3.civ Suggested Answers (1990-2006), Cracked, Word

CIVIL LAW Answers to the BAR as Arranged by Topics (Year 1990-2006)
ANSWERS TO BAR
EXAMINATION QUESTIONS
IN
FORWARD
This work is not intended for sale or commerce. This work is freeware. It may be freely copied and
distributed, nevertheless, PERMISSION TO COPY from the editors is ADVISABLE to protect the
interest of the ORIGINAL SOURCES/REFERENCES of this material. It is primarily intended for
all those who desire to have a deeper understanding of the issues touched by the Philippine Bar
Examinations and its trend. It is specially intended for law students from the provinces who, very
CIVIL LAW
often, are recipients of deliberately distorted notes from other unscrupulous law schools and
students. Share to others this work and you will be richly rewarded by God in heaven. It is also
very good karma.
ARRANGED BY TOPIC
We would like to seek the indulgence of the reader for some Bar Questions which are improperly
(1990
classified under a topic and for some topics whichare
2006)
improperly or ignorantly phrased, for the
authors are just Bar Reviewees who have prepared this work while reviewing for the Bar Exams
under time constraints and within their

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Disinheritance; Ineffective; Same answer as the first Alternative Answer
Preterition
In his last will (2000) and testament, Lamberto 1) except as to distribution.
of Justice
Wilmas Jurado solved
disinherits his daughter Wilma because "she is Legacy
this problem differently. In Institution
his opinion, the
disrespectful towards me and raises her voice TOTAL
legitime of the heir who was disinherited is
talking to me", 2) omits entirely his spouse distributed among the other compulsory heirs
Elvira, 3) leaves a legacy of P100,000.00 to his in proportion to their respective legitimes, while
mistress Rosa and P50,000.00 to his driver Legitime
his share in the intestate portion. If any, is
Ernie and 4) institutes his son Baldo as his sole distributed among the other legal heirs by
SUGGESTED
heir. HowANSWER: will you distribute his estate of accretion under Article 1018 of the NCC in
The disinheritance of Wilma was ineffective
P1,000,000.00? (5%) proportion to their respective
Baldo intestate shares.
because the ground relied upon by the testator
does not constitute maltreatment under Article In sum the distribution 250,0000
shall be as follows:
125,000
919(6) of the New Civil Code. Hence, the 200,000
testamentary provisions in the will shall be 575,000
Wilma
annulled but only to the extent that her (250.000)
legitime was impaired.
The total omission of Elvira does not constitute
preterition because she is not a compulsory
heir in the direct line. Only compulsory heirs in
the direct line may be the subject of Elvira
preterition. Not having been preterited, she 250,000
125.000
will be entitled only to her legitime.
The legacy in favor of Rosa is void under Article
1028 for being in consideration of her 375.000
Ernie
adulterous relation with the testator. She is,
therefore, disqualified to receive the legacy of
100,000 pesos. The legacy of 50,000 pesos in
favor of Ernie is not inofficious not having 50,000
50.000
exceeded the free portion. Hence, he shall be
The institution of Baldo, which applies only to d) As Judge, I shallTOTAL
rule as follows: Jorge is
entitled to receive it. 500,000 from the estate
the free portion, shall be respected. In sum, entitled to receive his legitime
250,000
the estate of Lamberto will be distributed as of his wife. He was50,000
not disinherited in the will
follows: even assuming that he gave ground for
200,000
Baldo----------------- disinheritance, hence, he is still entitled to his
1,000,000
450,000 legitime. Jorge, however, cannot receive
Wilma--------------- anything from the free portion. He cannot claim
250,000 preterition as he is not a compulsory heir in the
Elvira-----------------1,000,000 direct line. There being no preterition, the
250,000 institution of the sister was valid and the only
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: Disinheritance;
right of Jorge is to claim his legitime.
Ernie-----------------
The disinheritance of Wilma was effective because disrespect of, Ineffective
Mr. (1999) has three daughters D, D-l
Palma, widower,
50,000
and raising of voice to, her father constitute maltreatment under
Article 919(6) of the New Civil Code. She is, therefore, not entitled to
and D-2. He executes a Will disinheriting D
inherit anything. Her inheritance will go to the other legal heirs. The because she married a man he did not like,
total omission of Elvira is not preterition because she is not a and instituting daughters D-1 and D-2 as his
compulsory heir in the direct line. She will receive only her legitime. heirs to his entire estate of P 1,000,000.00,
The legacy in favor of Rosa is void under Article
Upon Mr, Palma's death, how should his estate
SUGGESTED
be divided? ANSWER:
Explain. (5%)
died, he was succeeded by his surviving wife (c) X = 1/2 by representation of B C=l/2 Y = 1/4
Irma, and his legitimate unborn child. They by representation of C
divided the estate equally between them, the
child excluding the parents of Isidro. An unborn (d) X - 1/3 in his own right Y- 1/3 in his own
child is considered born for all purposes right 2 - 1/3 in his own right
favorable to it provided it is born later. The
child was considered born because, having an
intra-uterine life of more than seven months, it
lived for a few minutes after its complete
delivery. It was legitimate because it was born
within the valid marriage of the parents.
Succession is favorable to it. When the child
died, Irma inherited the share of the child.
However, the share of the child in the hands of
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Irma
If the marriageto isreserva
is subject void. troncal
Irma hasfor the
no
benefit of the relatives of the child within
successional rights with respect to Isidro but the
third
she degree
would of consanguinity
have and rights
successional who belong
with
to the line of Isidro.
respect to the child.
Heirs; Intestate Heirs;
Shares
Luis was(2003)
survived by two legitimate children,
two illegitimate children, his parents, and two
brothers. He left an estate of P1 million. Luis
died intestate. Who are his intestate heirs, and
how much is the share of each in his estate?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The intestate heirs are the two (2) legitimate
children and the two (2) illegitimate children.
In intestacy the estate of the decedent is
divided among the legitimate and illegitimate
-half
childrenthe such
share that
of each
the legitimate
share of each
Their
child. share child
illegitimate are : For each legitimate
is one
child P333,333.33 For each
illegitimate child P166,666.66
Heirs; Intestate Heirs; Reserva
(Article 983, New Civil Code; Article 176, Family
Code)
Troncal
Isidro and(1995)
Irma, Filipinos, both 18 years of age,
Intestate were passengers of Flight No. 317 of Oriental
Succession
F legitimate children: A, B, and C. B Airlines.
(1992)
had three (3) has The plane they boarded was of
(1) legitimate child X. C has two (2) legitimate
one Philippine registry. While en route from Manila
children: Y and Z. F and A rode together in a to Greece some passengers hijacked the plane,
car and perished together at the same time in held the chief pilot hostage at the cockpit and
a vehicular accident, F and A died, each of ordered him to fly instead to Libya. During the
them leaving substantial estates in intestacy. hijacking Isidro suffered a heart attack and was
on the verge of death. Since Irma was already
a) Who are the intestate heirs of F? What are their
respective fractional shares? eight months pregnant by Isidro, she pleaded
b) Who are the intestate heirs of A? What are their
to the hijackers to allow the assistant pilot to
respective fractional shares? solemnize her marriage with Isidro. Soon after
c) If B and C both predeceased F, who are the Fs marriage, Isidro expired. As the plane
heirs? What are their respective fractional
intestate landed in Libya Irma gave birth. However, the
they
shares?inherit
Do in their own right or baby by died a few minutes after complete
Explain your answer.
representation? delivery. Back in the Philippines Irma
d) If B and C both repudiated their shares in Immediately filed a claim for inheritance. The
the estate of F who are F's intestate heirs? parents of Isidro opposed her claim contending
What are their respective fractional shares? that the marriage between her and Isidro was
Do they inherit in their own right or by void ab initio on the following grounds: (a) they
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Explain your answer,
representation?
(a) B = had not given their consent to the marriage of
1/2 their
2. son;
Does (b) have
Irma thereany
wassuccessional
no marriage rights
license;
at (c)
(b) B = 1/2 Z = 1/4 by representation of C C= 1/2 the
all? solemnizing
Discuss fully.officer had no authority to
Article 982 of the Civil Code provides that perform
SUGGESTED the marriage; and, (d) the solemnizing
ANSWER:
grandchildren inherit by right of 2. Irma
officer didsucceeded
not file an to the estate
affidavit of Isidrowith
of marriage as
representation. his
the surviving spouse
proper civil to the estate of her
registrar.
legitimate child. When Isidro
spouse has in the succession the same sharebeasset aside as Mario's conjugal share from the
each of the
that of children, c) C has no share property.
community The other half, amounting to one million pesos, is her
conjugal share (net estate), and should be distributed to her
because his father is still alive hence intestate heirs. Applying the above provision of law, Michelle and
succession by representation shall not apply Jorelle, Tessie's nieces, are entitled to one-half of her conjugal
d)
(Art. 975). D inherits P30.000 which is the share of share worth one million pesos, or 500,000 pesos, while the other
his father E who predeceased T by virtue of one-half amounting to P500,000 will go to Mario, Tessie's surviving
Art. 981 on the right of representation. ArticleMichelle
spouse. 977 of andthe Civil
Jorelle areCode provides
then entitled thatpesos
to P250,000 heirs
each
who as their hereditary
repudiate share.
their share cannot be
e) F has no share because his father G
repudiated the inheritance. Under Article 977 represented.
heirs who repudiate their share may not be Intestate
represented. Succession
"T" died intestate (1997) on 1 September 1997.He was
Intestate survived by M (his mother), W (his widow), A
Intestate
Succession
Enrique died,(1998)
leaving a net hereditary estate of and and
Mr. B (his
Succession Mrs.legitimate
(1999)
Cruz, who children),
are childless,C (his grandson,
met with
P1.2 million. He is survived by his widow, three being
a serious the motor
legitimate vehicle son accident
of B), D (his with other
Mr. Cruz
legitimate children, two legitimate grandson,
at the wheel beingandthe Mrs. son Cruz of Eseated
who was a
beside him,
grandchildren sired by a legitimate child who legitimate
resulting inson theof,instant
and who death predeceased,
of Mr. Cruz. "T"),
Mrs.
predeceased him, and two recognized and
CruzF was (his grandson,
still alive being when the helpson of G,but
came a she
SUGGESTED
illegitimateANSWER:children. Distribute the estate in legitimate
also died son on who the repudiated
way to the thehospital.
inheritance The
Under
intestacy. the [5%]
theory of Concurrence, the shares from "T").
couple His distributable
acquired propertiesnet estate
worth One is Million
are as follows: A (legitimate child) = P200,000 P120.000.00. HowPesos
(P1,000,000.00) should this amount
during be
their marriage,
B (legitimate child) = P200,000 C (legitimate SUGGESTED ANSWER:
sharedare
which in intestacy
being among the surviving heirs?
child) = P200,000 D (legitimate child) = O The legal heirs
SUGGESTED ANSWER: are A, B, D, and W. C is of both
claimed by the parents
spouses
excluded in equal
by claim shares.
B whoofis both Is
still alive. the claim
D inherits of both
(predeceased] E (legitimate child of D) = (a) No, the parents is not in valid.
sets of parents
representation valid and why? (3%)
P100,000 - by right of representation F (legitimate When Mr. Cruz of E who
died, he predeceased.
was succeeded F isby his
child of D) = P100,000 - by right of representation excluded
wife and because
his parents of the
as repudiation
his intestate of G, the
heirs who
G (illegitimate child) = P100,000 - 1/2 share of the T. The
predecessor.
will shareanswer may
hisMestate beequally.
is excluded premised by the onlegitimate
His two
estate was
legitimate child H (illegitimate child) = P100,000 - theories:
children
0.5 Million ofthe Theory
pesos which of Exclusion
is his halfand the in the
share
1/2 shareANSWER:
of the legitimate child W (Widow) = Theory of Concurrence.
absolute community amounting to 1 Million
ANOTHER
P200.000 Under
Pesos. the His Theory
wife, will, of Exclusion
therefore,the legitimes
inherit O.25
Under the- theory
same share as legitimate
of Exclusion child
the free portion
of the heirs are accorded
Million Pesos and his parents will inherit them and the free0.25
(P300,000) is distributed only among the
legitimate children and is given to them in
portion
When
Million Mrs. will be
Pesos. Cruz given died, exclusively
she was tosucceeded the by
addition to their legitime. All other Intestate heirs legitimate
her parents descendants.
as her Hence
intestate under
heirs. the
They will
are entitled only to their respective legitimes. The Exclusion
inherit all Theory: of her Aestate will getconsisting
P20.000.00.ofand herP 0.5
distribution is as follows:Legitime Free Portion Total 13.333.33 (1/3 of the free
Million half share in the absolute community portion) B will get P
A [legitimate child) P150.000 + P 75,000 - P225.000 20,000.00.
and her and 0.25P13. 333.33 inheritance
Million (1/3 of the free from her
B {legitimate child) P150.000 + P150.000 - portion)
husband, D will get
or a is total P20.000.00.
of 0.750 and P13.
Million 333.33
Pesos.
P225.000 C (legitimate child) P150.000 + P 75.000 - W, the widow limited to the legitime of
In sum,
(1/3 of thethe free parents
portion) of Mr. Cruz will inherit
P225.000 D (legitimate child) 0 0 0 E (legitimate child P20.000.00 Under the Theory of
250,000 Pesos while the parents of Mrs. Cruz
of D) P 75,000 + P35.500 - P112,500 F (legitimate Concurrence. In addition to their legitimes,
child of D) P 75.000 + P 37.500 - P112,500 G will inherit 750,000 Pesos.
the heirs of A, B, D and W will be given equal
Intestate
(illegitimate child) P 75.000 0 -P 75,500 H A: P20.000.00 plus P10.000.00 (1 /4 of the free
(illegitimate child) P 75.000 0 - P 75,500 W
shares
Succession
Eugenio in died
the (2000)
free portions:
without issue, leaving several
(Widow) P150,000 0 -P150.000
B: P20,000.00
portion) plus P10.000.00 (l/4 of the free
parcels of land
C: P20,000.00 plus P10.000.00 in Bataan. He was (1/4survived
of the free by
portlon)
Antonio,
portion) his legitimate
W: P20,000.00 plus P10,000.00 (l/4 of the free brother; Martina, the
Intestate only
portion)daughter
Alternative of Answer: his Shares predeceased
in IntestacysisterT-
Succession
Tessie (1998) by her husband Mario,
died survived Mercedes;
decedent Estate: P120.000.00 Survivedchildren
and five legitimate by: M - of
and two nieces, Michelle and Jorelle, who are Joaquin, another predeceased
Mother............................None W - brother. Shortly
the legitimate children of an elder sister who after Eugenio's death,
Widow.............................P 30,000.00 Antonio
A- also died,
had predeceased her. The only property she leaving three
Son.................................P legitimate
30,000.00 B- children.
left behind was a house and lot worth two Subsequently, Martina, the children
Son.................................P30.000.00 C - Grandson of (son
Joaquin
of
million pesos, which Tessie and her husband and the children
B).............None D - Grandson of (sonAntonioof E whoexecuted
predeceasedan
had acquired with the use of Mario's savings extrajudicial settlement
T)................P 30,000.00 F - Grandson of (sontheof Gestate
who of
from his income as a doctor. How much of the Eugenio, dividing it among themselves.
repudiated the Inheritance from"T").......................None The
SUGGESTED
property orANSWER:
its value, if any, may Michelle and succeeding year, a petition to annul the
Article 1001 of the Civil Code provides, "Should brothers and
Jorelle
sisters or claim as their
their children survivehereditary
with the widowshares?
or widower,[5%]
the latter
extrajudicial
Explanation: settlement was filed by Antero, an
shall be entitled to one-half of the inheritance and the brothers and illegitimate
a) The son
mother of (M)
Antonio,
cannotwho inheritclaims
from he T is
sisters or their children to the other half." Tessie's gross estate entitled
because to
SUGGESTED ANSWER:undershare Art. in the
985 estate
the of
ascendants Eugenio. shall The
consists of a house and lot acquired during her marriage, making it defendants filed a legitimate
motionshould tochildren
dismiss on the
part of the community property. Thus, one-half of the said property
inherit
The in
motion default to of
dismiss be and
granted.
would have to
ground
b)
descendants
Article that
The Antero
992widow'sof
does is barred
share
the deceased.
not byAntero
is P30.000.00
apply. Article is 992not of
the
because
claiming Civilunder
any Code Art, from
996 it states
inheritance inheriting that iffrom
from Eugenio. theHethe is
legitimate
widow or widower
claiming brother
his share ofinhis
and thefather.
legitimate How will
children
inheritance oryou
of his
resolve
descendants
father the motion?
consisting are left, of(5%)the surviving
his father's share in the
inheritance of
Eugenio (Dela Merced v. Dela Merced, Gr No. 126707, 5M inherited by Mrs. Luna from Mr. Luna will be
25
February 1999). from her by her parents.
inherited
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
It depends. If Antero was not acknowledged by However, if the child had intra-uterine life of
Antonio, the motion to dismiss should be less than 7 months, half of the estate of Mr.
granted because Antero is not a legal heir of Luna, or 5M, will be inherited by the widow
Antonio. If Antero was acknowledged, the (Mrs. Luna), while the other half, or 5M, will be
motion should be denied because Article 992 is inherited by the parents of Mr. Luna. Upon the
not applicable. This is because Antero is death of Mrs. Luna, her estate of 5M will be
claiming his inheritance from his illegitimate inherited by her own parents.
Intestate Succession;
father, not from Eugenio. Reserva Legitime
Troncal
Mr. Luna (1999)
died, leaving an estate of Ten Million (1997)
"X", the decedent, was survived by W (his
(P1 0,000,000.00) Pesos. His widow gave birth widow). A (his son), B (a granddaughter, being
to a child four months after Mr, Luna's death, the daughter of A) and C and D (the two
but the child died five hours after birth. Two acknowledged illegitimate children of the
days after the child's death, the widow of Mr. decedent). "X" died this year (1997) leaving a
Luna also died because she had suffered from net estate of P180,000.00. All were willing to
difficult childbirth. The estate of Mr. Luna is succeed, except A who repudiated the
now being claimed by his parents, and the inheritance from his father, and they seek your
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
parents of his widow. Who is entitled to Mr. legal advice on how much each can expect to
Half of the estate of Mr. Luna will go to the
Luna'a estate and why? (5%) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
receive as their respective shares in the
parents of Mrs. Luna as their inheritance from The heirs are B, W, C and D. A inherits nothing
Mrs. Luna, while the other half will be inherited distribution of the estate. Give your answer.
because of his renunciation. B inherits a
by the parents of Mr. Luna as the reservatarios legitime of P90.000.00 as the nearest and only
of the reserved property inherited by Mrs. Luna legitimate descendant, inheriting in his own
from her child. right not by representation because of A's
When Mr. Luna died, his heirs were his wife and
renunciation. W gets a legitime equivalent to
the unborn child. The unborn child inherited
one-half (1 / 2) that of B amounting to P45.000.
because the inheritance was favorable to it and
C and D each gets a legitime equivalent to one-
it was born alive later though it lived only for
half (1/2) that of B amounting to P45.000.00
five hours. Mrs. Luna inherited half of the 10
each. But since the total exceeds the entire
Million estate while the unborn child inherited
estate, their legitimes would have to be
the other half. When the child died, it was ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
reduced corresponding to P22.500.00 each
survived by its mother, Mrs. Luna. As the only INTESTATE
(Art. 895. CC). The total of all of these amounts
heir, Mrs. Luna inherited, by operation of law, SUCCESSION ESTATE:
to P180.000.00.
W- (widow gets 1/2 share) P90.000.00 (Art. 998) A-
the estate of the child consisting of its 5 Million P180,000.00
(son who repudiated his inheritance) None Art.
inheritance from Mr. Luna. In the hands of Mrs.
977) B - (Granddaughter) None C - (Acknowledged
Luna, what she inherited from her child was illegitimate child) P45.000.00 (Art.998) D -
subject to reserva troncal for the benefit of the (Acknowledged illegitimate child) P45,000.00 (Art.
relatives of the child within the third degree of 998) The acknowledged illegitimate child gets 1/2
consanguinity and who belong to the family of of the share of each legitimate child.
When Mrs. Luna died, she was survived by her
Mr. Luna, the line where the property came
parents as her only heirs. Her parents will Legitime; Compulsory
from.
inherit her estate consisting of the 5 Million she Heirs
Luis (2003)
was survived by two legitimate children,
inherited from Mr. Luna. The other 5 Million she two illegitimate children, his parents, and two
inherited from her child will be delivered to the brothers. He left an estate of P1 million. Who
parents of Mr. Luna as beneficiaries of the are the compulsory heirs of Luis, how much is
reserved property. the legitime of each, and how much is the free
In sum, 5 Million Pesos of Mr. Luna's estate will SUGGESTED ANSWER:
portion of his estate, if any?
go to the parents of Mrs. Luna, while the other The compulsory heirs are the two legitimate
5 Million Pesos will go to the parents of Mr. children and the two illegitimate children. The
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Luna as reservatarios.
If the child had an intra-uterine life of not less than 7 months, it parents are excluded by the legitimate children,
inherited from the father. In which case, the estate of 10M will be while the brothers are not compulsory heirs at
divided equally between the child and the widow as legal heirs. all. Their respective legitimate are: a) The
Upon the death of the child, its share of 5M shall go by operation of legitime of the two (2) legitimate children is one
law to the mother, which shall be subject to reserva troncal. Under half (1/2) of the estate (P500,000.00) to be divided
Art. 891, the reserva is in favor of relatives belonging to the
paternal line and who are within 3 degrees from the child. The between them equally, or P250,000.00 each. b)
parents of Mr, Luna are entitled to the reserved portion which is 5M The legitimate of each illegitimate child is one-
as they are 2 degrees related from child. The half(1/2) the legitime of each legitimate child or
P125,000.00.
c) Since the total legitime of the compulsory heirs is
legitime of the legitimate children and it follows that
P750,000.00, the balance of P250,000.00 is legitime
the of one legitimate child is P100,000.
the free portion. The legitime, therefore, of the oldest son is
P100,000. However, since the donation given
Legitime; Compulsory Heirs vs. Secondary him was P100,000, he has already received in
Compulsory Heirs (2005) full his legitime and he will not receive
Emil, the testator, has three legitimate anything anymore from the decedent. The
children, Tom, Henry and Warlito; a wife remaining P900,000, therefore, shall go to the
named Adette; parents named Pepe and Pilar; ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
four younger children by institution in the will,
an illegitimate child, Ramon; brother, Mark; Assuming that the donation is valid as to form
to be divided equally among them. Each will
and a sister, Nanette. Since his wife Adette is and substance, Juan cannot invoke preterition
receive P225,000.
well-off, he wants to leave to his illegitimate because he actually had received a donation
child as much of his estate as he can legally inter vivos from the testatrix (III Tolentino
do. His estate has an aggregate net amount of 188,1992 ed.). He would only have a right to a
Pl,200,000.00, and all the above-named completion of his legitime under Art. 906 of the
relatives are still living. Emil now comes to you Civil Code. The estate should be divided equally
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
for advice in making a will. How will you among the five children who will each receive
P600,000.00 legitime to be divided equally P225,000.00 because the total hereditary
distribute his estate according to his wishes
between Tom, Henry and Warlito as the estate, after collating the donation to Juan (Art.
without violating the law on testamentary
legitimate children. Each will be entitled to 1061, CC), would be P1 million. In the actual
succession? (5%)
P200,000.00. (Art. 888, Civil Code) P100,000.00 distribution of the net estate, Juan gets nothing
-- share of Ramon the illegitimate child. Preterition; Compulsory
while his siblings will get P225,000.00 each.
Equivalent to 1/2 of the share of each Heir (1999)
legitimate child. (Art. 176, Family Code) (a) Mr, Cruz, widower, has three legitimate
P200,000.00 Adette the wife. Her share is children, A, B and C. He executed a Will
equivalent to the share of one legitimate child. instituting as his heirs to his estate of One
(Art. 892, par. 2, Civil Code) Million (P1,000,000.00) Pesos his two children A
Pepe and Pilar, the parents are only secondary and B, and his friend F. Upon his death, how
compulsory heirs and they cannot inherit if the (b) In the
should Mr.preceding question,
Cruz's estate suppose
be divided? Mr. Cruz
Explain.
primary compulsory heirs (legitimate children) instituted
(3%) his two children A and B as his heirs
are alive. (Art. 887, par. 2, Civil Code) in his Will, but gave a legacy of P 100,000.00 to
his friend F. How should the estate of Mr, Cruz
Brother Mark and sister Nanette are not be divided upon his death? Explain, (2%)
compulsory heirs since they are not included SUGGESTED ANSWER:
in the enumeration under Article 887 of the (a) Assuming that the institution of A, B and F
Civil Code. were to the entire estate, there was preterition
The remaining balance of P300,000.00 is the of C since C is a compulsory heir in the direct
free portion which can be given to the line. The preterition will result in the total
illegitimate child Ramon as an instituted heir. annulment of the institution of heirs. Therefore,
(Art. 914, Civil Code) If so given by the the institution of A, B and F will be set aside
decedent, Ramon would receive a total of and Mr. Cuz's estate will be divided, as in
Preterition
P400,000.00. intestacy, equally among A, B and C as follows:
(2001)
Because her eldest son Juan had been A - P333,333.33; B - P333.333.33; and C -
pestering her for capital to start a business, (b) On the same assumption as letter (a), there
P333,333.33.
Josefa gave him P100,000. Five years later, was preterition of C. Therefore, the institution of
Josefa died, leaving a last will and testament in A and B is annulled but the legacy of
which she instituted only her four younger P100.000.00 to F shall be respected for not
children as her sole heirs. At the time of her being inofficious. Therefore, the remainder of
death, her only properly left was P900,000.00 P900.000.00 will be divided equally among A, B
in a bank. Juan opposed the will on the ground and C.
of preterition. How should Josefa's estate be
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
divided among her heirs? State briefly the
There was no preterition of the oldest son
reason(s) for your answer. (5%)
because the testatrix donated 100,000 pesos
to him. This donation is considered an advance
on the son's inheritance. There being no
preterition, the institutions in the will shall be
respected but the legitime of the oldest son
has to be completed if he received less.
After collating the donation of P100.000 to the
remaining property of P900,000, the estate of
the testatrix is P1,000,000. Of this amount,
one-half or P500,000, is the
objected, arguing that it should be in Jolo before a
mother, in favor of another sister, with their mother
court
Shariasince his lands are in Sulu. But Adils only
not giving her authority thereto but even
sisters in Pakistan want the proceedings held in signing said deeds, there is a valid partition
Lahore before a Pakistani court. Which court inter vivos between the mother and her
has jurisdiction and is the proper venue for the children which cannot be revoked by the
intestate proceedings? The law of which mother. Said deeds of sale are not contracts
country shall govern succession to his estate? entered into with respect to future inheritance.
SUGGESTED
(5%) ANSWER: "It would be unjust for the mother to revoke
In so far as the properties of the decedent the sales to a son and to execute a simulated
located in the Philippines are concerned, they sale in favor of a daughter who already
are governed by Philippine law (Article 16, Civil benefited by the partition."
Code). Under Philippine law, the proper venue SUGGESTED ANSWER:
for the settlement of the estate is the domicile C. Yes, under Arts. 51 and 52 of the New
of the decedent at the time of his death. Since Family Code. In case of legal separation,
the decedent last resided in Cebu City, that is annulment of marriage, declaration of nullity of
the proper venue for the intestate settlement marriage and the automatic termination of a
However,
of the successional rights to the estate
his estate. subsequent marriage by the reappearance of
of ADIL are governed by Pakistani law, his the absent spouse, the common or community
national law, under Article 16 of the Civil Code. property of the spouses shall be dissolved and
Art, 51. In said partition, the value of the
liquidated.
Succession; Death; Presumptive presumptive legitimes of all common children,
Legitime
a) (1991)
For purposes of succession, when is death deemedcomputed as of the date of the final judgment
occur or take place? b) May succession be
to of the trial court, shall be delivered in cash,
conferred by contracts or acts inter property or sound securities, unless the
vivos? Illustrate. c) Is there any law which parties, by mutual agreement, judicially
allows the delivery to approved, had already provided for such
compulsory heirs of their presumptive legitimesThe children of their guardian, or the trustee of
matters.
the lifetime of their parents? If so, in what
during their property, may ask for the enforcement of
instances?
SUGGESTED ANSWER: the judgment.
A. Death as a fact is deemed to occur when it The delivery of the presumptive legitimes
actually takes place. Death is presumed to take herein prescribed shall in no way prejudice the
place in the circumstances under Arts. 390-391 ultimate successional rights of the children
of the Civil Code. The time of death is accruing upon the death of either or both of
presumed to be at the expiration of the 10year the parents; but the value of the properties
period as prescribed by Article 390 and at the already received under the decree of
moment of disappearance under Article 391. annulment or absolute nullity shall be
B. Under Art. 84 of the Family Code amending Art. 52. Theas
considered judgment
advances of on
annulment or of
their legitime.
Art 130 of the Civil Code, contractual absolute nullity of the marriage, the partition
succession is no longer possible since the law and distribution of the properties of the
now requires that donations of future property spouses, and the delivery of the children's
be governed by the provisions on the presumptive legitimes shall be recorded in the
ALTERNATIVE
testamentary ANSWER:
succession and formalities of appropriate civil registry and registries of
B. In the case of Coronado vs.CA(l91 SCRA81),
wills. property; otherwise, the same shall not affect
it was ruled that no property passes under a Wills; Codicil; Institution of Heirs;
third persons.
will without its being probated, but may under Substitution of Heirs (2002)
Article 1058 of the Civil Code of 1898, be By virtue of a Codicil appended to his will,
[Many-Oy
sustained vs.
as aCA 144SCRA33).
partition by an act inter vivos Theodore devised to Divino a tract of sugar
land, with the obligation on the part of Divino
And in the case of Chavez vs, IAC 1191 or his heirs to deliver to Betina a specified
SCRA211), it was ruled that while the law
volume of sugar per harvest during Betinas
prohibits contracts upon future inheritance, the Proceedings;
lifetime. It is alsoIntestate
stated in the Proceedings;
Codicil that in
partition by the parent, as provided in Art. 1080 theJurisdiction
In his the(2004)
eventlifetime, a Pakistani
obligation citizen,
is not fulfilled, ADIL,
Betina
is a case expressly authorized by law. A person marriedimmediately
should three times seizeunder Pakistani
the property fromlaw.
has two options in making a partition of his When
Divino he died anheirs
or latters old and
widower,
turn ithe lefttobehind
over
estate: either by an act inter vivos or by will. If six children, two sisters, three
Theodores compulsory heirs. Divino failed homes, andtoan
the partition is by will, it is imperative that such estate worth at least 30 million pesos
fulfill the obligation under the Codicil. Betina in the
partition must be executed in accordance with of heirs.
Philippines.(3%) b)
He Distinguish
was born between
in Lahore
brings suit against Divino for the reversion of simple
but last
the provisions of the law on wills; if by an act and fideicommissary
resided in Cebu City, where he had
the tract of land. a) Distinguish between modal a mansion
inter vivos, such partition may even be oral or substitution
and whereand of heirs.
two of his(2%) c) Does children
youngest Betina havenow
institution substation
written, and need not be in the form of a will, a cause
live and of action
work. against
Two of Divino?
his oldest children are
"Where
providedseveral sistersisexecute
the legitime deeds of sale
not prejudiced. Explain (5%)
over their 1 /6 undivided share of the farmers in Sulu, while the two middle-aged
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
paraphernal property of their children are employees in Zamboanga City.
Finding that the deceased left no will, the
youngest son wanted to file intestate
proceedings before the Regional Trial Court of
Cebu City. Two other siblings
A. A MODAL INSTITUTION is the institution of
an heir made for a certain purpose or cause
(Arts. 871 and 882, NCC). SUBSTITUTION is the
appointment of another heir so that he may
enter into the inheritance in default of the heir
originality instituted. (Art. 857, NCC).
B. In a SIMPLE SUBSTITUTION of heirs, the
testator designates one or more persons to
substitute the heirs instituted in case such heir
or heirs should die before him, or should not
wish or should be incapacitated to accept the
inheritance. In a FIDEICOMMISSARY
SUBSTITUTION, the testator institutes a first heir
and charges him to preserve and transmit the
whole or part of the inheritance to a second
heir. In a simple substitution, only one heir
inherits. In a fideicommissary substitution, both
the first and second heirs inherit. (Art. 859 and
C. Betina
869, NCC)has a cause of action against Divino.
This is a case of a testamentary disposition
subject to a mode and the will itself provides
for the consequence if the mode is not
complied with. To enforce the mode, the will
itself gives Betina the right to compel the
return of the property to the heirs of Theodore.
(Rabadilla v. Conscoluella, 334 SCRA 522
Wills; GR 113725, 29 June 2000).
[2000]
Formalities
(1) If a will is executed by a testator who is a
(1990) citizen, what law will govern if the will
Filipino
is executed in the Philippines? What law will
govern if the will is executed in another
country? Explain your answers.
(2) If a will is executed by a foreigner, for
instance, a Japanese, residing in the
Philippines, what law will govern if the will is
executed in the Philippines? And what law will
govern if the will is executed in Japan, or some
SUGGESTED
other country,ANSWER:
for instance, the U.S.A.? Explain
(1)
your a.answers.
If the testator who is a Filipino citizen
executes his will in the Philippines, Philippine
law will govern the formalities.
b. If said Filipino testator executes his will in
another country, the law of the country where
he maybe or Philippine law will govern the
formalities. (Article 815, Civil Code}
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(2) a. If the testator is a foreigner residing in
the Philippines and he executes his will in the
Philippines, the law of the country of which he
is a citizen or Philippine law will govern the
formalities.
b. If the testator is a foreigner and executes his
will in a foreign country, the law of his place of
residence or the law of the country of which he
is a citizen or the law of the place of execution,
or Philippine law will govern the formalities
(Articles 17. 816. 817. Civil Code).
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, the will may be probated in the Philippines Wills;
b. In the Probate;
case ofNotarial a foreigner, and his national law
insofar as the estate of Eleanor is concerned. Holographic
Johnny,
shall govern with no Wills
known
substantive(1997)
living relatives,
validity whether he
While the Civil Code prohibits the execution of executed
executes ahis notarial
will in willthe
giving all his estate
Philippines or in to a
Joint wills here and abroad, such prohibition his sweetheart.
foreign country.One day, he had a serious
applies only to Filipinos. Hence, the joint will Wills;
altercation Holographic
with his sweetheart. Wills; Insertions
A few days &
which is valid where executed is valid in the Cancellations
Vanessa
later, he was on(1996)
died introducedApril 14,to1980, leavinglady
a charming behind
Philippines but only with respect to Eleanor. a holographic
who later became will which
a dearisfriend.
entirely Soonwritten,
after, he
Under Article 819, it is void with respect to dated andasigned
executed holographic in her willownexpressly
handwriting. revoking
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Manuel whose joint will remains void in the However,
the notarial it contains
will and so insertions
designating and his new
The will cannot be probated in the Philippines,
Philippines despite being valid where cancellations
friend as sole which heir. One are daynot authenticated
when he was by
even though valid where executed, because it
executed. her signature.
clearing up hisFor desk, thisJohnny
reason, the probate
mistakenly of
burned,
is prohibited under Article 818 of the Civil Code
Vanessa's
along with will
other was opposed
papers, theby hercopy
only relatives
of his
and declared void under Article 819, The SUGGESTED
who stood ANSWER:
holographic towill.
inherit by her intestacy.
Hisoriginally
business associate, May
prohibition should apply even to the American Yes, the will as written may be
Vanessa's
Eduardo holographic will be probated?
wife because the Joint will is offensive to public probated.knew The well the contents
insertions of the will were
and alterations
Explain.
which was shown to him by Johnny the day
policy. Moreover, it is a single juridical act void since ANSWER:
SUGGESTED they were not authenticated byitthe
which cannot be valid as to one testator and was
The executed.
probate of A
thefew days
notarial after
full signature of Vanessa, under Art. 814, NCC.will the
will burning
prosper. The
Wills;
void as toProbate;
the other. Intrinsic incident,
holographic Johnny
will died.
cannot Both
The original will, however, remains validbe wills
admitted were to sought
probate to
Validity
H died (1990)
leaving a last will and testament be probated
because a holographicin two
holographic willseparate
will can petitions.
is notonly be Will
invalidated by
wherein it is stated that he was legally married either
probated or both
ALTERNATIVE upon
the unauthenticated petitions
ANSWER:evidence prosper?
of the willoritself
insertions unless
alterations
to W by whom he had two legitimate children A It depends.
there
(Ajeroisv.aCA,
As a rule, acopy.
photographic
236 SCRA 468].
holographic
But since will
theis not
and B. H devised to his said forced heirs the adversely affected
holographic will was lost and there was no by Insertions or
entire estate except the free portion which he cancellations which were not
other copy, it cannot be probated and therefore authenticated by
gave to X who was living with him at the time the full signature
ADDITIONAL
the notarial ANSWERS:of the testator (Ajero v. CA,
will will be admitted to probate
In said will he explained that he had been 1.
of his death. 236In the
SCRA
because there case
468). isHowever,
of Gan vs. Yap
no revoking when will.the
(104 insertion
Phil 509), or
estranged from his wife W for more than 20 cancellation
the execution amounts and the to revocation
contents ofofa the lost will,
or
years and he has been living with X as man Art.814 of the holographic
destroyed NCC does not willapply
may but not Art.be 830.
and wife since his separation from his NCC. Art. 830
proved by the of thebareNCC does not
testimony require the
of witnesses
legitimate family. testator
who haveto authenticate
seen or read hissuch
cancellation
will. The for will the
In the probate proceedings, X asked for the effectivity of a revocation
itself must be presented otherwise it shall effected through
issuance of letters testamentary in accordance suchproduce
cancellation
no effect. (Kalaw The v. lawRelova,
regards132 the SCRA
with the will wherein she is named sole 237). In the
document itself Kalaw
as materialcase,proof theof original
executor. This was opposed by W and her holographic
authenticity. will designated
Moreover, in only
orderonethat heiraas the
will
(a) Should the will be admitted in said probate
children. onlymaysubstantial
be revoked provision which was will,
by a subsequent altered it isby
(b) Is the said devise to X
proceedings?
substituting
necessary thethat original
the latterheirwillwith beanother
valid and heir.
(c) Was it proper for the trial court to consider
valid?
Hence,
executed
Wills; if thewith
Holographic unauthenticated
the formalities
Wills; cancellation
required for
the intrinsic validity of the provisions of said
amounted
the
Witnesses making to(1994)
a ofrevocation
aVicente
will. The of the should
latter will, the will
will? Explain
SUGGESTED your answers,
ANSWER: On his deathbed, was executing a will.
maypossess
not beall probated because itvalid
had already
(a) Yes, the will may be probated if executed In the room were Carissa, Carmela, will
the requisites of a Comelio
according to the formalities prescribed by law. been revoked.
whether it be ordinary or a holographic will,
and Atty. Cimpo, a notary public. Suddenly,
and should be probated
there was a street brawl which caught in order that the
(b) The institution giving X the free portion is revocatory
Comelio's clauseprompting
attention, thereof may him produce
to look out
not valid, because the prohibitions under Art. effect. In the case at
the window. Cornelio did not see Vicente bar, since the sign a
739 of the Civil Code on donations also apply to will.holographic
SUGGESTED
Is the ANSWERS:
will valid?will itself cannot be presented,
testamentary dispositions (Article 1028, Civil a) Yes,
it cannotThe therefore
will is valid. The lawSince
be probated. doesit not
Code), Among donations which are considered require
cannot a witness
be probated, to actually
it cannot seerevoke
the testator
the
void are those made between persons who signnotarial
the will. It is sufficient
will previously writtenifby the thewitness
were guilty of adultery or concubinage at the could have seen the act of signing had he
decedent.
time of the donation. chosen
2. On thetobasis do so of theby Rules
casting his eyes
of Court, Ruleto76, the
(c) As a general rule, the will should be admitted b) Yes,
proper the
Sec.direction. will is valid.
6, provides that no Applying
will shall the be "test
proved of
in probate proceedings if all the necessary position", although Comelio
as a lost or destroyed will unless its did not actually
requirements for its extrinsic validity have been see provisions
Vicente sign are the will,and
clearly Cornelio
distinctly wasprovedin the
met and the court should not consider the proper position to see Vicente
by at least two (2) credible witnesses. sign if Cornelio
intrinsic validity of the provisions of said will. so wished.
Hence, if we abide strictly by the two-
However, the exception arises when the will in Wills; Jointrule
witness Wills to prove a lost or destroyed
effect contains only one testamentary (2000)
Manuel, a Filipino,
will, the holographic and will his
which American
Johnny wife
disposition. In effect, the only testamentary Eleanor, executed a
allegedly mistakenly burned, cannot Joint Will in Boston,
be
POSSIBLE ADDITIONAL ANSWERS: Massachusetts when they were residing in said
disposition underofthe
a. In the case a will is the
Filipino giving Philippine
citizen, of the probated, since there is only one witness,
free portion to X, since legitimes are provided city.Eduardo,
The law of Massachusetts
who can be called to testify as to allows the
law shall govern substantive validity whether execution of joint wills. Shortly thereafter,
by
he law. Hence,his
executes the trial
will in court
the may consider
Philippines or the
in a the existence of the will. If the holographic
9 October 1985. 139 SCRA Eleanor died. Can the said revoked
Will be probated
intrinsic validity
foreign country.
206).
of the provisions of said will. will, which purportedly, the earlierin
(Nuguid v. Nuguid, etal.. No. L23445, June 23, the notarial
Philippines for the
will cannot be proved becausesettlement of ofher
1966, 17 SCRA; Nepomuceno v. CA, L-62952, estate? (3%)
the absence of the required witness, then
the petition for the probate of the notarial
will should prosper.
due to formal defects. Assuming that a copy of excludedthe by a legitimate son of the decedent [Art.
is available,
first will may it now be admitted to probate Civil Code].
887, New This follows the principle that the
and given effect? Why? descendants exclude the ascendants from
SUGGESTED ANSWER: inheritance.
Yes, the first will may be admitted to probate
and given effect. When the testator tore first Wills; Testamentary
will, he was under the mistaken belief that the Intent (1996)
Alfonso, a bachelor without any descendant or
second will was perfectly valid and he would ascendant, wrote a last will and testament in
not have destroyed the first will had he known which he devised." all the properties of which I
that the second will is not valid. The revocation may be possessed at the time of my death" to
by destruction therefore is dependent on the his favorite brother Manuel. At the time he
validity of the second will. Since it turned out wrote the will, he owned only one parcel of
that the second will was invalid, the tearing of land. But by the time he died, he owned twenty
the first will did not produce the effect of parcels of land. His other brothers and sisters
revocation. This is known as the doctrine of insist that his will should pass only the parcel of
No, the first will cannot be admitted to probate.
dependent relative revocation (Molo v. Molo, land he owned at the time it was written, and
While it is true that the first will was successfully
90 Phil 37.) did not cover his properties acquired, which
revoked by the second will because the second SUGGESTED ANSWER:
will was later denied probate, the first will was, should
Manuelbe by intestate
is correct succession.
because Manuel
under Art. 793, NCC,
nevertheless, revoked when the testator claims otherwise. Who is correct? Explain.
property acquired after the making of a will
destroyed
(Diaz it after
v. De executing
Leon, 43 Philthe413
second invalid shall only pass thereby, as if the testator had
[1922]).
will. possessed it at the time of making the will,
Wills; Testamentary
should it expressly appear by the will that such
Disposition
Don died after(2006)
executing a Last Will and
was his intention. Since Alfonso's intention to
Testament leaving his estate valued at P12
devise all properties he owned at the time of
Million to his common-law wife Roshelle. He is
his death expressly appears on the will, then
survived by his brother Ronie and his half-
all the 20 parcels of land are included in the
(1) Was
sister Don's testamentary disposition of his
Michelle.
estate in accordance with the law on DONATION
devise.
succession? Whether you agree or not, explain Donation vs.
SUGGESTED
your Explain.Yes, Don's testamentary
ANSWER:
answer.
Sale
a) May(2003)
a person sell something that does not belong
disposition of his estate is in accordance with
him? Explain. b) May a person donate
to
the law on succession. Don has no compulsory
something that does not belong
heirs not having ascendants, descendants nor
to him? Explain. 5%
a spouse [Art. 887, New Civil Code]. Brothers SUGGESTED ANSWER:
and sisters are not compulsory heirs. Thus, he (a) Yes, a person may sell something which
can bequeath his entire estate to anyone who does not belong to him. For the sale to be
is not otherwise incapacitated to inherit from valid, the law does not require the seller to be
him. A common-law wife is not incapacitated the owner of the property at the time of the
under the law, as Don is not married to anyone. sale. (Article 1434, NCC). If the seller cannot
(2) If Don failed to execute a will during his
transfer ownership over the thing sold at the
lifetime, as his lawyer, how will you distribute
SUGGESTED After paying the legal
ANSWER: (2.5%) time of delivery because he was not the owner
his estate? Explain. (b) As a general
obligations of the estate, I will give Ronie, as thereof, he shall rule, a person
be liable cannotofdonate
for breach contact.
full-blood brother of Don, 2/3 of the net estate, something which he cannot dispose of at the
twice the share of Michelle, the half-sister who time of the donation (Article 751, New Civil
shall receive 1/3. Roshelle will not receive Code).
anything as she is not a legal heir [Art. 1006
New Civil Code].
(3) Assuming he died intestate survived by his
brother Ronie, his half-sister Michelle, and his
legitimate son Jayson, how will you distribute
SUGGESTED
his estate?ANSWER: Jayson
Explain. will be entitled to the
(2.5%)
entire P12 Million as the brother and sister will
be excluded by a legitimate son of the
decedent. This follows the principle of
proximity, where "the nearer excludes the Wills; Revocation of Wills; Dependent
(4) Assuming further he died intestate,
farther." Relative Revocation (2003)
survived by his father Juan, his brother Ronie, Mr. Reyes executed a will completely valid as
his half-sister Michelle, and his legitimate son to form. A week later, however, he executed
Jayson, how will you distribute his estate? another will which expressly revoked his first
SUGGESTED
Explain. ANSWER: Jayson will still be entitled to
(2.5%) will, which he tore his first will to pieces. Upon
the entire P12 Million as the father, brother
the death of Mr. Reyes, his second will was
and sister will be
presented for probate by his heirs, but it was
denied probate
SUGGESTED ANSWER: property to Ferdinand who then sued to
As judge, I will grant the motion to dismiss. recover the land from the city government.
Armando has no personality to bring the action Will the suit prosper?
for annulment of the sale to Conrado. Only an SUGGESTED ANSWER:
aggrieved party to the contract may bring the Ferdinand has no right to recover the land. It is
action for annulment thereof (Art. 1397. NCC). true that the donation was revocable because
While Armando is heir and successor-in-interest of breach of the conditions. But until and unless
of his mother (Art. 1311, NCC), he [standing in the donation was revoked, it remained valid.
place of his mother) has no personality to annul Hence, Spouses Michael and Linda had no right
the contract. Both are not aggrieved parties on to sell the land to Ferdinand. One cannot give
account of their own violation of the condition what he does not have. What the donors should
of, or restriction on, their ownership imposed have done first was to have the donation
by the donation. Only the donor or his heirs annulled or revoked. And after that was done,
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
would have the personality to bring an action they could validly have disposed of the land in
A. Until the contract of donation has been
to revoke a donation for violation of a condition favor of Ferdinand.
resolved or rescinded under Article 1191 of the
thereof or a restriction thereon. (Garrido u. CA, Civil Code or revoked under Art. 764 of the Civil
236 SCRA 450). Consequently, while the donor Code, the donation stands effective and valid.
or his heirs were not parties to the sale, they Accordingly, the sale made by the donor to
have the right to annul the contract of sale Ferdinand cannot be said to have conveyed
because
ALTERNATIVEtheir rights are prejudiced by one of
ANSWER: title to Ferdinand, who, thereby, has no cause
the judge,
As contracting
I will parties
grant thethereof [DBPtov.dismiss.
motion CA, 96 of action for recovery of the land acting for and
SCRA 342; Teves
Compliance with avs.condition
PHHC. 23 SCRA 114].
imposed by a B. Thebehalf.
in his donation is onerous, And being onerous,
Since Armando
donor gives riseis neither the donor
to an action nor heirthe
to revoke of what applies is the law on contracts, and not
the donor,under
donation he has no764,
Art. personality to bring the
NCC. However, the the law on donation (De Luna us. Abrigo, 81
action
right offor annulment.
action belongs to the donor. Is SCRA 150). Accordingly, the prescriptive
transmissible to his heirs, and may be period for the filing of such an action would be
exercised against the donee's heirs. Since the ordinary prescriptive period for contacts
Armando is an heir of the donee, not of the which may either be six or ten depending upon
donor, he has no legal capacity to sue for whether it is verbal or written. The filing of the
Alternative Answer:
revocation of the donation. Although he is not case five years later is within the prescriptive
The law on donation lays down a special
seeking such revocation but an annulment of period and, therefore, the action can prosper,
prescriptive period in the case of breach of
the sale which his mother, the donee, had
condition, which is four years from non-
executed in violation of the condition imposed
compliance thereof (Article 764 Civil Code).
by the donor, an action for annulment of a
Since the action has prescribed, the suit will
contract may be brought only by those who are Donations;
not prosper, Effect; illegal & immoral
principally or subsidiarily obliged thereby (Art. conditions
Are (1997) of illegal and immoral
the effects
1397, NCC). As an exception to the rule, it has conditions on simple donations the same as
been held that a person not so obliged may those effects that would follow when such
nevertheless ask for annulment if he is conditions are imposed on donations con causa
prejudiced
Such detrimentin hisor rights regarding
prejudice cannot one of the
be shown SUGGESTED ANSWER:
onerosa?
contracting parties (DBP us. CA.
by Armando. As a forced heir, Armando's 96 SCRA 342 No, they don't have the same effect. Illegal or
and other cases) and can show the
interest in the property was, at best, a mere detriment impossible conditions in simple and
which would The
expectancy. result
saletoof
himthefrom
land the contract
by his mother in remuneratory donations shall be considered as
which he had no intervention, (Teves
did not impair any vested right. The fact vs. PHHC, not imposed. Hence the donation is valid. The
23 SCRA 1141).
remains that the premature sale made by his donation
Donations; willCondition;
be considered as simple or pure.
Capacity
mother (premature because only half of the The
to Suecondition
Sometime (1996) or mode
in 1955, Tomasis merely
donatedan accessory
a parcel of
period of the ban had elapsed) was not disposition, and its nullity
land to his stepdaughter doessubject
Irene, not affect
to thethe
voidable at all, none of the vices of consent donation,
condition thatunless
she it
mayclearly appears
not sell, that
transfer or the
under Art. 139 of the NCC being present. donor
cede the would
same not have years.
for twenty made Shortly
the donation
Donations; Donations thecon causa onerosa is governed by
Hence, the motionConditions;
to dismiss should be without
thereafter, mode
he orIncondition.
died. 1965, because she
law on obligations and contracts, under which
Revocation
Spouses (1991)and Linda donated a 3-
granted. Michael needed money for medical expenses, Irene
hectare residential land to the City of Baguio an impossible or Illicit condition annuls the
sold the land to Conrado. The following year,
on the condition that the city government obligation dependent upon the condition where
Irene died, leaving as her sole heir a son by the
would build thereon a public park with a boxing the condition is positive and suspensive. If the
name of Armando. When Armando learned that
arena, the construction of which shall impossible or illicit condition is negative, it is
the land which he expected to inherit had been
commence within six (6) months from the date simply considered as not written, and the
sold by Irene to Conrado, he filed an action
the parties ratify the donation. The donee obligation is converted into a pure and simple
against the latter for annulment of the sale, on
accepted the donation and the title to the one. However, in order that an illegal condition
the ground that it violated the restriction
property was transferred in its name. Five may annul a contract, the impossibility must
imposed by
ADDITIONAL Tomas. Conrado filed a motion to
ANSWER:
years elapsed but the public park with the exist at the time of the creation of the
dismiss, on the ground that Armando did not
boxing arena was never started. Considering obligation; a supervening impossibility does not
have the legal capacity to sue. If you were the
the failure of the donee to comply with the affect the existence of the obligation.
Judge, how will you rule on this motion to
condition of the donation, the donor-spouses dismiss? Explain.
sold the
No. In simple or pure donation, only the illegal or irrevocable, the latter is revocable. In the problem
impossible condition is considered not written the clauses
given, all or conditions mentioned in the deed
but the donation remains valid and becomes of donation, except one, are consistent with the
free from conditions. The condition or mode rule of irrevocability and would have sustained
being a mere accessory disposition. Its nullity the view that the donation is inter vivos and
does not affect the donation unless it clearly therefore valid. The lone exception is the clause
appears that the donor would not have made which reserves the donor's right to sell the
the donation without the mode or condition. On property at any time before his death. Such a
the other hand, onerous donation is governed reservation has been held to render the
by the rules on contracts. Under Article 1183, donation revocable and, therefore, becomes a
Impossible or illegal conditions shall annul the donation mortis causa (Puig vs. Penqflorida, 15
obligation which depends upon them. In these SCRA 276, at p. 286). That the right was not
Donations;
cases, both Formalities;
the obligationMortis
and the condition exercised is immaterial; its reservation was an
Causa
B
are void.(1990)
donated to M a parcel of land in 1980. B implied recognition of the donor's power to
made the deed of donation, entitled Donation nullify the donation anytime he wished to do so.
Inter Vivos, in a public instrument and M Consequently, it should have been embodied in
accepted the donation in the same document. Donations; Inter Vivos;
a last will and testament. The suit for nullity will
It was provided in the deed that the land Acceptance
On January 21,(1993)
1986, A executed a deed of
thus prosper.
donated shall be immediately delivered to M donation inter vivos of a parcel of land to Dr. B
and that M shall have the right to enjoy the who had earlier constructed thereon a building
fruits fully. The deed also provided that B was in which researches on the dreaded disease
reserving the right to dispose of said land AIDS were being conducted. The deed,
during his (Bs) lifetime, and that M shall not acknowledged before a notary public, was
register the deed of donation until after Bs handed over by A to Dr. B who received it. A
death. Upon Bs death, W, Bs widow and sole few days after, A flew to Davao City.
heir, filed an action for the recovery of the Unfortunately, the airplane he was riding
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
donated land, contending crashed on landing killing him. Two days after
Yes, the action will prosper. that the donation
The donation is a
made by B is a donation mortis causa and not a the unfortunate accident. Dr. B, upon advice of
donation mortis causa because the reservation
donation interofvivos. Will said action prosper? a lawyer, executed a deed acknowledged
is to dispose all the property donated and, SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Explain your answer. before
No, theadonation
notary public
is notaccepting
effective. the
Thedonation.
law
therefore, the donation is revocable at will.
Is the donation effective? Explain
requires that the separate acceptance your of
answer.
the
Accordingly, the donation requires the
execution of a valid will, either notarial or donee of an immovable must be done in a
holographic (Arts 755, 728 NCC). public document during the lifetime of the
Donations; Formalities; Mortis donor (Art. 746 & 749, Civil Code) In this case,
Causa (1998)
Ernesto donated in a public instrument a parcel B executed the deed of acceptance before a
of land to Demetrio, who accepted it in the notary public after the donor had already died.
same document. It is there declared that the Donations;
donation shall take effect immediately, with Perfection
On (1998)
July 27, 1997, Pedro mailed in Manila a
the donee having the right to take possession letter to his brother, Jose, a resident of Ilollo
of the land and receive its fruits but not to City, offering to donate a vintage sports car
dispose of the land while Ernesto is alive as which the latter had long been wanting to buy
well as for ten years following his death. from the former. On August 5, 1997, Jose called
Moreover, Ernesto also reserved in the same Pedro by cellular phone to thank him for his
deed his right to sell the property should he generosity and to inform him that he was
decide to dispose of it at any time - a right sending by mail his letter of acceptance. Pedro
which he did not exercise at all. After his death, never received that letter because it was never
Ernesto's heirs seasonably brought an action to mailed. On August 14, 1997, Pedro received a
SUGGESTED ANSWER: 1. Is there
telegram a perfected
from Iloilo informing him that Jose
recover the will
Yes, the suit property,
prosper as alleging that the
the donation did 2.
had been killed in a be
Will
donation?your answer
[2%] theaccident
road same if the
Joseday
did mail
donation was void as it did not comply
not comply with the formalities of a will. with the
In this his acceptance letter
before (August 13, 1997) but it was received by
formalities of a
instance, the will.
fact Willthe
that thedonor
suit prosper? [5%]
did not intend Pedro in Manila days after Jose's death? [3%]
to transfer ownership or possession of the
donated property to the donee until the donor's
death, would result in a donation mortis causa
and in this kind of disposition, the formalities of
a will should be complied with, otherwise, the
donation is void. In this Instance, donation
mortis causa embodied only in a public
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
instrument without
One of the essential distinctionsthe formalities
between of vivos
a donation inter a will
could
and not mortis
a donation have causa transferred ownership
is that while the former is of
disputed property to another.
hand, assuming that the sports car costs less than
Code which requires the donation and the acceptance
then the donation maybe oral, but still, the
P5,000.00 thereof to be in a public instrument in order to
simultaneous delivery of the car is needed and be valid. The acceptance not being in a public
there being none, the donation was never instrument, the part which is not onerous is
perfected. void and Rosa may recover it from Amanda.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
2. Yes, the answer is the same. If Jose's mail Donations; Unregistered; Effects; Non-
containing his acceptance of the donation was Compliance; Resolutory Condition (2006)
received by Pedro after the former's death, Spouses Alfredo and Racquel were active
then the donation is still void because under members of a religious congregation. They
Article 734 of the Civil Code, the donation is donated a parcel of land in favor of that
perfected the moment the donor knows of the congregation in a duly notarized Deed of
acceptance by the donee. The death of Jose Donation, subject to the condition that the
before Pedro could receive the acceptance Minister shall construct thereon a place of
indicates that the donation was never worship within 1 year from the acceptance of
perfected. Under Article 746 acceptance must the donation. In an affidavit he executed on
Donations; Requisites;
be made during the lifetime of both the donor
Immovable
Anastacia Property
purchased a house and lot on behalf of the congregation, the Minister
and the donee. accepted the donation. The Deed of Donation
installments at a housing project in Quezon However, instead of constructing a place of
of Deeds.
worship,
City. Subsequently, she was employed in was not registered with the Registry
the Minister constructed a bungalow on the property
California and a year later, she executed a deed he used as his residence. Disappointed with the
of donation, duly authenticated by the Minister, the spouses revoked the donation and
Philippine Consulate in Los Angeles, California, demanded that he vacate the premises immediately.
donating the house and lot to her friend But the Minister refused to leave, claiming that aside
Amanda. The latter brought the deed of from using the bungalow as his residence, he is also
donation to the owner of the project and using it as a place for worship on special occasions.
discovered that Anastacia left unpaid Under the circumstances, can Alfredo and Racquel
installments and real estate taxes. Amanda evict the Minister and recover possession of
paid these so that the donation in her favor can the property? If you were the couple's counsel,
be registered in the project owner's office. Two what action you take to protect the interest of
months later, Anastacia died, leaving her ALTERNATIVE
your clients?ANSWER:
(5%)
mother Rosa as her sole heir. Rosa filed an Yes, Alfredo and Racquel can bring an action for
action to annul the donation on the ground that ejectment against the Minister for recovery of
Amanda did not give her consent in the deed of possession of the property evict the Minister and
SUGGESTED ANSWER: recover possession of the property. An action for
donation or in a
Rosa is correct separate
because thepublic
donation instrument.
is void. annulment of the donation, reconveyance and
Amanda replied that the donation
The property donated was an immovable. was Foran
damages should be filed to protect the interests of
onerous one because she had to
such donation to be valid, Article 749 of thepay unpaid
my client. The donation is an onerous donation and
installments
New Civil Codeandrequires
taxes; both
hencetheher acceptance
donation and therefore shall be governed by the rules on
may be implied. Who is correct? (2%)
the acceptance to be in a public instrument. contracts. Because there was no fulfillment or
There being no showing that Amanda's compliance with the condition which is resolutory in
acceptance was made in a public instrument, character, the donation may now be revoked and all
the donation is void. The contention that the rights which
(Central the donee
Philippine may have acquired
University, G.R. No.under it July
112127,
donation is onerous and, therefore, need not ALTERNATIVE
17,1995). ANSWER:
shall be deemed lost and extinguished
comply with Article 749 for validity is without No, an action for ejectment will not prosper. I
merit. The donation is not onerous because it would advice Alfredo and Racquel that the
did not impose on Amanda the obligation to Minister, by constructing a structure which also
pay the balance on the purchase price or the serves as a place of worship, has pursued the
arrears in real estate taxes. Amanda took it objective of the donation. His taking up
upon herself to pay those amounts voluntarily. residence in the bungalow may be regarded as
For a donation to be onerous, the burden must a casual breach and will not warrant revocation
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
be imposed by the of the donation. Similarily, therefore, an action
Neither Rosa nor donor
Amanda on the
is donee.
correct.In the
The
problem, isthere is noonly
such for revocation
SUGGESTED of the donation will be denied (C.
ANSWER:
donation onerous as burden imposed
to the portion by
of the 1.Yulo
None.
the donorcorresponding
on the donee. J. & There is nov.perfected
Sons, Inc. donation.
Roman Catholic Under
Bishop,
property to The
the donation
value of not the 2004).
Article 748 of the Civil Code, the donation of a
being onerous, it must comply with the G.R. No. 133705, March 31, 2005; Heirs
installments and taxes paid by Amanda. movable may be made
formalities of Article 749. ofRozendo Sevilla v. Deorally
Leon,or in writing.
G.R. If
No. 149570,
the value
March 12, of the personal property donated
The portion in excess thereof is not onerous. Donations; Validity; Effectivity; for
exceeds five thousand pesos, the donation and
The onerous portion is governed by the rules Unborn
Elated Child
that her (1999)
sister who had been married
the acceptance shall be made in writing.
on contracts which do not require the for five years was pregnant for the first time,
Assuming that the value of the thing donated,
acceptance by the donee to be in any form. Alma donated P100,000.00 to the unborn
a vintage sports car, exceeds P5,000.00 then
The onerous part, therefore, is valid. The child. Unfortunately, the baby died one hour
the donation and the acceptance must be in
portion which is not onerous must comply with after delivery. May Alma recover the
writing. In this instance, the acceptance of Jose
Article 749 of the New Civil P100.000.00 that she
was not in writing, therefore, the donation is
void. Upon the other
had donated to said baby before it was born not been fixed in the Deed of Donation, the donee is
that the baby died? Stated otherwise, is the
considering yet
not default in his obligation until the period is
donation valid and binding? Explain. (5%) fixed by order of the court under Article 1197
SUGGESTED ANSWER: of the New Civil Code. Since the period has not
The donation is valid and binding, being an act been fixed as yet, the donee is not yet default,
favorable to the unborn child, but only if the and therefore the donor has no cause of action
baby had an intra-uterine life of not less than to revoke the donation. (Dissenting opinion of
seven months and provided there was due Davide, CJ, Central Philippine University v.
acceptance of the donation by the proper Court of Appeals, 246 SCRA 511 [1995])
person representing said child. If the child had
less than seven months of intra-uterine life, it
PROPERTY
is not deemed born since it died less than 24
hours following its delivery, in which ease the Accretion;
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
donation never became effective since the Alluvion
For many (2001)
years, the Rio Grande river deposited
Even if the baby had an intra-uterine life of soil along its bank, beside the titled land of
donee never became a person, birth being
more than seven months and the donation was Jose. In time, such deposit reached an area of
determinative of personality.
properly accepted, it would be void for not one thousand square meters. With the
having conformed with the proper form. In permission of Jose, Vicente cultivated the said
order to be valid, the donation and acceptance area. Ten years later, a big flood occurred in
of personal property exceeding five thousand the river and transferred the 1000 square
pesos should be in writing. (Article 748, par. 3) meters to the opposite bank, beside the land of
Donations; with Resolutory Agustin. The land transferred is now contested
Condition
In 1950, Dr.(2003)
Alba donated a parcel of land to by Jose and Agustin as riparian owners and by
Central University on condition that the latter SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Vicente who claims ownership by prescription.
must establish a medical college on the land to Jose should prevail. The disputed area, which is
Who should prevail,? Why? (5%)
be named after him. In the year 2000, the heirs an alluvion, belongs by right of accretion to
of Dr. Alba filed an action to annul the donation Jose, the riparian owner (Art. 457 CC). When, as
and for the reconveyance of the property given in the problem, the very same area" was
donated to them for the failure, after 50 years, "transferred" by flood waters to the opposite
of the University to established on the property bank, it became an avulsion and ownership
a medical school named after their father. The thereof is retained by Jose who has two years to
University opposed the action on the ground of remove it (Art. 459, CC). Vicente's claim based
prescription and also because it had not used on prescription is baseless since his possession
the property for some purpose other than that was by mere tolerance of Jose and, therefore,
SUGGESTED ANSWER: did not adversely affect Jose's possession and
stated in the donation. Should the opposition
The donation may be revoked. The non-established of
thethe
University to theon
action of Dr. Albas ownership (Art. 537, CC). Inasmuch as his
of medical college the donated propertyheirs
was
beresolutory
sustained? Explain. possession is merely that of a holder, he cannot
a condition imposed on the donation by Accretion;
acquire the disputed area by prescription.
the donor. Although the Deed of Donation did not fix Avulsion
Andres is (2003)
a riparian owner of a parcel of
the time for the established of the medical college, registered land. His land, however, has
the failure of the donee to establish the medical gradually diminished in area due to the current
college after fifty (50) years from the making of the of the river, while the registered land of Mario
donation should be considered as occurrence of the on the opposite bank has gradually increased
resolutory condition, and the donation may now be in area by 200square meters.
revoked. While the general rule is that in case the (a) Who has the better right over the 200-
period is not fixed in the agreement of the parties, square meter area that has been added to
the period must be fixed first by the court before the (b) May registered
Marios a third person
land,acquire said
Mario or 200-square
Andres?
obligation may be demanded, the period of fifty (50) meter land by prescription?
years was more than enough time for the donee to
comply with the condition. Hence, in this case, there
is no more need for the court to fix the period
because such procedure with the condition. (Central
Philippine University v. CA. 246 SCRA 511).
The donation may not as yet revoked. The
establishment of a medical college is not a
resolutory or suspensive condition but a
charge, obligation, or a mode. The non-
compliance with the charge or mode will give
the donor the right to revoke the donation
within four (4) years from the time the charge
(10)
was years fromto
supposed the timebeen
have the cause of action
complied with, or
accrued. Inasmuch
to enforce as the
the charge by time to established
specific performance
the medical
within ten college has
had lost it by operation of law. That portion of the land
reasonable rent, if the owner of the land does not
become
has part of the public domain. appropriate
choose to the building after proper
indemnity. The parties shall agree upon the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: terms of the lease and in case of
b. Yes, a third party may acquire by
disagreement, the court fix the terms thereof.
prescription the 200 square meters, increase Builder; Good Faith vs. Bad
in area, because it is not included in the Faith (1999)
Torrens Title of the riparian owner. Hence, this (a) Because of confusion as to the boundaries
P.D.
doesNo.not1529.involve
The fact that
the the riparian land is
imprescriptibility of the adjoining lots that they bought from the
registered
conferred by does not 47,
Section automatically make the
same subdivision company, X constructed a
accretion thereto a registered land. (Grande v.
house on the adjoining lot of Y in the honest
CA, 115 521 (1962); Jagualing v. CA, 194 SCRA
Builder; Good belief that it is the land that he bought from
607 (1991).
Faith
A owns(1992)
a parcel of residential land worth the subdivision company. What are the
(b) Suppose
respective X was
rights of Xinand
good faithrespect
Y with but Y knew
to X's
P500,000.00 unknown to A, a residential house
that X was
house? (3%)constructing on his (Y's) land but
costing P 100,000.00 is built on the entire
simply kept quiet about it, thinking perhaps
parcel by B who claims ownership of the land.
that he could get X's house later. What are the
Answer all the following questions based on the
respective rights of the parties over X's house
premise that B is a builder in good faith and A
in this case? (2%)
is a landowner in good faith. a) May A acquire
the house built by B? If so, how? b) If the land
of the in
increased building
value toof P500,000.00
the house thereon,
by reasonwhat
amount should be paid by A in order to
acquire the house from B?
c) Assuming that the cost of the house
was P90,000.00 and not P100,000.00, may A
d)
requireIfBBtovoluntarily buys the land as desired
buy the land?
by A, under what circumstances may A
nevertheless be entitled to have the house
e)
removed?In what situation may a "forced lease"
arise between A and B. and what terms and
conditions would govern the lease?
Give reasons for your answers.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(a) Yes, A may acquire the house build by B by
paying indemnity to B. Article 448 of the Civil
Code provides that the owner of the land on
which anything has been built, sown or planted
in good faith, shall have the right to
appropriate as his own the works, sowing or
planting, after payment of the indemnity
provided for in Articles 546 and 546 of the Civil
(b) A should pay B the sum of P50,000. Article
Code.
548 of the Civil Code provides that useful
expenses shall be refunded to the possessor in
good faith with the right of retention, the
person who has defeated him in the possession
having the option of refunding the amount of
the expenses or of paying the increase in value SUGGESTED ANSWER:
which the thing may have acquired by reason a. Mario has a better right over the 200 square
thereof. The increase in value amounts to meters increase in area by reason of accretion,
(c) Yes, A may require B to buy the land.
P50,000.00. applying Article 457 of the New Civil Code,
Article 448 of the Civil Code provides that the which provides that to the owners of lands
owner of the land on which anything has been adjoining the banks of rivers belong the
built in good faith shall have the right to oblige accretion which they gradually received from
the one who built to pay the price of the land if Andres cannot
the effects of the claim
currentthat
of thethe increase in
waters.
(d) If B agrees
its value is not to buy land but
considerably failsthan
more to pay,
thatAof Marios land is his own, because such is an
can have the house removed ( Depra vs.
the building, accretion and not result of the sudden
Dumlao, 136 SCRA 475). detachment of a known portion of his land and
(e) Article 448 of the Civil Code provides that its attachment to Marios land, a process called
the builder cannot be obliged to buy the land if avulsion. He can no longer claim ownership
its value is considerably more than that of the of the portion of his registered land which was
building. In such case, he shall pay gradually and naturally eroded due to the
current of the river, because he
The case of Pecson v. CA, 244 SCRA 407, is square not meters. Jose claims that Mike is a builder in
the problem.
applicable to In the Pecson case, the builder because
bad faith he should know the boundaries of his
was the owner of the land who later lost the lot, and demands that the portion of the house
property at a public sale due to non-payment which encroached on his land should be
of taxes. The Court ruled that Article 448 does destroyed or removed. Mike replies that he is a
not apply to the case where the owner of the builder in good faith and offers to buy the land
land is the builder but who later lost the land; occupied by the building instead. 1) Is Mike a
not being applicable, the indemnity that should builder in good faith or bad faith? Why? (3%) 2)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
be paid to the buyer must be the fair market Whose preference should be followed? Why?
1) Yes, Mike is a builder in good faith. There is
value of the building and not just the cost of (2%)
no showing that when he built his house, he
construction thereof. The Court opined in that
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: knew that a portion thereof encroached on
case that to do otherwise would unjustly enrich
Pedro is correct. In Pecson vs. CA, it was held Jose's lot. Unless one is versed in the science of
the new owner of the land.
that Article 546 of the New Civil Code does not surveying, he cannot determine the precise
specifically state how the value of useful boundaries or location of his property by
improvements should be determined in fixing merely examining his title. In the absence of
the amount of indemnity that the owner of the contrary proof, the law presumes that the
land should pay to the builder in good faith. encroachment was done in good faith
Since the objective of the law is to adjust the 2} None of
[SUGGESTED
Technogas
the
ANSWER: preferences shall be followed.
Phils, v. CA, 268 SCRA 5, 15
rights of the parties in such manner as "to The
(a) preference
The
(1997)]. rights of ofY,Mike cannotofprevail
as owner the lot,becauseand of
administer complete justice to both of them in under Article of448
X, as builder of thethereon,
a house Civil Code, it is the
are governed
such a way as neither one nor the other may owner
by Art.of 448theofland the who
CivilhasCode thewhich
option or choice,
grants to Y
enrich himself of that which does not belong to not the builder.
the right to choose On between
the othertwo hand, the option
remedies: (a)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: belongs
appropriate to Jose,
the house he cannot demand that
by indemnifying X for theits
him",
2) Pablothe isCourt ruled
entitled to that the basis
the rentals of
of the
reimbursement should be the fair market value portion
value plus of the house encroaching
whatever on his landthe
necessary expenses be
building. As the owner of the land, Pablo is also destroyed or removed because
latter may have incurred for the preservation this is not one
of
thethe building.
owner of the building being an accession of the options
land, orgiven by lawXtotothe
(b) compel buy owner
the landof the if
thereto. However, Pedro who is entitled to land.
the price Theofowner the land may is notchoose betweenmore
considerably the
retain the building is also entitled to retain the appropriation
than the value of ofwhat
thewas builtIfafter
house. it is,payment
then X
rentals. He, however, shall apply the rentals to of indemnity,
cannot be obliged or totocompel
buy thethe landbuilder
but hetoshall pay
the indemnity payable to him after deducting for
pay thereasonable
land if therent, value and of thein land case is not of
ALTERNATIVE
reasonable ANSWER:
cost of repair and maintenance. ALTERNATIVE
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
considerably
disagreement,
ANSWER:
more
the than
court that
shall of
fix the building.
terms of
Pablo is entitled to the rentals. Pedro became 1) Since
(b) Mikethe cannot be considered
lot owner Y is deemed a builder
to be in
Otherwise,
the the builder shall his
pay rent without
for the
a possessor in bad faith from the time he bad lease.
good faith(Art
faith because
453), Xheasbuilt the party house
in good faith
learned that the land belongs to Pablo. As portion
first of the land encroached.
may determining
(a) remove thethe
corners houseand and
boundariesdemand of
such, he loses his right to the building, his lot to make for
indemnification suredamages
that his construction
suffered by him, was
including the fruits thereof, except the right of within
or (b) the demand perimeter paymentof hisofproperty.
the value Heofcould the
Builder; Good Faith vs. Bad Faith;
retention. have done this with
house plus reparation for damages (Art the help of a geodetic
447, in
Accession
a) Demetrio (2000)
knew that a piece of land engineer
relation to as Art 454).an ordinary
Y continuesprudent as ownerand of
bordering the beach belonged to Ernesto. reasonable man would
the lot and becomes, under the second do underoption, the
However, since the latter was studying in 2)
ownerJose'sof thepreference
circumstances. house as should be followed.
well, after he pays the He
Europe and no one was taking care of the land, may
Builder; have
sums demanded. Good the building
Faith vs. removed
Bad at the
Demetrio occupied the same and constructed expense
Faith
In good(2000) of Mike,
faith, Pedroappropriate
constructedthe building as
a five-door
thereon nipa sheds with tables and benches his own, oblige
commercial building Mikeon tothebuyland
theoflandPablo andwho ask
which he rented out to people who want to for
wasdamages
also in good in addition
faith. When to Pablo
any ofdiscovered
the three
have a picnic by the beach. When Ernesto options. (Articles 449,
the construction, 450, to
he opted 451, CC)
appropriate the
returned, he demanded the return of the land. Chattel
building byMortgagepaying Pedrovs. the cost thereof.
Demetrio agreed to do so after he has Pledge
Distinguish
However, (1999) a contract
Pedro insists that of he
chattel
shouldmortgage
be paid
removed the nipa sheds. Ernesto refused to let from a contract of pledge. (2%)
the current market value of the building, which
SUGGESTED ANSWER: SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Demetrio
Ernesto isremove
correct,the nipa sheds
is a on the ground was
In much
Demetrio builder in bad higher because of inflation. 1) Who
a contract of CHATTEL MORTGAGE
that
faith because he knew beforehandbythat
these already belonged to him rightthe
of is correct Pedro or Pablo?(1%) 2) In the
possession belongs to the creditor, while in a
accession. Who is correct? (3%)
land belonged to Ernesto, under Article 449 of meantime that Pedropossession
is not yet paid, who to is the
contract ofANSWER:
SUGGESTED PLEDGE belongs
the New Civil Code, one who builds on the land entitled to the rentals of the building, Pedro or
debtor.
Pablo is correct. Under Article 448 of the New
Pablo?
A chattel (1%)
of another loses what is built without right to Civil Codemortgage
in relation is to
a formal
Article contract
546, the while builder a
indemnity. Ernesto becomes the owner of the pledge is a real contract.
in good faith is entitled to a refund of the
nipa sheds by right of accession. Hence, necessary and useful expenses incurred by
Ernesto is well within his right in refusing to A
him, contract
or the increaseof chattel mortgage
in value whichmust the land be
Builder; Good Faith
allow the removal vs. sheds.
of the nipa Bad Faith; recorded
may have in a acquired
public instrumentby reason to bind of third
the
Presumption
Mike (2001)
built a house on his lot in Pasay City. Two persons
improvement, while aatcontractthe option of pledge
of the must be in
landowner.
years later, a survey disclosed that a portion of a public instrument containing
The builder is entitled to a refund of the description of
the building actually stood on the neighboring the thing pledged and the
expenses he incurred, and not to the market date thereof to bind
land of Jose, to the extent of 40 third
valuepersons.
of the improvement
Chattel Mortgage; foreclosure sale, foreclosed the mortgage and
Immovables
Vini constructed (1994)
a building on a parcel of land house
acquiredand lot. Learning of the proceedings
Xs
he leased from Andrea. He chattel mortgaged conducted by the bank, Z is now demanding
the land to Felicia. When he could not pay that the bank reconvey to him Xs house or
Felicia. Felicia initiated foreclosure proceedings. pay Xs loan to him plus interests. Is Zs
Vini claimed that the building he had SUGGESTED ANSWER:
demand against the bank valid and
constructed on the leased land cannot be No,
sustainable? Why? is
Zs demand 5%not valid. A building is
validly foreclosed because the building was, by immovable or real property whether it is
SUGGESTED ANSWERS:
law, an immovable. Is Vini correct? erected by the owner of the land, by a
a) The Chattel Mortgage is void and cannot be usufructuary, or by a lessee. It may be treated
foreclosed because the building is an as a movable by the parties to chattel
immovable and cannot be an object of a mortgage but such is binding only between
chattel mortgage. them and not on third parties (Evangelista v.
b) It depends. If the building was intended Alto Surety Col, inc. 103 Phil. 401 [1958]). In
and is built of light materials, the chattel this case, since the bank is not a party to the
mortgage may be considered as valid as chattel mortgage, it is not bound by it, as far as
between the parties and it may be considered the Bank is concerned, the chattel mortgage,
in respect to them as movable property, since does not exist. Moreover, the chattel mortgage
it can be removed from one place to another. does not exist. Moreover, the chattel mortgage
But if the building is of strong material and is is void because it was not registered. Assuming
not capable of being removed or transferred that it is valid, it does not bind the Bank
without being destroyed, the chattel mortgage because it was not annotated on the title of the
c) If it cannot
is void and was the land which Vini chattel
be foreclosed.
land mortgaged
No, Zs demand to the bank.
against Z cannot
the bank demand
is not valid.
mortgaged, such mortgage would be void, or
that the Bank pay him the loan Z
His demand that the bank reconvey to him Xs extended to
at least unenforceable, since he was not the
If whatof was X, because the Bank was not
mortgaged as a chattel is the house presupposes that he has a real right privy to such loan
owner the land.
building, the chattel mortgage is valid as transaction.
over the house. All that Z has is a personal
between the parties only, on grounds of right against X for damages for breach of the
estoppel which would preclude the mortgagor contract of loan.
from assailing the contract on the ground that The treatment of a house, even if built on
its subject-matter is an immovable. Therefore rented land, as movable property is void
Vini's defense is untenable, and Felicia can insofar as third persons, such as the bank, are
foreclose the mortgage over the building, concerned. On the other hand, the Bank
observing, however, the procedure prescribed already had a real right over the house and lot
for the execution of sale of a judgment debtor's when the mortgage was annotated at the back
immovable under Rule 39, Rules of Court, of the Torrens title. The bank later became the
specifically, that the notice of auction sale owner in the foreclosure sale. Z cannot ask the
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
d) The problem that Vini mortgaged the land bank
should be published in a newspaper of general The answer to pay for Xs loan plus interest. There is
by way of a chattel mortgage is untenable. hinges on whether or not the bank
circulation. no privity of contract between Z and the bank.
Land can only be the subject matter of a real is an innocent mortgagee in good faith or a
estate mortgage and only an absolute owner of mortgagee in bad faith. In the former case, Zs
real property may mortgage a parcel of land. demand is not valid. In the latter case, Zs
(Article 2085 (2) Civil Code). Hence, there can demand against the bank is valid and
But
be no on the assumption that what was
foreclosure. sustainable.
mortgaged by way of chattel mortgage was Under the Torrens system of land registration,
the building on leased land, then the parties every person dealing with registered land may
are treating the building as chattel. A building rely on the correctness of the certificate of title
that is not merely superimposed on the ground and the law will not in any way oblige to him to
is an immovable property and a chattel look behind or beyond the certificate in order
mortgage on said building is legally void but to determine the condition of the title. He is
the parties cannot be allowed to disavow their not bound by anything not annotated or
contract on account of estoppel by deed. reflected in the certificate. If he proceeds to
However, if third parties are involved such buy the land or accept it as a collateral relying
Chattel Mortgage;
chattel mortgage is void and has no effect. on the certificate, he is considered a buyer or a
Immovables
X constructed (2003) mortgagee in good faith. On this ground, the
a house on a lot which he was leasing
However,
Bank acquiresa bank is nottitle
a clean an ordinary
to the landmortgagee.
and the
Y. Later,
from X executed a chattel mortgage over
Unlike private individuals, a bank is expected to
said house in favor of Z as security for a loan house.
exercise greater care and prudence in its
obtained from the latter. Still later, X acquired
dealings. The ascertainment of the condition of a
ownership of the land where his house was
property offered as collateral for a loan must be a
constructed, after which he mortgaged both
standard and indispensable part of its operation.
house and land in favor of a bank, which
The bank should have conducted further inquiry
mortgage was annotated on the Torrens
regarding the house standing Page on 59 of
the 119
land
Certificate of Title. When X failed to pay his considering that it was already
loan to the bank, the latter, being the highest
bidder at the
standing there before X acquired the title to the land.
was then valued only at P1 Million. Lawrence was
bank
The cannot be considered as a mortgagee in insolve
declared
good faith. On this ground, Zs demand against nt.
the Bank is valid and sustainable. Assuming that the aircraft was sold for Pl
Million, give the order of preference of the
Chattel Mortgage; creditors of Lawrence and distribute the
Possession
A, (1993)
about to leave the country on a foreign SUGGESTED
amount of ANSWER:
P1 Million.
assignment, entrusted to B his brand new car Assuming that the aircraft was sold for P1
and its certificate of registration. Falsifying A's Million, there is no order of preference. The P1
signature. B sold A's car to C for P200,000.00. C Million will all go to the bank as a chattel
then registered the car in his name. To mortgagee because a chattel mortgage under
complete the needed amount, C borrowed Art. 2241 (4) NCC defeats Art. 2244 (12) and
P100.000.00 from the savings and loan (14}. Art. 2241 (3) and (5) are not applicable
association in his office, constituting a chattel because the aircraft is no longer in the
Easement vs.
possession of the creditor.
mortgage on the car. For failure of C to pay the
Usufruct
1. What is (1995)
easement? Distinguish easement
amount owed, the savings and loan association
2. Can
from there be (a) an easement over a
usufruct.
filed in the RTC a complaint for collection with
usufruct? (b) a usufruct over an easement? (c)
application for issuance of a writ of replevin to
an easement over another easement? Explain.
obtain possession of the vehicle so that the
chattel mortgage could be foreclosed. The RTC
issued the writ of replevin. The car was then
seized from C and sold by the sheriff at public
auction at which the savings and loan
association was the lone bidder. Accordingly,
the car was sold to it. A few days later, A
arrived
SUGGESTEDfrom his foreign assignment. Learning
ANSWER:
of what happened
Under the prevailing to rulings
his car,of
A the
sought to
Supreme
recover possession and ownership of
Court, A can recover the car from the Savingsit from the
savings
and Loan and loan association.
Association providedCan A recover
he pays the his
car from
price the savings
at which and loan association?
the Association bought the car at
Explain
a public your answer.
auction. Under that doctrine, there has
been an unlawful deprivation by B of A of his
car and, therefore, A can recover it from any
person in possession thereof. But since it was
bought at a public auction in good faith by the
Savings and Loan Association, he must
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
reimburse the Association at the price for which
Yes, A can recover his car from the Savings
the car was bought.
and Loan Association. In a Chattel Mortgage,
the mortgagor must be the absolute owner of
the thing mortgaged. Furthermore, the person
constituting the mortgage must have the free
disposal of the property, and in the absence
thereof, must be legally authorized for the
purpose. In the case at bar, these essential
requisites did not apply to the mortgagor B,
Chattel
hence the Mortgage; Preference
Chattel Mortgage of valid.
was not
Creditors a(1995)
Lawrence, retired air force captain, decided
to go into the air transport business. He
purchased an aircraft in cash except for an
outstanding balance of P500,000.00. He
incurred an indebtedness of P300,000.00 for
repairs with an aircraft repair company. He also
borrowed P1 Million from a bank for additional
capital and constituted a chattel mortgage on
While on a test
the aircraft flight the
to secure the aircraft
loan. crashed
causing physical injuries to a third party who
was awarded damages of P200,000.00.
Lawrence's insurance claim for damage to the

