accident there
happened arises night when company only tantumone
or establishment
is accidentally of
hitsvehiclethe a employer
local domicile
right for the
is
of not
acting
the the the
NCC,
motion.
employer
within and the
(3%) actual of assigned
Silvestre;
damageshence, tasks
that she there
of may his ALTERNATIVE
presumption
headlight of ANSWER:
that
the the was foot is ofnegligent,
functioning his co-
and
no right
employment. of action against AVIS under Article protection
Reciprocity
worker
rebuttable with of
principle
a industrial
hammer. cannot property
be
Explain. applied(2%) rights in our of
have suffered on account thereof. And since Peter onlyANSWER:
SUGGESTED had a student driver's permit. Asthe
only by proof of observance of a
2180 of the foreign
jurisdiction nationals
because the(citizens
Philippines of is Canada,
a party
It
the isconduct
true of Civil
that theunder Code.
lessor Art.was Not
2180 being
contrary(par. the 5), diligence
to consequence,
The owner of aofgood Peterthe father
was of a family
convicted
construction in(Metro
company. the
prosper?
Switzerland,
to the TRIPS b) Will U.S.) your if answer
the SCRA be
thethe
countries same
of if,
said
employer,
employers
morals, he are AVIS
mayliable has be
also noheld
for duty
damagesliable to caused
supervise
for quasi- by Manila
criminal
Article case. agreement
Transit
2180, v. CA, 223and
Thereafter,
paragraph 4 Romano
states
WTO.
521 sued
that
The
[1993];
"thefor
Silvestre.
their Neither has AVIS the duty to observe Paul,
foreign
principle the regular
nationals
involved refrain
is the from
most-favored imposing nation said
delict.employees
The lessee who may were recover acting
moralwithin damages the Delsan
damages
owners Transport
and againstmanagers Linesof
Peter v,an
and C&tA
SSPA. Construction,
establishmenta) Will the or
driver,
Likewise,
requirement
clause which was
if the
on2003). impleaded
Filipino driver
thecitizens.
is against as
is
principle party ofdefendant
charged and for
due
scope
under diligence
of theirin
Article 2219 the (10)
assigned selection intasks. of its
relation customers.
However,to Article the 412
action SCRA
enterprise
Peter for 524
damages
to are
drive likewise
the Peter
minivan and
responsible
withoutSSPAnon- afor regular
Besides,
mere fact it was
that given
Alberto in the
was problem
using a that
servicethe allowingin a The
convicted
discrimination. criminal protectioncase for affordedcriminal to
21, and allANSWER: actual damages which she may damages
license. c)caused
IsBT the by their ofemployees in the the
ALTERNATIVE
c)
causeYes,
vehicle ofof thethe the action
accident
employer shouldwas at prosper
the
the negligence
time forof both
the driver's
of negligence,
intellectual isexercise
property subsidiarily due
protection liablediligence for
in thein
have
The suffered
motion by
shouldreason be of denied.
such conductUnder underthe service
the selection of the andbranches in which the latter are
actual and damages arising from the criminal act.
Silvestre.
injurious
Articles
Public Service 20 moral
9,accident andLaw, 21. damages.
does
the registered
In fact, mean
not necessarily owner
even
ofbe a
Philippines also applies to other members of
employed
Vicarious orLiability
onPeter the and occasion of theirissue to
exemplary
that he was damagesoperating and attorney's
the vehicle fees
within can the the supervision
WTO. Thus, of it is not Paul areciprocity
really material
public utility is liable for the damages suffered d) A
(2006)
Arturo 15-year
functions."
resolved
be soldin his old
inprivate high
this case?
Pajero school
tointernational
Benjamin for P1 student stabs
Million.
claimed
scope of by his Rosa,
employment.on the authority In theCastilex of Magbanua
Industrial his principle law that
by third persons through use of such (2) classmate
Therebut
SUGGESTED
Benjamin is no
ANSWER:
took the who
legal
vehicle is
reason his
but did rival
whynot for
"oncomouse"
register a girl
the
vs.
