You are on page 1of 6




6 JUNE 2010 8:00 AM – 12 NOON


This questionnaire is in TWO PARTS: Part I with ten questions (numbered I to X),
contained in 3 pages; and Part II with 9 questions numbered XI to XIX, contained in 3
pages, for a total number of 6 pages.

Begin your answer to each numbered question on a separate page; an answer to a

subquestion under the same number may be written continuously on the same page
and succeeding pages until completed.

Answer the questions directly and concisely. Do not repeat the questions. Write




Sandra is the registered owner of a parcel of land covered by TCT No. 34567 in
Ternate, Cavite. Sandra executed a notarized deed of sale over the land in favor of
Beth, who paid a fair price for the land. The deed of sale was not registered because
Sandra told Beth that the owner’s duplicate title was in the possession of the Rural Bank
of Ternate, Cavite. Sandra however promised that she would soon pay off her debt to
the bank and deliver the owner’s duplicate title to Beth. Later Beth heard reports that
Sandra was again offering the land for sale. Beth filed with the Register of Deeds a
notice of adverse claim over the land based on Sandra’s deed of sale in her favor. The
adverse claim was entered in the primary entry book but was not annotated on TCT No.
34567 because of the negligence of the Register of Deeds.
Subsequently Sandra offered for sale the land to Carla. Carla went to the
Register of Deeds to verify if the title over the land is clean. Not finding any lien or
encumbrance on TCT No. 34567, Carla bought the land by paying the fair market value
thereof. The deed of sale by Sandra in favor of Carla was registered and a new title was
issued in the name of Carla. Sandra delivered possession of the land to Carla.
Carla was later on advised in writing by Beth’s lawyer of the earlier sale to Beth.
Beth’s lawyer demands that Carla surrender the ownership and possession over the
land in favor of Beth. Carla refers the matter to the Riguera & RIguera Law Office for
legal advice. You are an associate in Riguera & Riguera and the senior partner, Manuel
Riguera, asks you to prepare a concise memorandum stating the legal issues involved
and giving your opinion on whether Carla is entitled to the ownership of the land.
Write the memorandum addressed to Atty. Riguera. In writing the memorandum,
omit the statement of facts and proceed immediately to the issues involved and your
opinion on whether Carla is entitled to the ownership of the land.


Kate, a Filipina married John, an Australian national who was domiciled in

Canada. The union was blessed with three children Joey, Jess and Jen. In 2005,
John executed a holographic will in Sydney which was not recognized as a valid
form of a will under the laws of Australia. He instituted Kate as sole heir to his estate.

Under Australian law a person may will his estate to anyone provided the instituted
heir is alive at the time of the testator’s death. The following year, John died in a
plane crash. He left an estate worth $2 million dollars. His will was presented for
probate before the Regional Trial Court of Makati. The three sons filed an
opposition to the probate on the following grounds: a) The laws of Australia do not
allow holographic wills; and b) they were deprived of their legitimes under Philippine
law. Resolve the opposition.


In 1981 Harry and Wilma, Filipino citizens, got married in Manila. In 1986 Wilma
left for the U.S.A. and was subsequently naturalized as a U.S. citizen. Later Wilma
divorced Harry and married a U.S. citizen. Harry then filed with the RTC a petition for
authority to remarry invoking the second paragraph of Article 26 of the Family Code,
which provides that where a marriage between a Filipino citizen and a foreigner is
validly celebrated and a divorce is thereafter validly obtained abroad by the alien
spouse capacitating him or her to remarry, the Filipino spouse shall likewise have
capacity to remarry under Philippine law. The Office of the Solicitor General opposed
the petition on the ground that Article 26 only applies to the situation of a mixed
marriage, that is, where the parties are a Filipino and an alien at the time of the
celebration of the marriage and not the situation where both were Filipinos at the time of
the celebration of the marriage. Should the RTC grant the petition for authority to
remarry? Explain.


Zandro and Zita, both 18 years of age, were classmates in college. After a
brief courtship, they decided to get married without the blessings of their parents.
Eager to be married soon, they concocted a plan to offer a round trip airfare to
Hongkong to the Local Civil Registrar of Manila so that they will not be required to go
through the usual process of applying for the marriage license. A few hours after
they filed their application, the license was issued by the LCR of Manila. The
couple then proceeded to the sala of Judge Tongpats, who unknown to the parties,
had just retired a day earlier. When Zandro and Zita approached Judge Tongpats,
the latter handed six copies of what purports to be a marriage contract and asked
both to sign at the bottom of the page and give their personal information to the
clerk. After the parties complied, Judge Tongpats asked for his fee and handed to
them one copy of the contract and quickly commented, “you may now kiss your
bride”. Discuss what you perceive to be the defects and/or irregularities in the
marriage of Zandro and Zita and their effects on its validity.