aircraft was denied thus leaving him nothing
else but the aircraft which
2. (a) There can be no easement over a usufruct. there is a degree of regularity to indicate continuity of
easement
Since an may be constituted only on a possession and that if coupled with an apparent sign, such
corporeal immovable property, no easement easement of way may be acquired by prescription.
may be constituted on a usufruct which is not a ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
(b) There can
corporeal rightbe no usufruct over an easement. Yes, Ernie could close the pathway on his land.
While a usufruct maybe created over a right, Don has not acquired an easement of right of
such right must have an existence of its own way either by agreement or by judicial grant.
independent of the property. A servitude Neither did the buyers. Thus, establishment of
cannot be the object of a usufruct because it a road or unlawful use of the land of Ernie
has no existence independent of the property would constitute an invasion of possessory
to which It attaches. rights of the owner, which under Article 429 of
There cannot be a usufruct over an easement the Civil Code may be repelled or prevented.
since an easement presupposes two (2) Ernie has the right to exclude any person from
tenements belonging to different persons and ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
the enjoyment and disposal of the land. This is
the right attaches to the tenement and not to Yes, Ernie may close the pathway, subject
an attribute of ownership that Ernie enjoys.
the owner. While a usufruct gives the however, to the rights of the lot buyers. Since
usufructuary a right to use, right to enjoy, right there is no access to the public road, this
to the fruits, and right to possess, an easement results in the creation of a legal easement. The
However, a usufruct can be constituted
gives only a limited use of the servient estate. over a lot buyers have the right to demand that Ernie
property that has in its favor an easement or grant them
SUGGESTED a right of way. In turn, they have
ANSWER:
one burdened with servitude. The usufructuary 1. An EASEMENT
the obligation to pay the or valueservitude is an
of the portion
will exercise the easement during the period of encumbrance imposed
used as a right of way, plus damages. upon an immovable for
usufruct. the
c) benefit
What are of another
the rights immovable
of the lotbelonging
buyers, to
if
(c) There can be no easement over another a different
any? Explain. owner. (2%) (Art. 613, NCC)
easement for the same reason as in (a). An USUFRUCTANSWER:
SUGGESTED gives a right to enjoy the property
Prior to the with
of another grantthe of an easement,
obligation the buyersits
of preserving of
easement, although it is a real right over an
immovable, is not a corporeal right. There is a the
form dominant
and estate
substance, have no other
unless right
the than to
title
compel grant
constituting of
it oreasement
the law of right
otherwise of way. Since
provides.
Roman maxim which says that: There can be
no servitude over another servitude. the
(Art.properties
562, NCC). of the buyers are surrounded by
Easement; Effects; Discontinuous other immovables
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:and has no adequate outlet
Easements; Permissive Use (2005) Easement
to a public is an encumbrance
highway and the isolation imposed upon
is not duean
Don was the owner of an agricultural land with immovable
to their acts, for
buyers the
may benefit
demand anof another
easement
no access to a public road. He had been of immovable
a right of way belongingprovided to proper
a differentindemnityowneris in
passing through the land of Ernie with the which
paid andcase the it is
right called
of wayreal or predial
demanded easement,
is the
latter's acquiescence for over 20 years. or for
shortest the andbenefit
least of a community
prejudicial to Ernie.or group of
Subsequently, Don subdivided his property into Easement; persons
(Villanueva in which
v. case
Velasco, it is
G.R. known
No. as
130845, a personal
The distinctions Nuisance; usufruct
20 residential lots and sold them to different November easement. 27, 2000). between and
Abatement
Lauro
a)
easement owns
Usufruct an
are: (2002)agricultural
includes land all planted
uses ofmostly the
persons. Ernie blocked the pathway and refused with fruit and
property trees. for Hernando
all purposes, ownsincluding
an adjacent jus
a)
to letDidtheDon acquire
buyers passan easement
through of right of
his land. land
fruendi. Easement is limited to a specificwhich
devoted to his piggery business, use. is
way? Explain. (2%)
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: b) (2)Usufruct
two meters higher may in beelevation.
constituted Although on
No, Don did not acquire an easement of right of Hernando immovable has or constructed
movable property. a wasteEasement disposal
way. An easement of right of way is lagoon may befor constituted
his piggery, onlyit on is an
inadequate
immovable to
discontinuous in nature it is exercised only if contain c)
property. Easement
the waste water is notcontaining
extinguished by the
pig manure,
a man passes over somebody's land. Under death and it of often the overflows
owner ofand the inundates
dominant Lauros estate
while usufruct
Article 622 of the Civil Code, discontinuous plantation. This has increased the acidity of the is extinguished by the death of
the usufructuary
easements, whether apparent or not, may only soil in the plantation, causing the trees to unless a contrary intention
be acquired by virtue of a title. The Supreme appears. d)
wither andAn die. easementLauro sues contemplates
for damagestwo caused (2)
Court, in Abellana, Sr. v. Court of Appeals (G.R. estates
to his belonging
plantation. to two
Hernando (2) different
invokes hisowners;
right toa
No. 97039, April 24, 1992), ruled that an
usufruct
the benefit contemplates
of a natural only
easement one property
in favor of(real
his
easement of right of way being discontinuous in higher or personal)
estate, whereby
which the usufructuary
imposes upon the uses and
lower
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Further, possession of the
nature is not acquirable by prescription.easement by Don is enjoys
estate the
of property
Lauro the as well
obligation as its
to fruits,
receive while
the
Hernando is wrong. It is true that Lauros land
only permissive, tolerated or with the another waters owns the naked
descending title
from natural during the
the higher period
estate. Is
is burdened
e) the A usufruct withmay the be alienated easement
separately to
acquiescence of Ernie. It is settled in the case of Hernando usufruct.
correct? (5%)
accept or receive the water which naturally
of Cuaycong v. Benedicto (G.R. No. 9989, from the property to which it attaches, while an
and without
easement interruption
cannot of manseparately
be alienated descends from from
March 13, 1918) that a permissive use of a
a
thehigher
property estateto to aitlower
which attaches. estate. However,
road over the land of another, no matter how
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: Hernando hasNOTE: constructed a waste disposal
It is recommended by the
long continued, will not create an easement of
Yes, Don acquired an easement of right of way. An easement that lagoon for his piggery Committee and thatit is thisany waste twowater (2)
way by prescription.
is continuous and apparent can be acquired by prescription and that flows downward distinctionsto Lauros
shouldland. Hernando
be given full
title. According to Professor Tolentino, an easement of right of way SUGGESTED ANSWER:
may have a continuous nature if has, thus, interrupted credit. the flow of water and has
created and is maintaining a nuisance. Under
Act. 697 NCC, abatement of a nuisance does
not preclude recovery of damages by Lauro
even for the past existence of a nuisance.
The claim for damages may also be premised in to
Art.
time. As Tomas' business grows, the need for use of
(4)
2191NCC.
ANOTHER ANSWER:
Hernando is not correct. Article 637 of the New
Civil Code provides that the owner of the higher
estate cannot make works which will increase
the burden on the servient estate. (Remman
Enterprises, Inc. v. CA, 330 SCRA 145 [2000]).
The owner of the higher estate may be
compelled to pay damages to the owner of the
Easements;
lower estate.
Classification
Distinguish (1998)
between:
1. Continuous and discontinuous
2. Apparent|2%]
easements; and non-apparent
3. Positive and negative
easements; [2%]
easements. [1%]
extinguished by the registration of the servient estate. consistent with this rule, where the distance to the
However, this provision has been suppressed in modern
highway
streetconveyances
is
orshortest. requires widening of the easement.
Section 44, PD No. 1529. In other words, the ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
registration of the servient estate did not The facts show
2) Is David entitled that to theaneed rightfor of away wider in right
this
operate to cut-off or extinguish the right of of
case?way Why arose or whyfrom not?the increased production
way. Therefore, the complaint for the owing to ANSWER:
SUGGESTED the acquisition by Tomas of an
cancellation of the right of way should be No, David area.
additional is not Under entitledArt. to 626
the rightof the of Civil
way
Easements; Right of Way;
dismissed. being claimed. The isolation
Code, the easement can be used only for the of his subdivision
Requisites
David is the (1996)owner of the subdivision in Sta. was due to his
immovable own act
originally or omission because
contemplated. Hence, the he
Rosa, Laguna, without an access to the did not develop into an
increase in width is justified and should have access road the rice
highway. When he applied for a license to Easements;
field which he
been granted. Right was of supposed to purchase
establish the subdivision, David represented Waycoconut
The (2000)
according to farm
his own of Federico
representationis surrounded when he by
that he will purchase a rice field located the lands for
applied of Romulo.
a license Federico to seeks
establish a rightthe of
between his land and the highway, and develop Ejectment
way through(Floro
subdivision Suit
a portionvs.
us. Cancellation
of the land
Llenado, 244ofSCRA713).
Romulo to
it into an access road. But. when the license of
In
bringTitle
an his (2005)
ejectment
coconut case products filedtoby theDon market. against He
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
was already granted, he did not Cesar,
has can
chosen the
a latter
point ask
where forhe the
willcancellation
pass through of
1. CONTINUOUS EASEMENTS arebotherthose the to buyuse Don's
a housing title considering
project of that
Romulo. heThe (Cesar)
latter is
wants the
the rice field,
of which is or which
may be remains
incessant, unutilized
withoutuntil the the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
present. Instead, he chose to connect his rightful
him toowner pass ofanother
the lot? Explain. way which (2%) is one
intervention of any act of man, while Cesar
SUGGESTED cannot ANSWER:ask for the cancellation of Don's
subdivision with the neighboring kilometer longer. Who should prevail? (5%)
DISCONTINUOUS EASEMENTS aresubdivision
those which of Romulo
title evenwill if he prevail. Under Article
is the rightful owner of 650 theof lot.the In
Nestor,
are usedwhich has an and
at intervals access depend to the uponhighway.
the acts New
an Civilfor
action Code, the easement
ejectment, the only issue of right of way
involved is
Nestor allowed
of man. (Art. 615, Civil Code)him to do this, pending one
shall of possession
be established de facto, at the purpose
the point of which
least
negotiations
SUGGESTED on the compensation to be paid.
ANSWER: is merely totoprotect
prejudicial the servientthe owner estate from and any wherephysicalthe
2. APPARENT
When they failed EASEMENTS
to arrive are at an those which are
agreement, encroachment
distance from from without. The
the dominant title to
estate of a the land
public
made known
Nestor built aand wallare acrosscontinually
the roadkept in view
connecting or its ownership is not involved,
highway is the shortest. In casefor of ifconflict,
a person the is
by external
with David'ssigns that reveal
subdivision. David thefiled useaand in actual possession thereof, he is entitled
criterion of least prejudice prevails overtothe be
enjoymentin
complaint ofcourt,
the same, for the while NONAPPARENT
establishment of an v. Anas, of
maintained G.R. and No. L-20617,
respected in itMayeven 31, against the
criterion shortest distance. Since the route
EASEMENTS
easement of are
right those
of way whichthrough showthe no external 1965)
owner himself. (Garcia
SUGGESTED ANSWER: chosen by Federico will prejudice the housing
indication ofoftheirTheexistence. (Art. 615,to Civil Since
subdivision
Art, 649, NCC.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Nestor whichorhe
owner, any claimsperson be
who the projectthe ofcase filed by
Romulo, Don against
Romulo has the Cesar right is an to
Code)
most
by adequate
virtue of a realand practical
right may outlet
cultivate to the
or use ejectment
Easements; case, the
Right latter of cannot
Way; ask for the
3. POSITIVE EASEMENTS are those which demand that Federico pass another way even
highway.
any immovable 1) What are the requisites for the cancellation
though boughtit will of
Inseparability
Emma Don's
parceltitle.
bea(2001) of land He from
has to file the
Equitable-
impose upon thewhich
owner is of
surrounded
the servient by estate
other longer.
establishment
immovables of allowing
a compulsory
pertaining othereasement
to something persons of a
and proper
PCI Bank, action
which where
acquired the the issue
same of fromownership
Felisa,
the obligation of to be
right over
the the property
original can
owner. be raised.
Thereafter, Emma
done of
without or way?
adequate
of doing itoutlet himself, to a public
while highway, is
NEGATIVE Ejectment that Felisa Suit;
entitled to demand a right of prohibit
way through the discovered had granted a right of
EASEMENTS are those which the owner Commodatum
Alberto and (2006)
Janine migrated to the the land United
neighboring estates, way over the land in favor of of
of the servient estateafter frompayment doing something of the
States of whichAmerica,
Should
property this easement be established in such a Georgina, had leaving
no outlet behindto a their public4
which he indemnity.
could lawfully do if the easement did children, one of whom is Manny. They own a
manner that its use may be continuous for all highway, but the easement was not annotated
not exist. (Art. 615. Civil Code) duplex apartment and allowed Manny to live in
the needs of the
Easements; Right dominant
of estate, establishing when the servient estate was registered under
a
Waypermanent
Tomas (1993)
Encarnacion'spassage,3,000 the indemnity
square meter shall one of the units. While
the Torrens system. Emma then filed a in the United States,
consist
parcel of ofland,
the valuewhereofhe the has land occupied
a plant nursery,and is Alberto
complaint died. His widow and
for cancellation of the all right
his children
of way,
SUGGESTED
executed ANSWER:
an Extrajudicial Settlement of
the
locatedamount just of behindthe damage
Aniceta caused Magsino's to thetwo on the ground that it had been extinguished by
In case the right of way is limited to the The complaint
Alberto's estate for cancellation
wherein the of easement
2door apartment of
servient
hectare parcel estate.land. To enable Tomas to have such failure to annotate. How would you decide
necessary passage for the cultivation right
was of way must
assigned by fail.
all The the failure
children to annotate
to their
access to the highway, Aniceta agreedoftothe grant the controversy?
the easement
(5%)
upon the title of the servient
estate surrounded by others
him a road right of way a meter wide through and for the mother, Janine. Subsequently, she sold the
gathering of its crops through the servient estate
property is
to not
George. among
The latterthe grounds
required Manny for
which he could pass. Through the years Tomas' extinguishing an easement under Art. 631 of
estate
business without
flourished a permanent
which enabled way, the him to buy to sign a prepared Lease Contract so that he
indemnity shall consist in the payment ofofthe the
and Civil
his Code.
family Under
could Article
continue 617, easements
occupying the
another portion iswhich enlarged the area his If
are you were George's
inseparable from the counsel,
estate what legal
This easement
damage
plant cause
nursery. by
But
not
such
he
compulsory
was encumbrance.
still
if the
landlocked.
isolation
He unit. Manny refused to sign to the which they
contract
of the immovable is due to the proprietor's own steps
actively
alleging willor
that you take?
passively Explain.
belong.
his parents allowed him and hisOnce(5%) it attaches,
could not bring
acts. (564a). The ineasement
and out ofof his rightplant of nursery
way shall a SUGGESTED
it can only ANSWER:
be extinguished under Art. 631, and
jeep or delivery panel much less a truck that family
If I were to continue
George's occupying
counsel, the premises.
I are
would first demand
be established at the point least prejudicial to they exist even if they not stated or
he needed to transport his seedlings. He now that Manny
ALTERNATIVE vacate
ANSWER: the
annotated as an encumbrance on the Torrens apartment. If Manny
the servient estate, and insofar as consistent Under Section 44,an PD No. 1529, every
asked Aniceta to grant him a widerfrom portion refuses, I will file ejectment suit. When
with this rule, where the distance the of title of the
registered
servient
owner
estate.
receiving a
(II Tolentino
certificate of
326,
title
her property, theto price of which he was willing Manny
1987 ed.) was allowed by his parents to occupy
dominant estate a public highway may be pursuant to a decree of registration, and every
to pay, to enable the premises, without compensation, the
ALTERNATIVE
the shortest (Art. him
ANSWER: to
650, easement
constructde
NCC: Vda.
a road to
Baltazar v. subsequent
The
have requisites
access for atocompulsory
his plant nursery. of right of way are: (a)
Aniceta contract of innocent commodatum purchaser was for value, Upon
created. shall
CA. 245 SCRA
SUGGESTED
the dominant ANSWER:
estate 333 }
is surrounded by other immovables and is hold the same free from all encumbrances
refused
Art. 651an claiming
of adequate
the Civil Code that shethat had already of theallowed the death of the father, the contract was
without outletprovides
to a public the width
street or highway; easement
(b) proper
him a previous
must be sufficient to road
meet the right
needs of way.
of the dominantIsbeTomas
estate, and except
extinguished those asnoted
it is a on
purely said certificate.
personal contract. This
indemnity must be paid; (c) the isolation must not due to the acts
maytheaccordingly
entitled
of ownerto change
of the
the fromestate;
easement
dominant time toand
he time.(d)It the
now is the need
demands
right of the
of way rule,
As thehowever,
new owner admits of of theexceptions.
apartment George is
dominant
claimed isestate
at a which
point determines
least prejudicial the
to width
the of the passage.
servient estate These
and, Under
entitled Act
Extra-Judicialto 496, asPartition;
exercise amended
his right ofby Act No. 2011,
possession over
from may
needs Aniceta?
insofar as isvary from time and
Fraud
X wasSection
the same. (1990)
the 4,
owner Act of 3621,
a 10,000an easement
square if not
meter
registeredX shall
property. married remainY andand out shall
of their beunion.
held A, to
pass
B andwithC were the born.
land until cutoff or
After the death of Y, X married Z and they begot asshare allotted by law to the finder since the phrase "by
children, D, E and F. After the death of X, the chance" means "by accident", meaning an unexpected discovery.
The liberal view, however, would sustain Tim's right to the allocated
children of the first and second marriages share interpreting the phrase in question as meaning "by a stroke of
executed an extrajudicial partition of the good fortune", which does not rule out deliberate or intentional
aforestated property on May 1, 1970. D, E and search. It is submitted that the liberal view should prevail since in
F were given a one thousand square meter practical reality, hidden treasure is hardly ever found without
conscious effort to find it, and the strict view would tend to render
portion of the property. They were minors at the codal provision in question illusory.
the time of the execution of the document. D
was 17 years old, E was 14 and F was 12; and
they were made to believe by A, B and C that
unless they sign the document they will not get
any share. Z was not present then. In January Hidden
(a) Can the minority of D, E
1974, D, E and F filed an action in court to and F be a basis to Treasuresa(1997)
Marcelino, treasure hunter as just a hobby,
nullify the partition? Explain
nullify the suit alleging they discovered the your answer. has found a map which appears to indicate the
(b) How about fraud? Explain location of hidden treasure. He has an idea of
fraud only ANSWER:
in 1973.
your answer.
SUGGESTED the land where the treasure might possibly be
(a) Yes, minority can be a basis to nullify the found. Upon inquiry, Marcelino learns that the
partition because D, E and F were not properly owner of the land, Leopoldo, is a permanent
represented by their parents or guardians at resident of Canada, Nobody, however, could
the time they contracted the extrajudicial give him Leopoldo's exact address. Ultimately,
partition. (Articles 1327. 1391, Civil Code). anyway, he enters the land and conducts a
(b) In the case of fraud, when through insidious Leopoldo
search. Helearningsucceeds. of Marcelino's "find", seeks
words or machinations of one party the other to recover the treasure from Marcelino but the
is induced to enter into the contract without latter is not willing to part with it. Failing to
which he would not have agreed to, the action reach an agreement, Leopoldo sues Marcelino
still prosper because under Art, 1391 of the for the recovery of the property. Marcelino
Civil Code, in case of fraud, the action for contests the action. How would you decide the
annulment may be brought within four years SUGGESTED
case? ANSWER:
from the discovery of the fraud. I would decide in favor of Marcelino since he is
Hidden considered a finder by chance of the hidden
Treasure
Tim came into (1995) possession of an old map treasure, hence, he is entitled to one-half (1/2)
showing where a purported cache of gold of the hidden treasure. While Marcelino may
bullion was hidden. Without any authority from have had the intention to look for the hidden
the government Tim conducted a relentless treasure, still he is a finder by chance since it is
search and finally found the treasure buried in enough that he tried to look for it. By chance in
a new river bed formerly part of a parcel of the law does not mean sheer luck such that the
land owned by spouses Tirso and Tessie. The finder should have no intention at all to look for
old river which used to cut through the land of the treasure. By chance means good luck,
spouses Ursula and Urbito changed its course implying that one who intentionally looks for
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
through natural causes. To whom shall the the treasure is embraced in the provision. The
The treasure was found in a property of public
treasure belong? Explain. reason is that it is extremely difficult to find
dominion, the new river bed. Since Tim did
not have authority from the government and, hidden treasure without looking for it
therefore, was a trespasser, he is not entitled deliberately.
Marcelino is not a trespasser since
to the one-half share allotted to a finder of there is no prohibition
1. Marcelino did not find forthe
him to enterby
treasure the
hidden treasure. All of it will go to the State. In premises, hence, he is entitled
chance because he had a map, he knew the to half of the
addition, under Art. 438 of the NCC in order treasure.
location of the hidden treasure and he
that the finder be entitled to the 1/2 share, the intentionally looked for the treasure, hence, he
treasure must be found by chance, that is by is not entitled to any part of the treasure.
sheer luck. In this case, since Tim found the 2. Marcelino appears to be a trespasser and
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
treasure although there may be a question of whether
The law grantsnot by share
a one-half chance
to a finderbut because
of hidden treasure he
relentlessly
provided he is notsearched
a trespasser for
and it,
the he is is
finding not entitled
by chance. It isto
he found it by chance or not, as he has found
any share in the hidden treasure.
submitted that Tim is not a trespasser despite his not getting the hidden treasure by means of a treasure
authority from the government, because the new river bed where he map, he will not be entitled to a finder's share.
found the treasure is property for public use (Art. 420 NCC), to The hidden treasure shall belong to the owner.
which the public has legitimate access. The question, therefore, 3. The main rule is that hidden treasure
boils down to whether or not the finding was by chance in view of
the fact that Tim "conducted a relentless search" before finding the belongs to the owner of the land, building or
treasure. The strict or literal view holds that deliberate or intentional other property on which it is found. If it is found
search precludes entitlement to the one-half by chance by a third person and he is not a
trespasser, he is entitled to one-half (1/2). If
he is a trespasser, he loses everything.
(a) X borrowed money from Y and gave a piece Areof the right of redemption and the equity of
land as security by way of mortgage. It was given by law to a mortgagor the same? Explain.
redemption
expressly agreed between the parties in (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the mortgage contract that upon The equity of redemption is different from the
nonpayment of the debt on time by X, the right of redemption. EQUITY OF REDEMPTION is
mortgaged land would already belong to the right of the mortgagor after judgment in a
Y. If X defaulted in paying, would Y now judicial foreclosure to redeem the property by
become the owner of the mortgaged land? paying to the court the amount of the
(b) Why? Suppose
(3%) in the preceding question, the judgment debt before the sale or confirmation
agreement between X and Y was that if X failed of the sale. On the other hand, RIGHT OF
to pay the mortgage debt on time, the debt REDEMPTION is the right of the mortgagor to
shall be paid with the land mortgaged by X to redeem the property sold at an extra-judicial
Y. Would your answer be the same as in the foreclosure by paying to the buyer in the
SUGGESTED
preceding ANSWER:
question? Explain. (3%) foreclosure sale the amount paid by the buyer
(a) No, Y would not become the owner of the Nuisance; within one yearFamilyfrom suchHouse; sale. Not
land. The stipulation is in the nature of pactum A Nuisance
drug lord per se his
and (2006)
family reside in a small
commissorium which is prohibited by law. The bungalow where they sell shabu and other
property should be sold at public auction and prohibited drugs. When the police found the
the proceeds thereof applied to the illegal trade, they immediately demolished the
indebtedness. Any excess shall be given to the house because according to them, it was a
SUGGESTED
mortgagor.ANSWER: nuisance per se that should be abated. Can
(d) No, the answer would not be the same. This SUGGESTED ANSWER:
this demolition be sustained? Explain. (5%)
is a valid stipulation and does not constitute No, the demolition cannot be sustained. The
pactum commissorium. In pactum house is not a nuisance per se or at law as it is
commissorium, the acquisition is automatic not an act, occupation, or structure which is a
without need of any further action. In the nuisance at all times and under any
instant problem another act is required to be circumstances, regardless of location or
performed, namely, the conveyance of the surroundings. A nuisance per se is a nuisance
Mortgage;
property as payment (dacionPactum
en pago). in and of itself, without regard to
Commissorium
To (2001) from a rural bank,
secure a loan obtained circumstances [Tolentino, p. 695, citing
Purita assigned her leasehold rights over a Nuisance; Public Nuisance vs. Private
Wheeler v. River Falls Power Co., 215 Ala. 655,
stall in the public market in favor of the bank. Nuisance
State
111 with
So. (2005)whether each of the following
reason
907].
The deed of assignment provides that in case is a nuisance, and if so, give its classification,
of default in the payment of the loan, the bank whether public or private: Article 694 of the
shall have the right to sell Purita's rights over Civil Code defines nuisance as any act,
the market stall as her attorney-in-fact, and to omission, establishment, business, condition or
apply the proceeds to the payment of the loan. property, or anything else which injures or
cession?
1) Was Why? (3%) of leasehold rights a
the assignment endangers the health or safety of others, or
2)
mortgage Assuming
or a the assignment to be a annoys or offends the senses, or shocks, defies
mortgage, does the provision giving the bank or disregards decency or morality or obstructs
the power to sell Purita's rights constitute or interferes with the free passage of any
pactum commissorium or not? Why? (2%) public highway or street or any body of water
SUGGESTED ANSWER: It
or is a public
hinders or nuisance
impairs the if it affects
use a community
of property.
1) The assignment was a mortgage, not a or neighborhood or any considerable number of
cession, of the leasehold rights. A cession would persons. It is a direct encroachment upon
have transferred ownership to the bank. public rights or property which results
However, the grant of authority to the bank to injuriously to the public. It is a private
sell the leasehold rights in case of default is nuisance, if it affects only a person or small
proof that no such ownership was transferred a) numberA squatter's
of persons. hut It (1%)violates only private
and that a mere encumbrance was constituted. If constructed on public streets or riverbeds, it
rights.
There would have been no need for such is a public nuisance because it obstructs the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: free use by the public of said places. (City of
authority had there been a cession.
2) No, the clause in question is not a pactum Manila v. Garcia, G.R. No. L-26053, February
commissorium. It is pactum commissorium 21,1967) If constructed on private land, it is a
when default in the payment of the loan private nuisance because it hinders or impairs
automatically vests ownership of the the use of the property by the owner.
encumbered property in the bank. In the b) A swimming pool
problem given, the bank does not automatically (1%) This is not a nuisance in the absence of any
become owner of the property upon default of unusual condition or artificial feature other
the mortgagor. The bank has to sell the Hidalgo
than the Enterprises
mere water. v. In Balandan (G.R. No. L-
Mortgage;
property and Right of Redemption
apply the proceeds vs. Equity
to the 3422, June 13, 1952), the Supreme Court ruled
of Redemption (1999)
indebtedness. Mortgage; Pactum
that a swimming pool is but
Commissorium (1999) Page 64 of 119
a duplication of nature thus, could not (b)
be The mortgage shall not bind the 1/3 right and interest
nuisance.
considered as a
c) A house of prostitution
Irrespective of its location and how its business
(1%)
is conducted, it is a nuisance since it defies,
shocks and disregards decency and morality. It
is a public nuisance because of its injury to the
public.
d) A noisy or dangerous factory in a private
If the (1%)
land noise injuriously affects the health and
comfort of ordinary people in the vicinity to an
unreasonable extent, it is a nuisance. It is a
public nuisance because there is a tendency to
annoy the public. (Velasco v. Manila Electric
Co., G.R. No. L-18390, August 6, 1971)
e) Uncollected garbage
It will become a nuisance if it substantially
(1%)
impairs the comfort and enjoyment of the
adjacent occupants. The annoyance and the
smell must be substantial as to interfere
sensibly with the use and enjoyment by
persons of ordinary sensibilities. It is a public
nuisance because of its injury to the public.
Ownership; Co-
Ownership
A, B and C are (1992)
the co-owners in equal shares
of a residential house and lot. During their co-
ownership, the following acts were
respectively done by the co-owners: 1) A
then tilting
undertook to oneof
the repair side,
the to prevent the
foundation house from
of the
collapsing.
house, 2) B and C mortgaged the house
and lot to secure a loan. 3) B engaged a
contractor to build a concrete fence all
around the lot. 4) C built a beautiful
grotto in the garden. 5) A and C sold the
land to X for a very good price.
(a) Is A's sole decision to repair the