Corp.IAC v. (137
Vasquez SCRA 328),SCRA393
Jr (321 considering [1999]) that, . as
the applies, the most-favored nation clause
public utility. Hence, the cause of action is A.
whileYes.
cannot
sale they
with It
be will
thewere prosper
protected
Land going (Art,
out 2180)
under
Transportation of
the thelaw. because
classroom
Office.Among Heat
given,
Supreme the Courtlessor's held willful
that and illegal
notwithstanding act of under
the after public international law.
based in law, the Public Service Law. the
those
allowed time
their
excluded
his he last
son droveclass.
from
Carlos, thea vehicle,
Explain.
patent
minor (2%)he
protection
who did was
not not
are
have
disconnecting
fact that the employee the water didand some electric
overtime services
work performing
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
his assigned tasks asto provided for
INTELLECTUAL
resulted in Rosa's
for the company, the former was, nevertheless, PROPERTY
suffering a nervous a
The
by
driver's
"plant school,
Art.
license,
varieties
2180.
teacher
With
to or drive
and animal
respect
the car
administrator
to SSPA,
buyas
breeds, pan
it is in
theyde
or
not
2:00
engaged
a.
breakdown. m.) was
Art.own
inANSWER:
his
outside
20 NCC affairsand
normal working
Art, 21, out
or carrying NCCa exercise special parental authority. (Art. 2180,a
sal in
essentially a bakery. On
biological the way, Carlos
process driving
for the
liable
reckless for theofacts of Peter because the latter
Quasi-Delict;
hours.
ALTERNATIVE
authorize
Intellectual purpose
personal
Mismanagement
theCreationawardwhen of he
of Depositor’s
damages
went to for such
a restaurant
Account par. 7 inmanner,
production relation sideswiped
plants
to Art. and218 Dennis,
animals"
and Art. then 219riding
(Section of
The
(2006) insurance company is liable if Alberto was was
a not
bicycle.
22.4 an employee
As a result,Property
Intellectual as
he suffered held by
serious
Code, Supreme
R.A. physicalNo.
willful
(2004)
Dr.2:00
at ALX and is a
a.m. illegal
scientist
after conduct.
cominghonored out for
from work work. relatedThe the Family Code)
negligent
Tony bought in the operation
a genome
Ford of the car and
Expedition a the Court
injuries. in Filamer
Dennis filedChristian
a criminal Institute
problemvs.
complaint againstCA.
to the
time of thehuman accident (also project. from Among car
his 8293).
e) What The "oncomouse"
defense, if any,
Peter
in isthe
belongs
available
to a
is not
to
special
them?
car
dealer was assigned
in Muntinlupa to him for
City. stem the benefit
As payment, of the
Tony (2%)(190
1. Can
Carlos SCRA
an essentially
SUGGESTED Dennis
for 485). file
reckless an independent
imprudence
ANSWER:biological process for the civil
resulting action in
pioneering efforts concern cell research category
against of
Carlos students and who
his render
father service
Benjamin to the
for
insurance
issued company, and even though he was serious
The defenseof physical that injuries.
might be It available
is a real to them is
for the acure check drawn against
of Alzheimer’s disease. his current Under production
B. I would maintain
animals.
the same answer
invention
because
not
accountwithin with the scope of
Premium Bank.his Sinceassigned he tasksa damages
has school
the
because inits
observance based
exchange
body onof quasi-delict?
for
a
cells free
good
do nottuition
father Explain.
naturallyoffees.the (2,5%)
occur family in
corporate sponsorship, he helped develop a
when the accident happened. In onehim case the
The incident
SUGGESTED breeding did of
ANSWER: not Yes, occurDennis
oncomouse while the canemployee
has file
novelty, an
good reputation, the car dealer allowed to to prevent
nature
independent but the
are damage.
the
civil and product (Last
actionindustrial of
against par.,
man's Art.
ingenuity,2180,
microbe that ate and digested oil spills in the was in thestep performance of his Carlos duty asand such his
decided
immediately
Now
sea. he leads
by drive the aSupreme home
college the Court,
vehicle
team for where
merely cancer on inventive
an Civil
intellect
father Code)
for and industry.
damages based on
application.
quasi-delict there
employee.
These are The
the incident
three occurred
requisites of at night
patentability. time,
executive
his assurance
research of
in aMSS pharmaceutical
that his checkThe
State. company team was
is sufficiently has Quasi-Delict;
being an act
Acts contrary to morals
or there
omission causing indamage
and in29, any case, to
given
funded. the When use of
the a carcompany
experimented on a mouse whose body cells another dealer car,
deposited and after
the (Sec.