Luis was charged with theft. The information alleges that Luis stole the
international long distance calls belonging to PLDT by conducting International Simple
Resale (ISR), which is a method of routing and completing international long distance
calls using lines and air wave frequency which connect directly to the domestic facilities
of the country where the call is destined, effectively stealing this business from PLDT
while using its facilities. Luis filed a motion to quash the information on the ground that
international long distance calls and the business of providing telecommunication
services are not personal property which may be the subject of theft under Article 308 of
the Revised Penal Code.
a) Are international long distance calls personal property of PLDT which may be
the subject of theft? Explain.
b) Is the business of providing telecommunication services personal property
which may be the subject of theft? Explain.


Emma bought a parcel of land from Equitable-PCI Bank, which acquired the
same from Felisa, the original owner. Thereafter, Emma discovered that Felisa had
granted a right of way over the land in favor of the land of Georgina, which had no outlet

to a public highway, but the easement was not annotated when the servient estate was
registered under the Torrens system. Emma then filed a complaint for cancellation of
the right of way, on the ground that it had been extinguished by such failure to annotate.
How would you decide the controversy? Explain.


On 1 April 2010, Pedro sent a text message to his brother, Jose, a resident of
Iloilo City, “I donate my vintage Alfa Romeo sports car to u wc I know u hav long bin
wanting.” Jose texted back saying, “Tnx 4 giving d Alfa 2me! ” Pedro texted back,
“Ur welcome.” Upon his lawyer’s advice, Jose mailed a letter of acceptance of the
donation to Pedro, but it was received in Pedro’s house a day after the demise of Pedro
in a helicopter crash while campaigning for congressman. Jose filed an action against
the administrator of Pedro’s estate to compel the delivery of the Alfa Romeo. Jose
presented the text messages between Pedro and him which are stored in his cellular
phone and also the letter of acceptance. The executor opposed the claim on the
ground that the donation was void for non-compliance with the formal requirements for
validity of a donation, and hence the Alfa Romeo belongs to the heirs of Pedro. How
should the court resolve the issue of the Alfa Romeo’s ownership? Explain.


The spouses Perez filed a complaint for quieting of title and damages against
Engr. Delson wherein the Plaintiffs allege that they are the owners of the property being
occupied by Delson. The Perezes presented an OCT to prove their ownership.
Delson filed an answer with counterclaim wherein he counterclaimed that the title of the
Perezes should be nullified since they secured the OCT through fraud and deceit. The
spouses Perez filed a motion to dismiss the counterclaim on the ground that the same is
a collateral attack upon the title.
a) May a Torrens title be subject to a collateral attack? Explain.
b) Distinguish between a direct attack and an indirect or collateral attack on the
c) Should the counterclaim be dismissed? Explain.


A holographic will was presented for probate. The oppositors challenged the
validity of the will on the ground that the testatrix executed the same under undue
influence. The proponent presented two witnesses who testified that the will is in the
handwriting of the testatrix and that no undue influence was exerted upon her. The
oppositors argued that the will should not be allowed since the proponent did not
present three witnesses as provided for in Article 811 of the Civil Code.
a) Should the will be allowed? Explain.
b) Would your answer be the same if the ground of the opposition was the
forgery of the testatrix’s signature in the will? Explain.
c) What are the formal requirements for the validity of a holographic will?

Quintin died intestate survived by the following: Vince and Vina, children of a
predeceased brother of Quintin’s mother, Olivia; Jeng and Jill, children of Queenie,
who is a full blood cousin of Quintin; Jose and Jaime, full blood brothers of Quintin’s
father Oscar. Kate and Kim, nieces of Quintin by his predeceased sister Kyla;
Diana, a full blood sister of Quintin. His estate is P240,000.
(a) Determine the intestate shares of the relatives entitled to inherit from Quintin.
(b) Suppose the parents of Quintin are among the survivors, who will concur with
them in the estate of Quintin?



Tess is a legally adopted child of spouses Tim and Trish. Tess’ biological
mother, Tonet, is the full-blood sister of Tim. Tess married Tong in 1998 but they
remained childless even up the time of Tess’ death in December 2007. Prior to
Tess’ marriage to Tong, she had a common-law relationship with her business
partner and they had a daughter Tina. Upon Tess’ death, she left no will, no debts
and an estate of P360,000.00. She was survived by Tim, Trish, Tong and Tina. Who
are entitled to inherit from Tess? What are the respective intestate shares of the


Drew borrowed P500,000 from Pia, with Edwin acting as surety for the loan.
The loan was also secured by a real estate mortgage executed by Martin in favor of
Pia. On the maturity date, Edwin offered to pay Pia the P500,000 in cash. Pia asked
Edwin if Drew knew about Edwin’s offer to pay and Edwin replied that Drew did not
know of it.
a) Can Edwin compel Pia to accept payment from him? Explain.
b) Assuming that Pia refuses to accept Edwin’s payment, what is the recourse of
Edwin, if any? Explain.
c) Assume that Pia accepted Edwin’s payment. When Edwin tried to seek
reimbursement from Drew, the latter was unable to pay because of
insolvency. May Edwin foreclose upon the mortgage executed by Martin?