foundation of the house binding on B and
C? May A require B and C to contribute
their 2/3 share of the expense? Reasons.
(b) What is the legal effect of the
mortgage contract executed by B and C?
(c)
Reasons.Is B's sole decision to build the
fence binding upon A and C? May B
require A and C to contribute their 2/ 3
share of the expense? Reasons.
(d) Is C's sole decision to build the
grotto binding upon A and B? May C
require A and B to contribute their 2/ 3
share of the expense? Reasons.
(e) What are the legal effects of the
contract of sale executed by A. C and X?
Reasons.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: thereof and offering to reimburse B for
Ramon has acquired the land by acquisitive of A and he
whatever shallhadbe paid deemed
in purchasingto cover theonly the
prescription, and because of laches on the part rights and
property frominterests
the bank. of B In and
brief,Chow in thewill youhouse
of Rosario. Ramon's possession of the land was and lot.the
answer Thecomplaint
mortgage of shall
C andbe D,limited
if you were to the
adverse because he asserted sole ownership SUGGESTED
portion (2/3)
engaged byANSWER:
Dwhich
as hismay counsel?be allotted to B and C
thereof and never shared the harvest As counsel
in the partition of B,(Art.I shall 493, answer the complaint as
Civil Code).
therefrom. His adverse possession having been follows: When
SUGGESTED ANSWER: B bought the property, it was not
continuous and uninterrupted for more than 30 (c) B's
by a sole
rightdecision
of redemption to build the concrete
since the periodfence
years, Ramon has acquired the land by is not binding
therefore had already upon expired.A and C. Hence,ExpensesB bought to
prescription. Rosario is also guilty of laches not improve
the propertythe thingin anowned independentin common must be
unconditional
having asserted her right to the harvest for decided
sale. C and upon D by are anot majority
co-owners of the with co-owners
B of the
Ownership;
more than 40 years.Co-Ownership; who represent
property. Therefore, the the controlling
suit of Cinterest
and D cannot (Arts.
Prescription
Senen (2002)
and Peter are brothers. Senen migrated ALTERNATIVE
489 and 492.
prosper. ANSWER:
Civil Code).
to Canada early while still a teenager. Peter As counselANSWER:
SUGGESTED of B, I shall answer the complaint as
stayed in Bulacan to take care of their widowed (d) C's sole
follows: From decision
the facts to build the grotto
described, it is not
would
mother and continued to work on the Family binding that
appear uponthe A Certificate
and B who of cannot
sale has be not requiredbeen
farm even after her death. Returning to the to contribute
registered. The one-yearto the period expenses for the
of redemption
country some thirty years after he had left, embellishment
begins to run from of the thing owned
registration. in common
In this case, it
Senen seeks a partition of the farm to get his if not
has notdecided
yet even upon by the majority
commenced. Underof the the co-
Rules
share as the only co-heir of Peter. Peter owners
of Court,who the represent
property may the controlling
be releasedinterest by the
interposes his opposition, contending that (Arts. 489 and
Judgment debtor 492,orCivil his Code).
successor in interest.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
acquisitive prescription has already set in and (Sec. 29, Rule 27). It has been held that this
(e) The sale to X shall not bind the 1/3 share
that estoppel lies to bar the action for partition, includes a joint owner. (Ref. Magno vs.Ciola, 61
of B and shall be deemed
Ownership; Co-Ownership;
to cover only the 2/3
citing his continuous possession of the property Phil. 80).
share of Adied,
Redemption
Ambrosio and (2000)Cleaving
in the his landthree
(Art. daughters,
493, Civil
for at least 10 years, for almost 30 years in Code). Rosario
Belen, B shall have and Sylviathe right to redeem
a hacienda whichthe 2/3was
fact. It is undisputed that Peter has never
SUGGESTED ANSWER: share sold to
mortgaged to X the byPhilippine
A and C National since X isBank a third
due
openly
Senensclaimed soleprosper.
action will ownership of the
Article 494property.
of the person
to (Art. 1620,
the failure of theCivil Code). to pay the bank,
daughters
If he ever had the intention to do so,
New Civil Code provides that no prescription Senen Ownership;
the latter foreclosed Co-Ownership;
the mortgage and the
was completely ignorant of it. Will
shall run in favor of a co-owner or co-heir Senens Prescription
In
hacienda was sold tohis
1955, Ramon (2000)
and it sister
as theRosario
highest inherited
bidder.
action
againstprosper? Explain.
his co-owners or(5%).
co-heirs so long as he a
Six months later, Sylvia won the grandparents.
parcel of land in Albay from their prize at
expressly or impliedly recognizes the co- Since
the lotto Rosario
and used was part gainfully
of it toemployed
redeem the in
ownership nor notified Senen of his having Manila, she left Ramon
hacienda from the bank. Thereafter, she took alone to possess and
ALTERNATIVE
repudiated theANSWER:
same. cultivate
possessionthe of land.
the haciendaHowever,and Ramon refused never to
Senens action will prosper. This is a case of shareditsthe
share harvest
fruits with with Rosariocontending
her sisters, and was even that
implied trust. (Art 1441, NCC) For purposes of SUGGESTED
able
it wastoowned
ANSWER:
sell one-half
exclusively of theher, land in 1985 by
prescription under the concept of an owner Sylvia
claiming is not
to bankcorrect.
be the Theby
sole 3
heir
having
daughters
ofmoney.
bought
are
his parents. the
it from
co-owners the with
of theretirement her
hacienda being own Is she
(Art. 540, NCC). There is no such concept here. Having
correct reached
or not? (3%) age inthe 1990 only heirs
Rosario
Peter was a co-owner, he never claimed sole of Ambrosio.
returned to the When provincethe and property
upon learning was
ownership of the property. He is therefore foreclosed, the right
what had transpired, demanded that the of redemption belongs
estopped under Art. 1431, NCC. also
remainingto the half of 3 the daughters.
land be given Whento her Sylviaas
Ownership; Co-Ownership; redeemed the entire property before the lapse
her share. Ramon opposed, asserting that he
Redemption
In (1993)a loan of P20,000.00 from
1937, A obtained of the redemption period, she also exercised
has already acquired ownership of the land by
the National City Bank of New York, an SUGGESTED
the right ANSWER:
of redemption of her co-owners on
prescription,
Ramon is wrong and that
on she Rosario
bothiscounts: is barred
prescription by
American-owned bank doing business in the their behalf. As such holding the shares
laches
and laches. from demanding
His possession partition
as co-owner did and
not
Philippines. To guarantee payment of his of her two sisters in thethe property, and claims.
all the
reconveyance.
give rise to Decide
acquisitive conflicting
prescription. Possession
obligation, A constituted a real estate fruits corresponding thereto, in trust for them.
(5%)
by a co-owner
mortgage on his 30hectare parcel of Redemption by isone deemed co-owner not adverse
inures to to the
the
agricultural land. In 1939, before he could pay other co-owners but
benefit of all (Adille v. CA.157 SCRA 455). is, on the contrary,
his obligation. A died intestate leaving three Ownership;
deemed beneficialisto Co-Ownership;
them (Pongon v. GA, 166
Sylvia, however, entitled to be reimbursed
children. B, a son by a first marriage, and C Redemption
Antonio,
SCRA 375). Bart, (2002)
and Carlos
Ramon's are brothers.
possession will becomeThey
the shares of her two sisters in the redemption
and D, daughters by a second marriage. In purchased
adverse onlyfrom when their he parents
has specific portions
repudiated the co-
price.
1940, the bank foreclosed the mortgage for of a parceland
ownership of landsuch as evidencedwas
repudiation by made three
non-payment
SUGGESTED of the principal obligation. As the
ANSWER: separates
known to deeds Rosario. of sale,
Assuming each deedthat the referringsale to in
(a)
onlyYes. A's sole
bidder at decision to repair the
the extrajudicial foreclosure a particular
1985 wherelot in meter
Ramon claimedand bounds.
he wasWhen the sole the
foundation
sale, the bank bought theB property
is binding upon and C. B and
and Cwas deeds
heir of hiswere parentspresentedamounted for toregistration,
a repudiationthe of
must
later issued a certificate of sale. Theco-
contribute 2/3 of the expense. Each war Register of Deedsthecould
the co-ownership, not issue
prescriptive period separate
began
owner has the
supervened in right
1941towithout
compel the the other
bank co-
having certificates
to run only of fromTitlethat hadtime. to beNot issued,
moretherefore,
than 30
S. Government,
owners to contribute and the utilized the ofsame in in the names of three
years having lapsed since then, the brothers as coownersclaim of
been able to obtain to actualexpense
possession of the
agribusiness.
preservation In thing (theashouse)
1960,
of theremained B's owned
business
in the
Rosarioentire
has not property. The situation
as yet prescribed. The has claimnot of
property which with A's three
flourished,
common who C and
in proportionD sued B
to their for partition
respective and changed
laches isup not to now, also but each of theUntil
meritorious. brothers the
children appropriated for themselves the
accounting
SUGGESTED
interestsfrom of 485
ANSWER:
(Arts. the and
income
488, of the
Civil property,
Code). has been receiving
repudiation of therentals exclusively
co-ownership was from madethe
income it. In 1948, B bought the property
claiming that as heirs of their father they were lot
knownactually
to the purchased by him. Antonio
other co-owners, no right sells has his
from the bank using the money he received as
co-owners lot
been to aviolated
third person, for withthe notice said to his brothers.
co-owners to
back pay from the U.
To enable the
vindicate. Mere buyerdelay to secure a new title
in vindicating the inright,
standing alone, does not constitute laches.
his name, the deed of sale was made to referSalvador, to a timber concessionaire, built on his lot a
interest
undividedin the property of the seller (Antonio), warehouse where he processes and stores his
with the metes and bounds of the lot sold being timber for shipment. Adjoining the warehouse
stated. Bart and Carlos reacted by signifying is a furniture factory owned by NARRAMIX of
their exercise of their right of redemption as co which Salvador is a majority stockholder.
owners. Antonio in his behalf and in behalf of NARRAMIX leased space in the warehouse
his buyer, contends that they are no longer co- 1. How would
where it you classifyitsthe furniture-making
placed furniture-making
owners, although the title covering the property machinery
machinery.as property under the Civil Code?
has remained in their names as such. May Bart 2. Suppose the lease contract between
Explain.
and Carlos still redeem the lot sold by Antonio? Salvador and NARRAMIX stipulates that at the
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Explain. (5%) end of the lease the machinery shall become
No, they may not redeem because there was the property of the lessor, will your answer be
no Coownership among Antonio, Bart, and the same? Explain.
Carlos to start with. Their parents already
partitioned the land in selling separate portions
v. Court The
to them. of Appeals,
situation (342
is theSCRA
same653as in the
[2000]).
case Si
Possession
(1998)
Using a falsified manager's check, Justine, as
the buyer, was able to take delivery of a
second hand car which she had just bought
from United Car Sales Inc. The sale was
registered with the Land Transportation Office.
A week later, the seller learned that the check
had been dishonored, but by that time, Justine
was nowhere to be seen. It turned out that
Justine had sold the car to Jerico, the present
possessor who knew nothing about the falsified
check. In a suit by United Car Sales, Inc.
against Jerico for recovery of the car, plaintiff
alleges it had been unlawfully deprived of its
property through
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
fraud and should,
consequently, be allowed to recover it
The suit should prosper as to the recovery of without
having
the car.toHowever,
reimburse the Jerico
since defendant for the
was not price
guilty of
the latter
any fraud had
andpaid. Should
appears to the
be suit prosper?
an innocent
[5%]
purchaser for value, he should be reimbursed
for the price he paid. This is without prejudice
to United Car Sales, Inc. right of action against
Justine. As between two innocent parties, the
party causing the injury should suffer the loss.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Therefore, United Car Sales, Inc. should suffer
Yes, the suit will prosper because the criminal
the loss.
act of estafa should be deemed to come within
the meaning of unlawful deprivation under Art.
559, Civil Code, as without it plaintiff would not
have parted with the possession of its car.
ANOTHER ANSWER:
No, the suit will not prosper. The sale is valid
and Jerico is a buyer in good faith.
ANOTHER ANSWER:
Under the law on Sales, when the thing sold is
delivered by the seller to the buyer without
reservation of ownership, the ownership is
transferred to the buyer. Therefore in the suit
of United Car Sales, Inc. against Jerico for the
recovery of the car, the plaintiff should not be
allowed to recover the car without reimbursing
the defendant for the price that the latter paid.
(EDCA Publishing and Distributing Corp. vs.
Property; Real vs. Personal
Santos, 184 SCRA 614, April 26, 1990)
Property (1995)
If consulted, what would your legal advice latter vacate the premises and deliver the same to the
be?
SUGGESTED ANSWER: former. Petronila refused to vacate the place
The warehouse which is a construction on the ground that the usufruct in her favor
adhered to the soil is an immovable by nature would expire only on 1 June 1998 when Manuel
under Art. 415 (1) and the proper venue of any would have reached his 30th birthday and that
case to recover ownership of the same, which the death of Manuel before his 30th birthday
is what the purpose of the complaint to annul did not extinguish the usufruct. Whose
the amended Deed of Sale amounts to, should SUGGESTED
contentionANSWER: should be accepted?
ADDITIONAL ANSWERS:
be the place where the property is located, or Petronila's contention is correct. Under Article
1. Buildings are always immovable property, and 606 of the Civil Code, a usufruct granted for
the RTC of Bulacan.
even in the instances where the parties to a the time that may elapse before a third person
contract seem to have dealt with it separate and reaches a certain age shall subsist for the
apart from the land on which it stood in no wise number of ANSWER:
SUGGESTED years specified even if the third
does it change its character as immovable 1. The should
person furniture-making
die unless machinery
there is an expressis movable
property. A building is an immovable even if not property because it was
stipulation in the contract that states not installed by the
erected by the owner of the land. The only owner of the
otherwise. tenement.
In the case at To bar,become
there isimmovable
no
criterion
O.G. is union
4374) or incorporation
(Reyes and Puno, with the soil.
Outline of under Art.
express 415 (5) that
stipulation of the theNCC, the machinery
consideration for
Philippine
(Ladera vs.Civil Law,
Hodges Vol.
(CA) 482. p.7) ALTERNATIVE
must
the be ANSWER:
usufruct installed
is the existence by theof Petronila's
owner of son. the
This is a usufruct
ALTERNATIVE
tenement. ANSWER: which is clearly intended for
2. The warehouse built by Pedro on the Thus, the general rule and not the exception
It depends
the benefit on the circumstances
of Manuel until he reaches of the 30case.
yrs. If
mortgaged property is real property within the should apply in this case.
the
of agemachinery
with Petronila was attached
serving only in a fixed manner,
as a conduit,
context of Article 415 of the New Civil Code, in such a
holding theway that it in
property cannot
trust for be hisseparated
benefit.from
although it was built by Pedro after the the tenement
The death of Manuel without atbreaking
the age of the 26material or
foreclosure sale without the knowledge and causing deterioration
therefore, terminated the thereof,
usufruct.it is immovable
consent of the new owner which makes him a
builder in bad faith, this does not alter the LAND TRANSFER &
property [Art. 415 (3), NCC]. However, if the
machinery can be transported from place to
character of the warehouse as a real property
by incorporation. It is a structure which cannot DEEDS
place without impairment of the tenement to
which they were fixed, then it is movable
be removed without causing injury to the land. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
property. [Art. 416 (4), NCC]
So, my (Note:
adviceIf tothe examinee does not mention
Pedro is to file the case with 2. It is immovable
Acquisition of Lands; property.
CitizenshipWhen there is a
that the structure was built by a builder in provision
In 1970, the spouses Juan and Juanamaking
Requirement in the lease
(2003) contract de la Cruz,the
the RTCbad
of Bulacan, the situs of the property,
faith, it should be given full credit). lessor, at the bought
then Filipinos, end of the the parcel
lease,ofowner of the
Sower; Good Faith/ Bad machinery
unregisteredinstalled land in the by Philippines
the lessee, on thewhich said
Faithcultivated
Felix (2000) a parcel of land and planted it machinery
they built aishouse considered
which becameto have been their installed
to sugar cane, believing it to be his own. When by the lessor through
residence. In 1986, they the lesseeto who
migrated Canada acted
the crop was eight months old, and merely as hisCanadian
agent. Having been installedinby
and became citizens. Thereafter,
harvestable after two more months, a resurvey the owner of the opposed tenement, the Republic,
machinery
1990, they applied, by the
of the land showed that it really belonged to became immovableof .under Art. 415 land of the
SUGGESTED for the registration
Property; Real vs. Personal the aforesaid in NCC.
Fred. WhatANSWER:
are the options available to Fred? (Davao Sawmill v. Castillo 61 Phil. 709)
As to the pending crops planted by Felix in their
Property
Pedro names.
is the Should
(1997) registered the application
owner of of the
a parcel of
(2%) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
good faith, Fred has the option of allowing Felix spouses
land the de
situated la Cruz be
in Malolos, granted over the
Yes, application shouldBulacan.
be granted. In 1973,
As a he
to continue the cultivation and to harvest the Republics
mortgaged opposition?
the land to Why? 5%
the Philippine National
rule, the Constitution prohibits aliens from
crops, or to continue the cultivation and Bank (PNB)
owning private to lands
secure in atheloan of P100.000.00.
Philippines. This
harvest the crops himself. In the latter option, For Pedro's
rule, however, failure
does not to payapply the loan,
to the the PNB
spouses
however, Felix shall have the right to a part of foreclosed
Juan and Juana on the de la mortgage
Cruz because in 1980, at the andtimethe
the expenses of cultivation and to a part of the land
they wasacquiredsold at public auction
ownership over the to PNB
land,for being
albeit
ALTERNATIVE
net harvest,ANSWER:
both in proportion to the time of
Since sugarcane is not a perennial crop. Felix the highestthey
imperfect, bidder.werePNB stillsecured title thereto
Filipino citizens. The in
possession. (Art. 545 NCC), In
1987.the meanwhile, Pedro,
application for registration is a mere who was still in
is considered a sower in good faith. Being so,
possession
confirmation of of the the land, title
imperfect constructed
which the a
Art. 448 applies. The options available to Fred
warehouse
spouses have onalready
the property.
acquired In before
1988, they the PNB
are: (a) to appropriate the crop after paying Adverse
sold Claims;
land to Notice
became Canadian citizens. (Republic v. CA,was
the Pablo, the of Deed of Sale 235
Felix the indemnity under Art. 546, or (b) to
Levy
SCRA (1998)
Section
amended 567 70in of1989Presidential
[1994]). to include Decree No. 1529,
the warehouse.
require Felix to pay rent. Pedro, claiming ownership
Usufruct concerning adverse claims onofregisteredthe warehouse, land,
files a complaint
provides a 30-daytoperiod annul of the amendedofDeed
effectivity an of
(1997)
On 1 January 1980, Minerva, the owner of a
Sale
adverse beforeclaim, thecounted
Regional fromTrialtheCourt
dateof of Quezon
its
building, granted Petronila a usufruct over the
City, where Suppose
registration. he resides, against
a notice both the
of adverse PNB
claim
property until 01 June 1998 when Manuel, a
and Pablo. The PNB filed
based upon a contract to sell was registered ona motion to dismiss
son of Petronila, would have reached his 30th
the
March complaint
1, 1997 at fortheimproper
instancevenue of the contending
BUYER,
birthday. Manuel, however, died on 1 June
that
but on June 1, 1997, or after theproperty
the warehouse is real lapse of the under
1990 when he was only 26 years old.
Minerva notified Petronila that the usufruct had Article 415(1)
30-day period, of the Civil
a notice of levyCode on and therefore
execution in
been extinguished by the death of Manuel and the action
favor should have
of a JUDGMENT CREDITORinsteadwas beenalsofiled in
demanded that the Malolos, Bulacan.
registered to enforce Pedroa final claims
judgmentotherwise.for The
question
money arose the
against as registered
to whether the warehouse
owner. Then, on
should
June 15,be 1997considered
there having as realbeenor noas personal
formal
property.
cancellation of his notice of adverse claim, the
BUYER pays
to the seller-owner the agreed purchase price inresidential,
full commercial, industrial, or similar
registers
and the corresponding deed of sale. purposes, productiveand only by lease when not needed
Because the annotation of the notice of levy is by the government for public service.
carried over to the new title in his name, the
BUYER brings an action against the JUDGMENT (2) If the land is suited or actually used for
CREDITOR to cancel such annotation, but the fishpond or aquaculture purposes, it comes
latter claims that his lien is superior because it under the Jurisdiction of the Bureau of
was annotated after the adverse claim of the Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) and
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
BUYER had ipso facto ceased to be effective. can only be acquired by lease. (P.D. 705)
The suit will prosper. While an adverse claim (3) Free Patent is a mode of concession under
Will the suit prosper? [5%]
duly annotated at the back of a title under Section 41, Chapter VII of the Public Land Act,
Section 7O of P.D. 1529 is good only for 30 which is applicable only for agricultural lands.
days, cancellation thereof is still necessary to
render it ineffective, otherwise, the inscription (4) The certificate of the district forester that
thereof will remain annotated as a lien on the the land is already "alienable and disposable"
property. While the life of adverse claim is 3O simply means that the land is no longer
days under P.D. 1529, it continuous to be needed for forest purposes, but the Bureau of
effective until it is canceled by formal petition Lands could no longer dispose of it by free
The cancellation
filed with the Register of of
the notice of levy is
Deeds. patent because it is already covered by a lease
justified under Section 108 of P.D. 1529 contract between BFAR and Regina. That
considering that the levy on execution can not (5) The free
contract mustpatent of Jorge is highly irregular
be respected.
be enforced against the buyer whose adverse and void ab initio, not only because the Bureau
claim against the registered owner was has no statutory authority to issue a free
recorded ahead of the notice of levy on patent over a foreshore area, but also because
Annotation
execution. of Lis Pendens; When of the false statements made in his sworn
Proper
Mario (2001)
sold his house and lot to Carmen for P1 application that he has occupied and cultivated
million payable in five (5) equal annual the land since July 4, 1945, as required by the
installments. The sale was registered and title free patent law. Under Section 91 of the Public
was issued in Carmen's name. Carmen failed Land Act, any patent concession or title
to pay the last three installments and Mario obtained thru false representation is void ab
filed an. action for collection, damages and initio. In cases of this nature, it is the
attorneys fees against her. Upon filing of the government that shall institute annulment
complaint, he caused a notice of lis pendens to proceedings considering that the suit carries
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
be annotated on Carmen's title. Is the notice of with it a prayer for the reversion of the land to
The notice of lis pendens is not proper for the
lis pendens proper or not? Why? (5%) the state. However, Regina is a party in interest
reason that the case filed by Mario against
Carmen is only for collection, damages, and and the case will prosper because she has a
attorney's fees. lease contract for the same land with the
Annotation of a lis pendens can only be done in government.
cases involving recovery of possession of real
property, or to quiet title or to remove cloud
thereon, or for partition or any other
proceeding affecting title to the land or the use
or occupation thereof. The action filed by Mario
does not fall on anyone of these.
Foreshore Lands
(2000)
Regina has been leasing foreshore land from
the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources
for the past 15 years. Recently, she learned
that Jorge was able to obtain a free patent from
the Bureau of Agriculture, covering the same
land, on the basis of a certification by the
District Forester that the same is already
"alienable and disposable". Moreover, Jorge had
already registered the patent with the Register
of Deeds of the province, and he was issued an
Original Certificate of Title for the same. Regina
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
filed an action
An action forannulment
for the annulmentofofJorge's
Jorge'sOriginal
title on
the ground that it was obtained fraudulently.
Certificate of Title will prosper on the following
Will
(1) the action
Under
grounds: prosper?
Chapter IX of C(2%)
.A, No. 141,
otherwise known as the Public Land Act,
foreshore lands are disposable for
It is a well-known rule in this jurisdiction that persons
dealing with registered land have the legal right The mortgage to Desiderio should be cancelled
to rely on the face of the Torrens Certificate of without prejudice to his right to go after
Title and to dispense with the need to inquire Catalino and/or the government for
further, except when the party concerned has compensation from the assurance fund.
actual knowledge of facts and circumstances Fraud; Procurement of
that would impel a reasonably cautious man to Patent;
In 1979, Effect
Nestor (2000)
applied for and was granted a
make such inquiry. (Naawan Community Rural Free Patent over a parcel of agricultural land
Bank v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 128573, with an area of 30 hectares, located in General
In the given
January problem, the property was already
13, 2003) Santos City. He presented the Free Patent to
registered in the name of Rod when he bought the Register of Deeds, and he was issued a
the same from the latter. Thus, Don could be corresponding Original Certificate of Title (OCT)
considered as a buyer in good faith and for No. 375, Subsequently, Nestor sold the land to
value. However, since Rod did not actually sell Eddie. The deed of sale was submitted to the
any property to him, Don has no right to retain Register of Deeds and on the basis thereof,
ownership over the property. He has only the OCT No, 375 was cancelled and Transfer
right to recover the purchase price plus Certificate of Title (TCT) No. 4576 was issued in
Forgery; Innocent Purchaser; Mirror
damages. the name of Eddie. In 1986, the Director of
Principle
Bruce (1991)
is the registered owner, of a parcel of
Lands filed a complaint for annulment of OCT
land with a building thereon and is in peaceful
No, 375 and TCT No. 4576 on the ground that
possession thereof. He pays the real estate
Nestor obtained the Free Patent through fraud.
taxes and collects the rentals therefrom. Later,
Eddie filedANSWER:
a motion to dismiss on the ground
Catalino, the only brother of Bruce, filed a SUGGESTED
that motion
The he wasofan innocent
Nestor to dismisspurchaser for value
the complaint
petition where he, misrepresenting to be the
andannulment
for in good faith of and asNo.
O.C.T. such,375 heand has acquired
T.C.T. No.
attorney-in-fact of Bruce and falsely alleging
a
4576 title
should to be the property
denied for the which
following is valid,
that the certificate of title was lost, succeeded
unassailable
reasons: 1) Eddie andcannotindefeasible.
claim protection Decideasthe an
in obtaining a second owner's duplicate copy of
motion.
innocent (5%)
purchaser for value nor can he interpose the
the title and then had the same transferred in
his name through a simulated deed of sale in defense of indefeasibility of his title,
his favor. Catalino then mortgaged the because his TCT is rooted on a void title.
property to Desiderio who had the mortgage Under Section 91 of CA No. 141, as
annotated on the title. Upon learning of the amended, otherwise known as the Public
fraudulent transaction, Bruce filed a complaint Land Act, statements of material facts in the
against Catalino and Desiderio to have the title applications for public land must be under
SUGGESTED ANSWER: oath. Section 91 of the same act provides
of
The Catalino
complaintandfor
thethe
mortgage
annulment in favor of
of Catalino's Forgery;
that such Innocent
statements Purchaser;
shall be Holder considered in as
Desiderio declaredInnull
Title will prosper. the and
firstvoid.
place,Will
thethe
second Badessential
Rod, Faith
the owner(2005)
conditions and parts of his
of an FX taxi, found in the
complaint
owner's copy prosper,
of theor willsecured
title the titleby
ofhim
Catalino
from vehicle an
concession, envelope
title, containing
or permit TCT No.
issued, any 65432
false
and the mortgage
the Land Registrationto Desiderio be sustained?
Court is void ab initio, overstatement
a lot registered
therein, in or Cesar's
omissionname. of facts Posing
shall
the owner's copy thereof having never been as Cesar, Rod forged Cesar's
ipso facto produce the cancellation of signature onthe a
lost, let alone the fact that said second owner's Deed of Sale in Rod's
concession. favor. issued
The patent Rod registered
to Nestor the in
copy of the title was fraudulently procured and saidthis
document
case is voidwith ab theinitio
Registernot only of Deeds,
because andit
improvidently issued by the Court. In the 2)
obtained The a government
new title canname.
seek annulment of
was obtained by in his
fraud but also After a year,
because it
second place, the Transfer Certificate of Title the original
he sold and
the30lot transfer
to Don,which certificates
a buyer of
in beyond title
good faith and
covers hectares is far the
procured by Catalino is equally null and void, it the
a) reversion
Didvalue,
andmaximum
for of
Rod acquire
who the land title to tothethe state. lotEddie's
land? inExplain.
of 24also registered
hectares the
provided by his
the
having been issued on the basis of a simulated defense
SUGGESTED
(2%)
name. is untenable.
ANSWER: The protection afforded
No, free patent law.
or forged Deed of Sale. A forged deed is an by Rod the did not acquire
Torrens System title to to thean land. innocent The
absolute nullity and conveys no title. The inscription
purchaser in
for the
valueregistry,
can be to be
availed effective,
of only must
if the
mortgage in favor of Desiderio is likewise null be
land made
has beenin good
titled faith.
thru The
judicial defense
proceedings of
and void because the mortgagor is not the indefeasibility
where the issueof ofa Torrens
fraud becomesTitle does
academic not
owner of the mortgaged property. While it may extend
after the to a lapse
transfereeof one who (1) takes the certificate
year from the
be true that under the "Mirror Principle" of the of title with
issuance of thenotice
decreeof aofflaw. A holderInin
registration. bad
public
Torrens System of Land Registration, a buyer faith
land of a certificate
grants, the actionof titleof isthenotgovernment
entitled to the to
or mortgagee has the right to rely on what protection
annul a title of the law, for the
fraudulently obtainedlaw cannot does not be
appears on the Certificate of Title, and in the used as a such
prescribe shield for frauds.
action and will (Samonte
not be barred v. Court by
In Appeals,
the caseG.R.
Homestead
of
at bar,
Patents;
No.
Rod Void
104223,
only July
forged
12,
Cesar's
2001)
absence of anything to excite suspicion, is the transfer of the title to an innocent
signature
Sale
In (1999)
1950, on Bureau
the the -Deed of Sale.
of Lands issued It isa veryHomestead
under
simulatedno obligation
sale; b) The to look beyond
fact that thederived
it was purchaser for value.
apparent
A. Three
patent that there
to years later,wasA soldbadthe faith on the part
homestead to
certificate and investigate the mortgagor's
from a fraudulently of Rod
B. A died from the very
in 1990, andbeginning.
his heirs filed As such, he is
an action
title,procured
this ruleor
does not find application
improvidently in the owner's
issued second b) Discuss
not recover
to entitled the the
to therights of Don,
protection
homestead from ofif Bthe
any,onLandover
the
casecopy,
theat real
handowner's
because copyhere. Catalino's
being titleand in the
still intact the property.
Registration
ground that itsAct.(2%)
sale by their father to the latter
suffers from two
possession offatal infirmities,
the true owner, namely: a) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
is void under Section 118 of the Public Land
TheBruce.
fact that it emanated from a forged deed Law. B contends, however, Page that the 71 heirs
of 119 of A
of a cannot recover the
homestead from him anymore because their action Cesar bought a residential condominium unit from
prescribed
has and that furthermore, A was in pari Rise
High Co. and paid the price in full. He moved
delicto. Decide. (5%) into the unit, but somehow he was not given the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Condominium Certificate of Title covering the
The sale of the land by A to B 3 years after property. Unknown to him, High Rise Co.
issuance of the homestead patent, being in subsequently mortgaged the entire
violation of Section 118 of the Public Land Act, condominium building to Metrobank as security
is void from its inception. for a loan of P500 million. High Rise Co. failed to
The action filed by the heirs of B to declare the pay the loan and the bank foreclosed the
nullity or inexistence of the contract and to mortgage. At the foreclosure sale, the bank
recover the land should be given due course. acquired the building, being the highest bidder.
When Cesar learned about this, he filed an
B's defense of prescription is untenable
action to annul the foreclosure sale insofar as
because an action which seeks to declare the
his unit was concerned. The bank put up the
nullity or inexistence of A contract does not
defense that it relied on the condominium
prescribe. (Article 1410; Banaga vs. Soler, 2 SUGGESTED ANSWER:
certificates
Metrobank'sofdefense
title presented by High
is untenable. As aRise
rule,Co.,
an
8CRA 765)
On the other hand, B's defense of pari delicto is which were
innocent clean. Hence,
purchaser for valueit was a mortgagee
acquires a good
equally untenable. While as a rule, parties who and a
and buyer
cleanintitle
good to faith. Is this defense
the property. tenable
However, it is
are in pari delicto have no recourse against or not? Why?
settled (5%.)
that one who closes his eyes to facts
each other on the principle that a transgressor that should put a reasonable man on guard is
cannot profit from his own wrongdoing, such not an innocent purchaser for value. In the
rule does not apply to violations of Section 118 present problem the bank is expected, as a
of the Public Land Act because of the matter of standard operating procedure, to
underlying public policy in the said Act "to have conducted an ocular inspection, of the
conserve the land which a homesteader has promises before granting any loan. Apparently,
acquired by gratuitous grant from the Metrobank did not follow this procedure.
government for himself and his family". In Otherwise, it should have discovered that the
keeping with this policy, it has been held that condominium unit in question was occupied by
one who purchases a homestead within the Cesar and that fact should have led it to make
five-year prohibitory period can only recover Mirror Principle
further inquiry. Under the circumstances,
the price which he has paid by filing a claim (1990)
In 1950's, the Government acquired a big
Metrobank cannot be considered a mortgagee
against the estate of the deceased seller landed estate in Central Luzon from the
and buyer in good faith.
(Labrador vs. Delos Santos 66 Phil. 579) under registered owner for subdivision into small
the principle that no one shall enrich himself at farms and redistribution of bonafide occupants,
the F was a former lessee of a parcel of land, five
FIRST expense
ALTERNATIVEofANSWER:
another. Applying the pari
delicto ruletotodeclare
violation hectares in area. After completion of the
The action theofnullity
Section 118sale
of the of the
did
Public Land Act, the1410},
Court of Appeals has ruled resurvey and subdivision, F applied to buy the
not prescribe (Art. such sale being one
that "the homesteader said land in accordance with the guidelines of
expressly prohibited andsuffers the void
declared loss by
of the
fruits the implementing agency. Upon full payment
Public realized
Lands Act by [Art.
the vendee
1409, par. who(7)].
in turn
The
forfeits theof improvement that he of the price in 1957, the corresponding deed of
prohibition the law is clearly for has
the
introduced absolute sale was executed in his favor and
protection of into the ofland."
the heirs A such(Obot vs.
that their
SandadiUas, 69 OG, April 35, }
1966enhance was registered, and in 1961, a new title was
recovering the property would the
issued in his name. In 1963, F sold the said
public policy regarding ownership of lands In 1977, C filed an action to annul the deeds of
land to X; and in 1965 X sold it to Y, new titles
acquired by homestead patent (Art. 1416). The sale to F, X and Y and their titles, on the ground
were successively issued in the names of the
defense of pari delicto is not applicable either, that he (C) had been in actual physical
SECOND ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: said purchasers.
since the law itself allows the homesteader to possession of the land, and that the sale to F
Prescription does not arise with respect to
reacquire the land even if it has been sold. and the subsequent sales should be set aside
actions to declare a void contract a nullity
(Article 1410). Neither is the doctrine of pari on the ground of fraud. Upon motion of
delicto applicable because of public policy. The defendants, the trial court dismissed the
law is designed for the protection of the complaint, upholding their defenses of their
(a)
beingIs theinnocent
said appealpurchasers
meritorious? Explain
for value,
plaintiff so as to enhance the public policy of (b)
yourSuppose
answer the government agency
the Public Land Act to give land to the landless. prescription and laches. Plaintiff appealed.
concerned joined C in filing the said action
If the heirs are not allowed to recover, it could
against the defendants, would that change the
be on the ground of laches inasmuch as 40
result of the litigation? Explain.
years had elapsed and the owner had not
brought any action against B especially if the
latter had improved the land. It would be
detrimental to B if the plaintiff is allowed to
Innocent Purchaser for
recover.
Value (2001)
occupant thereof and for this reason his transfer required to explore beyond what the record in the
of title may be vulnerable, the transfer of the
certificate registry
same land and the issuance of new TCTs to X
and Y who are innocent purchasers for value
render the latter's titles indefeasible. A person
dealing with registered land may safely rely on
the correctness of the certificate of title and
the law will not in any way oblige him to go
behind the certificate to determine the
condition of the property in search for any
hidden defect or inchoate right which may later
invalidate or diminish the right to the land. This
1. The mirror
is the action principle
to annul the saleTorrens
of the was instituted
System in
of
1977 or more
land registration. than (10) years from the date of
execution thereof in 1957, hence, it has long
prescribed.
2. Under Sec 45 of Act 496, the entry of a
certificate of title shall be regarded as an
agreement running with the land, and binding
upon the applicant and all his successors in title
that the land shall be and always remain
registered land. A title under Act 496 is
indefeasible and to preserve that character, the
title is cleansed anew with every transfer for
value (De Jesus v City of Manila; 29 Phil. 73;
Laperal v City of Manila, 62 Phil 313; Penullar v
PNB 120 S 111).
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(a) The appeal is not meritorious. The trial
court ruled correctly in granting defendant's
motion to dismiss for the following reasons:
1. While there is the possibility that F, a former
lessee of the land was aware of the fact that C
was the bona fide
property based on the fact that the sale included the his obligation. However, the action was brought
half
one-pro-indiviso share. Pacifico had a notice of indicates
ten-year
within theprescriptive
on its face inperiod questprovided
for any hidden by law
lis pendens annotated on the title covering the defect oractions
wherein inchoate basedrighton which
written may contracts
property and ordered the cancellation of the subsequently
can be instituted. defeat a) hisWillright
the defense
thereto. prosper?
This is
notice of lis pendens. The notice of lis pendens the "mirror
Reason. (3%)principle'
b) What are of thethe Torrens
essentialsystem
could not be cancelled immediately because SUGGESTED
which makes
elements ANSWER:
of laches?
it possible (2%)for a forged deed to be
the title over the property was with a bank to No, the defense
the root of a goodwill title.not prosper. The problem
which the property had been mortgaged by did not give facts
Besides, it appears that spouses from which laches X and Ymay are be
Bart. Pacifico appealed the case. While the inferred. Mere delay
guilty of contributory negligence when they in filing an action,
appeal was pending and with the notice of lis standing
delivered this alone, OCTdoes to thenot constitute
mortgagee without laches
SUGGESTED
(Agra v. PNB.ANSWER:309 SCRA 509).
pendens still uncancelled, Bart sold the annotating
b) The fourthe mortgage
basic elements thereon. Between
of laches are; (1)
property to Carlos, who immediately caused them
conduct and onthe the innocent
part of purchaser
the defendant for value,
or of one
ALTERNATIVE
they should ANSWER:
bear
the cancellation of the notice of lis pendens, as under
If the buyer whom B, whohethe loss.
claims,
relied ongiving the teller riseA'sto the
title,
well as the issuance of a new title in his name. situation
was not aware of which of thecomplainant
adverse possession seeks a remedy; of
Is Carlos (a) a purchaser in good faith, or (b) a
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (2)
the delay
land by intheasserting
spousesthe X and complainant's
Y, then the rights,
transferee pendente lite? If
A. Carlos is a buyer in bad faith. The notice of your answer is (a), the
B. complainant
B has
latter cannotin hisrecover
favor thehaving propertyknowledge
had
thepresumption from of good or
how
lis can thewas
pendens right of annotated
still Pacifico as at co-owner
the backbeof notice
faith which of the candefendant's
only be overthrown conduct by and having
protected?
the title at the Explain.
time (5%)he bought the land from been
adequate afforded
proof an of badopportunity
faith. However, to institutenobody suit;
Bart. The uncancelled notice of lis pendens (3)
buyslack of knowledge
land without seeing the on property,
the parthence, of the
operates as constructive notice of its contents defendant
B could not that have the beencomplainant
unaware of such would assert
as well as interests, legal or equitable, included the
adverserightpossession.
on which If heafter bases his suit;
learning of suchand (4)
therein. All persons are charged with the injury
possession,or prejudice
B simply to closed
the defendant his eyesin andthedid event
Prescription & Laches; Indefeasibility
knowledge of what it contains. In an earlier relief
nothing is accorded
about it, then to the the complainant,
suit for or the suit
Rule of Torrens Title (2002)
case, it was held that a notice of an adverse is not held to be
reconveyance willbarred.
prosper as the buyer's bad
Way
Notice back Lis in 1948, Windas husband sold in
SUGGESTED
claim remains ANSWER: effective and binding faith willof have become evident.
(b) Even if the government favor of Verde Sportsa Center Corp. of (Verde) aa 10-
notwithstanding the lapse ofjoins the 30 C, this
dayswillfrom not Pendens
Rommel (1995)
was issued certificate title over
Carlos
alter is a transferee
the outcome pendente
of theThis lite
case insofar
so ismuch as hectare property belonging
parcel of land in Quezon City. One year later to their conjugal
its inscription in the registry. ruling even
Sanchos
because ofshare
estoppelin the asco-ownership
an express in the
provision land in partnership.
Rachelle, the legitimate The saleowner was ofmade the land, without
more applicable in a lis pendens.
is
Sec concerned
45 of Act because 496 and the Secland31 ofwas PD transferred
1529 that a Windas
discovered the fraudulent registration obtainedIn
knowledge, much less consent.
to him during
decree the pendency
of registration and ofthe thecertificate
appeal. of 1950,
by Rommel. WindaShe learned of the sale,
filed a complaint when she
against
B. Pacifico
title issuedcan inprotect
pursuance his right as a co-owner
thereof shall be discovered
Rommel for reconveyance the deed ofandsale caused among
the the
by pursuing his
conclusive upon appeal;and asking
against the allCourt of
persons, documents
annotation ofina notice her husbandsof lis pendens vaultonafter the his
Appeals
includingto the ordernational
the re-annotation
government of the andlis all demise.
certificateSoon of titleafter,issuedshe to Rommel.noticedRommel that the
pendens
brancheson the title
thereof, of Carlos;
whether and by invoking
mentioned by name construction
now invokes the of the sports complex
indefeasibility of hishad titlestarted.
Mirror
his right Principle;
of redemption
in the application or not. Forgery;
of Barts Innocent
share under Upon
consideringcompletion that oneof the construction
yearagainst
has already in 1952,
elapsed
Purchaser
The spouses
ALTERNATIVE
Articles 1620 (1999)
X the
ANSWER:
of andNew Y mortgaged
Civil Code. a piece of Winda
she tried nowbut files a suit
failed to get free Verde for the
membership
A. Carlos is a purchaser in good faith. A from
annulmentits issuance.
of the He
sale also on seeks
the the
ground that she
registered land to A, delivering as well the OCT privileges
cancellation in ofVerde.
the notice of LisInpendens. May
possessor in good faith has
to the latter, but they continued to possess and been defined as did not
SUGGESTED consent
ANSWER: to the sale. answer, Verde
one whothe is unaware that1/2there existsharvest
a flaw to the court cancel
A Notice
contends of
that, the
LisinPendens notice may
accordance of liswithpendens
be canceled
the Spanish even
cultivate land, giving of each before final judgment is rendered? Explain.
which
A in partialinvalidates
payment his acquisition
of their loan of to
thethe thing
latter, even Code
Civil beforewhich final Judgment
was then upon in force, properthe sale in
(Art. 526, NCC).
A, however, withoutGoodthe faith consists in
knowledge ofthe
X and Y, showing
1948 ofthat thetheproperty
notice is for didthenot purpose
needof her
possessors
forged a deed beliefof that
sale theof theperson from whom
aforesaid land in molesting or harassing
concurrence. Verde contends the adverse that in party
anyorcase
he
favorreceived
of himself,the thing got was a TCT thein owner of the and
his name, that
the the action notice hasof lis pendens is
prescribed ornot is necessary
barred by
same and could convey A.
P.D. Define
laches.No. Winda
to protect 1529)or explain
the right of the
rejoins the term
party
that her laches.
who caused title
Torrens it
then sold the land to B,hiswho title. In the the
bought caseland[at
bar], in question, while Carlos bought the B.
(2%)
to Decide
be
covering the case,
registered.
the (Section
property stating 77,
is your reasons and
indefeasible, for
relying on A's title, and who thereafter also got
subject property fromItBart your decision.
imprescriptible. (3%)
In this case, it is given that Rachelle is the
a TCT in his name. waswhileonly athennotice of lis
that the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
pendens was still annotated thereon, there was legitimate owner of the land in question. It can
spouses X and Y learned that their land had A. LACHES meansthat failure
SUGGESTED
also an ANSWER:
existing court order canceling the same. be said, therefore, whenor she neglect,
filed herfor an
been titled in B's name. May said spouses file unreasonable
The action
Hence, Carlos of
cannot X be andconsidered
Y against B for
as being notice of lis pendens her purpose was toof time,
and unexplained length
an action for reconveyance of the land in to do what, by exercising dueand diligence,
reconveyance
aware a flawofwhich
ofagainst the invalidates
land will [their] not prosper
the protect her interest in the land not justcould to
question
because B has b? Reason.
acquired a (5%)
clean title to the or should have been done earlier. It is
acquisition of the thing since the alleged flaw, molest Rommel. It is necessary to record the
property negligence
Lis pendensor toomission to assert a right within if a
the notice being an innocent
of lis pendens, was already purchaserbeing for reasonable time.
protect her interest because
A forged deed is an absolute
value. cancelled at the time of the purchase. nullity and (De Vera
she did not do it, there is a possibility that the v. CA, 305 SCRA 624
ordered
B. To protect his right overthat thethesubject B. While Article 1413 of the Spanish Civil Code
[1999])
conveys no title. The fact forged deed land will fall into the hands of an innocent
On this ground
property, Pacifico alone, Carlos can already be did not require the consent of the wife for the
was registered andshould have
a certificate timely
of titlefiled
wasan purchaser for value and in that event, the court
considered
action for a buyer in good
reconveyance and faith. (Po Lam
reinstated the v. validity of the sale, an alienation by the
issued in his name, did not operate to vest loses control over the land making any
Court
notice ofofAppeals,
lis pendens. 347 SCRA 86, [2000]). husband in fraud of the wife is void as held in
upon an ownership over the property of X and favorable judgment thereon moot and
Prescription & Laches; Elements
Y. The registration of the forged deed will not Uy
Notice Coque of Lis v. Pendens;
Navas, 45 Phil. 430 (1923).
Transferee
academic. For these reasons, the notice of lis
of
In Laches
an action (2000)
brought to collect
cure the infirmity. However, once the title to a sum of money Assuming
Pendente
Sancho and that
Lite
Pacificothe
(2002) alienation
are co-owners in 1948
of a parcelwas in
pendens may not be canceled.
based on a surety agreement,
the land is registered in the name of the forger the defense of fraud
of land. of Winda
Sancho and,
sold therefore,
the property makes
to Bart. the sale
laches
and title was raised
to the land asthereafter
the claim falls was filed
into themore to Verdesued
Pacifico void,Sanchothe action and Bart to set foraside the sale,
annulment of
than
handsseven of anyears
innocent frompurchaser
the maturity of
for value, the nonetheless, is already barred
the sale and reconveyance of the by
latter acquires a clean title thereto. A buyer of
a registered land is not
prescription and laches. More than 52 years have (a) The mortgage contract executed by O, if at all, is
elapsed
already from her discovery of the sale in voidable
only a contract since it involves a conjugal
1950.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: partnership property. The action to annul the
B. Windas claim that her Torrens Title covering same instituted in 1977, or eleven years after
the property is indefeasible and imprescriptible the execution of the sheriff's final sale, has
[does not hold water] is not tenable. The rule obviously prescribed because: 1) An action to
of indefeasibility of a Torrens Title means annul must be brought
a contract within
on the fourof(4)
ground years from
fraud
that after one year from the date of issue of the the date of discovery of the fraud. Since this
decree of registration or if the land has fallen is in essence an action to recover
into the hands of an innocent purchaser for ownership, it must be reckoned from the
value, the title becomes incontestable and date of execution of the contract or from
IMPRESCRIPTIBILITY, on the other hand, means
incontrovertible. the registration of the alleged fraudulent
that no title to the land in derogation of that of document with the assessor's office for the
the registered owner may be acquired by purpose of transferring the tax declaration,
adverse possession or acquisitive prescription this being unregistered land, (Bael u.
or that the registered owner does not lose by 2) IfIntermediatethe action is to be treated as an action to
Appellate Court G. R. L-74423
extinctive prescription his right to recover recover ownership of land, it would have
Jan.30, 1989 169 SCRA 617).
ownership and possession of the land. prescribed just the same because more than
The action in this case is for annulment of the 10 years have already elapsed since the date
sale executed by the husband over a conjugal SECOND ALTERNATIVE
of the execution ofANSWER:
the sale.
partnership property covered by a Torrens Title. (a) The action to recover has been barred by
Action on contracts are subject to acquisitive prescription in favor of M
prescription. considering that M has possessed the land
Prescription under a claim of ownership for ten (10) years
In 1960, an unregistered parcel of land was with a just title.
(1990)
mortgaged by owner O to M, a family friend, as (b) If M had secured a Torrens Title to the land,
collateral for a loan. O acted through his all the more S and P could not recover because
attorney-in-fact, son S, who was duly if at all their remedies would be:
authorized by way of a special power of
attorney, wherein O declared that he was the 1. A Petition to Review the Decree of
absolute owner of the land, that the tax Registration. This can be availed of within one
declarations/receipts were all issued in his (1) year from-the entry thereof, but only upon
name, and that he has been in open, the basis of "actual fraud." There is no showing
As O was unable
continuous to pay back
and adverse the loan
possession the that M committed actual fraud in securing his
in plus
interest for the past five [5) years, M had to 2. Antoaction
title in personam
the land; or against M for the
concept of owner.
foreclose the mortgage. At the foreclosure sale, reconveyance of the title in their favor. Again,
M was the highest bidder. Upon issuance of the this remedy is available within four years from
sheriffs final deed of sale and registration in the date of the discovery of the fraud but not
January, 1966, the mortgage property was later than ten (10) years from the date of
turned over to M's possession and control M registration of the title in the name of M.
has since then developed the said property. In
In
1967, 1977,
O died,after the bytenth
survived (10th)
sons S and P. death
anniversary of his father O. son P filed a suit to
annul the mortgage deed and subsequent sale
of the property, etc., on the ground of fraud. He
asserted that the property in question was
conjugal in nature actually belonging, at the
time of the mortgage, to O and his wife, W,
(a)
whoseIs the suit filed
conjugal by Pwent
share barred by prescription?
to their sons (S and
Explain
P) and to your
O. answer.
(b) After the issuance of the sheriff's final deed
of sale in 1966 in this case, assuming that M
applied for registration under the Torrens
System and was issued a Torrens Title to the
said property in question, would that added
SUGGESTED
fact have anyANSWER:
significant effect on your
(a) Under Art. 173 of the Civil Code, the action
conclusion? State your reason.
is barred by prescription because the wife had
only ten (10) years from the transaction and
during the marriage to file a suit for the
annulment of the mortgage deed. Alternative
Answers to (a) first Alternative Answer:
Decide on these claims, giving your The right to recover possession of registered land
reasons. ANSWER:
SUGGESTED does not prescribe because possession is just a
likewise
At this point in time, X cannot claim the right of necessary incident of ownership.
vested ownership over the Pangasinan parcel by
acquisitive prescription. In addition to the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
requisites common to ordinary and b) Mikaelo's defense of laches, however,
extraordinary acquisitive prescription consisting appears to be more sustainable. Renren bought
of uninterrupted, peaceful, public, adverse and the land and had the sale registered way back
actual possession in the concept of owner, in 1965. From the facts, it appears that it was
ordinary acquisitive prescription for ten (10) only in 1998 or after an inexplicable delay of
years requires (1) possession in good faith and 33 years that he took the first step asserting
(2) just title. "Just title" means that the adverse his right to the land. It was not even an action
claimant came into possession of the property to recover ownership but only possession of
through one of the modes recognized by law for the land. By ordinary standards, 33 years of
the acquisition of ownership but the grantor was neglect or inaction is too long and maybe
not the owner or could not transmit any right considered unreasonable. As often held by the
(Art. 1129. Civil Code). In this case, there is no Supreme Court, the principle of
"just title" and no "mode" that can be invoked imprescriptibility sometimes has to yield to the
Mikaelo's claim of laches, however, is weak
by X for the acquisition of the Pangasinan equitable principle of laches which can convert
insofar as the element of equity is concerned,
parcel. There was no constructive delivery of the even a registered land owner's claim into a
there being no showing in the facts how he
Pangasinan
Primary parcel
Entry becauseBook; it was not the
Acquisitive stale demand.
entered into the ownership and possession of
subject-matter Laches
Prescription; of the (1998)
deed of sale. Hence, B
the land.
retains
In 1965,ownership of the
Renren bought Pangasinan
from parcel ofof
Robyn a parcel Reclamation of Foreshore Lands;
land.
registered land evidenced by a duly executed Limitations
Republic Act 1899(2000) authorizes municipalities and
deed of sale. The owner presented the deed of chartered cities to reclaim foreshore lands
sale and the owner's certificate of title to the bordering them and to construct thereon
Register of Deeds. The entry was made in the adequate docking and harbor facilities.
daybook and corresponding fees were paid as Pursuant thereto, the City of Cavite entered
evidenced by official receipt. However, no into an agreement with the Fil-Estate Realty
transfer of certificate of title was issued to Company, authorizing the latter to reclaim 300
Renren because the original certificate of title hectares of land from the sea bordering the
in Robyn's name was temporarily misplaced city, with 30% of the land to be reclaimed to be
after fire partly gutted the Office of the Register owned by Fil-Estate as compensation for its
of Deeds. Meanwhile, the land had been services. The Solicitor General questioned the
possessed by Robyn's distant cousin, Mikaelo, validity of the agreement on the ground that it
openly, adversely and continuously in the will mean reclaiming land under the sea which
concept of owner since 1960. It was only in is beyond the commerce of man. The City
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
April 1998 ANSWER:
SUGGESTED that Renren sued Mikaelo to recover replies that General
The Solicitor this is is authorized
correct. The byauthority
RA. 1899 of
possession.
a) Renren's Mikaelo
action toinvoked
recover a) acquisitive
possession of because
the City of Cavite under RA 1899 to ofreclaim
it
Prescription; authorizes the
Real construction docks
prescription and b) laches, asking that
the land will prosper. In 1965, after buying hethebe and
Rights
A harbors.
owned
land (1992) Who
a parcel
is limited to is
ofcorrect? (3%) land
unregistered
foreshore lands. The located
Act did
declared
land fromownerRobyn,of the
he land. Decidethe
submitted theDeed
case byof on
not authorize it to reclaim land from between
the Tarlac side of the boundary the sea.
evaluating
Sale to thethese defenses,
Registry [5%]for registration
of Deeds Tarlacreclamation
"The and Pangasinan. His brother B the
being unauthorized, owned
City
together with the owner's duplicate copy of the theCavite
of adjoiningdid notparcel of unregistered
acquire ownership over land theon
title, and paid the corresponding registration the Pangasinan
reclaimed land. side.
Not being the owner, it could
fees. Under Section 56 of PD No. 1529, the A sold theconveyed
ALTERNATIVE
not have Tarlac
ANSWER: parcel
any to X in athereof
portion deed oftosale the
It depends.
executed as If athe reclamation
public instrumentof theby land
A and fromX.
Deed of Sale to Renren is considered contractor.
the
Aftersea is necessary
X paid in full the,inprice
the construction
of the sale, Xoftook the
registered from the time the sale was entered
For allDay
legal intents docks and the harbors, the Cityparcel
of Cavite is
in the Book (now and purposes,
called Renren
the Primary Entryis possession of the Pangasinan in the
considered the registered owner of the land. correct.
belief that Otherwise,
it was theitTarlacis not. Sincecovered
parcel RA 1899 by
Book).
After all, it was not his fault that the Registry of authorized
the deed of sale the executed
city to construct
by A and X. docks and
Deeds could not issue the corresponding After twelve
harbors, all works(12) that
years, area necessary
controversy for arose
such
transfer certificate of title. between B and
construction areX deemed
on the issue of the ownership
authorized. Including
Mikaelo's defense of prescription can not be of the
the reclamation
Pangasinan of parcel,
land fromB claims
the sea.
a vestedThe
sustained. A Torrens title is imprescriptible. No right of ownership
reclamation being over the Pangasinan
authorized, the city is parcel
the
ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
title to registered land in derogation of the title because
owner of the
B neverreclaimed
sold land
that and
parcel
it may
to X convey
or to
On the assumption that the reclamation
of the registered owner shall be acquired by anyone
a portion else.
thereof as payment for the services
P.D. No, contract
On was entered
thecontractor.
other hand, X into before
claims RA 1899
a vested rightwasof
prescription or adverse possession. (Section of the
1529) repealed by PD 3-A, the
ownership over the Pangasinan parcelCity of Cavite is correct.
by
47,
Lands underprescription,
acquisitive the sea are "beyond
because the commerce
X possessed
of man" in the sense that
this parcel for over ten (10] years under they areclaim
not
susceptible
of ownership. of private appropriation, ownership
or
alienation. The contract in question merely callsanswer for or show up on the date of initial hearing, does
reclamation
the of 300 hectares of land within the guarantee
not the success of the application. It is still incumbent upon
the applicant to prove with well nigh incontrovertible evidence that
coastal waters of the city. Per se, it does not he has acquired a title to the land that is fit for registration. Absent
vest, alienate or transfer ownership of land such registrable title, it is the clear duty of the Land Registration
under the sea. The city merely engaged the Court to dismiss the application and declare the land as public
services of Fil-Estate to reclaim the land for the land.
city.
Registration; Deed of
Mortgage
How do you(1994)register now a deed of mortgage An application for land registration is a
of a parcel of land originally registered under proceeding in rem. Its main objective is to
the Spanish
SUGGESTED Mortgage Law?
ANSWER: establish the status of the res whether it is still
a) After the Spanish Mortgage Law was part of our public domain as presumed under
abrogated by P.D. 892 on February 16, 1976, the Regalian doctrine or has acquired the
all lands covered by Spanish titles that were character of a private property. It is the duty of
not brought under the Torrens system within the applicant to overcome that presumption
six 16] months from the date thereof have Remedies;
with sufficient Judicial
evidence. Reconstitution
been considered as "unregistered private of 1989,
In Title (1996)
the heirs of Gavino, who died on
Thus,
lands." a deed of mortgage affecting land August 10, 1987, filed a petition for
originally registered under the Spanish reconstitution of his lost or destroyed Torrens
Mortgage Law is now governed by the system Title to a parcel of land in Ermita, Manila. This
of registration of transactions or instruments was opposed by Marilou who claimed
affecting unregistered land under Section 194 ownership of the said land by a series of sales.
of the Revised Administrative Code as amended She claimed that Gavino had sold the property
by Act No. 3344. Under this law, the instrument to Bernardo way back in 1941 and as evidence
or transaction affecting unregistered land is thereof, she presented a Tax Declaration in
entered in a book provided for the purpose but 1948 in the name of Bernardo, which cancelled
the registration thereof is purely voluntary and the previous Tax Declaration in the name of
b)
doesBynot recording
adverselyand affectregistering
third persons with whothe
Gavino. Then she presented two deeds of sale
Register of Deeds
have a better right. of the place where the land
duly registered with the Register of Deeds, the
is located, in accordance with Act 3344.
first one executed by Bernardo in 1954 selling
However, P.D. 892 required holders of Spanish
the same property to Carlos, and the second
title to bring the same under the Torrens
Remedies; one executed by Carlos in 1963, selling the
System within 6Judicial
months from Confirmation;
its effectivity on
Imperfect
On June 30, Title (1993) same property to her. She also claimed that
February 16,1986,
1976.A filed in the RTC of Abra an SUGGESTED ANSWER:
application for registration of title to a parcel of she
If and her
I were the predecessors
judge, I will give in interest
due course havetobeen
the
P.
land D.under
No. 1529, claiming that since June 12, petition in possessionof theof heirsthe ofproperty
Gavinosince despite1948.
the If you
1945, he has been in open, continuous, opposition were the judge, of Marilouhow will you following
for the decide the reasons:
exclusive and notorious possession and petition? a) JudicialExplain.
reconstitution of a certificate of title
occupation of said parcel of land of the public under No.RA.26 partakes of a land registration
domain which was alienable and disposable, proceeding and is perforce a proceeding in
under a bona fide claim of ownership. After rem. It denotes restoration of an existing
issuance of the notice of initial hearing and instrument which has been lost or
publication, as required by law, the petition was destroyed in its original form and condition.
heard on July 29, 1987. On the day of the The purpose of reconstitution of title or any
hearing nobody but the applicant appeared. document is to have the same reproduced,
Neither was there anyone who opposed the b) after If proceedings.
the Court goes In beyond
the same that purpose,
form they
application. Thereupon, on motion of the it acts without or in excess of
were when the loss or destruction occurred.jurisdiction. Thus,
applicant, the RTC issued an order of general where the Torrens Title sought to be
default and allowed the applicant to present his reconstituted is in the name of Gavino, the
evidence. That he did. On September 30, 1989, court cannot receive evidence proving that
The appellant urged that the RTC erred in
the RTC dismissed A's application for lack of Marilou is the owner of the land. Marilou's
dismissing his application for registration and
sufficient evidence. A appealed to the Court of dominical claim to the land should be
in not ordering registration of his title to the ventilated in a separate civil action before the
Appeals. REFERENCES: Heirs of Pedro Pinate vs. Dulay.
parcel of land in question despite the fact that Regional Trial Court in its capacity as a court of
187 SCRA 12-20 (1990); Bunagan vs. CF1 Cebu
there was no opposition filed by anybody to his generalBranchjurisdiction.
VI. 97 SCRA 72 (1980); Republic vs. IAC.
application. Did the RTC commit the error 157 SCRA 62,66 (1988); Margolles vs. CA, 230
SUGGESTED
attributed ANSWER:
to it?
No, the RTC did not commit the error attributed to it. In an SCRA 709; Republic us, Feliciano, 148 SCRA 924.
application for Judicial confirmation of imperfect or incomplete title Remedies; Procedure;
to public agricultural land under Section 48 of the Public Land Act, Consulta
What is the(1994)
procedure of consulta when an
the lack of opposition and the consequent order of default against instrument is denied registration?
those who did not SUGGESTED ANSWER:
1) The Register of Deeds shall notify the
interested party in writing, setting forth the
defects of the instrument or the legal ground
relied upon for denying the registration, and
advising that if he is not agreeable to such
ruling, he may, without withdrawing the
documents from the Registry, elevate the
matter by Consulta to the Administrator of the
2) Within fiveAuthority
Land Registration {5) days from receipt of
(LRA).
notice of denial, the party-in-interest shall file
his Consulta with the Register of Deeds
3) Afterandreceipt
concerned pay the of the fee.
consulta Consulta and
payment of the corresponding fee the Register
of Deeds makes an annotation of the pending
consulta at the back of the certificate of title.
4) The Register of Deeds then elevates the
case to the LRA Administrator with certified
records thereof and a summary of the facts
5) The involved.
and issues LRA Administrator then conducts
hearings after due notice or may just require
parties to submit their memoranda.
6) After hearing, the LRA Administrator
issues an order prescribing the step to be taken
or the memorandum to be made. His resolution
in consulta shall be conclusive and binding
upon all Registers of Deeds unless reversed on
appeal by the Court of Appeals or by the
Supreme Court. (Section 117, P.D. 1529).
The procedure of consulta is a mode of appeal from
denial by the Register of Deeds of the registration of
the instrument to the Commissioner of Land
Registration.
Within five days from receipt of the notice of denial,
the interested party may elevate the matter by
consulta to the Commissioner of Land Registration
who shall enter an order prescribing the step to be
taken or memorandum to be made. Resolution in
consulta shall be binding upon all Registers of Deeds
provided that the party in interest may appeal to the
Court of Appeals within the period prescribed (Sec.
117, P.D. 1529).
Remedies; Reconveyance vs. Reopening
of a Decree; Prescriptive Period (2003)
Louie, before leaving the country to train as a
chef in a five-star hotel in New York, U.S.A.,
entrusted to his first-degree cousin Dewey an
application for registration, under the Land
Registration Act, of a parcel of land located in
Bacolod City. A year later, Louie returned to
the Philippines and discovered that Dewey
registered the land and obtained an Original
Certificate of Title over the property in his
Deweys name. Compounding the matter,
Dewey sold the land to Huey, an innocent
(a) Is the action
purchaser pursued
for value. by Louie
Louie the proper
promptly filed an
(b) Assuming
remedy? that reconveyance is
action for reconveyance of the parcel the proper
of land
remedy, will the action prosper if the case was
against Huey.
filed beyond one year, but within ten years,
from the entry of the decree of registration?
5%
Yes. The property registered is deemed to be held (a)
ThisinAn action
action doesfor reconveyance
not prescribe. against With respect Huey to is
for
trustthe real owner by the person in whose not
Percival's
action the forproper
reconveyance, remedy, because
it would haveHuey prescribed,is an
name it is registered. The Torrens system was innocent
having been purchaser
filed more for thanvalue.
ten (10) The yearsproper
after
not designed to shield one who had committed recourse isand
registration forissuance
Louie toofgo an after
O.C.T. Deweyin the name for of
fraud or misrepresentation and thus holds the Melvin,
damages were byit reason
not for the of inherent
the fraudulent infirmity of the
title in bad faith. (Walstrom v. Mapa Jr., (G .R latter's
registration title. Underand the facts, the statute
subsequent sale ofofthe limitations
land. If
38387, 29 Jan. 1990) as cited in Martinez, D., will not apply to Percival
Dewey is insolvent, Louie may file a claim because Melvin knew that a
Summary of SC Decisions, January to June, Eduarte
part
againstof the v.
the CA,
land 323 Phil.
covered
Assurance byFund 462,
his title 467
actually
(Heirs of belonged
Pedro to
Remedies; Reconveyance; [1996]).
Percival.v.So,
1990, p. 359], Lopez Deinstead
Castro of 324
nullifying
SCRA in 591
toto the
[2000] title of citing
Prescriptive
On 10 September Period (1997)
1965, Melvin applied for a (b) Yes,
Melvin, the the remedy
court, in the will prosper
exercise because
of equity and the
Sps.
free patent covering two lots - Lot A and Lot B - action prescribes
jurisdiction, may grant inprayer
ten (10) for theyears, not within
reconveyance of
situated in Santiago, Isabela. Upon certification oneB (1)
Lot year when
to Percival who has a petition for the reopening
actually possessed the land
by the Public Land Inspector that Melvin had of thea registration
under claim of ownership decree sincemay 1947. be After
filed.all, Theif
been in actual, continuous, open, notorious, action for
Melvin's titlereconveyance
is declared void is abdistinct
initio andfrom the land the is
exclusive and adverse possession of the lots petitionto
reverted tothereopen
public the domain,decree Percivalof registration
would just the
since 1925, the Director of Land approved (GreybeAlba
same v. De
entitled la Cruz, 17
to preference Phil.
right to 49 [1910}).
acquire the land
Melvin's application on 04 June 1967. On 26 There
from theisgovernment.
no need toBesides, reopenwell thesettled
registration
is the rule
December 1967, Original Certificate of Title proceedings,
that once publicbut landthe has property
been in open, should just be
continuous,
On
(OCT)7 September
No. P-22771971, Percival
was issued in filed a protest
the name of The action
reconveyed
exclusive and for toreconveyance
the real
notorious owner.
possession is based
under aon implied
bonafide
alleging
Melvln. that Lot B which he had been claim of acquisition of ownership for the periodten (10)
or constructive trust, which prescribes in
occupying and cultivating since 1947 was years frombythe
prescribed date48
Section of ofissuance
the Public ofLand
the original
Act, the
included in the Free Patent issued in the name certificate
same ipso jure of title.
ceases Thisto be rule assumes
public and in that the
contemplation
of Melvin. The Director of Lands ordered the defendant
of law acquired is inthe possession
character of ofprivate
the land. land. Where
Thus, it is
investigation of Percival's protest. The Special the plaintiff who
reconveyance of the is land
in possession
from Melvinoftothe land,would
Percival the
Investigator who conducted the investigation action
ALTERNATIVE for reconveyance
ANSWER: would
be the better procedure, (Vitale vs. Anore, 90 Phil. 855; be in the nature of
found that Percival had been in actual The
a
v. suit action
Malay, for of
quieting
318 the
SCRA Solicitor
for
Pena, Land Titles and Deeds, 1982, Page 427) the
711 General
title which should
action is
On 28 November
cultivation 1986,
of Lot B sincethe Solicitor General
1947. prosper,
[1999]).
imprescriptible considering (Davidthat the doctrine of
filed in behalf of the Republic of the Philippines Remedies; Reconveyance;
indefeasibility of title does not apply to free
a complaint for cancellation of the free patent Elements
Rommel
patent was
secured (1995)
issuedthrough a certificate of title over
fraud. A certificate ofa
and the OCT issued in the name of Melvin and parcel
title cannotof land bein used Quezon as shieldCity. to One year later
perpetuate
the reversion of the land to public domain on Rachelle,
fraud. Thethe State legitimate
is not bound ownerbyofthe theperiod
land, of
the ground of fraud and misrepresentation in discovered the
prescription stated fraudulent
in Sec. registration
38 of Act 496. obtained
obtaining the free patent. On the same date, by Rommel.
(Director She filed
of Lands vs. aAbanilla,
complaint 124 against
SCRA 358)
The
Rommel actionfor forreconveyance
reconveyance filed andby Percival
caused the may
Percival sued Martin for the reconveyance of
Melvin filed his answers interposing the sole still prosper provided that
annotation of a notice of lis pendens on the the property has not
Lot B.
defense in both cases that the Certificate of passed
certificate to anofinnocent
title issued third to party for value
Rommel. (Dablo us.
Rommel
Title issued in his name became now invokes the indefeasibility of his title that
Court of Appeals. 226 SCRA 618) , and provided
incontrovertible and indefeasible upon the the action is filed within the prescriptive period of ten
considering that one year has already elapsed
lapse of one year from the issuance of the free years (Tale vs. Court of Appeals. 208 SCRA 266).
from its issuance. He also seeks the
Given
patent.the circumstances, can the action of the Since
SUGGESTED the action ANSWER: was filed by Percival 19 years after
cancellation
Yes,issuance
Rachelle's of the suitnotice
will of Lis pendens.
prosper becausethat Will
all
Solicitor General and the case for the of Melvin's title, it is submitted the
Rachelle's
elements suit
for an for reconveyance
action prosper?
reconveyance filed by Percival possibly same is already barred byfor reconveyance
prescription. ALTERNATIVEare
Explain.
present,
SUGGESTED
prosper? ANSWER: ANSWER (to namely:
second part a) Rachelle
of question) is claiming
The action for
"If fraud be discovered in the application which land.
dominical b) Rommel
reconveyance rightsfiledover procured the same
by Percival his
willtitle to the
prosper, land
because
led to the issuance of the patent and Certificate by fraud.
the land has c)ceased
The action to be was public brought
land and within
has the
of Title, this Title becomes ipso facto null and statutory
become period
private land of by open, continuous, public,
void. Thus, in a case where a person who four (4)
exclusive years from
possession under discovery
a bona fide of claim
the fraud of and not
obtained a free patent, knowingly made a false than
later
ownership ten
for (10}
more years
than from
thirty the
years, date
and of registration
Percival is of
statement of material and essential facts in his Rommel's
still in possessiontitle. d)
of Title
the to
propertythe land
at has
present. notHis
passed
application for the same, by stating therein that action forinto the hands can
reconveyance of an be considered as an
the lot in question was part of the public actioninnocent
(Olviga tov. CA.purchaser
quiet title, which for
GR 1048013. does value.
October
not prescribe 21, if the
domain not occupied or claimed by any other 1993)
plaintiff is in possession of the property.
Remedies;
Rommel canReopening invoke the indefeasibility of a Decree; of his title
person, his title becomes ipso facto canceled
Elements
What
if Rachelleare the (1992)
had essential
filed a requisites
petition or elements
to reopen or
and consequently rendered null and void." "It is
for
reviewthe the allowance
decree ofof the reopeningBut
registration. or review
Rachelle of
to the public interest that one who succeeds In
a decreefiled
instead of registration?
an ordinary action in personam for
fraudulently acquiring title to public land should SUGGESTED ANSWER:
not be allowed to benefit therefrom and the reconveyance. In the latter action,
The essential
indefeasibility elements
is not a valid are: defense
(1) that the because, in
State, through the Solicitor General, may file petitioner has a real or dominical right; (2)tothat
the corresponding action for annulment of the filing such action, Rachelle is not seeking
Lands us. Hon. Pedro Samson Animas, L-37682, 3- he has nor
nullify been to deprived
impugn the thereof through fraud;
indefeasibility of
patent and the reversion of the land involved to
29-74.) (3) that the petition is filed within one (1) year
the public domain"
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (Dinero us. Director of
Rommel's title. She is only asking the court to
from theRommel
ALTERNATIVE
compel issuance
ANSWER:of the decree; and (4) that
to reconvey the title to her as
Lands; Kayaban vs. Republic L-33307,8-20-73; the property has not yet been transferred to an
Director of the legitimate owner of the land.
innocent
purchaser {Rublico vs. Orellana 30 SCRA 511; Ubudan Administrative Code of 1987 which prohibits officers
vs.SCRA
45 Gil 17). employees
and of the government from purchasing
OPTIONAL EXTENDED ANSWER: directly or indirectly any property sold by the
Petition for review of the Decree of government for nonpayment of any tax, fee or
Registration. A remedy expressly provided in (a) Is the
other sale
public to Juan valid? If so, what is the
charge.
Section 32 of P. D. No. 1529 (formerly Section effect of the Issuance of the Certificate of Title
38. Act 496), this remedy has the following (b) If the sale is void, may Juan recover the
to Maria?
elements: a) The petition must be filed by a P10,000.00? If not, why not?
dominical
person claiming or other real rights to the land (c) If the sale is void, did it not nevertheless,
registered in the name of respondent. operate to divert Maria of her ownership? If it
b) The registration of the land in the name did, who then is the owner of the property?
of respondent was procured by means of actual,
(not just constructive) fraud, which must be
extrinsic. Fraud is actual if the registration
was made through deceit or any other
intentional act of downright dishonesty to
enrich oneself at the expense of another. It is
extrinsic when it is something that was not
c)
raised, The petition
litigated andmust be upon
passed filed within
in the one
main
(1) year from
proceedings. the date of the issuance of the
d)
decree. Title to the land has not passed to an
Innocent purchaser for value (Libudan vs. Gil,
45_ SCRA 27, 1972), Rublico vs. Orrelana. 30
SCRA 511, 1969); RP vs. CA, 57 G. R No.
40402. March 16, 1987).
Torrens System vs. Recording of
Evidence of
Distinguish theTitle (1994)
Torrens system of land
registration from the system of recording of
evidence of
SUGGESTED title.
ANSWER:
a) The TORRENS SYSTEM OF LAND REGISTRATION
is a system for the registration of title to the land.
Thus, under this system what is entered in the
Registry of Deeds, is a record of the owner's
estate or interest in the land, unlike the system
under the Spanish Mortgage Law or the system
under Section 194 of the Revised Administrative
Code as amended by Act 3344 where only the
evidence of such title is recorded. In the latter
system, what is recorded is the deed of
conveyance from hence the owner's title
emanatedand not the title itself.
b) Torrens system of land registration is that
which is prescribed in Act 496 (now PD 1529),
which is either Judicial or quasi-judicial. System