(1996)
Rosa was IPC) leasing an was no
apartment indication thein city.the
problem
There without
arethat he contractual
was performing obligation.
his duties Under
as a
office
check,
replicate hours,
it andwas the executive
dishonored
bear cancerous made
on the personal
tumor. ground use
Called of Because ofno the ethical
Rent reasons Law,
Control why Dr.
her ADX
landlord and
C. In
Section
driver.
his collegethe case
1 increase
of Rule
team ofcannot
111Peter, of be if he
the 2000
given were Rules to be
exclusive on
of the carClosed."
"Account
“oncomouse”, anditmet a an
is After accident,
an investigation,
life-form useful thefor employer could
it was Criminal
medical not the rental as much as he
considered
ownership as employee,
Procedure,
over their what the
is deemed
invention. exercise of due
instituted
was
found also
that made
an liable
employee
research and it is a novel creation. Its body under
of the Art.bank 2180 of
misplaced the wanted to, nor terminate her leaseThe as use
long of
as
diligence
with
such the
geneticallyin the selection
criminal action
modified is and
only
mouse, supervision
the action
useful forof
to
Civil Code
Tony'sdo account
cells for
not naturally theledger. injury
occurThus, caused
in nature by
the but the
bank she
are cancer was paying her rent. In order to force her
peter would
recover civil
research, not be
liability a arising
outweighs material issuethe
from
considerations since act the
foror
negligent
the productoperation
erroneously assumed
of man’s of thatthehis car
intellect, account
industry by the no to
and leave the premises, the landlord stopped
conviction
omission of Peter would
punished result in a subsidiary
on by the law.
animal rights. An action based on
executive,
longer exists.
ingenuity. on the
However, ground
Later itthere turned that
is aout the
doubt car
thatwhetherwhich
Tony's Theremaking repairs apartment, and caused
liabilityare
quasi-delict wherenois legal
no the
longer defense
and ethicalwould
deemed reasons
instituted notthat be
and
caused
account
local the
propertyhas more injury
laws than was sufficient
and assigned
ethics would to allow
funds the to the
In the
available
would
may
water case
by the
befrustrate
filed
and electricity
ofemployer.
Dr.Paul,
separately ALX's since servicesbasis
claimthe
[Section of
to be
exclusive
3, Rule 111,of
Quasi-Delict
executive by the employer for the prestige of disconnected. The difficulty of living without
cover
rights
Vicarious of theexclusive check.
Liability The
ownership dealer
on any however,
life-form. subsidiary
2. Assuming
ownership
Rules of Criminal liability
over Dennis' is the
action
"oncomouse".
Procedure]. pater is familias
tenable,
Animals rule
can
are
(2005)
Under
SUGGESTED
the theANSWER:
company. lawThe on insurance
quasi-delict, aside from
company was the
held electricity andthe running water resulted in
immediately
Dr.
(2002)
Explain
Yes, ALXmay
Tony needs
the filed
file concept your
an action anagainstaction
advice:
of vicarious
Premium forBank
(1) recovery
whether
liability
for damages of Benjamin
the
in under Art.capable
property raise
2180, thedefense
of beingthat
defense ofhe
appropriated is
selectionnot liable and
and
persons
liable even who caused
though injury
the to
employee persons, was who
not Rosa's
because suffering
the vehicle a nervous
is not breakdown.
registered in She
his
possession
under Art.
reciprocity
quasi-delicts. 2176. of
Even the
principle if
(1%) Bank, vehicle
there exists
in private aagainst
contractual Tony
relationship
international for supervision
owned'. InANSWER:of the
fact, oneemployee
can own would pet dogs be or a valid
cats,
else
performing areandwithin liable under thehis following SUGGESTED
sued
name? the
Explain. landlord(2.5%) for actual and moral
between
which
law
Tony
could
SUGGESTED heANSWER:
be was the
Premium
applied terribly
in scope
our of
an actionhumiliated
jurisdiction; assigned
and and(2) ALTERNATIVE
defense.
or any other
ANSWER:
animal. If wild animals are
circumstances:
tasks when
embarrassed.
whether there theDoes accident
are Tony legalhappened
haveanda ethical
cause [Valenzuela action damages.
ofreasons Will the action prosper? Explain.
capable of being owned, with more reason
v. CA, could
against
that 253 SCRA
Premium 3O3
frustrate Bank? (1996)].
Explain.
his claim(5%) of exclusive animals technologically enhanced or
ownership over the life-form corrupted