Demi borrowed P500,000 from Polly, “payable when able.” Four years had
lapsed from the grant of the loan and Demi has yet to pay Polly despite the latter’s
a) Polly filed a collection suit against Demi. If you were the lawyer for Demi, how
would you counter the suit filed by Polly? Explain.
b) Assuming that you were the lawyer for Polly, what action would you file in
behalf of Polly? Where would you file the suit? Explain.


Portia and Dina entered into an oral contract wherein Dina agreed to the sale of
Lot 1 to Portia for the price of P2,000,000. It turned out that at the time Portia and Dina
agreed upon the sale, Dina was not the owner of Lot 1.
a) Is the contract of sale valid? Explain.
Later on Portia asked Dina to deliver the lot to her but Dina refused since she
had obtained a better offer from Teresa. Portia filed an action for specific performance
against Dina. Dina filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that she cannot be
compelled to perform the contract since it was not in writing.
b) If you were the judge, would you grant Dina’s motion to dismiss? Explain.
Let us say that instead of filing a motion to dismiss Dina filed an answer raising
the defense that the contract of sale was unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds.
During the trial Portia’s lawyer stated that he will present Portia for the purpose of
testifying on the oral contract of sale. After Portia had finished her direct testimony, the
lawyer for Dina moved to strike out Portia’s testimony on the ground that it was in
violation of the Statute of Frauds.

c) What is the Statute of Frauds? What is the purpose of the Statute of Frauds?
d) If you were the judge, would you sustain the motion to strike out? Explain.


Ric and Pol entered into an “Agreement of Purchase and Sale” wherein Ric
bound himself to deliver a deed of absolute sale and clean title covering 2 parcels of
land to Pol upon the latter’s full payment of the purchase price of P2 million. Pol paid
only a total of P497,179.51. Ric filed an action for rescission of the Agreement which
was granted by the trial court. The court ordered the setting aside of the Agreement,
ordered Pol to return the parcels of land to Ric, and ordered Ric to return the
P497,179.51 to Pol. In his appeal, Pol contends that the Agreement cannot be
rescinded since he has already paid Ric a considerable sum and has therefore
substantially complied with his obligation. Is Pol’s contention correct? Explain.


Andres, Bong, and Carlos entered into an agreement (embodied in a public

instrument) wherein Andres and Bong would contribute land which was to be developed
into a subdivision while Carlos would contribute his technical expertise and efforts in
developing and marketing the subdivision. The land would then be sold to the public
and Andres and Bong would be entitled to 60% and Carlos 40% of the sales proceeds.
Pursuant to the agreement the land was mortgaged to a bank and the loan proceeds
were used to develop the land.
a) What is the name or the designation of the contract entered into among
Andres, Bong, and Carlos?
The subdivision project flopped because adverse claims on the lots scared away
buyers. The bank eventually foreclosed on the land. Andres and Bong sued Carlos
for the latter to bear a part of the losses.
b) Is Carlos liable to bear a part of the losses?


Peter, Andy, and Beth had an agreement wherein Peter lent his Nissan Sentra
to Andy and Beth for their free use for one week. Twelve days later, while Beth was
driving the car at the South Super Highway with due care, she met an accident in
which she had no fault. The car was a total wreck. Peter then sued Andy for payment
of the P500,000 value of the car. Andy countered that he should not be liable as the
loss of the car was due to a fortuitous event and the one actually using it was Beth.
Andy also argued that assuming he could be held liable, it should only be for the
amount of P250,000.
a) What is the name or the designation of the contract entered into among
Peter, Andy, and Beth? Explain.
b) Should Andy be held liable to Peter for the value of the car? If so, for how
much? Explain.


Acme Corporation mortgaged its building to the Bank of the Philippine
Archipelago in order to secure a loan of P50,000,000. The building was built by Delta
Builders, Inc. using material furnished by Altis Corporation. The contract price for the
construction, the price of the materials, and the 6-month’s wages of the workers of
Acme are all unpaid. Acme also has unpaid income taxes owing to the BIR. Since
Acme failed to pay the loan, the bank foreclosed on the mortgage and the building was
sold at the foreclosure sale for P40,000,000 to Value Partners, Ltd. Who would have a
right to the P40,000,000? Explain.


a) What are the kinds of damages provided for in the Civil Code? Briefly
define each.
b) The Aegis Nursing Institution, Inc. (ANI) was lambasted by Ding in a
radio broadcast as operating a diploma mill churning out ill-trained nursing graduates
who had paid their way through. ANI sued Ding for moral damages. Ding filed an
answer where he raised the defense that a juridical person is not entitled to moral
damages because it cannot experience physical suffering or wounded feelings. Is
Ding’s defense meritorious? Explain.