or recording of evidence of title is merely the
registration of evidence of acquisitions of land
with the Register of Deeds, who annotates the
same on the existing title, cancels the old one
and issues a new title based on the document
Unregistered
presented for registration.
Land
Maria (1991)
Enriquez failed to pay the realty taxes on
her unregistered agricultural land located in
Magdugo, Toledo City. In 1989, to satisfy the
taxes due, the City sold it at public auction to
Juan Miranda, an employee at the Treasurer's
Office of said City, whose bid at P10,000.00
was the highest. In due time, a final bill of sale
was executed in his favor. Maria refused to
turn-over the possession of the property to Juan
alleging that (1) she had been, in the
meantime, granted a free patent and on the
basis thereof an Original Certificate of Title was
issued to her, and (2) the sale in favor of Juan is
void from the beginning in view of the provision
in the
then executed an affidavit of desistance which led to
withdrawal of the information against Lolita and My answer will not be the same as to damages.
the
her release from jail. The parents failed to Marvin will be liable for damages for breach of
comply with their promissory note and the contract of option. With the payment of the
finance company sued them for specific consideration for the option given, and with the
SUGGESTED
performance. ANSWER:
Will the action prosper or not? consent of the parties and the object of contract
The
(3%) action will prosper. The promissory note being present,
(San Miguel,a perfected
Inc. v. contract Huang, of option
G.R. was No.
executed by Lolita's parents is valid and created. July 31, 2000) Under Article 1170 of
137290,
binding, the consideration being the the Civil Code, those who in the performance of
extinguishment of Lolita's civil liability and not their obligation are guilty of contravention
ALTERNATIVE
the stifling ofANSWER:
the criminal prosecution.
The action will not prosper because the thereof, as in this case, when Marvin did not
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
consideration for the promissory note was the A. give Carlos the agreed period of ten days, are
The sale ANSWER:
ALTERNATIVE of the land to Juan is not valid,
non-prosecution of the criminal case for estafa. My liable for damages.
beinganswer
contrarywill to
notlaw.beTherefore,
the same no if Carlos
transfer paid
of
This cannot be done anymore because the Marvin ownership P10,000.00
of the land because an option
was effected fromcontract
the
information has already been filed in court and was perfected.
delinquent taxpayer Thus, to if
him.Marvin withdrew the
The original
to do it is illegal. That the consideration for the offer prior of
certificates totitle
theobtained
expiration of the
by Maria thru10-day
a
promissory note is the stifling of the criminal period,
free patent he grant
breached
from the theBureau option contract.
of Lands
prosecution is evident from the execution by (Article 1324, Civil
under Chapter Code)
VII, CA 141 is valid but in view
the finance company of the affidavit of c) Supposing
of her delinquency, thatthe Carlos
said title accepted
is subject tothe
desistance immediately after the execution by offer the right of the City Government to sell the his
before Marvin could communicate
Lolita's parents of the promissory note. The withdrawal thereof?
land at public auction. TheDiscuss
issuance of thethe legal
OCT
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
consideration being illegal, the promissory note consequences. (2%)
Contract of Option; did not exempt the land from the tax sales.
is invalid and may not be enforced by court A contract to construct the house of Carlos is
Section 44 of P.O. No. 1529 provides that every
Elements
Marvin (2005)
offered to construct the house of Carlos perfected. Contracts are perfected by mere
action. registered owner receiving a Certificate of Title
for a very reasonable price of P900,000.00, consent
B. Juan may manifested
recover by the meeting
because he wasof notthe
a offer
shall hold the same free from an
giving the latter 10 days within which to and
partythe acceptance
to the violation of upon the thing and the
the law.
encumbrances, subject to certain exemptions.
accept or reject the offer. On the fifth day, cause which are to constitute the contract.
before Carlos could make up his mind, Marvin (Gomez
C. No, the v. saleCourt
did notof divest
Appeals,
Maria ofG.R. her title
No.
a) What is
withdrew histhe Under
effect of the withdrawal of 120747,
offer. precisely Article 1315
September
because theofsalethe2000)
21, is Civil
void.Code,
It is asCarlos
good
Marvin's offer? (2%) and
as if Marvin
no sale are everbound to fulfill
took place. what
In tax has the
sales, been
SUGGESTED ANSWER: expressly stipulated
owner is divested of hisandland all consequences
initially upon
The withdrawal of Marvin's offer will cause the thereof. Under Article 1167, if Marvin would
award and issuance of a Certificate of Sale,
offer to cease in law. Hence, even if refuse to construct the house, Carlos is
and finally after the lapse of the 1 year period
subsequently accepted, there could be no entitled to have the construction be done by a
from date of registration, to redeem, upon
concurrence of the offer and the acceptance. In third person at the expense of Marvin. Marvin
execution by the treasurer of an instrument
the absence of concurrence of offer and in that case will be liable for damages under
sufficient in form and effects to convey the
acceptance, there can be no consent. (Laudico Inexistent
Article 1170. Contracts vs. Annullable
property. Maria remained owner of the land
v. Arias Rodriguez, G.R. No. 16530, March DistinguishContracts (2004) briefly but clearly between
until another tax sale is to be performed in
31, 1922) Without consent, there is no Inexistent contracts and annullable contracts.
CONTRACTS
favor of a qualified buyer.
perfected contract for the construction of the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
house of Carlos. (Salonga v. Farrales, G.R. INEXISTENT CONTRACTS are considered as not
No. L-47088, July 10, 1981) Article 1318 of having Consensual been vs. entered
Real into and, therefore,
Contracts; Kinds ofvoid
ob initio.
the Civil Code provides that there can be no Real Contracts (1998)They do not create any obligation and
contract unless the following requisites concur: cannot
Distinguishbe ratified
consensual or validated,
from real as there
contracts is no
and
Marvin will not be liable to pay Carlos any
(1) consent of the parties; (2) object certain agreement
name at least to four
ratify(4)or validate.
kinds of realOn the other
contracts
damages for withdrawing the offer before the
which is the subject matter of the contract; and hand,
under the ANNULLABLE
present law. or [3%]
VOIDABLE CONTRACTS
lapse of the period granted. In this case, no are valid until
SUGGESTED ANSWER: invalidated by the court but may
(3) cause of the obligation.
consideration was given by Carlos for the CONSENSUAL
be CONTRACTS
ratified. In inexistent are those
contracts, onewhich are
or more
option given, thus there is no perfected perfected by
requisites of mere
a validconsent
contract(Art. are
1315. Civil In
absent.
contract of option for lack of cause of Code). REAL
anullable CONTRACTS
contracts, all are
the those which of
elements are a
obligation. Marvin cannot be held to have perfectedare
contract by present
the delivery except of the
thatobject of the of
the consent
breached the contract. Thus, he cannot be held one obligation.
of the (Art. 1316, Civil
contracting Code)was
parties Examples
vitiatedofor
b) Will
liable foryour answer be the same if Carlos Nature
damages. real of
one contracts
them has
ofareno Contracts;
deposit,
capacity pledge,
to givecommodatum
consent.
paid Marvin P10,000.00 as consideration Obligatoriness
Roland,
and simple a basketball(1991)
loan (mutuum). star, was under contract
for that option? Explain. (2%) for
Consideration; play-for-play exclusively for
one year to
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: Lady
Validity
Lolita Love,
was (2000)Inc. However,
employed in a finance even before the
company.
My answer will be the same as to the basketball
Because she could not account for the offered
season could open, he was funds a
perfection of the contract for the construction more
entrusted to her, she was charged with estafaby
attractive pay plus fringes benefits
of the house of Carlos. No perfected contract Sweet Taste,arrested.
Inc. Roland accepted the
and ordered In order to secure heroffer
arises because of lack of consent. With the and transferred
release from jail,toher Sweet
parentsTaste. Lady Love
executed a sues
withdrawal of the offer, there could be no Roland and note
Sweet
promissory to Taste
pay the forfinance
breachcompany
of contract.
concurrence of offer and acceptance. Defendants
the amount claim allegedly thatmisappropriated
the restriction toby play for
their
Lady LoveThe
daughter. alone is void,
finance hence, unenforceable,
company
as it
constitutes an undue interference with the rightany of payment at all. Printado has also a standing
to enter into contracts and the impairment of
Roland with publisher Publico for the printing of 10,000
contract
his freedom to play and enjoy basketball. volumes of school textbooks. Suplico was
aware of said printing contract. After printing
Can Roland be bound by the contract he 1,000 volumes, Printado also fails to perform
entered into with Lady Love or can he under its printing contract with Publico. Suplico
disregard the same? Is he liable at all? How sues Printado for the value of the unpaid
SUGGESTED
about Sweet ANSWER:
Taste? Is it liable to Lady Love? deliveries under their order agreement. At the
Roland is bound by the contract he entered same time Publico sues Printado for damages
into with Lady Love and he cannot disregard for breach of contract with respect to their own
the same, under the principles of obligatoriness printing agreement. In the suit filed by Suplico,
of contracts. Obligations arising from contracts Printado counters that: (a) Suplico cannot
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
have the force of law between the parties.
Yes, Roland is liable under the contract as far demand payment for deliveries made under
as Lady Love is concerned. He is liable for their order agreement until Suplico has
damages under Article 1170 of the Civil Code completed performance under said contract;
since he contravened the tenor of his (b) Suplico should pay damages for breach of
obligation. Not being a contracting party, contract; and (c) with Publico should be liable
Sweet Taste is not bound by the contract but it for Printados
SUGGESTED breach of his contract with
ANSWER:
can be held liable under Art. 1314. The basis of No, Publico because the of
the contentions order agreement
Printado between
are untenable.
Suplico and Printado was for the benefit
its liability is not prescribed by contract but is Printado having failed to pay for the printing of
Publico. Are the contentions of Printado
founded on quasi-delict, assuming that Sweet paper covered by the delivery invoices on time,
tenable?has
Taste knew of the contract. Article 1314 of the Suplico Explain yourtoanswers
the right as to each
cease making further
contention. (5%)
Civil Code provides that any third person who delivery. And the latter did not violate the
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
induces another that
It is assumed to violate
Lady hisLovecontract
knew shall be order agreement (Integrated Packaging
of the
liable for damages to the other contracting
contract. Neither Roland nor Sweet Taste would
Corporation v. Court of Appeals, (333 SCRA
party. Suplico
170, cannot
G.R. be held liable
No. 115117, Junefor
8,damages,
[2000]). for
be liable, because the restriction in the breach of contract, as it was not he who violated the
contract is violative of Article 1306 as being order agreement, but Printado. Suplico cannot be
contrary to law morals, good customs, public held liable for Printados breach of contract with
order or public policy. Publico. He is not a party to the agreement entered
Nature of Contracts; Privity of into by and between Printado and Publico. Theirs is
Contract (1996)
Baldomero leased his house with a telephone not a stipulation pour atrui. [Aforesaid] Such
to Jose. The lease contract provided that Jose contracts do could not affect third persons like
shall pay for all electricity, water and telephone Suplico because of the basic civil law principle of
services in the leased premises during the relativity of contracts which provides that contracts
period of the lease. Six months later. Jose can only bind the parties who entered into it, and it
surreptitiously vacated the premises. He left cannot favor or prejudice a third person, even if he
behind unpaid telephone bills for overseas is aware of such contract and has acted with
telephone calls amounting to over P20,000.00. v. CA, supra.)
knowledge thereof. (Integrated Packaging
Baldomero refused to pay the said bills on the Corporation
ground that Jose had already substituted him Rescission of Contracts;
as the customer of the telephone company. Proper
In Party1985,
December (1996)
Salvador and the Star
The latter maintained that Baldomero remained Semiconductor Company (SSC) executed a
as his customer as far as their service contract Deed of Conditional Sale wherein the former
SUGGESTED ANSWER: agreed to sell his 2,000 square meter lot in
was concerned,
The telephone notwithstanding
company the lease
is correct because as
contract between Baldomero and Jose. Who is Cainta, Rizal, to the latter for the price of
far as it is concerned, the only person it P1,000,000.00, payable P100,000.00 down, and
correct, Baldomero
contracted with wasorBaldomero.
the telephone
The company?
telephone
Explain. the balance 60 days after the squatters in the
company has no contract with Jose. Baldomero property have been removed. If the squatters
cannot substitute Jose in his stead without the are not removed within six months, the
consent of the telephone company (Art. 1293, P100,000.00 down payment shall be returned
NCC). Baldomero is, therefore, liable under the by the vendor to the vendee, Salvador filed
Nature
contract.of Contracts; Relativity of
Contracts
Printado (2002) in the printing business.
is engaged ejectment suits against the squatters, but in
Suplico supplies printing paper to Printado spite of the decisions in his favor, the squatters
pursuant to an order agreement under which still would not leave. In August, 1986, Salvador
Suplico binds himself to deliver the same offered to return the P100,000.00 down
volume of paper every month for a period of 18 payment to the vendee, on the ground that he
months, with Printado in turn agreeing to pay is unable to remove the squatters on the
within 60 days after each delivery. Suplico has property. SSC refused to accept the money and
been faithfully delivering under the order demanded that Salvador execute a deed of
agreement for 10 months but thereafter absolute sale of the property in its favor, at
stopped doing so, because Printado has not which time it will pay the balance of the price.
made Incidentally, the value of the land had doubled
by that time.
Salvador consigned the P 100,000.00 in court, and
property of ZY, his wife may also sue to recover it
action
filed anfor rescission of the deed of conditional Article
under 2016 of the Civil Code if she and the
sale, plus damages. Will the action prosper? family needed the money for support.
Explain. ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ALTERNATIVE ANSWER (2):
No, the action will not prosper. The action for A. (2). Mrs. ZY cannot file a suit to recover what
rescission may be brought only by the her husband lost. Art 2014 of the Civil Code
aggrieved party to the contract. Since it was provides that any loser in a game of chance
Salvador who failed to comply with his may recover his loss from the winner, with
conditional obligation, he is not the aggrieved legal interest from the time he paid the amount
party who may file the action for rescission but lost. This means that only he can file the suit.
the Star Semiconductor Company. The Mrs. ZY cannot recover as a spouse who has
company, however, is not opting to rescind the interest in the absolute community property or
contract but has chosen to waive Salvador's conjugal partnership of gains, because under
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
compliance with the condition which it can do Art. 117(7} of the Family Code, losses are
The action for rescission will not prosper. The
under Art. 1545, NCC. borne exclusively by the loser-spouse.
buyer has not committed any breach, let alone
Therefore, these cannot be charged against
a substantial or serious one, to warrant the
absolute community property or conjugal
rescission/resolution sought by the vendor. On
partnership of gains. This being so, Mrs. ZY has
the contrary, it is the vendor who appears to Conditional
no interest in law to prosecute and recover as
have failed to comply with the condition Obligations
Pedro (2000)
promised to give his grandson a car if
she has no legal standing in court to do so.
imposed by the contract the fulfillment of which the latter will pass the bar examinations. When
would have rendered the obligation to pay the his grandson passed the said examinations,
balance of the purchase price demandable. Pedro refused to give the car on the ground
Further, far from being unable to comply with that the condition was a purely potestative
what is incumbent upon it, ie., pay the balance SUGGESTED ANSWER:or not? (2%)
one. Is he correct
of the price the buyer has offered to pay it even No, he is not correct. First of all, the condition
without the vendor having complied with the is not purely potestative, because it does not
suspensive condition attached to the payment depend on the sole will of one of the parties.
of the price, thus waiving such condition as well Secondly, even if it were, it would be valid
as the 60-day term in its favor The stipulation because it depends on the sole will of the
that the P100,000.00 down payment shall be creditor (the donee) and not of the debtor (the
Conditional
donor).
returned by the vendor to the vendee if the Obligations
Are (2003)
the following obligations valid, why, and if
squatters are not removed within six months, is they are valid, when is the obligation
also a covenant for the benefit of the vendee, demandable in each case? a) If the debtor
which the latter has validly waived by means to to
pay; b)as
If the
soondebtor
as he promises
has the to pay
OBLIGATIONS
promises pay
implication when it offered to pay the balance when he likes; c) If the debtor promises to pay
of the purchase price upon the execution of a when he becomes a
deed
Aleatoryof absolute Contracts;
sale by the vendor. (Art. 1545, lawyer; d) If the debtor promises to pay if his
NCC)
Gambling
A. (2004)
Mr. ZY lost P100,000 in a card game called son, who is sick with cancer, does not die
Russian poker, but he had no more cash to pay within one year. 5%
in full the winner at the time the session SUGGESTED ANSWER:
ended. He promised to pay PX, the winner, (a) The obligation is valid. It is an obligation
two weeks thereafter. But he failed to do so subject to an indefinite period because the
despite the lapse of two months, so PX filed in debtor binds himself to pay when his means
court a suit to collect the amount of P50,000 permit him to do so (Article 1180, NCC). When
that he won but remained unpaid. Will the the creditor knows that the debtor already has
collection suit against ZY prosper? Could Mrs. the means to pay, he must file an action in
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
ZY file in turn a suit against PX to recover the court to fix the period, and when the definite
A. 1. The suit by PX to collect the balance of period as set by the court arrives, the
P100,000 that her husband lost? Reason. (5%)
what he won from ZY will not prosper. Under obligation to pay becomes demandable
Article 2014 of the Civil Code, no action can be SUGGESTED ANSWER:
9Article 1197, NCC).
maintained by the winner for the collection of (b) The obligation to pay when he likes is a
what he has won in a game of chance. suspensive condition the fulfillment of which is
Although poker may depend in part on ability, subject to the sole will of the debtor and,
it is fundamentally a game of chance. therefore the conditional obligation is void.
2) If the money paid by ZY to PX was conjugal (Article 1182, NCC).
or community property, the wife of ZY could SUGGESTED ANSWER:
sue to recover it because Article 117(7) of the (c) The obligation is valid. It is subject to a
Family Code provides that losses in gambling suspensive condition, i.e. the future and
or betting are borne exclusively by the loser- uncertain event of his becoming a lawyer. The
spouse. Hence, conjugal or community funds performance of this obligation does
may not be used to pay for such losses. If the
money were exclusive
not depend solely on the will of the debtor but alsocondition
on of Eva passing the 1998 Bar Examinations.
other factors outside the debtors
control.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(d) The obligation is valid. The death of the son
of cancer within one year is made a negative
suspensive condition to his making the
payment. The obligation is demandable if the
son does not die within one year (Article 1185,
NCC).
Conditional Obligations;
Promise
In (1997)documents signed by him, Juan
two separate
Valentino "obligated" himself each to Maria
and to Perla, thus - 'To Maria, my true love, I
obligate myself to give you my one and only
horse when I feel like It." - and -'To Perla, my
true sweetheart, I obligate myself to pay you
the P500.00 I owe you when I feel like it."
Months passed but Juan never bothered to
make good his promises. Maria and Perla came
to consult you on whether or not they could
recover on the basis of the foregoing settings.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
What would
I would your
advise legal
Maria advice
not be? running after
to bother
Juan for the latter to make good his promise.
[This is because a promise is not an actionable
wrong that allows a party to recover especially
when she has not suffered damages resulting
from such promise. A promise does not create
an obligation on the part of Juan because it is
not something which arises from a contract,
law, quasi-contracts or quasidelicts (Art,
1157)]. Under Art. 1182, Juan's promise to
Maria is void because a conditional obligation
As regards
depends Perla,
upon thethe document
sole will of theisobligor.
an express
acknowledgment of a debt, and the promise to
pay what he owes her when he feels like it is
equivalent to a promise to pay when his means
permits him to do so, and is deemed to be one
with an indefinite period under Art. 1180. Hence
the amount is recoverable after Perla asks the
court to set the period as provided by Art. 1197,
Conditional
par. 2. Obligations; Resolutory
Condition
In (1999)
1997, Manuel bound himself to sell Eva a
house and lot which is being rented by another
person, if Eva passes the 1998 bar
examinations. Luckily for Eva, she passed said
(a) Suppose Manuel had sold the same house
examinations.
and lot to another before Eva passed the 1998
bar examinations, is such sale valid? Why?
(b) Assuming that it is Eva who is entitled to
(2%)
buy said house and lot, is she entitled to the
rentals collected by Manuel before she passed
the 1998 bar examinations? Why? (3%)
concerned, may annul such assignment for not having Even [if] assuming that there was a perfect right of
their
givenconsent thereto. refusal,
first upon compensation
Hence, Eva's passing the Bar, did notof the
the rights take place
other buyer
terminated and Eva acquired ownership of the property.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: because the claim is unliquidated.
The assignment is valid because there is
absolute freedom to transfer the credit and the Extinguishment;
SECOND ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: Compensation vs.
creditor need not get the consent of the The sale compensation
Payment
Define to another person
(1998) as beforea Eva could
mode of
debtor. He only needs to notify him. buy it from Manuel
extinguishing an obligation,is valid,and as the contractit
distinguish
Extinguishment; Cause of between
from payment.
SUGGESTED Manuel
ANSWER: [2%]and Eva is a mere promise to
Action
TX filed (2004)
a suit for ejectment against BD for COMPENSATION
sell and Eva has is nota acquired
mode of aextinguishing
real right over to
non-payment of condominium rentals the concurrent
land assuming amount,that the obligations
there is aof those price
amounting to P150,000. During the pendency persons
stipulated who in thein theircontract own for righttheare reciprocally
contract to be
of the case, BD offered and TX accepted the debtors
considered and acreditors
sale and of there
each other (Tolentino,
was delivery or
SUGGESTED
full amount due as rentals from BD, who then 1991
tradition ed., ofANSWER:
p.
the365, thing citing
sold. 2 Castan 560 and
filed a motion to dismiss the ejectment suit on (b) No, vs.
Francia she IAC. is 162not SCRA entitled753).toIt the involvesrentals
the
the ground that the action is already collected by Manuel because
simultaneous balancing of two obligations at the time they in
SUGGESTED
extinguished. ANSWER:
Is BDs contention correct? Why accrued
order and were collected,
to extinguish them to the Eva was in
extent not yet
which
BD's contention is not correct. TX can still FIRSTowner
the ALTERNATIVE
of oftheone ANSWER:
property.
or why not? Reason. (5%) the amount
Assuming that Eva is the
is covered by that to
one entitled of buy
the
maintain the suit for ejectment. The other.
the (De
housemeans Leon,
and lot, 1992 ed., p. 221, citing 8
acceptance by the lessor of the payment by PAYMENT not sheonlyisdelivery
not entitled
of money to thebut
Manresa
rentals 401).
collected by
the lessee of the rentals in arrears even during also performance of Manuel
an obligation before(Article
she passed 1232,
the pendency of the ejectment case does not the
Civil Code). In payment, capacity to adispose
bar examinations. Whether it is contract of
constitute a waiver or abandonment of the of sale
the thing paidor aand contract
capacityto sell, reciprocal
to receive payment
ejectment case. (Spouses Clutario v. CA, 216 prestations
are required are deemed for debtorimposed and A creditor,
for the
Extinguishment;
SCRA 341 [1992]). seller to deliver
respectively: the object sold
in compensation, such and for the
capacity is
Compensation
Stockton (2002) of Core Corp. He
is a stockholder buyernecessary,
not to pay the price. because Before thethe compensation
happening of
desires to sell his shares in Core Corp. In view of operates the condition, by law the and fruitsnot of bythe thething actand of the
the
a court suit that Core Corp. has filed against SECOND ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
interestsInon
parties. the money
payment, the are deemed to
performance must havebe
him for damages in the amount of P 10 million, Under Art. 1164, there is no obligation on the
been
complete; mutually
while incompensated
compensation under
there Article
may be
plus attorneys fees of P 1 million, as a result of part of Manuel to deliver
Extinguishment; the fruits (rentals) of
Compensation/Set-
1187.
partial extinguishment of to an deliverobligation
statements published by Stockton which are the
Off;
X, whothing
Banks until
a(1998)
has supra) the obligation
savings deposit with Y Bank in the the
(Tolentino,
thing
allegedly defamatory because it was calculated sum ofarises. As the suspensive
P1,000,000.00 incurs a loan condition has
obligation
to injure and damage the corporations not
with been
the said fulfilled,
Bank the in the obligation
sum of to sell does
P800.000.00
reputation and goodwill. The articles of not
which arise. has become due. When X tries to
Extinguishment; Assignment of
incorporation of Core Corp. provide for a right of The withdraw his deposit, Y Bank allows only
Rights sugar (2001) cane planters of Batangas entered
first refusal in favor of the corporation. P200.000.00 to be withdrawn, less service
into a long-term milling contract with the
Accordingly, Stockton gave written notice to the charges, claiming that compensation has
Central Azucarera de Don Pedro Inc. Ten years
corporation of his offer to sell his shares of P 10 extinguished its obligation under the savings
later, the Central assigned its rights to the said
million. The response of Core corp. was an account to the concurrent amount of X's debt. X
milling contract to a Taiwanese group which
acceptance of the offer in the exercise of its contends that compensation is improper when
would take over the operations of the sugar
rights of first refusal, offering for the purpose one of the debts, as here, arises from a
mill. The planters filed an action to annul the
payment in form of compensation or set-off contract of deposit. Assuming that the
said assignment
SUGGESTED ANSWER: on the ground that the
against the amount of damages it is claiming promissory
Y bank is correct. note signed by Civil
X toCode, evidence the
Taiwanese group An. was1287, not registered doesthe
with not
against him, exclusive of the claim for loan
apply. All does
(Note: not
The provide
question
the requisitesWill for
presupposes
of Art. compensation
knowledge
Board of Investments. the1279,
actionCivil Code
prosper
attorneys ANSWERS:
fees. Stockton rejected the offer of between
are and
present. saidrequires
Inloantheand case hisofsavings
the Gullas deposit,
application vs. PNBof whothe
[62
SUGGESTED or not? Explain briefly. (5%)
the corporation,
Stockton is correct.arguing
Therethatis nocompensation
right of is correct? provisions
[3%] of the Omnibus Investment Code,
Phil.
SUGGESTED the Supreme Court held: "The Civil
519),ANSWER:
between the value
compensation betweenof thehisshares
price and themillion
of P10 which properly belongs to Commercial law)
Code
The action contains
will prosper provisions
not on theregarding ground
amount of damages demanded
and Core Corp.s unliquidated claim for by the compensation (set off) and deposit. These
invoked but on the ground that the farmers
corporation
damages. Incannot order thatlegally take effect. may
compensation Is be portions
have not given their consent to that
of Philippine law provide the
Stockton
proper, the correct?
two debtsGivemust
reason be for your answer.
liquidated and compensation shallmilling take contract
place when two
assignment. The imposes
(5%)
demandable. The case for the P 10million persons are reciprocally
reciprocal obligations on creditor
the parties. andThe debtorsugar of
damages being still pending in court, the each other. In this connection,
central has the obligation to mill the sugar cane it has been held
ANOTHER
corporation MAINhasANSWER:
as yet no claim which is due
The right of first refusal was not perfected as a that
of the the farmers
relation existing while the betweenlatter a havedepositorthe
and demandable against Stockton. and a
obligation bank tois that
deliver of creditor
their and
sugar debtor,
cane to x xx
the
right for the
SUGGESTED reason that there was a conditional
ANSWER:
acceptance equivalent to a counter-offer As
sugara general
central. rule,
As a
to bank
the has a
obligation right to of set
mill off
the
(a) Yes, the sale to the other person is valid as
consisting of the
sugar deposits
cane, the in its
sugar hands
central for
is the
a payment
debtor of theof
a sale within a the amountcondition
resolutory of damages as being
because any indebtedness to it on the part of a
credited
what operates on theas purchase price. condition
a suspensive Therefore, for farmers.
Extinguishment; In assigning its rights under the
compensation depositor."
contract, the Hence,
sugar compensation
central will also took
transfer place
to
Eva operates adid not result
resolutory since there
condition was no
for the Condonation
Arturo
between
borrowed
the mutual
(2000)P500,000.00 from his father.
obligations of theX and Y
ANOTHER
valid
FIRST
buyer. rightMAINof ANSWER:
ALTERNATIVE firstANS
refusal
WER: (Art. 1475 & 1319, the
AfterTaiwanese
he had paid its P300,000.00,
obligation to his
mill fathersugardied.
Yes,
NCC) the sale to the other person is valid. However, the buyer bank.
cane of the farmers. This will father's
amountestate to a
acquired the property subject to a resolutory
When the administrator of his
novation
requested payment of the balance the
of the contract by substituting of
debtor with a Arturo
P200,000.00. third party. replied UnderthatArticle
the same 1293had of
the Civil Code, such substitution cannot take
been
effect without the consent of the creditor. The
formers, who are creditors as far as the
obligation to mill their sugar cane is
condoned by his father as evidenced by a notation The
at action will not prosper. The existence of inflation
back
the of his check payment for the P300,000.00 deflation
or requires an official declaration by the
reading: "In full payment of the loan". Will this Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas.
be a valid defense in an action for collection? ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
SUGGESTED
(3%) ANSWER: The unlawful detainer action will prosper. It is a
It depends. If the notation "in full payment of given fact in the problem, that there was
the loan" was written by Arturo's father, there inflation, which caused the exchange rate to
was an implied condonation of the balance that double. Since the contract itself authorizes the
discharges the obligation. In such case, the increase in rental in the event of an inflation or
notation is an act of the father from which devaluation of the Philippine peso, the doubling
condonation may be inferred. The condonation of the monthly rent is reasonable and is
being implied, it need not comply with the therefore a valid act under the very terms of
formalities of a donation to be effective. The the contract. Brian's refusal to pay is thus a
defense of full payment will, therefore, be valid. Extinguishment;
ground for ejectment.
When, however, the notation was written by Loss sued
Dino (1994)Ben for damages because the latter
Arturo himself. It merely proves his intention in had failed to deliver the antique Marcedes
making that payment but in no way does it Benz car Dino had purchased from Ben, which
bind his father (Yam v. CA, G.R No. 104726. 11 wasby agreementdue for delivery on
February 1999). In such case, the notation was December 31, 1993. Ben, in his answer to
not the act of his father from which Dino's complaint, said Dino's claim has no
condonation may be inferred. There being no basis for the suit, because as the car was being
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
condonation at all the defense of full payment driven to be delivered to Dino on January 1,
If the notation was written by Arturo's father, it
will not be valid. 1994, a reckless truck driver had rammed into
amounted to an express condonation of the
the Mercedes Benz. The trial court dismissed
balance which must comply with the formalities
Dino's complaint, saying Ben's obligation had
of a donation to be valid under the 2nd SUGGESTED ANSWER:
indeed, been extinguished by force majeure. Is
paragraph of Article 1270 of the New Civil a) No. Article 1262, New Civil Code provides,
the trial court correct?
Code. Since the amount of the balance is more "An obligation which consists in the delivery of
than 5,000 pesos, the acceptance by Arturo of a determinate thing shall be extinguished if it
the condonation must also be in writing under should be lost or destroyed without the fault of
Article 748. There being no acceptance in the debtor, and before he has incurred in delay.
writing by Arturo, the condonation is void and b) The judgment of the trial court is incorrect.
the obligation to pay the balance subsists. The Loss of the thing due by fortuitous events or
defense of full payment is, therefore, not valid. force majeure is a valid defense for a debtor
In case the notation was not written by Arturo's only when the debtor has not incurred delay.
Extinguishment; Extraordinary Inflation
father, the answer is the same as the answers Extinguishment of liability for fortuitous event
or Deflation
On (2001)
July 1, 1998, Brian leased an office space in requires that the debtor has not yet incurred
above.
a building for a period of five years at a rental any delay. In the present case, the debtor was
rate of P1,000.00 a month. The contract of lease in delay when the car was destroyed on January
contained the proviso that "in case of inflation 1, 1993 since it was due for delivery on
or devaluation of the Philippine peso, the c) It depends whether or not Ben the seller,
December 31, 1993. (Art. 1262 Civil Code)
monthly rental will automatically be increased was already in default at the time of the
or decreased depending on the devaluation or accident because a demand for him to deliver
inflation of the peso to the dollar." Starting on due date was not complied with by him.
March 1, 2001, the lessor increased the rental to That fact not having been given in the
P2,000 a month, on the ground of inflation problem, the trial court erred in dismissing
proven by the fact that the exchange rate of the Dino's complaint. Reason: There is default
Philippine peso to the dollar had increased from making him responsible for fortuitous events
P25.00=$1.00 to P50.00=$1.00. Brian refused If on the other
including hand Ben was
the assumption notor
of risk inloss.
default as
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
to no demand has been sent to him prior to the
Thepay the increased
unlawful rate and
detainer action will an
notaction for
prosper. accident, then we must distinguish whether the
unlawful detainer
Extraordinary was filed
inflation against is
or deflation him. Will the
defined as price has been paid or not. If it has been paid,
action
the sharpprosper? Why?in(5%)
decrease the purchasing power of the suit for damages should prosper but only to
the peso. It does not necessarily refer to the enable the buyer to recover the price paid. It
exchange rate of the peso to the dollar. should be noted that Ben, the seller, must bear
Whether or not there exists an extraordinary the loss on the principle of res perit domino. He
inflation or deflation is for the courts to decide. cannot be held answerable for damages as the
There being no showing that the purchasing loss of the car was not imputable to his fault or
power of the peso had been reduced fraud. In any case, he can recover the value of
tremendously, there could be no inflation that the car from the party whose negligence
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
would justify the increase in the amount of caused the accident. If no price has been paid
rental to be paid. Hence, Brian could refuse to Extinguishment; Loss; Impossible
at all, the trial court acted correctly in
pay the increased rate. Service (1993) Page 86 of 119
dismissing the complaint.
In 1971, Able Construction, Inc. entered into a contract has been extinguished by the novation or extinction of
with Tropical Home Developers, Inc. whereby principal
the obligation insofar as third parties are concerned.
the former would build for the latter the houses
within its subdivision. The cost of each house, Extinguishment;
labor and materials included, was P100,000.00. Payment
In (1995)
1983 PHILCREDIT extended loans to Rivett-
Four hundred units were to be constructed Strom Machineries, Inc. (RIVETTT-STROM),
within five years. In 1973, Able found that it consisting of US$10 Million for the cost of
could no longer continue with the job due to machineries imported and directly paid by
the increase in the price of oil and its PHTLCREDIT, and 5 Million in cash payable in
derivatives and the concomitant worldwide installments over a period of ten (10) years on
spiraling of prices of all commodities, including the basis of the value thereof computed at the
basic raw materials required for the rate of exchange of the U.S. dollar vis--vis the
construction of the houses. The cost of Philippine peso at the time of payment.
development had risen to unanticipated levels RIVETT-STROM made payments on both loans
and to such a degree that the conditions and which if based on the rate of exchange in 1983
factors which formed the original basis of the would have fully settled the loans.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
contract
Yes, had been
the Able totally changed.
Construction. Able to
Inc. is entitled PHILCREDIT contends that the payments on
brought
the reliefsuit against
sought underTropical
ArticleHomes
1267, praying
Civil Code. both loans should be based on the rate of
that
The lawthe provides:
Court relieve"Whenit ofthe
its service
obligation.has Is Able exchange existing at the time of payment,
Construction
become so difficultentitledastotothe
be relief sought?
manifestly beyond which rate of exchange has been consistently
the contemplation of the parties, the obligor increasing, and for which reason there would
may also be released therefrom, in whole or in still be a considerable balance on each loan. Is
Extinguishment;
part." SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the contention of PHILCREDIT correct? Discuss
Novation
In 1978, Bobby(1994) borrowed Pl,000,000.00 from As regards the loan consisting of dollars, the
fully.
Chito payable in two years. The loan, which was contention of PHILCREDIT is correct. It has to be
evidenced by a promissory note, was secured paid in Philippine currency computed on the
by a mortgage on real property. No action was basis of the exchange rate at the TIME OF
filed by Chito to collect the loan or to foreclose PAYMENT of each installment, as held in Kalalo
the mortgage. But in 1991, Bobby, without v. Luz, 34 SCRA 337. As regards the P5 Million
receiving any amount from Chito, executed loan in Philippine pesos, PHILCREDIT is wrong.
another promissory note which was worded The payment thereof cannot be measured by
exactly as the 1978 promissory note, except for the peso-dollar exchange rate. That will be
the date thereof, which was the date of its violative of the Uniform Currency Act (RA, 529]
execution. 1) Can Chito demand payment on which prohibits the payment of an obligation
the 1991 promissory note in 1994? 2) Can which, although to be paid in Philippine
Chito foreclose the real estate mortgage if currency,
Liability; is measured
Lease; by a foreign currency.
Joint
Bobby fails to make good his obligation under (Palanca v. CA, 238 SCRA 593).
Liability (2001)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Four foreign medical students rented the
the 1991
1) Yes, promissory
Chito can demandnote?payment on the 1991
apartment of Thelma for a period of one year.
promissory note in 1994. Although the 1978 After one semester, three of them returned to
promissory note for P1 million payable two their home country and the fourth transferred
years later or in 1980 became a natural to a boarding house. Thelma discovered that
obligation after the lapse of ten (10) years, they left unpaid telephone bills in the total
such natural obligation can be a valid amount of P80,000.00. The lease contract
consideration of a novated promissory note provided that the lessees shall pay for the
dated in 1991 and payable two years later, or telephone services in the leased premises.
in 1993. All the elements of an implied real Thelma demanded that the fourth student pay
novation are present: a) an old valid SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the entire amount of the unpaid telephone
obligation; b) a new valid obligation; c) The fourth student is correct. His liability is only
bills, but the latter is willing to pay only one
capacity of the parties; d) animus novandi or joint, hence, pro rata. There is solidary liability
fourth of it. Who is correct? Why? (5%)
intention to novate; and e) The old and the new only when the obligation expressly so states or
obligation should be incompatible with each when the law or nature of the obligation
other on all material points (Article 1292). The requires solidarity (Art. 1207, CC). The contract
two promissory notes cannot stand together, of lease in the problem does not, in any way,
hence, theANSWER:
period of prescription of ten (10) stipulate solidarity.
SUGGESTED Liability; Solidary
years
2) has
No. The not yet
mortgage lapsed.
being an accessory contract prescribed with Liability
Joey, Jovy(1998)
and Jojo are solidary debtors under a
the loan. The novation of the loan, however, did not expressly
include the mortgage, hence, the mortgage is extinguished under loan obligation of P300,000.00 which has fallen
Article 1296 of the NCC. The contract due. The creditor has, however, condoned
Jojo's entire share in the debt. Since Jovy has
become insolvent, the creditor makes a
demand on Joey to pay the debt.
1) How much, if any, may Joey be compelled promissory
to note as a result of the foreclosure of the
[2%]
pay? 2) To what extent, if at all, can Jojo be mortgage.
chattel
compelled by Joey to contribute to such
payment? [3%]
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (c) The third defense of Y is untenable. Y is a
1. Joey can be compelled to pay only the surety of X and the extrajudicial demand
remaining balance of P200.000, in view of the against the principal debtor is not inconsistent
remission of Jojo's share by the creditor. (Art. with a judicial demand against the surety. A
1219, Civil Code) (d) The fourth
suretyship maydefense
co-existofwith
Y is auntenable.
mortgage.Y is
2. Jojo can be compelled by Joey to contribute liable for the entire prestation since Y incurred
P50.000 Art. 1217. par. 3, Civil Code provides. X.
a solidary obligation with
"When one of the solidary debtors cannot, (Arts. 1207, 1216. 1252 and 2047 Civil Code; Bicol
because of his insolvency, reimburse his share Savings and Loan Associates vs. Guinhawa 188 SCRA
to the debtor paying the obligation, such share 642)
shall be borne by all his co-debtors, in Liability; Solidary Obligation; Mutual
Guarantyand
A,B,C,D, (2003)
E made themselves solidarity
proportion to the debt of each."
Since the insolvent debtor's share which Joey indebted to X for the amount of P50,000.00.
paid was P100,000, and there are only two When X demanded payment from A, the latter
remaining debtors - namely Joey and Jojo - refused to pay on the following grounds. a) B is
these two shall share equally the burden of only 16 years old. b) C has already been
reimbursement. Jojo may thus be compelled by condoned by X c) D is insolvent. d) E was given
Joey to contribute P50.000.00. by X an extension of 6 months without
Liability; Solidary the consent of the other four co-debtors. State
Obligation
In June 1988, X obtained a loan from A and the effect of each of the above defenses put
(1992)
executed with Y as solidary co-maker a up by A on his obligation to pay X, if such
promissory note in favor of A for the sum of defenses are found to be true.
P200,000.00. The loan was payable at SUGGESTED ANSWERS:
(a) A may avail the minority of B as a defense,
P20,000.00 with interest monthly within the
but only for Bs share of P 10,000.00. A
first week of each month beginning July 1988
solidary debtor may avail himself of any
until maturity in April 1989. To secure the
defense which personally belongs to a solidary
payment of the loan. X put up as security a
co-debtor, but only as to the share of that co-
chattel mortgage on his car, a Toyota Corolla
debtor.
sedan. Because of failure of X and Y to pay the (b) A may avail of the condonation by X of Cs
principal amount of the loan, the car was share of P 10, 000.00. A solidary debtor may, in
extrajudicially foreclosed. A acquired the car at actions filed by the creditor, avail himself of all
After severalbidfruitless
A's highest letters ofduring
of P120,000.00 demandthe defenses which are derived from the nature of
against X
auction sale. and Y, A sued Y alone for the
recovery of P80.000.00 constituting the the obligation and of those which are personal
deficiency. Y resisted the suit raising the to him or pertain to his own share. With
sued together with Y.
following defenses: a) That Y should not be respect to those which personally belong to
b) That the obligation
liable at all because X was not has been paid others, he may avail himself thereof only as
completely by A's acquisition of the car regards that part of the debt for which the
(c) A may
latter not interpose(Article
are responsible. the defense
1222, of
NCC).
through "dacion en pago" or payment by
c) That Y should not be held liable for the insolvency of D as a defense. Applying the
cession.
deficiency of P80,000.00 because he was not a principle of mutual guaranty among solidary
co-mortgagor in the chattel mortgage of the debtors, A guaranteed the payment of Ds
car which contract was executed by X alone as share and of all the other co-debtors. Hence, A
d) Thatand
owner assuming that Y is liable, he should
mortgagor. cannot avail of the defense of Ds insolvency.
(d) The extension of six (6) months given by X
only pay the proportionate sum of P40,000.00.
to E may be availed of by A as a partial
Decide each defense with reasons.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: defense but only for the share of E, there is no
(a) This first defense of Y is untenable. Y is still novation of the obligation but only an act of
liable as solidary debtor. The creditor may liberality granted to E alone.
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
for damages against the jewelry shop which put upBernie
the 50% of the total payments made. (Rillo v. Court
defense of force majeure. Will the action of
Appeals, G.R. No. 125347, June
prosper or not? (5%) 19,1997)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The action will prosper. Since the defendant Period; Suspensive
was already in default not having delivered the Period
In a deed (1991)
of sale of a realty, it was stipulated
ring when delivery was demanded by plaintiff that the buyer would construct a commercial
at due date, the defendant is liable for the loss building on the lot while the seller would
of the thing and even when the loss was due to construct a private passageway bordering the
force majeure. lot. The building was eventually finished but
Non-Payment of Amortizations; the seller failed to complete the passageway
Subdivision Buyer; When justified (2005) as some of the squatters, who were already
Bernie bought on installment a residential known to be there at the time they entered
subdivision lot from DEVLAND. After having into the contract, refused to vacate the
faithfully paid the installments for 48 months, premises. In fact, prior to its execution, the
Bernie discovered that DEVLAND had failed to seller filed ejectment cases against the
develop the subdivision in accordance with the squatters. The buyer now sues the seller for
approved plans and specifications within the specific performance with damages. The
time frame in the plan. He thus wrote a letter to defense is that the obligation to construct the
DEVLAND informing it that he was stopping passageway should be with a period which,
payment. Consequently, DEVLAND cancelled SUGGESTED ANSWER:
incidentally,
No. the action hadfornot been performance
specific fixed by them, filed by
the sale and wrote Bernie, informing him that hence, theisneed for fixing a judicial period. Will
a) Was theare action of in
DEVLAND the buyer premature under Art. 1197 of the
his payments forfeited its favor. proper? the
Explain. (2%) Civilaction
Code. for
If aspecific performance
period has not been of the
fixed
SUGGESTED ANSWER: buyer against
although the seller by
contemplated prosper?
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 it
otherwise known as the Subdivision and taking into consideration the probable
Condominium Buyer's Protection Decree, non- ALTERNATIVE
contemplation ANSWER:
of the parties. Before the period
payment of amortizations by the buyer is justified It has been held in Borromeo vs. CA (47 SCRA
is fixed, an action for specific performance is
if non-payment is due to the failure of the 69), that the Supreme Court allowed the
premature.
subdivision owner to develop the subdivision simultaneous filing of action to fix the probable
project according
(Eugenio v. Drilon, to the
G.R. 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 the obligations and should not, therefore, be
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;
further installments after 4 years due to Prescription
On 01 January (1997)
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 the
entitled: 1) to pay without additional interest Redentor
Loss
name of died
of the a year
thing
Remedies. laterForce
due; or in 1982. In March
the unpaid installments due within a grace 1983,
Majeure
KristinaRemigio
(2000)
brought graduated
her diamond fromring
college. In
to a jewelry
period of four (4) months or one month for February 1992, Remigio
shop for cleaning. accidentally
The jewelry found a
shop undertook
every year of installment paid; 2) if the copy of the
to return thedocument so constituting
ring by February 1, 1999." Remedies
When
contract is cancelled, Bernie is entitled to the as
thethe trustee
said of the land.
date arrived, In May shop
the jewelry 1994,
refund of the cash surrender value equal to Remigio
informedfiled a case
Kristina against
that the JobRemedies
was not yet for the
DEVLAND
50% of theon thepayments
total other hand
made.has the right to
reconveyance of the land
finished. They asked her totoreturn
him. Remedies,
five days in
cancel the contract after 30 days from receipt
her answer,
later. averred
On February 6,that
1999,theKristina
action went
alreadyto the
by Bernie of notice of cancellation. DEVLAND is SUGGESTED ANSWER:
prescribed.
shop to claim How
theshould theshe
ring, but matter
was be decided?
informed
however obliged to refund to
that the same was stolen by a thief who
entered the shop the night before. Kristina filed
an action
The matter should be decided in favor of Remigio
1. Juana has the right of action to recover (a) her one-
because
(trustee) the action has not prescribed. The half
case at bar involves an express trust which
does not prescribe as long as they have not
been repudiated by the trustee (Diaz vs.
Gorricho. 103 Phil, 261).
Implied Trust
(1998)
Juan and his sister Juana inherited from their
mother two parcels of farmland with exactly
the same areas. For convenience, the Torrens
certificates of title covering both lots were
placed in Juan's name alone. In 1996, Juan sold
to an innocent purchaser one parcel in its
entirety without the knowledge and consent of
1.
Juana,What
andrights of action,
wrongfully if any,
kept fordoes Juanathe
himself
have against and/or
entire price paid. the buyer? |3%]
2. Since the two lots have the same area,
suppose Juana flies a complaint to have herself
declared sole owner of the entire remaining
second lot, contending that her brother had
forfeited his share thereof by wrongfully
disposing of her undivided share in the first lot.
Will the suit prosper? [2%]
Trust; Implied Resulting (Art. 1624; 1475. CC; Rodriguez v. CA, et al, G.
Trust
In 1960, (1995)
Maureen purchased two lots in a plush share in the proceeds
R No. 84220, of1992
March 25. the sale
207with
SCRAlegal
553).
ALTERNATIVE
interest ANSWER:
thereof, and (b) such damages as she
subdivision registering Lot 1 in her name and
No, the defense of Peter Co will not prosper.
Lot 2 in the name of her brother Walter with the may be able to prove as having been suffered
Hadji Butu validly acquired his right by an
latter's consent. The idea was to circumvent a by her, which may include actual or
assignment of credit under Article 1624 of the
subdivision policy against the acquisition of compensatory damages as well as moral and
Civil Code. However, the provisions on the
more than one lot by one buyer. Maureen exemplary damages due to the breach of trust
contract of sale (Article 1475 Civil Code) will
constructed a house on Lot 1 with an extension and bad faith (Imperial vs. CA, 259 SCRA
apply, and the transaction is covered by the
on Lot 2 to serve as a guest house. In 1987, 65). Of course, if the buyer knew of the co-
Statute of Frauds. (Art. 1403 par. (2) Civil
Walter who had suffered serious business ownership
Conditional over theSale lot he wasvs. buying, Juana
Code)
losses demanded that Maureen remove the can seek
Absolute Sale
Distinguish (c) reconvenyance
between (1997) of
a conditional her one-half
sale, on the
extension house since the lot on which the share
one hand, and an absolute sale, onthe
instead but she must implead thebuyerother
extension was built was his property. In 1992, as co-defendant
hand.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: and allege his bad faith in
Maureen sued for the reconveyance to her of purchasing
A CONDITIONAL the entireSALElot. is oneFinally,
where consistent
the vendor
Lot 2 asserting that a resulting trust was with
is the
granted ruling
ADDITIONAL ANSWER:
the in Imperial
right to us. CA.
unilaterally Juanarescindmay the
created when she had the lot registered in seek
contractinstead (d)
predicated a declaration
on the
1. Juana can file an action for damages against that she
fulfillment is ornownon-
Walter's name even if she paid the purchase the
Juansole
fulfillment, owner
for having as of the entire
the
fraudulentlycase remaining
mayone
sold be, oflot ofontwo
the the
price. Walter
SUGGESTED opposed the suit arguing that
ANSWER: the theory
prescribed
parcels which that heJuan
condition. partlyhas forfeited
AnheldABSOLUTE
in trust hisSALE
one-half
for is one
Juana's
assuming
This is a casethe of existence
an implied of aresulting
resultingtrust.
trustIfthe share
where
benefit. therein.
the
Juana titlemayto the claim property
actual or is not reserved
Walter claims to have acquired ownership since
action of Maureen has already prescribed of to the vendor or
compensatory if the vendor
damage for theisloss notof granted
her share the
ten land
the yearsby have already elapsed
prescription from thehis
or if he anchors right
in the land; moral damages for the mental the
to rescind the contract based on
registration
defense
SUGGESTED of the titleprescription,
onANSWER:
extinctive in his name.the Decide.
ten year fulfillment
anguish, or nonfulfillment,
anxiety, moral shock as
andthe case may
wounded
1. When, for convenience, the Torrens title Contract of Sale vs. Agency
Discuss fully.
period must be reckoned from 1987 when he to be, of
feelings the sheprescribed condition.
the two parcels of land were placed in Joan's togranted
A Sell (1999) B had suffered; exemplary
the exclusive right to selldamage his brand
demanded that Maureen remove the extension by way of example for the common good,for andhis
name alone, of Maong pants in Isabela, the price
house on Lot thereNo. 2 was because createdsuchandemand
implied trust attorney's fees. Juana has no cause of action
(a resulting trust) for the benefit ofofJuana with merchandise payable within 60 days from
amounts to an express repudiation the trust against
Juanitas trustee delivery,the and buyer
promisingwho acquired the land for
B a commission of 20%
and was made of knownone-half undivided
to Maureen. Theoraction
ideal value and in good faith, relying on the transfer
portion of each filed of the two islots. Therefore, on all sales. After the delivery of the
for reconveyance in 1992 not yet barred certificate showing thatbefore
Juan ishe thecould
registered
Juana can file an action Huang for damages merchandise
SUGGESTED to B but
ANSWER: sell any
by prescription. (Spouses v. Courtagainst
of owner
2. Juana'sof the
suit land.
to have herself declared as sole
of them, Bs store in Isabela was completely
Joan for having
Appeals, Sept. 13, SALES
fraudulently
1994). sold one of the two
parcels which he partly held in trust for Juana's
owner
burnedofwithoutthe entire remaining
his fault, together areawithwill notall of A's
prosperMust
SUGGESTED
pants. because
ANSWER:
B pay while Juan's
A for his actlostinpants?
selling Why? the
benefit. Juana may claim actual or The
Assignment othercontract
lot was between
wrongful.AIt and did notB ishave
a sale thenot an
legal
compensatoryof Creditfor
damage vs.the loss of her share (5%)
agency
Subrogation
Peter (1993) effect of forfeiting his share in the remaining by
to sell because the price is payable
in theCo, a trader
land; moral from Manila, has
damages for dealt
the mental B
business with Allied Commodities in Hongkong lot.upon
However, 60 days Juanafrom can file delivery
an action even againstif B is
anguish, anxiety, moral shock and wounded unable
Juana
for fivehas no cause
years. All throughof action against the buyer Juan forto resell it.orIftermination
partition B were an agent, of the co- he is not
feelings she had suffered;the years, Peter
exemplary Co
damage bound to pay
who acquiredan
accumulated the land for value
indebtedness of and in good
P500,000.00 ownership withthe price ifthat
a prayer he the
is unable
lot sold tobe resell
by way of example for the common good, and As a buyer, ownership passed to B
faith,
with relying
Allied on the transfer
Commodities. Uponcertificate
demand by of its
title it.
ANOTHER
adjudicated ANSWER:
to Juan, and the remaining lot upon
be
attorney's fees. 2. The suit
delivery and, willunder
prosper, Art. applying
1504toofher. rulingCode,
the Civil in
showing that Juan is
agent in Manila, Peter Co paid Allied the registered owner of adjudicated and reconveyed
ANOTHER ANSWER: Imperial
the thingvs.perishes
CA cited for above. the Bothowner.law and Hence, B
the land.
Commodities by check the amount owed. Upon
1. Under Article 476 of the Civil Code, Juana equitystill
must authorize
pay thesuch price.a result, said the
deposit in the payee's account in Manila, the Contract
Supreme Court. of Sale; Marital Community
can file an action for quieting of title as there is
check was dishonored for insufficiency of funds. Strictly speaking,
Property; Formalities Juana's(2006) contention that her
a cloud in the title to the subject real property.
For and in consideration of P1.00, Allied brother had
Spouses Biong forfeited
and Lindahis share wantedin the tosecond
sell their
Second, Juana can also file an action for
Commodities assigned the credit to Hadji Butu lot is incorrect.
house. They found Even aif the two lots have
prospective buyer, theRay.
damages against Juan, because the settled
who brought suit against Peter Co in the RTC of same area,
Linda it doeswith
negotiated not follow
Ray for thatthe theysale have of the
rule is that the proper recourse of the true
Manila for recovery of the amount owed. Peter the same value.
property. They Since agreed theonsale a offairthe first lot
price of P2
owner of the property who was prejudiced and
Co moved to dismiss the complaint against him on the Torrens
Million. Ray sent titleLinda
in thea name letterofconfirming
Juan was his
fraudulently dispossessed of the same is to
on the ground that Hadji Butu was not a real valid,
intention all that
to buy Juanathe may recover is
property. the value
Later, another of
bring an action for damages against those who
party
SUGGESTED
in interest and, therefore, without legal her undivided
couple, Bernieinterest and Elena,therein,offeredplus damages.a similar
caused orANSWER:
employed the same. Third, since
capacity
No, Co's to sue and
defense willtothat
not he had not agreed notto aa In addition, she can askof forP partition or But Ray
Juana had the right herprosper.
share inThis the isproperty house at a lower price 1.5 Million.
subrogation
case of of creditor.
subrogation, but Will
an Peter Co's defense
assignment of reconveyance
insisted on buying of her undivided
the houseinterest of Biong in the and
by way of inheritance, she can demand the
of absence
credit. of agreement
ASSIGNMENT to a subrogation of secondfor lot,sentimental
without prejudice to Ray
any agreement
partition of the thingOF CREDIT
owned is the process
in common, under Linda
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
reasons. prepared a
creditor
However,
of prosper?
transferring sincethe the
right farmland was sold
of the assignor to an
to the between
deed them that in lieu of thethepayment of a
Article 494 of the Civil Code, and ask that the 2. Theofsuit sale willtonotbeprosper,
signed by
since couple and
Juan's
innocent
assignee. purchaser
The assignmentfor value, may then
be Juanaeither
done has no the value
manager's of Juana's
check for share
P2 in the
Million. first
After lot and
receiving
title to the remaining property be declared as wrongful act of pocketing the entire proceeds
cause of action against theinbuyer whichconsistent
case, the with damages, the second
gratuitously
exclusively hers.
the established
or onerously,
rule that the rights of an ofinnocent
the
of the P2sale
Million,
of the first lot
Biong lot be
signed reconveyed
is not the deed of
a ground to her.
forsale.
assignment has an effect similar to that a However, Linda was not able
divesting him of his rights as a co-owner of the to sign it because
purchaser
sale (Nyco Sales Corp.v.BA Finance Corp. G.Rand
for value must be respected she waslot. abroad. Onsuchher wrongdoing
return, she by refused
protected second
Will Indeed,
the document
suit prosper? Explain. Juan to
No.71694.notwithstanding
Aug.16, 1991 200 theSCRA
fraud 637).
employed
As a by sign the ANSWER: for the benefit of Juana, her
saying she changed
the seller in securing his title. (Eduarte vs. CA, 253 does not constitute,
ALTERNATIVE
(2.5%)
result of the assignment, the plaintiff acquired mind. Linda
any of the modes filedofsuit for nullification
acquiring ownership of underthe
ADDITIONAL ANSWER:
SCRA
all the391)
rights of the assignor including the right deed of sale
Art. 712, Civil Code. and for moral and exemplary
to sue in his own name as the legal assignee. In damages against Ray.
assignment, the debtor's consent is not
essential for the validity of the assignment
No, the suit will not prosper. The contract of sale was In a CONTRACT OF SALE, ownership is transferred to
perfected when Linda and Ray agreed on the the buyer upon delivery of the object to him
object of the sale and the price [Art. 1475, New while in a CONTRACT TO SELL, ownership is
Civil Code]. The consent of Linda has already retained by the seller until the purchase price
been given, as shown by her agreement to the is fully paid. In a contract to sell, delivery of the
price of the sale. There is therefore consent on object does not confer ownership upon the
her part as the consent need not be given in buyer. In a contract of sale, there is only one
any specific form. Hence, her consent may be contract executed between the seller and the
given by implication, especially since she was buyer, while in a contract to sell, there are two
aware of, and participated in the sale of the contracts, first the contract to sell (which is a
property (Pelayo v. CA, G.R. No. 141323, June conditional or preparatory sale) and a second,
8, 2005). Her action for moral and exemplary the final deed of sale or the principal contract
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
damages will also not prosper because the Contract to Sell; after
which is executed Acceptance; Rightofofthe
full payment
The suit will prosper. Sale of community First
A is Refusal
the lessee (1991)
of an apartment owned by Y. A
case does
property not fall
requires underconsent
written any ofof those
both purchase price.
mentioned in failure
Art. 2219 and 2232 of the Civil allowed his married but employed daughter B,
spouses. The or refusal of Linda to affix whose husband works in Kuwait, to occupy it.
Code.
her signature on the deed of sale, coupled with The relationship between Y and A soured. Since
her express declaration of opposing the sale he has no reason at all to eject A, Y, in
negates any valid consent on her part. The connivance with the City Engineer, secured
consent of Biong by himself is insufficient to from the latter an order for the demolition of
effect a valid sale of community property (Art. the building. A immediately filed an action in
96, Family Code; Abalos v. Macatangay, G.R. the Regional Trial Court to annul the order and
Does Ray September
No. 155043, have any 30, cause
2004). of action to enjoin its enforcement. Y and A were able to
against Biong and Linda? Can he also
forge a compromise agreement under which A
recover damages from the spouses?
Considering that the contract has already been agreed to a twenty percent (20%) increase in
Explain. (2.5%)
perfected and taken out of the operation of the the monthly rentals. They further agreed that
statute of frauds, Ray can compel Linda and the lease will expire two (2) years later and
Biong to observe the form required by law in that in the event that Y would sell the property,
order for the property to be registered in the either A or his daughter B shall have the right
B. B then filed an action to rescind the sale in
name of Ray which can be filed together with of first refusal. The Compromise Agreement
favor of the corporation and to compel Y to sell
the action for the recovery of house [Art. 1357 was approved by the court. Six (6) months
the property to her since under the
New Civil Code]. In the alternative, he can before the expiration of the lease, A died. Y
Compromise Agreement, she was given the
recover the amount of Two million pesos sold the property to the Visorro Realty Corp.
right of first refusal which, she maintains is a
(P2,000,000.00) that he paid. Otherwise, it without notifying
stipulation pour atrui under Article 1311 of the
Ray can recover moral damages on
would result in solutio indebiti or unjust the ground SUGGESTED
Civil Code.ANSWER:
Is she correct?
that the
enrichment. action filed by Linda is clearly an B is not correct. Her action cannot prosper.
unfounded civil suit which falls under malicious Article 1311 requires that the third person
prosecution {Ponce v. Legaspi, G.R. No. 79184, intended to be benefited must communicate
May 6,1992). his acceptance to the obligor before the
Contract to Sell revocation. There is no showing that B
(2001)
Arturo gave Richard a receipt which manifested her acceptance to Y at any time
states:
Receipt Received from Richard as down before the death of A and before the sale.
payment for my 1995 Toyota Corolla with plate Hence, B cannot enforce any right under the
No. XYZ-1 23.............. P50.000.00 Double Sales
alleged stipulation pour atrui.
(2001)
On June 15, 1995, Jesus sold a parcel of
registered land to Jaime. On June 30, 1995, he
Balance payable: 12/30/01........ P50 sold the same land to Jose. Who has a better
000.00 right if: a) the first sale is registered ahead of
September 15, 2001. with knowledge
the second sale,of the latter. Why? (3%) b) the
second sale is registered ahead of the first
(Sgd.) Arturo Does this receipt sale,with knowledge of the latter? Why?
evidence a contract to sell? Why? (5%) (5%) ANSWER:
SUGGESTED
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (a) The first buyer has the better right if his
It is a contract of sale because the seller did sale was first to be registered, even though the
not reserve ownership until he was fully paid. first buyer knew of the second sale. The fact
that he knew of the second sale at the time of
Contract to Sell vs. Contract his registration does not make him as acting in
of Sale
State (1997)
the basic difference (only in their legal bad faith because the sale to him was ahead in
effects) Between a contract to sell, on the one time, hence, has a priority in right. What
hand, and a contract of sale, on the other. creates bad faith in the case of double sale of
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
land is knowledge of a previous sale.
b) The first buyer is still to be preferred, where (2)
theyears, or until 3 June 1973. It is further stated
sale is registered ahead of the first sale but
second that
thereinshould the Vendor (Juliet) fail to exercise
with knowledge of the latter. This is because her right to redeem within the said period, the
the second buyer, who at the time he conveyance shall be deemed absolute and
registered his sale knew that the property had irrevocable. Romeo did not take possession of
already been sold to someone else, acted in the property. He did not pay the taxes thereon.
bad faith. (Article 1544, C.C.)
Double Sales Juliet died in January I973 without having
(2004)
JV, owner of a parcel of land, sold it to PP. But repurchased the property. Her only surviving
the deed of sale was not registered. One year heir, her son X, failed to repurchase the
later, JV sold the parcel again to RR, who property on or before 3 June 1973. In 1975,
succeeded to register the deed and to obtain a Romeo sold the property to Y for P50,000.00.
transfer certificate of title over the property in Upon learning of the sale, X filed an action for
his own name. Who has a better right over the the nullification of the sale and for the recovery
parcel of land, RR or PP? Why? Explain the of the property on the ground that the so-called
SUGGESTED
legal basisANSWER:
for your answer. (5%) deed of absolute sale executed by his mother
It depends on whether or not RR is an innocent
was merely an equitable mortgage, taking into
purchaser for value. Under the Torrens
account the inadequacy of the price and the
System, a deed or instrument operated only as
failure of Romeo to take possession of the
a contract between the parties and as
property and to pay the taxes thereon. Romeo
evidence of authority to the Register of Deeds
and Y maintain that there was a valid absolute
to make the registration. It is the registration X? b) If you decide in favor of Romeo and Y,
sale and that the document signed by the
of the deed or the instrument that is the would you
former on 3 June 1973 was merely a promise to
operative act that conveys or affects the land. uphold the validity of the promise to
sell. a) If you were the Judge, would you uphold
(Sec. 51, P.D. No. 1529). sell? ANSWER:
SUGGESTED
In cases of double sale of titled land, it is a A. I will not of
the theory uphold the theory of X for the
well-settled rule that the buyer who first nullification of the sale and for the recovery of
registers the sale in good faith acquires a the property on the ground that the so-called
better right to the land. (Art. 1544, Civil Code). sale was only an equitable mortgage. An
Persons dealing with property covered by equitable mortgage may arise only if, in truth,
Torrens title are not required to go beyond the sale was one with the right of repurchase.
what appears
(Orquiola v. CAon its face.
386, SCRA 301, [2002]; The facts of the case state that the right to
Domingo v. Races 401 SCRA 197, [2003]). repurchase was granted after the absolute
Thus, absent any showing that RR knew about, deed of sale was executed. Following the rule
or ought to have known the prior sale of the in Cruzo vs. Carriaga (174 SCRA 330), a deed of
land to PP or that he acted in bad faith, and repurchase executed independently of the
being first to register the sale, RR acquired a deed of sale where the two stipulations are
good and a clean title to the property as found in two instruments instead of one
Equitable
against PP. document, the right of repurchase would
Mortgage
On (1991)
20 December 1970, Juliet, a widow,
amount only to one option granted by the
borrowed from Romeo P4,000.00 and, as
buyer to the seller. Since the contract cannot
security therefore, she executed a deed of
be upheld as a contract of sale with the right to
mortgage over one of her two (2) registered
repurchase, Art. 1602 of the Civil Code on
lots which has a market value of P15,000.00.
equitable mortgage will not apply. The rule
The document and the certificate of title of the
could have been different if both deeds were
property were delivered to Romeo.
On 2 June 1971, Juliet obtained an additional executed on the same occasion or date, in
sum of P3,000 from Romeo. On this date, which case,to
B. If I were under
decidetheinruling
favor inofspouses
Romeo and Y, I
however, Romeo caused the preparation of a would not uphold the validity of the
Claravall v. CA (190 SCRA 439), the contract
promise to
deed of absolute sale of the above property, to may still be sustained as an equitable
sell, so as to enforce it by an action for specific
which Juliet affixed her signature without first mortgage,
performance. given
Thethe circumstances
promise expressed
to sell would only
reading the document. The consideration in Art. 1602.
amount The reserved
to a mere offer and,right to repurchase
therefore, it is not
indicated is P7,000.00. She thought that this is then deemed
enforceable an original
unless intention.
it was sought to be
document was similar to the first she signed. exercised before a withdrawal or denial
When she reached home, her son X, after Even
thereof.assuming the facts given at the end of the
reading the duplicate copy of the deed, case, there would have been no separate
informed her that what she signed was not a consideration for such promise to sell. The
mortgage but a deed of absolute sale. On the contract would at most amount to an option
following day, 3 June 1971, Juliet, accompanied which again may not be the basis for an action
by X, went back to Romeo and demanded the Equitable
for specific Mortgage
performance. vs.
Sale
On (2005)
July 14, 2004, Pedro executed in favor of
reformation it, Romeo prepared and signed a
document wherein, as vendee in the deed of Juan a Deed of Absolute Sale over a parcel of
land covered by TCT No. Page 93 of 119
sale above mentioned, he obligated and bound
himself to resell the land to Juliet or her heirs
and successors for the same consideration as
reflected in the deed of sale (P7,000) within a
period of two
6245. It appears in the Deed of Sale that Pedro X sold a parcel of land to Y on 01 January 2002,
from
receivedJuan P120,000.00 as purchase price. payment
However, Pedro retained the owner's duplicate
of said title. Thereafter, Juan, as lessor, and
Pedro, as lessee, executed a contract of lease
over the property for a period of one (1) year
with a monthly rental of Pl,000.00. Pedro, as
lessee, was also obligated to pay the realty
taxes on the property during the period of
Subsequently,
lease. Pedro filed a complaint against
Juan for the reformation of the Deed of
Absolute Sale, alleging that the transaction
covered by the deed was an equitable
mortgage. In his verified answer to the
complaint, Juan alleged that the property was
sold to him under the Deed of Absolute Sale,
and interposed counterclaims to recover
possession of the property and to compel
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Pedro to turn over to him the owner's duplicate
The complaint of Pedro against Juan should be
of title. Resolve the case with reasons. (6%)
dismissed. The instances when a contract
regardless of its nomenclature may be
presumed to be an equitable mortgage are
enumerated in Article 1602 of the Civil Code:
"Art. 1602. The contract shall be presumed to
1When
be an the price of a
equitable sale with right
mortgage, to repurchase
in any of the is
unusually inadequate:
following cases:
2When the vendor remains in possession as lessee
or otherwise;
3When upon or after the expiration of the right to
repurchase another instrument extending the
period of redemption or granting a new period is
executed;
4When the purchaser retains for himself a part of
the purchase price;
5When the vendor binds himself to pay the taxes on
the thing sold;
6In any other case where it may be fairly inferred
that the real intention of the parties is that the
transaction shall secure the payment of a debt or
the performance of any other obligation.
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 payment rescinded. Y failed to pay on 01 February 2002,
of the purchase price. The law applicable is the but offered to pay three days later, which
SUGGESTED
Maceda Law. ANSWER: payment X refused to accept, claiming that
b) No, the vendor cannot rescind the contract SUGGESTED ANSWER:
their contract of sale had already been
under the circumstances. Under the Maceda No, X is not correct. In the sale of immovable
rescinded. Is Xs 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 and demand for rescission was made on Y, either
the payment was tendered within that period. judicially or by a notarial
This is a contract act,not
to sell and X cannot refuse
a contract of
Moreover, the notice of rescission served by to
absolute sale, since as there has been no (3)
accept the payment offered by Y three
the seller on the buyer was not effective days after
delivery of the
the expiration of 1592
land. Article the period.
of the New
because the notice was not by a notarial act. Civil code is not applicable. Instead, Article
Besides, the seller may still pay within 30 days 1595 of the New Civil Code applies. The seller
from
MacedasuchLaw;
notarial notice before rescission may
Recto has two alternative remedies: (1) specific
be effected.
are the so-calledrequirements
Law (1999)
What All these "Maceda" and for"Recto"
a valid performance, or (2) rescission or resolution
rescission were not complied with by the seller.
laws in connection with sales on installments? ALTERNATIVE
under ArticleANSWER:
1191 of the New Civil code. In
Hence, the rescission is invalid. Yes, the contract was automatically rescinded
Give the most important features of each law. both remedies, damages are due because of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: upon Ys failure to pay on 01 February 2002. By
(5%) default.
The MACEDA LAW (R.A. 655) is applicable to the express terms of the contract, there is no
sales of immovable property on installments. 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 35 Suria
Civil Code, SCRAv.
102
IAC 151 SCRA 661 [1987];
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 (50%)
foregoing cases,ofanythe total
money, per annum payable in sixty (60) equal monthly
payments made,benefit
fruits, or other and afterto five years of by the
be received installments of P198,333.33. They executed a
installments,
vendee as an rentadditional five percent
or otherwise (5%) be
shall Deed of Conditional Sale in which it is
every year but not to exceed ninety
considered as interest which shall be subject percent stipulated that should the vendee fail to pay
(90%) of the laws."
to the usury total payments made. three (3) successive installments, the sale shall
(2) In case
Article 1604the states
installments paid were
that "the less than
provisions of be deemed automatically rescinded without the
2 years,1602
article the seller
shallshall
alsogive the buyer
apply a grace
to a contract necessity of judicial action and all payments
period of not
purporting to less
be an than 60 days.
absolute If the buyer
sale." made by the vendee shall be forfeited in favor
fails
For to pay the1602
Articles installments
and 1604 due atto the
apply, two of the vendor by way of rental for the use and
expiration
requisites of the concur:
must grace period,
1) thethe sellerentered
parties may occupancy of the unit and as liquidated
cancel
into a the contract
contract after 30 days
denominated as from receipt of
a contract damages. For 46 months, Priscilla paid the
by theand
sale; buyer2) of the intention
their notice of cancellation
was to secure or an monthly installments religiously, but on the
demand
G.R.
existingNo.for rescission
152168,
debt by way byofnotarial
December 10,
mortgage. act. The
(Heirs of 47th and 48th months, she failed to pay. On the
2004)
RECTO
Balite v.LAWLim, (Art. 1484} refers to sale of 49th month, she tried to pay the installments
In the given
movables payablecase, although Pedro
in installments retained
and limiting due but the vendor refused to receive the
possession
the right of seller, in case of default by the the
of the property as lessee after payments tendered by her. The following
execution
buyer, to one of ofthe Deed
three of Sale,a) there
remedies: exact is no month, the vendor sent her a notice that it was
showing that
fulfillment; b) the
cancelintention of the
the sale if twoparties
or morewas to rescinding the Deed of Conditional Sale
secure an existing
installments have not debt 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
dismissed. premises. She replied that the contract cannot
Contract (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%)
for absolute sale, Simeon suddenly has a change May of Adela still exercise her right of redemption?
claiming
heart, that the deal is disadvantageous to Option Contract
(5%)
Explain.
him as he has found out that the property can (2002)
Explain the
SUGGESTED nature of an option contract.
ANSWER:
fetch three time the agreed purchase price. Yes,
(2%) Adela
SUGGESTED may still exercise her right of
ANSWER:
Bert seeks specific performance but Simeon An OPTION notwithstanding
redemption CONTRACT is the one lapse granting
of morea
contends that he has merely given Bert an privilege
than 30 to
days buyfrom or sell
notice within
of the an
sale agreed
given time
to
option to buy and nothing more, and offers to and because
her at a Article determined 1623 ofprice. the New It Civil
mustCode be
B. Willthe
return Berts action
option for which
money specific
Bertperformance
refuses to supported
requires thatby the a consideration
notice in writing distinct
of the fromsalethe
prosper?
accept. Explain. (4%) price. come
must (Art. 1479 from and 1482, NCC) vendor or
the prospective
C. May Simeon justify his refusal to proceed Option
vendor asContract; the case may Earnest
be. In this case, the
with the sale by the fact that the deal is Money
LT applied
notice of(1993)
the with
sale BPI was to given
purchase by the a housevendee and andlot
financially disadvantageous to him? Explain. in Quezon
ALTERNATIVE
the Register City,
ANSWER: one ofThe
of Deeds. its acquired
period of 30 assets.
daysThe
Adela
amount canoffered
no longer exercise her right of
SUGGESTED
(4%) ANSWER: never tolled. Shewas can Pl,000,000.00
still avail of that payable,
right. as
B. Berts action for specific performance will redemption. As co-owner,
follows: P200,000.00 down payment, she had only 30 days the
prosper because there was a binding from balance the of time she received
P800,000.00 written
payable notice
within 90ofdaysthe
agreement of sale, not just an option contract. sale fromwhich June in1,this case BPI
1985. took accepted
the form ofthe a copy offer,
The sale was perfected upon acceptance by of the deed of
whereupon LT saledrewbeing a check given fortoP200,000.00
her (Conejero in
Simeon of 10% of the agreed price. This v. CA, 16
favor of SCRA BPI 775 which[1966]) the . The law does
latter not
thereafter
amount is in really earnest money which, under prescribedepositedany in particular
its account. form On of written
September notice,5,
Art. 1482, shall be considered as part of the nor any distinctive method
1985, LT wrote BPI requesting extension for notifying the until
price and as proof of the perfection of the redemptioner (Etcuban
October 10, 1985 within which to pay v. CA, 148 SCRA 507 the
contract. (Topacio v. CA, 211 SCRA 291 [1987]). So long as the
balance, to which BPI agreed. On October 5, redemptioner was
C. Simeon cannot justify his refusal to proceed informed in writing, he has no cause to
[1992]; Villongco Realty v. Bormaheco, 65 1985, due to the expected delay in the
with the
SCRA sale by the fact that the deal is complain (Distrito v. CA, 197 SCRA 606, 609
352 [1975]). remittance of the needed amount by his
financially disadvantageous to him. Having [1991]). In fact, in Distrito, a written notice was
financier from the United States, LT wrote BPI
made a bad bargain is not a legal ground for held unnecessary where the co-owner had
requesting
Right of First a last extension
Refusal; Lessee; until October 30,
pulling out a biding contract of sale, in the actual knowledge of the
v. Villa, 35 Phil 769 [1916]) , and no such 1985,
Effect
Ubaldo within
(1996)
is the which
owner oftoa sale,
pay having
building thewhich acted asBPI
balance. has
absence of some actionable wrong by the other middleman and being present when the vendor
wrong has been committed by Bert. denied
been leasedLTs by request
Remigio because
for the past another
20 years. had
party (Vales signed thetodeed of sale.
offered
Ubaldo has repeatedly assured Remigio that iffor
buy the same property
Redemption; Legal; P1,500,000.00.
he should decideBPI to sell cancelled
the building, its he agreement
will
Formalities (2001)
Betty and Lydia were co-owners of a parcel of with
give Remigio the right of first refusal. Onamount
LT and offered to return to him the June
land. Last January 31, 2001, when she paid her of
30, P200,000.00
1994, Ubaldo that informed LT had Remigio paidthat to he it.was
On
real estate tax, Betty discovered that Lydia had October 20, 1985, upon
willing to sell the building for P5 Million. Thereceipt of the amount
sold her share to Emma on November 10, of P800,000.00
following
SUGGESTED day,
ANSWER: from hissent
Remigio US financier,
a letter to LT offered
Ubaldo
2000. The following day, Betty offered to BPI
to payis notto
offering thecorrect
buy theinbuilding
amount canceling
by tendering the contract
at P4.5 a cashier's
Million. with
redeem her share from Emma, but the latter LT.
check
UbaldoIn Lina
therefor
did Topacio but which
not reply. v One
Court BPI
weekofrefused
Appeals toand
later, Remigio accept.
BPI
replied that Betty's right to redeem has already LT then filed
Investment
received (G.
a lettera complaint
Rfrom
No. 102606,
Santosagainst JulyBPI
informing in him
3. 1993, the 211 RTC
SUGGESTED
prescribed.ANSWER:
Is Emma correct or not? Why? (5%) for
thatspecific
SCRA the291)buildingthe Supreme
performance
has beenand Court
sold toheld
depositedhim by that the
in court
Emma, the buyer, is not correct. Betty can still earnestthe amountmoney of is part
P800,000.00. of the purchase
Is BPI price
legally
Ubaldo for P5 Million, and that he will not renew
enforce her right of legal redemption as a co- and is proof of when
the its perfection
correct
Remigio's in canceling
lease expires.of
itcontract with theLT?
Remigio contract.
filed
owner. Article 1623 of the Civil Code gives a Secondly, notarial or judicial rescission under
an action against
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: Ubaldo and Santos for
co-owner 30 days from written notice of the Art. 1592 andthe1991 of the Civil Code is
cancellation
is correctofin sale, and to contract
compel Ubaldo
sale by the vendor to exercise his right of legal BPI necessary (Taguba
canceling
v. de Leon,
its
132 SCRA
with LT
722.)
to execute ainstead
deed
do soofby ofabsolute sale inrefusal,
his favor,
redemption. In the present problem, the 30-day but building BPI must way
a right of ofjudicial
first rescission will your
based
under on
Articlehis right
1191
answer be the same? Explain. of first
Civil refusal.
Code. The a) Will
law the
requires
period for the exercise by Betty of her right of
action prosper? Explain. b) If Ubaldo had given
redemption had not even begun to run because a judicial action, and mere notice of rescission
Remigio anANSWER:
option if ittoispurchase theThe law also
no notice in writing of the sale appears to have is insufficient
SUGGESTED resisted.
Redemption;
been given to her by Lydia. Legal; No, the action
provides to compel
that slight breach Ubaldois not to aexecute
groundthe for
Formalities
Adela and Beth are co-owners of a parcel of deed
(2002) rescissionof absolute
(Song Fo sale & will
Co, not prosper. Phil Co.,
vs, Hawaiian
land. Beth sold her undivided share of the According 47 Phils. 821), to AngDelay Yu v. in Courtthe of Appeals (238
fulfillment of the
property to Xandro, who promptly notified obligation (Art. 1169, Civil Code) is isa not
SCRA 602) , the right of first refusal ground based to
Adela of the sale and furnished the latter a on contract
rescind, onlybut is if predicated
time is on of the theprovisions
essence.
copy of the deed of absolute sale. When of human relations
Otherwise, the court and, may therefore,
refuse the its violation
rescission
Xandro presented the deed for registration, the is Perfected
if predicated
there is a just onSale;
cause Acceptance
quasi-delict.
for fixing of aof
the Secondly, the
period.
register of deeds also notified Adela of the sale, rightEarnest
Bert offers
of firstMoney
to buy(2002)
refusal Simeons
implies that property
the offer under of thethe
following terms
enclosing a copy of the deed with the notice. person in whose favor that right was given and conditions: P1 million
However, Adela ignored the notices. A year must purchase conform price, 10%
with the option
samemoney, terms and the balance
been paid; payable
ALTERNATIVE
later, Xandro filed a petition for the partition of conditions in cash
ANSWER: upon the
as those given to the offeree. In clearance of this
the
c) foreclose the chattel mortgage on the No, the action
property of allwillillegal
not prosper.
occupants. The lessee's
The option
the property. Upon receipt of summons, Adela case, right
however, Remigio was offering only P4.5
of isfirst refusal does not go so farclears as to the
things sold, also
immediately in casethe
tendered of default
requisiteof amount money
two or for Million promptly
instead of P5paid Million.and Simeon
more installments,Xandro
with nocontends
further action give
property of illegal occupants in no time atthe
him the power to dictate on the lessor all.
the redemption. that Adela price at which theBertlatter should paymentsell
against the purchaser.
lost her right of redemption after the expiration However, when tenders of the
of 30 days from her receipt of the notice of the balance and ask Simeon for the deed
sale given by him.
his property. Upon the facts given, the lessor SUGGESTED ANSWER:
had sufficiently complied with his commitment 1) A can exercise his right of repurchase within
to give the lessee a right of first refusal when four (4) years from the date of the contract
he offered to sell the property to the lessee for (Art. 1606, Civil Code).
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
P5 Million, which was the same price he got in
2} I would advise B to file an action for
selling it to Santos. He certainly had the right to
consolidation of title and obtain a judicial order
treat the lessee's counter-offer of a lesser
of consolidation which must be recorded in the
amount as a rejection of his offer to sell at P5
Registry of Property (Art. 1607. Civil Code).
Million. Thus, he was free to find another buyer
upon receipt of such unacceptable counter- Transfer of Ownership; Non-Payment
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
offer (Art. 1319. NCC). of thesold
Pablo Price
his (1991)
car to Alfonso who issued a
Yes, the answer will be the same. The action
will not prosper because an option must be postdated check in full payment therefor.
supported by a consideration separate and Before the maturity of the check, Alfonso sold
distinct from the purchase price. In this case the car to Gregorio who later sold it to Gabriel.
there is no separate consideration. Therefore, When presented for payment, the check issued
the option may be withdrawn by Ubaldo at any by Alfonso was dishonored by the drawee bank
time. (Art. 1324, NCC) for the reason that he, Alfonso, had already
Right of First Refusal; Lessee; closed his account even before he issued his
Effect
In (1998)
a 20-year lease contract over a building, the check. Pablo sued to recover the car from
lessee is expressly granted a right of first Gabriel alleging that he (Pablo) had been
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
refusal should the lessor decide to sell both the unlawfully deprived of it by reason of Alfonso's
No. The suit will not prosper because Pablo was
land and building. However, the lessor sold the deception. Will the suit prosper?
not unlawfully deprived of the car although he
property to a third person who knew about the
was unlawfully deprived of the price. The
lease and in fact agreed to respect it.
perfection of the sale and the delivery of the
Consequently, the lessee brings an action
car was enough to allow Alfonso to have a right
against both the lessor-seller and the buyer (a)
of ownership over the car, which can be
to rescind the sale and (b) to compel specific
lawfully transferred to Gregorio. Art. 559
performance of his right of first refusal in the
applies only to a person who is in possession in
sense that the lessor should be ordered to
good faith of the property, and not to the
execute a deed of absolute sale in favor of the
owner thereof. Alfonso, in the problem, was the
lessee at the same price. The defendants Non-payment of theGabriel
price inacquired
a contract
SUGGESTED ANSWER: owner, and, hence, theoftitle
saleto
contend
The action thatfiled
the by
plaintiff
the can
lessee,neither seek
for both does not render ineffective the obligation to
the car.
rescission of the sale nor compel
rescission of the offending sale and specific specific deliver. The obligation to deliver a thing is
performance
performance of of the
a "mere" right
right of firstofrefusal
first refusal.
which different from the obligation to pay its price.
Decide the
Equatorial case.
was violated,Realty [5%]
should prosper. The ruling
Development, in vs.
Inc. EDCA Publishing Co. v. Santos (1990)
Mayfair Theater, Inc. (264 SCRA 483), a case Transfer of Ownership; Risk
with similar facts, sustains both rights of action of Loss
D sold a (1990)
second-hand car to E for P150,000.00
because the buyer in the subsequent sale knew The agreement between D and E was that half
the existence of right of first refusal, hence in of the purchase price, or P75,000.00, shall be
ANOTHER ANSWER:
bad paid upon delivery of the car to E and the
The faith.
action to rescind the sale and to compel balance of P75,000.00 shall be paid in five
the right to first refusal will not prosper. (Ang equal monthly installments of P15,000.00 each.
Yu Asuncion vs. CA, 238 SCRA 602). The Court The car was delivered to E, and E paid the
ruled in a unanimous en banc decision that the amount of P75.000.00 to D. Less than one
right of first refusal is not founded upon month thereafter, the car was stolen from E's
contract but on a quasi-delictual relationship garage with no fault on E's part and was never
covered by the principles of human relations SUGGESTED ANSWER:
recovered. Is E legally bound to pay the said
and unjust enrichment (Art. 19, et seq. Civil Yes, E is legally bound to pay the balance of
unpaid balance of P75.000.00? Explain your
Code). Hence the only action that will prosper P75,000.00. The ownership of the car sold was
answer.
according to the Supreme Court is an "action acquired by E from the moment it was delivered
Right
for damages in of a proper forum for the to him. Having acquired ownership, E bears the
purpose." 2, (1993)
Repurchase
On January 1980, A and B entered into a risk of the loss of the thing under the doctrine
contract whereby A sold to B a parcel of land of res perit domino. [Articles 1496. 1497, Civil
for and in consideration of P10.000.00. A Code).
reserving to himself the right to repurchase the
same. Because they were friends, no period LEASE
was agreed upon for the repurchase of the
property. 1) Until when must A exercise his Extinguishment; Total Distruction;
right of repurchase? 2) If A fails to redeem the Leased
A Property
is the owner of a (1993)
lot on which he constructed
property within the allowable period, what a building in the total cost of P10,000,000.00.
would you advise B to do for his better Of that amount B
protection?
contributed P5,000,000.00 provided that the building phenomenon are still unpredictable despite the
whole
as a would be leased to him (B) for a period of science, advancesthe phenomenon
in is considered unforeseen.
ten years from January 1. 1985 to December
31, 1995 at a rental of P100,000.00 a year. To Leasee & Lessor; Rights and
such condition, A agreed. On December 20, A Obligations (1990)blocks from the center of
vacant lot several
1990, the building was totally burned. Soon the town was leased by its owner to a young
thereafter, A's workers cleared the debris and businessman B for a term of fifteen (15) years
started construction of a new building. B then renewal upon agreement of the parties. After
served notice upon A that he would occupy the taking possession of the lot, the lessee built
building being constructed upon completion, for thereon a building of mixed materials and a
the unexpired portion of the lease term, store. As the years passed, he expanded his
explaining that he had spent partly for the business, earning more profits. By the tenth
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
construction
Yes. A was correct of the inbuilding
rejectingthatthe was burned.ofA (10th) year of his possession, he was able to
demand
rejected build a three (3)-story building worth at least
B. As a result of the total destruction right
B's demand. Did A has a of thein
rejecting B's demand? P300,000.00. Before the end of the term of the
building by fortuitous event, the lease was
lease, B negotiated with the landowner for its
extinguished. (Art. 1655, Civil Code.)
Implied New renewal, but despite their attempts to do so,
Lease what
Under (1999) circumstances would an implied they could not agree on the new conditions for
new lease or a tacita reconduccion arise? the renewal. Upon the expiration of the term of
(2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: the lease, the landowner asked B to vacate the
An implied new lease or tacita reconduccion premises and remove his building and other
arises if at the end of the contract the lessee improvements. B refused unless he was
should continue enjoying the thing leased for reimbursed for necessary and useful expenses.
15 days with the acquiescence of the lessor, B claimed ANSWER:
SUGGESTED that he was a possessor and builder
and unless a notice to the contrary by either in good
a) B hasfaith, withto
the right right of retention.
remove This and
the building issue
parties has previously been given (Art. 1670). is nowimprovements
other before the court for resolution
unless the landownerin a
In short, in order that there may be tacita pending
decides to litigation.
retain thea) building
What areatthe therights
time ofof B?
the
reconduccion there must be expiration of the b) What are the rights of the landowner?
termination of the lease and pay the lessee
contract; there must be continuation of one-half of the value of the improvements at
possession for 15 days or more; and there that time. The lessee may remove the building
Lease
must be no ofpriorRural
demand to vacate. even though the principal thing may suffer
Lands
In 1995,(2000)
Mark leased the rice land of Narding in damage but B should not cause any more
Nueva Ecija for an annual rental of P1,000.00 impairment upon the property leased than is
per hectare. In 1998, due to the El Nino necessary. The claim of B that he was a
phenomenon, the rice harvest fell to only 40% possessor and builder in good faith with the
of the average harvest for the previous years. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
right oflandowner/lessor
retention is not tenable. B is to
not a
Mark asked Narding for a reduction of the b) The may refuse
builder in good faith because
reimburse 1/2 of the value of the as lessee he does
rental to P500.00 per hectare for that year but not claim ownership over the property leased.
SUGGESTED
the latter ANSWER:
refused. Is Mark legally entitled to improvements and require the lessee to
No, Mark is not entitled to a reduction. Under remove the improvements. [Article 1678, Civil
such reduction? (2%)
Article 1680 of the Civil Code, the lessee of a Leasee; Code), Death Thereof;
rural land is entitled to a reduction of the rent Stating Effectsbriefly
(1997) the thesis to support your
only in case of loss of more than 1/2 of the answer to each of the following cases, will the
fruits through extraordinary and unforeseen death - a) of the lessee extinguish the lease
fortuitous events. While the drought brought SUGGESTED agreement? ANSWER:
about by the "El Nino" phenomenon may be No. The death of the lessee will not extinguish
ALTERNATIVE
classified ANSWER:
as extraordinary, it is not considered the lease agreement, since lease is not
Yes, Mark is entitled to a reduction of the rent. His loss was more
as unforeseen.
than 1/2 of the fruits and the loss was due to an extraordinary and
personal in character and the right is
unforeseen fortuitous event. The "El Nino" phenomenon is transmissible to the heirs. (Heirs of
extraordinary because it is uncommon; it does not occur with Dimaculangan vs. IAC, 170 SCRA 393).
regularity. And neither could the parties have foreseen its Option to Buy;
occurrence. The event should be foreseeable by the parties so that Expired
On (2001)
January 1, 1980, Nestor leased the fishpond
the lessee can change the time for his planting, or refrain from
planting, or take steps to avoid the loss. To be foreseeable, the time
of Mario for a period of three years at a
and the place of the occurrence, as well as the magnitude of the monthly rental of P1,000.00, with an option to
adverse effects of the fortuitous event must be capable of being purchase the same during the period of the
predicted. Since the exact place, the exact time, and the exact lease for the price of P500,000.00. After the
magnitude of the adverse effects of the "El Nino"
expiration of the three-year period, Mario
allowed Nestor to remain in the leased
premises at the same rental rate. On June 15,
1983, Nestor tendered the amount of
P500,000.00 to Mario and demanded that the
latter execute a deed of absolute sale of the
fishpond in his favor. Mario refused, on the
ground that Nestor no longer had an option to
buy the fishpond.
Nestor filed an action for specific performance. sublessee
Will can invoke no right superior to that of his
action
the prosper or not? Why? (5%) sublessor, the moment the sublessor is duly ousted from the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: premises, the sublessee has no leg to stand on. The sublessee's
No, the action will not prosper. The implied right, if any, is to demand reparation for damages from his
sublessor, should the latter be at fault.
renewal of the lease on a month-to-month
basis did not have the effect of extending the (Heirs ofSevilla v. Court of Appeals G.R. No.
life of the option to purchase which expired at 49823, February 26, 1992).
the end of the original lease period. The lessor
is correct in refusing to sell on the ground that
the option had expired. Sublease; Delay in Payment of
Sublease vs. Assignment of Lease; Rentals
In January(1994)
1993, Four-Gives Corporation leased
Rescission of Contract (2005) the entire twelve floors of the GQS Towers
Under a written contract dated December 1, Complex, for a period of ten years at a monthly
1989, Victor leased his land to Joel for a period rental of P3,000,000.00. There is a provision in
of five (5) years at a monthly rental of the contract that the monthly rentals should be
Pl,000.00, to be increased to Pl,200.00 and paid within the first five days of the month. For
Pl,500.00 on the third and fifth year, the month of March, May, June, October and
respectively. On January 1, 1991, Joel December 1993, the rentals were not paid on
subleased the land to Conrad for a period of time with some rentals being delayed up to ten
On
twoDecember 31,
(2) years at 1992, Joel
a monthly assigned
rental the lease
of Pl,500.00. days. The delay was due to the heavy paper
to his compadre, Ernie, who acted on the belief Four-Gives
work involvedCorporation also the
in processing subleased
checks.five of
that Joel was the rightful owner and possessor the twelve floors to wholly-owned subsidiaries.
of the said lot. Joel has been faithfully paying The lease contract expressly prohibits the
the stipulated rentals to Victor. When Victor assignment of the lease contract or any portion
learned on May 18, 1992 about the sublease thereof. The rental value of the building has
and assignment, he sued Joel, Conrad and increased by 50% since its lease to Four-Gives
a)
ErnieWill
for the action
rescission of prosper? If so,
the contract against
of lease and Corporation. 1) Can the building owner eject
whom? Explain. (2%)
for damages. Four-Gives Corporation on grounds of the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: repeated delays in the payment of the rent? 2}
Yes, the action of for rescission of the contract of SUGGESTED ANSWERS:
Can the building owner ask for the cancellation
lease and for damages will prosper. Under Article 1) a) The "repeated delays" in the payment of
of the contract for violation of the provision
1659 of the Civil Code, "if the lessor or the lessee rentals would, at best, be a slight or casual
against assignment?
should not comply with the obligations set forth in breach which does not furnish a ground for
Articles 1654 and 1657, the aggrieved party may ask ejectment especially because the delays were
for rescission of the contract and indemnification for only due to heavy paper work. Note that there
damages, or only the latter, allowing the contract to was not even a demand for payment obviously
remain in force." Article 1649 of the same Code because the delay lasted for only a few days
provides that "the lessee cannot assign the lease (10 days being the longest), at the end of
without the consent of the lessor, unless there is a which time payments were presumably made
stipulation to the contrary." Consent is necessary and were accepted. There was, therefore, no
(Bangayan v. Court of
because assignment Appeals,
would cause G.R. No. 123581,
novation by the default. Note also that there was no demand
August 29, of
substitution one ofHowever,
1997) the rule is different
the parties. made upon the lessee to vacate the premises
in the case of subleasing. When there is no for non-payment of the monthly rent. There is,
express prohibition in the Contract of Lease, the b) The building owner cannot eject Four-Gives
therefore, no cause of action for ejectment
lessee may sublet the thing leased. (Art. 1650, Corporation on the ground of repeated delays in
arising from the "repeated delays".
Civil Code) the payment of rentals. The delay in the
In the given case, when Joel assigned the lease payment of the rentals is minimal and cannot
to Ernie, the same was done without the be made the basis of an ejectment suit. The
consent of Victor. The assignment is void. delay was due to the heavy paperwork involved
However, there is no indication that in the in processing the checks. It would be otherwise
written contract of lease between Victor and if the lease contract stated that in the payment
Joel, that subleasing the premises is prohibited. of rentals within the first five days of the month,
Hence, the sublease of Joel with Conrad is valid. time is of the essence or that the lessee will be
In view of the foregoing, Victor can file the case in delay if he falls to pay within the agreed
of rescission and damages only against Joel and period without need of demand. In this case he
b) In but
Ernie caseheof rescission,
cannot include discuss
Conrad. the rights can judicially eject the tenant on the ground of
and obligations of the parties. (2%) lack of payment of the price stipulated after a
SUGGESTED ANSWER: c) No. Resolution of a contract will not be
Rescission of the lease necessarily requires the return of the thing demand to vacate, (Article 1673(2), New Civil
permitted for a slight or casual breach, but only
to the lessor. Hence, the judgment granting rescission of the Code),
contract should also order the lessee to vacate and return the for such substantial and fundamental breach as
leased premises to the lessor. However, since the would defeat the very object of the parties in
making the agreement.(Zepeda v. CA, 216
SCRA 293]. The delay of ten (10)) days is not
such a substantial
and fundamental breach to warrant the resolution A, of
and that he has not been remiss in the payment of
contract
the of lease specially so when the delay Will
rent.the action
was due to the heavy paperwork in processing prosper? (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the checks. Yes, the action will prosper. Under Article 1651
SUGGESTED ANSWER: of the Civil Code, the sublessee is bound to the
2) a) No. Sublease is different from assignment lessor for all acts which refer to the use and
of lease. Sublease, not being prohibited by the preservation of the thing leased in the manner
contract of lease is therefore allowed and stipulated between the lessor and the lessee.
cannot be invoked as a ground to cancel the Sublease; Validity; Assignment of
lease, Sublease
A leased a(1990)
parcel of land to B for a period of
b) No, the lessor cannot have the lease two years. The lease contract did not contain
cancelled for alleged violation of the provision any express prohibition against the assignment
against assignment. The lessee did not assign of the leasehold or the subleasing of the leased
the lease, or any portion thereof, to the premises. During the third year of the lease, B
subsidiaries. It merely subleased some floors to subleased the land to C. In turn, C, without A's
its subsidiaries. Since the problem does not consent, assigned the sublease to D. A then
state that the contract of lease contains a filed an action for the rescission of the contract
prohibition against sublease, the sublease is of lease on the ground that B has violated the
lawful, the rule being that in the absence of an terms and conditions of the lease agreement. If
express prohibition a lessee may sublet the (a)
youB's sublease
were to how would you decide the
the judge,
thing leased, in whole or in part, without (b)
C? C's
and assignment
case, particularly with of the
respect to the validity of:
Sublease; Sublessee;
prejudice to his/its responsibility to the lessor sublease to D?
Liability
May
for the (1999)
a lessee sublease
performance of the
the property
contract. leased
without the consent of the lessor, and what are
the respective liabilities of the lessee and sub-
lessee to the lessor in case of such sublease?
SUGGESTED
(3%) ANSWER:
Yes, provided that there is no express
prohibition against subleasing. Under the law,
when in the contract of lease of things there is
no express prohibition, the lessee may sublet
the thing leased without prejudice to his
responsibility for the performance of the
contract toward the lessor. [Art, 1650) In case
there is a sublease of the premises being
leased, the sublessee is bound to the lessor for
all the acts which refer to the use and
preservation of the thing leased in the manner
stipulated between the lessor and the lessee.
(Art. 1651} The sublessee is subsidiarily liable
to the lessor for any rent due from the lessee.
However, the sublessee shall not be responsible
beyond the amount of the rent due from him.
(Art. 1652) As to the lessee, the latter shall still
be responsible to the lessor for the rents; bring
to the knowledge of the lessor every usurpation
or untoward act which any third person may
have committed or may be openly preparing to
carry out upon the thing leased; advise the
owner the need for all repairs; to return the
thing leased upon the termination of the lease
just as he received it, save what has been lost
or impaired by the lapse of time or by ordinary
wear and tear
Sublease; or from an inevitable cause;
Sublessee;
responsible
Liability
A for
(2000)
leased his the to
house deterioration or loss of
B with a condition the
that
thing
the leased,
leased unless he
premises proves
shall thatfor
be used it took place
without his purposes
residential fault. only. B subleased the
house to C who used it as a warehouse for
fabrics. Upon learning this, A demanded that C
stop using the house as a warehouse, but C
ignored the demand, A then filed an action for
ejectment against C, who raised the defense
that there is no privity of contract between him
and
failure of the airline to take extra precautions despite negate sale because they indicate that ownership over
police
a warning that an attempt to hijack the units
the was never intended to transfer to the distributor.
plane would be made, was negligence on the
part of the airline. Being negligent, it is liable Agency; coupled with an
for the death of the passenger. The defense of interestsold
Richard (2001)
a large parcel of land in Cebu to
force majeure is not tenable since the shooting Leo for P100 million payable in annual
incident would not have happened had the installments over a period of ten years, but
airline taken steps that could have prevented title will remain with Richard until the purchase
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: price is fully paid. To enable Leo to pay the
the hijacker from boarding the plane.
Under Article 1763 of the Civil Code, the price, Richard gave him a power-of-attorney
common carrier is not required to observe authorizing him to subdivide the land, sell the
extraordinary diligence in preventing injury to individual lots, and deliver the proceeds to
its passengers on account of the willful acts or Richard, to be applied to the purchase price.
negligence of other passengers or of strangers. Five years later, Richard revoked the power of
The common carrier, in that case, is required to SUGGESTED ANSWER:
attorney and took over the sale of the
exercise only the diligence of a good father of a The revocation is not valid. The power of
subdivision lots himself. Is the revocation valid
family; hence, the failure of the airline to take attorney given to the buyer is irrevocable
or not? Why? (5%)
EXTRA precautions in frisking the passengers because it is coupled with an interest: the
and by leaving that matter to the security agency is the means of fulfilling the obligation
personnel of the airport, does not constitute a of the buyer to pay the price of the land
breach of that duty so as to make the airline (Article 1927, CC). In other words, a bilateral
SUGGESTED ANSWER: to buy and sell the land) is
liable. Besides, the use of irresistible force by contract (a) B's
(contract
sublease
the hijackers was farce majeure that could not dependent
Agency; on theto
Guarantee C is valid.
agency. Although the
original
Commission
As an agent, periodAL of given
(2004)
was two years a guarantee for the lease
of
AGENCY
have been prevented even by the observance contract has expired, the lease continued with
extraordinary diligence.
commission, in addition to his regular
Agency the acquiescence
commission, after of he thesoldlessor
20 units duringof the third
(2003)
Jo-Ann asked her close friend, Aissa, to buy year. Hence, to
refrigerators there has beenHT
a customer, anHotel.
impliedThe renewal
some groceries for her in the supermarket. of the contract
customer, however, of lease.
failedUnderto payArt. for1650 of the
the units
Was there a nominate contract entered into Civil
sold. Code, the lessee
ALs principal, DRBI, may sublet from
demanded the thing
AL
between Jo-Ann and Aissa? In the affirmative, leased,
payment infor
whole or in part, when
the customers the contract
accountability. ALof
SUGGESTED
what was it? ANSWER:
Explain. 5% lease does not contain any express prohibition.
objected, on the ground that his job was only
Yes, there was a nominate contract. On the [Articles
to sell and1650, not to 1670collectCivil Code).for units
payment A's action
assumption that Aissa accepted the request of SUGGESTED ANSWER:
for rescission should not prosper on this
bought
(b) by the customer.
C's assignment Is ALs objection
her close friend Jo-Ann to but some groceries SUGGESTED
ground. ANSWER: of the sublease to D is not
valid?
valid. Can DRBI
Under Art.collect
1649, from
of the himCivil
or not?Code,
for her in the supermarket, what they entered No, AL's objection is not valid and DRBI can the
Reason.
lessee (5%) assign the lease without the
cannot
into was a nominate contract of Agency. collect from AL. Since AL accepted a guarantee
Article 1868 of the New Civil Code provides consent
commission, of in the lessor,
addition to hisunless
regular there is a
that by the contract of agency a person binds stipulation to the contrary.
commission, he agreed to bear the risk There is no of such
himself to render some service or to do stipulation
collection in
and the
to contract.
pay the If
principal the law
the prohibits
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
something in representation or on behalf of assignment
proceeds of the
of the sale lease
on the without
same the terms consent
agreed of
Yes, they entered into a nominate contract of the
upon lessor,
with all
the the more
purchaser would
(Article the
1907, assignment
Civil
another, with the consent or authority of the
lease to service in the absence of a relation of Agency;
of a sublease
Code) Real Estate be prohibited without such
latter.
principal and agent between them (Article Mortgage
CX executed
consent. This (2004)
aisspecial
a violation powerofofthe attorney
contract and
1644, New Civil Code).
Agency vs. Sale COMMON CARRIERS
authorizing
is a valid ground for rescission by A. any bank
DY to secure a
and to mortgage his property covered by the
loan from
(2000)
A foreign manufacturer of computers and a owners certificate of title. In securing a loan
Philippine distributor entered into a contract Extraordinary
from MBank, DY did not specify that he was
whereby the distributor agreed to order 1,000 Despite Diligence
acting foraCX (2000)
warning from the with
in the transaction policesaidthatbank.an
units of the manufacturer's computers every attempt to hijack a PAL
Is CX liable for the bank loan? Why or why plane will be made in
month and to resell them in the Philippines at the following
SUGGESTED ANSWER: week,
not? Justify your answer. (5%) the airline did not take
the manufacturer's suggested prices plus 10%. CX
extra is liable for the banksuch
precautions, loan becauseas frisking he of
All unsold units at the end of the year shall be authorized the mortgage
passengers, for fear of being accused on his property to of
bought back by the manufacturer at the same secure
violating thehuman
loan contracted
rights. Two by DY. If DYlater,
days later an
price they were ordered. The manufacturer defaults
armed and
hijackerfails to
did pay the
attempt loan,
to CX is
hijack liable to
a PAL
shall hold the distributor free and harmless pay. flightHowever,
to Cebu. his liability
Although heiswas limited to theby the
subdued
SUGGESTED ANSWER: extent of the value of
from anyisclaim
The contract for defects
one of agency, in the
not sale. The notionunits.
of sale isIs the
other passengers, hethe said property.
managed to fire a shot
agreement one for sale or agency? (5%)
negated by the following indicia: (1) the price is fixed by the ALTERNATIVE
which hit and ANSWER:
killed a CX
femaleis not personally
passenger. The
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
manufacturer with the 10% mark-up constituting the commission; liable
victim's to the banksued
parents loan because
the airline it was
for breach of
(2) the manufacturer reacquires the unsold units at exactly the The airline is liable. In case of death of a
contracted
contract, and by DY theinairline
his personal
raised capacity.
the defense Onlyof
same price; and (3) warranty for the units was borne by the passenger, common carriers are presumed to
the
force property
majeure. of CX
Is theis liable.
airline Hence,
liable or while
not? CX
(2%)
manufacturer. The foregoing indicia have been at fault or to have acted negligently,
has authorized the mortgage on his property to
unless they prove that they observed
secure the loan of DY, the bank cannot sue CX
extraordinary diligence (Article 1756, Civil
to collect the loan in case DY defaults thereon.
Code). The
The bank can only foreclose the property of CX.
And if the proceeds of the foreclosure are All notthose contracts were executed by B while A was
pay the loan
sufficient to in full, the bank cannot run after
CX for the deficiency.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
While as a general rule the principal is not
liable for the contract entered into by his agent
in case the agent acted in his own name
without disclosing his principal, such rule does
not apply if the contract involves a thing
belonging to the principal. In such case, the
principal is liable under Article 1883 of the Civil
ALTERNATIVE
Code. The ANSWER:
contract is deemed made on his
CX would not be liable for the bank loan. CX's
behalf (Sy-juco v. Sy-juco 40 Phil. 634 [1920]).
property would also not be liable on the
mortgage. Since DY did not specify that he was
acting for CX in the transaction with the bank,
DY in effect acted in his own name. In the case
of Rural Bank of Bombon v. CA, 212 SCRA,
(1992), the Supreme Court, under the same
facts, ruled that "in order to bind the principal
by a mortgage on real property executed by an
agent, it must upon its face purport to be
made, signed and sealed in the name of the
principal, otherwise, it will bind the agent only.
It is not enough merely that the agent was in
fact authorized to make the mortgage, if he,
has not acted in the name of the principal.
Neither is it ordinarily sufficient that in the
mortgage the agent describes himself as
acting by virtue of a power of attorney, if in
fact the agent has
Appointment of acted
Sub-in his own name and
has
Agent
X set his own
(1999)
appoints hand and seal
Y as his agent to his
to sell theproducts
mortgage.in
There
Cebu City. Can Y appoint a sub-agent a
is no principle of law by which person
and if he
can
does,becomewhat liable
are onthe
a real estate mortgage
effects of such
which
SUGGESTEDshe never
ANSWER:
appointment? (5%) executed in person or by
attorney
Yes, the inagent
fact". may appoint a substitute or
sub-agent if the principal has not prohibited
him from doing so, but he shall be responsible
(1) when
for the he of
acts wasthenot given the power to
substitute:
(2) whenone;
appoint he was given such power, but without
designating the person, and the person
appointed was notoriously incompetent or
insolvent.
ratify the sale contract, then Jesus shall be liable allowing the other general partner to bind the
1898.
(ArticleCivil Code). confined
will violatedue
corporation theto corporation
illness in law the principle
Makati Medical
that
Center.
only theRule
board onofthedirectors
validitymay andbindbinding
the effect
Termination; Effect of Death of each of the above contracts upon A the
corporation.
of Agentbriefly
Stating (1997)the thesis to support your SUGGESTED ANSWER:your answers,
principal. Explain
answer to each of the following cases, will the TheNo,agency
3) for the couched same reasons in general given interms the
death - (c) of an agent end an agency? comprised
Answer to Number
only acts 2 above.
of administration (Art.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: 1877, Civil Code). The lease contract on the
Yes. The death of an agent extinguishes the Conveyance
Manila parcel isofnot a valid,
Partners Share
not enforceable and
agency, by express provision of par. 3, Art Dissolution
Dielle,
not bindingKarloupon (1998)
and Una
A. ForareB to general
lease the partners
property in a
1919 of the Civil Code. merchandising
to C, for morefirm. thanHavingone (1) contributed
year, A must equal
amounts to the capital, theyofalso agree on
PARTNERSHIP provide B with
The
equal
1878. lease
Civil of
a special
the Caloocan
distribution
Code).
power
of whatever
attorney
City property
(Art.
to D isis
net profit
valid
realized andper binding
fiscal upon period. A. Since
After two the lease
years isof
Composition of Partnerships; Spouses; without operation, however, Una conveys her to
a fixed term, it is understood wholebe
Corporations (1994) from month
interest in theto partnership
month, since the rental
to Justine, without is
1) Can a husband and wife form a limited 1.
payable
the Is
knowledge the partnership
monthly and(Art. 1687, of
consent Civil Code).
Dielle and Karlo.
partnership to engage in real estate business, The
2. Whatsaleare
dissolved? of12%]the rights
Quezon of City
Justine, parcel to Eshould
if any, is not
with the wife being a limited partner? valid
she and
desire not
to binding
participate upon
in the A. B needed
management ofa
2) Can two corporations organize a general special
the power of
partnership and attorney to validly of
in the distribution sell
a netthe
partnership under the Civil Code of the land (Arts.
profit 1877 andwhich
of P360.000.00 1878, was Civil Code).
realized The
after
Philippines? 3) Can a corporation and an SUGGESTED
her of theANSWER:
salepurchase land at a very
of Una's good[3%]
interest? price does not
individual form a general partnership? 1. No,the
cure a conveyance
defect of the by acontract
partner arising
of his wholefrom
SUGGESTED ANSWER: interest
Powers in
lack of authority ofa partnership
the does not of itself
1) a) Yes. The Civil Code prohibits a husband dissolve
AgentRealty
Prime the partnership
(1994) Corporation in the absence
appointed Nestor of thean
and wife from constituting a universal agreement.
exclusive agent (Art. in 1813. Civil Code)
the sale of lots of its newly
partnership. Since a limited partnership is not SUGGESTED ANSWER:
developed subdivision. Prime Realty told
a universal partnership, a husband and wife 2. Justine cannot interfere or participate in the
Nestor that he could not collect or receive
may validly form one. b) Yes. While spouses management or administration of the
payments from the buyers. Nestor was able to
cannot enter into a universal partnership, they partnership business or affairs. She may,
sell ten lots to Jesus and to collect the down
can enter into a limited partnership or be however, receive the net profits to which Una
payments for said lots. He did not turn over
members thereof (CIR u. Suter, etal. 27 SCRA would
SUGGESTED have otherwise been entitled. In this
ANSWER:
the collections to Prime Realty. Who shall bear
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
152). case,
a) The P120.000
general (Art.
rule 1813,
is that Civil Code) dealing
a person
2) a) No, A corporation is managed by its the loss
Dissolution for Nestor's defalcation,
of Prime Realty
with an agent must inquire into the authority
or Jesus?
Partnership
Pauline, Patricia (1995)
board of directors. If the corporation were to of that agent. Inand
the Priscilla
present formed case, ifaJesus
business did
become a partner, co-partners would have the partnership for the purpose
not inquire into that authority, he is liable for of engaging in
power to make the corporation party to neon advertising for a term
the loss due to Nestor's defalcation unless of five (5) years.
transactions in an irregular manner since the Pauline
Article 1900, subsequently
Civil Code assigned
governs, in to which
Philipcase her
partners are not agents subject to the control interest in the partnership.
the developer corporation bears the loss. When Patricia and
of the Board of Directors. But a corporation Art. 1900 learned
Priscilla Civil Code of provides: "So far as third
the assignment, they
may enter into a joint venture with another persons to
decided aredissolve
concerned, an act is deemed
the partnership before the to
corporation as long as the nature of the have been performed
expiration of its term within asthethey scopehad of the an
venture is in line with the business authorized agent's authority,
unproductive business if such act is within
relationship with Philip the
b)
by As
its acharter.
general(Tuason
rule a corporation
& Co., Inc. may not form
v. Bolano, 95 terms of the
in the past. Onpower
the other of attorney,
hand, unaware as written,
of the
General
a general Agency vs. Special
Phil. 106). partnership with another corporation even ifof the
move agent
Patricia and has in fact
Priscilla butexceeded
sensing their the
Agency
A as (1992)
principal
or an individual because appointed B as hismay
a corporation agent
not 1. Is theofdissolution
limits
negative todone
his authority
reaction by according
Patricia of
his acquisition and to an
Pauline's
granting
be bound byhim persons general
who are andneitherunlimited Priscilla
directors interest,
However,
understanding if without
Jesus
Philip the consent
made
between due
simultaneously the inquiry ofpetitioned
Pauline
principalandand heorwas
the
for
management
nor officers of over A's properties, stating that
the corporation. not Philip
agent.
the informed valid? by Explain.
the
dissolution of the partnership. principal Prime Realty of
However,
A withholds a corporation
no power from may Bform and a that
general
the 2.
theDoes Philip
limits of have
Nestor's any authority.
right to petition Primefor the
Realty
partnership
agent may with execute another
such corporation
acts as heormay an shalldissolution
bear the loss. of the partnership before the
Accordingly,
individual B leased
provided
consider appropriate. A's parcel
the following of land are
conditions in b) expiration
Considering of its that Prime Realty
specified Corporation
term? Explain.
1) to CThe
Manila
met: Articles
for four of Incorporation
(4) years at P60,000.00 of per
the only "told" Nestor that he could not receive or
year,corporation
payable annually expressly
in advance. allows the collect payments, it appears that the limitation
corporation to enter into partnerships; does not appear in his written authority or
B leased
2) another
The parcel
Articles of of land of must
Partnership A in power of attorney. In this case, insofar as Jesus,
Caloocan
provideCity thattoallD partners
without will
a fixed termthe
manage at who is a third person is concerned, Nestor's
P3,000.00 per month
partnership, and payable
they shall monthly.
be jointly and acts of collecting payments is deemed to have
3)
severally In liable;
case of anda foreign corporation, it been performed within the scope of his
B sold
must to Ebea third parceltoofdo
licensed landbusiness
belonging in tothe
A authority {Article 1900. Civil Code). Hence, the
located in Quezon City for three (3) times the
Philippines. However,
principal isif liable.
Jesus was aware of the limitation of
c) No.that
price A corporation
was listed may in thenot be a general
inventory by A to B. Nestor's power as an agent, and Prime Realty
partner because the principle of mutual agency Corporation does not
in general partnership
another the remaining partners may not dissolve the
A should be hired as Secretary. The decision for the
partnership, the dissolution by Patricia and of A prevails because it is an act of
hiring
Priscilla without the consent of Pauline or administration which can be performed by the
Philip is not valid. duly appointed managing partners, W and X.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
2. No, Philip has no right to petition for B cannot be hired, because in case of a tie in
dissolution because he does not have the the decision of the managing partners, the
standing of a partner (Art. 1813 NCC). deadlock must be decided by the partners
owning the controlling interest. In this case, the
Dissolution of Partnership;
opposition of X and Y prevails because Y owns
Termination
A, B and C formed(1993)
a partnership for the
the controlling Interest (Art. 1801, Civil Code).
purpose of contracting with the Government in Obligations of a Partner;
the construction of one of its bridges. On June Industrial
Joe and RudyPartner
formed(2001)
a partnership to operate
30, 1992, after completion of the project, the a car repair shop in Quezon City. Joe provided
bridge was turned over by the partners to the the capital while Rudy contributed his labor
Government. On August 30, 1992, D, a supplier and industry. On one side of their shop, Joe
of materials used in the project sued A for opened and operated a coffee shop, while on
collection of the indebtedness to him. A moved the other side, Rudy put up a car accessories
to dismiss the complaint against him on the SUGGESTED
store. MayANSWER:
they engage in such separate
ground that it was the ABC partnership that is Joe, the capitalist
businesses? Why?partner,
[5%] may engage in the
liable for the debt. D replied that ABC restaurant business because it is not the same
partnership was dissolved upon completion of kind of business the partnership is engaged in.
the project for which purpose the partnership On the other hand, Rudy may not engage in
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
was formed. Will you any other business unless their partnership
As Judge, I would not dismiss
dismiss the
the complaint
complaint
against A If you were the Judge? expressly permits him to do so because as an
against A. because A is still liable as a general
industrial partner he has to devote his full time
partner for his pro rata share of 1/3 (Art. 1816,
to the business of the partnership [Art. 1789,
C. C.J. Dissolution of a partnership caused by
the termination of the particular undertaking Commodatum & Mutuum
CC).
specified in the agreement does not extinguish
obligations, which must be liquidated during Commodatum
the "winding up" of the partnership affairs (1993)
A, upon request, loaned his passenger Jeepney
(Articles 1829 and 1830. par. 1-a, Civil Code). to B to enable B to bring his sick wife from
Effect of Death of
Paniqui. Tarlac to the Philippine General
Partnerbriefly
Stating (1997)
the thesis to support your
Hospital in Manila for treatment. On the way
answer to each of the following cases, will the
back to Paniqui, after leaving his wife at the
death - of a partner terminate the partnership?
SUGGESTED ANSWER: hospital, people stopped the passenger
Yes. The death of a partner will terminate the Jeepney. B stopped for them and allowed them
partnership, by express provision of par. 5, Art. to ride on board, accepting payment from them
1830 of the Civil Code. just as in the case of ordinary passenger
Obligations of a Jeepneys plying their route. As B was crossing
Partner
W, (1992)
X, Y and Z organized a general partnership Bamban, there was an onrush of Lahar from Mt
A and B
Pinatubo, with
the respect
Jeep to the
that was passenger
loaned to him Jeepney
was
with W and X as industrial partners and Y and Z
loaned
that was by A to B to transport the
wrecked. 1) What do you call the contractlatter's sick wife
that
as capitalist partners. Y contributed P50,000.00
Manila?
to 2) Is B obliged to pay A for the use of
and Z contributed P20,000.00 to the common was entered into by
the passenger
fund. By a unanimous vote of the partners, W jeepney? 3) Is B liable to A for the
and X were appointed managing partners, loss of the Jeepney?
without any specification of their respective SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A applied
powers andforduties.
the position of Secretary and B 1) The contract is called "commodatum". [Art.
applied for the position of Accountant of the SUGGESTED
1933. CivilANSWER:
Code). COMMODATUM is a contract
partnership. 1, Under one
by which Art.of1830 (1) (c)
the parties of the
(bailor) NCC, to
delivers the
The hiring of A was decided upon by W and X, dissolution by Patricia and Priscilla is valid and
another (bailee) something not consumable so
but was opposed by Y and Z. did
thatnot
theviolate the contract
latter may use it forof partnership
a certain time even
and
though Pauline and Philip did not consent
return it.
The hiring of B was decided upon by W and Z, thereto.
2) No, B is The consent
not obliged to payof A Pauline
for the useis ofnot
but was opposed by X and Y. necessary because she had already
the passenger Jeepney because commodatum assigned
her interest to
is essentially Philip. The
gratuitous. (Art.consent of Philip
1933. Civil Code]is
Who of the applicants should be hired by the not also necessary because the assignment to
partnership? Explain and give your reasons. ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
him
3) of because
Yes, Pauline'sB interest
devoted did not make him a
(1) the
(c) thing to a that
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Interpreting Art. 1830 to mean if
partner, under
purpose Art,from
different 1813 of the
that for NCC. it has
which
one of the partners had assigned his interest
been
on theloaned (Art. 1942, par. 2, Civil Code)
partnership to
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: Tito must also pay for the ordinary expenses
No, because an obligation which consists in for the use and preservation of the thing
the delivery of a determinate thing shall be loaned. He must pay for the gasoline, oil,
extinguished if it should be lost or destroyed greasing and spraying. He cannot ask for
without the fault of the debtor, and before he reimbursement because he has the obligation
has incurred in delay. (Art. 1262. Civil Code) to return the identical thing to the bailor. Under
Commodatum Article 1941 of the Civil Code, the bailee is
(2005)
Before he left for Riyadh to work as a obliged to pay for the ordinary expenses for
mechanic, Pedro left his Adventure van with c) Does
the use Pedro
and have the
preservation of right to retrieve
the thing loaned.
Tito, with the understanding that the latter the van even before the lapse of one
could use it for one year for his personal or ALTERNATIVE
year? ANSWER:
Explain. (2%)
family use while Pedro works in Riyadh. He did No, Pedro does not have the right to retrieve
not tell Tito that the brakes of the van were the van before the lapse of one year. The
faulty. Tito had the van tuned up and the parties are mutually bound by the terms of the
brakes repaired. He spent a total amount of contract. Under the Civil Code, there are only 3
P15,000.00. After using the vehicle for two instances when the bailor could validly ask for
weeks, Tito discovered that it consumed too the return of the thing loaned even before the
Two
much months
fuel. To later,
make up Pedro returned
for the to the
expenses, he expiration of the period. These are when: (1) a
Philippines and asked
leased it to Annabelle. Tito to return the van. precarium contract was entered (Article 1947);
Unfortunately, while being driven by Tito, the (2) if the bailor urgently needs the thing
van was accidentally damaged by a cargo (Article 1946); and (3) if the bailee commits
a) Who
truck shall
without hisbear
fault.the P15,000.00 spent acts of ingratitude (Article 1948). Not one of
for the repair of the van? Explain. (2%) The fact that Tito
the situations had leased
is present the
in this thing loaned
case.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: to Annabelle would not justify the demand for
Tito must bear the P15,000.00 expenses for the the return of the thing loaned before expiration
van. Generally, extraordinary expenses for the of the period. Under Article 1942 of the Civil
preservation of the thing loaned are paid by the Code, leasing of the thing loaned to a third
bailor, he being the owner of the thing loaned. person not member of the household of the
In this case however, Tito should bear the bailee, will only entitle bailor to hold bailee
expenses because he incurred the expenses ALTERNATIVE
liable for theANSWER:
loss of the thing loaned.
without first informing Pedro about it. Neither As a rule, Pedro does not have the right to
was the repair shown to be urgent. Under retrieve the van before the lapse of one year.
Article 1949 of the Civil Code, bailor generally Article 1946 of the Code provides that "the
bears the extraordinary expenses for the bailor cannot demand the return of the thing
preservation of the thing and should refund the loaned till after the expiration of the period
said expenses if made by the bailee; Provided, stipulated, or after the accomplishment of the
The bailee brings the same to the attention of use for which the commodatum has been
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: constituted. However, if in the meantime, he
the
The bailor beforespent
P15,000.00 incurring them,
for the except
repair only
of the vanif
the repair is urgent that reply cannot be should have urgent need of the thing, he may
should be borne by Pedro. Where the bailor
awaited. demand its return or temporary use." In the
delivers to the bailee a non-consummable given problem, Pedro allowed Tito to use the
thing so that the latter may use it for a certain van for one year. Thus, he should be bound by
time and return the identical thing, the the said agreement and he cannot ask for the
contract perfected is a Contract of return of the car before the expiration of the
Commodatum. (Art. 1933, Civil Code) The one year period. However, if Pedro has urgent
bailor shall refund the extraordinary expenses d) Who shall bear the expenses
need of the van, he may demand forforits the
return
during the contract for the preservation of the accidental damage caused by the cargo
or temporary use.
thing loaned provided the bailee brings the truck, granting that the truck driver and
same to the knowledge of the bailor before truck owner are insolvent? Explain. (2%)
incurring the same, except when they are so SUGGESTED ANSWER:
In the given problem, Pedro left his Adventure Generally, extraordinary expenses arising on
urgent that the reply to the notification cannot
van with Tito so that the latter could useofit the
for the occasion of the actual use of the thing
be awaited without danger. (Art. 1949
one year while he was in Riyadh. There was no loaned by the bailee, even if incurred without
Civil Code)
mention of a consideration. Thus, the contract fault of the bailee, shall be shouldered equally
perfected was commodatum. The amount of by the bailor and the bailee. (Art. 1949 of the
P15,000.00 was spent by Tito to tune up the Civil Code). However, if Pedro had an urgent
van and to repair its brakes. Such expenses need for the vehicle, Tito would be in delay for
are extra-ordinary expenses because they are failure to immediately return the same, then
necessary for the preservation of the van Thus, Tito would be held liable for the extraordinary
b)
theWho
sameshall
shouldbear the costs
be borne by thefor thePedro.
bailor, van's expenses.
fuel, oil and other materials while it was Commodatum vs.
SUGGESTED
with Tito?ANSWER:
Explain. (2%) Usufruct (1998)
Distinguish usufruct from commodatum and state
these may be constituted over consumable
whether Mutuum;
goods. [2%]
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Interests
Samuel (2001) P300,000.00 housing loan
borrowed
1. USUFRUCT is a right given to a person from the bank at 18% per annum interest.
(usufructuary) to enjoy the property of another However, the promissory note contained a
with the obligation of preserving its form and proviso that the bank "reserves the right to
substance. (Art. 562. Civil Code) increase interest within the limits allowed by
On the other hand, COMMODATUM is a law," By virtue of such proviso, over the
contract by which one of the parties (bailor) objections of Samuel, the bank increased the
delivers to another (bailee) something not interest rate periodically until it reached 48%
consumable so that the latter may use it for a per annum. Finally, Samuel filed an action
certain time and return it. questioning the right of the bank to increase
In usufruct the usufructuary gets the right to
the interest rate up to 48%. The bank raised
the use and to the fruits of the same, while in SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the defense
The action willthat the While
prosper. Central
it isBank of the
true that the
commodatum, the bailee only acquires the use
Philippines had already suspended
interest ceilings set by the Usury Law are the Usury
no
of the thing loaned but not its fruits.
Usufruct may be constituted on the whole or a Law.
longer Will
in the action
force, prosper
it has beenorheld
not?that
Why?PD(5%)
No.
part of the fruits of the thing. (Art. 564. Civil 1684 and CB Circular No. 905 merely allow
Code). It may even be constituted over contracting parties to stipulate freely on any
consumables like money (Alunan v. Veloso, 52 adjustment in the interest rate on a loan or
Phil. 545). On the other hand, in commodatum, forbearance of money but do not authorize a
consumable goods may be subject thereof only v. CA, 238increase
unilateral SCRA 2Oof[1994]]) . To say
the interest otherwise
rate by one
when the purpose of the contract is not the will
partyviolate
without thethe other's
principle of (PNB
consent mutuality of
consumption of the object, as when it is merely contracts under Article 1308 of the Civil Code.
ANOTHER ANSWER: To be valid, therefore, any change of interest
for exhibition. (Art. 1936, Civil Code)
1. There are several points of distinction must be mutually agreed upon by the parties
between usufruct and commodatum. Usufruct (Dizon v, Magsaysay, 57 SCRA 25O [1974]). In
is constituted by law, by contract, by the present problem, the debtor not having
testamentary succession, or by prescription given his consent to the increase in interest,
(Art. 1933. Civil Code). Usufruct creates a real Mutuum;
the increase is void.
right to the fruits of another's property, while Interests
Carlos (2002)
sues Dino for (a) collection on a
commodatum creates only a purely personal promissory note for a loan, with no agreement
right to use another's property, and requires a on interest, on which Dino defaulted, and (b)
stipulation to enable the bailee to "make use" damages caused by Dino on his (Carlos)
of the fruits (Arts. 1939& 1940, Civil Code). priceless Michaelangelo painting on which Dino
Usufruct maybe onerous while commodatum is is liable on the promissory note and awards
always or essentially gratuitous (Arts. 1933 & damages to Carlos for the damaged painting,
1935, Civil Code). The contract constituting with interests for both awards. What rates of
usufruct is consensual, while commodatum is a SUGGESTED ANSWER:
interest may the court impose with respect to
With respect to the collection of money or
real contract (perfected only by delivery of the both awards? Explain. (5%)
promissory note, it being a forbearance of
subject matter thereof). However, both involve
money, the legal rate of interest for having
the enjoyment by a person of the property of
defaulted on the payment of 12% will apply.
another, differing only as to the extent and
With respect to the damages to the painting, it
scope of such enjoyment [jus fruendi in one and
is 6% from the time of the final demand up to
Jus utendi in the other); both may have as
the time of finality of judgment until judgment
subject matter either an immovable or a
credit is fully paid. The court considers the
movable; and, both maybe constituted over 2211,
latter CC)
as a forbearance of money. (Eastern
consumable goods (Arts. 574 & 1936, Civil
Shipping Lines, Inc. v. CA, 234 SCRA 78 [1994];
Code). A consumable thing may be the subject- Mutuum;
Art 2210 and
matter of
Mutuum vs. an abnormal usufruct but in a normal Interests
The parties (2004)
in a contract of loan of money
usufruct,
Commodatum
Distinguishthe subject-matter
(2004)
briefly may be used only
but clearly between Mutuum agreed that the yearly interest rate is 12% and
for exhibition.
and commodatum. A commodatum of a consumable it can be increased if there is a law that would
thing may ANSWER:
SUGGESTED be only for the purpose of exhibiting, authorize the increase of interest rates.
In
notMUTUUM,
consuming theit.object borrowed must be a Suppose OB, the lender, would increase by 5%
consumable thing the ownership of which is the rate of interest to be paid by TY, the
transferred to the borrower who incurs the borrower, without a law authorizing such
obligation to return the same consumable to increase, would OBs action be just and valid?
the lender in an equal amount, and of the same SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Why? Has TY a remedy against the imposition
kind and quality. In COMMODATUM, the object OB's action is not just and valid. The debtor
of the rate increase? Explain. (5%)
borrowed is usually a non-consumable thing cannot be required to pay the increase in
the ownership of which is not transferred to the interest there being no law authorizing it, as
borrower who incurs the obligation to return stipulated in the contract. Increasing the
the very thing to the lender.
rate in the absence of such law violates the principle
mutuality of contracts.
of To whom should a deliver the bag of money?
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: Decide with reasons.
Even if there was a law authorizing the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
increase in interest rate, the stipulation is still B would have no right to claim the money.
void because there is no corresponding Article 1990 of the Civil Code is not applicable.
stipulation to decrease the interest due when The law refers to another thing received in
the law reduces the rate of interest. substitution of the object deposited and is
DEPOSIT
predicated upon something exchanged.
The Mayor of Manila cannot invoke. Article 719
of the Civil Code which requires the finder to
Compensation; Bank deposit the thing with the Mayor only when
Loan
In (1997)
order to secure a bank loan, XYZ Corporation the previous possessor is unknown.
surrendered its deposit certificate, with a In this case , a must return the bag of money
maturity date of 01 September 1997 to the to the bank as the previous possessor and
bank. The corporation defaulted on the due known owner (Arts. 719 and 1990. Civil Code.)
repayment of the loan, prompting the bank to
encash the deposit certificate. XYZ Corporation
questioned the above action taken by the bank SURETY
as being a case of pactum commissorium. The
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
bank disagrees. What is your opinion? Recovery of
We submit that there is no pactum Deficiency
AB sold to CD (1997)
a motor vehicle for and in
commissorium here. Deposits of money in consideration of P120,000.00 to be paid in
banks and similar institutions are governed by twelve monthly equal installments of
the provisions on simple loans (Art. 1980. Civil P10,000,00, each installment being due and
Code). The relationship between the depositor payable on the 15th day of each month
and a bank is one of creditor and debtor. To secure
starting the promissory
January 1997. note, CD (a)
Basically this is a matter of compensation as all executed a chattel mortgage on the subject
ADDITIONAL
the elementsANSWER:
of compensation are present in motor vehicle, and (b) furnished a surety bond
Where the security for the debt is also money
this case (BPI vs. CA, 232 SCRA 302). issued by Philam life, CD failed to pay more
deposited in a bank, it is not illegal for the
than two (2) installments, AB went after the
creditor to encash the time deposit certificates
surety but he was only able to obtain three-
to pay
(Chu the
us. CA,debtor's overdue
et al., G.R obligation.
78519, September 26,
1989). fourths (3/4) of the total amount still due and
Deposit; owing from CD. AB seeks your advice on how
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Exchange
X (1992)
and Y staged a daring bank robbery in Manila he might, if at all, recover the deficiency. How
Yes, he can recover the deficiency. The action
at 10:30 AM in the morning of a regular would you counsel AB?
of AB to go after the surety bond cannot be
business day, and escaped with their loot of taken to mean a waiver of his right to demand
two (2) bags, each bag containing P50,000,00. payment for the whole debt, The amount
During their flight to elude the police, X and Y received from the surety is only payment pro
entered the nearby locked house of A, then tanto, and an action may be maintained for a
working in his Quezon City office. From A's
house, X and Y stole a box containing cash
deficiency debt.
ANTICHRESIS
totaling P50,000.00 which box A had been
keeping in deposit for his friend B. Antichresis
In their hurry, X and Y left in A's bedroom one (1995)
Olivia owns a vast mango plantation which she
(1) of the bags which they had taken from the can no longer properly manage due to a
bank. lingering illness. Since she is indebted to Peter
With X and Y now at large and nowhere to be in the amount of P500.000.00 she asks Peter to
found, the bag containing P50.000.00 is now manage the plantation and apply the harvest
claimed by B, by the Mayor of Manila, and by to the payment of her obligation to him,
the bank. principal and interest, until her indebtedness
B claims that the depository. A, by force
shall have been fully paid. Peter agrees. 1)
majeure had obtained the bag of money in and
WhatPeter? Explain.
kind of 2) is
contract What specific
entered into between
place of the box of money deposited by B. obligations are imposed by law on Peter
Olivia
as a consequence of their contract? 3) Does
The Mayor of Manila, on the other hand, claims the law require any specific form for the
that the bag of money should be deposited of their contract? Explain 4) May Olivia re-
validity
with the Office of the Mayor as required of the acquire the plantation before her entire
finder by the provisions of the Civil Code. indebtedness shall have been fully paid?
Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The bank resists the claims of B and the Mayor of
Manila.
1. A contract of antichresis was entered into between
payment of the loan. However, the loan was not paid
Olivia and Peter. Under Article 2132 of the New time.
on A month after 4 years, may the shares
Civil Code, by a contract of antichresis the of stock pledged be deemed owned by ABC or
creditor acquires the right to receive the fruits not? Reason. (5%)
of an immovable of his debtor, with the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
obligation to apply them to the payment of the The shares of stock cannot be deemed owned
interest, and thereafter to the principal of his by ABC upon default of MNO. They have to be
SUGGESTED
credit. ANSWER: foreclosed. Under Article 2088 of the Civil
2. Peter must pay taxes and charges upon the Code, the creditor cannot appropriate the
land and bear the necessary expenses for things given by way of pledge. And even if the
preservation and repair which he may deduct parties have stipulated that ABC becomes the
from the fruits. (Art, 2135, NCC) owner of the shares in case MNO defaults on
SUGGESTED ANSWER: the loan, such stipulation is void for being a
3. The amount of the principal and interest Pledge; Mortgage;
pactum commissorium.
must be specified in writing, otherwise the Antichresis
In (1996)
the province, a farmer couple borrowed
antichresis will be void. (Art. 2134, NCC) money from the local merchant. To guarantee
payment, they left the Torrens Title of their
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
land with the merchant, for him to hold until
4. No. Art. 2136 specifically provides that the
they pay the loan. Is there a - a) contract of
debtor cannot re-acquire the enjoyment of the
pledge, b) contract of mortgage, c) contract of
immovable without first having totally paid
antichresis, or d) none of the above? Explain.
what he owes the creditor. However, it is
potestative on the part of the creditor to do so
in order to exempt him from his obligation SUGGESTED ANSWER:
under Art. 2135, NCC, The debtor cannot re- None of the above. There is no pledge because
acquire the enjoyment unless Peter compels only movable property may be pledged (Art.
Olivia to enter again the enjoyment of the 2094. NCC). If at all, there was a pledge of the
property.
PLEDGE paper or document constituting the Torrens
Title, as a movable by itself, but not of the land
which the title represents.
Pledge There is no mortgage because no deed or
(1994)
In 1982, Steve borrowed P400.000.00 from contract was executed in the manner required
Danny, collateralized by a pledge of shares of by law for a mortgage (Arts. 2085 to 2092,
stock of Concepcion Corporation worth NCC; 2124 to 2131, NCC).
P800,000,00. In 1983, because of the economic There is no contract of antichresis because no
crisis, the value of the shares pledged fell to right to the fruits of the property was given to
only P100,000.00. Can Danny demand that the creditor (Art. 2132 NCC).
SUGGESTED ANSWER: the
Steve surrender other shares worth
a) No. Bilateral
P700,000.00? contracts cannot be changed A contract of simple loan was entered into with
unilaterally. A pledge is only a subsidiary security arrangement agreed upon by the
contract, and Steve is still indebted to Danny parties which is not one of those mentioned
for the amount of P400,000.00 despite the fall above.
in the value of the stocks pledged. ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
b) No. Danny's right as pledgee is to sell the There is a contract of mortgage constituted
pledged shares at a public sale and keep the over the land. There is no particular form
proceeds as collateral for the loan. There is no required for the validity of a mortgage of real
showing that the fall in the value of the property. It is not covered by the statute of
pledged property was attributable to the frauds in Art. 1403, NCC and even assuming
pledger's fault or fraud. On the contrary, the that it is covered, the delivery of the title to the
economic crisis was the culprit. Had the creditor has taken it out of the coverage
pledgee been deceived as to the substance or thereof. A contract of mortgage of real
quality of the pledged shares of stock, he property is consensual and is binding on the
would have had the right to claim another parties despite absence of writing. However,
thing in their place or to the immediate third parties are not bound because of the
Pledge
payment of the obligation. This is not the case
(2004) absence of a written instrument evidencing the
ABC
here.loaned to MNO P40,000 for which the latter mortgage and, therefore the absence of
pledged 400 shares of stock in XYZ Inc. It was
registration. But this does not affect the
agreed that if the pledgor failed to pay the loan
validity of the mortgage between the parties
with 10% yearly interest within four years, the
(Art. 2125, NCC), The creditor may compel the
pledgee is authorized to foreclose on the shares
of stock. As required, MNO delivered possession QUASI-CONTRACT
debtor to execute the mortgage in a public
document in order to allow its registration (Art.
of the shares to ABC with the understanding that
1357.NCC in relation to Art. 1358. NCC).
the shares would be returned to MNO upon the
Quasi-Contracts; Negotiorium house under the principle of negotiorum gestio.
Gestio
In (1992)
fear of reprisals from lawless elements He was not liable as the burning of the house is
besieging his barangay, X abandoned his a fortuitous event. Is B liable to A for damages
fishpond, fled to Manila and left for Europe. under the foregoing circumstances?
Seeking that the fish in the fishpond were SUGGESTED ANSWER:
ready for harvest, Y, who is in the business of No. B is not liable for damages, because he is
managing fishponds on a commission basis, a gestor in negotiorum gestio (Art. 2144, Civil
took possession of the property, harvested the Code) Furthermore, B is not liable to A because
fish and sold the entire harvest to Z. Article 2147 of the Civil Code is not applicable.
Thereafter, Y borrowed money from W and
B did not undertake risky operations which the
used the money to buy new supplies of fish fry
owner was not accustomed to embark upon: a)
and to prepare the fishpond for the next crop.
he has not preferred his own interest to that of
a) What is the Juridical relation between X and
the owner; b) he has not failed to return the
Y during X's absence? b) Upon the return of X
property or business after demand by the
to the barangay, what are the obligations of Y
owner; and c) he has not assumed the
to X as regards the contract with Z? c) Upon X's
management in bad faith.
return, what are the obligations of X as regards ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Y's contract with W? d) What legal effects will He would be liable under Art. 2147 (1) of the
result if X expressly ratifies Y's management Civil Code, because he used the property for an
and what would
SUGGESTED ANSWER:be the obligations of X in favor operation which the operator is not
of Y? Explain all your answers.
(a) The juridical relation is that of the quasi- accustomed to, and in so doing, he exposed
contract of "negotiorum gestio". Y is the the house to increased risk, namely the
"gestor" or "officious manager" and X is the operation of a pension house on the second
"owner" (Art. 2144, Civil Code). floor and stores on the first floor
(b) Y must render an account of his operations Quasi-Contracts; Negotiorium
and deliver to X the price he received for the Gestio (1995)
Armando owns a row of residential apartments
sale of the harvested fish (Art, 2145, Civil in San Juan, Metro Manila, which he rents out to
Code). tenants. On 1 April 1991 he left for the United
(c) X must pay the loan obtained by Y from W States without appointing any administrator to
because X must answer for obligations manage his apartments such that uncollected
contracted with third persons in the interest of rentals accumulated for three (3) years.
the owner (Art. 2150, Civil Code), Amparo, a niece of Armando, concerned with
(d) Express ratification by X provides the the interest of her uncle, took it upon herself to
effects of an express agency and X is liable to administer the property. As a consequence, she
pay the commissions habitually received by incurred expenses in collecting the rents and in
the gestor as manager (Art. 2149, Civil Code). some instances even spent for necessary
1. Whatto
repairs Juridical
preserverelation between Amparo and
the property.
Quasi-Contracts; Negotiorium Armando, if any, has resulted from Amparo's
Gestio
In (1993)1972, upon declaration of
September, unilateral act of assuming the administration of
martial rule in the Philippines. A, together with 2. What rights
Armando's and obligations,
apartments? if any, does
Explain.
his wife and children. disappeared from his Amparo have under the circumstances?
residence along A. Mabini Street. Ermita, Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
1. Negotiorum gestio existed between Amparo
Manila. B, his immediate neighbor, noticing that
and Armando, She voluntarily took charge of
mysterious disappearance of A and his family,
the agency or management of the business or
closed the doors and windows of his house to
property of her uncle without any power from
prevent it from being burglarized. Years passed
her uncle whose property was neglected. She is
without B hearing from A and his family, B
called the gestor negotiorum or officious
continued taking care of A's house, even
manager, (Art. 2144, NCC)
causing minor repairs to be done at his house 2. It is recommended by the Committee that an
to preserve it. In 1976, when business began to enumeration of any two (2) obligations and two
perk up in the area, an enterprising man. C, (2) rights as enumerated in Arts. 2145 to 2152,
approached B and proposed that they build NCC, would entitle the examinee to full credit.
stores at the ground floor of the house and
convert its second floor into a pension house. B
agreed to Cs proposal and together they spent
for the construction of stores at the ground
floor and the conversion of the second floor into
a pension house. While construction was going
on, fire occurred at a nearby house. The houses
at the entire block, including A's were burned.
After the EDSA revolution in February 1986, A
and his family returned from the United States
where they took refuge in 1972. Upon learning
of what happened to his house. A sued B for
damages, B pleaded as a defense that he
merely took charge of his
The courts may, however, increase or moderate the (2) When the contract refers to things pertaining to
indemnity according to the circumstances of each the
case.
Art. 2146. If the officious manager delegates to
another person all or some of his duties, he
shall be liable for the acts of the delegate,
without prejudice to the direct obligation of the
latter toward the owner of the business.
The responsibility of two or more officious
managers shall be solidary, unless
management was assumed to save the thing
or business from imminent danger.
Art. 2147. The officious manager shall be liable
for any fortuitous event:
(1) If he undertakes risky operations which the
owner was not accustomed to embark upon;
(2) If he has preferred his own interest to that
of the owner;
(3) If he fails to return the property or business
after demand by the owner,
(4) If he assumed the management
in bad faith.
Art. 2148. Except when the management was
assumed to save the property or business from
imminent danger, the officious manager shall
(1) If he for
be liable is manifestly
fortuitous unfit to carry on the
events
(2) If by his Intervention h e prevented a more
management;
competent person from taking up the
management.
Art. 2149. The ratification of the management
by the owner of the business produces the
effects of an express agency, even if the
business may not have been successful.
Art. 2150, Although the officious management
may not have been expressly ratified, the
owner of the property or business who enjoys
the advantages of the same shall be liable for
obligations incurred in his interest, and shall
reimburse the officious manager for the
necessary and useful expenses and for the
damages which the latter may have suffered in
The same obligation
the performance of hisshall be incumbent upon
duties.
him when the management had for its purpose
the prevention of an imminent and manifest
loss, although no benefit may have been
derived.
Art. 2151. Even though the owner did not
derive any benefit and there has been no
imminent and manifest danger to the property
or business, the owner is liable as under the
(1)
firstTheparagraph
officious manager
of thehas acted in article,
preceding
(2)
good The property
faith,
provided: and or business is intact, ready to
be returned to the owner.
Art. 2152. The officious manager is personally

Art. 2145. The officious manager shall perform
liable for contracts which he has entered into
his duties with all the diligence of a good
with third persons, even though he acted in
father of a family, and pay the damages which
the name of the owner, and there shall be no
through his fault or negligence may be
right of action between the owner and third
(1) If theThese
ownerprovisions
has expressly suffered by the owner of the property or
persons. shallor tacitly
not apply:ratified
the management, or business under management.
Further, in Phoenix Construction, Inc. v. Intermediate Availing of that portion of Section 12 of Article II of the
Appellate Court (G.R. L-65295, March 10, 1987. 1987
ownerConstitution which reads;
of the business,
148 SCRA 353) the Supreme Court held that the The State
(NOTE:xIt xx shall equally
is recommended byprotect the life of the
the Committee
that life
and the
mother an enumeration of anyfrom
of the unborn two (2) obligations "xxx"
conception,
role of the common law "last clear chance"
and any two (2) rights as enumerated la Arts.
doctrine in relation to Article 2179 of the Civil he claims
which confers a civil personality on the unborn
2145 to 2152, NCC would entitle the examinee to
Code is merely to mitigate damages within the the moment
from
Quasi-Contracts; of conception.
full credit.) Solutio
context of contributory negligence. Indebiti
DPO went(2004)
to a store to buy a pack of cigarettes
Damages Boy filed a caseonly.
for damages against the RRA,
worth P225.00 He gave the vendor,
(1994)
On January 5, 1992, Nonoy obtained a loan of abortionist,
a P500-peso bill. The vendor gave him the be
praying therein that the latter pack
Pl,000,000.00 from his friend Raffy. The ordered to pay him: (a)WasP30,000.00 as
plus P375.00 change. there a discount, an
promissory note did not stipulate any payment indemnity forantheerror
deathin of
thethe fetus, given?
(b)
oversight, or amount
for Interest. The note was due on January 5, P100.000.00 asDPOs
moral duty,
damages forinthe mental
What would be if any, case of an
1993 but before this date the two became anguish and anxiety he suffered, (c) P50,000.00
excess in the amount of change given by the
political enemies. Nonoy, out of spite, as exemplary How damages, (d) P20,000.00 as
vendor? is this situational relationship
deliberately defaulted in paying the note, thus nominal
SUGGESTED damages,
ANSWER: and (e) P25,000.00 as
between DPO and RRA denominated? Explain.
forcing Raffy to sue him. 1) What actual There was fees.
attorney's error May
in the amount
actual of change
damages given
be also
(5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
damages can Raffy recover? 2) Can Raffy ask by RRA. ThisIf is
recovered? so,a what
case of solutio
facts shouldindebiti in that
be alleged
for moral damages from Nonoy? 3) Can Raffy Yes, provided that the pecuniary loss suffered
DPO proved?
and received something that is not due him.
ask for nominal damages? 4) Can Raffy ask for should be substantiated and duly proved.
He has the obligation to return the P100.00;
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
temperate
1) Raffy may damages? 5) Can
recover the Raffyofask
amount thefor otherwise, he will unjustly enrich of himself at the
Damages arising from Death
attorney's fees?
promissory note of P1 million, together with
ALTERNATIVE
expense of ANSWER:
RRA. (Art. 2154, Civil Code)
Unborn
If
DPO has Child
a pregnant the duty (2003)
woman passenger
to return to RRA of a the bus were
excess
interest at the legal rate from the date of to
P100suffer an abortion
as trustee under following a vehicular
Article 1456 of the Civil
judicial or extrajudicial demand. In addition, accident
Code which dueprovides:
to the gross negligence
If property of the
is acquired
however, inasmuch as the debtor is in bad bus
throughdriver, may she
mistake and her
or fraud, thehusband claim
person obtaining
faith, he is liable for all damages which may be damages from the bus company
it is, by force of law, considered a trustee for the death
of an
reasonably attributed to the non-performance SUGGESTED
of their ANSWER:
unborn child? Explain. 5%
implied trust for the benefit
No, the spouses cannot recover actual of the person from
2) Yes,obligation.
of the under Article 2220,
(Art. NCC NCC).
2201(2). moral damages
whom the property comes. There
damages in the form of indemnity for the loss is, in this
are recoverable in case of breach of contract
case,
of life an implied
of the unborn or constructive
child. This istrustbecause in favor
the
where the defendant acted fraudulently or in
bad faith.
of RRA.
TORTS & DAMAGES
unborn child is not yet considered a person and
3) Nominal damages may not be recoverable in the law allows indemnity only for loss of life of
this case because Raffy may already be person.
CollapseThe of mother,
Structures; howeverLastmay Clear recover
indemnified of his losses with the award of damages
Chance
Mr and Mrs forRthe
(1990) ownbodily injury she
a burned-out sufferedthe
building, from
actual and compensatory damages. NOMINAL the loss of
firewall of which
the fetus which is
collapsed andconsidered
destroyedpart the of
DAMAGES are adjudicated only in order that a her
shopinternal
occupied organ.
by theThefamily
parents of Mrmay and also
Mrs S,
right of the plaintiff, which has been violated or recover damages for injuries
which resulted in injuries to said couple that are inflicted
and the
invaded by the defendant may be vindicated or directly
death ofupon theirthem, e.g., Mr
daughter. moral
anddamages
Mrs S hadfor been
recognized, and not for the purpose of mental
warnedanguishby Mr & that Mrs attended
R to vacate thetheloss of the
shop in
indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss suffered unborn
view of child. Since there
its proximity to theisweakened
gross negligence,
wall but
4) Death
by Raffy may ask2231.
him. (Article for, but
Civilwould
Code)most likely not exemplary
the former damages can
failedconviction also
to do so. for Mrbe recovered.
& Mrs S filed
be awarded temperate damages, for the Indemnity
Johnny Maton's homicide was
(Gelus
(1994)v.Mr
against CA, 2 SCRA R 801 [1961])
reason that his actual damages may already be affirmed byand the Mrs
Court an action
of Appeals for
andrecovery
in of
damages the former suffered
addition, although the prosecution had not as a result of the
compensated upon proof thereof with the
collapse
appealedofatthe all.firewall. In defense,
The appellate courtMr and Mrs
increased
promissory note. TEMPERATE DAMAGES may
R rely on the doctrine of last
the indemnity for death from P30,000.00 to clear chance
be awarded only when the court finds that
alleging
P50,000.00. thatOn Mr his
andappeal
Mrs S had
to the the last clear
Supreme
some pecuniary loss has been suffered but its
chance to avoid the accident
Court, among the other things Johnny if only they
Maton
amount cannot, from the nature of the case, be
heeded the formers warning
brought to the high court's attention, was to vacate thethe
proved with certainty. (Article 2224, Civil Code)
5) Yes, under paragraph 2, Article 2208 of the shop, and therefore Mr and Mrs
increase of indemnity imposed by the Court of Rs prior
Civil Code, considering that Nonoy's act or negligence
Appeals
SUGGESTED
should
despite
ANSWER: thebeclear
disregarded.
fact that the If you were
People
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
omission has compelled Raffy to litigate to Ithe
had judge,
wouldnot decidehow in
appealed would
fromyou
favor of decide
theMr & Mrs
appellatethe case?
S. court's
The
a) In Abejam
State your of v. Court of Appeals, the Supreme
reasons.
protect his interests. Furthermore. attorneys' proprietor
judgment. Is a building
Johnny or structure
Maton correct? is
Court said that even if the issue of damages
fees may be awarded by the court when it is responsible for the damages resulting from its
were not raised by the appellant in the Court
just and equitable. (Article 2208(110) Civil total or partial collapse, if it should be due to
Damages arising from Death of of Appeals but the Court of Appeals in its
Code). the lack of necessary repairs (Art 2190 Civil
Unborn
On Child
her third (1991)
month of pregnancy, Rosemarie, findings
As regards increased
the defensethe damages,
of last clearthe chance,
Supreme
Code)
married to Boy, for reasons known only to her, Court will not disturb the findings
the same is not tenable because according of the Court
to
and without informing Boy, went to the clinic b) Appeals.
of No, the contention of the accused is not
the SC in one case (De Roy v CA L-80718, Jan
correct because upon appeal to the Appellate
of X, a known abortionist, who for a fee, 29, 1988, 157 S 757) the doctrine of last clear
removed and expelled the fetus from her Court, the court acquired jurisdiction over the
chance is not applicable to instances covered
entire case, criminal as well as civil. Since the
womb, Boy learned of the abortion six (6) by Art 2190 of the Civil Code.
months later. conviction of homicide had been appealed,
there
is no finality in the amount of indemnity because Athe van owned by Orlando and driven by Diego, while
liability
civil arising from the crime and the negotiating a downhill slope of a city road,
judgment on the crime has not yet become suddenly gained speed, obviously beyond the
final authorized limit in the area, and bumped a car
c) Yes. Since the civil indemnity is an award in in front of it, causing severed damage to the
the civil action arising from the criminal care and serious injuries to its passengers.
offense, the rule that a party cannot be Orlando was not in the car at the time of the
granted affirmative relief unless he himself has incident. The car owner and the injured
appealed should apply. Therefore, it was error passengers sued Orlando and Diego for
for the Court of Appeals to have expanded the damages caused by Diegos negligence. In
indemnity since the judgment on the civil their defense, Diego claims that the downhill
d) No.hadCourts
liability becomecanfinal.
review matters not assignedslope
as caused the van to gain speed and that,
errors. Resource vs. CA . 204 SCRA
(Hydro as he stepped on the brakes to check the
309).
Defense; Due Diligence in acceleration, the brakes locked, causing the
Selection van to go even faster and eventually to hit the
As a result(2003)
of a collision between the taxicab
car in front of it. Orlando and Diego contend
owned by A and another taxicab owned by B, SUGGESTED ANSWER:
thatMechanical
No. the suddendefects
malfunction of thevehicle
of a motor vans brake
do
X, a passenger of the first taxicab, was
system
not is a fortuitous
constitute even
fortuitous and since
event, that, therefore,
the
seriously injured. X later filed a criminal action
they
presenceare exempt
of such from anywould
defects liability.
haveIs this
been
against both drivers.
May both taxicab owners raise the defense of contention tenable? Explain. (2%)
readily detected by diligent maintenance
due diligence in the selection and supervision check. The failure to maintain the vehicle in
of their drivers to be absolved from liability for safe running condition constitutes negligence.
SUGGESTED
damages to ANSWER:
X? Reason. 5% Liability; Airline Company; Non-
It depends. If the civil action is based on a Performance of an Obligation (2004)
quasi-delict the taxicab owners may raise the DT and MT were prominent members of the
defense of diligence of a good father of a family frequent travelers club of FX Airlines. In
in the selection and supervision of the driver; if Hongkong, the couple were assigned seats in
the action against them is based on culpa Business Class for which they had bought
contractual or civil liability arising from a crime, tickets. On checking in, however, they were
they cannot raise the defense. told they were upgraded by computer to First
Filing of Separate Civil Action; Need for Class for the flight to Manila because the
Reservation
As a result of (2003)
a collision between the taxicab Both
Businessrefused to transfer
Section despite better seats,
was overbooked.
owned by A and another taxicab owned by B, food, beverage and other services in First Class.
X, a passenger of the first taxicab, was They said they had guests in Business Class
seriously injured. X later filed a criminal action they should attend to. They felt humiliated,
against both drivers. embarrassed and vexed, however, when the
Is it necessary for X to reserve his right to stewardess allegedly threatened to offload
institute a civil action for damages against them if they did not avail of the upgrade. Thus
both taxicab owners before he can file a civil they gave in, but during the transfer of luggage
SUGGESTED ANSWER: against them? Why
action for damages
It depends. If the separate civil action is to DT suffered pain in his arm and wrist. After
recover damages arising from the criminal act, arrival in Manila, they demanded an apology
reservation is necessary. If the civil action from FXs management as well as indemnity
against the taxicab owners is based on culpa payment. When none was forthcoming, they
contractual, or on quasi-delict, there is no need sued the airline for a million pesos in damages.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
for reservation. Is the airline
FX Airlines liable for actual
committed breachand moral when
of contract
No, such reservation is not necessary. Under damages?
it upgraded Why DT andor why
MT, not?
over Explain briefly.
their objections,
Section 1 of Rule 111 of the 2000 Rules on (5%)
to First Class because they had contracted for
Criminal Procedure, what is deemed Business Class passage. However, although
instituted with the criminal action is only the there is a breach of contract, DT and MT are
action to recover civil liability arising from the entitled to actual damages only for such
crime or ex delicto. All the other civil actions pecuniary losses suffered by them as a result
under Articles 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of the New of such breach. There seems to be no showing
Civil Code are no longer deemed instituted, that they incurred such pecuniary loss. There is
and may be filed separately and prosecuted no showing that the pain in DT's arm and wrist
independently even without any reservation in resulted directly from the carrier's acts
the criminal action (Section 3, Rule 111, Ibid). complained of. Hence, they are not entitled to
The failure to make a reservation in the actual damages. Moreover, DT could have
criminal action is not a waiver of the right to avoided the alleged injury by requesting the
file a separate and independent
Fortuitous Event; Mechanical civil action airline staff to do the luggage transfer as a
based
Defects on(2002)
these articles of the New Civil Code matter of duty on their part. There is also no
(Casupanan v. Laroya GR No. 145391, August basis to award moral damages for such breach
26, 2002). 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
may recover moral damages if the cause of action Theis action may or may not prosper. Moral damages
on
basedArticle 21 of the Civil Code for the physical
include suffering, mental anguish, fright,
humiliation and embarrassment they felt when serious anxiety, besmirched reputation,
the stewardess threatened to offload them if wounded feelings, moral shock, social
ALTERNATIVE
they did notANSWER:
avail of the upgrade. humiliation, and similar injury. Although
If it can be proved that DT's pain in his arm incapable of pecuniary computation, moral
and wrist occasioned by the transfer of damages may be recovered if they are the
luggage was caused by fault or negligence on proximate result of the defendant's wrongful
the part of the airline's stewardess, actual act or omission. Moral damages predicated
damages may be recovered. upon a breach of contract of carriage are
The airline may be liable for moral damages
recoverable only in instances where the carrier
pursuant to Art. 2219 (10) if the cause of
is guilty of fraud or bad faith or where the
action is based on Article 21 or an act contrary
mishap resulted in the death of a passenger.
to morals in view of the humiliation suffered by
(Cathay Pacific Airways, Ltd. v. Court of
DT and MT when they were separated from
Appeals, G.R. No. 60501, March 5, 1993)
their guests and were threatened to be
Liability; Airline Company; Non- Where there is no showing that the airline
offloaded.
Performance of an Obligation (2005) acted fraudulently or in bad faith, liability for
Dr. and Mrs. Almeda are prominent citizens of damages is limited
In the instant tothe
case, if theinvoluntary
natural andupgrading
probable
the country and are frequent travelers abroad. consequences of the breach of
of the Almedas' seat accommodation was notthe contract of
In 1996, they booked round-trip business class carriage which the parties had
attended by fraud or bad faith, the award of foreseen or
tickets for the Manila-Hong Kong-Manila route could
moral have
damagesreasonably
has no foreseen.
leg to standIn on.
such a case
of the Pinoy Airlines, where they are holders of the liability does not include moral and
Gold Mabalos Class Frequent Flier cards. On exemplary damages.
Thus, spouses would not also be entitled to
their return flight, Pinoy Airlines upgraded their exemplary damages. It is a requisite in the
tickets to first class without their consent and, grant of exemplary damages that the act of the
inspite of their protestations to be allowed to offender must be accompanied by bad faith or
remain in the business class so that they could done inv. wanton,
(Morris Court of fraudulent
Appeals, G.R. or No.
malevolent
127957,
be with their friends, they were told that the manner. 21, 2001) Moreover, to be entitled
February
business class was already fully booked, and thereto, the claimant must first establish his
that they were given priority in upgrading right to moral, temperate, or compensatory
because they are elite members/holders of Gold damages. (Art. 2234, Civil Code) Since the
Mabalos Class cards. Since they were Almedas are not entitled to any of these
embarrassed at the discussions with the flight damages, the award for exemplary damages
attendants, they were forced to take the flight has no legal basis. Where the awards for moral
at the first class section apart from their friends and exemplary damages are eliminated, so
who were in the business class. Upon their must the award for attorney's fees be
return to Manila,
ALTERNATIVE they demanded a written
ANSWER:
eliminated. (Orosa v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
apology
Yes, from Pinoy
the action Airlines. Article
will prosper. When it wentof the
2201 111080, April 5, 2000; Morris v. Court of
unheeded, the couple sued Pinoy
Civil Code entitles the person to recover Airlines for Appeals, G.R. No. 127957, February 21, 2001)
breach of contract claiming moral
damages which may be attributed to non- and The most that can be adjudged in their favor for
exemplary damages, as well as attorney's
performance of an obligation. In Alitalia fees. Pinoy Airlines' breach of contract is an award for
Will the action
Airways prosper?
v. Court Give(G.R.
of Appeals reasons. (5%)
No. 77011, nominal
However,damages
if spouses under Article
Almeda 2221prove
could of thethat
Civil
July 24, 1990), when an airline issues ticket to a Code.
there (Cathay
was badPacific faith Airways
on the v.part
Sps.ofDaniel
Pinoy&
passenger confirmed on a particular flight, a AirlinesLuisa
Maria when it breached
Vasquez, G.R. No. the150843,
contract of
March
contract of carriage arises and the passenger carriage,
14, 2003) it could be liable for moral,
expects that he would fly on that day. When exemplary as well as attorney's fees.
Liability; Employer; Damage caused by
the airline deliberately overbooked, it took the
Employees
a) When would (1997)an employer's liability for damage,
risk of having to deprive some passengers of
by an employee in the performance of his assigned
caused
their seat in case all of them would show up.
tasks, be primary and when would it be subsidiary
For the indignity and inconvenience of being
In the given problem, spouses Almeda had a nature?
in b) Would the defense of due diligence
refused the confirmed seat, said passenger is
booked roundtrip business class ticket with in the selection and
entitled to moral damages. supervision of the employee be available to the
Pinoy Airlines. When their tickets were
upgraded to first class without their consent, employer in both
Zulueta v. Panbreached
Pinoy Airlines Americanthe (G.R. No. L-28589,
contract. As ruled instances?
January SUGGESTED
in
8, case of overbooking, airline is in bad faith.
in 1973), (a) The : employer's liability for damage based
ANSWER:
Therefore, spouses Almeda are entitled to on culpa aquiliana under Art, 2176 and 2180 of
damages. the Civil Code is primary; while that under Art.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: 103 of the Revised Penal Code is subsidiary.
(b) The defense of diligence in the selection and the vehicle at the time of the accident, be held
supervision of the employee under Article liable with his driver,
solidarily
2180 of the Civil Code is available only to John? (5%)ANSWER:
SUGGESTED
those primarily liable thereunder, but not to Yes. Art may be held solidary liable with John, if
those subsidiarily liable under Article 103 of it was proven that the former could have
the Revised Penal Code (Yumul vs. Juliano, 72 prevented the misfortune with the use of due
Liability;
Phil. 94). owner who was in the diligence. Article 2184 of the Civil Code states:
vehicle who
Marcial, (1996)
does not know how to drive, has "In motor mishaps, the owner is solidary liable
always been driven by Ben, his driver of ten with his driver, if the former, who was in the
years whom he had chosen carefully and has vehicle, could have, by the use of due diligence,
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
never figured in a vehicular mishap. One day, prevented the misfortune, x x x"
1. It depends. The Supreme Court in Chapman
Marcial was riding at the back seat of his
vs, Underwood (27 Phil 374), held: "An owner
Mercedes Benz being driven along EDSA by
who sits in his automobile, or other vehicle, and
Ben. Absorbed in reading a book, Marcial did
permits his driver to continue in a violation of
not notice that they were approaching the
law by the performance of negligent acts, after
corner of Quezon Avenue, when the traffic light
he has had a reasonable opportunity to observe
had just turned yellow. Ben suddenly stepped
them and to direct that the driver cease
on the gas to cross the intersection before the
therefrom, becomes himself responsible for
traffic light could turn red. But, too late.
such acts, x x x On the other hand, if the driver,
Midway in the intersection, the traffic light
by a sudden act of negligence, and without the
changed, and a Jeepney full of passengers
owner having a reasonable opportunity to
suddenly crossed the car's path. A collision
prevent the act or its continuance, injures a
between the two vehicles was inevitable. As a
person or violates the criminal law, the owner of
result,
SUGGESTEDseveral jeepney passengers were
ANSWER: the automobile, although present therein at the
seriously injured.
Marcial may not be A liable
suit for damages
because based
under Art.on time the act was committed is not responsible,
culpa aquiliana was filed against Marcial
2184, NCC, the owner who is in the vehicle is and
either civilly or criminally, therefor. The act
Ben,liable
not seeking
withtothe
hold them
driver jointly
if by the and severally
exercise of complained
Liability; ownerof must
who was be in
continued
the in the
due diligence he could have prevented held
liable for such injuries. May Marcial be the presence of the owner for such a length of time
liable? The
injury. Explain.
law does not require the owner to vehicle
Does the(2002)
presence of the owner inside the
that the owner, by his acquiescence, makes
vehicle causing damage to a third party affect his
supervise the driver every minute that he was driver's act his own."
driving. Only when through his negligence, the his liability for his drivers negligence? Explain
SUGGESTED
(2%) ANSWER:
owner has lost an opportunity to prevent the In motor vehicle mishaps, the owner is made
accident would he be liable (Caedo v. Ytt Khe solidarily liable with his driver if he (the owner)
Thai, 26 SCRA 410 citing Chapman v. was in the vehicle and could have, by the use
Underwood and Manlangit v. Mauler, 250 SCRA
of due diligence, prevented the mishap. (Caedo
560). In this case, the fact that the owner was
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: v. Yu Khe Thai, 26 SCRA 410 [1968]).
absorbed in reading
Yes, Marcial should bea book
held does
liable.not
Art. 2164. Moral Damages & Atty
conclusively show that he
NCC makes an owner of a motor lost thevehicle
opportunity Fees (2002)
Ortillo contracts Fabricato, Inc. to supply and
to preventliable
solidarily the accident
with the through
driver if,his negligence.
being in the install tile materials in a building he is donating
vehicle at the time of the mishap, he could to his province. Ortillo pays 50% of the contract
have prevented it by the exercise of due price as per agreement. It is also agreed that
diligence. The traffic conditions along EDSA at the balance would be payable periodically after
any time of day or night are such as to require every 10% performance until completed. After
the observance of utmost care and total performing about 93% of the contract, for
alertness in view of the large number of which it has been paid an additional 40% as per
vehicles running at great speed. Marcial was agreement, Fabricato, Inc. did not complete the
negligent in that he rendered himself oblivious project due to its sudden cessation of
to the traffic hazards by reading a book instead operations. Instead, Fabricato, Inc. demands
of focusing his attention on the road and payment of the last 10% of the contract despite
supervising the manner in which his car was its non-completion of the project. Ortillo refuses
being driven. Thus he failed to prevent his to pay, invoking the stipulation that payment of
driver fromowner
attempting to beat the last amount 10% shall be upon completion.
Liability; who was in the
the traffic light
at the junction of Quezon Avenue and EDSA, Fabricato, Inc. brings suit for the entire 10%.
vehicle
A Gallant(1998)
driven by John and owned by Art, and
which Marcial, without being a driver himself Plus damages,
A. Does Ortilloa counters
Ortillo have with
legal basis for claims for
his claim
a Corolla driven by its owner, Gina, collided
could have easily perceived as a reckless (a) moral damages
for moral damages? (2%) for Fabricato, Inc.s
somewhere along Adriatico Street. As a result
course of conduct. unfounded
B. How about suithis which has attorneys
claim for damagedfees, his
of the accident, Gina had a concussion.
reputation as a philanthropist
having hired a lawyer to defend him? (3%)and respect
Subsequently. Gina brought an action for
businessman
SUGGESTED in his community, and (b)
ANSWER:
damages against John and Art. There is no
attorneys fees.
doubt that the collision is due to John's
negligence. Can Art, who was in
A. There is no legal basis to Ortillos claim for
moral damages. It does not fall under the
coverage of Article 2219 of the New Civil Code.
B. Ortillo is entitled to attorneys fees because

Fabricatos complaint is a case of malicious
prosecution or a clearly unfounded civil action.
(Art. 2208 [4] and [11], NCC).
Moral Damages; Non-Recovery
Thereof
Under (2006)
Article 2219 of the Civil Code, moral
damages may be recovered in the cases
specified therein several of which are
enumerated below. Choose the case wherein
you cannot recover moral damages. Explain.
(2.5%) a) A criminal offense resulting in
physical injuries b) Quasi-delicts causing
physical injuries c) Immorality or dishonesty d)
Illegal search e) Malicious prosecution
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Immorality and dishonesty,
per se, are not among those cases enumerated
in Article 2219 which can be the basis of an
action for moral damages. The law specifically
mentions adultery or concubinage, etc. but not
any and every immoral act.
Quasi-Delict
(1992)
As the result of a collision between a public
service passenger bus and a cargo truck owned
by D, X sustained physical injuries and Y died.
Both X and Y were passengers of the bus. Both
drivers were at fault, and so X and Z, the only
heir and legitimate child of the deceased Y,
sued the owners of both vehicles. a) May the
owner of the bus raise the defense of having
exercised the diligence of a good father of a
family? b) May D raise the same defense? c)
May X claim moral damages from both
defendants? d) May Z claim moral damages
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
from both
(a) No. Thedefendants?
owner of theGive
busreasons for allthe
cannot raise your
answers,
defense because the carrier's liability is based
on breach of contract
(b) Yes. D can raise the defense because his
liability is based on a quasi-delict.
(c) Because X suffered physical injuries, X can

claim moral damages against D, but as against
the owner of the bus. X can claim moral
damages only if X proves reckless negligence
of the carrier amounting to fraud.
(d) Z can claim moral damages against both
defendants because the rules on damages
arising from death due to a quasi-delict are
also applicable to death of a passenger caused
by breach of contract by a common carrier
(Arts. 1755. 1756, 1764, 2206 and 2219. Civil
Code).
Yes, based on quasi-delict under the human relations forWhen
a) quasi-delict
a 7-year mayold nonetheless
boy injures prosper.
his The
provisions of the New Civil Code (Articles 19, Court
Supreme
playmate has consistently
while playing ruled thathis
with thefather's
act that
20 and 21) because the act committed by the breaksExplain.
SUGGESTED
rifle. theANSWER:
contract
(2%)may also be a tort. There is
lessor is contrary to morals. Moral damages are The parentsrelationship
a fiduciary of the 7-year old boythe
between who bankcaused
and
(10) in relation to
recoverable under Article 2219 Article 21. Although the injury to his playmate are
the depositor, imposing utmost diligence inliable under Article
action is based on quasi-delict and not on 219 of the the
managing Family Code, of
accounts in the
relation to Article
depositor. The
contract, actual damages may be recovered if 2180
dishonorof the Civilcheck
of the Code adversely
since theyaffectedexercisethe
the lessee is able to prove the losses and parental
G.R.
credit No. authority
L-24932,
standing over 27,
of June
Tony, the person
1968;
hence, of entitled
heAmerican
is the boy.to
ALTERNATIVE
expenses she ANSWERS:
suffered. Express
damagesInternational,
(Tamargo v. Court of
(Singson Inc. v. IAC,
v. Appeals,
BPI, G.R.G.R. No. No.
85044,
a) Yes, based on breach of contract. The lessor 72383, June 3, November
1992; Elcano 9, 1988;
v. Hill,Consolidated
G.R. No. L-24803, Bank
has the obligation to undertake repairs to make b) and
May When
Trust
26, 1977)a
v.domestic
CA, G.R. No. helper,
L-70766 while haggling
November
the apartment habitable and to maintain the for a lower price with a fish vendor in the
9,1998).
lessee in the peaceful and adequate enjoyment Vicarious
course of buying foodstuffs for her
of the lease for the entire duration of the Liability
Romano
employer's (1991)
was bumpedslaps
family, by a minivan
the fishowned vendor, by
contract (Article 1654. NCC). Since there was causing the Solomon her School
to fall of andPractical
sustain Arts (SSPA).
injuries.
willful breach of contract by the lessor, the Explain. The minivan
SUGGESTED was driven by Peter, a student
ANSWER:
(2%)
Employer whose
assistant of the domestic
assignment helper
was whoto clean slapped
the a
lessee is entitled to moral damages under fish vendor. Under Article 2180, par.before
5 of the
Article 3220, NCC. She is also entitled to actual school passageways daily one hour and
Civil
one Code,
hour "employers
after regular shall be in
classes, liable for thefor
exchange
damages, e. g. loss of income, medical damages caused
b) Yes, based
expenses, etc.,onwhich
contract sheand/or on tort.
can prove at The
the free tuition. Peterby was their
able employees
to drive the andschool
lessor willfully breached his obligations under household
vehicle after helpers
persuadingacting within
the the
regular scope
driver, of
trial. their assigned tasks, even though the former
Article 1654. NCC, hence, he is liable for Paul, to turn over the wheel to him (Peter).
breach of contract. For such breach, the lessee are
Romanonot engaged
sufferedin any business
serious physicalorinjuries.
industry." The
may recover moral damages under Art. 2220 of c) A carpenter in a
accident happened at night when onlyconstruction company
one
the NCC, and actual damages that she may accidentally
headlight of the hits the right
vehicle foot of hisand
was functioning co-
have suffered on account thereof. And since worker with
Peter only ANSWER: a hammer. Explain.
had a student driver's permit. As a (2%)
SUGGESTED
the conduct of the lessor was contrary to consequence,
The Peter was convicted in the
prosper? b)of
owner the
Will construction
your answer be company.
the sameArticle if,
morals, he may also be held liable for quasi- criminal
2180, case.
paragraph Thereafter, Romano sued for
Paul, the regular 4 states that "the owners and
delict. The lessee may recover moral damages damages
managers against Peter and SSPA. a) Will theare
driver, of was animpleaded
establishment or enterprise
as party defendant for
under Article 2219 (10) in relation to Article 21, action
likewise for damages
responsible against Peter and SSPA
Peter
allowing to drive thefor damages
minivan caused
without by
a regular
and all actual damages which she may have their
license.employees
c) Is the in the
exercise service
of of
due the branches
diligence in
c) Yes, the driver's
suffered by action
reason shouldof suchprosperconductfor under
both
in
thewhich the
selection latter
and are employed or on the
actual
Articles and9, 20 moral
and 21.damages. In fact, even
exemplary damages and attorney's fees can be occasion of theiroffunctions."
supervision Peter and Paul a material issue to be
d) Aresolved
15-yearinold this high
case?school student stabs
claimed by Rosa, on the authority of Magbanua
his classmate
SUGGESTED ANSWER: who is his rival for a girl
vs. IAC (137 SCRA 328), considering that, as
A. Yes.they
while It willwere
prosper going (Art,out2180)
of thebecause at the
classroom
given, the lessor's willful and illegal act of
time he
after drove
their lasttheclass.
vehicle, he was(2%)
Explain. not
disconnecting the water and electric services SUGGESTED ANSWER:
performing his assigned tasks as provided for
resulted in Rosa's suffering a nervous The school, teacher and administrator as they
by Art. 2180. With respect to SSPA, it is not
breakdown. Art. 20 NCC and Art, 21, NCC exercise special parental authority. (Art. 2180,
Quasi-Delict;
authorize the award of Mismanagement
damages for such willful of liable for the acts of Peter because the latter
par. 7 in relation to Art. 218 and Art. 219 of the
Depositors Account (2006) was not an employee as held by Supreme Court
and illegal conduct. Family Code)
Tony bought a Ford Expedition from a car e) What defense, in Filamer Christian Institute vs. CA. (190 SCRA
if any, is available to them?
dealer in Muntinlupa City. As payment, Tony (2%) 485). Peter
SUGGESTED ANSWER: belongs to a special category of
issued a check drawn against his current students The defense whothat render might service to the school
be available to them in is
B. I would for
exchange maintain
free the same
tuition fees. answer because
account with Premium Bank. Since he has a the observance of a good father of the family to
the incident did not occur while the employee
good reputation, the car dealer allowed him to prevent the damage. (Last par., Art. 2180, Civil
was in the performance of his duty as such
immediately drive home the vehicle merely on Code)
employee. The incident occurred at night time,
his assurance that his check is sufficiently Quasi-Delict; Acts contrary to
and
moralsinwas
any case, there
(1996) was no indication in the
funded. When the car dealer deposited the Rosa leasing an apartment in the city.
problem that he was performing his duties as a
check, it was dishonored on the ground of Because C.
of the Rent Control Law, her landlord
In the case of Peter, if he were to be
driver.
could not increase the rental as much as he
"Account Closed." After an investigation, it was considered as employee, the exercise of due
found that an employee of the bank misplaced wanted to, nor terminate her lease as long as
diligence in the selection and supervision of
Tony's account ledger. Thus, the bank peter would she was paying her rent. In order to force her to
not be a material issue since the
erroneously assumed that his account no convictionpremises, leave the the landlord stopped
of Peter would result in a subsidiary
making
longer exists. Later it turned out that Tony's liability where the defense repairs on the apartment, and caused
would not be
account has more than sufficient funds to cover In the water
the case and electricity
since services
the basistoofbe
Quasi-Delict available byofthe Paul,
employer.
the check. The dealer however, immediately disconnected. subsidiary liability The is difficulty
the pater of living
familias without
rule
(2005)
Under the ANSWER:
SUGGESTED law on quasi-delict, aside from the electricity and running water resulted in Rosa's
filed an action for recovery of possession of
Yes, Tony may file an action against Premium Bank for damagesthe under Art. 2180, the defense of selection and
persons whoEvencaused injurya contractual
to persons, who
vehicle against
under Art. 2176. ifTony was terribly suffering
for which he relationship
there exists supervision a nervous
of the breakdown.
employee wouldShebe sueda the
valid
else are
between liable
Tony and underBank,
Premium the an following
action SUGGESTED ANSWER:
landlord for ANSWER:
actual and moral damages. Will the
humiliated and embarrassed. Does Tony have a defense.
ALTERNATIVE
circumstances:
cause of action against Premium Bank? Explain. action prosper? Explain.
(5%)
C. In the case of Peter, if he were to be considered The an doctrine of VICARIOUS LIABILITY is that which
employee, the exercise of due diligence in the renders a person liable for the negligence of
selection and supervision of Peter would not be others for whose acts or omission the law
a material issue since the conviction of Peter makes him responsible on the theory that they
would result in a subsidiary liability where the are under his control and supervision.
defense would not be available by the Vicarious
In the case of Paul, since he was in the
employer. Liability
OJ (2004) as professional driver of MM
was employed
performance of his work at the time the Transit bus owned by Mr. BT. In the course of
incident occurred, the school may be held his work, OJ hit a pedestrian who was seriously
subsidiarily liable not because of the conviction injured and later died in the hospital as a result
of Peter, but because of the negligence of Paul of the accident. The victims heirs sued the
under Art. 2180. driver and the owner of the bus for damages.
Vicarious Is there a presumption in this case that Mr. BT,
Liability
After (2001)
working overtime up to midnight, Alberto, the owner, had been negligent? If so, is the
an executive of an insurance company drove a SUGGESTED presumption ANSWER:
absolute or not? Explain. (5%)
company vehicle to a favorite Videoke bar Yes, there is a presumption of negligence on
where he had some drinks and sang some the part of the employer. However, such
songs with friends to "unwind". At 2:00 a.m., he presumption is rebuttable. The liability of the
drove home, but in doing so, he bumped a employer shall cease when they prove that
tricycle, resulting in the death of its driver. May they observed the diligence of a good father of
the insurance company be held liable for the a family to prevent damage (Article 2180, Civil
SUGGESTED ANSWER: When
Code).the employee causes damage due to his
negligent act of Alberto? Why?
The insurance company is not liable because own negligence while performing his own duties,
when the accident occurred, Alberto was not there arises the juris tantum presumption that
acting within the assigned tasks of his the employer is negligent, rebuttable only by
employment. proof of observance of the diligence of a good
It is true that under Art. 2180 (par. 5), father of a family (Metro Manila Transit v. CA,
employers are liable for damages caused by 223 SCRA 521 [1993]; Delsan Transport Lines v,
their employees who were acting within the C&tA Construction, 412 SCRA 524 2003).
scope of their assigned tasks. However, the Likewise, if the driver is charged and convicted
mere fact that Alberto was using a service in a criminal case for criminal negligence, BT is
vehicle of the employer at the time of the subsidiarily liable for the damages arising from
injurious accident does not necessarily mean the criminal act.
Vicarious
that he was operating the vehicle within the
Liability
Arturo sold(2006)
his Pajero to Benjamin for P1 Million.
scope of his employment. In Castilex Industrial
Benjamin took the vehicle but did not register the
Corp. v. Vasquez Jr (321 SCRA393 [1999]). the
sale with the Land Transportation Office. He
Supreme Court held that notwithstanding the
allowed his son Carlos, a minor who did not have
fact that the employee did some overtime work
a driver's license, to drive the car to buy pan de
for the company, the former was, nevertheless, sal in a bakery. On the way, Carlos driving in a
2:00 a. m.) was outside normal working
engaged in his own affairs or carrying out a reckless manner, sideswiped Dennis, then riding a
hours.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
personal purpose
The insurance when he
company went to
is liable a restaurant
if Alberto was bicycle. As a result, he suffered serious physical
at 2:00 a.m.
negligent after
in the coming out
operation from
of the carwork. The injuries. Dennis filed a criminal complaint against
and the
time of the
car was accident
assigned to (also
him for the benefit of the 1. Can Dennis
Carlos file an imprudence
for reckless independent resulting
civil action
in
insurance company, and even though he was against Carlos injuries.
serious physical and his father Benjamin for
not within the scope of his assigned tasks damages based on quasi-delict? Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, Dennis can file an
(2,5%)
when the accident happened. In one case
independent civil action against Carlos and his
decided by the Supreme Court, where an
father for damages based on quasi-delict there
executive of a pharmaceutical company was
being an act or omission causing damage to
given the use of a company car, and after
another without contractual obligation. Under
office hours, the executive made personal use
Section 1 of Rule 111 of the 2000 Rules on
of the car and met an accident, the employer
Criminal Procedure, what is deemed instituted
was also made liable under Art. 2180 of the
with the criminal action is only the action to
Civil Code for the injury caused by the
recover civil liability arising from the act or
negligent operation of the car by the
omission punished by law. An action based on
executive, on the ground that the car which
quasi-delict is no longer deemed instituted and
caused the injury was assigned to the
may be filed separately [Section 3, Rule 111,
executive
Vicarious by the employer for the prestige of 2. Assuming Dennis' action is tenable, can
Rules of Criminal Procedure].
the company.
Liability
Explain (2002)
the The insurance
concept company
of vicarious liabilitywas
in Benjamin raise the defense that he is not
held liable even
quasi-delicts. (1%)though the employee was not liable because the vehicle is not registered in
performingANSWER:
SUGGESTED within the scope of his assigned his name? Explain. (2.5%)
tasks when the accident happened [Valenzuela
v. CA, 253 SCRA 3O3 (1996)].
SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, Benjamin cannot raise the called oncomouse in Manila? What will be your
defense that the vehicle is not registered in his him?
advice to
name. His liability, vicarious in character, is based (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
on Article 2180 because he is the father of a (1) The reciprocity principle in private
minor who caused damage due to negligence. international law may be applied in our
While the suit will prosper against the registered jurisdiction. Section 3 of R.A. 8293, the
owner, it is the actual owner of the private vehicle Intellectual Property Code, provides for
who is ultimately liable (See Duavit v. CA, G.R. reciprocity, as follows: "Any person who is a
No. L-29759, May 18, 1989). The purpose of car national, or who is domiciled, or has a real and
registration isv.to Domingo,
(Villanueva reduce difficulty in identifying
G.R. No. 144274, effective industrial establishment in a country
the party liable
September 14, in case of accidents
2004). which is a party to any convention, treaty or
agreement relating to intellectual property
Vicarious Liability; Public rights or the repression of unfair competition, to
Utility (2000)
Silvestre leased a car from Avis-Rent-A-Car Co. which the Philippines is also a party, or extends
at the Mactan International Airport. No sooner reciprocal rights to nationals of the Philippines
had he driven the car outside the airport when, by law, shall be entitled to benefits to the
due to his negligence, he bumped an FX taxi extent necessary to give effect to any provision
owned and driven by Victor, causing damage of such convention, treaty or reciprocal law, in
to the latter in the amount of P100,000.00. addition to the rights to which any owner of an
Victor filed an action for damages against both intellectual property right is otherwise entitled
Silvestre and Avis, based on quasi-delict. Avis by this Act. (n)" To illustrate: the Philippines
filed a motion to dismiss the complaint against may refrain from imposing a requirement of
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
it on the ground of failure to state a cause of local incorporation or establishment of a local
The motion to dismiss should be granted, AVIS
action. Resolve the motion. (3%) domicile forANSWER:
the protection of industrial property
is not the employer of Silvestre; hence, there is ALTERNATIVE
no right of action against AVIS under Article rights of foreign
Reciprocity nationals
principle cannot(citizens of Canada,
be applied in our
2180 of the Civil Code. Not being the employer, Switzerland,because
jurisdiction U.S.) if the
the countries
Philippinesofissaid foreign
a party
AVIS has no duty to supervise Silvestre. Neither nationals
to the TRIPSrefrain from imposing
agreement and thesaid
WTO. The
has AVIS the duty to observe due diligence in requirement
principle on Filipino
involved is the citizens.
most-favored nation
the selection of its customers. Besides, it was clause which is the principle of non-
given in the problem that the cause of the discrimination. The protection afforded to
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: intellectual property protection in the
accident was the negligence of Silvestre.
The motion should be denied. Under the Public Philippines also applies to other members of
Service Law, the registered owner of a public the WTO. Thus, it is not really reciprocity
utility is liable for the damages suffered by principle in private international law that
third persons through the use of such public (2) Therebut
applies, is no
thelegal reason why
most-favored "oncomouse"
nation clause
utility. Hence, the cause of action is based in cannot be protected
under public underlaw.
international the law. Among
law, the Public Service Law. those excluded from patent protection are
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY "plant varieties or animal breeds, or essentially
biological process for the production of plants
Intellectual and animals" (Section 22.4 Intellectual Property
Creation
Dr. ALX is (2004)
a scientist honored for work related Code, R.A. No. 8293). The "oncomouse" in the
to the human genome project. Among his problem is not an essentially biological process
pioneering efforts concern stem cell research for the production of animals. It is a real
for the cure of Alzheimers disease. Under invention because its body cells do not
corporate sponsorship, he helped develop a naturally occur in nature but are the product of
The
man'sbreeding of oncomouse
ingenuity, intellect and has novelty,
industry.
microbe that ate and digested oil spills in the inventive step and industrial application. These
Now
sea. he leads a college team for cancer are the three requisites of patentability. (Sec.
research in MSS State. The team has
29, IPC)
experimented on a mouse whose body cells There are no ethical reasons why Dr. ADX and
replicate and bear cancerous tumor. Called his college team cannot be given exclusive
oncomouse, it is a life-form useful for medical ownership over their invention. The use of such
research and it is a novel creation. Its body genetically modified mouse, useful for cancer
cells do not naturally occur in nature but are research, outweighs considerations for animal
the product of mans intellect, industry and rights.
ingenuity. However, there is a doubt whether There are no legal and ethical reasons that
local property laws and ethics would allow would frustrate Dr. ALX's claim of exclusive
rights of exclusive ownership on any life-form. ownership over "oncomouse". Animals are
Dr. ALX needs your advice: (1) whether the property capable of being appropriated and
reciprocity principle in private international law owned'. In fact, one can own pet dogs or cats,
could be applied in our jurisdiction; and (2) or any other animal. If wild animals are
whether there are legal and ethical reasons that capable of being owned, with more reason
could frustrate his claim of exclusive ownership animals technologically enhanced or corrupted
over the life-form

3.civ Suggested Answers (1990-2006), Cracked, Word

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

3.civ Suggested Answers (1990-2006), Cracked, Word

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

3.civ Suggested Answers (1990-2006), Cracked, Word

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What is the main topic discussed in the document?

What is the main topic discussed in the document?

What are some of the subtopics covered?

What are some of the subtopics covered?

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

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

very good karma.

under time constraints and within their

From the ANSWERS TO BAR EXAMINATION QUESTIONS

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

Death; Effects; Simultaneous

What entries in the Civil Registry may be

Going into the specific provisions of the

Marriage; Divorce Decree; Void

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

ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:

Lawrence's insurance claim for damage to the

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

Art. 2152. The officious manager is personally

B. Ortillo is entitled to attorneys fees because

(c) Because X suffered physical injuries, X can

You might also like